A side-by-side comparison of Antin Infrastructure Partners and Wellington Management across firm type, scale, strategy, and geography.
Wellington Management manages roughly 40.0× the assets of the other firm.
No overlapping asset classes — these firms operate in entirely separate markets.
| Antin Infrastructure Partners | Wellington Management | |
|---|---|---|
| Basics | ||
| Firm type | Asset Manager | Asset Manager |
| Country | France | United States |
| Founded | 2007 | 1928 |
| Firm age | 19 yrs | 98 yrs |
| Roles | Gp, Public Listing | Lp, Gp, Service Provider, Advisor, Lender |
| Scale & AUM | ||
| AUM | EUR 33.3B | $1.33T |
| Market position | Large ($20–100B) | Mega ($500B+) |
| AUM ratio | 40.0× larger | |
| Strategy & Focus | ||
| Investment style | infrastructure-focused | Multi-asset |
| Diversification | Moderate | Broad |
Antin Infrastructure Partners is a asset manager based in France, while Wellington Management is a asset manager based in United States. This page compares their firm type, assets under management, strategies, and geographic focus.
By reported AUM, Wellington Management is larger (EUR 33.3B vs $1.33T).
| Strategies |
| 7 — Value-Add, Digital Infrastructure, Transport, Renewables |
| 10 — CLOs, Private Placings, Commercial Real Estate Debt, Seed |
| Asset classes | infrastructure | fixed income, other, private credit, venture capital, hedge funds, secondaries, private equity |
| Geography | ||
| Geographic bias | Europe | North America |
| Regions | Europe, North America | North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, North America |
| Shared geographies | Europe, North America | |
| Fund Portfolio | ||
| Published funds | 10 | 10 |
| Largest fund | Antin Flagship Fund V | Wellington Hadley Harbor IV |
| Vintage range | 2008–2022 | 2019–2026 |
| Fund statuses | Closed (9), Fundraising (1) | Fundraising (3), Closed (7) |
| Team | ||
| Total contacts | 94 | 22 |
| Team-to-AUM ratio | 2.8 per $B | 0.0 per $B |
| Network & Relationships | ||
| Connectivity | 73/100 | 8/100 |
| Network strength | 54/100 | 1/100 |
| Relationships | 46 | 1 |
| Relationship density | Very high | Moderate |
| Network maturity | Emerging | Emerging |
| Similarity | ||
| Overall similarity | 18% | |
| Geography overlap | 67% | |