← Back to Models & Tools
LBO Series · Guide 10

LBO Mistakes That Fail Interviews

The 10 errors that tank otherwise-prepared candidates in PE interviews. Most aren't about knowledge — they're about precision, clarity, and thinking under pressure.

The Pattern

Strong candidates who fail LBO interviews usually make one of two types of mistakes: (1) mechanical errors that show they haven't actually built a real model, or (2) conceptual gaps that show they've memorized steps without understanding why. Both are fixable. This guide covers the most common versions of each.

#01
Computing IRR as MOIC divided by hold period
IRR = 3.0x MOIC / 5 years = 60%
IRR = 3.0^(1/5) − 1 = 24.6%

IRR is an annualized compounding return. Dividing MOIC by years gives you a simple return rate — which overstates IRR dramatically because it ignores compounding. A 3.0x in 5 years is a 24.6% IRR, not 60%.

Memorize the key reference points: 2.5x/5yr = 20%, 3.0x/5yr = 25%, 4.0x/5yr = 32%.

#02
Using EBITDA as a proxy for free cash flow
FCF available for debt paydown = EBITDA = $500M
FCF = EBITDA − Cash Interest − Cash Taxes − Capex − ΔWC

EBITDA ≠ cash flow. On $500M of EBITDA with 5.0x leverage at 9% all-in rate, you're paying ~$225M in interest. Add taxes and capex and your actual FCF is $150–$200M, not $500M. Using EBITDA as FCF will produce IRRs that are 15–20 percentage points too high and will expose you in any follow-up question.

#03
Computing taxes on EBIT instead of EBT
Cash Taxes = EBIT × Tax Rate (ignores interest expense)
Cash Taxes = EBT × Tax Rate = (EBIT − Interest) × Tax Rate

Interest expense is tax-deductible. The entire point of debt financing is partially the tax shield. Computing taxes on EBIT ignores the interest deduction and overstates your tax bill — which reduces FCF and understates IRR. This is a basic mechanics error that signals you haven't actually built the model.

#04
Using exit EBITDA instead of entry EBITDA for leverage calculation
Leverage = $2,500M debt / $690M exit EBITDA = 3.6x
Leverage = $2,500M debt / $500M LTM entry EBITDA = 5.0x

Leverage at entry is calculated on LTM EBITDA at the time of the deal — not on projected future EBITDA. Lenders underwrite against what is known, not what you're projecting. Using forward EBITDA to justify leverage is an error that any lender will immediately flag.

#05
Assuming multiple expansion in the base case without justification
We bought at 8x and we'll exit at 11x — that's reasonable given the sector.
Base case is exit at same multiple as entry (8x). Upside case models 9x if margin improvement justifies re-rating.

Multiple expansion is the least controllable return driver. It depends on market conditions, sector sentiment, and business transformation — none of which you can guarantee. Assuming expansion in the base case is the mark of an unsophisticated model. Sophisticated analysts model it in the upside case with explicit justification (sector re-rating, EBITDA quality improvement, growth acceleration).

#06
Forgetting to include transaction fees in the sources & uses
Uses: Purchase Price only. Total uses = $4,500M.
Uses: Purchase Price + Debt Fees + Advisory Fees + Repayment of Existing Debt. Total uses = $4,590M (2% fees on deal value).

Transaction fees (M&A advisory, legal, debt financing fees) typically run 1.5–2.5% of deal value. At a $4.5B deal, that's $68–$112M. These come out of the equity check or are financed separately — either way, they increase total sources needed and reduce equity returns.

#07
Not explaining the return attribution
"The IRR is 22%." [done]
"The IRR is 22%, driven primarily by EBITDA growth (~55% of value creation) and debt paydown (~45%). Multiple was held flat at entry, so there's no multiple expansion baked in."

Any interviewer who asks for an IRR will follow up with "where does that come from?" If you can't decompose the return into EBITDA growth, debt paydown, and multiple change, you haven't finished the analysis. Return attribution is the insight — the IRR number is just the output.

#08
Ignoring the interest coverage constraint
We can put in 8.0x leverage because it maximizes IRR.
At 8.0x leverage with $500M EBITDA, interest expense is ~$360M+ (8% × $4B), leaving only $140M of EBITDA before taxes — ICR of 1.4x, which most lenders won't finance.

Leverage is always constrained by what lenders will actually provide. Before you model 6.0x, 7.0x, or 8.0x leverage, check the coverage ratios. EBITDA / Interest should exceed 1.5x at minimum for most lenders, 2.0x for conservative structures. Violating this means the deal can't be financed as modeled.

#09
Confusing enterprise value and equity value in the exit calculation
We exit at $5.5B equity value — that's our return on $500M invested = 11x MOIC!
We exit at $5.5B enterprise value. Less $1.1B remaining debt = $4.4B equity value. Return on $500M = 8.8x MOIC.

Enterprise value includes debt — it represents the total value of the business to ALL capital providers. Equity value is what's left for shareholders after paying off debt. The sponsor only owns the equity. Conflating EV with equity value will cause a massive overstatement of returns and will signal to any interviewer that you don't understand the capital structure.

#10
Saying "I don't know" and stopping there
"I don't know what a PIK toggle is. I haven't seen that structure."
"I haven't modeled that specific structure, but I know PIK instruments accrue interest to principal instead of paying in cash — so my best estimate is that it would increase the ending debt balance and reduce exit equity versus a cash-pay structure. Happy to walk through my reasoning if useful."

In PE interviews, you will be asked things you don't know. The test isn't whether you know everything — it's whether you can think clearly under uncertainty. Show your reasoning. Acknowledge the gap, make a directional estimate, and offer to discuss. Candidates who reason through unknowns are more valuable than candidates who only answer questions they've prepared for.

← 15 Interview Q&As Operating Leverage in LBOs → Practice in Mock Interview