Creating liquidity in private markets is not about better tech like blockchain. The core challenge is one of market structure: finding a buyer when everyone wants to sell. Without a mechanism to provide a capital backstop during liquidity shocks, technology alone cannot create a functional secondary market.

The market's liquidity crisis is driven by a fundamental disagreement. Limited Partners (LPs) suspect that long-held assets are overvalued, while General Partners (GPs) refuse to sell at a discount, fearing it will damage their track record (IRR/MOIC) and future fundraising ability. This creates a deadlock.

Focusing on already-liquid stocks is often superior to buying illiquid but "transparently cheap" names. The fight for an illiquid company to gain market attention and liquidity is a significant, often underestimated, risk that can negate the perceived valuation advantage.

Historically, investors demanded an "illiquidity premium" to compensate for the bug of being unable to sell. Now, firms market illiquidity as a feature that enforces discipline. In markets, you pay for features and get paid for bugs, implying this shift will lead to lower future returns for private assets.

Rather than retreating from popular but crowded frontier market trades, bullish investors are expanding their search for alpha. They are moving further down the liquidity spectrum to find new, less-trafficked opportunities, signaling a deepening commitment to the asset class despite positioning concerns.

Institutional allocators are currently over-allocated to illiquid private assets due to the denominator effect. When distributions from these funds finally resume, the initial wave of capital will be used to rebalance portfolios back toward public markets, not immediately recycled into new private equity commitments, a trend private GPs may not see coming.

The primary concern for private markets isn't an imminent wave of defaults. Instead, it's the potential for a liquidity mismatch where capital calls force institutional investors to sell their more liquid public assets, creating a negative feedback loop and weakness in public credit markets.

Despite widespread complaints about a lack of liquidity, LPs in an a16z fund unanimously rejected the opportunity to sell shares in top portfolio companies like Stripe. This reveals that LPs want to ride their winners and only seek exits for their less promising investments, creating a fundamental market mismatch.

The primary risk in private markets isn't necessarily financial loss, but rather informational disadvantage ('opacity') and the inability to pivot quickly ('illiquidity'). In contrast, public markets' main risk is short-term price volatility that can impact performance metrics. This highlights that each market type requires a fundamentally different risk management approach.