Fund Track Record Presentation Template
Two documents and three sheets that force every deal a partner claims, write-offs included, to add up to the fund's real total.
Free download · No account needed
Deal-by-Deal Performance
[Firm], [Fund] — Every Investment
Every investment the fund has ever made, write-offs included. A deal leaves this sheet only when it leaves the fund.
| Company | Entry Value | Current / Exit Value | Status | Primary Partner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | — | — | — | — |
| — | — | — | — | — |
| — | — | — | — | — |
A write-off is a row with a value of zero, not a deleted row.
Tantallon Capital Partners' Fund II made 24 investments. Nineteen are still worth putting on a slide: five realized well, the rest sit at or above cost. The other five are complete write-offs, marked to zero. A deck built from the nineteen reports a 2.094x gross multiple on $79.1 million invested. Add the five write-offs back at their real cost and the fund's actual multiple, across the full $100.8 million invested, is 1.643x. Nothing on the nineteen-deal deck was false. It answered for four-fifths of the fund and reported the answer as whole.
This is not a gray area. Showing the performance of a subset of a fund's investments is extracted performance under the SEC's marketing rule, and the rule bars presenting it unless the advertisement also provides the total portfolio's results. The CFA Institute's GIPS standards build the same completeness principle into composite construction specifically to stop firms cherry-picking their best performance. Both describe the same nineteen-of-twenty-four problem from a different angle.
The second gap sits inside the firm. Munro, Sinclair and Drummond are primary on 10, 8 and 6 of the 24 deals; write-offs included, that already sums to 24. Each partner's own one-pager also lists deals they sat on as a board observer or co-sponsor, credited as though primary. Add those in and the three one-pagers claim 29 deals between them, five more than the fund actually made. An LP comparing bios across three fundraising decks finds one portfolio company claimed twice before finding the write-off dropped once.
What's in the pack
Deal-by-Deal Performance
Every investment the fund has ever made, entry and current or exit value, status and primary partner. A write-off is a row with a value of zero, never a deleted row
Gross and Net Performance
Fund-level MOIC, gross and net, each with the calculation stated next to the number, feeding the same figures your quarterly LP reporting already sends
Attribution by Partner
Every partner's primary-credited deal count, summed and checked against the Deal-by-Deal Performance sheet's row count, write-offs included
Track Record Narrative
The full portfolio stated before any multiple, with write-offs given their own section rather than a clause buried in general commentary
Methodology and Attribution Note
The document written to be read by someone trying to find the weak point: how gross and net MOIC are calculated, and how primary attribution is decided when more than one partner touched a deal
How it works
- 1
Open in River, or download it
Open the pack in River and let the agent build the sheets from your own fund's records, or download the blank Word and CSV files instantly.
- 2
Send the complete investment history
Every company the fund has ever put capital into, including write-offs, plus current valuations and the fee and carry terms.
- 3
Check the total before computing a multiple
The Deal-by-Deal Performance sheet's invested-cost total has to match the fund's own capital account records, the same completeness check a fund audit runs before signing off on a position.
- 4
Reconcile attribution, then write the narrative
Sum each partner's primary-credited deals against the sheet's row count, then draft the Track Record Narrative and Methodology and Attribution Note from what reconciles.
Frequently asked questions
Is this template free?
Yes. The Deal-by-deal Performance, Gross and Net Performance and Attribution by Partner sheets, plus the Track Record Narrative and Methodology and Attribution Note, download free with no account and no time limit. Edit with AI opens the same pack in River with an agent already primed to build the sheets from your own fund's investment history.
What does 'Edit with AI' actually do?
It creates a free account, installs this exact pack as a private space, and opens it with River already primed to ask for your investment history, valuations and realization data. Nothing is shared with other firms, and no deal is marked realized or written off until you confirm it yourself.
Does this calculate my fund's IRR or MOIC?
It calculates gross and net MOIC from the entry and current or exit value you provide, and IRR once you also give each investment's cash flow dates, with the formula stated next to every figure. It does not value a position: an active deal's current value has to come from your own valuation process.
Why do the gross and net multiples differ so much?
Fees and carry are real money the fund keeps before an LP sees a return. In the worked example, $19.2 million of the $120 million committed went to fees rather than deals, and carry took 20 percent of the profit over paid-in capital. Gross MOIC is 1.643x; net is 1.304x, and the note states both calculations.
How does the Attribution by Partner sheet stop double-counting?
It sums every partner's primary-credit deals and checks the total against the Deal-by-deal Performance sheet's row count. In the worked example, primary credit alone sums to 24, matching the fund exactly. A one-pager that also counts a board or co-sponsor role as primary would sum to 29, and the sheet flags the five-deal gap.
What format are the downloaded files?
Word documents for the Track Record Narrative and the Methodology and Attribution Note, and CSV for the Deal-by-deal Performance, Gross and Net Performance, and Attribution by Partner sheets. The documents open in Word, Pages and Google Docs. The sheets open in Excel, Numbers and Sheets with every column intact.
We are raising a new fund off this track record. Does this help?
Yes. A fundraise interrogates exactly these two things: the calculation behind each return figure and whether partner credit reconciles. Feed the finished sheets into a diligence response pack so the DDQ's track record answers and this pack's numbers stay identical across every prospect.
Find out whether your attribution actually reconciles
Send the complete investment history, write-offs included, and who was primary on each deal. The first pass checks whether the totals add up.
Edit with AI