The IT Value Creation Gap Is a Math Problem. Here Is the Math.

July 8, 2026 - by Eric Codorniz

There is a number that does not appear in most deal theses. It is not hidden intentionally. It is simply never calculated.

That number is the cost of treating IT as a support function during a hold period instead of a value creation lever. It compounds quietly across maintenance budgets, integration delays, and deferred decisions. And by the time these issues become visible, it shows up as multiple compressions, buyer escrow disputes, or an EBITDA miss that no one can clearly explain.

The math is not complicated. Every dollar of IT-driven margin improvement is worth roughly ten dollars of enterprise value at exit. That is not a projection. That is what the work delivers when it is structured correctly and executed with the deal thesis in mind.

The question is why so few portfolio companies (portcos) treat IT that way.

The Deal Closes Before IT Shows Up

According to Synoptek’s analysis of mid-market PE transactions, only 28 percent of PE-backed portcos run structured IT diligence before the Letter of Intent (LOI). Which means in the majority of middle-market transactions, the team responsible for delivering the value creation thesis is not in the room when the price is set.

The downstream effects are predictable. IT operating costs run higher than anticipated post-close. Integration timelines slip, synergies get pushed a quarter or two, and the EBITDA target that looked achievable at LOI starts to look aspirational by year two.

These are not three separate problems. They are one problem with three downstream effects. And the root cause is structural: IT is still being treated as a diligence checkbox rather than a value creation input.

What Changes When IT Is in the Investment Thesis

In a recent engagement, targeted IT diligence and post-close execution yielded $4 million in annualized EBITDA improvement and $40 million in enterprise value at the exit multiple. Three moves drove it.

1. A CapEx-to-OpEx migration reset the run-rate.
2. A SaaS license audit recovered costs in year one that paid for the engagement.
3. An 18-month vendor renewal calendar caught two auto-renewals at unfavorable pricing before they hit the P&L.

None of those moves needed a transformation program. None required a new executive hire. They needed a clear-eyed view of the IT estate, a sequenced plan tied to the deal thesis, and an accountable owner with the authority to execute.

The point is not the deal. The point is that the playbook is repeatable. Most portfolios are leaving the same value on the table because the same structural gap exists: IT is resourced for stability, not for value creation.

The Six Stages Where IT Moves the Needle

Walking the deal lifecycle, the pattern is consistent. Value is created or eroded at six distinct points, and most sponsors are active at only one or two of them.

1. At sourcing and pre-LOI, the firms outperforming on portfolio EBITDA are running a one-page IT screen at the LOI stage. Three questions. Current IT spend as a percent of revenue versus sector benchmark. TSA exposure. Cyber posture indicator. That screen takes 48 hours. It shapes the LOI price before the bid is in.
2. At due diligence, the separator is whether the work product tells the deal team what to pay, what to fix, and what to model into the exit. A checklist tells you nothing is on fire. A thesis-defensible work product attaches dollars to every material finding and ties the technology assessment back to the investment case.
3. At Day 1 and through the first 100 days, governance determines everything that follows. Without a single accountable IT decision authority in place from day one, IT decisions fragment by function. By day 30, the portco has committed to vendor renewals, cloud architectures, and software contracts that should have been governed. The value creation capacity that should have gone to revenue-side investments gets consumed by coordination overhead.
4. During the hold period, the highest-leverage moves are often the unglamorous ones. A SaaS license audit can recover nearly seven figures in annualized cost at a mid-market portco before the first quarterly board review. An ERP, by contrast, should not be touched in year one. The pattern that works is quick wins that build credibility, followed by structural investments timed to the operating model once it is actually understood.
5. At add-on integration, the integration playbook either exists or it gets invented under pressure. The portcos that struggle on the third or fourth add-on are the ones that absorbed the first two without building the repeatable framework. Identity, financial reporting consolidation, and customer master data do not forgive improvisation at scale.
6. At exit, the IT story either compresses the multiple or supports it. Exit-ready means three things are documented and defensible before the buyer’s diligence team arrives: financial visibility with IT spend mapped to EBITDA drivers, security posture with current quantification, and no material incidents in the trailing 24 months, and dependency clarity with no expiring contracts and no critical systems on end-of-life software. Start that work 12 to 18 months before going to market. The diligence the next buyer runs looks very similar to the one run at entry.

The Multiple Takes Care of Itself

The firms outperforming portfolio EBITDA right now are not doing something exotic. They are treating IT as a value creation workstream with named accountability, a defined cadence, and outcomes that are measured in dollars and reported at the board level. The ones leaving value on the table are managing IT as a cost center and discovering the gap at exit.

The math does not change. The decision about which category a portco falls into is made early, and it compounds in both directions across the hold period.

---

About the Author

Eric Codorniz is the Co-Founder of Synoptek. He drives PE-led value creation conversation across diligence, integration, and portfolio transformation. As an entrepreneur and leader with over 25 years of Business Technology & Consulting experience, Codorniz has launched multiple businesses and, most recently, had a successful exit from a Global IT Management & Consulting firm headquartered in Southern California.