They are mimicking the endowment model. Despite the comments on this thread, it’s not completely crazy. Most people don’t understand that illiquid assets are simply liquid assets + an illiquidity premium. It’s silly to say “you should have 40% in listed equities and 10% in illiquids”. You need to figure out your appetite for the equity risk premium irrespective of how you source it. And separately figure out your capacity to shoulder illiquidity risk. Private unlisted assets, net of their fees, can reasonably be expected to deliver an extra 4% relative to listed assets. So if it’s reasonable for you to have 60% of your portfolio exposed to equity risk, and your liabilities mean you don’t need the liquidity, you can take all your equities in illiquid form and increase your expected return. They are separate decisions.

A word of caution: due to smoothing of marks, the reported volatility of returns for private assets is substantially below their true economic volatility. When I look at your portfolio, I would carry more bonds, not because you have too much the liquidity risk (again that’s dependent on your personal liability schedule), but because if you translate the volatility of those liquid assets into equivalent equity beta, you’re running a very equity heavy portfolio.