Knowledge pillar
Direct investing, co-investments, alternatives, portfolio construction, risk management, and ESG/impact investing for family offices.
Family offices at $50M allocate 47% to public equity; those above $1B drop to 28% and triple alternatives. We analyse structural drivers, institutional comparisons, and policy ranges across three AUM tiers.
A comprehensive framework for family offices conducting direct investments: sourcing methodologies, four-stage due diligence, team sizing by AUM, term negotiation, board governance, and exit discipline with jurisdiction-specific considerations.
Three operating-model questions decide whether direct investing or fund allocation is the more honest answer for a given family office. The wrong choice is rarely loud — it just compounds slowly.
The IPS defines the boundary conditions inside which the investment team makes decisions. Without it, the team substitutes its own judgment for the family's intent — sometimes well, often not.
Pension and endowment models inform UHNW allocation but cannot drive it. Single-family circumstances — taxation, concentration, generational horizons, liquidity needs — produce a different efficient frontier.
ESG screening removes harmful holdings; impact investing actively seeks measurable outcomes. They are different disciplines, often confused, and a family office serving both should treat them separately.
The discipline that separates good manager selection from average is the willingness to say no — frequently, with documented reasons, and against social pressure.
A manager that scored well three years ago can be a different organisation today. Ongoing monitoring catches the drift before it costs the portfolio.
IMP, IRIS+, SDG alignment, and TCFD all attack overlapping problems from different angles. The risk for a family office is endless framework comparison; the remedy is a documented choice the team uses for every impact decision.
Standard risk reports — VaR, stress tests, factor exposures — are useful inputs to a richer conversation. The conversation is what catches concentrations, dependencies, and behavioural risks the numbers miss.
Most family offices receive competent risk reports. Far fewer translate them into committee conversation, action, and follow-through. The gap is where avoidable losses live.
Definitions every principal and advisor working in this area should be fluent in.
Curated insights on governance, investment, and operations for family office professionals. No noise, no sales pitches.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.