Search funds emerged from Stanford Business School in the mid-1980s to connect talented operators with capital-starved, owner-operated businesses. This process is more like entrepreneurship through acquisition rather than launching a company from scratch.
The mechanics are straightforward, though successful execution requires finesse. A “searcher” – usually an MBA graduate with operational experience – raises $300,000 to $600,000 in search capital. This amount funds a two-year search for a single target: a profitable, privately held business with enterprise values between $5 million and $30 million. Once an acquisition target is found, investors roll their search capital into a larger funding round of $5 million to $15 million to make the purchase.
The structure aligns incentives: searchers become CEO or president post-acquisition, earning 20-25% carried interest after investors receive their preferred returns. This has drawn increasing attention from institutional investors over four decades.
From 1984 to 2004, fewer than 100 search funds launched globally, concentrated mainly in the United States. The pace accelerated from 2005 to 2019, with over 400 funds spanning Europe, Latin America, and Australia.
Today, the growth continues. About 80 new search funds are launched annually, and total capital deployed reached $2.5 billion in 2022. University endowments and family offices have professionalized fundraising and expanded the pool of limited partners.
Search funds have become known for their strong returns. A 2023 Stanford study covering 278 search funds with realized outcomes found a pooled net IRR of 32.4% and a median multiple on invested capital (MOIC) of 3.1x.
To compare, global private equity buyouts from 2000 to 2022 delivered net IRRs of 18.7% and a median MOIC of 2.2x. Venture capital funds over the same period achieved net IRRs of 20.5% with a 2.5x median MOIC. On the surface, search fund returns appear higher than both asset classes.
However, deeper analysis is needed to fully understand the numbers. The variance plays a major role in outcomes.
Returns for search funds are spread out across a wide range. Top quarter performers earn IRRs above 50%, while the bottom quarter may suffer losses or sub-10% IRRs. In comparison, private equity buyouts show a narrower spread – typically a 15-25% range – leading to fewer losses but also fewer outsized wins.
This variance highlights the concentration risk of the search fund model. Unlike diversified buyout portfolios, search funds focus all efforts on one company. Success leads to impressive results, while failure means a total loss.
For investors, the risk-return trade-off is significant: search funds provide potentially higher returns but with volatility similar to venture capital.
Search funds focus on a segment largely skipped by institutional capital: the “missing middle” – founder-owned, owner-managed businesses facing succession needs. These companies rarely hold formal sale processes, giving searchers an opportunity to acquire businesses with less competition.
Deal sourcing relies on outreach: targeted mail, cultivating broker relationships, and attending industry conferences. This direct approach opens deals not visible to larger private equity firms.
Search fund acquisitions typically close at 3.5x to 5.0x EBITDA – a notable discount compared to the 8x-12x multiples seen in the mid-market. Conservative leverage profiles of 1.5x-3.0x Net Debt/EBITDA help create tailwinds for internal rates of return.
Lower multiples reflect some real risks, such as less detailed documentation, reliance on seller-provided data, and limited management infrastructure. Many search funds operate with small diligence teams or outsource certain tasks, increasing risk.
Valuation benefits are real, but sustainability as the model grows and competition increases remains an open question.
Instead of pure financial engineering, search funds focus on transforming operations. Searchers take active roles in businesses, implementing new systems and driving change.
Serving as CEO aligns incentives: searchers gain carried interest based on value growth, while investors receive preferred returns first. This motivates initiatives such as standardized KPIs, improved sales processes, and strategic acquisitions.
Case studies show that many family-owned businesses benefit when a new leader implements practices like regular board meetings, structured sales funnels, and professional financial reporting – all within the first year or two after acquisition.
Ready to move from theory to execution? My merger model is built to sharpen your financial modelling skills.
Mentorship networks and best-practice forums support searchers, but operational execution remains the make-or-break factor.
Search funds use lower leverage than traditional private equity. While mid-market private equity might feature 4x-6x Net Debt/EBITDA, search funds generally operate within a 2x-3x leverage range.
This conservative model reduces the chance of financial distress, though it also limits equity returns in stable businesses. The structure matches the risks associated with focusing on one company and uncertain operational transitions.
Debt typically costs 7-9% all-in, offering moderate leverage without excess risk. Limited partners expect high-teen returns, in line with venture capital rather than buyouts.
Despite being comprehensive, the data from Stanford includes voluntary reporting bias – poor performing funds may be underreported, possibly inflating return statistics. New data-collection efforts try to address this by capturing liquidation and write-off data.
Geography and fund vintage also play critical roles. North American funds show median IRRs of nearly 35%, European funds around 28%, and Latin American funds about 22%, reflecting different macroeconomic and currency challenges.
Returns are not guaranteed – they depend greatly on where, when, and how the investments are made.
Scaling the search fund model presents some challenges. Current limited partner interest suggests a practical limit of about 150 new search funds per year before opportunities become scarce.
Possibilities for growth include expanding to Asia and Africa, where there are many owner-operated businesses, but potential legal complications. Technological advances such as AI-powered outreach and advanced CRM systems may help make deal sourcing more efficient.
For institutions, search funds are a focused risk. Portfolio allocations often range from 1-3% of total alternatives – enough to capture potential upside without jeopardizing diversification.
Given the wide spread in returns, manager selection is crucial. Evaluation should prioritize operational ability and proven leadership, not just financial metrics.
Search funds sit in an interesting space within the private markets – they offer the chance for higher average returns, balanced by higher risk and volatility. For investors seeking exposure to the lower middle market, they represent a unique asset class with qualities of both private equity and venture capital.
Success will depend on managing risk, selecting skilled operators, and balancing growth with disciplined sourcing and execution.
P.S. – Check out our Premium Resources for more valuable content and tools to help you break into the industry.
