How Do Underwriters Select Peers When Valuing IPOs?

Abstract

Valuing initial public offerings (IPOs) using multiples allows underwriters discretion when selecting comparable firms. We find that they systematically exclude candidate comparable firms that make a given IPO appear overvalued. On average, comparable firms published in official prospectuses have 13%‐38% higher valuation multiples than those obtained from matching algorithms or selected by sell‐side analysts, including the same underwriter's analyst after the IPO. Even if IPOs are priced at a discount as compared to peers selected by the underwriters, they are still at a premium with regard to alternatively selected peers. Greater bias in the underwriter's selection of peers leads to poorer long run performance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 52 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.