.jpg)
Why Most Emerging Managers Sound the Same (and How to Actually Differentiate)

One of the quiet realities of emerging manager fundraising is that most firms, despite sincere effort and real expertise, end up sounding nearly identical to one another. The strategies vary at the margins, but the language rarely does. LPs hear about disciplined underwriting, proprietary sourcing, operational value creation, conservative leverage, and “alignment” so frequently that these terms have lost all power as differentiators. Everyone is disciplined. Everyone has a network. Everyone claims an edge.
The problem isn’t dishonesty. The problem is structural. Emerging managers are trying to articulate sophisticated ideas in a crowded market where LPs are listening through mental models built over decades. When your audience has been exposed to hundreds of similar pitches, differentiation becomes less a matter of originality and more a matter of precision — the ability to define the specific angle you have on a category, and to communicate it in a way that actually survives the LP’s internal filter.
Differentiation for emerging managers is rarely about inventing something new. It is about identifying what is uniquely durable in your view of the world and expressing it with enough clarity that an LP could repeat it accurately later. Most emerging managers fail here not because they misunderstand their strategy, but because they have never been forced to distill the one or two ideas that actually set them apart.
1. The Category Problem: LPs Don’t Hear the Sharp Edges
LPs begin by sorting managers into categories. They are trying to understand whether they’ve heard this story before, where it fits inside their allocation framework, and whether your variation on the theme has any real structural advantage. If you cannot state the category clearly, LPs will assign you one — and usually not the one you prefer.
This is why emerging managers often sound indistinguishable. They are describing their strategy in terms of activities (“We source proprietary deals”) instead of positioning within the category (“We capture forced-seller dynamics in micro-cap carve-outs that are too operationally messy for mid-market funds”). The first is noise. The second is narrative.
When I ask emerging managers what makes their strategy distinct, many give me a list of traits rather than a point of view. Traits blur together. Points of view stand out. LPs aren’t looking for novelty; they are looking for a worldview they can evaluate.
2. The Overstuffing Trap
Another reason emerging managers sound the same is because they try to include everything — every sourcing channel, every operating lever, every historical observation about the market. In an attempt to appear comprehensive, they dilute exactly the things that make them distinctive.
I’ve seen pitchbooks with five different “value creation strategies,” eight elements of “differentiation,” and entire paragraphs dedicated to generic industry dynamics. None of this is harmful on its own, but it accumulates into something LPs experience as fog. The sharper points get buried. The nuances flatten into cliché.
Differentiation is the art of exclusion. You cannot be known for eight things. You can barely be known for three. The emerging managers who break through are those who have the discipline to foreground what matters and let the rest function as supporting evidence rather than the headline.
3. Specialization Is a Differentiator — But Only If You Own It
Specialization is the closest thing the emerging manager universe has to a cheat code. When a strategy is tightly defined, LPs can evaluate it more easily. It signals coherence, clarity, and conviction — three qualities LPs associate with institutional readiness.
But specialization only works when the manager owns it fully. Too often, emerging managers retreat from specialization at the exact moment it could help them. They worry the category is too narrow, or too fringe, or too underappreciated to be fundable. They broaden the language to “hedge” against LP skepticism, and in doing so, they give up the very thing that could differentiate them.
When BKM launched Fund I in 2014, multitenant industrial was not a category LPs understood. It was considered “too messy” and “too operational.” The way we broke through was not by softening the specificity but by sharpening it. We educated the market. We stayed consistent. We owned the category fully. What was initially perceived as a disadvantage became a structural edge because the story was told with conviction.
Emerging managers often underestimate how much LPs appreciate a manager who can articulate a category with unusual clarity. It suggests the GP has done the thinking required to operate in it.
4. The Real Threat to Differentiation: Generic Strategy Language
The biggest threat to differentiation is not competition; it is internal vagueness. When a manager cannot identify the core drivers of their strategy, the deck becomes a collage of generalized statements. That creates an unintended signal: if the GP cannot express their own edge clearly, the LP assumes the edge may not exist.
Good differentiation is not a list of features. It is a logic chain — an explanation of why a specific set of conditions in a category produces mispricing or opportunity, why the manager is structurally advantaged to capture it, and why that advantage is durable. Emerging managers who articulate this chain well often outperform more experienced peers in early fundraising conversations because the story feels cleaner and more investable.
5. Why Differentiation Matters More Than Ever
The bar for emerging managers has risen. LPs filter faster. They have more options. They can only add a handful of new relationships in any given cycle. In this environment, differentiation is not a marketing exercise — it is the mechanism by which an LP decides whether to spend time on you at all.
Strong differentiation signals:
- that the manager knows exactly who they are
- that the strategy is coherent
- that the edge is real
- that the GP has thought deeply about category structure
- that the firm is institutionally ready
Emerging managers who skip this work end up competing on charisma or vague claims of “superior deal flow.” Those who embrace it position themselves as the sharpest expression of an idea.
Closing Thought
Differentiation is often treated as a cosmetic exercise, but in emerging manager fundraising, it is foundational. LPs do not choose the most charismatic manager or the most complex strategy; they choose the one whose worldview is easiest to understand and hardest to confuse with anyone else’s. When you claim less and clarify more, your story travels further. And in a world where LPs hear hundreds of pitches a year, the story that travels is the story that wins.


