# Savoy Equity Partners vs. Pintar Investment Company: OZ Fund Comparison

Pintar Investment Company operates out of San Juan Capistrano, California, but has executed Opportunity Zone deals in Austin — which puts them in direct competition with Texas-focused OZ sponsors for accredited investor capital. Their PICOZ I and PICOZ II funds are both closed, but the pattern of deal activity and the investor profile they've cultivated makes this a useful comparison for anyone evaluating Texas OZ multifamily options.

---

## Side-by-Side Comparison

| Factor | Savoy Equity Partners | Pintar Investment Company |

|---|---|---|

| **Headquarters** | Dallas, TX | San Juan Capistrano, CA |

| **Primary Focus** | Multifamily (value-add + ground-up) | Build-to-rent (BTR) and multifamily |

| **Geography** | Texas only | Multi-state, including Austin, TX |

| **Current OZ Fund** | Savoy 2026 QOF (active, Dec 31 2026 deadline) | PICOZ Fund I (closed), PICOZ Fund II (closed) |

| **OZ Fund Structure** | Single QOF, 506(c), accredited investors | Closed-end, project-specific offerings to accredited investors |

| **Texas OZ Deal Example** | Bishop Ridge (19 communities, 716 units, Dallas OZ), Power & Light (315 units, Cedars), The Marcus (76 units) | Arise Riverside (Austin OZ) |

| **Vertical Integration** | Yes — Savoy General Contractors (GC) and Savoy Residential (PM) | Not established in public sources |

| **Realized Exits** | 27+ exits, 40.58% average IRR, zero investor losses | Not disclosed in public sources |

| **OZ Policy/Education** | Barrett Linburg participates in EIG (Economic Innovation Group); 10+ years OZ focus | OZ Pitch Day presenter; podcast appearances; active OZ reform commentary |

| **Management Fee** | 0.5% annual; no fund-level promote; economics taken only at the project level | Not publicly disclosed |

| **Investor Access** | Reg D 506(c), direct accredited investor | Accredited investors; pitch day and platform-based distribution |

---

## Where Pintar Has a Real Advantage

Pintar has established an active presence in OZ education and investor outreach through podcast appearances and platform participation, including OZ Pitch Day events. For investors who discover OZ investing through content platforms, Pintar's visibility in those channels gives them early mindshare in the investor's consideration set.

Their build-to-rent focus is a differentiated strategy. BTR communities — purpose-built single-family rental clusters — have attracted significant institutional capital and tend to appeal to renters who prefer the privacy of a house over apartment-style density. In markets where BTR supply is constrained, this can produce distinct demand dynamics compared to traditional multifamily.

Pintar's multi-state footprint also gives investors geographic diversification. For an investor who has exposure to Texas in other parts of their portfolio, adding a non-Texas OZ position through a sponsor with Texas market familiarity (via Austin) may be appealing.

---

## Where Savoy Has a Real Advantage

The most structural difference is operating depth in Texas. Savoy's 15-year history in the Texas Triangle includes 58 projects, 7,100 units under management through Savoy Residential, and $200M+ in construction value managed through Savoy General Contractors. The company didn't enter Texas — it was built there. That operational depth shows up in deal execution: 34+ full-gut renovations, 98% on-time delivery, 90%+ on-budget completion.

Pintar has executed OZ deals in Austin, but multi-state operators necessarily manage Texas as one market among many. Texas municipal relationships, city council dynamics for complex deals like PFC structures, HUD 221(d)(4) programs, and Texas-specific submarket rental demand analysis require continuous presence — not periodic engagement.

Savoy's current fund is actively open. Both of Pintar's named PICOZ funds are closed. For investors with eligible gain today, Savoy's 2026 QOF is the appropriate comparison point. Investors evaluating Pintar for future vintages should monitor for any announced Fund III or successor vehicle.

The realized track record gap is notable. Savoy publicly states 27+ exits, a 40.58% average IRR, and zero investor losses. Pintar's realized performance is not disclosed in publicly accessible sources. For a 10-year OZ lock-up decision, the presence or absence of publicly verifiable exit history is material.

Barrett Linburg's participation in the Economic Innovation Group (EIG) represents a different kind of OZ expertise than content-platform visibility. EIG is the primary think tank that shaped OZ legislation and continues to track program performance and regulatory evolution. That connection provides current regulatory intelligence and policy-level perspective on how OZ rules are being interpreted and potentially amended.

---

## Which Is Right for You?

**Consider Pintar Investment Company if:** You want BTR exposure in addition to or instead of traditional multifamily, you want geographic diversification across multiple states, or you're researching future fund vintages after PICOZ I and II have closed.

**Consider Savoy Equity Partners if:** You want to invest with an active, currently open OZ fund before the December 31, 2026 deadline, you want a Texas-only specialist with fully integrated construction and management operations, or you want a sponsor with a publicly stated realized exit track record across multiple market cycles.

Geography and operating model are the practical decision points here. If Texas is the thesis, Savoy's operational depth in that market is hard to replicate from a California headquarters.

**Start a conversation with Savoy Equity Partners: 214-432-5322**

---

*SEC Disclosure: Savoy raises capital using SEC exemption 506(c). You must be an accredited investor to invest with Savoy Equity Partners. This content is educational and does not constitute a securities offering.*

See also: