Alternative investments have moved well beyond the margins of wealth management portfolios. According to the fourth annual CAIS–Mercer Alternative Investment Survey, nine in 10 financial advisors currently allocate client assets to alternatives, 88% plan to increase those allocations over the next two years, and approximately half now allocate more than 10% of portfolios to the category. The survey included 789 professionals from independent RIAs, broker-dealer affiliates, family offices and other advisory firms.
Evergreen structures are playing an important role in that expansion. The survey found that 82% of advisors use evergreen funds, either exclusively or alongside traditional drawdown vehicles. Interval funds, tender-offer funds, nontraded REITs, nontraded BDCs and other continuously offered structures can make alternative strategies more accessible, but greater access does not eliminate their complexities. Advisors still must understand each investment’s valuation process, distribution policy, underlying holdings, fees and liquidity provisions—including the possibility that redemption requests may exceed the amount a fund is prepared or required to repurchase.
Separate research from Hamilton Lane reinforces the importance of education. Its 2026 Global Private Wealth Survey found that 86% of private wealth professionals intended to increase private-market allocations during the year. At the same time, 81% said client education significantly increases interest in private markets. As clients gain access to a wider range of products, education must extend beyond potential return and diversification benefits to include the differences between daily liquidity, periodic repurchase programs and investments that may require capital to remain committed for years.
For advisors, scaling alternatives responsibly therefore requires portfolio-level oversight rather than evaluating each fund in isolation. A client may own several products individually described as semi-liquid while still having limited liquidity at the total-portfolio level. Advisors may also need to monitor overlapping exposures to the same managers, borrowers, industries, geographic markets or underlying assets. Cash-flow needs, expected capital calls, distribution reliability and redemption timing should be considered across the client’s entire allocation.
The operational burden also grows as more products are added. Advisors need current information to track performance, net asset values, distributions, leverage, portfolio composition and material developments after the initial investment. Technology integration and standardized data are becoming increasingly important because due diligence does not end when a client subscribes. FINRA has emphasized that broker-dealers recommending private placements must conduct a reasonable investigation, independently evaluate material claims and maintain updated due-diligence files when recommending follow-on offerings. Those responsibilities remain relevant as the number and variety of alternative investments available through the independent wealth channel expand.
The industry’s central question is consequently changing. Advisors are no longer simply deciding whether alternatives belong in client portfolios. They are determining how to build, monitor and explain increasingly complex allocations without losing sight of liquidity, concentration and client suitability. Firms that develop consistent portfolio-construction standards, ongoing monitoring processes and clear educational materials will be better positioned to expand access while managing the responsibilities that come with it.
