Private Equity interview preparation

Questions

100

Traced to a firm

83

Firms

40

Updated

September 2026

Asked at

All firmsAdvent International6Apollo Global Management6Audax Group6Carlyle Group6EQT6Silver Lake6Vista Equity Partners6WPWarburg Pincus6HIH.I.G. Capital5Oaktree Capital Management5Platinum Equity5TPTPG5General Atlantic4AMAres Management3Blackstone3Clayton Dubilier and Rice3GSGuggenheim Securities3Insight Partners3Invesco3Lazard3Neuberger Berman3NUNuveen3TSTruist Securities3Bain Capital2HWHarris Williams2Kohlberg Kravis Roberts2Millennium Management2Moody's2Rothschild & Co2WBWilliam Blair2Bessemer Venture Partners1Citi1Evercore1FTFranklin Templeton1Houlihan Lokey1HPS Investment Partners1KKR1Mizuho1MSMorgan Stanley1Sycamore Partners1

Topic

All topicsLBO mechanics7Value creation5Returns2Fund economics9Investment judgement18Valuation6Firm knowledge2Credit and financing9Operations4Due diligence8Career and fit11Sector knowledge4Accounting2Deal structuring7Industry knowledge3Brainteasers3

Level

AnyCoreIntermediateHard

Type

AnyTechnicalCaseFitMarket viewBrainteaser

1. 038An oil company loses $40 million of market cap because of litigation and sells an asset to pay for it. Is the stock price drop justified?ValuationHardsuperdaySilver LakeTechnology, Media and Telecom · San Francisco · 2022

   Say this

   It depends on two things: whether the expected liability is genuinely $40 million on a present-value basis, and whether the asset was sold at fair value. If both hold, the drop is justified. If the asset went at a discount, the drop should be larger.

   Then walk it

   1. First, size the liability properly. A $40 million settlement paid today is worth $40 million, but a $40 million liability payable over ten years is worth considerably less. The market should discount it.
   2. Then, is the litigation over? If the settlement establishes precedent for further claims, the true liability exceeds the headline number and the drop should be bigger.
   3. Second, the asset sale. If the asset was sold at fair value, the transaction is value-neutral: cash in, asset out, liability settled. The whole $40 million is the litigation cost.
   4. But a forced seller rarely gets fair value. If the asset was worth $50 million and went for $40 million, the company destroyed another $10 million and the drop should be $50 million.
   5. Then the operating consequence: does losing that asset reduce future cash flows? If it was producing, you have lost the associated EBITDA and the drop should reflect the capitalised value of that, not just the cash.
   6. So my answer would be: $40 million is the floor. The justified drop is $40 million plus any discount on the forced sale, plus the capitalised value of the lost earnings, less any tax benefit on the settlement.

   Where candidates lose it

   Treating it as a simple one-for-one. The examinable content is the forced-sale discount and the lost earnings from the disposed asset. Both make the justified drop larger than the headline number.

   Expect next

   • What if the asset was non-producing?
   • How would you value the litigation tail risk?
   • Is the settlement tax deductible, and does that change your answer?

   Reported by candidates at Silver Lake (Technology, Media and Telecom, San Francisco, 2022). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

2. 039If revenues get hit in a quarter, what would you do as the CFO to preserve cash?OperationsIntermediatetechnicalSilver LakeTechnology, Media and Telecom · San Francisco · 2022

   Say this

   Work from fastest and most reversible to slowest and most damaging. Working capital first, then discretionary spend, then capital expenditure, then headcount, and only then the financing options.

   Then walk it

   1. Working capital gives you cash within weeks and costs nothing structural: chase receivables, tighten credit terms, slow payables within contractual limits, and run down inventory.
   2. Discretionary opex next: travel, marketing programmes, consultants, contractors, non-essential projects. Fast, reversible, and largely invisible to customers.
   3. Capital expenditure: defer growth CapEx immediately, protect maintenance CapEx, because deferred maintenance is borrowing from next year at a bad rate.
   4. Headcount last among operational levers, because it is slow to take effect, carries severance cost upfront, and is expensive to reverse. Hiring freezes before redundancies.
   5. Financing in parallel: draw the revolver before conditions deteriorate, talk to lenders early about covenant headroom, and consider a sponsor equity injection if the shortfall is temporary.
   6. And the governance point: build a thirteen-week cash flow forecast immediately, update it weekly, and tell the lenders before they find out from the quarterly reporting. A surprised lender is a hostile lender.

   Where candidates lose it

   Going straight to headcount. It is slow, costly upfront and destroys capability. Working capital is faster and reversible, and knowing the sequence is the whole answer. Also, forgetting to communicate with lenders early.

   Expect next

   • What if it turns out to be structural rather than temporary?
   • When would you draw the revolver?
   • How do you know whether to cut or invest through it?

   Reported by candidates at Silver Lake (Technology, Media and Telecom, San Francisco, 2022). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

Firm tags come from public, anonymous candidate reports on Wall Street Oasis: strong signal, not sworn testimony. Firms are named as the places a question was reported, not as partners of Fin Maverick. Answers are written for this page to show how to think out loud; they are not scripts to recite.