For the vast majority of Israeli and Israel-related companies considering an IPO, London should continue to be the venue of choice. London has greater access to capital and liquidity than the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange and lower barriers to entry than US markets, as well as greater opportunities for index inclusion. The common narrative in the media that valuations in US capital markets are superior does not fully reflect the reality. While some of the largest and most successful companies have achieved attractive valuations in the US[1], a US IPO is realistic only for the very largest Israeli private companies. Furthermore, for the vast majority that have chosen this route in recent years, post-IPO share price performance has been extremely disappointing. Whilst the geopolitical situation for Israeli and Israel-related companies is currently challenging, we expect that, once the situation stabilises, there will be increasing interest from those companies about listing in London, particularly as the UK’s forthcoming “once in a generation” capital markets regulatory reforms take effect.

While the British media is currently focussed on a small number of large-cap companies, formerly listed in London, choosing to move their listings to New York, there is another story which is not so well publicised. Many small and mid-cap US companies have been attracted to UK markets and have carried out successful IPOs in London. Since 2017, 91 companies from the Americas have joined the LSE, compared to only 23 companies going the other way. US businesses have particularly been drawn to AIM, LSE’s growth market, which is a well-established and highly-respected market for growth companies.

BCLP has analysed all of the completed and ongoing public takeover transactions in the UK real estate sector since the beginning of 2019.[1]Deal activity during that period has been consistently strong, with 15 completed transactions and three currently ongoing.[2] Our analysis has identified two principal categories into which these transactions fall.

ClientEarth has launched a judicial review against the FCA for approving a prospectus which ClientEarth claims contained inadequate climate-related disclosures. This is part of an increased use by environmental pressure groups of judicial channels to challenge companies - and now regulators - and to promote the transition to Net Zero. The courts of England and Wales have shown that they are willing to hear cases of this type and this trend is likely to continue.