Setter Volume Report — global secondary market volume, 2013–2026

Setter's semi-annual survey of the global secondary market — every edition since 2013.

Total Volume

Total volume

Total secondary-market volume

Total secondary-market volume over time. Switch between a semiannual (H1 → H2) and a full-year view, and add or remove volume types. Figures are conservative: they exclude 2,000+ opportunistic and non-traditional buyers, the venture-backed secondary market, and sovereign funds such as ADIA, GIC and Temasek.

Showing 2013–2026

Volume over time · 2013–2026

PeriodH1 / H22013–2026
05010015020132015201720192021202320252026USD billionsHalf-year period
Volume over time · 2013–2026 — USD billions by period
Half-year periodH1 2013H2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Total volume $15.00bn$21.00bn$22.00bn$27.30bn$20.60bn$29.00bn$18.60bn$23.55bn$29.10bn$31.64bn$36.70bn$43.00bn$46.00bn$39.41bn$20.21bn$41.55bn$54.91bn$88.50bn$57.84bn$43.67bn$45.09bn$61.24bn$67.71bn$85.60bn$102.23bn$101.53bn$107.74bn$47.43bn
LP-led (fund) $11.55bn$19.16bn$17.38bn$20.88bn$15.06bn$24.32bn$12.50bn$19.60bn$21.40bn$21.30bn$23.06bn$28.34bn$28.58bn$27.58bn$12.58bn$16.78bn$22.01bn$51.42bn$30.58bn$25.42bn$28.14bn$34.75bn$38.05bn$49.50bn$59.49bn$54.35bn$58.09bn$28.59bn
GP-led $3.45bn$1.84bn$4.62bn$6.42bn$5.54bn$4.68bn$6.10bn$4.00bn$7.70bn$10.33bn$13.64bn$14.62bn$17.43bn$11.82bn$7.65bn$24.75bn$32.91bn$37.07bn$27.26bn$18.25bn$16.95bn$26.49bn$29.66bn$36.10bn$42.74bn$47.19bn$49.65bn$18.85bn

Total volume by type, in six-month periods — H2 is derived as full-year less first-half. Some strategies were only broken out in later reports, so their lines begin when first tracked.

Analyst note · The long arc

Full-year secondary volume

Full-year volume compounded 16.7% a year from 2004 to 2025 — a 25× rise — dipping in only 4 years and never twice running. Even the steepest drop (-29.2% in 2022) fully recovered within two years.

Full-year secondary volume, 2004–2025

010020030020042007201020132016201920222025USD billionsYear
Full-year secondary volume, 2004–2025 — USD billions by period
Year2004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025Average
Full-year volume $8.00bn$9.00bn$12.00bn$14.00bn$14.00bn$10.00bn$15.00bn$23.00bn$25.00bn$36.00bn$49.30bn$49.60bn$42.15bn$60.74bn$79.70bn$85.41bn$61.76bn$143.41bn$101.51bn$106.33bn$153.31bn$203.76bn$59.23bn

Down years: 2009, 2016, 2020, 2022. Each drawdown was followed by a fresh high within two years — a remarkably resilient two-decade climb.

Full-year CAGR

16.7%

2004–2025

Total growth

25×

$203.76bn vs $8.00bn in 2004

Down years in the era

4 of 21

never two in a row

Steepest annual drop

-29.2%

FY 2022

Analyst note · Seasonality

H1 as a share of the full year

First-half volume has averaged just 45.2% of the full year across 12 years, so H2 is consistently the bigger half. On top of H1 2026's record $107.74bn, buyers forecast a $151.27bn second half — putting the full year near $259.01bn, a new high above 2025's $203.76bn record.

H1 as a share of the full year

PeriodH12014–2025
  • 2025 $102.23bn of $203.76bn50.2%
  • 2024 $67.71bn of $153.31bn44.2%
  • 2023 $45.09bn of $106.33bn42.4%
  • 2022 $57.84bn of $101.51bn57.0%
  • 2021 $54.91bn of $143.41bn38.3%
  • 2020 $20.21bn of $61.76bn32.7%
  • 2019 $46.00bn of $85.41bn53.9%
  • 2018 $36.70bn of $79.70bn46.0%
  • 2017 $29.10bn of $60.74bn47.9%
  • 2016 $18.60bn of $42.15bn44.1%
  • 2015 $20.60bn of $49.60bn41.5%
  • 2014 $22.00bn of $49.30bn44.6%

Only twice (2 of 12 years) was H1 heavy enough that the implied full year would miss 2025's record — in 10 of the last 12 years, this H1 would set a new high.

Implied full-year 2026

$259.01bn

$107.74bn H1 + $151.27bn H2 forecast

H2 2026 forecast

$151.27bn

buyers' projected second half

Avg. H1 share of the year

45.2%

2014–2025 — H2 is the bigger half

2025 full-year record

$203.76bn

the mark to beat

Assets Purchased

Across the years

Assets purchased

The shape of the market as a whole: which asset classes the volume went into, and how it divided between LP-led fund sales and GP-led deals. Private equity has led every year the report has run and still accounts for 84.6% of volume, though its share has slipped from its peak as newer strategies scale. Infrastructure secondaries are the fastest-growing corner of the market, followed by private credit; real estate, once a substantial share, has shrunk as core and value-add funds fell out of favour. On the second question, GP-led transactions have grown considerably faster than LP-led since the middle of the last decade, and buyers expect the split to reach parity within three years. The two halves of that split are then taken in turn by the sections that follow.

Dollar series are shown in six-month periods (H2 derived as full-year actual less first-half actual); share series are computed from those dollar amounts.

Asset-class share of volume

-500501002014201620182020202220242026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Asset-class share of volume — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Private equity 72.7%80.2%80.1%73.1%82.3%82.8%83.5%86.2%85.9%90.0%91.5%90.6%86.4%93.3%94.6%91.9%92.9%91.4%91.4%91.8%93.5%92.7%89.8%87.6%84.6%87.2%
Infrastructure 2.3%5.1%3.0%3.4%4.6%3.1%3.3%2.7%3.8%3.7%3.3%4.9%7.1%1.5%1.7%4.5%3.3%6.0%6.1%6.1%4.2%5.5%4.1%5.2%8.0%4.3%
Private credit ––––––––––––––––––––––3.7%4.6%4.8%4.4%
Real estate 13.6%13.9%14.1%21.7%9.7%12.7%11.0%10.1%8.6%6.3%4.2%4.5%4.4%4.5%3.4%3.1%3.2%2.6%2.1%2.0%2.2%1.5%2.2%2.4%2.5%6.7%
Hedge funds 10.0%1.1%2.3%1.2%2.2%0.8%1.7%0.8%1.4%-0.1%0.7%-0.1%0.7%0.7%0.3%0.2%0.4%-0.0%0.2%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%1.0%
Agriculture / Timber ––––1.2%0.5%0.4%0.5%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.3%0.1%0.2%0.3%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.3%

Each series begins in the first year that strategy was reported separately.

Analyst note · Asset rotation

Asset-class growth since 2016

Infrastructure H1 volume is up 10× since 2016 and 105.0% in the past year alone — the fastest-growing asset class — yet private equity still accounts for 84.6% of all H1 2026 volume.

10-year growth by asset class (H1 2016 → H1 2026)

  • Infrastructure 10.05x
  • Private equity 5.96x
  • Real estate 1.47x
  • Hedge funds 0.16x

Multiples of H1 volume over the decade. Infrastructure leads at 10×; hedge-fund secondaries are the only asset class to shrink.

Infrastructure, 2016 → 2026

10×

H1 volume, ~10× in a decade

Infrastructure last year

$8.64bn

+105.0% H1 2025 → H1 2026

PE share of H1 2026

84.6%

still the whole market

Infra share of H1 2026

8.0%

up from 4.6% in 2016

LP-led vs. GP-led secondaries

Analyst note · Market structure

GP-ledA secondary transaction initiated by a fund's general partner, commonly involving a continuation vehicle or tender offer.'s share of the LP/GP split peaked at ~60.0% in 2021 and sits at 46.1% today. GP-led volume is up 8.1× since 2016 versus 4.6× for LP-ledAn LP-led secondary: an existing fund investor (a limited partner) sells one or more fund interests to another investor. — the survey's expected 50/50 split is a return to 2021, not new ground.

LP-led vs GP-led volume

02040608020132015201720192021202320252026USD billionsHalf-year period
LP-led vs GP-led volume — USD billions by period
Half-year periodH1 2013H2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
LP-led (fund) $11.55bn$19.16bn$17.38bn$20.88bn$15.06bn$24.32bn$12.50bn$19.60bn$21.40bn$21.30bn$23.06bn$28.34bn$28.58bn$27.58bn$12.58bn$16.78bn$22.01bn$51.42bn$30.58bn$25.42bn$28.14bn$34.75bn$38.05bn$49.50bn$59.49bn$54.35bn$58.09bn$28.59bn
GP-led $3.45bn$1.84bn$4.62bn$6.42bn$5.54bn$4.68bn$6.10bn$4.00bn$7.70bn$10.33bn$13.64bn$14.62bn$17.43bn$11.82bn$7.65bn$24.75bn$32.91bn$37.07bn$27.26bn$18.25bn$16.95bn$26.49bn$29.66bn$36.10bn$42.74bn$47.19bn$49.65bn$18.85bn

GP-led has out-sold LP-led in only two half-years on record — H2 2020 and H1 2021 — and in a single full year, 2020. Either side of that stretch, fund secondaries stay ahead.

Peak GP-led share

60.0%

of the split, H1 2021

GP-led share now

46.1%

H1 2026

GP-led since 2016

8.1×

H1 volume growth

LP-led since 2016

4.6×

H1 volume growth

LP-led Secondaries

Across the years

LP-led secondaries

LP-led secondaries are the traditional side of the market: a limited partner sells its fund interests to another investor, usually as a portfolio rather than one line at a time. This section covers what sat inside those interests. Buyout funds dominate the private equity share, with venture, growth, private credit, fund-of-funds and energy interests making up the rest, and the credit line has grown steadily under its successive names as buyers added dedicated credit secondaries strategies. It also tracks how mature the interests were. The volume-weighted average age of the funds bought stands at 6.45 years, up across recent editions, reflecting tail-end fund sales and the general ageing of unrealised portfolios that drives LPs to sell in the first place.

Dollar series are shown in six-month periods (H2 derived as full-year actual less first-half actual).

Breakdown of LP-led fund secondaries

-2002040602014201620182020202220242026USD billionsHalf-year period
Breakdown of LP-led fund secondaries — USD billions by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Private equity $11.30bn$15.50bn$11.60bn$16.90bn$9.99bn$15.61bn$17.40bn$17.46bn$19.16bn$24.64bn$25.51bn$24.35bn$10.11bn$14.74bn$20.18bn$45.57bn$27.21bn$22.15bn$24.65bn$30.12bn$34.36bn$43.94bn$53.20bn$46.11bn$50.83bn$25.30bn
Infrastructure $500.00m$1.40bn$614.00m$990.00m$860.00m$740.00m$946.00m$840.00m$1.39bn$1.61bn$1.51bn$1.94bn$1.44bn$620.00m$910.00m$4.01bn$1.93bn$2.60bn$2.76bn$3.72bn$2.82bn$4.71bn$3.11bn$3.77bn$3.27bn$1.96bn
Private credit ––––––––––––––––––––––$2.11bn$3.40bn$2.71bn$2.74bn
Real estate $3.00bn$3.80bn$2.30bn$5.80bn$1.04bn$2.86bn$2.40bn$2.65bn$1.87bn$2.13bn$1.07bn$1.33bn$600.00m$1.10bn$680.00m$1.38bn$1.14bn$620.00m$590.00m$830.00m$780.00m$590.00m$884.00m$930.00m$1.12bn$1.66bn
Hedge funds $2.20bn$300.00m$471.60m$360.00m$410.00m$200.00m$490.00m$250.00m$520.00m$-60.00m$340.00m$-50.00m$150.00m$280.00m$150.00m$180.00m$220.00m$-20.00m$100.00m$20.00m$60.00m$140.00m$80.00m$110.00m$67.00m$278.74m
Agriculture / Timber ––––$224.00m$110.00m$113.00m$150.00m$120.00m$10.00m$160.00m$10.00m$270.00m$60.00m$85.00m$300.00m$76.00m$60.00m$50.00m$50.00m$30.00m$100.00m$100.00m$50.00m$86.00m$105.43m

From H1 2025 the report states private equity excluding credit and breaks private credit out as its own category, so the private equity line steps down at that boundary for a definitional reason rather than a market one. Read across it directionally.

Types of funds purchased

Private equity funds purchased

02040602014201620182020202220242026USD billionsHalf-year period
Private equity funds purchased — USD billions by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
LBO $8.30bn$13.90bn$9.50bn$14.90bn$7.80bn$12.40bn$13.50bn$14.01bn$15.40bn$17.80bn$19.18bn$18.12bn$8.62bn$10.59bn$14.52bn$35.11bn$19.43bn$19.59bn$20.57bn$24.06bn$28.53bn$37.27bn$48.52bn$39.63bn$46.04bn$20.69bn
VC $700.00m$600.00m$773.30m$930.00m$1.20bn$700.00m$1.70bn$1.38bn$1.40bn$3.70bn$2.12bn$2.63bn$670.00m$2.92bn$2.82bn$6.29bn$3.77bn$630.00m$1.06bn$3.76bn$2.66bn$2.90bn$2.84bn$4.62bn$3.26bn$2.24bn
Private Credit $400.00m$200.00m$662.30m$190.00m$557.00m$840.00m$649.00m$1.16bn$580.00m$920.00m$2.20bn$940.00m$401.00m$240.00m$1.06bn$1.49bn$1.05bn$2.28bn$2.04bn$1.45bn$1.97bn$2.28bn$2.11bn$3.40bn$2.71bn$1.27bn
Fund of Funds $300.00m$700.00m$289.20m$430.00m$161.00m$940.00m$627.00m$600.00m$960.00m$1.34bn$970.00m$1.93bn$360.00m$830.00m$1.59bn$2.58bn$2.81bn–$919.00m$750.00m$1.09bn$1.25bn$1.52bn$1.62bn$1.29bn$1.08bn
Energy $1.60bn$100.00m$349.70m$480.00m$335.00m$640.00m$882.00m$350.00m$810.00m$890.00m$1.04bn$730.00m$63.00m$160.00m$196.00m$100.00m$157.00m$20.00m$58.00m$100.00m$107.00m$260.00m$315.00m$240.00m$240.00m$408.91m

The credit line carries every name the report has given the category — Mezzanine / Credit, Mezzanine, Debt and now Private Credit — so it runs continuously across the series.

Real estate funds purchased

01232014201620182020202220242026USD billionsHalf-year period
Real estate funds purchased — USD billions by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Core $1.70bn$900.00m$481.70m$1.32bn$314.00m$640.00m$233.00m$400.00m$230.00m$270.00m$310.00m$90.00m$149.00m$940.00m$152.00m$380.00m$199.00m$680.00m$184.00m$200.00m$244.00m$220.00m$506.00m$540.00m$653.00m$477.43m
Value-Add $750.00m$1.65bn$709.70m$2.59bn$338.00m$1.46bn$936.00m$1.17bn$580.00m$620.00m$260.00m$590.00m$116.00m$40.00m$161.00m$280.00m$512.00m–$221.00m$230.00m$261.00m$200.00m$217.00m$180.00m$235.00m$596.11m
Opportunistic $633.00m$1.17bn$1.10bn$2.00bn$384.00m$720.00m$1.30bn$1.01bn$1.07bn$1.23bn$500.00m$650.00m$334.00m$130.00m$365.00m$730.00m$431.00m$80.00m$184.00m$400.00m$277.00m$170.00m$161.00m$200.00m$235.00m$618.56m

Maturity of funds purchased

Average age of funds purchased

024682020202120222023202420252026Average age (years)Half-year period
Average age of funds purchased — Average age (years) by period
Half-year periodH1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Average age of funds purchased 5.525.725.785.785.115.254.655.306.396.016.767.046.455.83

Volume-weighted average age of the fund interests bought, reported from H1 2020 on. Buyers moved toward older, more mature portfolios over this stretch — from about 5.5 years to a peak above 7 — as tail-end and continuation deals grew.

GP-led Secondaries

Across the years

GP-led secondaries

GP-led secondaries are initiated by a fund's general partner rather than by a selling LP, and they are the single biggest structural change the market has seen. This section covers how those deals were structured and what sat inside them: continuation vehicles, both single-asset and multi-asset, tender offers, fund restructurings and stapled deals. Fund restructurings, which today mostly means continuation funds, were 88.0% of GP-led deal types in the current edition, while tender offers and purchases of direct interests have faded from the much larger share they held before it. What sits inside these deals is overwhelmingly buyout, though infrastructure continuation vehicles have climbed steadily as infrastructure managers adopted the tool.

Both are survey observations, shown as reported, so the semiannual view uses each edition's own reading rather than deriving a second half.

Types of GP-led deals completed

0255075100201820192020202120222023202420252026Share of GP-led deals (%)Half-year period
Types of GP-led deals completed — Share of GP-led deals (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Fund restructurings 33.0%36.0%55.0%49.0%74.0%84.0%85.0%85.0%71.0%80.0%70.0%76.0%83.0%88.0%90.0%88.0%71.7%
Purchases of directs 11.0%12.0%23.0%17.0%8.0%6.0%2.0%9.0%4.0%5.0%4.0%3.0%1.0%2.0%1.0%2.0%6.9%
Tender offers 41.0%7.0%10.0%7.0%4.0%2.0%8.0%3.0%15.0%9.0%14.0%9.0%2.0%0.0%5.0%1.0%8.6%
Unfunded / dry powder 1.0%2.0%1.0%2.0%1.0%1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%1.6%
Other 14.0%43.0%12.0%25.0%13.0%7.0%5.0%3.0%10.0%3.0%9.0%10.0%12.0%8.0%3.0%8.0%11.6%

Reported from FY 2018 on. From 2025 the report retitles this question "Types of GP-led secondaries", but it is the same five categories.

Assets purchased in GP-led deals

02550751002015201720192021202320252026Share of GP-led volume (%)Half-year period
Assets purchased in GP-led deals — Share of GP-led volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
PE directs (to 2024) 90.0%87.0%91.1%89.9%92.6%90.7%93.0%95.2%95.6%96.2%96.8%96.4%96.4%97.4%97.3%97.8%98.2%97.6%97.8%–––94.6%
RE directs (to 2024) 10.0%13.0%8.9%10.1%7.4%9.3%7.0%4.8%4.4%3.8%3.2%3.6%3.6%2.6%2.7%2.2%1.8%2.4%2.2%–––5.4%
LBO –––––––––––––––––––74.0%76.8%67.4%72.7%
Growth –––––––––––––––––––8.3%7.2%4.7%6.7%
Venture –––––––––––––––––––4.5%2.2%6.1%4.3%
Other PE (non-debt) –––––––––––––––––––3.5%4.4%3.1%3.7%
Infrastructure (non-debt) –––––––––––––––––––2.6%3.0%10.8%5.5%
Infrastructure (credit) ––––––––––––––––––––0.1%0.1%0.1%
Real Estate (non-debt) –––––––––––––––––––3.1%3.2%3.1%3.1%
Credit –––––––––––––––––––3.9%3.0%4.8%3.9%

What sits inside GP-led — or, in the older wording, direct — purchases. Through FY 2024 the survey asked only for a private-equity / real-estate split; the fuller asset mix replaced it from H1 2025, so the two sets of lines stop and start at that change rather than joining. Real estate spans both: it fell from 10.0% to 2.2% across the earlier decade and has sat near 3% since. Buyouts dominate the newer mix at 67–77%, while infrastructure climbed from 2.6% to 10.8%.

GPs' Approach

Across the years

GPs' approach to the market

How buyers felt general partners behaved toward the secondary market compared with the year before: whether GPs pushed liquidations and restructurings, sought stapled commitments, or tightened transfer restrictions. Each of those shapes both the supply of deals and the risk of one falling over before it closes. The picture has normalised from its peak, when a clear majority of buyers reported GPs pushing more liquidations, and the share seeing tighter transfer restrictions has fallen well below where it stood at the end of the last decade, which is part of why GP-led volume has been able to scale the way it has.

Each is a separate survey question, shown as reported and never derived, and each line begins in the edition its question was first asked.

Liquidations & restructurings

02550751002015201720192021202320252026Share of respondents (%)Half-year period
Liquidations & restructurings — Share of respondents (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
More 44.6%59.0%49.3%54.7%44.3%56.0%53.4%62.0%57.1%58.0%72.5%56.1%46.5%65.9%18.6%36.0%29.5%31.2%24.7%29.5%32.0%28.0%15.5%44.5%
Similar 55.4%40.0%49.7%41.3%52.7%41.0%45.0%38.0%40.0%41.0%21.5%37.0%50.5%34.1%74.4%59.0%65.5%63.8%74.3%70.5%67.0%71.0%83.0%52.9%
Less 0.0%1.0%1.0%4.0%3.0%3.0%1.0%0.0%3.0%1.0%6.0%7.0%3.0%0.0%7.0%5.0%5.0%5.0%1.0%0.0%1.0%1.0%1.5%2.6%

Staples sought by GPs

02550751002015201720192021202320252026Share of respondents (%)Half-year period
Staples sought by GPs — Share of respondents (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
More 30.6%32.4%18.6%25.3%30.3%25.0%31.9%37.0%28.9%31.0%18.0%29.0%20.0%24.1%21.0%41.9%44.7%32.1%27.4%15.6%22.0%33.0%23.9%28.0%
Similar 64.4%65.0%78.4%70.7%65.7%70.0%63.0%63.0%71.1%65.0%62.0%61.5%75.4%70.9%68.6%53.1%50.3%58.9%67.6%81.9%74.0%62.0%72.1%66.7%
Less 5.0%3.0%3.0%4.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%0.0%0.0%4.0%20.0%9.0%4.0%5.0%10.4%5.0%5.0%9.0%5.0%2.5%4.0%5.0%4.0%5.3%

Restrictiveness on transfers

02550751002015201720192021202320252026Share of respondents (%)Half-year period
Restrictiveness on transfers — Share of respondents (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
More restrictive 8.0%24.0%16.0%18.0%20.0%17.0%12.0%15.0%21.0%29.0%16.0%7.0%6.0%11.0%3.0%5.0%11.0%9.0%5.0%9.0%7.0%9.0%8.8%12.5%
No change 86.0%67.0%74.0%74.0%72.0%68.0%77.0%76.0%68.0%57.0%79.0%88.0%89.0%86.0%89.0%87.0%80.0%81.0%90.0%87.0%90.0%88.0%85.3%79.9%
Less restrictive 6.0%9.0%10.0%8.0%8.0%15.0%11.0%9.0%11.0%14.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%3.0%8.0%8.0%9.0%10.0%5.0%4.0%3.0%3.0%5.9%7.6%

Geography

Across the years

Geography of assets purchased

Where the assets buyers purchased were based, across North America, Western Europe and Asia-Pacific. North America has been the largest market for the whole history of the report at 59.4% of the assets purchased in the current edition, and Western Europe the steady second, while the Asia-Pacific share has moved with sentiment toward the region rather than following a trend of its own. Global multi-region portfolios have grown at the margins as buyers increasingly purchase whole programmes rather than picking individual funds, which is also why a seller's own location and the location of the assets it is selling have drifted apart.

Dollar volumes are shown in six-month periods (H2 derived as full-year less H1); percentage shares are calculated from these dollar amounts.

Share of purchased volume by region

0204060802014201620182020202220242026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Share of purchased volume by region — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
North America 54.5%47.2%60.2%45.5%54.8%56.5%51.5%46.2%50.3%60.8%66.5%49.6%58.1%56.0%69.3%55.3%66.0%60.3%62.5%60.2%63.8%64.6%59.1%60.3%59.4%57.5%
Western Europe 31.5%45.7%25.2%37.9%25.8%37.8%26.5%26.0%31.0%23.3%20.9%39.4%30.7%28.4%19.5%26.1%19.2%30.2%27.8%25.4%23.3%26.9%25.7%27.2%26.5%28.3%
Global ––6.3%10.3%12.9%–10.0%9.2%9.3%7.9%4.9%–2.3%7.8%4.8%9.8%9.4%2.7%6.2%10.8%8.9%6.4%11.9%8.8%11.9%8.2%
Asia-Pacific 14.1%7.1%8.3%5.2%5.0%8.8%10.3%10.7%6.0%8.2%6.7%7.7%4.8%7.1%5.8%7.4%4.1%5.5%3.4%2.9%3.7%2.0%3.0%3.5%2.0%6.1%
Other ––––1.5%0.7%1.7%7.9%3.5%–1.0%3.5%4.1%0.7%0.6%1.4%1.2%1.2%0.0%0.7%0.3%0.1%0.4%0.2%0.2%1.5%

Buyers

Across the years

Buyers

Who buys, and how concentrated the buy side has become. Volume splits across dedicated secondary funds, funds of funds, pensions and hedge-fund secondary buyers, and separately across large, medium and small buyers by the amount each deploys in the period. Dedicated secondary funds now take 93.7% of volume, well up from their share when the survey began, as funds of funds, pensions and hedge-fund buyers all shrank in relative terms. Concentration inside that group has tightened too: the largest buyers account for a far greater share than large buyers did in the survey's early years. Evergreen and 40-Act vehicles aimed at private wealth have added a further pool of capital behind them.

Dollar volumes, transaction counts and average deal size are full-year figures — a buyer's tier depends on the period it is measured over, so halves cannot be derived from them; shares are each edition's own reported figure, first halves included.

Share of volume by buyer size

PeriodAs reported2013–2026
025507510020132015201720192021202320252026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Share of volume by buyer size — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Large 53.0%44.0%59.8%49.0%62.0%57.1%58.4%61.9%70.8%63.4%73.7%68.6%72.0%50.0%67.2%69.5%80.9%73.9%75.9%62.2%74.1%71.4%79.9%81.9%85.6%81.8%67.2%
Medium 41.0%38.0%34.9%35.2%33.6%31.7%37.1%25.6%26.1%28.6%23.9%24.3%26.1%38.1%29.8%25.1%18.0%21.8%22.2%31.6%24.1%24.7%19.0%15.3%13.6%15.9%27.1%
Small 6.0%18.0%5.3%15.8%4.4%11.1%4.5%12.5%3.1%8.0%2.4%7.1%1.9%11.9%3.0%5.4%1.2%4.3%1.9%6.2%1.8%3.9%1.1%2.8%0.8%2.4%5.6%

How concentrated buying is among the largest firms. Read the trend directionally: the size thresholds move between editions — H1 2026 counts a large buyer as $600m+, some earlier full-year editions used $1bn+ — and a buyer is sized by what it deployed over the period being measured, so the same firm can be small over six months and medium over twelve. Dollars, transactions and average deal size are shown for full years only.

Buyer-type mix

02550751002014201620182020202220242026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Buyer-type mix — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Secondary funds 71.0%78.6%80.2%79.1%82.2%82.7%78.6%81.4%82.4%84.0%87.4%86.8%79.4%82.7%85.1%87.8%84.2%85.8%91.1%93.6%92.7%93.0%93.6%94.3%93.7%85.3%
Funds of funds 18.0%12.8%14.8%12.8%13.1%13.1%10.9%8.4%10.8%9.0%10.1%10.3%16.0%14.3%11.5%9.7%12.9%10.8%5.3%3.6%3.9%3.3%3.5%2.9%3.0%9.8%
Pensions –1.0%1.5%3.8%0.9%1.5%8.0%7.4%4.8%6.0%0.7%1.5%1.5%0.8%1.5%1.2%1.4%–1.1%1.2%1.1%1.8%0.8%0.9%1.1%2.2%
Inv. consultants –3.2%0.8%1.0%2.0%1.3%1.0%0.6%0.5%1.0%0.7%0.8%0.6%0.9%1.0%0.8%0.8%2.0%1.2%0.9%1.3%1.3%1.3%1.1%1.1%1.1%
Hedge sec / FoFs 8.0%4.4%2.7%3.3%1.8%1.4%1.5%2.2%1.6%–1.1%0.6%2.5%1.2%0.9%0.4%0.7%1.4%0.8%0.6%1.0%0.6%0.7%0.8%1.1%1.7%

Dedicated secondary funds have consistently bought the large majority of volume, with funds of funds a distant second and every other buyer type in the low single digits.

Locations of buyers (head-office based)

02550751002014201620182020202220242026Share of buyers (%)Half-year period
Locations of buyers (head-office based) — Share of buyers (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
North America 57.0%49.2%59.1%61.1%60.0%63.5%69.2%65.6%62.8%65.0%58.3%63.3%63.3%68.6%67.5%67.9%77.3%69.6%67.8%72.2%75.0%71.9%70.6%72.2%72.9%66.0%
Europe 40.0%50.3%40.4%37.4%38.1%34.7%29.5%33.8%35.0%33.0%39.7%35.1%32.0%28.9%31.1%30.4%19.8%28.5%31.0%26.6%23.6%26.7%28.1%26.8%25.8%32.3%
Asia 3.0%0.5%0.5%1.5%1.7%1.6%0.8%0.5%1.8%2.0%2.0%1.6%3.0%1.3%1.4%1.7%2.9%1.9%1.2%1.3%1.4%1.4%1.2%0.9%1.0%1.5%

Where the buying firms are headquartered — distinct from the geography section above, which is where the purchased assets are.

Buyers' scope of interest

020406020132015201720192021202320252026Share of buyers (%)Half-year period
Buyers' scope of interest — Share of buyers (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Broadened focus 30.0%37.0%31.4%22.6%16.7%14.7%20.9%17.9%21.7%17.1%27.2%12.8%16.7%16.7%16.7%11.0%16.7%8.2%10.0%5.3%11.0%9.6%9.8%9.2%18.8%12.0%17.0%
Intend to broaden 24.0%36.0%38.1%21.6%29.4%14.7%36.9%35.8%33.8%35.1%25.6%28.9%25.3%22.5%30.8%21.1%25.3%13.7%20.0%21.6%27.8%25.7%27.2%24.3%28.0%32.4%27.1%

The share who broadened into other alternative strategies over the period reported, against the share who said they intended to over the next twelve months. The two together read as a follow-through check rather than as one measure.

About the buyer universe

These figures reflect Setter's dedicated, sophisticated buyer universe. The market estimate excludes more than 2,000 opportunistic and non-traditional buyers, the venture-backed secondary market, and certain sovereign-fund activity. This is a methodology choice, not a data gap.

Deal Activity

Across the years

Deal activity

Transaction counts and average secondary deal size across the reporting history. The count has grown far more slowly than dollar volume, which is the clearest single sign of how the market has scaled: the average deal is now several times the size it was when the survey began and averages $85.10m in the current edition, as large LP portfolio sales, multi-billion-dollar continuation vehicles and whole-programme disposals take a growing share of the dollars. It also tracks execution risk: how many buyers saw more of their deals collapse than in the period before, and the reasons the ones that broke did not close.

Counts are shown in six-month periods (H2 derived as full-year less first-half); average deal size is computed from the derived dollar volume and transaction count. The two execution-risk figures are survey readings, shown as reported.

Transactions completed

05001000150020132015201720192021202320252026TransactionsHalf-year period
Transactions completed — Transactions by period
Half-year periodH1 2013H2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Transactions 5607409173535865415235638745047468498957025438331,2151,1209899308668271,0681,1451,3299261,266830

Average deal size ($mm)

05010015020132015201720192021202320252026USD millionsHalf-year period
Average deal size ($mm) — USD millions by period
Half-year periodH1 2013H2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Average deal size $26.79m$28.38m$23.99m$77.34m$35.15m$53.60m$35.56m$41.83m$33.30m$62.78m$49.20m$50.65m$51.41m$56.13m$37.22m$49.88m$45.19m$79.02m$58.48m$46.96m$52.07m$74.05m$63.40m$74.76m$76.92m$109.64m$85.10m$54.77m

Deals that fell through vs the prior period

02550751002020202120222023202420252026Share of respondents (%)Half-year period
Deals that fell through vs the prior period — Share of respondents (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
More deals fell through 60.0%60.0%7.0%9.0%33.3%36.0%17.9%19.5%11.0%10.1%15.3%10.4%12.2%23.2%
Same 35.4%35.3%69.9%67.2%52.8%51.3%72.1%66.6%76.2%78.9%80.5%79.7%81.0%65.1%
Fewer deals fell through 4.6%4.7%23.1%23.8%13.9%12.7%10.0%13.9%12.8%11.0%4.2%9.9%6.8%11.6%

Whether buyers saw more or fewer of their deals collapse than in the period before. Asked from H1 2020 on, which is why the line opens at the pandemic peak: 60% reported more deals falling through. Outside that, the figure sits between 7% and 20%, with the 2022 rate shock the only later period to push back above 30%.

Why deals fell through

02550751002020202120222023202420252026Share of broken deals (%)Half-year period
Why deals fell through — Share of broken deals (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Seller decided not to sell 46.0%55.1%76.7%57.1%46.9%71.3%72.7%68.7%76.1%70.5%79.6%78.1%72.2%67.0%
ROFR / ROFO exercised 3.8%––3.5%2.0%1.9%–4.2%4.0%4.5%5.1%6.5%13.9%4.9%
Disagreement over PSA terms 1.9%–2.5%10.7%2.0%3.8%4.5%6.2%2.0%4.5%2.5%6.5%5.6%4.4%
Adverse economic / MAC clause 34.7%34.5%2.5%7.0%24.6%3.8%––2.0%–2.5%2.1%2.8%11.7%
Disagreement over NAV 3.8%1.6%–1.8%4.0%3.8%2.2%2.1%5.9%2.3%2.5%–2.8%3.0%
Adverse portfolio / manager issues 7.7%6.8%5.1%12.5%8.1%5.7%13.6%8.3%4.0%9.1%2.5%4.3%–7.3%
Adverse tax issues 1.9%–5.2%1.8%6.2%3.9%2.2%4.1%1.9%4.5%5.1%–2.8%3.6%
GP did not allow transfer –1.7%7.7%5.3%6.0%5.8%4.5%6.2%3.9%4.5%–2.1%–4.8%

Why the deals that broke did not close. A seller simply changing its mind is the leading reason in every edition, at 46–80% of failures. The 2020 halves are the exception: adverse economic conditions and MAC clauses accounted for about 35% of collapsed deals through the pandemic, and returned to 25% during the 2022 rate shock.

Sellers

Across the years

Sellers

Who sells fund interests, and from where. The mix has rotated with each cycle: banks and insurers led the early years under regulatory pressure, before pensions and then general partners took over as the largest sources of supply, with sovereign wealth funds, funds of funds, endowments and family offices behind them. Endowment selling in particular has run well above its long-run average in recent years. What drives the rotation stays consistent even as the sellers change, namely the denominator effect and a slower pace of distributions leaving holders over-allocated and short of the cash they need for new commitments. The section also tracks seller geography, which does not move in step with where the assets themselves are based.

Seller shares are survey readings plotted as reported, with each edition seated at the half it was asked in and nothing subtracted. The dollar view of seller location is the exception: those are volumes, so its second half is the full year less the first.

Seller-type

020406020132015201720192021202320252026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Seller-type — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2013H1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Pensions 36.8%24.6%28.4%18.7%33.8%34.5%37.3%15.4%21.2%23.2%29.0%18.2%22.7%33.2%26.7%11.3%22.2%32.3%27.6%36.6%36.3%33.1%29.9%25.8%29.8%25.1%27.4%
Other Fund GPs 5.6%11.4%10.7%20.8%13.7%17.0%11.9%17.6%22.4%31.2%17.0%27.8%24.5%27.0%27.3%40.8%38.3%32.8%30.1%25.7%16.6%17.4%28.2%27.9%24.2%27.5%22.9%
Banks 31.6%22.8%24.8%20.5%18.0%13.0%10.3%9.0%8.0%3.1%2.0%19.5%13.1%–4.6%6.7%4.8%2.8%6.8%9.5%10.5%4.0%5.8%1.0%6.1%2.4%10.4%
Insurance 2.5%4.5%2.0%3.3%5.1%1.0%0.5%3.0%2.6%12.6%15.0%10.3%8.5%4.7%3.4%6.4%7.3%2.7%9.0%8.5%17.6%13.7%13.5%6.7%3.9%3.0%6.6%
FoF / Secondary 5.7%11.4%4.3%12.0%5.9%11.0%19.7%16.0%16.0%11.5%16.0%7.7%13.0%7.5%10.4%9.7%8.0%5.7%5.7%4.2%4.0%12.0%7.8%7.9%9.1%13.0%9.8%
Sovereign Funds 4.6%2.4%11.9%1.3%5.7%1.0%0.6%13.0%12.6%5.4%5.0%3.8%4.2%6.7%8.6%11.6%3.7%4.5%4.7%1.6%2.3%1.0%1.2%7.9%8.1%13.0%5.6%
Endowments / Charities –8.4%7.3%12.0%6.1%4.0%5.8%14.1%8.1%3.1%5.0%5.2%4.6%3.4%6.5%5.7%5.2%7.9%5.7%4.6%5.0%9.0%4.6%12.0%8.1%11.0%6.9%
Family Offices 4.7%8.0%5.1%7.8%6.8%17.0%11.6%6.0%6.6%7.3%7.0%3.6%6.3%9.7%9.7%6.8%5.9%6.7%6.8%6.8%7.1%6.0%6.9%9.3%9.5%5.0%7.5%
Corporate 2.0%––2.0%3.9%1.0%2.1%3.0%2.1%2.5%–3.2%3.0%4.7%2.2%1.1%4.4%4.5%3.4%2.4%0.4%3.0%2.0%0.2%1.2%–2.5%
Hedge Funds 5.2%5.1%3.4%–––––––4.0%––1.7%–––––––––1.5%––3.5%

Who actually sold, as a share of sell-side volume. Each line begins the year that seller type was first broken out separately.

Seller location

02550751002014201620182020202220242026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Seller location — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
North America 46.0%45.2%54.2%50.3%55.7%62.6%44.8%51.7%60.9%60.0%57.4%55.4%59.6%62.0%62.3%72.3%78.3%62.5%65.3%60.5%67.4%67.3%61.5%56.1%59.7%59.2%
Western Europe 43.0%28.8%28.8%26.3%30.7%30.7%34.2%28.9%29.0%27.0%19.4%22.4%23.3%25.9%29.0%21.6%12.1%22.7%25.3%29.9%25.1%24.3%20.7%27.4%24.7%26.4%
Asia-Pacific 8.0%13.3%14.6%20.1%9.8%5.6%10.1%6.1%7.8%10.0%20.3%19.8%11.2%10.0%5.6%5.7%5.5%13.2%7.3%8.5%6.7%8.0%11.6%11.7%13.6%10.6%
Other 3.0%12.7%2.4%3.3%3.8%1.1%10.8%13.3%2.4%3.0%2.9%2.5%5.9%2.1%3.1%0.4%4.1%1.6%2.1%1.1%0.8%0.4%6.1%4.8%2.1%3.8%

Where the selling came from. Switch between each region's share of sell-side volume and the dollars behind it; the dollar view runs in six-month periods, with the second half taken as the full year less the first.

Pricing & Returns

Across the years

Pricing & Returns

What buyers paid and what they underwrote to. Pricing is reported as a share of net asset value, which is the number most sellers are watching: LP-led fund interests change hands at a discount to NAV, 89.1% of it in the current edition against 94.8% for GP-led deals, which price closer to par. The gap between the two has been reasonably stable. Price moves with the exit environment rather than with volume, so it recovered from the lows of the rate shock without returning to the peaks that preceded them. Alongside price, the section tracks the target IRRs and multiples buyers underwrite to, which have drifted down as the market matured and competition for assets increased.

These are survey observations, shown as reported (not derived).

Pricing

02550751002023202420252026Price (% of NAV)Half-year period
Pricing — Price (% of NAV) by period
Half-year periodH2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
LP-led fund sales 86.4%87.2%89.3%89.2%89.6%89.1%88.5%
GP-led secondaries 92.5%94.1%94.7%94.2%95.0%94.8%94.2%

Average purchase price as a percentage of net asset value, LP-led fund sales against GP-led deals. Reported from FY 2023 on. GP-led deals price consistently tighter — the gap has held near six points across every period — and both recovered steadily from the 2023 trough.

Targeted IRRs by strategy

010203020162017201820192020202120222023202420252026Targeted IRR (%)Half-year period
Targeted IRRs by strategy — Targeted IRR (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
LBO 13.7%13.7%14.4%13.4%14.5%15.1%14.8%14.7%14.3%14.7%15.3%15.1%16.1%16.4%16.8%16.3%16.2%16.5%16.7%17.0%15.3%
VC 17.8%17.2%19.3%17.4%18.9%19.4%19.5%19.0%17.9%19.3%20.2%20.2%20.9%20.9%20.4%20.4%20.8%19.9%20.8%21.7%19.6%
PE directs / GP-led 18.9%17.6%18.4%18.4%19.4%18.9%19.0%19.3%18.5%19.3%20.2%19.4%19.7%19.8%20.5%19.7%20.0%20.0%20.9%20.1%19.4%
Energy ––––––––––––––16.5%18.4%18.6%17.6%15.5%16.3%17.2%
Real estate 13.5%13.9%14.0%14.4%15.6%14.3%14.0%14.5%12.9%12.2%14.1%13.8%14.2%15.3%14.3%17.1%16.1%15.4%14.8%15.0%14.5%
Infrastructure 10.3%10.6%10.7%10.9%11.9%10.7%12.1%11.7%10.7%10.5%12.0%11.7%12.2%12.5%12.3%11.4%12.1%12.8%12.8%12.4%11.6%
Performing credit ––––––––––––––11.9%11.6%12.4%12.6%11.8%12.0%12.0%
Timber ––––––––––––––10.8%10.3%10.6%10.7%9.6%11.5%10.6%

Targeted multiples by strategy

012320162017201820192020202120222023202420252026Targeted multiple (x)Half-year period
Targeted multiples by strategy — Targeted multiple (x) by period
Half-year periodH2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
LBO 1.38x1.37x1.37x1.38x1.42x1.45x1.44x1.46x1.50x1.49x1.53x1.54x1.58x1.60x1.87x1.57x1.60x1.62x1.67x1.62x1.52x
VC 1.59x1.58x1.62x1.60x1.65x1.73x1.70x1.68x1.77x1.75x1.83x1.87x1.99x1.95x2.02x1.90x2.05x1.95x2.00x2.15x1.82x
PE directs / GP-led 1.74x1.67x1.72x1.71x1.77x1.76x1.76x1.78x1.81x1.92x1.96x1.98x1.93x1.96x1.96x1.97x1.97x2.02x2.05x2.02x1.87x
Energy ––––––––––––––1.86x1.80x1.75x1.89x1.74x1.69x1.79x
Real estate 1.41x1.49x1.43x1.39x1.53x1.49x1.42x1.41x1.46x1.45x1.50x1.50x1.53x1.58x1.56x1.56x1.55x1.58x1.52x1.61x1.50x
Infrastructure 1.39x1.37x1.36x1.41x1.46x1.41x1.44x1.38x1.40x1.43x1.46x1.45x1.48x1.55x1.50x1.50x1.48x1.53x1.47x1.61x1.45x
Performing credit ––––––––––––––1.42x1.39x1.37x1.44x1.38x1.37x1.39x
Timber ––––––––––––––1.53x1.42x1.41x1.50x1.44x1.45x1.46x

Expected gross multiple on completed deals

0.00.51.01.52.02014201620182020202220242026Gross multiple (x)Half-year period
Expected gross multiple on completed deals — Gross multiple (x) by period
Half-year periodH2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Expected gross multiple 1.43x1.43x1.41x1.39x1.38x1.36x1.41x1.40x1.44x1.42x1.44x1.49x1.58x1.52x1.54x1.52x1.55x1.59x1.60x1.63x1.58x1.57x1.57x1.59x1.49x

The expected gross multiple is the overall result buyers expect on deals completed that period — distinct from the targeted multiples by strategy above, which are underwriting hurdles for prospective purchases.

Structuring & Leverage

Across the years

Structuring & Leverage

How deals were put together rather than what they cost. When bid-ask spreads widen, buyers bridge the gap with deferred payment structures, paying part of the purchase price months after closing, and the share of deals done all-cash falls from the 73.6% of the current edition; when sellers have the stronger hand they push back the other way. The section also tracks how much leverage buyers brought to the market, both fund-level facilities and deal-level debt, which shapes what they can pay without lowering the return they underwrite to. Together the two say how much of a reported price is actually cash at closing.

Both are survey observations, shown as reported (not derived).

Payment terms

0255075100201820192020202120222023202420252026Share of volume (%)Half-year period
Payment terms — Share of volume (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
100% cash on closing 69.0%70.0%74.0%69.7%77.2%90.6%87.8%87.6%71.9%72.6%71.9%68.4%69.5%57.7%63.1%73.6%73.4%
Partially deferred 25.0%22.0%18.0%11.0%11.0%6.0%8.0%7.0%25.2%12.9%25.8%23.8%25.2%37.8%32.3%22.3%19.6%
Preferred equity 4.0%3.0%1.0%5.3%1.8%––1.7%1.3%1.2%1.5%2.0%2.2%1.9%–3.1%2.3%
Earn-out / upside 1.0%4.0%–––––3.0%0.9%–0.7%5.8%2.3%1.7%–1.0%2.3%
Other terms 1.0%1.0%7.0%14.0%10.0%3.4%4.2%0.7%0.7%13.4%0.1%–0.8%0.9%4.6%–4.4%

How the volume-weighted deal mix was paid for, reported from FY 2018 on. All-cash closings dominate throughout, peaking above 90% in 2021; deferred structures return whenever pricing is under pressure, reaching 38% in 2025.

Buyers reporting more leverage vs prior year

0204060802014201620182020202220242026Respondents (%)Half-year period
Buyers reporting more leverage vs prior year — Respondents (%) by period
Half-year periodH2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Felt leverage higher 67.0%43.9%55.0%15.3%27.3%29.5%37.7%15.3%29.2%17.1%25.6%6.2%9.6%14.7%13.0%3.1%5.5%1.4%2.7%5.8%11.7%5.8%12.2%8.8%19.3%

The share of respondents who said they used meaningfully more debt than in the prior year — a reading on appetite, not a measure of leverage levels in the market.

Intermediation & Competition

Across the years

Level of Intermediation and Competition

How much of the market runs through an advisor, measured as intermediated volume in both dollars and share, and how buyer competition in advisor-run processes has moved. The market has become steadily more intermediated as deals have grown, reaching 78.5% of volume in the current edition: larger portfolios, processes that require more consents and a broader field of buyers all make a competitive advisor-run process more valuable to a seller than a bilateral negotiation. Buyer competition is a separate survey reading, and the two move together only loosely, since a more intermediated market is not automatically a more crowded one for any given deal.

Dollar volume is semiannual (H2 derived); share is computed from the derived dollars; competition is a survey observation.

Intermediated volume

02550751002014201620182020202220242026USD billionsHalf-year period
Intermediated volume — USD billions by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Intermediated volume $12.00bn$16.10bn$13.50bn$17.90bn$10.50bn$16.50bn$17.40bn$19.59bn$23.71bn$27.29bn$34.71bn$25.35bn$14.23bn$26.33bn$38.99bn$75.19bn$42.25bn$29.34bn$33.98bn$46.16bn$50.04bn$58.27bn$75.40bn$84.25bn$84.59bn$35.74bn

Buyers reporting higher competition vs prior year

02040602014201620182020202220242026Respondents (%)First half
Buyers reporting higher competition vs prior year — Respondents (%) by period
First halfH2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Felt competition higher 50.0%33.3%26.9%21.8%17.4%31.0%24.0%21.3%12.5%6.4%5.7%1.4%9.5%37.0%22.4%1.3%5.1%17.1%13.4%28.0%34.1%14.5%25.0%10.0%19.5%

The share of buyers who said they faced more competition for deals than a year earlier. A read on how hard the market felt to win in, rather than a count of bidders.

Forecasts vs Realized

Across the years

Buyers' forecasts versus realized

Every first-half edition asks buyers how much volume they expect in the second half, and this section sets those forecasts against what the market actually delivered. It is a read on how far dry powder and a visible pipeline translate into completed deals, and the gap is widest when conditions change inside the forecast period itself. Buyers have tended to be directionally right and conservative in magnitude, which is worth carrying into the outlook section: their expectations have been a floor more often than a ceiling.

Buyers' H2 forecast vs the realized H2

05010015020020132015201720192021202320252026USD billionsYear
Buyers' H2 forecast vs the realized H2 — USD billions by period
Year20132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026Average
Predicted H2 (buyer forecast) $18.50bn$45.00bn$45.70bn$39.70bn$55.70bn$66.40bn$82.80bn$58.30bn$110.40bn$113.58bn$109.86bn$131.24bn$120.24bn$151.27bn$82.05bn
Actual H2 (realized) $21.00bn$27.30bn$29.00bn$23.55bn$31.64bn$43.00bn$39.41bn$41.55bn$88.50bn$43.67bn$61.24bn$85.60bn$101.53bn–$49.00bn

Each first-half edition forecasts the coming second half; the realized H2 is the full year less the first half. The latest H2 is still a forecast, so the actual line stops a year short. Buyers have forecast more second-half volume than the market delivered in every year but 2013 — the gap between the lines is how optimistic the survey has proved.

Outlook

Across the years

Outlook

How buyers expected each coming period to compare with the one before it, asked in every edition since the survey began. It is the report's forward view on secondary market volume, and the readings cluster rather than scatter: expectations of a decline are rare and appear around obvious stress points, while expectations of growth are the default. Read alongside the forecast accuracy section, which sets past expectations against what actually happened, it gives a sense of both what buyers think and how much weight to put on it.

A survey observation, shown as reported, never derived.

How buyers expected the next period to compare

02550751002014201620182020202220242026Share of respondents (%)Half-year period
How buyers expected the next period to compare — Share of respondents (%) by period
Half-year periodH1 2014H2 2014H1 2015H2 2015H1 2016H2 2016H1 2017H2 2017H1 2018H2 2018H1 2019H2 2019H1 2020H2 2020H1 2021H2 2021H1 2022H2 2022H1 2023H2 2023H1 2024H2 2024H1 2025H2 2025H1 2026Average
Higher 25.0%14.0%19.0%9.0%15.2%37.0%28.4%12.0%10.3%23.4%21.1%8.4%59.1%52.5%40.1%16.1%12.9%32.8%44.1%36.0%17.3%13.1%14.1%23.2%31.3%24.6%
Similar 67.0%78.0%67.0%72.0%78.4%61.0%58.2%70.0%83.7%51.7%47.7%83.8%34.7%46.9%58.2%77.8%58.5%67.0%54.3%63.7%82.6%86.9%83.1%76.8%68.4%67.1%
Lower 8.0%8.0%14.0%19.0%6.4%2.0%13.5%18.0%6.0%24.9%31.1%7.8%6.2%0.6%1.7%6.1%28.6%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.8%0.0%0.3%8.2%

Asked each edition about the period ahead — whether volume would be meaningfully higher, similar, or meaningfully lower. Read alongside "Buyers' forecasts versus realized" above, which shows how those expectations turned out.

Methodology

Methodology

How the Setter Volume Report is compiled

This report summarises the results of our semi-annual survey of the most active global buyers in the secondary market for alternative investments, conducted at the end of June 2026. Volume is defined as total exposure (NAV + unfunded, in USD) purchased in deals where a binding agreement was entered into during H1 2026.

H1 2026

We directly asked principals the same questions that buyers, sellers and secondary fund LPs often ask us: how many transactions were completed, how much across each strategy, and what returns and debt levels buyers expect.

We were pleased by the high response rate — 90 of the 144 most active and regular buyers agreed to share their confidential results, representing 78.6% of total market volume. We prorated the results by the proportion of small, medium and large buyers that participated to estimate the totals reported herein.

Topics covered in this report

  • Total Volume of Secondary Deals
  • Breakdown of Volume between LP-led and GP-led
  • Breakdown of Volume by Type of Assets Purchased
  • Breakdown of Volume by Geography of Assets Purchased
  • Maturity of Funds Purchased
  • Profile of Buyers
  • Number of Deals and Average Deal Size
  • Payment Terms
  • Execution Risk
  • Buyers' Scope of Interest
  • Buyers' Target Returns
  • Profile of Sellers
  • Percentage of Intermediated Deals
  • Predicted Secondary Deal Volume
  • Change in Level of Buyer Competition
  • Changes in Debt Levels
  • Pricing
  • Expected Hiring
  • Expected Returns of Secondary Purchases
  • Expected Distribution and NAV Changes
  • General Partners' Approach to the Secondary Market

About

About

About Setter Capital

The advisory firm behind the Volume Report, and the other research it publishes.

Established in 2006, Setter Capital is a leading independent advisory firm specialising in liquidity solutions for fund managers and institutional investors in the secondary market for alternative investments. To date, Setter has completed 2,000+ transactions, representing more than $40+ billion in liquidity.

The Setter Volume Report™

The semi-annual report that provides the most comprehensive and accurate assessments of the secondary market.

The Setter30™

The quarterly ranking of the most sought-after venture-backed companies in the global secondary market.

The Setter Liquidity Rating™

A rating system that lets buyers, sellers and creditors assess the relative liquidity of over 7,000 different fund families.

The Setter Liquidity Report™

A 17-page comprehensive review of an investor’s portfolio addressing all aspects of active portfolio management and construction.

Setter Capital Inc.+1 416 964 9555settercapital.com

Need pricing or liquidity insight on a specific portfolio?

Setter Capital advises buyers and sellers across the global secondary market.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Straight answers to the questions buyers, sellers, LPs and journalists ask most about the secondary market: how big it is, how fast it is growing, what share is GP-led, what discount to NAV fund interests trade at, who is buying and selling, how continuation vehicles are priced and governed, and how the numbers here are measured. Answers drawn from outside reporting carry their sources; the rest come from the survey data on this page. Definitions of the key terms, including GP-led secondary, continuation vehicle, tender offer and stapled transaction, are grouped at the end.

90 questions in 16 groups

Market Size & Growth

Secondary market volume reached $107.74 billion in the first half of 2026, up 5.4% on the $102.23 billion recorded in H1 2025. Private equity accounts for roughly 85% of that activity, with the balance in infrastructure, private credit, real estate and other alternatives. With buyers predicting a further $151.27 billion in the second half, the market is on track to approach $259 billion for the full year.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Total volume

First-half 2026 volume was $107.74 billion — a new H1 record. Survey respondents predict roughly $151.27 billion in the second half, which would put full-year 2026 near $259 billion. Because the second half of the year has historically seen larger transaction volumes, the full-year figure is predicted to be well above twice this H1 number.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Total volume

First-half 2025 volume was $102.23 billion, showing H1 2026 volume up 5.4% on a year-over-year basis.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Total volume

First-half volume has grown from about $18.6 billion in 2016 to $107.74 billion in 2026 — roughly a 5.8x increase over the decade. Growth has not been linear: volume fell sharply in H1 2020 during the COVID pandemic and again in H1 2023, amid higher interest rates, before recovering to successive records.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Total volume

Yes. H1 2026 was the largest first half on record at $107.74 billion, up 5.4% year-over-year, and buyers expect the second half to be larger still. The long-run trend remains firmly upward, driven in particular by the rise of GP-led transactions.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Total volume

Full-year volume has compounded at 16.7% a year since 2004 and roughly 14% a year since 2014, a 25× rise from $8 billion to $203.76 billion. First-half volume is up 5.8× over the last decade (H1 2016 $18.6 billion → H1 2026 $107.74 billion). Growth has come in waves: down years in 2009, 2016, 2020 and 2022 were each followed by a new record within two years. The faster-growing segments are GP-led deals (8.1× since 2016), infrastructure (10×) and private credit (up 35% year-on-year).

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Total volume

It is still small relative to the stock of private assets. Bain counts roughly 32,000 unsold PE-backed companies worth $3.8 trillion, and distributions ran at just 14% of NAV in 2025 — below 15% for a fourth straight year, levels last seen in 2008–09. Against that, about $204 billion of secondary volume in 2025 represents a low-single-digit turnover of private-market NAV each year, which is why most participants expect the market to keep growing: Coller has forecast $500 billion of annual volume by 2030, and Preqin and William Blair both project about $250 billion for 2026.

Sources: Bain Global PE Report 2026, Coller EQT, Preqin

GP-led vs LP-led Secondaries

An LP-led secondary involves an existing investor selling one or more fund interests to another investor. A GP-led secondary is initiated by a fund's general partner and includes structures such as continuation vehicles, tender offers and fund restructurings. The report tracks the two separately because the shift toward GP-led deals is the single biggest structural change in the market.

GP-led secondaries were 46.1% of total volume in H1 2026, up from 41.8% a year earlier. In dollar terms that is $49.65 billion of GP-led activity versus $58.09 billion of LP-led. Respondents expect the split to reach roughly 50/50 within three years.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

GP-led volume totalled $49.65 billion in H1 2026, up 16.2% year-over-year — far outpacing the LP-led side, which slipped 2.4%. Fund restructurings, including continuation vehicles, made up about 88% of GP-led deal types, with tender offers, purchases of directs and follow-on capital making up the remainder.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

GP-led secondaries have gone from a niche of roughly 15% of volume in 2013 to 46.1% today. This trend reflects how general partners now treat the secondary market as a core liquidity management tool rather than a last resort, and how secondaries buyers expect GP-led and LP-led volume to be about even within three years.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

Vista Equity Partners' $5.6 billion continuation fund for Cloud Software Group (Citrix/Tibco) in June 2025 is the largest reported; New Mountain's $3.1 billion single-asset vehicle for Real Chemistry (April 2025) and Inflexion's £2.3 billion multi-asset vehicle (Europe's largest, May 2025) follow. In private credit, Crescent Capital's $3.2 billion vehicle (January 2026, led by Pantheon) and TPG Twin Brook's $3 billion (August 2025, led by Coller) set records, and Cerberus's $2.3 billion SubCom vehicle (April 2026, CVC) is the largest in digital infrastructure. Nordic Capital's €2.5 billion Fund VII restructuring in 2018, led by Coller, is generally regarded as the deal that made continuation vehicles mainstream.

Sources: Private Equity Wire on Vista, Simpson Thacher on Real Chemistry, PitchBook on Inflexion, Crescent, TPG, CVC

Single-asset. Evercore counts $52 billion of single-asset continuation vehicles against $42 billion multi-asset in 2025, and single-asset deals were 53% of GP-led volume in H1 2026, up 88% year-on-year; Lazard puts the H1 2026 split at 54% single-asset, 30% multi-asset and 14% preferred equity and other structures. Single-asset deals concentrate risk in one company, so they are underwritten like a buyout: Setter's buyers target about 20.1% IRR and 2.0× on GP-led directs, against 17.0% and 1.6× on buyout fund interests.

Sources: Evercore 2025, Lazard interim 2026

Close to NAV, and sometimes above it. Setter's buyers reported paying an average 94.8% of NAV on GP-led deals in H1 2026, against 89.1% on LP-led fund sales — a gap of about six points that has held in every period since pricing was first tracked in 2023. Campbell Lutyens reports a 4.0% average GP-led discount in 2025 with 48% of deals at or above par; Lazard found 87% of single-asset deals in H1 2026 priced above 90% of NAV and 23% above par. The tighter pricing reflects that the buyer is choosing a specific asset and negotiating directly with the manager, with a fairness opinion and a competitive process behind the price.

Sources: Campbell Lutyens FY2025, Lazard interim 2026

Continuation vehicles are conflicted by design — the GP is on both sides — so process matters. ILPA's 2023 guidance asks for LPAC review with at least 10 business days' notice, a 30-day election window, no crystallisation of carry for rolling LPs, no increase in fees or carry, a competitive multi-bidder process and a fairness opinion; a June 2026 draft update adds independent price validation, anonymised bid summaries and a requirement that the GP show the vehicle beats the alternatives (sale, fund extension, NAV facility). The SEC's 2023 Private Fund Adviser Rules would have mandated fairness opinions for adviser-led secondaries, but the Fifth Circuit vacated them in June 2024; fairness opinions have nonetheless become standard practice.

Sources: ILPA, Mercer Capital on 2026 draft, Morrison Foerster on SEC rules

Mostly buyout funds. LBO fund interests were about $46 billion, or 42.7% of all H1 2026 volume, with venture, growth, private credit, fund-of-funds, real estate and energy interests making up the rest. Buyers have been buying older funds: the volume-weighted average age of funds purchased rose from 5.5 years in H1 2020 to a peak of 7.0 years in H2 2025. Sellers increasingly bring whole programmes rather than single funds — Jefferies counted 27 LP portfolio sales above $1 billion in 2025 and 15 in H1 2026 alone.

Sources: Jefferies H1 2026

CalPERS's $6 billion sale in 2022 (Jefferies advising; Lexington and CVC/Glendower among buyers) is generally cited as the largest; New York City's five pension systems closed a $5 billion-plus sale of 450 commitments across 125 funds in May 2025 (Evercore advising, Blackstone Strategic Partners buying); Kaiser Permanente sold about $5 billion in 2023 to Ardian, Blackstone and Apollo and shopped a further $3.5 billion in 2024; Norinchukin Bank sold a $5 billion largely unfunded portfolio in 2019. In 2025–26, Yale (up to $2.5 billion), Harvard (about $1 billion), CIC and GIC (about $1 billion each) and La Caisse ($1.5 billion, China-focused) have all run or launched sales.

Sources: Private Equity Wire on CalPERS, NYC Comptroller, Bloomberg on Kaiser, Private Equity Wire on Yale

A seller (usually with an adviser) assembles a portfolio, prepares a data room and runs a competitive auction, typically over eight to twelve weeks. Large portfolios are often sold "mosaic" style — split among several buyers, each bidding on the funds they price best — which lifts the blended price. Bids are expressed as a percentage of NAV at a reference date, and the buyer assumes unfunded commitments and interim cash flows. Closing requires GP consent to the transfer; existing LPs may hold rights of first refusal. In H1 2026 only 12.2% of buyers saw more deals fall through than the period before, and when deals break the leading reason (72%) is simply the seller deciding not to sell, with ROFRs exercised in 13.9% of failures.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

Pricing & Returns

In H1 2026, across different alternatives strategies, LP-led fund interests changed hands at an average of 89.1% of net asset value, while GP-led deals priced stronger at about 94.8% of NAV.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Pricing & returns

Target returns vary sharply by strategy. Buyers underwrite venture secondaries to the highest returns (about 21.7% IRR / 2.15x) followed by GP-led directs (20.1% / 2.02x) and LBO (17.0% / 1.62x), with infrastructure (12.4% / 1.61x) and performing credit (12.0% / 1.37x) underwritten to the lowest returns. Target returns have continually sunk lower as price competition has compelled buyers to price more aggressively.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Pricing & returns

As purchase price divided by the fund's reported NAV at a reference date (usually the most recent quarter-end), with the buyer also assuming the unfunded commitment. Because NAV moves between reference date and closing, distributions and capital calls in the interim are netted against the price. Deferred payment terms flatter the headline: Jefferies estimates deferrals lifted headline prices by about 400 basis points in 2024. Aggregate pricing is a market average and should not be applied to an individual fund interest, whose price depends on manager quality, fund age, sector and the level of unfunded commitments.

Sources: Jefferies Jan 2025

The 2008–09 crisis is the floor: Preqin's model pricing fell to about 51% of NAV for buyout and 53% for venture in March 2009. The 2020 pandemic froze deals rather than repricing them — H1 2020 volume fell to $20 billion and 60% of Setter's buyers saw more deals fall through. The 2022 rate shock cut LP pricing to about 81% of NAV (buyout 87%, venture 68%, per Jefferies) and volume by 29%.

Sources: Preqin 2009, Jefferies Jan 2024

Mostly cash. 73.6% of H1 2026 volume closed all-cash, 22.3% used a deferred payment (typically 12–24 months), and preferred equity and earn-outs were 1–3% each. Deferrals rise whenever bid-ask spreads widen — they reached 37.8% of volume in H1 2025 — and fall back when pricing is competitive; all-cash peaked above 90% in 2021. Campbell Lutyens found 64% of buyers used a deferral in 2025 with an average length of 10 months.

Sources: Campbell Lutyens FY2025

Buyers

Dedicated secondary funds dominate the buy-side, accounting for 93.7% of volume in H1 2026, with funds of funds a distant second at around 3%. Pensions, investment consultants and hedge fund buyers make up the small remainder.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Buyers

Very concentrated. The 35 largest buyers — each deploying $600 million or more in the first half — accounted for 81.8% of all volume, despite our buyer universe for this survey spanning well over 100 firms. Activity stayed concentrated at the top among the biggest, best-capitalised secondary funds despite an ever-widening field of participants.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Buyers

The buyers of large LP portfolios are the firms with the biggest flagship funds. Ardian's ASF IX ($30 billion, January 2025, the largest secondaries fund ever raised) buys portfolios averaging about $2 billion each; Lexington Capital Partners X ($22.7 billion) is built around "partnership portfolios from large-scale investors"; Blackstone Strategic Partners bought the $5 billion-plus New York City pension portfolio in 2025; Coller, HarbourVest, AlpInvest and Hamilton Lane round out the group. Mid-market and tail-end LP portfolios are bought by specialists such as Hollyport, Future Standard (Portfolio Advisors), Committed Advisors and Kline Hill.

Sources: Ardian, Lexington, NYC Comptroller

ICG Strategic Equity raised the largest fund dedicated to GP-led deals — Strategic Equity V at $11 billion (March 2025) — and invests only in single-asset continuation vehicles. Other dedicated GP-led pools include Blackstone Strategic Partners GP Solutions ($2.7bn), Morgan Stanley's Ashbridge II ($2.5bn, single-asset), Pantheon's PSOF II ($1.1bn) and Ardian's new single-asset CV strategy launched in November 2025, while Lexington is raising a $2 billion-plus continuation-fund vehicle alongside its next flagship. HarbourVest, Goldman Sachs Vintage, AlpInvest, Coller, StepStone and Partners Group all run their flagships with a roughly even LP-led/GP-led split. Only about 10% of buyers can write a $300 million-plus cheque for a single-asset deal, which is why large CVs are syndicated among several leads.

Sources: Secondaries Investor on ICG, Evercore 2025

Ardian ASF IX ($30bn, 2025); Lexington Capital Partners X ($22.7bn, 2024); Blackstone Strategic Partners IX ($22.2bn, 2023), with Strategic Partners X targeting $22.5bn and past $14bn by July 2026; Carlyle AlpInvest ASP VIII ($15bn fund, $20bn programme, 2025); HarbourVest Dover Street XI ($15.1bn, $18.5bn with overflow, 2024), with Dover Street XII targeting $20bn; Goldman Sachs Vintage IX ($14.2bn, 2023); Coller International Partners IX ($12.5bn fund, $17bn platform, 2026); ICG Strategic Equity V ($11bn, 2025); Partners Group's eighth programme (over $9bn, 2026). Lexington is reported to be seeking at least $25 billion for LCP XI, which would set a new record.

Sources: Blackstone SP X, AlpInvest, Coller, Bloomberg Law on Lexington

Roughly one year of volume. Evercore counted $215 billion of available capital at the end of 2025 and $194 billion at mid-2026, a capital overhang of about 1.0× annual volume — historically low, and the reason pricing has firmed. Jefferies counts more broadly: $327 billion of dedicated secondary capital and about $477 billion including non-dedicated LP capital and leverage. Setter's buyer survey points the same way: 32.4% of buyers intend to broaden into new strategies in the next twelve months, the highest reading since 2018, and only 10% felt competition for deals was higher than a year earlier.

Sources: Evercore H1 2026, Jefferies 2025

Overwhelmingly in North America and Europe. In H1 2026, 72.9% of the buyers in Setter's survey were headquartered in North America, 25.8% in Europe and about 1% in Asia — proportions that have barely moved in a decade (57/40/3 in 2014).

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Buyers

Sellers

Selling in H1 2026 was led by general partners (27.5% of H1 volume) and pensions (25.1% of H1 volume), followed by sovereign wealth funds and funds of funds / secondary funds (about 13% each), endowments and charities (11%), family offices (5%), insurers (3%) and banks (2.4%).

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Sellers

Investors typically sell to generate liquidity, rebalance or reduce exposure, exit non-core manager relationships, or manage over-commitment.

Buyers expect pensions to be the largest source of supply over the next six months at about 36.1% of projected H2 volume, ahead of general partners (24%), funds of funds / secondary funds (14%) and sovereign wealth funds (11%).

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Sellers

Both banks and insurers are expected to be more active sellers in H2 2026. Bank sellers made up only 2.4% of selling in H1 2026 but are forecast to rise to about 8% of H2 volume as balance-sheet and regulatory pressures push portfolios to market. Insurers were around 3% of current selling.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Sellers

Yes. Pensions are expected to be the largest sellers in H2 2026 at 36% of projected volume, according to Setter's buyers. Sovereign wealth funds were 13% of H1 2026 selling, matching the highest share in the survey's history, and Evercore puts them at 21% of LP-led sell-side volume in H1 2026, up from 12% in 2025; GIC and CIC have each run roughly $1 billion sales. Endowments and charities were 11% of selling, above their 7% long-run average, consistent with the widely reported 2025 sales by Yale and Harvard.

Sources: Evercore H1 2026, DealStreetAsia on GIC

North American sellers supplied 59.7% of H1 2026 volume, Western Europe 24.7% and Asia-Pacific 13.6% — the highest Asian share since 2019, driven by sovereign funds, Japanese banks and Chinese-exposure sales. La Caisse's $1.5 billion China-focused sale and CIC's roughly $1 billion US portfolio are the recent examples.

Sources: PE Insights on La Caisse

Outlook & Forecast

Buyers predict about $151.27 billion of volume in the second half of 2026 — 25.8% above the $120.24 billion they forecast for the second half a year ago — split roughly $81.55 billion LP-led and $69.71 billion GP-led. About 31.3% of respondents expect H2 to be higher than H1, with almost none expecting it to be lower.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Outlook

The survey points to roughly $151.27 billion in H2 2026, which would bring full-year volume close to $259 billion. Read that as an optimistic case rather than a base case: in twelve of the thirteen years on record, buyers forecast more second-half volume than the market went on to deliver, 2013 — the survey's first year — being the only exception. The gap has usually been wide, and widest when conditions turned during the year.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Outlook

Asset Mix

Private equity was about 85% of H1 2026 volume ($91.17 billion), followed by infrastructure at 8.0% ($8.64 billion), private credit at 4.8% ($5.14 billion) and real estate at 2.5% ($2.65 billion), with hedge funds and agriculture/timber making up a fraction of a percent. Private equity has led every year the report has run.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

Infrastructure is the fastest-growing corner of the market. Infrastructure secondaries volume more than doubled year-over-year, up 104.6% to $8.64 billion, far outpacing private equity secondaries, which was roughly flat year-over-year. At 8.0% of total H1 2026 volume it remains small in absolute terms, but alongside private credit it is one of the largest growing strategies in the private funds secondary market.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

Private credit secondaries rose 35.4% year-over-year to $5.14 billion in H1 2026, well ahead of private equity secondaries, which was roughly flat over the same period. At 4.8% of total volume private credit remains small in absolute terms, but alongside infrastructure it is one of the largest growing strategies in the private funds secondary market.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

Largely, yes. Buyout (LBO) funds were the single biggest slice of private-equity secondary purchases at about $46.04 billion, or 42.7% of H1 2026 volume, still well ahead of venture, private credit and fund-of-funds interests; however, the share of LBO funds has edged down over time as venture, credit and infrastructure secondaries have grown in volume.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Assets purchased

Infrastructure secondaries were $8.64 billion, or 8.0%, of H1 2026 volume in Setter's survey — up 105% year-on-year and 10× since 2016, the fastest growth of any asset class. Jefferies estimates about $20 billion for 2025 and forecasts $30 billion in 2026; Evercore counts $12 billion in H1 2026 with about $22 billion of dedicated dry powder. Dedicated funds include Blackstone Strategic Partners Infrastructure IV ($5.5 billion, the largest), Partners Group ($5.5 billion), Pantheon ($5.3 billion), Ares ($3.3 billion) and StepStone ($1.7 billion). Buyers target 12.4% IRRs, and infrastructure continuation vehicles have risen to 10.8% of GP-led volume.

Sources: Jefferies infra, Blackstone

Private credit secondaries were $5.14 billion (4.8%) of H1 2026 volume in Setter's count, up 35% year-on-year and first broken out in 2025. Evercore, which includes credit continuation vehicles, counts $20.4 billion in H1 2026 — already above its full-year 2025 total — of which $17 billion was GP-led, with GP-led credit pricing near 99% of fair value. Coller's $6.8 billion Credit Opportunities II (2025) and Ares' $4 billion Credit Secondaries Fund (2026) are the largest dedicated vehicles; Crescent's $3.2 billion and TPG Twin Brook's $3 billion continuation vehicles are the largest deals. Ares projects the segment exceeding $50 billion a year by 2030.

Sources: Evercore credit H1 2026, Coller, Ares

Real estate has gone the other way. It was 14–22% of Setter's volume in 2014–15 and is 2.5% ($2.65 billion) today, as core and value-add fund sales dried up and pricing widened — real estate fund interests traded at about 68–70% of NAV in 2025–26, the deepest discount of any strategy. Ares nonetheless counts a record $20.3 billion of real estate secondaries in 2025 on a broader definition, 72% of it GP-led recapitalisations, with fund distributions at a ten-year low of 7% of NAV. Goldman Sachs' Vintage Real Estate Partners III ($3.4 billion) is the largest dedicated fund.

Sources: Ares RE secondaries, Mingtiandi on Goldman

Setter excludes venture-backed direct secondaries from its market estimate, so the venture numbers come from elsewhere and vary with definition. PitchBook counts $106 billion of US VC secondary transaction value in 2025, dominated by company tender offers and SPV trades in a handful of names — the top 20 companies were 81% of value. Industry Ventures estimates the global venture secondary opportunity at more than $120 billion. Fund-level venture secondaries — the part that overlaps with Setter's survey — were $8 billion in 2025 per Evercore, with venture fund interests pricing around 78–79% of NAV.

Sources: PitchBook VC secondary, Industry Ventures, Evercore 2025

OpenAI completed a $7 billion employee tender in August 2026 at an $852 billion valuation, after a $6.6 billion tender at $500 billion in October 2025 that alone was about 6% of all US secondary value that year; Anthropic ran a tender of up to $6 billion at $350 billion in early 2026; SpaceX's December 2025 sale valued it at $800 billion, and Stripe's February 2026 tender at $159 billion. Nasdaq Private Market sizes the company-tender market at $35 billion for 2025 and Carta ran 396 tenders, up 62%.

Sources: TechCrunch on OpenAI, PitchBook on tenders, NPM 2026

StepStone's VC Secondaries Fund VI ($3.3 billion, 2024) is the largest dedicated fund; G Squared raised $2.3 billion in August 2026, Pinegrove Opportunity Partners $2.2 billion in January 2026 (the largest first-time venture secondaries fund, backed by Brookfield and Sequoia Heritage), and Industry Ventures — now owned by Goldman Sachs — runs more than $7 billion. Large generalist buyers such as Lexington and HarbourVest buy venture fund interests within LP portfolio sales; Yale's 2025 sale included venture stakes.

Sources: StepStone, AltAssets on G Squared, Pinegrove

Deals & Payment Terms

The average secondary transaction was about $85.1 million in H1 2026, up 10.6% year-over-year. Average deal size has risen over time as ever-larger portfolios and continuation vehicles have come to market.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Deal activity

Buyers completed about 1,266 transactions in H1 2026, down 4.7% from 1,329 a year earlier even as total volume rose, indicating continued growth in average deal size.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Deal activity

About 78.5% of H1 2026 volume — some $84.59 billion — ran through an intermediary or adviser rather than being transacted directly between buyer and seller. That share has risen over the life of the report, from around 57% in 2013, as portfolios coming to market have grown larger and more complex and as competition among buyers has made a broadly run process more valuable to sellers.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Deal activity

Most transactions are paid in full at closing, with 73.6% of H1 2026 volume closed in all cash deals. 22.3% used deferred payment structures — down sharply from 37.8% a year earlier — with the balance using preferred equity or upside-sharing arrangements.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Deal activity

Geography & Market Cycles

North American assets made up about 59.4% of purchased volume in H1 2026, with Western Europe the steady runner-up at 26.5% and global and Asia-Pacific assets filling the balance. On the buy-side, roughly 72.9% of buyers are headquartered in North America and 25.8% in Europe.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Geography

The pandemic caused the sharpest downturn in the report's history. First-half volume fell to about $20.21 billion in 2020, down from roughly $46.0 billion in H1 2019, as pricing uncertainty froze deal activity. The market rebounded strongly the following year and has since set repeated records.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Geography

The 2022–2023 rate shock briefly interrupted the market's growth. First-half volume dipped to about $45.09 billion in 2023 from $57.84 billion in H1 2022, and discounts to NAV widened as buyers repriced risk. Activity has since recovered to new highs as pricing improved and the secondary market has continued its secular growth.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Geography

Intermediaries & Advisers

Advisers (also called placement agents or private capital advisory groups) run the sale process for a seller or GP: valuing the portfolio, building the buyer list, running the data room and auction, negotiating price and terms, and managing transfer consents. For GP-led deals they also structure the vehicle and manage the LP election. 78.5% of H1 2026 volume — $84.59 billion — ran through an intermediary, up from about 55% in 2014; Evercore puts the intermediated share of LP-led volume at 88%.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Intermediation

The investment-bank groups with the largest teams are Evercore Private Capital Advisory, Jefferies Private Capital Advisory (which advised on $30 billion in H1 2026 and over $33 billion in 2024), PJT Park Hill, Lazard and Greenhill (now part of Mizuho), alongside Campbell Lutyens (which advised on $38 billion in 2025, including seven $1 billion-plus LP trades), William Blair ($17 billion in the twelve months to March 2026), UBS, Houlihan Lokey, Raymond James and Goldman Sachs. Setter Capital, founded in Toronto in 2006, is the largest independent specialist, with more than 2,000 transactions and $40 billion of liquidity advised since inception and a buyer network of 1,800-plus firms. Evercore, Jefferies, Lazard, Campbell Lutyens, Greenhill, William Blair and Setter each publish semi-annual market reviews.

Sources: Jefferies H1 2026, Campbell Lutyens FY2025, William Blair

Cyclically. The share of Setter's buyers who felt competition was higher than a year earlier spiked to 37% in H1 2021 and 34% in H2 2024, then fell to 10% in H1 2026 as record supply met a smaller capital overhang. Campbell Lutyens transacted with 51 different buyers in 2025, and evergreen vehicles — which paid about 90% of NAV for LP portfolios, roughly 330 basis points above the market — have become the marginal price-setter on plain-vanilla buyout portfolios.

Sources: Campbell Lutyens FY2025

Fundraising & the Wealth Channel

Secondaries Investor counted nearly $166 billion of final closes in 2025, a record and 48% above the previous high; PitchBook counted $120 billion and William Blair $95 billion on narrower definitions. Secondaries were 18% of all private capital raised in 2025, up from 7% in 2021. H1 2026 fundraising passed $50 billion, and Campbell Lutyens expects $130–145 billion for the full year with Evercore forecasting more than $200 billion.

Sources: Secondaries Investor, Secondaries Investor H1 2026, Ropes & Gray

Perpetual funds sold to wealthy individuals (in the US as registered tender-offer or interval funds; in Europe as ELTIFs and LTAFs) that invest largely in secondaries because seasoned, discounted fund interests provide immediate NAV, diversification and cash flow. The largest include StepStone Private Markets ($6.3 billion), Ares Private Markets Fund ($5.9 billion), Franklin Lexington's FLEX ($3.5 billion across US and international vehicles), Hamilton Lane Private Assets Fund, Carlyle AlpInvest's CAPM and Coller's C-SPEF ($1 billion). Typical terms are a 1.25–1.65% management fee and quarterly redemptions capped at 5% of NAV.

Sources: StepStone SPRIM, Ares APMF, Franklin Templeton, Coller C-SPEF

A lot, and quickly. Jefferies counts $113 billion raised by evergreen vehicles in 2025 with about 41% allocated to secondaries; Evercore estimates secondary managers control about $130 billion of evergreen AUM with 45% in secondaries, and that more than half of all secondary buyers now run an evergreen vehicle; 22% of Ardian's $30 billion ASF IX came from private wealth, double the previous fund. Torys projects secondaries-focused evergreen AUM of about $200 billion within five to ten years. Setter's buyer-type data still shows dedicated secondary funds at 93.7% of volume because most evergreen capital is deployed by those same managers.

Sources: Jefferies 2025, Evercore H1 2026, Torys

Increasingly. Executive Order 14330 (7 August 2025) directed the Department of Labor to rescind its 2021 caution on private equity in defined-contribution plans — which it did within a week — and to propose a fiduciary safe harbour, published on 31 March 2026 with a six-factor process test covering performance, fees, liquidity, valuation, benchmarking and complexity. More than 200 Empower plan sponsors have added private-markets sleeves through collective investment trusts run by Apollo, Franklin Templeton, Goldman Sachs, Neuberger Berman, Partners Group and others, and BlackRock plans private assets in its LifePath target-date funds in 2026. Secondaries are expected to be a major beneficiary because they provide seasoned, cash-flowing exposure that suits daily-valued products.

Sources: White House EO, Federal Register proposal, 401(k) Specialist

Increasingly, the large alternative-asset platforms. EQT completed its $3.2 billion acquisition of Coller Capital on 1 September 2026; Franklin Templeton bought Lexington in 2022; Carlyle owns AlpInvest, Ares owns Landmark, CVC owns Glendower, TPG owns NewQuest, PGIM owns Montana Capital Partners, Goldman Sachs bought Industry Ventures in October 2025 for $665 million plus earn-out, and TA Associates took a minority stake in Kline Hill in 2025. Independents include Ardian, Coller's peers Hollyport and Committed Advisors, Dawson Partners (formerly Whitehorse) and Kline Hill.

Sources: PE Hub on EQT/Coller, Fortune on Goldman/Industry Ventures

Other Liquidity Tools

A NAV loan is debt secured on a fund's portfolio, used by GPs to fund distributions, follow-ons or bridge to exits without selling assets; loan-to-value is usually 5–30%. 17Capital, the largest specialist, closed a record $7.5 billion NAV lending fund in March 2026 and projects about $150 billion of annual disbursements by 2030. ILPA's 2024 guidance asks GPs to seek LPAC consent for NAV facilities and for any NAV-funded distributions. Setter's data shows leverage appetite among secondary buyers themselves is low: only 8.8% reported using meaningfully more debt in H1 2026.

Sources: 17Capital, ILPA NAV guidance

A structured alternative to an outright sale: the investor buys a senior claim on a portfolio's cash flows (a preferred return and multiple) while the LP keeps the upside, avoiding a headline discount. Campbell Lutyens counts $11 billion of preferred equity in 2025, about 5% of the market, flat year-on-year as firmer pricing pushed sellers toward straight sales; Dawson Partners (formerly Whitehorse Liquidity Partners) is the largest specialist with a $7.7 billion sixth fund. Preferred equity was 3.1% of Setter's H1 2026 volume by payment structure.

Sources: Campbell Lutyens FY2025, Dawson

GP-stakes investors buy minority equity in the management company itself rather than in its funds. There were 164 GP-stake deals in 2025, up 40%, led by Blue Owl (whose latest fund reached $10.6 billion) and Goldman's Petershill; secondaries funds have begun buying GP stakes, and several secondary managers — Coller, Lexington, AlpInvest, Landmark, Glendower, Industry Ventures — have themselves been acquired by larger platforms.

Sources: Akin Gump, PEI on Blue Owl

Regulation

Fund interests are private securities, so transfers are governed by the fund's limited partnership agreement (GP consent, rights of first refusal, transfer restrictions) and by securities and tax law in the seller's and buyer's jurisdictions, rather than by a dedicated secondaries regime. The practical rulebooks are ILPA's continuation-fund and NAV-facility guidance, the SEC's Advisers Act anti-fraud provisions, Form PF's quarterly event reporting for adviser-led secondaries (which a 2026 SEC/CFTC proposal would remove) and, for retail vehicles, the Investment Company Act in the US and the ELTIF and LTAF regimes in Europe. In Setter's survey only 8.8% of buyers reported GPs becoming more restrictive on transfers in H1 2026, against 29% in 2019.

Sources: Mayer Brown 2026

Adopted in August 2023, the rules would have required a fairness or valuation opinion for every adviser-led secondary and disclosure of the adviser's relationship with the opinion provider. The Fifth Circuit vacated the entire rule package on 5 June 2024, holding the SEC had exceeded its authority. Fairness opinions from firms such as Houlihan Lokey and Kroll have nonetheless become standard practice on continuation vehicles, and ILPA's 2026 draft guidance goes further by calling for independent price validation.

Sources: Morrison Foerster

Since 2025 the SEC has moved toward wider access: staff guidance in August 2025 dropped the requirement that registered closed-end funds investing more than 15% in private funds sell only to accredited investors with $25,000 minimums; the 2025 executive order asks the SEC to revisit accredited-investor and qualified-purchaser definitions; and the Capital Group–KKR interval funds launched in 2026 without any accreditation requirement. Each of these widens the pool of capital that ultimately buys secondaries.

Sources: Ropes & Gray on ADI 2025-16, AltsWire on Capital Group/KKR

History

In 1979 Dayton Carr bought Thomas J. Watson Jr.'s venture partnership interests and in 1982 founded Venture Capital Fund of America, generally regarded as the first secondary fund. Pantheon (1988), Landmark (1989), Coller Capital (1990), Lexington (1994, spun out of Landmark), Partners Group (1996) and AXA Private Equity (1996, renamed Ardian in 2013) followed. Annual volume first passed $1 billion in 1997 and reached about $20 billion in 2008; Dow Jones Private Equity Analyst put 2004 volume at about $8.4 billion; Setter Capital, founded in 2006, began estimating market volume that year and launched its buyer survey in 2013.

Sources: Wikipedia: PE secondary market, Secondaries Investor on Carr

1982: first secondary fund (VCFA). 1998: Coller and Partners Group buy Shell's $265 million pension portfolio. 2002: Cogent Partners founded, the first dedicated secondary adviser (acquired by Greenhill in 2015). 2006: American Capital's ACE I strip sale, the prototype GP-led deal; Setter Capital founded. 2007: CalPERS' $2.1 billion auction, the first mega LP sale. 2008: 17Capital founded, the first NAV lender. 2008–10: bank sellers (ABN AMRO, Lloyds, Citi, Bank of America) under Volcker/Basel; pricing bottoms near 50% of NAV. 2012–15: first GP-led restructurings of tail-end funds. 2018: Nordic Capital's €2.5 billion continuation vehicle makes GP-leds mainstream. 2020: GP-led volume matches LP-led for the first time. 2021: first $100 billion-plus year ($143 billion in Setter's count). 2022: CalPERS' $6 billion sale. 2023: ILPA continuation-fund guidance; Blackstone's $22.2 billion Strategic Partners IX. 2025: Ardian's $30 billion ASF IX; $204 billion record volume; 401(k) executive order. 2026: EQT acquires Coller; H1 record $107.7 billion.

Sources: Kirkland on Nordic Capital, Capital Dynamics on GP-leds

It has fallen in four years since 2004 — 2009, 2016, 2020 and 2022 — and never two years running, recovering to a new high within two years each time. The pandemic was the sharpest shock in the survey's history: H1 2020 volume fell 56% to $20.21 billion and 60% of buyers saw more deals fall through, with adverse-economic and MAC clauses behind 35% of failures. The 2022 rate shock cut full-year volume 29% and widened discounts, but activity recovered to records by 2024. Each downturn has also brought a new class of seller — banks after 2008, over-allocated pensions and endowments after 2022.

Setter Capital Volume Report

Briefly, in 2020–21: GP-led was the larger side in H2 2020 and H1 2021 (peaking at about 60% of the split) and in full-year 2020, when the pandemic stalled LP sales while managers used continuation vehicles to hold assets. LP-led regained the lead in 2022 and has kept it in Setter's count — 54% in H1 2026 — though Evercore and Jefferies, which include credit and infrastructure vehicles, show GP-led back on top in H1 2026. Buyers expect a durable 50/50 split within three years.

Sources: Evercore H1 2026

Key Terms

A GP-led secondary is a transaction initiated by a fund's general partner rather than by a selling LP investor. It covers continuation vehicles, tender offers, fund restructurings and similar structures, and now represents about 46% of total secondary market deal volume.

Setter Capital Volume Report

A continuation fund — more precisely, a continuation vehicle transaction — is a GP-led secondary in which a manager moves one or more assets out of an existing fund into a new vehicle, giving current investors the choice to cash out or roll their existing interest into the new fund. Such vehicles let the general partner hold high-conviction assets for longer while offering liquidity to LPs, and these fund restructurings make up the large majority of GP-led volume in H1 2026.

Setter Capital Volume Report

In a traditional LP-led secondary deal, an existing limited partner sells its interest in one or more funds to another investor, typically to generate liquidity or rebalance a portfolio. LP-led secondaries remain slightly more than half of total secondary volume.

A stapled secondary transaction is one in which a secondary buyer commits fresh capital to a general partner's new fund alongside purchasing existing interests. Stapled secondary transactions are one way GPs use the secondary market to support fundraising.

A tender offer is a GP-led process in which the general partner offers all of a fund's investors the option to sell their interests to an incoming buyer at a set price, without restructuring the fund itself.

The umbrella term Setter has used since 2018 for GP-led deals that move assets from an old fund into a new vehicle — today almost always a continuation fund. Fund restructurings were 88% of GP-led deal types in H1 2026, up from 33% in 2018.

Setter Capital Volume Report

A provision in many LPAs giving the GP or existing LPs the right to match a third-party bid before a transfer is approved. ROFRs exercised were the reason 13.9% of broken deals failed in H1 2026, the highest on record, as insiders increasingly matched bids on sought-after funds.

Setter Capital Volume Report

Splitting a large LP portfolio among several buyers, each bidding on the funds it prices best, rather than selling to a single buyer. Kaiser Permanente's $5 billion sale in 2023 (Ardian, Blackstone, Apollo and one other) and Yale's 2025 sale were run this way; it typically lifts the blended price at the cost of more closings and consents.

Sources: Bloomberg on Kaiser

The sale of interests in funds well past their investment period — typically eight years or older — where the remaining NAV is small relative to the original commitment. Tail-end interests trade at the deepest discounts (Evercore cites about 70% of NAV since 2022; PitchBook 35–45% discounts for 8-plus-year-old stakes) and are the specialty of buyers such as Hollyport and Kline Hill. The average age of funds Setter's buyers purchased peaked at 7.0 years in H2 2025.

Sources: PitchBook

Distributions to paid-in capital — the cash a fund has returned relative to what LPs invested. When DPI stalls, LPs are left over-allocated and short of cash to fund new commitments, and they turn to the secondary market. Bain counts distributions at 14% of NAV in 2025, the fourth straight year below 15%, and PitchBook notes 2021-vintage funds had returned just 0.14× by year four. Setter's buyers expected distributions to improve by 3.2% and NAV by 3.0% over the coming period as of H1 2026 — positive but modest, the combination in which secondary volume sets records.

Sources: Bain 2026, PitchBook

A fund (LP) secondary transfers an interest in a fund; a direct secondary transfers shares in an underlying company — either a GP selling a portfolio of directs to a secondary buyer or, in venture, shareholders selling private company stock via tender offers and SPVs. Purchases of directs were 23% of GP-led deals in 2019 but 2% in H1 2026, and Setter excludes venture-backed direct secondaries from its market estimate altogether.

Setter Capital Volume Report

Setter measures volume as total exposure purchased — NAV at the reference date plus the unfunded commitment the buyer takes on — in deals with a binding agreement in the period. Cash paid at closing is smaller: it is the price (about 89% of NAV for LP-led deals in H1 2026) applied to the funded portion only, less any deferral. This is why volume and pricing cannot simply be multiplied, and why estimates that count only funded NAV or only closed deals come out lower.

Setter Capital Volume Report

About the Volume Report

The Setter Volume Report is a semi-annual survey of global private funds secondary market activity. The report tracks secondary transaction volumes, what types of assets are trading and in what volumes, what types of investors are buying and selling, buyers' pricing and return expectations, buyer predictions for secondary market volume in the coming six months and more.

The Setter Volume Report is one of the longest-running and most-cited published sources of secondary market volume data. The Setter Volume Report's consistent, survey-based methodology has now been refined for over a decade and is now in its 27th Edition. This interactive page presents the latest edition alongside historical trends, so you can look up a single period's figures or track a metric over time.

The report is based on our survey of the most active global secondary market buyers, who provide information about their completed activity, transaction characteristics and expectations. Our H1 2026 edition draws on 90 buyer respondents, representing an estimated 78.6% of total market volume. Because Setter asks a consistent set of questions each survey, the results can be compared across editions.

Setter Capital Volume Report · see Methodology

Volume is measured using the total underlying exposure associated with transactions entered into during the period — net asset value at the reference date plus the remaining unfunded commitment — not simply the cash paid at closing. This distinction of using total underlying exposure is one of the reasons that different providers' estimates can differ, and it matters when comparing volume with pricing or discounts to NAV.

Because each counts a different thing. Setter surveys 90–100 dedicated buyers and measures total exposure (NAV plus unfunded) in deals with a binding agreement in the period, and excludes 2,000+ opportunistic buyers, venture-backed direct secondaries and sovereign-fund purchases. Advisers such as Jefferies ($240bn for 2025), Lazard ($233bn), Evercore ($226bn), Campbell Lutyens ($225bn) and William Blair ($220bn) build estimates from their own deal flow and buyer surveys, some include preferred equity and NAV-based structures, and some record deals at closing rather than signing. The direction and the LP/GP split agree across every provider; the absolute level differs by 10–20%.

Sources: Lazard 2025, Campbell Lutyens FY2025, William Blair 2026

See the timeline of the secondary market, 1979 to today →

Source: Setter Capital Volume Report. Volume is defined as total exposure (NAV + unfunded, USD) in deals with a binding agreement entered into during the reporting period.

V4 preview — figures are transcribed from the published reports; the published PDF remains canonical.