Valuing a company by looking at what similar public companies trade at. Quick and widely understood; its weakness is that a private company of a different size, growth rate and customer base is rarely as comparable as the label suggests.
Why it matters
Comparable companies analysis answers a simple question with a shortcut: instead of building a
valuation from first principles, look at what the market already pays for companies that resemble
this one, and use that as a starting point. It is fast, it is widely understood by both sides of a
negotiation, and it grounds a private company's valuation in something observable rather than
purely theoretical.
The shortcut is also the weakness. A private AI startup rarely has a close public twin — the public
market has few pure comparables for a given stage, growth rate, and business model, and the
companies that do exist are usually larger, more diversified, and trading with the liquidity
premium that comes from being publicly listed at all. Treating the comparison as more precise than
it is leads to a valuation that looks rigorous and is actually just borrowed from a company that
is not very similar.
How it works
The method selects a set of public companies judged similar in sector, business model, growth
profile, and size, and looks at what multiple the market currently applies to each — usually a
revenue multiple or EBITDA multiple,
depending on the company's profitability profile. That multiple is then applied to the private
company's own figures to produce an implied valuation.
The judgement is entirely in the selection and the adjustment: which companies genuinely resemble
this one, and what discount or premium should apply for differences in size, growth, and the fact
that private shares cannot be sold as easily as public ones. Skipping that adjustment step is how
the method produces a confident-looking number that does not survive scrutiny.
Because the method is quick to run, it is often the first thing produced in a negotiation and the
easiest one to anchor on. That is worth resisting on both sides of the table: a first number is not
a right number just because it arrived first, and a founder who accepts an unadjusted peer multiple
without checking whether the peer set is genuinely close has effectively let someone else's growth
rate and margin profile decide their own price.
Questions people ask
- Why is comparable companies analysis so widely used despite its limitations?
- Because it is fast, transparent, and grounded in observable market prices rather than a purely theoretical model. Both sides of a negotiation can look at the same public data and understand where a number came from, which makes it a useful starting point even when the individual comparisons are imperfect.
- Why do private AI startups often have poor comparable companies?
- Because the public market has relatively few companies that closely match a private startup’s stage, growth rate, and business model, and the ones that do exist tend to be larger and more diversified. A comparison to a company that only resembles yours on the surface can produce a valuation that looks precise while resting on a weak foundation.
See also
Precedent transactions,Revenue multiple
More in Valuation
- DCF — Valuing a company by forecasting the cash it will produce and reducing each future year to what it is worth today.
- EBITDA multiple — A valuation expressed as a multiple of annual EBITDA.
- Enterprise value — What the business itself is worth, independent of how it is financed: the value of the operations before counting cash in the bank or debt owed.
- Equity value — What the owners actually receive: enterprise value, plus the cash in the business, minus the debt it owes.
- Precedent transactions — Valuing a company by what buyers actually paid for similar companies.
Keep reading
Updated 2026-09-09