Investment Committee Memo · Waterfalls
FundRebel Dean, LLC
FundRebel, LLC · Residential RE · Debt · Vintage 2018
11
Waterfalls composite LP-favorability score (0–100)
0
LP take (absolute)
30
Pref quality
0
Fee drag
20
GP alignment
25
Timing risk
Key economics
- Preferred return
- 3.4%
- Hurdle rate
- —
- LP / GP split
- 99% / 1%
- GP catch-up
- No
- GP clawback
- —
- GP commitment
- —
Diligence findings (5 · 2 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.
- 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 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.
- lowWaterfall splits to the GP with no explicit return-of-capital tierA 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.
DDQ readiness — 62% covered
8 answered · 1 partial · 4 gaps of 13 standard questions.