Illiquidity Discounts in Private Company Valuation
Valuing private companies presents a unique set of challenges that differentiate it significantly from valuing publicly traded firms. One of the most critical adjustments in this context is the illiquidity discount a reduction in valuation to account for the lack of an active market in which to sell shares quickly and at fair value. While much of the valuation literature focuses on discounted cash flow (DCF) models and comparable company multiples, the empirical determination of illiquidity discounts remains less standardized and often misunderstood.
As private equity markets continue to expand globally and more investors seek opportunities in unlisted companies, understanding and applying illiquidity discounts has never been more relevant. This article explores practical, data-driven approaches to estimating illiquidity discounts for private companies, providing insights for financial analysts, investors, and business owners.
The Concept of Illiquidity Discount
Private company shares cannot be easily sold due to the absence of a liquid secondary market. This illiquidity imposes additional risks on investors, who may require higher expected returns or apply valuation discounts to compensate for the time and effort needed to realize their investment.
Empirical studies suggest that these discounts can range from 20% to 40% or even more, depending on factors like company size, industry, investor holding periods, and regional market conditions. For example, smaller firms operating in niche industries with few exit opportunities tend to attract higher illiquidity discounts compared to larger, well-known private firms with more potential buyers.
Empirical Approaches to Estimate Illiquidity Discounts
Several empirical methodologies have emerged to quantify illiquidity discounts in a rigorous and consistent manner:
1. Restricted Stock Studies:
These studies compare the prices of publicly traded shares with those of restricted shares in the same company that cannot be sold for a certain period, typically due to regulatory or contractual lock-up agreements.
For example, a study conducted in the US market revealed that restricted stocks often trade at discounts of around 25% to 35% compared to their freely tradable counterparts. This methodology provides a market-based estimate of the illiquidity premium demanded by investors for bearing liquidity risk.
2. Pre-IPO Studies:
Pre-IPO transactions offer another empirical benchmark. By analyzing valuations before and after a company goes public, analysts can infer the value premium attributed to liquidity.
For instance, a company valued at $100 million pre-IPO might see its valuation rise to $130 million post-IPO, implying a 30% illiquidity discount. However, analysts must carefully control for other factors that can drive valuation changes around IPOs, such as growth expectations or changes in investor sentiment.
3. Quantitative Models:
Modern valuation practices increasingly use regression-based models to predict illiquidity discounts based on observable company characteristics. Factors commonly included in these models are firm size, leverage, profitability, revenue growth, and industry sector.
For example, a quantitative approach may determine that smaller firms with high leverage and volatile earnings justify a discount closer to 40%, while larger, stable companies may warrant a discount closer to 20%.
4. Benchmarking against Private Transactions:
Analyzing historical private M&A transactions of comparable companies can also help estimate appropriate discounts. These benchmarks reflect actual market behavior and can be particularly useful in industries where private transactions are frequent and well-documented.
Nevertheless, differences in deal terms, control premiums, and geographic factors must be carefully adjusted to ensure comparability.
Key Factors Influencing the Illiquidity Discount
While empirical methods provide a foundation, analysts must also recognize qualitative factors that influence the appropriate discount, including:
- Expected holding period: Longer holding periods generally justify higher discounts due to extended exposure to illiquidity risk.
- Exit options: The availability of strategic buyers, secondary markets, or IPO potential can reduce the illiquidity discount.
- Minority vs. controlling stake: Minority interests typically carry a higher illiquidity discount than controlling stakes due to the lack of decision-making power.
Limitations and Professional Judgment
Despite these empirical tools, applying an illiquidity discount is not purely mechanical. Analysts must exercise professional judgment to account for factors unique to each company and transaction.
In some cases, data on comparable transactions or restricted stock may be outdated, geographically irrelevant, or industry-inappropriate, requiring careful adaptation.
Rethinking Discounting in Private Company Valuations
In private company valuations, particularly for early-stage firms, discounting techniques such as illiquidity discounts, minority discounts, and control premiums are commonly applied to adjust for risk, ownership structure, and lack of marketability. While these adjustments serve a theoretical purpose, their excessive or overlapping use can lead to significant distortions in fair value especially when the valuation is intended for financing or capital raising.
A minority discount is often applied to reflect the reduced influence and decision-making power of a non-controlling shareholder. Conversely, a control premium may be added to reflect the enhanced value of a controlling interest due to strategic or operational influence. In many private company valuations, these adjustments are layered on top of illiquidity discounts sometimes without clear justification or alignment with the actual transaction purpose.
Conclusion
Incorporating an illiquidity discount is a vital step in the valuation of private companies, reflecting the real-world constraints investors face when trying to exit such investments. While empirical studies and quantitative models provide valuable guidance, they are not substitutes for sound judgment and careful analysis of each company’s specific context.
As private equity and venture capital investment grow globally, the need for reliable and nuanced illiquidity discount methodologies will become even more critical. Financial analysts must therefore balance empirical rigor with flexibility and an understanding of evolving market conditions.
Ultimately, mastering the art and science of illiquidity discount estimation can improve valuation accuracy, support better investment decisions, and contribute to fairer outcomes for all stakeholders involved in private company transactions.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an illiquidity discount in private company valuation?
+
An illiquidity discount is a reduction in a private company’s value to reflect the difficulty of selling shares quickly at fair market value due to the lack of an active trading market.
How are illiquidity discounts estimated for private firms?
+
Common methods include restricted stock studies, pre-IPO studies, regression-based models using firm characteristics, and benchmarking against comparable private transactions.
Why do investors apply illiquidity discounts in valuation?
+
Private shares carry higher exit risk and longer holding periods. The discount compensates investors for limited marketability and the time and cost required to realize value.
What factors influence the size of an illiquidity discount?
+
Drivers include company size, industry, leverage, profitability, earnings volatility, expected holding period, exit options, and whether the stake is minority or controlling.
How do restricted stock studies measure illiquidity discounts?
+
They compare prices of freely tradable shares with restricted shares of the same company. The observed price gap reflects the market’s required discount for illiquidity.
What is the typical illiquidity discount range for private companies?
+
Empirical evidence commonly shows a range of roughly 20% to 40%, trending higher for smaller or riskier firms and lower for larger firms with better exit prospects.
To find out more, please fill out the form or email us at: info@eg.Andersen.com
Contact Us
