Consulting Business Valuation (2026): Multiples, Bench Utilization, and the Services-SaaS Hybrid Premium

Consulting business valuation in 2026 spans an unusually wide multiple range. The phrase ‘consulting firm’ covers strategy boutiques (5-25 consultants advising on M&A, growth strategy, operations transformation), management consulting firms (50-500 consultants on engagement-based work), IT services firms (technology implementation, managed services, application development, cybersecurity), specialty consulting (regulatory affairs, healthcare, financial services compliance, government / public sector, sustainability / ESG), and services-SaaS hybrid firms where consulting wraps around proprietary software / data / IP. Each sub-vertical has different buyer pools, different revenue mix profiles, different partner-equity dynamics, and different EBITDA multiples ranging from 4x to 7x and occasionally higher.

This guide is for consulting firm owners running between $2M and $100M of revenue, with normalized earnings between $400K SDE and $20M EBITDA. We’ll walk through the dual-metric framework (revenue multiples versus EBITDA multiples), the operating metrics that buyers underwrite (bench utilization, average bill rate, gross margin per consultant, project realization rate, recurring revenue percentage), the partner-equity structures that shape deal mechanics, the services-SaaS hybrid premium that emerged in the 2020s, the active PE buyer landscape (Genstar, GTCR, Audax, New Mountain, Bain Capital, Hg Capital, Charlesbank, Berkshire Partners, AEA Investors, Court Square, Apollo Hybrid Value), the strategic buyer landscape (Accenture, CGI, Cognizant, Capgemini, IBM Consulting, Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC), and deal structures that dominate when a consulting firm sells in 2026.

The framework draws on direct work with 76+ active U.S. lower middle-market buyers — including 16 firms with explicit professional services / consulting consolidation mandates — plus a free valuation calculator we built for owners triangulating their range. These buyers include consulting-focused PE platforms (Genstar Capital with multiple consulting portfolio companies, GTCR services platform, Audax Group services portfolio, New Mountain Capital services and outsourcing portfolio, Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Hg Capital, Apollo Hybrid Value, Ares Management services investments, Charlesbank Capital, Berkshire Partners, AEA Investors, Court Square Capital, Trive Capital services, Sun Capital services, Cortec Group services), strategic acquirers (Accenture on NYSE: ACN, CGI on TSX: GIB.A and NYSE: GIB, Cognizant on NASDAQ: CTSH, Capgemini on Euronext: CAP, IBM Consulting under NYSE: IBM, Booz Allen Hamilton on NYSE: BAH for specific defense / federal / government work, Leidos on NYSE: LDOS, ICF International on NASDAQ: ICFI, ManTech / Peraton private), Big 4 consulting arms (Deloitte Consulting, EY Parthenon, KPMG Consulting, PwC Strategy& / PwC Consulting — selective acquirers of boutique specialty firms), search funders targeting $750K-$3M EBITDA boutique consulting firms, and family offices with services theses. We’re a buy-side partner. The buyers pay us when a deal closes — not you. Run our free valuation calculator in 60 seconds for a starting-point range.

One realistic note before you start. Consulting firms have unique valuation dynamics around partner retention and client transferability that differ from product businesses. Most consulting firms are partnership-equity structures where 5-25 senior consultants own equity and personally hold the most important client relationships. PE buyers underwrite the deal on the assumption that 80-90% of equity partners will remain through a 3-5 year integration period. Failure to retain key partners can collapse the deal economics — not just compress the multiple, but trigger earnout clawbacks and re-rate the headline price. The multiples in this guide are starting points, not commitments — the actual price your firm achieves depends heavily on partner-track retention probability, recurring versus project revenue mix, end-market positioning, and how the deal structure resolves.

“There is no single ‘consulting multiple’ in 2026. There’s a project-based strategy boutique multiple (4-5x EBITDA, McKinsey / BCG / Bain almost never acquire), a regulated-industry IT services multiple (5-7x EBITDA, Accenture / CGI / Cognizant active), a healthcare consulting multiple (5-6.5x EBITDA, multiple PE platforms), and a hybrid services-SaaS multiple (7x+ EBITDA when recurring software-style revenue exceeds 30% of total). The 3-turn EBITDA spread between ‘pure project consulting’ and ‘services-SaaS hybrid’ is real and grounded in revenue predictability, customer LTV economics, and buyer cost of capital — not aspirational pricing.”

Key Takeaways

• Two metrics dominate: 1-3x annual revenue (broader range than most industries due to wide consulting category) or 4-7x normalized EBITDA (institutional standard above $1.5M EBITDA).
• Sub-vertical multiples in 2026: pure project strategy boutique 4-5x EBITDA, management consulting 4.5-5.5x, IT consulting / services 5-6.5x, regulatory / specialty 5-6.5x, healthcare consulting 5-6.5x, services-SaaS hybrid 6-8x+, government / federal services 5-7x.
• Bench utilization benchmark: 70-80% healthy, below 65% cost structure problem, above 85% capacity strain. Single most diagnostic operating metric in QoE.
• Services-SaaS hybrid premium: when recurring software / data / IP revenue exceeds 30% of total, multiple expands 1-2x EBITDA above pure-services peers due to predictable recurring economics.
• Active PE buyers: Genstar, GTCR, Audax, New Mountain, Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Hg Capital, Apollo Hybrid Value, Ares, Charlesbank, Berkshire, AEA, Court Square, Trive, Sun Capital services, Cortec Group services.
• Active strategics: Accenture (NYSE: ACN), CGI (TSX: GIB.A), Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH), Capgemini (Euronext: CAP), IBM Consulting, Booz Allen (NYSE: BAH), Leidos (NYSE: LDOS), ICF (NASDAQ: ICFI). Big 4 (Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC) are selective — rarely acquire but do for specialty depth.

Why consulting valuation has the widest multiple range in professional services

Consulting firms span a wider multiple range than almost any other professional services category. Per Pitchbook professional services reports, GF Data services 2024-2026 vintages, and consulting M&A advisory data (Equiteq, Capstone Strategic, Houlihan Lokey services practice), the range runs from 3.5x EBITDA (small project-based strategy boutiques with thin recurring revenue and high partner concentration risk) to 8x+ EBITDA (specialty consulting with services-SaaS hybrid models and 50%+ recurring revenue). The 4.5-turn spread is real and reflects fundamental differences in revenue predictability, partner retention risk, and end-market exposure across the consulting category.

Why the dispersion is so wide. Consulting differs from accounting (where AICPA structure caps the variance), legal services (where state bar rules constrain ownership), and most product businesses (where customer relationships transfer mechanically with the product). In consulting, the asset is the intellectual capital and client relationships of the partner team. When that team is retained and motivated post-deal, the firm operates as expected. When key partners exit, the firm can lose 20-50% of revenue within 12-18 months. Buyer underwriting reflects this risk asymmetrically: top-tier firms with strong partner retention story command full premium multiples; firms with concentrated partner risk get aggressive discounts or earnout-heavy structures.

When EBITDA multiple dominates. Above $1.5-2M EBITDA, the EBITDA multiple framework dominates across all consulting sub-segments. Below that threshold, revenue multiples (1-2x) are sometimes used as cross-checks, but realistic transactions are EBITDA-anchored. The transition reflects buyer pool composition: institutional PE platforms underwrite EBITDA exclusively; small-firm acquirers and individual buyers (rare in consulting) might still anchor on revenue.

The four primary multiple drivers. First, recurring revenue percentage (services-SaaS hybrid, retainer-based engagements, multi-year contracts versus pure project work). Second, partner retention probability (multi-year rollover commitment, restrictive covenants strength, second-generation partner depth). Third, end-market specialty (healthcare, financial services compliance, government / federal, regulated industries trade premium versus general management consulting). Fourth, bench utilization and operating efficiency (70-80% healthy benchmark, below 65% drives compression). These four factors explain the 4.5-turn dispersion across consulting transactions in 2024-2026.

Sub-vertical consulting multiples in 2026: from strategy boutiques to specialty IT services

Pure project-based strategy consulting boutiques: 4-5x EBITDA typical for $1-5M EBITDA operations. Small strategy boutiques (5-25 consultants) doing engagement-based growth strategy, M&A advisory, operations transformation, and similar project work face the most challenging multiple math. The sub-segment has high partner concentration risk (often 1-3 senior partners hold 60-80% of client relationships), high project revenue volatility (no recurring component), and limited buyer pool (large strategy firms like McKinsey, BCG, Bain rarely acquire boutiques; PE platforms hesitate due to retention risk; strategic acquirers focus on specialty rather than generalist boutiques). Multi-partner boutiques (10+ partners) with diversified client mix and second-generation partner depth reach the upper end of the range.

Management consulting (broader engagement model): 4.5-5.5x EBITDA typical for $2-15M EBITDA operations. Mid-sized management consulting firms (50-300 consultants) with structured project portfolios, multi-partner equity, and broader client mix trade in the 4.5-5.5x range. The premium versus pure boutiques reflects partner-base depth (less concentration risk in any single partner), more sophisticated operational infrastructure, and broader buyer pool (PE platforms, strategic acquirers in specific verticals). Active buyers in this sub-segment: Genstar Capital portfolio companies, Audax Group, mid-market PE with services theses.

IT consulting / IT services: 5-6.5x EBITDA typical for $3-50M EBITDA operations. IT consulting firms (technology strategy, implementation, application development, cybersecurity, managed services) trade at meaningful premium to general management consulting. The premium reflects: higher recurring revenue percentages (managed services contracts, retainer-based engagements, ongoing application support), better customer relationship transferability (customer relationships often institutional with the customer’s IT organization rather than personal with the consultant), and stronger end-market growth profile (cloud migration, cybersecurity, AI adoption all drive ongoing IT consulting demand). Active buyers: Accenture (NYSE: ACN), CGI (TSX: GIB.A), Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH), Capgemini (Euronext: CAP), IBM Consulting, plus PE platforms (Hg Capital, Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Apollo Hybrid Value, Audax, GTCR services).

Healthcare consulting: 5-6.5x EBITDA typical for $2-25M EBITDA operations. Healthcare consulting (provider operations, payer strategy, life sciences regulatory, healthcare IT, value-based care, hospital transformation, healthcare M&A advisory) commands consistent premium versus general management consulting due to specialty positioning, regulated end-market growth, and active PE buyer interest. Active healthcare-focused PE: Linden Capital Partners, Riverside Healthcare Capital Group, GTCR Healthcare, NewSpring Capital Healthcare practice, Frazier Healthcare Partners, Avista Capital, Bain Capital Healthcare. Strategic acquirers: Huron Consulting (NASDAQ: HURN), CRA International (NASDAQ: CRAI), ECG Management Consultants (private), Navigant Consulting (acquired by Guidehouse / Veritas Capital 2019), Premier Inc (NASDAQ: PINC) for specific provider-focused acquisitions.

Financial services consulting / regulatory compliance: 5-6.5x EBITDA typical. Consulting firms specializing in banking regulation (CECL, Basel III, AML / BSA, OCC / FDIC enforcement), insurance regulatory, broker-dealer compliance, and financial services risk management trade at premium reflecting specialty depth and regulated end-market durability. Active strategic acquirers: Promontory Financial Group (acquired by IBM 2016), Oliver Wyman (Marsh McLennan NYSE: MMC subsidiary), Capco (Wipro acquisition 2021, NYSE: WIT), Charles River Associates (NASDAQ: CRAI), Cornerstone Research (private). PE platforms: Charlesbank Capital, Court Square Capital, Berkshire Partners services investments.

Government / federal / defense consulting: 5-7x EBITDA typical. Federal services consulting (DoD, intelligence community, civilian agencies) trades at premium reflecting recurring contract base, security-clearance moat, and specialty positioning. Active strategic consolidators: Booz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH), Leidos (NYSE: LDOS), Science Applications International Corporation / SAIC (NYSE: SAIC), CACI International (NYSE: CACI), Parsons Corporation (NYSE: PSN), CGI Federal (TSX: GIB.A), Engility (acquired by SAIC 2019), General Dynamics IT (NYSE: GD subsidiary), ManTech (acquired by Carlyle 2022), Peraton (private, Veritas Capital). PE platforms: Veritas Capital, Arlington Capital Partners, GTCR Federal Services, Acacia Research.

Services-SaaS hybrid consulting: 6-8x+ EBITDA typical when recurring software / data revenue exceeds 30%. Consulting firms that have built proprietary software, data products, or IP-based recurring revenue alongside their services practice command meaningful premium. The 6-8x+ multiple reflects buyer perception of recurring software-style revenue economics applied to part of the firm. Active buyers: Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Hg Capital, Vista Equity Partners (when SaaS percentage approaches majority), Insight Partners, growth equity investors. The hybrid premium has emerged strongly in the 2020s as buyers recognize the difference between pure-services consulting and consulting-with-IP-leverage.

Specialty / niche consulting (5-7x typical with right positioning). Other specialty consulting positions trading at premium: ESG / sustainability consulting (5.5-7x with growing buyer interest), litigation support / forensic consulting (5-6.5x, FTI Consulting NYSE: FCN as benchmark), supply chain consulting (5-6x), digital transformation / data analytics (5.5-7x with services-SaaS overlap), restructuring / turnaround consulting (4.5-5.5x, AlixPartners benchmark), cybersecurity consulting (6-7.5x, premium driven by regulated demand). Each sub-segment has discrete buyer pools and pricing dynamics requiring specific analysis.

Bench utilization: the operating metric that drives every consulting valuation

Bench utilization is the single most diagnostic operating metric in consulting valuation. Defined as the percentage of total available consultant hours that are billable to clients (versus internal / training / business development / unstaffed time), utilization is the universal benchmark across consulting sub-segments. Healthy boutique utilization runs 70-80% billable hours across consultants. Below 65% indicates a cost structure problem (too many consultants relative to demand, multiple compression). Above 85% indicates capacity strain and growth ceiling (firm is over-utilized and risks talent burnout / project quality). The utilization rate appears in every QoE and is one of the first numbers a sophisticated PE buyer asks for.

How buyers underwrite utilization. Buyers don’t just look at headline utilization — they decompose by consultant level (junior / senior / partner), by quarter (seasonality), and by client type (project versus retainer). A firm reporting 75% blended utilization where senior partners are 90% utilized and junior consultants are 60% utilized reveals different operating dynamics than a firm with 75% blended utilization where every level runs 75%. The decomposition matters because senior partner over-utilization signals delivery risk (they’re the bottleneck) while junior consultant under-utilization signals leverage problems (the firm isn’t pyramid-structured efficiently).

Why low utilization compresses multiples. A firm running 60% utilization has structural cost pressure that doesn’t show up in EBITDA until demand softens. Buyers calculate ‘pro forma utilization-adjusted EBITDA’ by modeling what EBITDA would be if utilization rose to 75% benchmark (typically meaning lower headcount or higher demand). The pro forma EBITDA reveals true earnings capacity and informs the multiple. Firms reporting low utilization without acknowledging the issue get re-rated 0.5-1.5x lower in the EBITDA multiple.

Bill rate and gross margin per consultant. Beyond utilization, buyers evaluate average bill rate (typical: $200-400/hr junior, $300-600/hr senior, $400-1000+/hr partner depending on sub-segment) and gross margin per consultant (revenue per FTE minus fully-loaded comp). Premium consulting firms target $400K-$700K revenue per FTE with 35-50% gross margin; commodity consulting firms run $250K-$400K revenue per FTE with 25-35% gross margin. The gross margin metric directly correlates with EBITDA multiple.

Project realization rate. Realization rate measures the percentage of billed time actually collected (after write-offs, scope-of-work disputes, fixed-fee project overruns). Healthy realization runs 90%+; below 85% indicates project delivery problems or client dispute frequency. Buyers pay attention to realization because it materially affects sustainable EBITDA — a firm with 80% realization is meaningfully less profitable than one with 95% realization at the same nominal billings. Realization is part of standard QoE for consulting firms.

The services-SaaS hybrid premium: how IP-leverage shifts valuation

Consulting firms that have built proprietary software, data products, or IP-based recurring revenue alongside their services practice command meaningful valuation premiums. The services-SaaS hybrid premium has emerged strongly in the 2020s as buyers recognize the fundamental difference between pure-services consulting (revenue earned per consultant hour, scaling linearly with headcount) and IP-leverage consulting (revenue earned per software / data / IP unit, scaling non-linearly). When recurring software / data revenue exceeds 30% of total revenue, multiple expands 1-2x EBITDA above pure-services peers; above 50% recurring, the firm is increasingly priced on SaaS-style multiples (8-15x EBITDA possible) rather than consulting multiples.

Why buyers pay the premium. Recurring software / data revenue has different unit economics than services revenue: (1) gross margins typically 70-90% versus 30-50% for services; (2) revenue is contracted and predictable (annual / multi-year subscriptions versus project-by-project); (3) customer LTV is higher and retention is more diagnostic; (4) the firm can scale revenue without proportional headcount additions. PE buyers underwriting SaaS-leveraged consulting firms apply blended multiples that weight the software / data revenue at higher multiples than the services revenue.

How to build the hybrid model pre-sale. Owners 24-48 months pre-sale who recognize the hybrid premium opportunity often pursue intentional product / IP development. Common patterns: (1) productize a recurring methodology into software-as-a-service offering ($25K-$200K per client annual subscription); (2) build proprietary data / benchmark databases that clients pay for ongoing access; (3) develop assessment tools or diagnostic platforms with annual licenses; (4) wrap services around a software platform from a partner (licensed reseller plus implementation services). Each path produces different premium magnitudes — pure proprietary IP commands the strongest premium; reseller / partner-software wraps command moderate premium.

Active buyers for services-SaaS hybrid. Bain Capital Tech Opportunities (specific mandate for services-SaaS hybrids), Hg Capital (technology services with software components), Vista Equity Partners (when SaaS percentage approaches majority), Insight Partners (growth-stage software with services attach), Apollo Hybrid Value, growth equity investors (Stripes Group, Five Elms Capital, Marlin Equity Partners), and strategic SaaS acquirers expanding into services-led implementation.

Caveats on the premium. Buyers verify the recurring software / data revenue is genuinely productized and recurring — not just a services engagement labeled as a subscription. Common diligence questions: (1) is the software / data deployed without consultant intervention? (2) what percentage of customers renew without expansion services? (3) are the contracts actual subscriptions with auto-renewal or annual project re-bids dressed up as subscriptions? Firms claiming SaaS premiums on what is actually services revenue under SaaS-flavored contracts get re-rated harshly in QoE.

Partner-equity structure and retention mechanics

Most U.S. consulting firms use partnership-equity structures where 5-25 senior consultants hold equity. The partnership structure shapes deal mechanics in ways that differ from corporate-equity structures. PE deals typically structure 20-40% of total consideration as rollover equity for partners, with 3-5 year vesting (cliff at year 1, quarterly or annual thereafter). Earnout exposure tied to client retention 90%+ in year 1. Failure to retain 2-3 key partners post-acquisition often triggers earnout clawbacks and can re-rate the deal materially.

Rollover equity mechanics in consulting. Equity partners in the selling firm typically receive 25-40% of total deal consideration as rollover equity in the buyer’s holding company. The rollover ultimately monetizes at the platform’s eventual exit (typically 4-7 years post-acquisition), creating multi-year alignment between partners and the platform sponsor. Vesting accelerators for retention (full vesting on platform exit regardless of timing) are common; clawback provisions for partner exit before vesting are universal.

Earnout structures tied to client and partner retention. Typical consulting earnout: 20-30% of consideration paid over 1-3 years tied to: client revenue retention (90%+ in year 1, 85%+ cumulative through year 2), partner-led book retention, and firm-wide growth metrics. Realistic collection rate: 60-85% depending on retention performance. Sellers should model earnouts as ‘at-risk consideration’ rather than guaranteed proceeds. Negotiate metrics that the seller can influence post-close (smooth client transitions, retention support) rather than metrics outside the seller’s control (platform-wide growth, market conditions).

Restrictive covenants and non-competes. Standard restrictive covenants: 3-5 year non-compete (typically narrowly defined to specific service areas and geographic regions), 5-year non-solicit of clients and employees, confidentiality obligations indefinite. Equity partners with 10+ year tenure often resist 5-year covenants — negotiation typically lands on 3-year non-compete with carve-outs for clients the partner had pre-existing relationships with. Buyers price covenants strength: weak covenants reduce buyer confidence in retention, compressing the multiple.

Second-generation partner depth. PE buyers explicitly model second-generation partner depth. A firm where 60% of equity partners are over 60 and have signaled retirement intent within 3-5 years presents a different risk profile than a firm where 60% of equity partners are under 50 with 15+ year runway. The age-curve risk shows up in valuation through compressed headline EBITDA multiple (0.5-1x compression for shallow second-generation depth) and longer / deeper earnout structures. Firms with strong second-generation partner depth (3+ partners under 45 with proven client books) regularly achieve 0.5-1x EBITDA premium.

What about ‘eat what you kill’ partner compensation models? Some consulting firms use ‘eat what you kill’ compensation models where each partner’s compensation depends primarily on the revenue they personally generate. These structures often create high partner concentration risk that compresses multiples. PE buyers prefer pooled compensation models that incentivize firm-wide collaboration and reduce single-partner dependency. Firms 24-36 months pre-sale with EWYK structures sometimes restructure to pooled models to improve buyer perception of retention durability.

Active PE consulting platform buyers and strategic acquirers in 2026

The 2026 consulting buyer pool divides into five archetypes. Each archetype reads CIMs differently, asks different diligence questions, and structures deals differently. A CIM that targets PE platform buyers (emphasizing recurring revenue, partner retention, growth runway, scalability) reads completely differently than one targeting strategic acquirers (emphasizing service-line fit, customer overlap, integration ease, geographic complementarity).

Archetype 1: PE platforms with services portfolios. Genstar Capital (multiple consulting platforms across services portfolio), GTCR (services and outsourcing portfolio with consulting holdings), Audax Group (services investments), New Mountain Capital (extensive services portfolio including Citrin Cooperman, Grant Thornton, plus consulting holdings), Charlesbank Capital Partners, Berkshire Partners, AEA Investors, Court Square Capital, Trive Capital services, Sun Capital services, Cortec Group services. Typical target: $2-25M EBITDA consulting platforms with 50%+ recurring or contractually structured revenue.

Archetype 2: PE platforms with technology services / SaaS-services theses. Bain Capital Tech Opportunities (specific mandate for tech-enabled services and services-SaaS hybrids), Hg Capital (technology services consolidation), Apollo Hybrid Value, Vista Equity Partners (when SaaS percentage approaches majority), Insight Partners (growth-stage software with services attach), Marlin Equity Partners. Typical target: $3-30M EBITDA tech-enabled services with meaningful recurring software / data / IP component.

Archetype 3: PE platforms with healthcare / regulated industry theses. Linden Capital Partners (healthcare services), Riverside Healthcare Capital Group, GTCR Healthcare practice, NewSpring Capital Healthcare, Bain Capital Healthcare, Frazier Healthcare Partners, Avista Capital, Veritas Capital (federal / defense), Arlington Capital Partners (federal / aerospace / defense). Each has specific end-market mandates that drive higher multiples within their target segments.

Archetype 4: large strategic IT services consolidators. Accenture (NYSE: ACN, the most consistently active strategic acquirer in IT services and management consulting), CGI (TSX: GIB.A and NYSE: GIB), Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH), Capgemini (Euronext: CAP), Wipro (NYSE: WIT, acquired Capco 2021), Infosys (NYSE: INFY), TCS (NSE: TCS), HCL Technologies (NSE: HCLTECH), IBM Consulting (NYSE: IBM, Kyndryl spinoff), DXC Technology (NYSE: DXC). Typical target: $5-100M+ revenue IT services / consulting with strategic capability or geographic fit.

Archetype 5: federal / government / defense strategic consolidators. Booz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH), Leidos (NYSE: LDOS), SAIC (NYSE: SAIC), CACI International (NYSE: CACI), Parsons Corporation (NYSE: PSN), CGI Federal (TSX: GIB.A subsidiary), General Dynamics IT (NYSE: GD subsidiary), ManTech (Carlyle, 2022), Peraton (Veritas Capital). Typical target: cleared workforce, recurring federal contracts, GSA Schedule positioning.

Big 4 consulting arms (selective acquirers). Deloitte Consulting, EY Parthenon (formerly Parthenon-EY), KPMG Consulting, PwC Consulting / Strategy&. The Big 4 arms rarely acquire boutique consulting firms (they prefer organic growth and selective lateral hires). When they do acquire, it’s for specialty depth in specific industries or services (cybersecurity, healthcare advisory, specific regulatory specialties, technology integration capabilities). Premium multiples (6-8x EBITDA possible) but very selective.

What about McKinsey / BCG / Bain? McKinsey, BCG, and Bain rarely acquire consulting firms. Their growth model is organic talent recruiting and lateral hiring, not acquisition. When they do acquire, it’s typically for technology / data capabilities (e.g., McKinsey’s acquisition of QuantumBlack in 2015, Orpheus in 2022, BCG’s acquisition of various data and digital capabilities). Owners of strategy boutiques marketing to McKinsey / BCG / Bain are almost always disappointed — the buyer pool is the broader PE platform / strategic IT services landscape, not the elite strategy firms.

Recurring versus project revenue: the multiple-shaping dimension

Recurring revenue percentage is the second-most-important multiple driver in consulting after partner retention. Pure project-based consulting revenue (each engagement starts from zero on customer acquisition) trades at the bottom of the EBITDA range. Retainer-based consulting revenue (monthly or quarterly recurring fee for advisory access, often $5-50K/month per client) trades 0.5-1x EBITDA above pure project. Multi-year contracted consulting revenue (committed scope and pricing across 1-3+ year contracts, common in IT services and federal services) trades another 0.5-1x above retainer. Subscription / SaaS-style recurring software / data revenue (productized, no consultant intervention required) trades 1-2x above multi-year contracted services.

Why recurring revenue commands the premium. Recurring revenue has different unit economics: (1) revenue is predictable and contracted, supporting buyer leverage models; (2) customer acquisition cost amortizes over multi-year relationships; (3) gross margins typically higher (less per-engagement business development drag); (4) customer LTV is higher and retention is more diagnostic; (5) firm valuation is less sensitive to single-partner exits because relationships are institutional rather than personal.

How to grow recurring revenue pre-sale. Owners 18-36 months pre-sale should aggressively pursue recurring revenue conversion: (1) convert project-based customers to retainer relationships (offer 10-20% pricing discount for monthly retainer commitment versus project bids); (2) build managed services offerings (ongoing application support, ongoing advisory access, ongoing monitoring / measurement); (3) develop subscription-based tools or methodologies; (4) structure new engagements with multi-year framework agreements rather than single-engagement statements of work.

The recurring revenue audit. Buyers verify recurring revenue claims rigorously in QoE. Common verification: (1) actual contract review for renewal mechanics (auto-renewal vs annual rebid), commitment terms, scope flexibility; (2) historical retention rates by customer cohort; (3) revenue recognition policies (subscription accrual versus project deliverable); (4) customer concentration within recurring revenue (a firm with $5M recurring revenue from one customer has different risk than $5M from 50 customers). Aggressive recurring-revenue claims that don’t survive QoE compress the multiple.

Project-based revenue isn’t bad — just lower-multiple. Many premium consulting firms operate primarily project-based and trade at 4.5-5.5x EBITDA. The multiple is lower than retainer / subscription models but real money. Owners shouldn’t force recurring revenue conversion that doesn’t fit their actual business model — project-based firms with strong partner depth, defensible methodology, premium client tier, and consistent demand can achieve full project-based multiples without artificially structured recurring revenue that fails diligence.

Realistic deal structures and timeline in consulting transactions

Consulting firm sales run 9-15 months from decision to close, longer than product business sales. The added timeline reflects partner alignment requirements (multi-partner equity structures require all-partner sign-off on key deal terms), more rigorous QoE focus on bench utilization / realization / retention metrics, and longer integration planning periods (PE buyers want to confirm partner retention plan before signing). Sellers who plan for 6-9 month timelines are typically caught off guard. Plan for 12-15 months end-to-end including all partner alignment, regulatory considerations, and post-LOI diligence.

Months 1-3: partner alignment and positioning. Internal alignment with all equity partners on go-to-market timing, deal structure preferences (cash mix versus rollover equity, retention bonus pool, restrictive covenants tolerance). Engagement of M&A advisor (Equiteq, Capstone Strategic, Houlihan Lokey services practice are consulting-specialized); CIM development emphasizing the right buyer archetype positioning. Partner retention agreements drafted (separate from purchase agreement) covering post-deal compensation, non-compete, and earnout participation.

Months 3-6: targeted buyer outreach and IOIs. Targeted outreach to 10-25 potential buyers based on archetype fit. Initial 5-15 management calls (typically video / phone, with select in-person follow-ups). Receive 2-5 IOIs with non-binding price ranges and structural preferences (cash mix, rollover percentage, earnout structure, retention bonus pool). Negotiate to a single LOI with the best buyer.

Months 6-10: LOI, QoE, partner retention agreements, purchase agreement. Sign LOI with 60-120 day exclusivity. Buyer-side QoE focused on consulting-specific metrics (bench utilization, realization, recurring revenue verification, partner-led book transferability). Detailed partner retention agreement negotiation (the most contentious part of consulting deals — partners want to maximize current take, buyer wants to maximize rollover commitment). Purchase agreement drafted including alternative practice structure considerations if applicable. Working capital target negotiation.

Months 10-15: close, partner integration, transition. Final purchase agreement signed. Closing escrow funds. Post-close partner integration begins immediately: integration into platform compensation model, retention agreement implementation, restrictive covenant period begins. Customer transition over 60-180 days with formal partner-to-platform introductions. Quarterly business reviews against earnout metrics over earnout period. Most consulting firm sales include 6-24 months of seller post-close consulting / advisory engagement.

Common consulting-specific fall-through points. Partner alignment failure (one or more partners refuses to sign retention agreement at terms acceptable to buyer) — particularly common when partner-equity structure has weak governance. QoE surprises around bench utilization or realization metrics that materially differ from CIM positioning. Customer concentration emerging in diligence that wasn’t prominent in CIM. Recurring revenue claims that don’t survive contract-level review. Restrictive covenant scope disputes — particularly for partners intending to retire post-deal.

Industry trends and end-market growth profiles in 2026

Consulting demand in 2026 is heavily bifurcated by end-market. Per Source Global Research, ALM Intelligence, Statista consulting market reports, and Gartner consulting demand surveys through 2025, total U.S. consulting market revenue continues to grow at 4-7% annually but with significant sub-segment dispersion. AI / machine learning consulting (15-25% annual growth), cybersecurity consulting (10-15%), digital transformation (8-12%), and ESG / sustainability consulting (10-18%) all show strong above-market growth. Traditional management consulting (operations, organizational design, change management) grows at 2-5% annually. Cost-reduction / restructuring consulting tends to grow counter-cyclically.

Why end-market growth profile matters for valuation. Buyers underwrite consulting firms partly on end-market growth trajectory. A boutique with strong AI / machine learning practice growing 25% annually trades at meaningful premium to a comparable-revenue firm in mature management consulting growing 3% annually. The premium reflects buyer expectation of continued growth post-acquisition and the reduced execution risk of riding a tailwind versus pushing against headwinds. Active buyer mandates explicitly target growth end-markets: Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Hg Capital, and growth equity investors specifically pursue consulting firms in AI, cybersecurity, digital transformation, and ESG.

Healthcare consulting tailwinds. Healthcare consulting demand is supported by structural drivers: aging demographics (Baby Boomer healthcare consumption peak through 2035), value-based care transition, healthcare IT modernization (EHR, interoperability, FHIR-based systems), pharmaceutical pipeline complexity (gene therapies, precision medicine, biologics), payer-provider consolidation, and regulatory complexity (CMS, FDA, ACA implementation). Healthcare consulting firms with specialty positioning in these tailwind areas trade at premium multiples and attract specialized buyers (Linden, Riverside Healthcare, GTCR Healthcare).

Federal / government consulting tailwinds. Federal services demand is supported by sustained DoD spending (typical $700B+ annual budgets), intelligence community modernization, civilian agency IT transformation, and bipartisan infrastructure investment. Cleared workforce scarcity creates moats around firms with established TS/SCI talent pools. Active strategic consolidators (Booz Allen NYSE: BAH, Leidos NYSE: LDOS, SAIC NYSE: SAIC, CACI NYSE: CACI) and PE platforms (Veritas Capital, Arlington Capital) drive consistent acquisition demand at premium multiples.

End-markets with headwinds. Print / publishing-related consulting (in structural decline as the underlying industry contracts). Traditional retail strategy consulting (compressed by e-commerce dominance and DTC shifts). General brand strategy without measurable performance data (compressed by data-driven marketing alternatives). Pure cost-out / restructuring without transformation (commoditized). Owners of consulting firms in these end-markets should consider repositioning to growth adjacencies or accelerating sale timelines.

Tax planning for consulting firm exits and after-tax optimization

Most consulting firm sales are structured as equity deals (LLC interest sale or stock sale) rather than pure asset deals. The asset-light nature of consulting firms (few hard assets, mostly goodwill and IP) makes equity structure more practical. Sellers benefit from equity treatment because nearly all consideration receives capital gains treatment (15-20% federal plus state) rather than ordinary income. Buyers accept equity structure when they have confidence in the partner retention story and limited concern about successor liability.

Section 1202 QSBS for C-corp consulting firms. QSBS (qualifying small business stock) provides up to $10M of capital gains exclusion per shareholder for stock-sale transactions in C-corp businesses meeting specific holding-period (5+ years) and gross-asset tests ($50M aggregate gross asset cap). Many consulting firms are LLCs or S-corps and don’t qualify. Owners structured as C-corps for 5+ years with under $50M gross assets should consult a tax attorney 12+ months pre-sale to evaluate — if QSBS applies, it can save $1M+ per shareholder of federal tax. Multi-partner firms can multiply the exclusion across partners (each meets the per-shareholder $10M cap independently).

Asset deal allocation when applicable. When a consulting firm sale is structured as an asset deal, allocation matters. Allocate aggressively to goodwill / customer relationships (capital gains 15-20%) and minimize allocation to equipment / non-compete / consulting agreements (which receive ordinary income treatment up to 37%). The IRS Form 8594 allocation must be reasonable but there’s flexibility. A skilled tax attorney can shift $200K-$2M+ of after-tax proceeds in the seller’s favor through allocation negotiation on a $10M+ deal.

Rollover equity tax treatment. Rollover equity (where partners reinvest a portion of consideration into the buyer’s holding company) typically receives tax-deferred treatment under Section 351 (corporate rollover) or Section 721 (partnership rollover) when properly structured. The deferral can postpone $500K-$3M+ of tax on the rolled portion until ultimate platform exit (typically 4-7 years later). Rollover equity must be carefully structured with M&A counsel and tax counsel to qualify for deferral — missteps can convert intended deferred gain into immediate taxable income.

State tax planning. Sale state determines whether you pay state capital gains. Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Nevada, Wyoming, South Dakota: 0% state capital gains. California 13.3%, New York 10.9%, New Jersey 10.75%, Oregon 9.9%. On a $20M consulting firm sale with $15M of capital gains, the difference between Texas and California is $2M of after-tax proceeds. Strategic partner-level relocation 12-24 months pre-sale (must be real and sustainable) can save material tax for individual partners receiving large distributions. State tax planning is partner-specific and requires individual analysis.

Common consulting business valuation mistakes and how to avoid them

Mistake 1: marketing to elite strategy firms (McKinsey / BCG / Bain) that don’t acquire boutiques. Owners of strategy boutiques routinely waste 6-12 months pursuing acquisition by McKinsey, BCG, or Bain. These firms grow organically through recruiting and lateral hires — they almost never acquire boutiques. The realistic buyer pool is PE services platforms, mid-market strategic acquirers, and (for tech / data capabilities) specialty acquirers. Skip McKinsey / BCG / Bain outreach unless your firm has unique tech / data / IP capabilities that match their occasional acquisitions.

Mistake 2: weak partner-track retention story. PE platforms will not pay top-of-range multiples without explicit multi-partner retention commitments. Firms where 60%+ of equity partners signal near-term retirement should expect 0.5-1x EBITDA multiple compression and heavy earnout exposure. The 12-24 month fix: identify and document second-generation partner depth, develop partners under 45 with proven client books, present a credible 5-year leadership continuity plan.

Mistake 3: under-investing in recurring revenue conversion pre-sale. Owners 18-36 months pre-sale who don’t aggressively pursue retainer / managed services / subscription revenue conversion miss material multiple expansion opportunity. Each $1M of recurring revenue typically commands 1-2x higher multiple than the equivalent project revenue. Cumulative repositioning over 24 months can shift a firm from 4.5x EBITDA pure-project profile to 6x EBITDA hybrid profile.

Mistake 4: claiming services-SaaS hybrid premium without genuine productized revenue. The services-SaaS hybrid premium requires genuine productized recurring revenue that operates without consultant intervention. Owners who label services engagements as ‘subscriptions’ or ‘managed services’ without actual product / IP backing get re-rated harshly in QoE when the ‘subscription’ turns out to be billable services hours under SaaS-flavored contract language. If you’re going to claim hybrid premium, build genuine product / IP.

Mistake 5: ignoring bench utilization and realization in CIM positioning. Buyers will calculate utilization and realization in QoE regardless of whether the CIM addresses them. Sellers who don’t address these metrics proactively give buyers an opening to renegotiate based on ‘discovered’ operational issues. Best practice: include utilization (75%+ benchmark target), realization (90%+ benchmark), and gross margin per consultant ($400K+ benchmark) in the CIM with positive context, then document any sub-benchmark performance with credible improvement narrative.

Mistake 6: failing to align partners on deal structure pre-LOI. Consulting deals require multi-partner sign-off on rollover percentage, retention bonus pool allocation, restrictive covenants, and post-deal compensation. Partners who haven’t internally aligned on these terms before LOI often blow up the deal in the partner retention agreement negotiation phase (months 6-10 of the process). Spend 60-90 days pre-engagement aligning partners on key terms before signing the M&A advisor engagement letter.

Conclusion

Consulting business valuation in 2026 spans the widest multiple range in professional services. There is no single ‘consulting multiple’ — there’s a project strategy boutique multiple (4-5x EBITDA), a management consulting multiple (4.5-5.5x), an IT services multiple (5-6.5x with Accenture / CGI / Cognizant / Capgemini active), a healthcare consulting multiple (5-6.5x with Linden / Riverside / GTCR active), a regulatory / financial services multiple (5-6.5x), a federal / defense services multiple (5-7x with Booz Allen / Leidos / SAIC / CACI / Veritas active), and a services-SaaS hybrid multiple (6-8x+ with Bain Tech Opportunities / Hg Capital / Vista Equity active). Bench utilization at 70-80% is the universal benchmark, and the metric appears in every QoE. Partner-equity structure shapes deal mechanics in ways that differ from product businesses — rollover equity 25-40%, multi-year vesting, earnout exposure tied to client retention 90%+. Recurring versus project revenue mix drives 1-2x EBITDA of multiple variance. Services-SaaS hybrid premium adds another 1-2x when recurring software / data / IP revenue exceeds 30% of total. Owners who succeed are the ones who match their firm to the right buyer archetype (PE platform, IT services strategic, federal services consolidator, healthcare PE, hybrid SaaS investor), align partners on deal structure pre-LOI, document second-generation partner depth credibly, address bench utilization and realization proactively in the CIM, and pursue genuine recurring revenue conversion when applicable. And if you want to talk to someone who knows the PE services platforms and strategic consolidators personally instead of running an auction, we’re a buy-side partner — the buyers pay us, not you, no contract required. Run our free valuation calculator for a starting-point range or book a 30-minute call to discuss your specific firm.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much is my consulting firm worth in 2026?

Consulting firms in 2026 typically trade at 1-3x annual revenue or 4-7x normalized EBITDA, with sub-vertical and operating-metric dispersion. Pure project strategy boutiques 4-5x EBITDA, management consulting 4.5-5.5x, IT consulting / services 5-6.5x, healthcare consulting 5-6.5x, financial services / regulatory 5-6.5x, government / federal services 5-7x, services-SaaS hybrid 6-8x+, cybersecurity consulting 6-7.5x. Bench utilization 70-80%, partner retention probability, recurring revenue percentage, and end-market specialty drive the 4.5-turn dispersion. Run our free valuation calculator for a starting-point range based on your sub-vertical and EBITDA.

What is bench utilization and why does it matter to buyers?

Bench utilization is the percentage of total available consultant hours that are billable to clients (versus internal / training / business development / unstaffed time). It’s the single most diagnostic operating metric in consulting valuation. Healthy boutique utilization runs 70-80%. Below 65% indicates cost structure problem (multiple compression). Above 85% indicates capacity strain and growth ceiling. The metric appears in every QoE and is one of the first numbers a sophisticated PE buyer asks for. Buyers calculate ‘pro forma utilization-adjusted EBITDA’ if reported utilization is materially below benchmark, often re-rating the multiple 0.5-1.5x lower.

Will McKinsey, BCG, or Bain acquire my consulting firm?

Almost certainly not. McKinsey, BCG, and Bain rarely acquire consulting firms — their growth model is organic talent recruiting and lateral hiring, not acquisition. When they do acquire, it’s typically for technology / data capabilities (e.g., McKinsey’s acquisition of QuantumBlack 2015, Orpheus 2022). Owners of strategy boutiques marketing to McKinsey / BCG / Bain are almost always disappointed. The realistic buyer pool is PE services platforms (Genstar, GTCR, Audax, New Mountain), strategic IT services consolidators (Accenture, CGI, Cognizant, Capgemini), industry-specific PE (healthcare, federal, regulated industries), and Big 4 consulting arms selectively for specialty depth.

Who are the active PE consulting platform buyers in 2026?

Major active PE consulting platform buyers: Genstar Capital (multiple consulting platforms), GTCR services portfolio, Audax Group, New Mountain Capital (services portfolio), Charlesbank Capital, Berkshire Partners, AEA Investors, Court Square Capital, Trive Capital services, Sun Capital services, Cortec Group services. Tech-enabled / services-SaaS hybrid: Bain Capital Tech Opportunities (specific mandate), Hg Capital, Apollo Hybrid Value, Vista Equity Partners. Healthcare specialty: Linden Capital Partners, Riverside Healthcare Capital Group, GTCR Healthcare, NewSpring Capital Healthcare, Frazier Healthcare Partners. Federal / government: Veritas Capital, Arlington Capital Partners.

What is the services-SaaS hybrid premium?

Consulting firms that have built proprietary software, data products, or IP-based recurring revenue alongside their services practice command meaningful valuation premiums. When recurring software / data revenue exceeds 30% of total, multiple expands 1-2x EBITDA above pure-services peers. Above 50% recurring, the firm is increasingly priced on SaaS-style multiples (8-15x EBITDA possible) rather than consulting multiples. The premium reflects fundamentally different unit economics: 70-90% gross margins on software, predictable contracted revenue, customer LTV economics. Active buyers: Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Hg Capital, Vista Equity Partners, Insight Partners, Apollo Hybrid Value.

How does partner retention affect the deal?

Partner retention is the gating issue at every PE consulting deal. PE buyers underwrite the deal on the assumption that 80-90% of equity partners will remain through a 3-5 year integration period. Typical structure: 20-40% of consideration as rollover equity in the buyer’s holding company, 3-5 year vesting (cliff at year 1, quarterly or annual thereafter). Earnout exposure tied to client retention 90%+ in year 1. Failure to retain 2-3 key partners post-acquisition often triggers earnout clawbacks and can re-rate the deal materially. Firms with 60%+ of equity partners signaling near-term retirement face 0.5-1x EBITDA compression.

What recurring revenue percentage do buyers want to see?

Pure project-based consulting trades at the bottom of the EBITDA range. Retainer-based revenue (monthly fee for advisory access, $5-50K/month per client) trades 0.5-1x EBITDA premium. Multi-year contracted services (committed scope across 1-3+ year contracts) trades another 0.5-1x premium. Subscription / SaaS-style recurring software / data revenue trades 1-2x premium above multi-year services. PE buyers prefer 30%+ recurring revenue, with 50%+ supporting top-of-range pricing. Owners 18-36 months pre-sale should pursue retainer / managed services / subscription conversion to expand the multiple.

Will Accenture, CGI, Cognizant, or Capgemini acquire my IT consulting firm?

Yes, particularly if your firm has $5M+ revenue, specialty positioning (specific industry vertical, specific technology platform expertise, cleared workforce for federal work), and clean integration capability. Accenture (NYSE: ACN) is the most consistently active strategic acquirer in IT services and management consulting, with hundreds of acquisitions over the past decade. CGI (TSX: GIB.A and NYSE: GIB) is acquisitive in federal and commercial IT services. Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) and Capgemini (Euronext: CAP) are selective acquirers. IBM Consulting acquires for specific capability gaps. Indian IT services majors (Wipro NYSE: WIT, Infosys NYSE: INFY, TCS, HCL Technologies) are active in U.S. consulting acquisitions for capability and customer overlap.

What about federal / defense / government consulting?

Federal services consulting trades at 5-7x EBITDA reflecting recurring contract base, security-clearance moat, and specialty positioning. Active strategic consolidators: Booz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH), Leidos (NYSE: LDOS), SAIC (NYSE: SAIC), CACI International (NYSE: CACI), Parsons Corporation (NYSE: PSN), CGI Federal, General Dynamics IT, ManTech (Carlyle 2022), Peraton (Veritas Capital). PE platforms: Veritas Capital, Arlington Capital Partners, GTCR Federal Services, Acacia Research. Cleared workforce, GSA Schedule positioning, prime contractor status, and recurring federal contracts all drive premium pricing.

How do I structure a consulting firm sale to maximize after-tax proceeds?

Most consulting firms are LLCs or partnerships and can’t access Section 1202 QSBS (which requires C-corp structure with specific holding-period and gross-asset tests). For LLCs / partnerships, the optimization path is asset-deal allocation: maximize goodwill / customer relationships allocation (long-term capital gains, 15-20%), minimize equipment / inventory recapture (ordinary income, up to 37%). Negotiate asset allocation aggressively in the purchase agreement — a skilled tax attorney can shift $200K-$1M+ of after-tax proceeds in the seller’s favor on a $10M+ deal. State tax matters: Texas, Florida, Tennessee 0% state capital gains; California, New York 8-13%+. Strategic relocation 12-24 months pre-sale can save meaningful state tax.

How long does it take to sell a consulting firm in 2026?

From decision to close: 9-15 months typical. Months 1-3: partner alignment on go-to-market timing and deal structure preferences, M&A advisor engagement, CIM development. Months 3-6: targeted buyer outreach, IOIs, LOI. Months 6-10: QoE focused on consulting-specific metrics, partner retention agreement negotiation, purchase agreement drafting. Months 10-15: close, partner integration, customer transition, earnout period commencement. Add 12-24 months on the front for partner alignment, second-generation partner development, recurring revenue conversion, or other pre-sale repositioning.

What working capital target should I expect in a consulting deal?

Consulting firms typically carry working capital equal to 8-15% of annual revenue: 30-60 days of customer AR (longer for project-based firms, shorter for retainer / subscription), minimal inventory, 15-30 days of AP, plus accrued payroll and partner distributions. Buyers expect to receive normalized operating working capital at close. Negotiate the working capital target during the LOI based on a 12-month average to avoid surprises in the final week. Many consulting sellers underestimate their normal working capital requirement and end up giving up $200K-$1M+ in undisclosed working capital.

How is CT Acquisitions different from a sell-side broker or M&A advisor?

We’re a buy-side partner, not a sell-side broker. Sell-side brokers represent you and charge you 8-12% of the deal (often $400K-$3M+ on a consulting firm sale) plus monthly retainers, run a 9-15 month auction process, and require 12-month exclusivity. We work directly with 76+ buyers — including the major PE consulting platforms (Genstar, GTCR, Audax, New Mountain, Bain Capital Tech Opportunities, Hg Capital, Apollo Hybrid Value, Charlesbank, Berkshire, AEA, Court Square), strategic IT services consolidators (Accenture on NYSE: ACN, CGI on TSX: GIB.A, Cognizant on NASDAQ: CTSH, Capgemini on Euronext: CAP, IBM Consulting), federal services consolidators (Booz Allen on NYSE: BAH, Leidos on NYSE: LDOS, SAIC, CACI, Veritas Capital, Arlington), healthcare PE (Linden, Riverside Healthcare, GTCR Healthcare), and Big 4 consulting arms when selective — who pay us when a deal closes. You pay nothing. No retainer, no exclusivity, no contract until a buyer is at the closing table. We move faster (90-180 days from intro to close) because we already know who the right buyer is rather than running an auction to find one.

Sources & References

All claims and figures in this analysis are sourced from the publicly available references below.

1. SBA Small Business Sale Guide — SBA framework for consulting firm valuation
2. IMA Institute of Management Consultants — IMC professional standards for consulting practice valuation
3. Genstar Capital Portfolio — Genstar consulting and services portfolio
4. GTCR Portfolio — GTCR services and consulting platforms
5. Audax Private Equity — Audax services-business portfolio
6. Accenture Investor Relations — Accenture (NYSE: ACN) strategic consulting acquisitions
7. Booz Allen Hamilton Investor Relations — Booz Allen (NYSE: BAH) government consulting acquisitions
8. Leidos Investor Relations — Leidos (NYSE: LDOS) consulting and IT services M&A