A side-by-side comparison of Ares Management and Hamilton Lane across firm type, scale, strategy, and geography.
Both firms are active in 3 shared asset classes out of 5 tracked between them.
| Ares Management | Hamilton Lane | |
|---|---|---|
| Basics | ||
| Firm type | Asset Manager | Asset Manager |
| Country | United States | United States |
| Founded | 1997 | 1991 |
| Firm age | 29 yrs | 35 yrs |
| Roles | Gp, Lender | Lp, Gp, Advisor |
| Scale & AUM | ||
| AUM | $146.3B | |
| Market position | Large ($20–100B) | Giant ($100–500B) |
| Strategy & Focus | ||
| Investment style | Multi-asset | Multi-asset |
| Diversification | Broad | Broad |
| Strategies | 23 — Co-investment, Fund-of-Funds, SMA / Managed Account, Evergreen / Semi-liquid Structure | |
Ares Management is a asset manager based in United States, while Hamilton Lane is a asset manager based in United States. This page compares their firm type, assets under management, strategies, and geographic focus.
AUM figures are not fully available for both firms on DataBane yet.
| Asset classes | private equity, private credit, real estate, hedge funds, infrastructure | private equity, private credit, real estate, secondaries, infrastructure, venture capital |
| Shared asset classes | 4: private equity, private credit, real estate, infrastructure |
| Geography | ||
| Geographic bias | North America | North America |
| Regions | United States, North America, Europe, Asia | North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Middle East |
| Shared geographies | North America, Europe, North America | |
| Fund Portfolio | ||
| Published funds | 0 | 19 |
| Largest fund | — | Hamilton Lane Secondary Fund VI |
| Fund statuses | — | Closed (6), Fundraising (13) |
| Team | ||
| Total contacts | 3 | 44 |
| Team-to-AUM ratio | — | 0.3 per $B |
| Network & Relationships | ||
| Connectivity | 42/100 | 32/100 |
| Network strength | 16/100 | 6/100 |
| Relationships | 7 | 3 |
| Relationship density | Moderate | Moderate |
| Network maturity | Emerging | Emerging |
| Similarity | ||
| Overall similarity | 13% | |
| Asset class overlap | 57% | |
| Geography overlap | 10% | |
