Sample report
See a sample DealReview report
See the type of analysis produced by the Free Deal Assessment. This sample uses entirely fictional deal data and is provided only to demonstrate the structure and level of detail of the report.
SAMPLE REPORT — FICTIONAL DATA
DealReview
Preliminary Deal Assessment
Independent first view of an acquisition opportunity, prepared from the responses provided by the buyer.
Sample report — fictional data
Target / opportunity
Northbridge Engineering Services Ltd — SAMPLE
Prepared for
The purchasing party
Prepared at the request of the buyer
Assessment date
6 November 2026
Reference
SAMPLE
Overall classification
Further Validation Required
The responses indicate several areas where information is incomplete or where the position is not yet clear. These should be investigated further and, where appropriate, reflected in the heads of terms, diligence scope or transaction protections before further material commitment.
Sample report — fictional data. This document is preliminary decision-support information based on answers supplied by the buyer. It is not financial, legal, tax or investment advice, and it is not due diligence. See the important notice on the final page.
Executive assessment
Section 1
Executive assessment
Further Validation Required
The responses indicate several areas where information is incomplete or where the position is not yet clear. These should be investigated further and, where appropriate, reflected in the heads of terms, diligence scope or transaction protections before further material commitment.
The weighted score of 66 indicated “Generally Sound – Validate Key Assumptions”. Because 2 material concerns were identified, the classification has been adjusted to reflect the issues raised by the answers rather than the aggregate score alone.
Overall score
66
of 100
Issues requiring validation
6
Material concerns
2
Questions answered
37/37
31 diagnostic questions + 6 deal-context questions
Areas requiring the most attention
- Commercial & Customer Risk — score 56 of 100 (Further validation required). Concentration, revenue predictability, retention, margin durability and forward visibility.
- Operational & Management Dependency — score 56 of 100 (Further validation required). Owner reliance, management depth, key people, process resilience, premises and supplier dependency.
- Financial Quality — score 65 of 100 (Generally sound). Earnings reliability, cash conversion and information quality.
Basis of this assessment
This assessment is generated from 37 responses to a structured diagnostic covering five dimensions of acquisition risk. Weighted category scoring is combined with rule-based issue flags, so a single material issue is surfaced even where the overall picture appears reasonable. All observations remain assumptions until verified against source documentation.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 2 of 15
Deal snapshot
Section 2
Deal snapshot
Turnover
£3,800,000
EBITDA
£460,000
Asking price
£1,650,000
Implied EBITDA multiple
3.6x
£1,650,000 ÷ £460,000
Acquisition stage
Early discussions with the seller
Buyer type
Trade buyer
Context provided
| Target or opportunity name | Northbridge Engineering Services Ltd — SAMPLE |
| Turnover | 3800000 |
| EBITDA or adjusted EBITDA | 460000 |
| Asking price or enterprise value | 1650000 |
| Acquisition stage | Early discussions with the seller |
| Buyer type | Trade buyer |
Note on the implied multiple
The implied multiple is calculated by dividing the asking price by the earnings figure supplied. It is indicative only — shown as arithmetic context, not as a conclusion that the valuation is high, low, attractive or unattractive. A meaningful multiple requires an agreed, evidenced maintainable earnings figure and a clear understanding of which assets, liabilities, cash and debt transfer with the business.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 3 of 15
Diagnostic overview
Section 3
Diagnostic overview
Financial Quality
65Generally sound
Valuation & Deal Economics
76Lower initial concern
Commercial & Customer Risk
56Further validation required
Operational & Management Dependency
56Further validation required
Transaction Readiness & Structure
79Lower initial concern
| Dimension | Score | Answered | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Financial Quality | 65% | 7/7 | Generally sound |
| Valuation & Deal Economics | 76% | 6/6 | Lower initial concern |
| Commercial & Customer Risk | 56% | 6/6 | Further validation required |
| Operational & Management Dependency | 56% | 6/6 | Further validation required |
| Transaction Readiness & Structure | 79% | 6/6 | Lower initial concern |
Scores indicate the strength of the answers provided in each dimension. They are not a rating of the business and should not be used as the basis for a decision on their own.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 4 of 15
Financial Quality
Section 4.1
Financial Quality
65
Generally sound
7 of 7 questions answered
Whether reported earnings are supported by reliable records, convert into cash, and are likely to be maintained after completion.
Responses
| How complete is the financial information available for the business? | Two to three years of accounts, plus current management information |
| How well supported are the proposed EBITDA adjustments? | Broadly explained, not fully evidenced |
| What has the revenue trend been over the last three years? | Broadly stable |
| How does operating cash flow compare with reported profit? | Below profit, explained by timing or investment |
| What is the likely capital expenditure requirement? | Significant deferred expenditure likely |
| How robust are the accounting processes and reconciliations? | Regular reporting and reconciliations, limited external review |
| How predictable is the working capital profile? | Significant seasonal or stretching peaks |
Positive indicators
- A usable history, sufficient to test the most recent period in detail, with current management information alongside it.
- Adjustments are explained in outline; supporting schedules should be requested.
- Revenue has been stable, which is consistent with a steady trading position.
- Reporting and reconciliations are maintained, though with limited external scrutiny.
Issues requiring validation
- Cash conversion trails profit and the explanation should be tested across a longer period.
- Deferred capital expenditure may represent a cost that falls to the buyer after completion.
- Working capital peaks may require funding headroom that is not reflected in the headline price, and a normalised level will need to be agreed.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 5 of 15
Valuation & Deal Economics
Section 4.2
Valuation & Deal Economics
76
Lower initial concern
6 of 6 questions answered
Whether the price is supported by a testable rationale and other valuation evidence, how far it depends on unproven future performance, and whether the completion position is clear enough to be relied upon.
Responses
| How well is the asking price supported by a testable valuation rationale? | Supported by a documented rationale that can be tested against earnings |
| How has the asking price been benchmarked against other valuation evidence? | Benchmarked against sector or comparable transaction evidence |
| How dependent is the valuation on forecast or unproven future performance? | Some future growth assumptions, but anchored in established earnings |
| How clearly are the assets, liabilities and completion adjustments identified? | Completion adjustments have not yet been fully identified or discussed |
| How clearly has the headline enterprise value been translated into the expected equity/completion payment? | A broad bridge prepared, with some items still open |
| How well defined is the proposed consideration structure? | Broadly agreed, with some terms still to settle |
Positive indicators
- The price rests on a rationale that can be tested against the earnings of the business, which gives a workable basis for negotiation.
- Comparable or sector evidence has been used to test the price, which is a reasonable basis for the level being asked.
- Growth assumptions are present but sit on top of an established earnings base, which limits the exposure if they are not achieved.
- A bridge has been prepared in outline, with a limited number of items still to settle.
- The shape of the consideration is broadly agreed, with some terms still to be finalised.
Issues requiring validation
- What transfers with the business and what is adjusted at completion has not been worked through, so the amount actually payable is not yet established. This is missing information rather than a disagreement: it is normal at an early stage, and it needs to be resolved before terms are agreed.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 6 of 15
Commercial & Customer Risk
Section 4.3
Commercial & Customer Risk
56
Further validation required
6 of 6 questions answered
How dependent the business is on particular customers and contracts, whether revenue is evidenced as repeatable, whether margins hold, and how far forward revenue is secured or visible.
Responses
| What is the level of customer concentration? | Largest customer above approximately 35% of revenue |
| How predictable is revenue from existing customers? | Strong repeat customer base with demonstrated retention |
| What evidence supports the business's competitive position? | Reasonable differentiation with some supporting evidence |
| How stable are gross margins and the business's ability to recover cost increases? | Margins broadly stable, with partial cost recovery |
| How secure are the key contracts, frameworks and accreditations that underpin revenue? | Renewal, consent, assignment or change-of-control position not yet obtained, sought or confirmed |
| What visibility is there over forward revenue? | Reasonable visibility supported by evidenced pipeline and historic conversion |
Positive indicators
- A strong base of repeat customers with demonstrated retention supports the earnings case, whether that purchasing is contractual or discretionary.
- The business is reasonably differentiated, with some evidence behind the position and no indication of deterioration.
- Margins have been broadly maintained, with part of the cost increase recovered through price.
Issues requiring validation
- One customer represents a large share of revenue. At this level the business is substantially dependent on a single relationship, which is a frequent reason SME earnings prove unsustainable after completion.
- The terms of a revenue-critical contract or accreditation have not been fully checked: renewal, consent, assignment or the change-of-control position is not yet obtained, not yet sought or not yet confirmed. This is outstanding verification rather than a finding, and it is where a deal most often discovers a problem late.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 7 of 15
Operational & Management Dependency
Section 4.4
Operational & Management Dependency
56
Further validation required
6 of 6 questions answered
How much of the business sits with the owner, a small number of individuals or a limited number of dependencies, and what will be required to transfer it.
Responses
| What role does the owner play in the business? | The business is materially dependent on the owner for critical sales, delivery, knowledge or relationships, with no credible replacement or succession in place |
| How strong is the management layer below the owner? | Capable team, with some support still required |
| How secure is the management and key-employee team after completion? | Retention appears likely, with detailed terms still to settle |
| How resilient are the business's key operating systems and processes? | Generally robust, with some informal or concentrated processes |
| What is the premises and property position? | Approaching expiry, or terms requiring validation |
| How dependent is the business on key suppliers or single-source inputs? | Some concentration, but credible alternatives exist |
Positive indicators
- Nothing specific identified.
Issues requiring validation
- The business is materially dependent on the owner, with no credible replacement or succession in place. Removing that dependency is one of the most significant post-completion tasks and a common cause of value erosion.
- The lease is approaching expiry or its terms require validation. This is a point to resolve rather than a confirmed continuity problem: the risk is of rent increase, relocation or restricted use after completion.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 8 of 15
Transaction Readiness & Structure
Section 4.5
Transaction Readiness & Structure
79
Lower initial concern
6 of 6 questions answered
Whether the transaction is sufficiently prepared to be assessed and completed: whether the information exists to test it, whether the corporate, legal and regulatory position is clear, whether funding is in place, whether the agreed terms are documented, and whether the process allows enough time to validate.
Responses
| How complete is the information currently available to assess the transaction? | Core information available, with some supporting detail still to follow |
| How clear and compliant is the corporate, legal and regulatory position? | Position broadly understood, with minor points to confirm |
| Are there known disputes, claims or contingent liabilities? | Historic matters resolved, with no material continuing exposure |
| How developed is the funding plan for the acquisition? | Funding sources committed or available and appropriately sized for completion plus required headroom |
| How well documented are the principal transaction terms? | Draft or outline terms exist and the main principles are agreed |
| Does the transaction process allow sufficient time and protection for proper validation? | Exclusivity or timetable under discussion, with adequate time reasonably expected |
Positive indicators
- Nothing specific identified.
Issues requiring validation
- Nothing specific identified.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 9 of 15
Material concerns
Section 5
Material concerns
These arise from specific confirmed findings, not from a low score. Each is an issue the answers describe as already present, rather than information still to be obtained. They are not repeated among the issues requiring validation.
High customer concentration
Material concernOne customer represents a large share of revenue. Loss or renegotiation of that relationship would materially affect earnings, and concentration at this level is a frequent reason SME earnings prove unsustainable after completion.
commercial
Material owner dependency with no succession
Material concernThe business is materially dependent on the owner for critical sales, delivery, knowledge or relationships, with no credible replacement or succession in place. Removing that dependency is one of the most significant post-completion tasks and a common cause of value erosion.
operational
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 10 of 15
Issues requiring validation
Section 6
Issues requiring validation
Capital expenditure requirement
Issue requiring validationDeferred or imminent capital expenditure may represent a cost that falls to the buyer after completion and is not reflected in the price.
financial
Completion position not yet established
Issue requiring validationWhat transfers with the business, and what is adjusted at completion, has not yet been worked through. Until cash, debt, debt-like items and normal working capital are agreed, the amount actually payable is not established. This is a gap in the information rather than a dispute, and it needs to be resolved before terms are agreed.
valuation
Contract continuity not yet resolved
Issue requiring validationA revenue-critical contract, framework or accreditation has been identified, but an important renewal, consent, assignment or change-of-control point has not yet been resolved. This is outstanding verification rather than a finding, and it is where a deal most often discovers a problem late.
commercial
Property position requiring validation
Issue requiring validationThe lease is approaching expiry or its terms require validation. This is a point to resolve rather than a confirmed continuity problem: the risk is of rent increase, relocation or restricted use after completion.
operational
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 11 of 15
Seller questions and information requests
Section 7
Seller questions and information requests
Material concerns
12 items
Seller questions
- 01What share of revenue is represented by the largest customers?
- 02How long have those relationships existed, and what notice periods and terms apply?
- 03Has any key customer indicated a change in volumes, terms or supplier strategy?
- 04What does the owner personally handle that would need to be replaced?
- 05How long would the owner remain involved after completion, and on what basis?
- 06Which customer, supplier and staff relationships exist only through the owner?
Information requests
- Customer revenue and concentration analysis
- Key customer contracts, terms and notice periods
- Correspondence or indications of future volume
- Role description and responsibilities of the owner
- Transition and handover plan
- Summary of key relationships held by the owner
Issues requiring validation
16 items
Seller questions
- 01What capital expenditure has been deferred over the last three years, and what is now required?
- 02What is the expected cost and timing of asset replacement?
- 03Which assets, liabilities and completion adjustments are included in the price, and which are excluded?
- 04How will cash, debt and debt-like items be treated at completion?
- 05What are the termination, renewal and notice provisions on each revenue-critical contract?
- 06Do any revenue-critical contracts contain change-of-control, assignment or consent provisions that affect completion?
- 07Which accreditations or licences are revenue-critical, and when are they next reviewed?
- 08What is the remaining lease term, and are there break or review provisions?
Information requests
- Fixed asset register
- Capex history and forward plan
- Maintenance and equipment condition reports
- Asset register and details of excluded items or liabilities
- Balance sheet with cash, debt and debt-like items identified
- Working capital schedule and normalisation analysis
- Revenue-critical contracts, frameworks and terms
- Change-of-control, assignment and consent provisions
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 12 of 15
Seller questions and information requests (continued)
Section 7 · continued
Seller questions and information requests
Issues requiring validation
15 items
Seller questions
- 01Is the property held by the seller or a connected party, and on what terms?
- 02Would the business be able to continue trading from these premises after completion?
- 03What timing differences or investment explain the gap between profit and cash?
- 04Is the gap expected to reverse in the current year?
- 05What is a typical working capital level through the year?
- 06How would a normal working capital position be agreed for completion?
Information requests
- Accreditation and licence status
- Lease agreement and title
- Rent review, service charge and occupancy cost history
- Any planned relocation or occupancy change
- Cash flow statement
- Working capital movement analysis
- Monthly working capital schedule
- Debtor and creditor ageing by month
- Working capital normalisation analysis
Category-level general follow-up
10 items
Seller questions
- 01What evidence supports customer retention and repeatability?
- 02What forward revenue is secured or evidenced?
- 03Who makes operational decisions when the owner is absent?
- 04Which individuals are critical to delivery, knowledge or key relationships, and what are their intentions?
- 05Which processes or systems would stop the business if they failed?
Information requests
- Customer retention and repeat revenue analysis
- Gross margin analysis by period
- Order book and pipeline with historic conversion rates
- Organisation chart with responsibilities
- Key person list with roles and intentions
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 13 of 15
Seller questions and information requests (continued)
Section 7 · continued
Seller questions and information requests
Category-level general follow-up
3 items
Seller questions
- 01What share of critical inputs comes from each key supplier?
Information requests
- Process documentation and operating procedures
- Supplier list with spend and input dependency
These lists are generated from the issues raised by your own answers, ordered by priority. They are not exhaustive, and the appropriate scope of verification depends on the transaction and the information available.
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 14 of 15
Next steps and important notice
Section 8
Suggested next steps
- 01Investigate the issues flagged in this assessment further and, where appropriate, reflect them in the heads of terms, diligence scope or transaction protections before further material commitment.
- 02Request the documents listed so that the earnings and asset positions can be tested properly.
- 03Consider independent analysis of earnings quality and structure before committing to fees.
- 04Address these material concerns before further commitment: high customer concentration; material owner dependency with no succession.
Important notice
This report is preliminary decision-support information. It has been generated from answers supplied by the buyer and has not been verified against source documentation.
It is not financial, legal, tax or investment advice, and it is not due diligence. It does not constitute a recommendation to acquire, decline or continue with any transaction. Automated output cannot identify every risk, and the conclusions drawn depend entirely on the accuracy and completeness of the information provided.
You should obtain appropriate professional advice from a qualified accountant, solicitor and tax adviser before completing an acquisition.
Where a transaction proceeds, a Detailed Deal Review can provide independent analysis of earnings quality, valuation and structure. Scope and fee are agreed individually.
DealReview
Independent SME acquisition analysis · dealreview.co.uk
End of report
DealReview · Preliminary Deal Assessment · Sample report — fictional data
Page 15 of 15
Full report
The full sample report opens in a new tab. The sample is fictional throughout; an assessment of your own takes about five minutes and produces a report from your answers.