← News·Markets · OutlookMarkets

Fund Investors Pivot to Debt-Like Deals as Buyout Downturn Bites

Backers of buyout funds struck $9bn in so-called alternative transactions in 2025, up sharply from $6bn the year before, as investors in private equity funds turned to debt-like structures to generate returns in a…

NM
NewsMV Markets Desk
3 min read
5 July 2026Markets desk
Share this dispatch

Backers of buyout funds struck $9bn in so-called alternative transactions in 2025, up sharply from $6bn the year before, as investors in private equity funds turned to debt-like structures to generate returns in a market where conventional exits have become harder to close. The shift marks a meaningful change in how fund investors are managing exposure — and in what they are willing to accept in place of the cash distributions they were once promised.

A Liquidity Workaround, Not a Recovery

Alternative transactions — structured as debt-like deals rather than straight equity sales — have become the instrument of necessity for investors who back buyout funds and need liquidity without waiting for portfolio companies to be sold or listed. The $3bn year-on-year increase signals that this is no longer a fringe tactic. When conventional routes for returning capital — trade sales, IPOs, secondary buyouts — are slow or closed, fund investors are negotiating workarounds that look more like credit than private equity.

The appeal is straightforward: a debt-like structure offers a defined return profile and priority in the capital stack, which matters more in a downturn when asset values are uncertain and exit timelines are unpredictable. The cost is giving up upside if and when conditions improve.

Who Bears the Risk

These arrangements carry a clear distributional logic. Fund managers who agree to debt-like terms are in effect paying a premium for time — borrowing against assets they expect will eventually recover. Investors who accept these structures get liquidity now but surrender participation in any subsequent rebound. That trade-off grows more expensive the longer the downturn persists.

For the broader private equity ecosystem, the $9bn total in 2025 also raises questions about how fund managers report performance and manage expectations with their own investors. Debt-like deals can obscure whether underlying portfolio companies are genuinely improving or whether managers are simply engineering cashflows to keep backers from exiting the fund entirely.

The Commercial Stakes

The jump from $6bn to $9bn in a single year suggests appetite for these structures is growing faster than the downturn is resolving. If exit markets do not reopen at scale, the alternative transaction market could expand further — pulling capital and negotiating leverage toward investors and away from managers. That would reshape fee dynamics, fund terms, and the economics of raising the next vintage. The debt-like deal is not a sign the market has adapted. It is a sign it is still waiting.

Categorymarkets

Filed via ft.com

Keep reading

More from the markets desk

Key takeaways

Frequently asked

What are alternative transactions in this context?

They are deals structured as debt-like arrangements rather than straight equity sales, used by investors in buyout funds to obtain liquidity without waiting for portfolio companies to be sold or listed.

How much did these deals grow in 2025?

They rose to $9bn in 2025 from $6bn the year before, a $3bn year-on-year increase.

Why are fund investors using debt-like structures now?

Conventional routes for returning capital—trade sales, IPOs, and secondary buyouts—are slow or closed, so investors negotiate debt-like workarounds to get liquidity in an uncertain, downturn market.

What is the downside for investors who accept these structures?

They gain liquidity now but surrender participation in any subsequent market rebound, a trade-off that grows more expensive the longer the downturn persists.

What broader concern do these deals raise?

They can obscure whether portfolio companies are genuinely improving or whether managers are engineering cashflows to keep backers from exiting, raising questions about performance reporting.