Public FinTech Valuations - US vs. Europe

Last updated on 24 April 2025·Fintech·Europe, United States & Canada

Download PDF version

This analysis is available to download as a PDF presentation.

The valuation gap between 🇪🇺 Europe and the 🇺🇸 US across public fintech markets is huge and very visible

💳 Payments: 96% (!) of all market cap is based in the US, mostly due to card networks (Visa, Mastercard) and big platforms like PayPal or Shopify. Europe has only one (but a great one!) large-cap payment company Adyen

🏛️ Neobanking: very few publicly listed neobanking stocks, Wise being the only large pure-play digital bank. The world is waiting for Revolut and Chime IPOs!

🖥️ Software: SAP (worth nearly $300B) carries Europe's financial software industry that otherwise massively lags behind the US (72% vs. 28% market cap share)

📊 Trading: all leading online brokers like Charles Schwab, Robinhood, Coinbase or Interactive Brokers are based in the US and there are no comparable peers (size-wise) in Europe - only mid-cap players like Nordnet, IG, Allfunds or Plus500

💰 Lending: fully dominated by America (93% market cap) but Europe is waiting for the Klarna IPO to rival US-based Affirm

📑 Lead Generation / Brokers: here Europe shines (64% market cap), plenty of great mid-cap platforms (Moltiply Group, Hypoport, CDON, Multitude), with the overall market significantly bigger than in the US

Data and methodology

Underlying data

Public markets data is powered by FactSet (consensus analyst estimates), and Morningstar (historical data). Data points are calendarized to December where relevant: retrieved data on financial year ends (e.g. FY, FY+1 etc.) are mapped to calendar years (2025A, 2026E etc.) before the appropriate month weights are then applied to prior/future fundamentals.

Private transaction data is multi-sourced, aggregated from harvesting public information, 3rd party APIs, and data engineering. All data is verified and provided with an extensive manual process. If data permits, we apply our own logic to get to the EV. For example, for a large M&A deal with available information on the target's net debt, we might adjust a valuation to fully reflect an accurate EV. In all other cases, we take the reported valuation as the numerator. Financials: we source LTM revenue and LTM EBITDA data from company filings, press releases, or other verified sources. If LTM data is unavailable, we take the 'next best-fit' period (run-rate or calendar year), provided it makes sense in a given case. For example, if a deal closed in November 2025, we might take full-year 2025 revenue as a revenue benchmark.

Any raw figures are harmonised to USD for comparison purposes.

This page is built on data available at Multiples. Sign up for a free trial to see the full dataset.

ON THIS PAGE

SHARE THIS POST