Private Market Access for Mortals

Global defense budgets are expanding, but the allocation has changed. A growing share of spending is going toward AI-enabled systems, satellite networks, and advanced aerospace, not the platforms that dominated the last generation of procurement. We identified five companies at the center of this reallocation in a single research brief. Inside, you'll find the investment case for each, the contracts driving revenue, and the risks worth understanding before you commit capital. If you want exposure to defense sector growth beyond the traditional mega-caps, this report is a practical starting point. Free, concise, and built for investors who want to move ahead of the crowd.

Read the report

Welcome to the Edge.

You're getting this because you can handle a more careful, more sober kind of conversation about money than the version that fits in a Monday issue. So let's have one. The topic is private markets, and the goal is to leave you with an actual framework you can use, rather than another piece of breathless prose about how the next Andreessen Horowitz fund is going to change your life.

I'll be direct upfront. I am not a financial advisor. Nothing here is investment advice. I'm walking you through how I think about a particular kind of allocation, with all the caveats and trade-offs included, because I think the conversation in this space is almost universally too optimistic. The goal of the Edge is to give you the version a sophisticated friend would give you over dinner. Not a brochure.

Let's go.

     ◆     

What Counts as a Private Market

Most people use the term private markets to mean three pretty different things, and the conflation causes a lot of bad decisions. Let me separate them.

Venture capital is investing in early-stage companies, typically through a fund or a syndicate. The expected return profile is extremely skewed. A few investments generate enormous returns, most return little or nothing. Hold periods are typically 7 to 12 years. Liquidity is essentially zero until an exit event.

Private equity is investing in mature companies, typically through buyout funds. The expected returns are lower than venture in the best cases but higher than public equities on a risk-adjusted basis in most environments. Hold periods are typically 4 to 7 years. Liquidity is also essentially zero, though slightly better than venture because the underlying assets are cash-flowing businesses with real exit options.

Private credit is lending money to companies (often private equity backed companies) outside the public bond market. The expected return profile looks more like high-yield bonds, with some additional yield from the illiquidity premium. Hold periods vary. Liquidity is poor but better than equity in either category.

These are three different animals. Conflating them is like saying you want to invest in the stock market without specifying small cap, large cap, dividend, or growth. The shape of the bet matters a lot.

     ◆     

Why Sophisticated Investors Allocate to Private Markets

The honest case for private market allocation rests on three claims, each of which I'll lay out and then poke at.

Claim one is the illiquidity premium. The argument goes that because private market investors cannot exit on demand, they get paid extra in expected return for accepting that constraint. The evidence here is real but smaller than the marketing material suggests. The illiquidity premium exists, but it's been compressing for years as more capital has flowed into private markets. Recent estimates put it at roughly 1 to 3 percent annualized over comparable public market exposure. Worth something. Not life-changing.

Claim two is access to a different opportunity set. Public markets, the argument goes, are increasingly picked over and efficient. The interesting stuff is private. There's truth in this. The number of public US companies has shrunk by roughly half since the 1990s, and many of the most interesting growth companies stay private much longer than they used to. But the corollary that almost nobody mentions is that the private market is also more crowded with capital than ever, which means the same dynamic of efficiency creep is happening there. The free lunch isn't as free as it used to be.

Claim three is diversification. Private market returns are not perfectly correlated with public market returns, so adding them improves the risk-adjusted return of a portfolio. Mostly true, with one big caveat. The reported correlation between private and public market returns is artificially low because private assets are marked to model rather than marked to market. In a real downturn, the true correlation snaps much closer to one. You're not as diversified as the quarterly statements suggest. The diversification benefit is real but smaller than the official math implies.

Net of all three claims, the honest case is that a sensible private market allocation can add somewhere between 0.5 and 2 percent of annualized return to a well-constructed portfolio, with meaningfully more volatility and meaningfully less liquidity than public market exposure. That's the actual expected reward. The marketing version is much louder.

     ◆     

The Sizing Question

This is where most people get the math wrong. They read a piece about how endowments allocate 30 percent to private markets and they think the right number for them is somewhere in that neighborhood. It's not.

Endowments can allocate 30 percent to illiquid assets because they have perpetual time horizons and roughly 4 to 5 percent annual liquidity needs (their spending policy). Their constraint is generational, not annual. Your situation almost certainly isn't that.

For most individual investors with non-trivial wealth, the right framing is: what percentage of my total net worth can I genuinely afford to have locked up for 7 to 12 years, where I will receive zero income from those assets, and where the marked value on any given quarterly statement may bear little relationship to what they would actually sell for?

When you ask the question that way, the answer is usually a lot smaller than the marketing materials suggest. For most people who don't have a 9-figure balance sheet and a paid-off operating business, that number is in the 5 to 15 percent range. Below 5 percent, the allocation is too small to move the dial. Above 15 percent, the liquidity constraint starts to put real pressure on the rest of the portfolio in scenarios where you need cash.

The middle of that range is where I think most sophisticated individuals should live. Not aggressive. Not negligible. Big enough to matter. Small enough to survive.

     ◆     

Picking Vehicles

Once you've sized the allocation, the next question is what you actually put into it. There are roughly four ways to get private market exposure as an individual investor, each with its own trade-offs.

The first is direct investment. You write a check directly into a specific company, often through an angel investment platform or a personal syndicate. The advantages are concentration of conviction and lower fees. The disadvantages are concentration of risk, the need to source quality deals (which is hard), and total reliance on your own judgment. I think this is appropriate only if you have specific operating expertise in the companies' industries and a meaningful network that gets you into deals other people don't see.

The second is fund investment. You commit capital to a venture, private equity, or private credit fund managed by professionals. The advantages are diversification across many underlying investments and access to managers who do this full time. The disadvantages are high minimums (often 250,000 dollars or more for top tier funds), high fees (typically 2 percent management plus 20 percent of profits), and long lockups. This is the model that works for most sophisticated allocators, but it requires real capital and patience.

The third is fund-of-funds or platform offerings. Increasingly, platforms aggregate retail capital into vehicles that invest in top-tier funds, lowering minimums to the 25,000 to 50,000 dollar range. The advantage is access. The disadvantage is an extra layer of fees and often inferior selection compared to investing in the funds directly. If you're going this route, scrutinize the platform's track record and fee structure carefully. The marketing is always shinier than the math.

The fourth is publicly traded vehicles that offer exposure to private market returns. Business development companies, certain closed-end funds, and a handful of publicly listed private equity firms fall in this bucket. The advantages are liquidity and lower minimums. The disadvantages are that the public listing introduces market beta you didn't necessarily want, and the discount or premium to net asset value at which these trade can swing dramatically. For investors with small allocations or limited patience for true illiquidity, this is often the most practical entry point.

My personal opinion, which is worth what you paid for it: if you're under, call it, two to three million dollars of investable net worth, options three and four are probably where you should focus, with the heavier emphasis on option four. Above that level, options two and three open up. Option one I'd reserve for people with very specific informational advantages.

     ◆     

The Honest Failure Modes

Let me end with the part of the conversation that almost no marketing piece will give you. The ways private market allocations actually go wrong.

Failure mode one is vintage risk. The fund you committed to in 2021, when valuations were stretched, will probably underperform the fund you committed to in 2023. The difference is largely just when capital got deployed. Most individual investors don't have the patience or capital to allocate consistently across vintages, so they end up concentrated in whatever vintage happens to coincide with when they had money to commit. Be aware of this. Pace your commitments.

Failure mode two is fee drag. The headline 2 and 20 fee structure on a top-tier fund sounds reasonable until you do the math. On a 10 percent gross return, 2 and 20 takes that down to roughly 6 percent net. On a 7 percent gross return, it takes it down to roughly 4 percent. Many private market vehicles are sold to retail investors with gross expected returns in the 8 to 12 percent range and fee structures that take 30 to 50 percent of the gross return. Always look at net expected return, after all fees. The number is much less exciting than the gross.

Failure mode three is mark-to-myth. Private market assets are typically valued quarterly by the fund manager based on internal models, comparable transactions, and assumptions about future cash flows. These valuations are not market prices. In good times, they tend to lag public markets and feel smooth. In bad times, they tend to be slow to recognize the damage. The result is a portfolio that looks more stable than it actually is, which encourages investors to take more risk than they would if they could see the real-time price. The smoother the line on your quarterly statement, the less you should trust it.

Failure mode four is the capital call. When you commit to a fund, you don't write the full check upfront. You agree to fund capital calls as the manager invests. Those calls can come at inconvenient times, including market downturns when you would rather hold the cash. If you can't fund a call, you can lose your entire interest in the fund. Build the cash reserves to support every commitment you make. Don't get cute.

     ◆     

A Framework, in Closing

Here's the version I'd hand someone who asked me how to think about all of this:

First, decide what percentage of your net worth you can genuinely afford to lock up for 7 to 12 years. Be honest. That number is your ceiling. For most sophisticated individuals it sits between 5 and 15 percent.

Second, pick the access vehicle that matches your capital base. Below two to three million in investable assets, lean on publicly traded vehicles and lower-minimum platforms. Above that, fund commitments become the right tool. Direct investing is for specialists with informational edges.

Third, pace your commitments across vintages. Don't put all your private market chips in one calendar year. Spread the commitments over three to five years. Boring. Effective.

Fourth, look at net expected return after all fees. Discount any marked-to-model returns by some haircut to reflect the fact that they're not real prices. Build cash reserves to fund every future capital call without stress.

Fifth, and most importantly, do not increase your allocation in response to feeling left out. The single most expensive emotion in this asset class is the sense that everyone else has access to something you don't. They mostly don't. And the people who do are getting compensated less for it than the brochures imply.

     ◆     

Thanks for reading the Edge. Back to standard programming Monday. Until then, may your weekend include at least one decision you don't have to second-guess on Monday morning.

Alex Rivera

Wealth Architect at Wealth Grid

Ready to transform artificial intelligence from a buzzword into your personal revenue generator

HubSpot’s groundbreaking guide "200+ AI-Powered Income Ideas" is your gateway to financial innovation in the digital age.

Inside you'll discover:

Download your guide today and unlock a future where artificial intelligence powers your success. Your next income stream is waiting.

Get Your Guide