Getting on the Platform: Approval Funnel by Channel

Prepared by Mark Goldberg |Alts Leaders Survey 2025 | Research Note #2

---

Methodology & Interpretation Notes

This research note is based on the 2025 Alts Leaders Survey. Respondents included the majority of the wirehouse/regional firms, all the top independent broker-dealers, and a growing representative portion of the National RIA firms. The survey is comprehensive and captures 65.9% of all known capital flows to private market alternatives in the private wealth segment. This research note focuses on the platform approval process. The funnel reflects the institutionalized process of vetting investment strategies and funds. The survey captures initial meetings and screening (origination), to the review and due diligence, and ultimately approval and launch. The survey is the only source for comprehensive metrics that captures how many investment strategies/funds are presented to distribution partners and provides visibility to the likelihood of success. It serves the dual purpose of setting realistic expectations for investment managers and highlights the significant resources required by firms to vet opportunities to identify the most suitable opportunities for their clients.

Executive Summary

Getting onto the platform remains the critical gatekeeper for alternative investment managers. You can have the right strategy, performance track record, and marketing engine, but until a sponsor gets past the introduction, review, and approval stages, it never gets to investors.

In 2025, the data make clear just how steep that climb is: across channels, only a fraction of introductions survive. In wirehouse and regional platforms, for example, of 521 funds introduced, just 170 (≈ 32.6%) are taken into formal due diligence and only 34 (≈ 6.5%) ultimately earn approval. That works out to roughly 1 in 16 funds making it all the way through.

Independent broker-dealers offer a somewhat more favorable path. Of 123 introductions, 29 (≈ 23.4%) are reviewed, and 23 (≈ 19.0%) are approved meaning from introduction to approval are about 1 in 5. Even more importantly, once a fund enters the DD process at an IBD, the likelihood of approval jumps to nearly 80%.

At National RIAs, the scale is large but conversion is low. Of 470 introductions, only 50 (≈ 10.5%) are reviewed and just 16 (≈ 3.4%) make it through, implying an approval rate of roughly 1 in 30.

Timing is also noteworthy: the full journey from first meeting to launch typically spans 11–12 months. But averages mask the wide range. In 2025, approvals have taken as little as 4 months (at some IBDs) and as long as 31 months (at RIAs). This variance underscores the need for patience, sustained engagement, and realistic planning.

This research note turns the spotlight onto what really matters not investment strategies, but access to capital through distribution partnerships. By quantifying funnel dynamics, it shows where the choke points lie, where resource investment pays off, and what managers must overcome to break through.

Weighted Results by Channel

Wirehouse/Regionals Approval Funnel*

National RIA Approval Funnel*

Independent Broker-Dealer Approval Funnel*

Let’s review the results side by side.

Comparatively, the volume of investment introductions at both Wirehouse/Regionals and National RIAs firms far exceeds that of Independent BDs. However, far fewer make into the review process and even less ultimately make it onto their platforms. The volume of requests or introductions reflect the amount of capital flows to private market alternatives to these two segments of the market.  The investor capital flows to these participants far exceed that of Independent BDs and is generally believed to have higher ROI for investment managers. But substantial capital is raised in this segment, and many firms have had highly successful distribution partnerships. The differential flow through rate for advancing to due diligence review between Wirehouse/Regionals and National RIA firms is best attributed to resource constraints at National RIA firms. In part, they need to be more selective in the origination stage because they do not have the same as robust resources to conduct reviews as their counterparts.

What has changed since 2024?

Wirehouse/Regionals Approvals

Independent Broker-Dealer Approvals

The number of offerings being introduced are increasing while the numbers of those being put into review are declining. Firms are seeing a wider and deeper number of investment strategies and funds as the industry attracts new participants and existing sponsors add funds. At the same time, distribution partners are more selective in the initial screening process. The net result is an increasingly competitive marketplace for shelf space even as the firms expand their product offerings. Notably, Independent BDs are in “catch up mode” (as per one respondent) to their Wirehouse/Regional firm brethren.

How Long Does It Take?

The survey set out to improve transparency around the timing of the vetting process. The aspect of time-to-market is critical to planning and managing to a successful outcome. Unreasonable expectations from investment managers lead to frustration and poor resource management. Understanding not only the process but the length of time needed for distribution partners to conduct reviews, and manage their product calendars is a formula for success.

Observations & Implications 

• Wirehouse/Regionals: Very selective: just 6.5% approval, or ~1 in 16 from first meeting. Although 32.6% of introductions enter DD, due diligence reviews are robust and fund selection is is only 1 in 5 of those that begin due diligence review.

• Independent BDs: More favorable dynamics: ~1 in 5 approval odds overall. Once in DD, nearly 80% of products are approved. This makes IBDs the most pragmatic entry point.



• National RIAs: Significant meeting volume but low conversion: only 3.4% approvals (~1 in 30). They are highly selective despite the scale of introductions.



• Timing: Wirehouse and RIA paths average ~12 months to launch; IBDs are closer to 11 months.

• Range Matters: Beyond averages, the process can stretch dramatically. At the fast end, some IBD approvals have moved from first meeting to launch in just 4 months. At the slow end, RIAs have taken more than 2½ years. Managers must prepare for both possibilities. Building realistic capital formation assumptions, staffing, and investor-relations flexibility to weather a long cycle.

There are very notable ways to both improve investment managers opportunities for success and minimize delays in the length of the process which will be covered in subsequent research notes.