Host Shana Orczyk Sissel kicks off season four of What’s the Alternative? (a Wealthies Awards finalist) with Clark Edlund, Partner at CAZ Investments, to explain GP stakes, buying an ownership interest in an alternative asset manager to access “house” economics (management fees, carried interest, balance sheet) rather than only LP fund returns. The episode breaks down common private market terms and fee mechanics (management fees on committed vs deployed capital, preferred return/hurdles, catch-up, high watermark, and American vs European waterfalls) and why alignment and underwriting matter. They discuss diversification benefits across strategies and vintages, structural realities like slow capital calls and illiquidity, evolving liquidity tools, and the need for advisors to document liquidity expectations.

Key takeaways:

• GP stakes invest in asset management firms, capturing firm-level economics across past, present, and future vintages.
• GP vs. LP economics differ materially: LPs pay management fees; GPs receive fees plus potential carry and balance sheet returns.
• Understanding waterfalls (American vs. European), pref/hurdles, and catch-up provisions is critical to evaluating incentives and alignment.
• GP stakes can offer broad private-markets diversification and mitigate vintage timing, but require comfort with illiquidity and slow deployment.
• Advisors should set expectations, document liquidity budgets (e.g., in an IPS), and compare performance using metrics appropriate to the structure (IRR/MOIC vs. evergreen reporting).

Subscribe for more episodes of What's the Alternative?

Connect with us!

• Clark Edlund on LinkedIn
• CAZ Investments
• Shana Orczyk Sissel on LinkedIn
• Shana Orczyk Sissel on X
• Shana’s Website
• Banríon Capital Management