MyFarm Solar Fund vs Norfolk Mortgage Trust 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 2026-05-20 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. MyFarm Solar Fund invests in renewable energy infrastructure — specifically solar — and targets "forecast cash distributions of 10-12% p.a., paid quarterly," with a tax-adjusted equivalent cited as "an average 15% p.a. return on a fully taxable investment, from years two to ten, assuming a tax rate of 33%." Norfolk Mortgage Trust Fund is a private credit vehicle secured by first mortgages, targeting returns that "exceed the Six-month term deposit rate (published by the RBNZ) by 1.4% per annum (after the deduction of fees and expenses)" — a floating, benchmark-linked target rather than an absolute figure.
Investor access differs meaningfully. MyFarm Solar is wholesale-only with a $50,000 minimum; Norfolk is open to a broader investor base with a $5,000 minimum and is a PIE structure eligible for PIR tax rates, which MyFarm's IM does not reference. Norfolk discloses a 2.5% management fee; MyFarm's factsheet does not specify a comparable fee figure. Leverage also diverges: MyFarm carries a maximum LVR of 35% against solar assets; Norfolk lends at up to 75% LVR against property security.
Liquidity terms are structurally different. Norfolk requires 183 days' redemption notice and discloses gate provisions triggering at 5% or 20% of units redeemed within three months. MyFarm does not disclose equivalent redemption or gate terms in the extracted facts. Norfolk has operated since 2006 under Public Trust supervision; MyFarm Solar launched in June 2025 with no comparable track record.
Verify all details against each fund's source IM or PDS before relying on this summary.
Fact-by-fact comparison
Source documents
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.
