I’ve spent decades advising wealthy family offices on real estate; this market needs a fresh look at your 100-year plan

The Great Wealth Transfer is transforming the family office landscape—all while real estate markets face their own mix of challenges and opportunities. Over recent years, fluctuating valuations, stricter lending standards, and inconsistent performance across asset classes have tested portfolio managers, including those investing for family offices with real estate holdings. For family offices with substantial real estate investments, this overlap prompts a core question: Is their 100-year plan still relevant?

The “100-Year Plan” is an investment approach commonly associated with family offices. This framework lets investment teams benefit from long-term strategic planning when evaluating their allocations and portfolios. It allows them to shift focus away from short-term financial limits and toward building and sustaining returns across generations. It also gives managers a chance to capitalize on market disruptions and distress. So-called “black swan” events do occur (like environmental catastrophes and, of course, the rapid growth of AI), impacting these long-term strategies—hence the need for family offices to revisit their investment thesis.  

Real estate is an asset class particularly well-aligned with the 100-year plan and has become a foundational part of many family office portfolios. A report indicates that between 10% and 15% of all family office capital is invested in direct real estate. The same report also found that for family offices managing $500 million or more, real estate is one of the fastest-growing allocation categories.

A key challenge is that today’s market presents a more intricate landscape. Office and retail markets remain unstable in many regions, and much of the country is in urgent need of additional residential development. Public-private partnerships are growing more attractive to investors. Investing in niche sectors like hospitality or healthcare offers promising opportunities, but this requires specialized knowledge.  At the same time, uncertain pricing, rising capital expenditure (capex) requirements, higher interest rates, and tight credit markets are pushing many owner-operators to inject cash into their owned assets. Some are turning to third-party capital sources to pay down debt on overleveraged deals and replenish interest and capex reserves.

This can be beneficial for family offices, as they have historically used less leverage than traditional real estate investors and maintain higher cash reserves. Because of this, they are often better equipped to finance their own deals, provide their own rescue capital, or invest in third-party deals under more favorable terms. They can typically hold onto assets through market downturns until values recover. However, these strengths also create an opportunity to reevaluate their long-term strategy and asset allocation, and to confirm whether their 100-year plan still aligns with their objectives.

As family trees expand, more stakeholders join the decision-making process, and priorities can split. Some members may wish to actively manage or grow the legacy portfolio, while others prefer to pursue different interests or build independent wealth. Many families have not needed to actively invest in their real estate holdings for years but now face that requirement. Additionally, the inherent illiquidity of real estate can complicate everything from governance to intergenerational transitions.

When families start reevaluating their real estate holdings, the first set of considerations is almost always internal. What is the family’s overarching mission? What do different generations want from the portfolio? Do certain members need to divest if their goals are fundamentally misaligned? Because real estate is illiquid, family members also need to address questions like whether to double down on existing assets, diversify into new real estate or non-real estate investments, or reimagine how ownership and management responsibilities are split. Questions about compensation may also arise, especially if some family members are actively involved in the family office while others are not. Tax implications—which can vary widely based on structure and individual situations—add another layer of complexity.

Beyond family dynamics, investment strategy also requires fresh scrutiny. Families need to determine the appropriate investment horizon now that some assets may have matured, as well as whether their current allocation still holds up in the current market. They must assess suitable leverage levels, decide whether it’s smarter to reinvest in their own portfolio or pursue new opportunities, and consider the pros and cons of buying, selling, or ground leasing. Cash flow priorities are also a factor, as is whether to participate as a lender or preferred equity provider. Finally, many families will need to analyze whether to invest alone or with partners – a decision that comes with its own set of benefits and trade‑offs.

The 100-year plan is not merely a slogan. It’s a framework that gives family offices the perspective to ensure their legacy portfolios are preserved for future generations, allowing beneficiaries to pursue individual goals in a positive and supportive setting. With this objective in mind, this unusually volatile period may be the ideal time for family offices to confirm their plans are still relevant and position themselves well for the next century.