Dasseti vs. Loopio: Which DDQ Software is Best for Your Firm?

Loopio and Dasseti both help asset managers and private equity firms complete DDQs quickly and accurately, but they differ in scope.

Dasseti is a specialist platform built around an investment due diligence workflow. Loopio is a response management platform built to handle the full range of requests these teams respond to—not just LP DDQs.

The right fit comes down to two questions:

1. Are LP DDQs and ESG reporting the entire job—or close to it?
2. Or do your Investor Relations, Sales, InfoSec, and Compliance teams also respond to RFPs, security questionnaires, and other procurement requests that fall outside that one workflow?

If your team lives in a single document type, a specialist is usually enough. If it doesn’t, you need a platform that governs every answer across all of them.

In this comparison, we break down where Loopio and Dasseti differ most, so you can decide which one fits the way your firm actually works.

Choosing Between Loopio and Dasseti: 6 Factors to Consider

Responding to DDQs is rarely a solo effort—or a one-time one. Legal, compliance, and IR teams get pulled into dozens of questionnaires a year, and keeping their input coordinated and consistent across every one is slow and error-prone. The best DDQ software is built to remove the delays and inaccuracies that put a fundraise or mandate on the line.

Here are six factors when comparing Loopio and Dasseti:

1. Consultant database integrations: Does the platform sync with consultant databases like Nasdaq eVestment, and can it still handle bespoke DDQs that don’t match those standardized profiles?
2. AI transparency and control: Can the team control when AI is used—pulling approved answers verbatim when exact language matters, and clearly flagging when text is AI-generated?
3. Content governance: Is there a single source of truth with full version history and a record of who approved what and when?
4. Cross-functional collaboration: Can DDQ sections be assigned to IR, Compliance, Legal, and Finance, each with clear ownership and deadlines, all tracked in one workflow?
5. Response type coverage: Does the platform handle LP DDQs alongside RFPs, security questionnaires, and recurring vendor assessments?
6. Scalability: Does the platform hold up as DDQ volume and complexity grow, or does it break down past a certain point?

Read on for a full breakdown of how each platform stacks up against these key factors, or skip ahead to the side-by-side comparison.

Loopio Overview: Built for the Full Response (And DDQ) Lifecycle

Loopio is a response management platform that manages the full DDQ lifecycle—matching incoming questions to approved content, routing sections to the right contributors, and ensuring every answer that goes out to institutional investors is one the team can stand behind.

It’s built for more than DDQs, though: the same governed library, embedded AI, and collaboration workflows also handle the RFPs, security questionnaires, and vendor assessments that investment firms field year-round, so approved answers are reused across every request type from one powerful platform.

Verbatim Answers When it Counts

Loopio’s Content Connectors pull directly from the sources where your most current fund disclosures, compliance certifications, and regulatory language already live, such as Sharepoint, while your governed library holds the answers your team has reviewed and approved as a single source of truth.

When a DDQ arrives, Automated Answers drafts responses from that vetted content in one click, matching each question to the right material, with line-by-line citations so every answer comes with its proof attached. A Confidence Pulse also scores each draft across accuracy, trust, and completeness, so your team can see at a glance what’s investor-ready and what needs a closer look

And for the answers that can’t be paraphrased—AML procedures, litigation disclosures, regulatory certifications—Verbatim Mode lets you pull entries through exactly as written from the library, with no AI alteration, so your most sensitive answers reach an LP in their exact, approved language.

Fast First Drafts, Coordinated Final Answers

Loopio’s SmartScan automatically ingests DDQs in any format—Excel, Word, PDF, or from a web-based portal. It recognizes incoming questions and pulls matching answers from vetted content automatically, cutting down the manual first-pass work that eats up hours on a typical questionnaire.

For final sign-off or net-new questions, Recommended Experts surfaces the right compliance officer or legal reviewer based on past response history, so you can assign ownership and a clear deadline instead of letting the question stall in a general inbox. Every edit and approval is tracked along the way, giving you full version history and a clear record of who signed off on what.

Automated review cycles also keep content from going stale. Your team is prompted to revisit performance figures, compliance language, and regulatory disclosures on a regular cadence, so every answer is ready for the next DDQ.

One Platform For Every Response Type

The biggest advantage of Loopio over Dasseti is that it supports a full range of response types—from RFPs that win mandates to the security questionnaires LPs increasingly send to vet operational and data controls.

Everyone at your firm can draw from the same governed library, leveraging the same collaborative workflows and connectors to answer every request faster, more consistently, and in pre-approved language—with the right attachments in place, like fund fact sheets, audited financials, and regulatory filings.

That flexibility extends to submission. No matter the response type or required format, Loopio moves it forward with the right checks and balances so everything that leaves the business is accurate and approved—including answers pushed directly back into 170+ online portals through SmartFill.

Dasseti Overview: Purpose-Built for Investment Due Diligence

Dasseti is built specifically for the investment sector, serving asset managers, GPs, LPs and institutional investors. Its core strengths are LP due diligence, ESG reporting and ongoing manager monitoring, making it a specialist alternative to broader response management platforms.

Supports Both Sides of Due Diligence

Dasseti splits the due diligence process across two core products: COLLECT helps institutional investors and consultants gather and monitor manager data, while ENGAGE handles the response side for asset managers completing DDQs and investor RFPs. Harvest rounds out the suite with ESG data collection for private markets.

Dasseti provides a natural advantage for firms heavily concentrated on investment data. Its native connection to Nasdaq eVestment is a meaningful part of that, reducing duplicate entry for firms with an active profile, while additional integrations with Salesforce and Microsoft help teams move information between familiar systems.

That depth comes with a tradeoff: the platform is built around a single vertical workflow, so the strongest fit tends to be firms whose priority is ESG and investment-data reporting rather than a multi-format response operation.

Capable AI, in a Separate Window

Dasseti’s AI assistant, Sidekick, drafts answers from approved past responses and internal documents, and includes source references so reviewers can see where content came from. One thing to evaluate closely is whether those answers are pulled verbatim or generated fresh—a distinction that matters when a compliance officer signs off on a regulatory representation.

Sidekick is also accessed through a chat-style interface rather than built into the worklfow, which adds manual steps to get content into response. As teams complete more requests, though, approved answers feed a growing content bank, so past DDQs become the starting point for the next one.

Where teams tend to feel the ceiling is project management. Options for assigning individual questions or sections to specific contributors and reviewers are limited, which makes a complex, multi-stage DDQ across Legal, Compliance, Finance, and IR harder to coordinate inside the platform itself.

Strong on Monitoring, Narrow on Range

Due diligence rarely ends when the first questionnaire is submitted. Investors continue to request updates and monitor how fund, operational, and ESG information changes over time.

Dasseti is designed around that ongoing exchange, allowing teams to maintain structured manager data and reuse it across recurring requests rather than treating every DDQ as an isolated project. This makes it particularly relevant for firms looking to manage the continuing relationship between LPs, consultants, and investment managers, not just complete a single document.

The tradeoff is scope: that strength is concentrated on the investment-monitoring relationship, so teams whose work also spans RFPs, security questionnaires, and other response types often find they need a second tool once the request falls outside that lane.

Dasseti vs. Loopio: A Side-by-Side Comparison of the DDQ Platforms

Criteria	Loopio	Dasseti
Does the platform sync with consultant databases like Nasdaq eVestment, and can it still handle bespoke DDQs that don’t match those standardized profiles?	⚠️ Partial. No native eVestment integration, but a portal-agnostic Browser Extension supports 170+ portal providers and a governed library answers any bespoke DDQ format, in a portal or outside one.	✅ Yes. Native Nasdaq eVestment integration syncs consultant-database profiles, but only covers those structured fields. Worth confirming if it can handle bespoke DDQs.
Can the team control when AI is used—pulling approved answers verbatim when exact language matters, and clearly flagging when text is AI-generated?	✅ Yes. Verbatim Mode pulls approved library content unaltered. When AI generates an answer instead, it’s flagged as AI-composed and cites the sources it drew from.	⚠️ Partial. Sidekick drafts from approved content with source references, but it isn’t always clear whether an answer is verbatim or generated.
Is there a single source of truth with full version history and a record of who approved what and when?	✅ Yes. Governed content library with version history, freshness indicators, and audit trails on approvals and content changes.	⚠️ Partial. Q&A bank supports reuse, but does not offer the same documented ownership, freshness, and approval-trail controls.
Can DDQ sections be assigned to IR, Compliance, Legal, and Finance, each with clear ownership and deadlines, all tracked in one workflow?	✅ Yes. Automated workflows route sections to contributors with ownership and deadlines; Recommended Experts surfaces the right person to review or contribute.	⛔ No. Limited options for assigning individual questions or sections to specific contributors and reviewers.
Does the platform handle LP DDQs alongside RFPs, security questionnaires, and recurring vendor assessments?	✅ Yes. Handles a wide-range of response types, supporting various import and export formats.	⛔ No. Purpose-built for LP DDQs, investor RFPs, and ESG reporting.
Does the platform hold up as DDQ volume and complexity grow, or does it break down past a certain point?	✅ Yes. Scales across volume, formats, and contributors from one platform: a governed library, automated workflows, and version control keep quality consistent from 20 DDQs a year to hundreds.	⚠️ Partial. Proven within its investment-monitoring and ESG lane, but built around one vertical workflow; teams often add a second tool as work grows beyond it

Final Verdict: Choose The Platform That Scales With Your Team

If your workload is concentrated on LP DDQs, investor RFPs, ESG reporting, and consultant database management, Dasseti is a strong, purpose-built choice. It’s designed around exactly that workflow, and does it well.

For most teams, though, the work doesn’t stay that contained. 

DDQs arrive alongside RFPs, security questionnaires, and vendor assessments, often on the same desk, in the same week, pulling in multiple contributors. That’s the gap Loopio’s DDQ software is built to close: one governed platform, one AI that shows its work, and one place for every response type instead of a second tool the moment the scope changes.

Choose Loopio if…

✓ Your team responds to DDQs, RFPs, security questionnaires, or vendor assessments, and wants one governed source of truth for all of them.

✓ You need to know, with certainty, whether an answer is verbatim approved content or AI-generated before it reaches an institutional investor.

✓ Coordinating Legal, Compliance, Finance, and InfoSec on the same document is a recurring bottleneck, not an occasional one.