Impact Story
AI Was in the Plan. It’s Not in the EBITDA.
Where are you in the transaction?
Pre-Close Diligence
Post-Close Value Creation
Execute the thesis. Build the foundation. Move the EBITDA.
Carveout Management
Separate the asset cleanly. Exit the TSA on time. Start the hold period on solid ground. See carveout services
Go-to-Market Services
Get the asset ready. Tell the right story. Maximize the multiple.
Portfolio Cybersecurity
Protect enterprise value across every PortCo, every quarter. See cybersecurity services
Who we work with
Meet your team
Partner, Head of M&A and Transaction Services
Senior Partner, Head of Strategy & Value Creation
M&A Services FAQs
Why do operating partners sometimes discover expensive remediation items months after close that diligence didn’t quantify?
This happens when the team that ran diligence and the team that inherits execution are different firms, so the context behind a finding gets lost exactly at the point it matters most. A remediation item that looked minor or was never quantified during diligence tends to resurface once execution begins, usually at a higher cost than it would have carried at signing. Resultant's diligence findings come from the same in-house data architects, AI practitioners, and cybersecurity specialists who work alongside the advisory team on every engagement, which is what keeps a finding tied to a number instead of getting lost in the handoff to whoever executes afterward.
How much should tech findings move deal price?
The right test is whether the target's technology can support the deal thesis once integration and hold-period demands are added, not whether it looks adequate on the day of the deal. Diligence exists to answer exactly this question, translating architecture, data readiness, and cyber exposure into what they cost to fix and what they mean for the number on the table. Resultant's diligence team has completed more than 300 buy-side and sell-side engagements, which is the pattern recognition behind connecting a technical finding directly to price rather than leaving it as a general observation.
Why are private equity hold periods getting longer, and what does that mean for a technology plan?
Hold periods have lengthened as exits have slowed across the industry, which means a technology plan built for a single 100-day push is no longer enough on its own. A longer hold requires a roadmap that supports multiple strategic phases, from early integration through a mid-hold transformation push and eventual exit preparation, rather than one initial sprint followed by maintenance. Resultant's 350-person technology, data, AI, and managed services bench is built to be available across that full timeline, when and if the plan requires it, rather than sized for a single early push.
Why do roughly a third of carveout deals fail to capture the value they were bought for?
Most of these failures are operational, not financial: technology separation is usually the critical path in a carveout, and it is where timelines slip when the plan was not built during diligence. Treating separation and value creation as two parallel workstreams, owned by different teams, creates missed dependencies and delays that a single integrated plan would have caught. Resultant designs and negotiates the TSA alongside the same team that builds the post-close value-creation plan, which keeps carveout execution and value creation from drifting apart into separately managed workstreams.
Why do sellers run their own technology diligence before going to market?
A buyer's diligence team will find unresolved technology issues whether or not the seller addresses them first, so running the same review internally catches problems while there is still time to fix them instead of taking a price deduction at the table. Buyers increasingly weight AI capability and data infrastructure quality in a deal thesis, which gives a seller more to prove and more to lose if the story is not resolved in advance. Resultant conducts sell-side technology diligence before a buyer does and builds the technology narrative for the deal itself, the same discipline that lets a seller enter a process with a resolved story rather than an open question.
What portfolio-level cybersecurity risks should a PE fund track across its portfolio companies?
The biggest fund-level risk is inconsistency: each portfolio company manages its own cybersecurity posture independently, so the fund has no single view of where real exposure sits across the portfolio. A risk that looks minor at one company can represent concentrated exposure once it repeats across several, since many portfolio companies share vendors, tools, and infrastructure. Resultant's portfolio cybersecurity service is built to give general partners and fund stakeholders a consistent risk view across every portfolio company, identifying exposures individual PortCo teams may not see on their own.
Why does a technology gap missed during diligence tend to resurface as a bigger problem by exit?
A gap that is inexpensive to price and negotiate at signing keeps accumulating cost through the hold period, since nobody owns fixing it until a sale process forces the issue. By the time a buyer's own diligence team finds it, the same problem that could have been a modest price adjustment has become a valuation discount or a delayed close. Resultant's advisory and execution capability sit inside one firm specifically so a finding from diligence carries through the hold instead of being rediscovered, and often re-priced, at exit.
What makes technology risk different from other categories of diligence risk in a PE deal?
Most diligence categories, financial, legal, and commercial, describe the state of the business as it exists today. Technology risk is different because it determines whether the forward-looking thesis, the plan for what the business will become during the hold, is achievable with the systems, data, and team already in place. This is why Resultant maps every finding to one of four categories, deal-stage technology risk, value creation execution, go-to-market performance, or exit readiness, rather than treating technology as a single generic risk bucket alongside the others
Impact Stories
BUY-SIDE DILIGENCE
IT Spend at Scale Can Break a Model. A Global PE Firm Got Clarity on Both Before Closing.
GO TO MARKET
A Complex, Multi-Brand Analytics Business Sold at 21x EBITDA. The Technology Story Made the Difference.
Tell us where you are.
Insights delivered to your inbox