Paths, reference concepts, model scenarios, advisor outputs, and tools — the full map behind the ten-lesson program. New here? Start with the program overview.
Start Learning
The fastest route from zero context to the core map of wrappers, asset classes, and portfolio roles.
A practical sequence for reading structure, liquidity, fees, risks, tax, and manager quality before a product review.
Repurchase programs, tender offers, caps, proration, gates, queues, and the practical exit timeline.
Fee layers, valuation marks, total return, yield, benchmarks, and why share classes diverge.
The core concepts an advisor needs to explain without turning the meeting into a filing review.
Valuation, regulation, manager behavior, and the deeper questions that separate product marketing from diligence.
Reference Desk
Private-market products with scheduled liquidity windows rather than daily exchange trading.
Use Learn to separate asset exposure from the wrapper terms that control access, fees, tax, and exits.A business development company that is registered but not exchange listed.
Compare BDC mechanics in the Wrapper Matrix before applying the vocabulary to product-specific credit, fee, and liquidity facts.A real estate investment trust sold continuously without public exchange trading.
Use this concept when comparing property-level data with redemption pressure and valuation marks.A closed-end fund that must offer periodic repurchases under Rule 23c-3.
Interval funds are the cleanest example of structure changing the investor's exit rights.A closed-end structure that may conduct board-approved tender offers.
Use tender-offer concepts when reading PE and infrastructure wrappers with quarterly offer cycles.A fund policy that lets investors request redemptions on a schedule, usually subject to caps.
Learn uses model repurchase windows to show how stated liquidity can differ from investor demand.A formal offer by a fund to repurchase a stated amount of shares during a defined window.
Tender documents are core sources for the liquidity and filing-trail views.Partial fulfillment when investor requests exceed the fund's repurchase capacity.
Fill rates and proration events are the plain-English bridge between documents and client outcomes.A partial or full restriction on redemptions beyond normal stated mechanics.
Learn teaches gating language with controlled examples; product surfaces apply it only when anchored to source documents.The accepted amount divided by the amount investors requested to redeem.
AltHarbor uses fill rate to translate tender results into an advisor-readable stress signal.Controlled Examples
Use a controlled BDC scenario to connect wrapper structure, servicing fees, and share-class comparison before discussing performance.
Use a hypothetical liquidity window to show what happens when requests exceed stated capacity.
Use a model private-equity tender cycle to show why an exit window is not the same thing as daily liquidity.
Use a model valuation packet to connect reported NAV, private marks, valuation hierarchy, and performance comparisons.
Advisor Outputs
This structure gives scheduled access to private-market exposure, but liquidity windows, fees, tax reporting, and source documents control the client experience.
What was the worst recent fill rate, how were unfilled requests handled, and which document proves the current cap, cadence, and discretion language?
Confirm share class, management fee, incentive economics, servicing fees, loads, platform costs, and whether the return series is net of the same economics.
Review wrapper rights, liquidity capacity, fee layers, valuation inputs, source-document freshness, and manager discretion as separate gates before discussing allocation fit.
NAV is the fund's reported value at a point in time. In private markets, the date, valuation process, and Level III exposure matter as much as the number.
Interactive Tools
Compare interval funds, tender-offer funds, non-traded BDCs, NAV REITs, unregistered perpetual vehicles, and drawdown funds by liquidity mechanism, source hierarchy, tax form, fees, and misconception risk.
Use before applying strategy or performance claims so the wrapper does not get confused with the underlying asset class.Open toolModel what happens when redemption demand exceeds a stated quarterly or monthly cap.
Show proration, deferred demand, and why a stated cap is not the same as a guaranteed exit.Open toolLayer management, incentive, servicing, and load economics into a share-class comparison.
Translate a fee table into the amount of performance consumed by wrapper and distribution economics.Open toolSeparate stated yield from earned income, return of capital, and payout durability.
Help advisors explain why a high distribution is not automatically a high-quality return.Open toolShow how private marks, appraisal timing, and Level III exposure can delay visible stress.
Teach why reported NAV should be read with valuation source and timing context.Open toolCompare two model share classes across servicing fees, loads, eligibility, and account fit.
Make share-class selection visible before advisors compare net performance.Open toolMap prospectus, supplement, 8-K, shareholder report, N-PORT, and tender documents to the questions they answer.
Route an advisor from a product question to the document type most likely to prove it.Open toolFlagship Tool
| Wrapper | Liquidity rights | Legal floor | Tax | Core risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commonly quarterly repurchase policy, often up to 5% of shares or NAV. | No interval-fund-style legal minimum; board policy can change. | 1099 | Credit losses, leverage, incentive alignment, and redemption pressure in stress. | |
| Usually monthly or quarterly share repurchase program with stated caps. | No legal minimum; programs can be reduced, prorated, or suspended. | 1099 | Property valuation lag, leverage, redemption concentration, and appraisal timing. | |
| Mandatory repurchase offers every 3, 6, or 12 months, commonly quarterly. | Rule 23c-3 offer amount is generally 5% to 25% of outstanding shares. | 1099 | Repurchase limits, valuation marks, portfolio liquidity mismatch, and expense layering. | |
| Liquidity exists when the board authorizes a tender offer. | No standing statutory minimum comparable to interval-fund rules. | 1099 or K-1 | Discretionary liquidity, private valuation, tender timing, and lockup friction. | |
| Manager-defined, lockup-based, discretionary, or periodic depending on agreement. | No general statutory liquidity floor. | Usually K-1 | Illiquidity, valuation discretion, vintage mixing, tax complexity, and document-specific liquidity discretion. | |
| Agreement-defined windows, lockups, queues, gates, or manager discretion. | No general statutory liquidity floor. | Usually K-1 | Credit losses, leverage, liquidity mismatch, valuation marks, and document-specific exit discretion. | |
| Agreement-defined repurchase, tender, or withdrawal windows; may include queues, gates, or suspensions. | No general statutory liquidity floor. | Usually K-1 | Appraisal lag, leverage, cap-rate shifts, redemption pressure, and property concentration. | |
| Generally no periodic redemption right; transfers are restricted and secondary sales are negotiated. | No general statutory liquidity floor. | Usually K-1 | Capital-call timing, blind-pool risk, interim valuation limits, long duration, and J-curve interpretation. |
Interactive Tool
Initial requests are prorated, but repeated windows absorb most modeled demand.
Advisor-safe language: repurchase access is not guaranteed. Investors can submit requests during the window, but a capacity limit can produce pro-rata fills and the unfilled portion follows fund terms.
| Window | Demand entering | Accepted | Fill | Unfilled | Modeled next-window demand |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 14.0% | 5.00% | 35.7% | 9.00% | 7.65% |
| 2 | 7.65% | 5.00% | 65.4% | 2.65% | 2.25% |
| 3 | 2.25% | 2.25% | 100.0% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 0.00% | 0.00% | 100.0% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Controlled hypothetical only. Unfilled requests are not automatically cash; they may roll, lapse, or require resubmission depending on the documents.
Interactive Tool
Interactive Tool
A high distribution is not automatically a high return. First ask what funded the payout, whether NAV was stable, and which document proves the character.
A high distribution is not automatically a high return. First ask what funded the payout, whether NAV was stable, and which document proves the character.
A high distribution is not automatically a high return. First ask what funded the payout, whether NAV was stable, and which document proves the character.
Interactive Tool
Accepted versus requested amounts, cap usage, proration, and whether the window was constrained.
Supports the liquidity mechanics lesson, proration concept page, fill-rate model scenario, and advisor questions.
Whether liquidity is required, discretionary, board-authorized, or only available through policy.
Supports the Wrapper Matrix, concept definitions, and product-page structure vocabulary.
Management fees, incentive economics, servicing fees, loads, and class-specific expenses.
Connects share-class tables, illustrative fee-stack scenarios, and advisor explanations of net return gaps.
NAV date, valuation cadence, Level III exposure, and the source of private marks.
Supports NAV context, valuation concepts, and risk-language explanations.
Whether payout language is supported by income, gains, return of capital, or a policy rate.
Supports the Distribution Quality Lab and simplified distribution-quality explanations.
Tax form, account fit, eligibility, minimums, and operational requirements.
Connects wrapper comparison, tax concepts, share-class context, and implementation notes.