When people first come across Entrepreneurship through Acquisition (EtA), one of the early decisions they tend to wrestle with is whether to pursue a traditional Search Fund or fund the search themselves.

I understand why.

On paper, they look like two quite different paths. One provides an investor group, capital, and support from day one. The other offers greater independence, higher equity retention, and long-term flexibility over the direction of the business.

Having spent time on both sides of the EtA equation - as an entrepreneur buying businesses and as an investor supporting others through the process - I don’t think the choice is as binary as it often appears. I think of it much more as a spectrum, and in Australia and New Zealand, that distinction matters.

What are you actually trying to achieve?

Before deciding on a business investment structure, I always start with a more basic question: what do you actually want the journey to look like?

If you value having experienced investors around you throughout the search, that points you in one direction. 

If retaining equity and holding a business over a long horizon matters enormously to you, that might point you somewhere else. 

If you have enough capital to fund your own search but still want active mentoring and investor engagement, you probably sit somewhere in between.

The investment structure should follow those decisions, rather than the other way around.

I’ve seen entrepreneurs self-fund while treating their investor network as though they were already shareholders - sending updates, asking for input, and bringing people along for the journey. Then when an acquisition eventually emerges, they aren't introducing themselves to investors for the first time. They have already built relationships and credibility.

I’ve also seen searchers raise relatively small Search Funds simply because what they really wanted wasn’t just capital, but genuine engagement.

Both paths can work.

There is no prize for being structurally pure

The traditional Search Fund model exists for good reason. It has been refined over decades and carries a substantial body of experience behind it, including extensive research from Stanford and IESE (you can find links to both on the Resources page).  If that model gives you exactly what you need, there is no reason to complicate things.

However, our local market is still relatively young. Research from IESE shows that Australia remains a relatively small part of the global Search Fund landscape, while New Zealand has only entered the dataset in recent years. That relative immaturity creates some challenges, but also gives us the opportunity to be thoughtful about what works best for entrepreneurs wanting to invest locally.

We can learn from established international markets without assuming every ANZ entrepreneur needs to follow the exact same template. That might mean a traditional Search Fund, a self-funded search, or a structure that borrows attributes from both. 

Here are my top two baseline tips for mapping out the investment structure you want. 

1. Find the right people for your version

Investors have different appetites too. For example:

• Search-stage investors: They want to back an entrepreneur from the beginning of the search and follow their capital into the deal.
• Deal-stage investors: They want to avoid search-stage exposure, but are very happy to look at a quality business once you have found one.
• Flexible partners: They back good operators and are relatively flexible about the structure used to get there.

Building your own investor network isn’t just about securing capital; it is about finding people whose expectations align with yours. 

This takes calibration, conversations, and adjustments along the way, but the process forces you to become completely clear on what you are trying to build.

2. Work backwards

My advice to anyone wrestling with this decision is simple: don’t choose the label first.

Paint a clear picture of the business you want to acquire, the role you want to play, the support you need, the capital required, and what ownership should look like over time. 

Then work backwards to the structure.

There isn't one model, and there isn't one background that produces a good owner. What matters most is that the structure puts the right entrepreneur into the right business, with the right support around them to give that business the best possible chance of succeeding. 

That, ultimately, is the bit worth optimising for.

‍

Get involved

In October, we'll be bringing acquisition entrepreneurs, operators, investors, advisers, lenders, brokers and experienced business leaders together at the EtA Forum in Sydney.

For me, one of the most valuable parts of these events is the mix of experience of who is in the room. There isn't one route into business ownership, and there isn't one professional background that produces a good operator.

If you're exploring EtA, already operating a business, or interested in contributing your own experience to the community, you can find the Sydney Forum details here:  https://etacentral.com.au/eta-forum-sydney-2026/.

‍