Gaps Register – Alternative Investments Knowledge Bundle

Gaps Register

This file is a decision aid, not a reading file. Do not use it as a learning resource. It guides future content additions.

All content in this bundle is general public knowledge only. Nothing here constitutes legal, regulatory, accounting, or investment advice.

---

Summary

Scan covered: root index.md, learning-path.md, glossary.md, all 7 section indexes, all study/ files, and all sources/ files. Cross-checked against 78 knowledge files using grep and link resolution.

Candidate gaps found: 8 genuine gaps. No broken links. All 17 terms from the specific-checks list are already covered; see Not Actually Missing below.

Priority	Count
High	4
Medium	4
Low / Optional	3

---

High Priority Gaps

Update (Prompts 0016 and 0016B — 2026-06-24): All four high-priority gaps have been addressed. DSCR — concepts/debt-service-coverage-ratio.md Key-person provisions — concepts/key-person-provisions.md NAV facility — concepts/nav-facilities.md Overcommitment strategy — concepts/overcommitment-strategy.md

These materially affect comprehension of alternatives mechanics, are referenced repeatedly across the vault, and are either missing entirely or too thinly covered.

Gap	Why it matters	Current partial coverage	Recommended action	Suggested file path	Notes
DSCR (Debt Service Coverage Ratio)	Learning-path Stage 6 self-check Q3 asks “What is the DSCR and why does it matter for a leveraged buyout?” — the concept is not explained anywhere in the vault. A learner reaching Stage 6 will not be able to answer this question without external reference.	learning-path.md (question only); asset-classes/private-credit.md (passing mention); risk/leverage-risk.md (description field only)	Add a DSCR section to risk/leverage-risk.md, or create a short dedicated concept file	concepts/dscr.md	Highest priority single gap. The study layer asks about it; the knowledge layer does not explain it.
Key-person provisions	Key-person clauses are a critical LP protection mechanism; referenced in answer key, LPAC governance, AIMA DDQs, and concentration-risk.md. No consolidated treatment exists — understanding is split across five files with no clear home.	fund-structures/gp-lp-roles.md (mentioned); risk/concentration-risk.md (style-risk angle); risk/operational-risk.md (succession risk); sources/ilpa-principles.md (governance angle); sources/aima-ddqs.md (DDQ angle)	Create a dedicated concept file covering definition, trigger events, suspension vs termination, clawback interaction, and LP negotiation points	concepts/key-person-provisions.md	Referenced in answer-key.md A37 with substantive detail but no knowledge file to anchor it.
NAV facility (fund-level leverage)	The revision-cards.md Watch out for on leverage risk distinguishes asset-level, fund-level (NAV facility), and subscription-line leverage. leverage-risk.md covers LBO leverage and subscription lines well, but NAV facility mechanics (how they work, what collateral is used, how they affect LP NAV) are not explained — only named.	risk/leverage-risk.md (description field and one line in answer-key.md); study/revision-cards.md (Watch out for note only)	Add a NAV Facility section to risk/leverage-risk.md, or create a short concept file	concepts/nav-facility.md	Alternatively, expand the leverage-risk.md NAV Facility section — whichever keeps the file under 1,200 words.
Overcommitment strategy	Overcommitment is mentioned in capital-commitments.md (with a caveat about its risk for less experienced investors) and in liquidity-risk.md (as a primary cause of LP liquidity crises). Neither file gives the mechanics: how it is calibrated, what a distribution model looks like, and why it is dangerous in a simultaneous-call scenario. The study question bank (Q35) asks about it.	concepts/capital-commitments.md (mentions the term and caveat); risk/liquidity-risk.md (names it as a cause); study/question-bank.md Q35 and study/answer-key.md A35 (both have more detail than any knowledge file)	Add a dedicated section to risk/liquidity-risk.md, or create a short concept file	concepts/overcommitment-strategy.md	The answer key (A35) already contains the correct explanation — a knowledge file could be derived from it.

---

Medium Priority Gaps

Update (Prompt 0017 — 2026-06-24): All four medium-priority gaps have been addressed. Clawback — concepts/clawback.md Responsible Investment — concepts/responsible-investment.md CRS / FATCA — sources/crs-fatca.md AIFMD Annex IV — sources/aifmd-annex-iv.md

Useful but not foundational. Relevant to narrower contexts or can be partially inferred from existing files.

Gap	Why it matters	Current partial coverage	Recommended action	Suggested file path	Notes
Clawback mechanics	Clawback is a key LP protection in American waterfalls. concepts/waterfalls.md covers it adequately (three substantive paragraphs) but the glossary has no entry for it, and there is no dedicated file a learner can be pointed to. It also appears in carried-interest.md (cross-reference only).	concepts/waterfalls.md (three substantive paragraphs); concepts/carried-interest.md (one paragraph cross-reference); fund-structures/limited-partnerships.md (mentioned)	Either create a short dedicated file or add a Clawback entry to glossary.md. A dedicated file would also enable a Source Anchor to ILPA Principles.	concepts/clawback.md	Lower urgency than DSCR or key-person; the waterfalls.md coverage is functional. Escalate to High if a Prompt adds American waterfall coverage.
ESG / Responsible Investment	ESG is explicitly flagged in sources/invest-europe-professional-standards.md as “not covered in detail in this knowledge bundle.” It is mentioned in 7 files but never explained. It is increasingly relevant to LP onboarding, side letter negotiations, and regulatory reporting.	fund-structures/limited-partnerships.md (exclusion clauses); asset-classes/infrastructure.md (alignment); risk/regulatory-risk.md (SFDR mention); sources/invest-europe-professional-standards.md (explicit gap flag); sources/inrev-guidelines.md (mention)	Create a short concept file covering: what ESG integration means in alternatives, Article 8/9 SFDR classification, LP ESG reporting obligations, and connection to side letters	concepts/responsible-investment.md	Keep scope narrow: what it means for fund operations and LP reporting. Avoid policy or scoring methodology — those belong in source notes.
CRS / FATCA	CRS and FATCA appear in onboarding, subscriptions, NAV production, data management, and regulatory risk — always as named obligations, never explained. Any LP operations professional will encounter them. Currently there is no file that explains what they are, who they apply to, and what they require funds to do.	operations/onboarding-and-kyc.md (row in table); operations/subscriptions.md (mentioned); risk/regulatory-risk.md (table row); operations/data-management.md (mentioned)	Create a short source note or concept file explaining CRS/FATCA: scope, who classifies funds as Financial Institutions, what forms LPs submit, and the data burden on fund operations	sources/crs-fatca.md	Fits better as a source note than a concept file, since both are treaty-based regulatory frameworks.
AIFMD Annex IV	AIFMD Annex IV regulatory reporting is mentioned in operations/investor-reporting.md and risk/regulatory-risk.md but never explained. Annex IV filings are a real operational burden for EU-regulated fund managers and a common topic in LP operations onboarding.	operations/investor-reporting.md (table row and caveat); risk/regulatory-risk.md (framework table); operations/data-management.md (passing reference)	Create a short source note or add a section to risk/regulatory-risk.md covering what Annex IV requires, who files it, frequency, and the data it captures	sources/aifmd-annex-iv.md	Could be folded into a broader AIFMD source note rather than Annex IV alone.

---

Low Priority / Optional Gaps

Update (Prompt 0018 — 2026-06-24): All three low-priority gaps have been addressed. Sharpe Ratio and Volatility — both files expanded (see sharpe-ratio and volatility) Commodities and Digital Assets — both files expanded (see commodities and digital-assets) Investment period / commitment period — defined in glossary and clarified in vintage-year

Niche, advanced, or adequately handled by existing material with minor expansion.

Gap	Why it matters	Current partial coverage	Recommended action	Suggested file path	Notes
Sharpe Ratio and Volatility files are stubs	metrics/sharpe-ratio.md and metrics/volatility.md are 444 and 417 words respectively — thin by bundle standards. Both are useful for hedge fund and alternatives benchmarking context.	metrics/sharpe-ratio.md; metrics/volatility.md	Expand each file to at least 600 words by adding a worked example and a Watch out for section	In place	Not missing — just thin. Low urgency unless a study prompt adds hedge fund metrics questions.
Commodities and Digital Assets are stubs	asset-classes/commodities.md (477 words) and asset-classes/digital-assets.md (518 words) are below the 600-word target. Neither appears in the learning path or any study question.	asset-classes/commodities.md; asset-classes/digital-assets.md	Expand if the bundle scope grows to cover these asset classes more thoroughly. Currently acceptable stubs.	In place	These are lower relevance to a core alternatives operations knowledge base. Do not prioritise unless scope is explicitly extended.
Investment period / commitment period distinction	The terms “investment period” and “commitment period” appear across many files but are never defined in the glossary or a dedicated concept file. The distinction between investment period (when capital can be called for new investments) and harvest period (when capital can only be called for follow-on or expenses) is not explained explicitly.	concepts/capital-commitments.md; operations/fee-calculations.md; fund-structures/limited-partnerships.md (all mention the terms)	Add a short definition to glossary.md under Capital Activity Terms, or expand concepts/capital-commitments.md	In place (expand)	Lower priority — the concept can largely be inferred. But it does matter for understanding the fee-base transition in management fee calculations.

---

Not Actually Missing

These terms appeared to be potential gaps from the prompt’s specific-checks list. All are covered — some by dedicated files, some embedded in related files.

Term	Where it is covered
Drawdowns and distributions	Dedicated file: concepts/drawdowns-and-distributions.md
Vintage year	Dedicated file: concepts/vintage-year.md
Recycling provisions	Dedicated file: concepts/recycling-provisions.md
Equalisation	Dedicated file: concepts/equalisation.md
Subscription lines	Covered in operations/capital-calls.md; also referenced in glossary.md, concepts/j-curve.md, metrics/irr.md
Side letters	Covered in fund-structures/limited-partnerships.md; referenced in fund-structures/gp-lp-roles.md and operations/onboarding-and-kyc.md
LPAC	Covered in fund-structures/gp-lp-roles.md; referenced in glossary and sources/ilpa-principles.md
Fee offsets	Covered in operations/fee-calculations.md; referenced in fund-structures/gp-lp-roles.md
High water mark	Covered in asset-classes/hedge-funds.md and glossary.md
Hurdle rate / preferred return	Covered in concepts/carried-interest.md and concepts/waterfalls.md; in glossary
PIK interest	Covered in asset-classes/private-credit.md and glossary.md
Continuation funds	Covered in fund-structures/secondaries.md; referenced in sources/ilpa-principles.md
Beneficial ownership / UBO	Covered in operations/onboarding-and-kyc.md and sources/fatf-recommendations.md; in glossary
AIFMD (general)	Covered in risk/regulatory-risk.md and referenced across operations files; note: Annex IV is a medium-priority gap above
Overcommitment strategy	Mentioned in concepts/capital-commitments.md and risk/liquidity-risk.md — but coverage is thin; listed as a High Priority gap above

---

Consolidation Risks

Areas where two or more files cover overlapping ground. If either file is edited without the other, explanations may drift.

Risk area	Files involved	Nature of overlap	Mitigation
Waterfall and catch-up mechanics	concepts/waterfalls.md and concepts/carried-interest.md	Both explain the GP catch-up step. waterfalls.md is the canonical home; carried-interest.md cross-references it.	Keep carry mechanics in carried-interest.md; keep sequencing and arithmetic in waterfalls.md. If either is edited, check the other.
NAV concepts vs NAV production	concepts/nav.md and operations/nav-production.md	nav.md defines types of NAV (Estimated, Accounting, Investor, Final). nav-production.md covers how NAV is calculated and who does it. The boundary is clear but the two files could drift if one is expanded.	Keep definitional content in concepts/nav.md; keep process and governance in operations/nav-production.md.
Commitment cycle covered across three files	concepts/capital-commitments.md, operations/capital-calls.md, concepts/drawdowns-and-distributions.md	The commitment→call→distribution lifecycle is covered across all three. Overcommitment risk appears in both capital-commitments.md and risk/liquidity-risk.md.	The split is intentional (concept vs operation), but any update to one file’s overcommitment section should be reflected in the others.
IFRS 13 and ASC 820 twin files	sources/ifrs-13-fair-value.md and sources/asc-820-fair-value.md	Near-identical structure covering the same Level 1/2/3 hierarchy under two accounting regimes. Any substantive change to one should be mirrored in the other.	These files should be reviewed in pairs at every future edit pass.
Liquidity risk appears in two sections	risk/liquidity-risk.md and concepts/capital-commitments.md	Overcommitment risk as a source of LP liquidity stress is described in both.	Treat risk/liquidity-risk.md as canonical for overcommitment risk mechanics; capital-commitments.md can reference it rather than duplicate.