Over the past few years, the local equity markets have evolved through a period of adjustment. Market activity became more selective, valuation expectations moderated and investors grew more discerning in how they deployed capital. Regulatory frameworks continued to sharpen, particularly around disclosure, governance and accountability. While the atmosphere at times felt quieter than in earlier cycles, that period of recalibration allowed expectations to realign on both sides of the market.
What is now emerging is not exuberance alone, but a more measured confidence anchored in fundamentals. From our experience advising founder-led and growth companies on listing preparations at Evolve Capital Advisory, the past cycle has reinforced what founders most often underestimate. The listing is a moment, but public life is a discipline, defined by enduring expectations around governance, disclosure and institutional standards of credibility.
Changing risk appetite
Liquidity is gradually returning in a measured fashion. Across the small- and mid-capitalisation segment, institutional investors are re-engaging with growth opportunities, family offices are taking a more systematic approach to operating investments, and research coverage is becoming more active again. Policy initiatives aimed at strengthening participation and transparency are beginning to take effect. The direction of travel is broadly constructive, but it is accompanied by a materially higher bar for issuers. Capital is available, yet it is distinctly more selective than in past cycles.
This change in risk appetite has reshaped what public investors now look for in companies seeking to list. Growth remains important, but it no longer stands alone. Increasingly, what matters is whether that growth can be sustained under the disciplines of public life, including continuous disclosure, periodic financial scrutiny, governance and institutional accountability. Performance may attract attention, but preparedness determines whether confidence can be maintained.
See also: Sunway Healthcare to gauge interest for Malaysian IPO in January — Bloomberg
In private companies, intuition often substitutes structure. Decision-making is agile, reporting lines are fluid and controls evolve organically. That flexibility can be a strength during expansion. The transition into the public markets, however, introduces a different operating environment altogether. Public investors are not evaluating whether a business can grow in its current form. They are assessing whether that growth can continue under the demands of transparency, board oversight and regulatory obligations. The difference is not cosmetic. It is architectural.
This is where many first-time issuers underestimate the transition. The challenge is rarely limited to meeting listing eligibility requirements. The more profound shift begins after the listing. Disclosure becomes permanent rather than occasional. Performance moves onto an externally assessed periodic rhythm. Leadership evolves from entrepreneurial command to institutional stewardship. Capital allocation decisions become public signals rather than private judgments. The business no longer answers solely to itself.
The importance of being prepared
Preparedness changes the texture of this transition. A company that enters the market with a coherent equity narrative, an intentional corporate structure, disciplined financial planning, credible governance and reliable internal controls experiences public life as a natural extension of its operating discipline. A company that arrives without these foundations often experiences it as an ongoing exercise in explanation.
See also: Tesla’s ‘Musk premium’ in focus with SpaceX IPO on the horizon
The impact of preparedness is visible almost immediately in valuation behaviour. Investors apply a risk discount to what they cannot see clearly. Where assumptions appear loosely constructed, confidence naturally softens. Where governance lacks depth, institutional participation becomes more cautious. Where internal controls appear reactive rather than embedded, valuation multiples compress. Preparedness does not eliminate valuation discussion, but it shifts the centre of gravity from defensive justification towards forward-looking strategy.
For founders contemplating a public listing over the next 12 to 24 months, this shift carries important implications. Market timing will always play a role, but organisational readiness will increasingly determine outcomes. The more relevant question is no longer simply whether the market window is open, but whether the organisation itself is already operating at a public-market standard.
This perspective is particularly evident among growth companies considering secondary boards. There has been a renewed quiet interest, supported by improving liquidity and greater research visibility. Yet the bar is visibly higher. What used to be regarded as acceptable early-stage complexity is now viewed more directly as execution risk. The market is willing to engage, but it expects intentionality in structure, governance and financial discipline.
Perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of IPO preparation today is that readiness is no longer a transactional phase. It is a leadership posture. Companies that navigate the public transition most effectively are those that begin institutionalising their decision-making well before listing. Governance is embedded rather than installed. Controls are habitual rather than introduced under pressure. Capital planning is intentional rather than opportunistic. Communication is disciplined rather than episodic.
There is also a psychological dimension that founders only fully appreciate after listing. Many are prepared for regulatory scrutiny. Fewer are prepared for the permanence of visibility. Once public, strategic decisions are no longer debated solely within the organisation. They are interpreted externally. Capital allocation becomes narrative. Silence itself becomes commentary. This alters the emotional texture of leadership, even when the underlying business remains unchanged.
The companies that adjust best are those that understand early on that public life is not about surrendering control, but about distributing it across structure, process and accountability. In that sense, governance is not a constraint on entrepreneurship. It is a mechanism that allows leadership to scale.
Looking ahead to 2026, the market appears increasingly willing to support new listings, particularly when growth is accompanied by structural credibility. But the coming phase is unlikely to reward speed for its own sake. It will reward consistency, repeatability and institutional trust. Activity may return quickly. Endurance will be earned more gradually.
Sink your teeth into in-depth insights from our contributors, and dive into financial and economic trends
For founders weighing whether the period ahead represents the right time to list, the more useful question may not be whether conditions are improving. It may be whether the organisation is already behaving as if it were public. When that condition is met, timing becomes an opportunity rather than a constraint.
The bell will always ring. What matters is what happens long after the sound has faded.
Jerry Chua is managing partner and CEO of Evolve Capital
