NEURACAP
Sector ReportSep 28, 2026 · 21 pages · Free to read

Advertising Agencies and Services Sector Outlook — September 2026

NeuraCap's Advertising Agencies and Services sector outlook: who plays, how the market prices them, what has transacted, and what it means for owners, operators and acquirers.

Download PDFDownload PowerPoint

Key figures

5.9x
Sector median EV/EBITDA
12.4x
Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 5.4x at the discount end
10
Transactions with disclosed terms

Read the report

C:\Users\dawoo\OneDrive\Desktop\Deployments\neuracap_sector_reports_fable\Code\NeuraCap_Sector_Report_Pipeline_v2.1.0\ncsr\deck_kit\assets\logo_light_full.png

COMMUNICATION SERVICES › MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT › ADVERTISING AGENCIES AND SERVICES

Advertising Agencies: The Premium Sits with More Durable Models

This report shows how growth, margin quality and business mix align with forward valuation across the peer set.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

1

1 / 21

Executive summary

Advertising Agencies and Services divide between full-service agencies and adjacent models with different operating economics. Higher forward pricing sits with businesses that pair growth and margin quality, while the discount end reflects a mix of growth, profitability and business-model issues.

Key findings

  • The Premium End Pairs Growth With Margin Quality
  • Faster Growth Sits With Higher Forward Pricing
  • Full-Service Agencies Set the Sector Frame
  • Buyer Attention Appears Across Scale and Capability Depth

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

  1. 01

    COMMUNICATION SERVICES › MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT › ADVERTISING AGENCIES AND SERVICES

    COMMUNICATION SERVICES › MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT › ADVERTISING AGENCIES AND SERVICES.

    Cover — Advertising Agencies and Services sector insights, September 2026. Prepared by NeuraCap AI; market data as of 2026-09-28; primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E). The framing line carries the deck's finding with the figures stripped. 1

    Everything on this page

    COMMUNICATION SERVICES › MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT › ADVERTISING AGENCIES AND SERVICES Advertising Agencies: The Premium Sits with More Durable Models This report shows how growth, margin quality and business mix align with forward valuation across the peer set. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

  2. 02
    CONTENTS

    What This Report Covers

    What This Report Covers.

    Contents — the report runs 5 numbered sections plus the appendix: the bottom line, the landscape, valuation & situations, precedent transactions, strategic implications. The Bottom Line comes first by design: a reader who stops after section 01 still leaves with the whole story. 2

    Everything on this page

    CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line The Sector Splits Between Scaled Agencies and Adjacent Models 02 The Landscape Full-Service Agencies Define the Peer Set 03 Valuation & Situations The Premium End Pairs Growth with Margin Quality 04 Precedent Transactions Precedent Transactions Reward Distinct Capabilities and Scale 05 Strategic Implications Durable Growth and Margin Quality Strengthen Market Standing 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

  3. 03
    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

    Advertising Agencies and Services Split Between Full-Service Agencies and Adjacent Models

    Advertising Agencies and Services Split Between Full-Service Agencies and Adjacent Models.

    Advertising Agencies and Services Split Between Full-Service Agencies and Adjacent Models The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (7 of 10 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. 3

    Everything on this page

    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Advertising Agencies and Services Split Between Full-Service Agencies and Adjacent Models The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (7 of 10 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 The Premium End Pairs Growth with Margin Quality The premium end stands at 12.4x versus 5.4x at the discount end. With a forward EV / EBITDA lens, the gap remains after forecast earnings are already reflected, pointing to perceived durability. 2 Faster Growth Sits with Higher Forward Pricing On the 4 names at or above the growth split, forward EV / EBITDA is 9.3x; on the 3 names below it, it is 5.8x. Faster growth is associated with higher pricing in this small set. 3 Full-Service Agencies Set the Sector Frame Full-service advertising agencies represent 70% of the peer set, while adjacent models represent 30%. The mix keeps client relationships, retainer scope and delivery economics central to the valuation discussion. 4 Buyer Attention Appears Across Scale and Capability Depth The Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) and The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. transaction carried a $16.1B value at 9.0x EV / EBITDA and 1.5x EV / Revenue. The combination suggests buyers can support substantial commitments where client access and capability breadth come together. 5.9x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 7 rated of 10 companies 12.4x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 5.4x at the discount end top quartile (n=2) against bottom quartile (n=2) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 10 Transactions with disclosed terms 53 recorded in this tier · 1 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

  4. 04
    SECTION 02

    02

    02.

    Section 02 of 06 — Full-Service Agencies Define the Peer Set. Adjacent models broaden the landscape but bring different revenue and operating profiles. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 4

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Full-Service Agencies Define the Peer Set Adjacent models broaden the landscape but bring different revenue and operating profiles. 02 of 06 Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

  5. 05
    02 · MARKET MAP

    Full-Service Agencies Hold the Center of the Market

    Full-Service Agencies Hold the Center of the Market.

    Full-Service Agencies Hold the Center of the Market 10 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. 5

    Everything on this page

    02 · MARKET MAP Full-Service Agencies Hold the Center of the Market 10 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 FULL-SERVICE ADVERTISING AGENCIES 7 cos median 6.5x Omnicom Group (OMC) WPP Clear Channel (CCO) Stagwell (STGW) Magnite (MGNI) Boston Omaha (BOC) IZEA Worldwide (IZEA) These businesses combine client relationships with creative, media and activation capabilities across broader scopes. ADJACENT MODELS 3 cos median 5.4x Wingstop (WING) Quad/Graphics (QUAD) OptimizeRx (OPRX) These businesses provide exposure to restaurant operations, outsourced execution and healthcare professional engagement.

  6. 06
    02 · LANDSCAPE

    Full-Service Agencies Dominate the Set, While Adjacent Models Broaden the Opportunity

    Full-Service Agencies Dominate the Set, While Adjacent Models Broaden the Opportunity.

    Full-Service Agencies Dominate the Set, While Adjacent Models Broaden the Opportunity Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. 6

    Everything on this page

    02 · LANDSCAPE Full-Service Agencies Dominate the Set, While Adjacent Models Broaden the Opportunity Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Full-service advertising agencies 7 70% 6.5x Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) · WPP plc (WPP) · +5 more Scale anchors the landscape. This group represents 70% of the peer set and spans integrated agency, media and programmatic capabilities. Client retention, scope expansion and delivery discipline shape the quality of earnings. Adjacent models 3 30% 5.4x Wingstop Inc. (WING) · Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD) · +1 more Different economics widen the lens. This group represents 30% of the peer set and includes restaurant operations, outsourced agency services and healthcare professional engagement. Its revenue models and operating structures require a separate read.

  7. 07
    SECTION 03

    03

    03.

    Section 03 of 06 — The Premium End Pairs Growth with Margin Quality. The forward lens already reflects forecast earnings, raising the bar for a durable premium. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 7

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Premium End Pairs Growth with Margin Quality The forward lens already reflects forecast earnings, raising the bar for a durable premium. 03 of 06 Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

  8. 08
    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

    Forward Pricing Favors Businesses That Pair Growth with Margin Quality

    Forward Pricing Favors Businesses That Pair Growth with Margin Quality.

    Forward Pricing Favors Businesses That Pair Growth with Margin Quality EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 7 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 5.9x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (7 of 10 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. 8

    Everything on this page

    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION Forward Pricing Favors Businesses That Pair Growth with Margin Quality EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 7 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 5.9x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (7 of 10 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 12.4x CORE · median 5.9x DISCOUNT · median 5.4x Sector median 5.9x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top pairs both. The premium end carries a 12.4x tier multiple versus 5.4x at the discount end. Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO) and Magnite, Inc. (MGNI) combine positive growth with margins above the peer reference. Forward pricing tests durability. A forward EV / EBITDA multiple already gives credit for forecast earnings. A premium that remains therefore points to market confidence in the durability of growth and profitability. The discount end is mixed. OptimizeRx Corp. (OPRX) has a higher-margin profile, while Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD) combines declining growth with a lower margin. The discount tier does not reflect a single operating issue.

  9. 09
    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

    Faster Growth Aligns with Higher Pricing, but Margin Still Shapes the Read

    Faster Growth Aligns with Higher Pricing, but Margin Still Shapes the Read.

    Faster Growth Aligns with Higher Pricing, but Margin Still Shapes the Read Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=4; slower n=3; higher-margin n=4; lower-margin n=3). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. 9

    Everything on this page

    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Faster Growth Aligns with Higher Pricing, but Margin Still Shapes the Read Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=4; slower n=3; higher-margin n=4; lower-margin n=3). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 3% · EBITDA-margin split at 20% Faster Growth Aligns with the Higher Valuation Group On the 4 names at or above the growth split, forward EV / EBITDA is 9.3x, compared with 5.8x on the 3 names below it. The small set shows an association rather than a rule. Margin Quality Does Not Map Cleanly to Valuation OptimizeRx Corp. (OPRX) carries a 25% margin but sits in the discount tier, while WPP plc (WPP) carries an 11% margin in the core tier. Profitability matters, but the observed pricing also reflects growth and business mix. Revenue Quality Strengthens the Operating Story Recurring retainer scope, client retention and a diversified client roster can make earnings more resilient. Project-led volatility, procurement pressure and production pass-through can weaken that profile.

  10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Valuation Position Varies with Margins, Growth and Business Mix

    Valuation Position Varies with Margins, Growth and Business Mix.

    Valuation Position Varies with Margins, Growth and Business Mix Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (5.9x) (rows) and EBITDA margin vs the covered median (20%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. 10

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Valuation Position Varies with Margins, Growth and Business Mix Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (5.9x) (rows) and EBITDA margin vs the covered median (20%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Higher Pricing · Higher Margin Above-median multiple · above-median EBITDA margin 2 names Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO) · Magnite, Inc. (MGNI) Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO) and Magnite, Inc. (MGNI) pair higher pricing with higher margins. Their forward positioning points to market confidence in both earnings quality and durability. Higher Pricing · Lower Margin Above-median multiple · below-median EBITDA margin 2 names WPP plc (WPP) · Stagwell Inc. (STGW) WPP plc (WPP) and Stagwell Inc. (STGW) carry higher pricing despite lower margins. Their position suggests growth profile, client mix and capability breadth may also be relevant to valuation. Lower Pricing · Higher Margin Below-median multiple · above-median EBITDA margin 2 names Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) · OptimizeRx Corp. (OPRX) Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) and OptimizeRx Corp. (OPRX) pair lower pricing with higher margins. The gap indicates that profitability by itself does not secure a premium in this peer set. Lower Pricing · Lower Margin Below-median multiple · below-median EBITDA margin 1 names Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD) Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD) sits at lower pricing with a lower margin. The operating agenda centers on improving revenue quality, delivery efficiency and the balance between recurring scopes and project work.

  11. 11
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Strengthen the Operating Proof Behind Durable Growth and Margin

    Strengthen the Operating Proof Behind Durable Growth and Margin.

    Strengthen the Operating Proof Behind Durable Growth and Margin NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. 11

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Strengthen the Operating Proof Behind Durable Growth and Margin NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 Deepen Recurring Client Scopes Shift the revenue mix toward embedded retainers and scope expansion where client needs support it. This can reduce reliance on project work and improve visibility. What changes the answer: The answer changes when retention, scope expansion and project volatility move in different directions. Protect Delivery Economics Align staffing, freelancer use and creative production costs with the work mix. The aim is a margin profile that holds as revenue changes. What changes the answer: The priority rises when utilization, gross margin or revenue per employee weakens. Choose Where to Build Capability Test whether proprietary audience insight, programmatic execution or regulated-sector expertise is better built internally or added through a transaction. What changes the answer: The answer changes with client demand, pitch conversion and the time required to establish credible capability.

  12. 12
    SECTION 04

    04

    04.

    Section 04 of 06 — Precedent Transactions Reward Distinct Capabilities and Scale. The transaction record spans agency combinations, specialist capabilities and media assets. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 12

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Precedent Transactions Reward Distinct Capabilities and Scale The transaction record spans agency combinations, specialist capabilities and media assets. 04 of 06 Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12

  13. 13
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Buyers Have Agreed Values Across Agency Scale, Specialist Capability and Media Assets

    Buyers Have Agreed Values Across Agency Scale, Specialist Capability and Media Assets.

    Buyers Have Agreed Values Across Agency Scale, Specialist Capability and Media Assets 1 of 10 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 35 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Buyers Have Agreed Values Across Agency Scale, Specialist Capability and Media Assets 1 of 10 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 35 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13 Dec-2024 $16.1B Omnicom Group Inc. Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) and The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. combined two scaled agency networks. EV / LTM revenue 1.5x EV / LTM EBITDA 9.0x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests a buyer case built around wider client access, broader capabilities and greater operating scale. The fit also points to the value of combining creative, media and activation resources. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The $16.1B disclosed value equated to 9.0x EV / EBITDA and 1.5x EV / Revenue. The EBITDA multiple sits above the peer set's 5.9x middle.

  14. 14
    SECTION 05

    05

    05.

    Section 05 of 06 — Durable Growth and Margin Quality Strengthen Market Standing. Owners can focus the operating agenda on recurring scopes, client resilience and disciplined delivery. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 14

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Durable Growth and Margin Quality Strengthen Market Standing Owners can focus the operating agenda on recurring scopes, client resilience and disciplined delivery. 05 of 06 Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14

  15. 15
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    The Next Planning Cycle Should Link Growth Ambition to Earnings Durability

    The Next Planning Cycle Should Link Growth Ambition to Earnings Durability.

    The Next Planning Cycle Should Link Growth Ambition to Earnings Durability NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. 15

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS The Next Planning Cycle Should Link Growth Ambition to Earnings Durability NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15 FOR OWNERS Prioritize Durable Revenue Quality Focus the portfolio on recurring scopes, resilient client relationships and capabilities that deepen client access. Growth is more valuable when the delivery model protects profitability. FOR MANAGEMENT Match Cost Structure to Mix Use staffing, freelancer capacity and production resources to support the expected balance of retainers and projects. Margin progress should remain credible across changing demand. FOR BOARDS Set a Clear Capability Agenda Decide which capabilities warrant internal investment and where a transaction could accelerate progress. Client demand, execution risk and capital intensity should shape the choice.

  16. 16
    SECTION 06

    06

    06.

    Section 06 of 06 — The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources. Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 16

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16

  17. 17
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier.

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (5.9x); amber marks below · 7 rated companies; 3 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 7 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. 17

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (5.9x); amber marks below · 7 rated companies; 3 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 7 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥9.3x · median 12.4x · 2 companies Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. CCO Full-service advertising agencies $7.5B 12.7x 3% 33% 36 Magnite, Inc. MGNI Full-service advertising agencies $3.6B 12.1x 11% 35% 46 CORE — 5.7x–9.3x · median 5.9x · 3 companies Stagwell Inc. STGW Full-service advertising agencies $3.6B 6.5x 3% 17% 19 WPP plc WPP Full-service advertising agencies $11.4B 5.9x 0% 11% 11 Omnicom Group Inc. OMC Full-service advertising agencies $29.3B 5.8x -3% 20% 17 DISCOUNT — <5.7x · median 5.4x · 2 companies OptimizeRx Corp. OPRX Healthcare professional engagement and media $150M 5.6x 11% 25% 36 Quad/Graphics, Inc. QUAD Marketing execution and outsourced agency services $982M 5.1x -2% 8% 6

  18. 18
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First.

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 10 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (53 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 35 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 10 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (53 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 35 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jun-2026 Deluxe Corporation → Celero Commerce n/a n/a 7.4x Deluxe Corporation acquired Celero Commerce at 7.4x EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests a strategic fit between broader business services and commerce capabilities. Dec-2024 Omnicom Group Inc. → The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. $16.1B 1.5x 9.0x Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC) combined with The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. The transaction suggests value in broader client access, capability depth and operating scale. Oct-2023 Bell Media → Outfront’s Canadian Business n/a n/a 13.3x Bell Media agreed to acquire Outfront’s Canadian Business at 13.3x EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests established media inventory can support higher pricing for a strategic buyer. Dec-2021 Netmarble Corp. → Made Thought n/a n/a 19.9x Netmarble Corp. agreed to acquire Made Thought at 19.9x EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests differentiated creative capability can attract strategic interest. Dec-2017 Steel Connect, Inc. → IWCO Direct Holdings Inc. n/a n/a 5.8x Steel Connect, Inc. agreed to acquire IWCO Direct Holdings Inc. The transaction suggests a fit around scaled marketing execution and outsourced delivery. Jul-2016 Lamar Advertising → Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (Cleveland/Memphis) n/a n/a 12.5x Lamar Advertising agreed to acquire Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (Cleveland/Memphis) at 12.5x EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests geographic media assets can carry strategic value. Nov-2015 Fluent, Inc. → IDI, Inc. n/a 2.0x 2.0x Fluent, Inc. agreed to acquire IDI, Inc. at 2.0x on both EV / Revenue and EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests data capability can extend an advertising platform's offering. Jul-2013 Omnicom Group, Inc. → Publicis Groupe S.A. n/a n/a 9.6x Omnicom Group, Inc. agreed to combine with Publicis Groupe S.A. at 9.6x EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests global client reach and agency breadth supported the strategic logic. n/a Apollo → WPP n/a n/a 7.1x Apollo agreed to acquire WPP plc (WPP) at 7.1x EV / EBITDA. The transaction suggests scaled client relationships and a broad capability base can attract financial buyers.

  19. 19
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First.

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 10 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (53 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 35 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 19

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 10 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (53 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 35 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters n/a Company → Publicis n/a n/a 13.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved.

  20. 20
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality.

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. 20

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 20 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (7 of 10 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Advertising Agencies and Services and it clears the coverage gate with 8 of 10 companies (80%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 8 of the 8 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 11 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 441 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (440) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

  21. 21

    In This Peer Set, Higher Forward Pricing Sits with Growth and Durable Margins.

    In This Peer Set, Higher Forward Pricing Sits with Growth and Durable Margins..

    Closing — In This Peer Set, Higher Forward Pricing Sits with Growth and Durable Margins. The companion tables beside this deck carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger and the complete source index for any figure a client wants to trace. 21

    Everything on this page

    In This Peer Set, Higher Forward Pricing Sits with Growth and Durable Margins. NeuraCap AI — Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Advertising Agencies and Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21

Sources and methodology

This report covers Advertising Agencies and Services (Communication Services › Media and Entertainment › Advertising Agencies and Services) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 10 listed companies whose core business is Advertising Agencies and Services according to NeuraCap's industry classification of each company's reported business segments (a company is included only when this industry is central to what it does, not merely adjacent to it). Companies in the set: Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC), Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO), IZEA Worldwide, Inc. (IZEA), Magnite, Inc. (MGNI), Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC), OptimizeRx Corp. (OPRX), Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD), Stagwell Inc. (STGW), Wingstop Inc. (WING), WPP plc (WPP). The market map groups them by business vertical — Full-service advertising agencies: 7 companies (OMC, WPP, CCO, STGW, MGNI, BOC, IZEA); Adjacent models: 3 companies (WING, QUAD, OPRX). 7 of the 10 companies carry a valid multiple on the primary valuation basis and form the rated set behind every cohort statistic; the others are shown but do not enter the statistics.

Scope and company universe

This report covers Advertising Agencies and Services (Communication Services › Media and Entertainment › Advertising Agencies and Services) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 10 listed companies whose core business is Advertising Agencies and Services according to NeuraCap's industry classification of each company's reported business segments (a company is included only when this industry is central to what it does, not merely adjacent to it). Companies in the set: Boston Omaha Corporation (BOC), Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO), IZEA Worldwide, Inc. (IZEA), Magnite, Inc. (MGNI), Omnicom Group Inc. (OMC), OptimizeRx Corp. (OPRX), Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD), Stagwell Inc. (STGW), Wingstop Inc. (WING), WPP plc (WPP). The market map groups them by business vertical — Full-service advertising agencies: 7 companies (OMC, WPP, CCO, STGW, MGNI, BOC, IZEA); Adjacent models: 3 companies (WING, QUAD, OPRX). 7 of the 10 companies carry a valid multiple on the primary valuation basis and form the rated set behind every cohort statistic; the others are shown but do not enter the statistics.

What was excluded and why

11 records failed a validation gate and never feed a statistic in this report (11 excluded from aggregate). Each exclusion, with its reason: BOC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BOC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BOC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BOC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CCO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IZEA — EBITDA 666449.0000 is below the $1000000 materiality floor; any multiple would be meaningless (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IZEA — EBITDA 509307.0000 is below the $1000000 materiality floor; any multiple would be meaningless (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IZEA — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IZEA — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · OMC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · WPP — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate)

Primary valuation basis and how it was chosen

Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (7 of 10 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Advertising Agencies and Services and it clears the coverage gate with 8 of 10 companies (80%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 8 of the 8 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. The basis is selected in two steps: the industry's customary valuation conventions set the order of preference, and each convention is then tested for coverage — the share of companies with a valid, plausibility-checked multiple on the chosen period. A convention is used only when enough companies carry it; the best-covered convention is used, and disclosed, when none clears the threshold. Coverage measured for this report — EV / EBITDA: 8 of 10 companies; EV / rEVenue: 10 of 10 companies; P/E: 8 of 10 companies. 1 company shows a non-meaningful P / E denominator and is excluded from that statistic.

How the multiples and statistics are computed

Enterprise value (EV) is market capitalisation at the as-of date plus total debt minus cash and equivalents from the latest reported balance sheet, reconciled against the platform's stored value and disclosed where the two differ. Forward multiples divide EV (or the share price for P/E) by the consensus estimate for the stated calendar period; trailing multiples use the last twelve months of reported figures from SEC filings. A multiple with a negative or immaterial denominator is treated as not meaningful and excluded from every statistic. Cohort statistics are medians and quartiles over the rated set only; a group median with fewer than three observations is shown as the single company's figure and labelled as such. Valuation tiers cut the rated set at its quartiles (tiers cut at the rated set's quartiles: Premium ≥9.3x, Core 5.7x–9.3x, Discount <5.7x — NeuraCap groupings). Revenue growth compares consecutive calendar-year consensus revenue; EBITDA margin divides consensus EBITDA by consensus revenue for the same period. Figures shown in this report and the calculation behind each: 5.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) (7 rated companies) · 12.4x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Premium tier (n=2) · 5.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Core tier (n=3) · 5.4x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Discount tier (n=2) · 9.3x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth ≥ 3% (n=4) · 5.8x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth < 3% (n=3) · 8.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin ≥ 20% (n=4) · 5.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin < 20% (n=3) · 19% = median Rule of 40 score (revenue growth + EBITDA margin) (n=7)

Precedent transactions: what is in the record and why

The precedent record holds the M&A transactions in Advertising Agencies and Services recorded from SEC filings (8-K announcements and the documents they reference), newest first, with each value and multiple linked to the exact passage in the filing that states it. 53 transactions were recorded for this industry; 10 are shown. 43 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted because they say nothing about price; they remain in the companion workbook. Deal multiples are enterprise value over the target's last-twelve-month revenue or EBITDA at announcement, as disclosed; they are not restated to the public basis and no spread to the public multiples is claimed. Before a transaction reaches the record it passes a screen for mirrored or duplicate filings of the same deal, for divestitures where the filer is the seller rather than the buyer, for carve-outs recorded under the parent's name, and for values whose citation describes something other than the price paid (a debt raise, a termination fee); such records are corrected or excluded and the correction is noted. Data-quality notes on this record: 16 × deal value unit unresolved; 17 × no evidence record; 2 × divestiture roles reassigned. Case studies lead with the 1 richest stories — disclosed value, a readable multiple, newest first.

Sources

Company financials and transaction terms come from the companies' own SEC filings on EDGAR (10-K, 10-Q and 8-K documents), linked from each figure in the report. Forward figures are analyst consensus estimates for the calendar periods shown. Share prices and market capitalisations are market data as of September 28, 2026. Treasury yields are published by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. 445 source documents stand behind this report; by publisher domain: sec.gov, home.treasury.gov (1). Every figure on every page is traceable to one of these records; nothing in the report is derived from outside data.

Interpretation and important notice

Tier labels, situation maps, the agenda and the implications pages are NeuraCap analytical views drawn from the recorded evidence and are labelled as such. The report is informational: it is not investment advice, not a recommendation to buy or sell any security, not an opinion of value and not an offer of any kind. Readers should perform their own diligence before acting on anything described here.

This report is published for information only. It is not a recommendation to buy or sell any security, an offer or solicitation, an appraisal or a fairness opinion, and no fiduciary relationship is created by reading it. Multiples that fail NeuraCap’s plausibility gates are excluded and never plotted. See the full methodology and the disclaimer.

More coverage in Communication Services

Want this analysis for a company in Advertising Agencies and Services?

Company valuation reports run the same method against a single business — public or private.

Get a free sample reportBrowse the research