One segment or a mix: how would you want a hotel fund built?

Question

I've been reading two hospitality fund decks side by side and they disagree about the most basic thing. One buys extended stay only, same brand family, secondary markets, and says the whole point is that they know one operating model cold and can compare a bad month at property nine against property four. The other buys across segments on purpose, some leisure-destination, some business-heavy urban, some select service, and argues that hotel demand doesn't move as one thing and a mix is the only real protection when the economy softens.

Both arguments sound reasonable to me and I can't test either one from the outside. The specialist case is that operating knowledge compounds and a diversified hotel fund is just an average. The mixed case is that segment performance splits sharply in a downturn and concentrating means you're making one call about travel demand with all of the money.

What I can't figure out is whether diversification inside a single property type does anything at all when the whole property type is the cyclical one. Curious what people here would actually want to see if it was their check.

aaron_fitz10 · Answer

The thing that pushes me toward the specialist version is that I can actually understand what they're claiming. "We run extended stay in secondary markets" is a sentence I can check against their last four deals. "We're diversified across hospitality" tells me nothing about what they're good at, and when I ask a mixed fund how they underwrite a leisure resort versus a downtown box near a convention center, I want to hear two different answers and usually get one.

But I'm still exploring and I notice my preference is really about legibility rather than about returns. Concentration being easier to evaluate isn't the same as concentration being safer.

stephen_ok9 · Answer

I've been on the allocation side of this question for a while without deploying yet, and the way I've started framing it is that a hotel fund is already a concentrated bet before you open the portfolio page. It's one property type, and it's the property type most tied to discretionary spending and the economy. Spreading across four segments inside that doesn't undo the exposure, it just changes which parts hurt first.

So the mix case only wins if the segments genuinely move apart. Some of that is real, extended stay and leisure held up differently from group and business demand in the last cycle, and some of it is a story the deck tells because the manager wanted to buy something that came up cheap. Ask a mixed fund whether the segment allocation is a policy or the result of what they got offered. The answer moves my vote.

nicole_adeyemi · Answer

@meridian's last question is the one I'd lead with. I hold land and my whole discipline is refusing to buy something because it showed up, so I'm sensitive to portfolios that are really just a record of deal flow.

I voted for the specialist anyway, and my reason is boring. Hotels are operating businesses that reprice every night. Whoever is running them needs to know the operating model well enough to see a problem in month two instead of quarter three, and one operating model is easier to know than four. The counter is that if your one segment is wrong for eight years, patience doesn't save you the way it does with dirt. That risk is real and I don't have a good answer to it.

One segment or a mix: how would you want a hotel fund built?

3 replies