Three-Way Track Record Verification
Triangulate claims, references, and files before backing a fund manager
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 4
- Confidence
- 97%
This method verifies a manager's track record through three independent evidence points: the manager's account, testimony from executives at portfolio companies, and the underlying deal files. Evaluators first document who originated, assessed, negotiated, and managed each investment. They then contact the relevant CEOs to test whether the manager's claimed contribution matches the executives' experience. Finally, they inspect files for records consistent with both narratives. Agreement across the three sides suggests that the results came from an authentic, repeatable process rather than selective attribution or polished storytelling. Disagreement does not automatically disqualify the manager, but it identifies claims requiring deeper investigation before capital is committed.
Origin
David Conrod described the method on Masters in Business while explaining how FocusPoint evaluates general partners seeking capital.
Core principles
- 01Treat a manager's presentation as a claim to verify
- 02Seek evidence from people directly involved in past investments
- 03Compare independent accounts against primary documentation
- 04Trust consistency across sources more than persuasive storytelling
How to run it
- 1
Document the manager's claims
Capture the manager's account of representative investments, including who sourced each deal and what work the team performed.
Pro tip Ask for precise individual contributions rather than accepting firm-level attribution.
Watch out A polished case study is not independent evidence.
- 2
Call portfolio-company leaders
Speak with CEOs or other executives who observed the manager's work and ask them to verify the claimed role and value added.
Pro tip Use open-ended questions before presenting the manager's version.
Watch out References selected by the manager may be unusually favorable.
- 3
Inspect the files
Review investment records, diligence materials, committee documents, and other available evidence for consistency with both accounts.
Pro tip Focus on contemporaneous records created before the investment outcome was known.
Watch out Do not infer individual responsibility merely from a person's name appearing in a file.
- 4
Reconcile the triangle
Compare the manager's story, executive testimony, and documentary evidence. Advance only when material claims align or discrepancies have credible explanations.
Pro tip Create a claim-by-claim reconciliation table to make gaps visible.
Watch out Minor differences in recollection are normal; material contradictions about ownership of work are not.
In the wild
An allocator evaluates partners leaving a large buyout firm. The partners claim responsibility for three successful investments, so the allocator interviews each portfolio company's CEO and reviews investment-committee records. Two deals align across all sources, while the third was primarily led by a colleague who is not joining the new firm.
→ The allocator underwrites the new fund using only the two substantiated investments and adjusts its conviction accordingly.
Common mistakes
Relying on the pitch deck
Performance tables can be accurate while overstating an individual's role. Verify attribution as well as returns.
Treating references as a formality
Generic endorsements reveal little. Ask references to describe specific actions, decisions, and outcomes.
Ignoring inconsistencies
Small gaps can expose a larger attribution problem. Reconcile contradictions instead of averaging the accounts together.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for allocators, placement agents, and investment committees evaluating unfamiliar or first-time fund managers.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal when confidentiality restrictions prevent access to both independent references and underlying records.
From the transcript
“We we make a lot of reference calls, talk to the CEOs of the companies that they've backed to verify the track record that they're…”
“The reason we do that it's almost a triangle to see if they actually do have a story straight.”
“And then we try to look at their files to the files track with what the CEO told us and what they told us, and…”
From the episode
David Conrod on Successor Funds and Growth Equity (Podcast)
David Conrod