Timo Strunkmann-Meister is the Chair of the International Private Equity and Venture Capital Guidelines (IPEV) Board and a Senior Director and Head of the Fund Operations team at Capital Dynamics. He also serves as Chairman of Capital Dynamics’ Global Valuation Committee. He is a founding member of Invest Europe’s Working Group on Accounting Standards, Valuation and Reporting, and a current member of the Invest Europe Professional Standards Committee.
Prior to joining Capital Dynamics, he worked for 10 years as a senior manager at KPMG in Frankfurt where he was part of the firm’s private equity practice specialising in the audit of portfolio companies. While at KPMG, Timo held various positions including sector manager for the private equity activities of KPMG’s German audit function and in KPMG’s Mergers & Acquisition Tax Service Line focusing on tax due diligence and tax structuring.
Timo holds a master’s degree in Business Economics from the University of Cologne and an MBA from Eastern Illinois University, which he attended as a Fulbright Scholar. Timo also holds the professional designation of Certified Public Accountant (CPA) in the US as well as that of a German Public Tax Advisor and has successfully passed the examination as a German Certified Public Accountant.
1. What motivated you to join the IPEV Board, and what does it mean to you to serve as Chair?
My motivation stems from a shared responsibility across our industry to foster trust and consistency in valuations. Over the past decades, private equity and venture capital have become an integral part in the asset allocation of investors therefore making robust, reliable, and transparent valuation practices more important than ever.
The IPEV Valuation Guidelines, endorsed by a multitude of private equity and venture capital associations globally, serve as a cornerstone in the valuation processes of professional and institutional investors. They have been instrumental in creating a global standard that investors, managers, and regulators can rely on. Serving as Chair is both an honour and a responsibility – to safeguard that trust and to ensure the Guidelines continue evolving in line with market developments and stakeholder needs.
2. The Exposure Draft of the 2025 IPEV Valuation Guidelines was released for consultation last month. How does the review process work, and when will the final version be available?
The review process is highly collaborative and iterative. It begins with input from IPEV’s Member Associations and their members, who identify areas requiring updates or clarification. The IPEV Board then undertakes a detailed review over several months, debating technical points, incorporating market, accounting and regulatory developments, and aligning with international best practices. Stakeholder feedback is central to this process, ensuring that revisions reflect both practical experience and theoretical rigour. The final 2025 Guidelines are then planned to be published before year-end – once this consultation loop is complete, to ensure broad alignment and industry credibility.
3. Why are the IPEV Valuation Guidelines considered best practice, and what is their greatest value to practitioners?
The IPEV Valuation Guidelines provide a globally recognised framework for determining fair value in compliance with IFRS and US GAAP. For practitioners, their greatest value lies in consistency and comparability.
Fund managers can value investments using a framework that is accepted across the industry; auditors can review those valuations against a recognised standard; and investors gain confidence that valuations are not arbitrary but transparent and methodologically sound. In essence, the Guidelines enable informed decision-making and strengthen trust between GPs and LPs by ensuring that valuations are both credible and comprehensible.
4. Adherence is voluntary – yet the IPEV Guidelines are widely adopted. What drives that adoption?
The strength of the IPEV Guidelines lies precisely in their voluntary nature and the fact that they are not imposed by regulators but developed by the market participants themselves.
Institutional investors often insist on the use of IPEV-compliant valuations in Limited Partnership Agreements, sometimes even stipulating them as the sole accepted methodology. This insistence reflects their commitment to transparency, comparability, and fair reporting. As a result, adoption has become market-driven – the Guidelines are viewed not as a compliance exercise but as a foundation for trust and credibility across the private equity and venture capital ecosystem.
5. There is ongoing debate about the reliability of private market valuations. How do the IPEV Guidelines help strengthen trust and address concerns about systemic risk?
Scepticism about valuations is understandable, particularly in periods of market volatility or when private valuations appear out of step with public markets. The IPEV Guidelines address these concerns by providing a robust, principles-based framework for determining fair value, anchored in international accounting standards.
By promoting consistency and transparency, they reduce the likelihood of arbitrary or opportunistic valuations. This not only enhances investor confidence but also reassures regulators and policymakers that the industry possesses the tools and discipline to measure and report value responsibly.
6. Looking ahead, which themes do you expect to shape future updates of the IPEV Guidelines?
The Guidelines will continue to evolve with market practice, and several themes are already emerging. Sustainability and AI have entered the discussion, though only at a high level so far – both may require more detailed guidance as their impact on valuation becomes more tangible.
Another emerging area is market liquidity: as secondaries, continuation vehicles, and retail-oriented products such as ELTAFs (UK) and ELTIFs (EU) expand, valuation frameworks should reflect these national and regional developments where they affect fair value assessments.
More broadly, this also highlights another key challenge for the future: balancing technical rigour and scope adaptations with global applicability, so that the Guidelines remain both authoritative and practical in an increasingly complex and fast-changing investment landscape.
Want to discuss?
We are always keen to hear from you.
