The Secondary Market as a Necessary “Third Way”

Taubman was unequivocal in describing the current market moment: GPs cannot rely exclusively on IPO exits or sponsor-to-sponsor M&A processes to return capital to their LPs. They need what he called a “third way.” And that third way, in the current context, has a name: the secondary market.

The argument is as mathematical as it is strategic. The capital distribution plans that managers set at the start of 2026 have had to be revised. Assets that were on the monetization list have come off it, and in order to maintain their targeted pace of capital returns to LPs, managers are increasingly turning to alternative liquidity solutions.

GP-Leds as the Primary Driver, LP Secondaries Growing

On the earnings call, Taubman was direct about where the traction is right now: the real growth driver in the current environment is on the GP side. Continuation vehicles and other GP-led structures are the most immediate response to the liquidity pressure facing asset managers with positions that are difficult to monetize, particularly in the software sector.

That said, the firm is also pointing to growth in LP portfolio sales, driven by a different dynamic: LPs themselves are rethinking how to manage their commitments and rebalance their portfolios in a more volatile environment. Taubman confirmed growing interest in LP sales as well, though he was clear that the GP side remains the primary engine for now.

The cumulative volume that PJT Park Hill reports in its Fund Advisory division speaks for itself: more than $130 billion in LP portfolio sales and more than $150 billion in GP-led secondary transactions since 2010, according to the investor presentation.

Software: The Elephant in the Room for Continuation Vehicles

One of the most pointed questions of the call was whether the valuation challenges in the software sector were dampening GP-led continuation vehicles, where that segment had historically been very active.

Taubman’s answer was nuanced but revealing. The debate around software is no longer about short-term cash generation — it is about the terminal value of these businesses. GPs with significant software exposure are seeking liquidity in other parts of their portfolios where visibility is clearer, creating an interesting flow of secondary opportunities away from the software noise.

In a world where many of these companies were financed in the credit markets against a loan-to-value mindset, uncertainty about long-term value makes refinancing the entire capital stack more difficult without further equitization or other catalysts. This dynamic is already beginning to bleed into the credit markets through liability management activity — less about near-term fundamentals and more about quantum of debt and whether the existing capital structure is appropriate given the questions about long-term value.

The Virtuous Circle of Secondaries as an Asset Class

Perhaps the most significant takeaway for the secondary market community was Taubman’s long-term thesis. The biggest constraint on secondary market growth has not been lack of demand from GPs or LPs seeking liquidity — it has been the ability to execute transactions at scale with adequate competitive tension. And that requires more capital allocated to secondary funds as an asset class.

The investment case for LPs considering increased exposure to secondaries remains compelling: better matching of commitment and investment, no J-curve, a clear operating history and track record for the underlying asset, continued sponsorship from the manager, and historically strong returns. The more secondary investor appetite grows, the more secondary activity can be unlocked — and according to Taubman, that virtuous circle is already in motion.

The Macro Context: Volatility as a Catalyst

The primary fundraising market continues to face headwinds. PJT Park Hill’s revenues in that segment were down year-over-year, with the growth in Private Capital Solutions — the secondary advisory business — more than offsetting the primary fundraising decline, a dynamic Taubman described as likely to persist. For 2026, the firm expects primary fundraising revenues to broadly match prior high-water marks, while the secondary market is positioned for another year of robust growth as rising demand from both GPs and LPs for liquidity solutions is matched by growing secondary investor appetite.

When IPO markets are closed and strategic buyers are in a wait-and-see mode, the secondary market is not the backup plan. Increasingly, it is the primary one.

The headline from Lazard’s first quarter 2026 earnings call was impossible to miss: the $575 million acquisition of Campbell Lutyens and the creation of Lazard CL. But for those tracking the secondaries market closely, the more interesting story is what the Campbell Lutyens deal reveals about a much broader strategic repositioning that has been quietly underway at Lazard for years — and is now accelerating on multiple fronts simultaneously.

The Revenue Mix Shift Nobody Is Talking About

Before getting to the deal itself, consider this number: private capital connectivity revenue has grown from approximately 25% of Lazard’s total advisory revenue in 2019 to 40% today. Upon closing of the Campbell Lutyens acquisition, it will hit 50% — while total revenue continues to grow.

That is not a tactical adjustment. That is a structural transformation of what kind of firm Lazard is becoming. And secondaries advisory sits at the center of it.

CEO Peter Orszag was deliberate in framing this on the call: “The acquisition of Campbell Lutyens and establishment of Lazard CL strengthens our ability to deliver for clients at a time when fundraising is increasingly competitive and liquidity solutions are more complex.” The operative phrase is liquidity solutions. That is secondaries language, not traditional M&A language — and it is now driving half of Lazard’s advisory revenue story.

The Campbell Lutyens Deal: GP-Led Meets LP-Led

The strategic logic of the Campbell Lutyens acquisition is best understood through the lens of how the secondaries advisory market has split into two distinct businesses — and how Lazard was only competing in one of them.

Lazard’s existing Private Capital Advisory group has historically been strong on GP-led transactions: continuation funds, GP-led secondaries processes, and capital solutions for general partners. Campbell Lutyens, by contrast, has built its franchise predominantly on the LP side — advising institutional investors on portfolio sales, tender offers, and secondary dispositions.

Orszag described this as a “Lego piece nature” with “very little overlap.” In his words: “We’re now balancing in the secondaries market GP transactions — that are a source of excellence — with LP transactions that are on the Campbell Lutyens side more of the focus.” The combined Lazard CL platform will have over $100 billion in GP and LP secondary transaction volume over the past two years, more than 280 advisory professionals across 18 offices globally, and coverage across private equity, private credit, infrastructure, and real estate.

Lazard CL will be co-led by Holcombe Green, Lazard’s Global Head of Private Capital Advisory, and Gordon Bajnai, the current CEO of Campbell Lutyens, both reporting directly to Orszag.

The Flywheel: When Restructuring Feeds Secondaries

One of the most underreported angles from the call is the connection Orszag drew between Lazard’s restructuring and liability management business and its growing secondaries platform.

The logic works in both directions. When Lazard advises a distressed company on a liability management exercise — whether that is a debt exchange, an uptier transaction, or an amend-and-extend — those relationships naturally surface secondaries opportunities. LPs holding stakes in stressed funds may need liquidity. GPs may need capital solutions to support portfolio companies under pressure. The restructuring team opens the door; the secondaries team walks through it.

The reverse is equally true. Strong LP and GP relationships built through the secondaries and fundraising business generate introductions to restructuring and M&A mandates. Orszag was explicit: “There was a business flow in both directions. This was a core part of the strategic logic of the transaction.” He underlined the point by noting that just before the Campbell Lutyens announcement, he interviewed a senior banker “who was highlighting the importance of the secondary business to his M&A franchise.”

This flywheel is not theoretical. Lazard’s restructuring and liability management business delivered robust growth in Q1, supporting overall results alongside private capital advisory at a moment when pure M&A revenue came in below expectations. The diversification is already working.

Data and AI: The New Moat in Secondaries Advisory

Perhaps the least-discussed but most forward-looking element of Lazard’s secondaries strategy is the data and AI layer being built into Lazard CL from day one.

Orszag identified a structural problem in the secondaries market that most practitioners know well but rarely discuss publicly: “Really nuanced information and data on both GPs and LPs is difficult for most people to obtain.” The combination of Lazard’s existing PCA dataset with Campbell Lutyens’ proprietary LP and GP data — built over nearly four decades and across more than 3,700 institutional LP relationships — creates an information advantage that will be difficult to replicate.

Lazard’s stated intention is to pair this combined dataset with its AI capabilities to “deliver deeper insights for clients” and to advance its goal of becoming the leading AI-enabled independent financial firm. In a market where pricing, process management, and counterparty matching have historically depended on relationship networks and institutional memory, a data-rich platform backed by AI infrastructure represents a genuine structural edge — not just a marketing talking point.

The Talent Signal: Secondaries Is Now a Recruiting Tool

A small but telling detail from the call deserves attention. When discussing Lazard’s hiring pipeline for 2026, Orszag noted that he had personally interviewed a senior banker earlier in the week who cited the importance of the secondaries business to his M&A franchise as a reason for considering Lazard.

That is a reversal of the traditional dynamic. For most of the past two decades, M&A prestige attracted talent to advisory firms, and secondaries was a back-office function or a niche add-on. The fact that secondaries capability is now being cited by M&A bankers as a reason to join a firm — before the Campbell Lutyens deal had even been announced publicly — signals a meaningful shift in how top talent is evaluating platform strength.

Orszag connected this directly to the flywheel thesis: with Lazard CL in place, the firm’s ability to recruit and attract talent will expand further. The secondaries platform is becoming a talent magnet, not just a revenue line.

What This All Means for the Secondaries Market

Four takeaways that go beyond the Campbell Lutyens headline:

First, the 25%-to-50% revenue shift at Lazard is a leading indicator for the entire independent advisory industry. Firms that cannot demonstrate credible secondaries and private capital connectivity capabilities will increasingly find themselves losing mandates — and talent — to those that can.

Second, the GP-led vs. LP-led segmentation of the secondaries advisory market is real and strategic. The firms that cover both sides of the table, without conflicts, will define the next generation of the business.

Third, the connection between distressed advisory and secondaries is becoming a structural feature of the market, not a situational overlap. As more companies navigate complex capital structures and LPs face pressure to manage portfolio exposures, the firms that can move seamlessly between restructuring and liquidity solutions will have a compounding advantage.

Fourth, proprietary data combined with AI is emerging as the new barrier to entry in secondaries advisory. Relationships have always mattered in this market. But the firms that can overlay data intelligence on top of those relationships will consistently win on execution, pricing, and counterparty identification in ways that relationship-only platforms cannot match.

Lazard’s Q1 2026 earnings call was not just about one acquisition. It was a blueprint for what the leading secondaries advisory platform of 2030 will look like.

When a firm like Evercore reports adjusted revenues of $1.4 billion in a single quarter — double the prior year, and an all-time record — it’s worth reading between the lines.

Because if you pay close attention to the Q1 2026 earnings call, a clear pattern emerges: every time management needs to explain why the non-M&A side of the business is also firing, the same name keeps coming up.

Private Capital Advisory. And within it: secondaries.

Evercore’s Secondary Advisory Business Just Had Its Best First Quarter Ever

Evercore’s Private Capital Advisory (PCA) unit — which includes its secondary transaction advisory practice — reported a record Q1 in 2026. This didn’t come out of nowhere: it follows a record full year in 2025 for the same business.

For anyone tracking this market, that means something concrete: the pipeline of secondary mandates isn’t cooling off. It’s expanding.

CFO Tim Lalonde made it clear during the call: performance was “broad-based” — meaning it wasn’t one or two large deals moving the needle, but sustained activity across the entire platform.

LP-Led: The Hottest Segment Right Now

Perhaps the most relevant data point for secondary market observers came from this line by CEO John Weinberg, almost in passing:

“New deal activity continues to be elevated, particularly on the LP side.”

In the current environment, that makes a lot of sense. Sponsors are taking longer to exit their assets. IPOs remain inconsistent. LPs who haven’t seen meaningful distributions in years are actively looking for alternative liquidity solutions — and today, the secondary market is the most accessible answer.

LP-led transactions are capturing that demand.

GP-Led: Still Active, But With Longer Timelines

The continuation fund market isn’t dead. It’s still alive and generating mandates for Evercore. But management was candid about what they’re seeing on the ground: processes are taking longer to close.

Macro uncertainty — public market volatility, valuation questions, geopolitical noise — is causing some transactions to extend. It’s not a hard stop, but it is real friction in execution.

The good news: Evercore described its mix as “pretty balanced” between LP-led and GP-led. That means the business doesn’t depend on either segment breaking out to keep performing.

The Quote You Should Save

During the Q&A session, the right question was asked: if volatility and valuation pressure are complicating price discovery in secondaries... shouldn’t that be a headwind for the business?

Management’s response was revealing. And it ended with this:

“As secondaries grow and it becomes more powerful, they are doing better and better.”

It’s a simple line. But coming from the CEO of one of the world’s premier independent advisors, on a public earnings call, it says quite a bit about where this market is headed.

Beyond the Classic LP/GP Split: Private Credit Secondaries and Structured Minority

This was the part of the call that caught my attention the most.

Management explicitly mentioned they are seeing “strong momentum in newer product areas, including private credit and secondaries.”

Private credit secondaries. Said that casually, on an earnings call.

What this signals: Evercore isn’t just managing traditional deal flow — it’s actively building capability in the newest, least intermediated corners of the secondary market. The ones where competition is thinner and the advisory opportunity is wider.

They also flagged structured minority deals as an active area — with some timeline delays, but with a real pipeline behind it.

Talent as a Leading Indicator

One of the most reliable ways to read where an investment bank is placing its bets is to watch where it hires.

In Q1 2026, Evercore added a new Senior Managing Director specifically for Private Capital Advisory. And it has another one committed to join before year-end — also in PCA.

Two senior-level hires in the same group, in the same year. That’s not maintenance. That’s expansion.

The firm now has 182 SMDs in investment banking, with more than 45 still ramping. And a meaningful share of that investment is being placed on the private capital side of the house — with secondaries as a central piece.

The Macro Context That Explains Everything

To understand why Evercore’s secondary business is in this moment, you have to look at the broader environment management laid out on the call:

• Sponsor exit activity is “mixed” — large-cap M&A is working, but the middle market is sluggish. That creates a backlog of assets without exits and pressure on GPs to offer alternative liquidity.

• Financing markets are open and abundant — which makes it easier to structure complex secondary transactions.

• Fundraising remains challenging — yet despite that, the Private Funds Group also had a record Q1. There’s LP demand for alternative structures and products.

• Software valuations under pressure — creating both price discovery difficulty and consolidation opportunity through continuation funds and LP portfolio sales.

What This Means for the Market

Evercore isn’t a secondary fund. It’s the advisor. And that matters because the volume of mandates flowing across their desks is a leading indicator of what’s actually happening in the real market.

If the PCA business is at a record moment — with an elevated pipeline and teams in expansion mode — the read is straightforward: there’s a lot of capital looking for secondary transactions, and a lot of GPs and LPs looking for help structuring them.

The secondary market is no longer a niche alternative. It’s infrastructure for the modern private equity ecosystem. And Evercore’s numbers are one more piece of evidence that transition is well underway.

Do you have intel on secondary deals in the US or European market? Are you a GP or LP thinking through a transaction? Reach out.

Secondary Scoop — Intelligence on the secondary market in venture capital and private equity.

The Paris-based private investment firm has begun holding informal discussions with investors and is expected to formally market the fund later this year or in early 2027, the people said. The new vehicle is expected to be similar in size to Ardian’s previous fund, much of which has already been deployed or committed.

Ardian’s secondaries platform acquires stakes in private equity portfolios and continuation vehicles, an area that has seen rapid growth as sponsors and investors seek liquidity in a slower dealmaking environment.

The firm’s investors include major public pension funds such as CalPERS, CalSTRS and the Florida State Board of Administration. Ardian’s ninth secondaries fund generated a 27% internal rate of return through June 2025, according to public pension disclosures.

The fundraising effort comes amid record activity in the secondaries market. Global secondary transaction volumes climbed 48% last year to $240 billion, according to Jefferies, driven by growing demand for liquidity solutions and continuation fund transactions.

Source: Bloomberg.

The focus is LP-led only. No GP-led, no preferred equity.

1. Market Activity

Volume: a big year, with a range of estimates

LP-led transaction volume in 2025 came in somewhere between $110 billion and $125 billion, depending on which report you read. Campbell Lutyens puts it at $121 billion. Jefferies at $125 billion. Lazard at $117 billion. Coller, citing Evercore data, says $110 to $120 billion.

The range reflects different survey populations and different views on how to count borderline structures like NAV facilities. It is not a sign of disagreement on direction. Everyone agrees LP-led volume grew sharply year on year, somewhere between 44 and 54 percent.

As a share of total secondary market activity, LP-led sits at roughly 50 to 54 percent. Campbell Lutyens and Coller put it at 54 percent. Jefferies puts it at 52 percent. Lazard puts it closer to 50 percent. The slight disagreement matters because the GP-led market was also growing fast, so the LP share was holding steady rather than expanding.

All four agree

LP-led volume hit an all-time high in 2025. The market grew by roughly half in a single year. H2 was materially stronger than H1 across all sources.

What drove the volume

The core driver is simple: LPs have not been getting their money back from PE funds. Distributions to paid-in capital (DPI) have been running below historical norms since 2022, as the exit environment for fund managers stayed difficult. Rather than waiting, more LPs decided to sell positions in the secondary market to generate their own liquidity.

This was not a distressed dynamic. It was portfolio management. The seller mix shifted noticeably toward institutions using the secondary market as a planned, recurring tool rather than a last resort. Coller makes this point directly, noting that one in two LP-led sellers in 2025 was a repeat seller. Jefferies puts the repeat rate at roughly 60 percent. Campbell Lutyens describes the normalization of what it calls programmatic selling across LP types.

The other driver was overallocation. Public market performance in 2022 and 2023 left many institutional investors with their private equity allocations sitting above target as a percentage of total portfolio. Selling into a strong secondary market helped rebalance.

2. Transaction Pricing Analysis

Overall level

Average LP portfolio pricing in 2025 settled at roughly 86 to 87 percent of NAV, a decline of roughly 100 to 200 basis points from 2024. Campbell Lutyens quotes 86.4 percent (a 13.6 percent average discount). Jefferies quotes 87 percent. Lazard does not give a single headline number but describes a modest softening. Coller says quality portfolios transact in the 90 cents range.

The softening is real but modest. The main reason for the decline is not weaker demand. It is a shift in what was being sold. More tail-end and older vintage funds came to market in 2025, and those clear at wider discounts than mid-life or young portfolios. The average vintage of buyout funds sold moved from 2018 in 2024 to 2016 in 2025, according to Jefferies.

Where pricing moved most

Venture and growth equity saw the biggest positive movement. Campbell Lutyens records a 640 basis point improvement. Jefferies records 300 basis points. The numbers differ because of how they weight the underlying transactions, but the direction is consistent. The stabilisation of tech valuations and the AI momentum in 2025 helped narrow bid-ask spreads, particularly for top-tier managers where secondary buyers now have more confidence in terminal valuations.

Energy also improved materially, up roughly 480 basis points according to Campbell Lutyens, driven by geopolitical interest in oil and gas and the power demand tied to AI data centres.

Credit held the best average pricing of any strategy. Growth in secondary supply for credit lagged the demand coming from dedicated credit secondary funds and generalist buyers seeking exposure to direct lending, which kept pricing tight.

Real estate remained the laggard. Elevated financing costs, structural problems in the office sector, and general uncertainty around valuations kept buyer appetite cautious. All four sources describe this consistently.

The evergreen premium

Evergreen and semi-liquid vehicles paid above market for LP portfolios in 2025, but the premium narrowed. Campbell Lutyens quantifies it at 334 basis points above the market average. That is down from 403 basis points in 2024. Jefferies and Lazard both note the compression. Coller observes that wealth capital still accounts for less than 10 percent of secondary market funding and that these vehicles tend to behave rationally, co-investing alongside flagship funds rather than paying irrational premiums.

3. Transaction Activity Analysis

Type of sellers

The seller base broadened noticeably in 2025. Every LP type sold more in 2025 than in 2024, according to Campbell Lutyens. But the mix shifted.

Pensions and sovereign wealth funds

These two categories remained the largest source of LP-led supply. Pensions accounted for roughly 29 to 34 percent of LP-led volume depending on the source. But what stood out in 2025 was the surge in sovereign wealth fund activity. Campbell Lutyens records an 18-fold increase in SWF selling dollars year on year. Jefferies similarly flags SWFs as a major contributor alongside pensions. The driver was strategic reweighting, not distress. Large SWFs in Asia and the Middle East decided to reduce private equity exposure, and given their scale, even modest allocation shifts produced sizeable secondary portfolios.

Endowments and foundations

This category doubled its selling volume according to Campbell Lutyens. Jefferies puts the category at 12 percent of LP-led volume. US tax policy uncertainty in 2025 was a trigger for several larger endowments, alongside a broader reassessment of private equity return expectations and liquidity profiles. Lazard and Coller both note this category as one of the faster-growing seller types.

Asset managers and fund of funds

Asset managers remained a meaningful seller category, driven by the winding down of legacy fund of funds vehicles. Campbell Lutyens notes a 25 percent increase in dollar volume from this group, as managers cleared out older vehicles skewed toward tail-end vintages. Jefferies puts asset managers at 22 percent of LP-led volume.

Family offices

Family offices expanded their participation. Campbell Lutyens records 8 percent of LP-led volume from this category, up from 3 percent in 2024. Jefferies puts them at 5 percent. Both agree the direction is up. These sellers tend to be less institutionalised in their secondary market approach, so their increased activity reflects the growing ease of transacting and the normalisation of the tool.

First-time vs repeat sellers

Jefferies reports that 40 percent of LP-led participants in 2025 were first-time sellers. Coller puts the repeat seller rate at 50 percent. Campbell Lutyens describes the broadening more qualitatively but draws the same conclusion. The two observations are consistent: the market is simultaneously attracting new participants and deepening engagement with existing ones.

Synthesis

The seller base in 2025 was more diverse than in any previous year. The growth came not from one LP type but from several simultaneously, each driven by its own motivation. SWFs were doing strategic reweighting. Endowments were managing liquidity and tax concerns. Asset managers were winding down legacy vehicles. Family offices were using the market for the first time. This breadth is structurally significant because it means LP-led supply is no longer driven by a single trigger, making it more durable.

Strategy of funds sold

Buyout funds dominated LP-led volume in 2025, accounting for roughly 70 to 71 percent of total value across all four sources. Within buyout, there was a shift toward mid-market and small-cap, which Campbell Lutyens attributes to increased buyer coverage of those segments. Jefferies confirms the buyout dominance.

Venture and growth equity doubled in dollar terms from 2024 to 2025, reaching around $12 billion according to Campbell Lutyens. Better pricing dynamics, particularly for well-traded managers, made sellers more willing to transact. Jefferies puts venture at 12 percent of total LP-led volume.

Infrastructure and private credit each reached record LP-led volumes. Campbell Lutyens records $9 billion for infrastructure (up 77 percent) and $8 billion for private credit. The growth here reflects the maturation of specialist buyside strategies in these asset classes. Buyers who previously would not have known how to underwrite an infrastructure or credit portfolio now have dedicated teams, which clears the market more efficiently.

Vintage of funds sold

2025 saw a clear shift toward older fund vintages. Funds ten years or older accounted for 19 percent of LP-led volume, up from 14 percent in 2024, and represented a $12 billion increase in absolute dollar terms according to Campbell Lutyens. Jefferies confirms the average vintage of buyout funds sold moved backward by two years.

The cause is LP fatigue. Investors who expected exits from their 2014 to 2016 vintage funds by 2022 or 2023 are now in 2025 still holding these positions. The opportunity cost of holding tail assets with limited remaining upside has become too high. Campbell Lutyens puts it directly: LPs are fatigued waiting for exits and recognise the opportunity cost of holding tail assets.

The vintage shift also explains part of the pricing softening. Tail-end funds clear at wider discounts because there is less upside, less time, and more limited buyer familiarity with the underlying portfolio companies.

4. Target Returns Analysis

What buyers are targeting

Secondary buyers in the LP-led market are not all targeting the same return. The profile varies significantly by strategy, and the reports give a consistent picture of that dispersion even if the precise numbers differ by methodology.

For buyout funds, the consensus net IRR target sits in the 15 to 20 percent range, with most buyers clustering around 17.5 to 20 percent. Net multiple targets are typically 1.75 to 2.25x. Campbell Lutyens reports that buyout underwriting remained broadly consistent with 2024, with liquidity expected slightly earlier.

For credit funds, return targets are lower by design. Buyers are seeking 10 to 15 percent net IRR and 1.25 to 1.50x net multiples. The lower return expectations reflect the different risk profile: senior direct lending portfolios have less upside but considerably more downside protection. Campbell Lutyens notes that credit experienced some compression in return expectations in 2025 due to increased competition.

For venture and growth equity, targets are higher to compensate for binary outcomes and valuation uncertainty. Most buyers target 20 percent or above on an IRR basis, and 2.25x or above on a multiple basis. The improved pricing environment in 2025 required buyers to accept some compression, but the return expectations remain at the higher end of the LP-led spectrum.

Infrastructure buyers target the middle of the range, roughly 12.5 to 17.5 percent IRR and 1.50 to 1.75x net multiple, reflecting the long-duration, yield-oriented nature of the asset class.

Movement from 2024 to 2025

Campbell Lutyens tracks year-on-year changes in target returns and reports a nuanced pattern. IRR targets edged up slightly for most strategies, while multiple targets softened slightly. This reflects a shift in emphasis toward near-term liquidity. Buyers are placing more weight on getting capital back quickly and less weight on terminal multiple. It is consistent with the broader DPI focus across the market.

Energy was the outlier. Target returns in energy fell meaningfully (around 470 basis points on a multiple-adjusted basis) as improving macro conditions made energy assets less discounted and buyer confidence grew. The 2025 macro backdrop, including geopolitical energy security concerns and AI power demand, made energy a more mainstream LP-led category.

5. LP Pricing Trends

The quality premium

The single most consistent finding across all four reports is that quality commands a premium. Top-quartile large-cap and mid-market buyout funds continued to price at near par or at premium in 2025. First-lien credit portfolios cleared in the low 90s or at par. High-quality infrastructure transacted at single-digit discounts.

The average discount widened not because high quality got cheaper but because the mix of what was sold shifted toward lower-quality and older-vintage assets. If you strip out tail-end and distressed-adjacent portfolios, pricing for core buyout was broadly stable year on year.

Vintage sensitivity

Pricing in 2025 was steeply sensitive to fund age. Jefferies quantifies this directly: funds under five years old averaged 95 percent of NAV. Tail-end funds over ten years old averaged 73 percent. That is a 22-point spread based purely on age. The implication for sellers is that waiting costs money. An LP sitting on a 2014 vintage fund in 2025 is accepting a 27-cent-on-the-dollar haircut to exit. That is a deliberate choice, driven by the opportunity cost of holding and the desire to redeploy into newer vintages.

Geographic pricing

North American assets commanded the highest average pricing in 2025. Jefferies puts the average for North American LP portfolios at 88 percent of NAV. European assets averaged 86 percent. Asian assets averaged 56 percent, reflecting the geopolitical and macro uncertainty in the region.

The EMEA picture is worth noting specifically. Campbell Lutyens observes that fewer EMEA funds were sold in 2025, and attributes this to improved sentiment toward European PE. European valuations have been more conservative than US equivalents, and with rates coming down, LPs who held European positions saw improved perceived upside. Coller takes a different view, describing European LPs as increasingly proactive and willing to accept discounts. Lazard notes a modest decline in European GP-led volume alongside some geopolitical pressure. The disagreement is real. The most likely reconciliation is that some European LPs held on while others, particularly those with specific liquidity pressures, became more willing to transact at modest discounts.

Deferred payments

The use of deferred payment structures increased in 2025. Campbell Lutyens reports that 64 percent of buyers used deferred structures, up from 60 percent in 2024, and that the average deferral period extended from 8 to 10 months. Jefferies puts the prevalence at 23 percent of transactions, with deferral structures improving pricing by around 300 basis points for sellers. Lazard reports a similar trend, with longer payout periods and a greater proportion of consideration deferred.

The logic is straightforward. Sellers want higher optical pricing. Buyers are willing to pay it if some of the consideration is deferred, because the time value of money benefits the buyer. It is effectively a financing arrangement embedded in the transaction structure. The increase in its use reflects the market finding efficient ways to bridge bid-ask gaps without either side having to fully concede.

6. 2026 Market Sentiment and Outlook

Volume expectations

All four sources expect LP-led volumes to grow further in 2026. The specific numbers vary. Campbell Lutyens expects the overall secondary market to exceed $250 billion, with LP-led volume continuing to grow as a structural component. Jefferies sees line of sight to total market volume approaching $300 billion within 12 to 24 months, with H1 2026 alone expected to exceed $100 billion based on deal backlog. Lazard forecasts $275 billion for the overall market. Coller cites a backlog significantly higher than the prior year as supporting evidence for continued momentum.

What will drive LP supply in 2026

The DPI shortfall that drove sellers to market in 2025 has not been resolved. The M&A and IPO markets improved in 2025, but not to a level that fully addressed the backlog of unrealised assets sitting in PE funds from the 2015 to 2020 vintage years. Campbell Lutyens points out that M&A activity is projected to increase in 2026 but will still struggle to meet LP liquidity needs.

Jefferies makes a specific observation: of the roughly 12,000 US companies held in PE funds, around 8,000 are four years old or older. In 2024, only 1,500 exited. The gap between the stock of mature assets and the pace of exits is the structural driver of LP-led supply, and it is not going away quickly.

Mid-sized and smaller LPs are expected to become more active sellers in 2026. Campbell Lutyens describes this as growing sophistication, with smaller institutions adopting the same programmatic selling strategies previously seen only among large pension funds. Lazard makes the same observation.

Pricing in 2026

The consensus is that pricing will remain broadly stable. Campbell Lutyens reports that 70 percent of buyers expect LP-led pricing to be roughly unchanged in 2026. Jefferies puts it similarly. The macro environment, with stable public markets and gradually declining interest rates, is supportive. Sellers of quality assets will continue to find strong demand.

The caveat is the vintage mix. If LP-led supply in 2026 continues to skew toward older and more tail-end portfolios, average pricing will drift down further even if individual high-quality portfolios hold firm. The market is not getting cheaper at the top end. It is seeing more volume at the lower end, which pulls the average down.

The LP-led vs GP-led question

One genuine point of disagreement across the reports is whether LP-led will retain its majority share or whether GP-led will surpass it. Campbell Lutyens expects LP-led to stay ahead. Lazard predicts GP-led will surpass LP-led in 2026. Jefferies sits in the middle. Coller emphasises that GP-led is growing faster.

The resolution probably depends on how large GP-led transactions become. If sponsors continue to run $3 to $5 billion multi-asset continuation vehicles, GP-led volume can grow rapidly even if the number of transactions does not. LP-led volume is more diffuse, coming from thousands of sellers across the LP base. Both markets are growing. The share question is less important than recognising that supply on both sides is structurally supported.

Synthesis: What the Four Reports Add Up To

• Reading all four together, the picture that emerges for LP-led secondaries is coherent even where the numbers differ.

• LP-led is now a mainstream portfolio management tool. The destigmatisation is essentially complete. Half or more of sellers in 2025 had done it before. The market is no longer driven by distress or forced sales. It is driven by rational decisions about opportunity cost, overallocation and liquidity needs.

• Volume growth in 2025 was real and broad-based. It came from multiple seller types simultaneously, across multiple geographies and strategies. That breadth makes the growth durable rather than episodic.

• Pricing held up well at the quality end. The average softened because the mix of what was sold included more tail-end and older vintage assets. Buyers have not become less willing to pay for quality. They have become more selective about what they will pay full price for.

• The structural supply driver, which is the gap between the stock of mature PE assets and the pace of traditional exits, remains in place going into 2026. The M&A and IPO improvement in 2025 helped but did not close the gap. LP-led secondary volume will continue to grow as a consequence.

• The main uncertainty for 2026 is not on the supply side. It is on the demand side. Secondary fundraising needs to keep pace with rising supply. If it does, pricing holds. If it does not, discounts widen. Campbell Lutyens estimates $130 to $145 billion will be raised for secondaries in 2026. If that capital gets deployed, the market absorbs the supply and pricing remains broadly stable. That is the base case. It is also not guaranteed.

Sources: Campbell Lutyens Secondary Market Overview Report (FY 2025), Jefferies Global Secondary Market Review (January 2026), Lazard Secondary Market Report 2025 (February 2026), Coller Capital Secondaries: Capitalising on the Wave (December 2025). All data points cited in this piece are drawn directly from these four reports. Where sources disagree, both views are presented.