Revenue Multiple
$2.40M × 2.40×
Top-line multiple. Usually the cleanest number in a deal package.
weight 20blend share 20.0%contributes $1,152,000confidence 92
Sell-side / Exit · Your practice
Suggested asking price
$6.16M
$6,158,637
Valuing the book you own. The blend becomes a defensible asking price with a negotiation premium.
Fair-value blend plus a 10% negotiating premium. Applied adjustment +10%.
Fair-value blend$5.60M
Lowest method$4.34M
Highest method$7.24M
Method spread1.67× low-to-high
Quality multiplier1.23×
Implied revenue multiple2.33×
Implied % of AUM1.96%
Your practice financials
Inputs
$
$
27.8% margin — InvestmentNews 2024 median, $250M–$499M AUM
$
Earnings before owner compensation
$
$
$8K revenue per client × 2.40× — InvestmentNews 2024
$
%
%
%
×
Set from your own comparable deal data
×
Set from your own comparable deal data
×
Six-factor quality multiplier
Book quality
Drives the AUM Percentage and Comparable Transactions methods. Clamped to 0.50×–1.50×.
1.23×
weighted score 73.3/100
Recurring revenue mix82
Share of revenue from advisory fees vs. one-time commissions
+0.160×influence 25%
Organic growth64
Net new asset growth excluding market appreciation
+0.042×influence 15%
Client retention92
Annual household retention rate
+0.168×influence 20%
Client demographics55
Younger, accumulating households score higher than decumulating ones
+0.015×influence 15%
Concentration (inverted)70
Higher score = revenue spread across many households
+0.060×influence 15%
Advisor longevity / continuity60
Tenure, second-generation talent and transition readiness
+0.020×influence 10%
Neutral point is 50 on each factor; the multiplier is 0.50 + weighted score / 100, so all-50s returns 1.00×. Scores shown here: Recurring 82 · Organic 64 · Client 92 · Client 55 · Concentration 70 · Advisor 60.
Blend weights
Method weighting
Normalized weighted mean — weights need not sum to 100. Total 100 across 7 active methods.
Revenue Multiplew 20 · 20.0% of blend · conf 92
EBITDA Multiplew 20 · 20.0% of blend · conf 84
EBOC Multiplew 15 · 15.0% of blend · conf 78
Discounted Cash Floww 15 · 15.0% of blend · conf 62
Client Valuew 10 · 10.0% of blend · conf 58
AUM Percentagew 10 · 10.0% of blend · conf 88
Comparable Transactionsw 10 · 10.0% of blend · conf 74
Recommended blend baseline: revenue 20 · ebitda 20 · eboc 15 · dcf 15 · client 10 · aum 10 · comparable 10
Peer benchmarks
9,090 retail-focused SEC-registered firms
Form ADV · 2026-08-12
Regulatory AUM$285.00M
Below median
SEC filers — 25th $161.15M · median $303.32M · 75th $704.10M
AUM per client relationship$891K
Below median
SEC filers — 25th $671K · median $1.29M · 75th $2.45M
Client relationships320
Above median
SEC filers — 25th 118 · median 248 · 75th 558
Your inputs imply a 0.84% effective fee on AUM. 95.5% of the 16,865 approved SEC-registered advisers report charging a percentage of AUM. Median staffing among retail-focused filers is 6 employees, with a median $86.18M of AUM per advisory employee.
Source: U.S. SEC, Investment Adviser Public Disclosure (IAPD) Form ADV compilation feed (23,740 firm records in the 2026-08-12 feed). Percentiles computed from Form ADV Part 1A Item 5 answers. Raw feed. Benchmarks describe firm size and client mix — they are not transaction multiples.
Survey benchmarks
Published medians for $250M–$499M AUM
InvestmentNews · 2024 data
Sets EBITDA and value per client from the tier medians below. Turn off to enter your own figures.
- Revenue per client (tier median)
- $8K
- Operating profit margin (tier median)
- 27.8%
- Derived value per client
- $20K
- Derived EBITDA
- $667K
- Revenue per professional
- $1.06M
- Client attrition
- 3.8%
- Median minimum client fee
- $5K
Your inputs imply $8K per client. Study-wide median $10K.
Study-wide median 27.8% in 2024, up from 25.7%.
Tier revenue per client × your 2.40× revenue multiple. The study reports revenue per client, not transaction value per client.
Tier operating margin applied to $2.40M of revenue.
Revenue per staff member $857K.
Up from 2.8% the prior year — a reference point for the retention quality factor.
87% of firms made no fee-schedule change; 12% raised and 1% lowered prices.
Source: InvestmentNews 2025 Advisor Benchmarking Study (Advisory Compensation & Staffing; Pricing & Profitability), InvestmentNews Research (KM Business Information US) — 2024 data. Published report. Self-reported data from participating advisory firms; not audited and not a statistically valid sample of the whole market. These are operating benchmarks — the study does not publish transaction multiples, so the multiples in this tool stay yours to set.
Method-by-method
Where the value comes from
$5.76M
EBITDA Multiple
$667K × 6.50×
Profitability-based. Sensitive to how owner comp is normalized.
weight 20blend share 20.0%contributes $867,360confidence 84
EBOC Multiple
$1.08M × 4.20×
Earnings before owner comp — neutralizes owner pay policy.
weight 15blend share 15.0%contributes $680,400confidence 78
Discounted Cash Flow
5-yr FCF @ 7% growth, 14% discount, 3% terminal
Most theoretically sound, most assumption-sensitive.
weight 15blend share 15.0%contributes $1,086,211confidence 62
Client Value
320 clients × $20K
Relationship-count proxy. Useful sanity check on small books.
weight 10blend share 10.0%contributes $635,136confidence 58
AUM Percentage
× 1.23 quality
$285.00M × 1.50% × 1.23× quality
1.5% base rate, adjusted by the six-factor quality multiplier.
- Recurring revenue mix+0.160×
- Organic growth+0.042×
- Client retention+0.168×
- Client demographics+0.015×
- Concentration (inverted)+0.060×
- Advisor longevity / continuity+0.020×
weight 10blend share 10.0%contributes $526,894confidence 88
Comparable Transactions
× 1.23 quality
$2.40M × 2.20× × 1.23× quality
Uses your comparable-transaction multiple; set it from deal data you trust.
- Recurring revenue mix+0.160×
- Organic growth+0.042×
- Client retention+0.168×
- Client demographics+0.015×
- Concentration (inverted)+0.060×
- Advisor longevity / continuity+0.020×
weight 10blend share 10.0%contributes $650,760confidence 74