Why $PSUS Deserves a Premium to NAV and $PS Deserves a Premium Multiple | Marlton's James Elbaor

Why It Matters

A narrowing discount or premium could unlock significant value for investors, while PSUS expands U.S. access to Pershing Square’s high‑profile activist strategy.

Key Takeaways

• PSUS IPO becomes largest U.S. equity closed‑end fund.
• Analyst expects PSUS to trade at a premium to NAV.
• PSUS may behave like a holding company, not a typical fund.
• Current discount around 15‑20% could compress toward 4% peer level.
• PSUS offers U.S. investors access unavailable in London’s PSH.

Summary

The podcast features Andrew Walker and James Alvar discussing the recent IPO of PSUS, the new Pershing Square closed‑end fund, and its sister management company PS. Both vehicles represent one of the largest financial launches in recent years, with PSUS raising about $5 billion.

Alvar argues that PSUS will trade at a premium to net asset value (NAV), diverging from the typical discount seen in closed‑end funds. He likens the structure to a holding company, suggesting quarterly earnings calls and deeper corporate access, which could compress the current 15‑20% discount toward the peer average of roughly 4%.

Key data points include PSUS being the sixth‑largest IPO of the past decade and the largest U.S. equity closed‑end fund. Alvar cites the Gabelli fund’s 4% discount as a benchmark and references past premium cases such as the Mount Logan transaction (110% of NAV) and Robin Hood’s venture fund trading at a sizable premium.

If PSUS narrows its discount, U.S. investors—who previously lacked access to Pershing Square’s London vehicle—could capture outsized returns and benefit from the firm’s activist pedigree. The market’s perception of PSUS as a quasi‑holding company may reshape pricing dynamics for future 40‑act funds.

Original Description

James Elbaor of Marlton makes the case that $PSUS will trade at a premium to NAV instead of the typical closed-end fund discount and that $PS will ultimately trade at a premium multiple to peers like Blackstone, KKR, Apollo and Carlyle given its lean team and advantaged fee structure. We push on every part of that, including whether Ackman's portfolio is just an expensive S&P hug, why London still doesn't fully credit him, and whether Spark gives Pershing a real path into Universal Music Group.

Sponsor: Fiscal.ai. Real-time fundamental data for global equities, plus one of the leading data connectors for Claude and ChatGPT. Get 15% off at fiscal.ai/yav

Chapters:

0:00 Intro and the divergent thesis

1:05 Sponsor: Fiscal.ai

2:20 Marlton's lens on closed-end funds and UK trusts

5:00 $PSUS: scale, structure, why it's already the largest US equity CEF

7:30 The case for a premium to NAV instead of a 15 to 20% discount

12:30 $PSUS vs $PSH London: who can own what, and why it matters

15:20 The 40-Act book and Ackman's macro hedging history

17:50 Track record with and without the COVID hedge

22:00 Why London still does not fully credit Bill

23:50 "But isn't it just Google, Amazon, Meta?" — the index-hug pushback

26:00 Can Pershing get private assets (Spark, HHH-style deals) into $PSUS

29:00 $PSCM valuation: 30x FRE and the bridge from $300M to $550 to $590M

36:00 Why $PSCM should deserve a premium multiple to KKR, Apollo, Carlyle, Blue Owl

42:30 Preferred performance fees and why the income statement is cleaner

45:30 Alignment: insiders own 85%+

48:00 Permanent capital vs six-year "permanent" capital at the alts

49:40 50 employees at $PSCM vs 2,200 at Carlyle

52:00 Keyman risk on Bill and Ryan Israel's role

58:30 What's next: $UMG, Vincent Bolloré, and Spark as the vehicle

1:02:00 Wrap

Links:

Yet Another Value Blog - https://www.yetanothervalueblog.com

See our legal disclaimer here: https://www.yetanothervalueblog.com/p/legal-and-disclaimer

Production and editing by The Podcast Consultant - https://thepodcastconsultant.com/