Instead of focusing on process, allocators should first ask managers fundamental questions like "What do you believe?" and "Why does this work?" to uncover their core investment philosophy. This simple test filters out the majority of firms that lack a deeply held, clearly articulated conviction about their edge.

Related Insights

Backing independent sponsors on a deal-by-deal basis is more than an investment strategy; it is an extended due diligence process. This approach provides deep, real-time insights into a manager's problem-solving skills under pressure, offering transparency that is impossible to achieve before a Fund I commitment.

During due diligence, it's crucial to look beyond returns. Top allocators analyze a manager's decision-making process, not just the outcome. They penalize managers who were “right for the wrong reasons” (luck) and give credit to those who were “wrong for the right reasons” (good process, bad luck).

A common mistake for emerging managers is pitching LPs solely on the potential for huge returns. Institutional LPs are often more concerned with how a fund's specific strategy, size, and focus align with their overall portfolio construction. Demonstrating a clear, disciplined strategy is more compelling than promising an 8x return.

Many fund managers approach capital raising by broadcasting their own "unique" story. However, the most successful ones operate like great listeners, first seeking to understand the specific needs and constraints of the Limited Partner (LP) and then aligning their value proposition accordingly.

Many LPs focus solely on backing the 'best people.' However, a manager's chosen strategy and market (the 'neighborhood') is a more critical determinant of success. A brilliant manager playing a difficult game may underperform a good manager in a structurally advantaged area.

In a crowded market, the most critical question for a founder is not "what's the idea?" but "why am I so lucky to have this insight?" You must identify your unique advantage—your "alpha"—that allows you to see something others don't. Without this, you're just another smart person trying things.

To elicit candid answers from fund managers, the most effective technique is not the question itself but the silence that follows. Resisting the psychological urge to fill the space forces the manager to sit with the question, often leading to less rehearsed and more truthful responses.

According to Ken Griffin, legendary investors aren't just right more often. Their key trait is having deep clarity on their specific competitive advantage and the conviction to bet heavily on it. Equally important is the discipline to unemotionally cut losses when wrong and simply move on.

Founders Fund's perk allowing employees to co-invest personally is a clever mechanism to test true conviction. If an investor sponsoring a deal is unwilling to put their own money in, it raises a serious question about their belief in the investment's potential, forcing them to justify why it's a better allocation for LPs than their own capital.

When a private equity investment thesis is primarily built around a single person (e.g., a star CEO), it's a sign of weak conviction in the underlying business. If that person fails or leaves, the entire rationale for the investment collapses, revealing a lack of fundamental belief in the company's industry or competitive position.