A side-by-side comparison of Border to Coast Pensions Partnership and British Columbia Investment Management across firm type, scale, strategy, and geography.
Both firms are active in 3 shared asset classes out of 5 tracked between them.
| Border to Coast Pensions Partnership | British Columbia Investment Management | |
|---|---|---|
| Basics | ||
| Firm type | Public Pension Fund | Public Pension Fund |
| Country | United Kingdom | Canada |
| Founded | 2018 | 1999 |
| Firm age | 8 yrs | 27 yrs |
| Roles | Lp | Lp |
| Scale & AUM | ||
| Market position | Large ($20–100B) | Giant ($100–500B) |
| Strategy & Focus | ||
| Investment style | Multi-asset | Multi-asset |
| Diversification | Broad | Broad |
| Asset classes | private equity, private credit, real estate, infrastructure, fixed income | private equity, private credit, real estate, infrastructure, venture capital, fixed income, cash |
| Shared asset classes | ||
Border to Coast Pensions Partnership is a public pension fund based in United Kingdom, while British Columbia Investment Management is a public pension fund based in Canada. 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.
| 5: private equity, private credit, real estate, infrastructure, fixed income |
| Geography | ||
| Geographic bias | Europe | North America |
| Regions | North America, Europe, Asia, Global | North America, Europe, Asia, Canada |
| Shared geographies | North America, Europe, Asia | |
| Fund Portfolio | ||
| Published funds | 0 | 4 |
| Largest fund | — | BCI Investment Grade Private Credit Fund |
| Vintage range | — | 2018–2026 |
| Fund statuses | — | Investing (4) |
| Team | ||
| Total contacts | 10 | 13 |
| Network & Relationships | ||
| Connectivity | 35/100 | 23/100 |
| Network strength | 13/100 | 5/100 |
| Relationships | 5 | 2 |
| Relationship density | Very high | Moderate |
| Network maturity | Emerging | Emerging |
| Similarity | ||
| Overall similarity | 20% | |
| Asset class overlap | 71% | |
| Geography overlap | 38% | |
