Corporate finance
Prepare for corporate development questions with an original synergy ramp, cost schedule and diligence-question log, a worked case, assumptions and evidence checks.
01 / UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT
Corporate-development screening starts with strategic fit, a consistent financial view and unresolved diligence. The original case below examines synergy timing. It does not value a live company or imply that a target should be acquired.
The preparation question is: when do the proposed savings become cash, and what work is required to realize them? Use the job description and your actual responsibility to choose what to practice. The worked article supplies an inspectable artifact; this landing page connects it to preparation, application evidence and a next-resource decision.
All numerical scenarios are original fictional exercises. They are not employer question banks, client results, verified market data or a guarantee of hiring. Separate a case calculation from a conclusion that requires contracts, current records or an authorized decision.
Choose evidence that fits the actual mandate, rather than a generic list of finance keywords.
Corporate-development screening starts with strategic fit, a consistent financial view and unresolved diligence. The original case below examines synergy timing. It does not value a live company or imply that a target should be acquired.
This limited schedule omits discounting, taxes, additional investment and implementation probability. Those omissions prevent it from being a transaction valuation. Its purpose is to expose the difference between a steady-state claim and the cash path needed to achieve it.
Create a diligence log linking each saving to an owner, implementation dependency, date, evidence and downside. Separate strategic logic from modeled economics.
02 / BUILD YOUR APPROACH
Build a synergy ramp, cost schedule and diligence-question log and test whether another reader can reproduce your explanation.
When do the proposed savings become cash, and what work is required to realize them? List the given quantities, dates and definitions before introducing an assumption.
Under the supplied undiscounted schedule, year-one net cash is 2 − 8 = −6 million. Year two adds 3, bringing cumulative cash to −3. Year three adds 6, bringing it to +3. A 6 million run-rate claim is not 6 million of cash in every year.
If realized savings are half of the schedule, the three-year cumulative amount is 1 + 1.5 + 3 − 8 = −2.5 million. State whether the integration cost also changes; do not automatically halve every input.
Adding the full run-rate saving to year-one earnings or assigning all integration costs to a footnote overstates what the first period supports.
Create a diligence log linking each saving to an owner, implementation dependency, date, evidence and downside. Separate strategic logic from modeled economics. Identify the source, owner and next evidence request; do not invent authority.
03 / SEE IT IN PRACTICE
The purpose is to make the reasoning inspectable, not to imply professional execution or a verified result.
Case or question
Under the supplied undiscounted schedule, year-one net cash is 2 − 8 = −6 million. Year two adds 3, bringing cumulative cash to −3. Year three adds 6, bringing it to +3. A 6 million run-rate claim is not 6 million of cash in every year.
A defensible explanation
This limited schedule omits discounting, taxes, additional investment and implementation probability. Those omissions prevent it from being a transaction valuation. Its purpose is to expose the difference between a steady-state claim and the cash path needed to achieve it.
The weak inference
Adding the full run-rate saving to year-one earnings or assigning all integration costs to a footnote overstates what the first period supports.
Case or question
If realized savings are half of the schedule, the three-year cumulative amount is 1 + 1.5 + 3 − 8 = −2.5 million. State whether the integration cost also changes; do not automatically halve every input.
A defensible explanation
Create a diligence log linking each saving to an owner, implementation dependency, date, evidence and downside. Separate strategic logic from modeled economics.
The weak inference
Treating a scenario as an observed outcome or suppressing its assumptions makes the comparison unreliable.
Case or question
Use a synergy ramp, cost schedule and diligence-question log as a clearly labeled educational or professional work description, depending on what you actually did.
A defensible explanation
State your contribution, the data or facts you were permitted to use, the method and the boundary of your responsibility. A project should remain labeled as a project.
The weak inference
Presenting the fictional case as a client assignment, realized investment result or employer decision invents proof.
A concise answer can still preserve its definitions and uncertainty.
Use support for a named gap
The existing technical guide supports valuation foundations; it is not a dedicated corporate-development course. Start with the free case and determine whether the gap is analysis, explanation or application positioning.
Any current price and included work belong to the existing destination; this guide introduces no new product, price or service capacity.
This limited schedule omits discounting, taxes, additional investment and implementation probability. Those omissions prevent it from being a transaction valuation. Its purpose is to expose the difference between a steady-state claim and the cash path needed to achieve it.
If realized savings are half of the schedule, the three-year cumulative amount is 1 + 1.5 + 3 − 8 = −2.5 million. State whether the integration cost also changes; do not automatically halve every input. Explain the change and the information still missing.
The existing technical guide supports valuation foundations; it is not a dedicated corporate-development course. The fictional exercise does not establish employer requirements, professional authority, realized performance or a hiring outcome.
Complete a synergy ramp, cost schedule and diligence-question log, answer the follow-up and decide which evidence is still missing.
The main technical interview hub for accounting, valuation, DCF, M&A, and LBO prep.
How to answer accretion dilution interview questions in investment banking. Learn the mechanics, what actually drives EPS accretion, and the follow-ups interviewers use to separate real understanding from memorization.
Why precedent multiples are higher than trading comps, when to use each method, and how to answer the 5 most common follow-up questions in IB interviews.
How to learn DCF for investment banking interviews in the right order. Master the forecast, unlevered free cash flow, WACC, terminal value, and the common traps that make candidates sound memorized.
Enterprise value vs equity value explained for investment banking interviews. Learn the bridge, the multiples logic, and the follow-up questions candidates routinely miss.
How to answer WACC interview questions in investment banking. Understand what WACC means, how it is built, what changes it, and the follow-ups interviewers use to expose memorized candidates.
The merger model interview questions candidates get in investment banking interviews. Learn the concepts behind pro forma EPS, synergies, purchase accounting, and the follow-up questions that usually decide the round.
The characteristics of a good LBO candidate explained for investment banking and private equity interviews. Learn the logic behind stable cash flow, low capex, margin upside, and other common answers.
How to walk through the three financial statements in an investment banking interview. Learn the simple structure, how the statements link, and the follow-ups candidates most often miss.
The most frequently asked technical questions in IB interviews, accounting, valuation, DCF, M&A, and LBO, with concise answers that demonstrate real competence.
Accounting → Valuation → DCF → M&A → LBO: why sequence matters more than study time.
Practice a concise DCF interview answer, then explain the assumptions behind cash flow, WACC, terminal value and the enterprise-to-equity bridge.