忘了IRR的数字是越小越有利还是越大越好？

问题如下：

An pension committee would like to invest some allocation into private equity funds. There are three potential private equity funds in the list. The analyst discloses the following due diligence findings from a recent manager search: Fund A retains administrators, custodians, and auditors with impeccable reputations; Fund B has achieved its performance in a manner that appears to conflict with its reported investment philosophy; and Fund C has recently experienced the loss of three key persons.

Based on Exhibit 2 and the analyst’s due diligence, the pension committee should consider investing in:

选项：

Fund A

Fund B

Fund C

解释：

A is correct.

Fund A should be selected based on both quantitative and qualitative factors. Fund A has a five-year IRR (12.9%) that is slightly lower than, but comparable to, both Fund B (13.2%) and Fund C (13.1%). Given the sensitivity to the timing of cash flows into and out of a fund associated with the IRR calculation, however, the final decision should not be based merely on quantitative returns. It is also important to monitor the investment process and the investment management firm itself, particularly in alternative investment structures. Considering the qualitative factors identified by the analyst, Fund A is the only fund with a strong, positive factor: It benefits from service providers (administrators, custodians, and auditors) with impeccable reputations. Fund B seems to be experiencing style drift, which suggests that the returns are not consistent with the manager’s advertised investment edge (hence, a negative factor). Fund C has experienced the departure of key persons, which puts future fund returns in jeopardy (hence, a negative factor).

核心是这句话。

翻译一下

基金A保留声誉卓著的管理人员，保管人和审计师； 基金B的表现似乎与其所报告的投资理念相抵触； 基金C最近经历了三个关键人物的流失。