European founders urged to rethink where they list
Jeff Stewart, a serial entrepreneur and co-founding partner at Global Public Offering Fund (GPO Fund), is warning European startup leaders that one of the most consequential decisions ahead of an IPO is often mishandled: choosing the exchange based on perception rather than performance.
In comments highlighted in a recent interview feature, Stewart said founders are frequently “lured across the Atlantic” to pursue a U.S. listing, but argued the decision should be grounded in tangible business metrics—not prestige, peer pressure, or headline appeal.
Beyond prestige: the metrics that can shape outcomes
Stewart’s message centers on the idea that the “best” exchange is not universal. Instead, founders should evaluate how a venue aligns with their company’s fundamentals and post-IPO goals. Key considerations include liquidity, the quality and stability of the investor base, expected valuation dynamics, analyst coverage, and the long-term cost of being public.
While U.S. markets can offer deep capital pools and broad visibility, Stewart suggests those benefits may not automatically outweigh trade-offs such as higher ongoing compliance expectations, increased scrutiny, and the operational burden of maintaining a cross-border public profile.
A strategic decision with lasting impact
The exchange choice can influence a company’s ability to raise follow-on capital, retain employees through equity programs, and manage volatility once public. Stewart’s view: founders should treat the listing venue as part of a broader IPO strategy—one that supports sustainable trading, credible storytelling, and predictable execution rather than a one-time fundraising event.
As European tech companies continue to weigh domestic versus U.S. markets, Stewart’s advice underscores a growing theme in IPO planning: the right listing is the one that optimizes long-term outcomes, not short-term attention.
Related
