Institutional strategy: Key investor constraints
Consider:
Return target: income vs growth
Risk appetite: core vs opportunistic
Time horizon: long vs short-term
Liquidity: daily dealing vs long lock-up
Regulation: Solvency II, fair value rules (for example, insurers may face capital treatment under Solvency II, which affects allocations to higher-risk vehicles.)
Tailor mix of listed/unlisted vehicles
Listed vs Unlisted vehicles (institutional)
Listed Vehicles (e.g. REITs, Listed Property Companies)
Advantages:
Daily liquidity and transparent pricing.
Benchmarkable (e.g. FTSE EPRA NAREIT indices).
Easier diversification across sectors/regions.
Suitable for tactical asset allocation and shorter-term mandates
Risks:
Higher volatility and equity market correlation.
Share price reflects sentiment, not underlying asset value.
Potential NAV discount/premium can distort real estate fundamentals. Especially during market stress (Covid, many REIT’s high discounts)
Unlisted Vehicles (e.g. Core Funds, Value Add Funds)
Access to specific strategies (e.g. urban logistics, refurbishments).
Greater control (e.g. governance rights in club deals).
Lower short-term volatility.
Illiquidity and valuation lag.
Higher fees and complex structures.
Complexity in vehicle governance and reporting.
Unlisted funds also expose investors to liquidity risk, as seen in the UK’s open-ended retail funds, which suspended redemptions in 2016 and 2020 due to NAV mismatches.
Listed vs Unlisted vehicles Portfolio construction considerations
Strategic Allocation
Blended allocation (e.g. 70% unlisted, 30% listed)
Diversification: region, sector, vintage
Scenario modelling: interest rates, downturns, refinancing stress
Governance/cost: alignment via co-investment, assess fee layers
5. Vehicle-Strategy Fit
Match:
Opportunistic → closed-end
Core/income → open-end or REIT
Avoid mismatch:
Development in open-end → redemption risk
Listed income REITs exposed to market pricing volatility
Zuletzt geändertvor 4 Tagen