Transaction Advisory & Due Diligence
Read the whole data room and trace every exception to its source.
Transaction advisory partners and managers, and the operational and technology diligence teams on each engagement.
Advisory teams rarely have time to read a whole data room closely before the deadline. Cerenovus reads every approved document, tests management's operating story against them, and logs each exception with its source. Advisers spend the diligence window on judgment, and their report can state exactly which sources were read and which were missing.
Questions this team brings
What an advisory team needs settled before the report is signed, within the time the deal allows.
- 01
Can each statement in the report be traced to a specific document?
- 02
Where does management's operating story differ from what the documents show?
- 03
Which exceptions are still open, and which source would close each one?
- 04
Which gaps in the data room must the report state as limitations?
What Cerenovus typically finds
Exceptions that recur when a full data room is read against management's account. Each one is logged with its source and tracked until it is resolved or reported as a limitation.
Figures and answers that conflict
The management presentation, the board pack, system exports, and replies in the Q&A log give different figures for the same headcount, volumes, or sites. Each version is cited, so the team can see which one the records support.
Contract terms the summary leaves out
Customer and supplier contracts contain change-of-control, exclusivity, or termination clauses the contract summary omits. Each is linked to the page it sits on, for counsel to assess.
Processes that run differently than described
The process narrative describes one approval path. Email and system records show another, with steps done by hand and approvals given after the work was done. Each difference is logged against the narrative.
Work that rests on one person
Email and system records show one person who answers every approval, runs the reconciliations, or holds the main customer contacts. Each dependency is documented with its records, so advisers can cite it in the report.
Technology that differs from the inventory
Systems listed as current that are out of vendor support, license counts that do not match invoices, and integrations that turn out to be manual exports between spreadsheets.
Requests that never got an answer
Information requests with no reply, empty folders, and periods the data room does not cover, each listed against the conclusion it affects, so advisers can chase it or state the limitation.
5 steps from question to decision
The work follows the engagement: scope first, then reading, testing, and exceptions, with advisers deciding what the report says.
- 01
Agree on scope and approved sources
- 02
Read every approved document
- 03
Test the operating story against the documents
- 04
Track each exception until it closes
- 05
Advisers conclude, write, and sign
What your team receives
Working files for the advisory team, each exception tied to its page or cell.
Exception register
Every exception with its source, the claim it affects, and its status: open, resolved, or reported as a limitation, ready for the team to review and close.
Scope and limitations schedule
Every data room folder and approved source, marked read or not provided, with the requests left unanswered and the findings each gap limits, ready for the report's limitations section.
Findings pack in your firm's template
Cited findings, workflow maps, and supporting workbooks in your firm's own template, so advisers can check each point and carry it into their report.
The advisory team sets the scope and materiality thresholds, decides which exceptions matter, puts open questions to management, and writes and signs the report. Cerenovus reads, cites, and keeps the exception register; the conclusions are the advisers' own.
Sign the report knowing what was read
Cerenovus reads approved company data through read-only access and ranks what it finds by value.