Private Equity Press Review — Week 45 (2 – 8 November 2026)

Week 45 · 2–8 November 2026
Private equity faces the liquidity challenge

Private equity is going through a period of recomposition. The industry continues to raise considerable capital, but deploying it and, above all, returning it to investors is meeting a less favourable environment.

This reveals a paradox: while the largest managers keep expanding and new markets open up to them, slower exits are lengthening holding periods and straining the traditional fund cycle.

The past week illustrates these tensions, from the geographic reorientation of allocations to the concentration of transactions, new fundraisings and questions about opening private markets to individual savers.

Personal note from Gilles Mougenot: I pay particular attention to anything that can contribute to the study of private equity. This is why I have singled out this week the index presented by MSCI on 6 November, the World Private Equity Return Tracker (PERT), which questions the very nature of private equity performance, and this is why section 6, devoted to it, is particularly detailed.

1 | Europe: institutional investors are reorienting their allocations

The sentiment survey (“Pan-European Market Sentiment Survey 2026”) published on 5 November 2026 by Invest Europe with consultancy Arthur D. Little sheds light on the outlook for European private equity; the release gives neither the sample size nor the method: these are self-reported data.

According to the survey, 43% of the institutional investors polled expect to increase their European allocations over the next three years because of US trade policy, while 30% expect lower allocations to the United States.

This shift in intentions comes with changing sector priorities. Defence tops the sectors where managers expect to invest more, cited by 75% of the managers surveyed, ahead of deep tech and artificial intelligence (62%) and aerospace (53%).

According to the same release, European investment in defence reached €2.7 billion in the first half of 2026, more than double the level of H1 2025, while investment in deep tech rose 35% year on year to €8.5 billion.

The survey also finds that 69% of managers consider consolidation of their industry to be already under way.

These results suggest a twofold change: a possible geographic reallocation of capital towards Europe and a growing concentration of the industry around managers with substantial financial and operational resources.

Sources: Invest Europe / Arthur D. Little, release of 5 November 2026 (Business Wire, relayed by 01net.it); Invest Europe, Private Equity Activity H1 2026.

Going further: PE Research — Analysis 5.2: Private Equity, United States vs Europe (in French; comparison of the two markets using 2024 data, published June 2025); PE Research — Analysis 6: Private Equity and European defence (in French; June 2025).

2 | France: activity held up by a few large transactions

In Q3 2026, PitchBook records 204 private equity deals in France, the lowest quarterly level since 2020.

Their combined value nevertheless holds at €16.7 billion, with three transactions alone accounting for about 51% of that amount.

These three transactions, listed by PitchBook, are Idex (€3.8 billion, enterprise value according to ION Analytics, under the planned sale by Antin Infrastructure Partners to a fund managed by JPMorgan Asset Management, with closing expected by Q1 2027 at the latest), Nestlé Waters France (€3.0 billion for a €6.0 billion valuation, 23 July, in association with Platinum Equity) and TotalEnergies (€1.8 billion, €3.6 billion valuation according to PitchBook, 3 August), together €8.6 billion (according to my calculations).

Perimeter note: PitchBook classifies these deals as private equity (Buy Out), but two of them follow an infrastructure logic in the strict sense (stricto sensu). The TotalEnergies deal is the 3 August 2026 sale of 50% of a European portfolio of 1.2 GW of solar and onshore wind assets (Germany, Spain, France and Poland) to an insurance account managed by KKR, with TotalEnergies keeping the other 50% and operations; KKR states an enterprise value of €1.8 billion for the portfolio, whereas PitchBook records €1.8 billion against a €3.6 billion valuation: the basis of these figures differs, and the release gives neither the French share nor the price of the 50% sold. Idex is sold by Antin, an infrastructure manager, to an open-ended JPMorgan Asset Management infrastructure fund. The €16.7 billion should therefore be read as PitchBook’s perimeter, not that of private equity in the strict sense.

Exits also remain limited: PitchBook records 32 for a total value of €7 billion, more than half of which is the Idex transaction, not yet completed at the report’s publication date.

French fundraising reaches €5.2 billion year to date across twelve funds. The three largest Q3 closings total €2.7 billion: ARCHIMED MED IV (€1.5 billion), Argos Mid-Market IX, a European fund (€736 million) and Andera Expansion IV (€430 million).

Sources: PitchBook, Q3 2026 France Market Snapshot, 23 October 2026, pp. 3, 12, 14 and 15; PitchBook, “Three deals carry French PE as deal count hits lowest since 2020” (full access not checked); ION Analytics, “Idex’s value nearly tripled in Antin’s exit to JPMAM”; Antin, exclusive talks, 5 August 2026; Platinum Equity, Peranel press release; KKR, release of 3 August 2026 (TotalEnergies); Bloomberg, 3 August 2026 (headline read). Transparency: Gilles Mougenot is the founder of Argos and Senior Advisor of Argos Fund.

Going further: PE Research — Analysis 25: Private Equity 2026, market recovery or regime change? (in French; recovery driven by large deals, March 2026).

3 | Fundraising: capital concentration is confirmed

The world’s largest platforms continue to raise considerable capital despite the general slowdown in activity. The two examples below relate to private credit and infrastructure, outside private equity in the strict sense.

Blackstone announced on 5 November 2026 the close of its fourth institutional European direct lending fund, with about €13 billion of investable capital (about $14.6 billion according to MarketScreener; this figure covers the strategy and its related vehicles, not the single fund). Brookfield, for its part, stated on 6 November 2026 that it had raised $26 billion for its sixth infrastructure fund, with a final close targeted for early 2027, and $8 billion for its infrastructure debt fund.

These amounts illustrate the largest managers’ ability to attract institutional investors, notably in private debt and infrastructure strategies.

According to Invest Europe, European funds raised €67.6 billion in the first half of 2026, up 6% year on year. Buy Out accounts for €53.6 billion, up 29%, while growth capital falls about 58% to €4.2 billion.

Sources: AltAssets, Blackstone, 5 November 2026 (standfirst only read, article paywalled); MarketScreener, Blackstone (headline read); Infrastructure Investor, Brookfield, 6 November 2026; Invest Europe, Private Equity Activity H1 2026, pp. 8–16.

Going further: PE Research — Analysis 22: The consolidation of private equity players (polarisation between large platforms, niches and mid-sized managers; October 2025).

4 | After the midterms: what access for individual investors to private markets?

The Democratic victory in the House of Representatives and the Senate in the US elections of 3 November 2026 could complicate the Trump administration’s plans to ease individual investors’ access to private markets.

This political shift comes as a major reform of 401(k) retirement plans approaches its last regulatory stage.

On 5 November, according to the Insured Retirement Institute cited by 401(k) Specialist (6 November 2026), the US Department of Labor sent the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the final version of its rule on the fiduciary duties of retirement plan managers (“Fiduciary Duties in Selecting Designated Investment Alternatives”). According to that article, the text had not yet been officially published, that is, in the Federal Register (the US official journal), as of 6 November: it is therefore not yet in force.

The reform aims to ease the inclusion of alternative assets, notably private equity, private credit and real estate, in products offered to 401(k) account holders.

It provides for a safe harbor mechanism, designed to give better legal protection to plan officials who follow a prudent investment selection process.

The March 2026 proposal describes six factors plan managers may consider: performance, fees, liquidity, valuation, benchmarks and the complexity of investments (InvestmentNews, 30 March 2026, which introduces the list with “such as”); as the final version is not published, these criteria may change. The protection would not remove managers’ fiduciary obligations.

The March 2026 proposal reportedly drew more than 47,000 comments.¹ OMB’s final review could take 60 to 90 days, with no mandatory regulatory deadline. Entry into force around the end of Q1 2027 is envisaged, but not certain.

Politically, the new balance of power in Congress could strengthen initiatives to regulate alternative investments offered to individuals. Senator Elizabeth Warren has notably called for stress tests on private credit (Alternative Credit Investor, 5 November).

The stakes are considerable for the private equity industry. Access to 401(k) schemes could significantly widen its investor base, but raises questions about fees, valuation transparency and the compatibility of illiquid assets with retirement savings.

The reform thus raises an essential question: how can access to private equity be democratised without transferring to individual savers risks they are not always equipped to assess?

Sources: 401(k) Specialist, 6 November 2026; Alternative Credit Investor, 5 November 2026 (article on private credit); InvestmentNews, 30 March 2026; InvestmentNews, 31 March 2026 (Senator Warren’s position).

Going further: PE Research — Analysis 31: Private Equity and Retirement: A Debate on Both Sides of the Atlantic (analysis 31; it covers the March 2026 proposal, its criteria and litigation risk).

5 | Liquidity: the central problem remains exits

European and US data confirm the persistent difficulties of the divestment market.

In the first half of 2026, according to Invest Europe, European exits, measured at the historical cost of the holdings sold, stand at €13.2 billion, down 40% year on year and at their lowest half-year level since the first half of 2020.

The number of companies sold reaches 1,149. Sales to other private equity funds account for 35% of exits by amount, against over 40% in the previous two years. Trade sales account for 29% and public offerings (IPOs and sales of listed shares) for 13%. The balance is split between write-offs (8%), repayments of loans or preference shares (5%), sales to financial institutions (4%) and to management (3%) and other exit routes (2%), i.e. 99% in total due to rounding.

In the United States, PitchBook notes a recovery in middle-market activity (deals of $25 million to $1 billion) in Q3 2026. The number of acquisitions rises 24.1% from Q2 to about 1,124 deals (estimate). On exits, about 235 deals worth $27.6 billion (estimates) are recorded, 36.1% more in number than the previous quarter, but with a value 18.7% below Q3 2025.

This situation contributes to longer holding periods and to the development of alternative liquidity mechanisms, notably continuation funds.

According to PitchBook, transactions through these vehicles accounted for 7.3% of global exit value in 2025.

Sources: Invest Europe, Private Equity Activity H1 2026, pp. 8 and 34–44; PitchBook, Q3 2026 US PE Middle Market Report, 29 October 2026, pp. 4, 12, 13 and 17. The 7.3% figure is global.

Going further: PE Research — Analysis 29: What is a continuation fund, and why is it so successful? (definition, mechanics and risks of continuation funds); PE Research — Analysis 25 (in French; liquidity crunch linked to slower exits, March 2026).

6 | Can private equity performance be replicated in listed markets?

Private equity traditionally justifies its appeal by returns above those of stock markets. This outperformance is generally attributed to company selection, improved management, the use of leverage and funds’ ability to support companies’ development over several years. It is also meant to compensate the illiquidity borne by investors.

But how much of this outperformance truly results from managers’ skill? And how much could be obtained by investing in listed companies with comparable characteristics?

A study published on 6 November 2026 by MSCI, titled Public Markets as a Path to Private Equity Returns, tries to answer this question.

Replicating private equity’s financial characteristics

MSCI built an index, the World Private Equity Return Tracker (PERT), composed exclusively of listed securities and intended to replicate certain return characteristics of private equity.

Its method is not to imitate unlisted companies one by one: the index reweights listed equities so that its portfolio reproduces the region, sector and style (market factor) exposures of the private equity universe. These exposures are derived from fundamental data on fund-owned companies, drawn from MSCI’s proprietary Private Capital Universe database. This database, fed by investors (about 30,100 funds according to MSCI), is a commercial product: the list of funds and companies is not public.

In practice, the index starts from all listed developed-market equities (MSCI World IMI) and is built from six “building blocks”: North America, Europe-Middle East and Pacific, each in buyout and in venture capital, weighted according to their share in the MSCI Private Capital Universe database. For each block, a base portfolio reproduces the country and sector breakdown of the region’s private equity; six style factors are added: leverage, value, momentum, growth, small size and low volatility. The weight of each factor is estimated from the net-of-fees returns of MSCI’s fund indexes and from fundamental data on the companies held, then reviewed every quarter (February, May, August, November).

One feature to note: the index does not merely buy shares: it also sells some short. Each style factor is thus obtained by buying shares that have the desired characteristic (for example high debt) and selling, for an equivalent amount, the base portfolio described above (the one that reproduces the country and sector breakdown), so that only the effect of that style is isolated. The total of purchases and sales can reach three times the index’s capital (a 300% cap). Screens apply (average daily trading volume above USD 500,000, short-selling cost below 200 basis points, maximum 5% weight for any single listed company, whether bought or sold short). This structure should be kept in mind when reading the volatility comparison below. The details of the optimisation (objective, turnover constraints) are not published in the methodology.

It is therefore not a matter of reproducing a particular manager’s investment decisions, but of building a stock portfolio whose behaviour statistically approaches that of a set of private equity funds.

Part of the outperformance would be replicable

According to MSCI, this index replicated more than half of private equity’s historical advantage over listed markets, over the study period from December 2006 to March 2026.

This observation suggests that part of the outperformance historically attributed to private equity may be linked to financial and economic factors also accessible in public markets, rather than exclusively to managers’ skill.

A distinction must nevertheless be made between total return and outperformance: MSCI does not claim to replicate half of private equity’s return, but part of its additional return over a reference stock index.

A second MSCI article (“Matching Private-Equity Exposure While Capital Waits”) quantifies this replication over a slightly different period, from the first quarter of 2007 to the second quarter of 2026, in annualised returns: 12.33% for the MSCI Private Equity Index (unlisted funds), 11.42% for PERT and 8.23% for MSCI World IMI, the listed-market benchmark. PERT thus exceeds the listed index by about 3.2 points a year. Of a 410 basis-point gap between private equity and the listed market, it captures 319, or about 78%, while 92 basis points remain attributed to manager skill and other factors that cannot be replicated. These returns mostly predate the index’s launch (16 July 2025) and are therefore simulated.

Over the last three years observed, MSCI states that PERT would even have done better than the closed-end private equity fund index used as reference, with a return about 10 points a year higher than that index (MSCI speaks of “active return”: the return gap between a portfolio and its benchmark); this period includes months before the index’s launch, whose results are simulated. Over the last six months, however, PERT did worse than that index, by 2.6% cumulative.

Greater liquidity, but higher volatility

One advantage of this approach is the liquidity of the investments. Unlike holdings in a traditional private equity fund, the shares making up the index are tradable on the stock exchange.

This liquidity has a counterpart: valuations fluctuate daily.

Over the study period, MSCI reports risk (volatility) of 18.8% for PERT against 9.7% for its closed-end private equity fund index.

Who publishes the study, and in what context

The study is signed by Yaonan Zhang and Abhishek Gupta, of MSCI’s Research & Development team. MSCI is an index and data provider, not an asset manager.

PERT is not just a research object: an ETF replicates it, the Goldman Sachs MSCI World Private Equity Return Tracker ETF, whose summary prospectus is dated 29 December 2025. The index therefore serves as the benchmark for an investable product, which should be kept in mind when reading a note published by its designer.

Launched on 23 October 2025, with net fees of 0.50% a year, this ETF managed about $20 million at the outset and about $28 million according to a recent aggregator (undated reading), with almost no net inflows over a year: these orders of magnitude do not allow one to speak of commercial success at this stage.

MSCI highlights three uses: an alternative for investors without direct access to private equity, a vehicle to hold committed capital awaiting deployment, and a benchmarking tool. The target audience is institutional, with wealth managers cited among the segments concerned. MSCI states that the page is for informational purposes and recommends no product.

Methodological limits

Several reservations are essential.

The PERT index was launched only on 16 July 2025. Its earlier performance rests on historical simulations, whose results may differ from what an investor would actually have obtained.

The private equity performance data used by MSCI stop in March 2026, while listed-market data run to September. This lag complicates comparisons over recent periods.

Finally, the index does not reproduce the characteristics specific to holding and transforming unlisted companies: the ability to change their strategy, restructure their organisation, make add-on acquisitions or improve operational efficiency.

Limits of this reasoning

The exposures come from the PE managers. Sector and leverage weights are estimated from what the funds bought.

Returns before July 2025 are simulated, and the weights are estimated using private equity returns (Bayesian framework). The methodology document does not say whether these tests are run out of the estimation sample.

Private equity returns rest on periodic, lagged and smoothed valuations. This can distort the estimated links with the listed market.

As regards exits and entries in portfolios, this is a point of vigilance, on which the methodology partly answers. The weights are re-estimated at each quarterly review (February, May, August, November), from one to two quarters of data depending on the reference dates used: the index therefore follows changes in the composition of private equity with a lag. Because the universe comprises thousands of funds, individual entries and exits partly offset each other in the averages. There remains a risk of drift: if private equity changes orientation (for example more technology, or less leverage when rates rise), the index adjusts only the following quarter.

A fundamental question for the industry

The interest of this study goes beyond the creation of a new stock index.

It leads to distinguishing two components of private equity performance: the part that can be explained by financial or sector exposures accessible in listed markets, and the part that corresponds to managers’ specific added value.

If a significant part of private equity’s outperformance can be replicated by a liquid portfolio, the justification for management fees, carried interest and the prolonged lock-up of capital deserves closer scrutiny.

This index is one to follow over time. Launched on 16 July 2025, it still has a very short real track record: most of its published performance is simulated. Its behaviour will need to be observed over several years and in different market environments, in particular during phases of rising rates or falling markets, before any solid conclusion can be drawn on the share of private equity performance that can be replicated in listed markets.

Sources: MSCI, “Public Markets as a Path to Private Equity Returns”, Yaonan Zhang and Abhishek Gupta, 6 November 2026 (short note read online, charts not viewed; proprietary MSCI data, not corroborated at this stage); MSCI, World Private Equity Return Tracker Index factsheet and MSCI, “Matching Private-Equity Exposure While Capital Waits” (description of the method); Goldman Sachs MSCI World Private Equity Return Tracker ETF, summary prospectus, 29 December 2025 ; Goldman Sachs Asset Management, ETF launch press release, 23 October 2025 ; Yahoo Finance, 27 October 2025 ; TradingView, GTPE (aggregator, unofficial); MSCI, World Private Equity Return Tracker Index methodology, October 2025; MSCI, “Rethinking Access to Private Equity”, 15 October 2025.