Public Equity Partners

Richard S. Waring serves as Managing Director and holds final authority on portfolio construction and activist campaigns. Waring founded the firm in 1992 after earlier special-situations portfolio-management roles and has personally led board-seat campaigns, including the high-profile NetPerceptions engagement in the early 2000s. The investment team has historically numbered under ten professionals, with Waring directly involved in every position sizing decision.

The firm screens for misunderstood mid-cap public companies with recurring revenue, contractual cash flows, and fixable balance sheets — typically in enterprise software, financial services, and outsourced business services. Screening is based on publicly filed financial statements and industry contacts, not broker-dealer research. The firm often initiates dialogue with management teams before taking a position, using the early-stage conversation to gauge receptiveness to operational changes it might later propose as a board member or creditor.

No. Although the firm describes its approach as private-equity-style ownership applied to public companies, it has not launched a dedicated buyout fund. All positions have historically been taken in publicly traded securities, including both common equity and distressed debt, with the activism occurring inside existing public-company governance structures rather than through take-private transactions.

The firm has historically held positions for 18 to 36 months, consistent with the time required to recruit independent directors, negotiate balance-sheet restructurings, and see operational improvements reflected in public-market valuations. Quarterly redemption terms on the commingled fund create a natural pressure to realize catalysts within a multi-quarter window, rather than waiting for decade-long private-equity liquidity events.

Public Equity Partners has historically held 8 to 12 names, with the top five positions often representing over half of total assets. The firm uses concentration as a governance tool — meaningful stakes unlock board-seat access and creditor-committee standing, both of which require holding a position large enough to matter in a restructuring negotiation.