Evaluating a DST sponsor starts with understanding how much of its historical performance is available for review.
The next question is what that history actually tells us.
Historical disclosure gives advisors information to examine. Interpreting it requires understanding the measure, the number of programs behind each percentage, and the limits of the comparison.
Blue Vault’s covered closed-DST records provide one perspective: how actual distribution rates compare with the rates originally projected for those programs.
Across 418 records with both rates available, 322—or 77.0%—are distributing at or above projection. But that combined figure includes two different outcomes: programs meeting their projected rate and programs exceeding it.
That distinction matters when comparing sponsors.
What the Sponsor Comparison Shows
The chart ranks seven sponsors by the percentage of evaluated closed DST records distributing at or above their projected rates.
For this analysis, “closed” refers to programs closed to new investment. It does not necessarily mean the investment has completed its full cycle.
Closed DST Distribution Comparison
Ranked by the percentage of evaluated programs distributing at or above projection.
Ranking reflects only the percentage of evaluated records distributing at or above projected rates. It is not an overall ranking of sponsor quality, investment suitability, or total returns.
Based on sponsor-provided projected and actual distribution rates in Blue Vault’s covered closed DST records. These are not averages since inception or measures of total investment return. Includes only records with both rates available. “Above projection only” excludes programs distributing exactly at their projected rate. Percentages use each sponsor’s evaluated records; the total uses all 418 evaluated records. Coverage may not include every sponsor offering. Sponsor-provided data is not guaranteed to be accurate. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This information is not investment advice.
1. Meeting Projection and Exceeding It Are Different Outcomes
Of the 418 evaluated records:
- 260, or 62.2%, are distributing exactly at projection.
- 62, or 14.8%, are distributing strictly above projection.
- 96, or 23.0%, are distributing below projection.
Together, the first two categories produce the 77.0% at-or-above figure.
The distinction helps explain why the chart includes a separate “Above Projection Only” column.
Capital Square, for example, has 81.8% of its evaluated records distributing at or above projection, while 0.0% are strictly above. Its qualifying records are meeting their projected rates.
Passco has 50.0% at or above projection, while 32.7% are strictly above—the highest above-only percentage among the seven sponsors shown.
ExchangeRight has 100.0% at or above projection, with 21.2% strictly above.
The sponsor order changes when the question changes.
Ranking by meeting or exceeding projection places ExchangeRight first. Ranking solely by exceeding projection would place Passco first, followed by Inland and ExchangeRight.
Neither measure establishes which sponsor is best. Each describes a different aspect of the covered distribution record.
2. Read the Percentage Alongside the Program Count
The evaluated record counts range from 24 for AEI to 99 for ExchangeRight.
Those counts give advisors context for the percentages. AEI’s 91.7% represents 22 of 24 records. Capital Square’s 81.8% represents 72 of 88.
A larger sample provides more observations, but does not automatically establish a stronger sponsor or a more representative history. Advisors should also consider which programs are included, their property types, their vintages, and how long they have operated.
The total percentage is calculated from 322 qualifying records divided by all 418 evaluated records. It is not an average of the seven sponsor percentages.
These counts also represent the records usable for this particular calculation—not necessarily each sponsor’s complete historical program count.
3. Distribution Rates Do Not Tell the Entire Investment Story
This chart compares each program’s actual distribution rate with its own projected rate.
It does not compare sponsors against a common return target. Nor does it show how far above or below projection a program is distributing.
Most importantly, distributing at or above projection is not proof of a positive total investment return.
The comparison does not establish cumulative investor cash flows, the source or sustainability of distributions, changes in property value, proceeds at disposition, or the eventual full-cycle outcome. The actual rates used here are also not averages since inception.
A below-projection rate identifies a distribution shortfall under this measure. It does not, by itself, establish an investor’s eventual gain or loss.
For advisors, the chart is a starting point for questions such as:
- How much does the actual rate differ from projection?
- Has the distribution rate changed during the hold period?
- What supports the distributions?
- What additional operating and full-cycle information is available?
Historical Visibility Makes These Questions Possible
Sponsors whose historical information is represented give advisors evidence to examine beyond projections for the next offering.
That evidence can reveal programs meeting expectations, programs exceeding them, and programs falling short under a particular measure.
Coverage remains important. Four Springs is excluded from this calculation because actual distribution rates were not provided in the source dataset. Its exclusion does not establish poor performance or the absence of historical information elsewhere.
Blue Vault encourages sponsors to make comprehensive historical performance information available and welcomes updated historical information submitted directly.
Transparency does not guarantee good performance. It gives advisors more information with which to evaluate performance.
Continue the Analysis in Blue Vault
Use the comparison as a starting point, then examine the available program-level distribution information, sponsor history, and full-cycle outcomes in Blue Vault.
Already Have Blue Vault Access?
Log in to continue your research.
Not Yet Registered?
Financial advisors can access Blue Vault at no cost.
Sources & Methodology
Source: Blue Vault; The analysis includes 418 covered records across seven sponsors with both projected and actual distribution rates available.
“At or above projection” means the actual rate is greater than or equal to the projected rate. “Above projection only” requires the actual rate to be strictly greater. Each sponsor percentage uses that sponsor’s evaluated records as its denominator. The total uses all 418 evaluated records.
Sponsors are ranked by percentage at or above projection. This is a ranking of that specific measure, not overall investment performance or sponsor quality. Four Springs is excluded because actual distribution rates were unavailable in the source dataset.
Distribution-rate comparisons are not averages since inception or measures of total investment return. Coverage may not represent every historical sponsor program. Sponsor-provided information is not guaranteed to be accurate. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Blue Vault does not provide investment advice.
