A side-by-side comparison of Oaktree Capital Management and BC Partners across firm type, scale, strategy, and geography.
Oaktree Capital Management manages roughly 5.6× the assets of the other firm.
No overlapping asset classes — these firms operate in entirely separate markets.
| Oaktree Capital Management | BC Partners | |
|---|---|---|
| Basics | ||
| Firm type | Asset Manager | Asset Manager |
| Country | United States | London, United Kingdom |
| Founded | 1995 | 1986 |
| Firm age | 31 yrs | 40 yrs |
| Roles | Gp | Gp |
| Scale & AUM | ||
| AUM | $224B | $40B |
| Market position | Giant ($100–500B) | Large ($20–100B) |
| AUM ratio | 5.6× larger | |
| Strategy & Focus | ||
| Investment style | Multi-asset | Multi-asset |
| Diversification | Broad | Focused |
| Strategies | ||
Oaktree Capital Management is a asset manager based in United States, while BC Partners is a asset manager based in London, United Kingdom. This page compares their firm type, assets under management, strategies, and geographic focus.
By reported AUM, Oaktree Capital Management is larger ($224B vs $40B).
| 18 — Distressed Debt, Opportunistic Credit, Direct Lending, Senior Secured Loans |
| 2 — Asset-Backed Finance (ABF), Senior Secured |
| Asset classes | private credit, fixed income, private equity, real estate, other | private equity, private credit, real estate |
| Shared strategies | 1: Asset-Backed Finance (ABF) |
| Shared asset classes | 3: private credit, private equity, real estate |
| Geography | ||
| Geographic bias | North America | North America |
| Regions | North America, Europe, Emerging Markets, Global | North America, Europe, France, Germany |
| Shared geographies | North America, Europe | |
| Fund Portfolio | ||
| Published funds | 5 | 5 |
| Largest fund | Oaktree Opportunities Fund XII | BC Partners Fund XI |
| Vintage range | — | 2021–2025 |
| Fund statuses | Closed (5) | Investing (1), Closed (4) |
| Team | ||
| Total contacts | 24 | 13 |
| Team-to-AUM ratio | 0.1 per $B | 0.3 per $B |
| Network & Relationships | ||
| Connectivity | 49/100 | 0/100 |
| Network strength | 9/100 | 0/100 |
| Relationships | 11 | 0 |
| Relationship density | Moderate | Low |
| Network maturity | Emerging | Emerging |
| Similarity | ||
| Overall similarity | 28% | |
| Strategy overlap | 5% | |
| Asset class overlap | 60% | |
| Geography overlap | 20% | |