Using NCREIF to Benchmark Performance

A lot of this is google-able, but here you go anyway:

1. NFI-ODCE includes leverage and includes a wider array of assets (non-core, debt instruments, etc.) while NPI is unlevered core properties - pick the bucket that fits you the most.
2. Time weighted returns are normalized by default. You can read up on it more, but the way I've thought about it is a TWR is the return on one dollar invested since the beginning of the investment period. So if I invested $1.00 and now I have $1.50, my return is 50%. A few reasons for using this vs. IRR:
   1. Normalizes for manager size - it allows a more fair comparison of managers with differing size funds. It's what you did with your money, not how much you have.
   2. Harder to game - IRRs are notoriously easy to game with funds. I can put the entire investment on our subline at 1.5% (well, it was 1.5% when I was tracking them no idea what it is now) so that the investors don't have to put in any money until right before the day I sell and voila! a 100000000% IRR is born. Some pension funds allow/encourage this, while others refuse to allow for the guarantees that get banks comfortable to offer a subscription line.
   3. Go readyou can't eat IRR for a more detailed comparison between IRR (money-weighted returns) and TWR (Time-weighted returns).
3. Yes people will take the regional and product type to the extent possible as their benchmark, though they may compare it to the overall benchmark as well. What you compare it to is usually mandated by your investor though, so it's not really up to the fund.
4. It's not generally done in my experience unless mandated by an investor or as part of a pitch deck (in which case the fund is pitching to people who care about and will ask to benchmark to an index anyway). If it is part of a pitch deck, the fund is likely cherry picking the data to the extent possible to make them look as good as possible.