Skip to main content

Security report for futuregrowthcapital.com

Future Growth Capital · Finance · United Kingdom

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

82/100

Risk levelLow

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Future Growth Capital is a joint venture between Phoenix Group and Schroders, focused on providing private markets investment solutions primarily for UK pension funds and international investors interested in UK private markets. The company aims to unlock private markets to generate higher returns for pension savers and invest in UK businesses and infrastructure to drive economic growth. The website is professionally designed using modern web technologies such as React and Next.js, with good SEO, accessibility, and mobile optimization. Security posture is strong with HTTPS and security headers implemented, though explicit security policies and incident response information are not published. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable anomaly but the website's branding and content strongly indicate legitimacy. Privacy and cookie policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant. Contact is primarily via web forms, with no direct emails or phone numbers publicly listed. Overall, the site presents a trustworthy and professional digital presence for a financial services joint venture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching futuregrowthcapital.com

This scan found 14 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
100
Security headers
65
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
82

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The company operates in the finance sector, specializing in private market investment solutions for pension funds. It leverages the reputations and resources of two major UK financial institutions, Schroders and Phoenix Group, to establish market credibility. The business model focuses on asset allocation, portfolio construction, and manager research to deliver tailored private market strategies. The target audience includes institutional investors, particularly UK pension funds and international investors seeking UK market exposure. The firm offers both UK-specific and global private market strategies, including bespoke solutions. The partnership ecosystem includes Schroders and Phoenix Group as parent entities. Growth indicators include the launch of multi-private asset Long Term Asset Funds (LTAFs) and regulatory authorisation efforts. The company maintains a LinkedIn presence and provides extensive content and insights to support client engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, presence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the client-side code. However, the absence of published security policies, incident response plans, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms represents a gap in transparency and preparedness. No direct security contact channels were found. The site complies with GDPR through comprehensive privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the security posture is strong from a technical perspective but could be improved by publishing formal security governance documentation and incident response information.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to improve transparency and client trust.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  3. Add direct security contact information such as a security@ or abuse@ email address.
  4. Monitor and resolve the absence of WHOIS registration data to ensure domain legitimacy and reduce risk.
  5. Continue to maintain and update privacy and cookie compliance mechanisms in line with evolving regulations.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Schroder Investment Management Limited
Registration number
1893220 England
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Future Growth Capital
Description
Future Growth Capital is an independent private markets solutions business formed by Phoenix Group, a leading long-term savings and retirement business, and Schroders, the UK’s largest listed asset manager, to deliver the Mansion House objectives. Their mission is to unlock global private markets for UK pension savers, aiming to generate higher investment returns to support retirements and invest long-term patient capital into UK businesses and development projects to drive growth. They serve UK pension funds and international investors seeking access to UK private markets. The investment solutions team is one of the largest in the UK dedicated to serving the pensions industry, designing and managing private market investment solutions for efficient and confident investing. Backed by Schroders and Phoenix Group, they are a trusted long-term partner.
Key services
Private market investment solutions, Asset allocation, Portfolio construction, Manager research and implementation, Customised multi-private asset solutions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, JavaScript, CSS, HTML5
Frameworks
Next.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Security headers present
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected in scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Tealium
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Tealium
Marketing tools
Tealium
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multimedia
  2. Strong branding consistent with Schroders and Phoenix Group
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found; contact via web form
  4. Privacy and cookie policies are present and comprehensive
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published
  6. No WHOIS registration data available, which is unusual and warrants attention
  7. Use of modern web technologies and frameworks
  8. Good SEO and accessibility practices observed
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React and Next.js, enabling server-side rendering and good performance. The site uses a CMS likely Contentstack, inferred from content structure and metadata. It employs JavaScript libraries and asynchronous script loading for analytics and tracking (Tealium). The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA roles. SEO is well implemented with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data for video and website schema. Performance is moderate with multiple deferred scripts and preloaded CSS. No major technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicit but the use of cloudfront and tiqcdn suggests CDN usage for content delivery.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with futuregrowthcapital.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review futuregrowthcapital.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.