What is holding back returns of European private equity?

Transcription

1 What is holding back returns of European private equity? Study Amsterdam, January 2016

2 Introduction 2 Yearly return rates of European private equity have stabilized since the financial crisis, but are still not at pre-crisis levels Internal rate of return (IRR) [%] European benchmark Ø '03-'07 for 1Y-IRR = 25% Ø '09-'13 for 1Y-IRR = 10% Explanation > The IRR is reported at fund level and is based on European PE firms > The IRR is calculated as an annualized effective compounded rate of return using monthly cash flow (CF) to and from the investors, together with the unrealized or residual asset value as a terminal CF to investors 1Y-rolling IRR 5Y-rolling IRR Source: EVCA/EIF European Private Equity Market Outlook 2011 [1Y for ]; EVCA, "Pan-European Private Equity Benchmarks Study" ( ) [1Y for and 5Y for ] 2

3 Introduction 3 Our study examines why European private equity (PE) performance is below pre-crisis levels and PE firms' own targets Methodology Drivers of PE performance Three potential drivers of the lower performance of European PE have been examined Developments before and after crisis Long-term and short-term comparison for these drivers have been made 1 Price levels > Multiples at acquisition and exit I Current situation versus pre-crisis situation before 2008 (>7 years) 2 Debt financing > Leverage rates > Costs of debt (interest rates) II Current situation versus situation in 2012 (<3 years) 3 Portfolio duration (investment horizon) 3

4 Introduction 4 European portfolios of 2,671 private equity firms between were analyzed, including a total of 14,834 deals Study sample characteristics Number of European acquisitions and divestments per year 101 ' ' ,243 1,412 1, ,854 1,403 1,439 1,101 1, '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 Geographical distribution targets [%] Industry representation [%] United Kingdom 29% France 18% Germany 12% Netherlands 7% Italy 7% Sweden 6% Spain 5% Other 17% '15 1) 7,527 7,307 (51%) (49%) Acquisitions [#] Divestments [#] Capital goods & engineering 24% Consumer goods & retail 22% TMT 2) 17% Logistics & business services 14% Pharma & healthcare 8% Financial services 4% Energy & utilities 3% Chemicals and materials 3% Automotive 3% Building & construction 1% Selection criteria European portfolios from '98-'15: > PE firms based in USA, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and other European countries > Deals with missing investment or divestment year are excluded > Sample consists of 14,834 European companies acquired or sold by PE firms (7,307 investments and 7,527 divestments) 1) Data included until June 1, 2015; 2) Technology, media and telecommunication Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio] 4

5 Introduction 5 This study has been enriched with data from a survey among 820 professionals of leading private equity firms across Europe Characteristics of participants of 2015 survey Geographical focus [% of responses] DACH 36% Germany, Austria, Switzerland Iberia and Italy 20% Scandinavia 13% Benelux 7% Europe 7% UK 5% France 5% CEE excl. Poland 4% Central and Eastern Europe Poland 3% Industry focus [% of responses] Pharma & healthcare 49% Consumer goods & retail 48% TMT 1) 46% Logistics & business services 39% Capital goods & engineering 28% Financial services 26% Energy & utilities 22% Building & construction 14% Chemicals 13% Automotive 10% Selection criteria > Exclusive survey with 820 professionals from leading private equity firms across Europe > Survey includes questions that reflect what market experts expect for different countries and regions and what they consider relevant factors for the private equity business in 2015 Number of experts respondents [#] 820 1) Technology, media and telecommunication # years of PE experience [% of responses] 7% <5 years 29% 29% 5-10 years 64% 64% >10 years Source: European Private Equity Outlook 2015; Roland Berger 5

6 6 Contents Page A Executive summary 7 B How have drivers of PE performance evolved since the financial crisis? 10 C The 7-year itch: a deep dive into portfolio durations 22 This document shall be treated as confidential. It has been compiled for the exclusive, internal use by our client and is not complete without the underlying detail analyses and the oral presentation. It may not be passed on and/or may not be made available to third parties without prior written consent from Roland Berger Strategy Consultants. RBSC does not assume any responsibility for the completeness and accuracy of the statements made in this document. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants 6

7 A. Executive summary 7

8 8 Short-term trends in price levels and debt financing drive recent performance, but portfolio durations show a structural increase Executive summary [1/2] 1 Despite the economic growth of the EU that is driving PE performance in recent years, the annual performance of European private equity portfolios is still below pre-crisis levels 2 Three potential drivers behind the lower performance were examined: price levels, debt financing (leverage rates and costs of debt) and portfolio duration 3 Price levels and leverage rates are lower than before the crisis, but are increasing again, while costs of debt are historically low these factors seem to be driving the short-term improvement in PE performance in recent years 4 Portfolio durations have risen with a factor 2.5 to record lengths from 1.8 years in 2007 to 4.6 years in 2014, across all industries, regions and PE firms Source: Roland Berger 8

9 9 Longer portfolio durations lead to lower growth PE firms need to focus on divesting pre-crisis acquisitions to improve returns Executive summary [2/2] 5 6 Longer portfolio durations lead to lower annual growth in enterprise value, dropping from on average 50% (0-2 years) to 3% (7+ years) in some cases, PE firms settle for a loss if a company is in the portfolio for more than 7 years Recently, PE firms have taken action and divested an increasing number of pre-crisis investments however, still 34% of companies in the current portfolio was bought more than 7 years ago, representing more than 60% of total value 7 Active management of pre-crisis acquisitions is required to ensure that these long portfolio durations do not become a structural problem 8 PE firms say they want to focus more on divesting companies in Can and will they do so, or will the all-time high amount of available capital (1,100 USD bn in 2014) keep them preoccupied with making new investments? Source: Roland Berger 9

10 B. How have drivers of PE performance evolved since the financial crisis? 10

11 11 Three drivers of changes in performance are examined: price levels, debt financing and portfolio durations Drivers of PE performance Private equity performance Growth of enterprise value between entry and exit results in positive returns Changes in enterprise values over time are reflected by changes in EBITDA multiples at acquisition and exit 1 Price levels A. Leverage rates Lower returns could result from a lower share of debt in the financing structure (and a corresponding larger equity contribution) B. Cost of debt Higher interest rates result in higher costs, lower valuations and thus lower returns 2 Debt financing Portfolio duration Lower returns could be the result of longer portfolio durations (investment horizons), if enterprise value growth decreases within the investment horizon 3 Note: Fund costs are not included Source: Roland Berger 11

12 12 The difference between acquisition and exit multiples is growing and drives performance, but is still smaller than before the crisis 1 Price levels 2Y-rolling median EBITDA multiple at acquisition and exit, per year of acquisition 1) EBITDA multiple Year of acquisition Explanation > EBITDA multiples are shown per year of acquisition The exit multiple represents the median EBITDA multiple received for all companies sold in a given year > The difference in EBITDA multiple between acquisition and exit gives an indication of PE performance per year of acquisition Ø difference for '03-'07 = 2.6 Ø difference for '09-'13 = 1.1 EBITDA multiple at acquisition EBITDA multiple at exit Difference (exit - acquisition) 1) Analysis based on EBITDA multiples for 1,223 and 1,087 companies in current and exit portfolio, respectively; a minimum of 10 multiples was used to calculate the median for each year of acquisition Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio] 12

13 13 Leverage rates are increasing and drive the recent increase in PE performance, although they are not yet at pre-crisis levels 2A Leverage rates Average share of debt financing at acquisition 1) [%] Ø = 62% Ø = 51% 70 66% % 61% 59% 62% 60% 52% 54% 50% 51% 57% Ø % Year of acquisition 1) Analysis based on 304 deals in current portfolio with data on debt financing at purchase Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current portfolio] 13

14 14 Interest rates are at historically low levels which has a positive effect on PE performance compared to pre-crisis levels 2B Cost of debt ECB long-term interest rates [%] Ø '03-'07 = 4.2% 1) Ø '09-'13 = 2.7% 1) Explanation > Low interest rates increase attractiveness of debt financing, leading to high PE performance Germany France Netherlands United States Spain Italy United Kingdom 1) Excluding Spain and Italy Source: Eurostat 14

15 15 Low interest rates also have a positive effect on valuations of companies unrealized global portfolio value is USD 2,644 bn 2B Cost of debt Unrealized portfolio value of global PE [USD bn] , , , , % 2, , ,546 2, H1 > In 2013 and 2014, the global amount of capital distributed to investors (realized value) exceeded the amount of capital called (to be used for investments) Hence, the observed growth in unrealized value in recent years is due to an increase in the valuation of assets in the current portfolio of PE firms Lower interest rates can partly explain the rising valuations Explanation > Two forces drive an increase in unrealized portfolio value: a surplus between value of in- and divestments an increase in valuation of current portfolio assets > Unrealized portfolio value is also considered in common PE performance analyses, such as IRR benchmarks: An increase in unrealized value thus results in a higher IRR Source: Preqin (2015 Preqin Global Private Equity & Venture Capital Report) 15

16 16 Since 2007, portfolio durations have more than doubled to record lengths and pose a structural problem for PE firms 3 Portfolio duration Median duration of European portfolios [years] 157% Median '12-'15 = 4.5 yrs Total portfolio Median '03-'07 = 1.8 yrs Duration of European portfolios H1 68% Median '12-'15 = 5.6 yrs Divestments Median '03-'07 = 3.3 yrs Duration for exited companies H1 x% Growth from '03-'07 to '12-'15 Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio] 16

17 17 Portfolio durations have doubled or even tripled across all industries and regions compared to the pre-crisis situation 3 Portfolio duration 3Y-median duration in portfolio before and after crisis, per industry and region [years] Duration per industry Automotive 2.1 Building & construction 2.5 Capital goods & engineering 1.7 Consumer goods & retail 1.8 Chemicals and materials 2.4 Logistics & business services 1.7 Financial services 1.5 TMT 1) % 102% 195% 171% 90% 163% 189% 145% Duration per region Southern Europe 1.7 United Kingdom 2.0 Northern Europe 1.7 CEE 1.6 Western Europe % 146% 160% 174% 163% Northern Europe > Denmark > Finland > Latvia > Lithuania > Sweden Western Europe > Belgium > France > Germany > Ireland (Republic) > Luxembourg > Netherlands United Kingdom Southern Europe > Cyprus > Greece > Italy > Malta > Monaco > Portugal > Spain Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) > Austria > Bulgaria > Croatia > Czech Republic > Hungary > Poland > Slovakia > Slovenia Pharma & healthcare Energy & utilities % 129% x% Median Median Growth from '05-'07 to '12-'14 [%] 1) Technology, media and telecommunication Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio] 17

18 18 Longer durations lead to lower annual growth in enterprise value and therefore lower PE performance 3 Portfolio duration Average EV growth and confidence intervals per duration for [CAGR, %] 75% 60% 45% Explanation > Enterprise value (EV) growth is calculated as the annual growth (CAGR) between the value of each acquisition and divestment (exit) for a given portfolio duration 30% 15% 0% -5% 0-2 yrs 2-3 yrs 3-4 yrs 4-5 yrs 5-6 yrs 6-7 yrs 7-10 yrs Average EV growth [CAGR, %] 95% confidence interval [CAGR, %] Duration [years] Note: Enterprise value growth can be achieved through EBITDA growth (e.g. acquisitions) and/or by achieving EBITDA multiple expansion Source: Merger Market database (matching of current and exit portfolio resulted in 389 deals with reported enterprise value at acquisition and exit) 18

19 19 Although PE firms have been trying hard to optimize returns, annual growth is still lower for longer portfolio durations 3 Portfolio duration Importance of active portfolio management [%] "Managing portfolio companies actively will become more important in the future passive management is no longer suitable. Agree or disagree?" 95% Comments > In 2014, agreement was higher (98%) 75% 20% 0% 2% 3% Completely disagree Disagree to some extent Neither agree nor disagree Agree to some extent Completely agree % of responses [only one answer possible] Source: Roland Berger; European Private Equity Outlook

20 20 In summary: PE performance is growing again, but longer portfolio durations present a structural problem Long- and short-term evolution of performance drivers Driver Current vs. pre-crisis Current vs Explanation Price levels Leverage rates Costs of debt Portfolio duration The difference in EBITDA multiples at acquisition and exit is growing and boosts recent PE performance, but is not yet at pre-crisis levels Leverage rates have increased since 2012 but are still below pre-crisis levels Historically-low interest rates have reduced costs of debt and drive increases in valuation Portfolio durations have increased to record lengths since the crisis and pose a structural problem for PE firms Combined effect Market-driven levers have caused an increase in PE performance since 2012, but long portfolio durations hold back current PE performance Current situation vs. pre-crisis/2012: Better Worse Similar Source: Roland Berger 20

21 21 Dutch PE firms perform poorly compared to large international PE firms when it comes to portfolio duration (4.9 vs. 3.3 years) Portfolio durations for PE firms (years) PE portfolio durations in 2007 and % 3.3 Top-50 International PE firms 1) Median 2007 [years] x% Growth between 2007 and % 4.9 Dutch PE firms Median 2015H1 [years] Evolution of international & Dutch portfolios Share of companies in portfolio in 2007 [%] 80 75% 60 71% yrs yrs 48% 29% 3-5 yrs 3-5 yrs 5-7 yrs Share of companies in portfolio in 2015H1 [%] 5-7 yrs Top-50 International PE firms portfolios 1) 8% 7% 7+ yrs Duration [yrs] 37% 22% 7+ yrs Duration [yrs] Dutch Insights > In 2007, portfolios of Dutch and Top-50 international PE firms were comparable > In 2015, portfolios differ, as Dutch PE firms have sold relatively few old (7+ years) acquisitions > Top-50 international PE firms minimize the impact of longer durations by continuously making new investments, which still dominate portfolios 1) International PE firms are only included if ranked in the top-50 of total funds raised in the past 5 years (as of 2015), as compiled by Private Equity International Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio]; Private Equity International 21

22 C. The 7-year itch: a deep dive into portfolio durations 22

23 23 Statutory fund durations dictate PE firms to settle even for a loss if a company is in the portfolio for more than 7 years Average EV growth and confidence intervals per duration for [CAGR, %] 75% 60% 45% Explanation > Enterprise value (EV) growth is calculated as the annual growth (CAGR) between the value of each acquisition and divestment (exit) for a given portfolio duration 30% 15% 0% -5% Average EV growth [CAGR, %] 95% confidence interval [CAGR, %] Portfolio duration [years] Note: Enterprise value growth can be achieved through EBITDA growth (e.g. acquisitions) and/or by achieving EBITDA multiple expansion Source: Merger Market database (matching of current and exit portfolio resulted in 389 deals with reported enterprise value at acquisition and exit) 23

24 24 In recent years, PE firms have taken action and divested an increasing number of firms acquired before the crisis in 2008 Divestments per year [# of companies] 426 1% 614 2% 695 8% 753 8% 507 7% % % % % % 200 0% 99% 98% 92% 92% 93% 309 6% 89% 90% 85% 77% 66% 100% 94% yrs 0-7 yrs Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Exit portfolio] 24

25 25 Despite the increasing number of exits with long durations, 34% of the current portfolio was bought more than 7 years ago Distribution of portfolio companies in duration intervals 1) [%] # of companies in portfolio 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 2,881 (55%) 25% 2,507 (48%) 1,500 19% 1, % H1 10% 9% 6% 6% 4% 10% 6% 3% 2% Duration intervals [years] 1) The distribution in for instance 2007 consists of the companies that were bought in 2007 or before and are still in the current portfolio, plus the companies in the exit portfolio that were bought in 2003 or before and were exited after Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio] 25

26 26 The average size of deals was highest in the pre-crisis years , driven by a larger share of deals >1 EUR bn Average enterprise value (EV) at acquisition 2Y-rolling Ø EV [EUR m] 700 Ø '98-'04 = EUR m Ø '05-'08 = EUR m 2Y-rolling share of EV >1 EUR bn [%] 25 Ø '09-'15 = EUR m % 10% 9% 10% 10% 8% 8% 8% 6% 7% 5% 6% 4% 4% 4% 5% 2% Average enterprise value [EUR m] Share of deals with EV >1 EUR bn [%] Year of acquisition Note: analysis based on enterprise values for 3,238 companies in current portfolio Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current portfolio] 26

27 27 High pre-crisis deal size has resulted globally in acquisitions constituting more than 60% of unrealized portfolio value Unrealized value of assets per year of acquisition (on June 2014) [USD bn] 1,595 USD bn [ ] 61% of total for Unrealized value % 13 0% 13 0% 24 1% 48 2% 174 7% 15% 19% 17% 187 7% 234 9% % 205 8% 111 4% Unrealized value [USD bn] x% -- Share of total unrealized value [%] Year of acquisition > The unrealized value of assets decreased by 4.8% from June 2013 to June 2014 Fund managers are partly able to escape the shadow of the exit overhang Source: Preqin (2014, 2015 Global Private Equity and Venture Capital report) 27

28 28 30% of the current portfolio was acquired in for high EBITDA multiples, putting pressure on returns for these years Current portfolio (June 2015) per year of acquisition Number of companies 1,200 1,000 2,172 companies acquired '05-'08 [30% of current portfolio] 1, H1 Year of acquisition Median EBITDA multiple at acquisition 1) ) analysis based on acquisition multiples for 1,223 companies in current portfolio Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current portfolio] 28

29 29 The current portfolios of Dutch PE firms have a similarly large share of pre-crisis acquisitions, with representing 31% Current portfolio (June 2015) per year of acquisition Number of companies companies acquired '05-'08 [31% of current portfolio] H1 Year of acquisition Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current portfolio] 29

30 30 PE firms increasingly say they will focus more on divesting firms in 2015 Focus of PE investors on phases in PE value chain in ) [% of participants] Making new investments 20% 31% 34% Change w.r.t "Which phase of the PE value chain will you focus on most in 2013/2014/2015?" Developing portfolio companies Divesting existing investments 28% 26% 23% 22% 19% 34% Fundraising Extending existing funds 4% 7% 15% 11% 14% 14% ) As multiple answers were possible, the original survey results have been rescaled so that they sum to 100% Source: Roland Berger; European Private Equity Outlook

31 31 But given the all-time high of capital, they will be busy investing; can and will they simultaneously divest pre-crisis acquisitions? Available capital for global PE firms [USD bn] +35% 999 1,066 1,057-1% 954 1, % 1,074 1, x% CAGR Source: Preqin (2015 Preqin Global Private Equity & Venture Capital Report) 31

32

33 BACKUP 33 Large international PE firms minimize impact of long durations by making new investments, which still dominate portfolios Distribution of durations in portfolio per year for large international PE firms 1)2) % 12% 8% 7% 8% 9% 9% 12% 21% 17% 21% 16% 7% 4% 6% 23% 22% 13% 13% 18% 18% 21% 37% 13% 28% 21% 14% 7% 10% 19% 34% 32% 22% 12% 19% 24% 21% 100% 52% 60% 65% 72% 71% 58% 44% 40% 44% 49% 47% 46% 48% yrs yrs 3-5 yrs 0-3 yrs ) The distribution in for instance 2003 consists of the companies that were bought in 2003 or before and are still in the current portfolio, plus the companies in the exit portfolio that were bought in 2003 or before and were exited after 2003; 2) International PE firms are only included if ranked in the top-50 of total funds raised in the past 5 years (as of 2015), as compiled by Private Equity International (PEI300-ranking) Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio]; Private Equity International H1 33

34 BACKUP 34 By contrast, Dutch PE firms make relatively few new acquisitions, resulting in portfolios dominated by long durations Distribution of durations in portfolio per year for Dutch PE firms 1) % 7% 8% 6% 5% 7% 8% 15% 18% 16% 7% 5% 15% 11% 23% 17% 15% 18% 32% 14% 37% 6% 21% 31% 24% 23% 28% 26% 19% 26% 13% 13% 20% 27% 26% 74% 72% 75% 21% 69% 54% 59% 53% 52% 48% 42% 30% 28% 29% 100% H H1 7+ yrs 5-7 yrs 3-5 yrs 0-3 yrs 1) The distribution in for instance 2003 consists of the companies that were bought in 2003 or before and are still in the current portfolio, plus the companies in the exit portfolio that were bought in 2003 or before and were exited after 2003 Source: Merger Market database, downloaded on June 5, 2015 [Current and exit portfolio] 34