Sign up  |  Log in

Private equity

I totally bombed the private equity set.

Does anybody remember choosing investment C for the first question and B for the second?

Master the Level II curriculum by creating custom quizzes in the SchweserPro™ QBank. Question difficulty automatically adapts to your ability level on a given topic, measuring your knowledge and keeping you motivated. Included in every Schweser Study Package.

I am with You on C and B

C and A.

I just know you want high hurdle rates, low management fees, payout based on total return, etc.

C for investors and A for annual clawback

i think i went with C and A

first one had lowest carried interest, same management fees, or vice versa

second one had deal-by-deal clawback or something idk

annual clawback right? not end of fund clawback

C&A sounds familiar

Right you want clawback to be reconciled as often as possible.

annual clawback, highest hurdle, and lowest management fee…

yes, the annual or deal by deal clawback better.
.75 dpi
12% i -1’d that one
what else was there?

oh well, i guessed both and got 1 right… can’t complain

was one answer px multiples here?

RVPI important or not for LPs

Valuation metrics for VC firms

or replacement costs?

EBITDA

.75 dpi?

damn

i said 45/70 ~0.64

i put GP’s/LP’s self value for the last one but not sure about that one.

IRR was -14%, correct?

It was still early days for the Fund they hadn’t yet paid much out yet. thoughts?

ebitda wasn’t on the PE set.

What was the 12% question about? I agree with the .75 DPI, annual clawback, highest hurdle rate, lowest fee, etc.

Was the 12% question about the IRR? I think that they said the contributions were at the beginning of the year and the distributions at the end so you had to match them up somehow.

bannisja Wrote:
——————————————————-
> i put GP’s/LP’s self value for the last one but
> not sure about that one.

I did too for that. Isnt the valuation handled by the GP and that is a drawback to the LP.

^^^I can’t remember that question for the life of me.

Relative value approaches are not appropriate for VC firms.

what numbers did you guys use to get .75 dpi?

i used (distributed earnings)/(money obtained during marketing period)

bannisja Wrote:
——————————————————-
> i put GP’s/LP’s self value for the last one but
> not sure about that one.

I thought this one was…the GP does the valuations annually or the GP hires an independent third party to do the valuations…something like this…anyone else?

CLT2- relative value approaches- was that an answer exactly or are you telling me my px multiples (which is a relative valuation approach) is right?
if i went 5/6 on alts, i would feel a lot better b/c i think i went 1 or 2/6 on econ.

yeah relative valuation

Relative Valuation as in comparables. VC firms typically have no comparable companies to use as guideline companies for multiples.

Yeah, replacement and real options are OK. Relative Valuation is not.

i use dist/sum of called down for dpi

Fund C better for investors because of lower carry.

Fund A better for annual true up clawback..meaning money from GP is returned to investors if there is a loss.

_________
Forza Juve

were those the 3 choices? replacement, real options, and relative valuation?

why do i remember px multiples somewhere? god i hope i chose relative valuation here then… i don’t remember but it looks good to me out of those 3.

quant- what was the T stat #?