How Much Does Financial Structuring (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO) Cost? Prices and Fees 2026 (France & Switzerland)

Financial structuring (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO): 2026 price ranges in France and Switzerland.

Introduction: how much does financial structuring (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO) cost in 2026?

A financial structuring engagement for an LBO, MBO, MBI or OBO transaction generally costs between EUR/CHF 30,000 and 90,000 in advisory fees for an SME deal requiring EUR/CHF 2 to 15 million of debt to structure, and between EUR/CHF 60,000 and 250,000 for a mid-cap file or a multi-tranche financing above that threshold (Hectelion's 2026 practice). The right budget depends on one precise question: how many financing tranches, and how many lenders, need to be brought together in the same structure?

Financial structuring for an acquisition deal involves assembling senior debt, mezzanine debt, equity and sometimes an earn-out to finance the acquisition of a company by its management team, an external buyer or its own departing shareholder. France Invest, the French private equity trade association, notes that the success of this type of structure depends less on the negotiated interest rate than on the consistency between debt service and the target's cash-generation capacity. In France, the law strictly limits what the acquired company can contribute to its own financing:

"A company may not advance funds, grant loans or provide security with a view to the subscription or purchase of its own shares by a third party.", Article L.225-216 of the French Commercial Code.

Three factors are converging in 2026 to make the budget for a financial structuring engagement harder to anticipate than before. First, the tightening of credit conditions since the rise in policy rates has reduced the debt/EBITDA ratios accepted by lenders, which requires a more finely tuned balance between equity and debt than five years ago. Second, banks and debt funds are demanding stricter financial covenants and more frequent reporting, which lengthens the billed negotiation time. Third, hybrid structures are becoming more complex, earn-out, management package, asset and liability warranty are increasingly layered on top of conventional debt, which multiplies the number of parties to coordinate.

This article gives the price ranges at a glance, explains how an acquisition financing is structured, details what drives the fee, sets out how a structuring engagement is billed, situates the 2026 market trends, describes the process and its timeline, compares providers, explains how to reduce the cost without losing defensibility, lists the five costliest mistakes, then illustrates all of this with two priced case studies, before answering the ten most frequently asked questions.

The price of financial structuring at a glance: 2026 ranges by financing size

Type of engagement	Debt to structure	Fee range
Feasibility study and structure scoping	Any size	Fixed fee of EUR/CHF 5,000 to 10,000, or 20% to 35% of the budget of a full engagement
Full engagement, SME (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO)	EUR/CHF 2 to 15 million	Retainer of EUR/CHF 15,000 to 25,000 plus a success fee of 1% to 2% of the debt raised, total cost generally between EUR/CHF 30,000 and 90,000
Full engagement, mid-cap or multi-tranche financing	Above EUR/CHF 15 million	Retainer of EUR/CHF 25,000 to 50,000 plus a success fee of 0.5% to 1.5% of the debt raised, total cost generally between EUR/CHF 60,000 and 250,000 and above

Ranges from Hectelion's practice and market observations, 2026, for LBO, MBO, MBI and OBO structuring engagements conducted in France and Switzerland, excluding tax and disbursements (external due diligence, banking fees, legal fees). The success fee is calculated as a percentage of the debt actually raised, senior and mezzanine debt combined, excluding the equity contributed. The preparation time for a financial structuring engagement generally runs from 4 to 12 months depending on the complexity of the file.

The first tier of this table, the feasibility study, has grown in importance since credit conditions tightened: it tests the target's debt capacity before committing to the fees of a full engagement, based on an initial business valuation and a forecast business plan.

The price of financial structuring (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO) at a glance: 2026 ranges by deal size

Deal size	Switzerland (CHF)	France (EUR)
Small French-Swiss deals	CHF 15,000 to 50,000	EUR 15,000 to 50,000
Mid-cap companies (intermediate-size enterprises)	CHF 25,000 to 100,000	EUR 25,000 to 100,000
Complex deals	CHF 50,000 to 300,000	EUR 50,000 to 300,000

These tiers reflect Hectelion's 2026 practice (market observation), not an external statistic: they follow the actual complexity of structuring senior and mezzanine debt, the legal setup of the acquisition holding company, and the modelling of the financing plan, which increase with the number of tranches and lenders to coordinate rather than with the transaction amount alone. Preparation time generally runs from 4 to 12 months depending on the complexity of the file, with no fixed timeline per tier.

Secure the financial structure of your next deal

Thirty minutes are enough to scope the structure of your deal and its structuring budget. Hectelion advises buyers, executives and family shareholders in France and Switzerland on LBO, MBO, MBI and OBO transactions from CHF 2 to 500 million. Book a free, confidential call with our team: we assess the target's debt capacity, the number of tranches to consider and the timeline, before any engagement.

Acontos: get a free online estimate of your company's value

Before going into the detail, Hectelion has built Acontos, an online audit, due diligence and business valuation tool, powered by Anthropic's Claude Sonnet 5 artificial intelligence and calibrated on Hectelion's own methodology. From your accounts, it produces a first estimate of the value of your shares within minutes, free of charge and without retaining any document. Launch the valuation simulator to get an order of magnitude of the acquisition price to finance, then keep reading to understand what a financial structuring engagement costs, and what it covers.

How the financing is structured: senior debt, mezzanine, equity and covenants

An acquisition structure is generally organized around an acquisition holding company (Newco), set up by the buyer to carry the acquisition debt and hold the shares of the target company, whose upstreamed dividends fund repayment. Senior debt from banks, secured primarily against the target's assets and cash flows, forms the base of the structure, generally sized between 2.5 and 3.5 times normalized EBITDA depending on lenders and sector. When senior debt capacity is not enough to cover the price, a tranche of mezzanine debt fills the gap, subordinated to the senior debt, priced at a higher rate, sometimes combined with warrants giving access to equity.

The remaining balance is financed by the equity contributed by the buyer, a private equity fund or a partner private equity fund, and often supplemented by an earn-out paid to the seller based on future performance. Each debt tranche is governed by financial covenants, maximum leverage ratio, debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), investment cap, whose drafting and negotiation represent a significant share of the time billed by the structurer. The Loan Market Association (LMA) publishes the reference documentation used as the negotiation base for financings with leverage in Europe.

Finally, in the majority of MBO and MBI deals, the structure includes a management package designed to align the interests of operating management with those of capital providers, as well as an asset and liability warranty granted by the seller, whose valuation and negotiation call for a full financial instrument valuation in its own right. In Switzerland, Article 680 paragraph 2 of the Code of Obligations similarly restricts a company's repurchase of its own shares, which in turn limits OBO structures that would have the target finance the buyback directly rather than through the acquisition holding company.

What drives the price: structure, debt, guarantees, urgency

First, the number of financing tranches to structure. A structure with a single senior bank debt tranche requires a simpler negotiation than one combining senior debt, mezzanine debt and an earn-out, with each tranche carrying its own covenants and its own negotiation timeline.

Second, the number of lenders and investors involved. A banking pool of two or three institutions, or a private equity fund coming in alongside the buyer, multiplies the negotiation back-and-forth and the billed coordination time.

Third, the quality of the business plan and financial data of the target. A business plan that has already been stress-tested, with a reliable cash-flow track record, reduces the time needed to rework the figures to convince lenders, exactly as for a standard financial due diligence.

Fourth, the legal complexity of the structure. An OBO that has to work around financial assistance restrictions, or a French-Swiss deal that spans two legal frameworks, extends the engagement beyond a standard single-jurisdiction MBO.

Fifth, the presence of a management package or a complex asset and liability warranty, whose valuation and negotiation add to the base scope of the financial structuring engagement.

Finally, the urgency of the timeline. A closing driven by an external deadline, the seller's retirement, a tax deadline, competition from another buyer, compresses the negotiation time available with lenders and exposes the deal to less favorable terms, a constant market practice in both France and Switzerland.

Fixed fee or time and materials: the different forms of engagement and fees at Hectelion

Financial structuring is almost always billed under a mixed model, a fixed retainer covering the scoping and negotiation work, supplemented by a success fee paid at closing, calculated as a percentage of the debt actually raised. This billing model aligns the structurer's interest with the buyer's: the retainer rewards the work done even if the deal falls through, the success fee rewards a successful closing on the best terms.

Check what the fixed fee covers, this is the leading source of misunderstanding on quotes. Normally included in the retainer: analyzing debt capacity, building the financing plan, preparing the financing memorandum presented to lenders, and coordinating bank due diligence. Normally excluded, and to be priced separately: VAT, external banking and legal fees (lawyers, notaries), independent financial due diligence when entrusted to a third party, and the detailed valuation of a complex management package.

Beyond the retainer-plus-success-fee model, which remains the standard for most financial structuring engagements, Hectelion adapts the form of compensation to the nature of the engagement and the maturity of the file. The table below details the five forms of engagement and fees in practice.

Type of engagement	How it works	Indicative range
Hourly rate	Billing for time actually spent, based on the seniority of the team involved. Reserved for engagements whose scope cannot be fixed in advance, preliminary scoping, disputes or one-off expert input.	Varies by seniority and nature of the engagement, specified case by case in the engagement letter
Retainer (fixed availability fee)	Fixed fees paid at each milestone reached, scoping, memorandum, term sheets, compensating access to the team and the firm's availability, independent of the deal's final success.	EUR/CHF 5,000 to 10,000 per milestone reached
Milestone retainer plus success fee (retainer deducted from success fee)	A retainer is paid at each milestone reached, scoping, memorandum, term sheets, then deducted from the success fee due at closing, which remains calculated on the transaction amount.	Retainer of EUR/CHF 5,000 to 10,000 per milestone, success fee of 1% to 5% of the transaction amount, retainer deducted at closing
Success fee only	Compensation entirely conditional on the deal's success, with no retainer or interim fixed fee. Reserved for files whose feasibility is already well established when the engagement begins.	1% to 5% of the transaction amount, depending on the size and complexity of the file
Monthly fixed fee for the duration of the deal	A fixed fee billed each month until closing, compensating the continuous execution of the engagement, negotiation, lender coordination, documentation tracking, rather than simple access to the team as with a classic retainer.	EUR/CHF 2,000 to 8,000 per month, until closing

Ranges from Hectelion's 2026 practice, excluding tax. The compensation model retained is always set out in the engagement letter, after the free scoping call, based on the maturity of the file and the level of execution risk.

OBO (Owner Buy-Out): the only structure where the seller remains a shareholder

Among the four structures covered in this article, the OBO stands apart: the owner-manager sells the company to a holding company they control themselves, cashes in part of the company's value, and remains a shareholder, generally the majority one, alongside one or more financial partners who finance the acquisition debt. This structure addresses a specific need, diversifying personal wealth without losing operational control, often in preparation for a family succession or a full sale deferred by a few years. From a structuring standpoint, an OBO requires a two-way valuation exercise: the holding company buys the company at a price that must remain defensible to the tax authorities, while complying with Article L.225-216 of the French Commercial Code or Article 680 of the Swiss Code of Obligations, which prohibit the target from financing the buyback of its own shares itself. In practice, an OBO structuring engagement is billed within the same range as a comparably sized MBO, but the negotiation with lenders pays particular attention to the consistency between the agreed sale price and a recent independent valuation of the company, without which banks frequently refuse to finance the intended senior debt portion.

Hectelion's pricing: fees adapted to the actual structure

One clarification is needed on the status of the figures in this article: the price ranges mentioned come from Hectelion's own practice and from market observations of its competitors, in both France and Switzerland. They describe market practice, not a fixed fee schedule.

Hectelion adapts its pricing to the actual structure of each deal, from a feasibility study to a multi-tranche file, drawing on a multi-method methodology aligned with IVSC standards for the valuation of shares and debt instruments. Each quote is issued after a free scoping call, on the basis of a firm retainer and a success fee defined in the engagement letter, in line with our financial structuring offering.

2026 trends: tighter credit, stronger covenants, AI pressure on prices

The financial structuring market is undergoing a dual shift in 2026. On one hand, lenders have become more selective and stricter on covenants since the rise in policy rates, which lengthens the negotiation time needed to close a structure on the terms initially targeted, particularly for files whose business plan relies on ambitious growth. See also our analysis of EV/EBITDA valuation multiples, which determine the acquisition price to finance.

On the other hand, artificial intelligence is speeding up preparatory work: automated financial modelling of sensitivity scenarios, initial debt-capacity simulations and accounting reconciliations take fewer hours than before, which compresses feasibility study timelines without reducing the professional judgment required for negotiating covenants and the success fee. The market should therefore keep polarizing between standardized single-tranche structures, whose structuring cost is gradually falling, and bespoke multi-tranche structures, whose cost compensates the complexity of the negotiation, not just the time spent.

Process and timeline: from the engagement letter to closing

A financial structuring engagement runs through six phases, from getting up to speed on the file to closing, over a total duration of eight to fourteen weeks for an SME, longer for a multi-tranche file. The buyer (executive, manager or family shareholder) engages the structurer and provides the target's business plan and accounts. The structurer tests debt capacity based on a business valuation and a financial due diligence, builds the optimal financing plan between senior debt, mezzanine debt and equity, prepares the financing memorandum, then negotiates in parallel with prospective lenders. Once indicative terms are obtained (term sheets), the structurer supports the legal documentation through to closing. The detail of LBO, MBO, MBI and OBO structures and their respective logic is covered in our reference article on financial structuring.

The steps at a glance

Signing the engagement letter: scope and target timeline agreed with the buyer.
Financial diagnostic of the target: EBITDA normalization, cash-flow analysis and actual debt capacity assessment.
Structuring the deal: arbitrage between the acquisition holding company, senior debt, mezzanine debt and equity.
Approaching lenders: selecting the relevant lenders and investors, sending the financing memorandum.
Negotiating terms: discussing rates, covenants and guarantees until term sheets are obtained.
Legal documentation: drafting and reviewing loan agreements, shareholder agreements and guarantees.
Closing: final signature and release of funds.

For an SME, these seven steps generally take place over eight to fourteen weeks; a multi-tranche or French-Swiss file tends to run fourteen to twenty weeks instead.

Comparing providers: investment banks, structuring boutiques, accounting firms

Three categories of providers work on the financial structuring of an acquisition deal, each with legitimate use cases. Investment banks and large advisory firms have teams dedicated to leveraged financing and an extensive lender network, suited to large deals and multi-country structures, at fees generally above the SME range. Independent boutique firms, such as Hectelion, apply the same methodological rigor, aligned with IVSC standards, at fees calibrated for SMEs and mid-cap companies, with full independence from traditional financial intermediaries and the lenders approached. Generalist accounting firms and M&A law firms can lack specialization in multi-tranche bank negotiation and covenant drafting, a point worth checking before engaging them, even when they excel at the deal's legal documentation.

One point of caution: the structurer negotiating the debt must not be paid by the lenders it approaches on behalf of its client, a conflict of interest ruled out in practice by every serious firm. Before signing, three questions separate quotes that look comparable: how many lenders does the structurer typically approach in parallel, does the quote include full covenant negotiation or only a review of them, and is the success fee calculated on the debt raised or on the total acquisition price? A serious provider answers these three questions in writing without difficulty.

Why Choose Hectelion among these categories? Eight concrete points set Hectelion apart from other providers:

Entrepreneurial experience: structuring acquisition debt is not a theoretical exercise for Aristide Ruot, who has himself negotiated financings, managed cash flow under strain and absorbed the shocks of a fundraising round; this first-hand experience weighs into every arbitrage between senior debt, mezzanine debt and equity.
Price: a budget calibrated to the actual size of the financing to structure, two, five or fifteen million in debt, rather than the standard fee schedule a large investment bank would apply to an SME.
Know-how: the target's valuation and the structuring of senior and mezzanine debt are led by the same person, Aristide Ruot, Ph.D., which avoids back-and-forth between a valuer and a structurer with diverging readings of the business plan.
One-stop shop: deal structuring, business valuation, financial due diligence and complementary fundraising remain in the hands of a single team, from scoping through to closing.
Methodological excellence: the same rigor as an investment bank on the consistency between debt service and the target's cash-flow capacity, without that type of institution's fee schedule or timelines.
Adaptation to the file: Article L.225-216 of the French Commercial Code and Article 680 of the Swiss Code of Obligations are mastered natively, which avoids engaging two separate providers on a French-Swiss deal.
Understanding the entrepreneur: no compensation is received from lenders, private equity funds or financial intermediaries approached for the file, which keeps covenant negotiation entirely oriented toward the buyer's interest.
Controlled timelines: a structuring schedule, generally eight to fourteen weeks for an SME, announced at the scoping call and held through to closing.

Point of caution: this independence from the lenders and investors approached is something to verify, not simply to take on trust. Systematically ask your structurer, at Hectelion or elsewhere, whether they receive a commission or any benefit from the funders approached for your file.

How to reduce the cost of financial structuring without losing defensibility

The cost of financial structuring is not set in stone: several levers reduce the bill without ever sacrificing the robustness of the structure in front of lenders.

The levers at a glance

Prepare the target's business plan and accounts ahead of the engagement.
Stabilize the target's scope before launching the structuring process.
Target the lenders genuinely relevant to the sector from the outset.
Anticipate covenant drafting as early as the feasibility study.
Engage a single firm for a French-Swiss deal, rather than two separate providers.

First, preparing a business plan that has already been stress-tested and a complete data room before engaging the structurer avoids the most expensive rework hours on the quote, in line with good data room organization.

Second, launching a feasibility study before the full engagement makes it possible to test actual debt capacity and rule out unfinanceable structures before committing to the highest fees.

Third, limiting the number of lenders approached in parallel to those genuinely competitive in the target's sector, rather than multiplying redundant bank due diligence, reduces the billed coordination time.

Fourth, anticipating covenant drafting as early as the feasibility study, rather than discovering it during final negotiations, avoids the longest and most costly back-and-forth with lenders.

Fifth, on a French-Swiss file, engaging a single firm capable of covering both legal and banking frameworks rather than two separate providers, who duplicate part of the debt-capacity analysis and the negotiation.

None of these levers touches the rigor of covenant negotiation or the structurer's independence: reducing the cost of financial structuring comes down to the efficiency of the preparation, never the depth of work required by lenders.

Earn-out and price supplement: an instrument to negotiate, not to endure

The earn-out, this price supplement paid to the seller based on the target's future performance, is often negotiated at the end of the process, once the debt and equity structure has already been settled, which frequently makes it the blind spot of the structuring. Yet how it is treated directly changes the risk profile of the deal: a poorly calibrated earn-out can be reclassified as debt by senior lenders if it appears in the same contractual documents as the bank financing, which reduces the debt capacity available for the other tranches accordingly. Financial structuring must therefore treat the earn-out as a financial instrument in its own right, with its own trigger indicators (EBITDA, revenue, reaching a commercial milestone), its own valuation method for recognition on the acquisition holding company's balance sheet, and a clearly negotiated cap clause to avoid any dispute with the seller in later years. A structurer who addresses the earn-out at the end of the engagement, rather than from the feasibility study onward, exposes the deal to having to reopen negotiations with lenders once the price supplement terms have been settled with the seller.

The 5 mistakes that cost the most

Mistake 1: Building a structure on an overly optimistic debt/EBITDA ratio

Overestimating the debt capacity accepted by lenders exposes the deal to an emergency renegotiation late in the process, with worse terms and additional fees to restart the structuring midway through.

Mistake 2: Neglecting the drafting of financial covenants

A structure whose leverage ratio or DSCR has not been tested across several scenarios exposes the deal to a covenant breach as early as the first or second year of operation, with consequences potentially more costly than a longer negotiation upfront.

Mistake 3: Confusing a feasibility study with a full structuring engagement

A quote calibrated on a simple feasibility study, without actual negotiation with lenders, significantly underestimates the real budget of a deal that then requires an unanticipated full engagement.

Mistake 4: Ignoring legal restrictions on financial assistance

Having the target company bear all or part of the financing directly, rather than the acquisition holding company, exposes the deal, in both France and Switzerland, to a challenge under Article L.225-216 of the French Commercial Code or Article 680 of the Swiss Code of Obligations.

Mistake 5: Choosing a structurer without multi-tranche bank negotiation experience

A provider unaccustomed to coordinating senior debt, mezzanine debt and equity in parallel lengthens negotiation timelines and, in practice, secures less favorable terms than a firm experienced in this type of structure.

Case 1: Industrial MBO in France, structuring at EUR 72,000

Case built for illustrative purposes, based on observed market practice. Company E SAS, industrial equipment manufacturer, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region. Revenue of EUR 9 million, normalized EBITDA of EUR 1.5 million. Sale price negotiated with the founder, EUR 6 million. The management committee, made up of three senior executives, structures an MBO with senior debt of EUR 3.3 million, mezzanine debt of EUR 0.5 million, an equity contribution from management and a minority partner of EUR 1.9 million, and an earn-out of EUR 0.3 million paid to the seller over two years.

Total structured debt amounts to EUR 3.8 million. Structuring fees come to EUR 72,000, made up of a EUR 15,000 retainer and a success fee of 1.5% of the debt raised, or EUR 57,000. The engagement runs over ten weeks and includes the feasibility study, negotiation with two banking institutions and covenant drafting (leverage ratio capped at 2.5 times EBITDA, minimum DSCR of 1.2).

Case 2: MBI in Switzerland, multi-tranche structuring at CHF 190,000

Case built for illustrative purposes, based on observed market practice. Company F SA, specialized distributor, French-speaking Switzerland. Revenue of CHF 28 million, normalized EBITDA of CHF 4.3 million. An external buyer, backed by a partner private equity fund, structures an MBI for an acquisition price of CHF 24 million. The structure combines senior debt of CHF 13 million, mezzanine debt of CHF 3 million with warrants attached, an equity contribution from the buyer and the partner fund of CHF 7.5 million, and an earn-out of CHF 0.5 million.

Total structured debt amounts to CHF 16 million. Structuring fees come to CHF 190,000, made up of a CHF 30,000 retainer and a success fee of 1% of the debt raised, or CHF 160,000. The engagement runs over sixteen weeks, due to coordination between three lenders, negotiation of the buyer's management package and valuation of the asset and liability warranty granted by the seller.

A word from our founder

"I'm often asked: why does structuring cost EUR 40,000 at one firm and CHF 150,000 at another for comparable deal sizes? The answer rarely comes down to the provider, it comes down to the number of debt tranches and the number of lenders to coordinate."

"A quote that's too low almost always hides a dead end: no real covenant negotiation, only one lender approached, or a success fee calculated on the total acquisition price rather than on the debt raised alone."

"The right instinct isn't to compare rates, it's to compare structures. A robust structure costs more to put together than a fragile one, and always costs less than a covenant breach the following year."

Aristide Ruot, Ph.D.
Founder | CEO, Hectelion SA

FAQ: the 10 essential questions about the price of financial structuring

Introduction: what to know before the questions

The price of a financial structuring engagement depends first on the number of debt tranches and lenders to coordinate, before the size of the deal itself. The questions below answer the most common concerns of buyers, executives and family shareholders in France and Switzerland.

Q1: How much does financial structuring (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO) cost?

Between EUR/CHF 30,000 and 90,000 for an SME deal requiring EUR/CHF 2 to 15 million of debt, and between EUR/CHF 60,000 and 250,000 for a mid-cap or multi-tranche file above that threshold, depending on the number of tranches and lenders involved (Hectelion's 2026 practice).

Q2: How much does a financial structuring engagement cost at Hectelion?

At Hectelion, a structuring engagement for a small French-Swiss deal falls within the same range of EUR/CHF 15,000 to 50,000, adjusted for the number of tranches and the complexity of the structure. Book a call for a precise quote.

Q3: Is the price of financial structuring negotiable?

The scope is more negotiable than the price itself. Reducing the number of lenders approached or the depth of covenant negotiation lowers the quote, but weakens the structure and its resilience over time.

Q4: Who pays the structuring fees, the buyer or the acquisition holding company?

In practice, the acquisition holding company (Newco) pays the structurer's fees once it is formed, since it carries the acquisition debt. Before it is formed, the buyer generally advances the initial retainer.

Q5: Are structuring fees tax-deductible?

The tax treatment of structuring fees depends on the jurisdiction and the classification applied, capitalizable acquisition costs or a deductible expense of the acquisition holding company. This is a matter for tax advice, to confirm with your accountant or tax lawyer before the engagement.

Q6: Is the success fee calculated on the debt or on the acquisition price?

At Hectelion, the success fee is calculated on the debt actually raised (senior and mezzanine), not on the total acquisition price. Check this calculation basis with any provider, some base it on the overall deal amount, which significantly increases the bill.

Q7: Does a feasibility study cost less than a full engagement?

Yes. A feasibility study generally represents 20% to 35% of the budget of a full engagement, since it does not include actual negotiation with lenders or the final drafting of covenants.

Q8: Why does a multi-tranche structure (senior and mezzanine) cost more?

Because it involves more lenders and terms to negotiate in parallel, with distinct covenants for each tranche and greater coordination of the legal documentation.

Q9: How long does it take to get a quote for a structuring engagement?

A precise quote generally requires an initial thirty-minute call and the key details of the deal, acquisition price, EBITDA, timeline. An indicative quote can be sent within forty-eight hours.

Q10: Does the price include negotiation with lenders and covenant drafting?

At Hectelion, yes: the quote for a full engagement covers negotiation with prospective lenders and the drafting of financial covenants. Check this point with any provider, some bill covenant negotiation as an extra.

Estimate your company's value with Acontos, Hectelion's online simulator

To take this reading further with a concrete figure, Hectelion offers Acontos, its online audit, due diligence and business valuation tool. Powered by Anthropic's Claude Sonnet 5 artificial intelligence and calibrated on Hectelion's own methodology, it reads your accounts, normalizes EBITDA, applies real sector multiples and reconstructs a net debt bridge to estimate the value of your shares within minutes. Launch the valuation simulator for free: the tool is confidential, retains no document and does not replace a formal feasibility study, but it gives a useful first order of magnitude to calibrate the acquisition price to finance before discussing it with our team.

Conclusion: the price of financial structuring is read in the structure, not the quoted rate

The cost of a financial structuring engagement is not an isolated figure, it reflects a structure: the number of debt tranches, the number of lenders to coordinate, the quality of the business plan and the legal complexity of the deal. For a French-Swiss deal, the EUR/CHF 15,000 to 300,000 range covers the vast majority of files, from small deals to mid-cap or complex structures. Comparing quotes means comparing equivalent structures, not just rates or amounts, exactly as for any mergers and acquisitions advisory engagement.

Article summary

A financial structuring engagement (LBO, MBO, MBI, OBO) costs between EUR/CHF 30,000 and 90,000 for an SME deal requiring EUR/CHF 2 to 15 million of debt, and between EUR/CHF 60,000 and 250,000 for a mid-cap or multi-tranche file, depending on the number of tranches, the lenders involved and the legal complexity of the structure. A preliminary feasibility study costs 20% to 35% of that budget.

The price varies with six factors: the number of financing tranches, the number of lenders and investors, the quality of the business plan and financial data, the legal complexity of the structure, the presence of a management package or an asset and liability warranty, and the urgency of the timeline. The two priced cases illustrate this: EUR 72,000 for a French industrial MBO with two lenders and EUR 3.8 million of debt, CHF 190,000 for a Swiss multi-tranche MBI with three lenders and CHF 16 million of debt. Several levers reduce this bill without losing robustness: preparing a stress-tested business plan, launching a feasibility study, limiting the number of lenders approached and anticipating covenant drafting.

Comparing providers means checking independence from the lenders approached, the calculation basis of the success fee, and multi-tranche negotiation experience, beyond the quote amount alone. Hectelion structures LBO, MBO, MBI and OBO deals in France and Switzerland, for transactions of CHF 2 to 500 million, in full independence from traditional financial intermediaries. Once the structure is closed, the deal often leads to a purchase price allocation, then, in later years, a goodwill impairment test. For private deals within its scope, MBO, LBO, OBO, intragroup mergers or family successions, Hectelion can also produce a fairness opinion on the price retained; Hectelion is not FINMA-licensed and does not work on listed transactions.