Robeco examines why investors allocate capital to illiquid assets and whether the expected liquidity premium adequately compensates for the risks involved. The paper explores the tradeoff between higher expected returns, transaction costs, and liquidity constraints. One example suggests investors may require more than a 4% annual premium to justify a 5 year lockup.
The Ins and Outs of Investing in Illiquid Assets
Robeco
Thijs Markwat, Roderick Molenaar
Research
22 Pages
Key Takeaways
Liquidity Premium Required: A 5 year illiquidity period required a 4.3% annual premium in one framework, while a 10 year lockup required 6.0%.
Hidden Cost Impact: An illiquid asset needed a 3.4% gross return versus 3.0% for a liquid asset to achieve comparable net outcomes after costs.
Stress Period Risks: During the 2008 crisis, some private equity interests traded at discounts approaching 50%, highlighting the potential cost of forced liquidity.