Compare three ways to invest: direct funds, funds of funds and secondaries. See fees, returns, cash needs, the spread of investments and work needed to oversee them. For pension, endowment, family-office and fund-of-funds teams.
We start with your return assumptions, then take out fees and carry. When cash is called and paid back determines the IRR.
100% route comparisons update below from the same assumptions.
This shows your running cash position over time. Secondaries may return money earlier, while fund of funds can take longer to pay out.
See when money is likely to be called and when it may come back. Coloured bars show each route; the black line shows the total for that year.
This shows how much of your planned commitment has been called. It is not the fair value of the portfolio.
Direct funds offer more control. They also take more work to choose and oversee managers. Fund of funds spread exposure through one relationship, but add fees and may return cash later. Secondaries may invest and return cash sooner. Their pattern of returns may differ. These are scenarios, not predictions.
Yes. The sliders always add up to 100%, so you can choose any mix of direct funds, fund of funds and secondaries.
The model first applies fees and carry for the funds held. It then adds the fund-of-funds layer. Actual terms vary by vehicle.
Secondaries may buy older assets and pay cash back sooner. That can help offset calls from newer primary funds.
It is the share of your planned commitment that has been called. It is not NAV or a fair-value estimate.
Not always. Different managers can hold the same funds or companies. This is a simple breadth estimate, not a full look-through analysis.
Each route has its own return multiple before fees. This varies with the Conservative, Base or Optimistic setting. You can change them under Advanced. Fees, carry and cash-flow timing then shape the result. These are scenarios, not forecasts.