Frequently Asked
Questions

There are a plethora of investor portals available in the market — mostly focusing on user interface, which is a necessary goal. However, two additional considerations matter most: how tightly it is integrated with the accounting system, and how customizable it is, especially as it relates to investor statements. Most systems will lack one or the other. Additional considerations include digital subdocs and document management. If a system provides all of these, it will allow investors to self-serve statements and tax documents, and also update their information including contact and bank details securely. OpEff's investor portal supports self-serve investments and tax documents and is natively attached to its accounting system, Perfona.

Implementation can be tricky if multiple technologies are involved. If the investor portal is integrated natively with the fund accounting and waterfall system, implementation can be approximately 5x quicker. For a brand new fund, a portal should be implemented within 5 to 10 business days. For each year of history at an existing fund, add roughly 3 to 4 weeks. Firms can charge $150 to $450 per hour during implementation. However, consider the long-term impact: a standalone investor portal can add significant overhead and delays due to reconciliations over time. OpEff's investor portal connects directly to fund accounting, the NAV general ledger, investor allocation and waterfall calculator — all backed by agentic AI.

If back-office processes are built such that capital call and distribution notices are handled separately from waterfall and investor allocation, that can indicate outdated or rigid technology. Modern technologies like OpEff's Perfona handle capital call and distribution generation directly as part of investor allocation and waterfall calculations, removing the need for such reconciliations entirely.

Traditionally, legacy systems handled these as separate functions with thousands of lines of code to handle the smallest nuances. Modern technologies handle statement generation as part of the same code that calculates partnership allocations. The partnership allocation system calculates P&L allocations, fees and capital balances — and those figures are directly reported in capital account statements (CAS).

Hedge funds typically crystallize performance fees annually, requiring recoupment of any underperformance (loss carry-forward) before incentive accrues. PE firms, by contrast, accrue a preferred return on called capital from the day of the call. Managers must return the full accrual and invested capital before earning carried interest — often 3 to 5 years post-call when holdings are divested. OpEff's Perfona is the only comprehensive system that supports both strategies along with dozens of different waterfall calculations and fund projections.

Fund accounting systems must support maker-checker roles — a best practice around segregation of duties where the person making entries is different from the person reviewing them. A more stringent setup may require a third person for final sign-off. In modern systems, the maker is typically a data-loading automation, and the checker leverages automated reconciliations to sign off on multiple funds. With the advent of AI agents, OpEff is building a fully autonomous fund administration service that will remove the need for a human checker entirely.

Traditional fund accounting systems require significant additional staffing and have a steep learning curve. The general rule of thumb is 1 controller per billion in AUM. However, this is dependent on skill level and runs counter to the principles of technology leverage. OpEff's viewpoint is different: OpEff provides automations and in-house expertise to run your systems, so you don't need to learn the system or hire additional staff, but retain full access to all information at any point.

Traditional fund accounting systems either don't offer waterfall calculations or leverage a separately developed system, so finding native integration is rare. OpEff's Perfona is the only system with two hearts in one: a multi-asset, multi-currency general ledger and an investor allocation and waterfall system — both working in equilibrium. Contact us to see it in action.

NAV calculation for illiquid holdings relies on valuation policies and supporting documentation rather than market prices. Firms typically engage a third-party valuation company to value illiquid holdings in accordance with standards like IPEV or ASC 820 Fair Value Measurement. Common methods include market approach, income approach, cost approach, or reference points like recent transaction prices and third-party appraisals. Fund administrators require a full portfolio valuation package including valuation memo, methodology, key assumptions, comparables, and model output — usually on a quarterly basis.