Default
Score model

Pick how composites are weighted for you. Affects every score across the app.

Sign in to save models →
Sign in

Energea Portfolio 3 Africa LLC

Sponsored by Energea Global LLC·

Residential RE· Debt· LLC · 2 classes· ● High· PPM v1· Updated 2mo ago
2 data notes
Low-confidence extractionUnusual structure
Run the numbers
Composite
72.2
median 36 +36
Pref Return
70%
median 8.0% +62.0%
LP Take (Base)
99.5%
median 85.9% +13.7%
GP Commit
0.0%
median 0.0% +0.0%
Min Investment
$100
ticket size
Offering Size
$75M
target raise
Cascade · Distributions

Where each dollar goes

$875K
LP $871K · Fees $4K · GP $0
GROSS PROCEEDS$875KGPFFees to Manager$4,175 · 0.5% of grossLPT1Return of Capital$500,000 · 57.1% of grossLPT2Preferred Return (70%)$370,825 · 42.4% of grosspool fully distributed
Standard scenario · $500K equity · 5y hold · 1.75× exitRun your own cascade →
Class structure · 2 classes· viewing as Common Shares

How Energea Portfolio 3 Africa LLC divides the cap table

The cascade above is filtered to Common Shares. Reset to blended view.

Deal diligence6 findings · worst high

Automated checks across the fund's extracted PPM. Every finding is shown with the evidence it's based on — proven numbers or a verbatim quote and page.

Waterfall structure

Structural checks run against Energea Portfolio 3 Africa LLC's extracted waterfall. Each is a deterministic test — the numbers shown are proven from the PPM, not estimated.

A 70% preferred return is stated but no waterfall tier pays it

Medium

Key economics declare a preferred return, yet none of the extracted distribution tiers reference a pref/hurdle or carry a threshold rate. A pref that lives only in the summary — not the distribution mechanics — may not be contractually enforceable.

90% confidence

Waterfall splits to the GP with no explicit return-of-capital tier

Low

A residual GP split is present but no extracted tier returns the LP's contributed capital first. This is often an extraction nuance rather than a structural hole, but worth confirming against the distribution section.

70% confidence

Diligence gaps

Questions a standard diligence questionnaire would ask that the PPM leaves unanswered.

DDQ gap: Does the fund engage an independent auditor?

High

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?

High

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?

Medium

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.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?

Medium

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.

90% confidence

DDQ readiness

How much of a standard institutional due-diligence questionnaire this fund's offering documents answer out of the box. Gaps are questions an allocator will ask directly.

62%
Coverage
8 answered1 partial4 gaps13 questions
Economics
  • What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?Preferred return of 70%.Answered
  • What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?94% LP / 6% GP residual split.Answered
  • Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?No GP catch-up.Answered
  • Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?Gap
  • What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?Gap
Structure
  • What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?1 distribution tier(s) extracted; structure type not classified.Partial
  • What is the fund's investment strategy / asset class?Debt · Residential REAnswered
  • What is the fund's vintage year?Vintage 2021.Answered
  • What is the target offering size?Target offering of $75,000,000.Answered
  • What is the minimum LP investment?Minimum investment of $100.Answered
Fees & Expenses
  • Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?1 fee line item(s) extracted from the offering documents.Answered
Governance
  • Does the fund engage an independent auditor?Gap
  • Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?Gap

Fee scheduletaken before LP distributions

Total load 0.17%
Fee
Trigger
Basis
Rate

Service providers2 gaps

Legal Counsel
OK
Holland & Knight LLP
Not extracted — synthetic for demo
Auditor
Gap
Not disclosed
Audit intent not stated in PPM. Ask the sponsor: will the fund be audited, by whom, and on what frequency?
Fund Administrator
Gap
Not disclosed
No third-party fund administrator referenced. Manager likely handles admin internally — common for <$10M raises but reduces independence.
Placement Agent
OK
No placement agent engaged
No placement agent engaged. Direct placement by Manager — no placement fees eat your invested capital.

Community threads0 active

What allocators are saying. Diligence notes, open questions, attached scenarios.

No threads yet. Be the first →

Reviews

No reviews yet

Be the first allocator to leave a take.

Funds you might also likesame Residential RE