The Cost of Being Too Liquid

Key points

  • Private markets (private equity, private credit and real estate) have historically delivered an “illiquidity premium”
  • Institutions and family offices have recognized this illiquidity premium and have historically allocated significant capital to capture it
  • Advisors should consider developing an “illiquidity bucket”
  • Allocating a portion of a client’s portfolio to illiquid investments helps in maintaining a long-term approach

Legendary investor David Swensen famously stated that the intelligent acceptance of illiquidity, and a value orientation, constitutes a sensible, conservative approach to portfolio management.”1 What Swensen, and so many other sophisticated investors recognized is the illiquidity premium available by allocating capital to illiquid investments like private equity, private credit and private real estate.

In fact, throughout Swensen’s tenure as the chief investment officer of the Yale endowment, he often allocated between 70%–80% of his portfolio to alternative investments broadly, with illiquidity budgets of up to 50% of the total allocation. The illiquidity bucket is a technique institutions use to identify the amount of capital that they are willing to tie up for an extended period of time (7–10 years). As of the end of fiscal year 2025,2 Yale had a roughly US$44 billion in assets under management, with about 55% in the illiquidity bucket.

Of course, endowments are very different than individual investors, and Yale has certain built-in advantages, including unique access to private markets, dedicated resources to evaluate opportunities and long-time horizon. If Yale needs capital, it has the ability to reach out to well-heeled alumni and donors for additional capital.