Key Takeaways
- • CFA Institute research demonstrates that private market access alone does not guarantee improved defined contribution plan outcomes; benefits depend critically on asset class selection, allocation sizing, and overall plan design rather than mere inclusion of private assets.
- • Target-date funds with private equity allocations showed higher average accumulation values versus traditional public-market portfolios, while venture capital demonstrated modest potential; however, a 10% private market allocation produced minimal material impact over a participant's working career.
- • Private credit and private equity adoption expectations among DC consultants increased significantly between 2024 and 2026 (private credit rated 2.6 on a 4-point likelihood scale, private equity rising from 1.6 to 2.2), yet industry consensus holds that private market strategies should not be offered as standalone products in DC lineups.
- • Plan fiduciaries must prioritize participant outcomes, fee structures, and portfolio construction principles over simply providing private asset access; CFA researchers caution that "private market access is not, by itself, a retirement strategy," according to Raymond Pang, senior researcher at CFA Institute.
- • Industry research from T. Rowe Price's Sixth Annual Defined Contribution Consultant Study identifies target-date funds as the most likely access point for private asset integration, suggesting a structural pathway rather than a standalone implementation model.
Summary
Recent research from the CFA Institute challenges the assumption that expanding private market access in defined contribution plans will automatically enhance retirement outcomes for participants. The study, which modeled various allocations to private equity, private debt, infrastructure, real estate, and venture capital within a target-date fund framework, reveals that the relationship between private asset inclusion and participant results is nuanced and highly dependent on plan-specific variables.
The research found that target-date funds incorporating private equity allocations generally produced higher average accumulation values compared to traditional public-market portfolios, while venture capital also demonstrated some performance potential. However, the incremental gains proved modest: a 10% private market allocation did not materially alter outcomes over a participant's working career, according to the CFA Institute analysis. This finding suggests that the industry's growing enthusiasm for private assets may not translate directly into measurable retirement security improvements unless implemented with careful consideration of allocation size and asset class selection.
Consultant expectations for private market adoption in DC plans have accelerated significantly. T. Rowe Price's Sixth Annual Defined Contribution Consultant Study, published concurrently, found that private credit received an average adoption likelihood rating of 2.6 on a 4-point scale, while private equity rose to 2.2 from 1.6 in 2024—an increase of 37.5% over two years. Target-date funds emerged as the primary vehicle through which consultants expect private assets to reach DC participants, rather than as standalone investment options. Notably, industry participants interviewed by the DCIIA expressed consensus that private market strategies should not be offered as standalone products within DC lineups, indicating structural constraints on how this integration will occur.
The CFA Institute emphasizes that plan fiduciaries must shift focus from access alone to a more holistic evaluation framework encompassing participant outcomes, fee transparency, and prudent portfolio construction. Raymond Pang, senior researcher at CFA Institute and co-author of the research, stated: "Private market access is not, by itself, a retirement strategy." This framing positions private assets as one component of a comprehensive plan design rather than a solution to retirement income adequacy. The research also acknowledges that while private assets should be permissible in DC plans, this permissibility does not mandate inclusion across all plans or all plan sponsors, leaving fiduciaries with substantial discretion regarding implementation.
The research found that target-date funds incorporating private equity allocations generally produced higher average accumulation values compared to traditional public-market portfolios, while venture capital also demonstrated some performance potential. However, the incremental gains proved modest: a 10% private market allocation did not materially alter outcomes over a participant's working career, according to the CFA Institute analysis. This finding suggests that the industry's growing enthusiasm for private assets may not translate directly into measurable retirement security improvements unless implemented with careful consideration of allocation size and asset class selection.
Consultant expectations for private market adoption in DC plans have accelerated significantly. T. Rowe Price's Sixth Annual Defined Contribution Consultant Study, published concurrently, found that private credit received an average adoption likelihood rating of 2.6 on a 4-point scale, while private equity rose to 2.2 from 1.6 in 2024—an increase of 37.5% over two years. Target-date funds emerged as the primary vehicle through which consultants expect private assets to reach DC participants, rather than as standalone investment options. Notably, industry participants interviewed by the DCIIA expressed consensus that private market strategies should not be offered as standalone products within DC lineups, indicating structural constraints on how this integration will occur.
The CFA Institute emphasizes that plan fiduciaries must shift focus from access alone to a more holistic evaluation framework encompassing participant outcomes, fee transparency, and prudent portfolio construction. Raymond Pang, senior researcher at CFA Institute and co-author of the research, stated: "Private market access is not, by itself, a retirement strategy." This framing positions private assets as one component of a comprehensive plan design rather than a solution to retirement income adequacy. The research also acknowledges that while private assets should be permissible in DC plans, this permissibility does not mandate inclusion across all plans or all plan sponsors, leaving fiduciaries with substantial discretion regarding implementation.
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.