Series Accounting

Definition

Series accounting is a method for handling capital that subscribes to a fund at different times and different NAV per unit levels, without forcing every investor onto one blended fund-wide number. Each tranche of new capital is issued as its own series of units, priced at the NAV per unit prevailing on its subscription date, and tracks its own high-water mark and accrued performance fee independent of every other series.

Every series holds an identical pro-rata slice of the same underlying portfolio, so gross investment performance — the return before fees — is the same across all series at any given date. What differs between series is only the fee calculation: an investor who joined mid-drawdown starts with a lower high-water mark than one who joined at the fund's peak, and each series' performance fee is computed against its own mark, not a shared one.

After a crystallization date, once every series has paid whatever performance fee it owes, funds commonly consolidate the separate series back into a single series — since every unit now starts its next period on the same forward-looking footing — by converting each series' post-fee capital into new units at a common reference price.

Why it matters

Without series accounting (or its alternative, equalization), a single fund-wide NAV per unit forces every investor into the same performance-fee calculation regardless of when they actually invested. An investor who bought in after a gain had already happened would either be charged a fee on a gain they never earned, or the manager would have to under-collect fees on earlier investors to keep things fair — series accounting avoids both problems by giving each entry cohort its own mark.

For LPs, the practical effect is that two investors in the same fund can legitimately see different net returns on the same underlying portfolio over the same period, purely because they subscribed at different times relative to the high-water mark — worth understanding before comparing statements with a co-investor.

Two series, then consolidation at year-end

A fund launches Series A on January 1 at $100.00 per unit: 10,000 units, $1,000,000. On July 1, after the fund has risen, a new investor subscribes $600,000 at the then-prevailing NAV of $120.00 per unit. Rather than joining Series A — which would let them dodge a fee on the $20.00-per-unit gain Series A has already earned — the manager issues a new Series B at $120.00 per unit: 5,000 units, with its own high-water mark opening at $120.00.

By December 31, the whole fund's gross NAV per unit — identical across both series, since they hold the same portfolio pro-rata — reaches $132.00. At a 20% performance fee with no hurdle: Series A owes a fee on $132.00 − $100.00 = $32.00 per unit (its mark); Series B owes a fee on only $132.00 − $120.00 = $12.00 per unit (its own, later mark).

After both series pay their own fee, the manager consolidates the fund back into a single series, re-based at $100.00 per unit, converting each series' post-fee capital into new units at that common price. Combined post-fee capital of $1,256,000 + $648,000 = $1,904,000 converts into 12,560 + 6,480 = 19,040 units — and $1,904,000 / 19,040 checks back to exactly $100.00 per unit, confirming no value was created or lost in the consolidation itself.

Common mistakes

• !

  Merging series before each has actually paid the performance fee it owes on its own mark — consolidation should happen after crystallization, not before.

• !

  Consolidating at an arbitrary or inconsistent reference price rather than one applied uniformly to every series, which would quietly transfer value between investor cohorts.

• !

  Applying a single fund-wide high-water mark instead of one per series, which recreates exactly the unfairness series accounting exists to prevent.

• !

  Treating series accounting and equalization as interchangeable when comparing funds — they solve the same fairness problem through different mechanics, and a fund's offering documents specify which one it actually uses.

In practice

Crypto funds that raise capital continuously — rather than through periodic closes like a traditional private fund — lean on series accounting more heavily, since new subscriptions can arrive in almost any month against a NAV that has moved meaningfully since the last one. Some funds mint a new series every time a batch of subscriptions comes in and consolidate quarterly or annually at each crystallization date, rather than running the fund on a single blended NAV per unit.

Running the free Fee Calculator twice — once at each series' subscription NAV — shows how the same gross return produces different net fees for an early series versus a later one, useful for explaining to LPs why their statement doesn't match a co-investor's.

Questions, answered

Your next LP report,
on autopilot.

14-day free trial · No card required · $999/month after