Sector study · Transfer of SMEs and mid-sized companies · France. Powered by the GTM NEXUS 360® model.
Bpifrance Le Lab, together with CCI France, CMA France and the C.R.A, surveyed more than 5,000 business leaders (study of 27 November 2025): 40% intend to hand over their company within five years, i.e. around 370,000 companies with 1 to 4,999 employees and close to three million jobs. The breakdown is rarely quoted: 310,000 micro-enterprises, 58,000 SMEs and 1,200 mid-sized companies (ETIs) — the structured segment therefore amounts to some 59,200 companies. Against that, the country recorded only around 37,200 transfers in 2024, all sizes combined (DGE, Théma no. 30). The reflex is to see a tax problem and to expect the solution from the Ministry of Finance. That is an error of analysis: the discount is decided inside the company, in three intangible assets — its commercial deployment, its brand, its reputation. Three walls are closing in by 2030, and they share the same root.
Key figures
Illustrative, non-nominative figures from institutional sources. The study's method in numbers: 150 randomly drawn companies · 19 components · 3 pillars (0.35 / 0.35 / 0.30) · 95 descriptors · blind scoring. Composite scores by segment belong to the measurement phase.
What the study measures
Our study does not comment on business transfers from the outside: it measures them from the inside. Its thesis — the transferability of an SME or mid-sized company is first and foremost a matter of go-to-market, brand and reputation maturity. A company whose value rests on these three assets, rather than on the person of its leader, transfers better, at a higher price, to a wider pool of buyers.
The scope
France, single country: close to 171,000 market-sector SMEs and mid-sized companies (INSEE, Ésane 2023). No foreign benchmark — the comparison is internal, between segments of the same fabric.
The measurement
Stratified random sampling, blind scoring on 19 components and 3 pillars, protocol pre-registered before any data collection. A measurement, not an opinion.
The reading
Four strata. At the centre, the "median trough" — family-owned SMEs and mid-sized companies that prepare late — concentrates the discount risk. That is where the three walls hit hardest.
Wall 1. Attractiveness — a brand and reputation deficit
Sellers prepare late: in 2021, 41% said they had no knowledge of the steps and duration of a business transfer (CCI France). The average sale price has risen by 19% since 2012, to around €303,000 (DGE), but that average hides a brutal dispersion. In our grid, this wall is a brand and reputation deficit: a name built on the founder, and a trust that does not transfer, cannot be sold at a premium to a buyer who never knew that founder.
Wall 2. The cost of leverage — a go-to-market legibility deficit
In June 2026, the ECB raised its rates for the first time since 2023; credit for SMEs now stands at around 3.5% (Banque de France), against near-zero levels before 2022. Yet the Banque de France observes robust margins among SMEs and mid-sized companies: the problem is not profitability, it is the cost of leverage. A buyout is financed 50-70% by debt, three to five times EBITDA; when the cost of money doubles, the financeable price contracts. Our study reads this as a legibility deficit — a commercial engine that has neither industrialised nor made its performance predictable. A buyer finances what they can read: reliable reporting, a ready data room, predictable cash.
Wall 3. Numbers — a visibility deficit
A solid but median SME drowns in a pool of 370,000 companies. Visibility is not a matter of luck: it is a brand and a reputation that make a company findable and credible even before it is put up for sale. A counter-intuitive fact documented by the study: transferred companies show a three-year survival rate of 85.5%, higher than that of newly created companies (81.4%, DGE). Taking over is a safer bet than starting up — provided the target is made visible and desirable.
A sector reading of the study
The three walls do not hit every sector the same way. The study discriminates between them on two axes: capital intensity (the financing wall) and dependence on human capital (the attractiveness and transferability walls). Volumes: INSEE, Ésane 2023; transfer dynamics: DGE, 2024.
| Sector | SMEs (10-249) | Mid-sized (250-4,999) | Transfer dynamics | Dominant wall (study reading) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing | 25,447 | 2,077 | High density of family-owned mid-sized companies | Financing — capital-intensive; strategic asset (French Fab) |
| Construction | 25,948 | 427 | Fragmented, local fabric | Transferability — thin margins, dependence on the owner-manager |
| Retail and trade | 42,768 | 2,058 | 28% of 2024 transfers | Attractiveness — e-commerce disruption |
| Transport and logistics | 8,805 | 387 | Consolidation under way | Financing — heavy capital, thin margins |
| Hotels, cafés and restaurants | subset of Services | 29% of 2024 transfers | Attractiveness — value tied to the operator | |
| Business services | largest share of the 61,024 service SMEs | Favourite target of investment funds | Transferability — "the value walks out the door every evening" | |
| Health and personal services | subset of Services | Among the most exposed (demographics) | Numbers — high volume, low legibility |
What the study teaches
One — the three walls share a common root: value tied to the leader.
Two — the discount is not a tax matter; it is a matter of go-to-market, brand and reputation, and it can be measured.
Three — time is the scarce asset: transferability is built over three to five years, not in a six-month mandate.
Four — the bet is a good one: a transferred company lasts longer than a newly created one. But it has to be prepared.
Recommendations
Two stages: first a leader's decision; public amplification comes afterwards, and only afterwards.
Build transferability three to five years ahead
Decouple value from the person of the leader: hand over the address book, formalise processes, make the company run without its founder. The foundation of the three pillars.
Make performance legible (go-to-market pillar)
Reliable reporting, a ready data room, predictable cash — to defend the multiple against the cost of leverage.
Make the brand and the customer relationship autonomous (brand + reputation pillars)
A promise that does not rest on the leader's name, framework contracts, a trust that survives the departure.
Become visible early (brand + reputation pillars)
An industry reputation that makes the company findable well before it goes on the market.
Connect all three
Go-to-market, brand and reputation do not add up: they multiply through consistency, at every touchpoint. It is this consistency — not the balance sheet alone — that justifies the price on the day of the sale.
Then, and only then, comes the second stage: amplification through public schemes — the Bpifrance Transmission guarantee (up to 70% of the loan), the Dutreil pact, the CCI and CRA networks. Useful; they do not replace the groundwork.
It is a leader's decision, not the Finance Ministry's.
Where the study stands
The framework, the method and the factual base are set and pre-registered. The study is entering its measurement phase: random sampling of companies and blind scoring on the 19 components. Composite scores by segment — including the position of the median trough — will be published at the end of this phase. This op-ed sets out the framework and the reading; it does not pre-empt the measurement.
Olivier Forlini is the founder of PME Stratégies Business, a go-to-market, brand and reputation consultancy for SMEs and mid-sized companies (GTM NEXUS 360® model). Former business leader at Gartner France and former Managing Director of RepTrak France.
Sources
Bpifrance Le Lab, with CCI France, CMA France and the C.R.A, Transmission-Reprise study (27 November 2025, more than 5,000 responses) · Direction générale des entreprises, Théma no. 30 (2025) · CCI France (2021) · INSEE, Ésane 2023 (Insee Focus no. 372) · Banque de France / ECB (2026) · Sector study, Model 2 — pre-registered protocol. This article sets out the study's framework and reading; it publishes no composite score before measurement.