Agefi Luxembourg - janvier 2026

AGEFI Luxembourg 26 Janvier 2026 Fonds d’investissement ByDr.SebastiaanNielsHOOGHIEMSTRA* O n 19December 2025, theCSSF issuedCircular 25/901 (the “Circular”), amajor overhaul thatmodernizes, clarifies and simpli- fies rules for all CSSF-regulated invest- ment funds (“RegulatedFunds”), includingSIFs, SICARs andPart 2 UCIs. TheCircular repeals several long-standing circulars, renders others inapplicable, and intro- duces a comprehensive general glossary aimed at streamlining communicationwith theCSSF. While theCircular primarily tar- gets SIFs, SICARs andPart 2 UCIs, it is also (partially) relevant for RAIFs. This contribution focuses on the risk capital notion applicable toSICARs, which is equally relevant for SICAR-like RAIFs. For ease of reference, references in this contribution aremade toSICARs, with the understanding that they equally apply to SICAR-likeRAIFs. Concept of Securities RepresentingRiskCapital TheCircularintroducesadedicatedchapteroutlining theprinciplesonwhichtheCSSFbasesitsassessment oftheacceptabilityofaninvestmentpolicyinrelation to the concept of “securities representing risk capital” undertheSICARframework.Thisconceptisfounda- tional to the SICAR regime, as set out inArticle 1(1) and (2) of the Luxembourg lawof 15 June 2004 relat- ing to the investment company in risk capital, as amended(the“ SICARLaw ”).Accordingly,thechap- terprovidesthekeycriteriaappliedbytheCSSFwhen determiningwhether a given investment qualifies as risk capital . The concept of risk capital ensures that in- vestorsparticipateintheresultsgeneratedthroughthe managementofthefund’sassets,inconsiderationfor the risks they assume. The SICARLawdefines investment in risk capital as the direct or indirect contribution of assets to entities withaviewtotheirlaunch,developmentorlistingon a stock exchange. In essence, the regime is designed to channel capital into private equity strategies, par- ticularlyventureandgrowthstrategies,aswellasdebt financing strategies for non-listed undertakings that, by their nature, exhibit higher risk profiles but offer significant value-creation potential. The forms throughwhich SICARsmay contribute assets are di- verse.Suchcontributionsmaytaketheformofequity injections,loanorigination,bondsubscriptions,bridge financingormezzaninefinancing,amongothers.Im- portantly, a fresh capital increase is not always re- quired: the acquisition of securities representing risk capital on the secondary market also qualifies as an eligible investment. General Principles - Risk CapitalAssessment Criteria AccordingtoCSSFCircular25/901,aSICARmustas- sesstheappropriatenessofemployingaSICARstruc- ture through a comprehensive analysis of its alignment with the three constitutive criteria under- lying the risk capital concept, namely development, riskandexitstrategy,assetoutintheSICARLawand further detailed in the Circular. These elements form the basis of the CSSF’s assessment of whether a pro- posed investment policy is compatible with the risk capital requirement applicable to SICARs. Development of theUnderlying The concept of “development” under the SICAR regime is interpreted broadly.ASICARmust ensure thatitsinvestmentpolicyclearlyarticulateshowvalue willbecreatedatthelevelofeachtargetentity.Inprac- tice, this requires takingconcrete steps toenhance the financial value of the undertaking. Purely passive holdings, where the SICAR merely waits for an ap- preciation invaluewithout any formof involvement, are not considered sufficient. Tomeetthisstandard,SICARsaregenerallyexpected to exercise a degree of control or oversight over their investments, ensuring that the funds deployed con- tribute to the development of the target entity. This expectationapplies both todirect and indirect invest- ments, though it is particularly relevant in the case of indirectstructures.Activeinvolvementmaytakevar- ious forms, such as representation on management bodiesorotherformsofengagement,includingstruc- turing,restructuring,launching,modernizing,oroth- erwise optimizing the allocation of resources. However, active intervention is not always required. Where other elements, such as the nature of the financing, the identity and roles of the parties involved, or their remuneration structure, demon- strate that the investment constitutes risk capital, the CSSFmayaccept a less hands-onapproach.Notably, active management becomes especially significant where a SICAR concentrates its activity on a single target entity. Risk investments The second essential criterion for qualifying as risk capital under the SICAR regime is the presence of specific risks that go beyond or- dinarymarket risk. The investment policy of a SICAR must therefore include a clear descriptionof both the gen- eral risks inherent in risk capital investments and the specific risks associated with the spe- cific development project. This assessment should take into account various ele- ments, including the charac- teristics of the target entities, their activities and markets, their stage of maturity, the na- ture of the development project, and the anticipated holding period. Reliance solely on thegeographic locationof the target entities is insuf- ficient to establish the presence of risk capital. In- stead, the investment policymust demonstrate that the investment exposes the SICAR to risks directly linked to the development and growth of the target entities that are qualitatively different fromgeneral market fluctuations and that reflect the entrepre- neurial nature of risk capital financing. Exit Strategy The third essential criterion for determiningwhether a SICAR’s investment policy complieswith the char- acteristics of risk capital is the presence of a credible exit strategy. In principle, a SICAR must aim to ac- quirefinancialassetswiththeintentionofsellingthem at a profit, in contrast to a holding company whose primary purpose is to acquire and retain assets. This distinction serves as a key indicator of the SICAR’s genuine intention todivest fromthe investment once ithasreachedmaturityoraftervaluehasbeencreated throughdevelopment. TheCircularprovidesanon-exhaustivelistofpossible exitroutesthroughwhichaSICARmaycontemplate divestingfromitsunderlyinginvestments,whilealso encouraging the indication of a predictable holding period. Potential exit strategies include, for example, an over-the-counter sale, an initial public offering (IPO),oranyothercommerciallyviablemethodofre- alization.ItisthenfortheSICAR’smanagementtode- termine the most appropriate legal and tax-efficient manner to implement the divestment. Particular RulesRelated to CertainCategories of Investments Listed Securities,ABS&CDOs The investment in listed securities does not automat- ically preclude compliancewith the risk capital crite- rionundertheSICARregime.Forexample,securities listed on exchanges that do not qualify as regulated markets within the meaning of the UCITS directive may still be eligible. Likewise, securities listedon reg- ulatedmarketsmayqualifywhere theyare issuedby entities that meet the SICAR Law’s definition of risk capital. Investments in listed securities may also fall within the scope of risk capital where they are linked to a specific development project of the target entity, orwheretheyformpartofadelistingstrategy.Small- capcompanies are anotable illustrationof listedenti- ties thatmay be eligible for SICAR investment. Furthermore, the mere fact that an entity becomes listed does not oblige a SICAR to divest. Situations suchasstock-exchangelock-upperiodsorpost-trad- ing support arrangements may justify a continued holding. Bycontrast, investments inasset-backedse- curities (‘ABS’), collateralized debt obligations (‘CDOs’), and similar structured products are gen- erally regarded as not eligible under the SICAR framework, as they typically lack the development- driven risk characteristics required for qualification as risk capital. Cash&Other TemporaryNon-compliant Investments TheSICARframeworkpermitsthetemporaryinvest- ment of cash awaiting deployment into liquid, low- risk listed instruments such as bank deposits, money marketfundsormoneymarketinstruments.Thisap- proachprovidesaprudentmechanismformanaging liquidity until appropriate investment opportunities are identified. Any cash held for future investment, reinvestment or distributionmust bemanaged in ac- cordancewiththeprudentpersonrule,withparticular attention to preserving the capital of the sums tem- porarily invested. In addition, a SICAR may retain cash tomeet its operational liabilities, including pay- mentsduetoserviceprovidersorothercreditors.This ensures that liquiditymanagement remains bothop- erationally sound and consistent with robust risk- management principles. Mezzanine Financing&DistressedDebt Securities Mezzaninefinancingqualifies as an eligible formof investment under the SICAR framework, provided that the target entity benefiting from the financing meets the eligibility criteria for risk capital (for ex- ample, where the beneficiary is a non-listed com- pany). This eligibilitydoes not extend tomezzanine financing granted to listed companies, unless it forms part of a specific development project, such as adelisting. Investments inexistingmezzaninepo- sitions or in distressed debt may also qualify as risk capital where the objective is to enhance the value of the investment through the restructuring of the relevant undertakings. Derivative instruments investments A SICAR is permitted to use derivative instruments, but only under strict conditions. Derivatives may be employedforhedgingpurposesorwheresuchtrans- actions are necessary to implement the fund’s invest- ment policy. However, derivatives cannot constitute the core of the investment policy, as they do not, in themselves,createvalueorcontributetothedevelop- mentofthetargetentity.Theiruseisthereforelimited to risk-management purposes, specifically the hedg- ing of interest rate and foreign exchange risks, and does not extend to hedging investment risks. Where the issuing document provides for the use of deriva- tives, itmust expressly state that their use is restricted tothesetypesofhedging.Consequently,investments in derivative financial instruments cannot form the principal objective of a SICAR’s investment policy. Real estate& Infrastructure investments ASICARcannotdirectlyholdrealestateorinfrastruc- tureassets.However,indirectinvestmentthroughin- termediaryentities(suchasSPVs)orthroughfundsis permissible, provided that the underlying real estate or infrastructure assets exhibit the characteristics of risk capital. In all cases, the underlying investments mustmeettheriskcapitalcriteria.Inpractice,whether the development criterion is fulfilled typically de- pends on (i) thedevelopment stage of theproject and (ii) the type of investment made in the real estate or infrastructure asset. As a general matter, greenfield projects, andcertain types of brownfieldprojects, sat- isfy the development criterion, whereas secondary- stage assets donot. With respect to risk, real estate and infrastructure in- vestmentscangenerallybecategorizedintocore,core- plus/value-added,andopportunisticstrategies.Given theirbrownfieldnatureandthelimitedrisksinvolved, core investments typicallydo not satisfy the risk cap- ital criterion. Core-plus investmentsmay in some cir- cumstances be considered relatively low-risk, for instance due to long-term contractual arrangements or government-backed revenue streams; managers may therefore face challenges in demonstrating that such investments qualify as risk capital. By contrast, value-added and opportunistic strategies generally meet the riskcriteriondue to theirhigher riskprofiles anddevelopment-drivenvalue-creationcomponents. Commodities TheCSSF assesses the acceptabilityof a SICAR’s in- vestment policy in commodities on a case-by-case basis, by reference to the established risk capital cri- teria.Direct investments incommodities arenot per- mitted for SICARs under any circumstances. However, indirect exposure, through investments in companies engaged in commodity extraction or exploitation, is permissible, provided that both the riskanddevelopment criteria are clearly identifiable at the level of the underlying portfolio companies. In such cases, the CSSF requires that these criteria be demonstrable within the entities in which the SICAR invests,whether the exposure ishelddirectly or indirectly. Fund-of-fund / master-feeder strategy Under the SICARLaw, indirect investments in secu- ritiesrepresentingriskcapitalarepermitted.Whenin- vesting through a target fund, master fund or other investment vehicle, thevehicle’s investment objective must be aligned with the SICAR’s own investment policy. Investments made via private equity or ven- ture capital funds are acceptable where these funds restricttheirportfoliostoassetsthatqualifyasriskcap- italundertheSICARLaw.Thesameprincipleapplies torealestatefunds,providedthattheunderlyingreal estate exposures themselvesmeet the risk capital cri- teria. Bycontrast, hedge funds aregenerallynot eligi- ble, as their strategies do not primarily seek to create valueatthelevelofthetargetentitiesandthereforedo not satisfy the development and risk elements inher- ent to the notionof risk capital. Other IntermediaryVehicles Under the SICARLaw, indirect investments in secu- rities representing risk capital arepermitted. Such in- vestmentsmadethroughanintermediaryvehicleare acceptableonlywherethevehicle’sinvestmentobjec- tiveislimitedtoassetsthatqualifyasriskcapitalunder the SICAR Law. In these circumstances, the SICAR must implement adequate controls to ensure that all cash flowing into the investment structure is effec- tivelyused for risk capital purposes. Outlook: TheCircular&RiskCapital Notion –Codifying existingpractice The Circular introduces a dedicated chapter on the concept of securities representing risk capital, consol- idating prevailingmarket practice and existingCSSF interpretations, previously reflected in part in the CSSFSICARFAQ,withoutmodifyingtheunderlying SICAR or RAIF laws. The established development, risk and exit-strategy criteria remain unchanged. Rather than introducing new substantive standards or materially altering the regulatory framework, this chapter should be viewed primarily as a repapering and clarification exercise designed toprovide amore coherent,structuredandaccessibleframeworkforun- derstanding the notionof risk capital. (*) Dr. Sebastiaan Hooghiemstra is a senior associate in the invest- ment management practice group of Loyens & Loeff Luxembourg and canbecontactedatSebastiaan.Hooghiemstra@loyensloeff.com. The Notion of Risk Capital under CSSFCircular 25/901 L emarché des ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund) connaît une croissance soutenue et devrait poursuivre son expansion en 2026, avec des afflux significatifs vers les grandes classes d’actifs, enparticulier les ac- tionsmondiales desmarchés développés. SelonMichaelMohr,GlobalHeadofETFchezDWS, les flux records observés ces dernières années démontrent que les stratégies d’investissement pas- sives sont désormais pleinement intégrées dans les allocationsdesinvestisseurs,qu’ilssoientparticuliers ou institutionnels. Cette dynamique devrait se pro- longer, notamment en Europe, ce qui nourrit un optimismemarqué quant aux perspectives dumar- ché des ETF à l’horizon 2026. Les flux les plus importants devraient continuer de se concentrer sur les grandes catégories d’ETF, telles que les actions mondiales des marchés développés, mais aussi sur certaines expositions thématiques ciblées. DWS identifie toujours des opportunités attractives sur les actions européennes, avec une attention particulière portée au marché allemand. Parallèlement,lesactionsaméricainespourraientéga- lementoffrirdespointsd’entréeintéressantsen2026, soutenuesparlaperspectivedenouvellesbaissesdes taux d’intérêt, en particulier dans les secteurs de la technologie et des communications. Mohr souligne que la valorisation relative desmar- chés émergents reste attractivepar rapport auxmar- chés développés. Ces marchés devraient bénéficier d’une croissance des bénéfices plus soutenue en 2026 et 2027, renforçant leur intérêt dans une allo- cation diversifiée. Dans cette optique, le secteur de la santé demeure une composante défensive perti- nente, tandis que les actions « value »peuvent jouer un rôle de contrepoids face à des valeurs technolo- giques jugées relativement chères. Les ETF théma- tiquesdevraient également conserver unedemande régulière, portés par des produits spécialisés axés sur des tendances structurelles de long terme ou des thématiques d’actualité. Enfin,lacroissancecontinuedumarchéattiredenou- veaux acteurs, incluant des gestionnaires historique- ment actifs, des sociétés américaines et de nouveaux entrants.Cetteévolutiondevraitintensifierlaconcur- rence, le marketing et la communication autour des ETF. L’intérêt pour les ETF actifs devrait s’élargir au- delàdesinvestisseursprofessionnelspourtoucherles particuliers et les conseillers indépendants. À terme, la différenciation reposera sur la capacité des fournisseurs à délivrer performance et qualité, tout en préservant la réputation globale dumarché des ETF. Le marché des ETF : cap sur 2026 © iStock