Devon Alpha Fund (Wholesale) vs Hunter Diversified Private Credit Fund
Side-by-side facts extracted from manager-published IM/PDS/SIPO documents. 0 fields match, 0 differ, 0 disclosed by only one fund.
Why these differ
Generated 2026-05-19 from the structured facts below. Verify against the source IM/PDS before relying on this summary for investment decisions.
The most material structural difference is asset class and return profile: Devon Alpha Fund invests in Australasian equities targeting "Official Cash Rate (OCR) +5%", while the Hunter Diversified Private Credit Fund invests in private credit targeting "4% per annum higher than the New Zealand Official Cash Rate over a rolling 3-year period." The Devon fund's higher OCR-plus spread and explicit hurdle rate of 12% reflect its equity risk orientation; Hunter discloses no performance fee or hurdle rate in the extracted facts, while Devon charges a 0.87% management fee versus Hunter's marginally lower 0.83%.
The minimum investment differs significantly: Devon requires NZD 10,000 against Hunter's NZD 100,000, a ten-fold difference that may affect accessibility for smaller wholesale investors. Distribution frequency also diverges — Devon pays semi-annually, Hunter quarterly. Both funds share the same supervisor (The New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Limited), the same PIE and PIR-eligible status, and the same unit trust structure.
On liquidity, both funds carry gate provisions permitting suspension or deferral of redemptions, though Hunter's IM specifies a maximum six-month suspension window and explicitly contemplates partial or zero monthly redemptions; Devon's IM does not specify a maximum suspension duration. Hunter discloses a December 2016 inception date; Devon's IM does not specify one in the extracted facts. Notably, Hunter's manager is disclosed as Harbour Asset Management Limited, while the provider is listed as Hunter Capital — readers should confirm the management and distribution relationship directly.
Always verify these details against each fund's current source IM or PDS before making any investment decision.
Fact-by-fact comparison
Source documents
Hunter Diversified Private Credit Fund
No documents ingested yet.
Methodology
Facts extracted via Claude Sonnet 4.6 from manager-published IM/PDS/SIPO PDFs. Confidence tiers: ●verified (all required keys populated), ◐inferred (some required keys null), ○not on file. Where IM and SIPO/PDS disclose the same fact, verified takes precedence over inferred.
The “Why these differ” summary above is generated once per pair by Sonnet from the structured facts in this table and cached as JSON. It is regenerated when either fund’s facts change.
Wholesale-only — for eligible investors per FMCA Schedule 1. Not financial advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Verify each fact against the source IM/PDS before relying on it for investment decisions.
