Free & Clear Equity, Inc.

Key economics

Preferred return

—

Hurdle rate

—

LP / GP split

—

GP catch-up

—

GP clawback

—

GP commitment

—

Diligence findings (15 · 5 high/critical)

• high
  DDQ 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.
• high
  DDQ 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.
• high
  DDQ gap: Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Fees & Expenses). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.
• high
  DDQ 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.
• high
  DDQ gap: What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?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.
• medium
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ gap: Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?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.
• medium
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ 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.
• medium
  DDQ gap: What is the target offering size?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.
• low
  Broken cross-reference — Section 13.02Internal self-reference inside Section 11.02 points to a nonexistent 'Section 13.02'; the provision is Section 11.02 and the document has no Section 13.02.
• low
  DDQ gap: What is the minimum LP investment?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.
• low
  Document-quality defect — Closing recital enumeration (Sixth -> Eighth)The numbered closing recitals jump from 'Sixth' directly to 'Eighth', skipping 'Seventh' — a recital appears to be missing or mislabeled.
• low
  Numeric inconsistency — 201 N. Illinois Street ZIP code (46204 vs 46240)The same principal/registered office building address is given two conflicting ZIP codes: '46204' in Article III but '46240' on the incorporator address page.
• info
  Spelling / typo — SECOND AMENDMENT AND RESTATED ARTICLESDocument header reads 'SECOND AMENDMENT AND RESTATED ARTICLES' (grammatically wrong) whereas the title and body consistently read 'SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES'.

DDQ readiness — 15% covered

2 answered · 0 partial · 11 gaps of 13 standard questions.