Blog

Securitized Asset Funds…


When most people in the US private funds industry think of Form ADV – the uniform form used by investment advisers to register with both the SEC and state securities authorities – they’re most likely thinking of hedge funds, private equity funds, and venture capital funds. They might even be thinking of private credit funds - although this is not technically an option on the form itself (time for an update, perhaps?) and so these products often appear in the ‘Other private fund’ category.

The point is, they’re less likely to be thinking of Securitized Asset Funds – those whose “primary purpose is to issue asset backed securities and whose investors are primarily debt-holders.”

The reason is probably because most private fund managers don’t offer these products. A look at 9AT suggests that out of almost 13k private fund managers reporting to the SEC, only 247 have securitized asset funds reported on their ADV’s.

Relative to two other large private fund categories, hedge funds and private equity funds, the number of securitized asset funds lags far behind. There are currently a total of 3,286 securitized asset funds in our database, as reported on ADVs; 105 of them first appeared in 2025 filings, thus far. Compare that with hedge funds - 22,792 in our database, 1,347 from 2025 filing s- and private equity - 40,812 in our database, 1,464 from 2025 filings.

It’s clear, then, that these funds are a smaller part of the private fund market – at least, from a quantity perspective.

However, on average, securitized funds tend to be larger in size. Cost is a significant reason why securitized funds are larger. Collateralized Loan Obligations (CLOs) – which make up a good chunk of the market - need to be significantly larger than the average private fund in the U.S. due to the substantial fixed costs associated with structuring, issuing, and managing these vehicles. Unlike a basic equity hedge fund, for example, which can be launched with a relatively lean operational setup - typically requiring capital for legal structuring, regulatory filings, a Bloomberg terminal and initial marketing - a CLO involves extensive securitization processes, credit ratings, and ongoing compliance requirements. Key costs include legal fees for structuring complex tranche-based securities, arranger fees paid to investment banks that structure and distribute the CLO, and rating agency fees to assess the creditworthiness of the different tranches. Additionally, CLOs incur trustee and administrative costs, collateral management fees, and audit expenses, all of which contribute to a higher operational break-even point compared to a lean equity hedge fund.

The size required to launch a securitized fund significantly reduces the pool of asset managers who might launch these products. Indeed, you look at the sponsors, you see a ‘who’s who’ of private fund managers. In this year’s filings, KKR, Schroders, Cheyne Capital, Onex Credit Partners, Goldentree Asset Management, Cerberus Capital Management, Oaktree Capital, Bain Capital have all issued securitized asset funds, according to 9AT.

So, which firms service these products? CLOs aren’t required to take on an auditor. However, custodians and administrators - more commonly referred to as trustees and collateral administrators - are the main service providers vying for business.

Of the new ones in 2025 filings, 37 securitized asset funds did not list an admin provider, US Bank leads the pack so far this year with 19, as can be seen from Table 1 below. Citi moved to #2 with 12 funds. Interestingly, the firm did not feature at all on the list of top 3 admins for newly issued funds in 2023 or 2024.

What is apparent from the data is that US Bank has consistently led the pack in the last few years.

Table 1 – Top 3 Administrators of newly reported Securitized Asset Funds, by year by fund count

Administrator 2025 Administrator 2024 Administrator 2023 
US Bank 19 US Bank 83 US Bank 89 
Citi 12 Computershare 44 BoNY 34 
FIS Global BoNY 28 FIS Global 32 

The custody side (aka trustee) also sees US Bank off to an early lead this year, as it led in both 2024 and 2023. And, similarly to the administrator category, Citi and BoNY have a significant presence here as can be seen in Table 2 below, as does Computershare, which, while not yet appearing in the top three this year, has done so last year. Citi placed fourth last year by fund count.

Table 2 – Top 3 Custodians of newly reported Securitized Asset Funds, by year by fund count

Custodian 2025 Custodian 2024 Custodian 2023 
US Bank 25 US Bank 116 US Bank 117 
Citi 22 Computershare 55 Citi 55 
BoNY 14 BoNY 48 BoNY 50 

The securitized funds market is a fairly small one in terms of the broader private funds industry, and there is significant concentration in it. Of the 3,977 private funds reported so far in 2025, with a total GAV of $351bn, the 105 securitized asset funds represent only 2.6% of the quantity and 8.7% of the total GAV reported thus far in 2025. And those 105 funds are managed by just 34 advisers.

Looking at the tables above, the key service providers to these funds are themselves larger firms, which is perhaps little surprise when considering the corresponding size of typical securitized funds and the asset managers running them.

And, while the custodian category seem to be reasonably consistent in terms of the firms that feature towards the top of these league tables, the administrator category could be where this market sees movement in 2025. We’ll be keeping an eye on this space to see what happens!

Editor's Picks:

Previous