How to Make a Fund Factsheet

Jocelyn Gilligan, CFA, CIPM
Partner
September 30, 2022
15 min
How to Make a Fund Factsheet

Longs Peak is specialized in helping investment firms calculate and present investment performance. As a team, we have either reviewed or created thousands of factsheets for the 200+ investment firms we’ve worked with. Over the years, we’ve come to realize that many investment managers struggle to create fund factsheets that help potential investors truly understand their firm and strategy. Many end up with generic leaflets of information that don’t actually help get interested investors in the door. Others make them because they feel like they have to and piece together an abundance of data without cohesive direction. Unless you have an in-house marketing team that’s specialized in advertising for investment managers, you might feel like you don’t know where to begin.

So how can you decide what to include when making a factsheet for your strategies? Keep reading to find out.

Where to begin

There are three things that you should consider before you make (or hire someone to make) your factsheets:

  1. Who is the target audience (i.e., your core client)?
  2. What is the primary objective of your strategy?
  3. How do you make investment decisions?

Once you know these three things, design is really just puzzling together the critical elements and aligning it with your branding.

Understanding your Target Audience

While this may seem obvious, knowing your target audience can make a huge difference in the success of your factsheets (which can be measured by how many requests you get for additional information). We find that firms often put together a factsheet with information they most commonly see other firms including – risk-adjusted performance statistics, sector allocations, top holdings and more – without much consideration for who will be reading the document. While this is not a bad place to start, too often factsheets end up generic and are not meaningful to the reader. It is important that your factsheet helps your prospects understand your investment process and how your strategy can help them achieve their goals. Picturing who you are communicating with as you develop the factsheet will help ensure your message is clear and focused on what is most important to them.

Institutional investors, such as large pension funds you’d like to sub-advise for, will want to see performance appraisal statistics that demonstrate how your strategy performed on a risk-adjusted basis and how this aligns with your investment objective and process. We’ll discuss more about this in the following sections, but most importantly, your factsheet should tell the story of your investment process – what you set out to do and how you achieved it (or what happened if you didn’t). It’s sort of like a report on your strategy’s OKRs (Objectives and Key Results).

Retail investors are likely less prepared to interpret complicated statistics and care more about how you’re going to help them achieve their future goals (think future college tuition payments, that retirement home in the mountains, etc.). For this type of investor, it may be better to incorporate more absolute return visuals like growth-of-a-dollar line graphs and text that explains how you plan to help grow their capital while protecting it from material losses. Or how you’d make customized investment decisions with their goals in mind.

Regularly, firms have a target audience that is somewhere in between. Sophisticated enough that they understand some performance appraisal measures, but not so sophisticated that they understand what they all mean. In this case, you’ll want to consider your target audience’s goal in investing their money with you. Whether they’re saving for retirement, supporting the financial needs of a loved one, or looking to add risk to a well-diversified portfolio, knowing their objective will help you be clearer about how to communicate to this audience.

And remember, although your factsheet should be designed with your ideal client in mind, there may be situations where your target audience differs from this core customer. For example, if you normally target retail investors but get the opportunity to pitch to a large RIA, you may want to customize the factsheet to cater to this client type. In this case, just follow these same steps with this client in mind.

Need help defining your target audience? You can use this GUIDE to help you define your core customer (or client profile).

What is the Primary Objective of your Strategy?

The key message you want your factsheets to convey is how your strategy goes about identifying drivers of value/returns. You want to communicate your end-goal (your strategy objective) and then demonstrate through statistics, graphs, and charts how you achieved it (your key results).

Whether your strategy is primarily focused on beating the benchmark on the upside or protecting capital on the downside, the statistics shown should act like a scorecard that demonstrates how you performed specifically on that objective. If your strategy’s primary goal is to beat on the upside, you’ll want to show things like Upside Capture (usually shown together with Downside Capture), Batting Average, Sharpe Ratio, and Alpha. Alternatively, if your strategy aims to protect on the downside, things like Max Drawdown, Downside Capture (again usually shown with Upside Capture), or Downside Deviation will be more relevant.

If you manage a strategy that exhibits a non-normal return distribution (e.g., you manage a strategy with options that create positive spikes in performance), you’ll want to include risk measures designed to consider these asymmetrical returns. These measures could include things like Sortino Ratio and Semi-Deviation.

Regardless of the strategy type, be sure to take the time or consult with someone that can help you select statistics that support your investment objective and display how you’ve done on an absolute and risk-adjusted basis.

This information should also be used internally as a feedback loop to assess what worked and didn’t work. The findings from this reflection can also be used in market commentary – either in your factsheet or as a quarterly market newsletter – to explain performance results for the current period. Doing this creates transparency and builds trust. Furthermore, it demonstrates to prospects that you are paying attention to what is happening in the market and taking action to address these changes.

Want to learn more about different performance appraisal measures? We’ve written several posts on different measures available and when you might use them.

How do you Make Active Investment Decisions?

If you – or your sales team – don’t know the answer to this question, it’s probably time to make sure you have this message clear. Because if your team doesn’t know how to explain it, it’s going to be confusing for a prospect. Investors of all types typically want to understand the investment process – how a strategy is implemented and how you manage the trade-off between expected return and risk exposure. You can help them understand these things by clearly identifying where you are making active investment decisions and then illustrating that information in your factsheet.

Frequently, firms don’t know what to include to help explain the story of their investment process but answering a couple simple questions can help. Consider the following:

  • Are you performing fundamental or quantitative (systematic) analysis?
  • Do you characterize your strategy as top-down or bottom-up?
  • Do you consider micro or macroeconomic factors in your analysis?
  • Do you have a value- or growth-based approach?
  • Do you have geographic/country-based factors in your selection process?
  • For spread-based bond portfolio investments, how do you select fixed income issuer types, industries, and instruments? How do you define your universe and narrow that down by credit quality, duration and taxability?

We often see firms that want to include information in their factsheets that really has no relevance to their active decision making. For example, if your investment process involves bottom-up fundamental analysis focused on stock selection with no active decisions to over- or under-weight at the sector-level, showing sector weights in comparison to the benchmark is less relevant than it is for a manager that specifically makes active decisions on sector exposures. Does showing where you ended up this quarter provide any meaning to the reader? If not, it’s best to find something that does.

The same goes for other common factsheet components like holdings and asset allocation. If you manage a strategy that focuses on macro-level variables and invests in a handful of ETFs, swaps and futures contracts to capture macro dynamics to generate returns, showing your top holdings may provide little meaning to the reader and it could even reveal trade secrets you may not wish to divulge. Perhaps in this case, focusing on describing the macro-level environment or trends and how you added exposure to them may be more meaningful.

Having clarity about where active decisions are made will help you select the right information to show. Remember, most factsheets are 1-2 pages in length so there’s not a lot of real estate to waste, especially if your disclosures take up half a page!

The new SEC Marketing Rule

Finally, the SEC’s new Marketing Rule, which is set to take effect on November 4, 2022, has a variety of requirements for presenting investment performance in advertisements. It is crucial that your factsheets follow these requirements. If you have not taken the steps necessary to prepare for these changes, we strongly encourage you to have your factsheets and performance information reviewed to make sure that any advertisement you make has been prepared with the new requirements in mind. Here’s a checklist of key performance-related considerations to help get you started.

Conclusion

The main objective of publishing and distributing fund factsheets is to get you meetings with more prospective investors. If you’re not getting the interest you think you deserve, perhaps it’s time to consider how effective your fund factsheets are at communicating your performance to your core customers.

From our small business to yours, there are many books written about goal setting. As a firm, we subscribe to the OKR method and recommend reading Measure What Matters by John Doerr. While it’s not specifically intended for investment advisors or analyzing investment returns, the concepts can be helpful in outlining how to set objectives for your investment strategies and then use performance statistics to measure the key results.

If you are interested in learning more about how Longs Peak can help you create better prospect engagement through factsheets and pitchbooks, contact jocelyn@longspeakadvisory.com.

Recommended Post

View All Articles

Performance reporting has two common pitfalls: it’s backward-looking, and it often stops at raw returns. A quarterly report might show whether a portfolio beat its benchmark, but it doesn’t always show why or whether the results are sustainable. By layering in risk-adjusted performance measures—and using them in a structured feedback loop—firms can move beyond reporting history to actively improving the future.

Why a Feedback Loop Matters

Clients, boards, and oversight committees want more than historical returns. They want to know whether:

·        performance was delivered consistently,

·        risk was managed responsibly, and

·        the process driving results is repeatable.

A feedback loop helps firms:

·        define expectations up front instead of rationalizing results after the fact,

·        monitor performance relative to objective appraisal measures,

·        diagnose whether results are consistent with the manager’s stated mandate, and

·        adjust course in real time so tomorrow’s outcomes improve.

With the right discipline, performance reporting shifts from a record of the past toa tool for shaping the future.

Step 1: Define the Measures in Advance

A useful feedback loop begins with clear definitions of success. Just as businesses set key performance indicators (KPIs) before evaluating outcomes, portfolio managers should define their performance and risk statistics in advance, along with expectations for how those measures should look if the strategy is working as intended.

One way to make this tangible is by creating a Performance Scorecard. The scorecard sets out pre-determined goals with specific targets for the chosen measures. At the end of the performance period, the manager completes the scorecard by comparing actual outcomes against those targets. This creates a clear, documented record of where the strategy succeeded and where it fell short.

Some of the most effective appraisal measures to include on a scorecard are:

·        Jensen’s Alpha: Did the manager generate returns beyond what would be expected for the level of market risk (beta) taken?

·        Sharpe Ratio: Were returns earned efficiently relative to volatility?

·        Max Drawdown: If the strategy claims downside protection, did the worst loss align with that promise?

·        Up- and Down-Market Capture Ratios: Did the strategy deliver the participation levels in up and down markets that were expected?

By setting these expectations up front in a scorecard, firms create a benchmark for accountability. After the performance period, results can be compared to those preset goals, and any shortfalls can be dissected to understand why they occurred.

Step 2: Create Accountability Through Reflection

This structured comparison between expected vs. actual results is the heart of the feedback loop.

If the Sharpe Ratio is lower than expected, was excess risk taken unintentionally? If the Downside Capture Ratio is higher than promised, did the strategy really offer the protection it claimed?

The key is not just to measure, but to reflect. Managers should ask:

·        Were deviations intentional or unintentional?

·        Were they the result of security selection, risk underestimation, or process drift?

·        Do changes need to be made to avoid repeating the same shortfall next period?

The scorecard provides a simple framework for this reflection, turning appraisal statistics into active learning tools rather than static reporting figures.

Step 3: Monitor, Diagnose, Adjust

With preset measures in place, the loop becomes an ongoing process:

1.     Review results against the expectations that were defined in advance.

2.     Flag deviations using alpha, Sharpe, drawdown, and capture ratios.

3.     Discuss root causes—intentional, structural, or concerning.

4.     Refine the investment process to avoid repeating the same shortcomings.

This approach ensures that managers don’t just record results—they use them to refine their craft. The scorecard becomes the record of this process, creating continuity over multiple periods.

Step 4: Apply the Feedback Loop Broadly

When applied consistently, appraisal measures—and the scorecards built around them—support more than internal evaluation. They can be used for:

·        Manager oversight: Boards and trustees see whether results matched stated goals.

·        Incentive design: Bonus structures tied to pre-defined risk-adjusted outcomes.

·        Governance and compliance: Demonstrating accountability with clear, documented processes.

How Longs Peak Can Help

At Longs Peak, we help firms move beyond static reporting by building feedback loops rooted in performance appraisal. We:

·        Define meaningful performance and risk measures tailored to each strategy.

·        Help managers set pre-determined expectations for those measures and build them into a scorecard.

·        Calculate and interpret statistics such as alpha, Sharpe, drawdowns, and capture ratios.

·        Facilitate reflection sessions so results are compared to goals and lessons are turned into process improvements.

·        Provide governance support to ensure documentation and accountability.

The result is a sustainable process that keeps strategies aligned, disciplined, and credible.

Closing Thought

Markets will always fluctuate. But firms that treat performance as a feedback loop—nota static report—build resilience, discipline, and trust.

A well-structured scorecard ensures that performance data isn’t just about yesterday’s story. When used as feedback, it becomes a roadmap for tomorrow.

Need help creating a Performance Scorecard? Reach out if you want us to help you create more accountability today!

When you're responsible for overseeing the performance of an endowment or public pension fund, one of the most critical tools at your disposal is the benchmark. But not just any benchmark—a meaningful one, designed with intention and aligned with your Investment Policy Statement(IPS). Benchmarks aren’t just numbers to report alongside returns; they represent the performance your total fund should have delivered if your strategic targets were passively implemented.

And yet, many asset owners still find themselves working with benchmarks that don’t quite match their objectives—either too generic, too simplified, or misaligned with how the total fund is structured. Let’s walkthrough how to build more effective benchmarks that reflect your IPS and support better performance oversight.

Start with the Policy: Your IPS Should Guide Benchmark Construction

Your IPS is more than a governance document—it is the road map that sets strategic asset allocation targets for the fund. Whether you're allocating 50% to public equity or 15% to private equity, each target signals an intentional risk/return decision. Your benchmark should be built to evaluate how well each segment of the total fund performed.

The key is to assign a benchmark to each asset class and sub-asset class listed in your IPS. This allows for layered performance analysis—at the individual sub-asset class level (such as large cap public equity), at the broader asset class level (like total public equity), and ultimately rolled up at the Total Fund level. When benchmarks reflect the same weights and structure as the strategic targets in your IPS, you can assess how tactical shifts in weights and active management within each segment are adding or detracting value.

Use Trusted Public Indexes for Liquid Assets

For traditional, liquid assets—like public equities and fixed income—benchmarking is straightforward. Widely recognized indexes like the S&P 500, MSCI ACWI, or Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index are generally appropriate and provide a reasonable passive alternative against which to measure active strategies managed using a similar pool of investments as the index.

These benchmarks are also calculated using time-weighted returns (TWR), which strip out the impact of cash flows—ideal for evaluating manager skill. When each component of your total fund has a TWR-based benchmark, they can all be rolled up into a total fund benchmark with consistency and clarity.

Think Beyond the Index for Private Markets

Where benchmarking gets tricky is in illiquid or asset classes like private equity, real estate, or private credit. These don’t have public market indexes since they are private market investments, so you need a proxy that still supports a fair evaluation.

Some organizations use a peer group as the benchmark, but another approach is to use an annualized public market index plus a premium. For example, you might use the 7-year annualized return of the Russell 2000(lagged by 3 months) plus a 3% premium to account for illiquidity and risk.

Using the 7-year average rather than the current period return removes the public market volatility for the period that may not be as relevant for the private market comparison. The 3-month lag is used if your private asset valuations are updated when received rather than posted back to the valuation date. The purpose of the 3% premium (or whatever you decide is appropriate) is to account for the excess return you expect to receive from private investments above public markets to make the liquidity risk worthwhile.

By building in this hurdle, you create a reasonable, transparent benchmark that enables your board to ask: Is our private markets portfolio delivering enough excess return to justify the added risk and reduced liquidity?

Roll It All Up: Aggregated Benchmarks for Total Fund Oversight

Once you have individual benchmarks for each segment of the total fund, the next step is to aggregate them—using the strategic asset allocation weights from your IPS—to form a custom blended total fund benchmark.

This approach provides several advantages:

  • You can evaluate performance at both the micro (asset class) and macro (total fund) level.
  • You gain insight into where active management is adding value—and where it isn’t.
  • You ensure alignment between your strategic policy decisions and how performance is being measured.

For example, if your IPS targets 50% to public equities split among large-, mid-, and small-cap stocks, you can create a blended equity benchmark that reflects those sub-asset class allocations, and then roll it up into your total fund benchmark. Rebalancing of the blends should match there balancing frequency of the total fund.

What If There's No Market Benchmark?

In some cases, especially for highly customized or opportunistic strategies like hedge funds, there simply may not be a meaningful market index to use as a benchmark. In these cases, it is important to consider what hurdle would indicate success for this segment of the total fund. Examples of what some asset owners use include:

  • CPI + Premium – a simple inflation-based hurdle
  • Absolute return targets – such as a flat 7% annually
  • Total Fund return for the asset class – not helpful for evaluating the performance of this segment, but still useful for aggregation to create the total fund benchmark

While these aren’t perfect, they still serve an important function: they allow performance to be rolled into a total fund benchmark, even if the asset class itself is difficult to benchmark directly.

The Bottom Line: Better Benchmarks, Better Oversight

For public pension boards and endowment committees, benchmarks are essential for effective fiduciary oversight. A well-designed benchmark framework:

  • Reflects your strategic intent
  • Provides fair, consistent measurement of manager performance
  • Supports clear communication with stakeholders

At Longs Peak Advisory Services, we’ve worked with asset owners around the globe to develop custom benchmarking frameworks that align with their policies and support meaningful performance evaluation. If you’re unsure whether your current benchmarks are doing your IPS justice, we’re hereto help you refine them.

Want to dig deeper? Let’s talk about how to tailor a benchmark framework that’s right for your total fund—and your fiduciary responsibilities. Reach out to us today.

Valuation Timing for Illiquid Investments
Explore how firms & asset owners can balance accuracy & timeliness in performance reporting for illiquid investments.
June 23, 2025
15 min

For asset owners and investment firms managing private equity, real estate, or other illiquid assets, one of the most persistent challenges in performance reporting is determining the right approach to valuation timing. Accurate performance results are essential, but delays in receiving valuations can create friction with timely reporting goals. How can firms strike the right balance?

At Longs Peak Advisory Services, we’ve worked with hundreds of investment firms and asset owners globally to help them present meaningful, transparent performance results. When it comes to illiquid investments, the trade-offs and decisions surrounding valuation timing can have a significant impact—not just on performance accuracy, but also on how trustworthy and comparable the results appear to stakeholders.

Why Valuation Timing Matters

Illiquid investments are inherently different from their liquid counterparts. While publicly traded securities can be valued in real-time with market prices, private equity and real estate investments often report with a delay—sometimes months after quarter-end.

This delay creates a reporting dilemma: Should firms wait for final valuations to ensure accurate performance, or should they push ahead with estimates or lagged valuations to meet internal or external deadlines?

It’s a familiar struggle for investment teams and performance professionals. On one hand, accuracy supports sound decision-making and stakeholder trust. On the other, reporting delays can hinder communication with boards, consultants, and beneficiaries—particularly for asset owners like endowments and public pension plans that follow strict reporting cycles.

Common Approaches to Delayed Valuations

For strategies involving private equity, real estate, or other illiquid holdings, receiving valuations weeks—or even months—after quarter-end is the norm rather than the exception. To deal with this lag, investment organizations typically adopt one of two approaches to incorporate valuations into performance reporting: backdating valuations or lagging valuations. Each has benefits and drawbacks, and the choice between them often comes down to a trade-off between accuracy and timeliness.

1. Backdating Valuations

In the backdating approach, once a valuation is received—say, a March 31 valuation that arrives in mid-June—it is recorded as of March 31, the actual valuation date. This ensures that performance reports reflect economic activity during the appropriate time period, regardless of when the data became available.

Pros:
  • Accuracy: Provides the most accurate snapshot of asset values and portfolio performance for the period being reported.
  • Integrity: Maintains alignment between valuation dates and the underlying activity in the portfolio, which is particularly important for internal analysis or for investment committees wanting to evaluate manager decisions during specific market environments.
Cons:
  • Delayed Reporting: Final performance for the quarter may be delayed by 4–6 weeks or more, depending on how long it takes to receive valuations.
  • Stakeholder Frustration: Boards, consultants, and beneficiaries may grow  frustrated if they cannot access updated reports in a timely manner, especially if performance data is tied to compensation decisions, audit     deadlines, or public disclosures.

When It's Useful:
  • When transparency and accuracy are prioritized over speed—e.g., in annual audited performance reports or regulatory filings.
  • For internal purposes where precise attribution and alignment with economic events are critical, such as evaluating decision-making during periods of market volatility.

2. Lagged Valuations

With the lagged approach, firms recognize delayed valuations in the subsequent reporting period. Using the same example: if the March 31valuation is received in June, it is instead recorded as of June 30. In this case, the performance effect of the Q1 activity is pushed into Q2’sreporting.

Pros:
  • Faster Reporting: Performance reports can be completed shortly after quarter-end, meeting board, stakeholder, and regulatory timelines.
  • Operational Efficiency: Teams aren’t held up by a few delayed valuations, allowing them to close the books and move on to other tasks.

Cons:
  • Reduced Accuracy: Performance reported for Q2 includes valuation changes that actually occurred in Q1, misaligning performance with the period in which it was earned.
  • Misinterpretation Risk: If users are unaware of the lag, they may misattribute results to the wrong quarter, leading to flawed conclusions about manager skill or market behavior.

When It's Useful:
  • When quarterly reporting deadlines must be met (e.g., trustee meetings, consultant updates).
  • In environments where consistency and speed are prioritized, and the lag can be adequately disclosed and understood by users.

Choosing the Right Approach (and Sticking with It)

Both approaches are acceptable from a compliance and reporting perspective. However, the key lies in consistency.

Once an organization adopts an approach—whether back dating or lagging—it should be applied across all periods, portfolios, and asset classes. Inconsistent application opens the door to performance manipulation(or the appearance of it), where results might look better simply because a valuation was timed differently.

This kind of inconsistency can erode trust with boards, auditors and other stakeholders. Worse, it could raise red flags in a regulatory review or third-party verification.

Disclose, Disclose, Disclose

Regardless of the method you use, full transparency in reporting is essential. If you’re lagging valuations by a quarter, clearly state that in your disclosures. If you change methodologies at any point—perhaps transitioning from lagged to backdated—explain when and why that change occurred.

Clear disclosures help users of your reports—whether board members, beneficiaries, auditors, or consultants—understand how performance was calculated. It allows them to assess the results in context and make informed decisions based on the data.

Aligning Benchmarks with Valuation Timing

One important detail that’s often overlooked: your benchmark data should follow the same valuation timing as your portfolio.

If your private equity or real estate portfolio is lagged by a quarter, but your benchmark is not, your performance comparison becomes flawed. The timing mismatch can mislead stakeholders into believing the strategy outperformed or underperformed, simply due to misaligned reporting periods.

To ensure a fair and meaningful comparison, always apply your valuation timing method consistently across both your portfolio and benchmark data.

Building Trust Through Transparency

Valuation timing is a technical, often behind-the-scenes issue—but it plays a crucial role in how your investment results are perceived. Boards and stakeholders rely on accurate, timely, and understandable performance reporting to make decisions that impact beneficiaries, employees, and communities.

By taking the time to document your valuation policy, apply it consistently, and disclose it clearly, you are reinforcing your organization’s commitment to integrity and transparency. And in a world where scrutiny of investment performance is only increasing, that commitment can be just as valuable as the numbers themselves.

Need help defining your valuation timing policy or aligning performance reporting practices with industry standards?

Longs Peak Advisory Services specializes in helping investment firms and asset owners simplify their performance processes, maintain compliance, and build trust through transparent reporting. Contact us to learn how we can support your team.