Key Takeaways
- • The Financial Conduct Authority has flagged private markets as presenting heightened financial crime risks, issuing a "wake-up call" to the sector following a formal review of alternative firms' financial crime controls published in July 2026.
- • Eighteen percent of private markets firms surveyed stated their business and risk assessments (BWRAs) did not specifically address private markets risks, indicating significant gaps in compliance frameworks across the sector.
- • The FCA identified three structural characteristics that elevate financial crime exposure in private markets: complex, multi-layered ownership structures, cross-border transaction patterns, and the inherent opacity of alternative asset vehicles.
- • Some firms' financial crime risk assessments failed to adequately consider risk factors prescribed under Money Laundering Regulations (MLRs) 18 and 18A, representing a material compliance deficiency.
- • The review revealed inconsistent financial crime monitoring practices across approximately 2,500 private markets firms, with the sector identified as sitting "at the top of the range" for inherent financial crime risk relative to other asset management segments.
Summary
The Financial Conduct Authority has escalated regulatory scrutiny of private markets firms following the publication of findings from a comprehensive review into alternative asset managers' financial crime controls. The FCA's investigation, published in July 2026, identified systemic weaknesses in anti-money laundering and broader financial crime defenses across the sector, prompting the regulator to characterize the results as a "wake-up call" for industry participants.
The review exposed substantial compliance gaps, most notably that 18 percent of surveyed private markets firms acknowledged their business and risk assessments (BWRAs) did not adequately address private markets-specific risks. Additionally, some firms' risk assessments failed to incorporate risk factors mandated under the Money Laundering Regulations, specifically provisions 18 and 18A, which establish baseline standards for financial crime control frameworks. While the FCA noted instances of good practice among certain firms, the overall findings underscore inconsistent application of compliance standards across the approximately 2,500 firms operating in the private markets space.
The regulator has identified three structural features inherent to private markets that create heightened financial crime vulnerability. These include complex, multi-layered and cross-border ownership arrangements; the opacity characteristic of alternative asset structures; and the complex transaction patterns typical of private equity, private credit, and similar vehicles. These characteristics collectively position private markets firms at elevated risk relative to other asset management segments, creating conditions where money laundering, sanctions evasion, and other financial crimes may be more difficult to detect and prevent.
The FCA's action reflects a broader regulatory consensus that private markets operators must substantially strengthen their financial crime monitoring and compliance infrastructure. The findings carry immediate implications for institutional investors, limited partners, and family offices conducting due diligence on private market fund managers, as financial crime control quality has emerged as a material assessment criterion alongside traditional performance and governance metrics. Firms addressing these deficiencies proactively are likely to face competitive advantages in institutional fundraising and investor relationships.
The review exposed substantial compliance gaps, most notably that 18 percent of surveyed private markets firms acknowledged their business and risk assessments (BWRAs) did not adequately address private markets-specific risks. Additionally, some firms' risk assessments failed to incorporate risk factors mandated under the Money Laundering Regulations, specifically provisions 18 and 18A, which establish baseline standards for financial crime control frameworks. While the FCA noted instances of good practice among certain firms, the overall findings underscore inconsistent application of compliance standards across the approximately 2,500 firms operating in the private markets space.
The regulator has identified three structural features inherent to private markets that create heightened financial crime vulnerability. These include complex, multi-layered and cross-border ownership arrangements; the opacity characteristic of alternative asset structures; and the complex transaction patterns typical of private equity, private credit, and similar vehicles. These characteristics collectively position private markets firms at elevated risk relative to other asset management segments, creating conditions where money laundering, sanctions evasion, and other financial crimes may be more difficult to detect and prevent.
The FCA's action reflects a broader regulatory consensus that private markets operators must substantially strengthen their financial crime monitoring and compliance infrastructure. The findings carry immediate implications for institutional investors, limited partners, and family offices conducting due diligence on private market fund managers, as financial crime control quality has emerged as a material assessment criterion alongside traditional performance and governance metrics. Firms addressing these deficiencies proactively are likely to face competitive advantages in institutional fundraising and investor relationships.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.