Table of Contents
01
The bottom-line up-front: Top ten takeaways
02
Always exit ready? Only in theory
03
A tale of two timelines
04
Defining exit readiness: Playbook vs. checklist
05
Sponsor grades: Harsh but honest
06
The longer the hold, the higher the bar
07
Data, talent, and tools: Where readiness breaks
08
Best-in-class CFOs: What sets them apart
09
Best-in-class CFOs also understand AI adoption = buyer confidence
10
Preparing during a market pause
11
The bottom-line: Readiness is a state, not a stage
Survey Report 2025

Exit readiness in private equity

THE STATE OF THE PE SPONSOR & CFO RELATIONSHIP
Exit windows may be narrow, but expectations are wide.

With the Fed’s recent rate cut and an abundance of dry powder, dealmakers are eyeing a potential uptick in activity. Limited exit activity over the past 3–4 years has left Distributions to Paid-In (DPI) at historic lows, and combined with open and accessible credit markets, this is likely to trigger a multi-year exit cycle. Yet even as the macro backdrop shifts, the M&A market remains uneven: frenetic in some sectors, glacial in others. One constant, however, is sponsor expectations.

In practice, though, CFOs say the reality is tougher. Monthly reporting cycles, operational firefighting, and stretched finance teams often stand in the way of sustaining exit-level discipline.

Sponsors view this gap as more than an operational challenge; it’s a value creation opportunity. They want CFOs to actively optimize for exit: pulling value creation levers, stress-testing assumptions, monitoring KPIs, refining growth narratives, and implementing AI across finance workflows. AI is increasingly critical not just for execution, but for buyer perception and valuation: buyers are looking for companies that are technologically capable and data-driven, and 85% consider AI-enabled finance capabilities when assessing valuation.

Our survey of 200 sponsors and 200 portfolio company CFOs revealed structural and operational gaps in how readiness is defined, resourced, and executed. These gaps underscore a simple truth: the next era of value creation will depend less on financial engineering and more on closing the sponsor–CFO divide.

72%
of sponsors agree
CFOs are falling short on exit readiness/optimization initiatives.
97% of sponsor
expect their portfolio CFOs to maintain a seller’s mindset every day, whether an exit is imminent or not

Download the full report.

Our contact form is currently blocked by your cookie preferences. Please change your preferences to continue.

The bottom-line up-front: Top ten takeaways

01
Always ready? Not really:

97% of sponsors expect CFOs to be always exit ready but only 20% operate this way

shift into exit mode only when a sale window emerges, creating compressed timelines and heightened risk.

02
Timeline clash:

81% of sponsors want exit preparation to start 12–24 months out; most CFOs start 3–6 months before a potential sale leading to rushed diligence preparation, deferred and unquantified in-process initiatives, and lower perceived multiples.

Sponsor
timeline 24 Prep Horizon Start 12 Months 24 Months CFO 
timeline  3-6 MOnth Sprint Start 12 Months 24 Months
03
Playbook vs. checklist:

Sponsors define readiness holistically, encompassing active value creation levers, integrated systems, AI adoption plans, and credible equity stories. Their definition explicitly includes AI adoption initiatives that enhance predictive insights, support smarter decision- making, and reinforce tech-enabled equity stories buyers can trust. CFOs, by contrast, tend to focus on compliance, audit-ready financials, and assembling diligence packs.

Playbook vs. checkbook misalignment can lead to a reduction in perceived enterprise value of
1-3
Turns of exit multiples
04
Performance gap:

72% of sponsors say CFOs fall short on exit readiness and optimization initiatives

The 4 reasons sponsors say their CFOs aren’t exit ready: 
  1. Data quality
  2. Lack of exit experience
  3. Under-resourced teams
  4. Scenario planning/storytelling
05
Structural barriers:
The 6 CFO-reported barriers to getting exit ready:
  1. Bandwidth constraints
  2. Competing operational priorities
  3. Fragmented systems
  4. Unclear sponsor expectations
  5. Misaligned cross-functional KPIs
  6. Limited exit experience
06
Longer holds, higher bar:

Sponsors want CFOs to use extended holds to get exit ready.

56% of Sponsors say extended holds allow for exit optimization (operational transformation, enhanced controls, technology and broader merger integration, and talent development) but only 38% of CFOs use hold to optimize for exit. 
56% of Sponsors say extended holds allow for exit optimization (operational transformation, enhanced controls, technology and broader merger integration, and talent development) but only 38% of CFOs use hold to optimize for exit. 
56% of Sponsors say extended holds allow for exit optimization (operational transformation, enhanced controls, technology and broader merger integration, and talent development) but only 38% of CFOs use hold to optimize for exit. 
07
Pause = prep:

Sponsors expect CFOs to use market slowdowns strategically for exit optimization: cleaning data, optimizing operations, strengthening tech stacks (including AI adoption planning), pulling value creation levers, and refining credible growth stories.

report that portfolios where CFOs use market pauses effectively are more resilient, achieve faster diligence cycles, and ultimately capture higher multiples when exits resume

08
What top CFOs do:

Best-in-class CFOs start exit prep 18+ months in advance, run mock diligence, have prior exit experience, and proactively align with sponsors and requisite advisors on readiness.

HIGH PERFORMING
PORTFOLIO CFOS ARE
3x
more likely to begin exit preparation 18+ months before a potential sale
09
Alignment test:

Exit success depends on shared definitions of readiness, early investment in resources, and clear communication to bridge sponsor–CFO perception gaps.

HIGH PERFORMING CFOS ARE
2.5x
more likely to proactively align with sponsors on the definition of readiness
10
Continuous readiness drives value:

Companies embedding exit readiness into their operating model (including AI adoption initiatives visible to potential buyers, memorializing value creation initiatives and budgets in VCPs, and proactively stress-testing assumptions) avoid last-minute sprints, de-risk the portfolio company for the next buyer, accelerate deal execution, and unlock higher multiples.

71% of sponsors

say that CFOs who don’t bake exit readiness into their operating models will have lower deal multiples

01

Always exit ready?
Only in theory

CFOs in today’s business environment are under more scrutiny than ever. Economic uncertainty, growing regulatory requirements, and increased investor involvement are only a few of the challenges they are facing. Since the pandemic, pressure on CFOs to cut costs and grow revenue, while maintaining overall financial control, has intensified. At the same time, CFOs at PE-backed companies have broad, strategic responsibilities that extend far beyond managing the books.

One of the most significant areas where the CFO role has evolved is with respect to transforming the business. Today, CFOs are largely seen as sharing responsibility with the CEO for this function—especially critical to PE-backed companies where sponsors are eyeing a profitable exit.

While there was already widespread agreement about this in the 2021 survey, the conviction in this belief intensified significantly:

97% of sponsor
want their CFOs to operate as if they are always for sale
But only 20% of CFOs
operate this way
02

A tale of
two timelines

Sponsor timeline 24 Prep Horizon Start 12 Months 24 Months CFO timeline 3-6 Month Sprint Start 12 Months 24 Months

If readiness is about timing, then the clocks sponsors and CFOs are watching aren’t set to the same time zone. 81% of sponsors say they want preparation to begin 12–24 months before a potential sale. 14% are even more aggressive, arguing that preparation should start the moment a company is acquired (a mindset that treats every day of ownership as an opportunity to optimize for exit, not just operate the business). Think exit optimization rather than mere readiness.

CFOs see it differently. Only 27% begin that early, and more than half (54%) rely on a compressed 3–6-month sprint. In other words: sponsors are training their teams for a marathon, while CFOs are lacing up for a 5K. The problem is that exits rarely reward sprinters. Buyers and diligence teams can quickly spot when the story has been rushed, or worse, when value creation levers haven’t been fully engaged.

The consequences are tangible: 62% of CFOs admit they frequently scramble to pull together KPIs, financial models, and operational narratives under tight timelines, and 47% say they sometimes defer strategic initiatives until the exit window is imminent.

71% of sponsors
believe that compressed preparation correlates with lower deal multiples 
39% of sponsors
cite rushed exits as a primary source of post-sale adjustments or renegotiations
03

Defining exit readiness: Playbook vs. checklist

Sponsors want an exit readiness playbook, that includes: Value creation, Integrated systems, Equity story with supporting KPIs - opportunity for alignment - But CFOs think in terms of a checklist: Diligence packs,Audit-ready financials, Compliance tasks
Sponsors want an exit readiness playbook, that includes: Value creation, Integrated systems, Equity story with supporting KPIs - opportunity for alignment - But CFOs think in terms of a checklist: Diligence packs,Audit-ready financials, Compliance tasks
Sponsors want an exit readiness playbook, that includes: Value creation, Integrated systems, Equity story with supporting KPIs - opportunity for alignment - But CFOs think in terms of a checklist: Diligence packs,Audit-ready financials, Compliance tasks

When we asked sponsors and CFOs to define “exit readiness,” the divide was revealing.

For sponsors, readiness is holistic, strategic, and forward-looking. 86% of sponsors cited having value creation levers actively in motion as a critical marker of readiness. Nearly 79% highlighted integrated systems that connect operations, finance, and strategy across the portfolio company, and 73% emphasized having a credible equity story that buyers could believe in: a narrative woven from growth initiatives, operational excellence, and market positioning.

CFOs, by contrast, take a more tactical and task-focused view. 64% prioritized assembling diligence packs, 58% pointed to audit-ready financials, and only 32% included value creation as part of their definition. Other common priorities included cleaning up historical reporting (42%) and ensuring compliance with regulatory or contractual obligations (35%). In short, CFOs are thinking about what must be done to survive the exit process, while sponsors are focused on what must be done to win the exit process, de-risk the asset for the new buyer, and maximize valuation.

This difference is structural. Sponsors see readiness as a playbook with multiple, integrated chapters. CFOs treat readiness as a checklist: assemble the documents, ensure the audit trail is complete, and wait for the banker’s signal. The consequences of this misalignment are measurable.

Sponsors estimate that a purely checklist-driven approach can delay exit preparation and potentially lower enterprise value, often by 1–3 turns of exit multiple, highlighting the financial impact of misaligned readiness strategies. CFOs and sponsors are measuring success by very different scorecards. Bridging this gap is critical.

57% of CFOs
admit that when they focus on their checklist approach, they don’t have time to engage with value creation levers until the exit window is imminent
04

Sponsor grades: Harsh but honest

The 4 reasons sponsors say their CFOs aren’t exit ready:
  1. Data quality
  2. Lack of exit experience
  3. Under-resourced teams
  4. Scenario planning/storytelling

Sponsors are not shy in their assessments. 72% say their CFOs are falling short on exit readiness, with only 9% willing to say their CFOs are ahead of expectations.

Their critiques are consistent: data quality remains a persistent weak spot (67%), many CFOs lack direct exit experience (59%), and finance teams remain under-resourced (46%). In addition, nearly half of sponsors (48%) cited insufficient scenario planning as a recurring issue, while 38% noted that inconsistent tracking of key value levers slows the overall exit process.

The crux of the issue is grading criteria. Sponsors evaluate CFOs on their ability to accelerate value creation, integrating financials, operations, and strategic narratives to position the company optimally for buyers. CFOs, however, often believe they’re being judged primarily on compliance, controls, and accurate reporting.

Bridging this perception gap requires explicit communication of expectations, shared definitions of success, and early alignment on value creation priorities.

05

The longer the hold, the higher the bar

Holding periods have stretched, now averaging 6.7 years, compared with approximately 5.7 years historically. Sponsors see this longer horizon as an opportunity to optimize and professionalize operations in ways that will compound value at exit. 82% of sponsors said longer holds raise the bar for CFOs, with nearly 56% noting that extended timelines allow for deeper strategic initiatives such as operational transformation, technology integration, and talent development.

But CFOs aren’t adjusting at the same pace. Only 38% say they meaningfully change their approach when the timeline extends. Too often, they admit, the goal is simply to keep the engines running.

This creates another disconnect. Sponsors see longer holds as a chance to double down on value creation; CFOs treat them as business as usual. What’s more, 44% of CFOs reported that extended hold periods actually increase pressure to maintain day-to-day operations without additional resources, further widening the sponsor–CFO gap and slowing progress on value creation initiatives.

56% of sponsors
say extended holds allow for exit optimization (operational transformation, enhanced controls, technology and broader merger integration, and talent development)
But only 38% of CFOs
use hold to optimize for exit
06

Data, talent, and tools: Where readiness breaks

The 6 CFO-reported barriers to getting exit ready:
  1. Bandwidth constraints
  2. Competing operational priorities
  3. Fragmented systems
  4. Unclear sponsor expectations
  5. Misaligned cross-functional KPIs
  6. Limited exit experience

When we asked CFOs why sustaining exit readiness is so difficult, the answers were consistent. Nearly half (49%) say they lack the finance team bandwidth to maintain exit-level rigor while managing day-to-day operations. 44% point to fragmented systems that make reliable data elusive. 36% report they don’t have clarity on what their sponsor expects, and 31% admit they’ve never been through an exit before. Additional structural challenges include limited access to scenario-planning tools (28%), competing priorities across operational initiatives (42%), and difficulty aligning cross-functional teams around KPIs (33%).

These aren’t excuses; they’re real barriers that impact value. Sponsors estimate that gaps in exit readiness can erode potential deal valuation by 1–3 turns of exit multiple, making continuous readiness and proactive planning critical to capturing full value. Nearly 40% of sponsors also reported that misaligned or delayed financial narratives lead to prolonged diligence cycles, missed opportunities, or renegotiated terms. The costs are tangible, leaving value on the table and eroding confidence on both sides of the sponsor–CFO relationship.

07

Best-in-class CFOs: What sets them apart

Not all CFOs struggle with exit readiness. Sponsors report several high-performing CFOs within their portfolio. What sets them apart?

HIGH PERFORMING PORTFOLIO CFOS ARE 3x more likely to begin exit preparation 18+ months before a potential sale 2x more likely to conduct mock diligence exercises  4x more likely to have prior exit experience 2.5x more likely to proactively align with sponsors on the definition of readiness
HIGH PERFORMING PORTFOLIO CFOS ARE 3x more likely to begin exit preparation 18+ months before a potential sale 2x more likely to conduct mock diligence exercises  4x more likely to have prior exit experience 2.5x more likely to proactively align with sponsors on the definition of readiness
HIGH PERFORMING PORTFOLIO CFOS ARE 3x more likely to begin exit preparation 18+ months before a potential sale 2x more likely to conduct mock diligence exercises  4x more likely to have prior exit experience 2.5x more likely to proactively align with sponsors on the definition of readiness

The lesson is clear: exit readiness is not innate; it’s a muscle that must be trained consistently.

Best-in-class CFOs make readiness part of the everyday rhythm of operations: shaping narratives, stress-testing assumptions, and ensuring KPIs stand up to scrutiny. Those who wait until the last minute often face diligence gaps that slow the process and erode value.

08

Best-in-class CFOs also understand AI adoption = buyer confidence

Sponsors note that when CFOs take a proactive approach, including the adoption of AI to enhance forecasting, reporting, scenario modeling, and data visualization in ways buyers can see, exits run more smoothly, valuations are perceived more favorably, and buyer confidence increases.

But AI adoption isn’t just about efficiency; it’s a visible signal to potential buyers that the company is technologically capable, data-driven, and future-ready.

By embedding AI into the operating model and demonstrating it proactively, CFOs lay the foundation for a strong relationship with the buyer, enable faster VCP mobilization in the new hold period, and create a measurable impact on both perceived and realized valuation.

Sponsors believe cfos who integrate ai are 2x more likely to achieve smoother exits and higher perceived valuations
Sponsors
estimate that 85% of buyers
consider AI-enabled planning and reporting as a factor in valuation discussions, meaning that CFOs who prioritize AI not only improve internal decision-making but also strengthen the company’s credibility and multiples at exit
09

Preparing during a market pause

With global exit value at a five-year low ($392B in 2024), exit windows are tighter and opportunities rarer. But sponsors don’t see a market slowdown as an excuse for complacency. They expect CFOs to use the pause strategically, (addressing structural gaps, optimizing operations, and laying the groundwork for future exits), which also helps close the value gap between entry and exit multiples, particularly for deals with late 2020–21 vintage.

Nearly 71% of sponsors said they actively monitor whether portfolio CFOs are using downtime to clean up operations and streamline workflows, while 63% look for improvements in data integrity, reporting systems, AI adoption, and technology infrastructure.

Best-in-class CFOs during these pauses do more than “keep the lights on.” They optimize the tech stack, adopt AI tools to enhance forecasting and reporting, accelerate merger integration, actively pull on value creation levers, and refine growth stories buyers can trust.

71% of sponsors
say they monitor whether their portfolio CFOs are using deal pause to optimize for exit
Nearly 58% of sponsors
report that portfolios where CFOs use market pauses effectively are more resilient, achieve faster diligence cycles, and ultimately capture higher multiples when exits resume
10

The bottom-line: Readiness is a state, not a stage

Exit readiness has evolved. It is no longer a final-mile sprint reserved for bankers’ binders and diligence war rooms. It is a discipline that lives inside the operating model – requiring ongoing investment in people, systems, and alignment.

Sponsors already expect their CFOs to adopt this mindset. CFOs who get there first, armed with clean data, credible equity stories, and proactively embedded AI capabilities, won’t just avoid value leakage. By embedding AI into planning, reporting, and forecasting in ways buyers can see, CFOs signal that the company is technologically capable and future-ready, positively influencing perceived and realized valuation. In a market where exit windows are narrow, that difference is everything.

Making exit readiness a permanent state of mind

For PE-backed CFOs or PE sponsors looking for more than insights—for a playbook to create and sustain an always-on readiness mindset—Accordion has built the framework. Think of it as the cheat sheet for closing the sponsor–CFO gap, embedding value creation into the operating model, and transforming exit readiness from an episodic scramble into a continuous discipline.

Ready to operationalize this approach inside your company or portfolio?

Tell us where you need help

Accordion

Accordion sits at the heart of private equity — where sponsors and CFOs meet. Through financial consulting rooted in data, technology, and AI, we help clients drive value. Our services support the Office of the CFO across all stages of the investment lifecycle — including budgeting, forecasting, reporting, foundational accounting, strategic financial planning and analysis enhancement, CFO-led performance, transaction support, and turnaround and restructuring solutions. Accordion is headquartered in New York with ten offices around the globe.

Survey Methodology

The State of the PE Sponsor & CFO Relationship survey was conducted by Accordion, in conjunction with Wakefield Research, among 400 total participants—including 200 private equity (PE) sponsors (senior executives) and 200 chief financial officers (CFOs) at private equity-backed companies with $50 million or more in annual revenue. The CFO and PE sponsor samples were collected September 2025, using an email invitation and an online survey.

Q&A

1. What is Accordion’s Exit Readiness in Private Equity Survey about?

Accordion’s Exit Readiness in Private Equity report explores the disconnect between sponsor expectations and CFO execution when it comes to exit preparedness. Based on a survey of 200 private equity sponsors and 200 portfolio company CFOs, the study reveals how differing definitions, timelines, and resource constraints impact value creation and deal outcomes. It highlights the fact that readiness is no longer a final sprint – it’s a continuous discipline embedded in the operating model.

2. Why do private equity sponsors believe CFOs are falling short on exit readiness?

According to Accordion’s survey, 72% of sponsors believe their portfolio company CFOs are underperforming on exit readiness and value optimization. The disconnect stems from a fundamental difference in mindset: sponsors view readiness as a continuous, strategic discipline focused on value creation, while many CFOs treat it as a tactical, last-minute checklist exercise. Sponsors cite persistent challenges such as poor data quality, limited exit experience, under-resourced finance teams, and insufficient scenario planning or storytelling capabilities. They also point to fragmented systems and misaligned KPIs that make it difficult to connect financial insights with strategic goals. Ultimately, sponsors expect CFOs to elevate their role – embedding AI and data-driven insights, aligning earlier on exit timelines, and proactively refining growth narratives – to ensure the company operates as if it could go to market at any time.

3. How can CFOs improve exit readiness and drive higher valuation outcomes?

High-performing CFOs start exit preparation 18+ months in advance, run mock diligence exercises, and embed AI-driven forecasting and reporting into their workflows. They align early with sponsors on value creation priorities, integrate systems across the organization, and sustain readiness as part of everyday operations. This proactive approach not only de-risks transactions but also boosts buyer confidence and perceived valuation.