FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

GLOBAL ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORT 2025

23RD EDITION

From Recovery
to Reinvention
April 2025
By Dean Frankle, Renaud Fages, Johannes Burkhardt, Peter Czerepak, Mayank Jha,
Bingbing Liu, Michele Millosevich, Kedra Newsom Reeves, Chris Ng, Edoardo
Palmisani, Neil Pardasani, George Rudolph, Brian Teixeira, Martina Trepat, Andrea
Walbaum, Mateo Wiesner, and Ivana Zupa
Contents
03 Recognizing Growth and What Lies Beneath

08 Rethinking Products and Distribution

12 Staying Relevant in a Consolidating Market

16 Becoming Radically Leaner

21 Appendix

24 About the Authors

Recognizing Growth and
What Lies Beneath

The global asset The gains marked a strong continuing rebound from the
decline that occurred in 2022. Nevertheless, that growth
management industry can’t mask the deeper structural challenges that the
industry faces, including margin pressures, shi昀琀ing investor
reached a record $128 preferences, and intensifying competition.

Notably, market performance drove 70% of revenue growth

trillion in assets under in 2024, underscoring the industry’s vulnerability to external
conditions—especially in a period marked by extreme
management (AuM) in market volatility, rapid shi昀琀s in sentiment, and heightened
economic uncertainty arising in part from the disruptive
2024, up 12% from the e昀昀ects of the US tari昀昀s. To remain competitive and to
navigate an increasingly uncertain future, 昀椀rms must move
previous year. beyond the recovery that has characterized the past two
years and focus on reinventing themselves for the future.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 3

As the issue of costs has magni昀椀ed, many 昀椀rms are
increasingly adopting one of three strategic models to shape
their cost structures—focusing their spending on investment
management and trade execution; sales, marketing, and
operations; or IT.

Three Forces Reshaping

the Industry
Three forces in particular are reshaping the industry: shi昀琀s Industry-wide consolidation activity is increasing.
in product o昀昀erings and approaches to distribution; Because no one-size-昀椀ts-all approach is available, many
industry-wide consolidation; and the need for radically asset managers will need to consider enhancing their scale
leaner cost structures. In this report, we examine the and scope through strategic partnerships or M&A to stay
transformation strategies that asset managers will relevant. The consolidation we are seeing tends to revolve
need to adopt in order to meet these forces head-on and around strategies for broadening product o昀昀erings,
win in the next 昀椀ve to ten years. expanding global presence, building technology
capabilities, securing more permanent capital, and
Product offerings and distribution approaches are increasing proximity to clients.
shi昀琀ing. Increasingly, investors are demanding low-cost,
e昀케cient products such as exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Regardless of deal rationale, the key to success will lie in
Although ETFs command lower fees than legacy mutual the execution. For example, as private and public
funds do, they o昀昀er the potential for closer long-term managers converge to leverage their respective expertise in
customer ties. This is especially important at a time when product formation and distribution, they will need
the economics of the industry are tilting more and more thoughtful strategies for integrating their legacy di昀昀erences
toward the entity that owns the investor relationship—the in such areas as culture, compensation structures, and
distributor. In particular, asset managers might consider value creation.
developing products in the relatively fragmented and
nascent active ETF space. Cost structures need to be radically leaner. Amidst
ongoing pricing pressures and a shi昀琀ing market landscape,
Managers also have an opportunity to develop private the issue of costs has magni昀椀ed. In response, many 昀椀rms
market funds for retail investors, who are eager to tap into are increasingly adopting one of three strategic models to
the higher risk-return pro昀椀le that these asset classes o昀昀er. shape their cost structures—focusing their spending on
When it comes to matching private market assets with the investment management and trade execution; sales,
liquidity and regulatory requirements of the retail market, marketing, and operations; or IT.
昀椀rms must deal with some obstacles. But as a result, those
that develop viable products and scalable distribution Although these models di昀昀er in focus, all of them can
networks stand to bene昀椀t from a largely untapped market. bene昀椀t further from a zero-based approach to cost
management. This approach entails reexamining all costs
and may lead to such changes as outsourcing noncore
functions, automating processes with generative AI (GenAI),
and avoiding dual-run costs, especially in headcount.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 4

The Year in Review
Global asset management AuM grew by 12% in 2024, Half of the revenue increase, however, was o昀昀set by a shi昀琀
reaching a record $128 trillion, with all regions contributing to lower-priced products and by fee compression. (See
to the increase. (See Exhibit 1.) Exhibit 2.) Although the industry can celebrate another
year of growth, asset managers must be aware of the
Strong market performance drove this growth. Major underlying threats to their legacy products and distribution
indexes such as the S&P 500 (up 23% for the year) and channels, as well as to the operational models behind them.
NASDAQ (up 29%) rose signi昀椀cantly. Global revenues for
the industry rose by $58 billion, and more than 70% ($42 Last year, investors continued a long-term trend of shi昀琀ing
billion) of that gain came from market performance from actively managed funds to passively managed
compared to only 30% ($16 billion) from net in昀氀ows. products. Active AuM declined from 65% in 2023 to 61% in
2024 for mutual funds and ETFs. Net new 昀氀ows re昀氀ected
this trend, with $0.1 trillion in out昀氀ows from active funds,
excluding money market funds, versus $1.6 trillion in
in昀氀ows to passive funds. (See Exhibit 3.)

EXHIBIT 1

Global AuM Grew by 12% in 2024 to $128 Trillion

GLOBAL AUM ($TRILLIONS) NET FLOWS AS A SHARE OF BEGINNING-OF-YEAR AUM (%)

+12%

128
114 115 4.4

+7% 102 104

3.7
92 3.4
82 3.1 3.1
80 2.9
74
69
2.1
47 1.6
1.5 1.5
36
1.2
0.9

2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
to to
2009 2014

Sources: BCG Global Asset Management Market Sizing Database 2025; BCG Global Asset Management Benchmarking Database 2025.
Note: Market sizing corresponds to assets sourced from each region and professionally managed in exchange for management fees; it includes captive AuM
of insurance groups or pension funds where AuM is delegated to asset management entities with fees paid. Overall, 44 markets are covered globally, including
offshore AuM. Net flow rates for 2005–2009 and 2010–2014 represent annual averages for their respective periods. For all countries whose currency is not US
dollars, the end-of-year 2024 exchange rate is applied to all years to synchronize current and historic data. Values differ from those reported in prior studies
due to exchange rate fluctuations, revised methodology and changes in source data. AuM = assets under management.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 5

EXHIBIT 2

Market Performance Drove Most of the Revenue Growth in 2024

CHANGE IN REVENUE, 2023–2024 (%)

+7%

+4% –4%

+10%
–3%

>70% of revenue growth has

been driven by market
performance (vs net flows)…

…with half of this growth

offset by a shi昀琀 to lower-priced
products and fee compression

2023 Revenues Revenues Revenues Revenues from 2024

revenues from market from net flow from change in fee pressures revenues
performance product mix

Sources: BCG Global Asset Management Market Sizing Database 2025; BCG Global Asset Management Benchmarking 2025.
Note: Numbers above each bar represent the percentage change relative to total 2023 revenues, reflecting each factor's incremental impact on revenue.
The scope of the analysis encompasses active core, active specialties, solutions, passives, and alternatives. Values differ from those in prior studies due to
exchange rate fluctuations, revised methodology, and changes in source data.

EXHIBIT 3

Passive Funds Remain Popular, While Active Out昀氀ows Are Decreasing

GLOBAL NET FLOWS TO ACTIVE AND PASSIVE MUTUAL FUNDS AND ETFS, EXCLUDING MONEY MARKET FUNDS, 2010–2024 ($TRILLIONS)

1.6 1.6
1.5
1.1
1.0 0.9
0.8 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.8
0.7 0.7 0.7
0.6 0.5 0.6
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3
0.3 0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
–0.1
–0.3

–0.8

–1.5
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Active Passive

Sources: ISS Market Intelligence Simfund; BCG analysis.

Note: Analysis includes mutual funds and ETFs globally, and excludes money market funds. ETF = exchange-traded fund.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 6

Although mutual fund and ETF ownership skews toward
retail clients, institutional investors are shi昀琀ing to passive
products, too. In this market, over the past 昀椀ve years, Active funds saw $337 billion in
out昀氀ows from North America—
passive AuM grew from 17% to 20% of assets while active
AuM shrank from 44% to 38% of assets.

Breaking down the shi昀琀 to passive across mutual funds enough to pull global net 昀氀ows
and ETFs by geography, however, reveals a strong regional
tilt, in which North America’s $337 billion in out昀氀ows from
into negative territory—even
active funds was enough to drag global net 昀氀ows into as all other regions recorded
negative territory. All other regions saw positive net 昀氀ows
into active funds, driven largely by 昀椀xed-income funds and positive in昀氀ows.
actively managed ETFs. Fixed-income funds attracted $700
billion in net new 昀氀ows globally, while active ETFs drew
positive net new 昀氀ows of $325 billion, nearly $300 billion of
which came from North America.

Revenue growth outpaced cost growth in 2024, resulting in a

rise in pro昀椀ts of about 22%. (See Exhibit 4.) However, fees on
2024 net in昀氀ows were, on average, about 40 basis points less
than fees on 2023 existing AuM across mutual funds and
ETFs. The changing fee structure is a clear indication of
revenue pressure that asset managers will need to address
with product innovation and a search for scale.

EXHIBIT 4

Pro昀椀ts Rose in 2024 as Revenue Growth Outstripped Costs

Average AuM Net revenues Costs Profit pool

INDEXED TO 2010 INDEXED TO 2010 INDEXED TO 2010 INDEXED TO 2010
+12.1% +7.1%
+14.7% +21.9%

197 192 205

176 180
263 134 144 148
129
100 100 100
229

2010 2015 2023 2024 2010 2015 2023 2024 2010 2015 2023 2024
142
NET REVENUES/AUM COSTS/AUM
(BASIS POINTS) (BASIS POINTS) PROFIT MARGIN (%)
100
31 30 21 33
19 18 31 31
25 24 17 27

2010 2015 2023 2024 2010 2015 2023 2024 2010 2015 2023 2024 2010 2015 2023 2024

Source: BCG Global Asset Management Benchmarking Database 2025.

Note: The analysis is based on a global benchmarking study of 70 leading asset managers, representing $68 trillion in AuM, or about 53% of global AuM.
The sample is primarily composed of traditional asset managers and excludes pure alternative players, as those economics are not comparable with total
asset management revenues based on the global product trend analysis. Profit margin is calculated as (Net revenues – Total costs/Net revenues) x 100.
AuM = assets under management.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 7

Rethinking Products and
Distribution
Looking forward, asset First, they can secure a strong position within a shrinking
yet strategically important segment of actively managed
assets—speci昀椀cally, in active ETFs, model portfolios, and
managers have two separately managed accounts. Second, they can mobilize to

opportunities to win in play a key role in the growing market for delivering private
assets to retail clients.

this evolving product and

distribution landscape.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 8

The Active ETF Space
For well over a decade, investors have been shi昀琀ing out of
actively managed mutual funds and into passive products,
mostly ETFs. (See Exhibit 5.) Relative to mutual funds, ETFs
o昀昀er attractive net of fee returns, as well as greater liquidity,
tax e昀케ciency (especially in the US), and transparency.

Passively managed ETFs have seen sustained in昀氀ows since

2010. The passive ETF market is reaching maturity and has
become highly concentrated, with the top ten players
controlling 82% of AuM in 2024.

EXHIBIT 5

Investors Are Shi昀琀ing to Active ETFs and Passive Mutual Funds

MARKET SHARE OF MUTUAL FUND AND ETF AUM BY CATEGORY, 2014–2024 (%)

0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.7

59.7
66.1 63.4
70.4 68.1
74.2 71.8
77.9 76.0
81.4 79.9

22.1
19.8
16.8 18.2
14.0 15.2
11.8 12.8
10.6
8.7 9.5

14.5 14.8 15.7 16.5

11.3 11.9 12.8 13.9 13.9
9.7 10.4

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Active ETF Active mutual fund Passive ETF Passive mutual fund

Sources: ISS Market Intelligence Simfund; BCG analysis.

Note: The analysis includes mutual funds and ETFs globally (excluding money market funds), which represent 47% ($60 trillion) of total industry AuM ($128
trillion). AuM = assets under management; ETF = exchange-traded fund. Because of rounding, not all bar segments add up to 100%.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 9

EXHIBIT 6

Active ETFs Have Performed Similarly to Active Mutual Funds

There is no structural difference in the potential for market-beating returns… …suggesting a potential trend
MEAN TOTAL RETURNS (%) to lower-fee options
AVERAGE MANAGEMENT FEE (%)
15 14 15 15
11 11 –41%
9 10 9
7 7 8
7
6 6 7 1.08
3
0
–1
– 0.64
–5
–
–
–6
–10
–
––13
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Active mutual Active
Active ETF Active mutual fund fund ETF

Sources: ISS Market Intelligence Simfund; BCG analysis.

Note: Analysis includes active mutual funds and active ETFs globally and excludes money market funds. Returns are net of management fees.
ETF = exchange-traded fund.

Now a second wave of ETF adoption is bringing investor Players entering the active ETF space will also need to
capital to actively managed ETFs. Globally, active ETF build a series of capabilities. These include bespoke
AuM grew at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of product specialists, marketing teams, and vendor
39% over the past ten years. It is not hard to see why management. They will need tie-ins with advisor and
investors are drawn to these funds. There is no structural brokerage platforms, legal counsel, and tax experts—the
di昀昀erence between active ETFs and active mutual funds in last especially in the US where ETFs o昀昀er certain tax
terms of potential for market-beating returns, but the fees e昀케ciencies. Although 昀椀rms that have an established
are only 0.64% on average versus 1.08% for mutual funds. passive ETF business may already have the necessary
(See Exhibit 6.) capital market, tax, and tech functionalities in place, they
will probably need to bolster their research, portfolio
The active ETF market is at an attractive in昀氀ection point management, and trading executions. Conversely, players
for asset management 昀椀rms interested in entering this that have an established active mutual fund business will
space. It is growing quickly across geographies, and 44% of need to set up product specialist teams, tax and legal
all ETFs launched in 2024 were actively managed. Yet it is experts, and, notably, a capital markets team.
still a nascent business, holding only 7.0% of the total AuM
in ETFs. It is also a relatively fragmented market, with the An alternative option to making costly up-front investments
top ten players controlling 65% of AuM. in these capabilities is to work with ETF accelerators or
white-label providers that specialize in market entry
Firms that launch new active ETFs must make some facilitation. In this case, responsibility for portfolio
di昀케cult choices, however. For example, an asset manager management and distribution remains with the asset
with existing mutual funds will need to decide whether to manager, while the accelerator takes on the tasks of legal
convert its legacy funds into ETFs or create new active structuring, regulatory communications and 昀椀lings,
ETFs. Either way, the 昀椀rm is likely to 昀椀nd itself portfolio implementation, and capital markets execution.
cannibalizing its higher-fee mutual fund business, given In e昀昀ect, the asset manager trades some operational
that ETFs do not o昀昀er material cost advantages from a control and revenues in return for speed-to-market and
production and distribution perspective. Yet from a long- lower upfront costs.
term perspective, the new ETF products are likely to
capture otherwise unavailable capital 昀氀ows and allow the
昀椀rm to get closer to customers of the future.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 10

Private Assets for the
Retail Market
Another big opportunity lies at the intersection of private Technology-enabled feeder funds pool client assets to
markets and retail customers. On the demand side, clear minimum investment thresholds. The limitation of
investors are eager to access the risk-adjusted returns that this option from the perspective of investors is that the
top private market funds can deliver. On the supply side, structure does not provide interim liquidity or keep clients
private market managers are jockeying to tap into the 48% perpetually invested; instead, exposure winds down as the
of global assets controlled by retail wallets. fund manager distributes returns. For the advisor, the
roadblock involves the administrative burdens associated
Alternative assets, including those that invest in private with facilitating repeated subscription agreements,
instruments, now generate more than half of all global managing capital calls and distributions, and handling tax
revenues, although they hold less than 25% of global AuM. documents for each individual client.
From 2014 to 2024, the combined AuM for private equity,
private debt, real estate, and infrastructure funds grew at The other route is evergreen semi-liquid funds. Over the
a CAGR of 11.1%, far outpacing the asset management past four years, semi-liquid funds have grown more than
industry’s 6.5% compound annual AuM growth excluding 昀椀vefold, reaching a net asset value of over $300 billion in
these asset classes. Private asset growth re昀氀ects strong 2024, according to data from Goldman Sachs. These
long-term performance and steadily increasing demand. structures partially solve the issue of liquidity constraints
Both investors and managers have incentives to keep the by accepting capital on a continuous basis, allowing
party going. periodic redemptions and reinvesting the realized
proceeds in perpetuity. That said, the sponsor must
warehouse the assets to build the initial portfolio and to
create liquidity backstops to generate interim cash
Asset managers might consider conversion without eroding investor returns.

placing private assets in active We foresee signi昀椀cant experimentation with private

market structures in the years ahead. Asset managers
ETFs or model portfolios, or might consider placing private assets in active ETFs or
creating hybrid public-private model portfolios, for example, or creating hybrid public-
private evergreen or interval vehicles. Naturally, each
evergreen or interval vehicles. approach comes with its own suite of operational
challenges and risks.

The active ETF solution may be the most accessible option

Asset managers who want to join in, however, must for retail clients, but it requires managers to bear the risk
overcome obstacles in product design and distribution. of holding the underlying assets. Model portfolios allow a
昀椀rm to capture a signi昀椀cant share of client assets, but they
The product itself must satisfy the relatively rigid liquidity don’t inherently resolve the illiquidity mismatch.
and regulatory requirements associated with the retail
market. On the distribution side, a product sponsor is As competition intensi昀椀es, we expect product innovation
required to educate investors and advisors, create and to be a core di昀昀erentiator for winning 昀椀rms. For example,
amend capital formation and onboarding procedures, and blockchain and cryptocurrency can play an important role
ensure compliance across a more fragmented customer in disruption by enabling tokenization, reducing friction,
base. Private market investors need to clear additional enhancing transparency, and giving rise to programmable
accreditation, know-your-customer (KYC), and anti-money and fractional products. In private assets for the retail
laundering (AML) procedures, for example. These are tried market, we are seeing experimentation with tokenized
and true processes for institutional and high-net-worth funds, automated private credit pools, tradable fractions of
(HNW) investors, but an asset manager must adapt them illiquid assets, and integration into mainstream 昀椀nancial
to the concerns of clients in a lower wealth bracket. vehicles—all backed by blockchain rails.

So far, e昀昀orts to place private assets in retail products There is no single answer, but the opportunities in private
have broadly taken two forms: technology-enabled feeder market retail products are too big to ignore. Asset
funds and evergreen semi-liquid funds. managers recognize the potential rewards if they can meet
the challenges, and one of the results has been a surge in
M&A deals and partnerships involving entry to private
markets. We explore this trend in the next section.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 11

Staying Relevant in
a Consolidating Market

The asset management signi昀椀cantly reduces costs as a percentage of AuM. As 昀椀rms

surpass the $300 billion mark and approach $500 billion,
industry is undergoing typically by expanding to broader asset classes or client
segments, rising complexity and operational challenges
a wave of consolidation emerge. Managing a diverse portfolio while adhering to
investment mandates becomes more di昀케cult, leading to a
activity as 昀椀rms seek period marked by “diseconomies” of scale. Beyond the $500
billion mark, however, the largest asset managers bene昀椀t
greater economies of scale from optimization at scale. Their size permits them to
achieve cost e昀케ciencies despite the complexities associated
with managing a vast asset base.
and greater scope for
We have also found that both investment management and
their business. trade execution (IM&TE) and business management and
support costs decrease as a proportion of total costs at
greater scale. Larger asset managers are able to distribute
these expenses across a broader AuM base. Even so, these
Size matters. In a study of 270 asset managers, we found larger 昀椀rms have higher IT expenses as a proportion of
that the average asset manager doubled its AuM from 2013 costs, owing to their need for scalable IT infrastructure with
to 2023. Those with the largest amount of assets were able advanced capabilities. (See Exhibit 7.)
to drive costs down through technological synergies,
streamlined operations, and process e昀케ciencies. In addition to gaining advantages from scale, asset
managers bene昀椀t when they increase their scope by
In our examination of a proprietary benchmarking sample expanding their product portfolio, geographic footprint, or
of primarily traditional asset managers, we found that for capability set. Greater scope enables them to diversify
昀椀rms with AuM below $300 billion—o昀琀en those with lower revenue streams, reduce costs, and enhance client o昀昀erings
product or geographic complexity—increasing AuM through shared resources and expertise.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 12

EXHIBIT 7

Size Matters: The Advantages of Scale Are Evident in Cost Margins

Costs as a percentage of AuM across the value chain
COST MARGIN (BASIS POINTS)
40

–45% to –55%
30
+15% to +20%
~40%
–40 to –45%
20
~35%

10 ~25% ~30%
~20%
~20%
0 ~5% ~15% ~15%
<$50B $50B to $150B to $300B to $500B to $750B to $1T to >$1.25T
$150B $300B $500B $750B $1T $1.25T

Investment management and trade execution Business management and support Sales and marketing Operations IT

Sources: BCG Global Asset Management Benchmarking Database 2024; BCG analysis.
Note: The analysis primarily encompasses traditional asset managers globally and excludes pure alternative players; the latter players are likely to have
higher cost basis points and particularly high expense allocations to IT and investment management and trade execution. AuM = assets under management.

Five Key Objectives

The M&A deals and partnerships that we are seeing in the Secure more permanent capital. To gain access to
industry tend to revolve around 昀椀ve key objectives related to more permanent capital, a number of asset managers
improving scale and scope. (See Exhibit 8.) have entered into partnerships with insurers and annuity
providers. (See the sidebar “Stronger Together: Insurers
Broaden alternative investment offerings. By and Asset Managers Team Up to Invest in Private
collaborating with alternative providers, a 昀椀rm can diversify Markets.”) The long-term, stable nature of insurance
its revenues and build a wider capital base. In addition to assets reduces the need for continuous fundraising and
their potential in e昀昀orts to develop products for the retail mitigates exposure to market cycles. These partnerships
market, alternative products can help capture additional also create distribution opportunities, as asset managers
institutional and HNW investor capital. can serve insurance customers with tailored investment
solutions.
Expand global presence. Emerging markets, in particular,
present signi昀椀cant opportunities to serve the investment Enhance proximity to clients. Many 昀椀rms are deepening
needs of a growing middle class. Entering these regions their client relationships by collaborating with wealth
through M&As or joint ventures with established local 昀椀rms management platforms, direct-to-consumer 昀椀rms, and
yields regulatory advantages and facilitates market entry. 昀椀nancial advisory services. Such partnerships enable asset
managers to increase retention while reducing dependence
Build technology and data capabilities. Collaborating on traditional intermediaries such as brokerages.
with 昀椀ntechs, analytics 昀椀rms, and AI-driven investment
platforms can be among the most e昀케cient ways to invest
in advanced technology. For larger players and those with
specialized technology and data requirements, acquiring
an in-house product suite can lower costs and strengthen
their quantitative investment models. In some cases, it can
also provide alternative revenue streams.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 13

 EXHIBIT 8

Five Objectives Are Key for M&A and Partnerships

Expand global presence
Enter new markets through local
Broaden alternative collaborations to access regional
investment offerings investors, harness local expertise,
Expand exposure to and gain regulatory advantages
private equity, credit, real
assets, and other
alternatives to diversify
revenue and increase
presence in high-margin
private markets
INCREASING SCOPE

Secure more permanent capital

Collaborate with insurers and
Build technology and annuity providers to secure
data capabilities long-term, stable AuM and reduce
Collaborate with fintech, reliance on fundraising
analytics, and AI-driven
investment platforms to
optimize decision making, Increase proximity to clients
efficiency, and client Collaborate with wealth platforms,
experience direct-to-consumer firms, and advisory
services to expand distribution,
retention, and cross-selling

INCREASING SCALE
Source: BCG analysis.
Note: AuM = assets under management.

Execution Is Essential
Although selecting the right target or partner is critical, the
long-term success of any consolidation deal depends on
e昀昀ective execution. The participating parties should ensure,
from an early date, that they are unlocking the best of both Well-executed postmerger
organizations. That makes the role of corporate
development teams more important than ever. integration is essential to
In M&A, well-executed postmerger integration (PMI) is minimize disruption to investors,
essential, as it ensures a smooth transition in leadership,
operational e昀케ciency, and cultural alignment. Minimizing
maintain AuM stability, and
disruption to investors is critical to maintaining AuM
stability and ensuring client retention. The organization
ensure client retention.
should communicate proactively with investors about its
investment philosophy, portfolio management continuity,
and fee structures.

In partnerships, all parties should agree on the distribution

strategy and product design, as well as on the boundaries
where collaboration ends and competition begins. The
partners should establish a well-de昀椀ned go-to-market
strategy that outlines a plan for product positioning, client
targeting, and branding. They should also ensure regulatory
and operational alignment—including compliance
frameworks, IT systems, and reporting structures—to
streamline processes and prevent roadblocks.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 14

Stronger Together: Insurers and Asset Managers
Team Up to Invest in Private Markets

Insurers, with their long-term stable capital aligned to Traditionally, pension portfolio managers have weighted
future liabilities, have always been attractive investment their holdings heavily in 昀椀xed-income instruments, which
partners for asset managers. Now, however, as players struggle to meet long-term return targets. In response,
across the asset management ecosystem face fee 昀椀rms are introducing alternative strategies—including
pressures and fundraising challenges for private market private equity, infrastructure, and other illiquid assets—to
products, competition for insurance capital is intensifying. boost portfolio resilience.

For their part, insurance companies are increasingly For insurers, pension-related collaborations make it
recognizing the value proposition of seeding new private possible to develop products that balance stability with
market investments. In a survey of insurers, BlackRock’s long-term capital appreciation, ensuring both security for
2024 Global Insurance Report found that 91% of the policyholders and enhanced pro昀椀tability for 昀椀nancial
respondents plan to increase their investments in private institutions. For asset managers, pension channels o昀昀er
assets in 2025 and 2026. greater scale and scope for their investment products as
they cater to a wider and more diverse investor base.
A key attraction for insurers is the opportunity to extract an
illiquidity premium from private markets. As a result, they In parallel, new technologies such as AI and digital
can boost returns—especially in comparison to traditional distribution channels are transforming the way 昀椀rms
昀椀xed-income assets— when they invest their own accounts manage, distribute, and market their pension products.
or those of their policyholders. For asset managers, Technology is also reshaping the design and delivery of
insurance capital provides a patient, long-term base that pension solutions, making it possible to create highly
enables them to invest with a long-term strategic outlook personalized o昀昀erings to match with individual retirement
in illiquid strategies such as private equity, private debt, goals and risk preferences.
and real estate.
When partnering with insurers, asset managers must
These partnerships also generate broader strategic navigate regulatory, legal, and capital constraints that are
advantages. With insurance capital as a stable anchor, stricter than the ones they encounter with other
asset managers can scale their private market o昀昀erings institutional pools. Tax rules, solvency ratios, and capital
more e昀昀ectively, supporting revenue growth and long-term requirements, which vary by country, necessitate more
competitiveness. Insurers, meanwhile, bene昀椀t from the complicated portfolio construction. Success in these
asset manager’s expertise in navigating complex private partnerships requires speci昀椀c capabilities, careful risk
market deals that align with long-duration liabilities. management, and long-term strategic planning, but the
rewards can include long-term resilience for both parties.
Private market partnerships also serve the growing market
for retirement products. As global demographics shi昀琀 and
longevity increases, conventional pension structures face
mounting pressures with regard to ensuring retirees’
昀椀nancial security.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 15

Becoming Radically Leaner

Cost optimization is an Most 昀椀rms, however, have struggled to streamline operations

and reduce costs. In our proprietary benchmarking sample,
urgent strategic priority if we found that total costs have grown at a CAGR of 6% from
2022 to 2024.

asset managers are to be

resilient enough to thrive
at every phase of the
market cycle.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 16

The greatest proportion of costs is in investment
management and trade execution, which represent about
30% to 40% of total costs and grew at a CAGR of 6% over
the past two years. (See Exhibit 9.) The increases came
primarily from increasing competition for talent and from a
shi昀琀 toward private market products.

EXHIBIT 9

A Typical Cost Structure of Asset Managers Covers Multiple Activities

in the Value Chain
TOTAL COST (%) 10–20 30–40 10–20 10–20 10–20

Other Other <5

Other 5–10 5–10 Procurement and
Other facilities management
10–20 5–10
End user technology
Other 10–20
20–30 Risk management
Transfer agency 5–10
Client service 5–10
10–20

Application hosting HR and internal

Utilities
10–20 communications
10–20
10–20

Marketing Legal and audit

Post-trade services
10–20 10–20
10–20

FUNCTION Research and analytics Compliance

COST (%) 40–50 Client operations Maintenance 5–10
Product specialist 5–10 30–40
10–20

Finance, accounting,
and tax
Asset services 10–20
10–20

Sales professionals
40–50
Senior management,
Development organization, and strategy
Portfolio managers 30–40
Fund services 30–40
30–40
30–40

Investment Business
ASSET MANAGER Sales management and Operations IT management
VALUE CHAIN and marketing trade execution and support

Costs/AuM two-year CAGR (%)1 2–5 5–7 7+

Sources: BCG Expand Benchmarks; BCG Global Asset Management Benchmarking Database 2024, 2025; BCG analysis.
Note: AuM = assets under management; CAGR = compound annual growth rate.
1
CAGR of the ratio of total annual costs divided by average assets under management over a two-year period.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 17

The Trifurcation of Cost Structures investment talent intensi昀椀es. Instead of maintaining in-
house distribution teams, they can use distribution
Overall cost allocations have remained relatively stable. A powerhouses to curate their o昀昀erings, thereby reducing
closer look at individual 昀椀rms, however, reveals a growing costs in the areas of sales and marketing and operations.
trifurcation in spending patterns as asset managers
increasingly align their cost structures with their strategic Beta Factories. This model tries to reduce costs across
models—alpha shops, beta factories, and distribution the board for passively managed products while
powerhouses and solution providers. strategically investing in IT, which comprises 22% of total
costs, to drive scalability and automation.
This alignment re昀氀ects the winning strategies that BCG
identi昀椀ed in the 2016 Global Asset Management report. Because of their IT investments, beta factories are in a
The distinct paths to competitive advantage outlined there position to become tech providers for the broader industry,
are now driving di昀昀erentiated cost allocations across the o昀昀ering infrastructure, execution platforms, and advanced
industry. (See Exhibit 10.) Each model comes with analytics to partners. As a strategy for the future, beta
inherent cost tradeo昀昀s, and each 昀椀rm must decide where it factories can make a purer play for IT as their cost base
can best position itself to remain competitive. Each 昀椀rm while reducing their relative spending on IM&TE.
also needs to consider how a further entrenchment of these
trends would a昀昀ect its cost base and monetization strategy. Distribution Powerhouses and Solution Providers.
This model concentrates on the sales and marketing and
Alpha Shops. Firms that adopt this model focus on operations functions so that the 昀椀rm can strengthen client
generating returns with active trading strategies, so they engagement and service delivery. These functions, when
prioritize spending on IM&TE to sustain their ability to combined, account for about 39% of their total costs—and
generate di昀昀erentiated returns. The associated costs if anything, that share will have to increase over the next
account for about 39% of their total costs. Although our data few years.
primarily covers traditional players, we expect IT and IM&TE
to represent a higher proportion of costs for alpha specialists As the industry experiences further separation between alpha
such as hedge funds and proprietary trading 昀椀rms. shops and beta factories, distribution and solution providers
are serving as the gateway to clients across channels. To stay
In order to establish stronger di昀昀erentiation in active competitive in this role, they should consider strategies to
management, alpha shops may increase the proportion of get closer to key intermediaries such as outsourced chief
their costs in IM&TE as the competition to 昀椀nd top investment o昀케cers (OCIOs) and consultants.

EXHIBIT 10

Cost Allocations Are Evolving Along Three Strategic Paths

Cost structure archetypes
AVERAGE COSTS (BASIS POINTS)

–38%
30

39% Investment management

of total –53% and trade execution
20 costs Sales and marketing
Operations
IT
39%
10 of total Business management
costs and support
22%
of total Most important cost
costs allocation(s) for
0 the strategy
IM&TE focused S&M/operations focused Low-cost/IT focused

STRATEGY: Alpha shop Distribution powerhouse/ Beta factory

solutions provider

Sources: BCG Expand Benchmarks; BCG Global Asset Management Benchmarking Database 2024; BCG analysis.
Note: Cost structure archetypes were developed using a K-means cluster analysis of 36 asset managers overseeing ~$30 trillion in AuM. The analysis
primarily focuses on traditional asset managers globally and excludes pure alternative players. AuM = assets under management; IM&TE = investment
management and trade execution; S&M = sales and marketing.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 18

Regardless of the cost model that an asset manager follows,
the best way to ensure resilience is by adopting a zero-based
approach in which the 昀椀rm rethinks its cost structures from
the ground up.

Reimagining Costs with a Automation. Most 昀椀rms are adopting advanced

technologies such as GenAI to improve cost e昀케ciencies,
Zero-Based Mindset particularly in the areas of investment research, trading,
reporting, and compliance. (See the sidebar “AI Evolution:
Regardless of the cost model that an asset manager From Experimentation to Integration.”) As our 2024
follows, the best way to ensure resilience is by adopting a Global Asset Management report discussed in detail,
zero-based approach in which the 昀椀rm rethinks its cost asset managers should be proactive in integrating AI-
structures from the ground up. We see three key levers that driven tools into their research work昀氀ows and should
asset managers can use to optimize their cost structures: redesign portfolio management teams to fully capitalize on
outsourcing, automation, and avoiding dual-run costs. these advances. For example, diversi昀椀ed 昀椀rms have a
unique opportunity to leverage customer data gathered at
Outsourcing. Asset managers can reduce operational one end of their business to inform and strategize about
costs by shi昀琀ing their noncore cost-intensive functions such pricing and marketing decisions in other parts of their
as mid- or back-o昀케ce operations to third-party providers. product suite.
For small and midsize players, it increasingly makes sense
to outsource technology and data management functions. Our clients are combining levers such as automation and
outsourcing to reduce costs by forging partnerships with AI
As the value of bespoke customer data utilization grows and specialist companies that can serve the needs of noncore
technology’s role in di昀昀erentiation becomes more salient, operations such as so昀琀ware development.
the largest asset managers and dedicated tech 昀椀rms are
investing heavily in technological infrastructure. For their Avoiding Dual-Run Costs. With expansion comes the
part, however, small and midsize players should carefully risk of duplicated team structures, ine昀케ciencies in decision
weigh the bene昀椀ts of building in-house capabilities against making, and increased operational complexity. As asset
the costs and the ease of integration that third-party managers venture into new asset classes, they should,
platforms provide. wherever possible, deploy the expertise of their existing
teams across new disciplines to avoid dual cost structures.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 19

AI Evolution: From Experimentation to Integration

We dedicated last year’s Global Asset Management Report Early adopters of AI have reported substantial e昀케ciency
to the industry’s transformation as it developed use cases gains. For example, one asset manager that rolled out an in-
for AI. Since then, we have seen the industry shi昀琀 from house AI application to all employees quickly transitioned
experimental applications to deeply integrated solutions. from weekly to daily use. The 昀椀rm now deploys AI to support
As asset managers increasingly emphasize operational coding, document reviews, and investment reporting,
e昀케ciency, enhanced decision making, and client leading to major reductions in administrative workloads.
engagement, AI has emerged as a key accelerator.
Despite these advances, asset managers continue to
Firms are using AI to streamline work昀氀ows and enhance grapple with key challenges in AI adoption. Integration
customer interactions. As AI adoption advances, challenges across di昀昀erent functions remains complex, and 昀椀rms are
related to integration, compliance, and governance remain working to ensure that AI-generated outputs are reliable
focal points for the industry in re昀椀ning its approach to and that they align with accepted decision-making models.
automation and augmentation. Regulatory oversight is a crucial factor as well, with
evolving frameworks such as the EU AI Act shaping the
Increasingly, asset management 昀椀rms are applying AI trajectory of AI adoption.
across their front, middle, and back o昀케ces. The technology
plays a pivotal role in client engagement, from dra昀琀ing As AI’s role in asset management deepens, 昀椀rms’ attention
customized RFP responses to automating routine inquiries. will increasingly focus on re昀椀ning applications,
strengthening governance, and expanding AI-driven
Within the investment management and trade execution investment strategies. All of this will help ensure that
function, AI models analyze market trends and dra昀琀 innovation aligns with both business strategy and
investment committee documents. In addition, AI can regulatory expectations.
optimize allocation recommendations by extracting
insights from vast data sets, including alternative sources
such as news and earnings calls. Compliance teams use AI
to navigate evolving regulatory requirements more
e昀케ciently. In operations, AI-powered assistants can
automate customized reporting and signi昀椀cantly reduce
processing times. In IT, AI can enhance code generation
and debugging.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 20

Appendix
APPENDIX 1

All Regions Experienced Positive AuM Growth

North America Europe Australia and Japan

14% 7% 12%
7% 3% 6%
Global 5% 4% 6% 7%
5% 2%
54.2 61.6 23.3 25.0 7.2 8.1
17.9
12% 31.6 11.3 13.4 4.4
19.1 24.1 2.8 3.1

7%
128.0 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024
114.7
8% Asia-Pacific (excluding
5% Latin America Middle East and Africa Australia and Japan)

68.7 13% 13%

11% 10% 10%
4%
47.0 7% 28%
36.5 17% 12% 2.2 11%
2.8 26% 22.6 25.4
1.9 2.5
1.8
0.9 1.3 10.3
0.2 0.5 0.8 3.0
0.9
2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024

Total AuM Annual growth, Annual growth, Annual growth, Annual growth,
($trillions) 2005–2010 2010–2015 2015–2023 2023–2024

Source: BCG Global Asset Management Market Sizing Database 2025.

Note: Market sizing corresponds to assets sourced from each region and professionally managed in exchange for management fees. AuM includes captive
AuM of insurance groups or pension funds where AuM is delegated to asset management entities with fees paid. Globally, 44 markets are covered, including
offshore AuM (which is not included in the six regions). North America comprises Canada and the US. Europe comprises Austria, Belgium, the Czech
Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and the UK. Asia-Pacific (excluding Australia and Japan) comprises mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia,
Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. Middle East and Africa comprises selected sovereign wealth funds and pension funds of the region and
mutual funds, plus Morocco and South Africa. Latin America comprises Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico. For all markets where the currency is
not the US dollar, the end-of-year 2024 exchange rate is applied to all years to synchronize current and historical data. Values differ from those in prior
studies due to exchange rate fluctuations, revised methodology, and changes in source data. AuM = assets under management.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 21

APPENDIX 2

Alternative Investments Generate More Than 50% of Global

Revenues, with Less Than 25% of Global AuM
GLOBAL AUM SPLIT BY PRODUCT (%, $TRILLIONS) GLOBAL REVENUE SPLIT BY PRODUCT (%, $BILLIONS)

$36T $47T $69T $115T $128T $184T $130B $173B $259B $407B $435B $623B

11/4
12 15/7 7 14/10 11
20/23 5 18/24 9 20/37
31/40
12
16/6 41/71 8 39/102
8 16/11 10
18/9 5
4 13/15 10 13/17 6 12/22 54/220 4 53/229 9 56/348
7/3
18
12/6 12 15/10 13/17 6 13/23
5 14/16 8 18/24

5
9 18/46
18/30
5/6

17 2
29/53 13/53 7 13/57
12 32/41 5 6 12/74
56/20 4 32/37 8/14 15 11/28
–1 6 39/27
42/20 5
10/41 6 10/43 6 9/59
44/57
–1
31/54 6 28/73
1 19/77 11 20/85 5 17/108
10 26/48
21/25 21 23/30
15/10 11
12/6 13
9/3 11
4/9 4/17 5/20 5/34
2/3 3/5 11
9 16 8 21
2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2029E 2005 2010 2015 2023 2024 2029E

Alternatives1 Active specialties2 Solutions, LDI, and multiassets3 Active core4 Passive5 CAGR (%)

Source: BCG Global Asset Management Market Sizing Database 2025.

Note: Because of rounding, not all bar segment values add up to 100% or to the specified sum. AuM = assets under management; CAGR = compound annual
growth rate; LDI = liability-driven investment.
1
Includes these instruments: hedge funds, private equity, real estate, infrastructure, commodities, private debt, and liquid alternative mutual funds (such as
absolute return, long/short, market-neutral, and trading-oriented); private equity and hedge fund revenues do not include performance fees.
2
Includes these actively managed instruments: equity specialties (global equities [excluding US], emerging market, all sector and thematic, and undefined [if
market is not known]) and fixed-income specialties (emerging-markets fixed-income, high-yield, convertible, inflation-linked, and global [excluding US] and
undefined [if market is not known]).
3
Includes these instruments: target date, target maturity, liability-driven, outsourced chief investment officer, multiasset balanced, and multiasset allocation.
4
Includes these actively managed instruments: developed-market and global equity, developed-market government and corporate fixed-income, global
fixed-income, money market, and structured products.
5
Includes exchange-traded funds and passively managed equity and fixed-income instruments.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 22

APPENDIX 3

ETFs and Select Alternative Products Are Expected to Lead Growth

Through 2029
AUM GROWTH, 2024–2029E (%)
Passive equity (excluding ETF)
15
Equity ETF

Fixed-income ETF Private equity

12
Passive fixed-income Infrastructure
(excluding ETF) Private debt
Active fixed-
9 Multiasset
income core1 Real estate

Active equity core2

Other
6
Active equity specialized3
Hedge funds4
Other Commodities
3
Structured
LDI Active fixed-income specialized5
products
Money market Solutions (excluding LDI)6
0
0 50 100 150
NET REVENUE MARGIN (BASIS POINTS)7

Active core Active specialty Alternatives Solutions and LDI Passives, excluding ETFs ETFs

Estimated AuM, 2024 (scale = $1 trillion)

Source: BCG Global Asset Management Market-Sizing Database 2025.

Note: AuM = assets under management; ETF = exchange-traded fund; LDI = liability-driven investment.
1
Includes these actively managed fixed-income instruments: developed market, global, corporate, and government.
2
Includes these actively managed equity instruments: developed market and global.
3
Includes these actively managed equity instruments: global (excluding US), emerging market, all sector and thematic, and undefined (if market is not known).
4
Includes these instruments: absolute return, long/short, market-neutral, and trading-oriented mutual funds.
5
Includes these actively managed fixed-income instruments: global (excluding US), emerging market, high-yield, convertible, inflation-linked, and undefined
(if market is not known).
6
Includes these instruments: target date funds, target maturity, and outsourced chief investment officer.
7
Management fees net of distribution costs.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 23

About the Authors
Dean Frankle is a managing director and partner in the Renaud Fages is a managing director and partner in the
London o昀케ce of Boston Consulting Group. You may 昀椀rm’s Los Angeles o昀케ce. You may contact him by email at
contact him by email at frankle.dean@bcg.com. fages.renaud@bcg.com.

Johannes Burkhardt is a managing director and partner Peter Czerepak is a managing director and senior
in BCG’s Munich o昀케ce. You may contact him by email at partner in the 昀椀rm’s Boston o昀케ce. You may contact him by
burkhardt.johannes@bcg.com. email at czerepak.peter@bcg.com.

Mayank Jha is a managing director and partner in Bingbing Liu is a managing director and partner in the
BCG’s Mumbai o昀케ce. You may contact him by email at 昀椀rm’s Shanghai o昀케ce. You may contact him by email at
jha.mayank@bcg.com. liu.bingbing@bcg.com.

Michele Millosevich is a partner in BCG’s Milan o昀케ce. Kedra Newsom Reeves is a managing director and
You may contact him by email at millosevich.michele@ partner in the 昀椀rm’s Chicago o昀케ce. You may contact her by
bcg.com. email at newsom.kedra@bcg.com.

Chris Ng is an associate in BCG’s Calgary o昀케ce. You may Edoardo Palmisani is a managing director and partner in
contact him by email at ng.chris@bcg.com. the 昀椀rm’s Rome o昀케ce. You may contact him by email at
palmisani.edoardo@bcg.com.

Neil Pardasani is a managing director and senior partner

in BCG’s Los Angeles o昀케ce. You may contact him by email George Rudolph is a managing director and partner in
at pardasani.neil@bcg.com. the 昀椀rm’s New York o昀케ce. You may contact him by email
at rudolph.george@bcg.com.

Brian Teixeira is an associate director in BCG’s Boston

o昀케ce. You may contact him by email at teixeira.brian@ Martina Trepat is a partner in the 昀椀rm’s London o昀케ce.
bcg.com. You may contact her by email at trepat.martina@bcg.com.

Andrea Walbaum is a senior manager in BCG’s New York Mateo Wiesner is a consultant in the 昀椀rm’s New York o昀케ce.
o昀케ce. You may contact her by email at walbaum.andrea@ You may contact him by email at wiesner.mateo@bcg.com.
bcg.com.

Ivana Zupa is a managing director and partner in BCG’s

Zurich o昀케ce. You may contact her by email at zupa.ivana@
bcg.com.

For Further Contact Acknowledgments

If you would like to discuss this report, please contact The authors would like to thank the following colleagues
the authors. for their valuable contributions to this report: Jatin Bajwa,
Alessandro Barducci, Joppe Bijlsma, Henry Dai,
Niamh Dawson, Mukul Gupta, Christian Klingkowski,
Reema Kotecha, Sonali Maheshwari, Sergio Martin-Prieto,
Maël Robin, Pierre Roussel, Khushbu Sidan, and
Himakshi Srivastava.

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP FROM RECOVERY TO REINVENTION 24

Boston Consulting Group partners with leaders in business
and society to tackle their most important challenges and
capture their greatest opportunities. BCG was the pioneer
in business strategy when it was founded in 1963. Today,
we work closely with clients to embrace a transformational
approach aimed at bene昀椀ting all stakeholders—empowering
organizations to grow, build sustainable competitive
advantage, and drive positive societal impact.

Our diverse, global teams bring deep industry and functional

expertise and a range of perspectives that question the
status quo and spark change. BCG delivers solutions
through leading-edge management consulting, technology
and design, and corporate and digital ventures. We work
in a uniquely collaborative model across the 昀椀rm and
throughout all levels of the client organization, fueled by
the goal of helping our clients thrive and enabling them to
make the world a better place.

For information or permission to reprint, please contact

BCG at permissions@bcg.com. To 昀椀nd the latest BCG
content and register to receive e-alerts on this topic or
others, please visit bcg.com. Follow Boston Consulting
Group on LinkedIn, Facebook, and X (formerly Twitter).

© Boston Consulting Group 2025. All rights reserved. 4/25