Why real estate matters in modern investment portfolios today

This article has been reviewed by a Digital Journal editor and may be licensed for reuse.

Institutional real estate remains a substantial market, yet size may not settle the allocation question. MSCI estimated that professionally managed global commercial property reached $13.5 trillion in 2025, an 8.5% increase influenced largely by currency movements. In separate research, MSCI reported that target allocations to real estate declined for the first time in 13 years. Scale alone may no longer secure a protected position.

The usual discussion centers on when transaction activity, valuations, and capital flows can recover. McKinsey reported that global real estate deal value rose approximately 12% to $873 billion in 2025, although transaction counts remained broadly flat. The figures suggest selective movement across the market. For institutional and individual investors, recovery may be only one part of a wider portfolio decision.

That decision is also being shaped by changes in allocation practice. Strategic asset allocation often assigns target weights to categories and periodically rebalances them. A total portfolio approach may begin with the objectives of the whole fund and assess each investment by its contribution to risk, return, and liquidity. CalPERS explains its approach in similarly holistic terms, evaluating investments within the context of the entire portfolio.

Competition across categories complicates the comparison. MSCI highlights that roughly 60% of investors view infrastructure and private credit as direct competitors to real estate. Its analysis also found substantial overlap in the distribution of individual real estate and infrastructure asset returns. The analysis directs attention toward underlying income, leverage, operating demands, and risks.

Geoffrey Dohrmann, chairman, CEO, and editor-in-chief of Institutional Real Estate, Inc. (IREI), views this as a structural change in how property must compete for capital. IREI is a media and market intelligence company serving institutional real estate and infrastructure markets through publications, data, research, events, and consulting. After decades observing allocators and managers, Dohrmann believes the next phase may require a clearer explanation of what each real estate strategy contributes across the portfolio.

Under fixed allocations, capital could flow to property partly because a fund needed to maintain its real estate target. Dohrmann observes that a total portfolio framework can place an office investment, a data center, an infrastructure asset, and a credit strategy into a more direct comparison. Real estate may still offer income, diversification, and exposure to physical demand, but managers may need to demonstrate those qualities through current evidence and appropriate pricing.

The category itself has already widened. Dohrmann recalls when institutional portfolios concentrated on office buildings, regional malls, warehouses, and a narrower definition of housing. “There isn’t any part of real estate that isn’t considered to be institutional class,” he explains, pointing to data centers, cold storage, medical offices, student housing, senior housing and marinas. The expansion may give allocators more ways to select assets around demographic and operational demand.

Selection is likely to carry greater weight within that broader field. MSCI researchers studied 1,086 portfolios and reported that asset selection accounted for an average of 67% of performance differences from country benchmarks between Q1 1999 and Q1 2025. Dohrmann explains a related lesson from IREI’s archives in simpler terms. He says, “The future arrives first as an unremarkable niche.” 

For managers, Dohrmann believes the change may reward sharper strategies, stronger operating capabilities and a more disciplined explanation of portfolio purpose. It may also encourage consolidation, platform extensions and recapitalizations when owners prefer to retain assets while bringing in replacement capital. Each route carries different risks. His broader point is that fundraising scale or category membership may provide limited reassurance unless the underlying assets can support the investment case.

Dohrmann also cautions against treating recent disappointment as a permanent verdict on property. Real estate continues to meet practical needs because people require places to live, work, store goods and receive services. He views its historical position between bonds and equities as useful context for thinking about income and growth. The appropriate role, however, may depend increasingly on the objectives and constraints of each portfolio.

Allocators can respond by defining that role before choosing a vehicle or manager. Dohrmann recommends asking which risk the investment is intended to offset, which cash flows support the expected return, and what evidence could weaken the thesis. Real estate can continue to attract institutional and individual investor capital. Its case can become more credible when every allocation begins with a clearly stated job and ends with evidence that the investment can perform it.