Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 3, 2026
Cornell Capital Special Situations Partners II LP
Cornell Capital Special Situations Partners II LP looks over-valued against its niche peers and is dormant on financing cadence.
Businessfiled
Cornell Capital Special Situations Partners II LP operates in Other, based in NEW YORK.
Sector still resolves to a broad 'Other' bucket, so operating comparables below are weaker than for a tightly-classified peer.
No verified homepage on file yet — operating evidence is limited to the public record.
Capital & rounds (filed)filed
Cornell Capital Special Situations Partners II LP has raised $362M in disclosed capital across 1 recorded round, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Series D+ (a $100M–$400M round).
Largest single filing: $362M on 2015-05-18.
Most recent recorded round closed around 2015-05-18.
Valuation (modeled)modeled
Provath models Cornell Capital Special Situations Partners II LP at approximately $6.2B (range $2.1B–$13.7B). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.
Read: Over-valued. Modeled value is 2.27× the median modeled value of Series D+ Other companies in 2013–2015 (90 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.
Financing rhythm & timingmixed
Last raise 11.1 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.
Only one round on record and long silent — often defunct, acquired, or gone quiet.
Comparablesmixed
Capital scale ranks ahead of 99% of Other peers (25015 compared).
Modeled value ranks above 100% of those peers.
Closest niche peers: Campaign Monitor Holdings (UK) Ltd, Tomahawk Holdings, Inc., Liberty Resources II, LLC, Resolute Investment Holdings, LLC, THL Portfolio Holdings Corp..
Peoplefiled
1 named person on file across officers, directors and signatories.
Risks & flagsmixed
Financing has been silent well beyond sector cadence — possibly defunct, acquired, or paused.
Modeled above niche peers — valuation risk on entry.
Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.
No clearly named CEO/founder/principal in the surfaced records — key-person evidence is thin.