GP stakes, with management-company depth

FRE drives the base case. Fee-related earnings are the recurring cash flow that underwrites the base case. They need to be tracked at the GP level continuously, not just at quarterly reporting.

Carry is the upside but it is lumpy. Carry realisations depend on underlying fund performance and exit timing. Forecasting and reporting need to handle the lumpiness honestly.

Fundraising velocity is leading indicator. AUM growth comes from successive fund closings. Velocity, time-between-funds and step-up size are leading indicators of franchise health.

Key-person risk is concentrated. GP economics often concentrate on a handful of senior partners. Succession planning, key-person clauses and retention need structured monitoring.

GP Stakes is one of the platform's 68 native asset classes and is scored on its own rubric rather than through a sub-asset overlay. Twelve of the 68 native classes work this way: the deal population is structurally homogeneous enough that a single criteria set, document checklist and key term schema covers it without slicing further.

That keeps intake simple. Every gP Stakes opportunity is asked the same questions, extracted against the same key term fields, and compared against the same rubric, so the scoring is directly comparable across your whole gP Stakes book from the first deal onwards.

Every gP Stakes opportunity that moves through Reuben AI leaves a structured record rather than a folder of documents and a memo. The rubric score is stored with the criteria that produced it, each extracted key term is stored with the clause and page it came from, and every flag is stored with the reason it fired and who cleared it.

The practical effect is that the investment committee paper, the LP report line and the audit trail are all reading the same underlying record. When an LP asks in year three why a gP Stakes position was underwritten the way it was, the answer is retrieved, not reconstructed.

GP Stakes sits as a core allocation for Institutional mandates, and is adjacent or opportunistic for 3 of the other fund types the platform serves.

That matters operationally because most funds do not hold gP Stakes alone. The moment a portfolio spans more than one asset class, comparability becomes the constraint: a position scored on a bespoke gP Stakes spreadsheet cannot be ranked against a position scored somewhere else. Running gP Stakes on the same rubric engine as the rest of the book removes that break.

Reporting inherits the same property. Portfolio monitoring, valuation cadence, capital account movement and LP reporting all draw from the single stored record, so a gP Stakes position appears in the quarterly pack on the same basis as every other holding, with the same evidence behind it.