Ipes

Confidential
January 2018

The better the question. The better the answer.

The better the world works.
Contents

Page
Section 0 Ipes at a glance 2
Section 1 Opportunity overview 3
Section 2 Investment thesis and value creation story 8
Section 3 Indicative valuation and competitive landscape 20
Section 4 FDD: Key due diligence areas 25

Appendices
Appendix A Valuation multiples 27
Appendix B Credentials 30
Appendix C Ipes in focus 32
Appendix D Understanding Monterey data 35

Disclaimer
This preliminary document has been prepared by EY. The information and opinions contained in this document are derived from public and private sources which we believe to be reliable and accurate but which,
without further investigation, cannot be warranted as to their accuracy, completeness or correctness. This information is supplied on the condition that EY, and any partner or employee of EY, are not liable for any
error or inaccuracy contained herein, whether negligently caused or otherwise, or for loss or damage suffered by any person due to such error, omission or inaccuracy as a result of such supply. In particular any
numbers, initial valuations and schedules contained in this document are preliminary and are for discussion purposes only.
EY will incur obligation of no kind arising from this document and will not be held responsible for any use of this document. This document is intended for your sole use and may not be disclosed in any manner to third
parties without EY‘s express prior written consent.
The UK firm EY LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC300001 and is a member practice of EY Global.

1
Ipes at a glance Ipes at a glance

► Ipes provides fund administration and associated outsourced services to over 360 funds; primarily Private Equity, but also Debt and
Venture Capital funds with $158bn of AuA and c. £25m revenues. It has 5 offices across Guernsey, Jersey, UK, Luxembourg & Ireland

Highlights Key financials

Revenue AuA
c. 260 employees
c. $158bn (Nov’ 2017)
£25.3m^ (2016) c. $138bn (Nov’ 2016)
£21.9m^ (2015) c. $47bn (May 2012)
c. 31% CAGR growth from 2012-16*
Advises 188 clients across 368 funds Geography
Guernsey Jersey
► C. 130 FTEs ► C. 35 FTEs
Ranked 5th globally for Private Equity funds under ► 2nd largest administrator $40bn AuA* ► 8th largest administrator $8bn AuA*
administration by ICFA magazine. ► 16% market share ► 8% market share

Ranked as the 2nd largest fund administrator in Ireland

Guernsey by Lipper Fitzrovia UK ► c. 30 FTEs
► c. 35 FTEs
► Cork office established in 2016 to
Voted realdeals Funds Administrator of the Year ► UK revenue c. £3m provide specialised accounting support
at the Private Equity Awards 2017 and IT development

Luxembourg
► c. 30 FTEs
Proprietary technology through core
► Established full fund administration
system, Capital Tracker and, more service in 2010
recently, the ID Register
Services provided
• Fund administration • Other (Directorships, portfolio
• Depositary management and risk management)
• Reporting

^ Source: company website, EY analysis *Source: Monterey data. Please note, the data supplied by Monterey is subject to certain exclusions. Please refer to Appendix E for more details

2
Section 1

Business overview
 Ipes has grown organically from Channel Islands-based to an
increasingly pan-European market service provider Business overview

Overview

► Ipes focuses on providing fund administration, depositary, reporting and associated ancillary services to Private Equity, Debt and Venture Capital funds
► Private Equity currently makes up c. 80% of the client book
► Since investing in 2013, Silverfleet Capital has focused the strategy on growing the company organically

Geographies Guernsey, UK, Jersey and

Luxembourg

Funds under $50bn

administration

Clients 90
Indicative Revenue (£m)

2016: Launch of
IT systems Bespoke, fully resilient, dual the ID Register 260
25
data centre based

240
Geographies Guernsey, Jersey and UK 2013: Purchased by Silverfleet Capital
Deal value £50m
Funds under $20bn
administration
16 Clients 52 130
2016:
Introduction of
IT systems Infrastructure that lacked
2015: Expansion FACTA reporting
scalability and resilience
of UK office to
2016: Establishment of Cork,
new London
Ireland office to provide IT Geographies Guernsey, UK, Jersey,
headquarters
development and specialist Ireland and Luxembourg
accounting support
10 Funds under $158bn
110 2010: Establishment of administration
Luxembourg office
Clients 188
2008: Management buy-
out / RJD Partners IT systems Focus on development
Deal value: £25m of bespoke products

1998 2008 2013 2016 2017

Owner-managed RJD partners Silverfleet Capital

Denotes number of employees

4 Key milestone
Background Business overview

► After 4 years of holding Ipes, Silverfleet is planning to launch a sales process in Q1 2018, with Rothschild appointed as sell-side advisors

11. Silverfleet acquired Ipes on 16 August 2013 from RJD Partners for a consideration of £50m.

22. Under Silverfleet ownership, the business has primarily focused on private equity fund administration, seeking organic growth through expanding ‘share
of wallet’ with their existing client base.

33. The company has expanded organically into Ireland and scaled their operation in the UK. They have also rolled out new product offerings such as
depository services, and the introduction of the ID Register.

44. Given the fragmented nature of the market & Silverfleet’s history as a ‘buy & build’ specialist, we would have expected Ipes to have completed number of
inorganic growth options throughout the lifetime of their investment. To date, no acquisitions have been competed under Silverfleet’s ownership.

55. Most of Ipes’s European competitors have looked to extend their offering into new asset classes, such as real estate, debt etc. Ipes has continued to
focus predominately on private equity. Similarly, Ipes has largely remained out of the corporate services market, choosing, in some instances, to partner,
where required.

66. In this document, we start to highlight some ‘outside-in’ views of the current size and shape of the business, the likely ongoing investment hypothesis for
an investor, the wider market and likely valuation expectations.

5
Core service offering Business overview

Fund administration* Depositary Reporting Investor services Total

Indicative Revenue £16m £4m £4m £1m £25m

Industry margins 25% 10% 35% 25%

► Accounting and Reporting ► Capital and cash flow monitoring ► FACTA and CDOT - Classification, ► Client Due Diligence (CDD)
► Investor Relations ► Safekeeping of assets Registration, Investigation and ► Company secretarial, including
► Sanctions Screening ► Oversight, including periodic review of Reporting provision of directorships, registered
► Making Payments controls and procedures ► CRS offices, production of corporate
► Fund Performance Measurement ► Compliance with AIFMD (Annex IV ► Compliance with statutory filings records and corporate governance
► Calls and Distributions Reporting) under IFRS, US GAAP, UK GAAP and activities
► Investor Reporting ► Provides depositary oversight to Luxembourg GAAP ► AML compliance services
Scope of services
► Fund Launches c.$80bn assets for c.120 funds ► Audit support ► Risk Management
provided
► Carry Waterfalls ► Can partner with client’s preferred
► Processing Investments and bank for banking services
divestments
► Compliance Services
► Director Services**
► Net Asset Value (NAV)
calculations

Fee Structure ► AML compliance on a Fixed-fee basis

► Accounting services provided on
(Note: all new clients ► Client, investor and third-party queries
a fixed-fee basis ► Accounting and reporting services ► Accounting and reporting services
are subject to an on a time spent basis
► Investment and divestment provided on a fixed-fee basis provided on a fixed fee basis
additional on- ► Click-rate fees also applied for some
processing on a time-spent basis
boarding fee) services

► HG Capital, Phoenix Equity

► LGT, European Capital, Park Square
Sample clients Partners, Quadriga Capital, ► Northzone, Turkven ► Phoenix Equity Partners
Capital
Ufenau Capital Partners

*Ipes Luxembourg provides central administration services to SIFs, SICARs and unregulated fund structures.
**Services also provided via partners.
Key clients

6
Management team Business overview

Position Name Joined Office Overview

► Chris is responsible for the overall management and growth of the business
► He has over 20 years experience in financial and professional services, including previous roles
at PwC, Clifford Chance and Whitehead Mann
CEO Chris Merry 2014 London
► More recently, Chris served as CEO of RSM Tenon where he successfully stabilised and
repositioned the business for growth, ahead of its sale to Baker Tilly in 2013
► He is a qualified Chartered Accountant (ICAEW)
► Adrian is responsible for overseeing all financial activities
► Prior to Ipes, he was CFO of International Personal Finance
CFO Adrian Gardner 2016 London ► He started his career at PwC and then spent 13 years at Lazard, latterly as a managing director
in the TMT team. He then went on to serve as CFO at ProStrakan, PA Consulting and RSM Tenon
► He is a qualified Chartered Accountant
► Barry is responsible for service delivery across the Group
► He has been a director of Ipes since 2007 and has over 15 years experience in fund admin
COO Barry McClay 2004 Guernsey ► Prior to Ipes, he spent 5 years working in the Private Equity department of Northern Trust,
leading the administration and accounting teams
► He is a qualified Chartered Accountant and has an MBA from the University of Manchester

► Simon is responsible for the overall management and development of Ipes Luxembourg
► He has more than 15 years experience in Luxembourg finance, most recently working as an
CCO Simon Henin 2009 Luxembourg independent consultant advising on accounting, processes and business development
► Simon is a qualified Chartered Accountant
► He holds a masters in Commercial & Financial sciences and is fluent in English and French
► Tim joined with a mandate to differentiate the firm through the use of technology
► Tim has led the program to develop IT infrastructure & integration with the SWIFT network
► Since joining, Tim has been responsible for developing Capital Tracker (Ipes technology
Director,
Tim Andrews 2007 Ireland platform), and more recently the ID register
Technology
► Prior to Ipes, Tim spent two year at Mourant Fund Administration where he was responsible for
implementing their global accounting system
► He has an MA (Oxon) in Economics and Management

► Nigel is responsible for heading up Ipes’ Business Development and Marketing activities
Group Head of ► He has 15 year experience working with Private Equity funds and previously worked as head of
Business Nigel Strachan 2011 Jersey new business for corporate clients at Kleinwort Benson
Development ► He is a qualified Chartered Accountant and a member of the Chartered Institute for Securities
and Investment

Source: Company website

7
Section 3

Investment thesis and

value creation story
Investment highlights
Investment thesis and
value creation story

1 Macro ‘tailwinds’ across the sector: Asset managers continue to allocate more funds to alternatives, driving
demand for alternative asset administration services

2 Strong organic growth: Ipes provides services under long-term, stable contracts with established clients. High
visibility around “sticky” recurring revenue streams, attractive margins and with further opportunities for x-sell

3 Under new ownership, opportunity to re-evaluate the commercials around the client book incl. pricing for
existing clients, plus start to offer new geographies (e.g. FR, DE, US), new services (e.g. corporate services),
asset classes (e.g. RE)

4 Opportunity to extract further value (synergies) through more targeted investment in technology, combination
of footprint / “smart sourcing” and the removal of duplication across shared services

9
Investment highlights
Investment thesis and
value creation story

1
1 Macro ‘tailwinds’ across the sector: Asset managers continue to allocate more funds to alternatives, driving
demand for alternative asset administration services
Global AuM and alternative funds AuM ($trn) Key insights
Source: Preqin, BCG, HFR, EY analysis
Asset managers are increasingly investing in
65
69 1
7.8% 63 alternatives to generate higher returns. Global
11.8% -15.6% 57 alternative AuM has grown with a CAGR of 7.8% from
50
45 42 45 46 c. $4trn in 2009 to c.$10trn in 2016.
36 41 38
56 59
51
55
Traditional funds This has been driven by a search for returns in an
41 45
33 39 41 32 39 41
environment of historically low yields, combined with
10 Alternative funds a demand from institutional investors for assets that
2 3 4 6 4 4 5 5 6 88 99
meet their liability profile
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Within alternatives, growth has been strong across all
Global alternatives AuM by product ($trn) 2
2 sub-asset classes, particularly Infrastructure and
CAGR
Source: Preqin, HFR, EY analysis
(2008-16)
Debt. Institutional investors are increasingly looking
6.5 6.8 for sophisticated solutions across multiple asset
0.2
6.1
0.2
Others 14.7%
5.8 0.2 0.2
0.3 0.4 classes. Private Equity has the largest dry powder
4.8 5.1 0.1 0.3 0.5
0.3 0.6 0.6
Infra 16.1%
with c.$2.0trn of assets followed by real estate with
4.5 0.1
0.2
0.5 0.8 0.8
Private 11.8%
4.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.8
c. $545bn
3.7 0.1
0.1
0.1 0.3 0.2 0.4
0.6 0.6
2.2 Debt
0.1 0.5 2.2
0.3 2 2.1
0.4
1.7 1.7 1.8 RE 8.7% Growth has been particularly strong in Ireland and
1.5 1.5
HF 5.3% 3
2.4 2.6
Luxembourg, with a CAGR of 25% and 28%
2.2 2.2
1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 PE 7.7% respectively over the period. Further expansion into
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 both jurisdictions, particularly Luxembourg could
provide potential future opportunities for an investor
Alts admin market growth (Key jurisdictions AuA, $bn)
3 Sources: All data as reported to Monterey Research Reports. Asset classes as defined by Monterey 2016 Includes PE/ RE / Venture capital. Monterey
compilation dates: Luxembourg – December each year, Jersey/Guernsey – June each year CAGR Buy-side questions for consideration
(2008-16)
+10% • Given the growth of alternatives in Luxembourg, why
153 LUX has the business not seen significant FTE growth in
87 138 28%
69 Jersey Luxembourg?
56 220 196 207 6%
167 161
33 37 46 IRE • Similarly, given the growth in other asset classes, e.g.
22 25%
19 288 277 debt, where it has some historic exposure, why has
225 251 271
Guernsey 5% this element of the business remained relatively small?
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

10
Investment highlights
Investment thesis and
value creation story

2 Strong organic growth: Ipes provides services under long-term, stable contracts with established clients. High
visibility around “sticky” recurring revenue streams, attractive margins and with further opportunities for x-sell

Ipes client asset mix appears to be focused on the Private Equity and Fund of Funds asset classes which are considered to be complex, high value, high margin
►
assets. The client base is sticky and has therefore allowed Ipes to considerably expand their share of wallet with existing clients
Revenue and EBITDA growth from 2012 to 2016 Commentary
Source: EY Analysis
The make up of the client book by vintage (e.g. fund I or VI),
size, focus of the funds an administrator manages directly flow
into the sustainability of the business.

In a relatively benign fund raising environment, it is possible to

25
grow by on-boarding new ‘first time’ funds

20% However, EY research suggests that, more broadly, there is a

CAGR
wider trend of larger funds raising a disproportionate amount of
new funds, as shown on the next slide. Raising a question, over
the medium term, around potential sustainability.
14%
CAGR

Buy side questions for consideration

Ipes Top 5 Client Analysis ($bn) • Given AuA has grown at 31% CAGR from 2012-2016, whilst AuA is not
Source: Monterey always an accurate proxy, why has not more of this flowed through into
2012 2016 revenue & EBITDA ?
Increase / • How does this level of growth compare to their direct competitors (e.g.
Position AuA in 2012 Position AuA in 2016
Top 5 clients decrease over Aztec, Sanne etc.)?
in 2012 ($'bn) in 2016 ($’bn)
period
PAI Partners 1 8.52 2 5.42 -36% • What is driving organic growth? New funds raised by existing clients?
New services sold to existing clients and or ‘new, new’ client wins?
HgCapital 2 6.01 1 8.04 34%
Baring Vostok Capital Partners 3 3.56 4 3.73 5% • Are Ipes winning market share, if so, who from? See Appendix E
Silverfleet 4 2.94 6 2.58 -12% • Are Ipes winning the ‘follow on’ fund?
Motion Equity Partners 5 2.80 8 1.82 -35%
Grand Total 23.83 21.59 • Client concentration around emerging market / SME funds?

Access Capital Partners 6 2.78 3 4.50 62%

Private Label N/A N/A 5 3.44 n/a

11
Investment highlights
Investment thesis and
value creation story

2 ►
Strong organic growth: Ipes provides services under long-term, stable contracts with established clients. High
visibility around “sticky” recurring revenue streams, attractive margins and with further opportunities for x-sell

Partnering with successful, existing clients is more likely to drive growth for administrators in the long-run, by building out the product service offering.
► Ipes has achieved this organic growth by expanding their current offering in their ‘heritage’ asset class and jurisdictions (Guernsey and Jersey). Further
opportunities for organic growth is available to fund administrators who can extend service reach.

Number of buyout deals by fund size CAGR (%) Growth in fundraising activities
Source: Preqin, HFR, EY analysis Source: Preqin, HFR, EY analysis
3,985 (2010-16)
Buy side questions for consideration
399 +$1bn 21% 100% 100% • It is important to understand the
nature of their clients and whether
319 $500-999m 9% any sit within the top 20 managers.
Does Ipes have clients that will win
over the cycle?
438
$250-499m 15% 47% Other • How would Ipes perform if there is a
significant change in the top 20 fund
managers?
677 72%
$100-249m 8%
2,079
126
189
189

420

2152

<$100mn 11% 53% Top 20 mangers

1,155

28%

Source: Preqin 2016 2010 2016 2010 2016

12
Investment highlights Investment thesis and
value creation story

2 Based on Monterrey data, organic growth has been driven by existing clients in Guernsey & new client wins in
Jersey. We also suspect the roll out of depositary services will have contributed to growth. What about X-sell?

New and existing client wins for Ipes in Guernsey, Jersey and Luxembourg
Source: All data as reported to Monterey Research Reports. Asset classes as defined by Monterey. Monterey compilation dates: Luxembourg – December each year, Jersey/Guernsey – June each year

Guernsey (2017: $48.9bn) Jersey (2016: $8.5n) Luxembourg (2016: $0.1bn)

60.0 4.3% 9.0 43.4% 8.5 0.40 0.4
48.7 48.9 7.1 0.5
45.3 45.5 44.8 7.0
32.0%
39.7 8.4 8.9 5.9 0.9 0.5 0.30
40.0 7.9 9.8 9.3 0.1 6.0
3.7
AuA $bn

AuA $bn

AuA $bn
0.1 1.0
0.20
8.0 0.4
20.0 40.4 39.9 3.0 6.2 6.6 0.1
36.0 37.3 35.7 35.4 4.9 0.1
1.4 0.10
1.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.8 0.5 0.0 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.00 0.0 0.0
0.0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
PE/VC RE Others PE/VC Others PE/VC

Guernsey – 2017 Client List Jersey – 2017 Client List Luxembourg – 2017 Client List
$bn Clients RE PE/VC Other Total $bn Clients RE PE/VC Other Total $bn Clients FoF PE/VC RE Total
1 HgCapital - 11.0 - 11.0 1 Vitol Group - 3.0 3.0 1 Ventech Capital - 0.2 - 0.2
2 Access Capital Partners - 0.7 5.1 5.8 2 Quadriga Capital - 1.6 1.6 2 SIF Private Label - 0.2 - 0.2
3 PAI Partners - 5.6 - 5.6 3 Northzone Ventures - 0.7 0.7 3 - -
Platina Partners 0.0 0.0
4 Baring Vostok Capital Partners - 3.4 0.1 3.5 4 BNP Paribas - 0.1 0.5 0.6 4 - - - - 0.0
5 Silverfleet - 2.7 - 2.7 5 Montana Capital Partners - 0.5 0.5 5 - - - - 0.0
6 Balderton Capital - 2.0 - 2.0 6 EMH Partners - 0.4 0.4 6 - - - - 0.0
7 Motion Equity Partners - 1.9 - 1.9 7 Argos Soditic - 0.3 0.3 7 - - - - 0.0
8 Aberdeen Asset Managers - - 1.7 1.7 8 ADM Capital - 0.3 0.3 8 - - - - 0.0
9 Turkven Private Equity - 1.7 - 1.7 Marwyn Investment
9 - 9 - - - - 0.0
10 Phoenix Equity Partners - 1.6 - 1.6 Management 0.3 0.3
10 Cross Equity Partners - 0.2 0.2 10 - - - - 0.0
11 Others 0.1 9.4 2.0 11.4
Total 0.1 39.9 8.9 48.9 11 Others - 0.7 0.7 11 - - - - 0.0
Total 8.0 0.5 8.5 Total 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4

Legend1 Client acquired in 2016 Client acquired in 2017 Client acquired pre 2016

Source: All data as reported to Monterey Research Reports. Asset classes as defined by Monterey. Monterey compilation dates: Luxembourg – December each year, Jersey/Guernsey – June each year

13
Investment highlights Investment thesis and
value creation story

3 Under new ownership, opportunity to re-evaluate the commercials around the client book incl. pricing for existing
clients & offer new geographies (e.g. US), new services (e.g. corporate services), asset classes (e.g. RE)

► Ipes’s initial AuA growth has been supported through organic growth of the existing client book and some new client wins. Monterrey data suggests Ipes have
been winning more clients than they have lost, with an overall 6% CAGR (2012-16). Please refer to Appendix E for further details.

Ipes AuA analysis ($bn, Jersey, Guernsey, Luxembourg) Potentially significant ‘white space’ with the existing client book
Source: Monterey

6.04%
CAGR

Corp Svcs. Fund Adm.

(4.6) 51.9
11.3

Services
41.1 4.1

Other
2
3

Buy side questions for consideration

• Given Ipes’ predominate focus on PE admin out of core European
locations, are their clients more likely to use ‘multiple’ service
providers?
• If so, is there a large concentration risk with any 1 provider?
2012 2016
Client wins Client losses Net growth (decline) in existing client book

► Clients assumed as lost if not present in a following year. i.e. exist in 2012 but not in 2013
14 ► Wins assumed if client not present in preceding year i.e. client exists in 2013 but not in 2012
Investment highlights Investment thesis and
value creation story

3 ►
Under new ownership, opportunity to re-evaluate the commercials around the client book incl. pricing for existing
clients & offer new geographies (e.g. US), new services (e.g. corporate services), asset classes (e.g. RE)

Whilst servicing the US represents the majority of the global PE funds market, and potentially the largest opportunity for European administrators seeking
expansion over time, no single player has yet truly dominated Europe
Global PE funds Largest servicers in selected European locations; Commentary
Number of Global PE funds*
100% Others
Lux
Luxembourg2 Guernsey3 Jersey4 Whilst Ipes appear to enjoy a strong position in the
em Total AuA: $3857bn Total AuA: $385bn Total AuA: $559bn Guernsey market for private equity administration,
bou they do not make the Top 5 administrators in either
90% Jer
rg PE AuA: $93bn PE AuA: $244bn PE AuA: $148bn
sey
Gue (as of 31 Dec 2016) (as of 30 June 2016) (as of 30 June 2016) Jersey or Luxembourg
rns 100%
80% ey 90% In addition, in the context of where private equity
Cay 80% funds are domiciled globally, the European markets
ma
70%
n 70%
Others 30.0% appear to be significantly behind both the US and the
Isla
Others 38.9% Intertrust 7.1%
Cayman Islands by volume (#PE funds domiciled)
nds
60% Partners Group 7.4% State Street 9.9%
60%
50% Northern Trust 10.5% Bedell Fund Services
This only serves to demonstrate that even within
Others 62.2% 10.3%
40% Aztec Group what Ipes considers to be a core market – PE admin –
50% Alter Domus 6.9% 13.2%
30% Saltgate 19.2% there is a potentially significant opportunity for
Universal-Investment 7.1%

20% Carlyle Group 7.2% IPES 14.5% growth both in key European markets & beyond
40% Warburg Invest 8.0%
Aztec Group
10% Apax Partners 23.5%
CACEIS 8.5% 15.6%
Del 0% Buy side questions for consideration
30%
aw Luxembourg Guernsey Jersey
are • How many existing clients have structures in the US vs
Cayman Islands?
20% Key observations
• Who is the largest provider of Corporate Services to the
In Europe: existing Fund Administration book?
10% ► Relatively fragmented (especially in Luxembourg)
• Is there a concentration?
► Independents are more than competitive (vs banks and or scale administrators)
0% ► It appears that, in PE admin, no bank is strong in more than one European market
Domicile*
► Significant lift-out opportunities appear to exist e.g. Apax, Carlyle. Etc.

Sources: 1All data as per Monterey Fund Research Reports unless otherwise stated 2Luxembourg
Data as of 31 Dec 2014 3Guernsey data as of 30 June 2014 4Jersey data as of 30 June 2014,
*Figures at 2013; EY estimates & Oliver Wyman ‘Domiciles of alternative investment funds’

15
Investment highlights Investment thesis and
value creation story

4 Opportunity to extract further value (synergies) through more targeted investment in technology, combination
of footprint / “smart sourcing” and the removal of duplication across shared services

Overview of in-house technology Commentary

We estimate Ipes have historically spent somewhere in the region of

Capital Tracker
► Payment processing and
automated bookkeeping.
Generates investor capital
account statements. Live data
Purpose can be shared securely and in
real-time.
► Enables calculations of realised
gains or losses on the disposal
of an investment
ID Register
► Allows investors to create and
maintain a full KYC, FACTA and
CRS compliant profile, connect it
across all funds in which they
invest and ensure compliance
with AML regulations.
► Launched in 2016
► Free to set-up, ongoing monthly
fees apply
c.3-4% of revenue each year for past three years on technology
Capital Tracker is a proprietary system built, maintained & developed
‘in house’
Our research suggest that independent, European competitors
typically have a technology spend in the region of c.5-7% of revenue
Ipes’ Tier I competitors tend to use either eFront or Investran. These
systems are well known (requested?) by asset management clients
The company has recently moved its IT function to Cork, Ireland with a
team of c. 25 employees focussed on development

► C. $10bn of payments ► 17,500 registered investors and

Volume
processed each year
► Connected to the SWIFT
Integration banking network for use across
multiple banks
► Supports complex structures
Key benefit that are multi-asset, multi-
currency and multi-jurisdictional
140 GPs Buy-side questions
• Is Ipes’ technology a strength when winning new clients?
► N/A • Are the Capital Tracker and ID Register likely to require significant
future capital expenditure investment to remain relevant?
► Provides full support to users 24 • How pervasive is Capital Tracker across the product suite? Beyond
hours, 7 days per week. fund admin, to what extent is it integral say, to depositary etc?
► Once an investor has established
a profile, it is continuously
monitored and shared with other
investors reducing the need to
replicate documents and saving
time

16
Investment highlights Investment thesis and
value creation story

4 Opportunity to extract further value (synergies) through more targeted investment in technology, combination
of footprint / “smart sourcing” and the removal of duplication across shared services

PE solutions competitive landscape Key players in the competitive landscape

eFront
Breadth of functionality

Relevant
TNR

Capital Tracker
Name Overview
Framework
Alta ► eFront is rapidly winning market share
iLevel Return eFront ► Provides top-of-the-range end-to-end solutions for both GPs and LPs
Investran ► Driving market development through AltExchange

► Incumbent in the software solutions market, but viewed as losing market

Burgiss
Investran / share
Intralinks Sunguard ► Strong back-office accounting solution, popular with fund administrators
► Recent investments in reporting / analytics
► Has not won many new deals recently and has been losing market share
TNR ► Reasonably strong back-office solutions and front-end offerings, however
their service offerings have not been updated recently
Advanced technology
iLevel ► Strong spin-out from Blackstone, focused on portfolio management for GPs
Tier 1
► Provides low-end solutions for LPs competing with Front LP and Pevara
Size of bubble Burgiss
Tier 2 ► Provides less coverage and functionality than eFront
denotes customer
base ► Recent entrant to the market, remains small, but some notable client wins
AltaReturn
Tier 3 over the last two years

17
Potential value drags: Macro Investment thesis and
value creation story

Key issues Potential buy-side questions

? Brexit
In the context of a likely Brexit event, this has led some to
question the historic competitive position of the Channel
Islands as a jurisdiction of choice for funds
•

•
Upon leaving the EU, how is this likely to impact the way that EU views
the Channel Islands? Similarly, will this change UK government views?
Will the Channel Islands be able to ‘fend for themselves’ politically, should
they lose the backing of a UK government inside the EU?

?
Increased political uncertainty in the UK and the potentially
Political rising possibility of a further general election could see the
uncertainty return of a government and with it, a change in policy e.g.
restriction on the tax benefits of offshore structures
• The development of detailed ‘scenarios’ may be required for any and all of
Brexit, change of government and Blacklisting and how this may impact
the industry, jurisdiction, asset class down to the specific client book in
question. This could have meaningfully alter commercials of the business

?
• How are discussions on the need for change around substance
EU issued a recent updated ‘Blacklist’ of offshore
EU requirements between Jersey, Guernsey & EU currently progressing?
jurisdictions; could the risk of the Channel Islands being
Blacklisting • Will the islands be able to defend themselves in a similar way once the UK
included going forward increase in a post Brexit world?
leaves the EU?

? Public
scrutiny
In the wake of ‘Panama Papers’, ‘Lux Leaks’ & more
recently ‘Paradise Papers’ the industry has increasingly
become front page news. Public scrutiny is & will remain
high for the foreseeable future. Reputational risks are real
and, arguably, higher than the industry has faced before
•
•
•
•
What impact has there been from previous industry coverage?
How have the clients been affected / reacted?
What level of cyber security does the business currently run?
What is the standing of the business with regulators in countries where it
operates?

?
An ever increasing regulatory burden is placing more &
more requirements on the asset managers and, by
• Work through latest advice on how people are likely to structure their
Regulation: extension, on their administrator. Greater substance
investments moving forward? E.g. use of intermediate ‘hold co’s’?
BEPS requirements, changes in tax law etc have the ability to
• Ability to be jurisdiction agnostic from a client service perspective
change behaviour incl. how & where people structure their
investments

18
Potential value drags: Ipes specific Investment thesis and
value creation story

Key issues Potential buy-side questions

?
It is not clear whether the quality of organic growth has
Quality of been from existing clients raising new funds, or the success
inorganic of the company in pitching new service offerings.
growth Similarly, whether margin has been diluted through the
offering of new products / services e.g. depositary
• What is Ipes’ core differentiator when pitching in the market?
• How do they fair at winning new funds of existing clients?
• Who do they win market share from and why does the client choose Ipes?
• Where will future organic come from and how are they positioned to win?

?
These are people businesses, mainly operating in tight
Investment • How does the business source, hire & develop talent?
labour markets (incl. need for work permits). There have
in Talent: • How do you scale the business in key locations?
been recent changes to key senior management, the
High level of • What is the percentage of churn at each grade within the business?
market also suspects that there could have been an above
churn • How much does the business invest in training per year? Priorities?
average level of churn across all areas of the business

?
Ipes planned to grow inorganically with at least c.£5m
No EBITDA from European expansion forecast in their • Why did Management, with Silverfleet’s backing, not deliver any inorganic
acquisitions acquisition plan. However, the company has not made any growth through the investment with the cycle?
acquisitions

?
The company has expanded into new jurisdictions such as
Growth
Ireland and Luxembourg, but it is unclear whether they are
behind the • Detailed explanation of the drivers of organic growth & why they win vs
winning market share across the jurisdictions and targeting
rest of the their competitors?
the right clients . We suspect that the CAGR growth over
market
the period 2012-16 falls behind the rest of the market

? In-house
technology
Ipes utilises its own in-house technology, which is not
common practice in the industry. In addition, it may well
spend less (c. 3-4% of revenue) on technology each year,
vs the industry average of c.5-7%
•
•
•
Are all IT capabilities in-house or are they outsourced?
How does the Ipes platform integrate with other market-leading platforms?
What would the key migration considerations be to integrate with one of
the market-leading platforms?

? Right client
mix
Is Ipes winning the right business from the right clients? Is
it able to win new funds from existing clients? Are its
clients ‘new’ first generation funds, or larger funds winning
across the cycle?
•
•
•
Wins / losses report + other key sales KPI
Sales pipeline & approach to business development
Client referencing

19
Section 4

Competitive
landscape and
indicative valuation
Competitive landscape
Competitive landscape
and indicative valuation

► Silverfleet is planning to launch a sales process in Q1 2018, with Rothschild appointed as sell-side advisors

Synergy case / Strategic buyer PE platform

► There are a number of strategic buyers who could achieve meaningful synergies
from the purchase of Ipes, as an add-on to existing fund administration operations
or as a way to expand their asset servicing offering into this segment
► This is particularly relevant to banks who are looking to scale further in private
equity administration n Europe
► The relative attractiveness of Ipes to a bank is also potentially enhanced as the
business does not meaningfully offer corporate services (take on fiduciary risk),
which has been difficult for banks to get comfortable with the risk profile of this
activity
► We understand that Silverfleet intend to run a tight, ‘selected’ process
► As such, Silverfleet do not intend to invite stand-alone private equity to participate
in this process, unless they have an existing asset in the space
► Whilst there are a number of alternative asset managers who currently manage
their own back office in private equity and other asset classes
► These asset managers may well be considered if they are willing to discuss paying
for synergies that there might be available by putting the business together with
their own back office

Bank Trade PE-backed trade Examples of managers who have in-house back office

21
Indicative valuation: Some benchmark KPI ranges
Competitive landscape
and indicative valuation

2016 Selected KPI ranges – across wider TCS&A sector*

Annual revenue growth % 3 year Revenue CAGR % Adjusted EBITDA Margin % Rev / FTE (€000s)

13% 8% 33% 126k

33%

18% 167
2016 41%
average

37% 147
Key:
Max
33%
Q3
126
32%
Mean
Median
Q1 28%
Min 96k
10% 26%
IPES 16% 95
9%

8%
13%
75
11%

5%
8%

6% 3%

*Data benchmarked on a representative, but limited population of TCS&A businesses (not specific to just PE admin), based on both actual and forecasted financials.

22
Indicative valuation: “Stand alone”
Competitive landscape
and indicative valuation

► We estimate, on a standalone basis, an indicative valuation range for IPES to be c. £106m to £123m
► Indicative valuation based on an EV / EBITDA multiple of 12x to 14x and estimated FY17 EBITDA of c. £8.8m We have considered both precedent transaction multiples
and comparable listed company multiples. However, there are a very limited number of listed companies comparable to IPES:
► Intertrust has been considered given its focus on fund administration and corporate services, particularly post the acquisition of Elian. Intertrust’s multiple over
the last twelve months indicates a EV/EBITDA multiple range of 11.7x and 14.8x, with a current multiple of 11.6x and forward multiple (FY18) of 10.7x.
► Sanne Group, a listed company specifically focused in the alternatives asset space is currently trading at a premium and has a current multiple of c.29.8x. We
consider this multiple an outlier and as such have not included in the valuation analysis.
► The relevant precedent transactions, selected based on their subsector focus in fund administration, corporate services and alternative assets (listed in the
appendix), have a EV/EBITDA multiple range 12.4x to 15.1x, with a mean of 13.8x
► To further calibrate the valuation range, we have considered historical revenue growth and EBITDA margins. Refer to table below.
► To reflect IPES’s lower revenue growth rate, a valuation multiple at the lower end of the indicative valuation range may be more appropriate

20.0x EV/EBITDA valuation multiple range

Valuation range (£m)
18.0x
150
16.0x
15.1x
140
14.8x 15.1x
14.0x
130 132.9
12.4x 130.2
12.0x 11.7x 11.1x
11.3x 120
10.0x 10.5x
10.6x 110 109.1
8.0x 101.6 103.2
100 93.4
99.5
6.0x
90
Intertrust LTM PraxisIFM Precedent transactions
88.9
Historical revenue
80
EBITDA Margin
growth
70
Precedent transaction average2 12% 31% 63.2
60
Intertrust 14% 39%
Intertrust LTM PraxisIFM Precedent transactions
Sanne Group 34% 37%
Key:
IPES estimate 11% 32%
Indicative valuation range1 Average

Note 1: Range based on first and third quartiles of data set.

Note 2: Based on available information as not all precedent transaction company data is publically available. Data based on historical information at or around the time of sale

23
Indicative valuation: Estimating potential synergies
Competitive landscape
and indicative valuation

Estimating potential synergies

► Assuming potential synergies range between 10% - 30%1 of the target’s cost base
► In this case, this is in the range of c. £1.8m – £5.4m of cost synergies may be available through a combination of a trade buyer and IPES.

Key areas of potential synergies EBITDA pre/post-synergy

Overheads and
corporate functions
Staff & executives
► Combining centralized support functions (IT, Finance,
etc.) and streamlining operations
£3.6m
► Consolidation of staff and divisional management
teams £5.4m

► De-duplication of IT systems and migration of clients to £1.8m

IT costs and capex existing platforms in relevant jurisdictions

Properties ► Rationalisation of office space and HO integration

Other variable FTE ► A proportion of other expense savings such as IT

license costs, subscriptions, travel costs, etc. £8.8m £8.8m
related expenses

Data costs ► consolidation of data centres / processing

► Integration of sourcing models via off-shore / near-

Outsourcing strategy shore centres or to third parties IPES EBITDA Potential synergies Post-synergy EBITDA

► Greater knowledge share between businesses Upper range of potential synergies (up to c. £5.4m)
Knowledge improving efficiencies
Lower range of potnetial synergies (c. £1.8m)
Cross-sell
► Cross selling of services to combined customer base
opportunities
Note 1: Based on recent EY research on operational integration where 57% of respondents generated average synergies of 30% as a percentage of the target’s cost base and no respondent
achieved synergies below 10%

24
Section 4

FDD – Key Due

Diligence areas
FDD considerations Key due diligence areas

Financial
§ Organic vs acquisitive trend (revenue / costs / EBITDA / margins) – as relevant
§ Customer portfolio: revenue + profitability by key customer, status of funds in lifecycle, run-off, trend in winning
subsequent funds
§ Base revenues vs one off revenues (take-on, maintenance, liquidation). Mix of fixed fee vs time based fees. Mix of revenue
by service type
§ Understand contractual underpinning of revenues / EBITDA as well as dependency on significant contracts and expiry
waterfall
§ Adjusted pro forma, run-rate EBITDA taking into account full impact of recent acquisitions and restructuring projects and
win / loss of major customers
§ Net Debt
§ Working capital drivers, WIP / Debtors / Deferred income ageing and accounting
§ Key accounting policies: revenue recognition, WIP valuation, client on-boarding costs, Capitalisation policy for IT / project
expenditure
§ Staff costs, staff churn, bonuses

Source: EY analysis

26
Appendix A

Valuation multiples
Listed multiples Appendices

Share price Market Cap EV Revenue CAGR %

Company Country Business description EBITDA margin % FY16 EV/EBITDA
(£) (£'m) (£'m) FY14 - FY16

PraxisIFM Group Limited provides professional services to

corporate clients, individuals, and families. It operates
Praxis IFM Channel Islands 1.4 125 121 n.m. 25.70% 4.3x
through four segments: Fiduciary, Pensions, Funds, and
Other.

Provides fund and corporate services, capital market

solutions, and private wealth services to multinationals,
fund managers, financial institutions, and business
Intertrust N.V. Netherlands 13.2 1,178 1,809 18% 40% 11.3x
entrepreneurs worldwide. The company operates
predominantly through four segments: The Netherlands,
Luxembourg, Jersey and Cayman Islands

Provides corporate, fund and private client administration,

Sanne Group plc Channel Islands reporting, and fiduciary services worldwide specialising in 7.5 1,035 1,053 60% 37% 30.7x
alternative assets.

Publicly owned asset management holding company

providing wealth management, retirement and investment
SEI Investments Co. United States solutions, asset management, asset administration, 55.5 8,732 8,266 7% 38% 20.4x
investment processing outsourcing solutions, financial
services, and investment advisory services to its clients.

Provides software products and software-enabled services

SS&C Technologies
United States to financial service providers in North America, Europe, Asia, 35.9 7,400 8,928 29% 41% 20.2x
Holdings, Inc.
Australia, and Africa with capabilities in asset-servicing.

Min 125 121 7% 26% 4.3x

1,178 1,809 24% 38% 20.2x
Mean
3,694 4,035 29% 36% 17.4x
Median
8,732 8,928 60% 41% 30.7x
Max
3,613 3,769 20% 6% 9.0x
S1
Quartile 1 1,035 1,053 15% 37% 11.3x
7,400 8,266 37% 40% 20.4x
Quartile 3

28
Precedent transactions Appendices

Approx. Transaction EV /
Date Target Acquirer Country Currency Type of sale
value (m) EBITDA
Nov-17 Private Equity Services PraxisIFM Netherlands n/a n/a 100% n/a
Nov-17 Cortland Capital Market Services LLC Alter Domus US n/a n/a 100% n/a
Oct-17 TMF Group Holding CVC Capital Partners Netherlands EUR 1750 100% 12.3x
Sep-17 Luxembourg Investment Solutions and Compliance Partners Sanne Luxembourg EUR 55 100% 13.1x
Jun-17 Capita Asset Services Link UK GBP 888 100% 12.4x
Oct-16 Tricor Permira Hong Kong USD 835 100% 16.1x
Sep-16 Alter Domus Permira Luxembourg EUR n/a Minority 15.1x
Jun-16 Elian Intertrust Netherlands GBP 435 100% 12.3x
Oct-15 Intertrust IPO IPO Netherlands EUR 1253 37% 13.8x
Sep-15 SFM Europe Elian UK n/a n/a 100% n/a
May-15 Vistra Group Barings Private Equity Hong Kong USD 1100 100% 13.4x
Apr-15 Sanne IPO IPO UK GBP 259 100% 15.9x
Metrics excluding outliers
Recent transactions Min 12.3x
Mean 13.8x
Median 13.4x
Max 16.1x
SD 1.4x
Q1 12.4x
Q3 15.1x

Feb-14 Elian (Ogier Fiduciary) Electra backed MBO Jersey USD 294 n/a 10.0x
Sep-13 Equiom Limited LDC backed MBO Isle of Man n/a n/a n/a 7.0x
Jun-13 ATC Intertrust Netherlands USD 397 n/a 9.3x
Dec-12 Intertrust Blackstone Netherlands EUR 675 100% 8.5x
Apr-12 ANT Trust and Services SGG Netherlands EUR n/a 100% 7.5x
Mar-12 IFG (International Division) AnaCap Financial Partners UK GBP 70 100% 9.5x
Mar-12 Jersey Trust Company CBPE Capital Jersey n/a n/a Minority 10.5x
Jun-11 Citco GAP / Stonepoint Global n/a n/a n/a 12.0x
Mar-11 OIL IK Investment Partners / Vistra Asia USD 350 100% 12.1x
Mar-11 Orangefield AAC Capital Netherlands n/a n/a Majority 8.0x
Nov-10 SGG Cobepa Belguim n/a n/a 100% 7.9x
Nov-10 ATC HgCapital Netherlands EUR 117 61% 8.5x
Sep-10 Equity Trust TMF (Doughty Hanson) Luxembourg GBP 289 100% 8.8x
Older transactions Min 7.0x
Mean 9.2x
Median 8.8x
Max 12.1x
SD 1.5x
Q1 8.0x
Q3 10.0x

► The TCS&A market dynamics have evolved significantly in recent years and therefore we have only considered transactions since April 2015

29
Appendix B

Credentials
 Appendices
Credentials

This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only.

Project Blossom Project Beauchamp Project Beauchamp Project Speed Project Castle Project Buckle
2017 2017 2017 2016 2016 2016
EY provided buy-side Sale of Capita Asset Sale of Capita Asset Potential acquisition of a alterDomus has secured a Permira Private Equity
support for a channel- Services to Link Group for Services to Link Group for Channel Islands based fund commitment of a significant acquired Tricor an Asia
islands based TCS provider $888m $888m administration firm investment global private based TCS&A firm
equity firm Permira

EY provided M&A, commercial and EY provided sell-side financial EY provided buy-side support, EY provided transaction support to a EY acted as corporate finance sell EY provided transaction support
financial diligence services due diligence support to the commercial due diligence and potential acquirer side advisor and VDD advisor to (Finance, Operational and IT)
seller M&A advisory to a PE under Alter Domus
bidder

This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only. This announcement appears as a matter of record only.

Project Leffe Project Cromwell Project Pear Project Gala Project Ocean Project Kowloon
2016 2016 2015 2015 2015 2015
Potential acquisition of a EY provided transaction Potential acquisition of a Potential acquisition of a Potential acquisition of a Potential acquisition of a
TCS&A firm by an support to an undisclosed TCS&A firm by an TCS&A firm by an European TCS&A firm by TCS&A firm by an
undisclosed Private Equity Private Equity acquirer undisclosed trade buyer undisclosed Private Equity an undisclosed Private undisclosed Private Equity
firm firm Equity firm firm

EY provided transaction support EY provided transaction support EY provide buy-side lead EY provided transaction support EY provide buy-side lead EY provided transaction support
to the seller to the potential acquirer advisory services to a potential to a potential acquirer advisory services to a potential to a potential acquirer
acquirer acquirer

31
Appendix C

Ipes in focus
 Organic client wins and losses Appendices

Wins Losses
Year Geography Year Geography
Client AuA ($) From Client AuA ($) From
CDC Group 1.23 n/a Guernsey Bedell Fund Services Jersey
Adveq 0.46
Sherborne Investors Management 0.34 n/a Guernsey BS Private Equity 0.38 n/a Guernsey
2013 Starwood Capital 0.36 n/a Guernsey n/a Guernsey
2013 Add Partners 0.22
Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) 0.13 n/a Guernsey German Equity Partners Fund Manager 0.11 n/a Guernsey
SIF Private Label 0.03 Multiple administrators Luxembourg
PolyTechnos Venture-Partners 0.09 n/a Guernsey
Quadriga Capital 1.78 n/a Jersey
Aberdeen Asset Managers 0.2 n/a Jersey Change Capital Partners 0.24 n/a Jersey
RDIF 0.5 n/a Guernsey 2014 Parish Capital Advisors 0.41 n/a Guernsey
Multiple administrators Jersey Rhino Partners 0.01 n/a Jersey
Schemes Coded for Confidentiality Reasons 1.35
Aberdeen Asset Managers 0.2 n/a Jersey
StepStone Group 0.44 n/a Guernsey
Guernsey Schemes Coded for Confidentiality Reasons 1.35 Multiple administrators Jersey
2014 NextEnergy Capital 0.15 n/a
Paragon Partners 0.2 n/a Jersey Patron Capital Partners 0.36 Langham Hall Guernsey
Ambienta 0.1 n/a Guernsey Global Life Science Ventures 0.2 n/a Guernsey
White Star Capital 0.05 n/a Guernsey 2015 Strategic Capital Management 0.12 n/a Guernsey
Revetas Capital Advisors 0.03 n/a Guernsey Genesis Investment Management 0.06 n/a Guernsey
Constellation Capital 0.05 n/a Jersey InnKap 3 General Partner 0.01 n/a Guernsey
PP-UET Management 0.04 n/a Jersey PP-UET Management 0.04 n/a Jersey
Hermes GPE 1.55 n/a Guernsey S J Berwin & Co. 0.00 n/a Guernsey
Endeavour Advisors 0.21 Northern Trust Guernsey Endeavour Advisors 0.21 n/a Guernsey
SCM Strategic Capital Management 0.1 n/a Guernsey SU Private Equity 0.11 n/a Guernsey
2015
Genesis Capital 0.05 n/a Guernsey 2016 Constellation Capital 0.04 n/a Jersey
SU Private Equity 0.11 n/a Guernsey Smac Partners 0.01 n/a Guernsey
NG Private Equity Management 0 n/a Luxembourg NG Private Equity Management 0.00 n/a Luxembourg
Northzone Ventures 0.61 State Street Jersey Private Label 3.4 n/a Guernsey/Jersey
Montana Capital Partners 0.45 Langham Hall Fund Management Jersey Hermes GPE 1.3 n/a Guernsey
Endeavour Vision 0.39 n/a Guernsey Sherborne Investors Management 0.5 n/a Guernsey
Marwyn Investment Management 0.24 n/a Jersey Impax Asset Management 0.5 n/a Guernsey
Mediterra Capital Management 0.18 Heritage International Fund Managers Guernsey 2017 Alfa Capital Partners 0.2 n/a Guernsey
ÜNLÜ & Co 0.11 n/a Guernsey NBGI Private Equity 0.1 n/a Guernsey
2016 Cresco Capital 0.11 n/a Guernsey IDFC Capital 0.07 n/a Guernsey
Njord Partners 0.09 n/a Guernsey
Baring Private Equity Partners 0.05 n/a Guernsey
Cross Equity Partners 0.08 n/a Jersey
Cornerstone Private Equity 0.03 n/a Guernsey
Sole Shipping 0.05 n/a Jersey
Volpi Capital 0.05 n/a Guernsey
Ventech Capital 0.01 State Street Luxembourg
Asante Capital Group 0 n/a Jersey
Vitol Group 3 n/a Jersey
OpCapita 0.4 n/a Guernsey
EMH Partners 0.4 n/a Jersey
Argos Soditic 0.3 n/a Jersey
ADM Capital 0.3 n/a Jersey
TriSpan 0.2 n/a Guernsey
Mosaic Ventures 0.2 n/a Jersey
2017
Stage Capital 0.1 n/a Guernsey
Taxim Capital Advisers 0.1 n/a Jersey
PROfounders Capital Partners 0.05 n/a Jersey
Vitruvian Partners 0.04 n/a Jersey
Hoxton Ventures 0.03 n/a Guernsey
Platina Partners 0.02 n/a Luxembourg
NovaRoma Capital 0.01 n/a Jersey

Sources: All data as reported to Monterey Research Reports. Asset classes as defined by Monterey.
Monterey compilation dates: Luxembourg – December each year, Jersey/Guernsey – June each year

33
 Growth of existing client book Appendices

On the basis of the information available, it appears to suggest that approximately half of the client book is growing in AUA

Legend AuA ($m) Potential buy side questions

Existing client (more than 1 year) HG Capital
6000 ($8,048m) • What is driving the reduction in size of the existing client book?
New client (<1 year)
• How has Ipes managed to grow the AUA for certain clients? Have
PAI Partners new funds been raised? Or a greater number of services provided?

5000 • How are the new clients expected to grow?

Share of wallet? Cross and upsell of services?
Access Capital Partners

4000
Baring Vostok Capital Partners
Private Label

3000

Silverfleet

2000 Balderton Capital

Phoenix Equity Partners

1000
Aberdeen Asset Managers
Egeria
Baring Private Equity Partners NextEnergy Capital
Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) SIF Private Label Revetas Capital Advisors Genesis Capital
0
-100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200%
AuA CAGR from client acquisition
Sources: All data as reported to Monterey Research Reports. Asset classes as defined by Monterey. Monterey compilation dates: Luxembourg – December each year, Jersey/Guernsey – June each year
1Client compound aggregate growth rates (CAGRs) are calculated from the dates the fund is shown in Monterey data 2SIF Private Label refers to Swiss funds. Due to confidentiality the clients are not
disclosed and so are grouped as one client in the data

34
Appendix D

Understanding
Monterey data
 Appendices
Understanding Monterey data

► Monterey Insight (‘Monterey’) is an independent fund research company that provides a survey of service providers for all investment funds serviced in
Luxembourg, Ireland, Jersey and Guernsey.
Who are Monterey? ► Each work provides information on all promoters, administrators, sub-administrators, custodians, auditors, legal advisers and sponsoring brokers, their
client lists and their market shares. Each survey is produced annually and aims to be the reference point of the entire fund industry in Luxembourg,
Ireland, Jersey and Guernsey.

► Monterey have collected the TNAVs directly from the administrators and in a few cases where these are not available they have used the latest figures
available on their database. Where no value is available, “not disclosed” is listed in the publication.
Sources and quality ► Monterey data relies upon administrator disclosure and whilst do some provide verification the data should be interpreted as indicative rather than
control absolute. As a result the total AuA stated is not always representative of the whole AuA managed by each administrator in its respective jurisdiction
► Near to the survey publish date, a Service Provider-centric view of the data is provided for clients to verify and validate the data prior to production.
Only once Monterey have the sign off from the Service Providers will the survey be published and made available for release

► Assets types are usually identified by the administrators, on what constitute 70% of the portfolio and supported through information from
administrators, financial reports or prospectuses.
► Alternative funds: in majority hedge funds, but also includes for example derivatives, market neutral, long short equity funds.
Asset classes
► If a fund invests in property through funds, it will show as Investment Area: Property and Asset Class Fund of Funds, rather than Asset Class:
property/real estate. There may be similar cases for PE/VC
► Monterey differentiate Fund of Funds and FoHF.

► Monterey use exchange rates from FT Currency World

Exchange rates ► Luxembourg reports are compiled on 31 December each year. E.g. the 2016 report is calculated as at 31 December 2015
► Guernsey, Jersey and Ireland are compiled on 30 June each year. E.g. the 2016 report is calculated as at 30 June 2016

► We have assumed that all sub-funds listed as belonging to the same promoter are part of the same client
► Monterey collects data for different jurisdictions at different dates. We have aggregated this data for analysis purposes however please note the data is
EY assumptions not Monterey provide information relating to the asset class of each sub-fund. We have assumed this to be true and accurate as Monterey derive this
information directly from the administrators, however in practice this method is reliant on administrator’s having similar definitions of what to consider
each asset class and the data does have instances where asset classes are not definitively clear. However, for present purposes we have relied upon
Monterey’s defined asset classes

36
 Appendices
Understanding Monterey data

…but, nonetheless, still potentially raises some follow

Monterey does not show the whole picture.. on ‘outside in’ questions

c.150bn
• What makes up the ‘other’ $100bn of AuA?
• Has there been a conscious push towards being a private equity
?
asset class specialist?
• Has the business taken on material new clients that we cannot see here
through the publically available data?

? • PAI Partners – Always had Ipes as administrator since data exists in

2012.
• HgCapital – Always had Ipes as administrator since data exists in 2012.

• Barings Vostock Capital Partners - Always had Ipes as administrator

since data exists in 2012.
?
• Silverfleet - Always had Ipes as administrator since data exists in 2012.
c.$52bn
• Motion Equity Partners - Always had Ipes as administrator since data
exists in 2012.
• Access Capital Partners – Always had Ipes as administrator since data
exists in 2012.

Monterey Jurisdictions Unregulated funds Other Total AuA

(Regulated) outside Monterey

Sources: Monterey data as at June 2016, Total AuA per IPES website July 2017

37
EY | Assurance | Tax | Transactions | Advisory

About EY
EY is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction and advisory services. The insights and quality
services we deliver help build trust and confidence in the capital markets and in economies the world
over. We develop outstanding leaders who team to deliver on our promises to all of our stakeholders.
In so doing, we play a critical role in building a better working world for our people, for our clients and
for our communities.
EY refers to the global organization, and may refer to one or more, of the member firms of
Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a
UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. For more information about
our organization, please visit ey.com.

Ernst & Young LLP

The UK firm Ernst & Young LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC300001 and is
a member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited.

Ernst & Young LLP, 1 More London Place, London, SE1 2AF.

© 2014 Ernst & Young LLP. Published in the UK.

All Rights Reserved.

ey.com