Private Equity Market Review and Institutional Investor Survey

November 2009

Introduction ...... 3

The Private Equity Fundraising Landscape...... 4

Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey:

Executive Summary ...... 7

Profile of Respondents...... 9

Fundraising and Return Expectations...... 12

2010 Sectors and Geographies of Interest ...... 22

Niche Private Equity Sectors ...... 34

Structural Issues and Key Terms ...... 40

Investor Fears and Concerns...... 44

Conclusion ...... 46

Appendix I:

Private Equity Funds in Market or Thought to be Coming to Market Over the Next 12 Months ...... 49

Probitas Partners is a leading independent knowledge, innovation and solutions provider to private markets clients. It has three integrated global practices that include placement of alternative investment products, portfolio management and liquidity management. These services are offered by a team of employee owners dedicated to leveraging the firm’s vast knowledge and technical resources to provide the best results for its clients.

probity ¯˘ ¯ n. [from Latin probitas: good, proper, honest.] adherence to the highest principles, ideals and character.

On an ongoing basis, Probitas Partners offers research and investment tools on the alternative investment market as aids to its institutional investor and general partner clients. Probitas Partners compiles data from various trade and other sources and then vets and enhances that data via its team’s broad knowledge of the market. Also on an ongoing basis, Probitas Partners surveys institutional investors in order to determine more directly their perceptions of various aspects of the market, and the survey of private equity investors included here is part of that process. Included within this white paper is our listing of private equity funds in or thought to be coming to market over the next 12 months. A few important user notes on the funds listing: • The list does not track funds smaller than $100 million or €70 million, as these are not often targeted by institutional investors; • Information is collected from various data sources, but dynamically and accurately tracking when funds are launched and when they are finally closed is a difficult business. We constantly interact with investors and other industry sources in an effort to keep the data updated, and Probitas Partners appreciates receiving any corrections or updates which will help keep this listing as up-to-date as possible; • Probitas Partners relies upon its knowledge of the investment pace of previous funds, informal discussions with institutional investors and general partners, and its knowledge of emerging managers. Specifically, we do not seek confirmation of these estimates with general partners in order to avoid SEC public offering prohibitions. For the same reason, Probitas Partners excludes from this listing information on funds it is currently offering; qualified investors seeking information on Probitas Partners’ placed funds should contact Probitas Partners directly in order to have the most complete picture of all institutional funds currently in the market.

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 3 The Private Equity Fundraising down due to the liquidity problems faced Landscape by North American and European LPs, the largest backers of the sector. Private equity fundraising has plunged since September 2008 across all geographies and The decline in fundraising this year has all sectors but one. The fundraising totals been much sharper than in 2000 at the last for the U.S., Europe and Asia are detailed in market peak, driven by a more sudden and Charts I through III. All of these markets are dramatic fall in the public markets. Given the in line to decline some 60% to 70% for the investor sentiment in our latest survey, the full year. Fundraising in the Asian market, fall in fundraising appears to have bottomed where many economies continue to grow out and that 2010 will be better, though a even in the midst of a global recession, is steep rebound is unlikely.

Chart I Commitments to U.S. Private Equity Partnerships by Sector

$350

297.0 $300

$250 236.4 236.5

$200 160.5 152.2 $150 $ in billions 107.0 100.0 $100 90.7 91.4 69.6 58.8 50.1 48.0 $50 29.8 31.5 13.3 19.5 $0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Q1– Q3’09

Buyouts/Corporate Finances Secondaries/Other Venture Capital Mezzanine

Source: Private Equity Analyst Note: Does not include fund-of-funds

64.1 €70 61.0 61.1 58.3 €60 52.6 52.4

€50

€40 31.1 €30 24.1 21.1 € in billions 18.4 19.1 17.7 €20 12.3 8.3 €10 4.3 5.0 1.3 2.1 €0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Q1– Q3’09

Source: Thomson Venture Expert, EVCA, Probitas Partners Note: Does not include fund-of-funds

Chart III Commitments to Asian Private Equity Partnerships

$60 50.9 $50 42.7 41.2 $40

$30 26.6

$ in billions 17.9 $20 16.2 13.2 13.4

7.4 7.3 6.9 $10 5.3 6.7 5.6 5.9 6.5 2.0 2.3 $0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1H’09

Source: Asian Venture Capital Journal Note: Does not include fund-of-funds

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 5 Secondary specialist funds are the one pricing. Though activity in the secondary sector of the private equity market that has market declined in the first half of 2009 as reached a new record in 2009. As shown increasing discounts caused sellers to back in Chart IV, through the first nine months away from transactions, the bid/ask spread of this year, $18.7 billion has been raised in the market is narrowing and transaction for the sector as LPs anticipate increasing volume is increasing. activity in the secondary market at attractive

Chart IV Capital Raised by Secondary Fund Specialists

$20 18.7 $18 $16 15.1 $14 $12 $10 $8 7.4

$ in billions 6.4 5.6 6.1 $6 4.5 4.1 3.5 $4 2.6 2.2 2.1 $2 0.8 0.4 $0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Q1– Q3’09

Source: Private Equity Intelligence, Private Equity Analyst, Probitas Partners

Probitas Partners administers this survey annually to gauge emerging trends and to compare investors’ changing views over a longer period of time. A total of 291 institutional investors responded to this year’s survey, with results collected in the middle of October.

The key trends for 2010:

• Many investors remain over-allocated to private equity. Even after the rebound in the public markets starting in March, many respondents reported that they are roughly at or over their allocations. While most investors are looking to maintain their exposure to private equity, a significant minority is under-allocated and aggressively investing.

• New capital is focused on U.S. and European middle-market buyout funds as well as Asian growth capital funds. These sectors have increased in interest over the last year, while on a relative basis distressed debt funds and secondary funds have fallen. In discussions with investors, we have found that many anticipate that 2010 will be a strong vintage year for middle-market buyouts in the U.S. and Europe as those markets rebound from recession; continued economic growth in Asia is attracting interest there as well.

• China extended its lead as the most attractive Asian market. The inherent stronger growth of the Chinese economy continued to attract investors, lengthening its attractiveness over India. Interest in Japan continues to fall significantly due to fundamental problems in that market.

• Venture capital interest continues to decline. Interest in U.S. venture capital remains low, especially for life science funds, and interest in the sector has declined significantly from our 2007 survey, falling from third place to eighth over that period. Interest in European venture capital, always very weak in our surveys even amongst European investors, has fallen to a new low this year, with only 0.5% of respondents targeting the area in 2010.

• Mega buyout interest continues to be weak. Only 8% of respondents say they will actively target mega buyouts in 2010, and return expectations on 2010 vintage mega buyouts is quite low compared to the middle-market sectors.

• Investors are clearly focused on alignment of interest and fees. Both in our questions regarding terms and conditions, and in our questions on investors’ greatest fears, it was clear that alignment of interest was a key concern and the role of fees in diluting alignment was a strong LP focus.

Fund-of-Funds Manager 12.8% 12.2% Public Pension/ 10.4% Superannuation Plan Endowment/Foundation 10.4% 29.5% Family Office Insurance Company 9.0% Consultant/Advisor 3.2% 4.5% 2.1% 4.2% Corporate Pension/ Superannuation Plan Bank

1.7% Sovereign Wealth Fund Government Entity

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey Other

Chart VI Respondents Categorized by Firm Headquarters “My firm’s headquarters are located in...”

U.S. 35.8% Western Europe Canada 46.2% Japan Asia ex-Japan 4.2% Australia 5.6% 3.9% Middle East

1.8% 2.5%

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

8 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Profile of Respondents from 2009 to 2010, reflecting the continued growth and development of the Asian private The profile for this year’s survey respondents equity market. provides a context for the subsequent results. To get a sense for how institutional investors Respondents to this year’s survey included are managing their allocations in the current a wide range of institutional investors. As economic environment, respondents were detailed in Chart V, fund-of-funds managers asked about the state of their current private led all respondents at 29.5%, followed by equity allocations and how they planned public pensions at 12.8% and endowments/ to manage those allocations in 2010. Last foundations at 12.2%. Family offices and year’s survey was administered in November insurance companies comprised just more in the midst of the market dislocation. than 10% of respondents each. Tumbling public markets had a significant impact on investor’s anticipated allocations. Geographically, institutional investors from Though the public markets have rebounded more established markets made up the significantly in 2009, responses to allocation majority of respondents. As outlined in questions in this year’s survey were Chart VI, investors from the U.S. and Western very similar. Europe accounted for 46.2% and 35.8% of respondents respectively, demonstrating As outlined in Chart VII, an overwhelming their continued role as the leading providers percentage of respondents indicated they of capital to alternative investments globally. are at their target allocation and looking Although not detailed in Chart VI, the to maintain that level of exposure over number of respondents from Asia continues the coming year; just over a quarter of to increase year-over-year, nearly doubling respondents reported they are under their

Chart VII Current and Target Private Equity Allocations: 2009 vs. 2010 “As far as our current private equity allocation, we are...”

Roughly at our target and 9.5 considering increasing it 10.5 Roughly at our target and 41.1 looking to maintain it 38.0 Over our target and looking to 7.1 reduce exposure 6.5 Over our target but 2.6 seeking to increase it 1.2 Under our target but actively 23.4 committing to achieve it 27.5 Looking to reduce our target 1.9 and exit the asset class 2.9 14.4 Other 13.4

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Percentage of Respondents

2009 2010

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 9 target but actively committing in order to were several respondents in the “Other” achieve it. Just over 10% of respondents category for endowments, signaling that they indicated they are at their target allocation were over their target but still considering but considering increasing their level of committing on an opportunistic basis over exposure to private equity while another 6.5% the next 12 months. of respondents indicated that they are over their target and seeking to reduce exposure. From 2008 to 2009 there was a significant For both 2009 and 2010, the percentage drop-off in targeted private equity of respondents that chose “Other” seems allocations, a result of the Lehman Brothers rather large; however, the majority of collapse and the ensuing global economic these respondents were funds-of-funds or crisis. Although the responses were widely consultants without a specific allocation to spread over targeted allocation sizes, the the asset class. results from 2009 versus 2010, outlined in Chart IX, remained roughly the same. In comparing the allocations of public Given the current economic environment pensions and endowments, as shown in and the pressure to limit exposure to illiquid Chart VIII, the plurality of public pensions, at alternative investments, the trend of targeting 40.5%, are under their target allocation and smaller annual allocations, as compared to are actively committing capital, while 60% those targeted during the market peak of of endowments indicated they are roughly at 2007, will continue into 2010. or over their target. Not a single respondent from either of these types of institutions Survey respondents were next asked reported being over their target allocation to indicate what percentage of their and seeking to increase their exposure. There commitments in 2010 will be designated for

Chart VIII Current and Target Private Equity Allocations: Public Pensions vs. Endowments “As far as our current private equity allocation, we are...”

8.2 Roughly at our target and 2.9 considering increasing it Roughly at our target and 37.5 50.0 looking to maintain it Over our target and looking 8.2 to reduce exposure 8.8 Over our target but 0.0 seeking to increase it 0.0 Under our target but are actively 40.5 committing to achieve it 23.5 Looking to reduce our target 2.8 and exit the asset class 0.0 Other 2.8 14.8

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Public Pensions Endowments

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

10 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. re-ups with existing managers. As detailed very similar to 2008 survey results and in Chart X, the majority of respondents are indicate continued interest in establishing reserving 50% or more of their commitments new manager relationships amongst for re-ups and 10% of that group is reserving most investors. 90% or more for re-ups. These results are

Chart IX Targeted 2010 Private Equity Allocations: 2009 vs. 2010 “For 2010, we are looking to commit across all areas of private equity (in USD)...”

40% 33.9

30% 29.0 26.2 26.6

20% 15.9 15.1 12.2 10.5 10.5 10% 7.4 7.9 4.8 Percentage of Respondents Percentage

0% <$50 MM $50 MM– $150 MM– $250 MM– $500 MM–$1 B >$1 B $150 MM $250 MM $500 MM

2009 2010

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart X Expected Re-Up Allocations with Existing Managers “We expect the following percentage of our commitments to be targeted for re-ups with existing managers...”

30% 26.1 26.5

25% 21.3

20% 16.2

15%

10%

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 5.1 4.8 5%

0% <25% 25%–50% 50%–75% 75%–90% 90%–100% 2010 Allocation Achieved

Targeted Re-Ups with Current Managers

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 11 Fundraising and Return evenly spread over the categories. The least Expectations favored buyout sector was mega buyouts with 55% of respondents reporting they do The next section of the survey examines not invest in the sector. investor attitudes regarding the fundraising market as well as investor interest in and The results for North American, European, return expectations for buyout, venture and Asian investors, although not detailed capital, and niche funds. in Chart XII, all showed similar behavior for buyout investing. Across the board, investors Respondents were first asked what they overwhelmingly preferred to invest in their expect global private equity commitments domestic market. to be in 2010. As shown in Chart XI, the majority of respondents who stated an Respondents were optimistic regarding opinion believe global commitments will not return expectations for top quartile 2010 exceed $250 billion over the coming year. buyouts. As detailed in Chart XIII, a plurality Last year’s expectations were roughly the of respondents believe U.S. middle-market same, though at the current fundraising pace buyout funds will have net IRRs of 20–25% those expectations were optimistic. These with over 20% of respondents expecting results are an indication that investors are returns of 25% and above. European middle- still struggling with liquidity issues and a market buyouts garnered similar results; steep rebound in fundraising is unlikely. over 40% of respondents expect net IRRs of 20–25% and nearly 18% expect net IRRs Investor interest in specific buyout sectors of 25% and above. Return expectations for is examined in Chart XII. The majority of Asian middle-market buyouts/growth capital respondents actively invest in U.S. middle- were significantly higher; over 45% of market buyouts with European middle-market respondents anticipate net IRRs above 25%. buyouts ranking second, and Asian middle- The lowest return expectations were for market buyouts/growth capital ranking third. mega buyout funds with 37% of respondents Opportunistic interest in the sectors was anticipating net IRRs of 15–20%, and 34%

Chart XI Forecast Global Private Equity Allocations “We expect global commitments to private equity to be...”

40% 35.3

30% 27.0 23.3

20%

9.3 10% Percentage of Respondents Percentage

2.3 2.8

0% <$200 B $200 B–$250 B $250 B–$300 B $300 B–$350 B >$350 B No Opinion

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

100% 14.4 20.0 34.4 55.1

80% 33.8 35.3

60% 34.4

51.8 40% 44.7 36.9

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 31.2 20%

8.0 0% U.S. Middle-Market European Middle- Asian Middle-Market/ Mega Buyout Funds Buyout Funds Market Buyout Funds Growth Capital Funds

Actively Invest Invest Opportunistically Do Not Invest

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XIII Expected Buyout Performance, Top Quartile IRR “For top quartile buyout funds, I expect IRRs over their lives to be...”

100% 1.5 21.2 17.6 46.4 15.9

80% 41.8 37.1 41.2

60%

33.6 40% 28.5 30.6 34.1 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20% 15.7 10.9 3.6 5.8 11.4 0% 1.2 1.2 0.7 U.S. Middle-Market European Middle- Asian Middle-Market/ Mega Buyout Funds Buyout Funds Market Buyout Funds Growth Capital Funds

<10% 10%–15% 15%–20% 20%–25% >25%

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 13 of respondents anticipating returns of only Chart XVI outlines respondent’s interest 10%–15%. Respondents clearly anticipate in specific types of venture capital funds. that middle-market buyouts, regardless of Interest in the sector was low across all geographical focus, will outperform mega venture capital strategies with roughly buyouts in 2010. 40% or more of respondents in every case indicating they do not invest in the sector. Investor return expectations for net multiples Life science funds held the least interest of top quartile 2010 vintage funds followed for respondents; 56% indicated that they their IRR expectations. As detailed in do not invest in late-stage life science funds Chart XIV, nearly 20% of respondents expect while 54% did not invest in early-stage life top quartile mega buyouts to have net science funds. multiples below 1.5x and the majority expect multiples will not exceed 2.0x. On the other Investors were most interested in early- hand, over 18% of respondents expect top stage and late-stage technology funds with quartile Asian middle-market/growth capital 20.7% and 15.4% targeting those sectors, funds to generate multiples higher than 3.0x. respectively. Respondents who invest opportunistically in the sector preferred most The majority of respondents believe that strategies equally, with late-stage technology vintage 2010 funds will perform roughly the funds having the edge with 46.7%. Overall, same as 2009 funds, as shown in Chart XV, investors prefer technology funds over those but an increasing number of respondents focused on life science, with diversified funds expect that vintage 2010 funds will covering multiple sectors falling in between. outperform 2009 funds.

Chart XIV Expected Buyout Performance, Top Quartile Multiple “For top quartile buyout funds, I expect multiples over their lives to be...”

100% 2.3 3.1 0.7 18.4 22.2 21.6 22.5 3.1

80% 33.8 50.9 48.1 54.3 60%

34.6 40%

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 24.1 20% 24.0 19.4 12.5 0% 0.6 3.1 0.7 U.S. Middle-Market European Middle- Asian Middle-Market/ Mega Buyout Funds Buyout Funds Market Buyout Funds Growth Capital Funds

<1.5x 1.5x–2.0x 2.0x–2.5x 2.5x–3.0x >3.0x

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

100% 7.7 8.6 6.6 14.0 55.4 57.4 61.8 80% 55.5

60%

40% 36.9 34.0 31.6 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 30.5 20%

0% U.S. Middle-Market European Middle- Asian Middle-Market/ Mega Buyout Funds Buyout Funds Market Buyout Funds Growth Capital Funds

Higher than 2009 Same as 2009 Lower than 2009

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XVI Interest in Venture Capital Funds “As far as our interest in this sector, we...”

100% 43.2 53.9 50.6 38.8 56.0 42.1

80%

60% 46.7 36.1 43.3 36.0 40% 33.5 34.9 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20% 20.7 14.5 12.6 13.4 14.6 9.1 0% Early-Stage Early-Stage Life Early-Stage Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Technology Funds Science Funds Diversified Funds Growth Technology Growth Life Science Growth Diversified Funds Funds Funds

Actively Invest Invest Opportunistically Do Not Invest

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 15 Endowments were more interested in venture percentage of respondents (14%) who expect capital than the overall group of respondents, returns below 10%, further reflecting the as detailed in Chart XVII. Over 70% of preference for technology funds as the more endowment respondents either actively attractive area of venture capital investing. or opportunistically invest in early-stage technology funds and early-stage diversified Investor return expectations for net multiples funds. There was also more active interest in for top quartile 2010 venture capital late-stage/growth diversified funds, though funds were fairly uniform, as detailed in fewer respondents opportunistically targeted Chart XIX. The plurality of respondents the sector. Consistent with the overall across all strategies expect a net multiple respondent group, endowments were less of 2.0–2.5x. Overall return expectations are interested in life science funds. higher for early-stage funds and lower for late-stage/growth funds. As detailed in Chart XVIIII, investor return expectations for top quartile venture capital Regardless of specific sector focus, an funds were dispersed, with the plurality of overwhelming majority of investors believe respondents across almost all strategies vintage 2010 venture capital returns will expecting net IRRs of 20–25%. Early-stage remain consistent with those of 2009 technology funds are the only area in vintages, as shown in Chart XX. Although which over 20% of respondents have IRR not detailed in the chart, these expectations expectations above 25%, while early-stage are consistent across geographies as well as life science funds amassed the largest investor types.

Chart XVII Interest in Venture Capital Funds: Endowments “As far as our interest in this sector, we...”

100% 27.2 40.9 27.3 36.3 40.9 47.6

80%

45.5 54.5 60% 45.5 40.9 45.5 28.6 40%

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 27.3 20% 23.8 18.2 18.2 18.2 13.6 0% Early-Stage Early-Stage Life Early-Stage Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Technology Funds Science Funds Diversified Funds Growth Technology Growth Life Science Growth Diversified Funds Funds Funds

Actively Invest Invest Opportunistically Do Not Invest

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

16 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XVIII Expected Venture Capital Performance, Top Quartile IRR “For 2010 top quartile VC funds, I expect IRRs over their lives to be...”

100% 28.2 19.7 17.5 15.8 11.6 10.7

27.9 36.9 80% 32.8 25.6 30.8 32.0 60% 29.1 18.6 22.0 29.7 31.1 40% 18.4 22.1

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 17.6 22.1 20% 10.7 15.8 13.6

10.7 14.0 12.1 5.9 9.3 7.7 0% Early-Stage Early-Stage Life Early-Stage Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Technology Funds Science Funds Diversified Funds Growth Technology Growth Life Growth Funds Science Funds Diversified Funds

<10% 10%–15% 15%–20% 20%–25% >25%

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XIX Expected Venture Capital Performance, Top Quartile Multiple “For 2010 top quartile VC funds, I expect multiples over their lives to be...”

100% 3.0 19.0 15.5 12.4 6.1 6.0 23.8 28.3 17.9 20.2 80% 19.0 27.0 35.7 39.6 60% 36.9 34.8 30.2

31.0 40% 32.1 29.3 20.2 25.7 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 15.5 20% 12.0

11.0 13.1 12.4 8.3 7.9 0% 6.1 Early-Stage Early-Stage Life Early-Stage Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Technology Funds Science Funds Diversified Funds Growth Technology Growth Life Science Growth Diversified Funds Funds Funds

<1.5x 1.5x–2.0x 2.0x–2.5x 2.5x–3.0x >3.0x

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 17 Chart XXI outlines investor interest in the niche clear interest in both distressed debt sectors of distressed debt funds, mezzanine/ and secondary funds, they are much credit-focused funds, and secondary more opportunistic in their investment funds. Distressed debt funds were the approach to these niche sectors compared leading niche sector of interest with 34.4% to the survey’s overall respondents. Over of respondents reporting they actively 40% of respondents from Asia indicated invest in the sector and 43.9% reporting that they invest opportunistically in both they invest on a purely opportunistic basis. distressed debt and secondary funds; Secondary funds garnered the second most active investors in distressed debt from this interest with 24.7% of respondents actively region made up only 16% of the total and investing in the sector and 36.8% that active investors in secondary funds made invest opportunistically. up only 13% of the total. Asian respondents have little interest in mezzanine funds; Although it is apparent in Chart XXII over 60% indicated that they do not invest that respondents from Asia have a in such funds.

Chart XX Expectation for Overall Venture Capital Returns “In 2010, I expect returns for this sector to be...”

100% 4.0 4.8 7.9 5.1 2.4 5.0 68.7 69.7 75.9 64.3 68.0 71.9 80%

60%

40%

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 30.6 28.9 20% 26.3 27.0 19.3 20.2

0% Early-Stage Early-Stage Life Early-Stage Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Late-Stage/ Technology Funds Science Funds Diversified Funds Growth Technology Growth Life Science Growth Diversified Funds Funds Funds

Higher than 2009 Same as 2009 Lower than 2009

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

100% 21.7 40.3 38.5

80% 43.9

60% 41.5 36.8

40%

34.4 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20% 24.7 18.2

0% Distressed Debt Funds Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds Secondary Funds

Actively Invest Invest Opportunistically Do Not Invest

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XXII Interest in Niche Capital Funds: Asian Investors “As far as our interest in this sector, we...”

100% 36.0 60.9 43.5

80%

60% 48.0 43.5

40% 30.4 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20% 16.0 13.0 8.7 0% Distressed Debt Funds Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds Secondary Funds

Actively Invest Invest Opportunistically Do Not Invest

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 19 Investor return expectations for distressed slightly lower a majority of investors in both debt, mezzanine, and secondary funds cases expect multiples of 1.5–2.0x. are outlined in Charts XXIII and XXIV. Expectations for IRRs were similar for As indicated in Chart XXV, most investors distressed debt and secondary funds, with anticipate overall returns for niche funds in over half of respondents expecting IRRs of 2010 to remain consistent with 2009 returns: 20% or higher. Only 15% of investors expect 43.5% of respondents anticipate the same mezzanine IRRs at that level. returns for distressed debt funds, nearly 60% for mezzanine/credit focused funds, In examining expected net multiples, over 40% and over 55% for secondary funds. More of investors expect multiples for distressed respondents expect distressed debt returns debt funds to be 2.0–2.5x. Mezzanine and to decline compared to mezzanine and secondary fund return expectations are secondary funds.

Chart XXIII Expected Niche Fund Performance: Top Quartile IRR “For 2010 top quartile niche funds, I expect IRRs over their lives to be...”

100% 2.5 25.5 18.4 13.4

80% 46.3 33.6 36.5 60%

34.4 40% 29.2 32.8 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20%

12.0 8.1 0% 0.7 5.0 1.6 Distressed Debt Funds Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds Secondary Funds

<10% 10%–15% 15%–20% 20%–25% >25%

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

20 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XXIV Expected Niche Fund Performance: Top Quartile Multiple “For 2010 top quartile Niche funds, I expect multiples over their lives to be...”

100% 6.0 2.6 2.5 19.8 7.4 12.8 29.8 80% 40.6 64.7

60% 53.7

40% 36.8 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20%

12.9 6.6 0% 3.8 Distressed Debt Funds Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds Secondary Funds

<1.5x 1.5x–2.0x 2.0x–2.5x 2.5x–3.0x >3.0x

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XXV Expectation for Overall Niche Fund Returns “In 2010, I expect returns for this sector to be...”

100% 26.0 13.9 17.8

80% 59.1 55.9 43.5 60%

40%

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 30.5 20% 27.0 26.3

0% Distressed Debt Funds Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds Secondary Funds

Higher than 2009 Same as 2009 Lower than 2009

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 21 2010 Sectors and Geographies the past year, as detailed in Chart XXVI, the of Interest leading sectors respondents committed to were U.S. middle-market buyouts (49.5%), In the next section of the survey, investor distressed debt (42.8%), and European preferences for sectors, geography and middle-market buyouts (36.1%). Secondary strategy are examined. funds were also a leading sector of focus in 2009, ranking fifth with nearly 30% In order to provide further context for 2010 of responses. Garnering a mere 4.6% of expectations, respondents were asked to responses, mega buyouts slid from the identify those sectors in which they had fourth leading sector of focus in 2008 to the actually made investments in 2009. Over thirteenth in 2009.

Chart XXVI 2009 Key Areas of Interest “During 2009, my major focus was on the following sectors... (choose no more than four)”

U.S. Middle-Market Buyouts 49.5 Distressed Debt Funds 42.8 European Middle-Market Buyouts 36.1 Growth Capital Funds 32.5 Secondary Funds 29.9 Asian Funds 22.2 Restructuring Funds 19.1 U.S. Venture Capital 17.0 Energy Funds 16.0 Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds 14.4 Cleantech/Green-Focused Funds 6.7 Infrastructure Funds 4.6 Mega Buyout Funds 4.6 Funds-of-Funds 4.1 Emerging Markets 1.5 Timber Funds 1.5 European/Israeli Venture Capital 1.0 Other 10.8

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

22 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Investors continue to target roughly the those top sectors, Asian funds have seen same sectors they committed to in 2009. As the largest increase in investor interest, detailed in Chart XXVII, the top six sectors gaining nearly 14% — not surprising given of investor focus are U.S. middle-market the optimistic investor return expectations for buyouts (62.6%), European middle-market the region and the positive economic growth buyouts (44.1%), growth capital funds (39%), it continues to experience in spite of the Asian funds (35.9%), distressed debt funds global recession. (31.3%), and secondary funds (22.1%). Of

Chart XXVII 2010 Key Areas of Interest “During 2010, I plan to focus most of my attention on investing in the following sectors... (choose no more than four)”

U.S. Middle-Market Buyouts 62.6 European Middle-Market Buyouts 44.1 Growth Capital Funds 39.0 Asian Funds 35.9 Distressed Debt Funds 31.3 Secondary Funds 22.1 Restructuring Funds 21.5 U.S. Venture Capital 16.4 Energy Funds 13.3 Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds 12.3 Infrastructure Funds 10.8 Cleantech/Green-Focused Funds 6.7 Emerging Markets (ex-Asia) 6.7 Mega Buyout Funds 5.6 Fund-of-Funds 3.6 Timber Funds 1.5 European/Israeli Venture Capital 0.5 Other 7.7

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 23 As shown in Table I, venture capital has middle-market buyouts, 76.5% of European seen a marked decline in interest over our investors focusing on European middle- last four surveys. In 2007, U.S. venture market buyouts, and nearly 71% of Asian capital was the third ranked sector of investors focusing on Asian funds. Investors investor interest, targeted by 34% on survey from Europe and Asia are also extremely respondents. In the latest survey, it had active in U.S. middle-market buyouts with the slipped to the eighth ranked sector, targeted sector ranking second amongst both groups. by only 16% of respondents. There is more interest in U.S. venture capital amongst U.S. Endowments are often perceived as thought headquartered institutions, where in the leaders in the industry. Chart XXVIII outlines latest survey the sector ranks fifth with 25% the key areas of interest for endowments. of U.S. respondents focusing on the sector. Consistent with the overall respondent Interest among non-U.S. investors is very group, U.S. middle-market buyouts are weak. European venture capital, on the other the leading sector of interest amongst hand, has never ranked well in our surveys, endowments with over 62% targeting the even among European investors. In this sector (though it should be noted that 85% latest edition, it was selected as an area of of the endowment respondents are based interest by less than 1% of respondents, a in the U.S.). The 41.7% of endowments new low. targeting energy funds in 2010 is in stark contrast to the 13.3% of overall respondents There is an overwhelming preference for who have shown an interest in the sector, home markets amongst respondents from and interest by endowments in U.S. venture North America, Europe, and Asia investing capital is nearly twice that expressed in the in middle-market buyouts, with 75% of base survey. North American investors focusing on U.S.

Table I Survey Respondents Targeting Venture Capital and Comparative Ranking vs. Other Sectors

2007 2008 2009 2010 % of Respondents 34.1% 28.8% 12.6% 16.0% U.S. Venture Capital Category Rank 3rd 4th 8th 8th

% of Respondents 4.7% 5.3% 1.9% 0.5% European Venture Capital Category Rank Last Last Last Last

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

24 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XXVIII 2010 Key Areas of Interest: Base Overall Respondents vs. Endowments “During 2010, I plan to focus most of my attention on investing in the following sectors... (choose no more than four)”

62.6 U.S. Middle-Market Buyouts 62.5 44.1 European Middle-Market Buyouts 25.0 39.0 Growth Capital Funds 25.0 35.9 Asian Funds 29.2 31.3 Distressed Debt Funds 37.5 22.1 Secondary Funds 12.5 21.5 Restructuring Funds 29.2 16.4 U.S. Venture Capital 29.2 13.3 Energy Funds 41.7 12.3 Mezzanine/Credit-Focused Funds 12.5 10.8 Infrastructure Funds 0.0 6.7 Emerging Markets (ex-Asia) 0.0 6.7 Cleantech/Green-Focused Funds 0.0 5.6 Mega Buyout Funds 8.3 3.6 Funds-of-Funds 4.2 1.5 Timber Funds 0.0 0.5 European/Israeli Venture Capital 0.0 7.7 Other 16.7

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Percentage of Respondents

Base Overall Respondents Endowments

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 25 Survey respondents were next asked what North America and Europe, as shown in factors tend to drive their sector investment Chart XXX, making up 53.9% and 33.2% focus. The top two drivers, as shown in of investors’ portfolios, respectively. Asia Chart XXIX, account for almost 75% of the made up the third largest allocation with 17.1% responses. Nearly 50% of respondents will followed by global commitments with 16.1%. pursue what they believe to be the best Commitments to Latin America, Central funds and managers available in the market and Eastern Europe, and other emerging and 25% will focus on the private equity markets decreased over the past year, sector they believe will outperform all others reflecting the unwillingness of investors in in 2010. more established markets to invest outside their home markets given the current market Survey respondents were next asked what turmoil, especially in developing markets their geographical focuses were in 2009. where perceived additional political and Over the past 12 months, geographical financial risks exist. allocations were predominantly focused on

Chart XXIX Drivers of Sector Investment “My sector investment focus in 2010 is being driven by...”

My institution’s pursuit of the best funds 49.5 and managers available in the market A focus on those private equity sectors I believe 25.0 will outperform others in this vintage year Maintaining established relationships with fund 8.9 managers returning to market this year My institution's need to diversify 5.7 its private equity portfolio Targeting funds that will provide 3.6 access to co-investments

My need to deploy significant amounts 1.0 of capital allocated to private equity

Other 6.3

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

26 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XXX 2009 Private Equity Geographical Focus “During 2009, the geographical allocation of my portfolio by commitment amount in percentage terms was...”

25%

20.2 20% 17.7 15.2

15% 13.1 11.1 11.6 11.1 10% Pecentage of Portfolio Pecentage 5%

0% Global North Western Asia Latin Central & Other Emerging America Europe America Eastern Europe Markets

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 27 Investors’ targeted geographical allocations and Eastern Europe, on the other hand, has for 2010 are outlined in Chart XXXI. The bulk fallen considerably since last year as those of 2010 allocations are focused on North countries have been more impacted by the America and Western Europe with a slight recession. Interest in the Benelux region, increase in those focused on Asia and a Italy, and Spain has remained consistently slight decrease in those focused on global low over the past several years. commitments. The results differ amongst European and Asian investors with the Responses across specific investor types majority of European investors targeting and geographies are fairly consistent with Europe and a plurality of Asian investors those of the overall group; however, amongst targeting Asia, reemphasizing the notion Asian investors there is an overwhelming that investors remain focused on their preference to invest in Europe through domestic markets. pan-European funds.

Next, we asked survey respondents to European market preferences from European tell us which European markets they find respondents are outlined in Chart XXXIII. most attractive for 2010. As outlined in The four most attractive European markets Chart XXXII, the three markets that topped are the same for both types of respondents, the list in 2009 are again the leading though with greater percentages of support European markets of interest, with the Nordic from Europeans in each category. European region at 40%, the United Kingdom with investors also have a much higher interest 37.8%, and Germany with 30%. Investors in the country-focused funds targeting Italy are finding France much more attractive and Spain while displaying a much lower in 2010, gaining nearly 10% of responses interest in pan-European funds and European since last year. Investor interest in Central fund-of-funds.

Chart XXXI 2010 Private Equity Geographical Focus: Overall Respondents vs. European Investors vs. Asian Investors “During 2010, I anticipate the geographical allocation of my portfolio by commitment amount in percentage terms to be...”

25% 22.8

19.1 19.0 19.1 20% 17.7 16.4 16.3 15.5 15.5 15.9 15% 13.9

11.1 11.0 10.9 11.0 11.4 10.9 11.0 11.8 10.0 9.7 10% Pecentage of Portfolio Pecentage 5%

0% Global North Western Asia Latin Central & Eastern Other Emerging America Europe America Europe Markets

Base Overall Respondents European Investors Asian Investors

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

28 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XXXII Most Attractive European Country or Regionally-Focused Markets: 2009 vs. 2010 “I find the most attractive European markets to be... (choose no more than three)”

45% 40.0 40% 37.8

35% 30.6 30.0 30%

25% 22.4 22.8 19.6 18.9 20% 17.7 16.1 14.8 14.4 12.9 15% 12.2 11.7

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 9.1 8.3 7.9 10% 6.7 4.7 5.0 5.6 5.0 5% 3.5 3.9 1.6 0%

Italy Spain Other Funds France Benelux Germany in Europe Europe via Fund-of-Funds Pan-European Do Not Invest Do Not Nordic Region Nordic Central Europe Eastern Europe United Kingdom United

2010 2009

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XXXIII Most Attractive European Country or Regionally-Focused Markets: Overall Respondents vs. European Investors “I find the most attractive European markets to be... (choose no more than three)”

70% 63.4 60%

50% 47.9 43.7 40.0 40% 37.8 36.6 30.0 30% 22.8 19.7 20% 16.1 12.2 14.1 14.4 9.9

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 9.9 8.3 6.7 8.5 10% 5.0 5.6 3.9 5.6 5.0 2.8 1.4 2.8 0%

Italy Spain Other Funds France Benelux Germany in Europe Europe via Fund-of-Funds Pan-European Do Not Invest Do Not Nordic Region Nordic Central Europe Eastern Europe United Kingdom United

Base Overall Respondents European Investors

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 29 Investor interest in Asia has increased should be noted that two thirds of the Asian significantly in the past year. But which survey respondents are with institutions markets are driving that interest in 2010? headquartered in Japan or Australia, and Last year’s survey reported divergent views even these investors are more focused on on the most attractive geographies, but the China and India than their home markets. clear leaders were China and India with pan-Asian funds coming in a close third. This Chart XXXVI details the emerging markets year although China and India still claim the investors are most interested in 2010. top two spots, as shown in Chart XXXIV, China Investor interest in Eastern Europe has has significantly extended its lead at the experienced a significant drop-off, falling expense of pan-Asian and Japanese funds, nearly 25% to the fourth spot after coming which have fallen from 20.8% to 12.5% and in as the most attractive emerging market 9.1% to 7.1%, respectively. in last year’s survey. Brazil has claimed the top position with just over 34%, followed by Amongst Asian investors, as noted in Southeast Asia with 18.8%, and pan-Latin Chart XXXV, China and India are by far American funds with 12.5%, the area that the most preferred markets with 70.8% saw the greatest increase in investor interest and 58.3% of responses, respectively. The over the past year. only other markets garnering significant interest from Asian investors are the more Overall, investor interest in emerging markets developed markets of Australia and Japan; is down in 2010. Brazil is the only market to none of the respondents expressed interest garner more than 20% of responses. Seven of in the smaller country markets of Vietnam the ten listed emerging markets drew interest and Taiwan or interest in Southeast Asia. It from less than 10% of respondents.

Chart XXXIV Most Attractive Asian Country or Regionally-Focused Markets: 2009 vs. 2010 “I find the most attractive Asian markets to be... (choose no more than two)”

60% 50.5 50%

40% 36.3

30% 26.6 23.0 20.8 22.1 20% 12.5 13.4 9.2 10.7 7.19.1 7.1 7.1 10% 5.0 6.5 4.7 5.0 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 4.4 4.4 2.2 3.8 0.9 0.5 0.0 0.6 0%

India Other Funds Korea China Japan in Asia Taiwan Asia via Asia via Vietnam Australia Pan-Asian Global Funds Fund-of-Funds Do Not Invest Do Not Southeast Asia

2010 2009

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

30 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XXXV Most Attractive Asian Country or Regionally-Focused Markets: Overall Respondents vs. Asian Investors “I find the most attractive Asian markets to be... (choose no more than two)”

80% 70.8 70% 58.3 60% 50.5 50%

40%

30% 26.6 20.8 20% 16.7

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 12.5 12.5 13.4 9.2 10% 7.1 7.1 7.1 6.5 4.2 2.2 3.8 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0%

India Other Funds Korea China Japan in Asia Taiwan Asia via Asia via Vietnam Australia Pan-Asian Global Funds Fund-of-Funds Do Not Invest Do Not Southeast Asia

Base Overall Respondents Asian Investors

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Chart XXXVI Most Attractive Emerging Markets “I find the most attractive emerging markets to be... (choose no more than two)”

45%

40% 38.1 34.1 35%

30%

25% 18.8 20%

15% 12.5 Percentage of Respondents Percentage 10% 8.0 6.8 4.0 3.4 5% 2.8 2.3 1.7 2.3 0% Brazil Other Africa Turkey Russia Mexico Markets America Pan-Latin Pan-Latin Middle East in Emerging Market Funds Market Do Not Invest Invest Do Not Southeast Asia Eastern Europe Global Emerging

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 31 Next, survey respondents were asked about Chart XXXVIII focuses on those venture their strategic preferences when investing capital stages and sectors investors find in the U.S. middle-market. As detailed in to be most attractive in the coming year. Chart XXXVII, over 50% of respondents Early- and late-stage funds are the leading indicated a strong preference for funds stages of interest with seed-, mid- and multi- with an operational focus that are staffed stage strategies further behind. As far as with professionals who possess operating industry sector focus, technology focused backgrounds. There was also a notable funds and diversified, multi-sector funds lead preference for funds with buy-and-build with 29.8% each, while cleantech focused strategies and restructuring/turnaround funds attracted the least investor interest funds, with 40% of respondents focusing on at 11.8%. each of these sectors.

Chart XXXVII Most Attractive U.S. Middle-Market Sectors “I find the most attractive U.S. middle-market sectors or strategies to be... (check all that apply)”

Funds focused on operational improvements heavily staffed with professionals 50.8 with operating backgrounds

Restructuring/turnaround funds 40.0

Funds focused on buy-and-build strategies 40.0

Growth capital funds 34.1

Funds focused on single industries 18.9

Strategy is irrelevant; a demonstrable superior 17.3 track record is my only concern

Regionally-focused funds 12.4

Funds focused on strongly growing companies, 12.4 often investing without majority control

I do not invest in the U.S. middle-market 12.4

I only invest in the U.S. middle-market 2.2 through fund-of-funds

Other 0.5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

32 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. There were noticeable differences in venture interest in cleantech funds. Public pensions capital sector preferences amongst various also showed a considerable amount of interest institutional investors. Endowments, who in early-stage venture capital but nearly a demonstrate considerably more interest in third reported they do not invest in the sector venture capital, were the biggest proponents at all. of early-stage venture and had absolutely no

Chart XXXVIII Most Attractive Venture Capital Sectors “I find the most attractive venture capital sectors or strategies to be... (check all that apply)”

50% 41.6 39.9 40%

29.8 29.8 30% 28.1 27.0 25.3 21.3 20% 18.0 11.8 10% Percentage of Respondents Percentage 3.9 1.1 0%

Other Other Mid-Stage Late-Stage Seed-Stage Early-Stage Multi-Stage Focus Solely on Focus Venture Capital Venture Historic Returns Multiple Sectors Do Not Invest in Invest Do Not Cleantech Funds Cleantech Technology Funds Technology Funds Focused on Focused Funds Life Science Funds

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 33 Niche Private Equity Sectors There were notable differences in how endowments and public pensions approach There are several strategies within the distressed investing, as shown in Chart XL. distressed/restructuring sector that investors Over three quarters of all public pensions can pursue, detailed in Chart XXXIX. who responded to this year’s survey focused Respondents were most interested in on distressed debt for control funds, and distressed debt for control funds and all public pension respondents reported restructuring/turnaround funds, with that they invest in the sector in some significantly less interest in distressed debt fashion. Responses amongst endowments trading funds and distressed debt hedge were more widespread over distressed funds. Those strategies are both driven by strategies; however, the clear preference is trading rather than a value-added focus for restructuring/turnaround funds, with only and tend to generate lower multiples of a quarter of endowments indicating they return. Though the distressed investment prefer distressed debt for control funds. sector has increased in investor interest significantly over the last three years, over 17% of respondents still do not invest in these strategies.

Chart XXXIX Distressed Investments “Within the distressed debt/restructuring sector, I am most interested in...”

50%

39.3 40% 35.1

30%

20% 17.3

10% Percentage of Respondents Percentage 4.2 3.6 0.5 0% Distressed Debt Restructuring/ Distressed Debt Distressed Debt Do Not Invest in Other for Control Turnaround Trading Funds Hedge Funds This Sector Funds Funds

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

34 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XL Distressed Investments: Public Pensions vs. Endowments “Within the distressed debt/restructuring sector, I am most interested in...”

90%

80% 77.3

70%

60%

50% 45.8

40%

30% 25.0

Percentage of Respondents Percentage 20% 12.6 9.1 8.3 9.1 8.3 10% 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0% Distressed Debt Restructuring/ Distressed Debt Distressed Debt Do Not Invest in Other for Control Turnaround Trading Funds Hedge Funds This Sector Funds Funds

Public Pensions Endowments

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 35 We next asked respondents how they prefer in funds. The number of non-fund-of-funds to participate in the secondary market. managers who do purchase direct positions Because fund-of-funds managers are more in funds has increased significantly in the last likely to have dedicated secondary year, from 20% to nearly 36%. investment programs and consultants act on an advisory basis as opposed to investing in Fewer respondents reported not being active the secondary market themselves, Chart XLI in secondaries this year. Secondaries were details overall responses as well as responses the only area of alternative investing that excluding those from funds-of-funds experienced fundraising growth in 2009 and, and consultants. with bid-ask spreads beginning to shrink and transaction volume increasing, the secondary Non-fund-of-funds managers are more likely market has become an attractive area for to invest through specialist secondary funds many investors. and less likely to purchase direct positions

Chart XLI Secondary Market Investments: Base Overall Respondents vs. All Respondents Except Fund-of-Funds and Consultants “In the secondary market, my firm... (choose all that apply)”

35.5 Actively invests in secondary funds 41.8

Actively purchases direct positions in 50.0 funds in the secondary market 35.7

Actively purchases direct positions in 10.8 companies in the secondary market 8.2

Has sold or is considering selling funds in our 15.1 portfolio for portfolio management purposes 17.3

19.9 Is not active in secondaries in any manner 23.5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Base Overall Respondents All Respondents, Except Funds-of-Funds and Consultants

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

36 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XLII focuses on preferences in co-investment program, to opportunistically co-investments. A plurality of 37.4% of pursue co-investments and to invest directly respondents do not invest in co-investments in companies. This is not surprising, as the nor directly in companies, and the next wealth in family offices was most often largest group, at 33.2%, only invest in them accumulated by individuals who owned and on an opportunistic basis, demonstrating that built individual companies. They are most co-investments are not widely pursued by all often staffed with professionals more used to types of institutional investors. This is not the taking the type of risk generated by investing case amongst family offices; these investors directly instead of through a diversified are much more likely to have an active internal blind pool.

Chart XLII Directs and Co-Investments: Base Overall Respondents vs. Family Offices “Regarding directs and co-investments, my firm... (choose all that apply)”

33.2 Only opportunistically pursues co-investments 47.4

26.8 Has an active internal co-investment program 47.4

1.6 Has an outsourced co-investment program 0.0

13.7 Invests directly in companies 31.6

Does not invest in co-investments 37.4 nor directly invests in companies 0.0

0.5 Other 5.3

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Percentage of Respondents

Base Overall Respondents Family Offices

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 37 Over the last five years, at least until last As in last year’s survey, respondents were September’s market correction, there had split into two distinct groups concerning been an increasing trend of fund managers interest in hedge funds: those respondents launching publicly traded vehicles. A number who had been active in the sector for several of these vehicles used an over-commitment years and those who had no plans to invest model to maximize capital efficiency which in the sector. As outlined in Chart XLIV, a hurt them during the market downturn. As little more than 6% of respondents have just Chart XLIII shows, the bulk of respondents begun a program while another 2.1% are had not invested in these vehicles and considering creating an allocation. were not looking to invest in them in the near future.

Chart XLIII Publicly Traded Private Equity Vehicles “As far as publicly traded private equity vehicles, my firm... (choose all that apply)”

Has invested in publicly traded private equity funds-of-funds and plans to maintain 3.3 or build this exposure in the future Has invested in publicly traded private equity vehicles that invest directly in companies and plans 2.2 to maintain or build this exposure in the future

Previously invested in the sector but is 4.4 decreasing or eliminating our exposure

Has not made an investment in the sector 2.8 in the past but is considering doing so

Has not made an investment in the sector 86.2 in the past and has no plans to do so

Other 2.2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Yes, actively for several years 38.9

Yes, have just begun a program 6.3

No, but an allocation is being considered 2.1

No, we have no plans to invest in hedge funds 51.1

Other 1.6

0% 20% 40% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 39 Structural Issues and Key Terms the inclusion of a key man clause coming in third with 39.9%. The concerns of insurance The next series of survey questions serve to company respondents were somewhat provide investors with a chance to address different. They were more focused on the those key issues that surround fund structure, distribution of carried interest between the fees, and carried interest. senior investment professionals, a concern that shows their focus on team stability, as Chart XLV covers issues of focus on fund well as on transaction fee splits. structure. The largest area of concern for overall respondents was the level of general The results outlined in Chart XLV are generally partner financial commitment to the fund at consistent over geographies. Although not 52.1%, a key component in aligning LP and detailed in this chart, Asian investors are GP interests. Concern amongst investors most concerned with the inclusion and regarding overall level of management fees structure of key man provisions, and are follows closely with 47.9% of responses with more focused on caps on fund size.

Chart XLV Issues Regarding Fund Structure: Overall Respondents vs. Insurance Companies “The issues I focus on most as far as terms or structure of a fund are... (choose no more than three)”

Level of general partner financial 52.1 commitment to the fund 16.7 47.9 Overall level of management fees 50.0 39.9 Structure or inclusion of a key man clause 27.8 Distribution of carried interest between the 38.3 senior investment professionals 61.1 31.4 Transaction fee splits 55.6 28.7 Carry distribution waterfalls 16.7 27.7 Cap on fund size 50.0 21.3 Level of carried interest 33.3 16.0 Structure or inclusion of a no-fault divorce clause 11.1 Sharing of carry and/or investment decision 7.4 making with a third party sponsor 5.6 2.7 Other 0.0

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Percentage of Respondents

Base Overall Respondents Insurance Companies

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

40 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Survey respondents were next asked about both of those responses have increased since their preference for transaction fee splits. last year’s survey while the percentages of As shown in Chart XLVI, 59% believe 100% the other two have decreased, not surprising of transaction fees should be allocated to in the current market environment where investors, with 20.7% agreeing an 80%/20% bargaining power has begun to shift split between the investors and the fund more towards investors and away from manager is adequate. The percentages for fund managers.

Chart XLVI Transaction Fees “As far as transaction fee splits are concerned...”

I believe 100% of transaction fees 59.0 should be allocated to investors

I believe an 80%/20% split between the inves- 20.7 tors and the fund manager is adequate

The optimal split of transaction fees depends 11.7 on other terms in the agreement

I believe a 50%/50% split between the investors 5.9 and the fund manager is adequate

Other 2.7

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 41 Few buyout funds have carried interest year’s survey was that such investments levels greater than 20%. As detailed raise the issue of potential conflicts of in Chart XLVII, though a majority of interest between LPs and investors in the respondents are willing to pay more in management company. The concern has carry under certain circumstances, 30.3% grown over the past 12 months, taking the would not, believing 20% carried interest top spot by an overwhelming margin, as is an adequate incentive while another detailed in Chart XLVIII, while those who 14.1% believe that carry levels are currently perceive it to be an interesting investment too high. opportunity remained stable at roughly 17%. Only a 4.5% of respondents found third- Third-party investments have slowed over the party investing irrelevant to the investment past year as turmoil in the market continued. process, and it clearly continues to be a key The main concern amongst investors in last topic of interest amongst investors.

Chart XLVII Carried Interest for Buyout Firms “Carried interest, especially in the buyout sector, is normally set at 20% of profits. My firm would be willing to consider an increase in the standard carry... (choose all that apply)”

Only over specific return hurdles 42.2

Under no circumstances, 30.3 20% is an adequate incentive

In exchange for limits on management fees 25.4

For only those partners with a 22.7 long track record of success

Under no circumstances, carry 14.1 levels are too high as they are

In exchange for limits on fund size 9.2

Other 2.2

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

42 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. Chart XLVIII Third-Party Investments in Private Equity “I believe third-party investing in private equity management companies... (choose all that apply)”

Raises the possibility of conflicts of interest 70.6 between limited partners and investors

Is better handled through private 22.6 as opposed to public structures

Presents an interesting investment opportunity 17.5

Is a natural response to succession 15.8 issues in private equity funds

Is likely to expand significantly beyond the 15.3 large funds that have such relationships

Is irrelevant to the fund investment process 4.5

Other 1.7

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 43 Investor Fears and Concerns from the pre-set list. A selection of those responses is listed below, but it is notable The last question in the survey asked investors that several focused on the potential for GP to identify their four greatest fears regarding turnover caused by the impact of the poor the private equity market; those results are environment on carried interest distributions detailed in Chart XLIX. needed to retain top professionals.

The responses to this question were very • “Poor performance of 2004–2007 similar to last year’s, with a focus on vintages may result in significant team problems specific to the buyout markets: a departures at some firms due to the feeling that in many sectors too much money absence of carried interest” has been raised and that fees are too high and are destroying the alignment of interest • “Lack of adequate good professionals between investors and fund managers. The to manage the oversupply of capital in ranking of these concerns was similar across private equity” geographies and types of investors with one notable exception — endowments, who in • “Current economic slowdown may general had higher exposure and interest in hurt private equity for a long time if venture capital, had a higher level of concern fund managers do not adapt to the about factors specific to that market. new environment”

In addition, respondents were allowed to • “Increased regulation globally will submit their own answers instead of choosing negatively impact both GPs and LPs”

Chart XLIX Greatest Fears Regarding the Private Equity Market “My greatest fears regarding the private equity market at the moment are... (choose all that apply)” (continued on next page)

High purchase price multiples paid for buyout portfolio companies 51.4 in 2005 through 2007 will dramatically impact returns

Management fee levels and transaction fees on large funds are destroying 47.5 alignment of interest between fund managers and investors

Increasing economic difficulties will have widespread 35.0 impact on all alternative investment returns

Decreased leverage availability in the market will hurt 34.4 companies needing working capital or re-financing

Large firms in the market are becoming generalized asset managers 31.7 and are moving away from their key investment strengths

Private equity is most effective as a niche market and too much 29.0 money is being raised in all private equity sectors

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

There is still too much money available in the large buyout 22.4 market and that will dramatically impact future returns

Continued tepid IPO markets will negatively impact venture capital returns 16.9

Too much money is being directed into secondaries 16.4 and it will negatively impact returns

Large buyout funds should follow the example of venture capital funds 15.8 in the last cycle and return commitments to investors — but will not

The venture capital investing model is broken 15.8 and strong performance is unlikely to return

Too much money is pursuing too few experienced 13.7 private equity professionals in the Asian market

Investment by third parties into fund management companies is decreasing 9.8 alignment of interest between limited partners and general partners

Too much money has been raised for distressed debt funds 9.8

The denominator effect will continue to impact my 8.7 ability to invest in attractive opportunities in 2010

The strategy of mega buyout funds in my portfolio is drifting away from their 7.7 historic strength in control buyouts in order to keep deploying capital

My private equity allocation is too small to have a 4.9 significant impact on my overall portfolio returns

We do not have adequate staff in place to 4.9 deal with issues in my current portfolio

Access to top quartile venture capital managers is impossible without 3.8 previous relationship and new managers are unattractive

The number of funds I have in portfolio is too 3.8 large for my firm to effectively monitor

Decreasing opportunities are limiting my access to co-investments 3.3

Emerging market economies will be hurt by the recession but there are few 3.3 managers in the sector with the skills to deal with down markets

I am not sure that my firm will be able to make capital calls in a timely manner 1.1

Other 4.9

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Probitas Partners 2010 Private Equity Institutional Investor Survey

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 45 C o n c l u s i o n The past year has been one of turmoil in private equity. Legacy fund portfolios remain under stress with bankruptcies rising and fundraising falling dramatically as investors deal with issues of liquidity and portfolio allocation. Our survey results reflect a sentiment that 2010 will present interesting investment opportunities as North America and Europe rebound from recession and Asia continues to grow. On the basis of our survey and of ongoing discussions with investors, we have reached several conclusions: • Investors remain concerned that the performance of their legacy portfolios will continue to be hit hard by the economic crisis, especially in buyouts. The combination of high purchase price multiples and high leverage on transactions executed at the market peak from 2005 through 2007, together with the economic effects of the recession, will continue to impact their portfolios. Bankruptcies of private equity portfolio companies have skyrocketed in 2009 and are likely to continue at high levels into 2010. • Many investors remain over-allocated. Even after the rebound in the public markets since March, many respondents report that they are roughly at or over their allocations. Endowments have been particularly hard hit in this regard. Most investors are looking to maintain their exposure to private equity, and a significant number of investors who are new to the sector are under-allocated and are actively looking for new GP relationships. • U.S. and European middle-market buyout funds as well as Asian growth capital funds are a major area of focus for 2010. In discussions with investors, we have found that many of them anticipate that 2010 will be a strong vintage year for middle-market buyouts in the U.S. and Europe as those markets rebound from recession. In the U.S., investors are most interested in middle-market funds that have a strong operational focus that are focused on increasing earnings at portfolio companies, while Europe respondents favored funds targeting the Nordic Region, the United Kingdom, and Germany

• Mega buyout interest continues to be weak. While interest in middle-market buyouts have strengthened, only 8% of respondents say they are actively targeting mega buyouts, and more investors state that they are interested in the emerging markets than they are in mega buyouts. • For many investors, interest in Asia really means interest in China. Interest in private equity in China has continued to surge. Only three years ago, China, India, and Japan were basically tied in respondent interest, but while China has increased to the point where 50% of respondents are targeting it, interest in Japan has fallen to only 7%.

46 Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. • Interest in venture capital continues to decline. Interest in U.S. venture capital remains low and has fallen significantly over the last four years. In discussions with a number of investors, there is a feeling that the current venture capital model is broken, and many investors feel that they have not been able to generate significant returns in the sector over the last ten years. Interest in European venture capital, always very weak in our surveys even amongst European investors, has fallen to a new low this year. • Interest in distressed debt and secondary funds has moderated. Though still of interest to investors, interest in these sectors has moderated somewhat, with distressed debt in particular falling from second place in 2009 to fifth place in 2010. In this niche sector, a number of investors have already placed their bets on managers that they want to support and are not looking to widely expand the number of GP relationships they have. As far as secondaries are concerned, a number of investors made significant commitments to specialist funds this year and likely have less appetite for 2010. • Investors are clearly focused on alignment of interest and fees. Both in our questions regarding terms and conditions, and in our questions on investors’ greatest fears, it was clear that alignment of interest was a key concern. The ILPA has recently released a set of principles that it hopes will move market terms into a better alignment. In summary, though investors still have lingering concerns on their legacy portfolios, they are looking forward to new opportunities that will emerge as we come out of recession. The past two years have seen dramatic capital markets volatility as the debt markets supporting large buyouts closed, then the IPO window closed, and finally the public markets collapsed along with Lehman Brothers. The impact on private equity caused by this volatility has brought about significant changes in investors’ interest in sectors and geographies and has intensified a refocus on alignment of interest that will fundamentally change the industry for some time to come.

Probitas Partners does not include information on funds it is currently offering in this listing; qualified investors seeking information on Probitas Partners’ placed funds should contact Probitas Partners directly in order to have the most complete picture of all institutional funds currently in the market.

Note: Funds fitting into more than one category may have multiple listings.

Private Equity Funds in Market or Thought to be Coming to Market Over the Next 12 Months As of November 2009

Fund Size (MM) in US$ Unless Marked

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Large Buyout Funds (>$3 billion)

3i Europe 6 EUR5,000 EUR5,000 www.3i.com 1945 London

Avista Capital Partners II 3,000 2,000 www.avistacap.com 2005 New York; Houston, TX

New York; Menlo Park, CA; Los Angeles; Atlanta; Boston; Blackstone Capital Partners VI 15,000 21,700 www.blackstone.com 1985 Shanghai; Hong Kong; Mumbai; Tokyo; Paris; London

Washington, D.C.; New York; San Francisco; Shanghai; Carlyle Asia Partners III 3,000 1,800 www.carlyle.com 1987 Hong Kong; Mumbai; Dubai; London; Paris; Munich; Madrid; Istanbul

Cinven V EUR8,000 EUR6,500 www.cinven.com 1977 London; Paris; Frankfurt; Milan

New York; London; Clayton Dubilier & Rice VIII 5,000 4,000 www.cdr-inc.com 1978 George Town, Cayman Islands

Stockholm; Frankfurt; EQT VI EUR6,000 EUR4,250 www.eqt.se 1994 London; New York

Madison Dearborn Capital 7,500 6,500 www.mdcp.com 1992 Chicago Partners VI

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Metalmark Capital Partners II 3,000 1,500 www.metalmarkcapital.com 2004 New York

Morgan Stanley Capital New York; London; Hong Kong; 6,000 N/A www.morganstanley.com 1985 Partners V Seoul; Tokyo

Onex Partners III 4,000 3,450 www.onex.com 1984 Toronto; New York

North American Middle-Market Buyouts and Growth Capital Funds

21st Century Group Fund II 200 N/A www.21stcenturygroupfund.com 1988 Dallas, TX

280 Capital Partners 350 N/A www.280capitalpartners.com 2008 Sunnyvale, CA

New York; Stamford, CT; AEA Small Business Fund II 300 285 www.aeainvestors.com 1968 Shanghai; Hong Kong; London

Alpine Investors IV 175 120 www.alpine-investors.com 2001 San Francisco

Aquiline Financial Services Fund II 2,000 1,100 No Website Available 2005 New York

Arlington Capital Partners III 750 575 www.arlingtoncap.com 1991 Chevy Chase, MD

Chicago; Madison, NJ; Baird Capital Partners V 400 300 www.bairdcapitalpartners.com 1989 Milwaukee, WI; London; Hong Kong; Shanghai; Beijing

BankCap Partners II 250 109 www.bankcap.com 2007 Dallas, TX

Beecken Petty O'Keefe III 500 325 www.bpoc.com 1996 Chicago

Behrman Capital Partners IV 1,000 1,200 www.behrmancap.com 1991 New York; San Francisco

Birch Hill Equity Partners IV CAD850 CAD850 www.birchhillequity.ca 1994 Toronto

Blackpoint Equity 200 N/A www.blackpointequity.com 2007 New York

Blue Horizon Equity I 100 N/A www.bluehorizonequity.com N/A San Francisco

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Brynwood Partners VI 400 250 www.brynwoodpartners.com 1984 Greenwich, CT

CAI Partners & Company IV 600 CAD375 www.caifunds.com 1989 Toronto; New York

CapStreet III 250 368 www.capstreet.com 1990 Houston, TX

Cardinal Americas Fund 100 N/A www.cardinalamericas.com N/A Los Angeles

Castle Creek Capital Partners IV 500 175 www.castlecreek.com 1992 Rancho Santa Fe, CA

Castle Harlan V 1,500 1,163 www.castleharlan.com 1987 New York

Boston; New York; Chalice Direct Private Equity 200 N/A www.grailpartners.com 2005 San Francisco

CI Capital Investors II 750 N/A www.cicapllc.com 1993 New York

CIVC Partners Fund IV 575 650 www.civc.com 1970 Chicago

Code Hennessy & Simmons VI 1,300 1,300 www.chsonline.com 1988 Chicago

Collins Willmott Partners 300 N/A www.collinswillmott.com 2008 New York

Cressey & Co. Fund 4 500 N/A www.cresseyco.com 2007 Chicago; Nashville, TN

Washington, D.C.; DC Capital Partners I 150 N/A www.dccapitalpartners.com 2005 Alexandria, VA

Dogwood Equity II 125 74 www.dogwoodequity.com 2002 Raleigh, NC

Driscoll Partners 150 N/A www.dihedge.com 2008 Stonybrook, NY

Edgewater Growth Capital 750 472 www.edgewaterfunds.com 1991 Chicago Partners III

Ennovance Capital 300 N/A www.ennovance.com N/A North Wales, PA

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Forest Hill Partners 300 N/A www.foresthillcap.com N/A Little Rock, AR

FS Equity Partners VI 1,000 1,000 www.freemanspogli.com 1983 Los Angeles; New York

Fulham Investors III 250 165 www.fulhamco.com 1984 Wellesley, MA

Generation Partners III 300 180 www.genpartners.com 1996 Greenwich, CT; San Francisco

Los Angeles; London; Gores Capital Partners III 1,500 1,300 www.gores.com 1987 Boulder, CO

Grey Mountain Partners II 250 N/A www.greymountain.com N/A New York; Boulder, CO

Grotech Partners VII 250 410 www.grotech.com 1984 Vienna, VA; Hunt Valley, MD

Hamilton Robinson Capital 125 75 www.hrco.com 1984 Stamford, CT Partners III

Hart Capital Education Partners 100 N/A www.hartcapital.com 1998 Rowayton, CT

Healthpoint Capital Partners III 700 420 www.healthpointcapital.com N/A New York

Jefferies Capital Partners V 800 600 www.jefcap.com 1994 New York

JLL Partners Fund VI 1,500 1,500 www.jllpartners.com 1988 New York

Kinderhook Capital Fund III 350 270 www.kinderhookindustries.com 2003 New York

Lake Pacific II 200 101 www.lakepacific.com 2000 Chicago

Linden Capital Partners II 300 200 www.lindenllc.com 2002 Chicago

Lovell Minnick Equity Partners III 350 224 www.lovellminnick.com 2004 El Segundo, CA; Radnor, PA

Marwit Capital 3 225 183 www.marwit.com 1962 Newport Beach, CA

Mason Wells Buyout Fund 3 250 300 www.masonwells.com 1998 Milwaukee, WI

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Meidlinger Partners I 100 N/A www.meidlingerpartners.net 2008 Philadelphia

Houston, TX; Birmingham, AL; MVP Growth Equity Fund II 100 43 www.murphreeventures.com 1987 Baton Rouge, LA; Lafayette, LA

North Castle Partners IV 300 175 www.northcastlepartners.com 1997 Greenwich, CT

Oakcrest Capital Partners Fund 150 N/A www.oakcrestcapital.com 2006 Washington, D.C.

Prairie Capital V 275 250 www.prairie-capital.com 1997 Chicago

ReichmannHauer Capital 250 N/A www.rhcp.ca 2006 Toronto Partners II

Riverside Partners IV 250 225 www.riversidepartners.com 1989 Boston

Riverwood Capital I 750 N/A www.riverwoodcapital.com 2007 Menlo Park, CA; New York

Saratoga Partners V 250 250 www.saratogapartners.com 1984 New York

Satori Capital Partners 200 N/A www.satori-capital.com N/A Dallas, TX

Seguin Partners 150 N/A www.seguinpartners.com 2006 Woburn, MA

Seidler Equity Partners IV 400 260 www.sepfunds.com 1991 Marina del Rey, CA

SG Growth Partners I 250 N/A www.stripesgroup.com 2003 New York

Snow Phipps Fund 2 700 550 No Website Available 2005 New York

Solamere Capital 200 N/A www.solameregroup.com N/A Lexington, MA

Southgate Capital Partners 500 N/A www.southgateai.com N/A New York

Southlake Equity Group - Fund 1 250 N/A www.southlakeequity.com 2007 Southlake, TX; Chicago

Spectrum Equity Investors VI 1,000 1,018 www.spectrumequity.com 1994 Boston; Menlo Park, CA

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Staley Capital 1 100 N/A www.staleycapital.com 2008 Waltham, MA

SunTx Fulcrum Fund II 350 125 www.suntx.com 2000 Dallas, TX

Tandem Expansion Fund 500 N/A No Website Available N/A Toronto

The Azalea Fund III 100 N/A www.azaleacapital.com 1995 Greenville, SC

Tower Three Partners Fund I 500 N/A www.tower3partners.com N/A Greenwich, CT

TPH Partners 250 N/A www.tphpartners.com 2007 Houston, TX

Transportation Resource Bloomfield Hills, MI; 400 265 www.trpfund.com 1997 Partners III Secaucus, NJ

Trident Fund V 2,250 2,250 www.stonepoint.com 1987 Greenwich, CT

Vedanta Opportunities Fund 150 N/A www.vedacap.com N/A New York

Veritas Capital Fund IV 950 594 www.veritascapital.com 1992 New York

Walnut V 150 N/A www.thewalnutgroup.com 1997 Cincinnati, OH; New York

Wellbridge Capital 1 200 N/A www.wellbridgecapital.com N/A Marlton, NJ; Radnor, PA

Wellspring Capital Partners V 1,500 1,000 www.wellspringcapital.com 1995 New York

White Oak Guggenheim 200 N/A www.thewhiteoakgroup.com N/A Atlanta Aerospace and Defense Fund

Wynnchurch Capital Partners III 500 350 www.wynnchurch.com 1999 Rosemont, IL

Yucaipa American Alliance Fund II 2,000 210 www.yucaipaco.com 1986 Los Angeles

Yucaipa Corporate Initiatives 800 750 www.yucaipaco.com 1986 Los Angeles Fund II

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

European Middle-Market Buyouts and Growth Capital Funds

21 Centrale Partners IV EUR500 EUR330 www.21centralepartners.com 1998 Paris; Treviso, Italy; Milan

Amsterdam; London; AAC Capital NEBO Fund II EUR1,250 EUR700 www.aaccapitalpartners.com 1994 Stockholm

Abenex 2008 EUR400 EUR152 www.abnamrocapital.fr 1990 Paris

Advantage Capital Partners 3 GBP75 GBP38 www.advantagecapital.co.uk 2001 London

Paris; Frankfurt; Milan; Alpha Private Equity 6 EUR600 EUR900 www.groupealpha.com 1985 Monaco; Jersey, UK

London; Paris; Munich; Hong Apax France VIII EUR700 EUR900 www.apax.com 1972 Kong; Mumbai; Tel Aviv; Milan; Madrid; Stockholm; New York

Astorg V EUR1,000 EUR801 www.astorg-partners.com 1983 Paris

Atria Private Equity IV EUR400 EUR300 www.atria-partenaires.com 1999 Paris

Baigo Capital EUR300 N/A www.baigo-capital.com 2007 Frankfurt

Banexi Capital Partners EUR250 EUR262 www.azuliscapital.fr 1999 Paris Middle Market Fund IV

CACI 3 EUR250 EUR139 www.ca-privateequity.com 2000 Paris; Lyon; Philadelphia

CBPE Fund VIII GBP360 N/A www.cbpel.com 2009 London

Change Capital Partners II EUR400 EUR300 www.changecapitalpartners.com 2003 London

Charme Fund II EUR400 EUR150 www.ferrari.com N/A Maranello, Italy

Corpfin Capital IV EUR300 EUR223 www.corfincapital.com 1990 Madrid

Demeter FCPR 2 EUR200 EUR104 www.demeter-partners.com 2005 Paris; Berlin; Madrid

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

DFJ Esprit Fund III 215 100 www.dfjesprit.com 2007 London; Cambridge

Duke Street Capital VII EUR1,000 EUR963 www.dukestreetcapital.com 1988 London

Elysian Capital I GBP200 N/A www.elysiancapital.com 2008 London

Eurazeo III EUR1,000 N/A www.eurazeo.com 2001 Paris

Euroknights VI EUR 500 EUR 275 www.argos-soditic.com 1989 Geneva; Paris; Milan

Explorer III EUR400 EUR200 www.explorerinvestments.com 2003 Lisbon

FCPR fund MI V EUR100 EUR90 www.uigestion.com 2004 Paris

Finatem III EUR150 EUR122 www.finatem.de 2000 Frankfurt

Fondations Capital I EUR550 N/A www.fondationscapital.com 2007 Luxembourg; Paris

Fondo Nazca III EUR150 150 www.nazca.es 2001 Madrid

Utrecht, Netherlands; Gilde Buyout Fund IV EUR800 EUR600 www.gilde.com 1996 Paris; Zurich

Gimv-XL Fund EUR600 N/A www.gimv.com 1980 Frankfurt

Gresham V GBP400 GBP340 www.greshampe.com 1925 London

Growth Capital Partners Fund III GBP150 GBP100 www.growthcapital.co.uk 1999 London

Hexagone III EUR180 EUR152 www.lbofrance.com 1984 Paris

HgCapital 6 GBP1,800 GBP950 www.hgcapital.net 2000 London; Munich

Ibersuizas Capital Fund III EUR400 EUR330 www.ibersuizas.es 1989 Madrid

IKB Equity Capital Fund I EUR104 N/A www.ikb-pe.de 1999 Dusseldorf

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Inflexion III GBP250 GBP38 www.inflexion.com 1998 London

Inveralia II EUR200 EUR139 www.inveralia.com 1997 Madrid

L Capital 3 EUR400 150 www.lvmh.com 1986 Paris

Langholm Capital Partners II EUR350 EUR242 www.langholm.com 2002 London

LGV 6 Private Equity Fund GBP150 GBP200 www.lgvcapital.com 1988 London

Lion Capital III EUR2,000 EUR2,000 www.lioncapital.com 2004 London; New York

Litorina Kapital IV EUR300 EUR150 www.litorina.se 1998 Stockholm

MBO Capital III EUR250 EUR150 www.mboparenaires.com 2002 Paris

NBGI France Fund EUR 100 N/A www.nbgiprivateequity.co.uk 2000 London; Paris; Manchester, UK

Perfectis III EUR100 EUR122 www.perfectis.eu 2000 Paris

Pinova Capital Fund I EUR150 N/A www.pinovacapital.com 2007 Munich

Polaris III EUR350 EUR270 www.polarisequity.dk 1999 Copenhagen

PONTIS Growth Capital Fund II EUR600 N/A www.pontiscapital.at 2005 Vienna

Preludio EUR100 N/A www.unipolmerchant.it 2008 Bologna, Italy

Priveq Investment Fund IV EUR300 SEK1,200 www.priveq.se 1983 Stockholm

New York; Brussels; Prague; Munich; Budapest; Amsterdam; Riverside Europe Fund IV EUR550 EUR320 www.riversidecompany.com 1988 Warsaw; Seoul; Madrid; San Francisco; Hong Kong

Santangel Fund I EUR300 N/A No Website Available N/A Valencia, Spain

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Sovereign Capital III GBP350 GBP275 www.sovereigncapital.co.uk 1988 London

Spirit Capital Partners II GBP125 EUR72 www.spiritcapital.co.uk 2008 London

Stirling Square Capital Partners II EUR600 280 www.stirlingsquare.com 2003 London

Synergia 5 EUR350 300 www.synergosgr.it 2004 Milan

Trident Private Equity Fund III GBP150 GBP64 www.johcm.co.uk 1993 London

Vendis Capital I EUR100 N/A www.vendiscapital.com N/A Groot-Bijgaarden, Belgium

Vertis Capital EUR75 N/A www.vertissgr.it 2007 Naples, Italy

Vespa Capital EUR100 N/A www.vespacapital.com N/A Paris; London; Luxembourg

Whitesmith Private EUR700 N/A www.goldsmithcapitalpartners.com 2007 Grand Cayman Equity Investors

Winch Capital II EUR250 EUR165 www.lcf-rothschild.fr 1985 Paris; London

Media/Telecommunication Funds

Alta Communications X 500 500 www.altacomm.com 1996 Boston

Columbia Capital Equity 650 561 www.colcap.com 1989 Alexandria, VA; Waltham, MA Partners V

Cyrte Fund IV - Africa TMT Fund EUR150 N/A www.cyrte.com 2000 Naarden, Netherlands

Greycroft Partners II 125 75 www.greycroftpartners.com 2006 New York; Santa Monica, CA

VSS Comm V 1,000 1,300 www.vss.com 1987 New York; London

Energy Funds

Aravis Energy I EUR125 N/A www.aravis.ch 2002 Zurich

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Asia Clean Energy Fund 200 N/A www.ktic.co.kr 1986 Seoul

AVC Abundance Energy Fund 250 N/A www.abundancevc.com N/A Selangor

Canaan Natural Gas Fund X 225 200 www.canaanresources.com 1987 Oklahoma City, OK

Cardiff Capital Fund II CAD200 N/A www.cardiffcapital.ca N/A Calgary; Edmonton

China Clean Energy Capital 100 N/A www.chinacleanenergyinc.com 1995 Fuqing, China

Chrysalix Energy III 150 CAD70 www.chrysalix.com 2001 Vancouver

Curzon Park Capital GBP150 N/A www.curzonparkcapital.com 2007 London Cleantech Fund

Cycle Capital Fund I 100 N/A www.cyclecapital.net N/A Montreal

Demeter FCPR 2 EUR200 EUR104 www.demeter-partners.com 2005 Paris; Madrid

EarthRise Capital I 100 N/A www.earthrisecapital.com N/A New York

Emerald Cleantech Fund III EUR200 EUR150 www.emerald-ventures.com 2000 Zurich; Montreal

EMP Energy Fund 1,000 N/A www.empglobal.com N/A Manama, Bahrain

European Kyoto Fund EUR500 N/A www.cib.natixis.com 1984 Paris

European Renewable Energy Fund EUR250 N/A www.platinapartners.com 2002 London; Paris

FA Technology Ventures III 200 200 www.fatechventures.com N/A New York; Boston

Fundo Brasil Sustentabilidade BRL250 N/A www.latourcapital.com 2008 Sao Paulo

GEF North American Growth 350 N/A www.globalenvironmentfund.com 1990 Washington, D.C. Fund II

GEF South Asia Clean 150 N/A www.globalenvironmentfund.com 1990 Washington, D.C. Energy Fund

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Green Capital Oil & Gas Fund BRL500 N/A www.greencapital.com.br/english N/A Sao Paulo

Guggenheim Energy Chicago; New York; 500 N/A www.guggenheimpartners.com 1999 Opportunities Fund Hong Kong; Geneva

Icos Cleantech Growth Fund II EUR100 N/A www.icoscapital.com N/A Amsterdam

IDG Ventures India II TBD 150 www.idgvcindia.com 2006 Bangalore

JOG IV 150 150 www.jogcapital.com 2002 Calgary

KERN Energy Partners Fund III CAD750 CAD450 www.kernpartners.com 2000 Calgary

Leveraged Green Energy Fund 250 N/A www.lgefund.com N/A Arlington, VA

MAP Clean Energy Fund 400 N/A www.meacp.com N/A Singapore

Meidlinger Partners I 100 N/A www.meidlingerpartners.net 2008 Philadelphia

Millbrae Energy I 400 N/A www.millbrae-energy.com 2001 Greenwich, CT; Tulsa, OK

Nature Elements Capital Fund 350 N/A www.elementscap.com 2009 Beijing

Prithvi Sustainability Innovation 150 N/A www.icestartups.com N/A Mumbai and Technology Fund

Quintana Capital II 650 650 www.qeplp.com N/A Houston, TX; Beijing

Riverstone/Carlyle Renewable New York; London; 1,200 685 www.riverstonellc.com 2000 and Alternative Energy Fund II Houston, TX

Rockland Power Partners 500 N/A www.rocklandcapital.com 2003 Houston, TX

Costa Mesa, CA; Sail Venture Partners II 250 150 www.sailvc.com 2002 Arlington, VA; New York

South-Asia Clean Energy Fund 200 N/A www.yesbank.in 2003 Mumbai; New Delhi

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Tamarix Ventures 120 N/A www.tamarixvc.com 2008 Herzilya, Israel

TPH Partners 250 N/A www.tphpartners.com N/A Houston, TX; Denver, CO

WHEB Ventures Private Equity GBP150 GBP24 www.whebventures.co.uk 2002 London; Munich Fund II

White Deer Energy I 750 N/A No Web Site Available 2008 New York

Windfall Fund EUR200 N/A www.eolfi.com 2004 Paris

Mezzanine and Credit-Focused Funds

Accel-KKR Mezzanine I 150 N/A www.accel-kkr.com 2000 Menlo Park, CA; Atlanta

London; Vienna; Paris; Accession Mezzanine Capital III EUR350 262 www.mmlcapital.com 1988 Frankfurt; Budapest; Warsaw; Kiev; Stamford, CT

Ares Capital Mezzanine Partners 500 N/A www.aresmgmt.com 1997 Los Angeles; London; New York

Argos Expansion EUR150 N/A www.argos-soditic.com 1989 Geneva; Paris; Milan

Asia Strategic Capital Fund 300 N/A www.asiamezzanine.com 2004 Hong Kong

Audax Mezzanine Fund III 750 700 www.audaxgroup.com 1999 Boston; New York

Avante Mezzanine Partners 1 200 N/A www.avantemezzanine.com 2009 Los Angeles

London; Sydney; Beijing; Shanghai; Paris; Frankfurt; Barclays Structured Principal Madrid; Zurich; Taipei 1,500 N/A www.barcap.com 1997 Investing Fund Mumbai; Hong Kong; Kuala Lumpur; New York; San Francisco

Beechbrook Capital EUR200 N/A www.beechbrookcapital.com 2008 London

BHC Interim Funding III 250 200 www.brookshoughton.com 1999 New York; Stamford, CT

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Boathouse Capital 120 N/A www.boathousecapital.com 2008 Wayne, PA

Chatham Cascade Fund III 150 N/A www.chathamcapital.com 1997 Atlanta

Claritas Capital Specialty 100 N/A www.claritascapital.com 2002 Nashville, TN Debt Fund

Endeavour Structured Equity and Portland, OR; 125 N/A www.endeavourcapital.com 1991 Mezzanine Fund I Los Angeles; Seattle

Falcon Mezzanine Partners III 800 360 www.falconinvestments.com 2000 Boston; New York; Dallas, TX

Franchise Capital Partners III 150 N/A www.capitalspring.com 2005 New York

GC 2009 Mezzanine Partners 350 N/A www.golubcapital.com 1994 New York; Chicago; Atlanta

San Francisco; Chicago; GCG Investors II 250 190 www.greyrockcapitalgroup.com 2002 Westport, CT

Golub Capital Partners VI 1,000 1,000 www.golubcapital.com 1994 New York; Chicago; Atlanta

Hunting Dog Fund II 100 25 www.hdcap.com 2004 San Francisco

Huntington Capital II 100 N/A www.huntingtoncapital.com 2000 San Diego, CA

Insight Mezzanine Fund 250 N/A www.insightequity.com 2002 Southlake, TX

Kayne Anderson 500 N/A www.kaynecapital.com 1981 Los Angeles; Houston, TX Mezzanine Partners

New York; Sydney; Beijing; Paris; Hong Kong; Mumbai; KKR Mezzanine Fund 1,000 N/A www.kkr.com 1976 Tokyo; Dubai; London; San Francisco; Washington, D.C.

LBC Credit Partners II 750 400 www.lbccredit.com N/A Philadelphia; Chicago

M Cap Finance Deutsche EUR250 EUR168 www.mcap-finance.de 2004 Frankfurt Mezzanine Fund II

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Maranon Mezzanine Fund I 250 N/A www.maranoncapital.com 2007 Chicago; Birmingham, MI

Merit Mezzanine Fund V 600 455 www.meritcapital.com 1993 Chicago

New York; Beijing; Hong Kong; Morgan Stanley Mezzanine 1,000 N/A www.morganstanley.com/privateequity 1985 Mumbai; Tokyo; Seoul; London

New Canaan Funding 300 N/A www.newcanaanfunding.com 1995 New Caanan, CT; Wheaton, IL Mezzanine V

Newstone Capital II 1,000 865 www.newstonecapital.com N/A Los Angeles; Dallas, TX

London; Luxembourg; Park Square Capital II EUR2,000 EUR1,050 www.parksquarecapital.com 2004 St. Peter Port, Guernsey

Baar-Zug, Switzerland; Partners Group European St. Peter Port, Guernsey; EUR500 EUR447 www.partnersgroup.net 1996 Mezzanine 2008 Beijing; Singapore; Sydney; Tokyo; London; New York

Peachtree II 100 110 www.peachtreeequity.com 1997 Atlanta

Peninsula Capital Fund V 350 335 www.peninsulafunds.com 1995 Detroit, MI

Praesidian Capital Investors III 300 246 www.praesidian.com 2002 New York

Chicago; London; Los Angeles; Prudential Capital Partners III 900 775 www3.prudential.com/pcg 1984 San Francisco; Atlanta; New York; Dallas, TX

Sankaty Middle Market 750 N/A www.sankatyadvisors.com 1997 Boston; London; Chicago Opportunities Fund

Syntaxis Mezzanine Fund II EUR250 EUR100 www.syntaxis-capital.com 2006 Vienna; Warsaw

Boston; Mumbai; London; TA Subordinated Debt III 750 778 www.ta.com 1968 Menlo Park, CA

Volga River Credit EUR300 N/A www.nrgc.com 2006 Moscow Opportunity Fund

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

VSS Structured Capital II 300 123 www.vss.com 1987 New York; London

Yukon Partners 300 N/A www.yukonpartners.com 2008 Minneapolis

Specialized Secondaries Funds

ARIANE Private Debt Fund EUR250 N/A www.arianepartners.com 1999 Villanova, PA

New York; Bad Homburg, Auda Secondary Fund II 500 410 www.auda.com 1989 Germany; Hong Kong; Stockholm; London

Paris; Frankfurt; Milan; AXA Early Secondary Fund IV EUR600 EUR240 www.axaprivateequity.com 1996 Singapore; Zurich; London; New York

Zug, Switzerland; Munich; Capital Dynamics Global Hong Kong; London; 250 N/A www.capdyn.com 1988 Secondaries III Menlo Park, CA; San Francisco; New York

Coller International Partners VI 6,000 4,800 www.collercapital.com 1990 London

Pfaeffikon, Switzerland; Crown Global Secondaries II 750 255 www.lgt-capital-partners.com 1993 Hong Kong; Dublin; Tokyo; London; New York

Fondinvest 8 EUR400 EUR292 www.fondinvest.com 1994 Paris

Fort Washington Private Equity 100 N/A www.fortwashington.com 1984 Cincinnati, OH Opportunities Fund II

Goldman Sachs Early New York; Paris; London; 300 N/A www.gs.com/peq 1869 Secondaries Fund Dubai; San Francisco

Greenpark International EUR900 EUR700 www.greenparkcapital.com 2000 London Investors IV

Landmark Equity Partners XIV 2,000 1,200 www.landmarkpartners.com 1989 Simsbury, CT

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Landmark Hybrid Secondary Fund 400 N/A www.landmarkpartners.com 2000 Simsbury, CT

New York; Boston; Lexington Capital Partners VII 5,000 3,800 www.lexingtonpartners.com 1994 Menlo Park, CA; London

Morgan Stanley Global Secondary New York; Hong Kong; Tokyo; 500 N/A www.morganstanley.com/aip 1985 Opportunities Fund I Seoul; London; Menlo Park, CA;

Newbury Partners 800 702 www.newbury-partners.com 2006 Stamford, CT

Pantheon Global Secondaries London; San Francisco; 3,750 2,000 www.pantheonventures.com 1982 Fund IV Hong Kong; Brussels; New York

Chapel Hill, NC; London; Parish Capital Secondaries Fund 200 N/A www.parishcapital.com 2003 New York

New York; Boston; London; Permal Private Equity 350 350 www.permal.com 1973 Paris; Dubai; Japan; Opportunities 4 Hong Kong; Singapore

Private Equity Investment Fund V 250 171 www.peifunds.com 1992 New York

RCP Secondary Opportunity Fund 200 N/A www.rcpadvisors.com 2001 Chicago

RFI Venture Secondaries 200 N/A www.rho.com 1981 New York

Symmetry Secondary Fund 2007 100 45 www.symmetryinvestmentadvisors.com 2003 Edgewater, CO

TIFF Secondary Partners II 150 N/A www.tiff.org 1994 West Conshohocken, PA

Unigestion Secondary EUR150 NA www.unigestion.com 1971 Geneva Opportunity Fund II

Direct Secondaries Funds

Ant Bridge Asia IV EUR250 N/A www.agp.sg 2007 Singapore

New York; San Francisco; Camelot Direct Secondaries EUR200 N/A www.thecamelotgroup.com 2008 London; Dubai

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Cipio Partners VI EUR200 N/A www.cipiopartners.com 2003 Munich

Nova Capital I EUR300 N/A www.nova-cap.com 2002 London

Saints Capital VII 600 300 www.santsvc.com 2000 San Francisco; London

Verdane Capital VII SEK1,000 EUR120 www.verdanecapital.com 1985 Oslo; Stockholm

Turnaround/Restructuring Funds

Atlas Holdings 1 250 N/A www.atlastholdingsllc.com 2002 Greenwich, CT

Blackstreet Capital Partners II 125 N/A www.blackstreetcapital.com 2005 Bethesda, MD

Butler France Private Equity IV EUR500 N/A www.butlercapitalpartners.com 1990 Paris

Corsair Capital IV 2,000 1,073 www.corsairinvestments.com 1993 New York

Stockholm; Frankfurt; EQT Opportunity Fund II EUR400 EUR372 www.eqt.se 1994 London; New York

H2 Equity Partners Fund IV EUR350 EUR188 www.h2equitypartners.com 1991 Amersterdam; London

Kelso Place IV GBP75 GBP100 www.kelsoplace.com 2000 London

KH Global Consumer Brand 100 N/A www.khcapitalpartners.com 2009 New York Opportunities I

Littlejohn Fund IV 1,250 N/A www.littlejohnllc.com 1996 Greenwich, CT

Merchant Asset Partners GBP500 N/A www.merchantassetpartners.com 2009 London

Prophet Equity I 250 N/A www.prophetequity.com 2007 Southlake, TX

Sator Private Equity Fund I EUR750 N/A www.satorgroup.com 2007 Rome; Milan; London

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Special Situation Venture EUR300 EUR225 www.orlandofund.com 2001 Munich Partners III

Tenex Capital 400 N/A www.tenexcm.com 1999 Devon, PA

Watermill Private Equity Fund 200 N/A www.watermillventures.com 1978 Lexington, MA

Distressed Debt and Hybrid Funds

New York; Hong Kong; Seoul; AG Capital Recovery Partners VII 3,000 2,000 www.angelogordon.com 1988 London; Beverly Hills, CA; Oak Brook, IL

Anchorage Capital Partners I AUD200 N/A www.anchoragecap.com.au 2007 Sydney

Arcil NPA Fund 600 N/A www.arcil.co.in 2002 Mumbai

Arctic Asia Opportunities Fund II 300 100 No Website Available N/A Hong Kong

Ares Corporate Opportunities 4,000 2,065 www.aresmgmt.com 1997 Los Angeles; London; New York Fund III

Ashmore Global Special 2,600 1,300 www.ashmoregroup.com 1999 London; New York Situations Fund V

Avenue Europe Special EUR1,500 N/A www.avenuecapital.com 1995 New York Situations Fund

Miami, FL; Atlanta; Bayside Distressed Debt 1,000 N/A www.bayside.com 2004 Boston; San Francisco

Greenwich, CT; London; BDCM Opportunity Fund III 750 983 No Website Available 1995 Lake Forest, IL

Washington, D.C.; New York; San Francisco; Shanghai; Carlyle Distressed Financial 3,000 N/A www.carlyle.com 1987 Hong Kong; Mumbai; Dubai; Services Fund London; Paris; Munich; Madrid; Istanbul

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Washington, D.C.; New York; San Francisco; Shanghai; Carlyle Global Financial 1,000 N/A www.carlyle.com 1987 Hong Kong; Mumbai; Services Partners Dubai; London; Paris; Munich; Madrid; Istanbul

Catalyst Fund III 1,000 640 No Website Available 2002 Toronto

Clearlake Capital Partners II 500 N/A www.clearlakecapital.com 2007 New York

CRG Central European Special EUR150 N/A www.crgpartners.com 1999 New York; Vienna Situations Fund I

CVI Credit Value Fund 2,000 N/A www.carvalinvestors.com 1987 Minnetonka, MN

DGPA & Tato Capital EUR100 N/A www.dgpa.it 1991 Milan

Stockholm; Vienna; Paris; East Capital Special EUR100 N/A www.eastcapital.com 1997 Hong Kong; Milan; Opportunities Fund Oslo; Moscow

New York; Menlo Park, CA; Los Angeles; Atlanta; Boston; GSO Capital Solutions Fund 2,000 N/A www.blackstone.com 1985 Shanghai; Hong Kong; Mumbai; Tokyo; Paris; London

Halcyon Special Situations 200 N/A www.halcyon.in 2004 Mumbai India Fund

Highland Restoration Dallas, TX; Singapore; 1,000 N/A www.hcmlp.com 1990 Capital Partners London; New York

London; Sydney; Paris; Frankfurt; Hong Kong; ICG Recovery Fund 2008 EUR1,000 N/A www.icgplc.co.uk 1989 Amsterdam; Madrid; Stockholm; New York

New York; Chicago; Indigo Asset Management Fund 200 N/A www.indigoam.com N/A Seattle; Los Angeles

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Longroad Capital Partners III 400 183 www.longroadllc.com 2002 Stamford, CT; Austin, TX

NZC Guggenheim Opportunity Chicago; New York; 1,000 N/A www.guggenheimpartners.com 1999 Fund II Hong Kong; Geneva

Los Angeles; Shanghai; Beijing; Hong Kong; Tokyo; OCM Opportunities Fund VIII 5,000 3,500 www.oaktreecapital.com 1995 Singapore; Seoul; Luxembourg; Amsterdam; London; New York

Los Angeles; Shanghai; OCM Principal Opportunities Beijing; Hong Kong; Tokyo; 5,000 3,328 www.oaktreecapital.com 1995 Fund V Singapore; Seoul; Luxembourg; Amsterdam; London; New York

Providence, RI; Hong Kong; Providence TMT Special Situations 1,000 1,139 www.provequity.com 1989 New Delhi; London; Fund II New York; Los Angeles

Quadro Capital Partners EUR350 N/A www.quadrocapital.com 2009 Moscow

Strategic Value Global Greenwich, CT; London; 750 532 www.svpglobal.com 2001 Opportunities II Frankfurt; Tokyo

Strategic Value Special Greenwich, CT; London; 1,000 N/A www.svpglobal.com 2001 Situations Fund Frankfurt; Tokyo

Tennenbaum Opportunities 1,000 1,105 www.tennenbaumcapital.com 1996 Santa Monica, CA Fund VI

Treadstone Capital 150 60 www.treadstone.com 1993 Dallas, TX Management II

WB Debt Partners EUR250 N/A www.butlercapitalpartners.com 1990 Paris

Z Capital Special Situations Fund 500 N/A www.zcap.net 2006 Lake Forest, IL

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Technology and Diversified Funds

4C Ventures II 150 N/A www.4cventures.com 1980 New York; Palo Alto, CA

ABS Ventures X TBD 113 www.absventures.com 1982 Waltham, MA

ABVEN II EUR150 EUR100 www.abven.com 2005 London; Dublin

Acacia Technology 250 N/A www.acaciaresearch.com 1992 Newport Beach, CA

Acton Capital Fund EUR150 N/A www.actoncapital.de 1999 Munich

Akansa Capital 300 N/A No Website Available 2009 Mumbai

Alloy Ventures 2008 375 368 www.alloyventures.com 1977 Palo Alto, CA

Angel Venture Partners 100 N/A www.angelventurepartners.com 2006 Orange County, CA

Ariva Partners 150 N/A www.arivapartners.com 2007 Portola Valley, CA

Arsenal Ventures Fund II 125 N/A www.arsenalvp.com N/A Palo Alto, CA

Ascent Venture Partners V 200 140 www.ascentvp.com 1985 Boston

Boston; New York; London; Bain Capital Venture 500 500 www.baincapital.com 1984 Tokyo; Shanghai; Hong Kong; Partners 2008 Munich; Mumbai

Blumberg Capital II 100 100 www.blumbergcapital.com 1991 San Francisco

Boston Millennia Partners III 250 414 www.millenniapartners.com 1997 Boston

Cava I 150 N/A www.cavacapital.com N/A Wilton, CT

Council Ventures II 225 52 www.councilventures.com 2000 Nashville, TN

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Crossbow Ventures 3 125 N/A ww.crossbowventures.com 1999 West Palm Beach, FL; Zurich

Crosslink Venture VI 250 250 www.crosslinkcapital.com 1989 San Francisco

DAG Ventures IV 700 500 www.dagllc.com 1991 San Francisco

DBL Equity Fund-BAEF II 150 75 www.dblinvestors.com 2008 San Francisco

DCM VI 500 500 www.dcmvc.com 1996 Menlo Park, CA; Beijing; Tokyo

Deeva Capital I 100 N/A No Website Available 2006 India

Draper Fisher Jurvetson Dragon Menlo Park, CA; 200 53 www.dragonventure.com 1999 Fund II Beijing; Shanghai

Menlo Park, CA; Draper Fisher Jurvetson X 400 650 www.dfj.com 1985 Shanghai; Bangalore

Coral Gables, FL; Easton Capital Partners III 175 47 www.eastoncapital.com 1993 New York; Buffalo, NY

Endeavor Opportunity Partners II 150 17 www.endeavorcap.com 1988 Westport, CT

Espírito Santo Ventures III EUR120 EUR88 www.es-ventures.com 2000 Lisbon

Bloemendaal, Netherlands; Favonius FVE Fund II EUR150 EUR86 www.favoniusventures.net 1999 London

FinTech Gimv 100 N/A www.fgi.co.jp/english 1994 Tokyo

First Analysis Private Equity 200 100 www.firstanalysis.com 1981 Chicago Fund V

Fortissimo Capital II 200 80 www.fortissimo-capital.com 2003 Rosh Haayin, Israel

Foursan Capital Partners I 200 N/A www.4san.com 2000 Amman; London

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Genesis Partners IV 150 155 www.genesispartners.com 1996 Herzliya Pituach, Israel

Giza Venture Fund V 250 213 www.giza.co.il 1992 Tel Aviv

New York; London; Global Microfinance Equity Fund 150 N/A www.grassrootscap.com N/A Hyderabad, India

GrandBanks Capital II 150 125 www.grandbankscapital.com 2000 Wellesley, MA

Cayman Islands; Greater Pacific Capital II 750 300 www.greaterpacificcapital.com 2005 London; Mumbai

Gulf Venture Capital Fund I 150 N/A www.ip-venturepartners.com 2009 Abu Dhabi; Washington, D.C.

Holland Private Equity Technology EUR150 N/A www.hollandprivateequity.com 2008 Amsterdam Fund I

Hummer Winblad Venture TBD 201 www.humwin.com 1989 San Francisco Partners VII

ICT & Services Sector Fund 100 N/A www.dtacapital.com 1996 Kuala Lumpur

India Rizing Fund 300 N/A www.indiarizingfund.com 2008 Mumbai

Inter-Atlantic Fund III 150 N/A www.interatlanticfund.com 1997 New York

Invention Investment Fund II 2,500 1,000 www.intellectualventures.com 2000 Bellevue

IP Finance 300 N/A www.ipfinance.com 2009 Larchmont, NY

IT Ventures II 100 N/A www.it-investment.com/sector7_1.htm 1999 Giza

Jarvinian Venture Fund I 150 N/A www.jarvinian.com 2009 Boston

Jerusalem Venture Partners V 150 404 www.jvpvc.com 1993 Jerusalem; New York; Shanghai

New York; Singapore; Jina Ventures India II 200 50 www.jinaventures.com 2002 Mumbai; Bangkok

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Kingdom Venture Partners 100 N/A www.kingdomventures.com N/A Leander, TX; Gilbert, AZ

Lionhart Talon Private 300 N/A www.lionhart.net 1993 Toronto Equity Fund

Live Oak Partners II 100 N/A www.liveoakequity.com 1998 Alpharetta, GA

Longworth Venture Partners III 160 115 www.longworth.com 1999 Waltham, MA

Menlo Ventures XI 1,000 1,200 www.menloventures.com 1976 Menlo Park, CA

Meritage Private Equity Fund III 300 136 www.meritagefunds.com 1998 Denver, CO

Merus Capital Fund I 125 N/A www.meruscap.com 2007 Palo Alto, CA

San Diego, CA; Mission Ventures IV 250 210 www.missionventures.com 1997 Santa Monica, CA

MK Capital II 150 152 www.mkcapital.com N/A Northbrook, IL

Morpheus Media Fund 300 N/A www.o3capital.com 2007 Bangalore; Mumbai; New York

Bosques de Chapultepec, Multinational Industrial Fund II 150 66 www.fondomif.com N/A Mexico; Ottobrunn, Germany; Stuttgart, Germany

Nauta Tech Invest III EUR150 EUR50 www.nautacapital.com 2004 Barcelona; Boston

Menlo Park, CA; Beijing; New Enterprise Associates XIII 2,500 2,500 www.nea.com 1978 Shangai; Bangalore; Chevy Chase, MD; Baltimore, MD

Redwood Shores, CA; Newbury Ventures Cayman IV 250 250 www.newburyven.com 1992 Kanata, Canada; Paris

Notion Capital GBP100 N/A www.notioncapital.com N/A Cheltenham, UK; Bristol, UK

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Westport, CT; Palo Alto, CA; Oak Investment Partners XIII TBD 2,560 www.oakinv.com 1978 Minneapolis, MN

Open Prairie Ventures II 125 40 www.openprairie.com 1999 Effingham, IL

Opus Capital II 250 280 www.opuscapitalventures.com 2005 Menlo Park, CA

Pacific Synergies IV 100 N/A www.iccpventurepartners.com 1998 Manila

Pinnacle Equity Fund II 200 127 www.pinnacleventures.com 2001 Palo Alto, CA

Pittsford Ventures V 500 65 www.pittsfordventures.com 1979 Pittsford, NY; New York

Polaris VI TBD 330 www.polarisventures.com 1996 Waltham, MA; Seattle, WA

PolyTechnos European Growth EUR100 N/A www.polytechnos.com 1998 Munich Fund I

Quest Hospitality Ventures 100 N/A www.qvhospitality.com N/A San Francisco

www.rothschild.com/ R Capital III EUR200 EUR100 2001 Paris rcapitalmanagement/

Menlo Park, CA; Redpoint Ventures IV TBD 400 www.redpoint.com 1999 Shanghai; Los Angeles

Bangalore; Hong Kong; Sandalwood Capital Partners II EUR350 EUR100 www.sandalwoodpartners.com 2006 Santa Clara, CA

SBI Neo Technology Investment JPY40,000 N/A www.sbigroup.co.jp 1999 Tokyo

Dallas, TX; Palo Alto, CA; Sevin Rosen Fund X 300 305 www.srfunds.com 1981 Austin, TX

Sierra Ventures X TBD 400 www.sierraventures.com 1982 Menlo Park, CA

Signal Lake Venture Fund III 200 14 www.signallake.com 1998 Westport, CT; Boston

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

SSM Partners IV 125 113 www.ssmpartners.com 1973 Memphis, TN

Storm Ventures Fund IV 200 200 www.stormventures.com 2000 Menlo Park, CA

Sunrock Ventures I 100 N/A www.sunrockventures.com N/A Tampa, FL

Tamarix Ventures 120 N/A www.tamarixvc.com 2008 Herzliya Pituach, Israel

TechFund Europe II EUR100 EUR25 www.techfundcapitaleurope.com 1997 Paris; Saratoga, CA

Three Arch Partners V TBD 450 www.threearchpartners.com 1993 Portola Valley, CA

Turenne Venture Capital Fund 127 N/A www.turennecapital.com 1999 Paris

Hyderabad, India; VenturEast Life Fund III 150 15 www.ventureast.net 1990 Chennai, India

Williamstown, MA; Village Ventures III 125 104 www.villageventures.com 2000 New York; Denver, CO

VinaCapital II 250 N/A www.vinacapital.com 2003 Ho Chi Minh City

Vista Partners III 125 75 www.vistavc.com 2000 Boulder, CO; Fort Collins, CO

Life Science Funds

5AM Ventures Fund III 150 150 www.5amventures.com 2002 Menlo Park, CA; Waltham, MA

BioMedinvest II CHF120 CHF89 www.biomedinvest.ch 2002 Basel, Switzerland

Burrill China Fund 100 N/A www.burrillandco.com 1994 San Francisco

Burrill India Fund 100 N/A www.burrillandco.com 1994 San Francisco

Caduceus Private Investments IV 500 500 www.orbimed.com 1989 New York; Shanghai; Mumbai

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Capricorn Health-tech Fund EUR100 N/A www.capricorn.be 1993 Leuven, Belgium

CCB International CNY5,000 N/A www.ccbintl.com 1984 Hong Kong Healthcare Fund

Celtic Pharma Holdings II 750 250 www.celticpharma.com 1999 Hamilton, Bermuda; London

Channel Medical Partners II 150 40 www.chanmed.com N/A Skokie, IL

Cutlass Capital Venture Fund 100 N/A www.cutlasscapital.com 2001 Boston; San Francisco

Amsterdam; Munich; DDC Ventures EUR100 N/A www.lsp.nl 1998 Cambridge, MA

DFJ InCube Ventures 125 N/A www.incubevc.com 2008 San Jose, CA

Drug Royalty II 500 N/A www.dricapital.com 1992 Toronto

Salt Lake City, UT; Epic Venture Partners IV 150 150 www.wasatchvc.com 1993 Santa Fe, NM; Mesa, AZ

Forbion Venture Fund II EUR200 EUR200 www.forbion.com 2000 Naarden, Netherlands

Foundation Medical Partners III 150 150 www.foundmed.com 2001 Rowayton, CT

Fountain Healthcare Partners EUR100 N/A www.fh-partners.com 2005 Dublin; New York Fund I

Stamford, CT; Calgary; Hong GE Healthymagination Fund 250 N/A www.ge.com 1933 Kong; Tokyo; Singapore; London; Dubai

Helix Ventures 150 N/A www.helixventure.com 2008 Palo Alto, CA

HIG BioVentures 250 N/A www.higventures.com 1993 Miami, FL

HLM Venture Partners III 200 216 www.hlmvp.com 1983 Boston; San Francisco

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Pittsburg, PA; iNetworks BioOpportunity Fund 100 N/A www.inetworksllc.com N/A Morgantown, WV

Kearny Venture Partners II TBD 100 www.kearnyvp.com N/A San Francisco, CA

Amsterdam; Munich; Life Sciences Partners IV EUR100 EUR150 www.lsp.nl 1998 Cambridge, MA

Toronto; Montreal; Cambridge, Lumira Capital II 250 CAD211 www.lumiracapital.com 1988 MA; Mountain View, CA

MB Venture Partners 3 100 54 www.mbventures.com 2001 Memphis, TN

London; Manchester, UK; MTI VI GBP75 GBP103 www.mtifirms.com 1983 Waltham, MA

NeoMed V EUR150 EUR104 www.neomed.net 1996 Oslo; Geneva

Radnor, PA; Short Hills, NJ; NewSpring Health Ventures II 150 165 www.newspringventures.com 1999 Washington, D.C.

New York; Heidelberg, NGN BioMed Opportunity Fund II 350 250 www.ngncapital.com 2003 Germany; Greenwich, CT

ONSET VI 250 196 www.onset.com 1984 Menlo Park, CA

Orion Healthcare Equity Partners EUR100 N/A www.orhep.com N/A Boston

Pharma Capital Ventures 100 N/A www.pharmacapitalventures.com 2008 Upper Saddle River, NJ

Promere Fund 150 N/A www.hqcm.com 1986 Boston

New York; Corte Madera, CA; Psilos Capital IV 450 304 www.psilos.com 1998 Santa Fe, NM

Rosetta Partners 100 N/A www.rosettapartners.com 1999 New York; Santa Monica, CA

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Seroba Kernel Life Sciences EUR75 EUR20 www.seroba.ie 2001 Dublin Fund II

Signet Healthcare Partners 200 N/A www.signethealthcarepartners.com 1998 New York; Houston, TX Fund III

Boston; London; SV Life Sciences Fund V 400 572 www.svlsa.com 1993 Foster City, CA

Symphony Capital Partners II 400 315 www.symphonycapital.com 2002 New York

San Francisco; Hong Kong; TPG Biotechnology Partners III 550 402 www.tpgventures.com 2001 Mumbai; Fort Worth, TX; Menlo Park, CA

Cincinnati, OH; Triathlon Medical Ventures II 150 104 www.tmvp.com 2004 Indianapolis, IN; St. Louis, MO; Louisville, KY

Tullis-Dickerson Capital Focus IV 250 122 www.thi-funds.com 1986 Stamford, CT; Birmingham, AL

Asia-Focused Funds

2i Capital PCC: Indian 200 170 www.2icapital.com 2000 Bangalore; New Delhi Enterprise Fund

Aavishkaar Goodwell 100 18 www.aavishkaar.org 2002 Mumbai; Singapore Microfinance Development II

Aditya Birla Private Equity Fund 250 N/A www.adityabirla-pe.com 1999 Mumbai

Akansa Capital 300 N/A No Website Available 2009 Bangalore

Ambit Pragma Ventures 100 N/A www.ambitpragma.com 1997 Mumbai

Anchorage Capital Partners I AUD200 N/A www.anchoragecap.com.au 2007 Sydney

Ancora Capital Management I 300 N/A No Website Available N/A Jakarta; Hong Kong; Sydney

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Aquarius India Fund 100 N/A www.aquarius.com.sg 1995 Singapore; Bangalore; Mumbai

ARC Capital II 1,000 700 www.arch-fund.com 2006 Hong Kong

Arcil NPA Fund 600 N/A www.arcil.co.in 2002 Mumbai

Arctic Asia Opportunities Fund II 300 100 No Website Available N/A Hong Kong

Ascent India Fund III 400 180 www.utiventures.com 2000 Bangalore

Asia Strategic Capital Fund 300 N/A www.asiamezzanine.com 2004 Hong Kong

London; Hong Kong; Brisbane; Aureos East Asia Fund 250 N/A www.aureos.com 2001 Mumbai; Jakarta; Bangkok; Manila; Ho Chi Minh City

Avigo SME Fund III 250 125 www.avigocorp.com 2003 New Delhi

Shanghai; Beijing; Hong Kong; Baird Capital Partners Asia I 100 N/A www.rwbaird.com 1980 Chicago; London

BankInvest Private Equity New Copenhagen; Luxembourg; 150 145 www.biventure.com 1998 Markets III Singapore; Ho Chi Minh City

BioVeda China Fund II 100 30 www.biovedachinafund.com 2006 Shanghai

Cambodia Laos Investment & 200 N/A www.fidp-funds.com N/A Singapore; Phnom Penh Development Fund

CDH China Fund IV 1,400 1,600 www.cdhfund.com 2002 Hong Kong

CHAMP Buyout III AUD1,500 AUD950 www.champmbo.com 2000 Sydney; Melbourne; Brisbane

China Century Fund 300 N/A www.crcicapital.com 2005 Hong Kong

China Environment Fund III 250 30 www.tsingcapital.com 2001 Beijing

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Hong Kong; Shanghai; Beijing; CITIC Capital China Partners II 750 425 www.citiccapital.com 2002 Tokyo; New York

Crescent Capital Partners III 300 AUD100 www.crescentcap.com.au 2000 Sydney

CX Partners 600 N/A No Website Available 2008 Mumbai

Digital Convergence Buyout 200 100 www.tstone.co.kr 2001 Seoul Fund II

Direct Capital IV & Pohutukawa II NZD250 NZD120 www.directcapital.co.nz 1994 Auckland; Sydney

Dragon Capital Vietnam Third Ho Chi Minh City; 350 N/A www.dragoncapital.com 1994 Wave Private Equity Fund Hanoi; Bath, UK

DRC II JPY20,000 JPY4,300 www.drccapital.co.jp 2005 Tokyo

EM Capital India Discovery 300 N/A www.emcapital.com N/A Moraga, CA Partners I

Wellington, New Zealand; Endeavour Growth Capital I 300 N/A www.ecap.co.nz 1999 Auckland; Germantown, MD

Fortman Border Investment Fund CNY4,500 N/A www.fortmanfund.com 2009 Beijing

Founder Group Private CNY2,000 N/A www.founder.com 2009 Beijing Equity Fund

GP Capital CNY20,000 N/A No Website Available 2009 Shanghai

Gresham Private Equity Fund 3 AUD600 AUD325 www.gresham.com.au 1999 Sydney

Harbert Australian Private 100 N/A www.harbert.net 1993 Birmingham, AL; Sydney Equity Fund

ic2 Capital 250 N/A www.ic2capital.com N/A London; New Delhi

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

ICICI Venture Capital Fund III 1,200 810 www.iciciventure.com 1988 Mumbai

India Advantage Fund Series III 500 810 www.iciciventure.com 1988 Mumbai

Amsterdam; New Delhi; India Agri Business Fund 100 N/A www.raboprivateequity.nl 2002 London

India Growth Opportunity Fund 300 30 www.indiaco.com 1983 Pune, India

India Industrial Growth Fund 150 N/A www.frontlinestrategy.com N/A Mumbai

India Knowledge-Manufacturing 250 N/A www.forumsynergies.com N/A Bangalore; St. Louis, MO Fund I

Japan Industrial Partners I JPY70,000 N/A www.jipinc.com 2002 Tokyo

Kaizen Education Fund I 120 N/A www.kaizen-global.com 2009 Mumbai

KDB Corporate KRW1,000,000 N/A www.kdb.co.kr 1954 Seoul Restructuring Fund

Kendall Court Mezzanine (Asia) Singapore; Jakarta; 150 90 www.kendallcourt.com 2004 Bristol Fund Kuala Lumpur

KFH Malaysia Private Equity Fund 100 N/A www.kfh.com/english 1977 Kuwait

Korea Global Investment Fund 100 N/A www.hanwa.co.jp N/A Tokyo; Osaka

Kotak India Private Equity Fund 200 N/A www.privateequityfund.kotak.com 1997 Mumbai

Lunar Capital China Equity 200 60 www.lunarcap.com 1999 Hong Kong; Shanghai Partners III

Mainridge Capital I AUD150 N/A www.mainridgecapital.com.au 2008 Melbourne

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Mekong Enterprise Fund IV 150 100 www.mekongcapital.com 2002 Ho Chi Minh City

Milestone Private Equity India INR6,000 N/A www.milestonecapital.in 2006 Mumbai Build-out Fund I

Mongolia Investment & 100 N/A www.fidp-funds.com N/A Singapore; Phnom Penh Development Fund

Multiples I 450 N/A No Website Available 2009 Mumbai

Nature Elements Capital Fund 350 N/A www.elementscap.com 2009 Beijing

Kuala Lumpur; Sydney; Navis Asia Fund VI 1,250 1,050 www.naviscapital.com 1998 Hong Kong; Mumbai; Singapore; Bangkok

Neoplux 1 KRW200,000 N/A www.neoplux.co.kr 2000 Seoul

New Horizon Capital Fund III 750 500 www.nhfund.com 2007 Beijing

Nine Rivers I 125 N/A www.nrcmauritius.com 2008 Port Louis, Mauritius

NPE China Fund II 200 N/A www.natixis-pe.com 1999 Hong Kong

ORYX-STIC Fund II 500 150 www.sticinvestments.com 1999 Seoul

Pinnacle Private Equity AUD300 N/A www.pinnacleinvestment.com.au 2006 Sydney

Honk Kong; Shanghai; Prax Capital III 300 153 www.praxcapital.com 2003 Miami, FL

Reliance Equity Advisors I INR5,000 N/A www.reliancecapital.co.in 1986 Mumbai

Cleveland, OH; New York; Riverside Asia I 100 N/A www.riversidecompany.com 1988 Hong Kong; Tokyo; Belgium; Munich; Madrid

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Rockley China Fund 100 N/A www.rockleygroup.com N/A Oxford, OH

Shanghai Financial Development CNY8,000 N/A No Website Available 2009 Shanghai Investment Fund

Sichuan Mianyang High 870 N/A www.citics.com 1995 Beijing Technology Fund

SME Growth Fund II INR10,000 INR5,000 www.sidbiventure.co.in 1999 Mumbai; Chennai, India

South-Asia Clean Energy Fund 200 N/A www.yesbank.in 2003 Mumbai; New Delhi

Spring Capital Asia Fund I 200 N/A www.springcapasia.com 2007 Hong Kong; Shanghai

San Mateo, CA; Shanghai; Tano India Private Equity II 150 40 www.tanocapital.com 2006 Hong Kong; Mumbai; Taipei

Tasman Capital Partners AUD350 N/A www.tasmancapital.com.au 2008 Sydney

Singapore; Beijing; Tembusu Growth Fund II SGD300 SGD100 www.tembusupartners.com 2006 Shanghai; London

Tourism Finance Corp India 100 N/A www.tfciltd.com 1989 New Delhi Fund I

Tripod Capital II 300 N/A www.tripodcapital.com 2006 Pudong, China

UTEC 2 Limited Partnership for 120 JPY8,304 www.ut-ec.co.jp 2004 Tokyo Investment

Vietnam Pioneer Fund 100 N/A www.vnpioneers.com 2009 Ho Chi Minh City; Hanoi

WI Harper Fund VIII 150 N/A www.wiharper.com 1993 San Francisco; Beijing; Taipei

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Other Emerging Markets

London; Vienna; Paris; Accession Mezzanine Capital III EUR350 262 www.mmlcapital.com 1988 Frankfurt; Budapest; Warsaw; Kiev; Stamford, CT

AccessTurkey Fund I EUR250 N/A www.accessturkey.com 1999 Istanbul

ADC African Development EUR100 N/A www.altira-group.de 1996 Denver, CO; Albuquerque, NM

ADM Capital CEECAT Hong Kong; Beijing; Mumbai; EUR300 N/A www.admcap.com 1996 Recovery Fund Singapore; Istanbul; London

Boston; Buenos Aires; Sao Advent Latin American Fund V 2,000 1,300 www.adventinternational.com 1984 Paulo; Prague; Paris; Warsaw; London; Madrid; Tokyo

Belvill, South Africa; Agri-Vie Fund 100 N/A www.strategypartners.co.za N/A Tyger Valley, South Africa

Almaz Capital Russia Fund I 100 N/A www.almazcapital.com N/A Moscow

London; Prague; ARGUS Capital Partners III EUR350 EUR263 www.arguscapitalgroup.com 1998 Budapest; Warsaw

Warsaw; Prague; ARX CEE III EUR125 EUR67 www.arxequity.com 1998 Budapest; Bucharest

Askembla III EUR170 N/A www.askembla.se 1994 Stockholm

Dakar, Senegal; Atlantic Coast Regional Fund 150 N/A www.afigfunds.com 2005 Washington, D.C.

Rigas raj, Latvia; BaltCap Private Equity Fund EUR100 N/A www.baltcap.com 1995 Tallinn, Estonia

Bancroft III EUR250 EUR105 www.bancroftgroup.com 1989 London; Prague; Budapest

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Beltone Mid-Cap Egypt Fund 100 N/A www.beltonefinancial.com 2002 Cairo; Dubai

Capital Alliance Private Equity III 500 75 www.aca-web.com 1997 Lagos, Nigeria; New York

CRG Central European Special EUR150 N/A www.crgpartners.com 1999 New York; Vienna Situations Fund I

CRP VII — Brazilian 150 N/A www.crp.com.br 1981 Porto Alegre, Brazil Middle-Market Growth Fund

Da Vinci Private Equity Fund II 300 110 www.dvcap.com N/A Guernsey

Dhow Gulf Opportunities Fund 1,000 N/A No Website Available 2008 Doha, Qatar

East Capital Special Stockholm; Vienna; Paris; Hong EUR100 N/A www.eastcapital.com 1997 Opportunities Fund Kong; Milan; Oslo; Moscow

Emerging Europe Accession Fund EUR200 EUR110 www.bafund.net 1995 Bucharest; New York

Enfoca Descubridor 1 (Off-shore) 100 50 www.enfocasafi.com.pe/english 2007 Lima

Falah Growth Fund 600 N/A www.falahpartners.com N/A Almaty, Kazakhstan

Fons Mediterrània Capital EUR100 N/A www.rivaygarcia.es/eng 1999 Barcelona

Fundo Brasil Sustentabilidade BRL250 N/A www.latourcapital.com N/A Sao Paulo

Fundo de Investimento Privado de 100 N/A www.angolacapitalpartners.com N/A Luanda, Angola Angola (FIPA)

GP Capital Partners V 2,000 1,300 www.gp.com.br 1993 Sao Paulo

Green Capital Oil & Gas Fund BRL500 N/A www.greencapital.com.br/english N/A Sao Paulo

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Greylock Africa Opportunity 200 N/A www.greylockcapital.com 2008 New York Fund I

Greylock Latin America 450 N/A www.greylockcapital.com 2008 New York Opportunity Fund

Helios Investors 2 300 304 www.heliosinvestment.com 2004 London

Invest AD MENA Partners 2 400 120 www.adic.ae 1977 Abu Dhabi

Investec Africa Frontier Private 200 N/A www.investecassetmanagement.com 1991 Cape Town; London Equity Fund

Kazakhstan Growth Fund 125 N/A www.kcm-kazyna.kz N/A Kazakhstan

Johannesburg; Edinburgh; Leapfrog Microfinance Fund 100 N/A www.leapfroginvest.com 2009 Sydney; Washington, D.C.; Port Louis, Mauritius

MarCap II 300 N/A www.marcap.ru 2005 Moscow

MENA Joint Investment Fund 500 N/A www.citadelcapital.com 2004 Cairo; London

Mint Capital III 300 130 www.mintcap.ru 2001 Moscow

Mexico City; Multinational Industrial Fund II 150 66 www.fondomif.com 1999 Ottobrunn, Germany

Noor Kuwait LBO Fund 350 N/A www.noorlbofund.com 1997 Kuwait

P&S East Growth II EUR100 EUR25 www.p-s.com N/A Ljubljana, Slovenia

Pittsford Ventures V 500 65 www.pittsfordventures.com 1979 Pittsford, NY; New York

Probanco II 125 26 www.darbyoverseas.com 1994 Washington, D.C.; Sao Paulo

Year Fund/Parent Current Last Web Site Offices Founded

Rasmala MENA Private Equity 350 125 www.rasmala.com 2003 Dubai; London Fund 2

Zurich; Prague; Royalton Capital Investors II EUR250 94 www.royalton-partners.com 1996 Warsaw; Bucharest

Sphinx Turnaround Fund 100 N/A www.citadelcapital.com 2004 Cairo; London

Stratus Capital Partners I 300 N/A www.stratusbr.com 1999 Sao Paulo

TMG Private Equity Fund II 400 100 www.tmg.com.br 1997 Sao Paulo

Travant Capital Partners I 300 N/A www.travantcapital.com N/A Lagos, Nigeria

Trifecta Fund I 350 N/A www.trifecta.ru N/A Moscow

UFG Private Equity Fund II 300 280 www.ufgam.com 1994 Moscow

Venture Partners Botswana II EUR100 N/A www.venture-p.com 2002 Gaborone, Botswana

Confidential & Trade Secret. © 2009 Probitas Partners. Do not circulate or publish. 87 San Francisco N e w Yo r k L o n d o n H o n g K o n g 425 California Street 1251 Avenue of the Americas Dudley House 1st Floor Jardine House Suite 2300 Suite 2390 36-38 Southampton Street Suite 3220 San Francisco, CA 94104 New York, NY 10020 Covent Garden 1 Connaught Place USA USA London WC2E 7HF Central, Hong Kong Great Britain China Tel 1 415 402 0700 Tel 1 212 403 3662 Tel 44 20 7845 5400 Tel 852 2533 3678 Fax 1 415 402 0052 Fax 1 212 403 3537 Fax 44 20 7240 3339 Fax 852 2530 1108