Waterfalls
Default
Score model

Pick how composites are weighted for you. Affects every score across the app.

Sign in to save models →
Sign in

Groundfloor Loans 3 LLC

Sponsored by Groundfloor Finance·

Unknown· LLC · 1 class· ● Low· PPM v1· Updated 26d ago
2 data notes▶
Unusual structureUnscored: absolute lp take
Run the numbers
Composite
31.8
median 53 −21
Pref Returnⓘ
—
median 9.0% · Real Estate Debt / Mortgage Funds
LP Take (Base)ⓘ
—
median 88.1% · Real Estate Debt / Mortgage Funds
GP Commitⓘ
0.0%
median 0.0% +0.0%
Min Investment
$100
ticket size
Offering Size
$75M
target raise
Cascade · Distributions

Where each dollar goes

$875K
LP $850K · Fees $25K · GP $0
GROSS PROCEEDS$875KGPFFees to Manager$25,000 · 2.9% of grossLPT1Return of Capital$500,000 · 57.1% of grossLPGPT4Residual Split (100% / 0%) · 40.0%Limited Partners · $350KGeneral Partner · $0pool fully distributed
Standard scenario · $500K equity · 5y hold · 1.75× exitRun your own cascade →

Deal diligence15 findings · worst high

Automated checks across the fund's extracted PPM. Every finding is shown with the evidence it's based on — proven numbers or a verbatim quote and page.

Document quality

Drafting defects found in the PPM prose — numeric inconsistencies, broken cross-references, unfilled placeholders, and defined-term problems. Each is shown with the offending quote and its page.

Document-quality defect — Nick Bhargava bio

Low

The identical Nick Bhargava biography describes him as 'co-founder of our Sponsor' in the Management section but 'co-founder of the Company' in the affiliated-management section; the Company was formed in October 2025, so the latter is a wrong-term substitution creating a factual conflict.

“is Chief Executive Officer of our Manager, co-founder of our Sponsor, and has served on our Sponsor's Board of Directors ... is Chief Executive Officer of our Manager, co-founder of the Company, and has served on our Sponsor's Board of Directors”
PPM p.8780% confidence

Document-quality defect — Waiver Provisions enforceability sentence

Low

Incomplete/broken sentence in the Waiver Provisions enforceability discussion: the conditional clause 'to the extent that one or more of the provisions ... with respect to the Waiver.' is cut off with no main clause.

“However, the issue of enforceability is not free from doubt and to the extent that one or more of the provisions in our subscription agreement or our operating agreement with respect to the Waiver.”
PPM p.7185% confidence

Numeric inconsistency — Company telephone number

Low

The Company's telephone number is stated as (404) 850-9225 on the cover/summary pages but as (404) 850-9223 in the Summary, an internal contradiction in contact information.

“is (404) 850-9225. Information about the Company and its affiliated entities may be found on the Groundfloor Platform ... Our telephone number is (404) 850-9223.”
PPM p.395% confidence

Spelling / typo — a recently organized a Delaware

Info

Doubled article 'a ... a' in the Overview's opening sentence: 'a recently organized a Delaware limited liability company'.

“Groundfloor Loans 3 LLC is a recently organized a Delaware limited liability company formed to invest in and manage a diversified portfolio of commercial real estate assets.”
PPM p.8192% confidence

Spelling / typo — Affilaites'

Info

Misspelling of 'Affiliates'' as 'Affilaites'' in substantive risk-factor text.

“Our time and attention and/or that of our Affilaites' may be diverted to meeting regulatory and compliance obligations”
PPM p.5997% confidence

Spelling / typo — debit finance professionals

Info

'debit finance professionals' is a typo for 'debt finance professionals' in substantive text describing the Manager's personnel.

“related to our sponsors also rely on our Manager's real estate and debit finance professionals for investment opportunities.”
PPM p.2090% confidence

Spelling / typo — earn the any further interest

Info

Garbled phrase 'earn the any further interest' (extra 'the') in the prepayment risk disclosure.

“the term for final payment of the Loan will not change, but we will not earn the any further interest or the expected return on the prepaid portion”
PPM p.4190% confidence

Diligence gaps

Questions a standard diligence questionnaire would ask that the PPM leaves unanswered.

DDQ gap: Does the fund engage an independent auditor?

High

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Governance). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?

High

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?

High

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?

High

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?

Medium

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Governance). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?

Medium

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?

Medium

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Structure). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ gap: What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?

Medium

The offering documents don't answer a standard institutional DDQ question (Economics). An allocator will ask this directly — the GP should be ready with an answer.

90% confidence

DDQ readiness

How much of a standard institutional due-diligence questionnaire this fund's offering documents answer out of the box. Gaps are questions an allocator will ask directly.

38%
Coverage
5 answered0 partial8 gaps13 questions
Economics
  • What is the preferred return (hurdle) rate offered to LPs?Gap
  • What is the LP/GP carried-interest split above the preferred return?Gap
  • Is there a GP catch-up, and at what rate?Gap
  • Does the fund have a GP clawback provision?Gap
  • What is the GP's capital commitment (skin in the game)?Gap
Structure
  • What distribution-waterfall structure does the fund use?Gap
  • What is the fund's investment strategy / asset class?UnknownAnswered
  • What is the fund's vintage year?Vintage 2015.Answered
  • What is the target offering size?Target offering of $75,000,000.Answered
  • What is the minimum LP investment?Minimum investment of $100.Answered
Fees & Expenses
  • Is the fund's fee schedule disclosed (management fee, etc.)?3 fee line item(s) extracted from the offering documents.Answered
Governance
  • Does the fund engage an independent auditor?Gap
  • Does the fund use a third-party fund administrator?Gap
Generate IC memo →

Fee scheduletaken before LP distributions

Total load 1.00%
Fee
Trigger
Basis
Rate
Management Fee
Upon each investor distribution from loan interest and principal
1% of every investor distribution
1.00%
Organization and Offering Expense Reimbursement
Ongoing during offering period; paid in monthly installments
Flat reimbursement up to $150,000 (approx. $5,000 organizational costs + up to $145,000 legal fees); monthly reimbursement capped at 0.5% of aggregate gross offering proceeds
0.00%
Special Servicing Expenses
Upon loan non-performance or default, as determined by Manager in its sole discretion
Variable; actual expenses incurred for special servicing of non-performing assets including foreclosure costs, property taxes, maintenance, REO marketing and sale expenses
0.00%

Service providers3 gaps

Provider network →
Legal Counsel
Gap
Not disclosed
No independent counsel named for investors. Common in small syndications where Manager and Fund share counsel — reduces independence. Verify during diligence.
Auditor
Gap
Not disclosed
Audit intent not stated in PPM. Ask the sponsor: will the fund be audited, by whom, and on what frequency?
Fund Administrator
Gap
Not disclosed
No third-party fund administrator referenced. Manager likely handles admin internally — common for <$10M raises but reduces independence.
Placement Agent
OK
No placement agent engaged
No placement agent engaged. Direct placement by Manager — no placement fees eat your invested capital.

Community threads0 active

What allocators are saying. Diligence notes, open questions, attached scenarios.

⚛ RSSStart a thread →
No threads yet. Be the first →

Reviews

No reviews yet

Be the first allocator to leave a take.

Funds you might also likesame Unknown

Philadelphia Powderkegs, Inc.
CrownThrown
Debt
2019
—
31.3
TIDEROCK COMPANIES, INC.
Tiderock
—
2021
—
31.3
CF FUND II, LLC
Conquest Funding
—
2012
—
33.8
Red Oak Capital Fund V, LLC
Red Oak Capital
—
2015
—
29.4
Bridge Private Lending, LP
BridgeInvest
—
2015
—
28.8