Built for
institutional capital.
Theia Co-GP Platform Fund I is raising $30M–$100M from institutional investors and family offices who want to back an operating platform — not a passive blind pool — and participate in the economics of every deal deployed.
Fund structure
& terms.
The Co-GP model only works at velocity. A committed capital base allows Theia to deploy into deals with the speed and certainty that local sponsors require — without deal-by-deal syndication friction or competing mandates.
| Fund Size | $30M minimum · $100M cap |
| Structure | Co-GP platform fund — not blind-pool LP |
| Target LTV | 75% construction debt leverage per deal |
| Deployment Volume | $30M supports ~$120M in total development volume per cycle |
| Capital Recycling | Up to 2.0x over 5-year fund life |
| Asset Management Fee | 1.25% annually on committed capital |
| Deal Services Fee | 1.0% on invested capital per deal |
| Preferred Return | 8.5% non-compounding annually |
| Promote Waterfall | 80/20 → 75/25 → 70/30 (LP/GP) tiered above preferred |
| GP Co-Invest | 1% pro-rata per deal (right, not obligation) |
| Target LP MOIC | 2.1–2.4x base case |
| Target LP Net IRR | 20–25% base case |
Return scenarios.
Across three cases.
Returns are driven by four stacked income sources — GP promote, development fees, construction margin, and fabrication margin. The promote is baseline; the other three are only available because Theia has the license, team, and equipment to execute the work. Construction activity across the portfolio is the primary swing variable between scenarios.
| Driver | Conservative | Base Case | Upside |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Project MOIC (equity) | 1.85x | 2.20x | 2.50x |
| Avg Hold Period | 40 months | 30 months | 24 months |
| Deals with Construction Activity | 3 of 10 | 5 of 10 | 7 of 10 |
| LP Net IRR (estimated) | 16–18% | 20–25% | 26–32% |
| LP Net MOIC (estimated) | 1.85–2.00x | 2.10–2.40x | 2.30–2.60x |
Net of 2.25% combined annual fee load (1.25% AMF + 1.0% DSF). J-curve effects from staged capital deployment reduce early returns; recycling compresses hold on net basis. Full waterfall, sensitivity tables, and recycling assumptions available on request.
How the returns
are produced.
Four income sources stack to produce the base case. The promote is the floor — present on every deal regardless of construction activity. The other three are why the upside scenario is materially higher, and why the conservative scenario doesn't collapse, it just contracts.
2.2x gross → 20–25% net.
| GP Promote — carried interest, all deals | Floor |
| Development Fee — active mgmt, all deals | +Incremental |
| Construction Margin — BuildCo (~5 of 10) | +Incremental |
| Fabrication Margin — FabCo (applicable deals) | +Incremental |
| Less: 2.25% combined fee drag | (reduction) |
| Less: J-curve, staged deployment | (reduction) |
| LP Net IRR · Base Case | 20–25% |
Economics of execution.
| GP Promote (tiered waterfall) | ~$12.9M |
| BuildCo Profit (GP 40% share) | ~$2.7M |
| FabCo Profit (GP 40% share) | ~$2.0M |
| Fund Fee Revenue | ~$9.6M |
| Total GP Economics | ~$27.2M |
Ready to walk through the model?
Materials available on request include the full financial model with adjustable assumptions and sensitivity tables, GP-vs-LP return attribution, construction technology specifications, and the active pipeline detail.