Blackstone Inc.: 10-K Risk Factor Changes

The asset management business is intensely competitive. The asset management business is intensely competitive. The asset management business is intensely competitive. Competition is based on a variety of factors, including investment performance, the quality of client service, investor availability of capital and willingness to invest, fund terms (including fees and liquidity terms), brand recognition and business reputation. Our asset management business competes with a number of private funds, specialized investment funds, funds structured for individual investors, hedge funds, funds of hedge funds and other sponsors managing pools of capital, as well as corporate buyers, traditional asset managers, commercial banks, investment banks and other financial institutions (including sovereign wealth funds). We expect that competition will continue to increase. For example, certain traditional asset managers have developed their own private equity and private wealth platforms and are marketing other asset allocation strategies as alternatives to hedge fund investments. A number of factors serve to increase our competitive risks: The asset management business is intensely competitive. Competition is based on a variety of factors, including investment performance, the quality of client service, investor availability of capital and willingness to invest, fund terms (including fees and liquidity terms), brand recognition and business reputation. Our asset management business competes with a number of private funds, specialized investment funds, funds structured for individual investors, hedge funds, funds of hedge funds and other sponsors managing pools of capital, as well as corporate buyers, traditional asset managers, commercial banks, investment banks and other financial institutions (including sovereign wealth funds). We expect that competition will continue to increase. For example, certain traditional asset managers have developed their own private equity and private wealth platforms and are marketing other asset allocation strategies as alternatives to hedge fund investments. A number of factors serve to increase our competitive risks: • a number of our competitors have greater financial, technical, research, marketing and other resources and more personnel than we do, a number of our competitors have greater financial, technical, research, marketing and other resources and more personnel than we do, • some of our funds may not perform as well as competitors’ funds or other available investment products, some of our funds may not perform as well as competitors’ funds or other available investment products, • several of our competitors have significant amounts of capital, and many of them have similar investment objectives to ours, which may create additional competition for investment opportunities and may reduce the size and duration of pricing inefficiencies that many alternative investment strategies seek to exploit, several of our competitors have significant amounts of capital, and many of them have similar investment objectives to ours, which may create additional competition for investment opportunities and may reduce the size and duration of pricing inefficiencies that many alternative investment strategies seek to exploit, • some of our competitors, particularly strategic competitors, may have a lower cost of capital, which may be exacerbated by limits on the deductibility of interest expense, some of our competitors, particularly strategic competitors, may have a lower cost of capital, which may be exacerbated by limits on the deductibility of interest expense, • some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us, which may create competitive disadvantages for us with respect to investment opportunities, some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us, which may create competitive disadvantages for us with respect to investment opportunities, • some of our competitors may be subject to less regulation and accordingly may have more flexibility to undertake and execute certain businesses or investments than we can and/or bear less compliance cost than we do, some of our competitors may be subject to less regulation and accordingly may have more flexibility to undertake and execute certain businesses or investments than we can and/or bear less compliance cost than we do, • some of our competitors may have more flexibility than us in raising certain types of investment funds under the investment management contracts they have negotiated with their investors, some of our competitors may have more flexibility than us in raising certain types of investment funds under the investment management contracts they have negotiated with their investors, • some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances, different risk assessments or lower return thresholds, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and to bid more aggressively than us for investments that we want to make or to seek exit opportunities through different channels, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances, different risk assessments or lower return thresholds, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and to bid more aggressively than us for investments that we want to make or to seek exit opportunities through different channels, • some of our competitors may be more successful than we are in the development of new or customized products to address investor demand for new or different investment strategies and/or regulatory changes, including with respect to private credit products and products that are developed for individual investors or that target insurance capital, some of our competitors may be more successful than we are in the development of new or customized products to address investor demand for new or different investment strategies and/or regulatory changes, including with respect to private credit products and products that are developed for individual investors or that target insurance capital, 30 30 Table of Contents Table of Contents • in order to broaden distribution of their private wealth products, some of our competitors may be willing to pay higher placement, servicing or other forms of distributor fees, which may adversely impact the amount of capital we are able to raise in the private wealth channel, in order to broaden distribution of their private wealth products, some of our competitors may be willing to pay higher placement, servicing or other forms of distributor fees, which may adversely impact the amount of capital we are able to raise in the private wealth channel, • there are relatively few barriers to entry impeding new alternative asset managers, and the successful efforts of new entrants, including former “star” portfolio managers at large diversified financial institutions as well as such institutions themselves, is expected to continue to result in increased competition, there are relatively few barriers to entry impeding new alternative asset managers, and the successful efforts of new entrants, including former “star” portfolio managers at large diversified financial institutions as well as such institutions themselves, is expected to continue to result in increased competition, • some of our competitors may have better expertise or be regarded by investors as having better expertise in a specific asset class or geographic region than we do, some of our competitors may have better expertise or be regarded by investors as having better expertise in a specific asset class or geographic region than we do, • corporate buyers may be able to achieve synergistic cost savings in respect of an investment, which may provide them with a competitive advantage relative to us when bidding for an investment, corporate buyers may be able to achieve synergistic cost savings in respect of an investment, which may provide them with a competitive advantage relative to us when bidding for an investment, • some investors may prefer to invest with an investment manager that is not publicly traded or is smaller, with a more limited number of investment products and some investors may prefer to invest with an investment manager that is not publicly traded or is smaller, with a more limited number of investment products and • other industry participants will from time to time seek to recruit our investment professionals and other employees away from us. other industry participants will from time to time seek to recruit our investment professionals and other employees away from us. Additionally, technological innovation, including the use of artificial intelligence, has the potential to disrupt the financial industry and change the way financial institutions, including asset managers, do business. Some of our competitors may be more successful than we are in the development and implementation of new technologies, including services and platforms based on artificial intelligence, to address investor demand or improve operations. If we are unable to adequately advance our capabilities in these areas, or do so at a slower pace than others in our industry, we may be at a competitive disadvantage. Additionally, technological innovation, including the use of artificial intelligence, has the potential to disrupt the financial industry and change the way financial institutions, including asset managers, do business. Some of our competitors may be more successful than we are in the development and implementation of new technologies, including services and platforms based on artificial intelligence, to address investor demand or improve operations. If we are unable to adequately advance our capabilities in these areas, or do so at a slower pace than others in our industry, we may be at a competitive disadvantage. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Alternatively, we may experience decreased rates of return and increased risks of loss if we match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Moreover, if we are forced to compete with other alternative asset managers on the basis of price, we may not be able to maintain our current fund fee and carried interest terms. We have historically competed primarily on the performance of our funds, and not on the level of our fees or carried interest relative to those of our competitors. However, there is a risk that fees and carried interest in the alternative investment management industry will decline, without regard to the historical performance of a manager. Further, as part of a shift in the distribution arrangements in the private wealth industry, certain third-party intermediaries have sought to revise existing or implement new fee arrangements that align their fees with the initial amount or ongoing net asset value of capital invested through the intermediary in the applicable vehicle. While the extent of this shift going forward is uncertain, the costs associated with the distribution of certain of our private wealth perpetual products have increased and there may be further increases in distribution costs for these and future products. The reduction of net management fees or performance allocations we receive, including as a result of new fee arrangements, or the incurrence of higher costs in connection with product distribution, without corresponding decreases in our cost structure, would adversely affect the profitability of impacted products. Certain of the third-party intermediaries on whom we rely to distribute our investment products also sell their own competing proprietary investment products, which could limit the distribution of our products. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Alternatively, we may experience decreased rates of return and increased risks of loss if we match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Moreover, if we are forced to compete with other alternative asset managers on the basis of price, we may not be able to maintain our current fund fee and carried interest terms. We have historically competed primarily on the performance of our funds, and not on the level of our fees or carried interest relative to those of our competitors. However, there is a risk that fees and carried interest in the alternative investment management industry will decline, without regard to the historical performance of a manager. Further, as part of a shift in the distribution arrangements in the private wealth industry, certain third-party intermediaries have sought to revise existing or implement new fee arrangements that align their fees with the initial amount or ongoing net asset value of capital invested through the intermediary in the applicable vehicle. While the extent of this shift going forward is uncertain, the costs associated with the distribution of certain of our private wealth perpetual products have increased and there may be further increases in distribution costs for these and future products. The reduction of net management fees or performance allocations we receive, including as a result of new fee arrangements, or the incurrence of higher costs in connection with product distribution, without corresponding decreases in our cost structure, would adversely affect the profitability of impacted products. Certain of the third-party intermediaries on whom we rely to distribute our investment products also sell their own competing proprietary investment products, which could limit the distribution of our products. third-party third-party In addition, the attractiveness of our investment funds relative to investments in other investment products could decrease depending on economic conditions. Furthermore, any new or incremental regulatory measures for the U.S. financial services industry may increase costs and create regulatory uncertainty and additional competition for many of our funds. Conversely, regulatory measures aimed at reducing burden on U.S. banks, such as less onerous bank regulatory capital requirements, may create additional competition for certain of our credit strategies. See “—Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business.” In addition, the attractiveness of our investment funds relative to investments in other investment products could decrease depending on economic conditions. Furthermore, any new or incremental regulatory measures for the U.S. financial services industry may increase costs and create regulatory uncertainty and additional competition for many of our funds. Conversely, regulatory measures aimed at reducing burden on U.S. banks, such as less onerous bank regulatory capital requirements, may create additional competition for certain of our credit strategies. See “—Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business.” 31 31 Table of Contents Table of Contents These competitive pressures could adversely affect our ability to make successful investments and limit our ability to raise future investment funds, either of which would adversely impact our business, revenue, results of operations and cash flow. These competitive pressures could adversely affect our ability to make successful investments and limit our ability to raise future investment funds, either of which would adversely impact our business, revenue, results of operations and cash flow. We have increasingly undertaken business initiatives to increase the number and type of investment products we offer to individual investors, which could expose us to new and greater levels of risk. We have increasingly undertaken business initiatives to increase the number and type of investment products we offer to individual investors, which could expose us to new and greater levels of risk. We have increasingly undertaken business initiatives to increase the number and type of investment products we offer to individual investors, which could expose us to new and greater levels of risk.

The asset management business is intensely competitive. The asset management business is intensely competitive. The asset management business is intensely competitive, with competition based on a variety of factors, including investment performance, the quality of client service, investor availability of capital and willingness to invest, fund terms (including fees and liquidity terms), brand recognition and business reputation. Our asset management business competes with a number of private funds, specialized investment funds, funds structured for individual investors, hedge funds, funds of hedge funds and other sponsors managing pools of capital, as well as corporate buyers, traditional asset managers, commercial banks, investment banks and other financial institutions (including sovereign wealth funds), and we expect that competition will continue to increase. For example, certain traditional asset managers have developed their own private equity and retail platforms and are marketing other asset allocation strategies as alternatives to hedge fund investments. A number of factors serve to increase our competitive risks: The asset management business is intensely competitive, with competition based on a variety of factors, including investment performance, the quality of client service, investor availability of capital and willingness to invest, fund terms (including fees and liquidity terms), brand recognition and business reputation. Our asset management business competes with a number of private funds, specialized investment funds, funds structured for individual investors, hedge funds, funds of hedge funds and other sponsors managing pools of capital, as well as corporate buyers, traditional asset managers, commercial banks, investment banks and other financial institutions (including sovereign wealth funds), and we expect that competition will continue to increase. For example, certain traditional asset managers have developed their own private equity and retail platforms and are marketing other asset allocation strategies as alternatives to hedge fund investments. A number of factors serve to increase our competitive risks: • a number of our competitors in some of our businesses have greater financial, technical, research, marketing and other resources and more personnel than we do, a number of our competitors in some of our businesses have greater financial, technical, research, marketing and other resources and more personnel than we do, • some of our funds may not perform as well as competitors’ funds or other available investment products, some of our funds may not perform as well as competitors’ funds or other available investment products, • several of our competitors have significant amounts of capital, and many of them have similar investment objectives to ours, which may create additional competition for investment opportunities and may reduce the size and duration of pricing inefficiencies that many alternative investment strategies seek to exploit, several of our competitors have significant amounts of capital, and many of them have similar investment objectives to ours, which may create additional competition for investment opportunities and may reduce the size and duration of pricing inefficiencies that many alternative investment strategies seek to exploit, • some of our competitors, particularly strategic competitors, may have a lower cost of capital, which may be exacerbated by limits on the deductibility of interest expense, some of our competitors, particularly strategic competitors, may have a lower cost of capital, which may be exacerbated by limits on the deductibility of interest expense, • some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us, which may create competitive disadvantages for us with respect to investment opportunities, some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us, which may create competitive disadvantages for us with respect to investment opportunities, • some of our competitors may be subject to less regulation and accordingly may have more flexibility to undertake and execute certain businesses or investments than we can and/or bear less compliance expense than we do, some of our competitors may be subject to less regulation and accordingly may have more flexibility to undertake and execute certain businesses or investments than we can and/or bear less compliance expense than we do, • some of our competitors may have more flexibility than us in raising certain types of investment funds under the investment management contracts they have negotiated with their investors, some of our competitors may have more flexibility than us in raising certain types of investment funds under the investment management contracts they have negotiated with their investors, • some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances, different risk assessments or lower return thresholds, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and to bid more aggressively than us for investments that we want to make or to seek exit opportunities through different channels, such as special purpose acquisition vehicles, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances, different risk assessments or lower return thresholds, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and to bid more aggressively than us for investments that we want to make or to seek exit opportunities through different channels, such as special purpose acquisition vehicles, • some of our competitors may be more successful than we are in the development of new products to address investor demand for new or different investment strategies and/or regulatory changes, including with respect to products with mandates that incorporate environmental, social and governance considerations, or products that developed for individual investors or that target insurance capital, some of our competitors may be more successful than we are in the development of new products to address investor demand for new or different investment strategies and/or regulatory changes, including with respect to products with mandates that incorporate environmental, social and governance considerations, or products that developed for individual investors or that target insurance capital, • there are relatively few barriers to entry impeding new alternative asset fund management firms, and the successful efforts of new entrants into our various businesses, including former “star” portfolio managers at large diversified financial institutions as well as such institutions themselves, is expected to continue to result in increased competition, there are relatively few barriers to entry impeding new alternative asset fund management firms, and the successful efforts of new entrants into our various businesses, including former “star” portfolio managers at large diversified financial institutions as well as such institutions themselves, is expected to continue to result in increased competition, • some of our competitors may have better expertise or be regarded by investors as having better expertise in a specific asset class or geographic region than we do, some of our competitors may have better expertise or be regarded by investors as having better expertise in a specific asset class or geographic region than we do, • our competitors that are corporate buyers may be able to achieve synergistic cost savings in respect of an investment, which may provide them with a competitive advantage in bidding for an investment, our competitors that are corporate buyers may be able to achieve synergistic cost savings in respect of an investment, which may provide them with a competitive advantage in bidding for an investment, • some investors may prefer to invest with an investment manager that is not publicly traded or is smaller, with a more limited number of investment products that it manages and some investors may prefer to invest with an investment manager that is not publicly traded or is smaller, with a more limited number of investment products that it manages and • other industry participants will from time to time seek to recruit our investment professionals and other employees away from us. other industry participants will from time to time seek to recruit our investment professionals and other employees away from us. Additionally, technological innovation, including the use of artificial intelligence and data science, has the potential to disrupt the financial industry and change the way financial institutions, including asset managers, do business. Some of our competitors may be more successful than us in the development and implementation of new technologies, including services and platforms based on artificial intelligence, to address investor demand or improve operations. If we are unable to adequately advance our capabilities in these areas, or do so at a slower pace than others in our industry, we may be at a competitive disadvantage. Additionally, technological innovation, including the use of artificial intelligence and data science, has the potential to disrupt the financial industry and change the way financial institutions, including asset managers, do business. Some of our competitors may be more successful than us in the development and implementation of new technologies, including services and platforms based on artificial intelligence, to address investor demand or improve operations. If we are unable to adequately advance our capabilities in these areas, or do so at a slower pace than others in our industry, we may be at a competitive disadvantage. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Alternatively, we may experience decreased rates of return and increased risks of loss if we match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Moreover, if we are forced to compete with other alternative asset managers on the basis of price, we may We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Alternatively, we may experience decreased rates of return and increased risks of loss if we match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Moreover, if we are forced to compete with other alternative asset managers on the basis of price, we may 31 31 Table of Contents not be able to maintain our current fund fee and carried interest terms. We have historically competed primarily on the performance of our funds, and not on the level of our fees or carried interest relative to those of our competitors. However, there is a risk that fees and carried interest in the alternative investment management industry will decline, without regard to the historical performance of a manager. Further, some of our competitors may be willing to pay higher placement fees in order to gain distribution of their private wealth products. Fee or carried interest income reductions, or placement fee increases, on existing or future products, without corresponding decreases in our cost structure, would adversely affect our revenues and profitability. not be able to maintain our current fund fee and carried interest terms. We have historically competed primarily on the performance of our funds, and not on the level of our fees or carried interest relative to those of our competitors. However, there is a risk that fees and carried interest in the alternative investment management industry will decline, without regard to the historical performance of a manager. Further, some of our competitors may be willing to pay higher placement fees in order to gain distribution of their private wealth products. Fee or carried interest income reductions, or placement fee increases, on existing or future products, without corresponding decreases in our cost structure, would adversely affect our revenues and profitability. In addition, the attractiveness of our investment funds relative to investments in other investment products could decrease depending on economic conditions. Furthermore, any new or incremental regulatory measures for the U.S. financial services industry may increase costs and create regulatory uncertainty and additional competition for many of our funds. See “— Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business.” In addition, the attractiveness of our investment funds relative to investments in other investment products could decrease depending on economic conditions. Furthermore, any new or incremental regulatory measures for the U.S. financial services industry may increase costs and create regulatory uncertainty and additional competition for many of our funds. See “— Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business.” These competitive pressures could adversely affect our ability to make successful investments and limit our ability to raise future investment funds, either of which would adversely impact our business, revenue, results of operations and cash flow. These competitive pressures could adversely affect our ability to make successful investments and limit our ability to raise future investment funds, either of which would adversely impact our business, revenue, results of operations and cash flow. We have increasingly undertaken business initiatives to increase the number and type of investment products we offer to individual investors, which could expose us to new and greater levels of risk. We have increasingly undertaken business initiatives to increase the number and type of investment products we offer to individual investors, which could expose us to new and greater levels of risk. We have increasingly undertaken business initiatives to increase the number and type of investment products we offer to individual investors, which could expose us to new and greater levels of risk.

Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds. Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds. In the event that any of our investment funds were to perform poorly, our revenue, income and cash flow would decline because the value of our assets under management would decrease, which would result in a reduction in management fees, and our investment returns would decrease, resulting in a reduction in the Performance Revenues we earn. Moreover, we could experience losses on our investments of our own principal as a result of poor investment performance by our investment funds. Furthermore, if a carry fund does not achieve certain investment returns over its life as a result of poor performance of later investments, we will be obligated to repay the excess Performance Allocations that were previously distributed to us above the amount to which the relevant general partner is ultimately entitled. Similarly, certain of our vehicles’ terms require an offset of Performance Revenues related to past performance, often referred to as a “recoupment of loss carryforward.” If a recoupment of loss carryforward is triggered, including as a result of a meaningful decline in the vehicle’s revenues following a period of strong performance, such offset would serve to reduce the amount of future Performance Revenues to which we would be entitled in such vehicle. In the event that the offset is insufficient for the vehicle to fully recoup such loss carryforward, we may be required to make a cash payment after a certain period. In the event that any of our investment funds were to perform poorly, our revenue, income and cash flow would decline because the value of our assets under management would decrease, which would result in a reduction in management fees, and our investment returns would decrease, resulting in a reduction in the Performance Revenues we earn. Moreover, we could experience losses on our investments of our own principal as a result of poor investment performance by our investment funds. Furthermore, if a carry fund does not achieve certain investment returns over its life as a result of poor performance of later investments, we will be obligated to repay the excess Performance Allocations that were previously distributed to us above the amount to which the relevant general partner is ultimately entitled. Similarly, certain of our vehicles’ terms require an offset of Performance Revenues related to past performance, often referred to as a “recoupment of loss carryforward.” If a recoupment of loss carryforward is triggered, including as a result of a meaningful decline in the vehicle’s revenues following a period of strong performance, such offset would serve to reduce the amount of future Performance Revenues to which we would be entitled in such vehicle. In the event that the offset is insufficient for the vehicle to fully recoup such loss carryforward, we may be required to make a cash payment after a certain period. Poor performance of our investment funds could make it more difficult for us to raise new capital. Investors in funds might decline to invest in future investment funds we raise and investors in hedge funds or other investment funds might withdraw their investments as a result of poor performance of the investment funds in which they are invested. Investors and potential investors in our funds continually assess our investment funds’ performance, and our ability to raise capital for existing and future investment funds and avoid excessive redemption levels will depend on our investment funds’ continued satisfactory performance. Accordingly, poor fund performance may deter future investment in our funds and thereby decrease the capital invested in our funds and ultimately, our management fee revenue. Alternatively, in the face of poor fund performance, investors could demand lower fees or fee concessions for existing or future funds which would likewise decrease our revenue. Poor performance of our investment funds could make it more difficult for us to raise new capital. Investors in funds might decline to invest in future investment funds we raise and investors in hedge funds or other investment funds might withdraw their investments as a result of poor performance of the investment funds in which they are invested. Investors and potential investors in our funds continually assess our investment funds’ performance, and our ability to raise capital for existing and future investment funds and avoid excessive redemption levels will depend on our investment funds’ continued satisfactory performance. Accordingly, poor fund performance may deter future investment in our funds and thereby decrease the capital invested in our funds and ultimately, our management fee revenue. Alternatively, in the face of poor fund performance, investors could demand lower fees or fee concessions for existing or future funds which would likewise decrease our revenue. Furthermore, our organizational documents do not limit our ability to enter into new lines or business, and, from time to time, we may pursue new or different investment strategies and expand into geographic markets and businesses that may not perform as expected and result in poor performance by us and our investment funds. In addition to the risk of poor performance, such activity may subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including risks associated with (a) the possibility that we have insufficient expertise to engage in such activities profitably or without incurring inappropriate amounts of risk, (b) the diversion of management’s attention from our core businesses, (c) known or unknown contingent liabilities, which could result in unforeseen losses for us and our funds, (d) the disruption of ongoing businesses, (e) the ability to properly manage conflicts of interest and (f) compliance with additional regulatory requirements. Furthermore, our organizational documents do not limit our ability to enter into new lines or business, and, from time to time, we may pursue new or different investment strategies and expand into geographic markets and businesses that may not perform as expected and result in poor performance by us and our investment funds. In addition to the risk of poor performance, such activity may subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including risks associated with (a) the possibility that we have insufficient expertise to engage in such activities profitably or without incurring inappropriate amounts of risk, (b) the diversion of management’s attention from our core businesses, (c) known or unknown contingent liabilities, which could result in unforeseen losses for us and our funds, (d) the disruption of ongoing businesses, (e) the ability to properly manage conflicts of interest and (f) compliance with additional regulatory requirements. Our equity investments and some of our debt investments rank junior to investments made by others, exposing us to a greater risk of losing our fund’s investment. Our equity investments and some of our debt investments rank junior to investments made by others, exposing us to a greater risk of losing our fund’s investment. Our equity investments and some of our debt investments rank junior to investments made by others, exposing us to a greater risk of losing our fund’s investment.

Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds. Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds. In the event that any of our investment funds were to perform poorly, our revenue, income and cash flow would decline because the value of our assets under management would decrease, which would result in a reduction in management fees, and our investment returns would decrease, resulting in a reduction in the Performance Revenues we earn. Moreover, we could experience losses on our investments of our own principal as a result of poor investment performance by our investment funds. Furthermore, if, as a result of poor performance of later investments in a carry fund’s life, the fund does not achieve certain investment returns for the fund over its life, we will be obligated to repay the amount by which Performance Allocations that were previously distributed to us exceed the amount to which the relevant general partner is ultimately entitled. Similarly, certain of our vehicles’ terms require an offset of Performance Revenues related to past performance, often referred to as a “recoupment of loss carryforward.” If a recoupment of loss carryforward is triggered, including as a result of a meaningful decline in the vehicles’ revenues following a period of strong performance, such offset would serve to reduce the amount of future Performance Revenues to which we would be entitled in such vehicle. In the event that the offset is insufficient for the vehicle to fully recoup such loss carryforward, we may be required to make a cash payment after a certain period. In the event that any of our investment funds were to perform poorly, our revenue, income and cash flow would decline because the value of our assets under management would decrease, which would result in a reduction in management fees, and our investment returns would decrease, resulting in a reduction in the Performance Revenues we earn. Moreover, we could experience losses on our investments of our own principal as a result of poor investment performance by our investment funds. Furthermore, if, as a result of poor performance of later investments in a carry fund’s life, the fund does not achieve certain investment returns for the fund over its life, we will be obligated to repay the amount by which Performance Allocations that were previously distributed to us exceed the amount to which the relevant general partner is ultimately entitled. Similarly, certain of our vehicles’ terms require an offset of Performance Revenues related to past performance, often referred to as a “recoupment of loss carryforward.” If a recoupment of loss carryforward is triggered, including as a result of a meaningful decline in the vehicles’ revenues following a period of strong performance, such offset would serve to reduce the amount of future Performance Revenues to which we would be entitled in such vehicle. In the event that the offset is insufficient for the vehicle to fully recoup such loss carryforward, we may be required to make a cash payment after a certain period. 52 52 Table of Contents In addition, in most cases, the companies in which our investment funds invest will have indebtedness or equity securities, or may be permitted to incur indebtedness or to issue equity securities, that rank senior to our investment, which may limit the ability of our investment funds to influence a company’s affairs and to take actions to protect their investments during periods of financial distress or following an insolvency. In addition, in most cases, the companies in which our investment funds invest will have indebtedness or equity securities, or may be permitted to incur indebtedness or to issue equity securities, that rank senior to our investment, which may limit the ability of our investment funds to influence a company’s affairs and to take actions to protect their investments during periods of financial distress or following an insolvency. Poor performance of our investment funds could make it more difficult for us to raise new capital. Investors in funds might decline to invest in future investment funds we raise and investors in hedge funds or other investment funds might withdraw their investments as a result of poor performance of the investment funds in which they are invested. Investors and potential investors in our funds continually assess our investment funds’ performance, and our ability to raise capital for existing and future investment funds and avoid excessive redemption levels will depend on our investment funds’ continued satisfactory performance. Accordingly, poor fund performance may deter future investment in our funds and thereby decrease the capital invested in our funds and ultimately, our management fee revenue. Alternatively, in the face of poor fund performance, investors could demand lower fees or fee concessions for existing or future funds which would likewise decrease our revenue. Poor performance of our investment funds could make it more difficult for us to raise new capital. Investors in funds might decline to invest in future investment funds we raise and investors in hedge funds or other investment funds might withdraw their investments as a result of poor performance of the investment funds in which they are invested. Investors and potential investors in our funds continually assess our investment funds’ performance, and our ability to raise capital for existing and future investment funds and avoid excessive redemption levels will depend on our investment funds’ continued satisfactory performance. Accordingly, poor fund performance may deter future investment in our funds and thereby decrease the capital invested in our funds and ultimately, our management fee revenue. Alternatively, in the face of poor fund performance, investors could demand lower fees or fee concessions for existing or future funds which would likewise decrease our revenue. Furthermore, from time to time, we may pursue new or different investment strategies and expand into geographic markets and businesses that may not perform as expected and result in poor performance by us and our investment funds. In addition to the risk of poor performance, such activity may subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including risks associated with (a) the possibility that we have insufficient expertise to engage in such activities profitably or without incurring inappropriate amounts of risk, (b) the diversion of management’s attention from our core businesses, (c) known or unknown contingent liabilities, which could result in unforeseen losses for us and our funds, (d) the disruption of ongoing businesses and (e) compliance with additional regulatory requirements. Furthermore, from time to time, we may pursue new or different investment strategies and expand into geographic markets and businesses that may not perform as expected and result in poor performance by us and our investment funds. In addition to the risk of poor performance, such activity may subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including risks associated with (a) the possibility that we have insufficient expertise to engage in such activities profitably or without incurring inappropriate amounts of risk, (b) the diversion of management’s attention from our core businesses, (c) known or unknown contingent liabilities, which could result in unforeseen losses for us and our funds, (d) the disruption of ongoing businesses and (e) compliance with additional regulatory requirements. The historical returns attributable to our funds should not be considered as indicative of the future results of our funds or of our future results or of any returns expected on an investment in common stock. The historical returns attributable to our funds should not be considered as indicative of the future results of our funds or of our future results or of any returns expected on an investment in common stock. The historical returns attributable to our funds should not be considered as indicative of the future results of our funds or of our future results or of any returns expected on an investment in common stock.

Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. A number of jurisdictions, including the U.S., have restrictions on foreign direct investment pursuant to which their respective heads of state and/or regulatory bodies have the authority to block or impose conditions with respect to certain transactions, such as investments, acquisitions and divestitures, if such transaction threatens to impair national security. In addition, many jurisdictions restrict foreign investment in assets important to national security by taking steps including, but not limited to, placing limitations on foreign equity investment, implementing investment screening or approval mechanisms, and restricting the employment of foreigners as key personnel. These U.S. and foreign laws could limit our funds’ ability to invest in certain businesses or entities or impose burdensome notification requirements, operational restrictions or delays in pursuing and consummating transactions. For example, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) has the authority to review transactions that could result in potential control of, or certain types of non-controlling investments in, a U.S. business or U.S. real estate by a foreign person. In recent years, legislation has expanded the scope of CFIUS’ jurisdiction to cover more types of transactions and empower CFIUS to scrutinize more closely investments in certain transactions. CFIUS may recommend that the President block, unwind or impose conditions or terms on such transactions, certain of which may adversely affect the ability of the fund to execute on its investment strategy with respect to such transaction as well as limit our flexibility in structuring or financing certain transactions. Additionally, CFIUS or any non-U.S. equivalents thereof may seek to impose limitations on one or more such investments that may prevent us from maintaining or pursuing investment opportunities that we otherwise would have maintained or pursued, which could make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain of our funds. A number of jurisdictions, including the U.S., have restrictions on foreign direct investment pursuant to which their respective heads of state and/or regulatory bodies have the authority to block or impose conditions with respect to certain transactions, such as investments, acquisitions and divestitures, if such transaction threatens to impair national security. In addition, many jurisdictions restrict foreign investment in assets important to national security by taking steps including, but not limited to, placing limitations on foreign equity investment, implementing investment screening or approval mechanisms, and restricting the employment of foreigners as key personnel. These U.S. and foreign laws could limit our funds’ ability to invest in certain businesses or entities or impose burdensome notification requirements, operational restrictions or delays in pursuing and consummating transactions. For example, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) has the authority to review transactions that could result in potential control of, or certain types of non-controlling investments in, a U.S. business or U.S. real estate by a foreign person. In recent years, legislation has expanded the scope of CFIUS’ jurisdiction to cover more types of transactions and empower CFIUS to scrutinize more closely investments in certain transactions. CFIUS may recommend that the President block, unwind or impose conditions or terms on such transactions, certain of which may adversely affect the ability of the fund to execute on its investment strategy with respect to such transaction as well as limit our flexibility in structuring or financing certain transactions. Additionally, CFIUS or any non-U.S. equivalents thereof may seek to impose limitations on one or more such investments that may prevent us from maintaining or pursuing investment opportunities that we otherwise would have maintained or pursued, which could make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain of our funds. non-controlling non-U.S. In August 2023, an executive order established an outbound investment screening regime (the “Outbound Order”), which was intended to regulate or prohibit certain investments by U.S. persons in advanced technology sectors in jurisdictions that may be designated as a “country of concern.” In January 2025, the current U.S. Presidential administration signed an Annex to the Outbound Order that identified China, along with the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, as a “country of concern.” Similarly, in February 2025, the U.S. Presidential administration issued a memorandum to various regulatory agencies regarding enhanced restrictions on outbound investments into China, as well as on Chinese investments into the U.S. These actions could negatively impact our ability to raise capital from and deploy capital in such jurisdictions, including if the administration seeks to expand such limitations to apply to a broader range of activities. Further, a number of U.S. states are passing and implementing state laws prohibiting or otherwise restricting the acquisition of interests in real property located in the state by foreign persons. These laws may also impact the ability of certain non-U.S. limited partners to participate in certain of our investment strategies. In August 2023, an executive order established an outbound investment screening regime (the “Outbound Order”), which was intended to regulate or prohibit certain investments by U.S. persons in advanced technology sectors in jurisdictions that may be designated as a “country of concern.” In January 2025, the current U.S. Presidential administration signed an Annex to the Outbound Order that identified China, along with the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, as a “country of concern.” Similarly, in February 2025, the U.S. Presidential administration issued a memorandum to various regulatory agencies regarding enhanced restrictions on outbound investments into China, as well as on Chinese investments into the U.S. These actions could negatively impact our ability to raise capital from and deploy capital in such jurisdictions, including if the administration seeks to expand such limitations to apply to a broader range of activities. Further, a number of U.S. states are passing and implementing state laws prohibiting or otherwise restricting the acquisition of interests in real property located in the state by foreign persons. These laws may also impact the ability of certain non-U.S. limited partners to participate in certain of our investment strategies. non-U.S. Our funds’ investments outside of the United States may face delays, limitations, or restrictions as a result of notifications made under and/or compliance with these legal regimes and rapidly changing agency practices. Other countries continue to establish and/or strengthen their own national security investment clearance regimes, which could have a corresponding effect of limiting our ability to make investments in such countries. Heightened scrutiny of foreign direct investment worldwide may also make it more difficult for us to identify suitable buyers for investments upon exit and may constrain the universe of exit opportunities for an investment in a portfolio company. As a result of such regimes, we may incur significant delays and costs, be altogether prohibited from Our funds’ investments outside of the United States may face delays, limitations, or restrictions as a result of notifications made under and/or compliance with these legal regimes and rapidly changing agency practices. Other countries continue to establish and/or strengthen their own national security investment clearance regimes, which could have a corresponding effect of limiting our ability to make investments in such countries. Heightened scrutiny of foreign direct investment worldwide may also make it more difficult for us to identify suitable buyers for investments upon exit and may constrain the universe of exit opportunities for an investment in a portfolio company. As a result of such regimes, we may incur significant delays and costs, be altogether prohibited from 49 49 Table of Contents Table of Contents making a particular investment or impede or restrict syndication or sale of certain assets to certain buyers, all of which could adversely affect the performance of our funds and in turn, materially reduce our revenues and cash flow. Complying with these laws imposes potentially significant costs and complex additional burdens, and any failure by us or our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with them could expose us to significant penalties, sanctions, loss of future investment opportunities, additional regulatory scrutiny, and reputational harm. making a particular investment or impede or restrict syndication or sale of certain assets to certain buyers, all of which could adversely affect the performance of our funds and in turn, materially reduce our revenues and cash flow. Complying with these laws imposes potentially significant costs and complex additional burdens, and any failure by us or our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with them could expose us to significant penalties, sanctions, loss of future investment opportunities, additional regulatory scrutiny, and reputational harm. We are subject to substantial risk of litigation and regulatory proceedings and may face significant liabilities and damage to our reputation as a result of allegations of improper conduct and negative publicity. We are subject to substantial risk of litigation and regulatory proceedings and may face significant liabilities and damage to our reputation as a result of allegations of improper conduct and negative publicity. We are subject to substantial risk of litigation and regulatory proceedings and may face significant liabilities and damage to our reputation as a result of allegations of improper conduct and negative publicity.

Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. A number of jurisdictions, including the U.S., have restrictions on foreign direct investment pursuant to which their respective heads of state and/or regulatory bodies have the authority to block or impose conditions with respect to certain transactions, such as investments, acquisitions and divestitures, if such transaction threatens to impair national security. In addition, many jurisdictions restrict foreign investment in assets important to national security by taking steps including, but not limited to, placing limitations on foreign equity investment, implementing investment screening or approval mechanisms, and restricting the employment of foreigners as key personnel. These U.S. and foreign laws could limit our funds’ ability to invest in certain businesses or entities or impose burdensome notification requirements, operational restrictions or delays in pursuing and consummating transactions. For example, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) has the authority to review transactions that could result in potential control of, or certain types of non-controlling investments in, a U.S. business or U.S. real estate by a foreign person. In recent years, legislation has expanded the scope of CFIUS’ jurisdiction to cover more types of transactions and empower CFIUS to scrutinize more closely investments in certain transactions. CFIUS may recommend that the President block, unwind or impose conditions or terms on such transactions, certain of which may adversely affect the ability of the fund to execute on its investment strategy with respect to such transaction as well as limit our flexibility in structuring or financing certain transactions. Additionally, CFIUS or any non-U.S. equivalents thereof may seek to impose limitations on one or more such investments that may prevent us from maintaining or pursuing investment opportunities that we otherwise would have maintained or pursued, which could make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain of our funds. A number of jurisdictions, including the U.S., have restrictions on foreign direct investment pursuant to which their respective heads of state and/or regulatory bodies have the authority to block or impose conditions with respect to certain transactions, such as investments, acquisitions and divestitures, if such transaction threatens to impair national security. In addition, many jurisdictions restrict foreign investment in assets important to national security by taking steps including, but not limited to, placing limitations on foreign equity investment, implementing investment screening or approval mechanisms, and restricting the employment of foreigners as key personnel. These U.S. and foreign laws could limit our funds’ ability to invest in certain businesses or entities or impose burdensome notification requirements, operational restrictions or delays in pursuing and consummating transactions. For example, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) has the authority to review transactions that could result in potential control of, or certain types of non-controlling investments in, a U.S. business or U.S. real estate by a foreign person. In recent years, legislation has expanded the scope of CFIUS’ jurisdiction to cover more types of transactions and empower CFIUS to scrutinize more closely investments in certain transactions. CFIUS may recommend that the President block, unwind or impose conditions or terms on such transactions, certain of which may adversely affect the ability of the fund to execute on its investment strategy with respect to such transaction as well as limit our flexibility in structuring or financing certain transactions. Additionally, CFIUS or any non-U.S. equivalents thereof may seek to impose limitations on one or more such investments that may prevent us from maintaining or pursuing investment opportunities that we otherwise would have maintained or pursued, which could make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain of our funds. In August 2023, the President signed an Executive Order establishing an outbound investment screening regime that is intended to regulate or prohibit certain investments by U.S. persons in advanced technology sectors in China and other jurisdictions that may be designated as a “country of concern.” While the details of this new regime remain subject to a rulemaking process, the forthcoming requirements could further negatively impact our ability to deploy capital in such countries. Further, state regulatory agencies may impose restrictions on private funds’ investments in certain types of assets, which could affect our funds’ ability to find attractive and diversified investments and to complete such investments in a timely manner. For example, California adopted regulations that are scheduled to take effect in April 2024 and would subject certain potential investments in the healthcare sector that transfer a material amount of a healthcare portfolio company’s assets or governance to review by a state regulatory agency. In addition, a number of U.S. states are passing and implementing state laws prohibiting or otherwise restricting the acquisition of interests in real property located in the state by foreign persons. These laws may impact the ability of non-U.S. limited partners to participate in certain of our investment strategies. In August 2023, the President signed an Executive Order establishing an outbound investment screening regime that is intended to regulate or prohibit certain investments by U.S. persons in advanced technology sectors in China and other jurisdictions that may be designated as a “country of concern.” While the details of this new regime remain subject to a rulemaking process, the forthcoming requirements could further negatively impact our ability to deploy capital in such countries. Further, state regulatory agencies may impose restrictions on private funds’ investments in certain types of assets, which could affect our funds’ ability to find attractive and diversified investments and to complete such investments in a timely manner. For example, California adopted regulations that are scheduled to take effect in April 2024 and would subject certain potential investments in the healthcare sector that transfer a material amount of a healthcare portfolio company’s assets or governance to review by a state regulatory agency. In addition, a number of U.S. states are passing and implementing state laws prohibiting or otherwise restricting the acquisition of interests in real property located in the state by foreign persons. These laws may impact the ability of non-U.S. limited partners to participate in certain of our investment strategies. 49 49 Table of Contents Our investments outside of the United States may also face delays, limitations, or restrictions as a result of notifications made under and/or compliance with these legal regimes and rapidly changing agency practices. Other countries continue to establish and/or strengthen their own national security investment clearance regimes, which could have a corresponding effect of limiting our ability to make investments in such countries. Heightened scrutiny of foreign direct investment worldwide may also make it more difficult for us to identify suitable buyers for investments upon exit and may constrain the universe of exit opportunities for an investment in a portfolio company. As a result of such regimes, we may incur significant delays and costs, be altogether prohibited from making a particular investment or impede or restrict syndication or sale of certain assets to certain buyers, all of which could adversely affect the performance of our funds and in turn, materially reduce our revenues and cash flow. Complying with these laws imposes potentially significant costs and complex additional burdens, and any failure by us or our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with them could expose us to significant penalties, sanctions, loss of future investment opportunities, additional regulatory scrutiny, and reputational harm. Our investments outside of the United States may also face delays, limitations, or restrictions as a result of notifications made under and/or compliance with these legal regimes and rapidly changing agency practices. Other countries continue to establish and/or strengthen their own national security investment clearance regimes, which could have a corresponding effect of limiting our ability to make investments in such countries. Heightened scrutiny of foreign direct investment worldwide may also make it more difficult for us to identify suitable buyers for investments upon exit and may constrain the universe of exit opportunities for an investment in a portfolio company. As a result of such regimes, we may incur significant delays and costs, be altogether prohibited from making a particular investment or impede or restrict syndication or sale of certain assets to certain buyers, all of which could adversely affect the performance of our funds and in turn, materially reduce our revenues and cash flow. Complying with these laws imposes potentially significant costs and complex additional burdens, and any failure by us or our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with them could expose us to significant penalties, sanctions, loss of future investment opportunities, additional regulatory scrutiny, and reputational harm. We are subject to substantial risk of litigation and regulatory proceedings and may face significant liabilities and damage to our reputation as a result of allegations of improper conduct and negative publicity. We are subject to substantial risk of litigation and regulatory proceedings and may face significant liabilities and damage to our reputation as a result of allegations of improper conduct and negative publicity. We are subject to substantial risk of litigation and regulatory proceedings and may face significant liabilities and damage to our reputation as a result of allegations of improper conduct and negative publicity.

Technological developments in artificial intelligence could disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs. Technological developments in artificial intelligence could disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs. Technological developments in artificial intelligence, including machine learning technology and generative artificial intelligence (collectively, “AI Technologies”) and their current and potential future applications, including in the private investment and financial sectors, as well as the legal and regulatory frameworks within which they operate, are rapidly evolving. The full extent of current or future risks related thereto is not possible to predict and we may not be able to anticipate, prevent, mitigate or remediate all of the potential risks, challenges or impacts of such changes. AI Technologies could significantly disrupt the business models, investment strategies, operational processes, and markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Advancements in computing and AI Technologies, including efficiency improvements, without related increases in the adoption and development of such technologies, could also negatively impact demand for, and the valuation of, digital infrastructure assets, a sector to which certain of our investment strategies have significant exposure. Technological developments in artificial intelligence, including machine learning technology and generative artificial intelligence (collectively, “AI Technologies”) and their current and potential future applications, including in the private investment and financial sectors, as well as the legal and regulatory frameworks within which they operate, are rapidly evolving. The full extent of current or future risks related thereto is not possible to predict and we may not be able to anticipate, prevent, mitigate or remediate all of the potential risks, challenges or impacts of such changes. AI Technologies could significantly disrupt the business models, investment strategies, operational processes, and markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Advancements in computing and AI Technologies, including efficiency improvements, without related increases in the adoption and development of such technologies, could also negatively impact demand for, and the valuation of, digital infrastructure assets, a sector to which certain of our investment strategies have significant exposure. Through our use of AI technologies, we avail ourselves of the potential benefits, insights and efficiencies resulting from these technologies. For example, our employees can utilize internal generative AI-powered applications to help summarize, search or translate documents or gather information on a wide variety of topics. However, these technologies also present a number of potential risks that cannot be fully mitigated. If the data we, or third parties whose services we rely on, use in connection with the possible development or deployment of AI Technologies is incomplete, inadequate or biased in some way, the performance of our products, services, and businesses could suffer. Data in models that AI Technologies utilize are likely to contain a degree of inaccuracy and error, which could result in flawed algorithms. This could reduce the effectiveness of AI Technologies and adversely impact us and our operations to the extent we rely on the work product of such AI Technologies in such operations. The volume and reliance on data and algorithms also make AI Technologies, and in turn us and our portfolio companies and investments, more susceptible to cybersecurity threats, including the compromise of underlying models, training data, or other intellectual property. We, our funds, our portfolio companies and our funds’ investments could be exposed to risks to the extent third-party service providers, or any counterparties use AI Technologies in their business activities. There is also a risk that AI Technologies may be misused or misappropriated by our employees and/or third parties engaged by us. For example, a user may input confidential information, including material non-public information or personal identifiable information, into AI Technology applications, resulting in such information becoming part of a dataset that is accessible by third-party AI Technology applications and users, including our competitors. Such actions could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions. In addition, we may not be able to control how third-party AI Technologies that we choose to use are developed or maintained, or how data we input is used or disclosed, even where we have sought contractual protections with respect to these matters. We may be subject to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions related to our use of AI Technologies, including as related to alleged misuse or misappropriation of our data. This could also have an adverse impact on our reputation. We may also communicate externally regarding AI Technology-related initiatives, including our development and use of AI Technologies, which subjects us to the risk of being accused of making inaccurate or misleading statements regarding our ability to avail ourselves of the potential benefits of AI Technology. Through our use of AI technologies, we avail ourselves of the potential benefits, insights and efficiencies resulting from these technologies. For example, our employees can utilize internal generative AI-powered applications to help summarize, search or translate documents or gather information on a wide variety of topics. However, these technologies also present a number of potential risks that cannot be fully mitigated. If the data we, or third parties whose services we rely on, use in connection with the possible development or deployment of AI Technologies is incomplete, inadequate or biased in some way, the performance of our products, services, and businesses could suffer. Data in models that AI Technologies utilize are likely to contain a degree of inaccuracy and error, which could result in flawed algorithms. This could reduce the effectiveness of AI Technologies and adversely impact us and our operations to the extent we rely on the work product of such AI Technologies in such operations. The volume and reliance on data and algorithms also make AI Technologies, and in turn us and our portfolio companies and investments, more susceptible to cybersecurity threats, including the compromise of underlying models, training data, or other intellectual property. We, our funds, our portfolio companies and our funds’ investments could be exposed to risks to the extent third-party service providers, or any counterparties use AI Technologies in their business activities. There is also a risk that AI Technologies may be misused or misappropriated by our employees and/or third parties engaged by us. For example, a user may input confidential information, including material non-public information or personal identifiable information, into AI Technology applications, resulting in such information becoming part of a dataset that is accessible by third-party AI Technology applications and users, including our competitors. Such actions could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions. In addition, we may not be able to control how third-party AI Technologies that we choose to use are developed or maintained, or how data we input is used or disclosed, even where we have sought contractual protections with respect to these matters. We may be subject to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions related to our use of AI Technologies, including as related to alleged misuse or misappropriation of our data. This could also have an adverse impact on our reputation. We may also communicate externally regarding AI Technology-related initiatives, including our development and use of AI Technologies, which subjects us to the risk of being accused of making inaccurate or misleading statements regarding our ability to avail ourselves of the potential benefits of AI Technology. AI-powered third-party non-public third-party third-party Technology-related Regulations related to AI Technologies may also impose on us certain obligations and costs related to monitoring and compliance. For example, in April 2023, the Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released a joint statement on artificial intelligence demonstrating interest in monitoring the development and use of automated systems and enforcement of their respective laws and regulations. In October 2023, an executive order established new standards for AI safety and security. In addition to the U.S. regulatory framework, in 2024, the EU adopted the Artificial Intelligence Act in 2024, which applies to certain AI Technologies and the data used to train, test and deploy them, which may create additional compliance burdens, higher administrative costs and significant penalties should we fail to comply. Regulations related to AI Technologies may also impose on us certain obligations and costs related to monitoring and compliance. For example, in April 2023, the Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released a joint statement on artificial intelligence demonstrating interest in monitoring the development and use of automated systems and enforcement of their respective laws and regulations. In October 2023, an executive order established new standards for AI safety and security. In addition to the U.S. regulatory framework, in 2024, the EU adopted the Artificial Intelligence Act in 2024, which applies to certain AI Technologies and the data used to train, test and deploy them, which may create additional compliance burdens, higher administrative costs and significant penalties should we fail to comply. 38 38 Table of Contents Table of Contents Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus could result in additional burdens on our business. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus could result in additional burdens on our business. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus could result in additional burdens on our business.

Technological developments in artificial intelligence could disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs. Technological developments in artificial intelligence could disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs. Technological developments in artificial intelligence, including machine learning technology and generative artificial intelligence (collectively, “AI Technologies”) and their current and potential future applications, including in the private investment and financial sectors, as well as the legal and regulatory frameworks within which they operate, are rapidly evolving. The full extent of current or future risks related thereto is not possible to predict. AI Technologies could significantly disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Technological developments in artificial intelligence, including machine learning technology and generative artificial intelligence (collectively, “AI Technologies”) and their current and potential future applications, including in the private investment and financial sectors, as well as the legal and regulatory frameworks within which they operate, are rapidly evolving. The full extent of current or future risks related thereto is not possible to predict. AI Technologies could significantly disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We intend to seek to avail ourselves of the potential benefits, insights and efficiencies that are available through the use of AI Technologies, which presents a number of potential risks that cannot be fully mitigated. Data in models that AI Technologies utilize are likely to contain a degree of inaccuracy and error, which could result in flawed algorithms. This could reduce the effectiveness of AI Technologies and adversely impact us and our operations to the extent we rely on the work product of such AI Technologies in such operations. There is also a risk that AI Technologies may be misused or misappropriated by our employees and/or third parties engaged by us. For example, a user may input confidential information, including material non-public information or personal identifiable information, into AI Technology applications, resulting in such information becoming part of a dataset that is accessible by third-party AI Technology applications and users, including our competitors. Such actions could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions. Further, we may not be able to control how third-party AI Technologies that we choose to use are developed or maintained, or how data we input is used or disclosed, even where we have sought contractual protections with respect to these matters. The misuse or misappropriation of our data could have an adverse impact on our reputation and could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions. In addition, we may communicate externally regarding AI Technology-related initiatives, including our development and use of AI Technologies, which subjects us to the risk of being accused of making inaccurate or misleading statements regarding our ability to avail ourselves of the potential benefits of AI Technology. We intend to seek to avail ourselves of the potential benefits, insights and efficiencies that are available through the use of AI Technologies, which presents a number of potential risks that cannot be fully mitigated. Data in models that AI Technologies utilize are likely to contain a degree of inaccuracy and error, which could result in flawed algorithms. This could reduce the effectiveness of AI Technologies and adversely impact us and our operations to the extent we rely on the work product of such AI Technologies in such operations. There is also a risk that AI Technologies may be misused or misappropriated by our employees and/or third parties engaged by us. For example, a user may input confidential information, including material non-public information or personal identifiable information, into AI Technology applications, resulting in such information becoming part of a dataset that is accessible by third-party AI Technology applications and users, including our competitors. Such actions could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions. Further, we may not be able to control how third-party AI Technologies that we choose to use are developed or maintained, or how data we input is used or disclosed, even where we have sought contractual protections with respect to these matters. The misuse or misappropriation of our data could have an adverse impact on our reputation and could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions. In addition, we may communicate externally regarding AI Technology-related initiatives, including our development and use of AI Technologies, which subjects us to the risk of being accused of making inaccurate or misleading statements regarding our ability to avail ourselves of the potential benefits of AI Technology. 37 37 Table of Contents Regulations related to AI Technologies may also impose on us certain obligations and costs related to monitoring and compliance. For example, in April 2023, the Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released a joint statement on artificial intelligence demonstrating interest in monitoring the development and use of automated systems and enforcement of their respective laws and regulations. In October 2023, the Presidential Administration signed an executive order that establishes new standards for AI safety and security. In addition to the U.S. regulatory framework, the EU is in the process of introducing a new regulation applicable to certain AI Technologies and the data used to train, test and deploy them, which if enacted, could impose significant requirements on both the providers and deployers of AI Technologies. Regulations related to AI Technologies may also impose on us certain obligations and costs related to monitoring and compliance. For example, in April 2023, the Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released a joint statement on artificial intelligence demonstrating interest in monitoring the development and use of automated systems and enforcement of their respective laws and regulations. In October 2023, the Presidential Administration signed an executive order that establishes new standards for AI safety and security. In addition to the U.S. regulatory framework, the EU is in the process of introducing a new regulation applicable to certain AI Technologies and the data used to train, test and deploy them, which if enacted, could impose significant requirements on both the providers and deployers of AI Technologies. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus, particularly given the current administration, could result in additional burdens on our business. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus, particularly given the current administration, could result in additional burdens on our business. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus, particularly given the current administration, could result in additional burdens on our business.

Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus could result in additional burdens on our business. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus could result in additional burdens on our business. Our business is subject to extensive regulation, including periodic examinations, inquiries and investigations, by governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. These authorities have regulatory powers dealing with many aspects of financial services, including the authority to grant, and in specific circumstances to cancel, permissions to carry on particular activities. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and foreign government agencies and self-regulatory organizations, as well as state securities commissions in the United States, are also empowered to conduct examinations, inquiries, investigations and administrative proceedings that can result in fines, suspensions of personnel, changes in policies, procedures or disclosure or other sanctions, including censure, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders, the suspension or expulsion of a broker-dealer or investment adviser from registration or memberships or the commencement of a civil or criminal lawsuit against us or our personnel. Our business is subject to extensive regulation, including periodic examinations, inquiries and investigations, by governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. These authorities have regulatory powers dealing with many aspects of financial services, including the authority to grant, and in specific circumstances to cancel, permissions to carry on particular activities. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and foreign government agencies and self-regulatory organizations, as well as state securities commissions in the United States, are also empowered to conduct examinations, inquiries, investigations and administrative proceedings that can result in fines, suspensions of personnel, changes in policies, procedures or disclosure or other sanctions, including censure, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders, the suspension or expulsion of a broker-dealer or investment adviser from registration or memberships or the commencement of a civil or criminal lawsuit against us or our personnel. self-regulatory self-regulatory cease-and-desist cease-and-desist broker-dealer The financial services industry in recent years has been the subject of heightened scrutiny, and the SEC has specifically focused on private equity and the private funds industry. In that connection, in recent years the SEC’s stated examination priorities and published observations from examinations have included, among other things, private equity firms’ collection of fees and allocation of expenses, their marketing and valuation practices, allocation of investment opportunities, investor side letter terms, consistency of firms’ practices with disclosures, handling of material non-public information and insider trading, disclosures of investment risk, conflicts of interest, adherence to notice, consent and other contractual requirements regarding limited partnership advisory committees, fiduciary standards of conduct, financial technologies, and compliance with the SEC’s recently adopted rules, including those referenced herein. The financial services industry in recent years has been the subject of heightened scrutiny, and the SEC has specifically focused on private equity and the private funds industry. In that connection, in recent years the SEC’s stated examination priorities and published observations from examinations have included, among other things, private equity firms’ collection of fees and allocation of expenses, their marketing and valuation practices, allocation of investment opportunities, investor side letter terms, consistency of firms’ practices with disclosures, handling of material non-public information and insider trading, disclosures of investment risk, conflicts of interest, adherence to notice, consent and other contractual requirements regarding limited partnership advisory committees, fiduciary standards of conduct, financial technologies, and compliance with the SEC’s recently adopted rules, including those referenced herein. non-public In recent years, the SEC has proposed, and in some instances, adopted, a number of rules related to private funds and private fund advisors that impact our business and operations. For example, the SEC (in May 2023) and the SEC and CFTC jointly (in February 2024) adopted changes to Form PF, a confidential form relating to reporting by private fund advisers and intended to be used by the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel (“FSOC”) for systemic risk oversight purposes, that expand existing reporting obligations. Such increased obligations may increase our costs, including if we are required to spend more time, hire additional personnel, or buy new technology to comply effectively. In recent years, the SEC has proposed, and in some instances, adopted, a number of rules related to private funds and private fund advisors that impact our business and operations. For example, the SEC (in May 2023) and the SEC and CFTC jointly (in February 2024) adopted changes to Form PF, a confidential form relating to reporting by private fund advisers and intended to be used by the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel (“FSOC”) for systemic risk oversight purposes, that expand existing reporting obligations. Such increased obligations may increase our costs, including if we are required to spend more time, hire additional personnel, or buy new technology to comply effectively. The SEC has also proposed several other rules that may impact our operations. For example, an October 2022 SEC proposal would, if adopted, impose substantial obligations on registered investment advisers to conduct initial due diligence and ongoing monitoring of a broad universe of service providers that we may use in our investment advisory business. If adopted, these new rules could significantly increase compliance burdens and associated regulatory costs and complexity for us and enhance the risk of regulatory action, which could adversely impact our reputation and our fundraising efforts, including as a result of regulatory sanctions. Moreover, in February 2023, the SEC proposed extensive amendments to the custody rule for SEC-registered investment advisers which would apply to all assets of an advisory client, including real estate and other assets that generally are not considered securities under the federal securities laws. If adopted, the amendments would require, among other things, that qualified custodians maintain possession of and control of assets of advisory clients and participate in or effectuate any changes of such assets’ beneficial ownership. There is a lack of clarity as to whether all assets held by Blackstone’s advisory clients can be custodied in a manner that satisfies the proposed rule or whether existing qualified custodians will provide custodial services for such assets at a reasonable cost or at all. If adopted, these amendments could expose our registered investment advisers to additional regulatory liability, increase compliance costs and impose limitations on our investing activities. Whether such proposed rules will ultimately be adopted, or, if adopted, what the full extent of their impact would be is unclear. The general anticipation is that, if adopted, these proposed rules will increase regulatory and compliance costs, place burdens on our resources, including the time and attention of our personnel, and heighten the risk of regulatory action. The SEC has also proposed several other rules that may impact our operations. For example, an October 2022 SEC proposal would, if adopted, impose substantial obligations on registered investment advisers to conduct initial due diligence and ongoing monitoring of a broad universe of service providers that we may use in our investment advisory business. If adopted, these new rules could significantly increase compliance burdens and associated regulatory costs and complexity for us and enhance the risk of regulatory action, which could adversely impact our reputation and our fundraising efforts, including as a result of regulatory sanctions. Moreover, in February 2023, the SEC proposed extensive amendments to the custody rule for SEC-registered investment advisers which would apply to all assets of an advisory client, including real estate and other assets that generally are not considered securities under the federal securities laws. If adopted, the amendments would require, among other things, that qualified custodians maintain possession of and control of assets of advisory clients and participate in or effectuate any changes of such assets’ beneficial ownership. There is a lack of clarity as to whether all assets held by Blackstone’s advisory clients can be custodied in a manner that satisfies the proposed rule or whether existing qualified custodians will provide custodial services for such assets at a reasonable cost or at all. If adopted, these amendments could expose our registered investment advisers to additional regulatory liability, increase compliance costs and impose limitations on our investing activities. Whether such proposed rules will ultimately be adopted, or, if adopted, what the full extent of their impact would be is unclear. The general anticipation is that, if adopted, these proposed rules will increase regulatory and compliance costs, place burdens on our resources, including the time and attention of our personnel, and heighten the risk of regulatory action. SEC-registered 39 39 Table of Contents Table of Contents We regularly are subject to requests for information, inquiries and informal or formal investigations by the SEC and other regulatory authorities, with which we routinely cooperate, and which have included review of historical practices that were previously examined. Such investigations have previously and may in the future result in penalties and other sanctions. SEC actions and initiatives can have an adverse effect on our financial results, including as a result of the imposition of a sanction, a limitation on our or our personnel’s activities, or changing our historic practices. Even if an investigation or proceeding did not result in a sanction, or the sanction imposed against us or our personnel by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to the investigation, proceeding or imposition of these sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing clients or fail to gain new clients. In addition, certain states and other regulatory authorities have required investment managers to register as lobbyists, and we have registered as such in a number of jurisdictions. Other states or municipalities may consider similar legislation or adopt regulations or procedures with similar effect. These registration requirements impose significant compliance obligations on registered lobbyists and their employers, which may include annual registration fees, periodic disclosure reports and internal recordkeeping. We regularly are subject to requests for information, inquiries and informal or formal investigations by the SEC and other regulatory authorities, with which we routinely cooperate, and which have included review of historical practices that were previously examined. Such investigations have previously and may in the future result in penalties and other sanctions. SEC actions and initiatives can have an adverse effect on our financial results, including as a result of the imposition of a sanction, a limitation on our or our personnel’s activities, or changing our historic practices. Even if an investigation or proceeding did not result in a sanction, or the sanction imposed against us or our personnel by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to the investigation, proceeding or imposition of these sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing clients or fail to gain new clients. In addition, certain states and other regulatory authorities have required investment managers to register as lobbyists, and we have registered as such in a number of jurisdictions. Other states or municipalities may consider similar legislation or adopt regulations or procedures with similar effect. These registration requirements impose significant compliance obligations on registered lobbyists and their employers, which may include annual registration fees, periodic disclosure reports and internal recordkeeping. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation.

Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus, particularly given the current administration, could result in additional burdens on our business. Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus, particularly given the current administration, could result in additional burdens on our business. Our business is subject to extensive regulation, including periodic examinations, inquiries and investigations, by governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. These authorities have regulatory powers dealing with many aspects of financial services, including the authority to grant, and in specific circumstances to cancel, permissions to carry on particular activities. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and foreign government agencies and self-regulatory organizations, as well as state securities commissions in the United States, are also empowered to conduct examinations, inquiries, investigations and administrative proceedings that can result in fines, suspensions of personnel, changes in policies, procedures or disclosure or other sanctions, including censure, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders, the suspension or expulsion of a broker-dealer or investment adviser from registration or memberships or the commencement of a civil or criminal lawsuit against us or our personnel. Our business is subject to extensive regulation, including periodic examinations, inquiries and investigations, by governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. These authorities have regulatory powers dealing with many aspects of financial services, including the authority to grant, and in specific circumstances to cancel, permissions to carry on particular activities. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and foreign government agencies and self-regulatory organizations, as well as state securities commissions in the United States, are also empowered to conduct examinations, inquiries, investigations and administrative proceedings that can result in fines, suspensions of personnel, changes in policies, procedures or disclosure or other sanctions, including censure, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders, the suspension or expulsion of a broker-dealer or investment adviser from registration or memberships or the commencement of a civil or criminal lawsuit against us or our personnel. The financial services industry in recent years has been the subject of heightened scrutiny, which is expected to continue to increase, and the SEC has specifically focused on private equity and the private funds industry. In that connection, in recent years the SEC’s stated examination priorities and published observations from examinations have included, among other things, private equity firms’ collection of fees and allocation of expenses, their marketing and valuation practices, allocation of investment opportunities, investor side letter terms, consistency of firms’ practices with disclosures, handling of material non-public information and insider trading, disclosures of investment risk, conflicts of interest, adherence to notice, consent and other contractual requirements regarding limited partnership advisory committees and compliance policies and procedures with respect to conflicts of interest. The SEC’s stated examination priorities also include investment advisers’ and funds’ compliance with recently adopted rules, including those referenced herein. Statements by SEC staff in 2023 and the SEC’s enforcement and rulemaking activities reflected a focus on certain of these topics and on bolstering transparency in the private funds industry, including with respect to fees earned and expenses charged by advisers. The financial services industry in recent years has been the subject of heightened scrutiny, which is expected to continue to increase, and the SEC has specifically focused on private equity and the private funds industry. In that connection, in recent years the SEC’s stated examination priorities and published observations from examinations have included, among other things, private equity firms’ collection of fees and allocation of expenses, their marketing and valuation practices, allocation of investment opportunities, investor side letter terms, consistency of firms’ practices with disclosures, handling of material non-public information and insider trading, disclosures of investment risk, conflicts of interest, adherence to notice, consent and other contractual requirements regarding limited partnership advisory committees and compliance policies and procedures with respect to conflicts of interest. The SEC’s stated examination priorities also include investment advisers’ and funds’ compliance with recently adopted rules, including those referenced herein. Statements by SEC staff in 2023 and the SEC’s enforcement and rulemaking activities reflected a focus on certain of these topics and on bolstering transparency in the private funds industry, including with respect to fees earned and expenses charged by advisers. In recent years, the SEC has proposed, and in some instances, adopted, a number of rules related to private funds and private fund advisors that impact our business and operations. Most significantly, in August 2023, the SEC adopted new rules and amendments to existing rules under the Advisers Act (collectively, the “Private Fund Adviser Rules”). The Private Fund Adviser Rules require registered investment advisers to distribute quarterly statements containing detailed information about, among other things, compensation, fees and expenses, investments, and performance; obtain an annual audit for private funds; and obtain a fairness or valuation opinion and make certain disclosures in connection with adviser-led secondary transactions. In addition, the rules restrict all investment advisers from engaging in certain practices unless they satisfy specified disclosure, and in some cases, consent requirements. The Private Fund Adviser Rules also prohibit providing preferential liquidity and information rights to investors unless certain conditions are met. In recent years, the SEC has proposed, and in some instances, adopted, a number of rules related to private funds and private fund advisors that impact our business and operations. Most significantly, in August 2023, the SEC adopted new rules and amendments to existing rules under the Advisers Act (collectively, the “Private Fund Adviser Rules”). The Private Fund Adviser Rules require registered investment advisers to distribute quarterly statements containing detailed information about, among other things, compensation, fees and expenses, investments, and performance; obtain an annual audit for private funds; and obtain a fairness or valuation opinion and make certain disclosures in connection with adviser-led secondary transactions. In addition, the rules restrict all investment advisers from engaging in certain practices unless they satisfy specified disclosure, and in some cases, consent requirements. The Private Fund Adviser Rules also prohibit providing preferential liquidity and information rights to investors unless certain conditions are met. Although there is a pending legal challenge to the Private Fund Adviser Rules, whether such legal challenge will succeed is uncertain. While the full extent of the Private Funds Adviser Rules’ impact cannot yet be determined, the general anticipation is that they will increase regulatory and compliance costs, place burdens on our resources, including the time and attention of our personnel, and heighten the risk of regulatory action. Although there is a pending legal challenge to the Private Fund Adviser Rules, whether such legal challenge will succeed is uncertain. While the full extent of the Private Funds Adviser Rules’ impact cannot yet be determined, the general anticipation is that they will increase regulatory and compliance costs, place burdens on our resources, including the time and attention of our personnel, and heighten the risk of regulatory action. 38 38 Table of Contents The Private Fund Adviser Rules are complemented by amended rules that require enhanced record retention and documentation. Furthermore, the SEC (in May 2023) and the SEC and CFTC jointly (in February 2024) adopted changes to Form PF, a confidential form relating to reporting by private fund advisers and intended to be used by the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel (“FSOC”) for systemic risk oversight purposes, that expand existing reporting obligations. Such increased obligations may increase our costs, including if we are required to spend more time, hire additional personnel, or buy new technology to comply effectively. The Private Fund Adviser Rules are complemented by amended rules that require enhanced record retention and documentation. Furthermore, the SEC (in May 2023) and the SEC and CFTC jointly (in February 2024) adopted changes to Form PF, a confidential form relating to reporting by private fund advisers and intended to be used by the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel (“FSOC”) for systemic risk oversight purposes, that expand existing reporting obligations. Such increased obligations may increase our costs, including if we are required to spend more time, hire additional personnel, or buy new technology to comply effectively. The SEC has also proposed several other rules that may impact our operations. For example, an October 2022 SEC proposal would, if adopted, impose substantial obligations on registered investment advisers to conduct initial due diligence and ongoing monitoring of a broad universe of service providers that we may use in our investment advisory business. If adopted, these new rules could significantly increase compliance burdens and associated regulatory costs and complexity for us and enhance the risk of regulatory action, which could adversely impact our reputation and our fundraising efforts, including as a result of regulatory sanctions. Moreover, in February 2023, the SEC proposed extensive amendments to the custody rule for SEC-registered investment advisers which would apply to all assets of an advisory client, including real estate and other assets that generally are not considered securities under the federal securities laws. If adopted, the amendments would require, among other things, that qualified custodians maintain possession of and control of assets of advisory clients and participate in or effectuate any changes of such assets’ beneficial ownership. There is a lack of clarity as to whether all assets held by Blackstone’s advisory clients can be custodied in a manner that satisfies the proposed rule or whether existing qualified custodians will provide custodial services for such assets at a reasonable cost or at all. If adopted, these amendments could expose our registered investment advisers to additional regulatory liability, increase compliance costs and impose limitations on our investing activities. The SEC has also proposed several other rules that may impact our operations. For example, an October 2022 SEC proposal would, if adopted, impose substantial obligations on registered investment advisers to conduct initial due diligence and ongoing monitoring of a broad universe of service providers that we may use in our investment advisory business. If adopted, these new rules could significantly increase compliance burdens and associated regulatory costs and complexity for us and enhance the risk of regulatory action, which could adversely impact our reputation and our fundraising efforts, including as a result of regulatory sanctions. Moreover, in February 2023, the SEC proposed extensive amendments to the custody rule for SEC-registered investment advisers which would apply to all assets of an advisory client, including real estate and other assets that generally are not considered securities under the federal securities laws. If adopted, the amendments would require, among other things, that qualified custodians maintain possession of and control of assets of advisory clients and participate in or effectuate any changes of such assets’ beneficial ownership. There is a lack of clarity as to whether all assets held by Blackstone’s advisory clients can be custodied in a manner that satisfies the proposed rule or whether existing qualified custodians will provide custodial services for such assets at a reasonable cost or at all. If adopted, these amendments could expose our registered investment advisers to additional regulatory liability, increase compliance costs and impose limitations on our investing activities. We regularly are subject to requests for information, inquiries and informal or formal investigations by the SEC and other regulatory authorities, with which we routinely cooperate, and which have included review of historical practices that were previously examined. Such investigations have previously and may in the future result in penalties and other sanctions. SEC actions and initiatives can have an adverse effect on our financial results, including as a result of the imposition of a sanction, a limitation on our or our personnel’s activities, or changing our historic practices. Even if an investigation or proceeding did not result in a sanction, or the sanction imposed against us or our personnel by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to the investigation, proceeding or imposition of these sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing clients or fail to gain new clients. We regularly are subject to requests for information, inquiries and informal or formal investigations by the SEC and other regulatory authorities, with which we routinely cooperate, and which have included review of historical practices that were previously examined. Such investigations have previously and may in the future result in penalties and other sanctions. SEC actions and initiatives can have an adverse effect on our financial results, including as a result of the imposition of a sanction, a limitation on our or our personnel’s activities, or changing our historic practices. Even if an investigation or proceeding did not result in a sanction, or the sanction imposed against us or our personnel by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to the investigation, proceeding or imposition of these sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing clients or fail to gain new clients. In addition, certain states and other regulatory authorities have required investment managers to register as lobbyists, and we have registered as such in a number of jurisdictions. Other states or municipalities may consider similar legislation or adopt regulations or procedures with similar effect. These registration requirements impose significant compliance obligations on registered lobbyists and their employers, which may include annual registration fees, periodic disclosure reports and internal recordkeeping. In addition, certain states and other regulatory authorities have required investment managers to register as lobbyists, and we have registered as such in a number of jurisdictions. Other states or municipalities may consider similar legislation or adopt regulations or procedures with similar effect. These registration requirements impose significant compliance obligations on registered lobbyists and their employers, which may include annual registration fees, periodic disclosure reports and internal recordkeeping. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation.

Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. sustainability-related We, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies face risks associated with climate change including risks related to the impact of climate- and sustainability-related legislation and regulation (both domestically and internationally), risks related to business trends related to climate change and technology (such as the process of transitioning to a lower-carbon economy), and risks stemming from the physical impacts of climate change. We, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies face risks associated with climate change including risks related to the impact of climate- and sustainability-related legislation and regulation (both domestically and internationally), risks related to business trends related to climate change and technology (such as the process of transitioning to a lower-carbon economy), and risks stemming from the physical impacts of climate change. climate- sustainability-related lower-carbon Climate and sustainability-related regulations or interpretations of existing laws may result in enhanced disclosure obligations, which could negatively affect us, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies and materially increase the regulatory burden and cost of compliance. For example, in recent years the EU has adopted the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (“CSRD”), the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (“SFDR”) Climate and sustainability-related regulations or interpretations of existing laws may result in enhanced disclosure obligations, which could negatively affect us, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies and materially increase the regulatory burden and cost of compliance. For example, in recent years the EU has adopted the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (“CSRD”), the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (“SFDR”) sustainability-related 41 41 Table of Contents Table of Contents and its corresponding Taxonomy Regulation, and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (“CSDDD”), while the U.K. has published final rules for its Sustainability Disclosure Requirements and investment labels regime (“SDR”). In June 2024, BELL began reporting certain U.K.-law required climate-related financial information in line with the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosure’s recommendations. Several U.S. states are also at various stages of seeking to regulate climate-related disclosures. For example, California has enacted, and legislators in New York have introduced, climate disclosure laws that could require us to report on, among other matters, greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related risks. These frameworks have detailed disclosure requirements that would impact us and/or certain of our funds and may conflict with certain of our other regulatory obligations, such as limitations on general solicitation for private funds. As a consequence, we may be unable to fully comply with some requirements of these new regimes, which could result in regulatory actions against us. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration or the U.S. Congress may seek to modify policies or regulations of the prior administration, including limitations on coal and gas electric generation, mining and/or exploration, as well as various tax incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act intended to spur clean energy investment. While certain of our funds’ portfolio companies and investments may benefit from such policies, certain other portfolio companies and investments focused on renewables or other forms of “green energy” may be adversely impacted. and its corresponding Taxonomy Regulation, and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (“CSDDD”), while the U.K. has published final rules for its Sustainability Disclosure Requirements and investment labels regime (“SDR”). In June 2024, BELL began reporting certain U.K.-law required climate-related financial information in line with the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosure’s recommendations. Several U.S. states are also at various stages of seeking to regulate climate-related disclosures. For example, California has enacted, and legislators in New York have introduced, climate disclosure laws that could require us to report on, among other matters, greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related risks. These frameworks have detailed disclosure requirements that would impact us and/or certain of our funds and may conflict with certain of our other regulatory obligations, such as limitations on general solicitation for private funds. As a consequence, we may be unable to fully comply with some requirements of these new regimes, which could result in regulatory actions against us. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration or the U.S. Congress may seek to modify policies or regulations of the prior administration, including limitations on coal and gas electric generation, mining and/or exploration, as well as various tax incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act intended to spur clean energy investment. While certain of our funds’ portfolio companies and investments may benefit from such policies, certain other portfolio companies and investments focused on renewables or other forms of “green energy” may be adversely impacted. U.K.-law climate-related Climate-Related Moreover, collecting, measuring and reporting the information and metrics required under various existing regulations has imposed administrative burden and increased cost on us. Such burden and cost are likely to increase if new or proposed regulations are enacted, particularly if the requirements imposed on us by various regulations lack harmonization on a global basis. We may also communicate certain climate-related initiatives, commitments and goals in our SEC filings or in other disclosures, which subjects us to additional risks, including the risk of being accused of greenwashing. Moreover, collecting, measuring and reporting the information and metrics required under various existing regulations has imposed administrative burden and increased cost on us. Such burden and cost are likely to increase if new or proposed regulations are enacted, particularly if the requirements imposed on us by various regulations lack harmonization on a global basis. We may also communicate certain climate-related initiatives, commitments and goals in our SEC filings or in other disclosures, which subjects us to additional risks, including the risk of being accused of greenwashing. climate-related Certain of our funds’ portfolio companies operate in sectors that could face transition risk. For certain of our funds’ portfolio companies, business trends related to climate change may require capital expenditures, product or service redesigns, and changes to operations and supply chains to meet changing customer expectations. While this can create opportunities, not addressing these changed expectations could create business risks for portfolio companies, which could negatively impact the value of such companies and the returns in our funds. For example, significant chronic or acute physical effects of climate change, including extreme weather events such as hurricanes, floods, or wildfires, can have an adverse impact on certain of our funds’ portfolio companies and investments, especially our real asset investments and portfolio companies that rely on physical factories, plants, stores or other assets located in the affected areas, or that focus on tourism or recreational travel. As the effects of climate change increase, we expect the frequency and impact of weather- and climate-related events and conditions to increase as well. Certain of our funds’ portfolio companies operate in sectors that could face transition risk. For certain of our funds’ portfolio companies, business trends related to climate change may require capital expenditures, product or service redesigns, and changes to operations and supply chains to meet changing customer expectations. While this can create opportunities, not addressing these changed expectations could create business risks for portfolio companies, which could negatively impact the value of such companies and the returns in our funds. For example, significant chronic or acute physical effects of climate change, including extreme weather events such as hurricanes, floods, or wildfires, can have an adverse impact on certain of our funds’ portfolio companies and investments, especially our real asset investments and portfolio companies that rely on physical factories, plants, stores or other assets located in the affected areas, or that focus on tourism or recreational travel. As the effects of climate change increase, we expect the frequency and impact of weather- and climate-related events and conditions to increase as well. weather- climate-related In addition, our reputation and fundraising may be harmed if certain stakeholders, such as our limited partners or stockholders, believe that we are not adequately or appropriately responding to climate change or, conversely, are focusing on climate change in a way that is inconsistent with our fiduciary duty obligations, including through the way in which we operate our business, the composition of our funds’ existing portfolios, the new investments made by our funds, or the decisions we make to continue to conduct or change our activities in response to climate change considerations. Moreover, we face business trends related to climate change risks, such as, for example, the increased attention to sustainability considerations by our fund investors, including in connection with their determination of whether to invest in our funds. See “—We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation.” In addition, our reputation and fundraising may be harmed if certain stakeholders, such as our limited partners or stockholders, believe that we are not adequately or appropriately responding to climate change or, conversely, are focusing on climate change in a way that is inconsistent with our fiduciary duty obligations, including through the way in which we operate our business, the composition of our funds’ existing portfolios, the new investments made by our funds, or the decisions we make to continue to conduct or change our activities in response to climate change considerations. Moreover, we face business trends related to climate change risks, such as, for example, the increased attention to sustainability considerations by our fund investors, including in connection with their determination of whether to invest in our funds. See “—We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation.” 42 42 Table of Contents Table of Contents Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business. Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business. Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business.

Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. We, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies face risks associated with climate change including risks related to the impact of climate-and ESG-related legislation and regulation (both domestically and internationally), risks related to business trends related to climate change and technology (such as the process of transitioning to a lower-carbon economy), and risks stemming from the physical impacts of climate change. We, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies face risks associated with climate change including risks related to the impact of climate-and ESG-related legislation and regulation (both domestically and internationally), risks related to business trends related to climate change and technology (such as the process of transitioning to a lower-carbon economy), and risks stemming from the physical impacts of climate change. Climate and sustainability-related regulations or interpretations of existing laws may result in enhanced disclosure obligations, which could negatively affect us, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies and materially increase the regulatory burden and cost of compliance. For example, SEC proposed rules, if enacted, would require certain climate-related disclosures by us, including disclosure of financed emissions, an extensive and complex category of emissions that is difficult to calculate accurately and for which there is currently no agreed measurement standard or methodology. Further, in October 2023, California enacted climate disclosure laws that could require us and/or certain of our portfolio companies to report on greenhouse gas emissions, climate-related financial risks and other climate-related matters. In addition, beginning in 2024, our U.K. entity is expected to be required to disclose certain climate-related financial information in line with the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosure’s recommendations. Further, in January 2023, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (“CSRD”) came into effect. CSRD will require a much broader range of companies, including non-EU companies with significant turnover and a legal presence in EU markets, to produce detailed and prescriptive reports on sustainability-related matters within their financial statements. Also in the EU, the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (“SFDR”) currently imposes disclosure requirements on certain of our funds and the EU Taxonomy Regulation supplements SFDR’s disclosure requirements for certain entities and sets out a framework for classifying economic activities as “environmentally sustainable.” Certain requirements under SFDR and the EU Taxonomy Regulation, such as those requiring us to make certain public disclosures regarding our private funds, may conflict with certain of our other regulatory obligations, such as limitations on general solicitation for private funds. As a consequence, we may be unable to fully comply with some requirements of these new regimes, which could result in regulatory actions against us. The European Commission is currently consulting on making changes to the SFDR and certain SFDR-related regulations are likely to be amended or new guidance may be issued. Furthermore, the Climate and sustainability-related regulations or interpretations of existing laws may result in enhanced disclosure obligations, which could negatively affect us, our funds and our funds’ portfolio companies and materially increase the regulatory burden and cost of compliance. For example, SEC proposed rules, if enacted, would require certain climate-related disclosures by us, including disclosure of financed emissions, an extensive and complex category of emissions that is difficult to calculate accurately and for which there is currently no agreed measurement standard or methodology. Further, in October 2023, California enacted climate disclosure laws that could require us and/or certain of our portfolio companies to report on greenhouse gas emissions, climate-related financial risks and other climate-related matters. In addition, beginning in 2024, our U.K. entity is expected to be required to disclose certain climate-related financial information in line with the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosure’s recommendations. Further, in January 2023, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (“CSRD”) came into effect. CSRD will require a much broader range of companies, including non-EU companies with significant turnover and a legal presence in EU markets, to produce detailed and prescriptive reports on sustainability-related matters within their financial statements. Also in the EU, the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (“SFDR”) currently imposes disclosure requirements on certain of our funds and the EU Taxonomy Regulation supplements SFDR’s disclosure requirements for certain entities and sets out a framework for classifying economic activities as “environmentally sustainable.” Certain requirements under SFDR and the EU Taxonomy Regulation, such as those requiring us to make certain public disclosures regarding our private funds, may conflict with certain of our other regulatory obligations, such as limitations on general solicitation for private funds. As a consequence, we may be unable to fully comply with some requirements of these new regimes, which could result in regulatory actions against us. The European Commission is currently consulting on making changes to the SFDR and certain SFDR-related regulations are likely to be amended or new guidance may be issued. Furthermore, the 41 41 Table of Contents U.K. is implementing its own regulation and a new “U.K. Green Taxonomy” that imposes substantial data collection and disclosure obligations on us. Collecting, measuring and reporting the information and metrics required under various existing regulations has imposed administrative burden and increased cost on us, and such burden and cost are likely to increase as new or proposed regulations are enacted, particularly if the requirements imposed on us by various regulations lack harmonization on a global basis. We may also communicate certain climate-related initiatives, commitments and goals in our SEC filings or in other disclosures, which subjects us to additional risks, including the risk of being accused of greenwashing. U.K. is implementing its own regulation and a new “U.K. Green Taxonomy” that imposes substantial data collection and disclosure obligations on us. Collecting, measuring and reporting the information and metrics required under various existing regulations has imposed administrative burden and increased cost on us, and such burden and cost are likely to increase as new or proposed regulations are enacted, particularly if the requirements imposed on us by various regulations lack harmonization on a global basis. We may also communicate certain climate-related initiatives, commitments and goals in our SEC filings or in other disclosures, which subjects us to additional risks, including the risk of being accused of greenwashing. Certain of our funds’ portfolio companies operate in sectors that could face transition risk if carbon-related regulations or taxes are implemented. For certain of our funds’ portfolio companies, business trends related to climate change may require capital expenditures, product or service redesigns, and changes to operations and supply chains to meet changing customer expectations. While this can create opportunities, not addressing these changed expectations could create business risks for portfolio companies, which could negatively impact the value of such companies and the returns in our funds. Further, advances in climate science may change society’s understanding of sources and magnitudes of negative effects on climate, which could also negatively impact portfolio company financial performance. Further, significant chronic or acute physical effects of climate change, including extreme weather events such as hurricanes or floods, can also have an adverse impact on certain of our funds’ portfolio companies and investments, especially our real asset investments and portfolio companies that rely on physical factories, plants, stores or other assets located in the affected areas, or that focus on tourism or recreational travel. As the effects of climate change increase, we expect the frequency and impact of weather- and climate-related events and conditions to increase as well. Certain of our funds’ portfolio companies operate in sectors that could face transition risk if carbon-related regulations or taxes are implemented. For certain of our funds’ portfolio companies, business trends related to climate change may require capital expenditures, product or service redesigns, and changes to operations and supply chains to meet changing customer expectations. While this can create opportunities, not addressing these changed expectations could create business risks for portfolio companies, which could negatively impact the value of such companies and the returns in our funds. Further, advances in climate science may change society’s understanding of sources and magnitudes of negative effects on climate, which could also negatively impact portfolio company financial performance. Further, significant chronic or acute physical effects of climate change, including extreme weather events such as hurricanes or floods, can also have an adverse impact on certain of our funds’ portfolio companies and investments, especially our real asset investments and portfolio companies that rely on physical factories, plants, stores or other assets located in the affected areas, or that focus on tourism or recreational travel. As the effects of climate change increase, we expect the frequency and impact of weather- and climate-related events and conditions to increase as well. In addition, our reputation and fundraising may be harmed if certain stakeholders, such as our limited partners or stockholders, believe that we are not adequately or appropriately responding to climate change, including through the way in which we operate our business, the composition of our funds’ existing portfolios, the new investments made by our funds, or the decisions we make to continue to conduct or change our activities in response to climate change considerations. Moreover, we face business trends related to climate change risks, such as, for example, the increased attention to ESG considerations by our fund investors, including in connection with their determination of whether to invest in our funds. See “— We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation.” In addition, our reputation and fundraising may be harmed if certain stakeholders, such as our limited partners or stockholders, believe that we are not adequately or appropriately responding to climate change, including through the way in which we operate our business, the composition of our funds’ existing portfolios, the new investments made by our funds, or the decisions we make to continue to conduct or change our activities in response to climate change considerations. Moreover, we face business trends related to climate change risks, such as, for example, the increased attention to ESG considerations by our fund investors, including in connection with their determination of whether to invest in our funds. See “— We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation.” Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business. Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business. Financial regulatory changes in the United States could adversely affect our business.

Trade negotiations and related government actions may create regulatory uncertainty for our funds’ portfolio companies and our investment strategies and adversely affect the profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. Trade negotiations and related government actions may create regulatory uncertainty for our funds’ portfolio companies and our investment strategies and adversely affect the profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. In recent years, the U.S. government has indicated its intent to alter its approach to international trade policy and in some cases to renegotiate, or potentially terminate, certain existing bilateral or multi-lateral trade agreements and treaties with foreign countries, and has made proposals and taken actions related thereto. For example, the U.S. government has imposed, and may in the future further increase, tariffs on certain foreign goods, including from China, such as steel and aluminum. Some foreign governments, including China, have instituted retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods. Most recently, the current U.S. Presidential administration has imposed or sought to impose significant increases to tariffs on goods imported into the U.S., including from China, Canada and Mexico. While the U.S. has reached an agreement with each of Canada and Mexico to delay the imposition of such tariffs until early March 2025, the administration has indicated intent to reinstate them. Tariffs on goods imported from China took effect in February 2025, and the administration has stated plans to increase such tariffs further. Tariffs on goods imported from China, and to the extent reinstated, from Canada and Mexico could further increase costs, decrease margins, reduce the competitiveness of products and services offered by current and future portfolio companies. This could materially adversely affect the revenues and profitability of select companies whose businesses rely on goods imported from countries that are subject to significant tariffs. Further governmental actions related to the imposition of tariffs or other trade barriers or changes to international trade agreements or policies in respect of other jurisdictions could also have a similar adverse impact. In recent years, the U.S. government has indicated its intent to alter its approach to international trade policy and in some cases to renegotiate, or potentially terminate, certain existing bilateral or multi-lateral trade agreements and treaties with foreign countries, and has made proposals and taken actions related thereto. For example, the U.S. government has imposed, and may in the future further increase, tariffs on certain foreign goods, including from China, such as steel and aluminum. Some foreign governments, including China, have instituted retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods. Most recently, the current U.S. Presidential administration has imposed or sought to impose significant increases to tariffs on goods imported into the U.S., including from China, Canada and Mexico. While the U.S. has reached an agreement with each of Canada and Mexico to delay the imposition of such tariffs until early March 2025, the administration has indicated intent to reinstate them. Tariffs on goods imported from China took effect in February 2025, and the administration has stated plans to increase such tariffs further. Tariffs on goods imported from China, and to the extent reinstated, from Canada and Mexico could further increase costs, decrease margins, reduce the competitiveness of products and services offered by current and future portfolio companies. This could materially adversely affect the revenues and profitability of select companies whose businesses rely on goods imported from countries that are subject to significant tariffs. Further governmental actions related to the imposition of tariffs or other trade barriers or changes to international trade agreements or policies in respect of other jurisdictions could also have a similar adverse impact. multi-lateral The U.S. has also implemented a number of economic sanctions programs and export controls that specifically target Chinese entities and nationals on national security grounds, including, for example, with respect to China’s response to political demonstrations in Hong Kong and China’s conduct concerning the treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in its Xinjiang province. Moreover, the U.S. has implemented additional sanctions against entities participating in China’s military industrial complex and providing support to the country’s military, intelligence, and surveillance apparatuses. These sanctions impose certain restrictions on U.S. persons and entities buying or selling publicly traded securities of these designated entities. Further escalation of the “trade war” between the U.S. and China, the countries’ inability to reach further trade agreements, or the continued use of reciprocal sanctions by each country, may negatively impact opportunities for investment as well as the rate of global growth, particularly in China, which has and continues to exhibit signs of slowing growth. Such slowing growth could adversely affect the revenues and profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. The U.S. has also implemented a number of economic sanctions programs and export controls that specifically target Chinese entities and nationals on national security grounds, including, for example, with respect to China’s response to political demonstrations in Hong Kong and China’s conduct concerning the treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in its Xinjiang province. Moreover, the U.S. has implemented additional sanctions against entities participating in China’s military industrial complex and providing support to the country’s military, intelligence, and surveillance apparatuses. These sanctions impose certain restrictions on U.S. persons and entities buying or selling publicly traded securities of these designated entities. Further escalation of the “trade war” between the U.S. and China, the countries’ inability to reach further trade agreements, or the continued use of reciprocal sanctions by each country, may negatively impact opportunities for investment as well as the rate of global growth, particularly in China, which has and continues to exhibit signs of slowing growth. Such slowing growth could adversely affect the revenues and profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. There is uncertainty as to further actions that may be taken under the current U.S. Presidential administration with respect to U.S. trade policy, including with respect to the proposed tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico. See “—Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S, may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” There is uncertainty as to further actions that may be taken under the current U.S. Presidential administration with respect to U.S. trade policy, including with respect to the proposed tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico. See “—Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S, may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” 45 45 Table of Contents Table of Contents Our provision of products and services to insurance companies subjects us to a variety of risks and uncertainties. Our provision of products and services to insurance companies subjects us to a variety of risks and uncertainties. Our provision of products and services to insurance companies subjects us to a variety of risks and uncertainties.

Trade negotiations and related government actions may create regulatory uncertainty for our funds’ portfolio companies and our investment strategies and adversely affect the profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. Trade negotiations and related government actions may create regulatory uncertainty for our funds’ portfolio companies and our investment strategies and adversely affect the profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. In recent years, the U.S. government has indicated its intent to alter its approach to international trade policy and in some cases to renegotiate, or potentially terminate, certain existing bilateral or multi-lateral trade agreements and treaties with foreign countries, and has made proposals and taken actions related thereto. For example, the U.S. government has imposed tariffs on certain foreign goods, including from China, such as steel and aluminum. Some foreign governments, including China, have instituted retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods. In recent years, the U.S. government has indicated its intent to alter its approach to international trade policy and in some cases to renegotiate, or potentially terminate, certain existing bilateral or multi-lateral trade agreements and treaties with foreign countries, and has made proposals and taken actions related thereto. For example, the U.S. government has imposed tariffs on certain foreign goods, including from China, such as steel and aluminum. Some foreign governments, including China, have instituted retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods. 44 44 Table of Contents Furthermore, the U.S. has implemented a number of economic sanctions programs and export controls that specifically target Chinese entities and nationals on national security grounds, including, for example, with respect to China’s response to political demonstrations in Hong Kong and China’s conduct concerning the treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in its Xinjiang province. Moreover, the U.S. has implemented additional sanctions against entities participating in China’s military industrial complex and providing support to the country’s military, intelligence, and surveillance apparatuses. These sanctions impose certain restrictions on U.S. persons and entities buying or selling publicly traded securities of these designated entities. Further escalation of the “trade war” between the U.S. and China, the countries’ inability to reach further trade agreements, or the continued use of reciprocal sanctions by each country, may negatively impact opportunities for investment as well as the rate of global growth, particularly in China, which has and continues to exhibit signs of slowing growth. Such slowing growth could adversely affect the revenues and profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. Furthermore, the U.S. has implemented a number of economic sanctions programs and export controls that specifically target Chinese entities and nationals on national security grounds, including, for example, with respect to China’s response to political demonstrations in Hong Kong and China’s conduct concerning the treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in its Xinjiang province. Moreover, the U.S. has implemented additional sanctions against entities participating in China’s military industrial complex and providing support to the country’s military, intelligence, and surveillance apparatuses. These sanctions impose certain restrictions on U.S. persons and entities buying or selling publicly traded securities of these designated entities. Further escalation of the “trade war” between the U.S. and China, the countries’ inability to reach further trade agreements, or the continued use of reciprocal sanctions by each country, may negatively impact opportunities for investment as well as the rate of global growth, particularly in China, which has and continues to exhibit signs of slowing growth. Such slowing growth could adversely affect the revenues and profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies. There is uncertainty as to the actions that may be taken under the current administration with respect to U.S. trade policy, including with China. Further governmental actions related to the imposition of tariffs or other trade barriers or changes to international trade agreements or policies, could further increase costs, decrease margins, reduce the competitiveness of products and services offered by current and future portfolio companies and adversely affect the revenues and profitability of companies whose businesses rely on goods imported from outside of the United States. See “— Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S, may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” There is uncertainty as to the actions that may be taken under the current administration with respect to U.S. trade policy, including with China. Further governmental actions related to the imposition of tariffs or other trade barriers or changes to international trade agreements or policies, could further increase costs, decrease margins, reduce the competitiveness of products and services offered by current and future portfolio companies and adversely affect the revenues and profitability of companies whose businesses rely on goods imported from outside of the United States. See “— Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S, may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” Our provision of products and services to insurance companies subjects us to a variety of risks and uncertainties. Our provision of products and services to insurance companies subjects us to a variety of risks and uncertainties. Our provision of products and services to insurance companies subjects us to a variety of risks and uncertainties.

Difficult market, economic and geopolitical conditions can adversely affect our business in many ways, each of which could materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. Difficult market, economic and geopolitical conditions can adversely affect our business in many ways, each of which could materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. Our business is materially affected by financial market and economic conditions and events throughout the world that are outside our control. We may not be able to or may choose not to manage our exposure to these conditions and/or events. Such conditions and/or events can adversely affect our business in many ways, including Our business is materially affected by financial market and economic conditions and events throughout the world that are outside our control. We may not be able to or may choose not to manage our exposure to these conditions and/or events. Such conditions and/or events can adversely affect our business in many ways, including 22 22 Table of Contents Table of Contents reducing the ability of our funds to raise or deploy capital, reducing the value or performance of our funds’ investments and making it more difficult for our funds to exit and realize value from existing investments. This could in turn materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. In addition, in the face of a difficult market or economic environment, we may need to reduce our fixed costs and other expenses in order to maintain profitability. This may include cutting back or eliminating the use of certain services or service providers, or terminating the employment of a significant number of our personnel that, in each case, could be important to our business and without which our operating results could be adversely affected. A failure to manage or reduce our costs and other expenses within a time frame sufficient to match any decrease in profitability would adversely affect our operating performance. reducing the ability of our funds to raise or deploy capital, reducing the value or performance of our funds’ investments and making it more difficult for our funds to exit and realize value from existing investments. This could in turn materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. In addition, in the face of a difficult market or economic environment, we may need to reduce our fixed costs and other expenses in order to maintain profitability. This may include cutting back or eliminating the use of certain services or service providers, or terminating the employment of a significant number of our personnel that, in each case, could be important to our business and without which our operating results could be adversely affected. A failure to manage or reduce our costs and other expenses within a time frame sufficient to match any decrease in profitability would adversely affect our operating performance. Turmoil in the global financial markets can provoke significant volatility of equity and debt securities prices. This can have a material and rapid impact on our mark-to-market valuations, particularly with respect to our public holdings and credit investments. As publicly traded equity securities have in recent years represented a meaningful proportion of the assets of many of our funds, stock market volatility, including a sharp decline in the stock market, may adversely affect our results, including our revenues and net income. Moreover, our public equity holdings have at times been concentrated in a few large positions, thereby making our unrealized mark-to-market valuations particularly sensitive to sharp changes in the price of any of these positions. Further, although the equity markets are not the only means by which we exit investments, should we experience a period of challenging equity markets, our funds may experience continued difficulty in realizing value from investments. Turmoil in the global financial markets can provoke significant volatility of equity and debt securities prices. This can have a material and rapid impact on our mark-to-market valuations, particularly with respect to our public holdings and credit investments. As publicly traded equity securities have in recent years represented a meaningful proportion of the assets of many of our funds, stock market volatility, including a sharp decline in the stock market, may adversely affect our results, including our revenues and net income. Moreover, our public equity holdings have at times been concentrated in a few large positions, thereby making our unrealized mark-to-market valuations particularly sensitive to sharp changes in the price of any of these positions. Further, although the equity markets are not the only means by which we exit investments, should we experience a period of challenging equity markets, our funds may experience continued difficulty in realizing value from investments. mark-to-market mark-to-market mark-to-market mark-to-market Although decelerating, inflation remains above the U.S. Federal Reserve’s target levels. Despite multiple federal fund rate decreases over the course of 2024, interest rates have remained elevated, with the U.S. Federal Reserve indicating in early 2025 an expectation of slower rate decreases moving forward. Periods of elevated inflation and high interest rates, such as that experienced in recent years, can contribute to significant volatility in debt and equity markets and economic deceleration or contraction in the rate of growth in certain industries, sectors or geographies. Economic slowdown may contribute to poor financial results for our funds’ portfolio companies or assets, which may result in lower investment returns for our funds. The valuations of our funds’ real estate assets, and fundraising in certain of our real estate strategies targeting high-net-worth investors, have been adversely impacted by elevated interest rates and a high cost of capital. A slower-than-expected decrease, or a further increase, in interest rates would continue to present a challenge to real estate valuations. Such factors are even more challenging in the life science office and traditional office market, as well as other properties with long-term leases that do not provide for short-term rent increases. Although decelerating, inflation remains above the U.S. Federal Reserve’s target levels. Despite multiple federal fund rate decreases over the course of 2024, interest rates have remained elevated, with the U.S. Federal Reserve indicating in early 2025 an expectation of slower rate decreases moving forward. Periods of elevated inflation and high interest rates, such as that experienced in recent years, can contribute to significant volatility in debt and equity markets and economic deceleration or contraction in the rate of growth in certain industries, sectors or geographies. Economic slowdown may contribute to poor financial results for our funds’ portfolio companies or assets, which may result in lower investment returns for our funds. The valuations of our funds’ real estate assets, and fundraising in certain of our real estate strategies targeting high-net-worth investors, have been adversely impacted by elevated interest rates and a high cost of capital. A slower-than-expected decrease, or a further increase, in interest rates would continue to present a challenge to real estate valuations. Such factors are even more challenging in the life science office and traditional office market, as well as other properties with long-term leases that do not provide for short-term rent increases. high-net-worth high-net-worth slower-than-expected slower-than-expected long-term short-term Geopolitical concerns and other global events outside of our control have also contributed and may continue to contribute to volatile global equity and debt markets, particularly as geopolitical instability has in recent years become more prevalent. These concerns and events include, without limitation, trade conflict, civil unrest, threats to national security, and national and international security events (including war, terrorist acts or other hostilities). For example, in the U.S., the current Presidential administration has stated its intention to make governmental policy and regulatory changes in a variety of areas, including the imposition of tariffs or other trade barriers. In that connection, certain countries subject to those changes have expressed an intent to impose similar measures in return. Outside the U.S., ongoing wars in the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as concern as to whether China’s stimulus measures will effectively stabilize slowing economic growth in the country, have further contributed to global economic uncertainty and volatility in the global financial markets. This may adversely impact our performance and the performance of our funds and their respective portfolio companies. Geopolitical concerns and other global events outside of our control have also contributed and may continue to contribute to volatile global equity and debt markets, particularly as geopolitical instability has in recent years become more prevalent. These concerns and events include, without limitation, trade conflict, civil unrest, threats to national security, and national and international security events (including war, terrorist acts or other hostilities). For example, in the U.S., the current Presidential administration has stated its intention to make governmental policy and regulatory changes in a variety of areas, including the imposition of tariffs or other trade barriers. In that connection, certain countries subject to those changes have expressed an intent to impose similar measures in return. Outside the U.S., ongoing wars in the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as concern as to whether China’s stimulus measures will effectively stabilize slowing economic growth in the country, have further contributed to global economic uncertainty and volatility in the global financial markets. This may adversely impact our performance and the performance of our funds and their respective portfolio companies. In addition, severe public health events, such as those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, may occur from time to time, and could directly and indirectly impact us in material respects that we are unable to predict or control, including by threatening our employees’ well-being and morale and interrupting business activities. In addition, related factors may materially and adversely affect us, including the effectiveness of governmental responses, the extension, amendment or withdrawal of any government programs or initiatives and the timing and speed of economic recovery. Actions taken in response may contribute to significant volatility in the financial markets, resulting in increased volatility in equity prices, material interest rate changes, supply chain disruptions, such as simultaneous supply and demand shock to global, regional and national economies, and an increase in inflationary pressures. In addition, severe public health events, such as those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, may occur from time to time, and could directly and indirectly impact us in material respects that we are unable to predict or control, including by threatening our employees’ well-being and morale and interrupting business activities. In addition, related factors may materially and adversely affect us, including the effectiveness of governmental responses, the extension, amendment or withdrawal of any government programs or initiatives and the timing and speed of economic recovery. Actions taken in response may contribute to significant volatility in the financial markets, resulting in increased volatility in equity prices, material interest rate changes, supply chain disruptions, such as simultaneous supply and demand shock to global, regional and national economies, and an increase in inflationary pressures. COVID-19 well-being 23 23 Table of Contents Table of Contents In addition to the factors described above, other market, economic and geopolitical factors described herein that may adversely affect our business include, without limitation: In addition to the factors described above, other market, economic and geopolitical factors described herein that may adversely affect our business include, without limitation: • higher prices for commodities or other goods, higher prices for commodities or other goods, • economic slowdown or recession in the U.S. and internationally, economic slowdown or recession in the U.S. and internationally, • changes in interest rates and/or a lack of availability of credit in the U.S. and internationally and changes in interest rates and/or a lack of availability of credit in the U.S. and internationally and • changes in law and/or regulation, and uncertainty regarding government and regulatory policy. changes in law and/or regulation, and uncertainty regarding government and regulatory policy. A period of economic slowdown, which may occur across one or more industries, sectors or geographies, creates operating performance challenges for certain of our funds’ investments, which could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows. A period of economic slowdown, which may occur across one or more industries, sectors or geographies, creates operating performance challenges for certain of our funds’ investments, which could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows. A period of economic slowdown, which may occur across one or more industries, sectors or geographies, creates operating performance challenges for certain of our funds’ investments, which could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows.

Difficult market, economic and geopolitical conditions can adversely affect our business in many ways, each of which could materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. Difficult market, economic and geopolitical conditions can adversely affect our business in many ways, each of which could materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. Our business is materially affected by financial market and economic conditions and events throughout the world that are outside our control. We may not be able to or may choose not to manage our exposure to these conditions and/or events. Such conditions and/or events can adversely affect our business in many ways, including reducing the ability of our funds to raise or deploy capital, reducing the value or performance of our funds’ investments and making it more difficult for our funds to exit and realize value from existing investment. This could in turn materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. In addition, in the face of a difficult market or economic environment, we may need to reduce our fixed costs and other expenses in order to maintain profitability, including cutting back or eliminating the use of certain services or service providers, or terminating the employment of a significant number of our personnel that, in each case, could be important to our business and without which our operating results could be adversely affected. A failure to manage or reduce our costs and other expenses within a time frame sufficient to match any decrease in profitability would adversely affect our operating performance. Our business is materially affected by financial market and economic conditions and events throughout the world that are outside our control. We may not be able to or may choose not to manage our exposure to these conditions and/or events. Such conditions and/or events can adversely affect our business in many ways, including reducing the ability of our funds to raise or deploy capital, reducing the value or performance of our funds’ investments and making it more difficult for our funds to exit and realize value from existing investment. This could in turn materially reduce our revenue, earnings and cash flow and adversely affect our financial prospects and condition. In addition, in the face of a difficult market or economic environment, we may need to reduce our fixed costs and other expenses in order to maintain profitability, including cutting back or eliminating the use of certain services or service providers, or terminating the employment of a significant number of our personnel that, in each case, could be important to our business and without which our operating results could be adversely affected. A failure to manage or reduce our costs and other expenses within a time frame sufficient to match any decrease in profitability would adversely affect our operating performance. Turmoil in the global financial markets can provoke significant volatility of equity and debt securities prices. This can have a material and rapid impact on our mark-to-market valuations, particularly with respect to our public holdings and credit investments. While inflation in the U.S. has decreased significantly in recent months, 2023 was characterized by elevated inflation and high interest rates, which contributed to significant volatility in debt and equity markets. The valuations of our funds’ real estate assets, and fundraising in certain of our real estate strategies targeting high-net-worth investors, have been adversely impacted by elevated interest rates and a high cost of capital. An extended period of high interest rates would continue to present a challenge to real estate valuations. Such factors could be even more challenging for traditional office properties and those properties with long-term leases that do not provide for short-term rent increases. In addition, should inflation begin to increase again, some of our funds’ portfolio companies’ profit margins may be pressured, particularly against a backdrop of economic slowdown or contraction. Turmoil in the global financial markets can provoke significant volatility of equity and debt securities prices. This can have a material and rapid impact on our mark-to-market valuations, particularly with respect to our public holdings and credit investments. While inflation in the U.S. has decreased significantly in recent months, 2023 was characterized by elevated inflation and high interest rates, which contributed to significant volatility in debt and equity markets. The valuations of our funds’ real estate assets, and fundraising in certain of our real estate strategies targeting high-net-worth investors, have been adversely impacted by elevated interest rates and a high cost of capital. An extended period of high interest rates would continue to present a challenge to real estate valuations. Such factors could be even more challenging for traditional office properties and those properties with long-term leases that do not provide for short-term rent increases. In addition, should inflation begin to increase again, some of our funds’ portfolio companies’ profit margins may be pressured, particularly against a backdrop of economic slowdown or contraction. As publicly traded equity securities have in recent years represented meaningful proportion of the assets of many of our funds, stock market volatility, including a sharp decline in the stock market, may adversely affect our results, including our revenues and net income. Moreover, our public equity holdings have at times been concentrated in a few large positions, thereby making our unrealized mark-to-market valuations particularly sensitive to sharp changes in the price of any of these positions. Further, although the equity markets are not the only means by which we exit investments, should we experience a period of challenging equity markets, our funds may experience continued difficulty in realizing value from investments. In China, after a period of measures instituted to control the rate of economic growth in the country, the China growth rate has been slowing, and further slowing could have a systemic impact on the global economy and on equity and debt markets. As publicly traded equity securities have in recent years represented meaningful proportion of the assets of many of our funds, stock market volatility, including a sharp decline in the stock market, may adversely affect our results, including our revenues and net income. Moreover, our public equity holdings have at times been concentrated in a few large positions, thereby making our unrealized mark-to-market valuations particularly sensitive to sharp changes in the price of any of these positions. Further, although the equity markets are not the only means by which we exit investments, should we experience a period of challenging equity markets, our funds may experience continued difficulty in realizing value from investments. In China, after a period of measures instituted to control the rate of economic growth in the country, the China growth rate has been slowing, and further slowing could have a systemic impact on the global economy and on equity and debt markets. 24 24 Table of Contents Geopolitical concerns and other global events outside of our control have contributed and may continue to contribute to volatile global equity and debt markets. These concerns and events include, without limitation, trade conflict, civil unrest, threats to national security, national and international political circumstances (including war, terrorist acts or security operations) and pandemics or other severe public health events. Geopolitical instability has in recent years become more prevalent. For example, the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, and Israel’s war against Hamas, and the global responses thereto, have contributed to volatility in the global financial markets, which may adversely impact our performance and the performance of our funds and their respective portfolio companies. Geopolitical concerns and other global events outside of our control have contributed and may continue to contribute to volatile global equity and debt markets. These concerns and events include, without limitation, trade conflict, civil unrest, threats to national security, national and international political circumstances (including war, terrorist acts or security operations) and pandemics or other severe public health events. Geopolitical instability has in recent years become more prevalent. For example, the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, and Israel’s war against Hamas, and the global responses thereto, have contributed to volatility in the global financial markets, which may adversely impact our performance and the performance of our funds and their respective portfolio companies. In addition to the factors described above, other market, economic and geopolitical factors described herein that may adversely affect our business include, without limitation: In addition to the factors described above, other market, economic and geopolitical factors described herein that may adversely affect our business include, without limitation: • higher prices for commodities or other goods, higher prices for commodities or other goods, • economic slowdown or recession in the U.S. and internationally, economic slowdown or recession in the U.S. and internationally, • changes in interest rates and/or a lack of availability of credit in the U.S. and internationally and changes in interest rates and/or a lack of availability of credit in the U.S. and internationally and • changes in law and/or regulation, and uncertainty regarding government and regulatory policy. changes in law and/or regulation, and uncertainty regarding government and regulatory policy. A period of economic slowdown, which may occur across one or more industries, sectors or geographies, creates operating performance challenges for certain of our funds’ investments, which could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows. A period of economic slowdown, which may occur across one or more industries, sectors or geographies, creates operating performance challenges for certain of our funds’ investments, which could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows. A period of economic slowdown, which may occur across one or more industries, sectors or geographies, creates operating performance challenges for certain of our funds’ investments, which could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows.

Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Similar to the United States, our business and operations in the jurisdictions outside the United States, in particular Europe, are subject to extensive laws and regulation. Governmental regulators and other authorities in Europe have proposed or implemented a number of initiatives, rules and regulations that could adversely affect our business, including by imposing additional compliance and administrative burdens and increasing the costs of doing business in such jurisdictions. Increasingly, the rules and regulations in the financial sector in Europe are becoming more prescriptive. Rules and regulations in other jurisdictions are often informed by key features of U.S. and European rules and regulations and, as a result, our businesses in all jurisdictions, including across Asia, may become subject to increased regulation in the future. Similar to the United States, our business and operations in the jurisdictions outside the United States, in particular Europe, are subject to extensive laws and regulation. Governmental regulators and other authorities in Europe have proposed or implemented a number of initiatives, rules and regulations that could adversely affect our business, including by imposing additional compliance and administrative burdens and increasing the costs of doing business in such jurisdictions. Increasingly, the rules and regulations in the financial sector in Europe are becoming more prescriptive. Rules and regulations in other jurisdictions are often informed by key features of U.S. and European rules and regulations and, as a result, our businesses in all jurisdictions, including across Asia, may become subject to increased regulation in the future. In Europe, the EU Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (“AIFMD”) establishes a regulatory regime for alternative investment fund managers (“AIFMs”), including our AIFMs in Luxembourg and Ireland. The U.K. has “on-shored” AIFMD and therefore similar requirements continue to apply to funds marketed to U.K. investors. Changes to AIFMD, most of which will come into effect in 2026, have been adopted in the EU. These changes increase the compliance burdens on certain of our funds and require them to make changes to their operations, including, among other things, in respect of their use of leverage, which could impact the returns of such funds. In addition, the changes may restrict certain of our AIFs from marketing in EEA jurisdictions via national private placement regimes, which may impact our ability to raise capital from EEA investors. In Europe, the EU Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (“AIFMD”) establishes a regulatory regime for alternative investment fund managers (“AIFMs”), including our AIFMs in Luxembourg and Ireland. The U.K. has “on-shored” AIFMD and therefore similar requirements continue to apply to funds marketed to U.K. investors. Changes to AIFMD, most of which will come into effect in 2026, have been adopted in the EU. These changes increase the compliance burdens on certain of our funds and require them to make changes to their operations, including, among other things, in respect of their use of leverage, which could impact the returns of such funds. In addition, the changes may restrict certain of our AIFs from marketing in EEA jurisdictions via national private placement regimes, which may impact our ability to raise capital from EEA investors. “on-shored” The EU regulation on over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivative transactions, central counterparties and trade repositories (“EMIR”) requires mandatory clearing of certain OTC derivatives through central counterparties, creates additional risk mitigation requirements (including, in particular, margining requirements) in respect of certain OTC derivative transactions that are not cleared by a central counterparty, and imposes reporting and recordkeeping requirements in respect of most derivative transactions. In addition, the EU regulation on transparency of securities financing transactions (“SFTR”) requires certain mandatory reporting and disclosure in connection with certain securities financing transactions and total return swaps. Furthermore, the EU Central Securities Depositories Regulation (“CSDR”) provides for an EU-wide framework with respect to securities settlement and central securities depository and settlement services. Each of the aforementioned regulations is likely to increase the operational burden and costs associated with certain of our and our funds’ operations. The EU regulation on over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivative transactions, central counterparties and trade repositories (“EMIR”) requires mandatory clearing of certain OTC derivatives through central counterparties, creates additional risk mitigation requirements (including, in particular, margining requirements) in respect of certain OTC derivative transactions that are not cleared by a central counterparty, and imposes reporting and recordkeeping requirements in respect of most derivative transactions. In addition, the EU regulation on transparency of securities financing transactions (“SFTR”) requires certain mandatory reporting and disclosure in connection with certain securities financing transactions and total return swaps. Furthermore, the EU Central Securities Depositories Regulation (“CSDR”) provides for an EU-wide framework with respect to securities settlement and central securities depository and settlement services. Each of the aforementioned regulations is likely to increase the operational burden and costs associated with certain of our and our funds’ operations. over-the-counter over-the-counter EU-wide Further, in the EU, the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2014 (2014/65/EU) (“MiFID II”), which has also been on-shored in the U.K., requires us to comply with disclosure, transparency, reporting and record keeping obligations and enhanced obligations in relation to the receipt of investment research, best execution, product governance and marketing communications. Compliance with MiFID II has resulted in greater overall complexity, higher compliance and administration and operational costs and less overall flexibility for us. This includes increased regulatory capital and liquidity adequacy requirements for certain of our entities licensed under MiFID, as well as remuneration requirements of certain senior staff. Additional regulation around remuneration may make it harder for us to attract and retain talent, compared to competitors not subject to the same rules. Enhanced internal governance, disclosure and reporting requirements increase the costs of compliance. Further, in the EU, the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2014 (2014/65/EU) (“MiFID II”), which has also been on-shored in the U.K., requires us to comply with disclosure, transparency, reporting and record keeping obligations and enhanced obligations in relation to the receipt of investment research, best execution, product governance and marketing communications. Compliance with MiFID II has resulted in greater overall complexity, higher compliance and administration and operational costs and less overall flexibility for us. This includes increased regulatory capital and liquidity adequacy requirements for certain of our entities licensed under MiFID, as well as remuneration requirements of certain senior staff. Additional regulation around remuneration may make it harder for us to attract and retain talent, compared to competitors not subject to the same rules. Enhanced internal governance, disclosure and reporting requirements increase the costs of compliance. on-shored Certain regulatory requirements in the EU and U.K. intended to enhance protection for retail investors and impose additional obligations on the distribution of certain products to retail investors may lead to increased costs and limit our ability to access capital from retail investors in certain jurisdictions. These include EU and U.K. rules requiring that retail investors in packaged retail investment and insurance products receive key information documents and U.K. rules enhancing duties related to distribution of financial products to retail investors. Furthermore, in May 2023, the European Commission announced its Retail Investment Strategy, which could result in new regulation that could impact our ability to offer our funds to retail investors in the EU. Data protection authorities have significant audit and investigatory powers to probe how personal data is being used and processed and breaches of these regulations can lead to significant fines, regulatory action and reputational risk. See “— Certain regulatory requirements in the EU and U.K. intended to enhance protection for retail investors and impose additional obligations on the distribution of certain products to retail investors may lead to increased costs and limit our ability to access capital from retail investors in certain jurisdictions. These include EU and U.K. rules requiring that retail investors in packaged retail investment and insurance products receive key information documents and U.K. rules enhancing duties related to distribution of financial products to retail investors. Furthermore, in May 2023, the European Commission announced its Retail Investment Strategy, which could result in new regulation that could impact our ability to offer our funds to retail investors in the EU. Data protection authorities have significant audit and investigatory powers to probe how personal data is being used and processed and breaches of these regulations can lead to significant fines, regulatory action and reputational risk. See “— 48 48 Table of Contents Table of Contents Rapidly developing and changing global data security and privacy laws and regulations could increase compliance costs and subject us to enforcement risks and reputational damage.” European regulators, including the U.K. FCA and CSSF in Luxembourg are increasing their attention on greenwashing and rapidly developing and implementing regimes focused on sustainability within the financial services sector, which could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies in various ways. See “— Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” Rapidly developing and changing global data security and privacy laws and regulations could increase compliance costs and subject us to enforcement risks and reputational damage.” European regulators, including the U.K. FCA and CSSF in Luxembourg are increasing their attention on greenwashing and rapidly developing and implementing regimes focused on sustainability within the financial services sector, which could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies in various ways. See “— Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” sustainability-related Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.

Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Similar to the United States, the jurisdictions outside the United States in which we operate, in particular Europe, have become subject to further regulation. Governmental regulators and other authorities in Europe have proposed or implemented a number of initiatives, rules and regulations that could adversely affect our business, including by imposing additional compliance and administrative burdens and increasing the costs of doing business in such jurisdictions. Increasingly, the rules and regulations in the financial sector in Europe are becoming more prescriptive. Rules and regulations in other jurisdictions are often informed by key features of U.S. and European rules and regulations and, as a result, our businesses in all jurisdictions, including across Asia, may become subject to increased regulation in the future. Similar to the United States, the jurisdictions outside the United States in which we operate, in particular Europe, have become subject to further regulation. Governmental regulators and other authorities in Europe have proposed or implemented a number of initiatives, rules and regulations that could adversely affect our business, including by imposing additional compliance and administrative burdens and increasing the costs of doing business in such jurisdictions. Increasingly, the rules and regulations in the financial sector in Europe are becoming more prescriptive. Rules and regulations in other jurisdictions are often informed by key features of U.S. and European rules and regulations and, as a result, our businesses in all jurisdictions, including across Asia, may become subject to increased regulation in the future. In Europe, the EU Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (“AIFMD”) establishes a regulatory regime for alternative investment fund managers (“AIFMs”), including our AIFMs in Luxembourg and Ireland. The U.K. has “on-shored” AIFMD and therefore similar requirements continue to apply to funds marketed to U.K. investors notwithstanding Brexit. Changes to AIFMD have been adopted and are expected to come into force in late-2025. These changes increase the compliance burdens on certain of our funds and require them to make changes to their operations, including, among other things, in respect of their use of leverage, which could impact the returns of such funds. In Europe, the EU Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (“AIFMD”) establishes a regulatory regime for alternative investment fund managers (“AIFMs”), including our AIFMs in Luxembourg and Ireland. The U.K. has “on-shored” AIFMD and therefore similar requirements continue to apply to funds marketed to U.K. investors notwithstanding Brexit. Changes to AIFMD have been adopted and are expected to come into force in late-2025. These changes increase the compliance burdens on certain of our funds and require them to make changes to their operations, including, among other things, in respect of their use of leverage, which could impact the returns of such funds. In addition, on August 2, 2021, Directive (EU) 2019/1160 (the “CBDF Directive”) and Regulation (EU) 2019/1156 (the “CBDF Regulation”) came into effect, which in part amended AIFMD. The CBDF Regulation contains standardized requirements for cross-border fund distribution in the EU. CBDF Directive has been implemented in most EU member states, which may make it more complex and costly for us to raise capital from EEA investors. In addition, on August 2, 2021, Directive (EU) 2019/1160 (the “CBDF Directive”) and Regulation (EU) 2019/1156 (the “CBDF Regulation”) came into effect, which in part amended AIFMD. The CBDF Regulation contains standardized requirements for cross-border fund distribution in the EU. CBDF Directive has been implemented in most EU member states, which may make it more complex and costly for us to raise capital from EEA investors. 47 47 Table of Contents The EU Securitization Regulation (the “Securitization Regulation”), which became effective on January 1, 2019, imposes due diligence and risk retention requirements on “institutional investors” (which includes managers of alternative investment funds assets) which must be satisfied prior to holding a securitization position. These requirements may apply to AIFs managed by not only EEA AIFMs but also non-EEA AIFMs where those AIFs have been registered for marketing in the EU under national private placement regimes. Similar requirements continue to apply in the U.K. notwithstanding Brexit. The FCA is looking at amending the regime in the U.K. in the coming years which could result in divergence between the EU and U.K. requirements, thereby increasing the cost and complexity of compliance. The Securitization Regulation may impact or limit our funds’ ability to make certain investments that constitute “securitizations” under the regulation. The Securitization Regulation may also constrain certain of our funds’ ability to invest in securitization positions that do not comply with, among other things, the risk retention requirements. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in various penalties. The EU Securitization Regulation (the “Securitization Regulation”), which became effective on January 1, 2019, imposes due diligence and risk retention requirements on “institutional investors” (which includes managers of alternative investment funds assets) which must be satisfied prior to holding a securitization position. These requirements may apply to AIFs managed by not only EEA AIFMs but also non-EEA AIFMs where those AIFs have been registered for marketing in the EU under national private placement regimes. Similar requirements continue to apply in the U.K. notwithstanding Brexit. The FCA is looking at amending the regime in the U.K. in the coming years which could result in divergence between the EU and U.K. requirements, thereby increasing the cost and complexity of compliance. The Securitization Regulation may impact or limit our funds’ ability to make certain investments that constitute “securitizations” under the regulation. The Securitization Regulation may also constrain certain of our funds’ ability to invest in securitization positions that do not comply with, among other things, the risk retention requirements. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in various penalties. The EU regulation on over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivative transactions, central counterparties and trade repositories ( “EMIR”) requires mandatory clearing of certain OTC derivatives through central counterparties, creates additional risk mitigation requirements (including, in particular, margining requirements) in respect of certain OTC derivative transactions that are not cleared by a central counterparty, and imposes reporting and recordkeeping requirements in respect of most derivative transactions. The U.K. has on-shored EMIR in similar, but not identical form. In addition, the EU regulation on transparency of securities financing transactions (“SFTR”) requires certain mandatory reporting and disclosure in connection with certain securities financing transactions and total return swaps. Furthermore, the EU Central Securities Depositories Regulation (“CSDR”) provides for an EU-wide framework with respect to securities settlement and central securities depository and settlement services. The effectiveness of certain requirements under this framework has been postponed until November 2025. The U.K. has on-shored SFTR and CSDR, in similar, but not identical, forms. Each of the aforementioned regulations is likely to increase the operational burden and costs associated with certain of our and our funds’ operations. The EU regulation on over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivative transactions, central counterparties and trade repositories ( “EMIR”) requires mandatory clearing of certain OTC derivatives through central counterparties, creates additional risk mitigation requirements (including, in particular, margining requirements) in respect of certain OTC derivative transactions that are not cleared by a central counterparty, and imposes reporting and recordkeeping requirements in respect of most derivative transactions. The U.K. has on-shored EMIR in similar, but not identical form. In addition, the EU regulation on transparency of securities financing transactions (“SFTR”) requires certain mandatory reporting and disclosure in connection with certain securities financing transactions and total return swaps. Furthermore, the EU Central Securities Depositories Regulation (“CSDR”) provides for an EU-wide framework with respect to securities settlement and central securities depository and settlement services. The effectiveness of certain requirements under this framework has been postponed until November 2025. The U.K. has on-shored SFTR and CSDR, in similar, but not identical, forms. Each of the aforementioned regulations is likely to increase the operational burden and costs associated with certain of our and our funds’ operations. In December 2023, the European Commission reached a provisional agreement on previously proposed regulations to strengthen the regulatory and supervisory framework over money laundering and financing of terrorism, which includes the establishment of a new regulatory authority. Additionally, in the U.K., amendments to the anti-money laundering and financing of terrorism regime are expected to be finalized in 2024. These proposals, if adopted, could increase the risk of regulatory actions against us. In December 2023, the European Commission reached a provisional agreement on previously proposed regulations to strengthen the regulatory and supervisory framework over money laundering and financing of terrorism, which includes the establishment of a new regulatory authority. Additionally, in the U.K., amendments to the anti-money laundering and financing of terrorism regime are expected to be finalized in 2024. These proposals, if adopted, could increase the risk of regulatory actions against us. Further, in the EU, the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2014 (2014/65/EU) (“MiFID II”), which has also been on-shored in the U.K., requires us to comply with disclosure, transparency, reporting and record keeping obligations and enhanced obligations in relation to the receipt of investment research, best execution, product governance and marketing communications. Compliance with MiFID II has resulted in greater overall complexity, higher compliance and administration and operational costs and less overall flexibility for us. Certain aspects of MiFID II are subject to review and amendment in the EU and the U.K. Associated changes to the prudential regulation of EEA and U.K. MiFID investment firms have increased the regulatory capital and liquidity adequacy requirements for certain of our entities licensed under MiFID, as well as required us to make changes to the way in which we remunerate certain senior staff. Additional regulation around remuneration may make it harder for us to attract and retain talent, compared to competitors not subject to the same rules. Enhanced internal governance, disclosure and reporting requirements increase the costs of compliance. Further, in the EU, the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2014 (2014/65/EU) (“MiFID II”), which has also been on-shored in the U.K., requires us to comply with disclosure, transparency, reporting and record keeping obligations and enhanced obligations in relation to the receipt of investment research, best execution, product governance and marketing communications. Compliance with MiFID II has resulted in greater overall complexity, higher compliance and administration and operational costs and less overall flexibility for us. Certain aspects of MiFID II are subject to review and amendment in the EU and the U.K. Associated changes to the prudential regulation of EEA and U.K. MiFID investment firms have increased the regulatory capital and liquidity adequacy requirements for certain of our entities licensed under MiFID, as well as required us to make changes to the way in which we remunerate certain senior staff. Additional regulation around remuneration may make it harder for us to attract and retain talent, compared to competitors not subject to the same rules. Enhanced internal governance, disclosure and reporting requirements increase the costs of compliance. Certain regulatory requirements in the EU and U.K. intended to enhance protection for retail investors and impose additional obligations on the distribution of certain products to retail investors may lead to increased costs and limit our ability to access capital from retail investors in certain jurisdictions. These include EU and U.K. rules requiring that retail investors in packaged retail investment and insurance products receive key information documents and U.K rules enhancing duties related to distribution of financial products to retail investors. Furthermore, in May 2023, the European Commission announced its Retail Investment Strategy, which could result in new regulation that could impact our ability to offer our funds to retail investors in the EU. Certain regulatory requirements in the EU and U.K. intended to enhance protection for retail investors and impose additional obligations on the distribution of certain products to retail investors may lead to increased costs and limit our ability to access capital from retail investors in certain jurisdictions. These include EU and U.K. rules requiring that retail investors in packaged retail investment and insurance products receive key information documents and U.K rules enhancing duties related to distribution of financial products to retail investors. Furthermore, in May 2023, the European Commission announced its Retail Investment Strategy, which could result in new regulation that could impact our ability to offer our funds to retail investors in the EU. We are required to comply with the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) (the “EU GDPR”) because, among other things, we process European Union data subjects’ personal data in the U.S. via our global technology systems. Following Brexit, the U.K. implemented its own version of EU GDPR (the “U.K. GDPR”). We are required to comply with the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) (the “EU GDPR”) because, among other things, we process European Union data subjects’ personal data in the U.S. via our global technology systems. Following Brexit, the U.K. implemented its own version of EU GDPR (the “U.K. GDPR”). 48 48 Table of Contents The EU GDPR and U.K. GDPR impose a range of obligations on processors of personal data, including obligations that apply in respect of the transfer of personal data to other countries, including potential limitations on transfer or requirements to implement further protections for personal data. Data protection authorities have significant audit and investigatory powers to probe how personal data is being used and processed and breaches of these regulations can lead to significant fines, regulatory action and reputational risk. See “— Rapidly developing and changing global data security and privacy laws and regulations could increase compliance costs and subject us to enforcement risks and reputational damage.” European regulators, including the U.K. FCA are increasing their attention on greenwashing and rapidly developing and implementing regimes focused on ESG and sustainability within the financial services sector, which could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies in various ways. See “— Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” The EU GDPR and U.K. GDPR impose a range of obligations on processors of personal data, including obligations that apply in respect of the transfer of personal data to other countries, including potential limitations on transfer or requirements to implement further protections for personal data. Data protection authorities have significant audit and investigatory powers to probe how personal data is being used and processed and breaches of these regulations can lead to significant fines, regulatory action and reputational risk. See “— Rapidly developing and changing global data security and privacy laws and regulations could increase compliance costs and subject us to enforcement risks and reputational damage.” European regulators, including the U.K. FCA are increasing their attention on greenwashing and rapidly developing and implementing regimes focused on ESG and sustainability within the financial services sector, which could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies in various ways. See “— Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers. Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.

A decline in the pace or size of investments made by our funds may adversely affect our revenues. A decline in the pace or size of investments made by our funds may adversely affect our revenues. The revenues that we earn are driven in part by the pace at which our funds make investments and the size of those investments, and a decline in the pace or the size of such investments may reduce our revenues. In particular, in recent years we have meaningfully increased the number of perpetual capital vehicles we offer and the assets under management in such vehicles. The fees we earn from our perpetual capital vehicles, including our Core+ real estate strategy, represent a significant and growing portion of our overall revenues. If our funds, including our perpetual capital vehicles, are unable to deploy capital at a sufficient pace, our revenues would be adversely impacted. Many factors could cause a decline in the pace of investment, including a market environment characterized by high prices, the inability of our investment professionals to identify attractive investment opportunities, competition for such opportunities among other potential acquirers, decreased availability of financing on attractive terms or at all or decreased availability of investor capital, including as a result of a challenging fundraising environment or heightened investor requests for repurchases in certain vehicles. A number of our funds have invested and intend to continue to invest in large transactions or transactions that otherwise have substantial business, regulatory or legal complexity and may be more difficult to execute successfully than smaller or less complex investments. In addition, realizing value from such investments may be more difficult as a result of, among other things, a limited universe of potential acquirers. The revenues that we earn are driven in part by the pace at which our funds make investments and the size of those investments, and a decline in the pace or the size of such investments may reduce our revenues. In particular, in recent years we have meaningfully increased the number of perpetual capital vehicles we offer and the assets under management in such vehicles. The fees we earn from our perpetual capital vehicles, including our Core+ real estate strategy, represent a significant and growing portion of our overall revenues. If our funds, including our perpetual capital vehicles, are unable to deploy capital at a sufficient pace, our revenues would be adversely impacted. Many factors could cause a decline in the pace of investment, including a market environment characterized by high prices, the inability of our investment professionals to identify attractive investment opportunities, competition for such opportunities among other potential acquirers, decreased availability of financing on attractive terms or at all or decreased availability of investor capital, including as a result of a challenging fundraising environment or heightened investor requests for repurchases in certain vehicles. A number of our funds have invested and intend to continue to invest in large transactions or transactions that otherwise have substantial business, regulatory or legal complexity and may be more difficult to execute successfully than smaller or less complex investments. In addition, realizing value from such investments may be more difficult as a result of, among other things, a limited universe of potential acquirers. We may also fail to consummate identified investment opportunities because of regulatory or legal complexities or uncertainty and adverse developments in the U.S. or global economy, financial markets or geopolitical conditions. Additionally, our ability to deploy capital in certain countries may be adversely impacted by U.S. and foreign government policy changes and regulations. For example, an FTC rule that significantly increases the amount of information required to be provided in a Hart-Scott-Rodino filing became effective in February 2025. The process of obtaining pre-approval for certain transactions undertaken by our investment funds is expected to become more administratively burdensome and time consuming. Any potential time delay associated with obtaining approval may make it more difficult for our funds to deploy capital and exit and realize value from investments. We may also fail to consummate identified investment opportunities because of regulatory or legal complexities or uncertainty and adverse developments in the U.S. or global economy, financial markets or geopolitical conditions. Additionally, our ability to deploy capital in certain countries may be adversely impacted by U.S. and foreign government policy changes and regulations. For example, an FTC rule that significantly increases the amount of information required to be provided in a Hart-Scott-Rodino filing became effective in February 2025. The process of obtaining pre-approval for certain transactions undertaken by our investment funds is expected to become more administratively burdensome and time consuming. Any potential time delay associated with obtaining approval may make it more difficult for our funds to deploy capital and exit and realize value from investments. Hart-Scott-Rodino Hart-Scott-Rodino pre-approval Further, state regulatory agencies may impose restrictions on private funds’ investments in certain types of assets or industries, which could affect our funds’ ability to find attractive and diversified investments and to complete such investments in a timely manner. For example, certain states have, and others may in the future, increase state regulatory review measures of investments by private equity into the patient-facing healthcare industry, and certain states have considered, and others may seek to enact, legislation to restrict institutional investment in single-family homes. Such laws may impact the ability of our funds to invest in certain assets or sectors. In addition, the ability to deploy capital in China has been adversely impacted by policies and regulations in the U.S., which may be exacerbated prospectively. See “—Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” Further, state regulatory agencies may impose restrictions on private funds’ investments in certain types of assets or industries, which could affect our funds’ ability to find attractive and diversified investments and to complete such investments in a timely manner. For example, certain states have, and others may in the future, increase state regulatory review measures of investments by private equity into the patient-facing healthcare industry, and certain states have considered, and others may seek to enact, legislation to restrict institutional investment in single-family homes. Such laws may impact the ability of our funds to invest in certain assets or sectors. In addition, the ability to deploy capital in China has been adversely impacted by policies and regulations in the U.S., which may be exacerbated prospectively. See “—Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S., may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” patient-facing single-family Our revenue, earnings, net income and cash flow can all vary materially due to our reliance on Performance Revenues, which may make it difficult for us to achieve steady earnings growth on a quarterly basis and may cause the price of our common stock to decline. Our revenue, earnings, net income and cash flow can all vary materially due to our reliance on Performance Revenues, which may make it difficult for us to achieve steady earnings growth on a quarterly basis and may cause the price of our common stock to decline. Our revenue, earnings, net income and cash flow can all vary materially due to our reliance on Performance Revenues, which may make it difficult for us to achieve steady earnings growth on a quarterly basis and may cause the price of our common stock to decline.

A decline in the pace or size of investments made by our funds may adversely affect our revenues. A decline in the pace or size of investments made by our funds may adversely affect our revenues. The revenues that we earn are driven in part by the pace at which our funds make investments and the size of those investments, and a decline in the pace or the size of such investments may reduce our revenues. In particular, in recent years we have meaningfully increased the number of perpetual capital vehicles we offer and the assets under management in such vehicles. The fees we earn from our perpetual capital vehicles, including our Core+ real estate strategy, represent a significant and growing portion of our overall revenues. If our funds, including our perpetual capital vehicles, are unable to deploy capital at a sufficient pace, our revenues would be adversely impacted. Many factors could cause a decline in the pace of investment, including a market environment characterized by high prices, the inability of our investment professionals to identify attractive investment opportunities, competition for such opportunities among other potential acquirers, decreased availability of financing on attractive terms or at all or decreased availability of investor capital, including as a result of a challenging fundraising environment or heightened investor requests for repurchases in certain vehicles. A number of our funds, including our real estate and private equity funds, have invested and intend to continue to invest in large transactions or transactions that otherwise have substantial business, regulatory or legal complexity and may be more difficult to execute successfully than smaller or less complex investments. In addition, realizing value from such investments may be more difficult as a result of, among other things, a limited universe of potential acquirers. The revenues that we earn are driven in part by the pace at which our funds make investments and the size of those investments, and a decline in the pace or the size of such investments may reduce our revenues. In particular, in recent years we have meaningfully increased the number of perpetual capital vehicles we offer and the assets under management in such vehicles. The fees we earn from our perpetual capital vehicles, including our Core+ real estate strategy, represent a significant and growing portion of our overall revenues. If our funds, including our perpetual capital vehicles, are unable to deploy capital at a sufficient pace, our revenues would be adversely impacted. Many factors could cause a decline in the pace of investment, including a market environment characterized by high prices, the inability of our investment professionals to identify attractive investment opportunities, competition for such opportunities among other potential acquirers, decreased availability of financing on attractive terms or at all or decreased availability of investor capital, including as a result of a challenging fundraising environment or heightened investor requests for repurchases in certain vehicles. A number of our funds, including our real estate and private equity funds, have invested and intend to continue to invest in large transactions or transactions that otherwise have substantial business, regulatory or legal complexity and may be more difficult to execute successfully than smaller or less complex investments. In addition, realizing value from such investments may be more difficult as a result of, among other things, a limited universe of potential acquirers. We may also fail to consummate identified investment opportunities because of regulatory or legal complexities or uncertainty and adverse developments in the U.S. or global economy, financial markets or geopolitical conditions, and our ability to deploy capital in certain countries may be adversely impacted by U.S. and foreign government policy changes and regulations. For example, the ability to deploy capital in China has been adversely impacted by policies and regulations in China and the U.S., which may be exacerbated prospectively. For example, the President signed an Executive Order in August 2023 that established an outbound investment screening regime intended to regulate or prohibit certain investments by U.S. persons in advanced technology sectors in China and other jurisdictions that may be designated as a “country of concern.” See “— Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S, may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” We may also fail to consummate identified investment opportunities because of regulatory or legal complexities or uncertainty and adverse developments in the U.S. or global economy, financial markets or geopolitical conditions, and our ability to deploy capital in certain countries may be adversely impacted by U.S. and foreign government policy changes and regulations. For example, the ability to deploy capital in China has been adversely impacted by policies and regulations in China and the U.S., which may be exacerbated prospectively. For example, the President signed an Executive Order in August 2023 that established an outbound investment screening regime intended to regulate or prohibit certain investments by U.S. persons in advanced technology sectors in China and other jurisdictions that may be designated as a “country of concern.” See “— Laws and regulations on foreign direct investment applicable to us and our funds’ portfolio companies, both within and outside the U.S, may make it more difficult for us to deploy capital in certain jurisdictions or to sell assets to certain buyers.” 27 27 Table of Contents Our revenue, earnings, net income and cash flow can all vary materially, which may make it difficult for us to achieve steady earnings growth on a quarterly basis and may cause the price of our common stock to decline. Our revenue, earnings, net income and cash flow can all vary materially, which may make it difficult for us to achieve steady earnings growth on a quarterly basis and may cause the price of our common stock to decline. Our revenue, earnings, net income and cash flow can all vary materially, which may make it difficult for us to achieve steady earnings growth on a quarterly basis and may cause the price of our common stock to decline.

Employee misconduct could harm us by impairing our ability to attract and retain clients and subjecting us to significant legal liability and reputational harm. Fraud, deceptive practices or other misconduct at portfolio companies or service providers could similarly subject us to liability and reputational damage and also harm performance. Employee misconduct could harm us by impairing our ability to attract and retain clients and subjecting us to significant legal liability and reputational harm. Fraud, deceptive practices or other misconduct at portfolio companies or service providers could similarly subject us to liability and reputational damage and also harm performance. Our employees could engage in misconduct that adversely affects our business. We are subject to a number of obligations and standards arising from our asset management business and our authority over the assets managed by our asset management business. The violation of these obligations and standards by any of our employees would adversely affect our clients and us. Our business often requires that we deal with confidential matters of great significance to companies in which we may invest. If our employees were to improperly use or disclose confidential information, we could suffer serious harm to our reputation, financial position and current and future business relationships. Detecting or deterring employee misconduct is not always possible, and the extensive precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in all cases. Our employees could engage in misconduct that adversely affects our business. We are subject to a number of obligations and standards arising from our asset management business and our authority over the assets managed by our asset management business. The violation of these obligations and standards by any of our employees would adversely affect our clients and us. Our business often requires that we deal with confidential matters of great significance to companies in which we may invest. If our employees were to improperly use or disclose confidential information, we could suffer serious harm to our reputation, financial position and current and future business relationships. Detecting or deterring employee misconduct is not always possible, and the extensive precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in all cases. We are subject to U.S. and foreign anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as amended (“FCPA”), as well as anti-money laundering laws. Any determination that we have violated the FCPA, the EU and U.K. anti-money laundering regimes, the U.K. anti-bribery laws or other applicable anti-corruption, anti-bribery, or anti-money laundering laws could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct, securities litigation and a general loss of investor confidence. Any one of these could adversely affect our business prospects, financial position or the price of our common stock. Although the current U.S. President administration has signed an executive order to pause, subject to certain exceptions, the initiation of new investigations and enforcement actions under the FCPA, such laws have attracted significant regulatory focus in recent years, including outside of the U.S. For example, the SEC will be responsible for examining investment advisers’ compliance with a U.S. Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) rule currently scheduled to go into effect January 2026, that requires registered investment adviser and exempt reporting advisers to, among other measures, adopt an anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) program, file certain reports with FinCEN and to maintain records related to such activities. The application of these rules would impose significant compliance costs on us. The EU and the U.K. are similarly revising their respective anti-money laundering regimes. The EU’s revised anti-money laundering regime is expected to come into effect as early as June 2026 and the U.K. has also significantly expanded the reach of its anti-bribery laws. While we have policies and procedures designed to ensure strict compliance by us and our personnel with the FCPA and anti-money laundering and other applicable laws, such policies and procedures may not be effective in all instances to prevent violations. In addition, in light of the executive order to pause initiation of new FCPA investigations and enforcement actions in the U.S., other asset managers, particularly those who, unlike us, are not subject to the anti-corruption laws of a jurisdiction outside of the United States, may implement changes to their FCPA or anti-money laundering policies that would provide such managers access to investment opportunities that may not be available to us because of our current policies and procedures. We are subject to U.S. and foreign anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as amended (“FCPA”), as well as anti-money laundering laws. Any determination that we have violated the FCPA, the EU and U.K. anti-money laundering regimes, the U.K. anti-bribery laws or other applicable anti-corruption, anti-bribery, or anti-money laundering laws could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct, securities litigation and a general loss of investor confidence. Any one of these could adversely affect our business prospects, financial position or the price of our common stock. Although the current U.S. President administration has signed an executive order to pause, subject to certain exceptions, the initiation of new investigations and enforcement actions under the FCPA, such laws have attracted significant regulatory focus in recent years, including outside of the U.S. For example, the SEC will be responsible for examining investment advisers’ compliance with a U.S. Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) rule currently scheduled to go into effect January 2026, that requires registered investment adviser and exempt reporting advisers to, among other measures, adopt an anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) program, file certain reports with FinCEN and to maintain records related to such activities. The application of these rules would impose significant compliance costs on us. The EU and the U.K. are similarly revising their respective anti-money laundering regimes. The EU’s revised anti-money laundering regime is expected to come into effect as early as June 2026 and the U.K. has also significantly expanded the reach of its anti-bribery laws. While we have policies and procedures designed to ensure strict compliance by us and our personnel with the FCPA and anti-money laundering and other applicable laws, such policies and procedures may not be effective in all instances to prevent violations. In addition, in light of the executive order to pause initiation of new FCPA investigations and enforcement actions in the U.S., other asset managers, particularly those who, unlike us, are not subject to the anti-corruption laws of a jurisdiction outside of the United States, may implement changes to their FCPA or anti-money laundering policies that would provide such managers access to investment opportunities that may not be available to us because of our current policies and procedures. anti-corruption anti-bribery anti-money anti-money anti-bribery anti-corruption, anti-bribery, anti-money anti-money anti-money anti-money anti-bribery anti-money Furthermore, we may also be adversely affected if there is misconduct by personnel of our funds’ portfolio companies or by such companies’ service providers. For example, financial fraud or other deceptive practices at our funds’ portfolio companies, or failures by personnel at our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with anti-corruption, anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, trade and economic sanctions, export controls, anti-harassment, anti-discrimination or other legal and regulatory requirements, could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct and securities litigation, and could also cause significant reputational and business harm to us. Such misconduct may undermine our due diligence efforts with respect to such portfolio companies and could negatively affect the valuations of the investments by our funds in such portfolio companies. Losses to our funds and us could also result from misconduct or other actions by service providers, such as administrators, consultants or other advisors, if such service providers improperly use or disclose confidential information, misappropriate funds, or violate legal or regulatory obligations. Moreover, we may face an increased risk of such misconduct to the extent our funds’ investment in non-U.S. markets, particularly emerging markets, increases. Furthermore, we may also be adversely affected if there is misconduct by personnel of our funds’ portfolio companies or by such companies’ service providers. For example, financial fraud or other deceptive practices at our funds’ portfolio companies, or failures by personnel at our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with anti-corruption, anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, trade and economic sanctions, export controls, anti-harassment, anti-discrimination or other legal and regulatory requirements, could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct and securities litigation, and could also cause significant reputational and business harm to us. Such misconduct may undermine our due diligence efforts with respect to such portfolio companies and could negatively affect the valuations of the investments by our funds in such portfolio companies. Losses to our funds and us could also result from misconduct or other actions by service providers, such as administrators, consultants or other advisors, if such service providers improperly use or disclose confidential information, misappropriate funds, or violate legal or regulatory obligations. Moreover, we may face an increased risk of such misconduct to the extent our funds’ investment in non-U.S. markets, particularly emerging markets, increases. anti-corruption, anti-bribery, anti-money anti-harassment, anti-discrimination non-U.S. 51 51 Table of Contents Table of Contents Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds. Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds. Poor performance of our investment funds would cause a decline in our revenue, income and cash flow, may obligate us to repay Performance Allocations previously paid to us, and could adversely affect our ability to raise capital for future investment funds.

Employee misconduct could harm us by impairing our ability to attract and retain clients and subjecting us to significant legal liability and reputational harm. Fraud, deceptive practices or other misconduct at portfolio companies or service providers could similarly subject us to liability and reputational damage and also harm performance. Employee misconduct could harm us by impairing our ability to attract and retain clients and subjecting us to significant legal liability and reputational harm. Fraud, deceptive practices or other misconduct at portfolio companies or service providers could similarly subject us to liability and reputational damage and also harm performance. Our employees could engage in misconduct that adversely affects our business. We are subject to a number of obligations and standards arising from our asset management business and our authority over the assets managed by our asset management business. The violation of these obligations and standards by any of our employees would adversely affect our clients and us. Our business often requires that we deal with confidential matters of great significance to companies in which we may invest. If our employees were to improperly use or disclose confidential information, we could suffer serious harm to our reputation, financial position and current and future business relationships. Detecting or deterring employee misconduct is not always possible, and the extensive precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in all cases. In addition, a prolonged period of remote work, such as the one experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, may require us to develop and implement additional precautions in order to detect and prevent employee misconduct. Such additional precautions, which may include the implementation of security and other restrictions, may make our systems more difficult and costly to operate and may not be effective in preventing employee misconduct in a remote work environment. If one of our employees were to engage in misconduct or were to be accused of such misconduct, our business and our reputation could be adversely affected. Our employees could engage in misconduct that adversely affects our business. We are subject to a number of obligations and standards arising from our asset management business and our authority over the assets managed by our asset management business. The violation of these obligations and standards by any of our employees would adversely affect our clients and us. Our business often requires that we deal with confidential matters of great significance to companies in which we may invest. If our employees were to improperly use or disclose confidential information, we could suffer serious harm to our reputation, financial position and current and future business relationships. Detecting or deterring employee misconduct is not always possible, and the extensive precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in all cases. In addition, a prolonged period of remote work, such as the one experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, may require us to develop and implement additional precautions in order to detect and prevent employee misconduct. Such additional precautions, which may include the implementation of security and other restrictions, may make our systems more difficult and costly to operate and may not be effective in preventing employee misconduct in a remote work environment. If one of our employees were to engage in misconduct or were to be accused of such misconduct, our business and our reputation could be adversely affected. We are subject to U.S. and foreign anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as amended (“FCPA”), as well as anti-money laundering laws. In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice and the SEC have devoted greater resources to enforcement of the FCPA. In addition, the U.K. has also significantly expanded the reach of its anti-bribery laws. While we have policies and procedures designed to ensure strict compliance by us and our personnel with the FCPA and other applicable laws, such policies and procedures may not be effective in all instances to prevent violations. Any determination that we have violated the FCPA, the U.K. anti-bribery laws or other applicable anti-corruption, anti-bribery, or anti-money laundering laws could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct, securities litigation and a general loss of investor confidence, any one of which could adversely affect our business prospects, financial position or the price of our common stock. We are subject to U.S. and foreign anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as amended (“FCPA”), as well as anti-money laundering laws. In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice and the SEC have devoted greater resources to enforcement of the FCPA. In addition, the U.K. has also significantly expanded the reach of its anti-bribery laws. While we have policies and procedures designed to ensure strict compliance by us and our personnel with the FCPA and other applicable laws, such policies and procedures may not be effective in all instances to prevent violations. Any determination that we have violated the FCPA, the U.K. anti-bribery laws or other applicable anti-corruption, anti-bribery, or anti-money laundering laws could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct, securities litigation and a general loss of investor confidence, any one of which could adversely affect our business prospects, financial position or the price of our common stock. Furthermore, we may also be adversely affected if there is misconduct by personnel of our funds’ portfolio companies or by such companies’ service providers. For example, financial fraud or other deceptive practices at our funds’ portfolio companies, or failures by personnel at our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with anti-corruption, anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, trade and economic sanctions, export controls, anti-harassment, anti-discrimination or other legal and regulatory requirements, could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct and securities litigation, and could also cause significant reputational and business harm to us. Such misconduct may undermine our due diligence efforts with respect to such portfolio companies and could negatively affect the valuations of the investments by our funds in such portfolio companies. Losses to our funds and us could also result from misconduct or other actions by service providers, such as administrators, consultants or other advisors, if such service providers improperly use or disclose confidential information, misappropriate funds, or violate legal or regulatory obligations. Moreover, we may face an increased risk of such misconduct to the extent our investment in non-U.S. markets, particularly emerging markets, increases. Furthermore, we may also be adversely affected if there is misconduct by personnel of our funds’ portfolio companies or by such companies’ service providers. For example, financial fraud or other deceptive practices at our funds’ portfolio companies, or failures by personnel at our funds’ portfolio companies to comply with anti-corruption, anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, trade and economic sanctions, export controls, anti-harassment, anti-discrimination or other legal and regulatory requirements, could subject us to, among other things, civil and criminal penalties or material fines, profit disgorgement, injunctions on future conduct and securities litigation, and could also cause significant reputational and business harm to us. Such misconduct may undermine our due diligence efforts with respect to such portfolio companies and could negatively affect the valuations of the investments by our funds in such portfolio companies. Losses to our funds and us could also result from misconduct or other actions by service providers, such as administrators, consultants or other advisors, if such service providers improperly use or disclose confidential information, misappropriate funds, or violate legal or regulatory obligations. Moreover, we may face an increased risk of such misconduct to the extent our investment in non-U.S. markets, particularly emerging markets, increases. 51 51 Table of Contents Another pandemic or global health crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic may adversely impact our performance and results of operations. Another pandemic or global health crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic may adversely impact our performance and results of operations. Another pandemic or global health crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic may adversely impact our performance and results of operations.

Our funds’ investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. Our funds’ investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. Investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. For example, Investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. For example, • Ownership of infrastructure assets may present risk of liability for personal and property injury or impose significant operating challenges and costs with respect to, for example, compliance with zoning, environmental or other applicable laws. Ownership of infrastructure assets may present risk of liability for personal and property injury or impose significant operating challenges and costs with respect to, for example, compliance with zoning, environmental or other applicable laws. 66 66 Table of Contents Table of Contents • Infrastructure asset investments may face construction risks including, without limitation: (a) labor disputes, shortages of material and skilled labor, or work stoppages, (b) slower than projected construction progress and the unavailability or late delivery of necessary equipment, (c) less than optimal coordination with public utilities in the relocation of their facilities, (d) adverse weather conditions and unexpected construction conditions, (e) accidents or the breakdown or failure of construction equipment or processes, and (f) catastrophic events such as explosions, fires, terrorist attacks and other similar events. These risks could result in substantial unanticipated delays or expenses (which may exceed expected or forecasted budgets) and, under certain circumstances, could prevent completion of construction activities once undertaken. Certain infrastructure asset investments may remain in construction phases for a prolonged period and, accordingly, may not be cash generative for a prolonged period. Recourse against the contractor may be subject to liability caps or may be subject to default or insolvency on the part of the contractor. • The operation of infrastructure assets is exposed to potential unplanned interruptions caused by significant catastrophic or force majeure events. These risks could, among other effects, adversely impact the cash flows available from investments in infrastructure assets, cause personal injury or loss of life, damage property, or instigate disruptions of service. In addition, the cost of repairing or replacing damaged assets could be considerable. Repeated or prolonged service interruptions may result in permanent loss of customers, litigation, or penalties for regulatory or contractual non-compliance. Force majeure events that are incapable of, or too costly to, cure may also have a permanent adverse effect on an investment. • The management of the business or operations of an infrastructure asset may be contracted to a third-party management company unaffiliated with us. Although it would be possible to replace any such operator, the failure of such an operator to adequately perform its duties or to act in ways that are in our best interest, or the breach by an operator of applicable agreements or laws, rules and regulations, could have an adverse effect on the investment’s financial condition or results of operations. Infrastructure investments may involve the subcontracting of design and construction activities in respect of projects, and as a result our funds’ investments are subject to the risks that contractual provisions passing liabilities to a subcontractor could be ineffective, the subcontractor fails to perform services which it has agreed to perform and the subcontractor becomes insolvent. Infrastructure investments often involve an ongoing commitment to a municipal, state, federal or foreign government or regulatory agencies. The nature of these obligations exposes us to a higher level of regulatory control than typically imposed on other businesses and may require us to rely on complex government licenses, concessions, leases or contracts, which may be difficult to obtain or maintain. Such licenses, concessions, leases or contracts may also be terminated for convenience without adequate compensation. Further, many of our funds’ investments are in critical infrastructure sectors, such as transportation systems, energy and digital infrastructure, which are generally subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny at the time of investment and ongoing compliance requirements. Such requirements are likely to expand our compliance burdens, costs and enforcement risks. Infrastructure investments may require operators to manage such investments and such operators’ failure to comply with laws, including prohibitions against bribing of government officials, may adversely affect the value of such investments and cause us serious reputational and legal harm. Revenues for such investments may rely on contractual agreements for the provision of services with a limited number of counterparties, and are consequently subject to counterparty default risk. The operations and cash flow of infrastructure investments are also more sensitive to inflation and, in certain cases, commodity price risk. Furthermore, services provided by infrastructure investments may be subject to rate regulations by government entities that determine or limit prices that may be charged. Similarly, users of applicable services or government entities in response to such users may react negatively to any adjustments in rates and thus reduce the profitability of such infrastructure investments. 67 Table of ContentsOur funds’ investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks. Investments by BXLS may expose us to increased risks. For example, • BXLS’s strategies include, among others, investments that are referred to as “corporate partnership” transactions. Corporate partnership transactions are risk-sharing collaborations with biopharmaceutical and medical device partners on drug and medical device development programs and investments in royalty streams of pre-commercial biopharmaceutical products. BXLS’s ability to source corporate partnership transactions has been, and will continue to be, in part dependent on the ability of special purpose development companies to identify, diligence, negotiate and in many cases, take the lead in executing the agreed development plans. Moreover, as such special purpose development companies are jointly owned by us or our affiliates and unaffiliated life sciences investors, we (and our funds) are not the sole beneficiaries of such sourcing strategies and capabilities of such special purpose development companies. In addition, payments to BXLS under such corporate partnerships (which can include future royalty or other milestone-based payments) are often contingent upon the achievement of certain milestones, including approvals of the applicable product candidate and/or product sales thresholds, over which BXLS may not have the ability to exercise meaningful control. • Life sciences and healthcare companies are subject to extensive regulation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, similar foreign regulatory authorities and, to a lesser extent, other federal and state agencies. These companies are subject to the expense, delay and uncertainty of the product approval process, and there can be no guarantee that a particular product candidate will obtain regulatory approval. In addition, the current regulatory framework may change or additional regulations may arise at any stage during the product development phase of an investment, which may delay or prevent regulatory approval or impact applicable exclusivity periods. If a company in which our funds are invested is unable to obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, or a product candidate in which our funds are invested does not obtain regulatory approval, in a timely fashion or at all, the value of our fund’s investment would be adversely impacted. In addition, in connection with certain corporate partnership transactions, our special purpose development companies will be contractually obligated to run clinical trials. Further, a clinical trial (including enrollment therein) or regulatory approval process for pharmaceuticals has and may in the future be delayed, otherwise hindered or abandoned as a result of epidemics (including COVID-19), which could have a negative impact on the ability of the investment to engage in trials or receive approvals, and thereby could adversely affect the performance of the investment. In the event such clinical trials do not comply with the complicated regulatory requirements applicable thereto, such special purpose development companies may be subject to regulatory actions. • Intellectual property often constitutes an important part of a life sciences company’s assets and competitive strengths, particularly for royalty monetization and corporate partnership transactions. To the extent such companies’ intellectual property positions with respect to products in which BXLS invests, whether through a royalty monetization or otherwise, are challenged, invalidated or circumvented, the value of BXLS’s investment or BXLS’ rights in a termination event may be impaired. The success of a life sciences investment depends in part on the ability of the biopharmaceutical or medical device companies in whose products BXLS invests to obtain and defend patent rights and other intellectual property rights that are important to the commercialization of such products. The patent positions of such companies can be highly uncertain and often involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. • The commercial success of products could be compromised if governmental or third-party payers do not provide coverage and reimbursement, breach, rescind or modify their contracts or reimbursement policies or delay payments for such products. In both the U.S. and foreign markets, the successful sale of a life sciences company’s product depends on the ability to obtain and maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payers, including government healthcare programs and private insurance plans. Governments and third-party payers continue to pursue aggressive initiatives to contain costs and 68 Table of Contents manage drug utilization and are increasingly focused on the effectiveness, benefits and costs of similar treatments, which could result in lower reimbursement rates and narrower populations for whom the products in which BXLS invests will be reimbursed by third-party payers. For example, in the U.S., federal legislation has passed that modifies coverage, reimbursement and pricing policies for certain products. Regulatory agencies have provided guidance on how they intend to implement certain components of the legislation. In addition, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services has indicated the potential for substantial policy and personnel changes. In general, as regulatory agencies and others develop policies and continue to define and implement legislation, such policies and legislation may result in lower product prices, altered market dynamics, lower consumer demand for certain products, or the unavailability of adequate third-party payer reimbursement to enable BXLS to realize an appropriate return on its investment. Our funds may be forced to dispose of investments at a disadvantageous time. Our funds may make investments of which they do not advantageously dispose of prior to the date the applicable fund is dissolved, either by expiration of such fund’s term or otherwise. Although we generally expect that our funds will dispose of investments prior to dissolution or that investments will be suitable for in-kind distribution at dissolution, we may not be able to do so. The general partners of our funds have only a limited ability to extend the term of the fund with the consent of fund investors or the advisory board of the fund, as applicable, and therefore, we may be required to sell, distribute or otherwise dispose of investments at a disadvantageous time prior to dissolution. This would result in a lower than expected return on the investments and, perhaps, on the fund itself. Hedge fund investments are subject to numerous additional risks. Investments by our funds of hedge funds in other hedge funds, as well as investments by our credit-focused, real estate debt and other hedge funds and similar products, are subject to numerous additional risks, including the following: • Certain of the funds in which we invest are newly established funds without any operating history or are managed by management companies or general partners who may not have as significant track records as a more established manager. • Generally, the execution of third-party hedge funds’ investment strategies is subject to the sole discretion of the management company or the general partner of such funds. As a result, we do not have the ability to control the investment activities of such funds, including with respect to the selection of investment opportunities, any deviation from stated or expected investment strategy, the liquidation of positions and the use of leverage to finance the purchase of investments, each of which may impact our ability to generate a successful return on our fund’s investment in such underlying fund. • Hedge funds may engage in speculative trading strategies, including short selling, which is subject to the theoretically unlimited risk of loss because there is no limit on how much the price of a security may appreciate before the short position is closed out. A fund may be subject to losses if a security lender demands return of the lent securities and an alternative lending source cannot be found or if the fund is otherwise unable to borrow securities that are necessary to hedge or cover its positions. • Hedge funds are exposed to the risk that a counterparty will not settle a transaction in accordance with its terms and conditions because of a dispute over the terms of the contract (whether or not bona fide) or because of a credit or liquidity problem or otherwise, thus causing the fund to suffer a loss. Counterparty risk is accentuated for contracts with longer maturities where events may intervene to prevent settlement, or where the fund has concentrated its transactions with a single or small group of counterparties. Generally, hedge funds are not restricted from dealing with any particular counterparty or from concentrating any or all of their transactions with one counterparty. Moreover, the funds’ internal consideration of the creditworthiness of their counterparties may prove insufficient. The absence of a regulated market to facilitate settlement may increase the potential for losses. 69 Table of Contents • Credit risk may arise through a default by one of several large institutions that are dependent on one another to meet their liquidity or operational needs, so that a default by one institution causes a series of defaults by the other institutions. This “systemic risk” may adversely affect the financial intermediaries (such as clearing agencies, clearing houses, banks, securities firms and exchanges) with which the hedge funds interact on a daily basis. • The efficacy of investment and trading strategies depends largely on the ability to establish and maintain an overall market position in a combination of financial instruments. A hedge fund’s trading orders may not be executed in a timely and efficient manner due to various circumstances, including systems failures or human error. In such event, the funds might only be able to acquire some but not all of the components of the position, or if the overall position were to need adjustment, the funds might not be able to make such adjustment. As a result, the funds would not be able to achieve the market position selected by the management company or general partner of such funds, and might incur a loss in liquidating their position. • Hedge funds are subject to risks due to potential illiquidity of assets. Hedge funds may make investments or hold trading positions in markets that are volatile and which may become illiquid. Timely divestiture or sale of trading positions can be impaired by decreased trading volume, increased price volatility, concentrated trading positions, limitations on the ability to transfer positions in highly specialized or structured transactions to which they may be a party, and changes in industry and government regulations. It may be impossible or costly for hedge funds to liquidate positions rapidly in order to meet margin calls, withdrawal requests or otherwise, particularly if there are other market participants seeking to dispose of similar assets at the same time or the relevant market is otherwise moving against a position or in the event of trading halts or daily price movement limits on the market or otherwise. Any “gate” or similar limitation on withdrawals with respect to hedge funds may not be effective in mitigating such risk. Moreover, these risks may be exacerbated for our funds of hedge funds. For example, if one of our funds of hedge funds were to invest a significant portion of its assets in two or more hedge funds that each had illiquid positions in the same issuer, the illiquidity risk for our funds of hedge funds would be compounded. For example, in 2008 many hedge funds, including some of our hedge funds, experienced significant declines in value. In many cases, these declines in value were both provoked and exacerbated by margin calls and forced selling of assets. Moreover, certain of our funds of hedge funds were invested in third-party hedge funds that halted redemptions in the face of illiquidity and other issues, which precluded those funds of hedge funds from receiving their capital back on request. • Hedge fund investments are subject to risks relating to investments in commodities, futures, options and other derivatives, the prices of which are highly volatile and may be subject to the theoretically unlimited risk of loss in certain circumstances, including if the fund writes a call option. Price movements of commodities, futures and options contracts and payments pursuant to swap agreements are influenced by, among other things, interest rates, changing supply and demand relationships, trade, fiscal, monetary and exchange control programs and policies of governments and national and international political and economic events and policies. The value of futures, options and swap agreements also depends upon the price of the commodities underlying them and prevailing exchange rates. In addition, hedge funds’ assets are subject to the risk of the failure of any of the exchanges on which their positions trade or of their clearinghouses or counterparties. Most U.S. commodities exchanges limit fluctuations in certain commodity interest prices during a single day by imposing “daily price fluctuation limits” or “daily limits,” the existence of which may reduce liquidity or effectively curtail trading in particular markets. As a result of their affiliation with us, our hedge funds may from time to time be restricted from trading in certain securities (e.g., publicly traded securities issued by our current or potential portfolio companies). This may limit their ability to acquire and/or subsequently dispose of investments in connection with transactions that would otherwise generally be permitted in the absence of such affiliation. In addition, the use of leverage by the hedge funds in which our funds of hedge funds invest poses additional risks, including those described in “— Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.” 70 Table of ContentsWe are reliant on third-party service providers for certain aspects of our business, and are subject to risks in using prime brokers, custodians, counterparties, administrators and other agents. We are reliant on other third-party service providers for certain technology platforms that facilitate the continued operation of our business, including cloud-based services. We generally have less control over the delivery of such third-party services, and as a result, may face disruptions to our ability to operate our business as a result of interruptions of such services. A prolonged global failure of cloud services provided to us could result in cascading systems failures. In addition, we may not be able to adapt our information systems and technology to accommodate our growth, or the cost of maintaining such systems may increase materially from its current level, which could have a material adverse effect on us. Many of our funds depend on the services of prime brokers, custodians, counterparties, administrators and other agents, including to carry out certain securities and derivatives transactions. The terms of these contracts are often customized and complex, and many of these arrangements occur in markets or relate to products that are subject to limited or no regulatory oversight. Some of our funds utilize prime brokerage arrangements with a relatively limited number of counterparties, which has the effect of concentrating the transaction volume (and related counterparty default risk) of these funds with these counterparties. Our funds are subject to the risk that the counterparty to one or more of these contracts defaults, either voluntarily or involuntarily, on its performance under the contract. Any such default may occur suddenly and without notice to us. Moreover, if a counterparty defaults, we may be unable to take action to cover our exposure, either because we lack contractual recourse or because market conditions make it difficult to take effective action. This inability could occur in times of market stress, which is when defaults are most likely to occur. In addition, our risk management process may not accurately anticipate the impact of market stress or counterparty financial condition, and as a result, we may not have taken sufficient action to reduce our risks effectively. Default risk may arise from events or circumstances that are difficult to detect, foresee or evaluate. In addition, concerns about, or a default by, one large participant could lead to significant liquidity problems for other participants, which may in turn expose us to significant losses. Although we have risk management processes to ensure that we are not exposed to a single counterparty for significant periods of time, given the large number and size of our funds, we often have large positions with a single counterparty. For example, most of our funds have credit lines. If the lender under one or more of those credit lines were to become insolvent, we may have difficulty replacing the credit line and one or more of our funds may face liquidity problems. In the event of a counterparty default, particularly a default by a major investment bank or a default by a counterparty to a significant number of our contracts, one or more of our funds may have outstanding trades that they cannot settle or are delayed in settling. As a result, these funds could incur material losses and the resulting market impact of a major counterparty default could harm our businesses, results of operation and financial condition. In addition, under certain local clearing and settlement regimes in Europe, we or our funds could be subject to settlement discipline fines. See “— Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business.” In the event of the insolvency of a prime broker, custodian, counterparty or any other party that is holding assets of our funds as collateral, our funds might not be able to recover equivalent assets in full as they will rank among the prime broker’s, custodian’s or counterparty’s unsecured creditors in relation to the assets held as collateral. In addition, our funds’ cash held with a prime broker, custodian or counterparty generally will not be segregated from the prime broker’s, custodian’s or counterparty’s own cash, and our funds may therefore rank as unsecured creditors in relation thereto. If our derivatives transactions are cleared through a derivatives clearing organization, the CFTC has issued final rules regulating the segregation and protection of collateral posted by customers of cleared and uncleared swaps. The CFTC is also working to provide new guidance regarding prime broker arrangements and intermediation generally with regard to trading on swap execution facilities. 71 Table of Contents • Infrastructure asset investments may face construction risks including, without limitation: (a) labor disputes, shortages of material and skilled labor, or work stoppages, (b) slower than projected construction progress and the unavailability or late delivery of necessary equipment, (c) less than optimal coordination with public utilities in the relocation of their facilities, (d) adverse weather conditions and unexpected construction conditions, (e) accidents or the breakdown or failure of construction equipment or processes, and (f) catastrophic events such as explosions, fires, terrorist attacks and other similar events. These risks could result in substantial unanticipated delays or expenses (which may exceed expected or forecasted budgets) and, under certain circumstances, could prevent completion of construction activities once undertaken. Certain infrastructure asset investments may remain in construction phases for a prolonged period and, accordingly, may not be cash generative for a prolonged period. Recourse against the contractor may be subject to liability caps or may be subject to default or insolvency on the part of the contractor. Infrastructure asset investments may face construction risks including, without limitation: (a) labor disputes, shortages of material and skilled labor, or work stoppages, (b) slower than projected construction progress and the unavailability or late delivery of necessary equipment, (c) less than optimal coordination with public utilities in the relocation of their facilities, (d) adverse weather conditions and unexpected construction conditions, (e) accidents or the breakdown or failure of construction equipment or processes, and (f) catastrophic events such as explosions, fires, terrorist attacks and other similar events. These risks could result in substantial unanticipated delays or expenses (which may exceed expected or forecasted budgets) and, under certain circumstances, could prevent completion of construction activities once undertaken. Certain infrastructure asset investments may remain in construction phases for a prolonged period and, accordingly, may not be cash generative for a prolonged period. Recourse against the contractor may be subject to liability caps or may be subject to default or insolvency on the part of the contractor. • The operation of infrastructure assets is exposed to potential unplanned interruptions caused by significant catastrophic or force majeure events. These risks could, among other effects, adversely impact the cash flows available from investments in infrastructure assets, cause personal injury or loss of life, damage property, or instigate disruptions of service. In addition, the cost of repairing or replacing damaged assets could be considerable. Repeated or prolonged service interruptions may result in permanent loss of customers, litigation, or penalties for regulatory or contractual non-compliance. Force majeure events that are incapable of, or too costly to, cure may also have a permanent adverse effect on an investment. The operation of infrastructure assets is exposed to potential unplanned interruptions caused by significant catastrophic or force majeure events. These risks could, among other effects, adversely impact the cash flows available from investments in infrastructure assets, cause personal injury or loss of life, damage property, or instigate disruptions of service. In addition, the cost of repairing or replacing damaged assets could be considerable. Repeated or prolonged service interruptions may result in permanent loss of customers, litigation, or penalties for regulatory or contractual non-compliance. Force majeure events that are incapable of, or too costly to, cure may also have a permanent adverse effect on an investment. non-compliance. • The management of the business or operations of an infrastructure asset may be contracted to a third-party management company unaffiliated with us. Although it would be possible to replace any such operator, the failure of such an operator to adequately perform its duties or to act in ways that are in our best interest, or the breach by an operator of applicable agreements or laws, rules and regulations, could have an adverse effect on the investment’s financial condition or results of operations. Infrastructure investments may involve the subcontracting of design and construction activities in respect of projects, and as a result our funds’ investments are subject to the risks that contractual provisions passing liabilities to a subcontractor could be ineffective, the subcontractor fails to perform services which it has agreed to perform and the subcontractor becomes insolvent. The management of the business or operations of an infrastructure asset may be contracted to a third-party management company unaffiliated with us. Although it would be possible to replace any such operator, the failure of such an operator to adequately perform its duties or to act in ways that are in our best interest, or the breach by an operator of applicable agreements or laws, rules and regulations, could have an adverse effect on the investment’s financial condition or results of operations. Infrastructure investments may involve the subcontracting of design and construction activities in respect of projects, and as a result our funds’ investments are subject to the risks that contractual provisions passing liabilities to a subcontractor could be ineffective, the subcontractor fails to perform services which it has agreed to perform and the subcontractor becomes insolvent. third-party Infrastructure investments often involve an ongoing commitment to a municipal, state, federal or foreign government or regulatory agencies. The nature of these obligations exposes us to a higher level of regulatory control than typically imposed on other businesses and may require us to rely on complex government licenses, concessions, leases or contracts, which may be difficult to obtain or maintain. Such licenses, concessions, leases or contracts may also be terminated for convenience without adequate compensation. Further, many of our funds’ investments are in critical infrastructure sectors, such as transportation systems, energy and digital infrastructure, which are generally subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny at the time of investment and ongoing compliance requirements. Such requirements are likely to expand our compliance burdens, costs and enforcement risks. Infrastructure investments often involve an ongoing commitment to a municipal, state, federal or foreign government or regulatory agencies. The nature of these obligations exposes us to a higher level of regulatory control than typically imposed on other businesses and may require us to rely on complex government licenses, concessions, leases or contracts, which may be difficult to obtain or maintain. Such licenses, concessions, leases or contracts may also be terminated for convenience without adequate compensation. Further, many of our funds’ investments are in critical infrastructure sectors, such as transportation systems, energy and digital infrastructure, which are generally subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny at the time of investment and ongoing compliance requirements. Such requirements are likely to expand our compliance burdens, costs and enforcement risks. Infrastructure investments may require operators to manage such investments and such operators’ failure to comply with laws, including prohibitions against bribing of government officials, may adversely affect the value of such investments and cause us serious reputational and legal harm. Revenues for such investments may rely on contractual agreements for the provision of services with a limited number of counterparties, and are consequently subject to counterparty default risk. The operations and cash flow of infrastructure investments are also more sensitive to inflation and, in certain cases, commodity price risk. Furthermore, services provided by infrastructure investments may be subject to rate regulations by government entities that determine or limit prices that may be charged. Similarly, users of applicable services or government entities in response to such users may react negatively to any adjustments in rates and thus reduce the profitability of such infrastructure investments. Infrastructure investments may require operators to manage such investments and such operators’ failure to comply with laws, including prohibitions against bribing of government officials, may adversely affect the value of such investments and cause us serious reputational and legal harm. Revenues for such investments may rely on contractual agreements for the provision of services with a limited number of counterparties, and are consequently subject to counterparty default risk. The operations and cash flow of infrastructure investments are also more sensitive to inflation and, in certain cases, commodity price risk. Furthermore, services provided by infrastructure investments may be subject to rate regulations by government entities that determine or limit prices that may be charged. Similarly, users of applicable services or government entities in response to such users may react negatively to any adjustments in rates and thus reduce the profitability of such infrastructure investments. 67 67 Table of Contents Table of Contents Our funds’ investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks. Our funds’ investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks. Our funds’ investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks.

Our investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. Our investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. Investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. For example, Investments in infrastructure assets may expose us to increased risks that are inherent in the ownership of real assets. For example, • Ownership of infrastructure assets may present risk of liability for personal and property injury or impose significant operating challenges and costs with respect to, for example, compliance with zoning, environmental or other applicable laws. Ownership of infrastructure assets may present risk of liability for personal and property injury or impose significant operating challenges and costs with respect to, for example, compliance with zoning, environmental or other applicable laws. 67 67 Table of Contents • Infrastructure asset investments may face construction risks including, without limitation: (a) labor disputes, shortages of material and skilled labor, or work stoppages, (b) slower than projected construction progress and the unavailability or late delivery of necessary equipment, (c) less than optimal coordination with public utilities in the relocation of their facilities, (d) adverse weather conditions and unexpected construction conditions, (e) accidents or the breakdown or failure of construction equipment or processes, and (f) catastrophic events such as explosions, fires, terrorist attacks and other similar events. These risks could result in substantial unanticipated delays or expenses (which may exceed expected or forecasted budgets) and, under certain circumstances, could prevent completion of construction activities once undertaken. Certain infrastructure asset investments may remain in construction phases for a prolonged period and, accordingly, may not be cash generative for a prolonged period. Recourse against the contractor may be subject to liability caps or may be subject to default or insolvency on the part of the contractor. Infrastructure asset investments may face construction risks including, without limitation: (a) labor disputes, shortages of material and skilled labor, or work stoppages, (b) slower than projected construction progress and the unavailability or late delivery of necessary equipment, (c) less than optimal coordination with public utilities in the relocation of their facilities, (d) adverse weather conditions and unexpected construction conditions, (e) accidents or the breakdown or failure of construction equipment or processes, and (f) catastrophic events such as explosions, fires, terrorist attacks and other similar events. These risks could result in substantial unanticipated delays or expenses (which may exceed expected or forecasted budgets) and, under certain circumstances, could prevent completion of construction activities once undertaken. Certain infrastructure asset investments may remain in construction phases for a prolonged period and, accordingly, may not be cash generative for a prolonged period. Recourse against the contractor may be subject to liability caps or may be subject to default or insolvency on the part of the contractor. • The operation of infrastructure assets is exposed to potential unplanned interruptions caused by significant catastrophic or force majeure events. These risks could, among other effects, adversely impact the cash flows available from investments in infrastructure assets, cause personal injury or loss of life, damage property, or instigate disruptions of service. In addition, the cost of repairing or replacing damaged assets could be considerable. Repeated or prolonged service interruptions may result in permanent loss of customers, litigation, or penalties for regulatory or contractual non-compliance. Force majeure events that are incapable of, or too costly to, cure may also have a permanent adverse effect on an investment. The operation of infrastructure assets is exposed to potential unplanned interruptions caused by significant catastrophic or force majeure events. These risks could, among other effects, adversely impact the cash flows available from investments in infrastructure assets, cause personal injury or loss of life, damage property, or instigate disruptions of service. In addition, the cost of repairing or replacing damaged assets could be considerable. Repeated or prolonged service interruptions may result in permanent loss of customers, litigation, or penalties for regulatory or contractual non-compliance. Force majeure events that are incapable of, or too costly to, cure may also have a permanent adverse effect on an investment. • The management of the business or operations of an infrastructure asset may be contracted to a third-party management company unaffiliated with us. Although it would be possible to replace any such operator, the failure of such an operator to adequately perform its duties or to act in ways that are in our best interest, or the breach by an operator of applicable agreements or laws, rules and regulations, could have an adverse effect on the investment’s financial condition or results of operations. Infrastructure investments may involve the subcontracting of design and construction activities in respect of projects, and as a result our investments are subject to the risks that contractual provisions passing liabilities to a subcontractor could be ineffective, the subcontractor fails to perform services which it has agreed to perform and the subcontractor becomes insolvent. The management of the business or operations of an infrastructure asset may be contracted to a third-party management company unaffiliated with us. Although it would be possible to replace any such operator, the failure of such an operator to adequately perform its duties or to act in ways that are in our best interest, or the breach by an operator of applicable agreements or laws, rules and regulations, could have an adverse effect on the investment’s financial condition or results of operations. Infrastructure investments may involve the subcontracting of design and construction activities in respect of projects, and as a result our investments are subject to the risks that contractual provisions passing liabilities to a subcontractor could be ineffective, the subcontractor fails to perform services which it has agreed to perform and the subcontractor becomes insolvent. Infrastructure investments often involve an ongoing commitment to a municipal, state, federal or foreign government or regulatory agencies. The nature of these obligations exposes us to a higher level of regulatory control than typically imposed on other businesses and may require us to rely on complex government licenses, concessions, leases or contracts, which may be difficult to obtain or maintain. Infrastructure investments may require operators to manage such investments and such operators’ failure to comply with laws, including prohibitions against bribing of government officials, may adversely affect the value of such investments and cause us serious reputational and legal harm. Revenues for such investments may rely on contractual agreements for the provision of services with a limited number of counterparties, and are consequently subject to counterparty default risk. The operations and cash flow of infrastructure investments are also more sensitive to inflation and, in certain cases, commodity price risk. Furthermore, services provided by infrastructure investments may be subject to rate regulations by government entities that determine or limit prices that may be charged. Similarly, users of applicable services or government entities in response to such users may react negatively to any adjustments in rates and thus reduce the profitability of such infrastructure investments. Infrastructure investments often involve an ongoing commitment to a municipal, state, federal or foreign government or regulatory agencies. The nature of these obligations exposes us to a higher level of regulatory control than typically imposed on other businesses and may require us to rely on complex government licenses, concessions, leases or contracts, which may be difficult to obtain or maintain. Infrastructure investments may require operators to manage such investments and such operators’ failure to comply with laws, including prohibitions against bribing of government officials, may adversely affect the value of such investments and cause us serious reputational and legal harm. Revenues for such investments may rely on contractual agreements for the provision of services with a limited number of counterparties, and are consequently subject to counterparty default risk. The operations and cash flow of infrastructure investments are also more sensitive to inflation and, in certain cases, commodity price risk. Furthermore, services provided by infrastructure investments may be subject to rate regulations by government entities that determine or limit prices that may be charged. Similarly, users of applicable services or government entities in response to such users may react negatively to any adjustments in rates and thus reduce the profitability of such infrastructure investments. Our investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks. Our investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks. Our investments in the life sciences industry may expose us to increased risks.

We are not required to comply with certain provisions of U.S. securities laws relating to proxy statements and certain related matters. This, coupled with the significant voting power of holders of our Series I preferred stock and Series II preferred stock, may limit the ability of holders of our common stock to influence our business. We are not required to comply with certain provisions of U.S. securities laws relating to proxy statements and certain related matters. This, coupled with the significant voting power of holders of our Series I preferred stock and Series II preferred stock, may limit the ability of holders of our common stock to influence our business. We are not required to comply with certain provisions of U.S. securities laws relating to proxy statements and certain related matters. This, coupled with the significant voting power of holders of our Series I preferred stock and Series II preferred stock, may limit the ability of holders of our common stock to influence our business.

The significant voting power of holders of our Series I preferred stock and Series II preferred stock may limit the ability of holders of our common stock to influence our business. The significant voting power of holders of our Series I preferred stock and Series II preferred stock may limit the ability of holders of our common stock to influence our business. The significant voting power of holders of our Series I preferred stock and Series II preferred stock may limit the ability of holders of our common stock to influence our business.

We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We, our funds and their portfolio companies are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters. In recent years, alternative asset managers have become subject to competing demands from different investors and other stakeholder groups with divergent views on sustainability matters, including the role of such matters in the investment process. Certain investors, including public pension funds, have placed increasing importance on the impacts of investments made by the private funds to which they commit capital, including with respect to climate change, among other aspects of sustainability. At times, investors, including public pension funds, have limited participation in certain investment opportunities, such as hydrocarbons, and/or conditioned future capital commitments to certain funds on the implementation of screens or other sector-specific investment guidelines. Conversely, certain investors have raised concerns as to whether the incorporation of sustainability factors in the investment and portfolio management process may be inconsistent with the fiduciary duty to maximize return for investors, or may result in the subordination of the interests of investors based solely or in part on sustainability considerations. Investors, including public pension funds, which represent a significant portion of our funds’ investor bases, may decide to withdraw previously committed capital (where such withdrawal is permitted) or not commit capital to future fundraises based on their assessment of how we approach and consider the sustainability cost of investments and whether the return-driven objectives of our funds align with their sustainability priorities. This divergence increases the risk that any action or lack thereof with respect to sustainability matters will be perceived negatively by at least some stakeholders and adversely impact our reputation and business. If we do not successfully manage sustainability-related expectations across the varied interests of our stakeholders, including existing or potential investors, our ability to access and deploy capital may be adversely impacted. In addition, a failure to successfully manage sustainability-related expectations may negatively impact our reputation and erode stakeholder trust. We, our funds and their portfolio companies are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to sustainability matters. In recent years, alternative asset managers have become subject to competing demands from different investors and other stakeholder groups with divergent views on sustainability matters, including the role of such matters in the investment process. Certain investors, including public pension funds, have placed increasing importance on the impacts of investments made by the private funds to which they commit capital, including with respect to climate change, among other aspects of sustainability. At times, investors, including public pension funds, have limited participation in certain investment opportunities, such as hydrocarbons, and/or conditioned future capital commitments to certain funds on the implementation of screens or other sector-specific investment guidelines. Conversely, certain investors have raised concerns as to whether the incorporation of sustainability factors in the investment and portfolio management process may be inconsistent with the fiduciary duty to maximize return for investors, or may result in the subordination of the interests of investors based solely or in part on sustainability considerations. Investors, including public pension funds, which represent a significant portion of our funds’ investor bases, may decide to withdraw previously committed capital (where such withdrawal is permitted) or not commit capital to future fundraises based on their assessment of how we approach and consider the sustainability cost of investments and whether the return-driven objectives of our funds align with their sustainability priorities. This divergence increases the risk that any action or lack thereof with respect to sustainability matters will be perceived negatively by at least some stakeholders and adversely impact our reputation and business. If we do not successfully manage sustainability-related expectations across the varied interests of our stakeholders, including existing or potential investors, our ability to access and deploy capital may be adversely impacted. In addition, a failure to successfully manage sustainability-related expectations may negatively impact our reputation and erode stakeholder trust. sector-specific return-driven sustainability-related sustainability-related Certain investors also have begun to request or require data from their asset managers and/or use third-party benchmarks and ratings to allow them to monitor the sustainability impact of their investments. Regulatory initiatives to require investors to make disclosures to their stakeholders regarding sustainability matters have become increasingly common in certain jurisdictions, which may further increase the number and type of investors who place importance on these issues and who demand certain types of reporting from us or our funds. In addition, government authorities of certain U.S. states have requested information from and scrutinized certain asset managers with respect to whether such managers have adopted sustainability policies that would restrict Certain investors also have begun to request or require data from their asset managers and/or use third-party benchmarks and ratings to allow them to monitor the sustainability impact of their investments. Regulatory initiatives to require investors to make disclosures to their stakeholders regarding sustainability matters have become increasingly common in certain jurisdictions, which may further increase the number and type of investors who place importance on these issues and who demand certain types of reporting from us or our funds. In addition, government authorities of certain U.S. states have requested information from and scrutinized certain asset managers with respect to whether such managers have adopted sustainability policies that would restrict third-party 40 40 Table of Contents Table of Contents such asset managers from investing in certain industries or sectors, such as conventional energy. These authorities have indicated that such asset managers may lose opportunities to manage money belonging to these states and their pension funds to the extent the asset managers boycott certain industries. This may impair our ability to access capital from certain investors, and we may in turn not be able to maintain or increase the size of our funds or raise sufficient capital for new funds, which may adversely impact our revenues. such asset managers from investing in certain industries or sectors, such as conventional energy. These authorities have indicated that such asset managers may lose opportunities to manage money belonging to these states and their pension funds to the extent the asset managers boycott certain industries. This may impair our ability to access capital from certain investors, and we may in turn not be able to maintain or increase the size of our funds or raise sufficient capital for new funds, which may adversely impact our revenues. There has been increased regulatory focus on sustainability-related practices by investment managers and the accuracy of statements made regarding such practices, including whether such statements are inaccurate or misleading, either because they overstate (often referred to as “greenwashing”) or understate the extent to which such investment managers are engaging in sustainability-related practices. The SEC has commenced enforcement actions against several investment advisers relating to sustainability disclosures and policies and procedures failures. Any perception or accusation that we are overstating, or, conversely, understating our engagement in sustainability-related practices could damage our reputation, result in litigation or regulatory actions, and adversely impact our ability to raise capital and attract new investors. Outside of the United States, the European regulatory environment for alternative investment fund managers and financial services firms continues to evolve and increase in complexity, making compliance more costly and time-consuming. See “—Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” There has been increased regulatory focus on sustainability-related practices by investment managers and the accuracy of statements made regarding such practices, including whether such statements are inaccurate or misleading, either because they overstate (often referred to as “greenwashing”) or understate the extent to which such investment managers are engaging in sustainability-related practices. The SEC has commenced enforcement actions against several investment advisers relating to sustainability disclosures and policies and procedures failures. Any perception or accusation that we are overstating, or, conversely, understating our engagement in sustainability-related practices could damage our reputation, result in litigation or regulatory actions, and adversely impact our ability to raise capital and attract new investors. Outside of the United States, the European regulatory environment for alternative investment fund managers and financial services firms continues to evolve and increase in complexity, making compliance more costly and time-consuming. See “—Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” sustainability-related sustainability-related sustainability-related time-consuming. sustainability-related We may also communicate certain initiatives regarding environmental, human capital management, and other sustainability-related matters in our SEC filings or in other disclosures by us or our funds. These initiatives could be difficult and expensive to implement, the personnel, processes and technologies needed to implement them may not be cost effective and may not advance at a sufficient pace, and we may not be able to accomplish them within the timelines we announce or at all. We could, for example, determine that it is not feasible or practical to implement or complete certain of such initiatives based on cost, timing or other considerations. We may also communicate certain initiatives regarding environmental, human capital management, and other sustainability-related matters in our SEC filings or in other disclosures by us or our funds. These initiatives could be difficult and expensive to implement, the personnel, processes and technologies needed to implement them may not be cost effective and may not advance at a sufficient pace, and we may not be able to accomplish them within the timelines we announce or at all. We could, for example, determine that it is not feasible or practical to implement or complete certain of such initiatives based on cost, timing or other considerations. sustainability-related Furthermore, we could be criticized for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of the disclosure related to our or our funds’ sustainability-related policies, practices and initiatives (and progress on those initiatives), which disclosure may be based on frameworks and standards for measuring progress that are still developing, internal controls and processes that continue to evolve, and assumptions that are subject to change in the future. In addition, we could be criticized for the scope or nature of such initiatives, or for any revisions to these initiatives. Further, as part of our sustainability practices, we rely from time to time on third-party data, services and methodologies and such services, data and methodologies could prove to be incomplete or inaccurate. If our or such third parties’ sustainability-related data, processes or reporting are incomplete or inaccurate, or if we fail to achieve progress on a timely basis, or at all, we may be subject to enforcement action and our reputation could be adversely affected, particularly if in connection with such matters we were to be accused of greenwashing. Furthermore, we could be criticized for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of the disclosure related to our or our funds’ sustainability-related policies, practices and initiatives (and progress on those initiatives), which disclosure may be based on frameworks and standards for measuring progress that are still developing, internal controls and processes that continue to evolve, and assumptions that are subject to change in the future. In addition, we could be criticized for the scope or nature of such initiatives, or for any revisions to these initiatives. Further, as part of our sustainability practices, we rely from time to time on third-party data, services and methodologies and such services, data and methodologies could prove to be incomplete or inaccurate. If our or such third parties’ sustainability-related data, processes or reporting are incomplete or inaccurate, or if we fail to achieve progress on a timely basis, or at all, we may be subject to enforcement action and our reputation could be adversely affected, particularly if in connection with such matters we were to be accused of greenwashing. sustainability-related third-party sustainability-related Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.

We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to environmental, social and governance matters, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital from certain investors, constrain capital deployment opportunities for our funds and harm our brand and reputation. We, our funds and their portfolio companies are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to ESG matters. With respect to the alternative asset management industry, in recent years, certain investors, including public pension funds, have placed increasing importance on the impacts of investments made by the private funds to which they commit capital, including with respect to climate change, among other aspects of ESG. Conversely, certain investors have raised concerns as to whether the incorporation of ESG factors in the investment and portfolio management process may be inconsistent with the fiduciary duty to maximize return for investors. We, our funds and their portfolio companies are subject to increasing scrutiny from regulators, elected officials, stockholders, investors and other stakeholders with respect to ESG matters. With respect to the alternative asset management industry, in recent years, certain investors, including public pension funds, have placed increasing importance on the impacts of investments made by the private funds to which they commit capital, including with respect to climate change, among other aspects of ESG. Conversely, certain investors have raised concerns as to whether the incorporation of ESG factors in the investment and portfolio management process may be inconsistent with the fiduciary duty to maximize return for investors. 39 39 Table of Contents Certain investors have demonstrated increased concern with respect to asset managers taking certain actions that could adversely impact the value of, or, refraining from taking certain actions that could improve the value of, an existing or potential investment. At times, investors, including public pension funds, have limited participation in certain investment opportunities, such as hydrocarbons, and/or conditioned future capital commitments to certain funds on the implementation of screens or other sector-specific investment guidelines. Other investors have voiced concern with respect to asset managers’ policies that may result in such managers subordinating the interests of investors based solely or in part on ESG considerations. We may be subject to competing demands from different investors and other stakeholder groups with divergent views on ESG matters, including the role of ESG in the investment process. Investors, including public pension funds, which represent a significant portion of our funds’ investor bases, may decide to withdraw previously committed capital (where such withdrawal is permitted) or not commit capital to future fundraises based on their assessment of how we approach and consider the ESG cost of investments and whether the return-driven objectives of our funds align with their ESG priorities. This divergence increases the risk that any action or lack thereof with respect to ESG matters will be perceived negatively by at least some stakeholders and adversely impact our reputation and business. If we do not successfully manage ESG-related expectations across the varied interests of our stakeholders, including existing or potential investors, our ability to access and deploy capital may be adversely impacted. In addition, a failure to successfully manage ESG-related expectations may negatively impact our reputation and erode stakeholder trust. Certain investors have demonstrated increased concern with respect to asset managers taking certain actions that could adversely impact the value of, or, refraining from taking certain actions that could improve the value of, an existing or potential investment. At times, investors, including public pension funds, have limited participation in certain investment opportunities, such as hydrocarbons, and/or conditioned future capital commitments to certain funds on the implementation of screens or other sector-specific investment guidelines. Other investors have voiced concern with respect to asset managers’ policies that may result in such managers subordinating the interests of investors based solely or in part on ESG considerations. We may be subject to competing demands from different investors and other stakeholder groups with divergent views on ESG matters, including the role of ESG in the investment process. Investors, including public pension funds, which represent a significant portion of our funds’ investor bases, may decide to withdraw previously committed capital (where such withdrawal is permitted) or not commit capital to future fundraises based on their assessment of how we approach and consider the ESG cost of investments and whether the return-driven objectives of our funds align with their ESG priorities. This divergence increases the risk that any action or lack thereof with respect to ESG matters will be perceived negatively by at least some stakeholders and adversely impact our reputation and business. If we do not successfully manage ESG-related expectations across the varied interests of our stakeholders, including existing or potential investors, our ability to access and deploy capital may be adversely impacted. In addition, a failure to successfully manage ESG-related expectations may negatively impact our reputation and erode stakeholder trust. Certain investors also have begun to request or require data from their asset managers and/or use third-party benchmarks and ratings to allow them to monitor the ESG impact of their investments. Regulatory initiatives to require investors to make disclosures to their stakeholders regarding ESG matters are becoming increasingly common, which may further increase the number and type of investors who place importance on these issues and who demand certain types of reporting from us or our funds. In addition, government authorities of certain U.S. states have requested information from and scrutinized certain asset managers with respect to whether such managers have adopted ESG policies that would restrict such asset managers from investing in certain industries or sectors, such as conventional energy. These authorities have indicated that such asset managers may lose opportunities to manage money belonging to these states and their pension funds to the extent the asset managers boycott certain industries. This may impair our ability to access capital from certain investors, and we may in turn not be able to maintain or increase the size of our funds or raise sufficient capital for new funds, which may adversely impact our revenues. Certain investors also have begun to request or require data from their asset managers and/or use third-party benchmarks and ratings to allow them to monitor the ESG impact of their investments. Regulatory initiatives to require investors to make disclosures to their stakeholders regarding ESG matters are becoming increasingly common, which may further increase the number and type of investors who place importance on these issues and who demand certain types of reporting from us or our funds. In addition, government authorities of certain U.S. states have requested information from and scrutinized certain asset managers with respect to whether such managers have adopted ESG policies that would restrict such asset managers from investing in certain industries or sectors, such as conventional energy. These authorities have indicated that such asset managers may lose opportunities to manage money belonging to these states and their pension funds to the extent the asset managers boycott certain industries. This may impair our ability to access capital from certain investors, and we may in turn not be able to maintain or increase the size of our funds or raise sufficient capital for new funds, which may adversely impact our revenues. There has been increased regulatory focus on ESG-related practices by investment managers, particularly with respect to the accuracy of statements made regarding ESG practices, initiatives and investment strategies. The SEC maintains an enforcement task force to examine ESG practices and disclosures by public companies and investment managers and identify inaccurate or misleading statements, often referred to as “greenwashing.” The SEC has commenced enforcement actions against at least three investment advisers relating to ESG disclosures and policies and procedures failures, and we expect that there will continue to be significant enforcement activity in this area. The SEC has also proposed or adopted two ESG-related rules for investment advisers and for 1940 Act funds that address, among other things, enhanced ESG-related disclosure requirements concerning the use of ESG themes in their investing practices. This could increase the risk that we are perceived as, or accused of, greenwashing. Such perception or accusation could damage our reputation, result in litigation or regulatory actions, and adversely impact our ability to raise capital and attract new investors. Outside of the United States, the European regulatory environment for alternative investment fund managers and financial services firms continues to evolve and increase in complexity, making compliance more costly and time-consuming. See “— Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” There has been increased regulatory focus on ESG-related practices by investment managers, particularly with respect to the accuracy of statements made regarding ESG practices, initiatives and investment strategies. The SEC maintains an enforcement task force to examine ESG practices and disclosures by public companies and investment managers and identify inaccurate or misleading statements, often referred to as “greenwashing.” The SEC has commenced enforcement actions against at least three investment advisers relating to ESG disclosures and policies and procedures failures, and we expect that there will continue to be significant enforcement activity in this area. The SEC has also proposed or adopted two ESG-related rules for investment advisers and for 1940 Act funds that address, among other things, enhanced ESG-related disclosure requirements concerning the use of ESG themes in their investing practices. This could increase the risk that we are perceived as, or accused of, greenwashing. Such perception or accusation could damage our reputation, result in litigation or regulatory actions, and adversely impact our ability to raise capital and attract new investors. Outside of the United States, the European regulatory environment for alternative investment fund managers and financial services firms continues to evolve and increase in complexity, making compliance more costly and time-consuming. See “— Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our business and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.” 40 40 Table of Contents We may also communicate certain initiatives, commitments and goals regarding environmental, human capital management, and other ESG-related matters in our SEC filings or in other disclosures by us or our funds. These initiatives, commitments and goals could be difficult and expensive to implement, the personnel, processes and technologies needed to implement them may not be cost effective and may not advance at a sufficient pace, and we may not be able to accomplish them within the timelines we announce or at all. We could, for example, determine that it is not feasible or practical to implement or complete certain of such initiatives, commitments or goals based on cost, timing or other consideration. Furthermore, we could be criticized for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of the disclosure related to our or our funds’ ESG-related policies, practices, initiatives, commitments and goals, and progress against those goals, which disclosure may be based on frameworks and standards for measuring progress that are still developing, internal controls and processes that continue to evolve, and assumptions that are subject to change in the future. In addition, we could be criticized for the scope or nature of such initiatives or goals, or for any revisions to these goals. Further, as part of our ESG practices, we rely from time to time on third-party data, services and methodologies and such services, data and methodologies could prove to be incomplete or inaccurate. If our or such third parties’ ESG-related data, processes or reporting are incomplete or inaccurate, or if we fail to achieve progress with respect to our goals within the scope of ESG on a timely basis, or at all, we may be subject to enforcement action and our reputation could be adversely affected, particularly if in connection with such matters we were to be accused of greenwashing. We may also communicate certain initiatives, commitments and goals regarding environmental, human capital management, and other ESG-related matters in our SEC filings or in other disclosures by us or our funds. These initiatives, commitments and goals could be difficult and expensive to implement, the personnel, processes and technologies needed to implement them may not be cost effective and may not advance at a sufficient pace, and we may not be able to accomplish them within the timelines we announce or at all. We could, for example, determine that it is not feasible or practical to implement or complete certain of such initiatives, commitments or goals based on cost, timing or other consideration. Furthermore, we could be criticized for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of the disclosure related to our or our funds’ ESG-related policies, practices, initiatives, commitments and goals, and progress against those goals, which disclosure may be based on frameworks and standards for measuring progress that are still developing, internal controls and processes that continue to evolve, and assumptions that are subject to change in the future. In addition, we could be criticized for the scope or nature of such initiatives or goals, or for any revisions to these goals. Further, as part of our ESG practices, we rely from time to time on third-party data, services and methodologies and such services, data and methodologies could prove to be incomplete or inaccurate. If our or such third parties’ ESG-related data, processes or reporting are incomplete or inaccurate, or if we fail to achieve progress with respect to our goals within the scope of ESG on a timely basis, or at all, we may be subject to enforcement action and our reputation could be adversely affected, particularly if in connection with such matters we were to be accused of greenwashing. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation. Climate change, climate and sustainability-related regulation and sustainability concerns could adversely affect our businesses and the operations of our funds’ portfolio companies, and any actions we take or fail to take in response to such matters could damage our reputation.

We rely on complex exemptions from statutes in conducting our asset management activities. We rely on complex exemptions from statutes in conducting our asset management activities. We regularly rely on exemptions from various requirements of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), the Exchange Act, the 1940 Act, the Commodity Exchange Act and the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, in conducting our asset management activities. These exemptions are sometimes highly complex and may in certain circumstances depend on compliance by third parties whom we do not control. These exemptions may become unavailable to us for a variety of reasons, including, for example, if we or certain “covered persons” were to become the subject of a criminal, regulatory or court order or other “disqualifying event” under Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act that were not otherwise waived. If for any reason these exemptions were to become unavailable to us, we could become subject to regulatory action or third-party claims and our business could be materially and adversely affected. We regularly rely on exemptions from various requirements of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), the Exchange Act, the 1940 Act, the Commodity Exchange Act and the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, in conducting our asset management activities. These exemptions are sometimes highly complex and may in certain circumstances depend on compliance by third parties whom we do not control. These exemptions may become unavailable to us for a variety of reasons, including, for example, if we or certain “covered persons” were to become the subject of a criminal, regulatory or court order or other “disqualifying event” under Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act that were not otherwise waived. If for any reason these exemptions were to become unavailable to us, we could become subject to regulatory action or third-party claims and our business could be materially and adversely affected. third-party 47 47 Table of Contents Table of Contents Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business.

We rely on complex exemptions from statutes in conducting our asset management activities. We rely on complex exemptions from statutes in conducting our asset management activities. We regularly rely on exemptions from various requirements of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), the Exchange Act, the 1940 Act, the Commodity Exchange Act and the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, in conducting our asset management activities. These exemptions are sometimes highly complex and may in certain circumstances depend on compliance by third parties whom we do not control. If for any reason these exemptions were to become unavailable to us, we could become subject to regulatory action or third-party claims and our business could be materially and adversely affected. For example, the “bad actor” disqualification provisions of Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act ban an issuer from offering or selling securities pursuant to the safe harbor rule in Rule 506 if the issuer or any other “covered person” is the subject of a criminal, regulatory or court order or other “disqualifying event” under the rule which has not been waived. The definition of “covered person” includes an issuer’s directors, general partners, managing members and executive officers; affiliates who are also issuing securities in the offering; beneficial owners of 20% or more of the issuer’s outstanding equity securities; and promoters and persons compensated for soliciting investors in the offering. Accordingly, our ability to rely on Rule 506 to offer or sell securities would be impaired if we or any “covered person” is the subject of a disqualifying event under the rule and we are unable to obtain a waiver. These regulations often serve to limit our activities and impose burdensome compliance requirements. We regularly rely on exemptions from various requirements of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), the Exchange Act, the 1940 Act, the Commodity Exchange Act and the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, in conducting our asset management activities. These exemptions are sometimes highly complex and may in certain circumstances depend on compliance by third parties whom we do not control. If for any reason these exemptions were to become unavailable to us, we could become subject to regulatory action or third-party claims and our business could be materially and adversely affected. For example, the “bad actor” disqualification provisions of Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act ban an issuer from offering or selling securities pursuant to the safe harbor rule in Rule 506 if the issuer or any other “covered person” is the subject of a criminal, regulatory or court order or other “disqualifying event” under the rule which has not been waived. The definition of “covered person” includes an issuer’s directors, general partners, managing members and executive officers; affiliates who are also issuing securities in the offering; beneficial owners of 20% or more of the issuer’s outstanding equity securities; and promoters and persons compensated for soliciting investors in the offering. Accordingly, our ability to rely on Rule 506 to offer or sell securities would be impaired if we or any “covered person” is the subject of a disqualifying event under the rule and we are unable to obtain a waiver. These regulations often serve to limit our activities and impose burdensome compliance requirements. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business. Complex regulatory regimes and potential regulatory changes in jurisdictions outside the United States could adversely affect our business.

Our use of borrowings to finance our business exposes us to risks. Our use of borrowings to finance our business exposes us to risks. We use borrowings to finance our business operations as a public company. We have numerous outstanding notes with various maturity dates as well as other borrowings, including under the Revolving Credit Facility. As borrowings under the credit facility and our outstanding notes mature, we will be required to refinance or repay such borrowings. In order to do so, we may enter into a new facility, use asset based financing arrangements or issue new notes, each of which could result in higher borrowing costs. We may also issue equity, which would dilute existing stockholders. Further, we may choose to repay such borrowings using cash on hand, cash provided by our continuing operations or cash from the sale of our assets, each of which could reduce the amount of cash available to facilitate the growth and expansion of our businesses, make repurchases under our share repurchase program and pay dividends to our stockholders, operating expenses and other obligations as they arise. In order to obtain new borrowings, or to extend or refinance existing borrowings, we are dependent on the willingness and We use borrowings to finance our business operations as a public company. We have numerous outstanding notes with various maturity dates as well as other borrowings, including under the Revolving Credit Facility. As borrowings under the credit facility and our outstanding notes mature, we will be required to refinance or repay such borrowings. In order to do so, we may enter into a new facility, use asset based financing arrangements or issue new notes, each of which could result in higher borrowing costs. We may also issue equity, which would dilute existing stockholders. Further, we may choose to repay such borrowings using cash on hand, cash provided by our continuing operations or cash from the sale of our assets, each of which could reduce the amount of cash available to facilitate the growth and expansion of our businesses, make repurchases under our share repurchase program and pay dividends to our stockholders, operating expenses and other obligations as they arise. In order to obtain new borrowings, or to extend or refinance existing borrowings, we are dependent on the willingness and 56 56 Table of Contents Table of Contents ability of financial institutions such as global banks to extend credit to us on favorable terms or at all, and on our ability to access the debt and equity capital markets, which can be volatile. There is no guarantee that such financial institutions will continue to extend credit to us or that we will be able to access the capital markets to obtain new borrowings or refinance existing borrowings when they mature. In addition, the use of leverage to finance our business exposes us to the types of risk described in “— Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.” We or our funds have and may in the future also enter into “margin loans” whereby we or our funds borrow money from a bank and pledge the equity of the underlying portfolio company or real estate asset as collateral for the loan. The use of margin borrowings results in certain additional risks to the borrower. For example, should the securities pledged to brokers to secure our margin borrowings decline in value, we or our funds could be subject to a “margin call,” pursuant to which we or our funds must either deposit additional funds or securities with the broker, or suffer mandatory liquidation of the pledged securities to compensate for the decline in value. In the event of a sudden drop in the value of our assets, we or our funds might not be able to liquidate assets quickly enough to satisfy margin requirements. See “Part II. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Sources and Uses of Liquidity” for further information regarding our outstanding borrowings. Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments. Many of our funds’ investments rely heavily on the use of leverage, and our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on investments will depend on our ability to access sufficient sources of indebtedness at attractive rates. For example, in many private equity and real estate investments, indebtedness may constitute as much as 70% or more of a portfolio company’s or real estate asset’s total debt and equity capitalization, including debt that may be incurred in connection with the investment. The absence of available sources of sufficient senior debt financing for extended periods of time could therefore materially and adversely affect our private equity and real estate businesses. Furthermore, limits on the deductibility of corporate interest expense could make it more costly to use debt financing for our acquisitions or otherwise have an adverse impact on the cost structure of our transactions, and could therefore adversely affect the returns on our funds’ investments. See “— Changes in U.S. and foreign taxation of businesses and other tax laws, regulations or treaties or an adverse interpretation of these items by tax authorities could adversely affect us, including by adversely impacting our effective tax rate and tax liability.” In addition, an increase in either the general levels of interest rates or in the risk spread demanded by sources of indebtedness would make it more expensive to finance those businesses’ investments. See “— High interest rates and challenging debt market conditions have negatively impacted and could continue to negatively impact the values of certain assets or investments and the ability of our funds and their portfolio companies to access the capital markets, which could adversely affect investment and realization opportunities, lead to lower-yielding investments and potentially decrease our net income.” Investments in highly leveraged entities are inherently more sensitive to declines in revenues, increases in expenses and interest rates and adverse economic, market and industry developments. The incurrence of a significant amount of indebtedness by an entity could, among other things: • give rise to an obligation to make mandatory pre-payments of debt using excess cash flow, which might limit the entity’s ability to respond to changing industry conditions to the extent additional cash is needed for the response, to make unplanned but necessary capital expenditures or to take advantage of growth opportunities, • limit the entity’s ability to adjust to changing market conditions, thereby placing it at a competitive disadvantage compared to its competitors who have relatively less debt, 57 Table of Contents • allow even moderate reductions in operating cash flow to render it unable to service its indebtedness, leading to a bankruptcy or other reorganization of the entity and a loss of part or all of the equity investment in it, • limit the entity’s ability to engage in strategic acquisitions that might be necessary to generate attractive returns or further growth and • limit the entity’s ability to obtain additional financing or increase the cost of obtaining such financing, including for capital expenditures, working capital or general corporate purposes. As a result, the risk of loss associated with a leveraged entity is generally greater than for companies with comparatively less debt. When our funds’ existing portfolio investments reach the point when debt incurred to finance those investments matures in significant amounts and must be either repaid or refinanced, those investments may materially suffer if they have generated insufficient cash flow to repay maturing debt and there is insufficient capacity and availability in the financing markets to permit them to refinance maturing debt on satisfactory terms, or at all. If a limited availability of financing for such purposes were to persist for an extended period of time, when significant amounts of the debt incurred to finance our private equity and real estate funds’ existing portfolio investments came due, these funds could be materially and adversely affected. Many of the hedge funds in which our funds of hedge funds invest, our credit-focused funds and or CLOs, may choose to use leverage as part of their respective investment programs and regularly borrow a substantial amount of their capital. The use of leverage poses a significant degree of risk and enhances the possibility of a significant loss in the value of the investment portfolio. A fund may borrow money from time to time to purchase or carry securities or may enter into derivative transactions (such as total return swaps) with counterparties that have embedded leverage. The interest expense and other costs incurred in connection with such borrowing may not be recovered by appreciation in the securities purchased or carried and will be lost - and the timing and magnitude of such losses may be accelerated or exacerbated - in the event of a decline in the market value of such securities. Gains realized with borrowed funds may cause the fund’s net asset value to increase at a faster rate than would be the case without borrowings. However, if investment results fail to cover the cost of borrowings, the fund’s net asset value could also decrease faster than if there had been no borrowings. Any of the foregoing circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow. The due diligence process that we undertake in connection with investments by our funds may not reveal all facts and issues that may be relevant in connection with an investment. When evaluating a potential business or asset for investment, we conduct due diligence that we deem reasonable and appropriate based on the facts and circumstances applicable to such investment. When conducting due diligence, we may be required to evaluate important and complex issues, including but not limited to those related to business, financial, credit risk, tax, accounting, sustainability, legal and regulatory and macroeconomic trends. With respect to sustainability, the nature and scope of our diligence will vary based on the investment, but may include a review of, among other things: energy management, air and water pollution, land contamination, human capital management, human rights, employee health and safety, accounting standards and bribery and corruption. Selecting and evaluating such factors is subjective by nature, and there is no guarantee that the criteria utilized or judgment exercised by Blackstone or a third-party specialist (if any) will reflect the policies or preferred practices of any particular investor or align with the practices of other asset managers or with market trends. The materiality of various risks and impact of such risks on an individual potential investment or portfolio as a whole depend on many factors, including the relevant industry, geography and asset class and the nature of the investment. Outside consultants, legal advisers, accountants and investment banks may be involved in the due 58 Table of Contentsdiligence process in varying degrees depending on the type of investment. The due diligence investigation that we will carry out with respect to any investment opportunity may not reveal or highlight all relevant facts (including fraud) or risks that may be necessary or helpful in evaluating such investment opportunity and we may not identify or foresee future developments that could have a material adverse effect on an investment, including, for example, potential factors, such as technological disruption of a specific company or asset, or an entire industry. Further, some matters covered by our diligence, such as sustainability, are continuously evolving and we may not accurately or fully anticipate such evolution. The framework we may use to evaluate certain diligence considerations may not represent a universally recognized standard for assessing such considerations. For example, AIFMD requires us to identify, measure, manage and monitor sustainability risks relevant to the funds managed by our EU AIFMs and take into account sustainability risks when performing investment due diligence. Such requirements may make our funds less attractive to investors, and any non-compliance with such requirements may subject us to regulatory action. In addition, when conducting due diligence on investments, including with respect to investments made by our funds of hedge funds in third-party hedge funds, we rely on the resources available to us and information supplied by third parties, including information provided by the target of the investment (or, in the case of investments in a third-party hedge fund, information provided by such hedge fund or its service providers). The information we receive from third parties may not be accurate or complete and therefore we may not have all the relevant facts and information necessary to properly assess and monitor our funds’ investment. We may be unable to consummate or successfully integrate development opportunities, acquisitions or joint ventures that we pursue. We may from time to time seek to engage in selective development or acquisition of asset management businesses or other businesses complementary to our business where we think we can add substantial value or generate substantial returns. We may not be able to identify or consummate such opportunities, including due to competition for such opportunities, our ability to accurately value such opportunities and the need to negotiate acceptable terms, and obtain requisite approvals and licenses from the relevant governmental authorities, for such opportunities. Moreover, even if we are able to identify and successfully complete an acquisition, we may encounter unexpected difficulties or incur unexpected costs associated with integrating and overseeing the operations of the new businesses. We and our affiliates from time to time are required to report specified dealings or transactions involving Iran or other sanctioned individuals or entities. The Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (“ITRA”) requires companies subject to SEC reporting obligations under Section 13 of the Exchange Act to disclose in their periodic reports specified dealings or transactions involving Iran or other individuals and entities targeted by certain OFAC sanctions, including, by way of example, the Russian Federal Security Service, engaged in by the reporting company or any of its affiliates during the period covered by the relevant periodic report. In some cases, ITRA requires companies to disclose these types of transactions even if they were permissible under U.S. law. Companies that currently may be or may have been at the time considered our affiliates have from time to time publicly filed and/or provided to us the disclosures reproduced on Exhibit 99.1 of our Quarterly Reports as well as Exhibit 99.1 of this annual report, which disclosure is hereby incorporated by reference herein. We do not independently verify or participate in the preparation of these disclosures. We are required to separately file with the SEC a notice when such activities have been disclosed in this report, and the SEC is required to post such notice of disclosure on its website and send the report to the President and certain U.S. Congressional committees. The President thereafter is required to initiate an investigation and, within 180 days of initiating such an investigation, determine whether sanctions should be imposed. Disclosure of such activity, even if such activity is not subject to sanctions under applicable law, and any sanctions actually imposed on us or our affiliates as a result of these activities, could harm our reputation and have a negative impact on our business, and any failure to disclose any such activities as required could additionally result in fines or penalties. 59 Table of ContentsOur asset management activities involve investments in relatively illiquid assets, and we may fail to realize any profits from these activities for a considerable period of time. Many of our investment funds invest in securities that are not publicly traded. In many cases, our investment funds may be prohibited by contract or by applicable securities laws from selling such securities for a period of time. Our investment funds will generally not be able to sell these securities publicly unless their sale is registered under applicable securities laws, or unless an exemption from such registration is available. The ability of many of our investment funds, particularly our private equity funds, to dispose of investments is heavily dependent on the public equity markets. For example, the ability to realize any value from an investment may depend upon the ability to complete an initial public offering of the portfolio company in which such investment is held. Even if the securities are publicly traded, large holdings of securities can often be disposed of only over a substantial length of time, exposing the investment returns to risks of downward movement in market prices during the intended disposition period. Moreover, because the investment strategy of many of our funds, particularly our private equity and real estate funds, often entails our having representation on our funds’ public portfolio company boards, our funds may be restricted in their ability to effect such sales during certain time periods. Accordingly, under certain conditions, our investment funds may be forced to either sell securities at lower prices than they had expected to realize or defer - potentially for a considerable period of time - sales that they had planned to make. We make investments in companies that are based outside of the United States, which may expose us to additional risks not typically associated with investing in companies that are based in the United States. Many of our investment funds invest a significant portion of their assets in the equity, debt, loans or other securities of issuers located outside the United States. International investments have increased and we expect will continue to increase as a proportion of certain of our funds’ portfolios in the future. Investments in non-U.S. securities involve certain factors not typically associated with investing in U.S. securities, including risks relating to: • currency exchange matters, including fluctuations in currency exchange rates and costs associated with conversion of investment principal and income from one currency into another, • less developed or efficient financial markets than in the United States, which may lead to potential price volatility and relative illiquidity, • the absence of uniform accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, practices and disclosure requirements and less government supervision and regulation, • changes in laws or clarifications to existing laws that could impact our tax treaty positions, which could adversely impact the returns on our funds’ investments, • a less developed legal or regulatory environment, differences in the legal and regulatory environment or enhanced legal and regulatory compliance, • heightened exposure to corruption risk in certain non-U.S. markets, • political hostility to investments by foreign or private equity investors, • reliance on a more limited number of commodity inputs, service providers and/or distribution mechanisms, • more volatile or challenging market or economic conditions, including higher rates of inflation, • higher transaction costs, • difficulty in enforcing contractual obligations, • fewer investor protections and less publicly available information about companies, 60 Table of Contents • certain economic and political risks, including potential exchange control regulations and restrictions on our non-U.S. investments and repatriation of profits on investments or of capital invested, the risks of war, terrorist attacks, political, economic or social instability, the possibility of expropriation or confiscatory taxation and adverse economic and political developments and • the possible imposition of non-U.S. taxes or withholding on income and gains recognized with respect to such securities. In addition, investments in companies that are based outside of the United States may be negatively impacted by restrictions on international trade or the imposition of tariffs, which have been an area of focus for the current U.S. Presidential administration. See “— Trade negotiations and related government actions may create regulatory uncertainty for our funds’ portfolio companies and our investment strategies and adversely affect the profitability of our funds’ portfolio companies.” We may not have sufficient cash to pay back “clawback” obligations if and when they are triggered under the governing agreements with our investors. In certain circumstances, at the end of the life of a carry fund (and earlier with respect to certain of our funds), we may be obligated to repay the amount by which Performance Allocations that were previously distributed to us exceed the amounts to which the relevant general partner is ultimately entitled on an after-tax basis. This includes situations in which the general partner receives in excess of the relevant Performance Allocations applicable to the fund as applied to the fund’s cumulative net profits over the life of the fund or, in some cases, the fund has not achieved investment returns that exceed the preferred return threshold. This obligation is known as a “clawback” obligation and is an obligation of any person who received such Performance Allocations, including us and other participants in our Performance Allocations plans. Although a portion of any dividends by us to our stockholders may include any Performance Allocations received by us, we do not intend to seek fulfillment of any clawback obligation by seeking to have our stockholders return any portion of such dividends attributable to Performance Allocations associated with any clawback obligation. To the extent we are required to fulfill a clawback obligation, however, our board of directors may determine to decrease the amount of our dividends to our stockholders. The clawback obligation operates with respect to a given carry fund’s own net investment performance only and performance of other funds are not netted for determining this contingent obligation. Adverse economic conditions may increase the likelihood that one or more of our carry funds may be subject to clawback obligations. To the extent one or more clawback obligations were to occur for any one or more carry funds, we might not have available cash at the time such clawback obligation is triggered to repay the Performance Allocations and satisfy such obligation. If we were unable to repay such Performance Allocations, we would be in breach of the governing agreements with our investors and could be subject to liability. Moreover, although a clawback obligation is several, the governing agreements of most of our funds provide that to the extent another recipient of Performance Allocations (such as a current or former employee) does not fund his or her respective share, then we and our employees who participate in such Performance Allocations plans may have to fund additional amounts (generally an additional 50-70% beyond our pro-rata share of such obligations) beyond what we actually received in Performance Allocations. Although we retain the right to pursue any remedies that we have under such governing agreements against those Performance Allocations recipients who fail to fund their obligations, we may not be successful in recovering such amounts. Investors in a number of our vehicles may withdraw their investments, and investors in certain of our vehicles may have a right to terminate our management of, or cause the dissolution of, such vehicles, which would lead to a decrease in our revenues. We have a number of vehicles that permit investors in such vehicles to withdraw their investments and/or terminate our management of such capital, as applicable and in certain cases, subject to certain limitations. Investors in our hedge funds may generally redeem their investments on a periodic basis following, in certain cases, 61 Table of Contents ability of financial institutions such as global banks to extend credit to us on favorable terms or at all, and on our ability to access the debt and equity capital markets, which can be volatile. There is no guarantee that such financial institutions will continue to extend credit to us or that we will be able to access the capital markets to obtain new borrowings or refinance existing borrowings when they mature. In addition, the use of leverage to finance our business exposes us to the types of risk described in “— Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.” ability of financial institutions such as global banks to extend credit to us on favorable terms or at all, and on our ability to access the debt and equity capital markets, which can be volatile. There is no guarantee that such financial institutions will continue to extend credit to us or that we will be able to access the capital markets to obtain new borrowings or refinance existing borrowings when they mature. In addition, the use of leverage to finance our business exposes us to the types of risk described in “— Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.” We or our funds have and may in the future also enter into “margin loans” whereby we or our funds borrow money from a bank and pledge the equity of the underlying portfolio company or real estate asset as collateral for the loan. The use of margin borrowings results in certain additional risks to the borrower. For example, should the securities pledged to brokers to secure our margin borrowings decline in value, we or our funds could be subject to a “margin call,” pursuant to which we or our funds must either deposit additional funds or securities with the broker, or suffer mandatory liquidation of the pledged securities to compensate for the decline in value. In the event of a sudden drop in the value of our assets, we or our funds might not be able to liquidate assets quickly enough to satisfy margin requirements. See “Part II. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Sources and Uses of Liquidity” for further information regarding our outstanding borrowings. We or our funds have and may in the future also enter into “margin loans” whereby we or our funds borrow money from a bank and pledge the equity of the underlying portfolio company or real estate asset as collateral for the loan. The use of margin borrowings results in certain additional risks to the borrower. For example, should the securities pledged to brokers to secure our margin borrowings decline in value, we or our funds could be subject to a “margin call,” pursuant to which we or our funds must either deposit additional funds or securities with the broker, or suffer mandatory liquidation of the pledged securities to compensate for the decline in value. In the event of a sudden drop in the value of our assets, we or our funds might not be able to liquidate assets quickly enough to satisfy margin requirements. See “Part II. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Sources and Uses of Liquidity” for further information regarding our outstanding borrowings. Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments. Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments. Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.

Our use of borrowings to finance our business exposes us to risks. Our use of borrowings to finance our business exposes us to risks. We use borrowings to finance our business operations as a public company. We have numerous outstanding notes with various maturity dates as well as a revolving credit facility that matures on December 15, 2028. See “Part II. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Sources and Uses of Liquidity” for further information regarding our outstanding borrowings. As borrowings under the credit facility and our outstanding notes mature, we will be required to refinance or repay such borrowings. In order to do so, we may enter into a new facility or issue new notes, each of which could result in higher borrowing costs. We may also issue equity, which would dilute existing stockholders. Further, we may choose to repay such borrowings using cash on hand, cash provided by our continuing operations or cash from the sale of our assets, each of which could reduce the amount of cash available to facilitate the growth and expansion of our businesses, make repurchases under our share repurchase program and pay dividends to our stockholders, operating expenses and other obligations as they arise. In order to obtain new borrowings, or to extend or refinance existing borrowings, we are dependent on the willingness and ability of financial institutions such as global banks to extend credit to us on favorable terms or at all, and on our ability to access the debt and equity capital markets, which can be volatile. There is no guarantee that such financial institutions will continue to extend credit to us or that we will be able to access the capital markets to obtain new borrowings or refinance existing borrowings when they mature. In addition, the use of leverage to finance our business exposes us to the types of risk described in “— Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.” We use borrowings to finance our business operations as a public company. We have numerous outstanding notes with various maturity dates as well as a revolving credit facility that matures on December 15, 2028. See “Part II. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Sources and Uses of Liquidity” for further information regarding our outstanding borrowings. As borrowings under the credit facility and our outstanding notes mature, we will be required to refinance or repay such borrowings. In order to do so, we may enter into a new facility or issue new notes, each of which could result in higher borrowing costs. We may also issue equity, which would dilute existing stockholders. Further, we may choose to repay such borrowings using cash on hand, cash provided by our continuing operations or cash from the sale of our assets, each of which could reduce the amount of cash available to facilitate the growth and expansion of our businesses, make repurchases under our share repurchase program and pay dividends to our stockholders, operating expenses and other obligations as they arise. In order to obtain new borrowings, or to extend or refinance existing borrowings, we are dependent on the willingness and ability of financial institutions such as global banks to extend credit to us on favorable terms or at all, and on our ability to access the debt and equity capital markets, which can be volatile. There is no guarantee that such financial institutions will continue to extend credit to us or that we will be able to access the capital markets to obtain new borrowings or refinance existing borrowings when they mature. In addition, the use of leverage to finance our business exposes us to the types of risk described in “— Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.” 57 57 Table of Contents Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments. Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments. Dependence on significant leverage in investments by our funds could adversely affect our ability to achieve attractive rates of return on those investments.