👋 Welcome to the 22 new readers and welcome back to everyone else - and thanks for all the feedback I received after last weeks post - please keep it coming!

Last week, I shared my overall framework for evaluating GPs.

This week, I want to zoom in on the one chart I always open first when looking at a fund. It’s simple, but it gives a surprisingly complete picture of a fund’s return profile - in one glance you can see distribution, concentration, and how much is still unrealized.

Here’s what we’ll cover today:

  • Why I create this chart when I start getting serious about a fund

  • The mechanics behind the chart

  • A simple, but non-trivial example

  • How this chart should look across asset classes

  • And most importantly: Typical flags and questions this chart raises

As always, I’ll wrap up with a few of my favorite reads this week + new funds raised in the last 7 days.

Let’s dive in 👇

The one chart I open first

If I’m seriously considering a fund, this is the chart I pull up before anything else. In one view it shows how returns are distributed and how diversified the portfolio really is - two things I care about more than headline IRR.

It’s the quickest gut-check against concentration and outliers: look at distribution and avoid dependency on a single winner.

How the chart works

  • Y-axis: total value created, split into realized and unrealized. You instantly see the spread of outcomes and how much of it is locked in.

  • X-axis: portfolio companies, where the width of each bar = capital invested in that company. 

Net effect: height shows outcome, width shows bet size. Put together, you see if big bets paid off, if small bets drove the fund, and how much is still paper gains.

Add a few overlay metrics

Add two simple data points on top of the chart:

  1. Top 5 investments as % of total returns - Shows return concentration

  2. Top 5 investments as % of total capital deployed - Shows capital concentration

These two numbers tell you instantly whether you're looking at consistent execution or a portfolio carried by one or two home runs.

Adding these numbers consistently across funds and managers also gives quick numbers to benchmark against.

A simple thought experiment

Two GPs, each on Fund II with 10 investments in Fund I:

Fund A (for Alpha 🚀)

  • Clear 1st quartile performance across IRR, TVPI and DPI**.**

  • Relatively skewed performance, but several strong investments.

  • A few write-offs on the right tail.

Fund B (for Boring 😴)

  • Fund performs at the top of the 2nd quartile, just around first quartile performance.

  • Even distribution of outcomes - no single outlier.

  • Lower dispersion; fewer extremes.

Which would I choose? I don’t think the answer is clear cut. Instead, it depends on risk appetite and portfolio fit:

  • If I want predictability and repeatability, I’ll lean toward Fund B. The chart shows a diversified engine with less path dependency.

  • If I’m comfortable with concentration risk (and the outlier looks repeatable), Fund A is without a doubt the better swing for top-decile results - provided the team can explain why the big win wasn’t a one-off and how that playbook shows up elsewhere. (That’s where the rest of the framework - strategy, value creation, people - comes in.)

How this chart differs across asset classes

Lower return targets ⇒ expect evenness. The lower the fund’s target return, the more evenly distributed this chart should look - both across outcomes and invested capital.

  • Credit / Infrastructure: I want a very even distribution across invested capital and return. If one investment was driving returns, that was actually concerning. I'd take boring consistency over headline returns any day.

  • Venture: I expected the exact opposite. Returns should be driven by outliers. That's the model. A venture fund with even distribution probably means they're not swinging for the fences enough.

  • Buyout: I can accept a couple of outliers, but I also want a few other very solid investments to show depth and repeatability. Too much concentration meant they were either lucky or taking too much risk.

Typical flags and questions this chart can raise

The chart doesn't just show you what happened - it tells you what questions to ask next.

Small investments driving returns

If the best performers are all thin bars (small checks), and the GP is now raising a fund 2x larger, that's a red flag. Can they actually create the same value when they're writing $200M checks instead of $100M checks? The skill set is different. The operational leverage is different. You need to dig into whether their value creation playbook scales.

Large unrealized positions

If a GP has a big winner that's still unrealized (a tall bar with mostly unrealized value), that's the perfect moment to dig into their exit strategy.

  • Are they compounding winners by holding and adding capital? Or are they waiting too long to realize gains?

  • Both can be valid approaches, but you need to understand their philosophy - and whether it's actually a philosophy or just reluctance to crystallize returns.

Co-investing lens. If I’m co-investing, a highly uneven return profile is a warning sign. I’d rather co-invest with Manager B (more even distribution), of course, subject to my risk appetite.

The bottom line: Why this chart became my favorite

Most performance analysis focuses on aggregate numbers: IRR, TVPI, DPI. Those are important, but they don't tell you how the returns were made.

This chart shows you:

  • ✅ Return distribution (is it one home run or consistent execution?)

  • ✅ Portfolio concentration (big bets or diversification?)

  • ✅ Realization progress (paper gains or actual distributions?)

  • ✅ Number of investments (does it match their stated strategy?)

All in one view.

It's the perfect gut-check before you dive deeper into the individual deals.

A 3x fund that got there with one 20x winner and several write-offs is very different from a 3x fund with eight solid return drivers.

Both might be good investments. But they represent completely different risk profiles - and very different questions you need to ask in diligence.

This chart helps you see that difference immediately.

🔖 Interesting reads

Here are a few articles I found share-worthy this week.

💰 A quick intel snapshot of recently raised funds

If you enjoyed this newsletter, I’d appreciate it if you would forward it to a colleague or friend. If you’re that friend, welcome!

Written by

Steffen Risager

This newsletter is written by Steffen Risager, the founder of FundFrame, a platform for LPs to manage their private markets investments.

Before that, Steffen was CIO at Advantage Investment Partners, a Danish Fund-of-Funds.

Steffen has a decade of experience as an LP, and has made commitments totaling approx. $6bn across fund- and co-investments.

Keep reading

No posts found

© 2025 BeyondTVPI.

Privacy policy

Terms of use

Powered by beehiiv