Investment Management

Why do single-family offices use multi-family office structures?

Building an in-house wealth management team comes with high costs, a ceiling on access to certain opportunities, and a direct dependency on the family's own ability to attract and retain specialists. A multi-family office like Jera Capital addresses all three of these points simultaneously, which is why families currently maintaining a structured single-family office are reevaluating their model.

The difference between a single-family office and a multi-family office

A single-family office is a structure dedicated to one family. The team, mandate, and priorities are defined exclusively by that family, with no processes shared with other estates.

A multi-family office serves multiple families simultaneously. The team, processes, and infrastructure are shared among them, and the mandate is built based on the common needs of the clients served.

This structural difference explains the three advantages presented below. All of them stem from the fact that the structure is divided among families rather than sustained by a single one.

The real cost of maintaining an in-house wealth management team

A complete internal team, with specialists in private equity, credit, equities, and multi-asset strategies, costs between 20 and 60 basis points of assets under management annually, according to the North America Family Office Report 2025, by Campden Wealth. This cost is only justified once the volume of assets and the complexity of the holdings are high enough to dilute the expense of each hired specialist.

In a multi-family office, this structure is divided among several families. The result is an equivalent multidisciplinary team—often superior in depth of expertise—sustained by a fractional cost rather than by the assets of a single family. For a family currently supporting such a team on their own, the effect is immediate: the same level of sophistication becomes accessible at a significantly lower proportional cost.

Access to deals that an individual family cannot reach

Private equity funds, structured credit, and exclusive managers often operate with minimum ticket sizes and limited allocations per vehicle. A family with significant assets, but acting alone, often fails to reach the volume required to enter certain offerings, or enters under less favorable conditions than larger investors.

A multi-family office negotiates on behalf of several families at once. This changes the bargaining position. The aggregated volume provides access to managers, funds, and deals that would require a much higher ticket than an individual family could provide. By operating within this structure, a family with a structured single-family office gains the same level of access without needing to increase their own capital volume to obtain it.

How a multi-family office attracts and retains the best professionals in the market

Retaining a top-tier specialist in private equity, credit, or equities requires more than just competitive compensation. These professionals seek variety in mandates, complexity in problem-solving, and a consistent career trajectory. A single-family office, by definition, offers only one mandate—that of a single family—and no prospect of business growth or equity participation to compensate for that limitation. In practice, retaining this type of professional in a structure dedicated to one family means paying above-market rates indefinitely.

A multi-family office fills this gap. It offers multiple mandates, scale, and a career structure capable of retaining specialists without relying on artificially inflated compensation. For each family served, this results in access to professionals who would rarely accept an isolated role within a single family office.

When this combination is justified

No family needs to choose between maintaining control over their decisions and having access to these three advantages. The key is to understand what an in-house structure can sustain independently, and what makes more sense to operate in conjunction with a multi-family office, while preserving the governance and priorities defined by the family itself. See also our article on generational wealth succession and preparing heirs.

Asset volume, asset complexity, and succession stage remain the three variables that define this boundary. Below a certain volume, the cost of maintaining a full team in-house simply does not pay off, and access to market operations and professionals remains limited, regardless of the family's efforts to hire.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between a single-family office and a multi-family office? A single-family office is dedicated to one family, with an exclusive team and mandate. A multi-family office serves multiple families using shared staff, processes, and infrastructure, which reduces costs and expands access to market operations and professionals.

How much does it cost to maintain an in-house investment team? Between 20 and 60 basis points of assets per year, according to the North America Family Office Report 2025, by Campden Wealth, considering a team with specialists in private equity, credit, equities, and multi-asset strategies.

Can a family with a single-family office use a multi-family office at the same time? Yes. It is common for families with their own structure to turn to a multi-family office for specific mandates. The most frequent cases involve access to exclusive managers, operations with lower minimum tickets, or asset classes that do not justify a dedicated internal specialist.

What changes in access to operations when working with a multi-family office? The aggregate volume of multiple families provides bargaining power with managers and funds that, individually, would require a much higher minimum ticket than a single family could provide, changing entry conditions and, in many cases, making access possible.

Read also

Want to understand if this model makes sense for your wealth? Speak with Jera Capital.

Share