In the presentation, everything looked grown-up.

Private markets. Private credit. A long horizon. An illiquidity premium. A professional manager. Quality assets. Access to what once seemed the territory of institutional investors.

One of the slides had a small line about exit restrictions. The line was read. But it was never truly lived through.

Access to private markets is expanding. Bain's Global Private Equity Report 2025 notes that in 2024 private equity deals and exits recovered after a two-year decline, but fundraising remained under pressure because of long asset holding periods and investor caution. An important signal: private markets are becoming more accessible to a wider circle of investors, but the question of exit and timing remains central.

For a family, this changes the rules. Before, the main question was: is there access to such instruments? Now the main question is different: is the family ready to own them correctly?

Private markets require a grown-up relationship with time. With such instruments what matters is not only how much the family can earn, but also when it will be able to get the money back, on what terms and at what exit price. Money may be locked up for several years (lock-up), an exit may require advance notice (notice period), payouts may be temporarily restricted by the manager (redemption gates), and access to money may open only in certain periods (exit windows). The value of an asset may be calculated from the fund's internal valuation (NAV), updated not every day, and a sale on the secondary market may require a discount.

In addition, the family depends on the quality of the manager, the year of entry into the fund (vintage year), the currency, tax consequences, the fund's jurisdiction and the quality of reporting. These are not technical details. These are the rules by which the money will live inside the instrument.

Semi-liquidity is not liquidity with a nice name. It is a separate risk.

Illiquidity in itself is not evil. Sometimes it is a conscious price for access to a long-term opportunity. It becomes dangerous when the family buys such an instrument with money that in its mind remained “available just in case.”

This is where the break occurs.

In the report, the capital is there. In the app, it is there. In the presentation, it is there. In the family's sense of things, it is there. But when money is needed for living, business, medical treatment, a move, a tax payment, the children's education, support for parents or protection of the family, it turns out: the money sits inside terms, conditions, windows, restrictions and the hope that the exit will come on time.

Private credit, infrastructure strategies, real estate, long-asset funds, the energy transition and critical resources deserve especially careful scrutiny. These themes may be strategically important. But a global trend does not automatically make an instrument suitable for a specific family.

A global trend does not cancel family liquidity.

There is one more subtlety: valuation. A private asset may look more stable than the public market not because it is less risky, but because it is revalued less often. Smoothed valuation is not the same as the absence of risk. Sometimes it simply postpones the moment of meeting reality.

The family should understand: which layer of capital is entering private markets? Is it growth capital? Long-term capital? Capital for opportunities? Diversification? Income? Compensation for public-market risks? Or the wish to gain access to something that sounds prestigious and “not for everyone”?

If the function is not named, the instrument begins to manage the family more strongly than the family manages the instrument.

The family reserve must not accidentally become illiquid capital. Money that is meant to protect life must not go to a place where the exit depends on rules that are not the family's.

Before entering, simple questions need to be asked: when can we exit? Who determines the price? What happens in case of mass redemption requests? Is there a secondary market? What discount is possible? What will happen if the money is needed sooner? Who in the family understands the instrument? Can the second partner explain it in plain human language? How is the instrument connected with taxes, jurisdiction, access and a future transfer?

If the exit is described by the phrase “most likely it will work out,” you need to stop. Private markets can be a strong instrument. But the strength of an instrument does not replace the maturity of the owner.

The final question: if your private markets investment becomes unavailable for longer than you expected, will this disrupt only your return expectations, or the sustainability of the whole family?