Editorial Policy

Our Mission

We exist to give sophisticated investors a primary-source-anchored view of the alternative investments landscape. Most platform marketing is forward-looking. Most legacy content sites repeat that marketing. AltStreet researches platforms the way an institutional allocator's diligence team would — against SEC EDGAR filings, FINRA BrokerCheck records, audited financials, PPMs, and platform-disclosed documents — and publishes structured, evidence-anchored reviews and data findings that a sophisticated investor can verify independently.

Research Methodology

Primary-Source Standard

Every factual claim in an AltStreet review is anchored to a primary source. Primary sources include:

• SEC EDGAR filings — Form D, Form 1-A, 253G2, 1-K, 1-SA, N-CSR, FOCUS Part II, S-1, and related issuer documents
• FINRA records — BrokerCheck, IAPD, broker-dealer CRD and SEC# records
• Platform-disclosed materials — PPMs, subscription agreements, fee schedules, offering memoranda
• Audited financial statements — where publicly available or submitted through the Verified Profile program
• Direct platform access — investor questionnaires, accreditation verification, KYC/biometric ID, data room access, public catalog content
• Regulatory orders and enforcement actions — SEC administrative proceedings, FINRA disciplinary records, state securities regulator filings

Secondary sources (industry reports, press coverage, third-party analytics) are used for context and corroboration but are not the anchor for factual claims. When secondary sources are cited, the source and date are attributed.

The AltStreet Data Layer

We maintain a structured database of platform metadata, deal records, fee structures, regulatory filings, broker-dealer registrations, and documented exits. The data layer enables cross-record analysis that single-platform research cannot surface — pattern findings across a platform's catalog, cross-vintage performance comparisons, and structural pattern detection across the broader alternatives market.

Data layer findings published in reviews include source attribution, data-collection date, and the data field referenced. When data findings derive from cross-record analysis (e.g., "across 60 captured catalog records, none met our clean-disclosure threshold"), the methodology used to construct the sample is disclosed.

Platform Reviews

Platform reviews follow a structured format covering: corporate structure and regulatory standing, fee economics, fund or deal structure mechanics, custody and administration, tax treatment and reporting, liquidity and exit mechanics, investor operations, documented findings from primary-source analysis, evidence highlights, and an editorial perspective. Each review section is evidence-anchored. Where data is partial, missing, or contested, we label it as such.

Access Testing

Where investor access is a material feature of a platform's value proposition, we conduct documented user access tests — completing published onboarding flows, accreditation verification, KYC/biometric ID procedures, and data room access requests as a prospective investor. We document the platform's response to each step and publish the documented experience as part of the review. Access tests are framed as single verified observations, not universal claims about how every investor's experience will resolve.

Cross-Vintage and Cross-Record Analysis

Where a platform offers multiple vintages of the same underlying fund or manager across time, we analyze how marketing presentation, performance figures, and methodology disclosures evolve across vintages. This methodology surfaces findings (such as cross-vintage performance mutation for the same fund) that per-vintage review cannot detect.

Language Standards

Descriptive vs. Prescriptive

AltStreet reviews use descriptive analytical language rather than prescriptive investment advice. We describe what a platform's documents disclose, what the data shows, and what investors should verify independently. We do not issue buy, sell, or hold recommendations. For tax treatment, projected returns, and other forward-looking elements, we use conditional framing — "may," "can," "illustrative," "potentially" — rather than definitive language.

Source Attribution for Competing Figures

When multiple sources present different numbers for the same metric (e.g., platform-reported AUM versus regulator-filed figures, or different historical IRR figures across marketing vintages), we attribute each figure to its source and date rather than presenting a single composite without context.

Sample-Size Caveats

When findings depend on small samples (low-record-count platform catalogs, limited exit data, narrow vintages), we disclose the sample size and caveat the finding accordingly. Cross-record patterns across larger samples receive more weight than single-record observations.

Methodology Footnotes

Where we apply an internal methodology standard (such as our clean-disclosure threshold for marketing-material analysis), we label it explicitly as an AltStreet methodology standard — not a regulatory definition or industry-standard benchmark — and define what the threshold requires.

Avoiding Inflammatory Framing

We use neutral analytical language even when findings are unfavorable to a platform. Editorial framing is consistent across verified and unverified platforms and across favorable and unfavorable findings. We avoid characterizing platforms as "fraudulent," "scams," or other inflammatory labels unless there is an enforceable regulatory determination or court finding to that effect; otherwise we present evidence and let the reader draw conclusions.

Corrections Process

How to Submit a Correction

Email [email protected] with the following information:

• The specific URL or review section where the error appears
• The current claim or data point you believe is incorrect
• The corrected value or revised framing you are proposing
• The primary-source evidence supporting the correction (filing link, document excerpt, screenshot with source attribution, or other verifiable reference)
• Your name and affiliation (required for platform-side corrections from verified contacts; optional but appreciated for reader corrections)

Processing Timeline

• Acknowledgment: within 2 business days of submission
• Standard review: within 5 business days of acknowledgment for routine factual corrections
• Complex review: up to 14 business days for corrections that require additional document analysis, regulatory cross-referencing, or editorial discussion
• Priority processing (48 hours) is available for Verified Premium platform contacts; this is operational prioritization and does not change correction outcomes

Correction Outcomes

A correction request results in one of the following outcomes. The outcome is determined by analyst review of submitted evidence against AltStreet's editorial standard, not by who submitted the request or whether the platform is enrolled in the Verified Profile program.

• Corrected factual field — the submitted evidence supports the change. The field is updated in the review with source attribution, timestamp, and an entry in the review's update log.
• Added context or clarification — the evidence is partial or contextual. We add clarifying language adjacent to the finding rather than changing the underlying claim.
• Added platform response — applies to verified platforms with active right-of-reply access. The platform's attributed response is displayed adjacent to the finding; the finding itself is not modified.
• No change, with explanation — the evidence does not support the requested change. We document the request and the reasoning. For material disputed findings, the dispute is logged in the review's audit log.
• New finding or discrepancy flag — the submitted documents reveal an inconsistency with marketing claims, regulatory filings, or prior disclosures. We add a new finding to the review.

What We Will Not Do

• Remove editorial findings supported by primary-source evidence on request alone
• Modify findings based on threat of litigation absent a legal order from a competent jurisdiction
• Suppress data insights, evidence highlights, or perspective sections in response to marketing complaints
• Soften unfavorable findings in exchange for verification revenue, advertising, or commercial relationships
• Process anonymous corrections that do not include primary-source evidence — we acknowledge them but cannot evaluate them

Update Log Transparency

Material corrections (factual changes, new findings, retracted claims) are recorded in the review's update log with the date, description of the change, and where appropriate the source of the correction request. Routine updates (typos, formatting, broken links) are made without log entries. The update log is part of the review and visible to all readers.

Editorial Independence

Separation from the Verified Profile Program

AltStreet operates a paid Verified Profile program through which platforms can submit primary-source documentation, receive a structural fact re-audit, and access a right-of-reply channel on their review. Verification is a paid factual infrastructure product — not an editorial endorsement.

The following firewall is binding on all AltStreet operations:

• Verification does not modify editorial findings, perspective, one-line verdict, data insights, risk assessments, or any other independent AltStreet analysis
• Verified platforms and unverified platforms are reviewed using the same editorial methodology and standards
• Verification status is disclosed on platform reviews; readers can identify which platforms have engaged with the verification program
• Discrepancies identified during verification may be published as new findings even when the platform is paying for verification
• The full Verified Profile program rules are documented in the Verification Policy

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

• No investment commissions: AltStreet does not receive commissions, transaction fees, or revenue shares from investments made by readers in platforms or assets covered in our research.
• No advertising sponsorship of editorial content: We do not accept payment for favorable coverage, sponsored review placement, or any commercial influence over editorial decisions.
• No employee positions in covered platforms: AltStreet editorial staff do not hold investments in platforms or assets they cover during the period of coverage. Analysts with personal financial holdings in a platform under review recuse themselves from editorial decisions affecting that platform.
• Disclosure of financial relationships: Any non-verification financial relationship between AltStreet and a platform (future enterprise data licensing, consulting engagements, research services) is disclosed prominently on the relevant platform review.
• Affiliate links: Where AltStreet uses affiliate tracking on outbound platform links, the link relationship is disclosed at the point of mention. Affiliate status does not affect editorial coverage or analysis. We analyze affiliate and non-affiliate platforms with identical methodology and standards.

Content Categories

Platform Reviews

Structured forensic reviews of investment platforms covering corporate structure, regulatory standing, fee economics, custody and administration, tax treatment, liquidity and exit mechanics, investor operations, evidence highlights, and editorial perspective. Every review is evidence-anchored to primary sources.

Data Findings

Structured findings from cross-record analysis of the AltStreet data layer. Findings include the underlying data field, methodology, sample size, and data-collection date.

Category Reports

Analyses of trends, patterns, and structural characteristics within specific alternative asset categories. Based on primary-source data from the AltStreet database and disclosed methodology.

Educational Content

Articles explaining investment concepts, fund structures, regulatory frameworks, tax treatment, and market mechanics. Provides objective information without specific buy/sell recommendations.

Opinion & Commentary

Clearly labeled opinion pieces representing the author's perspective. Even labeled opinion content is supported by evidence and analysis.

Investment Disclaimers

Editorial Team Standards

• Expertise: Contributors have relevant background in finance, securities analysis, regulatory research, journalism, or related professional disciplines.
• Continuing Education: Ongoing engagement with evolving regulatory frameworks (SEC, FINRA, BaFin, AIFMD, CSSF), fund structures, and alternative asset categories.
• Methodology Discipline: Adherence to the primary-source standard, language standards, and corrections process documented in this policy.
• Recusal: Analysts with personal financial interests in covered platforms recuse themselves from editorial decisions affecting those platforms.
• Transparency: Author qualifications and any relevant disclosures are visible on contributor pages.

Reader Feedback

We welcome reader input across several channels:

• Corrections: [email protected] (with primary-source evidence)
• Coverage requests: [email protected]
• Investor experiences: tip-offs about platform experiences (positive or negative) are valuable inputs to our review process. Submit through either email above.
• Methodology feedback: suggestions on improving our research methodology, data standards, or review format are welcome at the corrections email.

Content Updates

Alternative investment markets evolve rapidly. AltStreet maintains review currency through:

• Trigger-based refresh: reviews are updated when new EDGAR filings, regulatory actions, structural changes, or material events affect platform analysis
• Quarterly refresh for verified profiles: Verified Profile program platforms receive guaranteed quarterly review refresh; unverified platforms refresh on editorial trigger schedule
• Date transparency: review dates, last-updated dates, and data-collection dates are displayed on every review
• Update logs: material updates are recorded in each review's update log with date and description

Sources & Attribution

• All quantitative and factual claims are attributed to a primary source where one exists
• Direct quotes from filings, marketing materials, or platform disclosures are clearly marked and attributed with document and location
• Data sources are cited with links to source documents where available (EDGAR, FINRA BrokerCheck, public regulatory portals)
• Third-party research and analysis is properly credited; we do not present others' work as our own
• Verbatim quotes from copyrighted materials are limited to fair-use excerpts necessary to support the editorial analysis

Regulatory Compliance

• AltStreet is not registered as an investment adviser, broker-dealer, or municipal securities adviser
• Compliance with FTC guidelines on affiliate and material connection disclosures
• Adherence to truth-in-advertising standards
• Respect for intellectual property and copyright rights
• Protection of user privacy per our Privacy Policy
• Documents and content submitted by platforms through the Verified Profile program are handled per the Verification Policy

Contact Information

Commitment to Readers

AltStreet exists for the reader. Sophisticated investors should be able to verify our claims against the same primary sources we use, understand the methodology behind our findings, and trust that commercial relationships do not influence editorial conclusions.

When we get something wrong, we want to know. The corrections process above is the binding mechanism — bring it to our attention with primary-source evidence, and we will verify and make revisions if supported.

Alternative investments can be complex, illiquid, and risky. Our role is to make the underlying structures, fees, and disclosures more legible — not to make investment decisions for readers.