Blog

Consistent performance

Historically, secondary vintages have delivered higher median returns than other private-markets strategies, with significantly lower dispersion across funds’ net IRRs (Exhibit 3). 

Much of that stability stems from the very architecture of the asset class. Features such as accelerated distributions, informational advantages that tilt selection toward stronger assets and managers, as well as diversification across seasoned, partially de-risked holdings act as natural stabilisers. 

The rise of GP-led transactions

Within the secondaries market, GP-led transactions have expanded over recent years, growing from 24% of volumes in 2012 to nearly half today (Exhibit 4). Their rapid growth reflects strong buyer demand and their increased use by sponsors, with rising numbers of leading GPs bringing higher-quality assets to market. 

At a time when IPOs, strategic trade and sponsor-to-sponsor exits have become more constrained, GP-led deals are providing managers with valuable realisation optionality. 

However, their rapid adoption also points to a broader structural evolution, with GP-led deals now serving as a routine mechanism for extending ownership and optimising investment outcomes. These transactions allow GPs to realise further value creation potential by lengthening investment horizons of their best assets and avoiding selling to a competitor.

This shift has made single- and multi-asset transactions a defining feature of today’s opportunity set. Three-quarters of leading GPs have now completed deals, and transaction sizes are trending larger.² Continuation vehicles, in particular, have emerged as the structure of choice, offering sponsors flexibility to extend ownership of prized companies, rebalance portfolios and deliver interim liquidity to LPs. 

For investors, the transactions represent a compelling opportunity within the secondaries market, they provide investors with concentrated stakes in seasoned assets managed by top-tier sponsors. The growing interest in the market is therefore unsurprising. A recent survey indicates that investors now target higher returns from GP-led single-asset transactions (Exhibit 5), underscoring why these are among the most sought-after deals in the secondaries market. 

Conclusion

Secondaries have become a core component of a private-markets allocation, powered by structural demand and enabled by an innovative and dynamic marketplace more than two decades in the making.

Their enduring appeal lies not in cyclical dynamics, but in a durable set of advantages that continue to resonate with investors. This includes a unique combination of strategic flexibility, accelerated distributions, enhanced access and selectivity, consistent returns and the maturing GP-led market.

Record deployment testifies to their growing centrality. With investors requiring greater flexibility, liquidity visibility and diversification, secondaries are playing an increasingly integral role in modern portfolio strategies.

Important Notice to Recipients:

This confidential document (this “Confidential Document”) is being communicated to a limited number of sophisticated persons (each, a “Recipient”) by CVC, as defined below for information purposes only. THIS CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT IS NOT INTENDED TO FORM THE BASIS OF ANY INVESTMENT DECISION AND MAY NOT BE USED FOR AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER TO SELL, OR A SOLICITATION OF ANY OFFER TO SUBSCRIBE FOR OR PURCHASE ANY INTERESTS OR TO ENGAGE IN ANY OTHER TRANSACTION.

Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to be binding against, or to create any obligations or commitment on the part of, the addressee nor any of CVC Capital Partners plc, Clear Vision Capital Fund SICAV-FIS S.A, each of their respective successors or assigns and any form of entity which is controlled by, or under common control with CVC Capital Partners plc or Clear Vision Capital Fund SICAV-FIS S.A. (from time to time the “CVC Entities“ or “CVC” and each a “CVC Entity”). For the purpose of the foregoing definitions, control includes the power to (directly or indirectly and whether alone or with others) appoint or remove a majority of an entity’s directors or its general partner, manager, adviser, trustee, founder, guardian, beneficiary or other management officeholder) and controlled and controlling shall be interpreted accordingly. No CVC Entity undertakes to provide the addressee with access to any additional information or to update this Confidential Document or to correct any inaccuracies herein which may become apparent. This Confidential Document is not intended for distribution, and shall not be distributed, in any jurisdiction where such distribution would violate applicable securities laws.

Certain information contained herein (including certain forward-looking statements, financial, economic and market information) has been obtained from a number of published and non-published sources prepared by other parties and companies, which may not have been verified and in certain cases has not been updated through the date hereof. While such information from other parties and companies is believed to be reliable for the purpose used herein, no member of CVC, any of their respective affiliates or any of their respective directors, officers, employees, members, partners or shareholders assumes any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of such information. Certain economic, financial, market and other data and statistics produced by governmental agencies or other sources set forth herein or upon which the CVC’ analysis and decisions rely may prove inaccurate.

Nothing contained herein shall constitute any assurance, representation or warranty and no responsibility or liability is accepted by CVC or its affiliates as to the accuracy or completeness of any information supplied herein or any assumptions on which such information is based. Further, this Confidential Document reflects only the views of CVC with respect to private equity markets and other market participants may hold different views or opinions. Accordingly, each Recipient should conduct their own independent due diligence and not rely on any statement or opinion offered herein.

In addition, no responsibility or liability or duty of care is or will be accepted by CVC or its respective affiliates, advisers, directors, employees or agents for updating this Confidential Document (or any additional information), or providing any additional information to you.

Accordingly, to the fullest extent possible and subject to applicable law, none of CVC or its affiliates and their respective shareholders, advisers, agents, directors, officers, partners, members and employees shall be liable (save in the case of fraud) for any loss (whether direct, indirect or consequential), damage, cost or expense suffered or incurred by any person as a result of relying on any statement in, or omission from, this Confidential Document. 

1 Jefferies, Global Secondary Market Review, July 2025.
2 Jefferies, Global Secondary Market Review, July 2025.

This article first appeared on GuruFocus.

Wedbush recently published a short list of tech names it favors into year-end, spotlighting Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) and Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) as core holdings, according to a Tuesday note from the firm.

Analyst Dan Ives said the moves do not signal an AI bubble but reflect durable demand for chips, cloud services and security tools as firms scale AI. He pointed to continued capital spending and enterprise deployments as the backdrop for the call.

The research note names ten stocks investors should watch: Advanced Micro Devices (NASDAQ:AMD), Alphabet (GOOGL), Apple (AAPL), CrowdStrike (NASDAQ:CRWD), Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META), Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT), Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA), Palantir (NASDAQ:PLTR), Palo Alto Networks (NASDAQ:PANW) and Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA).

Wedbush said it expects resilient earnings momentum into next year but warned investors to weigh froth in certain segments.

The call reinforces the firm’s bullish stance on tech while acknowledging near-term volatility and valuation risks.

As detailed above, we found that Prosapip1 neuronal knockout mice have deficits in LTP in the dHP, and LTP is the hallmark of learning and memory (Bliss and Collingridge, 1993; Frey and Morris, 1998; Collingridge et al., 2004). We also found that global neuronal knockout and dHP-specific knockout of Prosapip1 results in deficits in spatial learning and memory. Specifically, we showed that Prosapip1 in the dHP is required for normal performance in the novel object recognition, novelty T-maze, 3-chamber social interaction, and Barnes maze tests, which all require a unique form of learning and memory (Davis et al., 1992; Broadbent et al., 2010; Barker and Warburton, 2011; Rosenfeld and Ferguson, 2014; Lueptow, 2017; Pitts, 2018; Sánchez-Rodríguez et al., 2022). The novel object recognition test is primarily examining recognition memory, and with an inter-trial interval of 24 hr, specifically long-term memory (Broadbent et al., 2010; Barker and Warburton, 2011; Antunes and Biala, 2012; Lueptow, 2017; Cinalli et al., 2020). The novelty T-maze focuses on both spatial learning and memory, and with its short, 1 min inter-trial interval, this procedure is examining spatial working memory (Sharma et al., 2010; d’d’Isa et al., 2021). The 3-chamber social interaction test is assessing baseline sociability and also social recognition memory (Meira et al., 2018; Tzakis and Holahan, 2019; Wang and Zhan, 2022; Cope et al., 2023; Wei et al., 2024). Finally, the Barnes maze tests both spatial learning and working memory in intra-day trials, while simultaneously testing long-term contextual and spatial memory in inter-day trials and the probe test (Bach et al., 1995; Sharma et al., 2010; Rosenfeld and Ferguson, 2014; Pitts, 2018). Interestingly, loss of hippocampal LTP has been shown to impair spatial, but not contextual memory in the Barnes maze (Bach et al., 1995). As presented here, Prosapip1 knockout mice significantly reduced distance traveled to exit but did not switch to spatial searching. In this example, Prosapip1 knockout mice are retaining the contextual understanding of escaping the platform but do not recall the spatial location of the exit. Additionally, the link between NMDAR function and learning and memory is well established (Newcomer et al., 2000; Li and Tsien, 2009). For example, blockage of hippocampal NMDA receptors impairs spatial learning in rats (Davis et al., 1992; Bye and McDonald, 2019). Prosapip1 is therefore likely controlling the reinforcement of learning and memory by PSD scaffolding, stabilization, and GluN2B synaptic localization, leading to LTP.

We observed that Prosapip1 knockout specifically in the dHP replicated the recognition, social, and spatial learning and memory deficits exhibited by the global neuronal knockout mice, suggesting that Prosapip1 is controlling these learning and memory processes specifically in the dHP. The dHP primarily controls memory formation and recall (Eichenbaum, 1997; Broadbent et al., 2004; Squire et al., 2004; Pilly and Grossberg, 2012). We found that LTP in the CA1 subregion of the dHP was reliant on Prosapip1. The CA1 subregion is critically involved in contextual memory, object recognition memory, and spatial memory (Tsien et al., 1996; Lee and Kesner, 2004; Daumas et al., 2005; Sanderson et al., 2009; Sharma et al., 2010; Stevenson et al., 2018; Bye and McDonald, 2019; Cinalli et al., 2020; Jeong and Singer, 2022). Loss of Prosapip1 in CA1 is likely leading to decreased performance in the novel object recognition, novelty T-maze, and Barnes maze tests. The lack of social recognition displayed by Prosapip1(fl/fl);Syn1-Cre(+) mice and AAV-Cre-infected mice is likely attributed to the loss of Prosapip1 in the CA2 subregion of the dHP, which is the primary subregion controlling social recognition memory (Meira et al., 2018; Tzakis and Holahan, 2019; Wang and Zhan, 2022; Cope et al., 2023; Wei et al., 2024). Specifically, silencing the CA2 subregion of the dHP impairs social memory formation and consolidation (Meira et al., 2018). However, the CA3 and DG subregions of the dHP are also involved in spatial and contextual memory (Broadbent et al., 2004; Lee and Kesner, 2004; Daumas et al., 2005). As our conditional knockout strategy resulted in Prosapip1 deletion from the whole dHP, further studies are required to dissect the subregion specificity of the contribution of Prosapip1 to recognition, social, and spatial learning and memory processes.

Memory consists of three primary processes: encoding, consolidation, and retrieval (Straube, 2012). In this study, the defect in memory function is likely due to a failure to encode new information (Bye and McDonald, 2019) or consolidate this ‘short-term’ into ‘long-term’ memory (Yang et al., 2022). The spatial T-maze experiment utilized a short inter-trial interval of 1 min, which requires working spatial memory (Sharma et al., 2010), and Prosapip1 knockout mice exhibited a failure to encode new information. Similarly, the Barnes maze training trials were separated by an inter-trial interval of 30 min, but Prosapip1 knockout mice did not acquire spatial memory between training trials, nor during the longer consolidation periods between days, again implying a failure to encode spatial information or consolidate this information. The lack of synaptic localization of GluN2B is likely underlying the loss of memory encoding or consolidation (Nachtigall et al., 2024). It is unlikely that NMDAR dysfunction is affecting the retrieval of memory, as studies have exhibited rats’ ability to use previously acquired spatial information during NMDAR blockage (Bast et al., 2005; Mackes and Willner, 2006; Bye and McDonald, 2019).

Prosapip1 belongs to the Fezzin family of proteins (Wendholt et al., 2006). It is important to note that other Fezzins do not compensate for the loss of Prosapip1 in the dHP. Knockout of other Fezzins, like PSD-Zip70, also leads to cognitive deficits (Mayanagi et al., 2015). However, these deficits were attributed to the action of PSD-Zip70 in the PFC. Therefore, one could hypothesize that proteins in this family enact their function in specific brain subregions.

In summary, Prosapip1 in the dorsal hippocampus is integral to the synaptic localization of SPAR, PSD-95, and GluN2B, which are required for the formation of LTP and subsequent spatial learning and memory behavior. Abnormalities with PSD proteins are associated with neuropsychiatric disorders (Kaizuka and Takumi, 2018), and further unraveling of the physiological role of Prosapip1 may unlock insights into normal and abnormal mechanisms of learning and memory.