News and Insights

Almost two years on from ECI’s investment in January 2025, Insurance Insider is now a standalone company with an eight-strong leadership team, a fully redesigned customer experience, accelerating organic growth and a busy M&A pipeline.

We chat with Toby Fitzherbert, Investment Director at ECI, to discuss how the team delivered the carve-out from Delinian and where the business is heading next, with reflections from Mariana Valle, CEO of Insurance Insider.

Give us a quick overview of Insurance Insider: what does the business do and why were ECI excited to invest? 

Insurance Insider is the leading digital intelligence, insights and data platform for the global specialty insurance market. We were immediately excited when we first identified the business back in 2024 through our Data subsector network when it was part of Delinian. Insurance Insider had shown consistent organic growth with clear opportunities to accelerate.

Alongside this, the resilience case was clear. Their high quality journalism, data and analysis are key to decision-making within the specialty insurance market, and their customers love the product; it has a subscription-based revenue model with very strong retention metrics.

We met Mariana Valle, CEO, to discuss how we could bring our experience in the Data subsector to bear, helping Insurance Insider in its ambition to become the Bloomberg of insurance. We also identified a fantastic Chair for the business, Hamilton Matthews, the former CEO of Acuris and a leader in the financial data space. We built strong conviction through these discussions and ultimately completed the investment through a bilateral process at the start of 2025.

How were you able to deliver a successful carve-out and what were the key steps in the process?

Making sure we could support Mariana and the team to operate Insurance Insider as an independent entity was vital to our due diligence. The carve-out required significant planning and resources to ensure the team’s growth wasn’t derailed by the scale of the project.

One of the most important factors for success was the people involved. Our Commercial Team were instrumental here, with Rich Pearce leading the carve-out workstream. Importantly, this started well before we invested. We brought in specialist carve-out due diligence providers alongside the usual diligence suite, ensuring the full scale of the project was mapped and costed before the deal completed. A full interim leadership team, including a PMO lead, interim CFO, HR Director and IT Director, was in place before the deal was signed. This meant the interim management team could take on the heavy lifting of the separation, so the day-to-day management team could stay focused on running the business and driving growth.

Equally important was a laser focus on risk. Costs can spiral quickly in a carve-out if separation expenses and ongoing operating costs haven’t been properly scoped. IT licence costs per head change at a smaller scale business, employee benefits need detailed costing, and office moves need realistic estimates. Beyond cost, there are cyber risks from setting up new IT infrastructure, business disruption from system migrations, and people disruption as roles adapt to a new structure. All of this had to be managed without consuming too much of the management team’s time. 

After nine months, the carve-out was completed on time and on budget, and Insurance Insider was operating as an entirely standalone business in its brand new offices in the City, New York and Bulgaria. To the management team’s credit, the business continued to trade well, which gave us great encouragement in our investment thesis. 

How has ECI supported Insurance Insider post carve-out?

We always knew we were backing a great team, and part of our focus post-carve-out has been strengthening this even further with high-calibre hires. We’ve supported Mariana in hiring a permanent CFO and building a full finance function from scratch, developing the HR function, investing in the sales and commercial teams, and strengthening product and technology leadership. In just the last month, Insurance Insider announced the appointment of Jonathan Goor, who previously worked in senior roles at data businesses Acuris and With Intelligence, as COO.

Technology is so important to how Insurance Insider delivers proprietary data and sector-leading content to its customers. Post-carve-out, the team have already launched Insurance Insider 2.0, a redesigned platform with improved UI/UX and increased personalisation, making sure the information they're reading is bespoke to their needs. Insurance Insider 3.0 is already in the works, building further on its AI and data capabilities to serve more relevant information to customers. ECI's full suite of Growth Specialists have also been closely involved: Orlando Machado, our AI & Data specialist, has supported the team on operational efficiencies and AI adoption; Gillian Fox, our People & Culture specialist, has helped to build the HR function from scratch and scale; Chris Ginnelly, our Sales & Marketing specialist, has helped the team to hire and expand into the US; our Cyber specialist, Ash Patel, supported on cyber and IT set-up post carve-out; and Badr Khan, our Tech specialist, has joined the Board as a non-executive director to strengthen tech governance.

What comes next at Insurance Insider? 

Insurance Insider 3.0 represents the next major step. The business holds over 30 years of proprietary content and intelligence, sourced directly from insurers through deep industry relationships. This insight and data is incredibly valuable and cannot be replicated by competitors or AI. Mariana and the team are working to leverage this data to launch a new generation of data and AI products, including an MCP (Model Context Protocol) to embed Insurance Insider’s intelligence into customer AI workflows, and deliver its content more intelligently.

International expansion is also on the agenda, and in particular we are supporting the business to expand in the US, which is its fastest-growing geography, and they recently successfully launched their New York conference. The Commercial Team is working with management on key product extensions, including the asset management side of the insurance market. There is significant further opportunity across the US and in other geographies, including in Asia. Alongside organic growth initiatives, M&A is absolutely on the table, and the ECI Origination Team is working closely with management to identify selective acquisitions that can accelerate international expansion and build out capabilities.

Insurance Insider is already well on its journey from a specialist intelligence provider to a data and AI-led market intelligence platform with global reach. We have been delighted to support Mariana and the team to date and look forward to what comes next. 

Co-investment isn’t a new phenomenon, but over the past ten years, what was once an occasional feature of larger transactions has become a defining characteristic of how mid-market funds operate.

At ECI, two-thirds of our fund investments since 2020 have been shared with LPs, with a total of c. £500m syndicated. Jeremy and Chris share more about ECI’s co-investment approach and why demand shows no signs of slowing down.

What’s driving investor demand for co-invest?  

The most obvious draw for LPs is economics. Co-investments are typically offered on a fee-free, carry-free basis, which materially reduces the cost of an LP's exposure to a manager. An investor committing £50m to a fund and receiving £50m of co-investment halves their blended fees with that manager.

But economics are only one part of the story. Co-investment also offers additional exposure to attractive investments, a shorter investment horizon and added insight into the manager’s assessment.

A typical co-investment might mean a four-to-five-year investment hold, compared with the full lifecycle of a 10-year fund, meaning capital is typically returned sooner. LPs also gain closer access to the GP’s deal team, diligence materials and investment thesis on individual assets, giving them depth of insight that a blind-pool commitment does not necessarily provide. For many investors, the discretion to choose which opportunities to back is another key attraction.

LP investment in capability is accelerating the trend 

What has changed most noticeably over the past decade is how streamlined the co-investment process has become. Many investors have significantly increased the frequency with which they co-invest, and in doing so, established clear processes often run by dedicated teams. They can move quickly and reliably, providing the clarity required by managers.

Many funds of funds have raised standalone co-investment vehicles, often at significant scale. Smaller fund-of-funds managers are also now raising dedicated co-invest capital from their underlying clients. The result is a significantly larger pool of capital earmarked specifically for co-investment, and a cohort of LPs who can evaluate and execute on opportunities faster than ever before.

A 2025 survey by law firm Dechert found that more than half (54%) of private equity firms in EMEA run a co-investment programme, with most running it on an opportunistic, deal-by-deal basis.

The GP perspective: disciplined portfolio construction  

For GPs, co-investment serves a clear structural benefit. At ECI, we look to build portfolios of 12 to 15 platform companies per fund, limiting any single investment to around 10% of the fund at the point of investment. Co-investment therefore provides important flexibility in right-sizing the fund’s position.

Co-investment also deepens the GP-LP relationship. Syndication gives investors direct visibility into how case teams operate, how diligence is conducted and how value creation plans are executed. That transparency builds trust and creates a stronger foundation for the longer-term partnership.

For investors like ECI that meet management teams many years ahead of a transaction, it gives us flexibility of cheque size if the company we have built early conviction in has grown significantly over that multi-year relationship. 

Balancing supply and demand  

With more LP capital seeking co-investment than ever before, GPs face a practical question: how do you allocate fairly when demand outstrips the available deal flow?

The approach varies. Some GPs raise co-investment vehicles alongside their main fund, where capital is deployed pro rata into every investment. This is structurally simpler, albeit it offers LPs little to no discretion.

The alternative, and the model ECI follows, is deal-by-deal syndication with a rotational allocation policy. We survey our LPs to understand their preferences – minimum and maximum cheque sizes, sector focus, exclusions – and use that to build a shortlist for each opportunity. We then seek to provide wide access rather than concentrating opportunities solely among a handful of the largest investors.

As LPs have become more experienced, some have built teams who can co-underwrite opportunities alongside the GP, coming in upon closing rather than through post-investment syndication. The timing of when to engage with co-underwrite investors is important: too early risks starting conversations while the investment case is still being developed; too late and the GP runs the risk of not securing co-invest upon closing. Getting that balance right requires open dialogue between all parties.

Looking ahead   

It seems certain that LP capital will continue to flow into co-investments at pace, supported by the track record that co-investors have built and their own ability to raise increasingly large pools of capital. For GPs, this adds another meaningful criterion on which they will be assessed during their next fundraise.

As discussed earlier this year, DPI has risen rapidly to become one of the most critical performance metrics when it comes to fundraising (with ECI’s 2015 vintage fund standing at 2.5x DPI and 2018 vintage at 1.2x DPI) but we have seen co-investment follow closely behind. In a challenging fundraising market, strong performance on these two metrics is likely to remain high on the agenda.

Our first article on ‘What no one tells CEOs about private equity’ was so popular that it confirmed our suspicions: the world of private equity can be incredibly opaque, even to those who operate in it! And while there is a lot of discussion about valuations and deals, there is significantly less discussion about what incentives and decisions sit behind them. Here are four topics that we thought would give CEOs a useful peek behind the curtain.

1. Do private equity investors really have skin in the game? 

One of the common misconceptions about private equity is that investors are simply deploying other people’s money. In reality, the individuals you meet in the investment team (and those outside of the specific investment professionals you are dealing with in the wider PE firm’s team) are going to be expected to invest alongside their funds. That isn’t paper money; it is real cash they send into the firm to go into the deal.

This means that people making those decisions not only have their own capital at risk when they choose to invest, but they know they have all their colleagues’ capital at risk as well. The benefit of this, beyond needing meaningful conviction in the management teams you want to back, is that there is an alignment of interest between investment teams and their end investors (i.e. their LPs – typically funds of funds, endowments or pension managers).

But why does that matter to CEOs? When investors say they care about long-term value creation, they are truly putting their money where their mouth is. Decisions about growth and investment have real consequences for them personally.

2. How do management teams decide how much to roll over? 

When a private equity investment takes place, management teams are given the opportunity to "roll over" some of the proceeds from the transaction into the newly backed business. Usually, it is expected that the leadership team does so if they are staying in the business and that they reinvest a meaningful sum (e.g. 50% of their proceeds less tax and fees), as it shows they have conviction and are committing to the next stage of the journey, i.e. they are buying as well as selling.

But how do you decide how much? The investors want management to have meaningful skin in the game, but beyond that it comes down to how much value do you want to realise today versus how much upside do you want to keep exposure to in the future? Tax can also play a role in that decision. For many CEOs, they want to get the benefit of the value creation strategy that the investor is backing; however, it needs to be balanced with appetite for risk. The important part is that rollover shouldn’t be treated just as a financial structuring exercise; it’s more of a strategic choice about how management teams view the next phase of the company’s journey. The best part is, if your growth strategy goes to plan you should get two bites of the cherry either way – some cash out today, and a stake in what will hopefully be a much bigger business down the road.

3. Do private equity investors prefer organic growth or M&A? 

Private equity investors commonly back acquisition strategies, so it can lead CEOs to assume that investors prioritise M&A opportunities.

In reality, acquisitions can be an excellent way to accelerate growth, enter new markets, add capabilities or build out your customer base – so it’s no surprise private equity-backed businesses use M&A to create value. However, organic growth is often still viewed as the strongest indicator of a company’s underlying quality. Winning a new customer, increasing market share or launching a successful product is often a cheaper way of generating additional revenue than acquiring it through M&A. For that reason, investors often place a premium on businesses that can demonstrate strong organic growth.

The truth is, we’ve had success with pure buy-and-build businesses, and with companies that have grown purely organically, so any ‘preference’ does not exclude the other. But it’s important that when you see headlines about the number of acquisitions a PE firm has backed each year, it doesn’t mean all firms in the portfolio are going to be pursuing aggressive acquisitive strategies.

4. Will a private equity investor load my business with debt?  

Debt is probably the area where private equity attracts the most misunderstanding, particularly relative to our cousins in venture capital. In venture, there is typically no ‘conventional’ debt, as the companies they back are often losing cash, so can’t get a conventional loan from a bank. However, typically venture equity capital money ranks ahead of management via a liquidation preference or participating ‘double dip’ liquidation preference – basically the investor gets a fixed return (1-3x) before management and other shareholders get a pound/euro/dollar. At frothy valuations, that creates a significant hurdle for venture-backed management teams to clear.

If they deviate from plan, venture-backed management teams can and do lose all their value, i.e. these instruments behave like debt with ranking in the capital structure even though they are technically equity. A recent academic study in the US examining the impact of wealth taxes determined that 84% of venture-backed businesses realise zero value and 2% generate 80% of the value, so this is a real risk for 98% of VC-backed companies, not a theoretical one. In private equity, management rolled-over equity typically ranks equally to the investors, so upside and downside risk is shared equally, meaning the value built to the point of a deal is not at risk of being absorbed by an investor’s preferential instruments if there is a rocky patch in performance.

The perception of PE is sometimes that debt is a goal in itself, or that investors seek to maximise leverage wherever possible. It should instead be thought of as a tool – rather than a strategy – and a tool that is designed to benefit all shareholders.

The reason debt is used is relatively simple: it is typically a cheaper source of capital than equity. If an investor puts in £20m, they’re likely hoping to make a return of c.25% IRR (not the same thing, but somewhat akin to interest), whereas a lender would be happy earning c.10% interest. Combining debt and equity can therefore create a more efficient capital structure for the business and improve returns for everyone invested in it, including management teams who hold equity.

Importantly, that only works if debt supports the broader growth plan. Too much debt, and a business will find it harder to invest, hire, innovate or pursue strategic opportunities. That is not in anybody's interest. As per the above, organic growth is a strategic imperative, so it doesn’t make sense / is counterproductive for debt to stymie profitable growth.

Good investors spend a significant amount of time examining different performance scenarios to ensure a business has the flexibility it needs to continue investing while meeting its obligations. Investors will look to get a level of debt that is appropriate for the company’s size, resilience and growth ambitions – not just to maximise leverage.

Conclusion: It’s all about alignment

Discussions about rollover, incentives, growth strategy and debt structures can sometimes appear technical, but they are all rooted in a relatively simple principle: alignment. The strongest partnerships are built when investors and management teams share a common ambition for the future of the business.

We are delighted to announce that Independent Governance Group (IGG), a leading provider of professional pensions trusteeship, governance and communication services, has appointed Mike Ethelston as Chief Executive Officer, effective 2 November 2026.

Operating primarily across the UK and Ireland, IGG has 225 professional staff and more than 500 appointments with assets exceeding £320 billion.

Mike brings over thirty years of leadership experience at premier professional services firms to the role, having held senior positions at Accenture and Capco, where he was UK Managing Partner. Mike’s appointment comes as IGG looks to its next growth phase, building on the leading position in the pensions industry which Founder and current CEO Andrew Bradshaw has overseen. Andrew will become a Non-Executive Director at IGG and remains a significant investor in the firm.