Intelligence reports
Deep-dive B2B writing built on rigorous research (including interviews, expert commentary and desk research.)
Some excerpts have been anonymised to maintain confidentiality
Sample 1 - Qualitative research (interviews)
Anonymised excerpt from a global M&A outlook report
With the turn of 202X, acquisition appetite across industries has softened. Interviews with 14 corporate development leads over Q4 suggest that many are taking a selective approach, shaped by governance pressures and tighter thresholds for operational justification.
Several respondents said that internal investment committees are “pushing harder on operational justification” before allowing deals to progress beyond the screening stage. One Europe-based VP noted, “We’re no longer chasing scale for its sake. Everyone wants proof of gains within the first two years.”
This sentiment was echoed across the energy, advanced materials and industrial technology sectors. A senior strategist from a US-listed engineering group pointed to the “return of integration fear,” particularly among firms that struggled to consolidate acquisitions made during the 202X-202X cycle.
According to the strategist, internal reviews have placed greater emphasis on post-merger productivity, with board-level questioning around digital compatibility and workforce alignment increasing “by, at least, three times.” Several interviewees also highlighted the quiet build-up of distressed targets. One Gulf-based investment officer described a pipeline of mid-tier tech suppliers “whose valuations haven’t caught up with reality,” though noted that most remain reluctant sellers.
In turn, buyers are preparing in advance. Two respondents mentioned exploratory due diligence being carried out before formal approach to avoid delays once a deal was penned. Notably, there was disagreement on the return of cross-border acquisitions. North American respondents were more optimistic, citing talent shortages as justification for acquiring specialised teams abroad, while an executive in Europe said that concerns about regulatory load make this a complicated prospect for the region.
Sample 2 - Desk research
Anonymised excerpt from a FDI report
Across 2023–2025, foreign-investment policies have tightened in ways that materially affect capital flows across the globe. UNCTAD’s most recent World Investment Report recorded an 11% decline in global FDI inflows in 2024. This contraction coincides with a rise in “less favourable” policy measures, particularly in screening and review mechanisms.
In tandem, the Global Competition Review’s overview of global screening regimes revealed that more jurisdictions than ever now classify infrastructure, digital networks, advanced manufacturing and other data-heavy assets as strategic. Several countries have lowered the thresholds that trigger a mandatory filing in these areas, while others have expanded the definition of “critical” sectors to include activities previously considered low-risk. Together, these shifts are proliferating the gap between headline investment incentives and the practical conditions foreign investors encounter.
In a number of emerging and advanced economies, the formal investment framework remains outwardly liberal, but secondary legislation or regulatory practice can add years in extra approval layers, broad discretionary powers and long decision timelines. This is particularly visible in sectors linked to digital infrastructure, where screening provisions have become more increased across the board since 2023 (UNCTAD).
Macroeconomic pressures add another layer of unpredictability. Countries experiencing fiscal strain continue to rely on temporary tariff measures, currency controls or royalty adjustments. This in turn affects project viability across sectors.
Against this backdrop, the 202X FDI environment puts a premium on regulatory predictability. Jurisdictions with stable, transparent procedures, even if stringent, could attract durable inflows in years to come, while markets with opaque enforcement face a growing risk premium.
Sample 3 - Data analysis
Anonymised excerpt from an infrastructure report
A closer look at the global project pipeline database reveals a mismatch between where capital is assigned and the number of projects that actually move into procurement.
The dataset, covering 220 large-scale energy, transport and digital projects across 18 markets, shows that committed financing has risen sharply in transition-related infrastructure, yet overall progression is still uneven.
Delays continue to originate more from planning frameworks than from capital shortages. Across several European jurisdictions, permitting timelines now extend to 24-36 months for grid-modernisation work. This, in turn, results in slower sequencing and greater long-term delivery risk.
Early-stage consultations are similarly congested: only 19% of assessed transport-corridor projects reached tender within their expected timeframe, compared to 34% in 2022. Another drag is technology uncertainty. Many national strategies feature hydrogen projects, given its potential in aiding decarbonisation initiatives, yet few projects have advanced to engineering stages.
This pattern suggests that these assets, and transition projects more broadly, are still being treated as long-term options rather than near-term infrastructure commitments, consistent with a reduced volume of term-sheet enquiries during Q2 202X.
In contrast, digital infrastructure continues to move through the pipeline at a faster rate. Data-centre developments, especially in secondary markets, have higher conversion rates from proposal to contract signing, supported by more predictable revenue structures and clearer land-use policies.