Skip to content
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Lab
Sign Up
Sign Up

We spend our weekends yelling at API endpoints so you don’t have to.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Prompt Lab
  • Image Generation
  • Audio Comparison
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • Insights
  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • Rival Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival · Built with mass sleep deprivation, energy drinks, and someone else’s GPU cluster
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Lab
Sign Up
Sign Up

We spend our weekends yelling at API endpoints so you don’t have to.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Prompt Lab
  • Image Generation
  • Audio Comparison
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • Insights
  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • Rival Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival · Built with mass sleep deprivation, energy drinks, and someone else’s GPU cluster

GPT-5.3-Codex — Mini LBO Underwrite

  1. Home
  2. Models
  3. GPT-5.3-Codex
  4. Mini LBO Underwrite

See how GPT-5.3-Codex compares on this challenge:

  • GPT-5.3-Codex vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
  • GPT-5.3-Codex vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
  • GPT-5.3-Codex vs Z.ai: GLM 5

4 models have responded to the "Mini LBO Underwrite" challenge. Compare their approaches side-by-side on Rival. This response is part of Rival's open dataset of 5,600+ AI model responses.

Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Lab
Sign Up
Sign Up
Back to GPT-5.3-Codex

Mini LBO Underwrite

Gpt 5.3 Codex's response to the 'Mini LBO Underwrite' challenge.

GPT-5.3-Codex
February 25, 2026
Text

?
Prompt

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) – mission-critical HVAC maintenance + monitoring for data centers (mostly recurring service contracts). Use only the information below. Do NOT browse the web. This is a fictional exercise. ENTRY (close at end of FY2025) - FY2025 revenue: $900m - FY2025 EBITDA: $120m (13.3% margin) - Purchase price: 12.0x EBITDA - Transaction fees: 2.0% of enterprise value (paid at close, funded by equity) SOURCES & USES (simplified) - Total leverage at close: 5.5x EBITDA - Term Loan: 4.0x EBITDA, 9.0% cash interest, 1.0% annual amortization - Mezzanine: 1.5x EBITDA, 12.0% cash interest + 2.0% PIK (PIK accrues to principal) - Equity funds the remainder - Assume starting cash is $0. - Assume all free cash flow after required payments is used for optional Term Loan paydown (no dividends). OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS (FY2026–FY2030) Base case: - Revenue growth: 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 5% - EBITDA margin: 14.0%, 15.0%, 16.0%, 16.5%, 17.0% - Capex: 3.0% of revenue - Change in NWC: 0.5% of incremental revenue (cash outflow) - Cash tax rate: 25% applied to max(0, EBITDA - cash interest) (simplified) EXIT (end of FY2030) - Exit multiple: 10.5x FY2030 EBITDA - Exit fees: 1.0% of enterprise value - Mezzanine (including PIK) is repaid at exit. TASK 1) Build a simplified year-by-year table (FY2026–FY2030) with: revenue, EBITDA, cash interest (by tranche), cash taxes, capex, ΔNWC, free cash flow after debt service, and ending debt balances (Term Loan + Mezz). 2) Compute equity IRR and MOIC. 3) Provide a sensitivity table of equity IRR vs exit multiple (9.5x / 10.5x / 11.5x) and exit-year EBITDA margin (16% / 17% / 18%). 4) List 5 underwriting risks and 5 concrete downside protection levers. Keep it concise, but show the math clearly.

GPT-5.3-Codex
Response

gpt-5.3-codex logo
GPT-5.3-CodexMini LBO Underwrite
gpt-5.3-codex logo
GPT-5.3-Codex

Below is a clean LBO build using your assumptions only ($ in millions).

0) Entry math (end FY2025)

  • EV = (12.0 \times 120 = 1,440.0)
  • Fees = (2.0% \times 1,440.0 = 28.8)
  • Total uses = (1,468.8)

Debt at close (5.5x EBITDA):

  • Term Loan = (4.0 \times 120 = 480.0)
  • Mezz = (1.5 \times 120 = 180.0)
  • Total debt = 660.0

Equity check: [ \text{Equity} = 1,468.8 - 660.0 = 808.8 ]


1) FY2026–FY2030 operating + debt table (base case)

Key formulas used

  • Cash taxes = (25% \times \max(0,\ \text{EBITDA} - \text{cash interest}))
  • (\Delta NWC = 0.5% \times (\text{incremental revenue}))
  • FCF after required debt service
    (= \text{EBITDA} - \text{cash interest} - \text{cash taxes} - \text{capex} - \Delta NWC - \text{mandatory term amort})
  • Mandatory term amort = 1% of original term loan = (4.8) per year
  • All FCF above is used for optional term paydown
  • Mezz principal accretes by 2% PIK annually
FYRevenueEBITDATerm Cash Int (9%)Mezz Cash Int (12%)Cash TaxesCapex (3%)ΔNWCFCF after req. debt service (used for optional TL paydown)Ending Term DebtEnding Mezz Debt*
2026972.00136.0843.2021.6017.8229.160.3619.14456.06183.60
20271,040.04156.0141.0522.0323.2331.200.3433.36417.90187.27
20281,102.44176.3937.6122.4729.0833.070.3149.04364.06191.02
20291,157.56192.0032.7722.9234.0834.730.2862.43296.83194.84
20301,215.44206.6326.7123.3839.1336.460.2975.84216.18198.73

*Mezz ending debt includes annual 2% PIK accrual.


2) Equity MOIC and IRR (base case)

Exit at end FY2030

  • Gross EV = (10.5 \times 206.625 = 2,169.57)
  • Exit fees = (1.0% \times 2,169.57 = 21.70)
  • Net EV to stakeholders = (2,147.87)

Less debt repaid at exit:

  • Term = 216.18
  • Mezz (incl. PIK) = 198.73
  • Total net debt = 414.92

[ \text{Equity proceeds} = 2,147.87 - 414.92 = 1,732.95 ]

[ \text{MOIC} = \frac{1,732.95}{808.8} = 2.14\times ]

[ \text{IRR} = (2.1429)^{1/5} - 1 \approx 16.5% ]


3) Sensitivity: Equity IRR vs Exit Multiple and FY2030 EBITDA margin

(Revenue in FY2030 held at 1,215.44; only margin varied; debt paydown in FY2030 adjusted accordingly.)

Equity IRR (%)

FY2030 EBITDA Margin \ Exit Multiple9.5x10.5x11.5x
16%11.7%14.6%17.2%
17% (base)13.6%16.5%19.1%
18%15.4%18.2%20.9%

4) Key underwriting risks (5) and downside protection levers (5)

Top 5 risks

  1. Contract renewal / pricing risk: recurring base may reprice below model or churn rises.
  2. Customer concentration risk: large data-center clients delay expansions or in-source maintenance.
  3. Labor execution risk: technician wage inflation / scarcity compresses margin ramp.
  4. Leverage + costly mezz risk: high cash interest burden + PIK accretion reduces flexibility.
  5. Exit risk: multiple compression (12.0x entry to 10.5x exit already assumes de-rate; could be worse).

5 concrete downside-protection levers

  1. Tighter debt package at close: lower opening leverage and/or reduce mezz quantum.
  2. Contract structuring: multi-year agreements with CPI/pass-through labor escalators and termination penalties.
  3. Covenanted cash sweep / no leakage: enforce excess-cash paydown and no dividends until leverage milestones.
  4. Ops contingency plan: predefined cost actions (route density, procurement savings, SG&A flex cuts) triggered by KPI misses.
  5. Exit prep early: diversify customer base and lock higher-quality recurring mix to defend exit multiple even in softer markets.

If you want, I can also provide this in a compact “IC memo” format with an investment recommendation and pass/fail thresholds (min IRR, max leverage, covenant headroom).

Mini LBO Underwrite

Turn this model response into notes, narration, or a short video

Auto NotesTranscriptNarrateVideo Cut

Partner link

This output lives in our open dataset — 5K+ responses across 200 models. Take it. It’s free.

About GPT-5.3-Codex

Capabilities

ConversationReasoningCode GenerationAnalysisAgentic Tool Use

Categories

TextCodeMultimodal

Specifications

Provider
Openai
Released
2026-02-24
Size
XLARGE
Context
400,000 tokens

Keep exploring

SAME PROMPT

Claude Sonnet 4.6's version

Same prompt, different result

COMPARE

GPT-5.3-Codex vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Both outputs, side by side

We spend our weekends yelling at API endpoints so you don’t have to.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Prompt Lab
  • Image Generation
  • Audio Comparison
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • Insights
  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • Rival Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival · Built with mass sleep deprivation, energy drinks, and someone else’s GPU cluster