Three Things the COO Summit Taught Us About Building at This Stage

Black Flower Capital attended the With Intelligence Hedge Fund COO Summit Europe at Fairmont Windsor Park, 14 to 16 September 2026. Over three days, Fabian Fach joined managers, allocators and service providers from across the industry for a programme covering operational infrastructure, separately managed accounts, alpha capture, GP stakes, and the secure deployment of AI systems inside investment firms. This is what stood out.

By Fabian Fach, Founder, Black Flower Capital

In the Room

The With Intelligence Hedge Fund COO Summit Europe ran for three days at Fairmont Windsor Park. The programme covered operational infrastructure, separately managed accounts, alpha capture, GP stakes, and the secure deployment of AI systems inside investment firms. The summit operates under the Chatham House Rule: the discussions stay in the room, and the names stay off the record. What can be shared is where the attention went and why it mattered for a fund at BFC's stage.

The audience was not a cross-section of the hedge fund world. It was specifically the people who build and maintain the machines behind the strategies: chief operating officers, chief financial officers, general counsel, and the heads of technology, risk, and fund administration at funds ranging from early-stage to multi-billion in assets under management. The conversations that happen in that room are the ones that determine whether a fund survives its first institutional allocation process.

What Carried the Most Weight

Three themes dominated the conversations most relevant to where BFC is now.

Measurement discipline. The language around assets under management is less standardised than most allocators assume. Terms that appear equivalent across fund structures frequently refer to substantially different things: gross assets, net assets, committed capital, deployed capital, and shadow NAV all appear in manager presentations as variations on a single number that allocators are trying to compare. The discipline required to define a number carefully before presenting it is not a legal or compliance function; it is a first signal of operational rigour. Funds that are imprecise with their own metrics tend to be imprecise with the metrics that matter most to allocators. The point was made multiple times across multiple sessions, in slightly different forms, by practitioners who had each encountered the same problem from different sides of the table.

The operational engine. The parts of a fund business that receive the least external attention are frequently the parts that determine whether a strategy can be delivered reliably at scale. Prime brokerage relationships, technology architecture, fund administration, regulatory reporting, and the operational frameworks within which investment decisions are executed are not supporting functions to the investment process. They are the investment process as experienced by an institutional investor who is not watching the portfolio screen but is watching the operational due diligence checklist. A fund that cannot demonstrate operational infrastructure commensurate with its strategy, its counterparties, and its investor base will not pass the due diligence stage of a serious allocation regardless of its track record. The standard being applied in 2026 is materially higher than it was five years ago, and the gap between what a fund needs to demonstrate and what early-stage managers typically have in place is the gap that early institutional conversations expose.

Institutionalisation. The third theme is the deliberate work of building a firm whose processes do not depend on any single individual. For a founder-led fund, institutionalisation is the specific challenge that separates managers who grow into a durable business from those who grow into a dependency. The conversations at Windsor made clear that allocators have become considerably more systematic about assessing this dimension: they want to see documented processes, clear decision accountability that does not collapse to one person, and evidence that the fund would operate coherently in the absence of its founder. This is not a soft question about culture. It is a structural question about operational risk.

What It Means for BFC

The summit produced a clear sense of where BFC's infrastructure is already sound and where it needs to develop further as the fund scales. The three themes above are not abstract. Each maps directly to specific decisions about systems, documentation, and organisational design that are being made now, at a stage where the cost of building correctly is substantially lower than the cost of rebuilding later.

The operational community is the part of the institutional market that validates or invalidates a fund before the investment committee ever sees the track record. Building credibility within that community, which is precisely what events like Windsor exist to do, is part of what determines whether a fund moves from being known in the right circles to being approved through the operational due diligence process that follows.

Our thanks to the organisers, to the speakers who prepared their sessions with genuine care, and to the peers who made the informal conversations as valuable as the formal agenda.