Default
Score model

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

Sign in to save models →
Sign in

ILS Fixed Horizon LLC

Sponsored by ILS Capital Management·

Unknown· LLC · 6 classes· ● Low· PPM v1· Updated 26d ago
2 data notes
Unusual structureUnscored: absolute lp take
Run the numbers
Composite
61.8
median 38 +24
Pref Return
LP Take (Base)
at 1.75× exit
GP Commit
0.0%
median 0.0% +0.0%
Min Investment
$25K
ticket size
Offering Size
$75M
target raise
Cascade · Distributions

Where each dollar goes

$875K
LP $850K · Fees $25K · GP $0
GROSS PROCEEDS$875KGPFFees to Manager$25,000 · 2.9% of grossLPT1Return of Capital$500,000 · 57.1% of grossLPGPT4Residual Split (100% / 0%) · 40.0%Limited Partners · $350KGeneral Partner · $0pool fully distributed
Standard scenario · $500K equity · 5y hold · 1.75× exitRun your own cascade →
Class structure · 6 classes· viewing as Class C2 Non-Voting Debt Units

How ILS Fixed Horizon LLC divides the cap table

The cascade above is filtered to Class C2 Non-Voting Debt Units. Reset to blended view.

Deal diligence15 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.

Document quality

Drafting defects found in the PPM prose — numeric inconsistencies, broken cross-references, unfilled placeholders, and defined-term problems. Each is shown with the offending quote and its page.

Numeric inconsistency — Net Proceeds to Company at 100% sold

High

Use-of-Proceeds 100%-sold table states net proceeds to Company of $70,445,000 (93.918%) but footnote (4) on the same page allocates 94.918% ($71,189,000) of net proceeds to purchasing notes, contradicting both the dollar figure and the percentage.

Net Proceeds to Company from Offering (4) N/A N/A $70,445,000 93.918% ... 4) Assuming the Maximum Offering Amount is achieved, the Company expects to allocate (a) 94.918% ($71,189,000.00) of the Net Proceeds to the Company to purchase notes
PPM p.3586% confidence

Document-quality defect — Liquidation Distributions priority list

Medium

The liquidation-priority list under Liquidation Rights is mis-numbered: it runs items 1-5 ('First','Second','Third','Interest Payments...','Fourth') but represents only four priority tiers, with item 3's sentence broken across items 3 and 4, creating ambiguity in the distribution waterfall.

3. Third, to the holders of Debt Units to the extent of and in proportion to their respective unpaid 4. Interest Payments until such Debt Unit holder's unpaid Interest Payment has been paid in full; and 5. Fourth, to the Manager.
PPM p.1970% confidence

Unfilled placeholder text — (confirm with client)

Medium

An internal drafting note instructing the preparer to verify legal-proceedings disclosure was left in the investor-facing document.

(d) Legal proceedings. (confirm with client)
PPM p.4690% confidence

Broken cross-reference — Exhibit B

Low

The Subscription Agreement is referenced as 'attached hereto as Exhibit B,' but it is identified as Exhibit 1A-4 on the cover-page disclosures and in the Index to Exhibits, which uses a 1A-X numbering scheme with no 'Exhibit B.'

you will be deemed to (i) agree to all of the provisions of the Subscription Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit B
PPM p.3372% confidence

Spelling / typo — FINACNIAL

Info

Table of Contents heading misspells 'FINANCIAL' as 'FINACNIAL'.

MANAGEMENT’S ANALYSIS OF FINACNIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
PPM p.795% confidence

Spelling / typo — our activities i be restricted

Info

Broken sentence with a missing/garbled word ('i') in a substantive regulatory risk statement.

the Company may be required to institute burdensome compliance requirements and our activities i be restricted, which would affect the Company’s operations to a material degree.
PPM p.1285% confidence

Spelling / typo — SUBSRIPTION

Info

Index to Exhibits misspells 'SUBSCRIPTION' as 'SUBSRIPTION' in the description of Exhibit 1A-4.

ILS FIXED HORIZON LLC AMENDED SUBSRIPTION AGREEMENT
PPM p.6595% confidence

Spelling / typo — the Manager the additional financial information

Info

Broken sentence missing a verb ('the Manager [provides/discloses] the additional financial information') in the prior-performance disclosure.

Additionally, the Manager the additional financial information as outlined in the SEC’s Industry Guide 5, in table format, per requested guidelines as an Exhibit to this Offering.
PPM p.4082% 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: What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?

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: Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?

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 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.

38%
Coverage
5 answered1 partial7 gaps13 questions
Economics
  • What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?Gap
  • What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?Gap
  • Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?Gap
  • 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?4 distribution tier(s) extracted; structure type not classified.Partial
  • What is the fund's investment strategy / asset class?UnknownAnswered
  • What is the fund's vintage year?Vintage 2015.Answered
  • What is the target offering size?Target offering of $75,000,000.Answered
  • What is the minimum LP investment?Minimum investment of $25,000.Answered
Fees & Expenses
  • Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?3 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 1.00%
Fee
Trigger
Basis
Rate
Ongoing during the offering
1% per annum on total Capital Contributions made to the Company, paid monthly
1.00%
Note Transfer Fee
Each note purchase / transfer
Flat fee of $135 to $200 per note transferred from ILS Lending LLC / Pearl Funding LLC via Loan Source LLC to the Company
0.00%
Organization and Offering Expenses Reimbursement
Post-qualification from working capital reserves at Manager's discretion
Actual expenses estimated at approximately $61,000 (legal and administrative), reimbursed to Manager from working capital reserves
0.00%

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 Unknown