
The risky world of private assets opens up to retail investors
The pause is robbing private-market investors—typically deep-pocketed institutions, or uber-rich individuals—of a big payout. It is also robbing smaller investors of a chance to invest in some of the world's most successful companies, such as Stripe, a payments firm, and Elon Musk's SpaceX. That is making an existing problem worse. Measured against the value of all stocks, the monthly value of equity issued on stockmarkets globally has crumbled in recent years (see chart). That has made private markets the most exciting corner of the investing universe, with trillions of dollars flowing into private equity (PE), venture capital and private debt. Private assets under management, which also include infrastructure and property funds, have surged to $24trn, from $10trn a decade ago.
Now private-markets firms are dreaming of getting even bigger—by luring in the investing masses. Marc Rowan, who runs Apollo, a private-credit giant, says the savings of ordinary Americans are his company's biggest opportunity. Larry Fink, the boss of BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, focused his latest missive to shareholders on the subject. New products aimed at a broader cohort of investors are multiplying. This 'democratisation" could benefit millions of investors. But, because private assets are less liquid, more opaque and much less regulated than their listed peers, it also creates new risks.
There are good reasons why private assets have long been the preserve of a select few. At its inception, the typical private-equity fund secures commitments from a small club of pension schemes, endowments and other institutions to provide a sum of capital, usually in the tens of millions of dollars. The money is then called on in instalments whenever the fund's manager finds a company to buy. At the end of the fund's life, which can extend to a decade or more, the manager sells or floats the company before returning money to investors.
Such conditions are a poor fit for the mass market. Smaller investors are less likely to tolerate the unpredictability of cashflows coming out and back. They are also ill-equipped to handle the mountains of paperwork managers would send their way. Those wanting their money back before the end of the fund's life—in the event of a stockmarket correction, for instance—cannot easily sell their stakes. Enforcing capital calls on legions of individuals would also be impractical.
But pioneering products have arrived. In 2017 Blackstone's Real Estate Income Trust (BREIT) was launched to invest in property, which is typically unlisted. The fund has a minimum buy-in of $2,500, a 'perpetual" lifespan and monthly windows during which investors can sell out. BREIT limits the total amount of shares it will repurchase from investors to 5% of its net asset value (NAV) in any quarter. It has boomed in size, to a NAV of $54bn.
The Blackstone Private Credit Fund (BCRED), launched in 2021, has done the same for private debt. It is the largest of a growing array of vehicles, dubbed business development companies (BDCs), offering retail investors exposure to private investments. On April 29th Capital Group, an investment firm, and KKR, a private-markets giant, jointly launched two funds blending public and private assets. The vehicles will have a minimum investment of $1,000 and annual fees below 0.9%, much lower than most private funds. Such products 'only scratch the surface of what we can offer", say the sponsors. Assets held by BDCs have more than tripled over the past five years, to $438bn at the end of December.
Barbarians at the garden gate
Whether such products fly or flop depends on their ability to solve three problems. First is the murky nature of the assets themselves. Public data on private markets are scarce. Whatever are available are hard to interpret. Firms are often accused of massaging the valuations of their holdings to flatter returns. The measures they use are hard to compare with public-market benchmarks. Sporadic reporting allows them to smooth out bad periods.
There has been some progress. Last year MSCI, an index provider, unveiled private-market benchmarks that crunch the cashflow data for 14,000 funds since their inception. The new benchmarks also track funds' performance using figures gathered from investors. These should allow funds to be more rigorously compared with other offerings.
Another barrier to democratisation is law and regulation. Private-markets firms eye America's vast retirement system. Huge defined-benefit pension schemes, such as the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), have invested heavily in private markets for decades. But individually managed retirement accounts, and defined-contribution 401(k) schemes run by employers, which together hold $26trn in assets, have almost no exposure to private markets. A law from 1974, which spells out pension-plan providers' fiduciary duties, makes it possible they could be sued if they invest in private assets because of their lower liquidity and the high fees charged by fund managers.
Here too, change may come soon. Daniel Aronowitz, Mr Trump's nominee to run the Employee Benefits Security Administration at the Department of Labour, has complained about frivolous lawsuits against corporate-pension providers. In 2023 Mr Aronowitz called some criticisms of pe in pension portfolios 'naive and uninformed," noting that exposure could offer both diversification and returns. With narrow Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, private-fund managers are hopeful that they will finally get their foot in the door.
The most fundamental difficulty is that private assets are largely illiquid. Whereas stocks and bonds are traded all day long, stakes in private funds change hands only very rarely. Would-be buyers are scarce; working out a price is hard. Transactions, when they do happen, are not public so history can hardly serve as a guide. All this means retail investors cannot simply pile in and out of private assets at will, as they might with other parts of their portfolios.
This is a problem new products are finding hard to solve. In November 2022, amid market ructions, many investors in BREIT tried to withdraw their money. The trust could return only 43% of the capital it was asked for; more than a year later it was still limiting withdrawals. Private-equity products could face even bigger liquidity problems, notes Jerry Pascucci of UBS, a bank. Whereas credit and property generate steady streams of cash, equity funds must keep a hefty cash balance or draw on loans, both of which reduce returns, if they are to permit regular withdrawals.
To offer punters more liquidity, a few firms have started to offer exchange-traded funds (ETFs) containing private assets. The first was launched jointly in February by Apollo and State Street Global Advisers, a giant ETF provider, with the ticker PRIV. To ensure the minute-by-minute liquidity an ETF requires, however, the fund's private holdings will normally be limited to 35% of its total assets. Its largest holdings currently are mortgage-backed securities and Treasury bonds, which are very liquid.
The idea of a liquid vehicle for private assets comes with its own problems. When investors want to transact shares in an ETF, the fund manager must buy or sell shares in the underlying assets to match the changing exposure. Were investors to want to sell their stakes in large volumes, the ETF managers may struggle to find buyers for the illiquid equity and debt inside them. That could cause the funds to seize up. The Securities and Exchange Commission has expressed concerns that priv may not be sufficiently liquid and could struggle to comply with valuation rules. Its warnings appear to have deterred rival firms from launching copycat products.
For a long time the democratisation of private markets, though much talked about, remained elusive. Now at last the winds of financial innovation and regulatory change are blowing in the right direction. But as they entice more retail savers, private-fund managers will come under greater scrutiny. Working around the illiquidity of the asset class is hard, and it may even be dangerous to try. In the event that new products disappoint or trap people's savings, a backlash could ensue. The potential prize is huge. But catering for the investing masses is a risky business, too.
For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Billionaire Mark Cuban makes an AI prediction: Not Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos, the world's first trillionaire may be…
Billionaire Mark Cuban has predicted that the world's first trillionaire will be an entrepreneur who develops a successful artificial intelligence (AI) innovation. During an appearance on the "High Performance" podcast, Cuban made this prediction. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now While not naming a specific individual, the former "Shark Tank" judge suggested this future trillionaire could even be "one dude in a basement," emphasising that a solitary inventor with the right AI concept could achieve this financial milestone. Currently, Tesla and SpaceX CEO is the world's richest individual, with an estimated net worth of $402 billion, according to Forbes. However, an Oxfam report cited by Tami Luhby of CNN Business suggests that Musk, along with Amazon founder , Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault and his family, could reach trillionaire status within the next ten years. Mark Cuban on how AI will help make the world's first trillionaire In the podcast, Cuban said: 'The technology is changing so quickly. Somebody will come up with a new way to utilise it in a way we never thought about before. But AI just dwarfs all that. We haven't seen the best or the craziest of what it's going to be able to do. And not only do I think it'll create a trillionaire, but it could be just one dude in a basement. That's how crazy it could be." He also highlighted that this is only the 'preseason' of AI's capabilities. "Remember the early days of PCs and people were like, 'I don't need that. ... What's this internet thing? Why do we need it?' Then it was smartphones. We'll find something equivalent for AI and then, five years [later] ... people will be like, 'How did I live without it?' People will make a lot of money,' Cuban explained. 'I'm not saying we're going to get the Terminator. I'm not saying that all of a sudden, there are going to be robots that are smarter than people .. . But we'll find ways to make our lives better,' he added.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Elon Musk reacts to OpenAI's ‘fake stock' warning for investors: 'Your equity is…'
Elon Musk has reacted to OpenAI's "fake stock" warning for its investors. The tech billionaire who owns rival AI startup xAI has suggested that even the company's authentic equity may be an illusion. This follows a rare public warning from OpenAI disavowing any involvement with crypto-like financial products claiming to offer a stake in its business. OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, took to the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to inform that the so-called "OpenAI tokens" are not shares in the company and emphasised that it has no partnership with Robinhood , was not involved in the offering, and does not endorse it. The organisation stated that any transfer of OpenAI equity requires its approval, and no such approval was granted. It also urged people to exercise caution. What OpenAI said investors about its 'fake stock' In the X post, OpenAI wrote: 'These 'OpenAI tokens' are not OpenAI equity. We did not partner with Robinhood, were not involved in this, and do not endorse it. Any transfer of OpenAI equity requires our approval—we did not approve any transfer. Please be careful.' This situation drew a response from Musk, an OpenAI co-founder, who replied to the company's post with his own accusation on X saying: "Your 'equity' is fake." Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Redefine Elegance at One Luxe in Lokhandwala One Luxe by Veena Developers Undo by Taboola by Taboola The controversy started when Robinhood, a well-known trading platform, introduced a new product for its European users. In a statement to Gizmodo, a Robinhood spokesperson said: 'To cap off our recent crypto event, we announced a limited stock token giveaway on OpenAI and SpaceX to eligible European customers. These tokens give retail investors indirect exposure to private markets, opening up access, and are enabled by Robinhood's ownership stake in a special purpose vehicle .' Robinhood used a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to acquire a stake in OpenAI and then issued digital tokens representing that stake, aiming to make private company shares easier to trade through tokenisation. The company's CEO Vlad Tenev also took to X to explain: 'At our recent crypto event, we announced a limited Stock Token giveaway on OpenAI and SpaceX to eligible European customers. While it is true that they aren't technically 'equity' (you can see the precise dynamics in our Terms for those interested), the tokens effectively give retail investors exposure to these private assets. Our giveaway plants a seed for something much bigger, and since our announcement we've been hearing from many private companies that are eager to join us in the tokenization revolution . THANK YOU 🙏' AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now


Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Big, Beautiful Bill: From Tax cuts to mass deportations; key policies to know Trump's megabill
After hours of debate, negotiations and stalemate, Republicans in the US Senate have narrowly passed Donald Trump's mega-bill on tax and spending. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed with Vice-President JD Vance casting a tie-breaking vote after more than 24 hours of debate. The bill now heads back to House, where it still faces more opposition. The tax and spending bill is projected to cost more than $3 trillion during that time, but would be partially paid for with about $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid. Almost 12 million lower-income Americans would lose their health insurance by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Show more Show less