Agefi Luxembourg - mars 2026

AGEFI Luxembourg 30 Mars 2026 Fonds d’investissement By Samuel CLERC, Partner – Head of Transaction Services & Sébastien DEMADE, Senior Manager – Corporate Finance, Haca Partners T he small-cap segment occupies a distinctive positionwithin the M&A landscape. It represents a substantial share of the landscape, both in terms of the number of companies and its contribu- tion to employment and value creation, while remaining structurally under-equipped in the face of the growing sophistication of investment processes. The SMEs concer- ned are numerous, oftenpro- fitable and sometimes highly specialized, yet rarely prepared for themethodological and informational standards nowexpectedby increasingly demanding and structured financial investors. In this context, transac- tion services are still too oftenperceived as costly tools designedprimarily for larger transactions and therefore difficult to recon- cilewith the budgetary, organizational, and human constraints typically associatedwith small-cap environments. This perception nevertheless deserves to be fun- damentally reconsidered. While resources may be more limited in small-cap deals, the margin for error is equally narrow. Even minor uncertainty regarding performance, cash generation, or the sustainability of the business model can result in disproportionate valuation adjustments, reinforced contractual protection mechanisms, or a lasting deterioration in the relationship between sellers and investors. In such an environment, transaction services, when designed in a targeted, proportionate, and prag- matic manner, move beyond their traditional role as risk-mitigation tools and instead become gen- uine strategic levers for value creation. The Small-Cap Context: Structurally Different Challenges Most small-cap transactions involve SMEs with concentrated shareholding structures, often fam- ily-owned, where governance is centered around a founder or long-standing CEO. This individual frequently combines the roles of business leader, strategic decision-maker, and principal financial authority. Such centralization often allows for agility and rapid decision-making process. However, from an investor’s perspective, it also represents a structural risk that must be clearly understood and, where possible, mitigated. Within these organizations, the finance function is rarely designed as a strategic management tool. Instead, it primarily serves regulatory-relatedpur- poses: producing annual financial statements, managing the relationship with the external accountant, and overseeing tax and social obliga- tions. Monitoring tools may exist, but they are often heterogeneous, insufficiently documented, and heavily reliant on a limited number of key individuals. While this situation does not neces- sarily prevent the company from operating effi- ciently, it significantly limits its ability to articulate and demonstrate its value creation to external stakeholders. At the same time, the budgets allocated to transac- tion processes are structurally constrained. Yet the stakes involvedare considerable.Asmall-cap trans- action is rarely apurelyfinancial event. It frequently entails decisions relating to governance, strategic trajectory, and, in some cases, generational succes- sion. For the business owner, such a transaction typically represents amajor personal wealth event. Another defining feature of small-cap transactions is the presence of pronounced information asym- metry. Companies may generate revenue, profit, and therefore cash, but the financial translation of this performance is often incomplete. EBITDAnor- malization may be insufficiently documented, working capital management may rely on empiri- cal practices rather than structured analysis, and certain commercial or managerial dependencies may remain informal. From an investor’s perspec- tive, this asymmetry increases the profile of risk andultimately translates into implicit valuationdis- counts ormore restrictive contractualmechanisms. Why Standard Transaction Services Approaches Quickly Reach Their Limits Traditionaltransactionservicesmethodologies,large- ly inherited frommid-cap or large-cap transactions, rapidlyrevealtheirlimitations.Theseapproachesare typicallybasedon exhaustivemethodologies, exten- sive checklists, andvoluminous deliverables that are difficult to reconcile with the organizational and financial realities of small-caps. The first limitation relates to the operational burden associatedwithdue diligence processes. Documen- tation requests are often structured according to standardized frameworks that do not sufficiently account for the materiality of the issues under re- view. In an SME environment, every request has a cost: itmobilizes theCEO, theCFO, and sometimes the external accountant. When the effort required becomes disproportionate to the matters at stake, transaction services might be perceived as sources of disruption rather thandrivers for value creation. A second limitation concerns the way findings are presented and communicated. Technicallyflawless reportsmay nevertheless prove of limitedpractical use if they fail to clearly prioritize key findings and explicitly connect themtovaluation considerations, deal structuring, or negotiationdynamics. In small- cap transactions, the value of transaction services lies less in exhaustive analysis than in their ability to rapidly illuminate decision-making and struc- ture dialogue between the various stakeholders. Finally, traditional approaches tend to be exces- sively backward-looking. Investors do not merely seek to verify historical performance; they are pri- marily interested inunderstanding the sustain- ability of that performance and its ability to translate into cash generation over time.An analysis focused solely onhis- torical data limits the ability to project value forward and to build a credible narrative around the company’s future trajectory. AdaptingTransactionServices: ATargeted,Modular, and PragmaticApproach In the small-cap segment, the effectiveness of trans- action services depends on their ability to be adapt- ed to the specific context of eachdeal. This requires a deliberately scoped, modular approach that focuses on the topicsmost likely to influence valu- ation or deal structure. The first step involves iden- tifying so-called value killers capable of undermin- ing the economic value of the transaction. Dependence on a key customer, fragile margin structures, volatility in working capital require- ments, non-recurring elementswithin EBITDA, or chronic underinvestment can have a far greater impact than secondary accounting matters. The core of the analysis should focus on the EBIT- DA–cash–working capital triangle. The objective is not merely to validate financial figures, but to understand the underlying economic mecha- nisms that drive performance. With respect to EBITDA, the challenge lies in distinguishing recurring operational performance from excep- tional elements. Regarding working capital, the objective is to assess the structural characteristics of the operating cycle and its sensitivity to growth. As for cash generation, the key point is evaluating the company’s real capacity to finance its development without excessive reliance on external funding. In organizations with limited internal financial resources, the information required for such anal- ysis often exists but is scattered or insufficiently structured. Transaction services therefore play an important role in structuring this information and transforming intuitive knowledge of the business into clear financial insights. Creating Value Despite Limited Resources Budget constraints, far from being a structural obstacle, can actually become a source of efficiency. They impose discipline and encourage a focus on the issues that trulymatter for investors and trans- action outcomes. A business-oriented interpreta- tion of financial data helps connect numerical indi- cators with operational realities. It allows analysts to explain variations in margins, identify the true drivers of profitability, and distinguish structural trends from temporary fluctuations. This type of analysis is particularly valuable to investors, who are primarily concerned with understanding how the company generates sustainable value. Transaction services alsoplay apivotal role in struc- turing the company’s financial narrative . In small- capenvironments, the entrepreneurial story is often compelling, reflectingyears of operational expertise and market positioning. However, the financial narrative may remain fragmented or overly intu- itive. By structuring a coherent narrative supported by robust data, transaction services significantly strengthen the company’s credibility and facilitate more productive dialogue with investors. Finally, anticipating the issues most likely to arise during investor discussions represents a powerful tool for securing the transaction process. Topics such as customer concentration, dependence on the CEO, EBITDA recurring components, main- tenance capital expenditure requirements, and the evolution of working capital systematically emerge during negotiations. Identifying these issues early helps avoid late-stage surprises that could affect valuation or deal structuring. ESG in Small-Cap Transactions: From Perceived Constraint toMeasurable Value Lever Environmental, Social, and Governance consider- ations are increasingly becoming an integral com- ponent of investment analysis, including in the small-cap segment. This development reflects a broader recognition that extra-financial factors directly influence the resilience and sustainability of business performance. InSMEs, ESGissues rarely take the formof complex reporting frameworks or highly formalizedpolicies. Instead, they often manifest through operational practices that remain implicit. Governance concen- tratedarounda single leader, relianceonkey talents, regulatoryexposure, or supplychain robustness can all influence investor perceptions of risk. Transaction services help identify the topics that are materially relevant and link them to financial performance and risk assessment. Governance structures, human capital management practices, regulatory exposure, supply chain resilience, and environmental factors all contribute to reducing perceived investor uncertainty. More importantly, ESG considerations are emerg- ing as measurable drivers of value creation. Stronger governance reduces key-person risk, while robust HR practices support talent reten- tion. From an environmental standpoint, energy transition policies help anticipate regulatory and transition risks while improving resilience to external shocks. Conclusion: Rethinking Transaction Services for the Small-Cap Segment In the small-cap segment, transaction services can- not simply replicate methodologies originally designed for larger transactions. Instead, theymust be reconsideredas tools for economic insight, reduc- tion of information asymmetry, and decision secu- rity. In an environmentwhere resources are limited but the stakes remain high, efficiency and pragma- tism take precedence over exhaustive analysis. Transaction services that are carefully calibrated and focused on the genuine drivers of value enhance the attractiveness of the company and strengthen the robustness of its valuation. Ultimately, the objective is not merely to conduct due diligence, but to make the company’s value clearer, more credible, and ultimately more defen- sible from an investor’s perspective. Transaction Services and Small-Cap Deals: Creating Value Despite Budget Constraints Par Frédéric LOISEL – Co-Gestionnaire QCFL Bond Investment Opportunity - Quaero Capital S i le mille-pattes se deman- dait dans quel ordre il doit bouger ses pattes pour avancer, il se condamnerait à une immobilité suicidaire. Le syndrome du mille-pattes est aussi connu sous le nom de loi de Humphrey qui stipule que prêter une attention consciente à une action faite sans y penser comme res- pirer, ou à une habitude acquise comme marcher, peut interférer avec la capacité à l’accomplir. Sur les marchés financiers, le syndrome du mille- pattes s’oppose dans ses effets aux esprits ani- maux théorisés par Keynes. Le syndrome du mille-pattes est un détraqueur de tendance. Il affecte aujourd’hui lesménages américains en modifiant leur comportement d’investisseur. Le syndrome du mille-pattes traduit l’idée que l’effet de richesse induit par la hausse des marchés n’est plus perçu par les ménages comme un acquis aussi naturel que l’air que l’on respire. Le doute s’est installé. C’est une mauvaise nouvelle au regard du rôle central joué par les particuliers dans la dyna- mique boursière depuis deux ans. On le mesure à l’importance prise par les flux retail dans le volume quotidien traité sur les marchés actions américains (18% au premier semestre 2025 selon JPMorgan et Jeffries) ; et sur- tout à la stratégie d’investissement dite « buying the dip » (achat sur repli) plébiscitée par les par- ticuliers l’année dernière. Elle explique largement la puissance du rebond des marchés américains après « Liberation day ». Le syndrome du mille-pattes s’épanouit dans des environnements bien spécifiques. Le contexte américain marqué par la dégradation du marché de l’emploi et la hausse de l’endette- ment des ménages constitue un terrain claire- ment favorable. Sur l’emploi américain, le chiffre de janvier sorti très au-dessus des attentes (130K vs 35K atten- dus), masque une réalité plus sombre que tra- duit la très forte révision de nombre d’emplois créés sur toute l’année 2025. Avec une baisse de 1,029 millions, c’est la plus forte révision depuis 2009. Il n’y aura eu que finalement que 181K emplois créés en 2025, ce qui est historiquement très faible pour une année d’expansion écono- mique. La hausse de la productivité ne peut pas tout expliquer. Sur l’endettement, le dernier rapport trimestriel de la Fed de New York sur la dette des ménages et le crédit confirme la poursuite de la hausse amorcée en 2023 des défauts de paiement à plus de 90 jours des particuliers (« serious deliquen- cies ») sur la plupart des postes suivis : student loan, credit card et auto loan notamment. Le syndrome du mille pattes n’est pas la cause de la correction actuelle des marchés, mais il affaiblit considérablement leur potentiel de rebond. C’est un point clef dans un contexte boursier fragilisé par la prise de conscience du caractère disruptif de l’application de la techno- logie IA à de nombreux secteurs économiques. La baisse de l’or, celles des valeurs technolo- giques et du Bitcoin ont en effet plus fragilisé le bilan des particuliers que celui des investisseurs institutionnels. Moins exposés aux cryptos (le marché reste encore à 85% un marché retail), à la tech (baisse graduelle de l’exposition observée début 2025), ces derniers sont également entrés plus tôt sur l’or (2023 et 2024 pour les banques centrales, contre mi-2025 pour les particuliers). www.quaerocapital.com Le syndrome du mille-pattes prodrome d’un BearMarket ?