DDQ gaps
100%
DDQ gap: Does the fund engage an independent auditor?
683 of 685 funds
99%
DDQ gap: Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?
680 of 685 funds
99%
DDQ gap: What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?
676 of 685 funds
99%
DDQ gap: Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?
675 of 685 funds
91%
DDQ gap: What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?
625 of 685 funds
77%
DDQ gap: What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?
525 of 685 funds
64%
DDQ gap: Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?
435 of 685 funds
55%
DDQ gap: What is the target offering size?
374 of 685 funds
48%
DDQ gap: What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?
330 of 685 funds
47%
DDQ gap: What is the minimum LP investment?
325 of 685 funds
23%
DDQ gap: Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?
155 of 685 funds
3%
DDQ gap: What is the fund's vintage year?
21 of 685 funds
2%
DDQ gap: Is there a key-person provision?
14 of 685 funds
0%
DDQ gap: Do investors have the right to remove the manager / general partner?
2 of 685 funds
0%
DDQ gap: Are investor subscriptions protected by a minimum-offering escrow?
2 of 685 funds
0%
DDQ gap: Are material amendments to the operating agreement subject to investor consent?
1 of 685 funds
Document quality
47%
Spelling / typo — Unites States Code
323 of 685 funds
31%
Broken cross-reference — Section 6.1.2(a)(ii)
210 of 685 funds
27%
Unfilled placeholder text — [ ]
186 of 685 funds
24%
Defined-term defect — the Company
165 of 685 funds
23%
Document-quality defect — Independent Directors definition — missing numeral
159 of 685 funds
20%
Numeric inconsistency — Aggregate par value of all authorized Shares
136 of 685 funds
Waterfall structure
20%
Disposition Fee (3%) is taken above the waterfall
135 of 685 funds
6%
A 7% preferred return is stated but no waterfall tier pays it
38 of 685 funds
4%
Waterfall splits to the GP with no explicit return-of-capital tier
30 of 685 funds
1%
All Distributions tier 1 over-allocates: shares sum to 200%, not 100%
10 of 685 funds
1%
Full (100%) GP catch-up to a 20% carry
7 of 685 funds
0%
No clawback provision — promote paid is not trued-up to the LP at wind-down
3 of 685 funds
0%
Residual split allocates 75%, not 100% (LP 50% + GP 25%)
1 of 685 funds
These are deterministic structural checks and document-quality findings produced from extracted PPM data — see how any individual fund scores on the LP-favorability leaderboard or compare two funds side by side. Educational only; not investment advice.