8 MIN READ 
Every generation of investors has a defining story. For one it was the internet and the dot-com bubble that followed. For the next it was the housing boom that ended in the financial crisis of 2007-2008. This generation’s story is artificial intelligence, and its most revealing chapter is being written in private markets. When SpaceX went public in June 2026, it raised $75 billion in the largest IPO on record and closed its first day valued at roughly $2.1 trillion, about 112 times the prior year’s revenue. Anthropic, last valued privately at $965 billion, is reportedly preparing a listing at close to twice that figure. The lesson is not that individual investors finally have a seat at the table. It is that by the time a household name reaches the public market, much of its value creation has already happened privately, and the investors who captured it were the ones with access, patience and the discipline to underwrite it early.
That gap is precisely why private markets are being opened to individuals. Platforms, specialized funds and advisory firms now offer access once reserved for institutions and family offices, and Deloitte projects retail allocations to private capital could reach $2.4 trillion by 2030. Policy is moving in the same direction. Following an August 2025 executive order, the Department of Labor proposed a rule in 2026 that would create a fiduciary safe harbor for offering alternative assets in 401(k) plans, a market worth nearly $14 trillion.
Here is where things get uncomfortable.
Access has arrived at an unusual moment, when the most recognizable private companies carry their richest valuations and the semi-liquid vehicles built for individual investors are facing their first real test. Familiarity with a company is not the same as understanding the investment. In private markets, the name on the pitch deck is often the least important variable.
Investors need to look past the company to the structure, entry valuation, fees, liquidity terms and the role the position plays in a broader portfolio. Overlooking any one of these can turn a compelling idea into a costly allocation.
Expanding access has also exposed a growing financial knowledge gap. Many investors are enthusiastic about the opportunity without fully understanding how private investments differ from publicly traded securities, how they fit within an overall strategy or what level of due diligence they require.
Private Markets Move Into the Mainstream
Historically, private markets were the domain of institutions because of regulatory thresholds, high minimums and, above all, relationship-driven access. Unless an investor could write a large check and had a seat in the inner circle, participation was unlikely.
That landscape has changed as companies stay private longer and build far more value before they list. Demand for the most recognizable names, among them OpenAI, Anthropic, Anduril, Stripe and Databricks, continues to grow, and secondary platforms, special purpose vehicles and tender offers have made fractional ownership easier to obtain than ever.
The SpaceX listing offers a useful reminder of what public investors actually receive. After peaking above $225 a share days after its debut, the stock traded near $148 in early October, still above its $135 offering price but well below its high.
A celebrated company and a well-priced investment are two different things.
Expanding access does not translate into expanded expertise. If anything, it raises the stakes for understanding fees, taxes, liquidity and structure, and for evaluating the manager behind an opportunity as carefully as the opportunity itself.
The Liquidity Test Has Arrived
The fastest-growing doorway into private markets has been the evergreen fund, a semi-liquid structure that accepts ongoing subscriptions and offers periodic redemptions, typically capped at about 5% of net asset value per quarter. The U.S. evergreen market reached roughly $607 billion in the first quarter of 2026, according to Morningstar PitchBook.
This year has shown the limits of that design. Concerns about AI disrupting software business models collided with a surge of redemption requests in evergreen direct lending funds, and several capped withdrawals. To be clear, this does not mean the structures are broken. Redemption limits exist to protect remaining investors from forced selling. It does mean a redemption window is not the same as liquidity, and these positions should be sized with the expectation that capital may not be available exactly when it is wanted.
Familiarity Isn’t Due Diligence
AI tools, financial media and social platforms have given investors unprecedented access to research and opinion, and with it a false sense of confidence. Following a founder or recognizing a brand creates familiarity. It does not answer the questions that determine whether an investment is attractive at a particular price, under a particular structure, at a particular point in the cycle.
Compelling pitch decks are easy to produce. Real due diligence combines qualitative and quantitative work: the quality of the business, the terms of the security, the alignment of the sponsor and how the position interacts with everything else in the portfolio.
It also requires an appreciation for dispersion. In passive public investing, returns largely converge on the index. In private markets, outcomes vary widely from one manager to the next, and two firms investing in the same sector can produce dramatically different results based on sourcing, discipline, process and experience. Manager selection is not a detail in private markets. It is often the decision that matters most.
A Contrarian View: Look Where the Crowd Isn’t
The prevailing narrative says the opportunity in private markets is getting into the next great AI company before it lists. We see it differently. For many portfolios, the more valuable role private markets can play is not amplifying AI exposure but diversifying away from it. Investors who own broad public equity indexes already hold meaningful AI exposure through the largest constituents. Adding late-stage stakes in the same theme may increase concentration rather than reduce risk.
Some of the more interesting opportunities sit in less crowded corners where returns are driven by factors largely unrelated to the AI cycle, which may include GP stakes, segments within the real estate market, litigation finance, and specialized lending niches. These strategies rarely make headlines, which is part of the point. Less competition for deals can support more disciplined entry prices, and return streams driven by different factors can strengthen a portfolio’s overall resilience. The Department of Labor’s proposed rule makes a similar point, noting that a lower-return strategy may be prudent if its low correlation to public markets improves a portfolio’s risk-adjusted results.
Private Markets Require a Different Lens
Investors naturally gravitate toward recognizable brands, but they also need to contemplate beta exposure vs alpha generation in a desired asset class, along with understanding fees, expenses and underwriting assumptions. They should also ask whether their advisor has meaningful, long-tenured experience in private markets and what access and sourcing looks like.
Structure matters as much as substance. Traditional private funds often follow a 2% annual management fee and a 20% performance allocation. Products packaged for individual investors may layer on placement fees, administrative expenses or fund-of-funds costs that raise the return hurdle meaningfully, sometimes enough to undermine the case for participating at all. Closed-end funds bring a different consideration: capital calls. Commitments are typically drawn over time rather than all at once, which makes liquidity planning an essential part of portfolio construction.
None of this argues against owning a position in a company, or a narrowly focused fund that you believe in. A modest allocation that reflects a personal conviction or investment thesis may be entirely appropriate. The problem arises when enthusiasm turns a speculative position into a load-bearing part of a retirement plan. Position sizing should reflect long-term objectives and risk tolerance, not headlines or the prominence of the company involved.
Expertise Matters More as Access Expands
As private markets become more accessible, the bar for informed decision-making should rise with them. Investors need to understand how these investments fit within their broader goals, and advisors need the experience and resources to scrutinize opportunities with institutional rigor.
Before committing capital, investors should ask two questions.
- Do I have the knowledge to evaluate this opportunity on its merits
- And if I am relying on guidance, does my trusted resource have the experience, expertise and access to help me make that judgment well?
Access to private markets is no longer the scarce resource. Judgment is. The investors best positioned for the next decade will be those who can separate compelling stories from sound investments, and who understand that in private markets, what you pay and how you own it matter as much as what you own.
Important Disclosures:
Investment Advisory Services offered through Krilogy®, an SEC Registered Investment Advisor. Please review all prospectuses and Krilogy’s Form ADV 2A carefully prior to investing. This is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy the securities described herein. An offering is made only by a prospectus to individuals who meet minimum suitability requirements.
All expressions of opinion are subject to change. This information is distributed for educational purposes only, and it is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, recommendation, or endorsement of any particular security, products, or services.
Diversification does not eliminate the risk of market loss. Investments involve risk and unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. Investors should understand the risks involved of owning investments, including interest rate risk, credit risk and market risk. Investment risks include loss of principal and fluctuating value. There is no guarantee an investing strategy will be successful. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Indices are not available for direct investment; therefore, their performance does not reflect the expenses associated with the management of an actual portfolio. The S&P data is provided by Standard & Poor’s Index Services Group.
Services and products offered through Krilogy® are not insured and may lose value. Be sure to first consult with a qualified financial advisor and/or tax professional before implementing any strategy discussed herein.
