A researched directory of the institutions that commit capital to venture funds. Filter by type, geography, ticket size and manager preference, then open a full profile with named investment contacts and the source behind every field.
Find the LPs most likely to back your fund.
This is a real search against the live database, run right now, not a screenshot. The reasoning is shown. The institutions are what you get when you sign in.
“I’m raising a $30m Africa-focused Fund I. Who should I talk to?”
- Mandate includes Africa
- Documented as backing emerging managers
- Named investment contact on file
- Publishes a submission route for managers
- Mandate includes Africa
- Documented as backing emerging managers
- Named investment contact on file
- Publishes a submission route for managers
- Mandate includes Africa
- Documented as backing emerging managers
- Named investment contact on file
- Publishes a submission route for managers
- Mandate includes Africa
- Documented as backing emerging managers
- Named investment contact on file
- Publishes a submission route for managers
Signing in gives you the institutions behind these rows, the named investment contacts, the published route in for managers, and the source under every field.
Finding the right LP is a research problem, not a list problem.
Most first-time managers work from a spreadsheet of institution names with no mandate, no ticket size and no way in. So the quarter goes on the wrong doors. Investor relations raises the institution’s own fund and cannot commit to yours. A sovereign wealth fund writing $50m cheques will not anchor a $10m first close. And a guessed email address costs you the introduction the moment it bounces.
LP Intelligence gives you the mandate, the route in, and the evidence behind both.
How it works.
Narrow 520 institutions down to the handful whose mandate actually matches your fund, then open each one with the evidence attached.
- ✓LP type and subtype
- ✓Geography and country
- ✓Ticket size and status
- ✓Manager preference
From 520 institutions to a working list
Filter on the things that decide whether an approach is worth making: LP type, geography, ticket size, and whether the institution is documented as backing emerging managers.
Request Early Access →520 institutions across 62 headquarters countries, from pension funds and endowments to development finance institutions and sovereign wealth funds.
Records flagged as possibly wrong are held back rather than shown to you.
Apply the taxonomy filters, drawn from a closed vocabulary rather than free text, so a filter never misses a record because of spelling.
121 institutions are documented as backing emerging managers, and 9 as backing first-time funds specifically.
Where an institution publishes a range, it is recorded. Where it does not, disclosed commitments are recorded as observed examples instead.
A ticket range and a set of observed cheques are labelled differently, because they mean different things.
Keep your working list in the platform instead of a spreadsheet that goes stale the week you build it.
Across 62 countries, each with a 42-field profile. Every field is blank until it has been researched, never filled in to look complete.
What you get.
Early access. The directory is in build, the research behind it is live.
The LP directory
520 institutions that commit capital to venture funds, across 62 headquarters countries, as a filterable card grid.
Taxonomy filters
LP type, subtype, geography, country, asset class, strategy, industry, ticket size and manager preference, all from a closed vocabulary.
Full LP profiles
42 fields per institution: mandate, capital base, ticket evidence, allocation status, contact block and provenance.
Named investment contacts
The people on the investment side, with title and the team page the name was published on. No personal emails, no guessed addresses.
Manager submission routes
Where an institution publishes a way for fund managers to apply, it is recorded, along with open calls and their deadlines.
Ticket evidence
Published ranges where they exist, and disclosed commitments as observed examples where they do not. The two are labelled differently.
Intelligence timeline
Dated updates on each institution, shown only once a person has reviewed them. Nothing is summarised from the open web at page load.
Saved lists and exports
Keep your target list in the platform, and take it out as a file when you need it in your own pipeline.
Researched, not synthesised.
- Profiles look complete because a model filled in the gaps.
- Contact addresses follow a firstname.lastname pattern nobody verified.
- A mandate is inferred from an office location or a portfolio company.
- The contact is whoever was most prominent, often investor relations or a group executive.
- You find out which parts were invented after the email has gone.
- Every field carries the source it came from and the date it was checked.
- Only addresses an institution publishes itself, and only role mailboxes.
- A mandate is recorded only where the institution states it.
- Investment contacts only, because investor relations raises their fund and not yours.
- A field we have not researched is blank and says so, rather than being filled in.
That is a harder standard to hit, and it shows: our profiles are emptier than the synthesised ones. That is the point. A wrong claim in a first email costs more than a missing one, so a field stays blank until it has a source behind it.
Everything you need to know
Where does the data come from?
Does an LP appearing here mean they are accepting proposals?
How many institutions are in it?
Why are some profiles emptier than others?
Do you include personal contact details?
Is any of it generated by AI?
How current is it?
How much does it cost?
Is this investment advice or an introduction service?
Get early access to LP Intelligence.
Tell us what you are raising and we will open access to you as it becomes available.