SearchCorporate, M&A & Securities

M&A Deal Points Benchmarking

A deal points study for the deal on the desk: each term in the seller's markup set against its real peers, with the clause behind each precedent a click away.

Watch it work Book a walkthrough

Follow one seller's markup to the approved memo ↓

Watch with transcript →

The problem

The precedent pull, rebuilt from scratch for each turn of the agreement

When the seller's markup lands, an associate pulls precedents from the document system by hand, reads the clauses and builds a comparison table before the next call. That is about two days of associate time on each turn, and the table holds whatever deals turned up in time, with no sizes and no percentiles.

Published studies come out once a year, mix sectors and sizes, and name no deal. Paid databases hold none of the firm's own agreements. And each firm precedent is another client's confidential deal, so the associate has to remember which ones may be named on a call with the other side.

Built forM&A partnersAssociatesKnowledge lawyersPractice technology teams

The Problem Today

On the call, partners say a term is market on a feeling: precedent pulls take days and studies mix all kinds of deals.

139: deals in the profession's best-known published study published
5,200+: deals in one paid database, none of them the firm's own published

Pulled together today

Precedents
Spreadsheet
Clauses
Studies

Days lost before each turnAssociates rebuild the precedent table for each call
A client named by mistakeFirm precedents belong to other clients

The Solution

Each clause readThe same deal points from each precedent and each turn, cited to the section
This deal's real peersFiltered by size, sector and year, with ethical walls applied first
Each term against the marketA strip of precedent dots per term, with this deal's percentile marked
Partner approves the memoTalking points cite each deal; the call version keeps firm deals unnamed

Built-in controls

Firm precedents stay anonymous outside the firm
No value counts until it is cited to its clause
Ethical walls applied before any count

What You Get

Partners walk into the call knowing where each term sits, and which three deals prove it.

≈12 h: of associate time saved per deal on precedent pulls our estimate

The clause behind each dotQuoted from the agreement, never paraphrased
Percentiles in place of anecdotesEach term placed among its real peers
The firm's own deals countFirm precedents beside public merger agreements

Nine features

A deal points study for one deal, from markup to approved memo

The features follow a turn of the agreement: reading the markup, choosing the peers, plotting each term, then drafting and clearing the memo.

01Deal points by turn
Each turn of the agreement read term by term, changes flagged
How it works
- Reads the letter of intent, our turn 2 draft and the seller's turn 3 markup
- Records 14 deal points, each value cited to its section
- Marks the 7 terms that moved since turn 2, from survival to data security
Senior associateHas the changed terms in one table as soon as the markup lands, before anyone opens the 97 pages of redline.
02Extraction checks
Low-confidence readings checked by the knowledge lawyer before they count
How it works
- The peer group holds 2,604 values, every one tied to the clause it came from
- Readings below the 90% confidence threshold go to the knowledge lawyer
- Of 37 checked, 30 were confirmed and 7 corrected, each with its reason
- Agreements filed this week wait with 9 values until they are accepted
Knowledge lawyerCatches a survival period read from the original clause when an amendment had extended it, before the wrong figure moves a percentile.
03Peer group
A peer group narrowed to the deals that truly match this one
How it works
- Narrows the library by sector, then size, then signing date, with a count at each step
- Removes 3 agreements behind an ethical wall before any count, logging matter numbers only
- Ranks the closest deals by size, sector and how recent they are
M&A partnerApproves a peer set she can defend on the call: software and security deals of this size, signed since 2023, with no walled matter in the count.
04Benchmark
Each deal point drawn as a strip of precedent dots, this deal marked
How it works
- One strip per term, with the middle half shaded and the median ticked
- This deal sits on each strip with its percentile among the peers
- Indemnity terms are measured on the 124 peers with a surviving seller indemnity
- 3 of 14 terms land outside the middle half, all favoring the seller
M&A partnerCan say where a 12-month survival period sits for this kind of deal, the 20th percentile, where she once quoted a cross-sector median from memory.
05Is this market?
An is-this-market bar that answers with a percentile and the closest deals
How it works
- Answers from the peers on screen with the percentile, median and middle half
- A 5% escrow comes back at the 15th percentile of 124, against a 10% median
- Names the three closest deals and their terms, each one a citation
Senior associateAnswers the partner's is-that-market question with the deals behind it, and no spreadsheet to rebuild before the call.
06A precedent's clause
A dot that opens the clause it stands for, quoted from the agreement
How it works
- Clicking any dot opens that precedent's clause with its section
- Shows the deal's size, signing date, source and the reading's confidence
- Says whether the deal may be named on the call or stays confidential
M&A partnerHas the clause in front of her when she calls a term market, and knows before she speaks whether the deal behind it can be named.
07Clauses compared
The closest precedent clauses set word for word beside this deal's
How it works
- This deal's clause beside the three closest precedents in the peer group, word for word
- The closest three run 18, 15 and 12 months against the seller's 12
- The only 12-month deal paired it with a 10% escrow, twice the 5% offered here
Senior associateDrafts the counter from precedent wording already on screen. Pulling twenty to forty agreements to find three that fit is over.
08Negotiation memo
A talking-points memo sorted into push, give, watch and hold
How it works
- Push: survival back to 18 months, escrow to 10%, and two carve-outs struck
- Give: the 4-year non-compete and silence on sandbagging, traded for the escrow
- Watch: ask for the data security representation flat, as 66% of peers hold it
Senior associateDrafts the call plan from the benchmark itself, so each number already matches the 186 peers when it goes up for approval.
09Approved call version
A call version with firm precedents unnamed, approved by the deal partner
How it works
- A firm precedent becomes a year, a sector and a size; public deals keep their names
- Checks before it leaves: citations, figures, and no confidential precedent named
- Approved 15 minutes after the benchmark ran
M&A partnerTakes a memo into the call that she can quote from freely, with no other client's deal named by mistake.

Three of the seller's terms fall outside the middle half, all in its favor

The seller's turn 3 markup against 186 peers; indemnity terms against the 124 with a surviving seller indemnity.

Deal point	Seller's markup	Peer median	Percentile
Survival of general reps	12 months, down from 18	18 months	20th, outside
Indemnity escrow	5% ($17.5M), down from 10%	10%	15th, outside
Material adverse effect carve-outs	11, up from 9	8	95th, outside
General indemnity cap	10% ($35.0M)	10%	61st
Escrow period	15 months, down from 18	15 months	50th
Seller non-compete	4 years, down from 5	4 years	53rd of 98
Reverse termination fee	4.0% ($14.0M)	4%	69th of 58 with a fee
Data security representation	Knowledge-qualified, was flat	Flat in 66%	Held by 34%

Around the benchmark

The library, the filings check and the audit behind the deal points study

What the knowledge lawyer, the associate and practice technology open around the strips.

Benchmark filtered to the three terms outside the middle half: survival of general reps, indemnity escrow and material adverse effect carve-outs — **Only the three that matter**One switch hides the eleven terms inside the middle half. Survival at the 20th, escrow at the 15th and carve-outs at the 95th stay on screen.

Proposed counter for the survival clause at eighteen months, built from the closest firm precedent's wording and marked as a draft for the partner — **Counter-language from the closest clause**The draft counter takes the closest precedent's wording, sets survival at the 18-month peer median, and stays a draft until the partner decides.

Precedent library of firm and public agreements with value, signing date, sector, source, points read and whether each sits in the deal's peer group — **The precedent library**1,236 firm precedents and 1,678 public merger agreements, each showing how many of its 14 points were read and whether it sits in this deal's 186.

Filings check: 3 new merger agreements found in software and security, 42 values read and 9 below 90% confidence queued for the knowledge lawyer — **New public filings, held back**The filings check found 3 new software and security agreements. 9 of their 42 values fell below 90% confidence and wait for the knowledge lawyer.

Audit log of the deal: the benchmark run, peer group filters, a market question, a clause opened, the call version built and the memo approved — **Who did what before the call**Each filter, question, clause opened and approval is logged with its time, from the benchmark run to the partner's sign-off.

Settings for sources, the percentile method, a 20-peer minimum, a 90% confidence threshold, anonymous firm precedents, ethical walls and roles — **The method, as settings**Percentile as the share at or below, the 25th to 75th as the middle half, 20 peers at least, a 90% threshold and firm precedents anonymous.

The partner approves the peers and the memo; the associate drafts both

Agents read, plot and draft. Four people split the decisions.

M&A partner

Sees: The strips, the peer group funnel and the memo beside its checks
Signs: Approves the peer group and the memo before the call

Senior associate

Sees: The changed terms, the closest clauses and the market answers
Signs: Runs the benchmark and drafts the memo, and cannot approve it

Knowledge lawyer

Sees: Each reading below the confidence threshold, beside its clause
Signs: Accepts or corrects it before it counts in any benchmark

Practice technology manager

Sees: Sources, roles and retention, with no deal content
Signs: Keeps the connections and roles, and makes no deal decision

Seven limits

Under 20 peers, no agent will call a term market

Reading, plotting, matching and drafting are split up, and each split carries a limit the partner can point to.

Deal point extractor

Reads each precedent and each turn of the deal's drafts, and extracts the deal points with the clause and section for each.

Never records a value without the clause it came from
Below 90% confidence, the value goes to the knowledge lawyer

Filings watcher

Finds new merger agreements attached to public company filings and adds them to the queue.

Never adds a filing to a benchmark before its values are checked

Peer group agent

Proposes the peers by sector, size, year and similarity, and applies ethical walls.

Never drops a precedent silently: each exclusion has a reason in the log

Market view agent

Plots each term, computes percentiles and the middle half, and flags terms outside it.

Never calls a term market with fewer than 20 peers

Clause matcher

Finds the closest clauses and lines them up with the differences marked.

Quotes a precedent's wording exactly, or leaves it out

Talking points agent

Drafts the memo, each argument citing the deals behind it.

Leaves the memo in draft for the partner and emails no one

Confidentiality guard

Keeps firm precedents anonymous outside the firm and enforces ethical walls.

Never lets a confidential client's name into a shareable output

Peers, ethical walls and misread clauses, answered

What is a deal points study, and what does this one add?

A deal points study counts how often each negotiated term, from the indemnity cap to the earnout, turns up across signed acquisition agreements. This solution builds one for a single deal: from the firm's own precedents and public merger agreements, filtered to that deal's peers, with the clause behind each dot.

Can confidential firm precedents be used without naming the client?

Yes. Inside the firm, a lawyer reads the precedent in full. In the call version of the memo, and in anything shared, it is cited by year, sector and size alone. Walled matters are hidden from the deal team before any count.

Who chooses the agreements that count as peers?

The peer group agent proposes them by sector, size, signing date and similarity, and the deal partner approves the set. Every agreement left out carries a written reason in the log. When too few peers hold a term, the strip asks for a wider group.

What happens when a clause is misread?

Each value carries a confidence. Below the firm's threshold it goes to the knowledge lawyer, who accepts or corrects it with the clause on screen. Agreements from new filings join a benchmark only after that check.

How are deals with no surviving indemnity handled?

They are left out of the indemnity strips and kept in the others, so survival, cap, basket and escrow are compared only with deals where the seller still stands behind its representations.

Does it draft counter-language as well?

Yes. From the clause comparison, it takes the closest precedent's wording, sets the term at the peer median and marks it a draft. The partner decides what goes into the next turn, and no agent mails a draft to anyone outside the deal team.

Corporate, M&A & Securities