Plans by buyout and growth investors to list portfolio companies in the next 12 months signal a fragile but broadening revival—underpinned by rule changes and a shifting policy tone.

London

Eleven private-capital firms plan to float portfolio companies in London over the next 12 months, according to people directly involved in the preparations, stoking hopes that the City’s long‑awaited IPO revival is finally taking shape. The groups span buyout, growth and infrastructure funds and have begun early work with banks on prospectuses and investor education, with several aiming to open books as early as the fourth quarter if market conditions hold, the people said.

The emerging pipeline marks a sharp change in tone after months of hand‑wringing about whether the UK could compete with New York for listings. In the first half of 2025, just nine companies floated in London, raising about £182 million in aggregate—thin gruel by historical standards. Yet advisers say the combination of more stable valuations, clearer political direction and overhauled listing rules has nudged boardrooms to put London back on the table.

“The conversation has flipped from ‘why would we list in London?’ to ‘what do we need to make London work?’,” said a senior partner at a European private‑equity group preparing a UK float of a consumer‑technology asset. “Discounts to New York haven’t vanished, but the governance and disclosure regime now feels more pragmatic and the investor base more receptive than a year ago.”

People close to the preparations said the 11 prospective floats include software, digital infrastructure and energy‑transition businesses, alongside a handful of specialist consumer and healthcare companies. Most are mid‑caps likely to seek valuations between £300 million and £2 billion, though at least two larger assets could test appetite for multi‑billion‑pound offerings if market windows stay open into spring.

The renewed interest follows last year’s overhaul of the UK listing rules, which moved to a simpler, more flexible disclosure‑based regime on 29 July 2024. Bankers say the rule change—long requested by issuers and investors—has cut friction for companies with dual‑class structures and high‑growth profiles, while preserving core shareholder protections. Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ ‘Leeds reforms’ and July’s Mansion House agenda added further momentum by setting out a multi‑year plan to boost competitiveness across capital markets.

Dealmakers also point to a handful of recent local success stories—most prominently, the 2024 flotation of Raspberry Pi, whose shares surged on debut—as proof that quality assets can secure depth of demand in London. “Investors are showing up for the right growth narratives,” said a London‑based ECM head at a US bank. “We are not out of the woods, but there’s a bid for differentiated tech and infrastructure.”

Behind the scenes, private‑capital owners face intensifying pressure to return cash. Exit timelines that stretched during the rate‑hiking cycle are shortening as financing markets unfreeze and limited partners demand distributions. Sponsors who might once have preferred a sale to a strategic buyer are revisiting IPOs as a route to price discovery and partial liquidity, with sell‑downs to follow.

Still, bankers caution that execution risk remains high. Order books have become more price‑sensitive, and issuers who overreach on valuation face the prospect of painful concessions or pulled deals. Macro events—from energy prices to geopolitics—could shut the window with little notice. And while the UK’s reforms have improved London’s pitch, US exchanges continue to offer deeper pools of capital for large tech issuers.

What has shifted is the perceived balance of risks for mid‑cap assets that have a natural European footprint. Advisers say the disclosure‑based regime allows credible growth stories to come earlier in their lifecycle without cumbersome eligibility hurdles, while buy‑and‑build strategies can lean on follow‑on equity more quickly post‑listing. The UK’s long‑only investor base—flush with cash after a year of limited issuance—has indicated a willingness to anchor deals that price sensibly and provide sufficient free float.

Several firms preparing floats are also designing ‘home‑market first’ narratives, emphasising UK jobs, R&D and supply chains. “There’s a premium for companies that fit neatly into the UK’s growth priorities—digital infrastructure, energy transition, advanced manufacturing,” said one banker advising on two of the prospective IPOs. “That doesn’t guarantee a stronger multiple, but it does help with cornerstone demand and with policy optics.”

Among the potential candidates, people familiar with the plans cited at least three software companies with recurring‑revenue models, two fibre and data‑centre operators considering carve‑outs from broader infrastructure platforms, and several healthcare businesses focused on diagnostics and specialty services. One clean‑energy component maker is weighing London against Amsterdam and Frankfurt; its sponsor is expected to run a dual‑track process through year‑end.

Pricing discipline looms as the decisive variable. Syndicate desks say investors have coalesced around a playbook: insist on conservative IPO pricing that leaves upside on day one, and prefer issuers that commit early to specific timetables for staged sell‑downs. “We’ve learned that the market rewards humility,” said a UK small‑cap portfolio manager. “If sponsors treat IPOs as the start of a relationship, not the end of a deal, London will reciprocate.”

The government is pushing in parallel. Officials have signalled an appetite to keep chipping away at friction in pensions and prospectus rules, while exploring options to channel more domestic savings into growth equity. Ministers have also stepped up direct outreach to founders and sponsors who previously defaulted to New York, pitching a simpler rulebook and a clearer policy path.

That outreach is having some effect in the boardroom, people involved said, particularly for assets with operational centres in the UK. Sponsors weighing New York against London described internal debates that turn on practical questions—index inclusion, analyst coverage, and the ability to conduct follow‑on acquisitions using paper—rather than on brand alone. “Our choice is not ideological,” said a partner at a global growth fund. “It’s about where we can build currency for M&A and keep execution risk under control.”

Even if only a portion of the 11 candidates price in the coming year, a steadier cadence of medium‑sized IPOs could help rebuild confidence after a dismal run. Sustained issuance would give UK fund managers fresh product, improve liquidity in growth indices and—critically—signal to founders that London can deliver fair valuations for scaling companies.

The near‑term calendar is likely to cluster around late‑autumn and early‑spring windows, with bankers watching for calmer rates volatility and digestible macro data. Should the first wave land well, syndicate desks expect a broader set of sponsors to dust off shelved float plans for the second half of 2026. Conversely, a string of mis‑fires would risk entrenching the narrative that London remains a secondary venue for global growth stories.

For now, caution and optimism are in uneasy balance. But for the first time in several years, the City’s IPO market appears to have a credible pipeline—one built not just on hope, but on term sheets, analyst teach‑ins and sponsors prepared to take the plunge. Whether that pipeline turns into prints will be the market test of London’s reform era.