Show V/O:
This is Alternative Allocations by Franklin Templeton, a monthly podcast where we share practical, relatable advice and discuss new investment ideas with leaders in the field. Please subscribe on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast to make sure you don't miss an episode. Here is your host, Tony Davidow.
Tony:
Welcome to this special episode of the Alternative Allocations podcast series. In this episode, we will discuss the 2026 private market outlook. To explore the challenges and opportunities, I'm joined today by Jeb Belford, CIO of Clarion Partners, Taylor Robinson, Partner and Portfolio Manager of Lexington Partners, and Anant Kumar, Director of Research at Benefit Street Partners. Welcome gentlemen.
Jeb:
Thank you very much.
Taylor:
Great to be here.
Tony:
As we look to 2026, we think there are three macro themes: broadening, steepening, and weakening. We'll touch on those in a little bit of detail here and in more detail in our private market outlook. But broadening is broadening the opportunities from an asset class perspective and across the globe.
Steepening reflects our views that the yield curve is likely going to steepen over time and weaken means we are concerned about the dollar continuing its path of weakening over time. To discuss the implications of our private market outlook, we'll get into the discussion here and I'll start by asking each of you to talk about where you see the best opportunities and why. And Jeb, I'll start with you if you don't mind.
Jeb:
Thanks Tony. Our big picture outlook for the commercial real estate sector at the moment is that we're at the beginning of a new cycle. In our view, there's a lot of evidence that supports that, values have come down, fundamentals in the real estate sector, by which I mean the operating fundamentals are generally strong.
Credit is widely available in our space. You can invest at what we think of as below the cost to replace the assets, which is usually a good time to invest in real estate. And the overall economic picture is generally constructive for real estate.
So all of these factors lead us to think that real estate is starting a new cycle and in new cycles, you start to see increasingly positive returns as we move into it.
Tony:
We'll delve into that a little bit. I know there are areas where we perceive headwinds and tailwinds, but that's kind of a great jumping off point. Taylor, secondaries have certainly been an area that's been getting an awful lot of focus over the last couple of years.
It's perhaps our highest conviction idea. How does secondaries look for you today?
Taylor:
Yeah, the amazing thing, Tony, is I don't think it's changed much since we talked about this topic last year. The issue remains in private equity, and when I talk about private equity, I'm also talking about growth capital and venture capital, really equity that sits within funds.
There's a tremendous need for liquidity for the original investors and the hold periods of private companies are extending. All of this is happening while the portfolio companies themselves are doing pretty well. So this tremendous amount of net asset value, which is the equity value of the companies that sit within these funds, is growing faster than the sources of liquidity.
So, we think we have this tremendous opportunity to provide liquidity to those original investors through different types of deals, either working with the seller, the original LP, the investor directly, or working with some of the private equity firms who control those assets to provide liquidity back to the market. So, we're just very excited about continuation of the theme that we had coming into 2025, and we really haven't seen that change materially.
Tony:
We'll talk a little bit about the difference between LP-led and GP-led, which is this new phenomenon, but we agree with you, the excitement in the space, the growth, the opportunities, and ultimately the benefit it provides to individual investors is really quite compelling. Anant, I want to switch gears with you because it's funny, everyone talks about private credit, and I think you and I've had several discussions over the last couple of months that a lot of people, as they talk about so much money going into private credit, what they're really focused on is direct lending. And direct lending is one of the major pillars, but not necessarily representative of the whole space.
So, as you look at private credit, and you have the vantage point of looking more globally, where do you see the best opportunities and why?
Anant:
Thanks, Tony. So I think when you think about private credit, as you mentioned, direct lending is the lion's share of what the asset class is represented by, but there's also asset-backed lending, which is a huge asset class. There's commercial real estate, which comes in the private credit world as well.
There's distressed and structured credit. So, there's many parts of private credit, but let me take them a little piece by piece. So, on the direct lending part, we're quite constructive on the space because we think the market's coming into balance, and that's the reason for optimism.
If you looked at the market about a year ago, there was too much demand and not enough supply. There was a lot of capital that's been raised, and the supply, which comes in the form of M&A deals, that had been slowed down to a crawl because the regulatory environment wasn't particularly accommodative. But in the last year, we've seen that the environment's become a lot more accommodative of M&A deals.
So we've seen a resurgence in deal-making activity, which is giving us more deals, more supply, so the market's coming into balance between lenders and borrowers. That's why we're constructive on the space. Now when it comes to asset-backed finance, that's just an incredible space to be in right now.
It encompasses so many different asset classes and verticals that we think there's incredible opportunity there. And the beauty of the asset-backed lending class is the diversification benefits it provides to a portfolio because it has amongst the lowest correlation with the other typical assets that an investor holds that we think it's an incredible portfolio add for almost all investors.
Tony:
Maybe if you could, just because we talk about it all the time, and I'm sometimes concerned that people hear the terminology, they don't quite know what it is. Just give a quick primer on what is asset-backed finance.
Anant:
Sure. So asset-backed finance, as the name suggests, is lending or finance against a specific set of assets, a specified pool of collateral. It has somewhat different cash flow characteristics than a traditional direct lending loan.
Typically, in an asset-backed loan, it's contractual cash flows that are more front-loaded, and it amortizes over time, as opposed to a traditional loan where you get interest payments and then you have a bullet maturity. Also, this is, as I mentioned, backed by specific assets. It could be equipment for a small business, it could be music royalties, there's a wide range of sort of esoteric assets.
Unlike traditional lending, where you're lending against the cash flows of the company, where you have liens on assets, but what's backing it is a cash flow, it's not a particular asset. So asset-backed lending is a very broad term. It can encompass assets ranging from, as I said, music royalties to commercial real estate to equipment loans to inventory financing.
It's very broad-based, and that's why it gives you that diversification benefit.
Tony:
Excellent. And I want to bring something back here, which is you talked about M&A activity. Taylor, you talked about M&A activity. I think coming into 2025, we thought the beginning of the year, we would start to see a pickup of exits in the form of M&A activity and IPOs.
It was a little slow in the beginning of the year, just with a lot of uncertainty, but the calendar started to pick up. And Taylor, I know I've asked you this question before, and I kind of know how you respond to it, but if the assumption is that the secondary market has benefited because of the lack of liquidity, does the exit pickup change your views on the opportunity set in any way?
Taylor:
Well, look, just to start, we have constructed over the years a massive portfolio of private equity, tens of billions of dollars. It certainly benefits that because the cash starts to come out of that portfolio we've built. I'd remind people that we have been executing the strategy for a very long time, and what we've observed in the market is there's always a seller of something for some reason.
It can be something as simple as a CIO change or a slight change in manager preference. We describe it as active management of private equity. And over the years, what has at its outset been a bit of a cottage industry is now a big part private equity of institutional portfolios, and so you see active management of that.
And the feature of today's secondary market is oftentimes a seller is selling just portions of their commitments to certain funds. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are severing ties with a specific set of private equity managers that they will not re-up. Oftentimes the use of proceeds in a transaction is to sell a portion of an older commitment that has done okay, and use those proceeds to re-up into the same fund manager, or the new fund, I should say, managed by the same sponsor.
Look, when liquidity comes back into the market, does it take a little bit of the pressure off some sellers? Potentially. But I just think we see a market that is growing so substantially.Pput some metrics around that as a market, we see probably north of two times the amount of deal flow every year as what ultimately trades in the market.
So it's just massively undercapitalized versus the need. And again, to the point I made earlier, that the issue is getting bigger, not smaller in terms of the need for liquidity. So yes, I think what you're saying is we're starting to see in our own portfolio, which is very broad, green shoots in terms of distribution activity and assets getting sold.
I think a portion of that is private equity sponsors need to realize that the... We're talking about the credit markets, right? They're wide open right now.
They are available. The IPO market is there. I think sponsors, in many cases, once they accept that the asset might be worth half a turn or a turn or a turn and a half of EBITDA lower than they'd hoped they'd get, there is a market for that.
So we're starting to see that. There's a little bit of a recognition that, okay, now the LPs are serious. They want their liquidity. They need it. That is the lifeblood of this asset class. Time to sell some stuff.
Tony:
And I think the bottom line is it's actually good for the overall ecosystem. As you point out, there is still going to be this supply demand imbalance for an extended period of time.
Taylor:
For sure. And it creates a rebuilding of inventory for all of us. We have always said a healthy secondary market creates a healthy primary market.
You can't have only one for a long period of time or only the other. You need both.
Tony:
And thank you for that. I did want to go back to, you started the discussion earlier on LP-led versus GP-led. And I think this year there's certainly some high-profile institutions who are looking for liquidity in the marketplace.
And I think it's easy for folks to understand the value and the attributes of an LP-led transaction. Maybe not as well understood is GP-led, which has definitely picked up quite a bit over the last couple of years. Maybe as you answer that, you could also think about where that might take us in 2026.
Do we still see the continuation of almost equal amounts of opportunities in LP-led and GP-led?
Taylor:
I mean, the short answer is I think so, yes. Our market in 2025 so far is about 45% GP-led, 55% LP-led. And just as a reminder for people, when we say LP-led, that is the limited partner, the LP, the pension fund, the endowment, the foundation, or an individual who has invested in this asset class selling to a buyer like us, that the deal is led by the LP.
The GP-led side is where a private equity firm on behalf of their LPs says, look, I have one asset that I really love, or two assets, or three or a strip of assets, where we think it makes sense to continue to own that, but we need to provide liquidity to the LPs. So what they do is they, let's just talk about the case of one asset. They come to a firm like Lexington.
They look to our market to price that deal. And then they move that company into a new fund, a continuation vehicle that they continue to manage. Now, for these deals to get done, it has to be a win-win-win for the private equity firm, for Lexington partners, or one of our competitors, and for the LPs.
So the pricing has to be fair. The LPs have to have made a decent return on that asset, or at least want liquidity bad enough to elect into that. The private equity firm loves it because they continue to manage that asset and earn the economics associated with the next phase of value creation.
So they can be tremendously powerful, and you don't have to go through all of the friction and cost associated with selling an asset in the marketplace or taking it public. And the LP gets to decide for themselves whether they sell into that deal or they roll their exposure. So they can either take liquidity or not.
There's nothing coercive about it. So I think that is a permanent tool in the toolkit of private equity firms. I don't think they are going to give that up.
And I think it's an increasingly important part of the private equity lifecycle. If you think about the extended hold periods of companies in private equity. It used to be an asset class where people assumed a five-year hold. And then it's more recently a seven to eight-year hold, and it is probably going longer.
More of the world is private. And so there just need to be ways for different sets of investors to own different phases of the lifecycle and growth of these assets. And that's really what it is.
It is a way of recapitalizing a company without having to explore that liquidity through one of the traditional exit paths.
Tony:
That's really terrific. And again, I think we all agree that this is a great opportunity. That will be an opportunity for a decade and decade to come.
Taylor:
Counting on it. Yeah.
Tony:
Thank you for that. It keeps us all busy. Jeb, I wanted to pick up on, you talked about where the opportunities are, maybe dig a little bit deeper. So specifically, where are you seeing the opportunities and which sectors are you looking to avoid? And I'm thinking the office sector as one of those.
Jeb:
Okay. So when we think about investing, we generally think about investing over the long-term. Most of our strategies are oriented towards long-term hold periods.
So we're trying to figure out what property types and what markets are going to perform the best over a long period of time with consistent, positive performance. And we think about that in terms of fundamentals, really how the property is going to operate and what drives those fundamentals. And what we tend to think drives the fundamentals across our space are big macroeconomic themes, such as demographics and innovation and a persistent housing shortage and affordability problem in this country.
And we analyze those big picture drivers, which we think are persistent and figure out or try to figure out which of our property types and geographic cities or markets are going to benefit the most. And we boil it down in a way, which is a little generic, but I'll dig a little deeper in a second into themes. One of them's an industrial theme.
So the industrial property type, think warehouses and think other kinds of assets that support the distribution system, have benefited tremendously from the rise of e-commerce and the continued pace of e-commerce. We don't think that is likely to reverse. So we think all of the industrial-oriented property types, particularly what we think is a traditional industrial, have an amazing long-term driver behind it. And we think it's going to be one of the best-performing groups of property types. So we would advise investors to overweight that significantly.
Housing is another big picture theme. We have a big housing shortage in the country. It's very hard to imagine how we can effectively build enough housing, broadly housing, to really dig into that issue. So we think the long-term driver of housing type real estate of all kinds, again, in the United States is very strong. So we think that should also be a huge portion of your real estate portfolio.
Healthcare's another big theme. The demographic wave of the baby boomers, aging in this country is creating a tremendous, a tremendous spike in the number of people in the elder generation that need both housing and medical services. So what we think of as our healthcare sectors, senior housing, medical office, and life science space all have another long-term fundamental demand driver to them that we think is going to make those sectors more attractive and perform better than others.
As a counter example, you mentioned it a second ago, is office. Office does not have one of those big fundamental themes driving it. In fact, it's been extremely challenged and remains extremely challenged after a big world-changing event, COVID, which has changed the way a lot of people use and think about office. And it's created real weakness there. And we think that weakness is likely to persist. And therefore, we would significantly underweight the portion of office that you would have in your portfolio. And in some cases, conclude you probably shouldn't really own any.
Tony:
And, I wanna talk about industrial maybe just a little bit more because, again, to personalize this and make it more relatable for our listeners. I think one of the things that you and I have talked about, if you strip away all the rhetoric coming from the current administration, and the ultimate goal is to bring manufacturing back here, you could see where reshoring or inshoring could be beneficial for the industrial manufacturing sector because you need to build that out. Maybe just talk about that a little bit.
Jeb:
So I think there are a couple of important concepts there. And you've used some of the terms that we use. So given COVID and the aftermath of COVID, that definitely opened people's eyes to making sure you had supply chains that were delivering your goods that you actually ultimately wanted to deliver to the consumer.
That's caused a, let's make sure we've got that inventory nearby. So that's either nearshoring, storing goods nearby, nearby the country, or inshoring or onshoring, which is storing more goods inside the country to have them available to sell. That's generated the need for more industrial warehouse space, and that's been positive for the sector.
And we actually think because of the trade uncertainty out there, that dynamic and factor is not going away. Manufacturing, to the extent that we have increased manufacturing in the country, and it sure looks like that's the trend that we're on, those manufacturing facilities have ancillary needs for all the inputs, parts, materials, goods, which benefits, again, warehouses that provide that to those local manufacturing sites. So the rise of manufacturing helps industrial.
The idea that we need stuff nearer to us is benefiting industrial. Just the continued rise of e-commerce is benefiting industrial. And we have a demographic, another big demographic wave kind of in the middle of our age spectrum, which is a consumption ages.
So stronger consumption also benefits both industrial and retail. So industrial as a property type is driven by a lot of factors, a lot of positive factors, and it's hard to see how that's not going to be a good property type to be invested in long-term.
Tony:
I always find that helpful. I think that oftentimes for the average advisor investor out there, they hear all the negative noise about the office sector and they paint everything with the same brush. And I think the more that we can kind of break it down into what drives the sector performance, industrial is very different than offices.
Offices likely is a secular bear market with a lot of headwinds. Industrial just seems to make sense over the long run. And regardless of what happens over the next couple of years, you have to imagine more building of facilities here in America.
Jeb:
I think a historical comment I would make there is that if you looked anywhere from 10 years ago and before that, the office property type was our most significant sector in portfolios that owned a lot of property types and in our real estate indices. And it had, let's call it a 35% share, whereas industrial back then had a 15% share. It was considered probably the most boring of the property types.
And that's completely shifted around. So today, it's almost exactly the opposite. Industrials plus or minus 35, it's taken office’s place, and offices dwindled down to pretty close to 15.
So it would be significantly different if our 35% sector was having a pretty significant issue than a 15% sector having a significant issue. So we'd argue that, not that it isn't problematic for those that own office, but it's a much smaller problem today than it ever has been in the past.
Tony:
Yeah, that's great. So a natural sort of segue is our highest conviction idea across private credit has been commercial real estate debt. And in many ways, commercial real estate debt is playing some of the disruption that is happening in the office sector and other parts of the real estate ecosystem.
You did a great job breaking down asset-backed finance for everyone. Talk a little bit about real estate debt and why you think that's so attractive here. Sure.
Anant:
So we're not really dabbling in office right now. We're not trying to pick the bottom here. I'd say outside of office, the worst is behind us in lending in the real estate sector, in the commercial real estate sector.
Our highest conviction idea is multifamily housing. As Jeb mentioned, there's a shortage of single-family housing in the U.S. and the affordability is a problem as well. So the multifamily housing, the rental market, there's going to be a structural support there because of the macro situation.
And your rent check is the first check you pay off. Even if you're cutting back on other items, you pay for shelter. So there's a floor in that market.
And the reason we like it today is markets probably reducing valuations by somewhere between 25 and 30%. So if you're investing here today and we're writing loans at about a 55% to 60% LTV, then for those loans to lose money, you would need to see a drawdown of north of 50% in the housing market for those loans to, from peak to trough, for those loans to have a problem. And we've really never seen that.
Even during the GFC, the drawdown was more like 35%. So for loans being written today to see losses, you need, I won't say apocalyptic, but you do need a very severe recession, 15% unemployment, extended period of a recession for those loans to suffer. So we think it's a very resilient and safe place.
And the entry point today is pretty attractive when you're writing 60% LTV loans on a sector that's already dropped in valuation by 25 to 30%.
Tony:
And I'll just add to that. The other thing that exacerbates the problem is we don't believe that banks are going to be lending capital. So private credit managers step in to provide that liquidity and you get to dictate the terms, the conditions, and the covenants, something very important.
So if we contrast it to 2021, you were a term taker. And we look at today, 25 going into 26, you're the term maker. You have the upper hand in negotiating.
Anant:
Absolutely. And that's what I was talking about earlier, the market coming into balance right now. So as a provider of capital, we can have more structural protections, we can have covenants, we can not have as much leverage.
So that's all positive too as today representing a good entry point into the asset class. And to your other point about the banks pulling back, yeah, there is going to be a disintermediation. The way we saw in direct lending, that used to be the province of banks earlier, like the C&I loans, and they pulled back from that.
But that's where the non-bank financial institutions stepped in. And we're seeing a similar trend happening in the commercial real estate housing market as well.
Tony:
So gentlemen, as we think about 2026, I think you guys have painted a pretty rosy picture, but there's always the unknowns out there. I'll ask the proverbial question, what is it that keeps you up at night? Where are the risks that maybe we should be paying attention to?
And Jeb, maybe if you don't mind, I'll start with you.
Jeb:
So I would say there are really two that I would say are the “keep you up at night” type things. One is, which would not be the baseline case. And I think as far as our view and a broader view, consensus to market, but if we're wrong and we actually get a decent recession, we move that way, that affects real estate demand.
Commercial real estate market does have a pretty high correlation to the trajectory of the economy. So if we had a decent recession, that would hurt our demand for a while and that wouldn't be a disaster because our demand gets weaker for a little while, we would have even less new construction and we're in a period of less new construction in general right now. And we get through that, it's a little bit to worry about.
And the other one that is problematic is if we have another jump up in basically the cost of credit, and I'm thinking treasuries. So treasuries move from where they were, and I'm thinking of the 10-year treasury right now. It's settled in that four to four and a quarter range. That's been the range it's been trading at for the last little bit. And I think our market at least is generally absorbed that and come to think of that as the new normal. If that were to change and jump to five, for example, and everybody were to believe that the right long-term treasury and the 10-year was five, that would probably cause another pricing change in lots of asset classes, including ours. So we got to watch that too.
Tony:
And as you point out, neither of those are our core views as well.
Jeb:
I would say neither are consensus. Both of it from a Franklin Templeton point of view, from a Clarion point of view, what I think the general market sentiment point of view is, but it's not like people aren't worrying about them.
Tony:
Taylor, anything keep you up at night?
Taylor:
Yeah, it's funny. I'm listening to what Jeb's saying. Because we are macro investors in private equity, private markets, and because we're invested in tens of thousands of companies across the portfolio and almost that amount potentially in a single fund, we become repriced index of private markets assets.
And so it's really the same two things you mentioned, the potential for macro headwinds or meaningful shifts in the cost of capital that keep me up in terms of the portfolio we own. But the nice thing about this business is oftentimes when those happen, they present really attractive buying opportunities. I don't mean to be sort of, there are definitely things that keep us up at night.
Those would be the two that would have the effect on the portfolio we own, but they can be positive on what could potentially change the business of providing liquidity. One, if we got an incredible surprise in the IPO markets and the liquidity poured back into the system, which again, I don't think that would be our house view. It just doesn't feel like that's going to happen.
Jeb:
It would be great though.
Taylor:
Well, that's the point. That would be great for what we own. That would be the opposite. It might slow the buying opportunity, create a couple of slow years where we would expect over a longer period of time, those returns may be tougher for deals we do in that market cycle. One thing I say in every meeting I'm in is we are not smart enough to time markets.
We invest fairly evenly in a pretty linear way through all of this. That is the beauty of having capital that's patient. And I feel like I'm glossing over things, but I think consistent with the house view, don't really expect either of those things, either of those extremes to play out. And we think it's just going to be more of the same.
Tony:
Let's hope.
Taylor:
Let's hope.
Tony:
Anant, how are you doing? You've got a little noise in your space.
Anant:
We do. And there's always a need to be diligent when you're underwriting credits. Credit is an asymmetric asset class. So you can, at most you get bar back, but you can lose a lot of left tail distribution of returns. So you always have to be a little bit pessimistic and do that diligence. And as recent events have shown, there can be sometimes some oversights on the diligence, but that's always a feature of the markets.
You don't stop investing in the asset class because of that. Just because Bernie Madoff did a Ponzi scheme, you don't stop investing in equities. You just be more diligent about underwriting.
The thing that keeps me up at night, and it's not the short-term policy changes and tariffs, et cetera. Those actually represent buying opportunities because those are short-term dislocations. For example, the Liberation day or Obliteration day of April 2nd, if you invested a week after that, you would have really good returns because the market corrected itself as deals were struck.
So to me, that's not the thing that keeps me up at night. What keeps me up at night is the small possibility that we are going to have structurally higher inflation, much above the Fed's target 2% is a term, a number bandied about a little bit. But I think the economists coming around to the fact that 2.5% is probably a more natural rate of inflation in the economy. But suppose inflation were to get to 3.5% and stay persistent there. I think that narrows the policy toolkit that the Fed has. They can't really cut.
If they can't really cut, the cost of capital for the companies we'll enter, the middle market companies, it becomes too high to be sustainable. So you could enter a period of malaise where borrowing costs or cost of capital is persistently high and that would have a negative impact on the portfolio. The short-term stuff, that's actually a buying opportunity.
But this structural higher inflation is what keeps me up at night. Now, we're not seeing signs of that. One of the things about inflation is the cure for high inflation is high inflation, right?
When you have high inflation, the economy slows, demand destruction, self-correcting mechanism there a little bit. If you have an exogenous shock like you had in the ‘70s, for example, that's when you get stagflation.
I don't think we're going to that environment, but if you ask me what keeps me up at night, it's that confluence of factors where you have high inflation, the Fed's tools are narrow, and then the portfolio companies we lend to just have high costs of capital for an extended period of time.
Tony:
Gentlemen, this is always one of my favorite podcasts that we do because we get to listen to the experts directly talking about where we are, where we're going. I would invite all of our listeners, we have a much more detailed and robust 2026 Private Market Outlook with a lot more of the data and the facts around it, but this is a great discussion and we'll have to see how it all plays out.
So thank you, Jeb, Taylor, Anant, and thank you to our listeners. As we always do, please tell us what you like, rate our episode, don't be bashful, share it with your friends, and we'll have to see how 2026 plays out for us here. Thank you all.
Show V/O:
Thanks for listening to Alternative Allocations by Franklin Templeton. For more information, please go to alternativeallocationspodcast.com. That's alternativeallocationspodcast.com. And don't forget to subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.
Disclaimers V/O:
This material reflects the analysis and opinions of the speakers as of the date of this podcast and may differ from the opinion of portfolio managers, investment teams, or platforms at Franklin Templeton. It is intended to be of general interest only and should not be construed as individual investment advice or a recommendation or solicitation to buy, sell, or hold any security or to adopt any investment strategy. It does not constitute legal. or tax advice.
The views expressed are those of the speakers, and the comments, opinions, and analyses are rendered as of the date of this podcast and may change without notice. The information provided in this material is not intended as a complete analysis of every material fact regarding any country, region, market, industry, security, or strategy. Statements of fact are from sources considered reliable, but no representation or warranty is made as to their completeness or accuracy.
All investments involve risks, including possible loss of principal. The value of investments can go down as well as up, and investors may not get back the full amount invested.
Please see episode specific disclosures for important risk information regarding content covered in the specific episode.
Data from third party sources may have been used in the preparation of this material, and Franklin Templeton, FT, has not independently verified, validated, or audited such data. FT accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss arising from use of this information, and reliance upon the comments, opinions, and analyses in the material is at the sole discretion of the user. Products, services, and information may not be available in all jurisdictions and are offered outside the U. S. by other FT affiliates and or their distributors as local laws and regulation permits. Please consult your own financial professional for further information on availability of products and services in your jurisdiction.
Issued in the U. S. by Franklin Distributors, LLC. Member FINRA/SIPC, the principal distributor of Franklin Templeton's U.S. registered products, which are available only in jurisdictions where an offer or solicitation of such products is permitted under applicable laws and regulation. Issued by Franklin Templeton outside of the U. S. Please visit www.franklinresources.com to be directed to your local Franklin Templeton website.
Copyright Franklin Templeton. All Rights Reserved.
