Upcoming IPOs: Preliminary Assessments, Anchors, and Ranges
In an era where global markets balance between optimism and caution, initial public offerings (IPOs) continue to draw the attention of investors from all continents. The upcoming IPOs scheduled for late 2025 and early 2026 are not merely financial events; they serve as a barometer of economic health, reflecting how companies adapt to inflation, technological shifts, and geopolitical challenges. For investors from Russia, the USA, Europe, or Asia, understanding preliminary valuations, valuation anchors, and price ranges is critical: these tools help anticipate where real value lies and where inflated expectations may exist. In this article, we will explore how these parameters are formed, drawing upon fresh data and examples from the current cycle of offerings.
The IPO market in 2025 is evolving: analysts such as PwC and Deloitte predict that the global volume could reach $250 billion, with growth in emerging sectors such as AI and sustainable energy. In Russia, despite sanctions, the Moscow Exchange is witnessing a revival — approximately 18-22 new listings are expected by the end of the year. These offerings attract not only local players but also international investors through alternative channels, highlighting the universal relevance of this topic for a global audience.
IPO Calendar: Tracking and Prospects
Global Landscape of Offerings: November-December 2025
Investors eager not to miss the wave of offerings always start with the calendar — a dynamic tool that evolves as companies prepare for listing. In November-December 2025, the global landscape looks promising: an IPO from a Silicon Valley biotechnology company specializing in cancer immunotherapy is expected on NASDAQ, with the book-building date set for November 15 and trading to commence in January 2026. This company, with ongoing phase-three clinical trials and partnerships with major pharmaceutical firms, exemplifies the high-risk, high-reward offerings that dominate the American market. Similarly, on Euronext Paris, a European cloud service provider focused on small and medium-sized enterprises, with an emphasis on AI integration for process automation, is preparing a listing aiming to raise €700 million, potentially showcasing post-pandemic recovery in the fintech sector, where demand from SMEs remains robust despite macroeconomic volatility.
Russian Context and Planned Listings
In the Russian context, the Moscow Exchange publishes updates in the "Corporate Events" section, where upcoming IPOs include the offering of a major consumer goods producer from St. Petersburg, planned for December 2025, with a volume of 12 billion rubles. This company, with a 25-year history and established branding, represents a conservative choice in the current environment, appealing to investors seeking stability. Another contender is an IT company from Yekaterinburg, developing software for optimising warehouse logistics using machine learning, which has applied for a listing expected to start trading in February 2026. This company, boasting a 35% annual revenue growth and a 22% EBITDA margin, attracts investors interested in high-growth IT assets, albeit with increased currency risks associated with the local macroeconomy.
Asian Electric Vehicles and Raw Material Supply Chains
Asian exchanges, such as Shanghai and Hong Kong, are leading in terms of the number of expected listings: a series of offerings in the electric vehicle sector is anticipated, including battery suppliers from South Korea with proprietary solid-state battery technology, scheduled for November, potentially raising $1.5 billion. This IPO symbolises a shift in the global supply chain, where Asian players are capturing market share from Western competitors by offering better value and scalability speed. The valuation of this company is bolstered by strategic partnerships with Tesla and BMW, ensuring long-term contracts that mitigate demand-side risks.
Tracking Tools and Seasonality
Tracking the calendar requires a combination of tools: official exchange resources provide primary data on applications, while platforms like IPO Central, Yahoo Finance, and Refinitiv Capital Connect aggregate global updates with detailed analyses. In the current market environment, where seasonality plays a critical role — the end of the year is often quiet due to holidays and a limited base of active investors — January 2026 may herald a peak in activity, particularly if the European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve continue to ease monetary policy. Historically, January-February see a 40% increase in activity compared to November-December, as evidenced by data from the past decade.
Promising companies on the calendar are those whose business models demonstrate stable growth regardless of economic cycles: for example, the aforementioned biotechnology company with a 40% annual increase in its R&D portfolio and three approved drugs, or the Russian IT player exporting to Europe and Asia, minimising local currency risks. The risk of postponement hinges on macroeconomic conditions: 25% of planned IPOs are delayed due to market conditions, yet 75% proceed as planned if the issuer demonstrates financial stability during due diligence.
Preliminary Assessments: Metrics and Calculation Factors
Main Approaches and Valuation Calculation
The preliminary evaluation of the issuer is a fundamental step where abstract prospects are transformed into concrete figures, assisting investors in assessing potential from the outset of the listing preparation process. For the planned biotechnology IPO in the USA, this valuation could reach $4 billion, calculated based on current phase III clinical trials, successful partnerships with pharmaceutical giants such as Pfizer and Moderna, as well as potential royalties from future drugs. The process begins with due diligence by the organisers — investment banks like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, or Credit Suisse — which analyse the financial balance, cash flow, tangible assets, intellectual property, and 3-5 year forecasts over a period of 3-4 months, including sensitivity analysis across various scenarios.
Key Metrics: EV/EBITDA, P/E and P/S
Key metrics include EV/EBITDA (Enterprise Value to EBITDA) for capital-intensive sectors such as energy and industry, and P/S (Price-to-Sales) for growth companies without stable profits, such as IT and biotech. In the case of the Russian consumer goods producer, the preliminary valuation of 40-60 billion rubles is based on a P/E (price-to-earnings) ratio of 12-15x, considering a stable 25% revenue growth over the last quarter, an 18% EBITDA margin, and a forecasted 20% growth over the next two years. In comparison, within the IT sector, the P/S ratio might be 6-10x depending on growth and profitability, while for infrastructure related to energy transition, the range may be 4-6x, focusing on DCF due to the long-term nature of projects.
Adjustments for Risks and Specific Factors
The factors influencing the calculation and adding nuances are diverse and require careful analysis. The quality of assets, such as patents in biotech or software IP in IT, add a premium of up to 20%, as they create moats against competition. Geographic diversification in IT services (revenue from the USA, Europe, Asia) adds another 10% for resilience against local risks. On a global scale, for the Asian electric vehicle IPO, the valuation is adjusted for supply chain challenges and dependency on scarce raw materials such as lithium — high price volatility of lithium could reduce the valuation by 10-15%, emphasising the role of commodity risks in pricing. Macroeconomic factors — inflation, interest rates, currency exchange rates — also adjust models: a 50 basis point increase in rates typically reduces the DCF estimate by 5-8% due to the higher discount rate.
Conservatism in Scenarios and Real vs. Preliminary Value
The real value often deviates from the preliminary one: historically, 30% of IPOs reduce their valuation during the book-building phase if macroeconomic conditions worsen or investor sentiment shifts abruptly. Investors must scrutinise the conservatism of scenarios — for instance, in the aforementioned European cloud IPO, forecasts comprise three cases: a base case with 20% CAGR, an optimistic one with 30% CAGR, and a pessimistic case with 10% CAGR, with EBITDA margins varying from 15% to 25% depending on the scenario. This allows for a nuanced understanding of how resilient the valuation is to shocks such as recession, competitive pressures, or supply chain disruptions. The weighted average probability-adjusted valuation is often 10-15% lower than the base case, which is more realistic.
The calculation also takes into account industry nuances: in energy, the focus is on sustainability, where ESG factors boost the valuation by 5-8%, as seen in recent European renewable energy examples, where investors are willing to pay a premium for alignment with climate goals. It is important to note for a global audience that in emerging markets, including Russia, India, and Brazil, valuations are often more conservative due to currency risks, political uncertainty, and liquidity, yet offer higher upsides for patient investors prepared for volatility. The divergence between developed and emerging markets can be 2-3x, where one company would command a 10x P/E in the USA and 6-7x in Russia despite identical fundamentals.
Price Ranges: Formation and Dynamics of Adjustments
Announcement of the Range and Its Structure
The price range is announced in the preliminary prospectus (red herring) and serves as a crucial guideline for demand indications, assisting investors in planning participation and bid sizes. For the Russian IT IPO, the range may be set at 800-1200 rubles per share, implying a market capitalisation of 50-75 billion rubles and allowing organisers to test the market at various price levels. The formation of the range starts with internal models of the organisers, where the lower bound reflects conservative anchors and prudent risk management, while the upper bound incorporates optimistic growth forecasts and potential synergies from mergers or expansions.
Width of the Range and Market Signals
The width of the range — typically 20-30% between the minimum and maximum — balances risks and opportunities: a narrow range (15%) signals confidence and strong competitive positioning, as seen in the case of the American biotech IPO with scientific validation, while a wide range (35-40%) indicates caution in the face of volatility and macroeconomic uncertainty. Narrow ranges often indicate a clear understanding of value by the issuer and organisers, while wider ones provide flexibility for adjustments. For example, a week before the book-building, the range may be narrowed by 5-10% after the roadshow indicates strong investor interest at specific price points.
Adjustments and Offering Parameters
Adjustments occur based on preliminary indications of interest: if institutional demand covers 200% of the volume at the lower end, the range is raised, as recently done for the Asian battery supplier, expanding it by 12% after the first three days of the roadshow. Offering parameters, such as the number of shares and free float (the proportion of shares available for trading), directly influence the final range: a larger free float (15-20%) usually necessitates a narrower range to attract broad ownership and avoid price manipulation. For global IPOs, free float is typically 10-20% to prevent manipulations, while in Russia, it may range from 15-25% to enhance investor confidence and comply with Moscow Exchange requirements for first-tier listings.
Investors strategise around the range when preparing bids: large investment funds often bid at the lower end of the range for bargains and maximum first-day pop, while retail investors tend to place bids at the upper end, anticipating a 10-20% first-day pop, reflecting historical averages. In a global context, for a European fintech offering, a range of €12-16 was adjusted upwards after the roadshow, where management convincingly illustrated a 30% monthly growth in users and a 40% gross profit margin in the long term. The risks of exceeding the range are rare under normal conditions but can arise during hype, as witnessed in 2021, when 15% of IPOs exceeded their maximum by 30-50%, followed by a drop of 40-60% within 12 months, disappointing investors.
The dynamics of adjustments reflect the market state and investor sentiment: during bullish periods, such as now in Asia with economic recovery, 40% of ranges expand upwards, raising the upper limit by 10-15%, while in downturns, they contract to attract broader investor interest. This makes the range a non-static parameter but a living indicator, where timely monitoring is key to success for investors from any jurisdiction. Some organisers provide weekly updates on ranges during the roadshow, allowing investors to observe the evolution of demand.
Valuation Anchors: Selection and Comparative Roles
What Are Anchors and Their Fundamental Role
Valuation anchors are reference points that anchor the valuation in reality through comparison with publicly listed counterparts, ensuring objectivity in preliminary assessments and minimising subjectivity. For an industrial IPO in Russia, an anchor might be an EV/EBITDA ratio of 7x, calibrated against companies such as Norilsk Nickel (traded as PJSC GMKN), which has an EV/EBITDA of 4-5x, and international counterparts like Rio Tinto (NYSE: RIO), trading at 6-7x, justifying our issuer's valuation of 30 billion rubles based on a projected EBITDA of 4.5 billion rubles in the next year. Selecting comparable companies requires diligence: they should match in size (revenue of at least $500 million), sector (industry in this example), maturity stage (public companies of at least 5 years), and exclude outliers such as unprofitable firms or companies in special circumstances (turnarounds, spin-offs).
Multiples and Their Adaptation
Multiples such as P/E (Price-to-Earnings), P/S (Price-to-Sales), and EV/Revenue are adapted to specifics: in biotech, a P/S multiple of 12x is compared with public biotech companies like Gilead Sciences (NASDAQ: GILD, P/S ~3-4x) and Regeneron (NASDAQ: REGN, P/S ~8-12x), adding a premium for innovation and potential drug breakthroughs. In the cloud service industry, an EV/Revenue multiple of 6-8x is based on Salesforce (NYSE: CRM, EV/Revenue ~6x) and ServiceNow (NYSE: NOW, EV/Revenue ~8-10x), providing a relevant framework. Adjustments for differences are standard in the industry and critical for accuracy: geographical factors (Europe vs. Asia) can lower the anchor by 1-2x due to lower growth and regulatory complexity, while a strong moat (competitive advantages) can raise it by 1-3x due to the sustainability of cash flows.
ESG Factors and New Dimensions
In 2025, ESG anchors are gaining traction and becoming more mainstream: "green" comparables, such as Orsted in the energy sector (CPSE: ORSTED, P/E ~15-18x with ESG premium), add a premium of 10-15%, influencing ranges and final valuations. Companies with strong ESG scores often trade at a 5-10% premium compared to their peer group, particularly among European and Asian investors. This reflects the growing demand for sustainable investing and investors' willingness to pay for reduced long-term risks. For a European green IPO, this adds €200-300 million to the valuation versus the base case.
Selection and Adjustment of Comparables
Comparing with comparables minimises subjectivity in valuation, providing a market-based perspective: for the electric vehicle IPO, comparables like Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA, EV/Revenue ~3-4x, but with a growth premium of ~50x P/E) and NIO (NYSE: NIO, EV/Revenue ~1-2x due to structural challenges) help adjust the EV/Revenue anchor from theoretical 10x to practical 7-8x. The number of comparables used in calculations is typically 5-10 to capture the inter-quartile range and avoid outlier biases. Data sources (Bloomberg, Capital IQ, Refinitiv) provide real-time multiples updated daily, which are critical for accuracy.
The process of selecting anchors is not merely mechanical but an art: weak anchors (indirect comparables, obsolete data) signal risks and unreliability in valuation, as seen in cases of overvalued IPOs from 2022, where comparables ignored rising costs and falling margins. Globally, anchors are evolving: in Russia, the focus is on local comparables for currency stability, while in the USA, growth metrics and innovation premiums take precedence. Understanding this helps investors identify undervalued opportunities where anchors underestimate expansion potential or structural shifts in the industry, creating asymmetric risk-reward profiles.
Market Risks and Investor Expectations: Impact on Parameters
Macroeconomic Risks and Volatility
Market risks permeate the planning and execution of IPOs at every level, adjusting valuations and ranges through the lens of volatility and external shocks that are beyond the issuer's control. For the upcoming biotech IPO in the USA, geopolitical factors (tensions in Taiwan, sanctions) may narrow the range by 10%, reflecting supply risks for clinical trials and manufacturing equipment. A VIX (the fear index of the S&P 500) volatility above 20 points often leads to a discount on anchors by 15% or more, as evidenced in recent Asian listings, where raw material inflation (lithium, cobalt) undermined investor expectations and resulted in downward adjustments. Historically, high volatility (VIX > 25) has been associated with the deferral or cancellation of 35-40% of planned IPOs.
Investor Expectations and Sentiment
Investor expectations shape sentiment and drive demand at various price points, often reflecting psychology more than fundamental factors. Surveys of analysts by the CFA Institute and Morgan Stanley show that 60% of institutional investors expect a 15-25% upside from tech IPOs in 2026 in the USA, focusing on AI integration and automation potential. For a Russian retail IPO, expectations are more conservative — a 10-15% growth in capitalisation — due to local inflation (10-12% annually) and reduced purchasing power among consumers, but strong domestic demand from retail investors often covers 150-200% of the offering volume. Implicit risks, such as regulatory delays (SEC approvals take 4-6 months in the USA, while the Central Bank of Russia takes 2-3 months), postpone approximately 25% of offerings, affecting timelines and causing frustration.
Factors Shaping Expectations
Expectations are measured through roadshow feedback, media sentiment, and pre-marketing indications: positive sentiment raises the upper range by 5-15%, while pessimism narrows it. In a global context, for a European fintech, expectations regarding AI integration, machine learning capabilities, and expansion into adjacent markets added 20% to the preliminary valuation, while concerns over cyber-attacks and data privacy regulations adjusted downward by 10%, resulting in a net +10% versus initial anchors. Factors such as Federal Reserve rates (a 50 basis point decrease typically stimulates appetite for risk assets by an average of 5-8%), macroeconomic growth (GDP growth of +0.5% = valuation premium of +2-3%), bolster optimism, while recession signals, war, and trade tensions dampen confidence. For a global audience, this serves as a reminder: risks are universal, but local factors (sanctions in Russia, supply chain disruptions in Asia) add layers of complexity, making investment diversification critical.
Structure and Volume of Offerings: Balancing Liquidity and Control
Primary vs. Secondary Shares and Their Roles
The structure of an offering determines how the IPO integrates into the capital market, balancing the raising of capital for growth with diversification of ownership and liquidity for existing shareholders. Primary shares (new shares issued by the company) account for 60-80% in most cases and serve to fund organic growth, as seen in a planned Russian industrial IPO, where 70% of new shares (volume of 8 billion rubles from a total of 11.5 billion) will finance the expansion of production capacities and internationalisation. Secondary shares from founders, early investors, or VCs add 20-30% and serve as a partial exit mechanism, increasing the free float from 5% to 18%, which is critical for NYSE or NASDAQ listings, where regulators require a minimum of 10% for adequate liquidity and to avoid concentrated ownership.
Volume, Liquidity, and Valuation Premia
The offering volume significantly influences valuation and post-IPO dynamics: large offerings (> $1 billion), such as the Asian electric vehicle companies, receive a scale premium for market liquidity and inclusion in major indices but risk a market flood, reducing the first-day pop by 5-10% due to large supply. The optimal size is often $300-700 million in the current environment, balancing capital raising with investor demand. Lock-up periods (9-12 months) prevent dumps by existing shareholders: in biotech IPOs, a 12-month lock-up stabilises the price, minimising volatility in the first 2-3 quarters while limiting downside from insider selling. Allocation terms typically involve 70% to institutions and 30% to retail, ensuring balance, alongside greenshoe options (an additional 15% of the volume) for stabilisation and flexibility.
Impact on Liquidity and Risks
The impact on liquidity is evident and critical: a higher free float accelerates trading volume, as seen in the European cloud IPO with a 20% float, where daily turnover reached 5% of capitalisation in the first month, attracting algorithmic traders and creating healthy price discovery. Optimising structure is a strategic art: for small/medium businesses, such as the Russian IT company on the Moscow Exchange, a smaller volume (5 billion rubles) minimises dilution for the dominant shareholder while maintaining control at levels above 70%. Structural risks include over-allocation (allocating more shares than planned), leading to undervaluation and frustration, and under-allocation, causing excess demand and price surges beyond expectations. Proper design of the structure, as seen in recent successful examples, can enhance post-IPO performance by 15-20% over the subsequent year, creating a win-win for all stakeholders.
Organisers and Regulatory Aspects: Roles in Shaping Parameters
The Role of Investment Banks as Organisers
Organisers — major investment banks like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan Chase (in the USA) or Sberbank, VEB.RF, and Alfa-Bank (in Russia) — play a pivotal role, determining anchors, ranges, and offering parameters through expertise, investor networks, and data-driven models. In the American biotech IPO, JPMorgan conducts extensive due diligence over 3-4 months, adjusting valuations by 10-15% based on internal data regarding patents, regulatory risks, and the competitive landscape, ensuring a realistic estimate. Their role in preliminary assessments includes scenario modelling, where anchors are calibrated against 8-10 comparable companies, ensuring both conservatism and market acceptance.
Regulatory Requirements and Compliance
Regulatory aspects add a significant layer of complexity: the SEC in the USA requires detailed disclosure of risks in the final prospectus, often leading to expanded risk sections and a more conservative tone that influences the width of ranges — non-compliance with requirements can delay the process by months. In Russia, the Central Bank focuses on localization and anti-money laundering compliance, where underwriters like VEB.RF adapt parameters for currency control and cross-border restrictions, with prospectus approvals taking 2-3 months versus 6+ months in the USA. A syndicate of 3-5 major banks distributes offering volumes, minimising systematic risks associated with concentration.
Legal and Compliance Factors
Legal aspects, including compliance with GDPR in Europe, SOX in the USA, and local jurisdiction tax codes, adjust valuations and parameters: privacy risks (data leaks from clients) reduce anchors by 5-10%, especially in fintech and IT firms. While the final parameters are determined by the organisers in collaboration with the CFO and the issuer's board of directors, regulators reserve the right to veto parameters deemed non-compliant. Globally, this ensures investor and market confidence: Russian IPOs are subject to stricter transparency requirements under the Central Bank, while American IPOs are more flexible in structure but faced with higher litigation risks for organisers. The evolution of regulations, such as MiFID II in Europe, increases focus on investor protection and best execution, impacting the design of IPO processes.
Forecasts and Adjustments: Path to Final Valuation
Forecast Scenarios and Long-term Prospects
Post-IPO forecasts focus on a 12-24 month horizon, linking preliminary parameters with anticipated performance in the secondary market and the company's long-term prospects. For a retail IPO in Russia preparing for its offering, a 25-30% increase in capitalisation is expected within a year, based on a strong e-commerce trend, expansion of SKUs (stock-keeping units), and improved logistics efficiency through AI. The base scenario anticipates a 20% revenue growth, maintenance of an 18% EBITDA margin, and a multiple re-rating from 8x to 10x EV/EBITDA due to growth acceleration and operational improvements. The downside scenario (15% probability) includes a macroeconomic downturn, cuts in consumer discretionary spending, and margin compression to 15%, potentially resulting in a 15% drop in capitalisation. The upside scenario (20% probability) includes a pop at IPO, institutional demand for inclusion in funds, and growth re-rating to 12x, leading to a 35-40% rise.
Dynamic of Book-building and Range Adjustments
Adjustments during the book-building process are dynamic and reflect real market interest: strong demand (300% coverage at the lower end of the range) raises the price by 15-20%, as seen in the Asian fintech, where the final valuation exceeded the preliminary estimate by 12-15% due to strong institutional allocations. Weak demand (only 80% coverage) necessitates a price cut of 10-15% or postponement for better timing. Changes in anchors occur iteratively: a market downturn over consecutive weeks may adjust the P/E down by 2x, updating the range downward. The potential for oversubscription serves as a powerful indicator: a 4x oversubscription in biotech signals significant hype and potential bubble risks, but if managed correctly through size and pricing, it can result in healthy first-day performance.
Final Valuation vs. Preliminary Valuation and Investor Value
The final valuation often runs 7-12% higher than the preliminary estimate during positive sentiment and a strong roadshow, yet 25-30% of adjustments downward are observed during negative macro events or sentiment reversals. For investors, timely monitoring of all updated parameters is crucial: platforms like Seeking Alpha, Morningstar, and local resources (RBC, Banki.ru for Russia) provide real-time updates, helping seize value in a volatile and fast-moving IPO cycle. In 2025, with global macro shifts, rate changes, and geopolitical dynamics, these forecasts serve not as speculation but as a data-driven guide for strategic investment decisions. Successful IPO investors are those who combine deep fundamental analysis with macro understanding and risk management, creating resilient portfolios capable of achieving outperformance even in challenging markets.
