What it means
The theory was set out by finance academics in the 1980s and rests on the knowledge gap between managers and outside investors. Because outsiders cannot verify how good a company's prospects really are, they discount the price of anything the company tries to sell them.
Retained earnings sidestep that problem entirely, which is why they sit at the top of the order. Debt comes second because lenders take less risk than shareholders and are protected by contracts, covenants and often security over assets.
The price of debt therefore moves far less on the market's opinion of the business, so raising it sends a much weaker signal about what management privately believes. New equity comes last because it is the most exposed to that information gap.
When a listed company announces a share issue, investors frequently assume the shares are expensive in management's own view, and the price often falls on the announcement. That fall is a genuine cost borne by the existing shareholders.
The practical implication is that a company's mix of debt and equity is a by-product of its history rather than a deliberate target. A business that has been profitable for a decade will look conservatively financed simply because it never needed outside money.
A younger business burning cash will carry more debt not by choice but by necessity. This sits in contrast to trade off theory, which argues that firms choose an optimal mix by balancing the tax relief on interest against the risk of financial distress.
Pecking order predicts no target ratio at all, only a sequence that firms work down as each source is exhausted. Neither theory explains every decision, and most real financing choices blend the two.
What pecking order captures well is timing: why firms build cash reserves in good years, why they resist issuing shares after a price fall, and why equity issues cluster when share prices have already run up.
In practice
Real-world examples.
Example
A profitable engineering firm funds a $3,000,000 factory extension entirely from accumulated cash, even though its bank offered a competitive loan. The founders prefer to avoid covenants and reporting obligations, which is pecking order behaviour driven by control as much as by cost.
Example
A listed retailer announces a rights issue to repair its balance sheet after a poor year and sees its share price drop 9% on the day. Investors read the announcement as confirmation that trading is worse than the last update suggested.
Example
A software business with no profits and no assets to pledge cannot use either of the first two rungs of the ladder. It raises a venture round instead, illustrating that the pecking order describes preferences rather than options genuinely available to every company.
Think of it
“Pecking order theory is like preferring to use savings, then a credit card, then borrowing from friends. Each step reveals more about your finances.
Case study
Seen in the real world.
This is an illustrative and entirely fictional example. Marlow Instruments, an invented maker of laboratory equipment, generated steady profits for eight years and funded every expansion from its own cash. Its debt to equity ratio drifted close to zero, and an outside adviser argued the company was being wasteful by ignoring the tax relief available on interest.
The fictional finance director's answer was that the company had simply never faced a decision that required outside money. When a large acquisition came along that internal cash could not cover, Marlow borrowed rather than issuing shares, and only considered an equity raise once lenders declined to go further.
The illustrative sequence, cash then debt then equity, was never written into a policy document. It emerged naturally from a management team that disliked both dilution and the scrutiny that comes with selling shares, which is exactly the behaviour the theory predicts.
Watch out
Common mistakes.
- Treating the pecking order as advice about the best way to finance a business, when it is a description of how managers actually behave.
- Assuming a company with low debt must be badly managed, rather than recognising it may simply have been profitable enough never to need borrowing.
- Confusing the pecking order with the priority of repayment in an insolvency, which is a completely separate ranking of creditors and shareholders.
Questions
People also ask.
Why would a company avoid issuing shares if the market price looks high?
Managers who believe the price is fair or low see an issue as selling a stake cheaply, and investors reading that signal often push the price down further.
Does the theory apply to private companies?
Yes, and arguably more strongly, since private owners face an even wider information gap with outside investors and are usually reluctant to dilute their control.
How does this square with startups that raise equity round after round?
Those businesses have no retained earnings and no assets to borrow against, so they start at the bottom of the order out of necessity rather than preference.
From the founder's library
Take it further with the book.
Build your financial confidence beyond this definition. Shihan's full-length guide, Accounting Fundamentals, takes the same plain-English approach and turns it into a complete, practical playbook for non-finance managers, business owners and students - with chapter-end quiz answers and presentation slides included.
25% off with code MMHQ25, applied at checkout. Priced in USD - checkout may show the equivalent in your local currency.
View the book and save 25%