What is a GP-led continuation fund, and how does it address alignment of interest between GPs and LPs?
I've seen continuation funds mentioned in CFA alternative investment material as a growing trend. How exactly does a GP roll assets from an old fund into a new vehicle? And isn't there a conflict of interest since the GP is both buyer and seller?
A GP-led continuation fund is a secondary market transaction where the general partner transfers one or more portfolio companies from an existing fund into a newly created vehicle, giving existing LPs the choice to cash out or roll their interest into the new fund. This structure has become a dominant segment of the PE secondary market.\n\nHow It Works:\n\n1. The GP identifies portfolio companies that need more time or capital to maximize value\n2. A new continuation vehicle (CV) is formed with fresh terms (typically 3-5 year life, new management fee, new carry structure)\n3. A secondary buyer leads the transaction, providing pricing validation and fresh capital\n4. Existing LPs choose to either:\n - Cash out at the transaction price (liquidity option)\n - Roll over into the new vehicle (continued upside exposure)\n5. The GP typically commits meaningful co-investment to align interests\n\nConflict of Interest Mitigation:\n\nThe GP is effectively on both sides of the deal, which creates inherent conflicts:\n\n- Independent valuation: A fairness opinion from an independent advisor validates the transfer price\n- Lead secondary buyer: A reputable secondary fund (e.g., Lexington Partners, Ardian) underwrites the transaction, providing market-based pricing\n- LPAC approval: The Limited Partner Advisory Committee reviews and approves the transaction terms\n- GP commitment: The GP rolls 100% of its existing carry and often commits additional capital to the new vehicle\n- LP optionality: No LP is forced to participate; they can take cash at the validated price\n\nWorked Example:\n\nBrackenridge Capital Partners Fund III (2017 vintage) has two remaining portfolio companies. The fund's 10-year life expires in 2027, but the GP believes both assets can double in value over 3 more years.\n\nContinuation vehicle terms:\n\n| Parameter | Old Fund | Continuation Vehicle |\n|---|---|---|\n| Remaining life | 1 year | 3 years (+ 2 extensions) |\n| Management fee | 1.5% on committed | 1.0% on NAV |\n| Carried interest | 20% over 8% hurdle | 12.5% over 8% hurdle |\n| GP commitment | Original co-invest | +$15M new commitment |\n| Transfer NAV | $180M | $180M (validated by Wycliffe Secondaries) |\n\nLPs choosing to cash out receive $180M pro rata. LPs rolling over retain their exposure at the same valuation. Wycliffe Secondaries provides $95M of primary capital, purchasing the cashed-out LP interests and providing follow-on capital.\n\nLP Decision Framework:\n\nLPs should evaluate: (1) confidence in the GP's thesis for continued value creation, (2) whether the continuation vehicle terms are fair, (3) their own liquidity needs, and (4) the track record of the GP in managing extended-hold assets.\n\nLearn more about GP-led structures in our CFA Alternative Investments course.
Master Level III with our CFA Course
107 lessons · 200+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
What are the most reliable candlestick reversal patterns, and how should CFA candidates interpret them in context?
What are the CFA Standards requirements for research reports, and what must be disclosed versus recommended?
How does IAS 41 require biological assets to be measured, and what happens when fair value cannot be reliably determined?
Under IFRIC 12, how should a company account for a service concession arrangement, and what determines whether the intangible or financial asset model applies?
What is the investment entities exception under IFRS 10, and why are some parents exempt from consolidating their subsidiaries?
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.