Pete Lyon:    I think we're in the middle of a market structure change. Just like we had in public equity domain where we decimalization of equities and ETFs of equities and increased liquidity across the curve, we have a situation here in alternatives where market structures are evolving very quickly.

 

Allison Nathan: Are private markets at an inflection point? Interest rates are elevated. Liquidity is tightening. And cracks are beginning to surface, especially in private credit. So, what does the shifting landscape mean for investors in private markets and for the companies that rely on them for capital? Welcome to Exchanges, the weekly show where we unpack how Goldman Sachs is making sense of the most consequential forces shaping markets and economies. I'm Allison Nathan.

 

[MUSIC INTRO]

 

My guests today are Pete Lyon, global co-head of the Capital Solutions Group within our Global Banking & Markets business. And Michael Brandmeyer, global head and CIO of the External Investing Group within Goldman Sachs Asset Management We'll explore today's opportunities, how private capital is evolving, and the risks coming into focus.

 

Pete, Mike, welcome to Exchanges.

 

Michael Brandmeyer: Thank you.

 

Pete Lyon:    Thank you. Thanks for having us.

 

Allison Nathan:   So, let me start by taking a step back. When you both look across the private equity and credit markets today, what do you see as the single biggest shift in the landscape over the past 12 to 18 months? Mike, maybe you can start us off?

 

Michael Brandmeyer: Sure. We are at a big inflection point right now. And there is certainly a lot of stuff going on. But first, let me put it into context. So, if you look between 2010 right after the GFC, right through 2022 when the Fed increased interest rates, you had a period of unprecedented growth in private markets. Private markets actually over that period of time were up six times. So, just a massive period of growth.

 

Then the Fed increased interest rates. And everything came to a halt. And so, as we sit here today, now four years later, there are these big questions that are looming over the market. Number one is AI. AI is changing everything in the investing world as we talk about often on this podcast. In private markets, that's definitely true. Some of that is the big investments that are being made in AI and a lot of the opportunities around it. And how much of private equity has invested in software over the last period of time, it's about 30 percent. But there’s a lot of questions. What is going to happen to that exposure? So, that's number one.

 

Number two is private markets have been doing great over that period of time. But public markets have been absolutely ripping, particularly in the last two years. And so, people are asking the question, gosh, is the illiquidity premium there? Is it worth it to be investing in private equity when I can just invest in public markets? So, that's another question that I'm sure we'll get into.

 

And then finally, we talked about the cracks. The distributions. Distributions are sort of a circulatory system of private equity. It's the way that the whole thing works. You lock up your money, on average you think that in five to six years you're going to get your money back with a multiple. Maybe it's going to be one and a half. Maybe it's going to be two. Maybe it's going to be three times or in some cases more or less. But the average time of holding companies has gone up a lot.

 

The average time to IPO for a venture company right now is 14 years, right? It's a long period. And these are for the big winners, the companies who are going to go public. In private equity, it was five-and-a-half years just going back maybe five and 10 years ago. Now the average buyout is being held for almost seven years. So, the system is gummed up. The circulatory system is not working. And so, that's making fundraising harder. It's driving consolidation. It's driving a lot of change in the industry.

 

So, we are definitely at an inflection point. And I haven't even touched on what's going on in private credit.

 

Pete Lyon:    So, maybe I'll build, a little bit Allison, on what Mike has said. Even taking a further step back, I think we're in the middle of a market structure change. Just like we had in public equity domain where we decimalization of equities and ETFs of equities and increased liquidity across the curve, we have a situation here in alternatives where market structures are evolving very quickly.

 

I think to your question we are at an inflection point. I think if you look at private credit, for example, it's been much maligned in the press in certain aspects of it. But if you look at any historical averages in terms of defaults and underperformance in private credit, we're really nowhere close to even those averages, either in private credit or in public credit. And there are certain aspects of private credit, whether it's in software-centric companies or companies that were overlevered coming out of the '21/'22 LBO period that are a bit softer in performance.

 

But really, private credit holistically is a very solid asset class. And if you look back to the GFC, in prior business cycles, you had default rates exceeding 10 percent. Today they're at two percent or below, depending on what subcategory of private credit you're looking at. And even in a very stressed scenario where you had 50 percent plus of private credit underperforming, if you look at that over history in a 10 percent default rate, you've still only got five percent of losses versus a up to top to bottom at a peak to trough of the equity market it was over 50 percent during that same period.

 

So, private credit is a very resilient asset class. And I think there are aspects of it, as Mike alluded to, that will go under pressure as the economy strains a bit, if that does happen. Right now, we're in a pretty resilient period. But we think it's a good asset class to be in. And that will persist.

 

And then if you look at private equity as Mike said, we're a little bit of an indigestion period, if you will. We've had the luxury over prior cycles of much shorter hold periods. And investment gains that were driven by lifts in multiples. And now we have a market that's elongated. And we think what's happening is things are really going to return to historical norms. As it relates to holding periods, call it six, seven years. And if you look at the distributions as a percent of in the ground NAV, those have been historically low. Mike and I will go through those. But we think those will return to normalized levels of 15 to 20 percent.

 

But it's going to take some time. And, you know, I think AI is going to be a big factor in the context of all that and how that plays out, both upside and downside across portfolios is being discussed today. But I think if you look at equity monetizations on the private equity side of things, it's been slower. But we're starting to see the waves lap up on the beach with higher frequency now. We don't think there's going to be a tsunami of distributions. We think it's going to be more consistent as the market continues to perform. But that's a big if, right?

 

Allison Nathan:   Right. So, we are not particularly worried about private credit as an asset class. But let's talk a little bit more and dig in on that private equity side, Mike. So, what will be the catalyst, not for a tsunami, but to see normalization in that area?

 

Michael Brandmeyer: So, let's talk about why are we in this period of indigestion right now? Why is the circulatory system not working? It's relatively simple and it just goes back to the math of private equity. If you go back to 2022 after that period of massive growth, what happened? The economy didn't go into recession. Capital markets were open. There was plenty of dry powder. Pete said on average about 20 percent of market value realizes on average every year. Why have we been stuck down at eight, nine, 10 percent over the last three years?

 

Well, the reason is relatively simple. The Fed increased rates by roughly 500 basis points. And private market portfolios weren't really marked down that much. And so, if you do the math, remember this is a levered asset class where usually you take about one part of equity and one part of debt to finance the buyout of a company. If that debt gets a lot more expensive, that asset is actually worth less. And so, the private equity portfolios were worth less, but the marks were slow to come down.  

 

What's happened to change that? A couple things have happened. The economy's been strong. So, we've had three to four years of economic growth. That means the underlying operating earnings of these companies have continued to grow. Number two. Debt prices have eased a little bit now since the Iran War and the inflation worries. Rates are back up a little bit. But in general, rates have been coming in.

 

And now there's this intense pressure that GPs are feeling because the LPs are clamoring to have distributions. And then, frankly they're saying, "We're not going to go into your next fund until you've returned more money from this last fund and the fund before that." So, those things are combining to create an environment. And, but for the Iran War, we think that 2026 was setting up to be a great year. When I talked to my colleagues in Investment Banking and in Pete's area and others, we look at the number of mandates that we have as a firm, it's very considerable. If you look at the IPO backlog, it's been growing for a number of months now.

 

And so, we think that the market is really poised for a relatively strong period of distributions. And then also you have secondaries. Private equity secondaries is something  that has really come up over the last decade. And that's providing an escape valve as well.

 

And so, when you add together these conditions, we think the setup for things to normalize over the next one, two, three years is very strong with all the geopolitical and economic caveats notwithstanding.

 

Allison Nathan:   Right. And of course, the pressure on rates, which has not been what we all expected to see, at least at this point because, as you said, primarily because of the war.

 

But when we think about how the sponsors are actually dealing with some of this and some things going in the right direction and some things not going as well as I think we had expected, how are you seeing them adjust? Are they putting more equity? Are they getting more creative about their structures? Are they just walking away from deals? Or is it just wait and see?

 

Pete Lyon:    Maybe I'll take a swing at that Allison.

 

Allison Nathan:   Sure.

 

Pete Lyon:    And Mike, you can jump in here. I would say the sponsor community is not to be underestimated. This is a very experienced and creative crowd. And I would say outside of the normal course M&A processes that we see, the ability, and Mike alluded to this, to find liquidity across the capital structure has been increasingly more acute. And you think about the monetization path that sponsors have. Years ago, it was just IPOs and M&A. Sell side M&A and IPOs. Those are still readily available. But you think about the liquidity spectrum, whether it's NAV-based lending, whether it's cash flow-based lending against the GP, whether it's secondaries, whether it's structured transactions, the world is awash with liquidity right now. And the sponsors realize that. They have a lot of liquidity built up in their system to invest in new companies. But there's also a lot of liquidity on the buy side ready to invest in their companies.

 

We have a functioning IPO market now. We have a leverage buyout market that's been incredibly slow. There hasn't been a lot of supply because of this mismatch between sellers and buyers. But capital is actually starting to grow into some of the market multiples now.

 

And so, as I alluded to earlier, I think you're going to see more liquidity across sponsored portfolios, this DPI phenomena, or said more simply, the return of capital to investors, will improve over time. But it's going to be over a period of time. This is not going to be an overnight sensation. But right now, we have a very constructive macro backdrop. And surprise, surprise, the sponsors are running into it. So, I would not underestimate their ability to create liquidity events for their limited partners.

 

Michael Brandmeyer: The one thing I would add to that is we have a strong bias toward GPs that add a lot of value. And so, as Pete said, I wouldn't underestimate GPs because it's been a difficult time. They've had to contend with a difficult geopolitical and economic backdrop. But the capability to add value to these companies, the magic of private equity is you have concentrated ownership among an ownership group that has deep domain expertise and operating expertise. So, they have not been sitting on their hands. They've been doing a lot with these assets. And we think that they're going to drive value over time.

 

Allison Nathan:   But as you said earlier, Mike, you've got these private markets. We have reason to believe that there is going to be more normalization ahead. But at the end of the day, the public markets are accelerating, very dramatically as you said. New highs. New highs. New highs. So, why private market versus public market in that context?

 

Michael Brandmeyer: Yeah. We're getting this question a lot these days. I even get it sometimes at cocktail parties. Should I still be having this allocation to private equity? And as a matter of fact, when you look at three-year rolling returns, private equity has actually gone negative in terms of alpha to the public markets for the first time over the last two years.

 

And so, just to explain what we do is we take a portfolio of private assets and public assets, and we match up the buy and the sell dates to determine what is the direct alpha of holding a private equity portfolio.

 

What we did is we looked at periods of return when returns in the public markets were negative, when they were zero to 10 percent, and when they were 10 percent and above. And what you tend to see because of the marking convention of private equity tends to be more smoothed over time is private equity is roughly flat when public markets are up more than 10 percent. And you see a lot of the alpha in more normal return environments of zero to 10. And you see a lot of private equity outperformance, dramatic outperformance, when public markets are negative.

 

And so, we're confident that over time, I mean, the last two years, one of the reasons why private equity doesn't look so great is public markets were up between 40 and 50 percent over that period of time. The marks are smoothed over time. And as you see things normalize, we're confident that alpha is going to be back in the historic ranges where we've seen it.

 

Pete Lyon:    And also, Allison, I think you have to consider, to build on what Mike said, the dispersion of the public markets is very high. Right? So, while the public markets are up, it's very concentrated in terms of what's driving that alpha. Whereas a typical diversified private equity portfolio, unless it's specifically concentrated in a subsector of the economy, which some are, you will see that outperformance over a longer hold period.

 

So, we still think, A, the asset class has durability and running room. And B, has a real place in global portfolio allocation. It's just this recent period of time where you've seen these big dispersions. And that has proved true historically through some of the data when you see a big outperformance in the public markets vis-à-vis the private markets.

 

Allison Nathan:   Right. But as an investor, shouldn't you be paid more over time in the private markets because they're less liquid. You should be receiving an illiquidity premium. Shouldn't you?

 

Pete Lyon:    Yeah, that's right. And Mike, you've probably measured the data more specifically. But historically, some of those illiquidity premiums have gotten as high as 1200 points versus the public markets. I think that has compressed lately. But if you look at long period averages, I think you still get paid the illiquidity premium in the private markets. But Mike, you might want to comment across the data that you see.

 

Michael Brandmeyer: Well, I think a way of summarizing some of this conversation is to say that actually alpha is cyclical in the private markets. And that's because private equity is a levered asset class. It is pro cyclical. So, that is an underlying fact of private markets. But you also have, as Pete said, a lot of volatility and variability in public market returns over time.

 

And so, you do tend to see this now when you look over that 25- or 30-year period of time that I referenced, it tends to even itself out. And I think most academics would say if you're getting one to one and a half points of an illiquidity premium, generally speaking, that's very much worth it for a portfolio that's diversified across assets.

 

Allison Nathan:   Right. So, Mike, if we look ahead, where do you see the most compelling growth opportunities in the private markets over, let's say, three to five years?

 

Michael Brandmeyer: So, I think there are a couple of areas that I would highlight. Number one is, if you look at the whole innovation economy, that is really happening in the private markets. I talked about the average company taking 14 years to go public. The reason for that is you don't need to go to the public markets to raise money.  There is massive amounts of capital available if you want to grow a company. Contrast that with Amazon. They went public in 1997 because they needed to raise $54 million. Right? So, in other words, if you go back to that period of time, you couldn't raise more than $54 million in the private markets. Now you've got people raising tens of billions of dollars.

 

So, the only reason that you're really going to go public in most cases is because you need to provide monetization to your early investors and to your employees. And so, that means that most of the innovation out there in terms of new companies is going to live in the private markets. I don't see that changing, honestly. And that's a trend that has long-term legs. That's number one.

 

Number two, other forms of liquidity have really become much, much more important in today's market. Pete talked a little bit about hybrid capital and different forms of financing. But the secondary market has become really big over a period of time. It was about $250 billion last year. We estimate that over the next three to five years, the secondary market could be as big as $500 billion. So, there are other forms of liquidity. And this is a very creative market. It does evolve quickly and new solutions come up. This is a great example where we're seeing more and more instruments come up that are creating liquidity for investors in markets.

 

The third thing I would say that's going to continue to grow is retail. So, if you look at these returns, if you look at what I'm talking about, what's happening in the innovation economy, I think a lot of people are saying “should we prevent all retails except for the wealthiest investors from participating in these different premia that you see in these markets?” And I think a lot of people are saying, "No, we should democratize that. We should open that up to more people."

 

We agree with that with a big but. There need to be guardrails. There needs to be education. And so, we are fans of opening up access to alternatives. We are providing solutions to our own investors. We are working with other firms on what they're doing in the evergreen space. But this is a trend, notwithstanding what's happening in private credit, that we believe is going to continue over the next decade and probably decades.

 

Allison Nathan:   Pete, can you talk a little bit more about that on the private credit side? Because the retail participation has been what's been in focus on private credit and a source of concern.

 

Pete Lyon:    Yeah, if you look back over the last five, six years, retail participation in private credit has compounded every year 60 percent. And it's right now about 20 percent of the private credit market is held writ large in retail. And that was fine until there was a liquidity mismatch between those who were the investors in the funds and those who managed the funds. And part of that, as I alluded to earlier, is a conflation in the press between what is actually a systemic credit problem and what is not. And we don't believe that there is a systemic credit problem in the private credit industry or in credit generally right now because of the performance in the economy.

 

But I do think that as Mike alluded to, it's important that the investors understand the nature of the underlying vehicles that they're invested in, i.e. if there's a five percent liquidity provision, there's a reason for that. Because these assets are illiquid. They're supposed to be illiquid. Now, there is a burgeoning private credit trading aspect coming into the markets. It'll be interesting to see what becomes of private credit versus a public credit over time as private credit becomes traded and more liquid. But right now, the retail participation in those vehicles has ebbed, not surprisingly, because when investors want their liquidity, it's not fully available on the day they want it.

 

And so, I think that is now better understood. As Mike alluded to, I think that was broadly an education point rather than was a feature of these funds to be illiquid and to have these gates. But I don't think that was well understood enough. And that's why we've had a lot of the press around it. But as you look at the broad credit cycle right now, if you look at portfolio quality, if you look at default rates, if you look at PIK rates, all the key things that people look to in terms of the underlying performance, it's actually quite good.

 

It doesn't mean to say we can't have a credit cycle. Doesn't mean to say that if inflation kicks in, and the war in the Middle East continues and what have you that there will be more credit defaults. Of course there will be. That is a feature of credit. Not public credit versus institutional credit. It's just a feature of credit. But as I alluded to earlier, credit as an asset class will continue to be very durable and one that we'll recommend to our clients. But obviously, the underlying structures are important for them to understand.

 

Allison Nathan:   Right. And presumably, all assets or many risky asset classes would underperform in that type of scenario.

 

Pete Lyon:    Of course.

 

Allison Nathan:   So, just to conclude, I think you said it earlier, Pete, you think we are at an inflection point and it's somewhat structural in nature. Mike, do you agree?

 

Michael Brandmeyer: Yeah, we are at an inflection point. And while it is a pretty unpredictable world right now given what's happening in geopolitics, we're worried about inflation, there are things in the backdrop to be concerned about and to weigh, surely. That all being said, a lot of the ingredients are there. Right? The capital markets are very much open right now. And at least if you look at the last couple weeks, they are pretty risk on right now. You could have some very large IPOs over the course of 2026. Sponsors are ready to transact, right? Despite what's going on in private credit, there is private credit available for the right types of deals.

 

And so, you need to climb that wall of worry. You need to get the confidence back. I mean, that's what the M&A market is really about in private markets, is getting that confidence back that once you launch a sales process, it's actually going to go through to fruition. But I think that confidence, if we can have some period of normalcy here, if we can have an offramp from the war and return to normal times, which we will at some point, you are going to have that confidence building time.

 

And we think that within two to three years, you could be seeing distribution environments and deal activities that are even above what you saw in 2021, which is the prior top tick in the market. So, I think we are cautious sitting here today because of what we see happening in the world. But there is an underlying optimism that we feel about this market, despite some of the challenges we're seeing, that there are probably some pretty good years ahead of us here.

 

Pete Lyon:    The other thing, Allison, I might add to what Mike has said. If you take a look at the industry, it's been a large industry that's been around for 50 years, plus or minus depending on how far back you want to go. It's consolidating because it's maturing. What you're seeing is a very barbell-like structure. You've got the big, multi-line, largely public asset managers across various strategies. And then you've got the more discreet strategies that have excelled, really based on the performance and the alpha they've created.

 

We think that market structure can persist. The question is, A, the existential question is your funding model. How do you fund yourself - retail, institutional? And how does that mix change over time? And B, where do all those folks in the middle of that barbell wind up? And some of them will continue and persist and continue to scale. Some of them will be more monochromatic if you will in terms of their approach to the market. But right now, we believe we're at that inflection point, A, in the market. So, you're seeing this liquidity and DPI problem starting to get cured. But more holistically, what's going on in the industry? We think it's fascinating. And we at Goldman Sachs are fortunate to have a front row seat in that across our agency and asset and wealth businesses. And so, partnering with my good friend Mike across these is a lot of fun these days.

 

Allison Nathan:   So, a lot to watch. But cautiously optimistic.

 

Michael Brandmeyer: Correct.

 

Pete Lyon:    Yes.

 

Allison Nathan:   Thanks, Mike and Pete, for joining us.

 

Pete Lyon:    Thanks, Allison.

 

Allison Nathan:   This episode of Goldman Sachs Exchanges was recorded on Tuesday, May 26th, 2026. I'm Allison Nathan. Thanks for listening.

 

The opinions and views expressed herein are as of the date of publication, subject to change without notice, and may not necessarily reflect the institutional views of Goldman Sachs or its affiliates. The material provided is intended for informational purposes only, and does not constitute investment advice, a recommendation from any Goldman Sachs entity to take any particular action, or an offer or solicitation to purchase or sell any securities or financial products. This material may contain forward-looking statements. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Neither Goldman Sachs nor any of its affiliates make any representations or warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of the statements or information contained herein and disclaim any liability whatsoever for reliance on such information for any purpose. Each name of a third-party organization mentioned is the property of the company to which it relates, is used here strictly for informational and identification purposes only and is not used to imply any ownership or license rights between any such company and Goldman Sachs.

A transcript is provided for convenience and may differ from the original video or audio content. Goldman Sachs is not responsible for any errors in the transcript. This material should not be copied, distributed, published, or reproduced in whole or in part or disclosed by any recipient to any other person without the express written consent of Goldman Sachs. Disclosures applicable to research with respect to issuers, if any, mentioned herein are available through your Goldman Sachs representative or at http://www.gs.com/research/hedge.html

Goldman Sachs does not endorse any candidate or any political party.

© 2026 Goldman Sachs. All rights reserved.