Home / Directory / Illiquid valuation
Illiquid valuation: a buyer's guide
What we list in this category, where each entry came from, 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.
What we list
Every product we hold in this category, in one list. A supplier that has run in production for twenty years and one that launched last year appear together and carry the same fields, because that is the comparison a buyer has to make. Each entry's founding year and owner are on its company page where the company states them, and both bear on continuity: long service is evidence a supplier will still be there, and a young supplier may offer capability and pricing the incumbents do not while carrying fewer references at your size.
- 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
- ARGUS — Commercial real estate software used for property and portfolio analysis and valuation. 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 LP — 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
- 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
- Kroll Valuation Platform — Cloud platform for alternative asset managers that extracts data from investment documents and models and automates valuations of illiquid private assets, starting with private credit. source
- Oxane Panorama — Private credit platform whose Valuations module and third-party valuation service cover corporate credit, asset-based lending, real estate and securitized products. source
- Oxane Panorama Valuations — Valuation module inside the Oxane Panorama private credit platform, offered alongside a third-party independent valuation service. source
- Portfolio Valuation — Independent fair value opinions on illiquid fund holdings; this is the practice formerly branded Duff & Phelps, but kroll.com blocked every page I tried so nothing here is confirmed. source
- Portfolio Valuation — Independent valuations of equity, debt and derivative securities for private and public holdings, used heavily by private equity firms. source
- Portfolio Valuation — Independent valuation of illiquid securities across the capital structure, including senior, subordinated and mezzanine loans, loan pools and structured products for direct lenders and BDCs. source
- Portfolio Valuation — Fair value determinations for private portfolios spanning equity, debt, structured credit, asset-based finance, real assets and complex securities, for GPs, LPs, BDCs and institutional managers. source
- Portfolio Valuation Operate Services — Outsourced valuation of illiquid holdings including secured and unsecured private credit, distressed debt, complex instruments, partnership interests and real estate. source
- Portfolio Valuation Services — Valuation of illiquid fund holdings delivered by the Murray Devine team, which Citrin Cooperman absorbed; the vendor page returned 403 so the detail is from search summaries. source
- 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 Services — Third-party ASC 820 and IFRS 13 valuations of illiquid debt and equity for hedge funds, private equity firms and BDCs; the page returned empty so this rests on search summaries only. source
- Portfolio Valuations — Independent valuations of illiquid investments for alternative asset managers, delivered by the Valuations & Opinions Group alongside the Lincoln Private Market Index. source
- Valuation of Complex and Illiquid Instruments — Boutique that marks hard-to-price derivatives and structured credit, including variance and volatility swaps, CDOs, CLOs and total return swaps. source
- Valutico — Data-driven business valuation platform used by private equity, advisory, audit and banking teams; the site claims over 850 teams as users. source
- eFront — Enterprise alternative investment operations and analytics suite, sold by BlackRock alongside Aladdin. source
- privateMetrics — Benchmarks and valuation analytics for private infrastructure and private equity investments. source
- timveroOS — Private credit platform that produces valuation marks, scenario analysis and stress tests rolled up from deal-level data to fund views. 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?
Compliance and regulatory
Whether the system stands up to your regulator and your auditor. Covers the reporting regimes the product supports directly, whether it can evidence who saw or changed a record, how long records are retained, and where in the world your data physically sits — which is a hard constraint for many firms rather than a preference.
- Can the system evidence to an auditor who saw or changed a given record, and when?
- In which jurisdictions is our data stored and processed?
- Are there any pending criminal matters or debarment proceedings involving the firm, its officers or its managers?
- Which regulatory reporting regimes does the product support directly?
- When a regime changes, is the update included in the licence or charged separately?
Clients and references
Whether they have done this for a firm like yours, and whether those firms stayed. Vendors present client counts and logos readily; they present ATTRITION reluctantly, which is why this section asks for clients lost and migrations completed as separate questions from clients won. Size fit decides more failed implementations than feature lists do, so it is asked directly.
- How many client firms use this product in production today?
- How many of those are of a similar type to our firm?
- How many are within our assets-under-management band?
- How many clients did you LOSE in each of the last three years?
- How many implementations begun in the last three years were abandoned before go-live?
You can send all 167 of these questions to the vendors you choose, and get every answer back side by side. Run an RFP — it is free to you and free to them.