“In a typical year, we might hire five managers out of a thousand meetings that we do.” Art Vinokur, who leads manager selection at Franklin Templeton Investment Solutions, said this on stage at Global Alts New York 2026, as iConnections reported in September 2026. That is half a per cent. For a fund manager, a meeting with an allocator like him is a rare chance. For the allocator, the figures highlight the time required to find a suitable manager.
That imbalance is the core design problem of every LP-GP programme. On one side sit limited partners (LPs): pension funds, endowments, funds of funds and family offices that commit capital to investment funds. On the other side sit general partners (GPs), the managers who raise and run those funds. GPs want as many LP meetings as they can get. LPs want fewer and better ones. A schedule built primarily around GP demand risks losing LPs and, with them, the value GPs are paying for.
This guide is for organisers of venture capital (VC), private equity (PE) and fund conferences, and for startup conferences that add an investor day. It shows how leading programmes select, size and schedule LP-GP meetings. The short answer: LP attention is the scarce resource, so you build the schedule from the LP side. Let LPs choose, limit their meeting load and allocate GP places according to their interest.
What is an LP-GP meeting?
The format is straightforward. An LP-GP meeting is a pre-scheduled one-to-one conversation at an investor conference between a limited partner and a general partner who is raising a fund. It often runs for around 30 minutes, usually takes place in a quiet room or suite, and is the first step of a due diligence process that can take many months.
It works differently from the founder-investor meetings most startup conferences run. There, the VC is the one being pitched to. In an LP-GP meeting, the VC sits on the other side of the table and asks for capital. The same fund partner who screens 30 founders on Tuesday may pitch to six LPs on Wednesday. If your event already pairs founders with investors, our guide on how to match founders with the right VCs covers that layer. LP-GP meetings require stricter rules because the pool of LPs is smaller and more selective.
Picture the programme lead of a European VC conference. She has 120 LPs confirmed for her investor day and 300 fund managers asking to meet them. Every decision in this guide is one she has to make.
Why LP attention is the bottleneck
Consider again the five manager appointments per thousand meetings. An allocator who filters that hard notices every meeting that falls outside their investment interests. One badly matched slot costs the LP more than it costs the GP.
The GP side, meanwhile, keeps growing more crowded. According to the PitchBook-NVCA Venture Monitor for Q3 2026, published on 8 October 2026, established firms took 88.2 per cent of all US venture capital raised so far this year, the highest share in the dataset. Andreessen Horowitz alone closed 23.8 billion US dollars across several funds. For newer managers, that leaves fewer open doors, and a conference meeting with an LP becomes one of the few ways in. For you, it means more GP applications than you can ever serve.
LP-GP meetings in 2026
Scarce LP time, crowded GP side
Put those numbers together and the job becomes clear. Demand on the GP side is almost unlimited. Supply on the LP side is fixed by how many hours your LPs are willing to give you. The quality of your programme is therefore judged by the LPs, even though the GPs pay most of the bill.
Your LPs are the product. Protect their calendars.
Three ways to decide who meets whom
Once you accept that LP time is scarce, the next question is who controls the selection. The leading programmes in 2026 use three different models, and each fits a different kind of event.
LP-led selection with mutual ranking
The ILPA Summit (Institutional Limited Partners Association, New York, 3 to 5 November 2026) shows the strictest version. GPs applied between 13 April and 12 June. Registered LPs then reviewed the applications and selected participants based on their investment interests. After that, LPs and GPs ranked their meeting preferences by mutual interest. The 90 top-ranked GPs are invited, and each one meets at least six LP organisations. The meetings run in six formal blocks over two days, plus flexible slots for extra LP demand, and each GP gets a private meeting suite. ILPA also reserves the right to cap the number of GPs by category or strategy.
The six-meeting promise rests on an important condition: the LPs chose those GPs themselves.
Committee curation plus open networking
Slush shows how a startup conference can add an LP layer without building a full summit. On Investor Day (17 November 2026), Slush hosts invite-only LP x GP matchmaking sessions, matched to each LP’s investment focus. A day later, Slush x RAISE gives the stage to 20 emerging managers raising Fund I to III. A selection committee of LPs picks them from hundreds of applications. Each manager pitches for three minutes, and LP-GP networking follows. A dedicated LP lounge stays open on both main event days.
This model gives emerging managers visibility in front of many LPs at once. The pitch alone books no meetings, though. If you copy it, schedule the follow-up conversations as carefully as the stage time.
Open request platforms at scale
The third model lets both sides search and request meetings on a platform. iConnections runs it at the largest scale. For Global Alts Miami 2027 it promotes more than 21,000 pre-scheduled meetings with more than 1,500 allocators and 1,200 managers. For Global Alts Europe 2027 in Paris it promotes more than 4,000 meetings with over 400 allocators and 300 managers. These are the provider’s own figures. If each meeting involves one allocator, that works out at roughly 10 to 14 meetings per allocator.
Open requests only work when the LP side can say no. Without request limits and LP acceptance, the most visible allocators receive hundreds of requests and the rest receive few.
| Model | Example | Who selects | Scale | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LP-led selection with ranking | ILPA Summit | LPs review and rank applications | 90 GPs, at least 6 LP meetings each | Dedicated LP-GP summits |
| Committee curation plus networking | Slush Investor Day, Slush x RAISE | LP committee picks the GPs | 20 emerging managers on stage | Startup conferences with an investor day |
| Open requests on a platform | iConnections Global Alts | Both sides request, LPs accept | 4,000 to 21,000+ meetings | Large multi-day allocator events |
| Office hours | Venture Forward | Curated by the organiser | About 25 emerging managers, 30-minute rounds | Ecosystem and nonprofit formats |
The last row is the smallest format. Venture Forward selects about 25 emerging managers per event for curated office hours: four rounds of 30-minute meetings, with experienced GPs in the morning and LPs in the afternoon. It is a good entry point if your investor day has only a handful of LPs.
How many GPs can your programme take?
Whichever model you choose, the capacity maths works the same way. You start from LP time, not from GP demand.
Go back to the programme lead with 120 LPs and 300 interested fund managers. Here is how her numbers play out:
| Step | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
| LP capacity | 120 LPs x 8 meetings each | 960 meetings |
| Meetings each GP should get | ILPA uses at least 6 | 6 per GP |
| GPs you can accept | 960 / 6 | 160 GPs |
| If you accept all 300 applicants | 960 / 300 | 3.2 meetings per GP on average |
At 160 GPs, every manager leaves with a worthwhile day and every LP keeps a manageable calendar. At 300, the average GP gets three meetings, many get one or none, and the paying side starts to complain. Saying no to 140 applicants is the price of a programme that works.
Eight meetings per LP over a two-day investor day is our editorial starting point, not an industry rule. Heavier loads, like the 10 to 14 implied by the iConnections figures, belong to multi-day events built entirely around meetings. Also decide who moves between meetings. At ILPA, each GP has a private suite, so the GP team and its materials stay in one place.
Capacity is set by the LP side. Everything else follows from it.
A timeline from application to follow-up
The capacity limit also explains why good LP-GP programmes start so early. You need time to collect applications, let LPs choose and still send GPs a confirmed schedule. ILPA’s 2026 cycle for a November summit is a useful reference.
Planning timeline
LP-GP programme for a November event
- Step 1 Set the criteria Define which GPs qualify: fund number, strategy, target fund size. ILPA's emerging manager criteria ask for a first or second fund with a target of at least 100 million US dollars.
- Step 2 Open GP applications About seven months ahead. ILPA opened on 13 April for a 3 November start.
- Step 3 Close applications About five months ahead. ILPA closed on 12 June.
- Step 4 LP review and ranking LPs pick the GPs they want to meet, then both sides rank preferences.
- Step 5 Notify selected GPs About three and a half months ahead. ILPA notified GPs in mid-July.
- Step 6 Build the meeting grid Turn rankings into formal blocks and keep flexible slots for extra LP demand.
- Step 7 Follow up Two weeks after the event, ask which meetings led to a second conversation.
A startup conference that adds its first LP session can work with a shorter runway. Keep the order, though: criteria, applications, LP choice, then the grid. Skipping the LP choice is the most common shortcut, and the most expensive one.
Five rules that keep LPs coming back
The timeline gets the meetings into the calendar. These rules decide whether the LPs return next year, and with them the GPs who pay for access.
- LPs opt in to every meeting: no meeting lands in an LP’s calendar that the LP did not choose or accept. ILPA’s mutual ranking and Slush’s matching to investment focus both work this way.
- Cap the load per LP: set a maximum number of meetings per LP and keep a few flexible slots for extra interest, as ILPA does with its formal blocks plus flexible time.
- Sell access, not outcomes: GPs usually pay to take part, and ILPA, for example, prices GP registration by tier. What a GP buys is a fair chance with LPs who opted in. Never sell a meeting with a named LP.
- Cap GPs by strategy: an LP who wanted one buyout fund should not face five similar ones in a row. ILPA reserves the right to cap GPs by category or strategy for exactly this reason.
- Keep the LP list discreet: run the sessions invite-only, as Slush does, and show each GP only the LPs it will actually meet.
Imagine an LP who sat through four pitches from funds she would never back, none of which she requested. She will not mention it to you. She simply will not register next year. The overload logic is the same one we describe for founders in how to prevent investor overload at demo days, only with a smaller and less forgiving group.
How to measure an LP-GP programme
Rules only matter if you can show they worked. Meeting counts are the wrong proof here. If an allocator hires about one manager in 200 meetings, a high meeting count says little about value.
Measure what LPs and GPs actually care about instead:
- the kept-meeting rate, meaning the share of scheduled meetings that took place
- how LPs rate the relevance of their meetings, collected right after the event
- the share of meetings that led to a second conversation or a request for documents within a few weeks
- the share of LPs who register again for the next edition
The last number matters most to the programme lead. It is the one her sponsors and her paying GPs will ask about. Our guide on how to track investor follow-ups after a demo day shows a simple system for the follow-up part. Fund decisions take longer than seed rounds, so stretch the measurement window accordingly.
Running LP-GP meetings with Converve
Converve schedules LP-GP programmes on a rule-based meeting matrix that you configure. You set up LPs and GPs as separate groups, decide who may request meetings with whom, and cap the number of meetings per LP. Meetings are confirmed in free slots of both agendas, so an LP’s calendar only fills with meetings the LP has accepted. The startup and investor solution shows how this works for investor days, and the B2B matchmaking platform explains the matrix itself.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an LP and a GP?
A limited partner (LP) commits capital to an investment fund, for example a pension fund, endowment, fund of funds or family office. A general partner (GP) manages the fund, raises the capital and makes the investments. At an investor conference, GPs usually pitch their fund to LPs.
How many meetings should an LP take at a conference?
There is no fixed standard. ILPA Summit 2026 guarantees each selected GP at least six LP meetings over two days, and iConnections’ event figures imply roughly 10 to 14 meetings per allocator at its large multi-day events (iConnections, 2026). For a two-day investor day, around eight meetings per LP is a sensible starting point.
Who should choose the meetings, LPs or GPs?
LPs, because their time is the scarce side. At ILPA Summit, registered LPs review GP applications and select participants before both sides rank preferences (ILPA, 2026). Allocators hire only about five managers per 1,000 meetings (Franklin Templeton via iConnections, 2026), so every unwanted meeting costs them.
Should GPs pay to meet LPs?
Most LP-GP programmes charge GPs to take part. ILPA, for example, prices GP registration by tier (ILPA, 2026). The fee should buy access to LPs who opted in, not a guaranteed meeting with a named LP.
How far ahead should you schedule LP-GP meetings?
For a dedicated summit, start about seven months ahead. ILPA opened GP applications in April for a November event, closed them in June and notified selected GPs in mid-July (ILPA, 2026). Smaller investor days can work with a shorter runway, as long as LPs still choose before the grid is built.
Conclusion: build the schedule from the LP side
LP-GP meetings follow one simple logic. LP attention is the scarce resource, so the schedule starts with the LPs. Let them choose, cap their load, size the GP side to fit and measure what happens after the event. The programme lead with 120 LPs and 300 applicants will turn away more managers than she accepts. That selectivity helps keep the programme relevant to LPs and encourages them to return.
If you are planning an investor day or a fund conference with LP-GP meetings, get in touch with Converve and we will show you how the meeting matrix handles it.
