Default
Score model

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

Sign in to save models →
Sign in

ETX Park Fund #2, LLC

Sponsored by ETX Management·

Residential RE· Debt· LP · 2 classes· ● High· PPM v1· Updated 2mo ago
2 data notes
Low-confidence extractionUnusual structure
Run the numbers
Composite
66.8
median 36 +31
Pref Return
7%
median 8.0% 1.0%
LP Take (Base)
96.6%
median 85.9% +10.7%
GP Commit
0.0%
median 0.0% +0.0%
Min Investment
$500
ticket size
Offering Size
$7M
target raise
Cascade · Distributions

Where each dollar goes

$875K
LP $845K · Fees $30K · GP $0
GROSS PROCEEDS$875KGPFFees to Manager$30,000 · 3.4% of grossLPT1Return of Capital$500,000 · 57.1% of grossLPT2Preferred Return (7%)$201,276 · 23.0% of grossLPGPT4Residual Split (100% / 0%) · 16.4%Limited Partners · $144KGeneral Partner · $0pool fully distributed
Standard scenario · $500K equity · 5y hold · 1.75× exitRun your own cascade →
Class structure · 2 classes· viewing as Class A

How ETX Park Fund #2, LLC divides the cap table

The cascade above is filtered to Class A. 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 ETX Park Fund #2, LLC's extracted waterfall. Each is a deterministic test — the numbers shown are proven from the PPM, not estimated.

A 7% 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

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: What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?

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.

54%
Coverage
7 answered1 partial5 gaps13 questions
Economics
  • What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?Preferred return of 7%.Answered
  • What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?Gap
  • 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 2018.Answered
  • What is the target offering size?Target offering of $7,300,000.Answered
  • What is the minimum LP investment?Minimum investment of $500.Answered
Fees & Expenses
  • Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?4 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 6.00%
Fee
Trigger
Basis
Rate
% of Gross Revenue
3.00%
% of Sale Proceeds
2.00%
1.00%

Service providers3 gaps

Legal Counsel
Gap
Not disclosed
No independent counsel named for investors. Common in small syndications where Manager and Fund share counsel — reduces independence. Verify during diligence.
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