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?

Comments (8)

  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
2y 

 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. 

  • Associate 3 in PE - LBOs
2y 

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. 

2y 
topspark90, what's your opinion? Comment below:

they're likely getting co-investments from their LPs or others on top of the fund's allocation

Array
  • 1
2y 
TheBuellerBanker, what's your opinion? Comment below:

This. They'd never commit a seriously material % of their committed capital towards a certain trxn without extended commitments from key LPs 

  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
2y 
Anonymous Monkey, what's your opinion? Comment below:

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
2y 
PE-biz-dev, what's your opinion? Comment below:

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
2y 
fwank wwoyd wong, what's your opinion? Comment below:

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.

  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
2y 
Anonymous Monkey, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Qui temporibus aut eos sed et similique. Aut in et ad repudiandae vero id velit culpa. Saepe magni quia iusto sunt velit in.

Start Discussion

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2023 Private Equity

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

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2023 Private Equity

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

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2023 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Bain Capital 98.9%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.4%
  • Blackstone Group 97.9%
  • Ardian 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2023 Private Equity

  • Principal (8) $676
  • Director/MD (22) $599
  • Vice President (85) $362
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (86) $276
  • 2nd Year Associate (192) $264
  • 1st Year Associate (372) $228
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (28) $157
  • 2nd Year Analyst (79) $133
  • 1st Year Analyst (227) $122
  • Intern/Summer Associate (30) $80
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (288) $58