Case 66 / 183 Analyst

M&A Due Diligence Priorities

M&A & Deal Analysis

The prompt

“What to check first, red flags by workstream, go/no-go framework”

📋 What you're given

What to check first, red flags by workstream, go/no-go framework

1. Task Overview

Task: Prioritize the acquirer's due diligence workstreams for a target company, score the red flags each workstream uncovers, and translate that score into a go/no-go recommendation.

Step 1: Given Data — Due Diligence Findings

The buyer's advisors have completed initial fieldwork across six workstreams and reported the following findings for the target.

WorkstreamWeightKey FindingSeverity Rating (1-5)
Financial30% (0.30)Revenue recognition irregularity flagged in Q4 review4
Legal20% (0.20)Unresolved patent-ownership dispute with a former employee3
Commercial20% (0.20)Top 3 customers account for 40% of revenue3
Operational15% (0.15)Core production equipment averages 12 years old, no capex plan2
Tax10% (0.10)Unfiled state tax returns in two jurisdictions for FY20243
HR5% (0.05)CEO operates without a signed employment or non-compete agreement2

Step 2: Weighted Red Flag Score

Show Weighted Red Flag Score Formula

Weighted Red Flag Score = Σ (Workstream Weight × Severity Rating)

Using this formula, compute the weighted red flag score across all six workstreams.

Step 3: Go/No-Go Recommendation

Show Go/No-Go Formula

Decision = "Proceed" if Score < 2.5; "Proceed with Price/Terms Adjustment" if 2.5 ≤ Score < 3.5; "Escalate to IC / Walk Away" if Score ≥ 3.5

Assume:

  • Score thresholds above were pre-agreed with the deal team before fieldwork began
  • Severity Rating of 5 represents a deal-breaker finding on its own, regardless of workstream weight

Using these inputs, determine the recommendation the DD team should bring to the investment committee.

💡 Model answer

Try answering out loud first — then reveal the model answer and compare.

⚠️ Common mistakes

  • Treating due diligence as a pass/fail checklist instead of a weighted risk assessment — not every red flag deserves the same response
  • Letting one severe finding in a low-weight workstream (e.g., HR) drive the same reaction as a moderate finding in a high-weight workstream (e.g., Financial)
  • Forgetting that a single deal-breaker-level finding (Severity 5) can override the weighted score entirely, regardless of how low the other workstreams score
  • Confusing "walk away" with "renegotiate" — most red flags are priced or structured around, not treated as automatic deal killers
  • Stopping at "we found issues" without translating findings into concrete purchase agreement mechanics (price adjustment, escrow, indemnity, earnout)

🔁 Follow-up questions

Previous Case 65: MAC Clause and Deal Closing Risk

⭐ Rate this case

0 ratings

💬 Comments (0)

No comments yet — be the first to ask a question.

Part of a 183-case learning path. Create a free account to save progress & unlock follow-up answers.
Create free account