Institutional Memory
Prior assumptions, decisions, and outcomes carried into the next review.
Discuss this workflowKeep every mandate grounded in the firm’s transaction history.
Bring the firm’s transaction experience into the next pitch, the next valuation question, and the next live mandate. Keep the reasoning connected as the deal moves.
Request a demo
The mandate, in context
Every deal is new. Your firm is not starting from zero.
The useful precedent is more than a transaction multiple. It is the assumption behind it, the evidence that changed it, and the judgment the team made. Hermetica brings that history into today’s work.
01 / Pitch & precedent
Begin with what the firm already learned.
Connect a new mandate to relevant transaction history, prior valuation work, and deal-team debate. Recover why a comparable mattered, where the case differed, and what the team learned through execution.
Explore Institutional MemoryProject Alder / prior mandate
What made this precedent relevant?
- Original view
- Recurring revenue supported the initial comparison.Pitch record · February 2024
- What changed
- Diligence showed a different customer concentration.Deal-team review · April 2024
For the team’s review
Carry the reasoning forward. Reassess the comparison for this mandate.
Inspect the source
Alder transaction review
Section 3 · valuation rationale
- Period
- February–April 2024
- Context
- Precedent context, not a current valuation
The initial comparison relied on recurring revenue. Following diligence, the team revised the peer set to reflect customer concentration.
02 / Valuation & diligence
Keep the number and its meaning together.
Company materials, models, and diligence reports can use the same label for different measures. Compare the entity, period, and definition before a figure reaches the valuation discussion.
Explore Source ReconciliationProject Alder / earnings bridge
Which EBITDA is being compared?
- Company materials
- €28.4mAdjusted EBITDA · FY2025
- Diligence report
- €25.9mNormalized EBITDA · FY2025
- Difference to review
- €2.5mAdjustment scope differs
For the team’s review
Same period. Different adjustments. Keep the bridge visible before using either figure.
Inspect the source
Alder diligence report
Page 18 · earnings bridge
- Period
- FY2025
- Context
- Normalized EBITDA; adjustment scope differs from management’s measure
Management’s adjusted EBITDA includes €2.5m of add-backs excluded from the normalized measure. The definitions should not be treated as equivalent.
03 / Live execution
Know what moved. Keep the next action clear.
Connect deal email, key dates, and counterparty updates to a current timeline and workplan. Keep ownership and the source message beside each change so the team can review what it means for the mandate.
Explore Deal CockpitProject Alder / execution
What changed in the next round?
- 12 May
- Final-bid date revisedCounterparty email · change to review
- 14 May
- Management sessionDeal lead · preparation due
- 21 May
- Final bids requestedProcess letter · current deadline
For the team’s review
A revised date stays connected to its message, the workstream, and the responsible team member.
Inspect the source
Alder process update
Counterparty email · final-bid timetable
- Period
- 12 May 2026
- Context
- Requested process date; deal-team confirmation required
Please use 21 May for the final-bid deadline. The management session remains on 14 May; confirm the revised timetable with the deal team.
One connected system
The capabilities behind the mandate.
Source Reconciliation
The evidence that governs the question, with conflicting inputs left visible.
Discuss this workflowDeal Cockpit
Timelines, workstreams, and next actions on one source-linked deal record.
Discuss this workflowDoes Hermetica make the valuation call?
No. Hermetica brings the relevant evidence, definitions, and precedent into review. The banking team decides which comparisons apply, which assumptions to use, and what advice to give.
Can we work from our own transaction history?
The starting point is the firm’s own evidence: company materials, models, transaction records, and the reasoning around past mandates. We agree which sources and workflows are in scope before deployment.
What should we bring to a first session?
Describe one recurring task, such as preparing a pitch, reconciling valuation inputs, or keeping a deal workplan current. A high-level description is enough; do not upload confidential deal materials to the request form.
A session around your work
Start with one live investment-banking question.
A pitch, a valuation discussion, or a mandate in motion. We’ll tailor the session to the work your team needs to move forward.
Request a demo30 minutes. Tailored to your workflow.