{
  "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-efee526b2162",
  "docSlug": "6ebe7bc3c470921e",
  "documentTitle": "Global Private Equity Report 2015",
  "authorId": "Bain",
  "authorName": "Bain",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
  "presentationDate": null,
  "orientation": "portrait",
  "aspectRatio": 0.773,
  "pageNumber": 53,
  "pageCount": 68,
  "prevPage": 52,
  "nextPage": 54,
  "slideType": "industry_trends",
  "function": "analyze_data",
  "density": "overcrowded",
  "nDataPoints": 63,
  "notes": "The chart shows TVPI (Total Value to Paid-in ratio) for global buyout funds by vintage year from 1990 to 2010.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "paragraph",
    "line_chart",
    "footnote"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-efee526b2162/53",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-efee526b2162",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-efee526b2162.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-efee526b2162#slide-53",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "The gap separating the top-quartile GPs from their bottom-quartile peers has narrowed to less than 50 cents—$1.54 per dollar invested for the best 2010-vintage buyout funds vs. $1.10 per dollar invested for the laggards.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-b48c-7655-b300-1c02858fc2c2",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.25,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.591
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "Global buyout fund vintage-year benchmark returns (TVPI, as of Q2 2014)",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "line",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "1f6a99c4-2f0f-48ed-a82c-95b23802c022",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.02,
        "w": 0.396,
        "x": 0.302,
        "y": 0.858
      },
      "kind": "legend",
      "text": "Bottom-quartile threshold | Median | Top-quartile threshold",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "a607d2b5-642c-4d88-9317-3e6fc7c48a7e",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "metric",
      "text": "TVPI (Total Value to Paid-in ratio)",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": "Quantification",
      "toolSlug": "quantification",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-b48c-7655-b300-20682c27197e",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.085,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.124
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "The democratizing influence of plenty of money in the hands of many has had a leveling effect on PE returns. Transparent auctions guarantee hot competition for assets, and GPs that prevail in them pay top dollar. The combination of high acquisition prices and longer hold periods is eroding returns. Meanwhile, slow but steady economic growth in major developed markets has put a temporary floor beneath the returns of the weaker PE performers.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "47af68ed-49fe-4d01-8685-b58dacae9fd3",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.048,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.421
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "The squeeze on fund performance. The compression in return multiples between the top- and bottom-quartile funds is mirrored in a narrower distribution of returns overall for recent-vintage funds (see Figure 2.19). Whereas during the 1990s, when 52% of US focused buyout funds generated returns that clustered between",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "7d280fd1-9d55-446f-b6c6-b28ecedd3a45",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.185,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.227
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "The cumulative result of these shifts has to compress industry returns. As recently as a decade ago, top-quartile buyout funds generated between $2 and $3 or more for each dollar of capital invested—nearly a full turn higher than the best of the bottom-quartile funds whose ratio of returns per invested dollar hovered between 1-to-1 and 1.5-to-1 (see Figure 2.18). The picture is very different today. Among recent-vintage funds launched between 2006 and 2010, the gap separating the top-quartile GPs from their bottom-quartile peers has narrowed to less than 50 cents—$1.54 per dollar invested for the best 2010-vintage buyout funds vs. $1.10 per dollar invested for the laggards. The extent of the compression that we are seeing in recent vintage funds may be temporary. As these funds exit investments and realize gains, the gap between the top- and bottom-performing funds could widen some. Nevertheless, the increasing competitiveness of the markets means that there will be some lasting compression of returns.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "951d5601-2f35-4b44-9037-81eef350837a",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.025,
        "w": 0.18,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.885
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "Note: TVPI is total value to paid-in ratio\nSource: Preqin",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "2315e01f-3271-4751-82df-3c62bf49ea57",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.012,
        "w": 0.386,
        "x": 0.307,
        "y": 0.057
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Global Private Equity Report 2015 | Bain & Company, Inc.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "910a2f3b-faf9-46e3-b84b-3a621ba4756b",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.018,
        "w": 0.55,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.532
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Figure 2.18: Buyout-fund performance has become compressed for recent fund vintages",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "be742dcd-a70f-4d28-8ab1-0f91328ca1e4",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Action Titles",
      "slug": "action-titles",
      "agent": "Architect",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-173e-703c-8768-63797f9919ea",
      "evidence": "Title: 'Buyout-fund performance has become compressed for recent fund vintages'",
      "confidence": 88
    },
    {
      "name": "Annotation",
      "slug": "annotation",
      "agent": "Designer",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-173e-703c-8768-66aa4a13a56b",
      "evidence": "Three labeled lines (Top-quartile, Median, Bottom-quartile)",
      "confidence": 80
    },
    {
      "name": "Chart Selection Guide",
      "slug": "chart-selection-guide",
      "agent": "Designer",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-173e-703c-8768-6b5d14c6ae16",
      "evidence": "Multi-line time-series for distribution over vintage years",
      "confidence": 70
    },
    {
      "name": "Waterfall chart",
      "slug": "waterfall-chart",
      "agent": null,
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "bdb52591-2d84-443e-9217-de19851acee1",
      "evidence": "The cumulative result of these shifts has to compress industry returns. As recently as a decade ago, top-quartile buyout funds generated between $2 and $3 or more for each dollar of capital invested—",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "Vintage Year TVPI Benchmark",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1d21-7467-a462-c8d8572141a7",
      "evidence": "Chart legend: 'Top-quartile threshold, Median, Bottom-quartile threshold' with TVPI note",
      "confidence": 85
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 58,
      "from": 52,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-07a4-702a-b0b2-910214af8673",
      "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit",
      "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit",
      "beatName": "Evidence & Proof",
      "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof",
      "evidence": "Performance compression data: vintages, quartile gaps, persistence slipping",
      "position": 4,
      "confidence": 82,
      "parentBeatName": "Evidence",
      "parentBeatSlug": "evidence"
    },
    {
      "to": 58,
      "from": 29,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-07a5-761b-9143-8438c4caf57f",
      "arcName": "The Triple Take",
      "arcSlug": "triple-take",
      "beatName": "The Implications (So What)",
      "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what",
      "evidence": "Section 2: dynamics that will shape PE in 2015+",
      "position": 2,
      "confidence": 70,
      "parentBeatName": "Reflection",
      "parentBeatSlug": "reflection"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 57,
      "from": 52,
      "name": "So What Cascade",
      "slug": "41-so-what-cascade",
      "bestFor": "Data presentations, executive summaries, driving to recommendations",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b312-49466c52b2cc",
      "evidence": "Compressed returns -> narrower band -> persistence slipping -> GPs' mandate to differentiate.",
      "position": 9,
      "objective": "Drive return-compression data to a so-what about GP differentiation",
      "structure": "The Data -> So What? (Insight 1) -> So What? (Insight 2) -> So What? (The Action)",
      "confidence": 80,
      "description": "Chain insights together, each answering 'so what?' until you reach the actionable conclusion"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}