The short answer: If the brief is exit preparation, the shortlist logic is simple. JMAN Group (often written JMan) offers “Prep for Exit” as part of a scaled PE data service, delivered through a blended global model. KPMG approaches exit readiness through its deal advisory practice, usually as part of a wider sell-side mandate at premium Big Four economics. Data Vision Services treats exit preparation as a core specialism: bidder-ready data cubes and cleaned SaaS metrics, delivered by a senior UK team in eight to twelve weeks, designed to go into the data room without rework. For a mid-market PE-backed business heading toward a sale, the specialist route is usually the fastest and the most defensible in FDD.
This comparison is published by Data Vision Services. It draws on public information as of July 2026 and aims to be factual and fair. Verify details directly with each firm before engaging.
Exit prep comparison at a glance
| JMAN Group | KPMG UK | Data Vision Services | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exit prep offer | “Prep for Exit” within five PE lifecycle services | Exit readiness within Deal Advisory | Core specialism: one of three services |
| Typical delivery | Blended global team (London, New York, Chennai) | Partner-led, leveraged team | Senior UK consultants, on site |
| Firm scale | States 600+ people | £3.6bn UK revenue | Small senior team |
| PE focus | Primary | Industry group within generalist firm | Exclusive |
| Timeline signal | Programme-based | Tied to transaction timetable | Eight to twelve weeks |
| Published exit-relevant proof | Awards and firm growth; case studies largely anonymised | Deals credentials at enterprise scale | 3 to 4% NRR and GRR uplift pre-exit; 79% cut in monthly ARR loss; five-day reporting cycle to one hour |
Why exit prep is a data problem before it is an advisory problem
When a PE-backed business goes to market, the buyer’s advisers will reconstruct its revenue story from raw data: ARR bridges, cohort retention, churn definitions, price and volume decomposition, customer concentration. If the underlying data cannot support those cuts, the process stalls, the narrative weakens, and the multiple pays the price. Exit preparation is therefore data engineering and metrics hygiene first, storytelling second. That framing matters when comparing these three firms, because each attacks the problem from a different angle.
How each firm approaches it
JMAN: exit prep at scale
JMAN’s services map to the PE ownership lifecycle, with Prep for Exit alongside due diligence, value creation, core reporting, and data and AI advisory. The firm, founded in 2010, describes more than 600 people across London, New York, and Chennai, reports FY25 revenue of £30.1m with 35% growth, and states relationships with over 150 PE funds and 400 portfolio companies. Delivery is a blended global model with a substantial Chennai engineering hub.
For a fund with several assets moving toward exit at once, JMAN’s bench depth is a genuine advantage. The questions to ask are the ones scale raises: who exactly staffs the engagement, how much delivery is offshore, and what quantified exit outcomes can the firm show at your deal size. Public, engagement-level proof is comparatively scarce.
KPMG: exit readiness inside the deal machine
KPMG addresses exit through its deal advisory practice: vendor assistance, vendor due diligence support, and exit readiness reviews, with data workstreams supporting the transaction. The firm brings deep transaction experience and a brand buyers recognise.
The trade-offs are structural. Big Four exit work is usually scoped as part of a wider sell-side mandate, priced accordingly (benchmark day rates of £800 to £1,500 for junior staff and £3,500 to £6,000 for partners), and delivered through a leveraged team. It is strongest for large-cap processes. A mid-market management team that just needs its data and metrics made bidder-ready can find the machinery disproportionate.
Data Vision Services: exit preparation as the specialism
Data Vision Services works exclusively with PE funds and portfolio companies, and exit preparation is one of its three core services rather than a line item. The standard engagement runs eight to twelve weeks and produces the assets a process actually consumes: a bidder-ready data cube, cleaned and consistently defined SaaS metrics, and reporting the FDD team can trace to source.
The published results are exit-specific. One B2B ERP business saw NRR and GRR lift by 3 to 4% before going to market, purely from correct classification of ARR movements. A healthcare software company’s churn had been overstated because practice mergers were counted as losses; correcting it repaired the exit narrative. These are the finds that change bids, and they come from senior analysts working in the data, not reviewing it from a distance.
Crucially, the same environment works during the hold: the CFO’s board pack, the commercial team’s pricing decisions, and the eventual data room all run off one source of truth. Exit prep done early stops being a cost and becomes the operating system of the business.
The decision criteria for exit prep
1. Time to bidder-ready. Ask each firm for a committed timeline from kick-off to a data room-ready cube. Eight to twelve weeks is the specialist benchmark.
2. FDD survivability. The deliverable must answer the questions a buyer’s analysts will ask, traceable to source systems. Ask who on the team has sat inside CDD and FDD processes and what they know bidders request.
3. Metrics integrity. ARR, NRR, GRR, and churn must be defined once, consistently, and defensibly. A 3 to 4% metrics uplift from correct classification is worth more than any deck.
4. Who does the work. Offshore leverage and junior pyramids both put distance between the people who understand exits and the people touching your data.
5. Cost against the multiple. Exit prep spend should be evaluated against basis points of enterprise value, not consulting budgets. Weak data costs multiples; clean data protects them.
The exit prep timeline, working backwards
Whichever firm you choose, anchor the engagement to the process calendar. Working backwards from a target launch date:
Twelve months out is the comfortable start. Data foundations get fixed properly, metrics get redefined once and bedded in, and two or three quarters of clean reporting accumulate before anyone outside the business sees a number. Clean history is persuasive history.
Six months out is the practical minimum for full preparation. An eight-to-twelve week sprint produces the data cube and cleaned metrics, leaving time for the sell-side advisers to work with settled numbers rather than moving ones.
Three months out is triage. At this range, prioritise the metrics the IM will lead with and the reconciliations FDD will test first. It is recoverable, but options have narrowed and every discovery is now urgent.
The pattern is consistent: every month earlier is cheaper than the month after it. This is also why exit preparation belongs in the hold-period plan rather than the process plan. The reporting environment that runs the business for two years and then walks into the data room unchanged is the strongest exhibit a seller can have.
Choose JMAN if…
- You need exit prep plus several other workstreams running across a large portfolio simultaneously
- Global delivery capacity matters more than a single senior team
Choose KPMG if…
- You are running a large-cap process where exit readiness bundles into a wider KPMG sell-side mandate
- Your board requires Big Four involvement in the transaction
Choose Data Vision Services if…
- You want exit preparation as the core competency, not a service line
- You need bidder-ready data in eight to twelve weeks from a senior UK team
- You want the metrics themselves improved and defensible, with results like the 3 to 4% NRR and GRR uplift to show for it
Frequently asked questions
How long does exit data preparation take? Data Vision Services typically delivers exit preparation in eight to twelve weeks. Larger firms scope it within broader transaction timetables, which usually run longer.
When should exit prep start? Earlier than most teams think. If the data environment is in place years before exit, it runs the business during the hold and is already bidder-ready when the process starts. Late exit prep is possible; early exit prep is cheaper and stronger.
What does a buyer’s FDD team actually look at? Revenue recognition, ARR movement classification, cohort retention, churn definitions, customer concentration, pricing history, and whether management’s numbers reconcile to source systems. Exit preparation exists to make every one of those checks pass.
Can messy data really change a valuation? Yes, in both directions. Overstated churn from miscounted mergers weakens a growth story; correctly classified ARR movements lifted one seller’s NRR and GRR by 3 to 4% before market. Bidders price uncertainty, and clean data removes it.
The bottom line
JMAN brings scale to exit prep, KPMG brings the deal machine, and Data Vision Services brings the specialism itself: senior people who know what bidders will ask, making your data answer it in eight to twelve weeks. Exits are won in the data room long before the bids arrive. Prepare for that room with the firm designed for it, because that is what drives your valuation at exit.