Workshop Co-Investments: Investitionsparameter für institutionelle Investoren und rechtliche Aspekte
←
→
Transkription von Seiteninhalten
Wenn Ihr Browser die Seite nicht korrekt rendert, bitte, lesen Sie den Inhalt der Seite unten
Workshop Co-Investments:
Investitionsparameter für institutionelle Investoren
und rechtliche Aspekte 4. November 2020
Annette Olschinka-Rettig
Geschäftsführerin/
Managing Director
Diplomkauffrau
Betriebswirtschaftslehre
Poppelsdorfer Allee 106
53115 Bonn
+49 (0) 228 96987-15
olschinka-rettig@bvai.de
Agenda und Referenten
9:30 - 10:00
Co-Investments: Wann, warum und für wen lohnt sich der Aufwand?
Holger Roßbach, Senior InvestmentDirector, Cambridge Associates
Mit Co-Investments nicht k.o. gehen – Warum bei Co-Investments das
10:00 - 10:30 “Co” an erster Stelle steht
Daniel Boege, Partner, Golding Capital Partners
10:30 - 11:00
Erfolgsfaktoren für nachhaltig erfolgreiche Co-Investmentstrategien
Dr. Florian Kreitmeier, Managing Partner & Co-CEO, SwanCap Partners
11.00 - 11.30 Co-Investments aus regulatorischer, rechtlicher und steuerlicher Sicht
Dr. Gregor Evenkamp & Marco Simonis, Clifford Chance
11.30 - 12.00 Panel
2
White Paper Co-Investments: Überblick
Arten / Analysen Asset Manager Survey Investoren-Interviews
▪ Definitionen und Klassifizierungen ▪ Erstmalige Umfrage mit 35 Asset- ▪ Exemplarische Befragung von drei
nach Anlageklassen, Zugangs- managern aus dem BAI deutschen institutionellen Inves-
wegen und Investitionszeitpunkt Mitgliederkreis, die aktiv mit Co- toren zu Sidecars, Direct Co-
▪ Abgrenzung der Intensitätsgrade Investments arbeiten Investments und Co-Investment
der Involvierung von Investoren ▪ Co-Investments besonders eta- Fonds
▪ Beurteilung von Co-Investments bliert im Equity-Bereich, aber auch ▪ Motivation: überproportionale Ge-
aus der Sicht von Investoren, fortschreitende Verbreitung bei wichtung von attraktiven Inves-
Assetmanagern und Zielunter- Debt titionsopportunitäten und be-
nehmen ▪ Co-Investments gleichermaßen schleunigter Kapitaleinsatz
▪ Erläuterung möglicher verbreitet über Sidecars, Direct ▪ Attraktivität von Gebührenvorteilen
Interessenskonflikte Co-Investments und Co- ▪ Herausforderung: Investitions-
Investment Fonds entscheidungen innerhalb weniger
▪ Rechtliche und steuerliche
Aspekte ▪ Geschätzter Anteil von Co- Wochen
Investments am Volumen je ▪ Voraussetzung: langjährige Er-
▪ Ausblick Anlageklasse ca. 5-10% fahrung mit einer Assetklasse und
▪ Für die Zukunft wird eine weiter hinreichende personelle Kapazität
steigende Nachfrage nach Co-
Investments erwartet
Autoren:
Annette Olschinka-Rettig
Sven Gralla
3
Survey: Zugangswege Co-Investments (I)
4
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020
Survey: Zugangswege Co-Investments (II)
5
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020
Direct Co-
Investments 60%
Co-Investment-
57%
Fonds
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020
Zugangswege
Sidecar
57%
AIF mit Co-
Investments nur als
46%
Substrategie /
Beimischung
Survey: Verbreitung von Co-Investments
Corporate Private Equity
66%
Infrastructure Equity
63%
Anlageklassen
Real Estate Equity
34%
Corporate Private Debt
31%
Infrastructure Debt
17%
Real Estate Debt
17%
6
Survey: Ergebnisse zu Investoren
Wer investiert und warum?
- Co-Investments besonders verbreitet bei Versorgungswerken, Versicherungsunternehmen und
Pensionskassen / -fonds oft mit Anlagevolumina von insgesamt > EUR 10 Mrd.
- Primäre Motivationen: Gebührenvorteile und schneller Kapitaleinsatz
Was sind nach Einschätzung der Assetmanager die wesentlichen Hürden für Investoren?
- Kurzfristige Beurteilung von Co-Investments oft nicht möglich
- Unzureichendes Know-How
- Aufwändige Analyse und damit verbundene Kosten
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020 7
Investoren-Involvierung im Co-Investment-Prozess
Deal-Sourcing Evaluierung Verhandlung Monitoring Exit
Closing
Signing
Passive
Involvier-
ung
Semiaktive
Involvierung
Aktive Involvierung
8
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020
Aktivitätsgrade nach Zugangsweg
Survey:
AIF mit Beimischung
Passive Involvierung
Co-Investments-Fond
Direct
Involvierung
Involvierung
Sidecar
Semiaktive
Aktive
Direct Co-Investment Sidecar
Verbreitung Üblich Selten
9
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020
J-Curve Vergleich von Co-Investment Fund und Primary Private Equity Fund
+15 %
Netto IRR
0%
-15 %
Stilisierter Verlauf innerhalb der ersten 3 Jahren
Co-Investment Fund Primary Private Equity Fund
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020 10Performance Vergleiche nach Vintage Jahren
Renditevergleich Häufigkeit der Outperformance
20%
90%
18%
Anteil an Co-Investment Fonds
80%
16%
Median Netto IRR
70%
mit höherer Rendite
14%
60%
12%
50%
10%
18,9%
8%
40% 80,0%
15,8% 71,0%
13,5% 14,6%
6% 30% 60,0% 57,0%
4% 20%
2% 10%
0% 0%
Vintage Vintage Vintage Vintage
1998-2016 2009-2016 1998-2016 2009-2016
Funds: Verwendetes Performance-Maß:
Primary Privat Equity Funds Netto IRR
Co-Investment Funds Netto TVPI
11
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020, nach Beaton/McCauleySurvey: Geschätzter prozentualer Anteil Co-Investments an AuM
Median < 5% 5 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% > 30%
60%
55%
50%
50%
45%
40% 38%
33% 33%33%
32%
30%
26%
25% 25%25%
21% 21%
20% 18% 18%
17% 17%17%
15% 15%
13%
9%
10%
0%
Corporate Private Corporate Private Debt Real Estate Equity Real Estate Debt Infrastructure Equity Infrastructure Debt
Equity
12
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020Survey: Charakteristika von Co-Investment Transaktionen
Timing
- Dauer von Angebot bis Closing eines Co-Investments oft 4-6 Wochen
- Bei Direct Co-Investments tendenziell länger
- Bei Debt Co-Investments tendenziell kürzer
Opportunitäten
- Anzahl angebotener Co-Investment Transaktionen abhängig von jeweiliger Assetklasse,
bei Private Equity z.B. 100-300 Transaktionen p.a.
- Realisationsquote nie über 15 %, sondern überwiegend bei rd. 5-7%
Transaktionsgrößen
- Nach Anlageklassen unterschiedlich, z.B. bei Private Equity eher EUR 10-25 Mio.,
bei Infrastructure Equity auch deutlich darüber
- Zudem abhängig von Zugangsweg und Investorentyp (z.B. Fonds vs. Einzelinvestor)
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments, 2020 13Survey: Erwartete zukünftige Entwicklung von Co-Investments
Erwarteter Wachstumstrend
wird auch in den
Investoren-Interviews
bestätigt!
Quelle: White Paper Co-Investments
14CO-INVESTMENTS: WANN, WARUM UND FÜR WEN LOHNT
SICH DER AUFWAND?
HOLGER ROSSBACH
NOVEMBER 2020CO-INVESTMENTS: WANN, WARUM UND FÜR WEN LOHNT
SICH DER AUFWAND?
HOLGER ROSSBACH
NOVEMBER 2020Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 BENEFITS OF CO-INVESTING - “THE WHY”
3 THE RIGHT TIME TO START - “THE WHEN”
4 IS IT RELEVANT TO ME? - “THE WHO”
5 GETTING IT RIGHT – “THE HOW”
page | 3Once Upon a Time, Options Were Straightforward
PRIVATE EQUITY 1.0 (1985-2005)
Capital concentration estimation–For illustration purposes only
PLAIN VANILLA
PRIVATE EQUITY
(LBO)
MEZZANINE
GROWTH EQUITY
DISTRESSED VENTURE CAPITAL
GDP- or Neutral GDP++
GDP+/-
GROWTH ORIENTED
VALUE ORIENTED (Leverage)
(Low to no leverage)
(May include leverage as strategy)
COMPANY TRAJECTORY
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 4Today, the investable universe is expanding in all directions
PRIVATE EQUITY 2.0 (2005–PRESENT)
Capital concentration estimation—For illustrative purposes only
Long-Dated Funds
Public/ Private Direct Secondaries (VC/PE)
SPACs
Asset Management Sector-Focused Direct
Investing DIRECTS Secondaries (VC/PE)
(Mature/Seed)
Independent
PE/GP Capital Sponsors
Solutions PLAIN VANILLA
BUY-AND-BUILD BUY-AND-BUILD
PRIVATE EQUITY “Staying
(LBO) Private”
OPERATIONAL PE SECTOR FUNDS VC/GE
PRIVATE CREDIT GROWTH BUYOUTS
UNCORRELATED GROWTH EQUITY
DISTRESSED VENTURE CAPITAL
GDP- or Neutral GDP++
GDP+/-
GROWTH ORIENTED
VALUE ORIENTED (Leverage)
(Low to no leverage)
(May include leverage as strategy)
COMPANY TRAJECTORY
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 5Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 BENEFITS OF CO-INVESTING - “THE WHY”
3 THE RIGHT TIME TO START - “THE WHEN”
4 IS IT RELEVANT TO ME? - “THE WHO”
5 GETTING IT RIGHT – “THE HOW”
page | 6Several reasons to pursue co-investments
Return Asset selection can amplify return potential
enhancement
All things being equal, co-investing should prevent both fee and J-curve drag
Fee reduction Lower the overall cost of access to the asset class
Greater Control when and where you invest
control
Depending on approach, co-investing leads to increased involvement
Portfolio Add exposure where you want, emphasize areas important to your program or mission
construction
Allows to systematically reduce or off-set risk with a systematic tracking approach
Tactical Build stronger relationships with managers
benefits
Accumulate greater information about investments
Increase your team’s investment experience and perspective
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 7Co-investment deal flow by economics
120
54%
100
80
Total Number of Co-Investments
37%
60
40
20
9%
0
No-Fee, No-Carry Reduced Economics Full Economics
Source: Cambridge Associates Co-Investment Pipeline Database. page | 8
Notes: Data from 1/1/2015 to 3/22/2019 spanning 208 co-investments for which Cambridge Associates was provided management fees and carried interest data and on which Cambridge Associates
conducted due diligence. “No-Fee, No-Carry” represents co-investments with a 0% management fee and a 0% carried interest; “Reduced Economics” represents co-investments with a management fee
and carried interest less than 2% and 20%, respectively; and “Full Economics” represents co-investments with a management fee and/or carried interest of 2% and 20%, respectively, or higher.Co-investing offers the potential to improve returns via reduced cost of access
GROSS TO NET IRR SPREAD (BPS)
Potential to re-capture up to 0.2x in
1,200
multiple on invested capital and
hundreds of basis points of return.
Due to the variables in the internal rate
800 of return (IRR) calculation, including the
725 timing of cash flows the impact of
650
management fees, the average return
spread between gross fund IRRs and net
fund IRRs is approximately 7%, but
ranges from 2% to 25%.
225
US PE US VC International International Fund of Funds
PE VC
Sources: Cambridge Associates Private Investments Database. page | 9
Notes: Calculated as the spread between gross company-level returns and net fund level returns using 622 US Private Equity Funds, 1,043 US Venture Capital Funds, 443 Ex-US Private Equity Funds, and
146 Ex-US Venture Capital Funds. The sample excludes funds that do not provide company-level data.Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 BENEFITS OF CO-INVESTING - “THE WHY”
3 THE RIGHT TIME TO START - “THE WHEN”
4 IS IT RELEVANT TO ME? - “THE WHO”
5 GETTING IT RIGHT – “THE HOW”
page | 10Build toward your target exposure over time
Start gradually Set expectations for a slow start
As a fund gradually becomes fully invested over a 3-5 year period, perhaps so
should a co-investment program
Co-investment processes need to be established, tested, and refined
Determine if you want to begin with co-investments/ownership stakes which
are smaller than your long-term goals
Maintain pacing flexibility Market conditions may delay or accelerate attractive opportunities
Gradual implementation Early portfolio performance will be more volatile until sufficient
requires patience diversification is achieved
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 11Keep in mind: Recession-era investments have performed well
MULTIPLE OF INVESTED CAPITAL CAPITAL LOSS RATIO
2.3x
BUYOUTS 1.8x
(US)
23%
11%
3.0x 48%
37%
VENTURE
1.9x
CAPITAL
(US)
Pre-Crisis Recessionary Periods
Source: Cambridge Associates Private Investments Database. page | 12
Notes: Data as of September 30, 2019. Analysis is based on 1,930 realized investments made by US buyout funds and 6,764 realized investments made by US venture capital funds in years considered to
be pre-crisis or recessionary periods. “Pre-crisis” years are 1989, 1990, 2006, and 2007 and recessionary periods represent 1991, 1992, 2009, and 2010. Capital Loss Ratio is defined as the percentage of
capital in deals realized below cost, net of any recovered proceeds, over total invested capital. Returns are gross of fees and expenses.
Copyright © 2020 by Cambridge Associates. All rights reserved. Confidential.Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 BENEFITS OF CO-INVESTING - “THE WHY”
3 THE RIGHT TIME TO START - “THE WHEN”
4 IS IT RELEVANT TO ME? - “THE WHO”
5 GETTING IT RIGHT – “THE HOW”
page | 13Most investors have developed their private investment programs over time
CLIENT EXPOSURE ACROSS A SAMPLE PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO
Stage 1 “The Past” Stage 2 “Today” Stage 3 “The Future”
Fund-of-Funds Direct Funds Co-Investments
FoF Exposure Direct Fund Exposure Co-Invest Exposure
Total PE Portfolio Exposure
These portfolios typically less Typically better alignment with client’s Increased expertise and
tailored to individual clients needs objectives experience of investors
Often over diversified, especially Constructed to provide meaningful, but no Helps to round out and fill gaps
page | 14
when committing to several FoFs over-, diversification in exposure
End up “buying the market” Sometimes still shortcomings in terms of Double down on strong GP
meeting target allocations relationshipsCambridge Associates’ co-investment deal flow composition since inception
DEAL FLOW BY SECTOR DEAL FLOW BY STRATEGY
Other Public Other
Real Estate 1% Services 4%
15% 15% Real Estate 1%
13%
Venture
Infrastructure 31%
6% Consumer
10% Credit
9%
IT/Telecom Energy/
15% Materials/
Mining Buyout
11% 24% Growth
Industrials 18%
Healthcare Financials
9%
8% 10%
DEAL FLOW BY REVENUE DEAL FLOW BY AVAILABLE CO-INVESTMENT SIZE[1]
≥$500M >$500M
$250M to ≤$500M 3% ≤$5M
13% 9%
5%
$100M to $5M to ≤$10M
≤$250M 5%
11%
>$100M and
$50M toContents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 BENEFITS OF CO-INVESTING - “THE WHY”
3 THE RIGHT TIME TO START - “THE WHEN”
4 IS IT RELEVANT TO ME? - “THE WHO”
5 GETTING IT RIGHT – “THE HOW”
page | 16Finding the right co-investment approach
Define your objectives What is the right size for an allocation to co-investments?
Are there additional objectives besides return? Do you need to meet AnlV or
PFAV targets?
Are risk targets other portfolio objectives equally important?
What’s your experience To what degree do you have direct investment experience inhouse?
Think about Partnering with external resources that bring relevant direct
experience to the table
Work with someone who has the experience to design a co-investment
process that works for you and the condensed timeline of co-investments
Be comfortable saying no even after due diligence has been completed
What’s your capacity If you want to maintain final decision-making, assure that you can meet short
time-lines and have an external partner that knows to design decision
documents around your needs
Search for the “right level of outsourcing”: There is whole range from
providing deal flow only to turnkey solutions out there
If you want to learn and insource, search for a transparent partner that is
willing to educate you over time
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 17Determining a co-investment allocation
PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO RETURNS
WITH CO-INVESTMENT ALLOCATION
100% 20%
100% 5%
95% 10% Allocate enough for your
90%
90%
19%
program to benefit from
80%
20%
18%
the fee/return potential
80% of co-investment
30%
70% 17%
70% To start, consider
allocating at least one
Projected Program Return
60% 16%
Portfolio Allocation
fund commitment slot to
50% 15% co-investment
40%
14.9%
14%
Even a 5% allocation can
14.4%
13.9%
have a positive impact
30% 13.7% 13%
13.4%
20% 12%
10% 11%
0% 10%
US Private Equity (LHS) US Co-Investment (LHS) Projected Program Return (RHS)
Source: Cambridge Associates Private Investments Benchmark Index. page | 18
Notes: To calculate the weighted projected program return, the 25-year periodic return for US Private Equity through third quarter 2018 was used, equal to a 13.4% net IRR, and co-investment returns
were projected to be 500 bps higher. Weighted portfolio returns are calculated by applying the strategy weights to long-term returns.
For illustrative purposes only.Cambridge Associates Co-investment process
Selection Stage 1: Selection Stage 2:
Deal flow Pre-Selection Tailored Selection
Three CA quality filter dimensions Client-specific filter criteria
Timeframe: 30-90 days
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7
Sourcing Initial Review Further Execution Final approval Monitoring
Diligence go/no-go diligence
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 19Tailoring the Co-Investments to meet individual clients’ total portfolio objectives
GEOGR AP HI C FOOTP RI NT
SI Z E OF T AR GET COM P ANY
R EVENUE GR OWT H
P E/ VC/ I NFR A/ P D T AR GET ALLOCATI ONS
EXI ST I NG VS. NEW M ANAGER R ELAT I ONSHIP S
R I SK P AR AMET ERS
R ET UR N OB J ECTI VES 40 years of
R EGULAT OR Y / T AX CONSI DERATIONS
experience Meeting and
in building
customized
SECT OR P R EFER ENCES
portfolios
enhancing
FI DUCI AR Y CONSI DERATIONS
COR P OR ATE I NVESTM ENT OB J ECTI VES portfolio
LI QUI DI TY P R OFILE
objectives
I M P ACT/ESG
P ACI NG / T I CK ET SI ZES
M ANAGER P R EFER ENCES
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 20
[1] Portfolio shown for illustrative purposes and not representative of actual portfolios managed by Cambridge Associates, LLC or its affiliates.Example: ESG Co-Investment Alignment Spectrum for a UK Pension Client
SCORING FOR ESG CO-INVESTMENT ALIGNMENT
Weak ESG AND no Weak ESG Reasonable ESG Strong ESG Strong ESG AND
fit with client goals SCORE 0-2 SCORE 2-3.5 SCORE 3.5-5 Impact
Weak ESG AND ESG integration, climate Solid integration of ESG Proactive and material Strong ESG PLUS
Material risk that strategy alignment and as part of the investment ESG integration; clear Investments materially
will invest in clear stewardship are not a approach climate alignment with delivering on 7 impact
breaches of policy or pose material part of process low carbon future; Strong outcomes:
material reputational or firm ethos. and engaged stewards of • Climate change (reduce CO2
or energy use);
risks (e.g. Fossil Fuels) capital. • Water (reduce use or improve
quality);
Very well aligned with • Resource efficiency (reduce
landfill, increase recycling,
client objectives reduce single-use plastics)
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Assess manager and portfolio on multiple metrics
(e.g. forward climate alignment, ESG integration) LEAD WITH
AVOID HARM
IMPACT
ESG Score 0-10
ESG IN CO-INVESTMENT SELECTION AND MONITORING
Un-investable
Potentially Investable Investable for this client
for this client
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 21Cambridge Associates’ Co-Investments: $110B+ in aggregate opportunities
SINCE INCEPTION PIPELINE
452
421
307
285
123
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total deals 123 285 307 452 421
Initial reviews 68 158 171 204 164
Evaluations 20 18 29 40 36
Average deal size ($M) $102.1 $93.9 $125.5 $59.9 $90.6
Median deal size ($M) $33.2 $40.0 $30.0 $13.1 $25.0
Total deals ($M) $10,721.3 $23,298.7 $29,112.8 $22,766.9 $24,463.5
Evaluations ($M) $2,070.1 $1,807.9 $5,787.0 $6,592.1 $5,717.3
Source: Cambridge Associates Co-Investment Pipeline Database. page | 22
Notes: Preliminary data as of 12/31/2019. Based on co-investment opportunities that were brought to the attention of the firm since team inception in 2015 through December 2019.Conclusion
BENEFITS CHALLENGES
Potential for higher returns Risk of adverse selection
Lower fees Significant resources and expertise
required to evaluate
J-Curve mitigation
Tight response times
More flexibility, control in constructing
portfolio Takes time to get to critical mass
More risk management Valuation and oversight requirements
PHILOSOPHY
Develop a co-investment policy to ensure proper risk controls
Leverage manager knowledge, market knowledge, and investment knowledge to amplify
execution capabilities
Source: Cambridge Associates page | 23Cambridge Associates GmbH is authorised and regulated by the Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (‘BaFin’)
Identification Number: 155510. Registered office: Leopoldstraße 23, 80802 München, Deutschland.
Copyright © 2020 by Cambridge Associates LLC. All rights reserved.
This document may not be displayed, reproduced, distributed, transmitted, or used to create derivative works in any form, in
whole or part, without written permission from Cambridge Associates (“CA”). This document does not represent investment
advice or recommendations, nor does it constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Information in
this document or on which the information is based may be based on publicly available data. CA considers such data reliable but
does not represent it as accurate, complete, or independently verified, and it should not be relied on as such. Nothing contained
in this document should be construed as the provision of tax, accounting, or legal advice. Past performance is not indicative of
future performance. Broad-based securities indexes are unmanaged and are not subject to fees and expenses typically associated
with managed accounts or investment funds. Investments cannot be made directly in an index. Any information provided in this
document is as of the date of the document, and CA is under no obligation to update the information or communicate that any
updates have been made. This document has been prepared solely for institutional, professional, or qualified investors. As such, it
should not be relied on by any person who would qualify as a retail investor in any jurisdiction or by any person or entity in a
jurisdiction where use of this document would be in violation of local law or regulation.
page |Mit Co-Investments nicht “k.o. gehen” Warum bei Co-Investments das „Co“ an erster Stelle steht Daniel Boege, Partner, Golding Capital Partners 04. November 2020
Überblick – Golding Capital Partners
Überblick Daniel Boege
Gründungsjahr 2000
Einer der führenden unabhängigen Anbieter
Position
von Alternativen Investments in Europa
Verwaltetes Vermögen Mehr als € 9 Mrd.
Anlagestrategien Buyout, Private Debt, Infrastruktur, Secondaries
Produkte und
Anlageprogramme, Managed Accounts
Dienstleistungen
Investiert in über 300 Primaries, Secondaries und Co-Investments
Investmenterfahrung
mit ca. 170 Managern weltweit
Über 200 institutionelle Investoren in Deutschland, Österreich,
Investorenbasis Partner,
Luxemburg, Liechtenstein und Spanien
Head of Buyout
Mitarbeiter Über 110 Mitarbeiter an fünf Standorten
Aufsichtsbehörden BaFin1) (Deutschland), CSSF2) (Luxemburg)
1) Aufsichtsbehörde der Golding Capital Partners GmbH, München
2) Aufsichtsbehörde der Golding Capital Partners (Luxembourg) S.à r.l., Luxemburg
Einer der führenden unabhängigen Anbieter von Alternativen Investments in Europa
- vertraulich - Seite 2Private Equity ist eine hochattraktive Anlageklasse
Investmentphilosophie
Alpha erreichen nur die besten Fondsmanager
PE Wertschöpfung basiert auf Handwerk und „Kunst“
PE erzielt eine Überrendite
Überrenditen werden nachhaltig nur von den besten Fondsmanagern erzielt
- vertraulich - Seite 3Ein „Investment“… FC Bayern München Saison 2019 / 20 November 2019 August 2020 … unter zwei Managern - vertraulich - Seite 4
Typische Wertschöpfungskette einer PE-Transaktion
Typische Wertschöpfungskette einer PE-Transaktion – Fondsmanager
Zugang
Finden Prüfen Bewerten Finanzieren Inzentiveren Betreuen Verkaufen
erhalten
1 2-8 Monate 4-6 Jahre Ca. 6 Monate
2 1/3 1/3 1/3
Typische Wertschöpfungskette einer PE Co-Investment-Transaktion
Zugang
Finden Prüfen Bewerten Finanzieren Inzentiveren Betreuen Verkaufen
erhalten
1 2-12 Wochen
1 Zeitaufwand 2 Wertsteigerung
Fondsmanager in allen Teilen der Wertschöpfung involviert
- vertraulich - Seite 5Co-Investieren ist wie Autofahren… …aber Sie befinden sich dabei auf dem Beifahrersitz! - vertraulich - Seite 6
Zwei Prüfungsebenen bei Co-Investments
Qualität Strategiekonformität Interessengleichheit
Co-Investor und Manager
Investierbarer Fondsmanager Strategiekonforme Transaktionen
mit gleichen Zielen
Fondsmanager
Unternehmen /
Transaktion
Sektor & Geschäftsmodell Bewertung & Kapitalstruktur Informationssituation
Passende Sektoren und Attraktive Einstiegsbewertung und
Informationssituation zum Einstieg
Geschäftsmodelle angemessene Kapitalstruktur
Adäquate Beurteilung beider Ebenen unabdingbar für den Investmenterfolg
- vertraulich - Seite 7Kontakt
Golding Capital Partners
Golding Capital Golding Capital Golding Capital Golding Capital Golding Capital
Partners GmbH Partners (UK) Ltd. Partners Partners (USA), Inc. Partners GmbH
Einsteinstraße 172 17 Hanover Square (Luxembourg) S.à r.l., 245 Park Avenue 8F Pacific Century
81677 München London W1S 1BN 6, avenue Marie- New York, NY, 10167 Place
Deutschland Großbritannien Thérèse USA Marunouchi, 1-11-1
2132 Luxemburg Marunouchi,
Luxemburg Chiyoda-ku
Tokio 100-6208,
Japan
Tel +49 89 419 997 0 Tel +44 203 700 5213 Tel +352 262734 810 Tel +1 212 203 0130 Tel +81 3 6860 8562
info@goldingcapital.com www.goldingcapital.com
- vertraulich - Seite 8November 2020│ Strictly Confidential
SwanCap Partners
Erfolgsfaktoren für nachhaltig erfolgreiche Co-Investment Strategien
December 13 strictly confidential
#1Legal Disclaimer
Investor Presentation – not a replacement for legal documentation
This Investor Presentation (“Presentation”) is not a replacement for offering memoranda and partnership agreements (including the subscription
agreements), which form the sole basis for the offering of, and any subscription to, SwanCap Funds, and which are provided to investors separately.
Non-binding nature, no liability
This Presentation exclusively addresses qualified investors within the meaning of the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and professional investors
which are each experienced with the asset class of private equity. The interested party is provided with this Presentation without any obligation on a non-
binding basis. In particular, providing this Presentation to an interested party does not create an obligation of SwanCap Investment Management S.A. or
SwanCap Partners GmbH to provide further information or advice. The information contained herein is based on information derived from trustworthy
sources. However, it has only been reviewed with respect to plausibility, not with respect to accuracy or completeness. Neither SwanCap Investment
Management S.A. nor SwanCap Partners GmbH assume any liability for the content of this Presentation.
The information contained in this Presentation does not satisfy the statutory requirements regarding neutrality of financial analyses , is not subject to the
prohibition of trading prior to the publication of financial analyses and may be amended at anytime.
Past results and confidentiality
Past performance is not a reliable indicator for future performance.
The content of this Presentation is confidential and only intended for the recipient. Disclosing this information to third parties requires the prior consent of
SwanCap Investment Management S.A. or SwanCap Partners GmbH.
There is no obligation to update this Presentation.
strictly confidential
#2Your Contact at SwanCap Partners
SWANCAP PLATFORM
Contacts
Dr. Florian Kreitmeier
Managing Partner & Co-CEO
SwanCap Partners
Montgelasstr. 14
81679 München
Tel: +49 89 809 1316-11
Florian.Kreitmeier@swancap.eu
Please feel free to reach out to us in case of questions via ir@swancap.eu
SwanCap Partners Montgelasstr. 14 1140 Avenue of the 5, rue Heienhaff Via Sassetti 32
81679 Munich Americas, New York L-1736 Senningerberg 20124 Milan
Germany NY 10036 USA Luxembourg Italy
strictly confidential
#3SwanCap Overview: Independent Private Equity Investment Boutique with two
decades of experience
SWANCAP PLATFORM
Private Equity specialist
with top-quartile performance
Selective investment approach Primary Fund investments
with focus on + Co-investments
capital preservation + Secondary transactions
25+ Private Equity Professionals
Luxembourg Munich, DE
AIFM
Milan, IT
New York, USA
4 offices in Europe and North America
Preferred access to
Long-term institutional
attractive investment
investor base
opportunities
20-year experience
in Europe and North America1
strictly confidential
#4SwanCap’s Co-investment Track Record: Co-investments as a key element of our
investment strategy
SWANCAP PLATFORM
Co-investments Vintage years Sectors
95+ 19 vintage years
GP-partner
50 Regions Strategies
ROW
Mega-cap
Commitments, in € bn
Mid-market
Large-cap
1.2+
Portfolio valuation net:
1.9x TVPI/20%
strictly confidential
#5Co-investment opportunity set: Growing number co-investment opportunities based
on healthy buyout markets and increasing LP “appetite”
Co-Investment Volume
Global buyout activity Share of club deals and co-sponsor deals
# of deals % based on # buyout transactions
5,106 share of co-sponsor deals (GP / LP)
4,829
4,663
4,343
4,275
3,961 3,979
share of club deals (GP / GP)
3,748
global # of buyout deals
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
■ Significant historic growth supported by gradual increasing ■ Desire by GPs to avoid club deals with competitors
dry powder / fundraising ■ GPs avoid over-concentration in single deals
■ Current level of dry powder indicates ongoing growth ■ Professional LP co-investors replace other GPs as partner
strictly confidential
#6Co-investment market (cont’d): Promising outlook of future co-investment flow given
perceived advantages by lead GPs
Co-Investment Volume
GP benefits for co-investment partnerships GP requirements for co-investment partnerships
■ Relationship building: GP enhances relationships ■ Flexible capital in terms of ticket size and structures
■ Fire power: Increase in equity tickets ■ Reliable source for follow-ons / buy-and-build strategies
■ Active portfolio management to avoid over-concentration ■ Speed of execution and predictable, transparent process
■ Insights: Additional deal or transaction insights ■ Like-minded investor well known for many years
Preqin Special Report: uncertain
Private Equity offer more opportunities
Co-Investment Outlook 19%
34%
offer fewer opportunities 3%
44%
offer same number of opportunities
strictly confidential
#7SwanCap Co-Investment Strategy/Program – Key Attractions:
Strong returns, balanced diversification and fast capital deployment
Co-Investment Attractions
Advantages of investing via a co-investment fund
return advantage of a co-investment fund Active, balanced diversification
access to leading GPs
+4-6%
GP region sector size vintage
13% superior selection &
portfolio construction
typically no lead GP
2% fee / 20% carry
Improved cash flow profile &
deployment
■ Fast deployment
■ Fast repayment
■ Better
J-curve
Preqin cost advantage Superior Selection co-investment
PE median co-investment & Access return
strictly confidential
#8Ingredients for SwanCap’s successful co-investment program: Access, selection and
portfolio construction as prerequisites for a value-enhancing co-investment program
Co-Investment Strategy
Key success factors
■ Opportunity Set - access to a sufficient
A deal flow
Access to large universe of high quality
deal opportunities to avoid
Access
140
■ High quality opportunities
120
100
80
“adverse selection”
■ Different kind of investment 60
40
opportunities - diversified by
20
-
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 today
GP, Size, Strategy, Geography, Sector, etc.
B ■ Considerable variation in co-investment
Selection
returns requires DD
■ Resources and expertise necessary
selection
■ Skill-set and capabilities, resources
Select and identify best deals
C
construction
■ Optimal portfolio diversification
Portfolio
across sponsors, industries,
regions, vintages, strategies, sizes
■ Attractive capital deployment
and improved J-curve investments
strictly confidential
#9Selection: No adverse selection for co-investments offered to LPs
Co-Investment Strategy
■ Research by Munich TU / Oxford on Co-Investments ■ SwanCap’s experience
‒ No adverse selection: overall returns slightly above vs. ‒ Lead GP usually commits its highest possible/optimal
buyout deals not offered to LPs amount to the deal -> hence is convinced
‒ Performance and distribution of gross returns similar ‒ Lead GP do not risk relationship / future fundraising
also within a given fund by showing less attractive deals to LPs
‒ Net LP returns much higher due to no / lower fees ‒ Low quality Co-I offered by weak GPs as fundraising
inducement can be recognised
Gross KS PME – Co-invest vs. other buyout deals
Underperforming
Co-Investments Other buyout deals larger deals are
those NOT offered
2.45 as co-investments
2.15
1.76 1.70 1.76
1.59
1.16 1.13
0.41
0.26
25 TH M EDIAN M EAN 75 TH W EIGHTED
Source: “Adverse Selection and the Performance of PE Co-Investments”, R. Braun, T. Jenkinson, C. Schemmerl (2017). strictly confidential
Dataset from 3 large FoF on 13k buyout and VC deals over 1981-2010, of which 1,016 (7.6%) offered as Co-I by 458 LPs. # 10Highly Selective Investment Approach: Deal Selection Criteria – 3 important
perimeters for own and independent due diligence
Co-Investment Strategy
Due Diligence Perspectives
Company perimeter Transaction perimeter Portfolio perimeter
Leading player Right deal setting Perfect portfolio
in an attractive industry / GP angle complement
Established, leading Sponsor to be the “right” buyer In line with
✓ market position ✓ (sector expertise) ✓ own investment strategy
How long in due diligence?
✓ Experienced, top-tier management
✓ Close to the management team? ✓ Portfolio-fit for diversification
Sector with robust return profiles Time for proper due diligence?
✓ and mid-term secular growth trends ✓ Stringent 100-day plan? ✓ No concentration
Proven capabilities to execute and Fulfilment of
✓ Multiple levers for value creation
✓ deliver on the plan ✓ highest ESG standards
Reasonable downside protection
✓ Growth potential
✓ Historical track record in the sector
✓ to support capital preservation
Alignment of interest
✓ ESG , No regulatory risk
✓ (sponsor / mgmt. / co-investor) ✓ Documentation requirements
strictly confidential
# 11Selective investment approach (cont’d):
What to avoid during co-investment processes
Co-Investment Strategy
Invest under time pressure
No time or opportunity to conduct our own, independent due diligence in an adequate manner
“Wrong” sponsor for the “right” company
e.g missing sector expertise, no sponsor USP, broad auction without management access
Limited “insights” / Asymmetric information
Limited insights into the rationale of a transaction and missing understanding of the business model
Misalignment of interest between sponsor and co-investor
Company valuation not supported by business fundamentals
Avoid maxed-out company valuations as a result of broad auctions and heavy competition
“Passively follow the GP”
Avoid too strong dependence and reliance on sponsor investment case which might focus on different priorities
strictly confidential
# 12SWAN
Case Study:
IV Due Diligence components during selection process
Co-Investment Strategy
(several pre-Investment Committe Invest.
Kick-Off Deal Flyer papers) Monitoring
Committee
Due Diligence
& transaction review
ESG Sponsor
Deal Access Region
Experience
Industry
of Partner
Transaction Portfolio
Review Diversification
Capital
Preservation
USP ■ Independent Modeling
■ Independent analysis
BP / M u ste rmann
■ Own 3rd party due diligence
Business Plan Company
Valuation Value
Review Review
Value Chain
■ Own expert interviews
Creation Deal Assessment Memorandum ■ Management Calls
Multiple Manage- ■ Benchmarkings
Levers ment
Financial Market
Analysis Analysis
Quality
Dynamic
of Earnings
Cash Flows Competition
Growth Disruption
strictly confidential
# 13SWAN
Case Study: Focus on equity value creation – BCG found operational value
IV creation is increasingly the biggest driver for PE returns
Co-Investment Strategy
Contribution to PE returns (%)
13 Financial Leverage
25
32
51
Increase in
39
Valuation Multiple
39
46
31
Operational value creation
(increase in revenue and profits)
48
36
22
18
1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
Source: BGC, “The Rise of Alternative Assets and Long-Term investing” (March 2017). strictly confidential
# 14SWAN
Case Study: Focus on equity value creation (cont`d) - Understanding the
IV envisaged value build-up of the investment case
Co-Investment Strategy
Sample equity value creation bridge
3.5x
3.0x
E
2.5x
pipeline
2.0x
existing products
F
1.5x
C D
1.0x
B
A
0.5x
0.0x
start fees price volume switching rest Top-3 rest others leverage multiple gross MEP Sponsor Mgmt. Sensitivity
entry Top-5 clusters other today new products total Case Case
operational value creation
Pricing Switching Portfolio Pipeline Valuation Sensitivity
strictly confidential
# 15Portfolio Construction: Balanced diversification across a variety of dimensions is key
– right-sizing the portfolio
Co-Investment Strategy
■ What size should a risk-return maximising Portfolio diversification effect (illustrative)
Co-Investment portfolio be?
2.0
‒ The “skill argument” -> concentration “Top ideas” but Optimum Over-
1.8 concentration risk diversification
• “Top ideas” generate higher returns and less chances further reduces risk
1.6 of home runs but dilutes returns
• Over-diversification dilutes returns
1.4
1.2
1.0 MM standard
deviation
0.8 (~ risk profile)
0.6
‒ The stats argument -> larger # of deals
• Diversify to reduce risk
0.4
✓
0.2
• Maximises chance of “home runs”
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36
Number of portfolio Co-Investments
strictly confidential
# 16Portfolio Construction: Empirical studies suggest a Co-Investment portfolio should at
least have 10 deals to improve expected outperformance
Co-Investment Strategy
Net median KS PME by buyout portfolio size Co-investment Alpha strategy
(University of Chicago)
Fund portfolios Co-I Portfolios (no fees) ✓ PORTFOLIO: right size & composition
– 20-25 deals for reduced return volatility
– Maximise chances of hitting “home runs”
1.68 1.68
✓ SELECTION: strong sourcing + flexibility
– High selectivity from quality deal funnel
1.53 – Co-investment fund size not restricting
1.49 1.48 investment options re: equity tickets
1.44
✓ COSTS: strive for no fee - no carry deals
– 4% to 5% IRR net return advantage
for a strong-performing portfolio
5 10 30
N UMBER OF P ORTFOLIO L INES
Source: “Adverse Selection and the Performance of PE Co-Investments”, R. Braun, T. Jenkinson, C. Schemmerl (2017). strictly confidential
LP in-house costs excluded (-0.05 for CoI, -0.01 for funds). KS: Kaplan, Schoar # 17Portfolio Construction: Simulations show that reasonably sized Co-Investment
portfolios significantly reduce tail-end risk while slightly adding to median IRRs
Co-Investment Strategy
Co-investment Portfolio IRRs distribution – Monte Carlo simulation
5 Co-Inv 15 Co-Inv 25 Co-Inv
Median Gross IRR 20.7% 22.6% 23.1%
A Co-Invest. portfolio of 25 deals
P ROBABILITY
significantly reduces tail-end risk
by narrowing returns’ dispersion
compared to smaller ones
-10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
P ORTFOLIO IRR
strictly confidential
Source: SwanCap Monte Carlo simulations. # 18Final considerations – looking for Alpha via Co-Investments: Implications for a
successful co-investment strategy, especially in the current market environment
Summary
Access to a broad spectrum of opportunities & the resources and capabilities to conduct
1 own, independent due diligence
▪ Uncertainty is high, valuations are high
▪ Stay disciplined and highly selective
High Quality Assets & Selectivity
2 ▪ Relentless focus on quality – invest in and alongside the best-in-class Managers
▪ Leading management teams and businesses with sustainable competitive advantage
▪ Understand structural vs. temporary changes (customer behaviour, technology, etc.)
Portfolio Construction and Diversification is key
3 ▪ Key to diversify in terms of Geographies, Sectors, Strategies and Vintage Years
▪ Avoid concentration risk to sponsor, sector, geography, etc.
Focus on Operational Value Creation & Growth
4 ▪ Operational Value Creation capabilities key to generate outperformance
▪ Ability to cope with “change” and react fast of utmost importance
▪ Change in 3 ways: operational, scale, disruption
Capital Preservation
5 ▪ Focus on attractive risk-return profiles
▪ Look out for adequate downside protection (structural, preferred, etc.)
strictly confidential
# 19Private Equity I Local Insights I Customized Solutions
strictly confidential
# 20CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT WESENTLICHE ASPEKTE DER STRUKTURIERUNG UND AUSGESTALTUNG MARCO SIMONIS & DR. GREGOR EVENKAMP, PARTNER, CLIFFORD CHANCE BAI-Workshop 4. November 2020
ÜBERBLICK
• Wesentliche Formen der Anlage in Co-Investments
• Einordnung als bzw. Abgrenzung zu AIF
• Investoren-spezifische Aspekte von Co-Investments u.a. für
Versorgungseinrichtungen, Versicherungsunternehmen und
Investmentvermögen
• Vertragliche Ausgestaltung / Besondere Aspekte der Due Diligence
• Steuerliche Aspekte
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 2WESENTLICHE FORMEN DER ANLAGE IN CO- INVESTMENTS
„SIDE CAR“ CO-INVESTMENTS (1) Wesentliche Merkmale • Institutionelle Investoren investieren ihr Vermögen (als Limited Partner (LP)) in einen Fonds (auch Primärfonds), der von einem Assetmanager (General Partner - GP), geführt wird. • Der Assetmanager bietet den Investoren zusätzlich zum Fondsinvestment Co- Investments über ein paralleles Co-Investment Vehikel (Special Purpose Vehicle - SPV) an, über das wiederum die einzelnen Zielinvestments getätigt werden. • Dieses Vehikel nutzen Investoren individuell, d.h. Anzahl und Höhe der realisierten Co- Investments können von Investor zu Investor unterschiedlich sein. • Co-Investments werden daher über investorenspezifische und abgrenzbare „Compartments“ innerhalb des SPV abgewickelt. • Im Ergebnis investiert dann einerseits der Primärfonds und zugleich parallel auch das Co-Investment Vehikel. CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 4
„SIDE CAR“ CO-INVESTMENTS (2)
Quelle: BAI White Paper Co-Investments
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 5DIREKTE CO-INVESTMENTS (1)
Wesentliche Merkmale
• Diese Co-Investments bezeichnen Strukturen, in denen mehre Investoren direkt, somit
unabhängig und außerhalb einer Fondsstruktur bzw. eines Co-Investment SPVs
investieren.
• Man kann differenzieren:
– Investitionen ohne Involvierung eines Assetmanagers, somit Investitionen eines
Lead-Investors mit anderen Investoren, sog. Co-Investoren. (Alternative 1).
– Investitionen, bei denen ein Assetmanager (oder auch ein Kreditinstitut) „Lead
Investor“ ist und entweder mit anderen GPs (oder auch anderen strategischen Co-
Investoren, die nicht zugleich LP sind) ohne Zwischenschaltung eines SPV direkt
gemeinsam investiert (Alternative 2).
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 6DIREKTE CO-INVESTMENTS (2)
Quelle: BAI White Paper Co-Investments
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 7CO-INVESTMENT FONDS (1) Wesentliche Merkmale • In einem reinen Co-Investment-Fonds sind mehrere institutionelle Investoren passiv investiert. • Der Fondsmanager selektiert die Co-Investments nach zuvor festgelegten Kriterien. • Co-Investment-Fonds investiert gemeinsam mit anderen Fonds als Co-Investor und ermöglicht diesen damit durch seine Co-Investments die Realisierung größerer Investitionen. CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 8
CO-INVESTMENT FONDS (2)
Quelle: BAI White Paper Co-Investments
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 9EINORDNUNG ALS BZW. ABGRENZUNG ZU AIF
CO-INVESTMENTS ALS AIF? (1)
Investmentvermögen ist gemäß § 1 Abs. 1 Satz 1 KAGB
• jeder Organismus
• für gemeinsame Anlagen,
• der von einer Anzahl von Anlegern
• Kapital einsammelt,
• um es gemäß einer festgelegten Anlagestrategie
• zum Nutzen dieser Anleger zu investieren und
• der kein operativ tätiges Unternehmen außerhalb des Finanzsektors ist.
(sog. materieller Fondsbegriff)
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 11CO-INVESTMENTS ALS AIF? (2)
Typischerweise wird das Kapital die Anleger gerade nicht für die
Zwecke einer der gemeinschaftliche Rendite „gepoolt“…
• Nach ESMA / BaFin muss ein Vehikel vorliegen, welches das externe von den
Investoren eingesammelte Kapital „poolt“,
• um eine gemeinschaftliche Rendite für die Investoren zu generieren,
• die daraus resultiert, dass gemeinschaftliche Risiken durch das Kaufen, Halten und
Verkaufen von Vermögensgegenständen eingegangen werden.
…aber was, wenn doch (wie bei „Side Car“ Co-Investments)?
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 12CO-INVESTMENTS ALS AIF? (3) Abgrenzungsproblematik ist nicht neu ESMA - Final report Guidelines on key concepts of the AIFMD 24 May 2013 • 49. A hedge fund association mentioned that co-investment vehicles should not be treated as AIFs unless the manager/affiliate has raised capital from the investor… • 52. An asset managers’ association mentioned that co-investment, insofar as it permits alignment, is a benefit and should not serve to bring structures that would otherwise be excluded within the scope of the AIFMD. • 75. An asset managers’ association was of the opinion that co-investment by the manager or by individuals or other entities closely connected with the manager should be ignored when determining whether an entity raises capital from a number of investors. CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 13
CO-INVESTMENTS ALS AIF? (4) Intensität der Involvierung der Investoren maßgeblich • Besitzen die Anteilseigner des Organismus – als Gruppe – eine laufende Ermessens- bzw. Kontrollbefugnisse, liegt kein „Organismus für gemeinsame Anlagen“ vor (so ESMA - Leitlinien zu Schlüsselbegriffen der Richtlinie über die Verwalter alternativer Investmentfonds (AIFMD)). • Hilfreich auch Erwägungsgrund 8 der Richtlinie 2011/61/EU über die Verwalter alternativer Investmentfonds („AIFM-Richtlinie“), wie in Deutschland im KAGB umgesetzt: „Diese Richtlinie sollte ferner nicht […] für Joint Ventures gelten“. CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 14
CO-INVESTMENTS ALS AIF? (5) Anforderungen aus Sicht der ESMA • Laufende Ermessens- bzw. Kontrollbefugnis als „eine Form einer unmittelbaren und kontinuierlichen Entscheidungsgewalt über operative Fragen in Bezug auf die tägliche Verwaltung der Vermögenswerte des Organismus, die wesentlich weiter reicht als die normale Ausübung von Entscheidungs- oder Kontrollbefugnissen.“ • Erforderlich ist dabei ein „substanzielles Mehr“, das über normale Befugnisse von Investoren in den jeweiligen Typ der Co-Investment Vehikels bzw. Side-Cars hinausgeht. • In der Praxis sind die Entscheidungs- oder Kontrollbefugnisse, die sich die Investoren für das jeweilige Co-Investment Vehikels bzw. Side-Car und in Bezug auf Zielinvestments einräumen lassen, häufig vom jeweiligen Aktivitätsgrad abhängig. CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 15
CO-INVESTMENTS ALS AIF? (5)
Intensität der Involvierung der Investoren (typisierend)
AKTIVE CO-INVESTOREN
► Aktive Co-Investoren erbringen
SEMI-AKTIVE CO-INVESTOREN
typischerweise über den vereinbarten
Gesamt-Co-Investmentbetrag weitere PASSIVE CO-INVESTOREN
wesentliche Beiträge im Bezug auf die Co- ► Semi-aktive Co-Investoren decken –
Investments. anders als aktive Co-Investoren –
► Aktive Co-Investoren decken dabei typischerweise nicht den gesamten Zyklus
typischerweise den gesamten Zyklus ab, eines Co-Investments ab, sondern ► Passive Co-Investoren erbringen
vom Deal-Sourcing, der Evaluierung, den beschränken auf die Phasen der typischerweise über den vereinbarten
Verhandlungen und dem Monitoring bis Evaluierung und der Verhandlungen. Gesamt-Co-Investmentbetrag keinen
hin zum Exit. ► Semi-aktive Co-Investoren entscheiden weiteren Beitrag im Bezug auf die Co-
typischerweise individuell, ob ein Co- Investments.
► Sie greifen typischerweise aktiv in die
Selektion und auch in die Due Diligence Investment eingegangen oder abgelehnt ► Passive Co-Investoren investieren in
bei Co-Investments ein. wird. der Regel in Co-Investment-Fonds oder in
Sidecars.
► Aktive Co-Investoren treffen
eigenständige Entscheidungen.
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 16INVESTOREN-SPEZIFISCHE ASPEKTE VON CO-INVESTMENTS U.A. FÜR VERSORGUNGSEINRICHTUNGEN, VERSICHERUNGSUNTERNEHMEN UND INVESTMENTVERMÖGEN
SICHERUNGSVERMÖGENSFÄHIGKEIT –
ALLGEMEINE ASPEKTE
▪ Übertragbarkeit vs. JV-typische Übertragungsbeschränkungen
▪ Verbot der Nachhaftung vs. Teilnahmepflicht an Kapitalerhöhungen
▪ Sicherstellung der Erwerbbarkeit vs. Minderheitsbeteiligung und
Änderungsmöglichkeit durch Mehrheitsgesellschafter
▪ Umgang mit Interessenkonflikten
▪ Ggf. Opt-Out bei Zukäufen?
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 18SICHERUNGSVERMÖGENSFÄHIGKEIT-
ANLAGEVERORDNUNG (1)
Private Equity Versorgungswerk /
Pensionskasse
Beteiligungsquote - Streuungsgrenze § 4 Abs. 4 AnlV:
Durchschau bzgl.
1%-Streuungsgrenze? ▪ Anlage in PE-Fonds bzw. Unternehmen auf 1% des
Sicherungsvermögensbeschränkt
BaFin-Kapitalanlagerundschreiben 11/2017:
Bündelungs-
Dachfonds ▪ Bei Anteilen und Aktien an geschlossenen
(§ 2 I Nr. 13b AnlV) Investmentvermögen nach § 2 Abs. 1 Nr. 13
Buchstabe b oder Nr. 17 AnlV gilt grundsätzlich die
1% Grenze, es sei denn, die Investmentvermögen
investieren in geeignete Zielfonds (Dachfonds), hier
bezieht sich die 1%-Grenze auf die gehaltenen
Zielfonds.
Zielfonds Abweichend u.a. AnlV-Rundschreiben NRW:
Alt. 1: Nicht-
AIF ▪ Durchrechnung auf Zielunternehmen bzw.
Alternative Streuungsgrenzen
Target
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 19SICHERUNGSVERMÖGENSFÄHIGKEIT-
ANLAGEVERORDNUNG (2)
Private Equity
Versorgungswerk /
Pensionskasse
Beispiel: EUR 5 Mrd. Sicherungsvermögen
Durchschau bzgl.
1%-Streuungsgrenze
Bündelungs-
Dachfonds
(§ 2 I Nr. 13b AnlV)
< 50 Mio.
Zielfonds jeweils < 50 Mio.EUR
Alt. 2: AIF
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 20SICHERUNGSVERMÖGENSFÄHIGKEIT-
ANLAGEVERORDNUNG (3)
Immobilien
Co-Investments in (Nicht-AIF)
Versorgungswerk / Immobiliengesellschaften können
Pensionskasse
- Immobilienquotentauglich (Nr. 14a) oder
- Beteiligungsquotentauglich (Nr. 13a)
ausgestaltet sein.
Alt. 1: Nicht- Beschränkungen für Immobiliengesellschaften nach
Bankdarlehen?
AIF Nr. 14a:
- Keine schädliche operative Tätigkeit
Co-Investment
- Beschränkung Darlehensaufnahme
- EWR/OECD-belegene Immobilien
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 21SICHERUNGSVERMÖGENSFÄHIGKEIT-
ANLAGEVERORDNUNG (4)
Immobilien
Co-Investments in Immobilien über Sidecar-Vehikel
Versorgungswerk / mit Einordnung als AIF:
Pensionskasse
▪ Immobilienquote nach § 2 Abs. 1 Nr. 14c AnlV
− Darlehensaufnahme bis 60% langfristig + 30%
AIFM
kurzfristig
− Immobilien außerhalb OECD möglich
Alt. 2: AIF Bankdarlehen
▪ Alternativ: Beteiligungsquote (Nr. 13b) oder
sonstige AIF-Quote (Nr. 17)
Co-Investment
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 22SOLVENCY II (1)
Solvency II-
Versicherung
49%
Nicht-AIF /
39%
AIF 36%
30%
25%
22%
Co-Investment
Target
CO-INVESTMENTS AUS REGULATORISCHER, RECHTLICHER UND STEUERLICHER SICHT CLIFFORD CHANCE | 23Sie können auch lesen
