How to evaluate private-bank alternatives access
A practical scorecard for sophisticated investors comparing advisory quality, private-market access, diligence, conflicts, fees, reporting and liquidity.
A practical decision process
A five-step process for comparing private-bank alternatives access and governance.
- Define the portfolio objective: Record the intended allocation, risk budget, liquidity needs, return objective, concentration limits and decision authority.
- Map the complete offer: Identify the underlying manager or asset, legal structure, access route, counterparties, minimum commitment and expected holding period.
- Review diligence and conflicts: Assess origination, manager diligence, product governance, placement economics, related-party interests and access to underlying information.
- Reconcile fees, liquidity and reporting: Compare all fee layers, valuation policy, transfer limits, cash-flow reporting, performance reporting and material-event disclosure.
- Score the offers consistently: Use one documented scorecard and record the suitability, tax and legal reviews required before commitment.
How should sophisticated investors compare private-bank alternatives offers?
Use a written scorecard covering advisory independence, origination source, product and manager diligence, conflicts, total fees, liquidity, valuation, reporting and access to underlying decision-makers. Compare each offer against the investor's portfolio objectives and decision process before reviewing individual products.
Questions to put to every provider
| Dimension | Question | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Advice | Is the recommendation based on the portfolio mandate? | Documented suitability and allocation rationale |
| Access | Is the opportunity proprietary, syndicated or broadly distributed? | Origination source and allocation policy |
| Diligence | What was reviewed and who approved the product? | Investment memo, approval process and outstanding risks |
| Conflicts | Who is paid by whom? | Complete written fee and conflict disclosure |
| Economics | What is the expected investor return after every layer of fees? | Net return bridge and downside scenarios |
| Reporting | How often are valuations and material developments reported? | Sample report and valuation policy |
| Liquidity | What restrictions, gates or transfer constraints apply? | Legal terms and realistic exit routes |
Matchpoint's institutional-quality comparison before commitment
Matchpoint can support a defined private-market evaluation mandate covering opportunity comparison, underlying evidence, economics, conflicts and execution considerations. The scope is agreed in writing and does not constitute personal investment advice.
What decision-makers ask
Compare origination quality, product governance, manager diligence, conflicts, total fees, liquidity terms, portfolio reporting, suitability controls and the level of access to underlying information and decision-makers.
Include advisory or custody charges, placement or distribution economics, management fees, performance fees, SPV costs, administration, financing costs and any embedded product-level expenses.
Reporting should identify valuation policy, portfolio exposures, cash flows, performance net of fees, material events, concentration, liquidity restrictions and the timing and source of underlying-manager information.
