Pillar
Portfolio Efficiency
Check size, ownership, company count and reserves are connected. This section helps you see how the choices fit together, then review the assumptions behind the score.
6 pages
The five subscores
- Does your check size still match your fund sizeWhether the check a fund can actually write, after reserves and across its target portfolio count, buys a real position at the stage the fund invests at.
- Can you actually get the ownership you are targetingCan your fund reach its ownership target at its entry stage? Explore check sizes, valuations, dilution and the debate over ownership.
- Is your thesis wider than your portfolio can coverWhether a fund's declared industry scope and the portfolio it intends to build describe the same fund, and why the mismatch runs in both directions.
- Are you configured for the fund you are actually onWhether a fund's configuration matches the lifecycle stage its firm has declared, across four indicators, plus what pacing actually tells a General Partner.
- Can your team run the strategy you have declaredWhether the team can run the investment practice the fund has declared, across lead practice, board seat practice, portfolio count, and team size.
How to read this engine
Efficiency here means coherence rather than thrift. The engine is not asking whether the fund spends carefully. It is asking whether the fund's configuration describes one executable strategy, given the stage it enters at and the lifecycle stage the firm has declared. The five subscores are not independent of one another in practice, which is why moving a single input often moves several at once: a change to portfolio count really does change the cheque, the scope fit, and the team load simultaneously.
Composite Efficiency Index
How coherently a fund's configuration choices fit together for its lifecycle stage. A 0 to 100 headline built from the five subscores, and the reading to start with. Its five contributions depend on deployment phase. Return per Unit of Variance and the Consistency Score are separate model indicators, with their own calibration limits.
A Composite Efficiency Index means little on its own, because the same number carries different weight at different lifecycle stages. It is shown against its cohort context: the median and top-quartile values for funds at the same lifecycle stage. Those reference values are currently provisional rather than empirical, and the platform says so where it shows them: Provisional benchmark values, pending calibration as the cohort grows. They should not be treated as observed peer statistics until empirical calibration has been completed and identified.
None of the three readings is a quality judgment about the fund or a prediction about its returns. A high Composite Efficiency Index says the configuration's parts fit each other; it does not say the strategy is a good one, that the market will reward it, or that the team will execute it. The five-check index assesses the declared plan. Other indicators can use recorded portfolio activity, so read each definition before comparing the results.