Portfolio monitoring for private equity, built on bank feeds.

Portfolio monitoring in private equity is the ongoing tracking of a fund’s portfolio companies between board meetings: cash position, liquidity, covenant headroom, and performance against plan. For lower-mid-market funds the hard part is rarely the analysis — it is getting reliable numbers out of companies that run on different systems, on a cadence the fund can act on.

Most funds choose one of two paths: standardize every portco on one reporting system, or read the data each company already produces. The first is an ERP project per company. The second reads bank feeds and the reports each portco already generates — the bank feed is unambiguous even where ERP data carries manual workarounds — and encodes the fund’s monitoring rules against both.

No. Monitoring runs on BAI bank feeds and the reports each portfolio company already produces — bank statements, the weekly cash summary, the board pack. No portco staff time is required, no portal gets adopted, and no ERP gets touched. Monitoring that depends on portco behavior change dies at adoption; reading beats asking.

A 13-week cash flow forecast is a weekly, transaction-level projection of cash receipts and disbursements over the coming quarter. Lenders and sponsors use it to see a liquidity squeeze early enough to act on it. It is a forecasting discipline, distinct from the weekly cash position monitoring tracks — one projects forward, the other reconciles what has already happened.

Read access to the company’s bank feeds — typically BAI files or a direct bank connection — and copies of the reports the company already produces, such as the weekly cash summary or board pack. That is the full ask: no ERP access required, which matters when five acquisitions in two years landed on disparate systems.

No — there is no license to buy and no new dashboard for anyone to adopt. We build the monitoring layer on top of the data you already have: the reports each portfolio company already produces, whatever ERP they come from, the spreadsheets the fund runs on today. The exceptions surface where your team already works. Portfolio monitoring software for private equity ships generic metrics; this encodes the KPIs and thresholds your fund actually manages to.

Each portfolio company reports on its own cadence and in its own format — a bank feed, a weekly cash summary, a board pack. The monitoring layer normalizes that inbound data as it arrives and flags what is late, what is missing, and what is off-trend against your encoded rules. Remote monitoring in private equity fails when it asks portcos to report into a portal; done this way, the operating partner opens one exception queue instead of chasing PDFs across seventeen companies.

Two levels. Fund level: the marks your LPs ask about — TVPI, DPI, RVPI, and pace against the fund model. Portfolio-company level: cash position and runway, revenue and EBITDA against plan, leverage and covenant headroom, and the valuation marks behind the quarterly write-up. The weekly cash layer is what makes the rest trustworthy — EBITDA bridges and covenant math are only as good as the numbers arriving on schedule.

Only as real-time as what gets typed in. A platform is real-time when seventeen portcos update it daily; left to quarterly board packs, it is a quarter stale with a live dashboard skin. Bank feeds settle daily whether anyone types anything or not — so a weekly position built on feeds is usually closer to real-time portfolio monitoring than the portal that promised it.

No — it feeds them. Fund services teams and administrators produce the official books; the monitoring layer gives them clean, normalized portfolio-company data to work from instead of a quarter of PDFs. Portfolio monitoring for fund services works as a division of labor: we keep the weekly operating picture current, the administrator keeps the official record.

The same normalized data that powers the weekly view rolls up into the quarterly LP pack — portfolio-company performance, covenant status, and valuation support in the shape of the ILPA reporting template rather than a hand-assembled deck. The 10–12 hours of executive-assistant assembly per deck is the part that goes away.

Honest answer: it depends on adoption, not features. If your portcos will reliably report into a platform — institutional fund, professionalized portcos, an integration budget — the platforms are built for you. If your companies run seventeen ERPs and reporting-in has already failed once, the layer that reads what they already produce gets you to a weekly number without the portal project.