Hunter Diversified Private Credit Fund vs PG Strategic Growth 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: the Hunter Diversified Private Credit Fund targets private credit, aiming for "4% per annum higher than the New Zealand Official Cash Rate over a rolling 3-year period," while the PG Strategic Growth Fund invests in international equities and discloses no equivalent target return figure in the extracted data. This distinction drives meaningfully different risk and volatility characteristics.
Minimum investment reflects another significant divergence — Hunter requires NZ$100,000, positioning it firmly as a wholesale vehicle, whereas PG Strategic Growth sets its minimum at NZ$1,000 and is flagged as not wholesale-only, suggesting broader retail accessibility. Both are PIE-eligible unit or trust structures supervised by The New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Limited.
On fees, Hunter charges a 0.83% management fee with no performance fee disclosed; PG Strategic Growth charges 1.20% plus a 10% performance fee, which materially increases the total cost in strong-return environments. Distribution frequency also differs: Hunter pays quarterly, PG Strategic Growth monthly.
Redemption mechanics diverge in structure rather than headline frequency. Hunter offers monthly redemptions but retains broad suspension powers — up to six months — and may provide partial or zero redemptions in low-liquidity periods. PG Strategic Growth permits redemptions at any time but applies a $10 million maximum gate per investor account over a rolling four weeks. Hunter's inception date is disclosed as December 2016; PG Strategic Growth's IM does not specify one in the extracted data.
Always verify all 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.
