Category: VC

The dried-up startup exit

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

The quintessential Silicon Valley deal is drying up. Sales of VC-backed tech startups, which once provided a steady flow of money to entrepreneurs and their backers, are down sharply so far this year, compared with recent years. And while the impact of the narrowing of that exit will be primarily felt along Sand Hill Road, the cause of the slump traces back to Wall Street.

So far this year, just 235 VC-backed tech companies have sold, according to 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase. That paltry level represents the fewest startups sold in the first five and a half months of any year since 2010, even as the overall tech M&A market has broadened and increased the current number of total tech transactions by nearly 15% since the start of the current decade. Year to date, M&A volume for VC-backed vendors is running 13% lower than the average number of deals over the past five years, according to the M&A KnowledgeBase.

The sharp decline in exits comes as the ranks of the startups are swelling, with thousands of businesses receiving venture investment each year. So if the slowdown isn’t coming from the supply side, that leaves only the demand side. And indeed, we can narrow the cause of the recent slump to one particular set of startup buyers: US public companies.

For the first half of the current decade, according to the M&A KnowledgeBase, NYSE- and Nasdaq-listed vendors accounted for more than 40% of the purchases of VC-backed companies. In some years, that approached nearly half of the transactions. So far this year, the tech industry’s big fish have gobbled up the minnows in only slightly more than one-third of the deals. If the classic startup-sells-to-tech-giant transaction isn’t playing out as often as it once did, that’s primarily because many of the tech industry’s one-time biggest buyers have themselves been bought.

Some behemoths have been consolidated by fellow behemoths, with the net effect that the combined entity – perhaps still struggling with integrating a business that does hundreds of millions of dollars, or even billions of dollars, of revenue – doesn’t have the capacity to do anywhere near as many deals as the two stand-alone companies did. Consider the relative M&A rates for Dell and EMC on both sides of that blockbuster pairing. In other cases, tech giants have gone private, with buyout shops that tend to focus on financially optimizing existing businesses, rather than trying to bump up revenue growth through potentially costly acquisitions of shiny new startups. For instance, BMC has done only three purchases since its leveraged buyout four years ago, down from an average of four acquisitions in each of the three years leading up to its take-private.

Source: 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase

For more real-time information on tech M&A, follow us on Twitter @451TechMnA.

Tech’s ‘usual suspects’ are back in the market for startups

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After a prolonged period of restructuring and refocusing their own businesses, tech bellwethers are once again in the market for startups. Many of the industry’s biggest names are putting their record levels of cash and record-priced equity to work as they return to paying significant valuations for largely unproven companies. This year’s return of the recently rejuvenated ‘usual suspects’ of tech M&A comes after a few years when the big names were somewhat overshadowed by unconventional buyers rolling the dice on technology vendors.

For instance, the list for 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase of who has printed significant acquisitions of VC-backed companies this year includes Cisco, CA Technologies and Hewlett Packard Enterprise. In 2017, there aren’t buyers like General Motors, as there was in 2016, or Delivery Hero, as there was in 2015. To generalize broadly, we might suggest that the driver in the startup M&A market has swung from fear to greed. What we mean by that is several of the 2015-16 big VC exits appear to be motivated by fear, specifically – as kids these days say – fear of missing out. The threat of being disrupted by technology appears to have driven earlier transactions such as Unilever’s $1bn purchase of Dollar Shave Club last July and old-line Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers’ $759m pickup of online platform provider IronPlanet last August.

This year’s resurgence of the well-known tech giants, which have both the means and the need to acquire faster-growing startups, has helped boost the number of significant VC exits in 2017 to almost as many transactions as the same period of the two previous years combined. According to the M&A KnowledgeBase, buyers so far this year have announced six deals valued at more than $500m. (That total includes transactions for which 451 Research has a proprietary estimate of the unannounced terms.) For comparison, the same period in 2016 and 2015 produced a total of just seven VC exits valued at more than a half-billion dollars.

Probably no group is happier to see renewed demand from these tried-and-true acquirers of startups than the main supplier of startups, Silicon Valley. VCs overwhelmingly rely on sales of their portfolio companies to generate returns and, thus, keep their firms in business. The acceleration in the pace of big deals for startups is helping to offset a rather lackluster IPO market, which offers the other exit for their portfolio companies. Not that many startups are taking that exit, as we detailed in our special report on the fertile, but barren, tech IPO landscape.

Tech M&A goes from fitful to faltering

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

If tech M&A was stumbling in the first three months of the year, it face-planted in April. Spending on tech deals announced around the globe in the just-completed month slumped to just $12.9bn, the lowest monthly total since the start of 2015, according to 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase. The paltry value of April’s tech transactions works out to just half the average amount spent in each of opening three months of this year.

Spending last month came in light largely because dealmakers didn’t buy big, announcing just three transactions valued at more than $1bn, according to the M&A KnowledgeBase. That’s less than half the monthly average of eight ‘three-comma’ deals over the past 12 months. And even the big prints that did get done in April were relatively small. Last month’s largest transaction (the $2.3bn KKR-led acquisition of Hitachi Kokusai Electric) barely squeaked into the top 10 of the biggest deals of 2017, landing at number eight on our M&A KnowledgeBase list.

Acquirers didn’t just put off big-ticket purchases in April – in many cases they didn’t buy at all. According to the M&A KnowledgeBase, deal volume in April sank to its lowest monthly level in three years. Tech shoppers announced just 258 transactions last month. April’s weak deal volume and spending put overall 2017 M&A activity well behind recent years. In fact, through the first four months of this year, both measures are lining up fairly closely with the pre-boom year of 2013.

No ray of sunshine from Cloudera IPO

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

As far as Wall Street is concerned, the outlook for the tech IPO market is still cloudy after Cloudera’s offering. Sure, the data analytics platform vendor priced shares higher than its underwriters expected and investors pushed the freshly minted stock about 20% higher in aftermarket trading on Friday. But that solid start isn’t likely to necessarily draw other startups to the public market because Cloudera’s capital structure got so uniquely inflated.

Few startups could even imagine – much less collect – an investment of three-quarters of a billion dollars from a single investor in a single round, as Cloudera did from Intel three years ago. The chipmaker paid up for the privilege, putting a ‘quadra unicorn’ valuation of $4.1bn on Cloudera. Altogether, Cloudera raised more than $1bn from private market investors, making the $225m raised from public market investors seem almost like lunch money.

And then there’s the small matter of valuation. In its debut, Cloudera is only worth about half of what Intel thought it was worth when it made its bet. (As we noted in our full preview of Cloudera’s IPO, Intel’s investment appears even more bubbly when we consider that, at the time, Cloudera was generating less than half the quarterly revenue it currently puts up and its operating loss actually topped its revenue.)

As a longtime corporate investor, Intel can chalk up the overpayment for the stake of Cloudera to ‘strategic’ considerations. (Much like the chipmaker effectively wrote off its massive bet on security, unwinding half of its underperforming acquisition of McAfee at roughly half the valuation it initially paid in the largest infosec transaction in history, according to 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase.) Besides, Intel can afford it: the day that Cloudera priced its IPO – thus confirming Intel’s overpayment – the chipmaker reported that it earned $3bn in the first quarter of this year alone.

http://www.the451group.com/images/upload/4-28-17_kbi_pic.png

Survey sees tech M&A heading up and to the right

Brenon Daly

Contact:  Brenon Daly 

Despite a slow start to 2017, tech M&A activity is expected to accelerate over the course of the year, according to the prevailing view in the semiannual M&A Leaders’ Survey from 451 Research and Morrison & Foerster. (See full report.) Slightly more than half of the respondents (52%) forecast that deal flow will top last year’s level, more than three times the 15% of respondents who indicated that year-over-year activity would decline in 2017. The projection in our just-completed survey represents the most-bullish outlook in two years.

If the sentiment does come through in increased activity for the rest of the year, it would also mark a dramatic reversal from the start of 2017. In the first quarter, tech acquirers announced 12% fewer transactions than they did in Q1 2016 or Q1 2015, according to 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase. Of course, 2017 comes after the two highest years of tech M&A spending since the internet bubble burst. Collectively, acquirers in 2015 and 2016 announced deals valued at more than $1 trillion, according to the M&A KnowledgeBase.

451 Research subscribers can view the full report on the most-recent M&A Leaders’ Survey from 451 Research and Morrison & Foerster, which includes the outlook for overall activity and valuations in the tech M&A market, as well as highlights specific trends and drivers for deals in 2017 and beyond.

Okta’s growth-story IPO finds an audience on Wall Street

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly 

The unicorn parade on Wall Street continued Friday as security vendor Okta nearly doubled its private market valuation in its debut on the Nasdaq. The subscription-based identity and access management provider initially sold shares at $17 each, but investors bid them to about $24 in midday trading. With the surge, Okta is valued at some $2.4bn. (See our full preview of the offering.)

Okta becomes the third enterprise IT startup to come public so far this year, and it extends the strong performance of these new issues. It also joins the two previous IPOs – MuleSoft and Alteryx – in sporting a rather stretched valuation. Based on a market cap of $2.4bn, Okta is trading at about 15x trailing sales.

Granted, Okta’s sales are growing quickly, having nearly quadrupled in just the past two fiscal years to $160m. Still, the company is commanding quite a premium compared with fellow secure identity specialist CyberArk, which also just happens to be the last information security startup to create more than $1bn of value in its IPO. (To be clear, CyberArk, which went public in 2014, also sells identity-related products in the form of privileged identity management, but doesn’t really compete with Okta.)

Wall Street currently values CyberArk at about 8.2x trailing sales, or just slightly more than half the level that investors are handing to the freshly public Okta. Bulls would argue that Okta merits the premium given that it is growing twice as fast as CyberArk. But others might counter with a question about what that growth is costing each of the companies. Okta lost a mountainous $83m on its way to generating $160m in sales last year. In contrast, CyberArk, which has run in the black for the past four years, netted $28m from its 2016 revenue of $217m.

If nothing else, the valuation discrepancy underscores that growth is still the key metric for investors. Okta’s IPO is simply supply meeting demand, same as it ever was on Wall Street. Indeed, CyberArk has also experienced that. Shares of the company reached an all-time high – nearly 50% higher than current levels, roughly Okta’s current valuation – in 2015, when revenue was increasing north of 50%, compared with the mid-30% level now.

For more real-time information on tech M&A, follow us on Twitter @451TechMnA.

For tech M&A, above-market deals are running behind

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly 

If spending on tech M&A was sporadic in the opening quarter of 2017, the valuations paid in those deals largely held to typical patterns. There were a handful of transactions sporting enviable double-digit multiples, along with a whole backlog of deals that printed in the low single digits. Between those bands, however, there was one range that generally features a host of transactions but has been relatively quiet so far this year: slightly above-market valuations.

Specifically, the January-March quarter recorded just three deals that valued target companies at 6-8x trailing sales, according to 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase. That’s fewer than any quarter in 2016, and just slightly more than half the average number of similarly valued transactions each quarter last year. Given the generally lumpy nature of M&A, we obviously don’t want to make too much out of pricing trends in any single quarter. But it is important to note the falloff in activity because this valuation range often stands as a fairly accurate barometer for the health of the overall M&A market.

Yet this segment gets ignored, with more attention paid to splashy, headline-grabbing deals such as Cisco lavishing $3.7bn on AppDynamics, a company that barely cracked $200m in revenue last year. For a variety of reasons, however, we wouldn’t hold out this transaction as representative of the nearly 1,000 deals tallied last quarter in the M&A KnowledgeBase. (Cisco, which is trading at its highest level since the internet bubble, had to outbid Wall Street for AppDynamics, at a time when ‘dual tracking’ still isn’t much of a threat. As if to indicate that, indeed, those were rather singular influences on the deal, consider the fact that AppDynamics garnered the highest price for any VC-backed startup in three years.)

Instead, we would look below those one-off transactions. More relevant to most tech acquirers are deals where they have to stretch, but not contort, on pricing. These transactions – carrying, again, a 6-8x multiple and generally falling in the midmarket in terms of size – tend to serve more usefully as comparable deals for the corporate and financial acquirers that do the overwhelming majority of tech M&A. Here we’re talking about recent transactions such as Akamai reaching for SOASTA, or Hewlett Packard Enterprise further bulking up its storage portfolio with SimpliVity. Both of those deals fall into the 6-8x sales range (according to our understanding) and represent decidedly midmarket bets by big-name buyers. In other words, just the sort of transaction that’s vital to the broader tech M&A market, but generally gets overlooked – particularly so far this year.

After a slow start for tech M&A, business picks up late in Q1 

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly 

After record spending in the tech M&A market in 2015 and 2016, dealmakers took a little while to get going this year. The value of tech transactions in both January and February slumped to the lowest consecutive monthly totals since 2013, according to 451 Research’s M&A KnowledgeBase. The two-year surge seemingly led to a two-month slump, as buyers digested their acquisitions. By the final month of the first quarter, however, acquirers were back in business, spending as much in March as they did in the two previous months combined.

Altogether, as tallied by the M&A KnowledgeBase, worldwide spending on tech and telecom deals in the first three months of 2017 hit $77bn, essentially flat with the opening quarter last year. However, the value of transactions announced in each of the subsequent quarters in 2016 accelerated dramatically from last year’s sluggish start, with average quarterly spending for Q2-Q4 coming in nearly twice the level of Q1.

Matching last year’s acceleration in spending may be a challenge for the rest of 2017, as buyers are on pace to do substantially fewer deals this year. That’s true for both broad tech M&A as well as the top end of the market. The first quarter’s deal volume of 910 represents a decline of roughly 12% compared with the January-March period in the previous two years. More significantly, tech acquirers announced fewer transactions valued at more than $1bn in the just-completed quarter than in any other quarter in more than three years.

An earthbound IPO for Cloudera

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly 

Looking to extend the current bull run for enterprise software IPOs, Cloudera has taken the wraps off its prospectus and put itself on track to hit Wall Street in about a month. Assuming the debut follows that schedule, the heavily funded Hadoop vendor would be the third infrastructure software provider to come public in six weeks, following MuleSoft and Alteryx. Unlike the debuts of those two other software firms, however, Cloudera’s IPO will almost certainly be a down round.

Three years ago, when Cloudera’s quarterly revenue was less than half its current level, Intel acquired 22% of the company at a valuation of $4.1bn. Since then, both the company and other equity holders agreed that ‘quadra-unicorn’ valuation got a little ahead of itself and have priced Cloudera shares below Intel’s level of just less than $31 each. (In contrast, MuleSoft has more than doubled its final private market valuation on Wall Street.) Cloudera – along with its nine underwriters, led by Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Securities and Allen & Co – should set the inaugural public market price for shares in about a month.

Because Wall Street likes to use a ‘known’ to help assign value to an ‘unknown,’ investors will look at Cloudera’s future trading valuation relative to the current trading valuation of fellow Hadoop provider Hortonworks. However, that comparison won’t particularly help Cloudera get any closer to its previous platinum valuation. Hortonworks currently has a market capitalization of just $650m, or 3.5x its 2016 revenue and 2.7x its forecast revenue for 2017.

The two Hadoop-focused companies actually line up fairly closely with one another, financially. Cloudera and Hortonworks hemorrhage money, largely because of huge outlays on sales and marketing. (Both firms spend roughly twice as much on sales and marketing as they do on R&D.) Cloudera is nearly one-third bigger than Hortonworks, recording $261m in sales in its most recent fiscal year compared with $184m for Hortonworks. Both are growing at about 50%.

Within that revenue, both Cloudera and Hortonworks wrap a not-insignificant amount of professional services around their product, which weighs on their margins and, consequently, their valuations. Both are consciously shifting their revenue mix. Cloudera is further along in moving toward a ‘product’ company, with professional services accounting for 23% of revenue in its latest fiscal year compared with 32% for Hortonworks. That progress is also reflected in the fact that Cloudera’s gross margins are several percentage points higher than those at Hortonworks, although both are still low compared with pure software providers. (For instance, MuleSoft, which also has a professional services component, has gross margins in the mid-70% range, about seven percentage points higher than Cloudera.)

With its larger size and more-efficient model, Cloudera will undoubtedly command a premium to Hortonworks. (That will come as a relief to Cloudera because if Wall Street simply valued the company at the same multiple of trailing sales it gives Hortonworks, Cloudera wouldn’t even be a unicorn.) We’re pretty sure Cloudera will come to market with a ‘three-comma’ valuation, but it won’t be near the $4bn valuation Intel slapped on it. Perhaps Cloudera can grow into that one day, but it certainly won’t start out there.

For tech IPO market, it’s variety not volume

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly 

This time last year, the only sound coming from the tech IPO market was crickets chirping. Not a single company made it public in Q1 2016, the first quarterly shutout since the end of the recent recession. So far this year, there’s a lot more going on, even if the recent activity lags what we might have expected after a prolonged listless period for new listings.

What the current IPO market lacks in depth, however, it more than makes up for in variety. Just since 2017 opened, we’ve seen a number of ‘outlier’ events, including a multibillion-dollar dual-track exit, a unicorn rewarded on Wall Street, the largest consumer Internet offering in three years, and even a company use the circuitous route of a blank-check deal to go public. You know it’s a strange time for IPOs when a company that had been planning to go public on the Nasdaq but opted for a sale instead goes ahead and rings Nasdaq’s opening bell when that deal closes, as AppDynamics did.

There are other indicators of just how hard the tech IPO market is to read right now, including:
-AppDynamics scrapping its planned offering after Cisco swept in with a too-rich-to-pass-up $3.7bn offer in January, days before the software vendor was set to debut on Wall Street. As rich as AppDynamics’ sale was, however, the deal looked like a discount when fellow infrastructure software provider MuleSoft did hit the market almost two months later. MuleSoft’s trading valuation nearly matches AppDynamics’ terminal value, which included a premium.
-Both of the enterprise-focused tech firms that have gone public so far this year (MuleSoft and Alteryx) raised more money from private market investors than they did from Wall Street.
-And what to say about the IPO of Snap, which lost more money in 2016 than it took in as revenue? A five-year-old company that starts its prospectus by talking about ‘eyeballs,’ and then doesn’t give investors any say about how the business should be run in any case? A media company that went public just as it was experiencing its slowest audience growth? Despite all of those questionable metrics, Snap created more than twice the market value of all enterprise tech IPOs last year.

With Okta set to debut next week and several Hadoop vendors reportedly close to revealing their paperwork, the tech IPO market has enough to keep it going for the next few weeks. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that Wall Street will be as welcoming as it has been. The US equity indexes are about 25% higher than they were during the bear market that mauled investors in the opening months of 2016. Yet all of the indexes have recently reversed, and are in the red for the past month. Meanwhile, 451 Research surveys of investors have shown a steady erosion of confidence in the stock market, which could give them pause before buying shares in any of the unknown and unproven tech startups looking to go public.