Help me understand NAV growth - quick question

Hi,

I have a quick question that's been bothering me about NAV/performance fee behavior.

Imagine a fund with a NAV of $1,000,000 and a 20% performance fee (ignoring expenses and the management fee for this example), funded entirely by one LP.

In Year 1, the fund achieves a 10% return, resulting in an ending NAV of $1,100,000, with $1,080,000 belonging to the LP and $20,000 allocated to the GP as a performance fee.

In Year 2, the fund achieves another 10% return. My question is: Does the GP's stake grow by the 10% return plus the performance fee allocation for that year, or does it grow only by the performance fee allocation for Year 2?

Intuitively, the first scenario feels correct (the GP's stake increases by the percentage return and the performance fee allocation). However, a colleague of mine who works in fund administration for private equity insists that only the performance fee/carry allocation growth is applied.

Could someone clarify this? Is this discrepancy due to different methodologies used in the private equity versus hedge fund world? Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

4 Comments
 

Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's what you need to know about NAV growth and performance fee behavior:

  1. Year 1 Calculation:

    • Initial NAV: $1,000,000
    • Return: 10%
    • Ending NAV: $1,100,000
    • LP's share: $1,080,000
    • GP's performance fee: $20,000
  2. Year 2 Calculation:

    • Starting NAV: $1,100,000
    • Return: 10%
    • Ending NAV: $1,210,000
    • Performance fee for Year 2: 20% of the $110,000 gain, which is $22,000
  3. GP's Stake Growth:

    • The GP's stake grows by the performance fee allocation for Year 2, which is $22,000.
    • The GP's stake does not grow by the percentage return on the entire NAV; it only grows by the performance fee allocation.

This approach aligns with the methodology used in private equity, where the GP's compensation is based on the performance fee (carry) rather than a percentage return on the entire NAV. This might differ from hedge fund practices, where different fee structures and methodologies could apply.

For further insights, you can refer to the detailed discussions on WSO forums: - https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/for-seniors-who-ha…</a">For seniors who have spent your career in private equity, do you regret it?

This should clarify the discrepancy and provide a better understanding of how performance fees are applied in private equity.

Sources: For seniors who have spent your career in private equity, do you regret it?, Secondary PE Modeling, For seniors who have spent your career in private equity, do you regret it?, What Happens when a PE Fund Closes?, Why the hate towards growth PE / sourcing (e.g. KKR Tech)?

I'm an AI bot trained on the most helpful WSO content across 17+ years.
 
Most Helpful

The return is compounded based on the net.

Year 1:

Start NAV: $100

Say you achieve a 10% return

End NAV: $110

Assume 2/20 fees: 2% x 100 + 20% x 10 = 2 + 2 = 4

NAV Net of Fees = $110 - $4 = $106

Year 2:

Start NAV = $106 Say you achieve 10% return again End NAV = $116.6

NAV Net of Fees = $116.6 - $2.12 - 2.12 = $112.36

2 YR CAGR = [1+ (112.36 - 100)/100]^(1/2) - 1 = 6% annualized return

Recheck work: Year 1: 100 x 1.06 = $106 Year 2: 106 x 1.06 = $112.36

Also think about it logically, the client/investor in the fund is really only entitled to the NAV net of all expenses. So only the Net NAV gets compounded (assuming no inflows or outflows into the fund).

 

Quibusdam ratione sit omnis voluptatibus quasi non ut. Eum et qui quos quis sed beatae laudantium similique.

Dolor in rerum rerum eos libero. Assumenda distinctio dolorem molestiae quo iste maiores et. Quibusdam ut soluta at. Quo ut adipisci nemo magni. Qui libero dolorum et omnis tempore. Blanditiis ullam est quisquam ullam eligendi dicta mollitia.

Maxime non molestias et corrupti. Aut qui in est. Consectetur consectetur eveniet quos laudantium perspiciatis est saepe. Perferendis sit quos non laboriosam sit quaerat.

Quia eos aut ab et officiis numquam. Voluptates provident dolores aut explicabo. Nam quia necessitatibus enim doloremque nobis quia animi.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Point72 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.1%
  • Citadel Investment Group 97.1%
  • AQR Capital Management 96.1%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Magnetar Capital 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.0%
  • Blackstone Group 97.0%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.0%
  • Millennium Partners 95.0%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • AQR Capital Management 99.0%
  • Point72 98.1%
  • D.E. Shaw 97.1%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.2%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.2%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Portfolio Manager (9) $1,648
  • Vice President (27) $464
  • Director/MD (12) $423
  • NA (9) $320
  • Engineer/Quant (86) $288
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (26) $284
  • Manager (4) $282
  • 2nd Year Associate (32) $253
  • 1st Year Associate (76) $192
  • Analysts (242) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (28) $146
  • Junior Trader (5) $102
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (282) $96
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”