Every figure, reconciled across every source.
Most material issues in private deals do not sit within a single document. They sit in the gap between two: the revenue in the CIM and the deposits in the bank statements, the customer count in the model and the contracts in the room, the EBITDA in the management accounts and the income on the tax return.
Testing those gaps manually takes weeks, so review is usually sample-based. We test the full population.
The issues that move price sit between documents, not inside them.
What we tie together
- CIM and management presentation
- Management model and budget
- Audited or reviewed financial statements and management accounts
- Tax returns
- Bank statements
- Invoices, customer-level and contract-level revenue
- Payroll and headcount records
- Debt agreements and covenant compliance certificates
Indicators
- Revenue, margin, and customer figures that differ between sources
- Cash that does not support reported revenue
- Customers in the model with no contract, or contracts with no revenue
- Headcount and payroll that do not match the cost base
- Covenant calculations that do not match the underlying accounts
Every mismatch is reported with both sources cited, so your team can see the discrepancy for itself.
What it gives your team
01
Full-population testing
Every figure is tested, not a selected sample.
02
Earlier warning
Discrepancies surface in the first days of exclusivity rather than in the final QoE draft.
03
Better questions for the seller
"Your CIM shows 214 active customers and the contracts folder holds 171" is a question with a specific answer.
Discuss a transaction under LOI.
Share the sector, the deal size, and the end of exclusivity. We respond within one business day with an assessment of fit and the proposed scope of the report.