We screened 187 serial acquirers across 14 markets by a single metric: return on invested capital with goodwill in the denominator. The metric that most analysis removes is the one that matters most.
Fifty-nine companies earn above a 12% cost of equity. The remaining 128 — more than two out of three — earn below cost of capital. Forty-seven earn below 5%. Serial acquisition is the most popular growth model in public markets and the most reliable way to destroy value.
We sourced every ROIC, every goodwill ratio, every drawdown, every verdict from public financials and verified each against our benchmark files. Switzerland leads with a 62% Tier A rate. Canada — birthplace of the serial acquirer model — trails at 15%. Between them, 14 markets tell 14 different stories about what makes acquisition-led growth work or fail.
Why ROIC With Goodwill Matters for Serial Acquirers
Most serial acquirer analysis uses return on equity or return on tangible capital — metrics that strip goodwill from the denominator. Goodwill is the premium paid above book value in every acquisition. Remove it and a company that paid 3x book value for a target looks the same as one that built the business organically. That distortion is how bad acquirers hide.
We put goodwill back in. ROIC with goodwill in the denominator measures what shareholders actually earn on the total capital deployed — including every acquisition premium ever paid. A serial acquirer earning 20% return on tangible capital earns 8% with goodwill included. The first number flatters. The second number tells the truth.
Mauboussin & Callahan (2023) demonstrated that ROIC is the metric most correlated with value creation: their “dollar bill test” shows a correlation of r=0.58 between ROIC and market-implied value per dollar of invested capital (r=0.78 when combined with growth). ROIC is persistent — 48% of top-quintile companies remain there after three years. And the returns differential is stark: top-quintile ROIC delivers 33% compound annual total shareholder returns versus -11% for the bottom quintile.
We use a 12% threshold as our proxy for cost of equity. This is conservative — most serial acquirers carry higher equity risk than the broad market. A company earning 11% ROIC with goodwill is not borderline — it destroys value.
The key question for any serial acquirer: does the ROIC remain above cost of capital after you include the goodwill? For 128 of 187 companies in our screen, the answer is no.
Two Paths for Serial Acquirers
Two models produce the highest Tier A rates. They share nothing except the outcome.
The Swiss Path: Avoid Acquisitions
Switzerland — 62% Tier A, 17% average GW/TA. Eight of thirteen companies earn above cost of capital. Three Tier A companies — Inficon, Belimo, Bucher Industries — carry zero goodwill. Schindler at 9% GW/TA rounds out the low-goodwill group. Switzerland’s serial acquirers succeed by barely acquiring. Average operating margins of 15.5% are moderate by global standards, but the disciplined balance sheets mean those margins convert directly to high ROIC. Low invested capital plus moderate margins equals exceptional returns.
The American Path: Margins Absorb Everything
United States — 38% Tier A, 43% average GW/TA. The highest goodwill intensity of any market. American serial acquirers carry enormous acquisition premiums — and earn above cost of capital anyway. Average operating margins of 22.4% are the highest of any market screened. When margins run that wide, even a bloated balance sheet can service the goodwill. Illinois Tool Works leads at 30.8% ROIC — and achieved it by stopping acquisitions in 2012.
Why Both Work
Mauboussin & Callahan (2023) decompose sustained high ROIC into two drivers: NOPAT margin and invested capital turnover. Companies sustaining top-quintile ROIC average NOPAT margins 2.7x the universe average, while their invested capital turnover runs just 1.5x. The margin path dominates.
Both Switzerland and the US confirm this — through opposite mechanisms. Switzerland earns high turnover on a low goodwill base. America earns high margins that absorb the goodwill. Both paths clear cost of capital.
The Third Path: Sweden’s Warning
Sweden — 25% Tier A, 34% average GW/TA, 8.8% average operating margins. Twenty-four serial acquirers competing in a country of 10 million people. Swedish roll-ups combine high goodwill with thin margins — the opposite of what makes the American model work, without the discipline that makes the Swiss model work. Nine companies earn below 5% ROIC. Vitec Software is the archetype — 21% operating margins, 50% GW/TA, 6.3% ROIC. Great business, terrible capital allocation.
The Goodwill Cliff: Where Serial Acquirer Returns Break
Fifty-one companies in our screen carry goodwill at or above 40% of total assets. Only 12 earn above cost of capital — a 24% Tier A rate compared to 35% for companies below the threshold.
The pattern holds across markets. In the US, Roper Technologies (62% GW/TA, 6.2% ROIC) and Fortive (60%, 5.9%) are two of the most acquisitive companies in the S&P 500 — both earn below cost of capital. In Canada, Open Text (55%, 4.1%) and Dye & Durham (47%, -9.5%) confirm the pattern. In Sweden, nine companies above 40% GW/TA collectively average below 5% ROIC.
The survivors above 40% share one or both of two traits: elite operating margins or a structural moat that protects pricing power.
| Company | Market | GW/TA | ROIC | Why It Survives |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGI Group | CA | 60% | 12.3% | 16.4% margins, IT services scale |
| Nemetschek | DE | 53% | 14.5% | 24.1% margins, architecture software |
| Amadeus Fire | DE | 52% | 15.7% | Pre-deal business earned 49% ROIC |
| Wolters Kluwer | NL | 50% | 19.7% | 24.6% margins, regulatory moat |
| Revenio | FI | 45% | 15.7% | 24.2% margins, iCare medical moat |
| Roko | SE | 43% | 12.0% | 16.0% margins |
| Broadridge | US | 42% | 14.2% | Financial infrastructure monopoly |
| Veralto | US | 42% | 18.7% | Water quality/product ID duopoly |
| ISS | DK | 41% | 21.7% | Turnaround from deep distress |
| Rollins | US | 41% | 23.9% | Pest control recurring revenue |
| Sonova | CH | 41% | 12.5% | Hearing aid duopoly |
| Enghouse Systems | CA | 40% | 12.1% | 18.0% margins, small VMS targets |
Twelve survivors out of 51. Without elite margins or monopoly positioning, the goodwill load crushes returns. The 40% threshold is not magic — failure rates increase gradually starting around 30% GW/TA. But above 40%, the evidence from 14 markets is clear: three out of four serial acquirers destroy value.
14 Markets, 14 Serial Acquirer Stories
Switzerland — The Discipline Standard
Thirteen companies. Eight earn above cost of capital (62%) — the highest Tier A rate of any market. Four carry zero goodwill. Average GW/TA of 17% keeps balance sheets lean. Inficon leads at 29.8% ROIC. The Swiss model proves that avoiding acquisitions — or pricing them conservatively — is the surest path to sustained returns. Only one company earns in Tier D. Full analysis →
Japan — The 50% Illusion
Sixteen companies. Eight earn above cost of capital (50%). But four — Nihon M&A Center, Disco, Keyence, MonotaRO — carry zero goodwill and do not acquire. Adjusted for genuine acquirers, the Tier A rate drops to 36%. JGAAP goodwill amortization artificially deflates the 11.5% average GW/TA. M3 earns 15.8% ROIC but trades at -87% from peak — excellent capital allocation, catastrophic starting valuation. Full analysis →
Finland — Industrials, Not Acquirers
Ten companies. Four earn above cost of capital (40%). All four — Kone, Vaisala, Wartsila, Revenio — are established industrials earning through operational moats. Finland’s sole explicit serial acquirer, Boreo, earned 1.3% ROIC with a -91.8% drawdown after importing the Swedish rollup model. Full analysis →
United States — Margin Fortress
Sixteen companies. Six earn above cost of capital (38%). Zero earn below 5% — the only market with no Tier D. Average GW/TA of 43% is the highest of any market, but 22.4% average operating margins compensate. Illinois Tool Works leads at 30.8% ROIC — and achieved it by stopping acquisitions in 2012. Full analysis →
Spain — The Capital Efficiency Outlier
Thirteen companies. Five earn above cost of capital (38%). Logista leads at 32.9% ROIC on 2.3% operating margins — the thinnest of any Tier A company across all 14 markets. Logista proves ROIC is about capital efficiency, not margins: tobacco and pharma distribution generates enormous revenue relative to invested capital. Five companies earn below 5%. Full analysis →
Netherlands — The Quiet Achiever
Eleven companies. Four earn above cost of capital (36%). Only one Tier D — alongside Switzerland (one) and the US (zero), one of the safest markets for serial acquirer capital. Wolters Kluwer at 19.7% ROIC proves information services can absorb 50% GW/TA when operating margins reach 24.6%. Average GW/TA of 21% keeps balance sheets lean. Full analysis →
Germany — Binary Outcomes
Ten companies. Three earn above cost of capital (30%), all with caveats. Zero Tier B. Six earn below 5% — the worst Tier D rate (60%) of any market. Amadeus Fire lost 33 percentage points of ROIC from a single acquisition but still clears cost of capital because the pre-deal business earned 49%. No other market is this polarized. Full analysis →
Australia — Cross-Border Carnage
Fourteen companies. Four earn above cost of capital (29%). Zero Tier B — no borderline cases. Technology One leads at 29.6% ROIC with 10% GW/TA. Every major one-deal destroyer — CSL, Reece, Worley — failed on a cross-border acquisition. Australian companies overpay when they go overseas. Full analysis →
Sweden — Crowded and Failing
Twenty-four companies — the largest universe in our screen. Six earn above cost of capital (25%). Nine earn below 5%. OEM International leads at 26.4% ROIC with just 8% GW/TA. Storskogen (-0.2% ROIC) and Coor Service Management (3.1%) demonstrate the overcrowded Swedish model at its worst. Full analysis →
Denmark — Turnarounds, Not Compounders
Thirteen companies. Three earn above cost of capital (23%). All three are turnarounds with volatile histories. ISS leads at 21.7% ROIC after restructuring; NKT at 19.7% recovered from near-collapse. GN Store Nord’s SteelSeries deal sent the stock down 85.8%. Full analysis →
United Kingdom — Discipline Without Results
Eleven companies. Two earn above cost of capital (18%). Zero companies breach 40% GW/TA — among the most disciplined balance sheets of any market. Yet four acquirers collapsed from 15%+ ROIC to below 10%. Goodwill discipline is necessary but not sufficient. Grafton Group leads at 14.9%. Full analysis →
France — Great Operations, Poor Allocation
Twelve companies. Two earn above cost of capital (17%). Three sit at the borderline — the most Tier B companies of any market. Edenred leads at 13.5% with 32.5% operating margins. Worldline’s Ingenico acquisition produced a -83.9% drawdown. French companies operate well but allocate capital poorly. Full analysis →
Italy — The Mediocrity Trap
Eleven companies. Two earn above cost of capital (18%). Six cluster in Tier C (55%) — the highest mediocrity rate of any market. Recordati leads at 22.6% ROIC. Average GW/TA of 21% is disciplined, but disciplined pricing per deal does not guarantee disciplined returns. Italian serial acquirers avoid catastrophe but cannot generate excellence. Full analysis →
Canada — Where the Model Was Born
Thirteen companies. Two earn above cost of capital (15%) — the lowest Tier A rate of any market. Seven earn below 5% (54% Tier D rate). Constellation Software — the gold standard for serial acquirers globally — has declined to 10.8% ROIC and no longer earns above cost of capital on our methodology. Full analysis →
The 59 Serial Acquirers That Create Value
Fifty-nine companies across 14 markets earn above 12% ROIC with goodwill in the denominator. They represent 32% of the universe. The full list, ranked by ROIC:
| # | Company | Market | ROIC | GW/TA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nihon M&A Center | JP | 86.6% | 0% |
| 2 | Disco Corp | JP | 59.9% | 0% |
| 3 | Recruit | JP | 41.2% | 18% |
| 4 | MonotaRO | JP | 35.1% | 0% |
| 5 | Logista | ES | 32.9% | 12% |
| 6 | Illinois Tool Works | US | 30.8% | 32% |
| 7 | Hoya | JP | 30.8% | 4% |
| 8 | Inficon | CH | 29.8% | 0% |
| 9 | Technology One | AU | 29.6% | 10% |
| 10 | Keyence | JP | 28.8% | 0% |
| 11 | Dover | US | 28.7% | 39% |
| 12 | Kone | FI | 27.7% | 17% |
| 13 | Belimo | CH | 26.4% | 0% |
| 14 | OEM International | SE | 26.4% | 8% |
| 15 | Rollins | US | 23.9% | 41% |
| 16 | Geberit | CH | 22.6% | 30% |
| 17 | Recordati | IT | 22.6% | 16% |
| 18 | ISS | DK | 21.7% | 41% |
| 19 | Raksul | JP | 21.7% | 15% |
| 20 | NKT | DK | 19.7% | 8% |
| 21 | Wolters Kluwer | NL | 19.7% | 50% |
| 22 | Veralto | US | 18.7% | 42% |
| 23 | Nedap | NL | 18.6% | 0% |
| 24 | Vidrala | ES | 17.4% | 11% |
| 25 | Schindler | CH | 17.0% | 9% |
| 26 | Straumann | CH | 16.7% | 16% |
| 27 | Vaisala | FI | 16.7% | 17% |
| 28 | Wartsila | FI | 15.9% | 17% |
| 29 | M3 | JP | 15.8% | 19% |
| 30 | Amadeus Fire | DE | 15.7% | 52% |
| 31 | Revenio | FI | 15.7% | 45% |
| 32 | Hydratec | NL | 15.5% | 9% |
| 33 | Wesfarmers | AU | 15.4% | 13% |
| 34 | Reply | IT | 15.3% | 26% |
| 35 | Fugro | NL | 15.2% | 11% |
| 36 | Watsco | US | 15.1% | 10% |
| 37 | AddTech | SE | 14.9% | 30% |
| 38 | Grafton Group | UK | 14.9% | 20% |
| 39 | GEA Group | DE | 14.7% | 25% |
| 40 | Momentum Group | SE | 14.6% | 28% |
| 41 | Nemetschek | DE | 14.5% | 53% |
| 42 | Lagercrantz | SE | 14.3% | 32% |
| 43 | Broadridge | US | 14.2% | 42% |
| 44 | Viscofan | ES | 13.6% | 1% |
| 45 | Edenred | FR | 13.5% | 25% |
| 46 | MT Hojgaard | DK | 13.4% | 5% |
| 47 | Breville Group | AU | 13.3% | 24% |
| 48 | ARB Corp | AU | 13.1% | 5% |
| 49 | Temenos | CH | 12.9% | 39% |
| 50 | Puig | ES | 12.8% | 25% |
| 51 | Indra | ES | 12.8% | 21% |
| 52 | Diploma | UK | 12.8% | 31% |
| 53 | Sonova | CH | 12.5% | 41% |
| 54 | Lifco | SE | 12.4% | 39% |
| 55 | CGI Group | CA | 12.3% | 60% |
| 56 | Bureau Veritas | FR | 12.2% | 32% |
| 57 | Bucher Industries | CH | 12.2% | 0% |
| 58 | Enghouse Systems | CA | 12.1% | 40% |
| 59 | Roko | SE | 12.0% | 43% |
Four observations from the global ranking:
Japan dominates the top 10 — but not through acquisitions. Six of the top 10 ROIC names are Japanese. Four of those six carry zero goodwill and are organic growers included because they are frequently grouped with serial acquirers. The highest ROIC for a genuine acquirer (GW/TA above 3%) is Recruit at 41.2%.
The bottom of Tier A is crowded and fragile. Twelve companies earn between 12.0% and 13.0% ROIC. A single bad acquisition or cyclical downturn drops them below the threshold. Constellation Software was in this range before declining to 10.8%.
Only 12 of 59 carry GW/TA above 40%. The remaining 47 earn above cost of capital with moderate or low goodwill. High ROIC and high goodwill coexist only when operating margins exceed 17% or when structural moats protect pricing.
Switzerland and Sweden contribute eight names each — through opposite models. All eight Swiss Tier A companies average 17% GW/TA. The six Swedish Tier A companies average 30% GW/TA. Switzerland avoids goodwill. Sweden’s survivors earn through it despite the market’s high failure rate.
The Constellation Software Benchmark for Serial Acquirers
Every serial acquirer pitch references Constellation Software. The Toronto-listed compounder built the serial acquisition playbook: buy small vertical market software companies, never sell, compound returns. CSU is the gold standard — and the gold standard no longer clears cost of capital.
CSU earns 10.8% ROIC with goodwill in the denominator. That places it in Tier B — borderline. The company’s ROIC has declined from the high teens as deal sizes increased and competition for VMS targets intensified. Lumine Group, spun off from CSU in 2023, has no public ROIC data yet.
If Constellation Software — with its disciplined processes, deep experience, and vertically integrated operating model — can no longer earn above 12% ROIC, what are the odds that imitators can? The answer from our data: slim. Canada’s 15% Tier A rate is the lowest of any market. Canada built the serial acquirer that every investor benchmarks against — and produces the worst results.
Most “next CSU” pitches share a common error: they compare the target to CSU’s historical returns rather than its current trajectory. The relevant question is not “Can this company become the next Constellation Software?” but “Can it sustain returns that CSU itself can no longer sustain?”
Only two Canadian serial acquirers earn above cost of capital. CGI Group at 12.3% ROIC with 60% GW/TA and 16.4% operating margins. Enghouse Systems at 12.1% — barely above the line. Both are borderline survivors, not compounders.
How We Built This Serial Acquirer Scorecard
We screened 187 serial acquirers across 14 markets by return on invested capital with goodwill in the denominator. Data covers the latest fiscal year available as of February 2026.
- ROIC: Net operating profit after tax / invested capital (equity + debt - cash), with goodwill included. Source: QuickFS (13 markets), Stock Analysis (Japan).
- GW/TA: Goodwill / total assets (most recent quarter).
- (GW+Int)/TA: Combined goodwill and identifiable intangible assets / total assets. Available for 13 markets (not Japan).
- Operating margin: Operating income / revenue.
- Drawdown: Maximum decline from 5-year peak. Source: Yahoo Finance.
- Tier classification: A (>12%), B (10-12%), C (5-10%), D (<5%).
We define a serial acquirer as a listed company that has completed three or more acquisitions in the past decade and where M&A is a stated or demonstrated growth strategy. Some markets include companies with zero goodwill that analysts and investors frequently group with serial acquirers; we note these in each market analysis.
Mauboussin & Callahan (2023) provide the research basis for using ROIC as the primary metric: their analysis of the Russell 3000 demonstrates r=0.58 correlation between ROIC and value creation, with 48% persistence in the top quintile over three years. We use 12% as our cost of equity threshold — conservative for the risk profile of most serial acquirers.
Japan operates under a dual reporting regime: JGAAP amortizes goodwill (max 20 years); IFRS uses impairment-only accounting. GW/TA does not compare directly across Japanese companies or between Japan and other markets.