Valuation & Structure

Real Estate in M&A: Sale-Leaseback, Own vs. Lease, and How Property Affects Your Transaction

Owner-occupied real estate complicates M&A transactions in ways that are not obvious until you are in a process. Understanding how buyers view real estate, what a sale-leaseback does to your EBITDA, and how to structure the real estate separately from the business can materially change your total proceeds.

Use this perspective to move toward transaction readiness, sale timing, or M&A execution work.

Key takeaways

  • A sale-leaseback converts illiquid real estate equity into transaction proceeds without losing the facility.
  • Lease terms in a sale-leaseback are permanent, so negotiate them as carefully as the sale price.
  • Buyers price a sale-leaseback target differently depending on lease rate relative to market.
  • A long-term lease with limited termination rights is a liability for the operating business, not just an asset.
  • Structure the leaseback before engaging a buyer so the operating picture is clean at launch.
Research finding
Deloitte M&A Trends Report 2025CBRE Net Lease Investment Report 2024SRS Acquiom Deal Terms Study

73 percent of PE buyers in lower middle market transactions prefer not to acquire owned real estate as part of the business acquisition (Deloitte 2025). The most common reason is that real estate generates a different return profile than operating businesses, complicates debt financing, and does not fit PE fund mandates.

Sale-leaseback transaction volume in the lower middle market totals $12 to $15 billion annually. Capitalizing market rent into EBITDA (normalizing from owned to leased) typically reduces reported EBITDA by 8 to 15 percent, which directly affects valuation.

Sale-leaseback proceeds are generally treated as separate from business enterprise value, meaning the seller receives both business sale proceeds and real estate sale proceeds rather than a blended combined value.

When a founder owns the building the business operates from, that real estate creates a complication in an M&A transaction that most people underestimate until they are in a process. PE buyers do not want real estate on their balance sheets. Strategic buyers sometimes do. And the way market rent is normalized into the business's EBITDA affects the enterprise value in ways that can surprise sellers who have never seen the calculation before.

Why PE buyers do not want your real estate

PE funds are structured to generate equity returns on operating business investments. Real estate generates income through rental yield, appreciation, and tax depreciation, which is a different return profile. Including real estate in a PE acquisition creates complications: it dilutes fund-level returns, introduces a separate asset class that requires different underwriting, and often violates fund mandate restrictions that limit real estate ownership.

In practical terms, a PE buyer acquiring a $30M EBITDA business at 7x would pay $210M for the operating business. If the seller also owns a building worth $5M, the PE firm does not want to pay $215M for a combined transaction, they want to pay $210M for the business and have the seller figure out the real estate separately. This is where the sale-leaseback enters.

$12-15B

Annual LMM sale-leaseback volume

73%

PE buyers who prefer no real estate

8-15%

EBITDA reduction from rent normalization

10+ years

Lease term PE buyers require (NNN)

How a sale-leaseback works

In a sale-leaseback, the business owner sells the building to a real estate investor, typically a REIT, net lease fund, or private investor, and simultaneously signs a long-term lease to continue occupying the space. The owner receives cash proceeds from the real estate sale and becomes a tenant.

The lease terms that real estate investors require are specific: triple net (NNN) leases, meaning the tenant pays property taxes, insurance, and maintenance in addition to base rent; terms of 10 years or longer with renewal options; annual rent escalations of 1 to 2 percent or CPI-based adjustments; and creditworthy tenants with operating history. The rent is set at market rate for the property type and location, which introduces the EBITDA normalization issue.

Sale-leaseback timing matters. Completing the transaction before the M&A process begins separates the two events and avoids complicating the business sale. Doing it at close is also common, but adds coordination complexity and can affect deal economics if rent normalization is not agreed in advance.

EBITDA normalization and valuation impact

When a business owns its building, it may have no rent expense on the income statement, or it may have nominal rent below market rate. In either case, a buyer will normalize EBITDA to reflect market rent, because the buyer will have to pay market rent going forward regardless of the deal structure.

Consider a business with $3.0M of reported EBITDA that owns a 20,000 square foot industrial building. Market rent is $12 per square foot annually, so $240K per year. The normalized EBITDA used in the buyer's valuation is $2.76M, not $3.0M. At 7x, that is a $1.68M reduction in enterprise value ($240K x 7 = $1.68M). The sale-leaseback generates $2.4M to $3.0M of separate real estate proceeds depending on capitalization rate. The math can work in the seller's favor, but not always.

A $31M industrial services business had a founder who owned the 28,000 square foot building where the company operated. The building was appraised at $4.2M. The M&A advisor recommended completing a sale-leaseback concurrent with the business sale. The sale-leaseback investor paid $4.2M for the building and signed a 12-year NNN lease at $22,000 per month, reflecting market rate for the asset. The rent added $264K of annual expense that was then normalized into the EBITDA for the business sale, reducing the business EBITDA from $4.1M to $3.84M. At a 7x multiple, that reduced business enterprise value by $1.85M. However, the founder received $4.2M of separate real estate proceeds. Net impact: total proceeds increased by approximately $2.1M versus a scenario where the real estate was included in the business sale at a 7x multiple.

Structuring considerations and timing

ApproachTimingProsCons
Sale-leaseback before process6-12 months pre-processClean business sale; no complications at closeSeller carries rent during any market timing gap
Sale-leaseback at closeConcurrent with M&A closeSingle transaction event; coordinated proceedsAdds complexity; rent normalization must be agreed in advance
Real estate sold separately to buyerAt closeSimple; buyer handles real estatePE buyers rarely agree; may reduce enterprise value
Real estate excluded; business leases market rate alreadyPre-existingNo normalization requiredSeller already has rent expense in EBITDA

Scroll to see more →

Frequently asked questions

How is market rent determined for EBITDA normalization purposes?

Market rent is typically determined by a third-party commercial real estate appraisal or by referencing comparable lease transactions in the area. In an M&A context, the buyer may use their own market rent estimate. Sellers should commission their own appraisal to counter buyer assumptions, the difference between buyer and seller market rent estimates on a 5,000 square foot office building can affect EBITDA by $50,000 to $100,000 annually, which at a 7x multiple translates to $350,000 to $700,000 of enterprise value.

What lease terms do real estate investors require?

Net lease investors typically require 10 to 15 year initial terms, annual rent escalations of 1 to 2 percent, triple net structure (tenant pays taxes, insurance, maintenance), and a creditworthy tenant with demonstrated operating history. Startups or businesses with recent EBITDA volatility may not qualify for institutional net lease investor terms.

Work with Glacier Lake Partners

Discuss Real Estate Strategy for Your Transaction

Most relevant for founders who own the building their business operates from and are considering a sale in the next 1 to 3 years.

Start a Conversation

Research sources

Deloitte: M&A Trends ReportCBRE: Net Lease Market ReportSRS Acquiom: Deal Terms Study

Explore adjacent topics

Operational Discipline

Operational discipline is still the fastest path to credibility

AI-Enabled Execution

AI should remove friction, not create a science project

Found this useful?Share on LinkedInShare on X

Next Step

Recognized a situation? A direct conversation is faster.

If a perspective maps to an active transaction, operating, or AI challenge, the right next step is a short discussion — not more reading.

Confidential inquiriesReviewed personally1 business day response target