1. Executive Summary

‍

Industry overview (macro + sector-specific)

Financial services M&A accelerated in 2025 as rate-cut expectations improved financing sentiment and boards refocused on scale, digital capabilities, and product adjacency. Activity was heavily concentrated in large transactions—both strategics (payments/banking) and sponsor-led platforms (wealth/insurance distribution roll-ups).

‍

Recent M&A momentum (deal count, value)

The market was value-led rather than volume-led:

• Deal count: essentially flat (2,219 → 2,236)
  
  
• Disclosed value: sharply higher ($282.1bn → $418.9bn, +49% YoY)
  
  
• Megadeals returned: deals >$1bn rose from 54 → 93, accounting for ~81% of 2025 disclosed value
  
  

‍

High-level multiples & key trends (what this implies)

• Bifurcated market: buyers paid up for scale assets and platforms (distribution + recurring revenue), while more commoditized/standalone assets faced tougher underwriting (funding + regulatory friction).
  
  
• Strategic rationale focus: payments/processing and wealth/insurance distribution continued to be driven by adjacency (cross-sell), data/tech enablement, and cost takeout potential—with higher scrutiny on integration and execution.
  
  
• Europe stood out: the largest YoY value increase came from Europe, consistent with more “transformational” consolidation logic.
  
  

‍

Major players / consolidators (who’s been most active, at a high level)

• Strategic consolidators: large payments networks/processors, diversified banks pursuing capability builds, and global insurers/asset managers optimizing distribution and scale.
  
  
• Sponsor strategies: continued platform build / roll-up playbooks in fragmented areas (insurance brokerage, RIAs/wealth platforms, specialty finance), typically emphasizing repeatable M&A integration.
  
  

Summary of Key Metrics

2. Industry M&A Market Overview

‍

Deal activity trends (Y/Y and Q/Q)

2025 was a “value recovery” year rather than a broad-based volume surge. Global financial services M&A deal count stayed essentially flat (2,219 → 2,236), but disclosed value rose materially ($282.1bn → $418.9bn, +49% YoY), reflecting the return of megadeals and larger strategic moves.

Regional pattern (2025 vs. 2024):

• North America: deal count dipped (998 → 947) while value increased to $188.7bn (from $167.4bn).
  
  
• Europe: the sharpest value acceleration—$49.5bn → $141.2bn, while deals were modestly lower (593 → 573).
  
  
• Asia & Oceania: deal count slightly higher (353 → 364) and value up to $65.5bn (from $48.9bn).
  
  

Q/Q framing (directional):

• In financial services, quarterly activity is often lumpy because a small number of “transformational” deals can dominate disclosed value in any period.
  
  
• 2025’s headline value performance was primarily explained by more deals clearing the $1bn threshold and a higher share of “strategic scale” transactions.
  
  

‍

Notable megadeals (what they signal)

Megadeals were the defining feature of 2025:

• Deals >$1bn increased from 54 (2024) to 93 (2025) and accounted for ~81% of 2025 disclosed value.
  
  

Theme read-through by subsector (high level):

• Payments / processing: scale + integrated platforms + data/tech adjacency were central; PwC highlights large-ticket payments and processing moves among 2025’s most material FS transactions.
  
  
• Wealth / asset management: distribution and operating leverage were common drivers, including high-profile transactions in the asset management value chain.
  
  
• European financials: outsized value uplift points to more “strategic” or structural consolidation dynamics (often tied to profitability and efficiency agendas).
  
  

‍

Private equity vs. strategic acquirer share

• In the EY dataset summarized in the report, PE/VC represented ~10% of FS deals (by count).
  
  
• Strategics continued to drive many of the largest disclosed-value transactions, while sponsors remained very active in platform build / roll-up strategies in fragmented verticals (notably in distribution-heavy segments like insurance brokerage and wealth platforms).
  
  

Practical implication for process dynamics (banker lens):

• Competitive tension tended to be highest where assets offered recurring revenue + distribution advantage + integration optionality (creating both strategic and sponsor interest).
  
  
• Assets requiring heavy transformation or with higher regulatory friction saw more selective buyer pools and greater emphasis on “clean execution” and integration planning.
  
  

‍

Capital availability (what matters to closing risk)

Capital availability and cost of capital remain a gating factor for transaction feasibility, particularly for leveraged or sponsor-led deals and for targets with higher earnings cyclicality (e.g., credit-sensitive lenders). Key market mechanics affecting FS M&A in 2025–26 include:

• Financing re-opened selectively: large, high-quality assets and cash-generative platforms had easier access to funding than marginal credits.
  
  
• Regulatory capital and approvals: bank and insurance transactions face additional constraints from capital rules, supervisory review, and (in some jurisdictions) political considerations—often elongating timelines and increasing execution risk.
  
  
• Seller expectations vs. buyer underwriting: dealmaking improved where expectations reset or where buyers could credibly underwrite synergies, cost takeout, and cross-sell.

‍

M&A Volume/Value by Year

Map of Global Deal Hotspots

3. Valuation Multiples & Comps

‍

Why valuation “multiples” look different in Financial Services

Financial services is not one multiples regime—it’s several:

• Banks & many lenders: EV/EBITDA is often not meaningful because debt is an operating input and financial statements are structured around net interest income and regulatory capital. Market convention typically leans on P/E and P/B (plus ROTCE/ROE and credit-cycle metrics). (Siblis Research)
  
  
• Insurance & asset/wealth managers: EBITDA-based metrics can be used selectively, but EV/Sales and P/E often remain more stable (mix of fee income, float economics, and earnings quality).
  
  
• Payments/processors/financial software-like platforms: These behave more like tech-enabled services—EV/Revenue and EV/EBITDA are commonly used because revenue is fee-based and margins scale with volume.
  
  

‍

Median multiples by sub-sector (US-listed; Damodaran, Jan 2026)

The table below uses Damodaran’s “Revenue Multiples by Sector (US)” dataset (as of January 2026) to anchor EV/Sales and context margins for major FS sub-sectors. (Stern School of Business, Stern School of Business)

Exhibit: Sub-sector EV/Revenue snapshot (Jan 2026)

Key takeaway: FS “platform-like” business models can trade at very high EV/Sales relative to the market baseline, while many balance-sheet-driven models compress into book/earnings frameworks.

‍

EV/EBITDA — non-bank financial services

Damodaran’s Enterprise Value to Operating Income table (Jan 2026) provides EV/EBITDA for segments where EBITDA is more interpretable. In that dataset, Financial Svcs. (Non-bank & Insurance) shows extremely high EV/EBITDA—indicative of mixed profitability, growth expectations, and the presence of firms with low/volatile EBITDA (which can mechanically inflate the multiple). (Stern School of Business)

‍

Analyst commentary (what to do with this):

• Treat very high EV/EBITDA as a screening flag, then normalize: remove one-offs, evaluate recurring gross profit, and sanity-check on EV/Revenue, Rule-of-40 style heuristics for platform models, or unit economics (take-rate, retention, CAC payback) for payments/fintech.
  
  

Historical multiple ranges (3–5 year view)

A clean, defensible long-run comparison for FS is typically P/E by sector, because it avoids the EBITDA/EV conceptual mismatch for many FS business models.

• Siblis Research publishes current and historical sector P/E for the largest U.S. companies; this is commonly used for time-series context. (Siblis Research)
  
  
• For S&P 500 Financials, WorldPEratio reports an estimated sector P/E (computed via XLF-based benchmarking) and provides a 5-year interval for comparison. (World PE Ratio)
  
  

Use in the report/deck: show a 3–5 year line of Financials sector P/E vs S&P 500 P/E, then explain inflections with rates/credit, capital requirements, and market volatility.

Comparison to S&P 500 / related industries

Two practical benchmarking cuts:

1. Financials vs S&P 500 on P/E
   
   

• As of Jan 16, 2026, the S&P 500 Financials sector estimated P/E ~18.35x (per WorldPEratio’s methodology). (World PE Ratio)
  
  
• Pair this with a broad-market P/E series (e.g., Siblis sector table) to show relative discount/premium over time. (Siblis Research)
  
  

2. “FS platforms” vs “market EV/Sales”
   
   

• Total market EV/Sales ~3.97x vs Financial Svcs. (Non-bank & Insurance) EV/Sales ~18.91x (Damodaran, Jan 2026), highlighting how platform-like models can re-rate materially above broad-market revenue multiples. 

‍

Historical Valuation Multiples

Peer Multiples & Financials

4. Top Strategic Acquirers & Investors (last ~12–24 months)

‍

Who’s been most active (and why) — the practical buyer map

Recent Financial Services M&A has been led by a mix of:

• Scale / infrastructure strategics (payments rails, processing, issuer/merchant platforms)
  
  
• Universal banks and bancassurers buying capability + distribution
  
  
• Asset/wealth managers pursuing AUM scale and product breadth
  
  
• Sponsors / private capital leaning into platform roll-ups and “insurance capital” partnerships (stable, long-duration capital)
  
  

These motivations align with what major advisors have flagged as the dominant FS themes: consolidation + transformation (PwC), targeted strategic growth under macro/regulatory uncertainty (KPMG), and scope acquisitions in payments plus private-markets expansion in wealth/AM (Bain). (PwC, KPMG, Bain)

‍

Top strategic acquirers (selected; deals announced/closed in the last ~24 months)

Below are high-impact consolidators (not an exhaustive ranking of all buyers), prioritized by materiality of transactions and/or strategic signal:

1. Capital One — buying Discover to add a scaled payments network and broaden economics beyond issuing. (Capital One Investor Relations, AP News)
   
   
2. Global Payments — acquiring Worldpay to become a larger “pure-play” merchant solutions platform at global scale. (Global Payments Inc., Financial Times)
   
   
3. FIS — reshaping portfolio: monetizing its Worldpay stake and acquiring Issuer Solutions to deepen recurring issuer-processing capabilities and synergy opportunities. (FIS Global, Financial Times)
   
   
4. BNP Paribas — acquiring AXA Investment Managers to build a leading European asset manager and lock in a long-term AXA partnership. (AXA.com, BNB Paribas)
   
   
5. Nomura — acquiring Macquarie’s US & European public asset management business to scale its global investment management platform and diversify revenue mix. (nomuraholdings.com, Macquarie, Financial Times)
   
   
6. Nationwide Building Society — acquiring Virgin Money to increase UK scale in mortgages/savings and broaden capabilities. (nationwide.co.uk, GOV.UK, The Guardian)
   
   
7. CVC / Nordic Capital / ADIA consortium — taking Hargreaves Lansdown private to accelerate tech transformation and platform improvement. (Nordic Capital, CVC)
   
   
8. CVC (private markets) — “insurance capital” channel via the AIG partnership, reflecting a broader push by alternatives into insurance-linked capital and retail-permanent structures. (Financial Times)
   
   

Note: “Top acquirers” in FS is highly subsector-dependent; payments/processing and wealth/platforms frequently dominate disclosed-value headlines, while many insurance brokerage and RIA roll-ups are smaller but numerous (often with undisclosed values).

‍

PE platforms and roll-up strategies (how sponsors are underwriting deals)

What sponsors want in FS right now:

• Repeatable integration playbooks (hub-and-spoke add-ons)
  
  
• Recurring fee revenues (wealth platforms, brokerage, payments enablement)
  
  
• Regulatory/compliance maturity (to reduce “unknown unknowns” post-close)
  
  
• Distribution assets (client relationships, advisor networks, embedded channels)
  
  
• Permanent/long-duration capital via insurer partnerships (alternatives + insurance is a growing structural theme). (Financial Times, Morningstar)
  
  

What this means for process dynamics:

• Sponsors compete hardest for assets where they can credibly underwrite synergy/cost takeout, tech modernization, and multiple expansion via scale.
  
  
• Assets with heavy compliance remediation, weaker unit economics, or elevated regulatory friction skew toward strategic-only buyer sets.

‍

Logo Grid: Active Acquirers

Deals by Acquirer, Value, Rationale

5. Transaction Case Studies

‍

Below are 4 one-page “banker snapshot” style case studies spanning payments, banking/cards, and asset/wealth management. (Multiples are included only where publicly disclosed; many FS transactions do not publish explicit EV/EBITDA or EV/AUM.)

‍

Case Study 1 — Capital One → Discover (Cards + Network Vertical Integration)

Deal overview

• Buyer / Seller: Capital One Financial / Discover Financial Services
  
  
• Announced: Feb 19, 2024 (Capital One Investor Relations)
• Closed: May 18, 2025 (per public reporting) (Barron’s, AP News)
  
  
• Deal size: ~$35bn–$35.3bn (commonly reported) (Barron’s, AP News)
  
  
• Consideration: 100% stock; Discover holders receive 1.0192 COF shares per DFS share (Capital One Investor Relations)

Strategic rationale (why this deal)

• Own the network economics (reduce reliance on third-party networks; capture more of the transaction stack). (Capital One Investor Relations)
  
  
• Improve merchant acceptance and strengthen a “global payments platform at scale” narrative. (Capital One Investor Relations)
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not disclosed as EV/EBITDA / EV/Revenue in the press release. (Stock exchange ratio + premium disclosed.) (Capital One Investor Relations)
  
  

Expected synergies

• Capital One has cited $2.7bn in targeted cost savings by 2027 (split between expense and network-related synergies in reporting). (Payments Dive)
  
  

Analyst commentary (integration focus)

• Network acceptance expansion and merchant-side economics are the “hard part” versus pure back-office cost takeout; regulatory and operational risk management is the gating factor for timing/realization. (AP News, Payments Dive)
  
  

‍

Case Study 2 — Global Payments → Worldpay (Merchant Scale + Portfolio Reset)

Deal overview

• Buyer / Seller: Global Payments / Worldpay (from GTCR + FIS stake)
  
  
• Announced: Apr 2025 (Global Payments Inc., Financial Times)
• Completed: Jan 2026 (deal completion reported) (American Banker, FinTech Magazine)
  
  
• Deal size: ~$24.2–$24.3bn (reported) (American Banker, FinTech Magazine)
  
  
• Related transaction: divestiture of Global Payments’ Issuer Solutions to FIS; deal value widely cited as $13.5bn (American Banker, Financial Times)

Strategic rationale

• Reposition GPN into a more focused, scaled “pure-play commerce solutions” provider across merchant segments and geographies. (American Banker, FinTech Magazine)
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not consistently disclosed in public materials as a single EV/EBITDA multiple in the sources above; treated as a strategic portfolio transaction.
  
  

Expected synergies

• Company guidance: ~$600m annual run-rate cost synergies over ~3 years post-close, driven by operations + tech infrastructure consolidation. (Global Payments Inc., Business Wire)
  
  

Analyst commentary

• This is a classic “scale + simplification” transaction: the investment case is less about topline magic and more about execution on cost synergies, product rationalization, and defending share in a competitive merchant acquiring market. (Global Payments Inc., Financial Times)
  
  

‍

Case Study 3 — BNP Paribas → AXA Investment Managers (European AM Platform Build)

Deal overview

• Buyer / Seller: BNP Paribas / AXA (AXA Investment Managers)
  
  
• Closed: July 1, 2025 (AXA.com, BNP Paribus)
• Deal size: €5.4bn total transaction value (includes Select sale details referenced in AXA materials) (AXA.com, Euronext Live)
  
  
• Structure: acquisition + long-term partnership for BNP Paribas to provide investment management services to AXA. (AXA.com, Euronext Live)
  
  

Strategic rationale

• Build a scaled European asset management platform and broaden alternatives / private assets capability while strengthening distribution. (BNP Paribus, BNP Paribus)
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not disclosed in the cited press materials as EV/EBITDA or EV/AUM.
  
  

Expected synergies

• Specific synergy amounts are not clearly stated in the press releases above; the strategic logic emphasized platform scale, broader product set, and distribution. (BNP Paribus, BNP Paribus)
  
  

Analyst commentary

• In AM, value creation often comes from operating leverage + cross-distribution, but the biggest “swing factor” is net flows and retention (client behavior post-integration), not only cost actions.
  
  

‍

Case Study 4 — Nomura → Macquarie Public Investments (US/EU) (Scale + Fee Diversification)

Deal overview

• Buyer / Seller: Nomura / Macquarie Asset Management (public investments in North America & Europe)
  
  
• Announced: Apr 22, 2025 (Macquarie)
• Completed: Dec 1, 2025 (Macquarie, nomuraholdings.com)
• Deal size: ~A$2.8bn (~US$1.8bn cited by Nomura) (Macquarie, nomuraholdings.com)
• Assets: completion materials cite ~US$166bn AUM in the acquired business (Nomura release). (nomuraholdings.com)
  
  
• Commercial tie-in: strategic partnership for product distribution/co-development. (nomuraholdings.com)
  
  

Strategic rationale

• Increase fee-based revenue and global scale in investment management; add established teams and operating platform across US/EU. (Macquarie, nomuraholdings.com)
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not disclosed in the company releases as EV/EBITDA; in AM, valuation is often discussed in terms of economics per AUM and earnings power rather than a single headline multiple.
  
  

Expected synergies

• Company releases emphasize continuity and partnership; a precise synergy figure is not stated in the Macquarie/Nomura completion press materials cited above. (Macquarie, nomuraholdings.com)
  
  

Analyst commentary

• For AM acquisitions, the key diligence question is client/PM retention (and therefore AUM stability). Cost synergies exist (platform + back-office), but flows + performance + distribution typically dominate the outcome.

‍

One-Page Snapshot Per Deal (Can Template)

6. Valuation Framework & Modeling

‍

Purpose: Explain how Financial Services deals are typically valued and modeled in practice. This is educational / informational and not investment advice.

‍

How deals are priced (what actually drives the number)

Most processes triangulate to a price using three primary valuation lenses, weighted differently by subsector:

A) Public comps (trading multiples)

Used to anchor “where the market is” today:

• Banks / lenders: P/TBV (or P/B), P/E, ROTCE/ROE, plus credit metrics (NCOs, reserve coverage, CET1).
  
  
• Insurance: P/E and P/B, plus underwriting quality (combined ratio for P&C; spread metrics for life), capital adequacy.
  
  
• Asset/wealth managers: P/E and EV/EBITDA (selective); often also AUM-based heuristics.
  
  
• Payments/fintech / processing: EV/Revenue and EV/EBITDA, plus unit economics (take-rate, retention, margin).
  
  

B) Precedent transactions (deal multiples paid)

Used to answer “what buyers actually paid” for similar assets:

• Adjust for cycle, rate regime, growth, margin profile, and deal structure (cash vs stock, earnouts, capital treatment).
  
  
• In FS, precedent multiples can be noisy because many terms are undisclosed and regulatory capital treatment matters.
  
  

C) DCF (discounted cash flow)

Used when:

• A target has a clear cash flow profile and/or
  
  
• There is a credible synergy and integration plan, and/or
  
  
• Comps are less relevant (unique platform, carve-out, complex earnings normalization).
  
  

Banker reality: the “price” is often dictated by (i) EPS accretion/dilution and payback, (ii) capital impact, and (iii) synergy credibility, with comps/DCF serving as guardrails.

‍

Typical control premiums (FS-specific context)

Control premiums vary widely and depend on:

• Synergy capacity: especially cost takeout and funding synergies (banks), expense synergies (payments processors), and distribution/cross-sell (wealth/insurance).
  
  
• Scarcity / strategic value: proprietary distribution, network effects, regulatory licenses, core processing tech.
  
  
• Cycle / rates: higher uncertainty tends to compress premiums; stable cash flows can sustain them.
  
  

Common modeling approach: run a premium range (e.g., low/mid/high) and test:

• EPS accretion timeline
  
  
• CET1 / capital headroom
  
  
• payback period
  
  
• IRR / MOIC for sponsor-style underwriting (if applicable)
  
  

‍

Key model drivers (where the valuation sensitivity “lives”)

1) Revenue growth vs EBITDA margin (most common for fee-based FS)

For processors / fintech / asset-light models:

• Revenue growth drives terminal value and narrative
  
  
• EBITDA margin drives near-term cash flow and synergy payoff
  
  
• Retention and take-rate are often the “hidden” levers (affect both)
  
  

2) Cost synergies and timing (most important in many strategics)

• Ramp profile matters: 25% / 50% / 75% / 100% run-rate over 3–4 years
  
  
• One-time costs often partially offset synergy NPV
  
  
• “Real” synergy is post-integration + retention-adjusted
  
  

3) Cost of capital / terminal assumptions

• WACC (or discount rate) changes have outsized impact on DCF value
  
  
• Terminal value assumptions should align with mature growth + reinvestment needs
  
  
• For banks/insurers: capital constraints can change how “free cash flow” is defined

‍

Sample DCF Input Summary

Sensitivity Analysis Table

7. Trends & Strategic Themes

‍

Sector-specific shifts shaping dealmaking

1) Technology and data modernization as a core M&A driver
Across financial services, technology has shifted from a support function to a strategic asset, making M&A a faster path to capability acquisition than organic build:

• Payments / processing: buyers seek modern, cloud-native platforms, real-time data, and fraud/AI tooling to defend margins and scale globally.
  
  
• Banks & insurers: acquisitions increasingly target core system upgrades, digital onboarding, analytics, and risk platforms, often embedded within broader scale deals.
  
  
• Wealth & asset management: emphasis on client experience, adviser productivity, and data-driven distribution.
  
  

Implication: Tech-enabled assets with proven scalability command valuation premiums, while legacy platforms often require a “transformation discount.”

‍

2) Regulation and capital rules as deal shapers (not deal killers)
Regulation does not stop M&A—but it dictates structure, timing, and buyer universe:

• Banks: capital requirements (CET1, stress tests) and supervisory approval drive deal pacing and limit leverage-driven strategies.
  
  
• Insurance: reserve adequacy, RBC ratios, and accounting (e.g., long-duration liabilities) shape who can buy and how value is realized.
  
  
• Cross-border deals: regulatory complexity often favors domestic or regional consolidation over truly global combinations.
  
  

Implication: The most successful buyers underwrite deals with capital headroom and regulatory execution as first-order constraints.

‍

3) Cost of capital normalization (but not “cheap money”)
While expectations of rate cuts improved sentiment, capital remains structurally more expensive than the 2015–2021 period:

• Sponsors are more selective, prioritizing cash-generative platforms and visible synergies.
  
  
• Strategics emphasize EPS accretion, payback period, and balance-sheet resilience.
  
  
• Valuations are increasingly justified by operational improvements, not multiple expansion alone.
  
  

Implication: Deals clear ICs when value creation is operationally driven, not purely financial.

‍

Emerging business models and deal themes

AI-enabled financial services

• AI is increasingly embedded in fraud detection, credit underwriting, customer service, and portfolio management.
  
  
• M&A is used to acquire data sets, models, and engineering talent, not just revenue.
  
  
• Buyers focus on defensible data moats rather than generic AI tooling.
  
  

B2B platforms and vertical SaaS-like models

• Payments, treasury, and compliance platforms serving specific industries (healthcare, travel, SMEs) continue to attract interest.
  
  
• These models often trade closer to software multiples due to high retention and recurring revenues.
  
  

Wealth and insurance distribution consolidation

• Fragmented advisor, brokerage, and agency markets remain fertile ground for roll-up strategies.
  
  
• Scale improves economics through centralized compliance, tech spend, and marketing, while preserving local client relationships.
  
  

‍

Antitrust and regulatory scrutiny (what’s changed)

• Regulators are more focused on consumer impact, competition, and systemic risk, particularly in large banking and payments deals.
  
  
• Remedies (divestitures, behavioral commitments) are increasingly common in large transactions.
  
  
• Importantly, scrutiny has led to more structured deals, not a collapse in deal activity.
  
  

Implication: Early regulatory strategy and stakeholder mapping are now core parts of deal diligence.

‍

Expert POV: forward-looking commentary

Financial services M&A is less about “buying growth” and more about “buying capability and resilience.”
Winning acquirers are those that:

• Use M&A to accelerate technology and distribution,
  
  
• Underwrite deals with conservative capital and synergy assumptions, and
  
  
• Treat integration as a multi-year operating transformation, not a one-time event.
  
  

In this environment, clarity of strategic intent matters more than deal volume. Assets that combine recurring revenue, data advantage, and scalable platforms are likely to remain at the center of M&A activity, even if overall market conditions fluctuate.

‍

Timeline of Trend Emergence

8. 2025–26 Market Outlook

‍

Expected M&A drivers (what should pull deals forward)

1) Regulatory and policy uncertainty easing (select subsectors)

• Multiple advisors highlight that potentially lighter regulation and shifts in supervisory posture could support more bank and capital markets deal activity, especially where consolidation is framed as “transformation” (tech + scale + efficiency). (PwC, PwC)
  
  

2) Technology-driven transformation

• Across FS, the “must invest” agenda (core modernization, fraud, data/AI, digital distribution) continues to push firms toward buy vs build decisions. Deloitte’s 2026 FS outlook emphasizes rapid tech disruption and shifting customer expectations as structural pressures. (Deloitte)
  
  

3) Cost-of-capital normalization + improved financing availability

• Outlook publications point to improved conditions vs. the 2022–23 tightening, supporting a gradual recovery in deal volumes/value (especially for larger-cap corporate buyers and well-capitalized sponsors). EY projects US deal volumes over $100m rising in 2025 and further (modestly) in 2026. (EY)
  
  

4) Banking consolidation logic remains intact

• Even where headline activity is “muted,” PwC’s FS-focused materials frame consolidation as a persistent theme: economies of scale, technology upgrades, and margin resilience. (PwC)
  
  
• On credit fundamentals, Moody’s 2026 outlook for global banks is stable, citing supportive growth and lower rates (helpful backdrop for confidence in M&A underwrites). (Moody’s)
  
  

5) Wealth/AM consolidation continues (platform + distribution)

• PwC commentary (via industry coverage) expects wealth manager M&A to increase in 2026, supported by anticipated rate cuts and ongoing scale/tech rationales. (FA Magazine)
  
  

‍

Headwinds (what can still stall deals)

1) Macro volatility and geopolitical risk

• Large, board-approved transactions remain sensitive to sudden risk-off moves (rates, inflation surprises, geopolitical events).
  
  

2) Antitrust and approvals timing

• Even when deals are economically compelling, timelines (and remedy risk) can widen bid/ask spreads and reduce certainty—especially in large payments/banking combinations. PwC has flagged regulatory trajectory as a key swing factor. (PwC, PwC)
  
  

3) Valuation gaps and earnings uncertainty

• In subsectors where earnings are more cyclical (IB/capital markets, credit-sensitive lenders), forward earnings confidence becomes the gating item, not just multiples.
  
  

‍

Buy-side vs. sell-side expectations (2025 → 2026)

Buy-side (strategics + sponsors)

Strategics

• Prioritize capability acquisitions (data/AI, fraud/risk, digital distribution) and scale synergies (processing, AM platforms, bank consolidation). (PwC, Deloitte)
  
  
• Emphasis on integration readiness and synergy credibility over “story” deals.
  
  

Private equity / private capital

• Selective but active in platform roll-ups (wealth/insurance distribution, payments enablement) where there’s a repeatable integration playbook.
  
  
• Financing conditions and exit optionality (IPO reopening) remain key; PwC notes IPO tailwinds can support M&A. (PwC)
  
  

Sell-side (what will come to market)

• Expect continued supply of:
  
  
  
  • Non-core divestitures / portfolio reshaping (especially large FS groups rationalizing product lines)
    
    
  • Founder/partner succession-driven consolidation (RIA/wealth and brokerage segments)
    
    
  • Tech-enabled assets with recurring revenue and high retention (premium processes)
    
    

Funnel of Deal Types by Strategic Priority

Outlook Grid (Short / Mid / Long Term)

9. Appendices & Citations

‍

A. Deal Tables

B. Data sources with hyperlinks (reference list)

Market outlook / macro & themes

• EY-Parthenon US M&A outlook (2025–2026 forecasts). (EY, PR Newswire)
  
  
• Deloitte 2026 banking & capital markets outlook (AI, data infrastructure, stablecoins, financial crime themes). (Deloitte, Deloitte Insights)
  
  
• PwC US banking & capital markets deals outlook (2026 themes; regulation, deal cycles, AI integration). (PwC)
  
  
• Moody’s Global Banks 2026 outlook (stable; lower rates, capital, asset quality; competitive shifts). (Moody’s, Royal Gazette)
  
  
• Goldman Sachs 2026 global M&A outlook (strategic transformation, private markets, flexible capital). (Goldman Sachs)
  
  

Valuation benchmarks

• Aswath Damodaran (NYU Stern) — revenue multiples by sector (Jan 2026 dataset + update cadence). (Stern School of Business, Stern School of Business)
  
  

‍

C. Methodology (how the exhibits are constructed)

• Deal activity (count/value): uses a disclosed-value convention; totals may understate value due to undisclosed consideration (common in FS, especially in brokerage/wealth and smaller platform deals).
  
  
• Megadeals: selected examples for narrative signal; not an exhaustive list of all >$10bn FS transactions.
  
  
• Multiples: presented as sector/peer reference points, not “valuation conclusions.” Banking and insurance often require industry-specific valuation frameworks (e.g., P/TBV and ROE/ROTCE bridges for banks; capital and reserve adequacy for insurers).
  
  
• No investment advice: all figures are for research/education and should be refreshed against a live market data platform (CapIQ/Bloomberg/FactSet) for any live process.

‍

Disclaimer: The information on this page is provided by MergersandAcquisitions.net for general informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, tax, or professional advice, nor an offer or recommendation to buy or sell any security, instrument, or investment strategy. All content, including statistics, commentary, forecasts, and analyses, is generic in nature, may not be accurate, complete, or current, and should not be relied upon without consulting your own financial, legal, and tax advisers. Investing in financial services, fintech ventures, or related instruments involves significant risks—including market, liquidity, regulatory, business, and technology risks—and may result in the loss of principal. MergersandAcquisitions.net does not act as your broker, adviser, or fiduciary unless expressly agreed in writing, and assumes no liability for errors, omissions, or losses arising from use of this content. Any forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain and actual outcomes may differ materially. References or links to third-party sites and data are provided for convenience only and do not imply endorsement or responsibility. Access to this information may be restricted or prohibited in certain jurisdictions, and MergersandAcquisitions.net may modify or remove content at any time without notice.

‍