A Lubbock, Texas multifamily owner-operator built from a single Baytown property in 2008 into a Texas Triangle portfolio, funded deal by deal from accredited individuals. It publishes an unusually detailed performance record, and is working through the same rate-reset stress as its peers.
CaveatIn April 2026 UMB Bank sued Madera Equity, Madera Capital Holdings and all four principals personally on their guaranties, attaching a forbearance agreement and a notice of default. The bank voluntarily dismissed the case 27 days later and no judgment was entered, but the filing documents a loan default that reached litigation.jump ↓
CaveatThe managed portfolio has shrunk across the sponsor's own dated releases (45+ properties in 2022, 35+ in 2024, 30+ today), while cumulative acquisitions kept rising. Read the two numbers together.jump ↓
CaveatMadera publishes its losers. The performance page carries an unprompted note that recent Houston vintages underperformed, some with negative returns, and the chart plots them. That is rarer than it should be.jump ↓
CREsponsor scorecard
A standardized public-record assessment. Select any scored lens or profile factor to inspect the cited evidence. The overall grade is a weighted function of the scored lenses, it is not hand-set.
Geographic concentration
01
Texas Triangle · Houston-weighted
Profile factor
Entirely Texas today: Houston 12 properties, Dallas 9, Fort Worth 8, per the sponsor's market page. Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and the Carolinas are labelled 'researching', not entered.
Awards
02
35/100
Limited
Screen run 2026-07-25 and returned almost nothing: one vendor-run employee-choice award (Swift Bunny, 2023). No NMHC Top 50 placement, no independent performance or development award found.
Online reputation
03
72/100
Mixed
Residents rate it well: 4.34 weighted average across 1,887 Google reviews at six communities, above the sector norm. Held back because only six of roughly 30 properties were checked and BBB was unreachable.
Team expertise
04
84/100
Deep public record
Fourteen years of unbroken Form D signatures by the same four principals, and the bios beat what Madera publishes: the asset-management partner spent 19 years at Starwood Capital, the finance partner 52 years.
Risk screen
05
45/100
Material findings
No SEC enforcement, no bankruptcy. But a lender sued the platform and all four principals on personal guaranties in April 2026 (dismissed 27 days later, no judgment), and a Houston asset drew a 2025 foreclosure posting.
Differentiator
06
Owns its proptech stack
Profile factor
Madera built Quext inside the portfolio in 2019 and still owns it: now sold externally as OneQuext and NOVY, and picked by JPI for its own deals. A real operating edge, and a real related-party channel.
Sources of capital
07
Retail accredited + JV partners
Profile factor
No public pension, endowment or sovereign commitment found. Equity comes from accredited individuals at $15K–$200K minimums across ~95 Reg D vehicles; JPI and WayMaker are development JV partners, not LPs.
Scores are CREsponsor editorial assessments of the cited public record, not ratings by any regulator. Methodology · Report a correction.
Track record
Madera is the rare private sponsor that publishes a scatter plot of its own deals, marks the losses in red, and writes a paragraph about why they lost money. That candour is the most distinctive thing on the page and it deserves credit. It also does not make the numbers audited, and the way they are presented has enough internal inconsistency to be worth walking through.
85Full-cycle investments2008–2025, per sponsor
28.92%Average IRRlabelled gross on one page, net on another
Named realized outcomes: LP IRR as published2 of 2 independently checked; expand a row
The Briscoe Dallas · 322 units · Class A garden27.68% ✓
Both endpoints are confirmed. The Form D vehicle, 12639 Coit, LP, was filed 1 October 2020 with a $23,525,000 ceiling at a $50,000 minimum; Madera sold the 322-unit property to a Dallas Housing Finance Corp affiliate on 1 December 2022, 161 units converted to an 80%-of-AMI restriction. The return is not established: Texas discloses no sale prices, the buyer files none, LP cash flows are private. The 27.68% is consistent with a real 25-month hold ending in a genuine sale, no more. 12639 Coit, LP Form DPreston Hollow Advocate
Barrett Creek Dallas · 256 units · Class B value-add29.5% ≠
Only partially corroborated. A Form D for 6525 Glenview LP was filed 5 March 2020 with a $9,125,000 ceiling, matching the stated acquisition month, but CREsponsor could not confirm this vehicle holds Barrett Creek rather than another asset: the sponsor publishes no vehicle-to-property map. No exit counterparty, closing date or price was found in county or trade sources. The $30M basis, $3.1M renovation spend and 29.50% return rest on the sponsor alone. 6525 Glenview LP Form Dsponsor case study
2008–2011 (per sponsor + first filings)→2022–2026 (per press + SEC)
A single Baytown, Texas property; first Form D vehicles raise $1.9M–$2.6M each→Peak of 45+ managed properties and a $1B JPI development JV; today 30+ assets and a new pooled fund
Headline figures are the sponsor's own and unaudited; no third-party performance audit is public. Per-deal figures are as published on the sponsor's case-study pages. The corroboration notes are CREsponsor's. maderaequity.com/performance
What travels with the headline figure
Three caveats, all from the sponsor’s own pages on 25 July 2026: the case-studies index labels 28.92% gross while the performance chart’s axis reads net, and the chart plots 84 deals averaging 29.9% rather than the 85 at 28.92% the prose claims. Four markers sit in the chart’s negative-return colour, and Madera volunteers those losses in a note on recent Houston vintages rather than omitting them.
Cumulative acquisitions rise in every telling — 100+ properties in 2022, 120+ today — while the managed portfolio moves the other way, which makes Madera a net seller through the rate reset and is the framing to carry into the risk screen below:
Counted from the sponsor's own Texas market page, which breaks the portfolio down by metro, and cross-checked against the street addresses embedded in ~95 Form D vehicle names.
Madera is a Texas Triangle operator run from outside the triangle. The corporate address on every Form D since 2011 is 5214 68th Street in Lubbock (roughly 320 miles from Dallas and 520 from Houston), while the assets sit in Dallas, Fort Worth and Houston. Lubbock itself carries no portfolio properties in the sponsor’s current breakdown.
Metro counts are the sponsor's own. Note that they sum to 29 properties and 9,124 units against the same page's headline of '30+ properties' and '10,000+ units': the rounding is the sponsor's. sponsor market page
The same page reports 94.2% average occupancy and +4.8% year-over-year rent growth across the Texas book (sponsor market page), both self-reported, neither dated, and both comfortably healthy if accurate. Set them beside the foreclosure posting and the shrinking property count and the picture is an operating business that runs its assets well while its capital structure absorbs the rate reset.
The three metro counts sum to 29 properties and 9,124 units, against the headline “30+” and “10,000+” printed at the top of the same page. A partner bio elsewhere on the site puts it at “nearly 40 properties (around 12,000 units under current management).” Three numbers, one site, one day. None is implausible and CREsponsor has not picked between them; the range is reported as found.
The named assets below are the ones that could be tied to a specific address through a Form D vehicle name, a case study, or trade coverage. Madera does not publish a current property list, so this is a documented subset rather than the portfolio.
Jefferson RailheadOne of five DFW developments announced Aug 2022
Jefferson GrandscapeJPI / Madera / WayMaker joint venture
Jefferson Cedar RidgeJPI / Madera / WayMaker joint venture
Jefferson NorthlakeJPI / Madera / WayMaker joint venture
Jefferson PeninsulaJPI / Madera / WayMaker joint venture
Announced expansion, not yet entered1community
Show communities
Orlando · Atlanta · Nashville · Charlotte · RaleighAll five still labelled RESEARCHING on the markets page, two years after the Jan 2024 Southeast announcement
Addresses are drawn from Form D vehicle names, case studies and trade coverage, then confirmed against the property's Google Maps listing. Current ownership was not independently re-verified for every asset. sponsor market page + Form D vehicle names
The concentration cuts the way it always does. Three metros in one state, all exposed to the same Texas property-tax regime, the same insurance market and the same Sun Belt supply wave, is a narrow base, and Houston, the largest single exposure at 12 properties, is precisely where the sponsor says its recent vintages underperformed and where its one foreclosure posting sits. Against that, a firm that has bought and sold in DFW and Houston since 2008 has seen these submarkets through two full cycles, which is worth something no diversified newcomer can buy.
The Southeast expansion is the open question. It was announced in January 2024 with a merger and a named strategy lead; two and a half years later the sponsor’s own markets page still lists every southeastern metro as “researching.”
Scored on the depth of publicly verifiable record (14 years of unbroken Form D signatures, named prior employers at Starwood Capital and a NYSE-listed company, quantified attribution), not on competence. Deductions for two senior people missing from the team page, for a chief-executive seat that changed hands in Sep 2025 without the page saying so, and for career facts that rest on the sponsor's own bios.
The strongest fact about this team is structural rather than biographical. Every Madera Form D reviewed for this profile (from Madera - Summer Brook, LP in September 2011 through Madera Merritt Park, LP in September 2024, across roughly 95 partnerships), lists the same four related persons: Alton R. Smith, David P. Marcinkowski, Gary D. Hall and Charles R. Young, all in Lubbock. Fourteen years of continuous, penalty-of-perjury signatures with no additions and no departures is a stability signal that no team page can manufacture, and it is the main reason this lens scores where it does.
The bench beneath them is also genuinely institutional, and more so than Madera’s own bio pages say. Reading all six executives’ LinkedIn profiles on 2026-07-30 named the employer the asset-management bio leaves anonymous: the partner credited with “roughly 80,000 units” spent 19 years at Starwood Capital Group, rising to Managing Director as lead asset manager on an 85,000-unit national portfolio. The finance partner’s bio claims 25+ years; his dated record runs 52, and includes seven years as Associate CFO of the Texas Tech University System, running its investment, debt and risk offices. Neither fact was on this page before, and both are the kind an allocator would want first.
Two deductions remain, and one is new. Most of the remaining career detail still comes from the sponsor’s own bio pages; two people described in third-party sources as senior Madera executives do not appear on the team page at all; and the chief executive of the operating arm shows his Madera Residential CEO seat ending in September 2025 on his own profile, a change the team page does not reflect. No reason is published and none is implied here.
Two names that belong here and are not on the team page. A third-party contributor biography describes Jay Parsons: one of the most widely followed rental-housing economists in the sector, previously chief economist at RealPage, as “Principal and Head of Investment Strategy at Madera Residential, a partner with WayMaker, and an economic advisor to JPI.” Madera’s own January 2024 announcement said he would head investment strategy. Separately, Andrew W. Spangler is described on LinkedIn as President and Chief Legal Officer with oversight of Quext, Madera Residential and Madera Equity. Neither appears among the six people the current team page lists. CREsponsor did not establish whether either has departed, and no departure is asserted; the roster gap is recorded as a diligence question, not a finding.
Clean with the regulators, stressed with the lenders
Editorial score45/100
Nine screens run 2026-07-25 across SEC EDGAR full text, IAPD, federal and Texas appellate dockets, county civil records and trade press. Scored down for two documented credit events, not for anything adjudicated: no judgment, enforcement action or bankruptcy was found.
Finding Lender litigation against the sponsor and principals UMB Bank sued Madera Equity, Madera Capital Holdings and four principals individually in the N.D. Tex. on 30 April 2026 (No. 3:26-cv-01412), pleading default on a promissory note. Exhibits include four personal guaranties, a forbearance agreement and a notice of default. UMB dismissed on 27 May 2026, terminating the case that day, so the allegations were never tested. The docket does establish a default that reached forbearance, then a suit reaching the principals personally. N.D. Tex. 3:26-cv-01412 docket
Finding Foreclosure postings The 265-unit Adenine Apartments, 1755 Wyndale Street, Houston, bought 2023, was the largest Houston commercial loan newly posted for foreclosure auction in October 2025: a $42M Prime Finance Partners loan, $158,490 per unit. The Real Deal, sourcing Roddy's, notes borrowers and lenders sometimes settle before auction; CREsponsor did not establish how this resolved. Built 2016 and rating 4.6 across 269 Google reviews: a capital-structure event, not an operating failure. The Real Deal, 6 Oct 2025
Clear SEC enforcement, firm and principals EDGAR full-text search returns zero across all form types for 'Madera Residential' and no enforcement matter for 'Madera Equity'. Principal surname searches return only unrelated issuers, and for one common surname, different individuals at companies with no Texas real-estate connection. EDGAR indexes filings only, so this does not reach administrative proceedings or litigation releases. Control: the same unfiltered query returns 10,000+ on a common term. EDGAR full-text search
Finding Investment-adviser registration and Form ADV There is no Form ADV to read. IAPD returns no registered adviser named Madera Residential or Madera Equity; the only 'Madera' firm on file is Madera Technology Advisors, LLC of Dover, Delaware, unrelated. Operating outside adviser registration is lawful and ordinary for a Reg D sponsor, but it means no Item 11 regime, no brochure fee schedule and no regulator receiving an annual filing. A clean record here is the absence of a reporting obligation, not the result of one. SEC IAPD
Clear Texas appellate courts In re Madera Residential, LLC and Madera Residential, Ltd., No. 02-24-00423-CV, is a mandamus Madera itself brought in the Second Court of Appeals on 23 September 2024, from a case in Tarrant County's 153rd District Court (cause 153-331096-21, real party in interest Ray Lawrence). Emergency relief was granted the day it was filed and the writ on 21 October 2024: Madera prevailed. The opinion could not be retrieved, so the underlying dispute is unknown and nothing is asserted about it. Texas Second Court of Appeals docket
Clear Federal civil dockets Beyond the UMB matter, the only federal case naming Madera entities as defendants is Cooper v. Madera Residential GP LLC (N.D. Tex. 3:20-cv-01680), an employment-discrimination suit filed 24 June 2020 and terminated on 21 October 2020 after the parties designated a mediator. A four-month disposition with mediation is consistent with settlement or voluntary dismissal; no judgment appears on the docket. One employment case over a decade and a half is unremarkable for an employer of this size. CourtListener RECAP
N/A County civil dockets, false positive resolved A docket aggregator indexes a Dallas County matter as 'James Kenney vs. Madera Residential, LLC' (DC-26-01962, DC-26-02721, February 2026), which reads as a suit against the sponsor. It is not. The record shows Kenney, d/b/a J L Delmar Contractors, suing 7549 Stonebrook Frisco, LLC d/b/a The Brook Apartments, with Madera named only as GARNISHEE on a post-judgment writ: a third party thought to hold the debtor's funds. Recorded only because the caption invites the opposite conclusion. Dallas County docket record
N/A Insurance-fraud litigation, false positive resolved Court filings in Lexington Insurance Company v. The Ambassador Group LLC (W.D. Ky. 3:20-cv-00330) use the phrase 'the Madera Residential Insurance Fraud' and reference 'the alleged counterfeit policies issued to Madera Residential, LLC.' Madera is not a party. On the face of those filings it is the entity the allegedly counterfeit policies were issued to: the recipient of the alleged fraud, not its author, and the phrase is the pleading's shorthand. CourtListener RECAP
Clear Algorithmic rent-pricing / RealPage antitrust Not among the operators named in the algorithmic-pricing actions. CourtListener's federal dockets (2026-07-29) return 11 documents for Madera Residential or Madera Companies, led by the Lexington Insurance false positive resolved above and none in MDL 3071. Control: the same archive returns an MDL 3071 order naming 'Defendant Knightvest Residential'. Checked partly because a principal formerly at RealPage now advises the platform: an association, not an allegation. CourtListener dockets
Screens as of 2026-07-25.
The honest reading is a split verdict, and it splits along a clean line. With regulators, Madera is unremarkable in the good sense: no SEC enforcement, no adviser-registration problems, no bankruptcy, no state or federal action alleging investor harm, and a mandamus it won. With lenders, 2025 and 2026 have been hard. A CLO-financed 2023 Houston acquisition was posted for auction; a bank moved from forbearance to a federal complaint that reached all four principals’ personal guaranties; and the managed portfolio contracted by roughly a third over the same period.
Two things keep this from being worse than it is. The UMB case was dismissed by the bank itself within a month, which is the shape of a resolved dispute rather than an escalating one: though the terms are private and a dismissal without prejudice leaves the door open. And a sponsor whose principals sign personal guaranties has more of its own capital at risk than one that borrows exclusively without recourse, which cuts both ways: it aligns the GP with the deal and it concentrates the consequence of a bad vintage on four balance sheets.
What a prospective investor should press on: which entity borrowed from UMB and against what collateral, whether the Adenine loan was modified or the asset lost, and how many of the assets sold since 2022 were sold by choice.
Awards and designations
Public-record assessment
Almost nothing to report, which is itself the finding
Editorial score35/100
Checked 2026-07-25 across the sponsor's own site, NMHC rankings, national trade awards, business-journal lists and vendor programmes. Scored on what an independent granting body has actually recognised.
A vendor-run recognition drawn from employee-engagement survey results among that vendor's own clients. It measures internal sentiment among firms who bought the survey: real, but neither competitive nor investment-related.
This is the thinnest awards screen CREsponsor has run on a sponsor of this scale. No NMHC Top 50 owner or manager placement was found. No development, transaction or performance award from a national or regional trade body surfaced. No business-journal recognition surfaced. The sponsor’s own site (which is otherwise willing to publish detail), carries no awards page at all.
Two readings, and the truthful answer is probably both. Recognition of this kind is largely a function of self-nomination and marketing spend, and a Lubbock firm that does not run an awards programme will not collect awards; absence is weak evidence of anything. But peers at 10,000 units routinely appear somewhere in the NMHC rankings or regional trade honours, and Madera’s principals do appear at industry conferences, so the firm is not invisible to the sector. Scored low on evidence, not characterised as a failing.
Online reputation
Public-record assessment
Residents rate it well, on a fifth of the portfolio
Editorial score72/100
Six communities checked on Google Maps 25 July 2026 covering 1,887 resident reviews, plus employer sentiment via search snippet. Held below the ratings themselves because the sample is roughly a fifth of the portfolio and the BBB check could not run.
Ratings captured 25 July 2026. Review-weighted average 4.34; five of six communities at or above 4.0, one below 3.5, none below 3.0.
A 4.34 weighted average is strong. Large Class B and C workforce portfolios typically run in the mid-3s, and even allowing that this sample skews toward newer Class A product (a 2019 high-rise, a Medical Center tower), the aggregate sits comfortably above the sector norm, on a review base deep enough that a few managed reviews would not move it. It is consistent with a sponsor that manages in-house and has built resident-facing technology as a business line.
Two limits on that conclusion. First, coverage: six of roughly 30 communities is a documented subset, chosen because those were the assets CREsponsor could tie to Madera through a Form D vehicle name, a case study or trade coverage. Madera publishes no current property list, so a full sweep is not possible from outside, and a self-selected subset skews toward the assets that get written about. Second, the Better Business Bureau check did not run: bbb.org was unreachable in this environment, so complaint volume against the management entity is unverified in either direction.
The Adenine result is worth isolating: the one asset in this profile under a foreclosure posting is also the joint-highest rated at 4.6 across 269 reviews. Resident satisfaction and capital structure are independent variables, and this sponsor is a clean illustration of it.
The owned technology stack
Profile factor
The vendor is the general partner
DifferentiatorOwns its proptech stack
Established from the sponsor's own platform pages and timeline, corroborated by an independent acquisition announcement and by a development partner's selection of the platform for its own assets.
Most multifamily sponsors buy software. Madera built it, kept it, and now sells it to other owners.
The timeline is on the sponsor’s own about page: technology development began in 2018, and Quext was founded in 2019 to build operator-side smart access and IoT that, in the firm’s telling, the market had not produced. Quext acquired Homebase in October 2023 (BusinessWire). Today the stack is sold as OneQuext (Quext, GeoKey and Homebase unified for smart access, managed connectivity and IoT), alongside NOVY, a leasing platform covering screening, fraud prevention, fee-transparency compliance and lease generation. Both are deployed portfolio-wide; the sponsor’s featured Dallas high-rise runs the full package across all 348 units.
The independent corroboration is the useful part. When JPI announced its five-development joint venture with Madera in August 2022, it separately stated that it had chosen Quext IoT for those assets (JPI). A national Class A developer selecting the platform for its own projects is a market test that a self-description is not.
So what. Two consequences, pulling in opposite directions, and an allocator should price both.
It plausibly explains the resident numbers. A 4.34 weighted review average on an in-house-managed book is consistent with an operator that has spent seven years building the resident-facing layer rather than licensing it, and the leasing platform’s fraud-prevention and compliance functions address exactly the operational leakage that drags Sun Belt NOI. It also gives the platform a revenue line uncorrelated with cap rates: genuinely rare at this size, and worth more in a year like 2025 than in 2021.
It is also a related-party channel. The general partner owns a vendor whose products are installed across the assets its limited partners paid for. There is nothing improper in that and vertical integration is a real edge, but it relocates the fee question: the thing to ask is not only what Madera charges as a sponsor, but what Quext charges the properties, how those contracts were priced against third-party alternatives, and who captured the value when Homebase was acquired and the platform began selling externally. No offering document is public, Madera files no Form ADV, and no PPM was reviewed, so none of that is answerable from outside. Ask for the affiliate agreements in writing.
Recent activity
2026-05-27Positive
UMB Bank voluntarily dismisses its guaranty suit
Litigation
Twenty-seven days after filing, the bank filed a notice of dismissal and the case was terminated. No answer had been filed and no judgment was entered; the resolution terms are not public.
UMB Bank sues the platform and all four principals
Litigation
A federal complaint in the Northern District of Texas alleges default on a promissory note and attaches four personal guaranties, a Madera Capital guaranty, a forbearance agreement and a notice of default.
The 265-unit Houston asset Madera bought in 2023 carries the largest new Houston foreclosure posting of the month, a $42M Prime Finance CRE CLO loan at $158,490 per unit. Outcome not established.
Madera Capital Fund I, LP files Form D, a structural reset
Fundraise
An open-ended pooled investment fund with an indefinite offering amount, restarting the numbering that had reached XV in 2023. Charles Young is the sole listed executive officer and Madera Capital F1 GP, LLC the promoter. No sale recorded as of this filing.
The investment platform is relaunched as Madera Equity, with Madera Residential recast as one of three operating companies alongside OneQuext and NOVY. maderaresidential.com now redirects to maderaequity.com. Month not published; the sponsor's timeline dates it to 2025.
Madera Merritt Park, LP, the last property-level Form D
Fundraise
A $32M offering at a $25,000 minimum. No further single-asset partnership has been filed in the twenty-two months since, which is the clearest public signal of the acquisition pause.
Second Court of Appeals grants Madera's mandamus petition
Litigation
The appellate court granted the writ Madera sought against a ruling of the 153rd District Court in Tarrant County, having granted emergency relief a month earlier. The underlying dispute's substance is not established.
Merges with WayMaker; announces Southeast expansion
Leadership
Rental-housing economist Jay Parsons is named to head investment strategy. The release restates scale at 110+ properties and 30,000 units acquired, against 35+ then under management: down from 45+ eighteen months earlier.
2023-10-17: Quext acquires Homebase, folding smart-apartment technology into the platform that would become OneQuext (BusinessWire).
2022-12-01: Madera closes the sale of The Briscoe, 322 units on Coit Road in Dallas, to an affiliate of the Dallas Housing Finance Corp; 161 units convert to an 80%-of-AMI restriction (Preston Hollow Advocate).
2022-08-25: JPI, Madera and WayMaker announce a five-development DFW joint venture covering 1,750+ Class A homes, with nine communities and 3,300+ homes valued above $1 billion planned. JPI separately selects Quext IoT for the assets (JPI).
2019: Quext founded inside the Madera umbrella to build operator-side smart access and IoT (sponsor timeline).
2015: Acquisition activity expands across Dallas, Fort Worth and Houston with a value-add focus (sponsor timeline).
2011-09-06: First Madera Form D vehicles reach EDGAR: Lincoln Meadows, Summer Brook and Summer Oaks, raising $1.9M–$2.1M each at $40,000 minimums, all four principals listed.
2008: Charlie Young and Dave Marcinkowski co-found Madera Residential around a single property in Baytown, Texas; first limited partners invest (per sponsor).
Sources of capital
Profile factor
Individuals bear the equity risk; institutions sit beside it, not under it
Sources of capitalRetail accredited + JV partners
Established from ~95 Form D filings, a development partner's press release, and a screen of public pension, sovereign, endowment and insurance disclosures that returned nothing. Amounts raised are not visible in EDGAR.
No institutional limited partner was identified across SEC filings, trade press and public-pension, sovereign, endowment and insurance disclosures, so if a Madera deal loses money individual accredited investors absorb it. The roughly 95 Reg D partnerships are named for the property rather than the brand and are only findable by searching the principals as related persons; minimums fell from $200,000 in 2017 to $15,000 by 2023, every Form D reviewed was filed before its first sale and never amended so amounts raised are unknowable, and the only institutional relationships are development joint ventures with JPI and WayMaker rather than LP commitments.
How Madera Residential compares
CAF Capital Partners: the closest peer, a Texas multifamily sponsor that also publishes a performance page, and the better-documented of the two on realized returns.
Nitya Capital: a similar Texas book carrying materially more distress, which is the useful comparison for reading Madera’s single Adenine posting in proportion.
Knightvest Capital: larger and institutionally backed, and the directory’s clearest example of a transaction history reconstructable from a sworn court exhibit rather than a marketing page.
Every figure on this page is either drawn from an SEC filing or court docket and identified as such, drawn from an independent third party, or reported by the sponsor and explicitly tagged “per sponsor.” Nothing here is a CREsponsor estimate.
Who is Madera Residential and where are they based?
Madera Residential is a multifamily investor and operator headquartered at 5214 68th Street in Lubbock, Texas, per its SEC Form D filings. It was co-founded in 2008 by Charlie Young and Dave Marcinkowski, starting from a single property in Baytown, Texas. In 2025 the firm launched Madera Equity as its investment-platform brand; maderaresidential.com now redirects there, and Madera Residential is presented as one of three companies under the platform alongside OneQuext and NOVY.
What is Madera Residential's track record?
The sponsor publishes 85 full-cycle investments from 2008 to 2025 with a 28.92% average IRR, a 2.58x return multiple and a 48-month average hold (per sponsor, unaudited). Read three caveats with it: the case-studies page labels that figure gross IRR while the performance chart's axis says net; the chart itself plots 84 deals at a 29.9% average rather than 85 at 28.92%; and four of the plotted deals are rendered in the negative-return colour. No third-party performance audit is public.
How large is Madera Residential's portfolio?
Roughly 30 properties and 10,000+ units today, all in Texas (per sponsor). That is smaller than it was. A JPI press release in August 2022 described Madera as managing over 45 properties worth more than $2.1 billion; the sponsor's own January 2024 release said over 35 properties; the 2026 site says 30+. Cumulative acquisitions since 2008 are given as 120+ communities and roughly 30,000 units.
Is Madera Residential facing any lawsuits or foreclosures?
Two documented matters. UMB Bank, N.A. sued Madera Equity, LLC, Madera Capital Holdings, Ltd. and all four principals individually in the Northern District of Texas on 30 April 2026 (No. 3:26-cv-01412) over an alleged promissory-note default, attaching four personal guaranties, a forbearance agreement and a notice of default; UMB voluntarily dismissed the case on 27 May 2026 and no judgment was entered. Separately, the 265-unit Adenine Apartments in Houston, bought by Madera in 2023, was posted for a foreclosure auction in October 2025 on a $42 million CRE CLO loan. No SEC enforcement action naming the firm or its principals was found.
Who runs Madera Residential?
Four partners have signed every Madera Form D reviewed from 2011 to 2024: Charlie Young (Managing Partner and CEO), Dave Marcinkowski (Partner and Quext founder), Gary Hall (Partner, Construction) and Alton Smith (Partner, Finance, a CPA and former CFO of the formerly NYSE-listed Furr's/Bishop's, Inc.). James Kane, a former Managing Director of Asset Management who oversaw roughly 80,000 units across 15 states, leads the Southeast push, and Dave Gilles is CEO of Madera Companies and co-CEO of Quext.
What is the minimum investment with Madera Residential?
Form D filings show minimums ranging from $15,000 to $200,000 depending on the vehicle. Recent single-asset partnerships cluster at $25,000–$50,000; Madera Capital Fund XV listed $15,000 and Fund II listed $200,000. Fees, promote and waterfall are not public: Madera is not an SEC-registered investment adviser and files no Form ADV, so no brochure fee schedule exists to consult.
Is Madera Residential raising capital now?
The most recent filing is Madera Capital Fund I, LP, a Form D filed 20 August 2025 for an open-ended pooled investment fund with an indefinite offering amount and no sale yet recorded. It restarts the fund numbering that had reached XV in 2023 and lists Charles Young as sole executive officer with Madera Capital F1 GP, LLC as promoter. No new property-level partnership has been filed since Madera Merritt Park, LP in September 2024.
Who are Madera Residential's investors?
Individual accredited investors, not institutions. CREsponsor identified no public pension, endowment, sovereign wealth fund or insurance commitment in filings, trade press or pension board materials. On the development side Madera partners with JPI, a national Class A developer, and merged with WayMaker in January 2024; those are joint-venture and platform partners rather than limited partners, so the downside on the equity sits with individuals.
What makes Madera Residential different from other Texas multifamily sponsors?
It owns the software it runs on. Quext was founded inside Madera in 2019 to build operator-side smart-access and connectivity technology, acquired Homebase in October 2023, and is now sold externally as OneQuext alongside NOVY, a leasing and compliance platform. Very few sponsors of this size own a proptech business outright. It is also a genuine related-party arrangement, since the general partner owns a vendor deployed across the portfolio.
How much of Madera Residential's fundraising is visible in SEC filings?
The vehicle count is, but the dollars are not. Roughly 95 Madera-affiliated Reg D vehicles appear in EDGAR between 2011 and 2025, most named for the property's street address. Every one reviewed was filed before its first sale, reporting zero sold, and none was ever amended, so EDGAR shows registered offering ceilings, from $1.92 million in 2011 to $90 million in 2023, but no amount actually raised.
Revision history3entries
Corrected two citations. The Swift Bunny 2023 Employee Choice Award, carried at provenance 'verified', linked to a URL missing one character and therefore dead; the winners list itself was retrieved at the corrected address and does name Madera Residential, and its own wording confirms the page's characterisation of the award as a vendor survey among that vendor's clients, so the claim stands and only the link changed. Separately, the SEC-enforcement row asserted that no 'administrative proceeding, AAER or litigation release' names the sponsor while citing EDGAR full-text search, which indexes filings only and cannot show any of the three; the row now states the limit of what it checked and names its control.
Sources of capital condensed to a two-sentence statement with inline sources. The section had grown to 11-131 lines per page of LP cards, fund cards and audit trail; the facts that decide an allocation (who the capital comes from, and who absorbs a loss) were being carried by a slab most readers skip. Every claim and link in the short version is carried over from the long one, and the per-vehicle detail remains in git history, in the FAQ entries for minimums and fees, and in `sources[].gave:`. No score changed: the lens is value-mode and carries no weight in the hero grade.
Initial publish. Identity and continuity established from SEC Form D filings: the same four principals (Alton R. Smith, David P. Marcinkowski, Gary D. Hall and Charles R. Young), appear on every Madera vehicle from September 2011 through September 2024. Vehicle universe mapped at roughly 95 Reg D partnerships, most named for the property street address rather than the brand, which is why a brand-name EDGAR search returns almost nothing. Established that no Madera filing was ever amended and all were filed pre-first-sale, so amounts raised are not visible in EDGAR. Rebrand documented: maderaresidential.com now redirects to maderaequity.com, with Madera Residential presented as one company under a platform launched in 2025. Scale trajectory documented across three dated releases: managed properties 45+ (Aug 2022, JPI release) to 35+ (Jan 2024, sponsor release) to 30+ (2026 site), showing contraction. Track record captured as published (85 full-cycle deals, 28.92% IRR, 2.58x, 48-month hold) with three internal discrepancies surfaced: 85 versus 84 deal counts, 28.92% versus 29.9% averages, and gross versus net IRR labelling. The Briscoe exit independently corroborated: Form D vehicle 12639 Coit, LP maps to the case study's Coit Road address, and the sale to a Dallas Housing Finance Corp affiliate closing 1 December 2022 is confirmed in trade press. Risk screen run across nine checks. Two material findings: UMB Bank, N.A. sued the platform and all four principals personally on guaranties in April 2026 following an alleged note default and forbearance, voluntarily dismissed 27 days later with no judgment entered; and the 265-unit Adenine Apartments was posted for an October 2025 foreclosure auction on a $42M CRE CLO loan. Two apparent hits resolved as false positives and documented as such: Madera is a third-party garnishee, not a defendant, in the Dallas County Kenney matter, and is the recipient rather than the issuer of allegedly counterfeit insurance policies in the Western District of Kentucky Lexington Insurance case. The Tarrant County mandamus was resolved in Madera's favour. SEC enforcement and RealPage antitrust screens returned clean. Reputation checked across six communities at a 4.34 review-weighted average; awards screen returned one vendor employee-choice award.
