MoIC, TVPI, DPI: three multiples, three questions

In a committee pack, the same vehicle can show 1.47× in the portfolio table and 1.25× on the fund page, without either figure being wrong. The gap does not come from the valuation: it comes from the denominators and from the treatment of amounts not yet collected. This is typically the point on which a due diligence or an audit review asks for a reconciliation, and on which a dashboard without written conventions has nothing to say.

Similar numerators, two denominators

An investment's MoIC divides the fair value of the holding plus proceeds already received by the cost invested in it; it is calculated gross of fees and carried interest. A fund's TVPI divides distributions paid to investors plus their share of NAV, net of accrued carried interest, by called capital, which also includes management fees, fund expenses and, depending on the fund's governing documents, recalled or recycled distributions. DPI isolates the realised portion — distributions over called capital — and RVPI the portion still carried at valuation; together they add up to TVPI as long as they share the same denominator. This identity is a consistency check. A table in which DPI and RVPI do not add up to TVPI usually mixes different bases: called capital and invested cost, or values gross and net of carried interest.

On the same vehicle, the aggregate investment-level MoIC is therefore generally higher than TVPI, if only because of fees. Presenting the two without a bridge leaves the reader to conclude that value has been lost between the investments and the fund.

The bridge between aggregate MoIC and TVPI

Consider a fictional fund that has called €40m, of which €34m has been invested in portfolio companies and €6m used for fees. It has distributed €22m and its NAV stands at €28m. For simplicity, the fund holds no cash, has distributed all proceeds received and accrues no carried interest.

The 0.22× separating 1.47× from 1.25× is explained here entirely by the €6m of fees. In a real fund, the bridge includes other items — recycling, recalls, uninvested cash, proceeds received but not yet distributed, accrued carried interest, exited investments removed from the scope of the table — and it is precisely the list of those items that makes the reconciliation auditable. The TVPI entry sets out the denominator conventions.

The realised portion is obtained by dividing DPI by TVPI: 0.55 / 1.25, i.e. 44.0% of total value already collected and 56.0% still carried by NAV. Early in a fund's life, this ratio sheds light on the exit timetable. Late in its life, a low DPI against a high TVPI is first and foremost a question for the valuations of unrealised investments.

What the numerator should not absorb

Differences between two versions of the same multiple rarely stem from the definition. They stem from four conventions that need to be written into the valuation policy and applied in the same way in every campaign.

Pending cash flows. Escrow or an earn-out is not a distribution until it has been collected. On an investment with a cost of €10m, NAV of €8m and distributions of €6m, counting €2m held in escrow as distributed in advance lifts MoIC from 1.40× to 1.60×, for an amount that depends on a condition the fund does not control. Invest Europe's guidelines (2024) recommend including a fair value estimate of it at the reporting date, and the IPEV guidelines (2025, §5.10) treat it as a contractual right to be valued. Jolv applies a more prudent convention: the amount is excluded from MoIC until it is collected and shown separately.

Write-downs. A fully written-down investment counts as 0.00×. Keeping it at 1.00× to avoid dragging down the aggregate smooths the portfolio and defers the question to the next campaign.

Debt and PIK. A repayment is cash received and leaves cost invested since inception unchanged. Capitalised PIK interest increases the accounting cost basis and the fair value of the receivable, without being a follow-on investment or an IRR cash flow. Jolv adds it to the investment's cost, so capitalisation does not mechanically lift MoIC; ILPA and Invest Europe measure MOIC on cash invested only, so capitalisation increases it. The difference is material and the convention must be written down. Treating capitalised interest as a cash flow, by contrast, builds into IRR a receipt that has not occurred. The PIK entry gives the details.

The discount for lack of marketability. A multiple “after discount” can only be reconstructed if the point of application is known. Applied to the multiple, the discount bears on enterprise value and flows through to equity with the effect of leverage; applied to the fair value of the holding, it remains proportional. The DLOM entry quantifies the difference.

What a committee should be able to verify

Three questions are enough to characterise a multiple presented in committee. Which numerator: NAV alone, or NAV plus realised distributions? Which denominator: the invested cost of an investment, or the fund's called capital? Which amounts remain pending: escrow, earn-outs, capitalised interest? As long as one of these answers is missing, the figure is not wrong, but it cannot be reconstructed, and neither an auditor nor an investor will be able to recalculate it.

These are the conventions Jolv applies: MoIC = (campaign NAV + realised distributions) / invested cost, each component traceable to the ticket, escrow excluded until collected, PIK included in cost (a Jolv convention, distinct from invested capital as defined by ILPA). Fund metrics are consolidated from the campaigns; Jolv does not keep the fund's accounts or produce LP statements. See also MoIC and RVPI, the practice of valuation campaigns and the method questions gathered in the IPEV 2025 FAQ.

Sources

• Invest Europe, Investor Reporting Guidelines, January 2024, §6.1 d (p. 25) and §6.2 b (p. 26)
• ILPA, Performance Template Definitions – Granular Methodology, v1.1, January 2025
• ILPA, Performance Template Suggested Guidance – Granular Methodology, v1.1, 2025
• CFA Institute, Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®) for Firms 2020, glossary (TVPI, DPI, RVPI, paid-in capital)
• IPEV Board, International Private Equity and Venture Capital Valuation Guidelines, December 2025 edition, §5.10 "Contractual Rights"