As the pool of publicly traded companies continues to shrink, many investors are seeking diversification beyond traditional exchanges. Yet as private and public markets increasingly overlap, a key question emerges: do the advantages of alternative assets justify the accompanying risks?

This debate took center stage at CNBC’s 15th annual Delivering Alpha investor summit, where leaders from some of the world’s most influential investment firms shared their views on the evolving landscape. Among them were General Atlantic Chairman and CEO Bill Ford, Coatue Management founder Philippe Laffont, Ares Management co-founder and CEO Michael Arougheti, and JPMorgan Asset & Wealth Management CEO Mary Erdoes. Their insights offer a snapshot of how major industry players are thinking about public vs. private market opportunities, the future of the IPO process, and how retail investors should navigate alternative investments.

Where Investors Are Finding Opportunities in Public and Private Markets

Bill Ford emphasized that in the current era of rapid AI advancement, the most transformative innovation is still being led by large, publicly traded tech companies. For investors hoping to participate in private market opportunities, understanding what major public players such as Oracle, Google, and Microsoft are doing is essential. Even if a firm is not directly investing in public equities, he argued, staying fully informed about public tech strategies is crucial because those developments shape private market valuations and decisions.

Philippe Laffont, whose firm invests across the entire spectrum from early-stage startups to public companies, highlighted the different mindset required for each category. Public market investing, he explained, requires evaluating not only a company’s future but also determining whether its growth prospects have already been priced into the stock. Using Oracle’s rise from $50 to $350 per share as an example, Laffont noted that investors must constantly assess whether optimism has already been fully reflected in public valuation.

Private markets demand a different temperament. Investments take longer to mature, require more direct involvement with founders or executives, and depend on greater patience. While Laffont appreciates having access to both types of opportunities, he acknowledged that the skill sets are distinct enough that at times he wishes he could focus on just one.

Ford added that private markets offer something public markets increasingly struggle with: duration. With typical investment horizons stretching five to seven years or more, private investors can ride out cycles and focus on long-term growth without the short-term pressure that public markets often impose.

Is the IPO Market Broken — Or Ready for a Rebound?

One of the liveliest disagreements among the speakers concerned the state of today’s IPO market. Laffont argued that the traditional IPO process has deteriorated to the point of being “beyond repair.” In his view, the dramatic decline in the number of IPOs over the past few decades shows that the system no longer serves its intended purpose. Retail investors, he pointed out, are at a disadvantage because they cannot easily participate in companies’ early growth stages before they list publicly.

Laffont sees tokenization as a potential solution. As private assets become tokenized, they can trade more freely, effectively functioning like public securities. This could democratize access to private companies and reduce the structural barriers that keep many investors on the sidelines. He envisions a future in which most assets—public or private—become tradable in real time.

Ford, however, expressed more confidence in the possibility of an IPO recovery. He attributed the recent slowdown to what he described as an “exit recession” in private markets—driven partly by regulatory factors and partly by market conditions. According to Ford, 2025 showed early signs of renewed IPO momentum before the government shutdown stalled progress. Many strong companies were prepared to list in the fourth quarter, and he expects the pipeline to reopen in 2026. Public markets, he believes, still want high-quality new listings, even if private markets have grown more dominant.

Retail Investors and the Growing Accessibility of Alternatives

As alternative investments gain traction among individual investors, the question of due diligence has become increasingly important. Michael Arougheti stressed that expanding retail access must be grounded in fiduciary responsibility. Investors should fully understand the products they buy, but he argued that individual investors often receive less credit than they deserve for their financial sophistication.

Arougheti believes retail investors should not be excluded from institutional-grade products, provided the offerings are structured appropriately and supported by strong education for both advisors and clients. Properly incorporated into a diversified portfolio—such as a traditional 60/40 mix of stocks and bonds—alternative assets can improve long-term outcomes. As a result, he expects retail participation in alternatives to continue growing.

Mary Erdoes noted that regulatory changes under the current administration reflect this expanding interest. Policymakers are exploring ways to make alternative investments accessible through retirement plans and new investment vehicles designed for future generations. She pointed out that 99% of U.S. companies are not publicly traded, and limiting investors to public market opportunities deprives them of exposure to a vast segment of economic activity. Removing the “public markets premium,” she said, can unlock substantial value.

Erdoes argued that a portfolio limited exclusively to public markets is no longer appropriate for most investors—provided risk is managed effectively. Instead, investors should approach their portfolios as a spectrum from public to private assets, adjusting allocations based on liquidity needs, risk tolerance, and long-term goals.

Navigating Cycles and Volatility With Semi-Liquid Structures

Arougheti emphasized that one of the most significant advantages of alternative investments is the ability to hold assets through full economic cycles. Semi-liquid investment structures, he noted, allow investors to stay invested during periods of volatility rather than selling at inopportune times. Traditionally, retail investors have been taught to avoid leverage and stay liquid, but this often results in selling what is easiest to sell—rather than what is strategically best.

He believes newer structures help minimize this type of poor decision-making by giving investors clarity about liquidity constraints and the long-term value creation they can expect.

Erdoes added that evergreen funds, interval funds, and other long-duration vehicles allow investors to hold private assets indefinitely, avoiding forced exits when a fund reaches its maturity date. This is especially valuable when dealing with assets that are unlikely to go public but continue appreciating over time.

Together, these developments are encouraging more investors to incorporate alternatives into their portfolios in a way that is sustainable, well-sized, and aligned with long-term objectives. As Erdoes put it, the key is ensuring access to opportunities that investors can afford and understand.

A Turning Point for Alternative Investments

The conversations at Delivering Alpha highlight a broader shift in how investors—both institutional and retail—approach public and private markets. With fewer companies going public and new technologies enabling greater access to private assets, the traditional boundaries between markets are fading. While challenges remain—particularly around regulation, liquidity, and investor education—the momentum toward a more integrated investment landscape seems clear.

As alternatives move further into the mainstream, investors of all backgrounds will need to reassess how they balance risk, duration, and opportunity in a changing financial world.