Site icon Portico Advisers

The Great Unlock

When I started this business five years ago, I believed that EM private markets investors would embrace a richer, more diversified set of strategies than the traditional PE fund model.

Though I initially framed this evolution as “the tyranny of choice,” I thought it would be liberating — an opportunity to attain better alignment with the universe of investable companies in EM.

Alas, apart from an explosion in corporate venture capital (CVC), progress had been a bit stultifying.

But over the last few months, it feels like we may be entering the great unlock, with firms pushing the market forward with compelling products and strategic moves. 

For instance: 

Will all of these succeed? 

I don’t know.

But the action is exciting.

What’s particularly invigorating is that the universe of prospective investors in EM private companies is growing. The industry’s reliance upon (increasingly) hidebound institutions is diminishing.

The movements are also a wake-up call, though.

If you’re a PE firm doing business as usual, consider this an invitation to think about your own market position and growth strategy.

A few questions to get you going:

 Always happy to be a thought partner!

Contact me here.

— Mike


Is Sustainable Investing Dangerous?

In the latest episode of the Portico Podcast, I interview Tariq Fancy — the former CIO for Sustainable Investing at BlackRock— about his delightfully thought-provoking essay The Secret Diary of a ‘Sustainable Investor’.
 
Tariq and I get into the important distinction between ESG-related investments in public and private markets, as well as the roles the public and private sectors can play in solving climate change and inequality.
 
You don’t want to miss this one.
 
Check it out on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Spotify


Actis

Actis closed its Actis Energy 5 vehicle with $4.7 billion of fund commitments (~20% above target), and the firm anticipates that co-investment opportunities will take the aggregate capital deployed to $6B.

It’s a massive success that signals a strong endorsement of the firm’s strategic pivot. Notwithstanding the challenges besetting the EM PE industry, Actis’s decision to eschew growth equity and embrace real assets was a bold decision.

Assuming they execute smartly, the firm should be well positioned to attract and deploy sizable volumes of capital going forward.


DPI, Quona & Talking About Impact

Development Partners Internationalannounced that it closed its third flagship fund at $900M, with an incremental $250M in co-invest available for deployment across Africa. 

Hats off to the team following what had to be a grind of a fundraise. African PE has gone through a challenging period, indeed.

One of the things I like about DPI’s refreshed website is the clarity and focus re: impact and ESG. Impact has been a part of DPI’s DNA since inception, but they’ve brought it to the fore with a clearly articulated impact agenda that is tied to the SDGs. It’s well done.

One of the best examples I’ve seen of a firm communicating its commitment and strategy toward impact is Quona.

(Don’t miss our interview with Monica Brand Engel discussing fintech and financial inclusion here).

Quona recently refreshed their brand identity, and I love it.

Their new website deftly threads the impact needle — conveying the dynamism and scale of their commercial opportunity whilst establishing the firm’s bona fides as an OG impact investor.

You should check it out.

I hadn’t thought about it until recently, but most of our client engagements now incorporate an impact strategy audit and / or the development of customized impact frameworks and measurement methodologies.

I should hasten to add that these aren’t ‘greenwashing’ exercises, and that Portico’s not interested in levying an ESG tax on firms (see interview with Tariq Fancy above).

That said, we’re always happy to help mission-driven firms (1) identify and accentuate the additionality of their investments; and (2) hold themselves accountable with meaningful metrics.

Send me a note if you’d like to chat.


Noisy Customers

ILPA released its fund terms survey. You have to be a member to download the full study, but anyone can glimpse the key findings or read about it in Institutional Investor.

The nut of it is that LPs are paying more in management fees (because they’re allocating to larger and larger funds), and those management fees are covering a smaller share of expenses (because GPs are passing along more operating costs to LPs).

Is it just me, or is it becoming an annual ritual to hear institutional LPs complain about the actions of (mega-cap) PE firms?

And then exacerbate the problem by handing (mega-cap) PE firms even more money?

Here’s a tip: you’re getting worse terms because the people on the other side of the table don’t respect you. They know that you’re not willing to walk away, because then you’d have to find a new manager relationship — and that entails work and a modicum of career risk.

The good news in the report is that “transparency has improved” so the institutions have a better grasp on the volumes of beneficiaries’ retirement savings that are being used to fund GPs’ operational expenses.


Wall of Shame

For Private-to-Private transactions, [employee] dissatisfaction is concentrated in non-management employees and comes mostly from how management treats them. In Public-to-Private transactions, the dissatisfaction is stronger, multi-faceted, and present for all employees, including management.

— “Employee Views of Leveraged Buy-Out Transactions” by Marie Lambert, Nicolas Moreno, Ludovic Phalippou, and Alexandre Scivoletto


From the Bookshelf

The inventors we remember are significant not so much as inventors, but as founders of “disruptive” industries, ones that shake up the technological status quo. Through circumstance or luck, they are exactly at the right distance both to imagine the future and to create an independent industry to exploit it.

Let’s focus, first, on the act of invention. The importance of the outsider here owes to his being at the right remove from the prevailing currents of thought about the problem at hand. That distance affords a perspective close enough to understand the problem, yet far enough for greater freedom of thought, freedom from, as it were, the cognitive distortion of what is as opposed to what could be. This innovative distance explains why so many of those who turn an industry upside down are outsiders, even outcasts …

Another advantage  … [is] being a disinterested party. Distance creates a freedom to develop inventions that might challenge or even destroy the business model of the dominant industry.

 — Tim Wu, The Master Switch (Knopf: 2010)

# # #

The information presented in this newsletter is for informational purposes only. Portico Advisers does not undertake to update this material and the opinions and conclusions contained herein may change without notice. Portico Advisers does not make any warranty that the information in this newsletter is error-free, omission-free, complete, accurate, or reliable. Nothing contained in this newsletter should be construed as legal, tax, securities, or investment advice.

Copyright © by Portico Advisers, LLC 2021, all rights reserved.

Exit mobile version