ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples
REMOTE · EXITVALUE.AI
Median EV/EBITDA and EV/Revenue multiples by industry and deal size from real M&A transactions.
Available components
Last scanned (21 hours ago)
Scores higher than 58% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 4 Nov 2026.
Category Finance and Payments
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security74
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability67
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1131 tokens (~282/item across 4 items; 4 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management20
- Stability observed for 6 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 3 to 7. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 1 days of observed history at the previous scan, 2 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 Oct 26 −1
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “get_valuation_multiples” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “list_industries” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: pass → fail ▼ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- Server version: 1.0.0 → 1.1.0 functional
- New tool “compare_industries” functional
- New tool “get_multiples_trend” functional
- “get_valuation_multiples” reworded the description of “industry” cosmetic
- “get_valuation_multiples” reworded the description of “size_bracket” cosmetic
- 29 Oct 26 71
First indexed and scored.
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 4 Nov 2026 · Probed https://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=exitvalue.ai | CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 2 Oct 2026 | 31 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 63dd9d586cc28852a128fd7c06e6c833871 |
| SANs: *.exitvalue.ai, exitvalue.ai | ||||||
| CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 4df3b15dd6c0784c507cd37b58e6f115 |
| CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 872165fc34b6e5fba8add5b3705fb53a |
| CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 6c8f1dc727c7117f7baf853ac980f9cd |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of exitvalue.ai. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| ai. | present | 1814, 3799 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| exitvalue.ai. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp |
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
compare_industries Compare industries' M&A multiples ~325
Read-only. Puts 2-6 industries side by side for one metric: median multiple, middle 50% (25th-75th percentile) and deal count n per industry, using the same data, name matching and thresholds as get_valuation_multiples. Without size_bracket it compares all-deal-size medians (n>=5); with size_bracket it compares that enterprise-value bracket (n>=10). Rows below the threshold are marked INSUFFICIENT DATA rather than estimated; unmatched names and industry-group ids are flagged per row. Use it for 'which sells for more, X or Y?' questions; use get_valuation_multiples for the full breakdown of one industry.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| industries | array | yes | 2 to 6 sub-vertical ids or plain-English industry names to compare, e.g. ['dental-practice', 'veterinary-practice', 'physical therapy']. |
| metric | string | – | Multiple to compare: ev_ebitda (enterprise value / EBITDA, default) or ev_revenue (enterprise value / revenue). |
| size_bracket | string | – | Optional enterprise-value (deal size) bracket: under_5m_ev = under $5M, 5m_25m_ev = $5M-$25M, 25m_100m_ev = $25M-$100M, 100m_500m_ev = $100M-$500M, over_500m_ev = $500M and up. Omit to compare all de… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_multiples_trend Get M&A multiples trend by year ~231
Read-only. Year-by-year history for ONE sub-vertical: for each deal year 2018-2026, the median EV/EBITDA and/or EV/Revenue multiple with middle 50% (25th-75th percentile), deal count n and median deal value. Only years with at least 10 disclosed deals for a metric are shown; missing years are listed as gaps and never interpolated, so many sub-verticals have few or no years. Use it for 'are multiples rising or falling for X?' questions; use get_valuation_multiples for pooled current figures by deal size.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| industry | string | yes | Sub-vertical id from list_industries (e.g. 'hvac', 'dental-practice'), or a plain-English name ('HVAC', 'dentist', 'plumber', 'MSP'); plain names are mapped to the closest tracked category and the an… |
| metric | string | – | Optional: ev_ebitda or ev_revenue. Omit to show both where published. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_valuation_multiples Get M&A valuation multiples ~351
Read-only. Answers 'what multiple does a business in industry X sell for?' for ONE industry. Returns median EV/EBITDA and EV/Revenue multiples with the middle 50% (25th-75th percentile) and deal count n, broken down by enterprise-value bracket (disclosed deals 2018-2026, n>=10 per cell) plus an all-deal-sizes figure (n>=5). Figures below those thresholds are withheld, never estimated. Passing an industry group id (e.g. 'home-services') returns one all-sizes median per sub-vertical. Use compare_industries to put several industries side by side and get_multiples_trend for year-by-year history. Population medians only: it does not value a specific business.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| industry | string | yes | Sub-vertical id from list_industries (e.g. 'hvac', 'dental-practice'), or a plain-English name ('HVAC', 'dentist', 'plumber', 'MSP'); plain names are mapped to the closest tracked category and the an… |
| size_bracket | string | – | Optional enterprise-value (deal size) bracket: under_5m_ev = under $5M, 5m_25m_ev = $5M-$25M, 25m_100m_ev = $25M-$100M, 100m_500m_ev = $100M-$500M, over_500m_ev = $500M and up. Omit to get every publ… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_industries List industries ~76
Read-only. Lists every industry and sub-vertical ExitValue.ai tracks, with their ids and display names, and flags which sub-verticals have published multiples (has_published_multiples). Takes no input. Use it first when you are unsure of an id; the other tools accept these ids or plain-English names.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples MCP server?
ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples is a hosted endpoint at https://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · exitvalue.ai
claude mcp add --transport http ai-exitvalue-ma-multiples 'https://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp'
What is the ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples MCP server?
ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as ai.exitvalue/ma-multiples. Median EV/EBITDA and EV/Revenue multiples by industry and deal size from real M&A transactions. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://exitvalue.ai/api/mcp).
Is the ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples MCP server safe to use?
ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples scores 72 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples MCP server expose?
ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples exposes 4 tools: list_industries, get_valuation_multiples, compare_industries, get_multiples_trend. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 983 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples MCP server still maintained?
ExitValue.ai M&A Multiples is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.