Investment Committee Memo · Waterfalls
AccretivUSA, Inc.
AccretivUSA · Residential RE · Debt · Vintage 2012
77
Waterfalls composite LP-favorability score (0–100)
99
LP take (absolute)
78
Pref quality
91
Fee drag
25
GP alignment
55
Timing risk
Key economics
- Preferred return
- 8%
- Hurdle rate
- —
- LP / GP split
- —
- GP catch-up
- No
- GP clawback
- —
- GP commitment
- —
Diligence findings (6 · 3 high/critical)
- highDDQ gap: Does the fund engage an independent auditor?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Governance). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
- highDDQ gap: Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
- highDDQ gap: What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
- mediumDDQ gap: Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Governance). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
- mediumDDQ gap: What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Structure). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
- mediumDDQ gap: What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
DDQ readiness — 54% covered
7 answered · 0 partial · 6 gaps of 13 standard questions.