Two clear models depending on whether you want predictability or pure alignment. Both share the same principle: keep significantly more of what you generate. Specific numbers are discussed in a call so we can size them to your model.
substnz offers two commercial models for tied agents and asset managers operating under our investment firm license: a fixed-fee model (one-time onboarding cost plus a fixed periodic fee, predictable cost base) and an aligned revenue-share model (one-time onboarding cost plus an economics share tied to capital raised, no fixed periodic fees). Platform access, compliance operations, BaFin registration support, and the supervisory layer are included in both. Exact numbers are confirmed during the intro call.
The economics need to fit the way you work. Some teams want a predictable cost base and full retention of upside on their mandates. Others want zero fixed overhead and economics that scale only when they raise. We offer both, and we choose with you which one makes sense given your model, target markets, and pipeline.
Underneath either model is the same principle: substnz is the regulatory and operational backbone, you do the substantive capital markets work, and the economics reward the work that drives the business.
One-time onboarding cost plus a fixed periodic fee. Predictable cost base. You retain full economics on your mandates above the line. Typically suits asset managers and established placement teams who want certainty and prefer to manage their P&L as a known operating expense.
One-time onboarding cost. No fixed periodic fee. Economics share tied to capital raised. Fully aligned. Typically suits independent placement agents and capital-raising boutiques who want to scale without fixed overhead and prefer their cost base to move with their results.
End-to-end support for your registration as a tied agent in the public BaFin register — fit-and-proper, documentation, filing, tracking.
AML/KYC, suitability, conflicts management, regulatory reporting, supervisory function. Run under our investment firm license at no additional fee.
Investor CRM, pipeline, virtual data rooms, invoicing, GP/strategy management, onboarding workflows. Included at no extra cost in both models.
Access to 17+ EEA markets via the substnz passport. No additional country-specific licensing fees.
We carry the Haftungsdach supervisory and liability function for your tied agent activities. Examinations and regulator correspondence sit with us.
Two reasons. First, the right model and the right level depend on what you actually do — target markets, ticket sizes, mandate cadence, whether you’re a single principal or a team. A number we put on this page would either be too generic to be useful or too restrictive to be fair.
Second, the conversation about economics is the conversation about fit. Before talking numbers, we want to understand whether the substnz model is the right home for you at all. A 30-minute intro call answers both questions far more efficiently than a price card.
What we will say upfront: there is always a one-time onboarding cost (the same in both models), and there are no hidden fees on top of whichever model you choose. Everything is in the contract.
Because the right number depends on your model, target markets, and the scope you actually need. Posted prices would either be too generic to be useful or too restrictive to be fair to the range of teams we work with. We confirm the exact economics in an intro call.
There is a one-time onboarding cost in both models. It covers fit-and-proper assessment, contracting, internal procedures setup, platform activation, and the BaFin registration process. The specific amount is discussed during the intro call and reflects the scope of your setup.
We look at the shape of your business: how predictable your pipeline is, how much capital you expect to raise, your preferred P&L treatment, and whether you’re a principal or a team. For most asset managers and established teams, the fixed-fee model is cleaner. For independent placement agents and boutiques scaling up, the revenue-share is usually a better fit.
No. Whichever model you choose, the economics are what’s in the contract. Platform access, compliance operations, supervisory function, BaFin registration support, and MiFID II passporting are included — not separately billed.
Running your own investment firm carries capital requirements, ongoing compliance staffing, supervisory reporting infrastructure, and a multi-year build to passport across Europe. The Haftungsdach economics under substnz, in either model, are typically a fraction of the ongoing fixed cost of running a standalone WpI — without sacrificing regulatory standing.
Yes. Some teams start on revenue-share and migrate to fixed-fee once their pipeline stabilises, or vice versa. We can build that flexibility into the contract from the start if useful.
A 30-minute intro call covers your model, the right economic structure, and the onboarding plan. We’ll be specific about numbers once we understand the fit.