5
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
a, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain
mber 30, 2017). The SOF Funds present comparatively strong Net IRR, DPI and TVPI across each vintage year. Exhibit 2: SOF Funds performance versus Cambridge Associates Secondary Fund Benchmark34, 35, 36, 37 In Exhibit 3, each of SOF, SOF D, SOF II and SOF III is benchmarked against its vintage group of top quartile buyout fund
a, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain
mber 30, 2017). The SOF Funds present comparatively strong Net IRR, DPI and TVPI across each vintage year. Exhibit 2: SOF Funds performance versus Cambridge Associates Secondary Fund Benchmark34, 35, 36, 37 In Exhibit 3, each of SOF, SOF D, SOF II and SOF III is benchmarked against its vintage group of top quartile buyout fund
a, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain
mber 30, 2017). The SOF Funds present comparatively strong Net IRR, DPI and TVPI across each vintage year. Exhibit 2: SOF Funds performance versus Cambridge Associates Secondary Fund Benchmark34, 35, 36, 37 In Exhibit 3, each of SOF, SOF D, SOF II and SOF III is benchmarked against its vintage group of top quartile buyout fund
a, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain
mber 30, 2017). The SOF Funds present comparatively strong Net IRR, DPI and TVPI across each vintage year. Exhibit 2: SOF Funds performance versus Cambridge Associates Secondary Fund Benchmark34, 35, 36, 37 In Exhibit 3, each of SOF, SOF D, SOF II and SOF III is benchmarked against its vintage group of top quartile buyout fund
a, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain
mber 30, 2017). The SOF Funds present comparatively strong Net IRR, DPI and TVPI across each vintage year. Exhibit 2: SOF Funds performance versus Cambridge Associates Secondary Fund Benchmark34, 35, 36, 37 In Exhibit 3, each of SOF, SOF D, SOF II and SOF III is benchmarked against its vintage group of top quartile buyout fund
Entities connected to both Lithuania and Cambridge Associates Secondary Fund

Latvia
LOCATION
Estonia
LOCATION
Hungary
LOCATION
Denmark
LOCATION
Norway
LOCATION
Belgium
LOCATION
Finland
LOCATION
Ireland
LOCATION
Luxembourg
LOCATION
Romania
LOCATION
Bulgaria
LOCATION
Slovakia
LOCATION
Czech Republic
LOCATION
Slovenia
LOCATION
Croatia
LOCATION
Malta
LOCATION
Cyprus
LOCATION
United Kingdom
LOCATION
Northern Ireland
LOCATION
Liechtenstein
LOCATION