Alternative Investments Evolve in Latin American Pension Funds

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

The International Association of Pension Fund Supervisors (AIOS) recently published the study: Investment Portfolio Composition in AIOS Country Pension Systems (June 2026). Beyond comparing the pension systems of eight countries, the document shows how alternative investments have transitioned from being a marginal allocation to becoming a strategic component of the region’s institutional portfolios.

The growth of assets under management illustrates this evolution. Between 2020 and June 2025, pension funds in AIOS member countries increased their assets from approximately US$631 billion to US$840 billion, equivalent to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of nearly 6.6%.

However, market size is only part of the story. The study identifies distinct allocation patterns, among which three particularly illustrative cases stand out.

Chile, Colombia, and Peru have opted for a high internationalization of their portfolios. In these markets, nearly half of the assets are invested in foreign issuers, seeking greater geographic and currency diversification.

Mexico, on the contrary, presents a different model. Although it maintains a higher proportion of investments in domestic issuers, it has developed one of the most sophisticated regulatory frameworks to channel resources into alternative assets through structured vehicles such as CKDs and CERPIs.

The difference is relevant. Analyzing solely the issuer’s domicile can lead to underestimating the international exposure of Mexican Afores.

Mexico Retains the Largest Regulatory Leeway

One of the study’s most interesting findings is that Mexico retains the largest regulatory leeway to expand its exposure to alternative assets.

The youngest SIEFOREs can allocate up to 30% of their assets to structured instruments, a higher limit than that observed in most of the analyzed countries. In comparison, Chile will gradually raise the limit for alternative asset investments in Fund A, from 17% currently to 19% in August 2026, and a maximum of 20% in August 2027.

Although current allocations remain below those limits, the Mexican regulatory framework still offers ample room for alternative asset exposure to continue increasing in the coming years.

Alternative Assets Are Already Strategic

The study also shows that the growth of alternative assets is not a passing fad.

During the 2020-2025 period, practically all countries expanded their exposure to this asset class. Mexico recorded a compound annual growth rate of nearly 17%, while Chile reached approximately 61%, and Costa Rica recorded the highest growth rate (123%), albeit starting from a very small base.

In absolute terms, Mexico maintains the largest regional exposure, with approximately US$22 billion invested in private equity, US$16.5 billion in real estate, and nearly US$4.7 billion in infrastructure.

Implications for International Managers

For global private equity, infrastructure, and private credit managers, the message is clear.

The opportunity in Latin America does not rely solely on the growth of assets under management, but on the sophistication process that institutional investors are undergoing. Allocations to private markets continue to expand, regulatory frameworks continue to evolve, and portfolios are seeking greater diversification to face increasingly long investment horizons. In this context, Mexico continues to hold a prominent position within the region. 

It combines the largest institutional market in Latin America with a regulatory framework that allows for significant participation of alternative assets. The challenge for international managers will no longer be demonstrating why private markets should be part of portfolios, but rather differentiating themselves in an environment where competition for institutional capital will only intensify.

Column by Arturo Hanono

The Engines Behind the 15.3 Trillion Dollars of AUM Reached by BlackRock

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesy

“Market fundamentals are strong and well-supported, with higher margins and earnings momentum catalyzed by new technology. The scale and depth of our client relationships globally have never been greater. Clients are turning to BlackRock for insights and opportunities,” with these words, Larry Fink, Chairman and CEO of the firm, contextualized the firm’s second quarter results.

Results that have exceeded expectations and translated into a rise in its shares at the start of the trading session. Specifically, the manager reached 15.3 trillion dollars in assets under management (AUM) after registering 868 billion dollars of net inflows during the last twelve months, reflecting organic growth in base fees of 10%. “Flows in the first six months of 2026 more than doubled year-over-year, bringing assets under management (AUM) to a record 15.3 trillion dollars,” Fink recognizes.

During the first half of the year, the firm registered record net inflows of 321 billion dollars, including 192 billion dollars in the second quarter, broadly based across the platform and driven by ETFs, private markets, active fixed income, and systematic equity strategies.

The most striking data point is that it registered a 31% increase in revenue compared to the previous year, “reflecting the positive impact of markets, organic growth in base fees, fees related to the HPS transaction, higher performance fees, and higher technology services and subscription revenue,” as they explain.

The Engines of BlackRock

As Fink pointed out, the firm has simultaneously become “a leading public markets manager, a scaled private markets platform, and a global technology company.” And he defends that the quality and breadth of their platform differentiates them with clients more than ever. “It is enabling us to capture a larger share of their portfolios and drive durable earnings for our shareholders. In the second quarter, clients entrusted us with 192 billion dollars in net capital inflows, generating organic base fee growth of 8%, well ahead of our target,” he recognizes.

Additionally, iShares surpassed 6 trillion dollars in AUM, approximately doubling its size in three years. However, the data point that Fink highlights is that demand is building across its active management franchise with 53 billion dollars of net inflows, “where systematic strategies drove net inflows in equity and a record 7 billion in liquid alternatives.”

The third key point driving the manager is the technology segment. In fact, revenue from technology services and subscriptions increased by 67 million dollars compared to the second quarter of 2025 and 36 million compared to the first quarter of 2026, reflecting sustained demand for Aladdin and multi-product solutions. The annual contract value (ACV) of technology services and subscriptions increased by 15% compared to the second quarter of 2025. “This increase reflects the continued adoption of Aladdin as transparency, data, and analytics become increasingly critical for our clients and the industry,” notes Fink.

Financial Reflection

These engines have a clear reflection in the manager’s financial results, and its adjusted operating margin for the second quarter was 45.9%, the highest in nearly five years. Quarterly operating income grew approximately 40% year-over-year, and their conviction in BlackRock’s future growth led them to increase their planned level of share repurchases for 2026 to 2 billion dollars.

“Helping more people benefit from the long-term growth of the capital markets is at the core of our strategy and our largest source of opportunity. It is how we deliver higher and more durable organic growth. We see it in our results this quarter: 8% organic base fee growth, an adjusted operating margin near 46%, double-digit earnings per share growth, and increased return of capital. The more we help our clients participate in the markets, the more our own growth solidifies: higher organic growth, higher earnings growth, and more value for our shareholders. Our momentum is accelerating, and I have never been more optimistic about the growth ahead,” concludes Fink on his assessment of these latest quarterly results.

State Street Accelerates Its Growth: Record Revenues and All-Time Highs in AUM and Custody

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesy

State Street Corporation, one of the world’s largest custodians and institutional asset managers, presented a solid second quarter of 2026, driven by growth in fees linked to the investment business, higher service revenues, and a favorable environment for financial markets. The highlight of the report from this global investment giant is the fact that the results not only exceeded market expectations but also marked new all-time highs in both revenues and assets under custody and administration (AUC/A), as well as assets under management (AUM).

According to the figures, the institution reported total revenues of 4.000 billion dollars, which represented a 17% increase compared to the same period of 2025, while earnings per share (EPS) reached 3.65 dollars, compared to 2.17 dollars a year earlier. Net income also showed significant expansion, favored by double-digit growth in practically all business lines.

One of the most relevant indicators for the wealth and asset management industry was the growth of managed assets. At the close of June, assets under custody and/or administration (AUC/A) rose to a record 57.9 trillion dollars, which represents an annual increase of approximately 15%, driven by the appreciation of financial markets and new institutional mandates.

In parallel, assets under management (AUM) grew to 6.3 trillion dollars, also an all-time high for the institution and nearly 17% above the level observed a year earlier, consolidating State Street as one of the main institutional managers in the world.

Additionally, the report notes that operating performance was primarily supported by an increase in fee revenue. Fee revenues recorded one of the most important advances of the quarter, favored by factors such as: higher average assets managed; an increase in custody service revenues; growth in fund administration; higher investment management revenues and greater activity from institutional clients. In contrast, net interest income once again showed more moderate evolution, reflecting an interest rate environment that is beginning to stabilize, meaning growth came primarily from the services business, considered the strategic core of State Street.

Another highlight was profitability

State Street details in its report that the return on tangible common equity (ROTCE) continued to strengthen, while the return on equity (ROE) was situated around 16.7%, reflecting greater operating efficiency and a better utilization of revenue growth. Likewise, the company reported its tenth consecutive quarter of positive operating leverage, meaning that revenues grew at a faster pace than expenses. During the quarter, State Street also maintained an important capital return policy for its shareholders.

The institution returned approximately 631 million dollars through dividends and share repurchases, maintaining a solid regulatory capital position and sufficient financial flexibility to continue investing in technology, automation, and artificial intelligence applied to institutional financial services.

In the conference call with investors, management highlighted that the growth reflects both the recovery of market activity and the capacity to attract new institutional clients and expand its service offering. The firm also raised its outlook for the remainder of 2026, supported by the dynamism observed during the first half of the year and sustained demand for administration, custody, and investment management solutions.

State Street’s results confirm a trend that has also been observed among other large asset managers during this reporting season: the growth of managed wealth continues to be the main engine of the business, while the increase in fees derived from higher assets under management and custody continues to compensate for the structural pressure on investment product prices.

The World Cup Ends, but the Business Is Just Beginning

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesy

This Sunday, the 2026 World Cup final will be played between the national teams of Spain and Argentina; on the sporting side, it will be the closing of an event that will go down in history as the first to be carried out with 48 participating teams, but in terms of business, it will be the start of a cycle that will reach its climax in 2030.

For FIFA, the World Cup is not solely a one-month tournament, but the main asset that sustains its business model. According to its budget for the 2023-2026 cycle, the organization projected revenues close to 11 billion dollars, driven mainly by the expansion of the tournament to 48 teams and a greater number of matches, which increased commercialization opportunities.

The majority of those resources come from television rights (4.264 billion dollars), ticketing and hospitality (3.097 billion), commercial rights and sponsorship (2.693 billion), and commercial licenses. These figures represent the largest budget in the history of the organization.

The previous figures confirm a trend that sports investors have been observing for several years: football has ceased to be solely an entertainment product to consolidate itself as a global platform for value generation, and an extraordinary business that encompasses various facets, including large investment funds.

A business that transcends the 90 minutes

Unlike other sporting events, the World Cup concentrates in a few weeks a value chain that involves media companies, airlines, hospitality, technology, mass consumption, banking, telecommunications, logistics, and e-commerce, to mention some of the most visible ones.

For FIFA, each edition of the tournament is the main revenue detonator of the four-year cycle. In its financial report, the organization points out that the sale of audiovisual rights continues to be its main source of resources, followed by commercial agreements with global and regional sponsors, as well as the sale of tickets and hospitality packages.

The expansion of the World Cup also increased commercial inventory. More matches mean more advertising spaces, more corporate hospitality, more content for television and digital platforms, and greater exposure for sponsor brands.

The financial “champions”

Although media attention usually focuses on the champion team, in reality the great economic beneficiaries are actors whose profitability does not depend on the sporting outcome.

In the first place, without any doubt, is FIFA, which capitalizes on practically all business lines of the tournament: audiovisual rights, marketing, licenses, hospitality, and ticket sales.

In the second place appear the sponsor companies. Global brands such as Adidas, Coca-Cola, Visa, Hyundai-Kia, Aramco, Lenovo, and Qatar Airways use the World Cup as a platform to strengthen their positioning, increase sales, and accelerate marketing campaigns in practically all markets where they operate.

The sponsor portfolio has also expanded with new regional and sector agreements, reflecting the growing commercial value of the tournament.

Media groups constitute another of the big winners. In the United States, for example, the growth of audiences during the World Cup has significantly raised the expected value of future broadcast contracts.

Analysts estimate that the next audiovisual rights could reach between 1.500 and 2.000 billion dollars for that market, driven by the interest of platforms such as Netflix, YouTube, and Disney.

Even apparently minor elements of the sporting spectacle generate new revenue sources. During this World Cup, the official hydration breaks opened additional inventory for television advertising, allowing broadcasters to commercialize premium spaces whose joint value exceeded 250 million dollars in the United States, something not negligible at all for their coffers.

The economic legacy transcends

One of the most common mistakes consists of measuring the financial success of World Cups solely by tourism spending during the tournament. The reality is that many of the investments begin to generate returns once the competition is concluded.

Host cities strengthen their international positioning; airport, hotel, and transport operators take advantage of the greater visibility; sports brands continue to monetize the sale of jerseys and official merchandise; while digital platforms maintain audiences built during several weeks of competition.

However, the economic impact should not be overestimated either. A recent analysis by Reuters points out that, although FIFA will be the main financial beneficiary of the tournament, host cities register more moderate benefits due to high operational and security costs, as well as the tourism substitution effect in some mature destinations.

That experience reinforces the importance of evaluating large sporting events under long-term profitability criteria and not solely by the flow of visitors during the weeks of competition.

The next World Cup has already begun

The most relevant conclusion for companies and investors is that the World Cup functions as a permanent business cycle. The reality is different; once the final is concluded, the negotiation of new sponsorship contracts, the renewal of audiovisual rights, the planning of commercial campaigns, the development of digital platforms, the incorporation of new technologies, and the preparation of infrastructure for the next event begin immediately.

In other words, while fans celebrate the world champion, the sports industry is already working on the next business opportunity. That is perhaps the greatest financial lesson left by the tournament: the trophy is delivered only once, but the income flows derived from the World Cup continue to be generated for years.

For FIFA, global brands, media companies, and a good part of the international sports economy, the final whistle never represents the closing of the business; it simply marks the start of the next growth cycle.

The Gap Between Aspirations and Investment Decisions: Where It Is Born and How to Overcome It

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Canva

Investors are clear about what they want, but their decisions are not always aligned. For Fidelity International, this disconnect—which they call “the gap between aspirations and actions”—is a persistent feature of investor behavior.

According to its global survey “Be Invested 2026,” which polled 13,000 investors across 13 markets worldwide, many investors may not be taking the necessary steps to achieve their long-term financial goals.

In the view of Samantha Ricciardi, Head of Europe, Middle East, and Africa (EMEA) at Fidelity, and Damien Mooney, Head of Asia-Pacific ex-Japan, this reality manifests in several ways:

“Investors aspire to achieve high long-term returns, yet they keep a considerable percentage of their wealth in cash. They are aware of the importance of staying invested, but they continue to react to short-term market movements. Although they express confidence in their decisions, they do not always feel fully prepared to put them into practice. Even with more tools, more information, and greater access than ever, it is not always easy to stay on course toward long-term goals.”

The Root of the Gap

Both leaders warn that the implications of this gap are very real. Over time, small deviations can compound and lead to substantially different outcomes, especially concerning long-term milestones like retirement.

  • The Cash Drag: Globally, investors aspire to an average annual return of 7.9% over the long term, yet cash represents an average of 22% of their investment portfolios.

  • The Cost of Inaction: According to Fidelity’s analysis, moving out of excess cash can generate a considerable performance improvement of up to 3 annualized percentage points over a 10-year horizon.

  • Behavioral Hurdles: When volatility hits the markets, many investors pause or exit entirely rather than staying invested. Additionally, complexity remains a major barrier, leaving investors feeling overwhelmed and searching for clearer, trustworthy guidance.

How to Close the Gap

For the asset manager, the encouraging news is that significant progress can be made through small, deliberate adjustments:

  • Reduce Excess Liquidity: Moving idle cash into diversified, long-term market assets is the most direct way to capture missed returns.

  • Mitigate Home Bias: Avoiding over-concentration in one’s domestic market broadens the opportunity set, raises return potential, lowers overall portfolio volatility, and protects against localized capital losses.

  • Leverage Professional Advice: The survey reveals that investors who work with a financial advisor show greater confidence in reaching their long-term goals and are more comfortable taking calculated risks.

Ultimately, turning long-term aspirations into disciplined investing behavior relies on harmonizing costs, incentives, and portfolio construction to ensure that risk-taking is fully aligned with the investor’s ultimate objectives.

Which Assets to Favor in a World of Persistent Inflation?: The View of M&G

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesyFrom left to right: Andrew Chorlton, CIO of Fixed Income at M&G Investments; Fabiana Fedeli, CIO of Equities, Multi-Asset, and Sustainability; and Emmanuel Deblanc, CIO of Private Markets.

The market has entered a new phase of the cycle in which inflation will continue to shape monetary policies and the behavior of risk assets, while forcing many of the traditional rules of investing to be put under review. This is the main conclusion reached by the CIOs of Fixed Income, Equities, Multi-Asset and ESG, and Private Markets of M&G Investments, during a panel titled CIOs Investment Perspectives: Navigating the Aftershock- is inflation Back? recently organized by the firm for international journalists at its London headquarters.

Although risk assets have continued to show strength and fixed income has resisted better than in previous episodes of inflationary stress, M&G’s CIOs argued that investors must adapt to an environment characterized by higher interest rates for longer, structural changes in the economy, and new sources of risk stemming from geopolitics, public debt, and artificial intelligence. In this context, Gautam Samarth, multi-asset fund manager and panel moderator, highlighted that sharp dispersion within equities has heavily influenced investor results, while underlining the main change of the year as the sharp reset of interest rate expectations, following a period in which markets went from anticipating cuts to assuming that central banks will maintain a much more restrictive stance.

M&G’s Vision on Fixed Income

For Andrew Chorlton, CIO of Fixed Income, persistent inflation remains the dominant factor in understanding market behavior. He recalled that, five years after the end of the pandemic and following the impact of the invasion of Ukraine, “developed economies have still not managed to fully control inflationary pressures.” In his view, markets have made the same mistake for four consecutive years by taking the Federal Reserve’s interest rate expectations as a proxy for the rest of the world, and being disappointed each and every time due to starting the years with overly optimistic forecasts.

The Fixed Income CIO draws two readings from this behavior. On one hand, the idea that “investors want rates to be lower because that is supportive and good for everything, without recognizing that we are still in the middle of a battle against inflation.” On the other, that after the experience of 2022, controlling inflation has become “very personal” for central bankers, in the sense that they are not willing to “make the same mistake twice.” Chorlton pointed to Kevin Warsh, the new Chairman of the Fed, as an example; before taking office, Warsh maintained a stance more inclined toward lowering interest rates, but has now realized that “it is his reputation on the line,” adopting “a clear focus on fighting inflation.”

In any case, Chorlton believes that the performance of fixed income has been reasonably solid. Compared to the sharp adjustment experienced in 2022, an exercise that was practically flat in an environment marked by volatility, geopolitical tensions, and inflation “cannot be described as a bad result,” he stated. Furthermore, he argued that the government bond market currently offers a much more attractive starting point thanks to the existence of positive real yields.

His view is more cautious regarding corporate credit. In his opinion, spreads price in an excessively benign scenario, based solely on the continuity of the current context and low default levels. In contrast, the rates market already incorporates a large portion of known risks—inflation, fiscal policy, or political uncertainty—which is why he believes the risk-reward relationship is currently more favorable in sovereign bonds than in credit.

New Rules for Investing in Equities

For her part, Fabiana Fedeli, CIO of Equities, Multi-Asset, and Sustainability, argued that many of the traditional rules used for decades to analyze the stock market have stopped working. In her view, investors remain too constrained by the classic distinction between long and short-duration assets, when the market currently pays much closer attention to business fundamentals and major structural trends like artificial intelligence.

Fedeli recalled that just two years ago, there was a broad consensus that a higher-for-longer rate scenario should especially hurt tech companies, given they are long-duration businesses. However, the exact opposite happened. “The rule-of-thumb rules we all learned said that should not have happened, because high rates should have caused a bloodbath in long-duration tech, and that didn’t happen; in fact, it has continued not to happen,” she noted.

Fedeli believes the rise of artificial intelligence has profoundly changed the way the market values companies, and she believes the impact of higher financing costs will still take time to transfer to the companies leading this technological revolution. While she acknowledges that a time will come when the high investments required to develop AI will force many companies to turn to debt markets more intensively, she believes that point has not yet arrived.

However, she does identify macroeconomic risks that, in her view, the stock market still undervalues. Among them, she highlights the possibility that energy prices remain elevated for longer as a result of investment needs in energy security, infrastructure reconstruction, and inventory rebuilding. This scenario could end up weakening aggregate demand and affecting corporate earnings in certain sectors, though not uniformly. Therefore, she stressed the importance of maintaining long-term investment horizons and avoiding hasty decisions driven by concerns that may take years to materialize.

Inflation Protection: Key for Private Markets

The analysis by Emmanuel Deblanc, CIO of Private Markets, focused on the structural changes transforming investors’ perception of risk. In his view, the conversation around inflation has evolved significantly and now incorporates factors that until recently were barely taken into account, such as geopolitics, the sustainability of public finances, or potential regulatory and tax changes resulting from the growing debt of sovereign states.

Even so, Deblanc believes that “the value of having strategies and assets that provide protection against inflation has probably been undervalued and continues to be undervalued.” In his opinion, investors tend to associate these instruments solely with high-inflation scenarios, whereas they can also play a relevant role if, after an inflationary period, the economy enters a phase of disinflation or even deflation. What is truly important, he argues, is having assets capable of preserving purchasing power in highly changeable macroeconomic environments.

Another major debate raised by Deblanc revolves around the very concept of a risk-free asset. The executive questioned whether US government debt can continue to be considered the indisputable benchmark for global investors, especially in a context of high fiscal deficits and a sustained increase in public debt in economies like the United States or France. As he explained, inflation constitutes a way to erode the value of a currency without needing to incur a formal default, which forces a rethink of whether sovereign debt remains the appropriate benchmark for pricing the risk of all other assets.

Furthermore, he warned that governments’ tax collection capacity will increasingly become a determining factor in assessing investment risk. Rising tax and regulatory pressure could particularly affect regulated sectors, such as water or electricity, while differences between jurisdictions will tend to widen as some countries face greater difficulties handling the deterioration of their public accounts. In this new context, he concluded, understanding the risks associated with inflation, regulation, and fiscal sustainability will be just as important as analyzing traditional asset valuations.

The New Financial Power: Global Family Offices Manage Trillions and Set the Pace in Private Investment

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

In the financial world, a new power is rising, and it is no small matter: today, family offices have become some of the most sophisticated players in the global financial ecosystem.

“Family offices are shifting from being administrative structures to becoming sophisticated investment organizations,” notes the Global Family Office Report 2025 by UBS, one of the most comprehensive studies on this segment.

Originally created to preserve and manage the wealth of a business family, a new generation of family offices has evolved into true investment platforms. They feature professional teams, global asset allocation strategies, and growing participation in markets that were traditionally dominated by institutional funds.

This phenomenon reflects a profound transformation in how great fortunes manage their wealth. It is no longer just about preserving assets for future generations, but about building diversified portfolios capable of competing with pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, and major international asset managers.

A Market That Has Grown in Silence

Determining the exact size of the family office universe is complex due to its private nature, but various estimates agree that the number of these structures has increased significantly in recent years.

According to data compiled by Campden Wealth and UBS, there are around 8,000 family offices worldwide, though some private estimates push the figure above 10,000.

This growth is closely linked to the expansion of global wealth. According to Capgemini’s World Wealth Report, the number of High-Net-Worth Individuals (HNWIs) continues to rise, driven primarily by wealth creation in sectors like technology, financial markets, energy, and entrepreneurship.

Meanwhile, Boston Consulting Group’s (BCG) Global Wealth Report estimates that global private financial wealth exceeds 275 trillion dollars—a universe in which family offices play an increasingly important role as capital managers.

While there is no consolidated figure for the assets under management (AUM) of all family offices, industry specialists estimate they manage several trillion dollars globally.

Family Offices Build Their Own Investment Engine

The main difference between a traditional family office and the new generation lies in their operating model. The former focused primarily on administrative tasks: tax compliance, real estate management, wealth succession, and coordination with private banks. Modern family offices operate increasingly like institutional managers.

Many employ Chief Investment Officers (CIOs), analysis teams, private equity specialists, sector experts, and international investment structures. The objective has also shifted: moving from a strategy focused on preserving wealth to one oriented toward generating long-term capital growth.

According to UBS, a common characteristic among large family offices is their time horizon: unlike many institutional investors bound to quarterly cycles, families can invest with a multi-decade vision.

In this context, one of the greatest shifts in family office asset allocation is the growing exposure to alternative investments. The public market of stocks and bonds is no longer the sole destination for family capital.

Today, large family fortunes seek opportunities in investment areas such as private equity, venture capital, infrastructure, real estate, private credit, energy, artificial intelligence, or assets linked to the energy transition, among others.

The UBS Global Family Office Report 2025 shows that private markets maintain a strategic position within family portfolios, particularly because they offer access to non-listed companies and the potential for returns superior to public markets.

This trend coincides with a broader transformation of the financial system: the growth of alternative assets.

According to Preqin, a specialized provider of private market data, global alternative assets are on track to approach 30 trillion dollars in the coming years, driven by demand from institutional investors and private wealth.

Technology and Innovation: The Bet of the New Generation

Another relevant change is the profile of new wealth. Entrepreneurs built around sectors like technology, artificial intelligence, fintech, and e-commerce are constructing family offices with a different mindset than previous generations.

Instead of limiting themselves to protecting traditional family businesses, many of these structures act as strategic investors in new sectors. Direct investment in startups has become common practice; some family offices even compete with venture capital funds by seeking early-stage stakes in technology companies.

An example is the ecosystem created around tech entrepreneurs like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, or Mark Zuckerberg, whose private investment structures have the capacity to participate across multiple industries. The logic is clear: families who built their wealth in one industry are now looking to participate in the next waves of growth.

Beyond financial markets, one of the greatest concerns for family offices is the transfer of wealth between generations. According to studies by Deloitte and Campden Wealth, a significant portion of business families face difficulties in maintaining their wealth past the second or third generation.

For this reason, new family offices are incorporating specialized areas of family governance, such as financial education for heirs, strategic philanthropy, responsible investing, and succession planning.

The priority is no longer just how much money a family has, but how it manages to preserve and multiply it over decades.

Latin America Joins the Trend

Although the United States, Europe, and Asia concentrate some of the largest family offices in the world, Latin America is beginning to develop a more sophisticated ecosystem. Mexico, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Argentina harbor some of the region’s largest private fortunes, and more families are professionalizing the management of their assets.

The regional trend points toward greater institutionalization: establishing dedicated offices, hiring professional teams, and gaining greater international exposure.

For wealth managers, this represents a growing opportunity. The competition is no longer just about managing investments, but about offering holistic solutions for families seeking to preserve wealth across generations.

Family offices represent a quiet transformation of the global financial system. They do not have the visibility of an investment bank, nor the public exposure of an ETF, but they manage a significant amount of capital and make decisions that can influence companies, entire sectors, and even regions.

Their power lies precisely in their independence: they can invest with long horizons, take strategic risks, and capture opportunities that other investors cannot.

In a world where capital seeks new sources of growth, family offices have ceased to be simple managers of family wealth. Now, in many cases, they are the new private sovereign wealth funds of global capitalism.

Bitcoin Matures: Lower Liquid Supply and Growing Institutional Dominance Redefine Its Cycle

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Canva

Bitcoin has come a long way from the famous purchase of two pizzas for 10,000 BTC made by Laszlo Hanyecz in May 2010 to its current consolidation as a global asset. According to the latest Binance Research report, which analyzes its evolution over its 16-year history from a functional, behavioral, and structural perspective, the cryptocurrency is increasingly integrated into institutional portfolios.

The report highlights a structural contraction of the liquid supply. The proportion of Bitcoin held by long-term holders has risen from around 30% in 2013 to approximately 60% today, recording the largest increases during market bear periods, which points to a dynamic of accumulation rather than capitulation. In addition, nearly 25% of the Bitcoin supply has remained inactive for more than five years, suggesting that the volume actually available for trading is materially lower than what the circulating supply reflects.

Institutional participation has become one of the defining features of the current cycle. Institutional entities currently own around 3.88 million BTC, equivalent to 18.5% of Bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million, while public companies and ETFs each account for close to 6% of the total. Excluding positions linked to DeFi and other protocols, the estimated institutional holding stands at around 3.5 million BTC, equivalent to about 1 in every 6 BTC. This marks the first cycle in which the marginal buyer is increasingly institutional rather than retail. Furthermore, nearly half of corporate Bitcoin accumulation has occurred over the last 12 months.

Meanwhile, spot Bitcoin ETFs in the US already accumulate close to 1.62 million BTC, a figure higher than the remaining Bitcoin left to be mined, highlighting the growing weight of flows into ETFs, the adoption of Bitcoin as a corporate treasury asset, and the behavior of long-term holders compared to mining issuance.

Likewise, volatility trends reflect greater market maturity. The 90-day realized volatility dropped to approximately 29% by the end of 2025, its lowest level in nearly a decade, while the average volatility of the cycle has moderated to around 48%, compared to 74% and 76% recorded in the two previous cycles. Bitcoin’s market capitalization has also increased to represent approximately 5% of the total market capitalization of gold, compared to virtually zero levels in 2010, with particularly significant advances following the launch of spot Bitcoin ETFs in the US in January 2024.

The report also notes that emerging markets are driving the next phase of Bitcoin adoption. The APAC region recorded 31% year-on-year growth in the number of Binance users, followed by Latin America at 29%, and MENA at 26%. Collectively, the share of Binance users in emerging markets holding BTC reached 58% in 2026, a 29% year-on-year growth, well above the 18% growth observed in developed markets. Bitcoin’s sustained profitability against major emerging market currencies over the past 13 years has favored greater adoption in these regions.

According to Javier García de la Torre, Director of Binance for Spain and Portugal, “Bitcoin is entering a new stage of maturity, marked by a lower liquid supply, growing institutional participation, and an increasingly relevant role as a reserve asset. What a few years ago was perceived as an experimental asset is today consolidating as a strategic diversification tool for companies and institutional investors.”

Sports Enter the Portfolios: Blue Owl Acquires a Minority Stake in the Cleveland Cavaliers

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesy

Blue Owl, one of the world’s largest alternative asset management and investment firms, announced the acquisition of a minority stake in the Cleveland Cavaliers through its HomeCourt Partners fund, a vehicle created specifically to invest in professional sports franchises.

The announced operation reflects a global trend: sports teams, previously considered only as entertainment businesses, are now seen by institutional investors as alternative assets with appreciation potential, recurring revenue, and low correlation with traditional markets.

For decades, investing in a sports team was practically a privilege reserved for billionaire businesspeople and family groups with a strong emotional connection to a franchise. Today, that logic is changing.

Major professional leagues have become a new territory for private equity funds, alternative managers, and family offices looking for exposure to scarce assets with global brands, diversified revenue streams, and long-term growth potential.

The transaction represents the sixth NBA franchise backed by HomeCourt Partners since its creation, consolidating a strategy that seeks to transform sports ownership into a formal alternative investment asset class. Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert will maintain the majority stake in the franchise.

Beyond the Cleveland team, the operation reflects a broader trend: professional sports are moving away from being solely an entertainment business to become a financial asset within institutional portfolios.

The appeal of sports franchises for institutional investors stems from several characteristics that are highly valued in private markets today.

Unlike other traditional assets, sports teams combine:

  • Global brands that are difficult to replicate

  • Exclusive participation rights in closed leagues

  • Growing revenues from television and digital platforms

  • Long-term commercial contracts

  • Ability to expand internationally

  • Highly engaged fan communities

For many alternative asset managers, these characteristics turn sports franchises into assets with similarities to other private investment segments such as infrastructure, premium real estate, or intellectual property assets.

“Sports investments are a fast-growing alternative strategy due to the diversification and potential stream of stable income they can provide investors,” explained Michael Rees, co-president of Blue Owl, when announcing the operation.

The investment thesis is clear: while public markets face cycles of volatility, sports assets offer exposure to structural trends such as global consumption, entertainment, technology, and digital monetization.

The Shift from Individual Owners to Institutional Investors

The most significant change in recent years is the entry of institutional capital. The NBA was one of the first major US leagues to open the door to specialized institutional investors. In 2020, it created a framework that allowed approved funds to hold minority ownership stakes in teams.

Within this context, HomeCourt Partners was born as a strategic alliance between Blue Owl and the NBA to provide institutional capital to the league’s ecosystem.

The fund has a unique feature: it is the only pre-approved institutional investor that can acquire equity stakes in any of the 30 NBA franchises, allowing it to build a diversified portfolio within a single league. The strategy responds to a phenomenon already observed in other sports industries.

Firms like Arctos Partners, RedBird Capital Partners, Sixth Street, and CVC Capital Partners have developed specialized vehicles to invest in teams, leagues, commercial rights, and sports-related assets.

The logic is similar to that used by traditional private equity funds: acquire stakes in businesses with growth potential, professionalize operations, and benefit from the future appreciation of the asset.

Sports Valuations Break Records

The growing participation of institutional investors coincides with a period of strong appreciation in the value of sports franchises. According to Forbes estimates, the average value of an NBA franchise has multiplied significantly over the last decade, driven by higher commercial revenues, broadcasting contracts, and the global expansion of the league.

Currently, several franchises exceed valuations of over 5 billion dollars, while the most valuable teams in the sports world reach figures exceeding 10 billion dollars. The Golden State Warriors, the Los Angeles Lakers, and the New York Knicks are among the most valuable sports franchises in the world.

The phenomenon is not exclusive to basketball. In the NFL, the Dallas Cowboys have been valued by Forbes at more than 10 billion dollars, becoming one of the most valuable sports assets on the planet.

The growth responds to a transformation of the business model; previously, value was concentrated mainly in tickets and television, whereas now it includes international rights, streaming platforms, sports betting, e-commerce, digital content, VIP experiences, and fan data utilization, among others.

Blue Owl Bets on Long-Term Assets

The investment in the Cavaliers also fits within Blue Owl’s overall strategy. The firm, which trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker OWL, has become one of the most important players in the alternative asset market.

With approximately 315 billion dollars in assets under management at the close of the first quarter of 2026, Blue Owl operates primarily across three major platforms: private credit, real assets, and GP Strategic Capital.

Its strategy has focused on offering institutional investors, insurers, and high-net-worth individuals access to private investments with long-term horizons. The foray into sports represents a natural extension of that philosophy: identifying assets with unique characteristics and the capacity to generate value over decades.

The growth of sports assets also has implications for large family fortunes. Now, sports are beginning to be incorporated as an emerging category within strategic asset allocation.

Although direct investment in franchises remains highly exclusive, specialized vehicles allow institutional investors to gain exposure without needing to acquire a majority stake.

For high-net-worth Latin American individuals, who have historically shown interest in international assets and global brands, this segment could gain relevance. The search for diversification, wealth protection, and exposure to global consumer trends is leading the world’s wealthiest families to explore new investment categories.

Blue Owl’s entry into the Cleveland Cavaliers confirms a structural shift in the financial industry: some of the most attractive assets of the future may not be found on traditional stock exchanges, but rather in businesses with global communities, intellectual property, and the capacity to generate income for generations.

Trump’s Tariffs Change the Global Trade Map; These Are the Winners According to BBVA Research

  |   By  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesy

With the return of Donald Trump to the United States presidency and the imposition of his aggressive tariff policy, the dominant scenario among analysts and investors was that the world’s largest economy would trigger a significant contraction in international trade. However, an analysis by BBVA Research proposes a different conclusion: global trade did not disappear or contract; it simply changed its origin.

The trade war between the United States and China is accelerating a transformation that was already underway since the pandemic: the search for more diversified supply chains that are less dependent on a single country and closer to the US market.

According to the BBVA Research study “What Impact Have Trump’s Tariffs Had on Imports?”, it is concluded that the new levies did have a direct effect on trade flows: for every one-percentage-point increase in tariffs applied to a country, US imports from that economy decreased by around 2%.

But the most relevant data point for markets and companies is that this drop did not necessarily mean a reduction in total trade. The United States simply began to substitute suppliers. The result is a redistribution of market share within global value chains.

“Tariffs are modifying trade patterns rather than reducing trade,” is the central conclusion drawn from the BBVA Research analysis. The question now for investors and companies is not only how much trade is lost due to trade barriers, but who occupies the space left behind by the affected suppliers.

China Loses Ground and Mexico Gains Share

The main shift is observed in the trade relationship between the United States and China. For decades, China was the primary manufacturing supplier for the US market. However, the combination of geopolitical tensions, technological restrictions, and new tariffs has forced US companies to look for alternatives.

In this scenario, Mexico emerges as one of the main beneficiaries of this process. The country was already the primary trading partner of the United States prior to this new phase of trade tensions. In 2023, it surpassed China as the main source of US imports, and in 2024, it consolidated that position.

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau show that bilateral trade between Mexico and the United States reached record levels last year, with an exchange exceeding 800 billion dollars annually, driven mainly by manufacturing sectors such as automotive, machinery, electronics, and industrial equipment.

The phenomenon responds to several structural advantages: geographic proximity to the United States; productive integration under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA); competitive labor costs; a broad network of industrial suppliers; and installed capacity in advanced manufacturing, among others.

For BBVA Research, Mexico is not only capturing trade displaced from China, but is also acquiring a more strategic role within regional supply chains. So-called nearshoring has stopped being just an expectation of future investment and has begun to be reflected in trade patterns.

Latin America Seeks to Capitalize on the New Reconfiguration

The shift in global chains is not limited to Mexico. The trade fragmentation between the United States and China opens up opportunities for various Latin American economies, though with differing capacities to capture investment.

Mexico is the most obvious case due to its integration with the United States, but other countries can benefit in specific niches. For example:

  • Costa Rica: This country has developed a prominent position in medical and electronic manufacturing.

  • Dominican Republic: It has strengthened its export-oriented free trade zone sectors.

  • Brazil: It can take advantage of opportunities linked to manufacturing, energy, and strategic raw materials.

  • Chile and Peru: Countries that hold a relevant position in critical minerals needed for the energy transition and advanced technologies, such as copper and lithium.

However, BBVA Research has pointed out in various analyses on investment and nearshoring that the opportunity is not guaranteed, because the region needs to resolve historical obstacles such as insufficient logistical infrastructure, regulatory uncertainty, low regional integration, a deficit of specialized talent, and energy costs.

Additionally, the competition is no longer solely among emerging countries in the region, as Mexico competes against Vietnam, India, Malaysia, and other Asian economies that are also looking to capture the manufacturing shifting out of China.

AI Opens a New Window for Mexico and Asia

One of the most relevant elements of the BBVA Research analysis is that the commercial reorganization is not driven exclusively by tariffs. There is another structural factor: the new technological economy driven by artificial intelligence.

The explosion in global demand for AI-related infrastructure—such as semiconductors, servers, electronic components, and specialized equipment—is once again modifying trade flows. BBVA identifies that in some products linked to this new economy, the United States is reducing purchases from China and increasing acquisitions from economies like Taiwan and Mexico.

The reason is that technology companies are seeking suppliers considered more reliable from a geopolitical and logistical perspective. Mexico has a particularly relevant opportunity in sectors such as electronics manufacturing, advanced automotive components, data centers, electrical equipment, as well as semiconductors and specialized assembly.

Although Mexico does not yet compete directly with Taiwan in advanced chip production, it can capture important stages of the technology chain, especially manufacturing, integration, and logistics. For investors, this trend offers a different interpretation: nearshoring is no longer just about relocating traditional factories, but about building industrial ecosystems around strategic sectors.

Tariffs Are Unlikely to Resolve the US Trade Deficit

Despite the fact that US tariff policy seeks to reduce foreign dependence and decrease the trade deficit, BBVA Research warns that the outcome may be limited. The reason is that countries do not disappear as suppliers; they simply change.

The logic is compelling: if the United States reduces imports from China but increases purchases from Mexico, Vietnam, or other economies, the trade deficit may alter its geographic composition, but it will not necessarily disappear.

Furthermore, tariffs can generate secondary effects such as higher costs for US companies, pressure on consumer prices, lower efficiency in production chains, and potential trade retaliation—several of these effects are, in fact, already a reality today. That is why the final impact will depend on how much companies can absorb the higher costs and how quickly they manage to reorganize their supply chains.

The key point of the BBVA Research analysis lies in the fact that the global economy is not entering a phase of less trade, but rather a phase of more fragmented and strategic trade. In other words: globalization is not disappearing; it is just changing shape.

During recent decades, companies primarily sought efficiency and lower costs. Now, they also seek security, resilience, and lower geopolitical exposure. In this new scenario, Mexico and certain Latin American countries, to a lesser extent, start with a relevant advantage.

The combination of their location, the USMCA in the specific case of Mexico, their manufacturing base, and proximity to the world’s largest consumer market places them among the best-positioned countries to capture a portion of the new trade map. The true winner of the tariff war will not necessarily be the one who imposes the most barriers, but the one who manages to become the alternative supplier when companies decide to reroute.