What should an investor verify first?

A specific, realistic view of the company's plausible exit pathway and timeline.

Which documents matter most?

The cap table, to see whether senior investors' own fund-life pressure might force an eventual sale timeline.

What is the main downside to test?

Investing in a strong company with no plausible near or medium-term liquidity event on the horizon.

How should the final decision be made?

Size the position assuming illiquidity could extend far longer than the hoped-for exit timeline.

Back to JournalCo-Investments and Direct Private Deals

How to Evaluate a Private Deal Without an Assured Exit

Aryan Singh1 min read

Understanding the Direct Deal

Unlike a fund with a fixed maturity date forcing eventual exits, a direct private deal has no built-in liquidity mechanism at all — the investor's capital stays committed indefinitely until the company itself achieves an IPO, acquisition, or some other realisation event.

Reading Rights, Price and Lead-Investor Quality

Evaluate the company's realistic exit pathways specifically: is an IPO plausible given its scale and sector, are strategic acquirers active in this space, and does the cap table include any senior investors whose own fund-life pressure might force a sale timeline that benefits or disadvantages this specific position.

Where Deal Underwriting Breaks

The common failure is investing in a strong company without any specific view on how or when capital might eventually be returned. A great business with no plausible near or medium-term liquidity event can still leave an individual investor's capital locked up far longer than a comparable AIF commitment.

Making the Investment Decision

Before committing, write down a specific, realistic view of the exit pathway — IPO, acquisition, or secondary sale — and a plausible timeline, and size the position assuming that timeline could extend meaningfully longer than expected, with no contractual mechanism forcing an earlier resolution.

A private deal without an assured exit requires treating illiquidity as effectively open-ended — size the position for a timeline much longer than hoped for, not the optimistic case.

Key takeaways

A direct deal has no built-in liquidity mechanism — unlike a fund, there's no forced eventual exit date.
Evaluate specific, realistic exit pathways: IPO plausibility, active strategic acquirers, senior investor pressure.
A great business with no plausible near-term liquidity event can lock up capital far longer than an AIF.
Size the position assuming the exit timeline extends meaningfully longer than the hoped-for case.

More in Co-Investments and Direct Private Deals

Continue with the other chapters in this module.

Co-Investments and Direct Private DealsWhat Is a Co-Investment in Private Markets?A co-investment is a direct stake in a specific portfolio company, offered alongside a fund's own investment in that same deal — the investor holds shares (or units) directly rather than through...Co-Investments and Direct Private DealsCo-Investment vs Direct InvestmentA co-investment rides alongside a fund's own diligence and deal-sourcing, entering on terms shaped by a professional lead investor.Co-Investments and Direct Private DealsCo-Investment vs AIF CommitmentAn AIF commitment provides diversified exposure across many portfolio companies chosen by the manager over time, with fees on the full committed amount.