Europe's M&A market is alive and kicking - in spite of the odds
'Despite persistent macroeconomic headwinds, including elevated recession risk, geopolitical instability, and renewed trade friction, global M&A remained remarkably resilient in the first half of 2025,' said Garrett Hinds, PE senior research analyst at Pitchbook.
'Total deal value reached $2.0 trillion across 24,793 transactions in the first half of 2025, representing year-on-year increases of 13.6% and 16.2%, respectively,' he said in Pitchbook's latest M&A report.
While the global landscape is looking surprisingly optimistic, so is the dealmaking environment in Europe. In fact, if companies can repeat the number of deals completed in the first half of 2025, M&A count in Europe is pacing for its best year in over a decade.
The valuation gap
Last year represented a period of recovery for dealmaking after a period of rising interest rates and economic uncertainty in 2023. Despite this, negotiations were still stalled by valuation gaps, as buyers and sellers failed to agree on the worth of firms.
'When a company has acquired a business, for example, in the M&A boom of 2020 and then expects to sell that company in 2025, following a rise in interest rates, inflation, and tariffs, there's going to be an expectation by the seller that the value of the business has increased or that they're going to get their money back,' Lorenzo Corte, global co-head of Skadden's transactional practice, told Euronews.
He continued: 'Oftentimes that expectation doesn't meet with the expectation of buyers…which results in either the sale not being made or the sale being made with mechanisms that are designed to bridge the value gap, which get quite complicated.'
One way to do this is by using an 'earn-out' mechanism. This allows the buyer to pay part of the purchase price at a later date, and the amount owed will depend on how well the business performs.
Related
Vodafone EU chief: Telecoms barriers can't just be blamed on Brussels
Banking mergers are hot right now, but cross-border deals still face hurdles
While the global economic environment remains volatile, easing inflation and interest rates now mean that valuation gaps are less of a stumbling block.
'What you saw when we moved from a low-rate environment to a higher-interest-rate environment was that people simply couldn't do their modelling,' said Nigel Wellings, partner and co-head of corporate in Europe at Clifford Chance.
'So they couldn't work out what the cost of their debt was going to be over three to five years. And if you can't do that, it's very difficult for a buyer to come up with a valuation.'
He added that although uncertainty persists, companies have 'more of a sense of the direction of travel of rates'.
A shifting business landscape
Company leaders are being forced to reassess their priorities in a changing world, notably as themes such as the green transition and artificial intelligence take centre stage.
This is one factor driving M&A in 2025, with firms looking to sell non-core units or acquire others to re-position their focus.
'Many of the CEOs that we interview every year as part of the Global CEO Survey, they tell us that they don't think their business model is actually fit for purpose if you look at the next 10 years,' said Erik Hummitzsch, partner and EMEA & German deals leader at PwC Germany.
He told Euronews: 'Therefore M&A is used to sell parts of the business that may not make it over the next decade. Or firms may buy other companies to take a different approach when managing their portfolio.'
Firms are also selling or acquiring businesses to adapt to geopolitical shifts, limiting their exposure to challenging markets while increasing their presence in others.
In particular, Pitchbook analysts expect sectors with tight margins to see increasing consolidation this year. For example, the automobile and chemical industries could be forced to scale because of cost pressures, largely linked to tariffs from the US government. Increased spending on aerospace and defence also makes businesses within these sectors attractive targets for growth-focused M&A.
In the April to June period, the IT sector was the only area in Europe to record a quarter-on-quarter increase in M&A value, rising by 36.6%.
Is Europe still scared of scale?
At the end of last year, optimism in the US was partially driven by a belief that President Trump would loosen regulatory controls on dealmaking.
Over in Europe, Skadden's Lorenzo Corte said that similar enthusiasm was sparked by the Draghi report, published in September. The report, which arrived with much fanfare in Brussels, included a series of proposals on EU competitiveness, authored by former ECB president Mario Draghi.
'The Draghi report was a call to encourage consolidation in Europe in order for European companies to compete with their global competitors more efficiently,' said Corte.
'So I think the players in the market were expecting a significant amount of consolidation to kickstart in Europe. I think there's been some, and that it will continue, although it's still too short a period to evaluate an actual trend.'
When it comes to merger approvals, the EU is often criticised for being overly cautious. The Commission has, for example, blocked deals between rail giants Siemens Mobility and Alstom, or between airlines Ryanair and Aer Lingus, over concerns they would harm market competition. A deal between Mars and Kellanova is currently stalled while it awaits a green light from competition officials.
Related
RTL to buy Sky Deutschland for €150mn in TV consolidation effort
Seeking significant growth, Euronext hails EU merger softening
And it's not just the Commission that is holding up deals. National governments can also complicate mergers, as seen with the Spanish government's hostility to BBVA's takeover of rival bank Sabadell.
According to Clifford Chance's Nigel Wellings, there is now a realisation from the EU that 'it can't just react negatively to scale' and that 'big doesn't always mean bad'.
He argued: 'If you're in a sector like financial services, where you're competing globally, then scale and being a European champion is a positive.'
The EU's ability to foster industrial champions is also particularly relevant when it comes to defence. In response to geopolitical tensions and entreaties from US president Donald Trump, member states have been ramping up military spending, with Germany notably loosening its debt-brake rule to boost defence and infrastructure capabilities.
Moving through the headwinds
Analysts suggest that this year's M&A market is neither red hot nor entirely sluggish, with tariffs and economic risks counteracted by easing interest rates and a greater appetite for scale.
The trajectory for the months ahead depends largely on President Trump's tariffs and the economic consequences. Investors will also be watching developments in Ukraine, regulatory shifts, and rate decisions from the ECB and the Federal Reserve.
Private equity exits, when PE investors sell a firm and return money to investors, have also been relatively weak over the past year. If PE firms can work through the backlog and free up capital, this will likely create more momentum in the year ahead.
'We're not at a heavy sell-side process where you put something on the market and three, four bidders come forward immediately,' said Wellings. 'But if you do your process properly and work hard on valuation, you're seeing deals come through.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
10 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Armenia-Azerbaijan Peace Deal And The New Trump Corridor
The leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan signed a Trump-brokered peace deal in the White House ending decades of tensions and conflict - if it holds. The deal includes the creation of a highly profitable strategic trade corridor that passes through both countries, incentivizing them to stay on course. That route, now known as the Zangezur Corridor ( previously discussed by this column multiple times), will be developed by American companies and rebranded Trump Route For International Peace and Prosperity (Tripp). It will include rail lines, communication lines, oil and gas is the route so important that age-old adversaries have potentially buried the hatchet in order to make it happen? The corridor would forge a pathway from the Stans in Central Asia down through the Caucasus to Turkey and beyond to the world, effectively revitalizing the old Silk Road. Which means it would bypass both Russia and Iran, countries which have hitherto colluded to keep Central Asia's trade access westward bottled up except via their territory. Russia, in particular, is the loser here having dominated the terrain for over two centuries, imposing a choke hold and Moscow-centric dependency on its backyard from Turkmenistan to Kyrgyzstan. Those economies now stand to be liberated geopolitically from effective control by understand the geopolitical implications full well. It looks, at first glance, as if their historic adversaries - namely the Turkic world - are empowered and physically reconnected through this plan. So why has Armenia consented? Answer: because Armenians now distrust Moscow as security guarantor and have found a new one instead. As this column has pointed out numerous times, Moscow repeatedly failed to defend its allies in recent years (think Syria and Iran) since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Armenians were astonished that Moscow allowed the Azeris to retake Nagorno Karabakh in 2023, then cynically turned around and offered to partner versions of the Zangezur that would include bringing in US participation, Armenia gets a new guarantor of its security, one that can keep the pan-Turkic threat in check, and achieves payback for Moscow's betrayal. For President Trump, the additional benefits include new leverage for his upcoming Ukraine peace talks with Putin, added leverage against Iran and - what nobody has mentioned - the replacement of China's trade route (Belt and Road Initiative) from linking via Iran at its final critical outlet stage. In the first instance, can offer to re-include Russia as a participant in the Zangezur - or not depending on Putin's intransigence. In the second case, Iran is faced with the threat of its northern Turkic neighbor Azerbaijan getting richer and acting as a magnet to the Iranian province of Azerbaijan to break off and join its Turkic cousins. With regard to China, a new trade outlet for Central Asia makes the hitherto landlocked regional Stans less dependent on neighboring Chinese trade and economic factor that goes unmentioned in the global coverage about TRIPP is the fate of Tbilisi. Currently, Georgia benefits substantially from acting as a trade route, not least for the oil pipeline that goes from Baku via Tbilisi to Ceyhan in Turkey. The Zangezur Corridor would render all that superfluous - thereby delivering a blow to Georgia's economy. And to its regime, universally acknowledged as directed behind-the-scenes by the country's richest man, Bidzina Ivanishvili, a pro-Russian influence on the country. His main rival and former President, now in prison, the pro-American Mikheil Saakashvili has gone public pointing out the potential geopolitical and economic disaster for Georgia in contrast to the Western-aligned era of his tenure as leader. 'Yes we are ending up in complete geopolitical isolation alongside Iran and Russia…This is where breaking our strategic alliance with America and Europe has brought us,' he says, while warning of 'accelerated emigration and deepening poverty'for his country. In short, the destabilizing of the pro-Moscow Georgian state would be yet another blow to Russia's strategic influence in its the outlook for TRIPP and the peace deal is not all smooth sailing either. Most recently, a top Iranian minister openly threatened repercussions against it saying 'this corridor will not become a passage owned by Trump but rather a graveyard for Trump's mercenaries'. Considering the amount of new infrastructure envisaged by the deal, maximal vulnerability to sabotage must also be considered. Which brings up the question of how participating US companies will defend the security of the route against the countries it geostrategically challenges. The Zangezur is essentially the equivalent of a Panama or Suez Canal both of which needed Western military support for decades during and after completion. Protecting such an endeavor would certainly require boots on the ground - which rather contradicts President Trump's America First pledges to avoid foreign military entanglements.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House: Infrastructure, economics at center of Trump Armenia-Azerbaijan peace deal
President Trump is putting infrastructure development and economic deals at the center of a peace deal between Azerbaijan and Armenia, as the administration pushes to achieve a historic truce in a decades-long conflict in the south Caucuses. Trump will host Armenia Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev for a signing ceremony at the White House on Friday. Included in the deal is a call for developing the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP). The White House described it as a multimodal transit area connecting mainland Azerbaijan and its Nakhchivan enclave, an autonomous region bordered by Armenia, Iran and Turkey. The White House said the transit corridor, which will cut through Armenia, will respect Yerevan's 'sovereignty and territorial integrity and its people.' The regional transit corridor is a long-held desire for Azerbaijan, and the Trump deal triggered pushback from Armenian diaspora groups in the U.S. who oppose moving forward with Baku without justice for years of conflict and the more recent Azerbaijani takeover of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, once an autonomous, Armenian stronghold. 'Real peace must be predicated on justice and accountability for Azerbaijan's ongoing human rights violations — these issues shouldn't be left on the back burner,' Alex Galitsky, program director at the Armenian National Committee of America advocacy group, told Politico. 'A deal that rewards Azerbaijan's aggression, undermines Armenia's sovereignty, and denies justice to Artsakh's Armenians will only make it harder to resolve these critical human rights issues down the line.' Part of the agreements being signed Friday include a commitment by Yerevan and Baku to sign a joint letter calling for the dissolution of the Minsk Group — chaired by the U.S., France and Russia — that was established to find a peaceful solution to the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh. The Trump administration said Armenia is bought in for the economic benefits expected from the transit corridor and separate deals signed with the U.S. Trump is expected to sign separate deals with Azerbaijan and Armenia spanning energy, technology, economic cooperation, border security, infrastructure and trade. 'Armenia walks out of this with an enormous strategic commercial partner, probably the most enormous and strategic in the history of the world, the United States of America. They wind up without concern about yesterday's conflict, and they're completely and totally optimistic about tomorrow's future,' a senior administration official said. The deal signed Friday is a directive to set up the TRIPP negotiating team to establish the commercial entities in control of development. The negotiations are likely to begin next week. 'Since the announcement yesterday morning, I received calls from nine different operators. I was pleased to see three different American operators,' a senior administration official said. 'We're going to get everybody around the table. We're going to find the most first-class operating system that we can, not because it brings peace, although that's a fantastic thing, but it's also going to bring commercial prosperity, which will ensure peace beyond just today's signing ceremony.' But the signing ceremony does mark a significant breakthrough in a devastating, more than three-decade conflict and has drawn bipartisan praise. 'This administration's infrastructure plan is a new and powerful element that could finally move the two sides closer to a ratified peace treaty. Good move,' Michael Carpenter, who served as former President Biden's senior director for Europe at the National Security Council, wrote on social media. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - New plan to limit Russian energy, protect US trade
President Trump has become increasingly angry with Russian President Vladimir Putin. For about two months he has been threatening the Kremlin with 'secondary' sanctions, which would impose high duties on imports from the nations which continue to purchase Russian energy resources. The Russians seem unfazed by Trump's warnings (as well as by Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) recent remarks), citing their resilience to sanctions. Several authoritative sources argue that the U.S. simply cannot afford to impose even 100 percent duties on China, India or Turkey. If all of Russia's energy trading partners were subjected to new tariffs, the U.S. would hijack a significant part of its foreign trade and ruin its trade relationships with at least 26 countries. I agree with those who believe the new tariffs cannot be put in place by Trump's updated deadline for Russia. We have seen that 125 percent duties on China lasted less than a month, and in recent days, President Trump has announced 50 percent tariffs against Brazil, 25 percent tariffs against India and 15 percent tariffs on the European Union. One hundred percent duties don't seem plausible. I would urge changing the overall approach to make the tariffs more affordable. The goal appears to be to cut Russia's energy supply to the world. Trump's plan should make Russian oil more expensive to the buyers (by the way, the European 'oil price cap' approach has failed. It resulted in discounts for the Russian oil, thus encouraging its smuggling and creation of Russia's 'shadow tanker fleet'). In this sense, Trump's position looks more effective — but the major problem lies in the numbers. The predecessor of Trump's strategy — the bill proposed by Sens. Graham and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) — calls for the duty to be applied to all imports coming to the U.S. from Russia's energy trading partners. I believe it is too radical and, frankly speaking, not very justified because of the lack of differentiation. A much better option would be to relate the tariffs to the actual amount of money countries pay to Moscow. For example, India sent $115 billion in its goods and services to the U.S. in 2024 and paid $49 billion for Russian oil that year. China exported $513 billion in goods to the U.S. in 2024 while it bought Russian oil, gas, and coal for up to $76 billion. The EU's figures stood at $939 billion and $34 billion, correspondingly. If the U.S. applies 100 percent tariffs linked to the Russian energy resources imported, it would fix additional duties for India this year at 42.6 percent of its exports to U.S., China's at 14.8 percent and Europe's at a mere 3.6 percent. These figures are not so astonishing. On the one hand, they seem manageable, and on the other hand, they still double the price of Russian oil for importing nations. If this strategy is taken as the principal one, the overall additional duties would equal the entire volume of Russia's energy exports, $261.9 billion for 2024. As the U.S. combined imports of goods and services amount to $4.11 trillion, the figure makes less than 6.5 percent in additional tariffs. It looks like a fair price for knocking Russia out as self-proclaimed 'energy superpower.' The measure would make Russia's 'shadow fleet' useless, since it doubles the price for Russia's energy for any country except those with zero exports to the U.S.. But these, if they exist, aren't significant oil importers that might be helpful to Moscow in substituting the vanishing demand for its oil and gas. I suggest amending Graham and Blumental's bill to impose the duty for goods or services imported into the U.S. to an amount that corresponds to each country's imports of Russian energy resources for the previous year. It would be a right recipe to destroy the Russian energy exports in two to three years and put Putin's economy on the brink of collapse without ruining America's trade ties to its major commercial partners. Should Trump adopt such a plan on Aug. 11, the chances of stopping Russia's aggression against Ukraine could rise significantly. Vladislav Inozemtsev is special adviser to the Middle East Media Research Institute's Russian Media Studies Project and is co-founder and senior fellow at the Center for Analysis and Strategies in Europe. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
