Home / Directory / Illiquid valuation

Illiquid valuation: a buyer's guide

What we list in this category, how the field splits between long-established products and newer ones, and the questions worth pressing on before you commit.

Every entry below was recorded from a page we opened, and each carries the source we read. Where we could not establish something it is left blank rather than guessed. Read how this site works if you want the detail.

Long-established products

Recorded as established: in production for many years, usually with a deep reference base and broad coverage. Those are real advantages, and so is the fact that a fifteen-year horizon is easier to argue for a supplier that has already lasted one.

• Portfolio Valuation Services — Independent fair value estimates for Level 3 assets held by hedge funds, BDCs, private equity firms and insurers. source
• Portfolio Valuation and Fund Advisory — Independent third-party valuations of illiquid debt and equity securities under ASC 820 and IFRS 13 for funds and investment managers. source
• eFront — Enterprise alternative investment operations and analytics suite, sold by BlackRock alongside Aladdin. source

Newer products

Recorded as modern or emerging. Newer suppliers often offer capability and pricing the incumbents do not, and they carry risks the incumbents do not: fewer references at your size, less operating history, and concentration if they are small. Both belong in the same comparison, on the same fields.

• 73 Monitor — AI-assisted monitoring of illiquid holdings, sold with 73 Value for valuations and 73 Extract for pulling data out of unstructured documents. source
• 73 Value — Automates equity and credit valuations for private capital managers as part of the 73 Intelligence platform; investors shown on its own site include Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, Hamilton Lane and Golub Capital. source
• Chronograph — Cloud portfolio monitoring and analytics for private capital investors, including mark-to-market valuation workflows; took a growth equity investment of over $140M from Sixth Street Growth. source
• Chronograph GP — Portfolio company data collection, valuations and reporting for GPs; a separate Chronograph LP product does the same job for limited partners. source
• Chronograph GP Valuations — Cloud platform that consolidates and streamlines quarterly mark-to-market valuation workflows for private equity, credit, infrastructure and real assets. source
• FAIR (Fee Allocation Incentive Reporting) — Independent validation of the management fees, partnership expenses and carried interest that LPs are charged by private fund managers; colmore.com now redirects to BlackRock's eFront Insight page, so the service appears to have been folded into eFront and I could not confirm its current owner or product name. source

What to ask

These come from the same question bank our request-for-proposal process uses, so a guide and an RFP never drift apart. The four sections below carry the most weight in that bank.

Functional fit

Whether the system does the job for YOUR instruments, markets and volumes — not for the demonstration portfolio. The questions separate what runs in production today from what is on the roadmap, because that distinction disappears in a sales meeting and reappears during implementation. It also asks what still has to be typed in by hand, which every system has and few volunteer.

• Which asset classes does the product support in production today?
• Is there a full audit trail of who changed what and when, and can it be exported?
• Does the system enforce segregation of duties between front and back office?
• Is maker-checker approval supported on material actions, and is it configurable by action type?
• Can a valuation be sourced and approved independently of the people who trade?

Security and resilience

Whether the vendor's security is independently attested or merely asserted. The questions ask for certifications you can read, penetration tests you can see the summary of, and recovery objectives that are written down. Incident history is asked directly, because a vendor that has handled a breach well is often a safer choice than one that has never been tested.

• Which independent attestations do you hold currently?
• Will you provide the most recent report under a non-disclosure agreement?
• Is data encrypted in transit and at rest?
• Is single sign-on supported, and is multi-factor authentication enforced?
• Can your own staff see our data, and is that access logged and reviewable by us?

Commercial terms

Total cost across the whole term, and what happens if you leave. Year one is asked separately from years two to five because year one hides where the money goes. The section asks explicitly what is NOT included, since the gap between the quote and the invoice lives there, and it asks about exit terms while you still have the leverage to negotiate them.

• How is the product priced?
• What is the total first-year cost for our stated requirement, including implementation?
• What is the total annual cost in years two through five?
• What is NOT included in that figure?
• Is there a contractual cap on annual price increases?

Artificial intelligence

If a model touches your data, on what terms. This section exists because the answers differ enormously between vendors and are rarely offered unprompted. It asks whether your data trains models serving other clients, whether you can opt out and keep full function, whether a human reviews output before it affects a book or a client report, and who is liable when a model is wrong. Skip it only if you genuinely do not care.

• Does the product use machine learning or generative AI anywhere in its normal operation?
• Is client data ever used to train models that serve other clients?
• Can we opt out of AI features entirely and keep full product function?
• Does our data leave your infrastructure to reach those providers?
• Is a human review step required before an AI output affects a book, a trade or a client report?

See all 22 products in Illiquid valuation · Glossary