Alternative investments are becoming an increasingly central component of private portfolios. Not because they are “trendy,” but because they offer something that listed markets cannot: returns generated by the real economy and less dependence on daily volatility.
Chiara Chimenti, chief operating and strategy officer at Yeldo, is convinced of this. She explains how instruments such as private debt, private equity, infrastructure, and venture capital are taking on a complementary role to traditional asset classes, mainly thanks to the illiquidity premium and the possibility of better diversification.
Chimenti, in recent years there has been increasing talk of alternative investments, but what does this really mean and why is it so important for investors to include them in their portfolios today?
Alternatives are instruments outside the listed markets, such as private debt, private equity, infrastructure, or venture capital. These are instruments that generate returns from real economic activities, not from daily stock market volatility, and this is what makes them complementary to traditional asset classes.
Today, they are relevant both because they diversify better—reducing exposure to public market movements—but above all because they offer an illiquidity premium, as the return is linked to the nature of the underlying asset, not to daily volatility.
The right investor is not the “patient” one, but the one who accepts a non-deterministic horizon, i.e., durations that may extend beyond the initial forecast. And they seek returns anchored to the real economy, not market cycles.
The issue of returns should not be addressed in a generic way: returns on alternatives depend on the nature of the underlying asset. A senior loan secured by real estate, a development project, or a private equity transaction have completely different risk-return profiles. For each transaction, it is important to understand what generates that return.
One of the perceived barriers is the entry ticket. Is a lot of capital still needed to access these investments?
Much less than before. European regulatory developments—I am thinking of ELTIF 2.0—and digitalization have lowered the barriers to entry: today, you can enter professional transactions with tickets starting at €10,000–25,000. In the alternative real estate sector, investments are typically made in income-generating properties in resilient segments such as residential, multifamily, and logistics, or in real estate developments financed through structured debt—senior, whole-loan, mezzanine—a rapidly expanding segment in Europe, or even real asset infrastructure related to energy and digital infrastructure.
As for the “optimal” ticket, diversification is more important than the minimum threshold: 3–5 independent transactions are enough to build a balanced initial portfolio.
This is the logic behind the open-ended private credit fund accessible through our platform: a diversified solution, built according to institutional criteria, with a minimum ticket of €100,000 and expected double-digit returns.
High returns mean higher risk: in your opinion, what are the key risks for investors?
The issue of risk is central and must be addressed with a great deal of transparency.
In “alternative real estate,” there are three main risks:
- Credit or project risk: the possibility that timelines, costs, or sales will not go as planned. In debt, the key elements are LTV, collateral value, covenants, and asset quality.
- The solidity of the counterparty: this is probably the most important factor: track record, invested equity, governance, and ability to manage any delays.
- Illiquidity and non-deterministic horizon: these instruments cannot be liquidated on a daily basis and may take longer than expected. Investors need to be aware of this in advance and factor it into their liquidity planning.
The correct way to manage these risks is through the rigorous selection of counterparties and the diversification and understanding of the contractual mechanisms that protect investors.
What is the main knowledge gap among Italian investors in the use of structured instruments and private markets?
In Italy, there seems to be a familiarity gap. European data show that, despite very high levels of savings, only a minority of retail investors use structured financial instruments: the European Parliament points out that just over a quarter invest actively, while many maintain liquidity or traditional real estate. This does not reflect a lack of interest, but rather a historically cautious approach and little exposure to the world of private markets, which until recently was almost exclusively reserved for institutional investors.
To overcome this gap, we need operators who describe transactions realistically: explaining the structure, guarantees, and flows, and making investors aware.
In your view, why can private credit be the asset class that bridges the gap to a more modern and balanced portfolio?
I believe that alternatives have the potential to become a structural component of private portfolios in the coming years. This is because they respond to a real need: to find returns in instruments that are anchored to the economy and less impacted by short-term volatility.
In this process, technology will play an enabling role. We need technology that educates, simplifies access, and shows the progress of transactions in a transparent manner. Thanks to regulated platforms, clear reporting, and standardized processes, even those who are not large institutional investors can participate with confidence.
Among the asset classes, private credit(including real estate) is, in my opinion, the most suitable for bridging the gap: it combines structure, income, measurable risk, and consistency with the real economy. When used with discipline, it can lead investors toward a modern, balanced portfolio built for the long term.
