ELTIFs, evergreen funds and open-ended private-markets structures — compiled independently from the prospectus and the PRIIPs KID. Free, neutral, for retail investors and their advisers.
Data as at: product data 16 Oct 2026 · distribution and access data 5 Oct 2026
Private-markets funds for retail investors are growing fast. Yet what matters most — when and how you get your money back, and what the fund really costs — sits deep in the prospectus and is nowhere comparable across providers. That is exactly what we make visible.
More and more ELTIFs and evergreen funds are being distributed to retail investors, some from as little as EUR 1. Access is there — orientation is not.
Redemption terms, gates, notice periods and true total costs are named differently by every provider and buried deep in the documents. A clean comparison has not existed until now.
We compile these details in a structured way and make them comparable — with our own liquidity score showing how easily you can get at your money. Neutral, without recommendation.
Equally weighted total return indices by segment, calculated from the net asset values of the funds in this database — in euro, net of the ongoing charges of the share class used. Values prior to August 2026 are back-calculated.
These funds invest in non-listed assets and allow regular redemptions — but only up to a point. Three things are worth understanding before you subscribe:
Start by asset class — or go straight into the full database.
Three principles that make the difference — and that we keep visible instead of hiding them.
No ranking, no recommendation, no paid placements. We compare — we do not rate the fund.
The figures come from the prospectus and the PRIIPs KID and are made comparable across providers.
If a figure is missing from the document, it says "not documented" — not "0". The difference between it does not exist and we do not know matters.
The honest state of our data — openly disclosed:
Notice period documented for 119 of 140 funds, gate for 135. That is the biggest gap — and it happens to be the core promise.
Ongoing costs documented for 116 funds. The source is predominantly the PRIIPs KID, which makes them comparable across providers.
Currently one figure per fund, not per share class. Fees differ considerably between classes — by up to 1.4 percentage points.
Empty field = not documented in the source we reviewed. Figures from the prospectus and the PRIIPs KID.
The fund comparison puts up to four semi-liquid funds side by side: redemption frequency, gate, notice period, ongoing charges, performance fee, minimum investment and liquidity score — every figure with source and date from the prospectus and PRIIPs KID. Add funds directly here, or collect them in the fund database using the tick boxes.
What the comparison puts side by side — with the range across all 139 funds we cover, as at 16 Oct 2026.
How often the fund redeems units. In our database: 97 quarterly, 27 monthly, 7 semi-monthly, 8 with another or no documented frequency.
List: Monthly redemption · Quarterly redemption
How long before the redemption day the request must arrive. Documented as a number for 118 funds: from 0 to 365 days (calendar or business days, depending on the prospectus), median 38 days.
Cap on redemptions per dealing day or period, as a percentage of fund assets. 134 of 139 funds state a gate; rates range from 1% to 80%, per dealing day, quarter or year.
Ongoing costs according to the PRIIPs key information document, excluding performance fee and entry charge. Documented for 115 funds: from 0.70% to 7.28% p.a., median 2.40%.
List: No performance fee
Smallest subscription amount according to the prospectus, in the smallest share class of the same currency. In euro funds the median is EUR 10,000; 18 funds can be subscribed from EUR 1,000 or less, 9 require EUR 100,000 or more.
List: From EUR 1,000 · From EUR 10,000
Key figures as on the fund pages, as at 16 Oct 2026. The comparison above shows them in detail with source, deadlines and costs.
| Fund | Provider | Ongoing costs | Redemption | Gate | Minimum investment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| klimaVest ELTIF | Commerz Real AG / Commerz Real Fund Management S.à r.l. | 2.42% | daily | 50% per redemption day | 10,000 EUR |
| BlackRock Private Equity Fund | BlackRock | 2.30% | quarterly | 5% per quarter | 10,000 EUR |
| BlackRock Multi Alternatives Growth Fund | BlackRock | 2.17% | quarterly | 5% per quarter | 10,000 EUR |
| infraVest ELTIF | Commerz Real | 2.42% | monthly | 50% per redemption day | 1 EUR |
All 140 ELTIFs and evergreen funds in this database, up to four at a time. Add funds here via the search or tick them in the fund database.
From the prospectus, the PRIIPs key information document and provider information; every figure in the comparison states its source and date. Product data as at 16 Oct 2026.
Yes. The selection is part of the address (#compare=…); “Copy link” puts it on the clipboard. The comparison can be saved as CSV or PDF.
No. It puts terms and costs side by side and does not rank by suitability. The liquidity score measures how quickly you get your money back under the prospectus — it is not a quality rating of the fund.
Accessible does not mean suitable. The check tells you what you are legally allowed to subscribe to — not what fits you. Semi-liquid funds can cap or suspend redemptions; a total loss is possible. The prospectus and the key information document are authoritative; your institution decides on your classification and the route to subscription.
The basis is the distribution notifications in the ESMA registers (ELTIF register and register of cross-border distribution), national registers (BaFin, FMA, AMF, FINMA) and provider disclosures, plus the minimum investment and investor category of each fund. Funds without authorisation in your country are shown for information only — they are not being offered.
Investor categories per country. Which categories you can choose depends on your country of residence: only some countries have a level between retail investor and professional client, and it has a different name in each. When in doubt we apply the stricter reading; more generous national special routes appear only as a note for the country.
Evidence: A register · B provider/research · C derived from the regulatory framework, no fund-specific evidence (in most countries this includes retail access to ELTIFs: the ESMA register shows it per fund only, not per country) · D unverified, no reliable statement.
Live analysis of our database · product data as at 16 Oct 2026 · access data as at 5 Oct 2026
How we count, what we include, what we exclude.
Charts free to use with attribution.