MSCI Burgiss vs CEPRES
A side-by-side comparison of MSCI Burgiss and CEPRES — two options for modeling & valuation. Pricing, features, and honest pros and cons.
Category
Modeling & Valuation
LP Reporting & Investor Relations
Rating
4.3 / 5
4.3 / 5
Pricing
Enterprise / Custom
Enterprise / Custom
Best for
Benchmarking fund performance the way LPs will
LPs underwriting managers and GPs proving track records with data
Key features
- Private fund performance data sourced from LPs
- Vintage-year benchmarks by strategy and geography
- TVPI, DPI, IRR and PME analytics
- Portfolio analytics for allocators
- Integration with MSCI's broader risk toolkit
- Verified deal and fund performance database via direct GP exchange
- DealForge deal analytics and benchmarking
- Fund screening, due diligence and portfolio forecasting
- AInsights AI layer for private-markets queries
- Cash-flow modeling and scenario analysis
Pros
- LP-sourced data avoids self-reporting survivorship bias
- The benchmark set institutional LPs actually reference
- Deep vintage history across market cycles
- Gross, deal-level data most benchmark providers simply lack
- Trusted intermediary status opens data LPs cannot get elsewhere
- Useful on both sides of the fundraise conversation
Cons
- Institutional pricing well beyond emerging-manager budgets
- Venture cuts are less granular than broad buyout coverage
- Buyout coverage is deeper than early-stage venture
- Meaningful subscription cost for smaller managers