New / small funds doing larger deals...

Quick question folks. I am currently amidst recruiting for PE and have been involved in a handful of processes for shops that are a lot smaller than I am looking for, but who are doing deals seemingly well above their weight class. If you were to join a mid-market shop with a $500m fund (not AUM, actual fund size), what size deals would you expect these guys to be doing? I have been interviewing at a few shops with fund sizes <$500m that say they look for platform acquisitions with $50m in EBITDA which doesn't seem to add up here... Is this just because they are new funds so they are trying to do a quick first fund with only a handful of investments before raising a larger one?

 

 Is this just because they are new funds so they are trying to do a quick first fund with only a handful of investments before raising a larger one?

Yes. You could invest in 10 companies that cost $50 each, or you could invest in 4 companies that cost $125 each. If you invest in four companies that cost $125 each, and they go well, you can go back to your LPs and say "We did a good job, but we need to be able to do more than 4 investments". It's a watered down framework but the point stands. 

 

I would be surprised if a shop is going to write checks that comprise >25% of the committed capital just given concentration issues.  Over the past few years, there has been significantly increased interest from LPs in co-invest given the increased amount of dry powder they've accumulated, plus allows them to avoid GP fees on that money.  IMO it's the easiest way for small funds to do bigger deals. 

 

Based on this, would you guys think that they'd look to fundraise in short order with a larger target or would it still be the typical ~5 years with the first fund?

 
Most Helpful

I worked at a first-time fund and yes, in general a Fund I will be more concentrated than subsequent funds. There's a few reasons, including: 

  • Raising a Fund I is tough as nails and >80% of LPs will straight up disqualify you on that point alone. The thing is, they're not trying to avoid performance risk (which won't be known for years) so much as they are trying to avoid founder / team / chemistry risk... so just showing that you can do any deals together in your box is a major proof point ahead of raising a Fund II 
  • LPs basically look at a Fund I as a high-ceiling, low-floor opportunity. A Fund I needs to have the potential for outsized returns for an LP to justify parking money there v. somewhere established (lower risk)... taking a more concentrated approach enables that
  • Co-investments from LPs can actually be easier to raise than a dedicated fund... you're only asking someone to opt into a specific asset v. opt into a new team who will blindly manage your money. These coinvestments still count towards AUM so it's advantageous for early funds to raise a bunch of SPV capital. You'll more easily get to a $1B Fund II if you had a $250M Fund I + $250M in SPVs v. just a $250M Fund I. 
  • Because of all the dynamics above, Fund II will usually very quickly follow Fund I. At my shop we had deployed >50% of Fund I by our final close and started raising Fund II 3 months afterwards
 

All of the above is pretty spot on. Only thing I'd add is that the first-time funds you see doing really big deals are often run by former megafund guys who are comfortable with larger deals. The idea is that you can use coinvest to do larger deals and justify much larger fund sizes down the line without having to raise a bunch of money in a committed fund upfront.

 

Itaque beatae fuga ipsam eum sequi officia eius sit. Tempore numquam labore quod nam aut fugit. Perferendis aut corporis doloribus voluptatem iusto dolorem dolorem.

Et aliquam in beatae ut ut maxime et ex. Consectetur nam voluptate sint libero quod veniam. Dicta consectetur quia provident asperiores maxime. Impedit aliquid aut ducimus voluptate. Aut est magnam repellat qui et. Nemo molestias vel molestiae ex ut. Expedita quam dolore rerum omnis omnis laborum modi.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Blackstone Group 99.0%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.4%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Blackstone Group 98.9%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 98.4%
  • Ardian 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Bain Capital 99.0%
  • Blackstone Group 98.4%
  • Warburg Pincus 97.9%
  • Starwood Capital Group 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Private Equity

  • Principal (9) $653
  • Director/MD (22) $569
  • Vice President (92) $362
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (90) $280
  • 2nd Year Associate (205) $268
  • 1st Year Associate (387) $229
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (29) $154
  • 2nd Year Analyst (83) $134
  • 1st Year Analyst (246) $122
  • Intern/Summer Associate (32) $82
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (314) $59
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
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
9
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
10
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
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...”