AUS
NZ
UK
CA
USA
IND
Highlights
Apollo Global Management and UniSuper stress the need for transparency in private asset valuations
Industry representatives call for ASIC to define the purpose behind valuation disclosure
Discussions unfolded during ASIC’s symposium on public and private market practices
The private asset segment received renewed attention following remarks by Apollo Global Management and UniSuper at the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) Symposium. The discourse centered around the need for clearer guidelines on how private market valuations should be disclosed. Both institutions operate in sectors closely linked to long-term capital allocation and are significantly impacted by regulatory transparency.
Apollo Global Management (NYSE:APO), which holds a range of private market investments globally, and UniSuper, a prominent Australian superannuation fund, addressed concerns about inconsistent practices in valuation across asset types. The discussions come at a time when broader market participants, including those tracking benchmarks such as the ASX 200, are responding to increased regulatory engagement in non-public asset classes.
Call for Defined Valuation Purpose from ASIC
Matthew Michelini, Apollo’s head for Asia Pacific, emphasized the need for the corporate regulator to offer specific guidance on what it aims to achieve through increased transparency. Speaking at the ASIC-hosted event, he outlined the complexity inherent in valuing private assets, especially given their unique liquidity features and holding durations.
He noted that setting broad valuation principles would be helpful but urged that ASIC clarify the purpose behind the regulatory requirement. Without this clarity, market participants may find it difficult to align practices, particularly when balancing transparency with the practical realities of managing non-public investments.
Industry Alignment Expected with Structured Framework
Michelini noted that many industry leaders have already adopted disciplined valuation methods, and a structured regulatory framework would help standardize such practices across the board. By aligning expectations, other firms could reasonably adjust their own reporting structures.
He further elaborated that without understanding whether valuations are expected to be immediate or phased over time, it would be difficult to meet compliance expectations. His remarks resonated with attendees, many of whom manage diversified portfolios spanning both public and private assets.
UniSuper Echoes Concerns Over Regulatory Direction
Representatives from UniSuper also raised the need for a clearly articulated regulatory objective. The fund acknowledged the importance of transparency but emphasized that the framework must accommodate the practical dimensions of valuing illiquid assets. The current ambiguity, they said, poses operational challenges for institutions tasked with maintaining accurate valuations for reporting and compliance.
UniSuper, a key stakeholder in long-term retirement funding, has a vested interest in ensuring that valuation rules do not disrupt portfolio stability. The fund reiterated that a balanced approach would help safeguard institutional efficiency while enhancing market confidence.
Regulatory Expectations Weigh on Broader Market Sentiment
The debate around private market valuations has implications beyond asset management firms. Broader market indicators, including benchmark indexes such as the ASX 200, often react to regulatory signals and institutional policy shifts. Discussions from the ASIC symposium may influence how private assets are integrated into broader market strategies, particularly as institutional funds adjust to evolving compliance landscapes.
As regulators and institutions navigate these discussions, the focus remains on achieving greater clarity without constraining innovation or operational flexibility within the private asset domain.
