Upcoming Planned IPOs: Preliminary Valuations, Anchors, and Ranges
In an era where global markets balance between optimism and caution, initial public offerings (IPOs) continue to attract the attention of investors from all continents. The upcoming IPOs planned 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 US, Europe, or Asia, understanding preliminary valuations, valuation anchors, and price ranges is crucial: these tools help predict where real value lies and where overvalued expectations may exist. In this article, we will explore how these parameters are formed, relying on fresh data and examples from the current cycle of offerings.
The IPO market in 2025 is evolving: analysts from firms like PwC and Deloitte project the global volume could reach $250 billion, driven by growth in emerging sectors such as AI and sustainable energy. In Russia, despite sanctions, the Moscow Exchange is witnessing a revival—around 18-22 new listings are expected by year-end. These offerings attract not only local players but also international investors through alternative channels, highlighting the universality of the theme for a global audience.
Upcoming IPO Calendar: Tracking and Prospects
Global Offering Landscape: November-December 2025
Investors eager not to miss the upcoming wave of offerings always start with the calendar—a dynamic tool that evolves as companies prepare. In November-December 2025, the global landscape looks promising: an IPO of a biotechnology company from Silicon Valley specializing in cancer immunotherapy is expected on NASDAQ, with a proposed book-building date of November 15 and trading set to begin in January 2026. This company, currently in three-phase clinical trials and partnering with major pharmaceutical giants, represents an example of high-risk yet high-potential offerings that dominate the American market. Similarly, on Euronext Paris, a European cloud services provider focused on small and medium-sized businesses is gearing up for listing, aiming to raise €700 million and becoming a shining example of post-pandemic recovery in the fintech sector, where demand from SMEs remains stable despite macroeconomic volatility.
Russian Context and Planned Listings
In the Russian context, the Moscow Exchange publishes updates in the "Corporate Events" section, where the nearest IPOs include the listing of a major consumer goods manufacturer 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, attracting investors seeking stability. Another candidate is an IT company from Yekaterinburg developing software for warehouse logistics optimization using machine learning, which has filed for listing with a proposed trading start in February 2026. This company, with an annual revenue growth of 35% and an EBITDA margin of 22%, attracts investors interested in high-growth IT assets, albeit with increased currency risks due to the local macroeconomic situation.
Asian Electric Vehicles and Commodity Supply Chains
Asian exchanges, such as Shanghai and Hong Kong, lead in numbers: a series of offerings in the electric vehicle sector is expected, including a battery supplier from South Korea with proprietary solid-state battery technology, slated for November with potential capital raising of $1.5 billion. This IPO symbolizes a shift in the global supply chain, where Asian players are gaining market share from Western competitors by offering better value and scaling speed. The valuation of this company is adjusted based on strategic partnerships with Tesla and BMW, securing long-term contracts and mitigating demand 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 analysis. 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 could witness a peak in activity, especially if the European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve continue to ease monetary policy. Historically, January-February sees a 40% increase in activity compared to November-December, as evidenced by data from the past decade.
Promising companies in the calendar are those whose business models demonstrate sustainable growth regardless of economic cycles: for instance, the aforementioned biotechnology firm with a 40 percent annual growth in its R&D portfolio and three approved drugs, or a Russian IT player exporting to Europe and Asia, minimizing local currency risks. The risk of delays depends on the macroeconomics: 25% of planned IPOs are postponed due to market conditions, but 75% are completed as scheduled if the issuer demonstrates financial stability during due diligence.
Preliminary Valuations: Metrics and Calculation Factors
Key Approaches and Valuation Calculation
A preliminary valuation of the issuer is a fundamental step where abstract prospects turn into concrete figures, helping investors assess potential from the very beginning of the listing preparation process. For the planned biotechnology IPO in the US, this valuation could reach $4 billion, based on current phase III clinical trials, successful partnerships with pharmaceutical giants like Pfizer and Moderna, and anticipated royalties from future drugs. The process begins with due diligence by the organizers—investment banks like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, or Credit Suisse—that analyze financial balance sheets, cash flow, tangible assets, intellectual property, and 3-5 year forecasts, including sensitivity analysis across different scenarios over a period of 3-4 months.
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 growing companies without stable profits, such as in IT and biotech. In the case of the Russian consumer goods manufacturer, the preliminary valuation of 40-60 billion rubles is based on a P/E (price-to-earnings ratio) of 12-15x, taking into consideration a stable 25% revenue growth in the last quarter, an 18% EBITDA margin, and a projected 20% increase in the next two years. In contrast, in the IT sector, the P/S can range from 6-10x depending on growth and profitability, while for infrastructure in energy transition, it may be 4-6x, focusing on DCF due to the long-term nature of the projects.
Adjustments for Risks and Specific Factors
Factors affecting calculations and adding nuances are varied and require careful analysis. The quality of assets, such as patents in biotech or software IP in IT, adds a premium of up to 20%, as they create moats against competition. Geographic diversification in IT services (with revenues from the US, Europe, and Asia) adds another 10% for resilience against local risks. On a global scale, for the Asian electric vehicle IPO, the valuation is adjusted based on supply chains and reliance on scarcity of raw materials such as lithium—high price volatility in lithium can reduce valuation by 10-15%, emphasizing the role of commodity risks in valuation. Macroeconomic factors—inflation, interest rates, and exchange rates—also adjust models: a 50 basis point increase in rates typically reduces the DCF valuation by 5-8% due to a higher discount rate.
Conservativeness of Scenarios and Real vs. Preliminary Value
The real value often differs from the preliminary one: historically, 30% of IPOs adjust lower at the book-building stage if macroeconomic conditions worsen or investor sentiment shifts significantly. Investors must verify the conservativeness of scenarios—for example, in the mentioned European cloud IPO, projections incorporate three cases: a base case with 20% CAGR, an optimistic case with 30% CAGR, and a pessimistic case with 10% CAGR, where the EBITDA margin varies from 15% to 25% depending on the scenario. This allows understanding how resilient the valuation is to shocks like recession, competitive efforts, or supply chain disruptions. The weighted probability-adjusted valuation is often 10-15% lower than the base case, which is more realistic.
The calculation also accounts for industry nuances: in energy, there is an emphasis on sustainability, where ESG factors increase 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. For a global audience, it is important to note that in emerging markets including Russia, India, and Brazil, valuations are often more conservative due to currency risks, political uncertainty, and liquidity, but they offer higher upside for patient investors willing to navigate volatility. The difference between developed and emerging markets can be 2-3x, where one company might achieve a 10x P/E in the US and 6-7x in Russia despite identical fundamentals.
Price Ranges: Formation and Adjustment Dynamics
Announcement of the Range and Its Structure
The price range is announced in the preliminary prospectus (red herring) and serves as a crucial benchmark for demand indications, helping investors plan their participation and the size of applications. For the Russian IT IPO, the range might be set at 800-1200 rubles per share, implying a capitalization of 50-75 billion rubles and allowing organizers to test the market at different price levels. The formation of the range begins with the internal models of the organizers, where the lower bound reflects conservative anchors and prudent risk management, while the upper bound reflects optimistic growth forecasts and potential synergies from mergers or expansions.
Range Width 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 positions, as seen in the case of an American biotech IPO with scientific validation, while a wider range (35-40%) indicates caution in the face of volatility and macroeconomic uncertainty. Narrow ranges often reflect a clear understanding of value by the issuer and organizers, while wide ranges provide flexibility for adjustments. For example, a week before book-building, the range might narrow by 5-10% after the roadshow demonstrated strong investor interest in specific price points.
Adjustments and Offering Parameters
Adjustments occur based on preliminary indications of interest: if demand from institutional investors covers 200% of the volume at the lower end, the range is raised, as was recently done for the Asian battery supplier, expanding it by 12% after the first three days of the roadshow. Offering parameters, such as the volume of shares and free float (the share of shares in free circulation), directly influence the final range: a larger free float (15-20%) typically requires a narrower range to attract broad ownership and avoid price manipulation. For global IPOs, the free float usually ranges from 10-20% to prevent manipulation, while in Russia, it may range from 15-25% to increase investor confidence and comply with Moscow Exchange requirements for first-level listings.
Investors use the range strategically when preparing applications: large investment funds often apply at the lower end of the range for bargains and maximum gains upon pop, while retail investors aim for the upper end, anticipating a first-day pop of 10-20%, as is historically average. In the global context for a European fintech, a range of €12-16 was adjusted upward after the roadshow, where management convinced stakeholders of a 30% monthly growth in users and a 40% net profit margin in the long term. Risks of breaching the range are rare under normal conditions but are possible during hype, as seen in 2021 when 15% of IPOs exceeded the maximum by 30-50%, only to drop by 40-60% within 12 months, disappointing investors.
The dynamics of adjustments reflect market conditions and investor sentiment: during periods of growth, such as the current recovery in Asia, 40% of ranges are expanded upward, raising the upper limit by 10-15%; during downturns, they are narrowed to attract broader investor interest. This makes the range a dynamic parameter, rather than a static one, and timely monitoring is the key to success for investors from any jurisdiction. Some organizers provide updates on ranges weekly during the roadshow, allowing investors to see the evolution of demand.
Valuation Anchors: Selection and Role of Comparisons with Peers
What Are Anchors and Their Fundamental Role
Valuation anchors are benchmarks that ground assessment in reality through comparisons with publicly traded peers, ensuring objectivity in preliminary calculations and minimizing subjectivity. For an industrial IPO in Russia, an anchor might be an EV/EBITDA of 7x, calibrated against firms like Norilsk Nickel (traded PJSC GMKN), which has an EV/EBITDA of 4-5x, and international peers like Rio Tinto (NYSE: RIO), trading at 6-7x, justifying an assessment of our issuer at 30 billion rubles based on projected EBITDA of 4.5 billion rubles for the upcoming year. The selection of comparables requires diligence: they should match in size (revenue of at least $500 million), sector (industry in this example), maturity stage (public companies for 5+ years), and exclude outliers such as loss-making firms or companies with special circumstances (turnarounds, spinoffs).
Multiples and Their Adaptation
Multiples such as P/E (Price-to-Earnings), P/S (Price-to-Sales), and EV/Revenue are adapted to the specifics: in biotechnology, a P/S multiple of 12x is compared with public biotech firms like Gilead Sciences (NASDAQ: GILD, P/S ~3-4x) and Regeneron (NASDAQ: REGN, P/S ~8-12x), adding a premium for innovations and potential of products. In the cloud service sector, an EV/Revenue of 6-8x relies on Salesforce (NYSE: CRM, EV/Revenue ~6x) and ServiceNow (NYSE: NOW, EV/Revenue ~8-10x), providing a relevant framework. Adjustments for discrepancies are standard in the industry and are critical for accuracy: geographical factors (Europe vs Asia) can reduce anchors by 1-2x due to lower growth and regulatory complexity, while a strong moat (competitive advantages) increases it by 1-3x due to the long-term nature of cash flows.
ESG Factors and New Measurements
In 2025, ESG anchors gain traction and become more mainstream: "green" comparables, like Orsted in the energy sector (CPSE: ORSTED, P/E ~15-18x with ESG premium), add a premium of 10-15%, impacting the ranges and final valuations. Companies with strong ESG scores often trade at a 5-10% premium to their peer group, especially among European and Asian investors. This reflects a growing demand for sustainable investing and a willingness among investors to pay for reduced long-term risks. For a European green IPO, this adds €200-300 million to the valuation versus the base scenario.
Selection and Adjustment of Comparables
Comparing with peers minimizes subjectivity in assessments, providing a market-based perspective: for an 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 for supply chain and production risks, reducing the EV/Revenue anchor from theoretical 10x to practical 7-8x. The number of comparables used in calculations is typically 5-10 companies to cover the inter-quartile range and avoid outlier biases. Data sources (Bloomberg, Capital IQ, Refinitiv) provide real-time multiples that are updated daily, critical for accuracy.
The process of selecting anchors is not mechanics but an art: weak anchors (indirect comparables, obsolete data) signal risks and unreliability in assessments, as seen in overvalued IPOs of 2022, where comparables ignored inflated costs and falling margins. On a global scale, anchors evolve: in Russia, there is an emphasis on local comparables for currency stability, while in the US, growth metrics and innovation premiums are prioritized. 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 US, geopolitical factors (tensions in Taiwan, sanctions) could narrow the range by 10%, reflecting risks in supply equipment for clinical trials and manufacturing. High volatility in the VIX (the fear index on the S&P 500) above 20 points often leads to discounts on anchors of 15% or more, as seen in recent Asian offerings where raw material inflation (lithium, cobalt) undermined investor expectations, causing downward adjustments. Historically, high volatility (VIX >25) is associated with postponement 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 more psychology than fundamental factors. Surveys of analysts from firms like CFA Institute and Morgan Stanley show that 60% of institutional investors expect a 15-25% upside from tech IPOs in 2026 in the US, focusing on AI integration and automation potential. In the Russian retail IPO, expectations are more conservative—10-15% capitalization growth—due to local inflation (10-12% annually) and reduced purchasing power of consumers; however, robust domestic demand from retail investors often covers 150-200% of the offering volume. Implicit risks, such as regulatory delays (SEC approvals taking 4-6 months in the US, Central Bank of Russia—2-3 months), postpone about 25% of listings, affecting timelines and causing frustration.
Factors Shaping Expectations
Expectations are measured through roadshow feedback, media sentiment, and pre-marketing indications: positive sentiment raises the top end of the range by 5-15%, while pessimism narrows it. In a global context, for a European fintech, expectations around AI integration, machine learning capabilities, and expansion into adjacent markets added 20% to the preliminary valuation, but awareness of cybersecurity attacks and data privacy regulations adjusted it down by 10%, creating a net +10% versus initial anchors. Factors such as Federal Reserve rates (a 50 basis point reduction typically stimulates appetite for risk assets by an average of 5-8%), macroeconomic growth (GDP growth of +0.5% = valuation premium of +2-3%), enhance optimism, while recessionary signals, wars, and trade tensions dampen confidence. For the global audience, this is a reminder: risks are universal, but local factors (sanctions in Russia, supply chain disruptions in Asia) add layers of complexity, making diversification critical.
Structure and Volume of the Offering: Balancing Liquidity and Control
Primary vs Secondary Shares and Their Roles
The structure of the offering determines how the IPO integrates into the capital market, balancing capital raising for growth with the diversification of ownership and liquidity for existing shareholders. Primary shares (newly issued shares by the company) account for 60-80% in most cases and serve to fund organic growth, as in the planned Russian industrial IPO, where 70% of new shares (volume of 8 billion rubles out of a total of 11.5 billion rubles) finance the expansion of production capacity and internationalization. Secondary shares from founders, early investors, or venture capitalists add 20-30% and serve as a mechanism for partial exit, 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 avoidance of concentrated ownership.
Volume, Liquidity, and Valuation Premiums
The volume of the offering influences valuation and post-IPO dynamics: large offerings (greater than $1 billion), such as the Asian electric vehicle ipo, receive a scale premium for market liquidity and inclusion in major indices but risk market flooding, reducing the first-day pop by 5-10% due to high 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 existing shareholders from dumping shares: in biotech IPOs, a 12-month lock-up stabilizes the price, minimizing volatility in the first 2-3 quarters and limiting downside from insider selling. Allocation terms—70% to institutions, 30% to retail—ensure balance, with greenshoe options (an additional 15% of volume) for stabilization and flexibility.
Impact on Liquidity and Risks
The impact on liquidity is obvious and critical: a higher free float accelerates trading volume, as seen in a European cloud IPO with a 20% float, where daily turnover reached 5% of capitalized value in the first month, attracting algorithmic traders and fostering healthy price discovery. Optimizing the structure is a strategic art: for small and medium-sized businesses, like a Russian IT firm on the Moscow Exchange, a smaller volume (5 billion rubles) minimizes dilution of the majority shareholder, maintaining control at over 70%. Risks in structure include over-allocation (issuing more shares than planned), leading to undervaluation and frustration, or under-allocation, resulting in excess demand and price surge beyond expectations. A well-designed structure, as seen in recent successful examples, improves post-IPO performance by 15-20% over the year, creating a win-win for all stakeholders.
Organizers and Regulatory Aspects: Roles in Shaping Parameters
The Role of Investment Banks as Organizers
Organizers—major investment banks like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase in the US, or Sberbank, VEB.RF, Alfa-Bank in Russia—are at the helm, determining anchors, ranges, and offering parameters through expertise, networks of investors, and data-driven models. In an American biotech IPO, JPMorgan conducts extensive due diligence over a period of 3-4 months, adjusting valuation by 10-15% based on internal data regarding patents, regulatory risks, and competitive landscape, ensuring a realistic estimate. Their role in preliminary assessment includes scenario modeling, where anchors are calibrated against 8-10 comparable firms to ensure conservativeness and market acceptance.
Regulatory Requirements and Compliance
Regulatory aspects add a considerable layer of complexity: the SEC in the US requires detailed disclosure of risks in the final prospectus, often leading to an expansion of risk sections and a more conservative tone, influencing the width of ranges—non-compliance with requirements can delay the process for months. In Russia, the Central Bank focuses on localization and anti-money laundering compliance, where underwriters like VEB.RF adapt parameters to currency controls and cross-border restrictions, approving the prospectus in 2-3 months compared to 6+ months in the US. A syndicate of 3-5 major banks distributes the volume of the offering, minimizing systematic concentration risk.
Legal and Compliance Factors
Legal aspects, including compliance with GDPR in Europe, SOX in the US, and local jurisdiction tax codes, adjust valuations and parameters: privacy risks (leakage of customer data) lower anchors by 5-10%, particularly in fintech and IT companies. The final parameters are determined collaboratively by the organizers, CFOs, and the issuer's board, but regulators have the right to veto parameters deemed non-compliant. On a global scale, this ensures trust among investors and markets: Russian IPOs are stricter under the Central Bank's transparency requirements, while American IPOs are more flexible in structure but carry higher litigation risks for organizers. The evolution of regulations, such as MiFID II in Europe, intensifies focus on investor protection and best execution, influencing the design of IPO processes.
Forecasts and Adjustments: The Path to Final Valuation
Forecast Scenarios and Long-Term Prospects
Post-IPO forecasts focus on a 12-24 month horizon, linking preliminary parameters with expected performance in the secondary market and long-term company prospects. For the upcoming Russian retail IPO, a 25-30% capitalization growth is anticipated over the year, based on a strong e-commerce trend, expansion of SKU (stock keeping units), and improved logistics efficiency through AI. The base scenario anticipates a 20% revenue growth, maintenance of an 18% EBITDA margin, and multiple re-rating from 8x to 10x EV/EBITDA due to growth acceleration and operational improvements. The downside scenario (15% probability) includes macroeconomic downturns, cuts in consumer discretionary spending, and margin compression to 15%, which would lead to a 15% capitalization decline. The upside scenario (20% probability) includes IPO pop, institutional demand for inclusion in funds, and growth re-rating to 12x, resulting in a 35-40% increase.
Book-Building Dynamics and Range Adjustments
Adjustments during book-building 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 an Asian fintech IPO, where final valuation exceeded preliminary estimates by 12-15% due to strong institutional allocations. Weak demand (only 80% coverage) necessitates a price cut of 10-15% or postponement of the offering for better timing. Changes in anchors occur iteratively: a market downturn over consecutive weeks can adjust P/E downward by 2x, updating the range downwards. The potential for oversubscription is a powerful indicator: a 4x coverage in biotech signals significant hype and potential bubble risks, but if managed correctly through size and pricing, can lead to healthy first-day performance.
Final Valuation vs. Preliminary and Investment Value
The final valuation versus preliminary valuation often lands 7-12% higher in positive sentiment and strong roadshow scenarios, but 25-30% downward adjustments are observed during negative macro events or sentiment reversals. For investors, timely tracking of all updated parameters is key: platforms like Seeking Alpha, Morningstar, and local resources (RBC, Banki.ru for Russia) provide real-time updates, helping capture 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.
