美股招股观察

How to Conduct Industry Research for a US IPO: Demonstrating Market Size in a Prospectus

The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued 14 comment letters in Q1 2025 specifically challenging revenue projections and market size claims in F-1 registration statements for non-US issuers, a 40% increase from the same period in 2024. For Hong Kong and PRC companies pursuing a US listing via NYSE or NASDAQ, the most common deficiency cited in these letters was not financial misstatement, but inadequate substantiation of total addressable market (TAM) and serviceable addressable market (SAM) figures used in the prospectus. The SEC Staff’s focus has shifted from mere disclosure to demonstrable methodology: issuers must now show how each market size figure was derived, from which primary or secondary sources, and why those sources are reliable under the specific conditions of the PRC or Hong Kong market. This article provides a technical framework for constructing defensible market size analysis in an F-1 prospectus, covering source selection, methodology documentation, and the specific regulatory standards expected by both the SEC and the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) for issuers with dual-listing intentions.

The Regulatory Nexus: SEC and HKEX Standards for Market Size Disclosure

The SEC requires that all material information in a registration statement be both accurate and complete, with no omission of facts necessary to prevent the disclosed information from being misleading. Under Item 101 of Regulation S-K, issuers must describe their business, including the markets in which they operate. The SEC Staff interprets this to require a clear, quantified description of the market opportunity, not merely qualitative statements about industry growth.

For Hong Kong issuers or PRC companies with a Hong Kong corporate structure, the HKEX’s Listing Rules impose parallel obligations. Rule 11.07 requires that a prospectus contain “all information necessary to enable an investor to make an informed assessment” of the issuer’s activities and prospects. The HKEX’s Guidance Letter HKEX-GL86-16, updated in 2023, specifically addresses market and industry data in listing documents, stating that any third-party data must be “independently verified” and that the issuer must disclose the “basis of preparation” for any market size estimates.

The convergence of SEC and HKEX standards creates a dual burden for issuers planning a US listing with a subsequent Hong Kong secondary listing. The SEC will accept third-party industry reports from reputable firms such as Frost & Sullivan, IDC, or Gartner, but only if the report’s methodology is fully disclosed and the data is current (within 12 months of the filing date). HKEX Guidance Letter GL86-16 goes further, requiring that the report’s scope, sample size, and survey methodology be included in the prospectus or incorporated by reference.

Primary vs. Secondary Data: What the Regulators Accept

The SEC Staff’s informal guidance from the 2024 SEC Speaks conference indicated that primary research—data collected directly by the issuer or its advisors—carries more weight than secondary research in assessing market size. For a PRC-based issuer in the enterprise software sector, the SEC expects the issuer to show actual customer counts, contract values, and renewal rates, not just industry averages from third-party reports.

Secondary data, such as government statistics from the National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBS) or industry association reports, must be reconciled with the issuer’s own operating data. If the issuer claims a TAM of RMB 50 billion for its segment, but the NBS data shows the broader industry at RMB 30 billion, the SEC will require an explanation of the discrepancy. The SEC Staff’s comment letter to a 2024 PRC fintech issuer specifically demanded a reconciliation between the issuer’s claimed market share (12%) and the aggregate revenue of all known competitors, as derived from public filings and analyst reports.

Methodology Documentation: The SEC’s Four-Part Test

The SEC Staff applies a four-part test to market size disclosures in F-1 filings:

  1. Source Identification: Each data point must be traceable to a named source, with publication date and page number if from a printed report.
  2. Methodology Transparency: The issuer must describe how the source calculated its figures—top-down (macroeconomic driver to segment) or bottom-up (sum of known participants).
  3. Currency: Data must be no older than 18 months at the time of filing, with more recent data preferred. For rapidly changing sectors like AI or biotech, data older than 12 months triggers a deficiency letter.
  4. Relevance: The market definition must match the issuer’s actual business. A company selling SaaS to PRC manufacturing firms cannot cite a TAM for “global enterprise software” without a clear breakdown of the PRC manufacturing subsegment.

Structuring the Market Size Section in an F-1 Prospectus

The market size section of an F-1 prospectus typically appears under “Industry Overview” or “Market Opportunity.” For Hong Kong issuers, the HKEX’s Model Code for Prospectuses (Appendix 1 to the Listing Rules) requires this section to be presented in a “clear, concise and understandable” format, with all figures in a consistent currency and unit.

The standard structure, as observed in 2024 F-1 filings for PRC issuers including LianBio and Zai Lab, follows a three-tier hierarchy:

  • Total Addressable Market (TAM): The maximum revenue opportunity if the issuer achieved 100% market share in its defined segment.
  • Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM): The portion of TAM that the issuer can reach given its current product, geography, and distribution capabilities.
  • Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM): The realistic revenue the issuer expects to capture, typically within 3-5 years.

Each tier must be supported by separate data sources and methodologies. A common error is using the same third-party report for all three tiers without adjustment. The SEC Staff’s comment letter to a 2024 biotech issuer specifically rejected this approach, requiring the issuer to derive SAM from its own clinical trial data and SOM from its sales pipeline.

Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up: Which Method the SEC Prefers

The SEC Staff does not mandate a specific methodology, but the choice affects the level of scrutiny. Top-down analysis, which starts with a macro figure (e.g., global healthcare spending) and narrows to a segment (e.g., PRC oncology diagnostics), is more vulnerable to challenge because the assumptions in each narrowing step must be justified.

Bottom-up analysis, which sums the revenue of known competitors and adds the issuer’s own projected capture, is generally more defensible. For a PRC issuer in the electric vehicle (EV) charging sector, a bottom-up approach would aggregate the revenue of all listed PRC EV charging companies (NIO Power, XPeng Superchargers, State Grid EV) and then estimate the issuer’s share based on its installed base and contracts.

The SEC Staff’s 2024 review of a PRC SaaS issuer required the company to switch from a top-down to a bottom-up methodology after the Staff determined that the macro assumptions (PRC GDP growth, enterprise IT spending as a percentage of GDP) were not specific enough to the issuer’s subsegment of supply chain software.

Geographic Segmentation for Cross-Border Issuers

For Hong Kong and PRC issuers, geographic segmentation is a critical component. The SEC expects the market size to be broken down by region—PRC, Hong Kong, Southeast Asia, and any other markets where the issuer operates or plans to operate. The HKEX’s Guidance Letter GL86-16 specifically requires that “where an issuer operates in multiple jurisdictions, the market data must be presented on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis.”

A 2024 F-1 filing for a Hong Kong-based logistics company was delayed by six weeks after the SEC Staff demanded separate TAM figures for Hong Kong, the Pearl River Delta, and the rest of the PRC. The Staff noted that the issuer’s business model (cross-border e-commerce fulfillment) required different assumptions in each region, and the original single TAM figure was misleading.

Source Selection and Verification for PRC Market Data

The reliability of PRC market data is a recurring issue in SEC reviews of F-1 filings. The SEC Staff has developed specific criteria for accepting PRC government statistics and industry association reports.

Government Statistics: NBS and MIIT Data

The National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBS) publishes annual data on industry output, revenue, and employment. For most sectors, NBS data is considered a reliable primary source by the SEC, provided the issuer cites the specific publication (e.g., “China Statistical Yearbook 2024”) and the table number. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) publishes sector-specific data for manufacturing, telecom, and IT services.

However, the SEC Staff has flagged two risks with PRC government data. First, the data may be aggregated at a national level and not representative of the issuer’s specific subsegment. Second, the data may be subject to revision, as occurred with the NBS’s 2023 revision of 2022 industrial output figures. Issuers should include a risk factor stating that PRC government data is subject to revision and that the issuer’s market size estimates may change.

Third-Party Industry Reports: Acceptable Sources

The SEC accepts industry reports from Frost & Sullivan, IDC, Gartner, iResearch, and Analysys (for internet sectors). For a 2025 F-1 filing, the SEC expects these reports to be commissioned by the issuer or its underwriters, with the report’s methodology disclosed in the prospectus. The HKEX’s Guidance Letter GL86-16 requires that the report’s author be independent of the issuer and that the report be “prepared specifically for inclusion in the listing document.”

A 2024 deficiency letter to a PRC e-commerce issuer cited the use of a generic industry report from a third-party provider that was not commissioned for the filing. The SEC Staff required the issuer to commission a new report with a detailed methodology, including survey sample size, respondent demographics, and statistical confidence intervals.

Primary Research: Surveys and Expert Interviews

For issuers in niche sectors where third-party reports are unavailable, the SEC accepts primary research conducted by the issuer or its advisors. This includes customer surveys, expert interviews, and channel checks. The SEC Staff’s 2024 guidance on primary research requires:

  • A description of the survey methodology, including sample size and selection criteria
  • The confidence interval and margin of error for quantitative data
  • A disclosure of any conflicts of interest (e.g., if the survey was conducted by a related party)
  • The dates on which the research was conducted

A PRC biotech issuer in 2024 successfully defended its market size estimates using a primary survey of 200 hospital procurement managers, with the survey conducted by an independent PRC research firm. The SEC Staff accepted the data after the issuer disclosed the survey instrument, the sampling methodology (stratified random sampling by hospital tier), and the response rate (68%).

Common Pitfalls and SEC Comment Letter Patterns

Analysis of 2024 SEC comment letters to PRC and Hong Kong issuers reveals three recurring deficiencies in market size disclosures.

Overstated TAM Without Segment Breakdown

The most common deficiency is a TAM that is too broad or too optimistic. The SEC Staff expects the TAM to be broken down into subsegments that correspond to the issuer’s actual revenue streams. A PRC SaaS issuer claiming a TAM of USD 10 billion for “PRC enterprise software” was required to break this down by vertical (manufacturing, finance, retail) and by deployment method (cloud vs. on-premise).

The SEC Staff’s comment letter specifically asked: “Please provide a breakdown of the TAM by the specific product categories in which you operate, and explain how each subsegment’s growth rate was derived.”

Inconsistent Data Across Filing Sections

The SEC Staff cross-references the market size data in the “Industry Overview” section with the financial data in the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis” (MD&A) section. If the issuer claims a 15% market share in the industry overview, but the MD&A shows revenue growth of 5% while the industry is growing at 10%, the SEC will require an explanation.

A 2024 PRC fintech issuer was forced to amend its F-1 after the SEC Staff noted that the industry overview projected 20% annual growth for the issuer’s segment, but the MD&A showed the issuer’s own revenue declining by 3% in the same period. The issuer had to revise the industry growth rate downward and explain the discrepancy.

Failure to Update Data Between Amendments

The SEC expects market size data to be updated with each amendment to the F-1 filing. If the initial filing uses data from December 2023, and the first amendment is filed in June 2024, the issuer must provide updated data for the intervening period. The SEC Staff’s 2024 comment letter to a Hong Kong biotech issuer noted that the market size data in the first amendment was identical to the initial filing, despite six months having elapsed. The Staff required the issuer to commission an updated industry report.

Practical Workflow for Building a Defensible Market Size Section

For a Hong Kong or PRC issuer preparing an F-1 filing, the following workflow minimizes the risk of SEC comment letters.

Step 1: Define the Market with Precision

The market definition must match the issuer’s business description in the prospectus. If the issuer describes itself as a “PRC healthcare diagnostics company,” the market should be “PRC in-vitro diagnostics market,” not “global healthcare diagnostics market.” The definition should include the specific product categories, customer segments, and geographic regions.

Step 2: Select and Commission Sources

For a 2025 filing, the issuer should commission a third-party industry report from a firm with a proven track record in SEC filings (Frost & Sullivan, IDC, Gartner). The report should be commissioned at least 12 weeks before the initial confidential filing date. The issuer should also gather PRC government data from NBS and MIIT, and prepare a reconciliation between the third-party data and government data.

Step 3: Document Methodology and Assumptions

The issuer should prepare a methodology memorandum that describes:

  • The data sources used for each tier (TAM, SAM, SOM)
  • The calculation methodology (top-down or bottom-up)
  • The assumptions underlying each calculation
  • The date of the data and the rationale for its currency

This memorandum should be shared with the underwriters’ counsel and the SEC counsel for review before the F-1 is filed.

Step 4: Cross-Reference with Financial Data

The market size data must be consistent with the issuer’s financial projections and historical financial data. The issuer should prepare a reconciliation table showing how the market share implied by the market size data matches the issuer’s actual revenue and growth rates.

Step 5: Prepare for SEC Comment Letters

The issuer should anticipate SEC Staff questions on market size methodology. Common questions include:

  • “How did you derive the 12% growth rate for your TAM?”
  • “Please explain why your SAM is 40% of TAM, given your current product portfolio.”
  • “Provide the underlying data for the third-party report cited in the industry overview.”

The issuer’s response should include the methodology memorandum and, if necessary, a supplemental report from the third-party research firm.

Actionable Takeaways

  1. Commission a third-party industry report from a recognized firm (Frost & Sullivan or IDC) at least 12 weeks before the confidential F-1 filing, ensuring the report’s methodology is fully disclosed in the prospectus.
  2. Break down TAM into SAM and SOM using separate data sources and methodologies, with each tier reconciled against the issuer’s actual operating data from the past 24 months.
  3. For PRC market data, cite specific NBS or MIIT publications with table numbers and publication years, and include a risk factor stating that PRC government data may be subject to revision.
  4. Prepare a methodology memorandum documenting every assumption and source, and share it with underwriters’ counsel and SEC counsel before filing to preempt deficiency letters.
  5. Update all market size data with each amendment to the F-1 filing, ensuring no data point is older than 12 months at the time of the amendment’s submission.