Shape a branded SIF experience
Adapt discovery, research and reporting to the workflow and brand context of your platform without changing the evidence base.
SIFPrime for institutions
Institutional SIF intelligence for research, risk and distribution teams.
Bring fund data, performance monitoring, risk evidence and controlled reporting into one workflow—configured around your users, governance and delivery requirements.
30-minute scoped walkthrough · Security and data review available · No implementation commitment
Built for
- AMCs
- Wealth platforms
- Banks
- Family offices
- Fintech and research teams
- Dated
- Evidence with provenance
- Role-aware
- Views and review ownership
- Scoped
- Data and implementation delivery
Source, observation date and missing fields remain visible.
Research, distribution, committee and operations context.
Agree fields, access, refresh and permitted use before build.
Start with the decision, then choose the capabilities.
Combine research, analytics and delivery around one useful workflow instead of adding another broad software layer.
Define
Shape the working surface
Start with the teams and research experience that need to share one evidence base.
Use one SIF intelligence base
Bring the directory, NAV, performance and strategy information into a coherent institutional research surface.
View public SIF dataEquip
Standardise the decision frame
Give research and distribution teams consistent comparison and education tools.
Apply a consistent comparison frame
Help advisors, researchers or clients evaluate products through shared product, performance and risk lenses.
Open comparisonPrepare teams for the category
Support internal readiness with focused SIF education for product, advisory and distribution teams.
Explore AcademyDeliver
Control outputs and scope
Match each research output to its audience, then define the implementation boundaries.
Shape research outputs by audience
Define monthly research, reports and decision material for the people responsible for review and action.
View public researchDefine the implementation scope
Agree data, access, security and operating requirements before committing to an implementation.
Start a scope conversationInstitutional Intelligence
Build one controlled decision layer around the tracked fund universe, evidence and institutional review process.
Current coverage: 33 strategies, 30 live strategies and 17 fund houses.
Fund analytics
Compare strategy, NAV, performance, cost, benchmark and observed downside fields.
Risk reporting
Design views around risk questions, monitoring thresholds and evidence trails.
Data delivery
Scope fields, provenance, refresh schedules and permitted downstream use.
Role-aware workflow
Align research, review, distribution and administrative responsibilities.
A consistent fund analytics frame
Compare funds without flattening the differences between mandates or hiding the status of the evidence.
Fund and mandate
- Strategy family
- AMC and status
- Benchmark
- Cost and liquidity
Performance
- Dated NAV
- Return windows
- Benchmark relationship
- Available history
Risk context
- Observed downside
- Risk language
- Missing fields
- Review ownership
Data governance
- Source trail
- Observation date
- Refresh schedule
- Permitted use
One evidence base, role-aware views
Give each team the context and controls it needs without creating separate versions of the truth.
Product and research
Evaluate the universe through shared definitions and dated observations.
Advisory and distribution
Use approved evidence in a consistent client or advisor workflow.
Committee and review
See assumptions, missing evidence, exceptions and accountable owners.
Admin and operations
Manage access, refresh, hand-offs and the operating process.
Scope first, then implement.
A useful institutional build begins with the job to be done. This keeps the first release focused and gives every team a clear basis for review.
Define users and decisions
Identify the teams involved, the decisions they make and where the current workflow breaks down.
Agree the evidence and controls
Confirm data sources, review needs, roles and the outputs that must be trusted.
Review a scoped demo
Walk through the proposed workflow and validate the useful surfaces before committing to delivery.
Set the delivery plan
Agree milestones, owners, dependencies and the measures that show whether the workflow improved.
Set the right scope before the first conversation.
Open a topic to understand who the workflow can serve, where customization begins and what makes a useful first pilot.
Open only what is relevant
Use these notes before requesting a demo or defining a pilot. Every topic starts closed so your team can focus on the scope that matters.
The scope can be shaped for product, research, investment, advisory, distribution or client-service teams. The first step is choosing the primary user and decision.
SIFPrime has an existing research and education foundation. Institutional work is then scoped around the required data, workflow, branding and operating model.
A focused first workflow such as fund research, risk review or advisor enablement is usually the clearest way to validate value and requirements.
Bring the primary audience, current workflow, desired output, relevant systems and any review or access requirements. A complete technical specification is not required for the first call.
Bring one decision workflow to the demo.
We will map the users, evidence, controls and outputs around that workflow so the discussion stays specific.