IPO or M&A? Why Indian promoters are choosing both
What Has Changed?
Live Events
IPO vs. M&A: What Founders Stand to Gain
Real-Time Instances: How India Is Playing The Dual Game
Dual-Track Being Execution-Heavy Is Worth It
What H2 2025 Will Bring
The Bigger Picture
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel
As India steps into the second half of 2025, the country's most ambitious Founders are exiting differently. IPO and M&A are no longer a binary choice. This is the dual-track exit era: When companies prepare for an IPO but keep strategic or financial M&A discussions alive. Long considered a hedge in Western markets, this approach is now an intentional and predominant playbook in India.And this is not just talk. IPO filings of over INR 1.1 lakh crore (USD ~12.7bn) in H1, and more than USD 20bn in disclosed M&A deals, including inbound interest in fintech, NBFCs Q-commerce , and defence, speak for themselves. However, the untold story lies deep beneath the filings, where Founders are engaging in a parallel choreography of multiple processes.IPO used to be the aspirational route, while M&As always seemed to be Plan B. But 2025 has replaced this thinking. Today, founders prepare for IPOs to unlock M&A premium and vice versa.Firstly, regulatory uncertainty posed roadblocks at the structural level. The reverse flip, i.e., the relocation of Indian-origin startups from Delaware/Singapore back into India, is now quite routine. Several high-growth companies have demonstrated that it is not only feasible but also rewarding, particularly with Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) increasingly attending to technological intricacies in IPO vetting, along with MCA/RBI setting up easements in compliance procedures.Secondly, late-stage capital has become selective, thereby forcing Founders to bake in some measures of optionality. The mere preparation of a Draft Red Herring Prospectus (DRHP), with its rigour in compliance, disclosures, and governance, forces a company to become exit-ready, however, whichever door it walks through.Thirdly, market volatility exists. What might seem like a golden IPO window in Q1 can suddenly be gone by Q3. Running a synchronised M&A process provides a fallback or, in many cases, a much speedier, cleaner route.IPOs pave the way for long-term growth capital, boost brand visibility, and create a public currency for future deals. M&As bring speed, valuation clarity, and the potential for strategic synergies. Today, Founders are not choosing one over the other; they are leveraging both. Dual tracking is no longer a fallback; it's a forward-looking strategy to maximise value, retain leadership, and shape the future on their terms.A leading fintech unicorn filed its DRHP to raise INR 2,600 crores, post its reverse-flip back to India in April 2025. No M&A deal is prima facie announced; however, indications suggest that the company is setting IPO valuation as the pricing anchor for strategic acquirers.Meanwhile, a prominent quick commerce player has quietly advanced its dual-track agenda. After re-domiciling to India in 2024, its path to IPO was always expected. However, multiple suitors are reportedly circling, and the company seems to be using M&A interest as a pricing test before officially filing its DRHP.In the industrial space, a major building materials company has taken a textbook dual-track approach. While it has SEBI's nod for an INR 4,000 crore IPO, it is also actively exploring inorganic expansion via distressed asset acquisitions under India's Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) framework. This two-pronged play supports growth and enhances the company's appeal to both public investors and strategic buyers.These are no longer isolated cases, but structural changes affecting the exit planning side, as well as the way Indian companies view liquidity strategy in comparison with timing, readiness, and leverage.The true dual-track process is by no means a passive hedge, but an execution-intensive strategy. Companies must maintain two parallel data rooms - one for IPO diligence and the other for private buyers. The narrative must be tailored differently - growth, governance and scalability for public markets; synergies and market consolidation for strategic buyers. Advisors such as bankers, lawyers, and consultants need to be coordinated to run parallel but distinct processes. Public disclosures like DRHP filings must be timed with precision. They can be used tactically to spark or strengthen M&A conversations, creating price tension across both tracks.The IPO calendar for H2 2025 is packed, with several large companies across infrastructure, fintech, and consumer sectors preparing to test public market appetite. Meanwhile, strategists sit on record dry powder. Global majors in defence, payments, and consumer internet are scouring India not for early-stage bets but for exit-ready, governance-strong assets.Pre-IPO dealmaking is likely to accelerate, particularly for companies in the INR 500–2,000 crore revenue band, where public market appetite may remain sector-sensitive or ambiguous. Dual-track exits will also expand beyond tech into new verticals such as renewables, EV infrastructure, healthcare delivery, and logistics.Interestingly, the DRHP itself is gaining a new role, less as a declaration of IPO intent, more as a pricing discovery tool. Increasingly, founders and boards are using it as the new term sheet, signalling readiness and setting valuation benchmarks that strategic buyers must react to.We believe the rise of dual-track exits marks more than just a tactical shift; it signals a maturing of India's private capital ecosystem. This is where Founder ambition meets institutional discipline. Companies are no longer reactive to market sentiment; they're proactively shaping outcomes with optionality built into every decision. Dual tracking is not about indecision, but intelligent design. For founders, it means greater control over timing and valuation. For investors, it offers more flexible exit pathways. And for India Inc., it points to a new era of dealmaking, one that blends global capital sensibilities with India's appetite for innovation and growth.(The author is , Partner, Deal Value Creation Services, BDO India)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
24 minutes ago
- India.com
DNA Analysis
From consumer goods to the pharmaceutical sector, every assessment indicates that Trump's excessive tariffs on India will ultimately harm the United States. However, Trump remains firm on increasing tariffs. The reason is clear: for Trump, these tariffs are not just an economic issue but a weapon for blackmailing. The first target of this strategy is Russian oil, and the second is the BRICS alliance standing against America. One member of BRICS today gave Trump a tough message—Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. In today's DNA, we analysed the strong defiance shown by BRICS members, particularly Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who openly rejected any negotiations with Trump and characterized his approach as mere intimidation rather than dialogue. #DNAWithRahulSinha #DNA #DonaldTrump… — Zee News (@ZeeNews) August 6, 2025 In a speech, Brazil's president said, 'I will talk to Xi Jinping, I will send an invitation to India's Prime Minister Modi, and if Putin were able to travel, I would invite him too. But I will not talk to Trump because he does not want to talk—he only wants to threaten.' Why did Brazil's president use such strong words against Trump? The reason lies in the harsh tariffs Trump has imposed on BRICS members. Russian oil is merely an excuse; Trump's real goal is to weaken the BRICS group to maintain Western dominance in the world. To understand why Trump harbors such animosity towards the BRICS coalition, one must look closely at the key decisions made at the last BRICS summit. At the summit held in Brazil, the first decision was that BRICS members will conduct trade in their own currencies in the future, which directly threatens the influence of the US dollar over a large part of the world. The members also agreed to establish a BRICS Bank similar to the World Bank. If such a financial institution comes into existence, it will reduce the importance of Western-backed institutions like the World Bank. Additionally, BRICS members decided to increase strategic cooperation to combat terrorism and terror-supporting countries. Should this happen, a significant part of Asia and Africa could pose an organized strategic challenge to the United States and its Western allies. For these reasons, Trump is determined to force BRICS members to bend and create divisions within the alliance. While tariff threats have made 34 countries yield, Trump has been unable to make BRICS's key members—India, China, Russia, and Brazil—budge at all.
India.com
24 minutes ago
- India.com
Trump's 50% tariffs on India! which sectors will impact? study says ‘estimated impact of…'
U.S. President Donald Trump has announced a 50% tariff on Indian goods, which will take effect from August 7. This move raised major concerns about its potential impact on the Indian economy. However, there's some good news a new report suggests the impact will be minimal. According to a study by the PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PHDCCI), the tariff is expected to affect India's GDP by only 0.19%, which is almost negligible. Out of India's total exports worth $86.5 billion, only $8.1 billion around 1.87% will be affected by this move. Trump Tariffs: What PHDCCI Study Says? The paper, released by the PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PHDCCI), also recommends a series of measures to mitigate the impact of US tariffs. 'Our analysis indicates that there will be an estimated impact of only 1.87 per cent on India's total global merchandise exports and a negligible 0.19 per cent on India's GDP as a result of a 25 per cent tariff announced by the US on India,' said Hemant Jain, President, PHDCCI. The study said the total potential export impact is estimated at USD 8.1 billion based on 2024-25 merchandise exports of USD 86.5 billion (1.87 per cent of India's total global export). Which Sectors Will Impact By Trump Tariffs? Among other sectors, the study said the levies would impact engineering goods (USD 1.8 billion), gems and jewellery (USD 932 million), and ready-made garments (USD 500 million). In the wake of the US tariffs, the industry body has recommended several measures, including increasing market penetration, product development and market diversification. It suggested that stakeholders should negotiate bundled-pricing deals (textiles plus accessories) to absorb some tariff cost and maintain shelf-price competitiveness. 'Leverage Indian diaspora networks (trade fairs, cultural events) to boost volume with existing buyers under current product portfolios,' it said. PHDCCI also made a strong case for investments in joint ventures with US firms to produce tariff-sensitive goods on-shore, thereby converting exports into high-value services and intellectual property (IP) licensing. (With Inputs From PTI)
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Decoding China, the lessons for a vulnerable India
The exodus of over 300 Chinese engineers from Foxconn's pivotal iPhone 17 manufacturing facilities in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka — a recent move ostensibly executed under corporate directive — is far more than an administrative recalibration. It is a meticulously calibrated stratagem, designed to arrest India's burgeoning manufacturing ambitions and to perpetuate a 'unipolar Asia' under Beijing's overarching economic hegemony. A geo-economic move This calculated withdrawal is not simply a logistical reshuffling. It is a subtle, yet potent, geo-economic manoeuvre by a rival apprehensive of a rising India. The recall of these highly specialised technicians, possessed of invaluable expertise in establishing sophisticated production lines, optimising operational efficiencies, and troubleshooting the labyrinthine complexities of modern manufacturing, represents a deliberate impediment to the crucial transfer of technology. Such knowledge is the bedrock upon which India seeks to construct its edifice of advanced electronics manufacturing, and its withholding strikes at the very heart of India's aspirational ascent. In addition, China has leveraged its dominance in rare earth production and processing by restricting exports of rare earths (which include elements such as gallium, germanium, graphite), and rare earth magnets, which are crucial for electric vehicles and electronics, to India. China has also imposed curbs on the export of other critical minerals that are vital for various high-tech industries. There have also been informal trade restrictions on the export of capital equipment from China to India, including high-end manufacturing equipment for electronics assembly and other sectors, heavy-duty boring machines and solar equipment, severely impacting India's ability to set up and expand its own manufacturing facilities. The broader implication of these actions, particularly the recall of engineers and restrictions on specialised equipment, is a deliberate attempt to limit the transfer of advanced manufacturing technology and know-how to India. This aims to keep India dependent on Chinese inputs and prevent it from developing a truly self-reliant high-value manufacturing base. Crucially, many of these restrictions are not formalised bans but are implemented through verbal instructions and administrative delays. This makes them harder to directly challenge but equally effective in disrupting supply chains, increasing costs, and creating uncertainty for Indian manufacturers. In essence, China's strategy is multi-pronged, leveraging its control over crucial raw materials, manufacturing equipment, and even human capital to impede India's manufacturing ascent, especially in the high-stakes electronics and emerging technology sectors. These actions, when viewed through the prism of Beijing's anxieties concerning India's emergence as a potentially formidable manufacturing competitor in an era of 'friend-shoring' by the West, align perfectly with its broader strategic calculus. China's economic success is increasingly predicated upon maintaining robust export revenues. Consequently, any nation daring to challenge its pre-eminence in global manufacturing, particularly in high-value sectors such as electronics, is inevitably perceived not merely as a competitor but also as an existential threat. The withdrawal of these engineers, therefore, constitutes a potent stratagem to disrupt India's trajectory and safeguard China's long-entrenched export market share and economic primacy in the region and beyond. India's ambition to transform itself into a globally competitive manufacturing hub is seen in Beijing as a direct challenge to China's long-term stability. The reality in China Consider the demographic exigencies currently confronting China: an ageing and progressively shrinking populace, an unfortunate legacy of the protracted one-child policy, coupled with a palpable erosion of wealth occasioned by an enduring property crisis — even as local satraps exceed production targets in their zeal to impress Beijing. This widening structural imbalance between an excessive production capacity and faltering domestic consumption increasingly compels China to lean heavily on export revenues to underwrite its fiscal outlays and maintain a semblance of economic progress. As its social welfare and pension liabilities burgeon exponentially, the Chinese government finds itself under mounting fiscal duress. Any reduction of export revenues would directly impinge upon Beijing's capacity to fund critical domains such as domestic security and military expenditure, potentially precipitating an undesirable degree of social instability. China's formidable trade surplus, now on the cusp of a trillion dollars, is not solely a testament to its industrial prowess but also a stark manifestation of weak internal consumption and persistent industrial overcapacity. The People's Bank of China's repeated interest rate reductions on savings accounts have largely failed to ignite internal demand. This chronic overcapacity, therefore, constrains Chinese enterprises to aggressively depress prices and inundate international markets in a desperate bid to remain solvent — a strategy that has, perhaps ironically, severely eroded profitability across a plethora of sectors. As a result, China's determined endeavours to stymie competition are not merely a reflection of simple geopolitical rivalry. Rather, they are an undeniable reflection of profound domestic compulsions. Should India, by dint of astute policy and diligent execution, succeed in getting its house in order and convincingly demonstrate the potential to compete comprehensively in the global manufacturing landscape, Beijing is highly likely to escalate its countermeasures. These could range from the insidious pressures of economic coercion to outright military posturing, all in a relentless quest to safeguard its core economic interests and, by extension, its internal stability. However, the news of the U.S. raising India's tariffs to 50%, even while China enjoys a 90-day exemption from punitive tariffs despite buying more Russian oil and gas than India does, makes India less of a threat to China. While India has been seen as a key partner in western efforts to diversify supply chains away from China, the imposition of the new U.S. tariffs serves as a reminder that all alignments carry their own fragilities, and underscores the need for India to build true strategic autonomy. The Indian Prime Minister's forthcoming visit to Beijing comes against this complex backdrop. An appraisal of India's strengths, shadows China's industrial pre-eminence is not fortuitous or trivial; it is a systemic dominance that spans critical and emerging sectors, from the esoteric realms of Artificial Intelligence and quantum computing to the cutting-edge frontiers of 6G telecommunications and electric vehicles. We need to understand that China does not merely export goods; it orchestrates and largely controls global supply chains in these advanced technologies. Even its overcapacity, otherwise a sign of economic infirmity, is being deftly weaponised as a strategic instrument for price suppression and audacious market capture. The aggressive pricing strategies employed by behemoths such as BYD in the electric vehicle segment are a quintessential illustration: by flooding global markets with irresistibly priced goods, China effectively stifles nascent competition and inexorably solidifies its global market share. This is economic statecraft in action. In stark contrast, India's manufacturing ecosystem, despite its vibrant aspirations, remains undeniably nascent. The cherished dream of transforming into a global 'manufacturing hub' frequently founders upon a litany of formidable hurdles, including persistent infrastructure lacunae and the pervasive sclerosis of bureaucratic red tape. We remain regrettably reliant on imports for a pantheon of crucial components — ranging from sophisticated chips and engines to semiconductors and sensors — even for the foundational 'screwdriver technology' indispensable for basic assembly. This profound reliance on external sources underscores the considerable ground India must traverse to genuinely metamorphose into a self-sufficient manufacturing powerhouse. 'Make in India' still needs help from outside India. From Beijing's vantage point, China has nothing to worry about yet; its actions against India are an effort to neutralise potential 'noise' within its immediate periphery while it assiduously scales up its economic and political corridors with key strategic partners across the sprawling geographies of Pakistan,the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Africa, and Latin America. India's narrative of offering an alternative to the Chinese behemoth falters on our own dependence. If India genuinely harbours the ambition to 'compete' on the global stage, it needs a laser-like focus on its own foundational development. That is what China's behaviour has taught India: The onus is on us Indians. Shashi Tharoor is a former Under-Secretary General of the United Nations, a fourth-term Member of Parliament (Congress), Lok Sabha, for Thiruvananthapuram, Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, and the Sahitya Akademi Award-winning author of 27 books, including 'Pax Indica: India and the World of the 21st Century' (2012)
