M&A Deal Leaks as a Negotiating Tactic: What the Data Shows

Although deal leaks are illegal and never best practice for dealmakers, they still occur during mergers and acquisitions (M&A) — accidentally and intentionally. In some cases, leaks are the result of loose controls or human error; in others, they’re used deliberately in an attempt to create competitive tension, draw out rival bidders or force a buyer’s hand. But do leaks actually deliver those outcomes? 

The latest findings from the 2025 M&A Deal Leaks Report, which draws on 16 years of research conducted by SS&C Intralinks and the M&A Research Centre at Bayes Business School, shows that while many leaks are intentional, they are a blunt instrument at best — and a counterproductive one at worst. 

Leaks failed to move the needle on rival bidding 

A common assumption behind intentional leaks is that increased visibility will attract competition. But the data tells a different story. In 2024, just 5.7 percent of leaked deals attracted rival bids compared to 5.1 percent of those that remained confidential. Across the full data set, the pattern is even clearer: leaks are more likely to disrupt negotiations than to drive competition. 

Once confidentiality is broken, bidders begin to question the integrity of the process. Potential bidders may view the leak not as an invitation, but as a warning sign that they are being used as leverage or pulled into a process already stacked against them. While a leak may inflate up-front pricing, the data shows that they rarely translate into durable negotiating leverage. 

Leaks doubled takeover premiums — with a caveat 

That distinction becomes clear when you look at how markets respond before terms are finalized. In 2024, targets in leaked deals commanded higher announced takeover premiums (57.5 percent) than non-leaked deals (26 percent), indicating the potential for materially higher gains at the point of disclosure.

While these figures suggest that leaks can shift pricing dynamics in sellers’ favor, they reflect market expectations rather than completed outcomes, emerging before diligence, regulatory review and final negotiations are complete. As a result, any pricing benefit associated with leaks does not necessarily translate or determine how negotiations ultimately unfold through closing. 

Adding friction to an already complex process 

Where leaks do have a clear and lasting impact is on execution. In 2024, leaked deals took 15 days longer to complete than their non-leaked counterparts, extending already lengthening deal cycles. Once information enters the market, the circle of stakeholders widens, regulatory scrutiny tends to intensify, and both internal and external messaging become harder to manage. Together, these dynamics introduce friction at multiple points in the process, adding to the pressure on negotiations already under strain. 

It’s important to note that leaked deals often still close. Completion rates for both leaked and non-leaked deals have remained relatively similar over the course of our research. But they tend to close less cleanly when leaked — marked by greater volatility in the form of incremental delays, valuation friction and added scrutiny that weighs on deal teams. 

The broader lesson for dealmakers is not simply that leaks carry risk, but that they can weigh down an already complex process. Early disclosure forces teams to manage speculation, stakeholder noise and regulatory attention before key decisions are ready to be made, diverting time and leverage from execution. 

The strategic value of controlling information 

In high-stakes deal environments, controlling access, timing and context across an expanding group of internal and external stakeholders is a meaningful advantage. Strong confidentiality preserves flexibility, allowing deal teams to test assumptions, adjust structures and negotiate terms without undue influence from premature scrutiny. 

Choosing the right technology partner is an important first step toward gaining that advantage. By combining secure data sharing, granular permission controls and real-time insight across the deal lifecycle, SS&C Intralinks DealCentre AI™ helps teams limit unnecessary exposure while keeping transactions moving forward. With stronger governance over information sharing, negotiations can be shaped by facts and strategy rather than speculation. 

To learn more about how leaks influence M&A outcomes and how deal teams can mitigate disclosure risk, read the 2025 M&A Deal Leaks Report.