CIMA F3 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

When valuing an unlisted company using a P/E ratio from a similar listed company, we normally reduce the proxy P/E to reflect the extra risk and reduced attractiveness of the unlisted investment.

A. Relative lack of marketability – Unlisted shares are harder to sell and usually take longer to realise, so investors demand a higher return, i.e. a lower P/E. ✔

B. Lower level of scrutiny and regulation – Unlisted companies face less disclosure and governance requirements, so information risk is higher. Greater risk ⇒ lower valuation multiple ⇒ reduced P/E. ✔

C. Smaller and less established – Unlisted companies tend to be smaller, less diversified and less stable, so investors again expect a higher return, implying a lower P/E. ✔

D. Control premium not included – If the proxy P/E excludes a control premium but you are valuing a controlling stake, you would increase the P/E, not reduce it. ✘

E. Higher forecast earnings growth – Higher expected growth justifies a higher P/E, not a lower one. ✘

F. One-off profit item in latest earnings – This should be dealt with by adjusting the earnings, not by cutting the P/E multiple. ✘

So the three factors justifying a reduction in the proxy P/E are A, B and C.

The company is deciding between:

Selling the business via a Management Buyout (MBO), or

Selling to an external private equity (PE) buyer.

From the original company’s viewpoint, an advantage of an MBO is:

The buyers are the existing management team. Relationships already exist, and there’s usually more trust and alignment.

Post-divestment, the original company may still trade with the divested unit (e.g., as a supplier or customer). Cooperation tends to be better with a familiar internal team than with an external PE house whose primary focus is financial returns.

Why the others are wrong:

B. Enhanced big data opportunities – unrelated to the divestment method.

C. Improved relationships with MBO team in the event of a sale to PE – logically inconsistent; if sold to PE, it’s not an MBO.

D. Higher price due to synergistic benefits – PE typically looks for financial engineering and operational improvements, not classic corporate synergies. You are more likely to see synergy premia when selling to a trade buyer, not in an MBO.

So the key pro-MBO argument here is better cooperation post divestment → A.