What 18 investment firms forecast for the next decade.
Every year, dozens of the world's largest investment firms publish their capital market assumptions — forward-looking estimates of what each asset class will return over the next decade. Pension funds, endowments, and sovereign wealth funds use these numbers to allocate trillions of dollars.
The Horizon Actuarial Survey collects these estimates from 41 firms — but individual forecasts are buried behind consulting relationships. The survey tells you the average. It doesn't tell you who said what.
We wanted the full picture. So we downloaded PDFs, read Excel files, and extracted data from bar charts across 18 investment firms whose capital market assumptions are publicly available — from J.P. Morgan and BlackRock to Northern Trust, Schwab, Invesco, and ten more. The result is the most comprehensive free comparison of forward-looking return expectations we're aware of.
Here's where they agree — and where they disagree by as much as 4.5 percentage points.
The 18 Providers
We sourced capital market assumptions from 18 firms that publish 10-year (or similar) forward-looking return forecasts. These range from the largest asset managers in the world (J.P. Morgan, BlackRock, Vanguard) to specialist consultants (Callan, Verus, Meketa) to research-driven firms (Research Affiliates, AQR, GMO).
Together, these firms advise on more than $30 trillion in assets. Their methodologies vary — building-block models, CAPE-based valuation, factor premia, Monte Carlo simulation — which is precisely why comparing them is so revealing.
What 18 Firms Expect from US Equities
US large-cap equities are the single most consequential allocation decision for most investors. Here is what each firm expects, sorted from most bearish to most bullish:
What the houses expect from US equities.
10-YR NOMINAL GEOMETRIC · USD · MOST BEARISH FIRSTThe Horizon Actuarial Survey's 41-firm average for US large cap is 6.5% (2024 edition) — modestly above our 18-provider mean of 5.9%. This gap likely reflects the strong US equity rally of late 2024, which would compress forward returns for valuation-sensitive firms publishing in early 2026.
The Full Picture: Four Asset Classes, 14 Firms
US equities are just one piece. Here's how the same firms see international developed equities, emerging markets, and US bonds — sorted by their US equity forecast:
| Provider | US Eq | Intl Dev | EM | US Bonds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research Affiliates | 3.1% | 7.7% | 7.5% | 5.1% |
| Invesco | 4.7% | 5.9% | 8.5% | 4.5% |
| BlackRock | 5.2% | 6.8% | 5.9% | 4.1% |
| PGIM | 5.2% | 6.7% | 7.5% | 4.7% |
| Morningstar | 5.3% | 7.5% | 9.9% | 4.5% |
| Verus | 5.4% | 6.8% | 6.7% | 4.7% |
| Schwab | 5.9% | 7.0% | 8.1% | 4.8% |
| Amundi | 6.1% | 7.5% | 7.9% | — |
| AQR | 6.3% | 6.9% | 7.4% | 4.9% |
| Meketa | 6.4% | 7.2% | 7.1% | 4.9% |
| J.P. Morgan | 6.7% | 7.5% | 7.8% | 4.8% |
| Northern Trust | 6.8% | — | 6.9% | 5.0% |
| Callan | 7.3% | 7.6% | 8.2% | 4.7% |
| BNY Mellon | 7.6% | 7.8% | 8.1% | 4.3% |
| Spread | 4.5pp | 1.9pp | 4.0pp | 1.0pp |
| Median | 6.0% | 7.2% | 7.7% | 4.7% |
The pattern is striking. Read the table column by column:
US equities: 4.5 percentage point spread. Wide disagreement. Methodology matters enormously.
International developed: 1.9 percentage point spread. Much tighter. Firms are closer to consensus.
Emerging markets: 4.0 percentage point spread — driven partly by Morningstar's outlier forecast of 9.9%.
US bonds: Just 1.0 percentage point spread. Remarkable consensus from 4.1% to 5.1%.
Where All 18 Firms Agree
1. International equities should outperform the US
This is the single strongest consensus finding in the data. Of the 13 providers that publish both US and international developed forecasts, every single one expects international to outperform — by an average of 1.4 percentage points.
The gap ranges from 0.2 percentage points (BNY Mellon: 7.6% US vs 7.8% international) to 4.6 percentage points (Research Affiliates: 3.1% US vs 7.7% international). Even J.P. Morgan — one of the more constructive voices on US equities — expects EAFE to beat the S&P 500 by 0.8 percentage points per year.
The valuation gap between US and non-US equities is the widest in decades, and every forecaster in our sample has noticed.
2. Bonds are investable again
The tightest consensus in the entire dataset is fixed income. US aggregate bonds: 1.0 percentage point spread across 13 providers (4.1% to 5.1%). After a decade of near-zero yields, the post-2022 rate regime has restored bonds to allocation-worthy status — and everyone agrees on the magnitude.
High yield shows similar agreement: most providers cluster between 5.5% and 6.3%. Cash estimates range from 2.8% (Meketa) to 3.7% (Callan, AQR, Verus) — a tight band for an asset class that was near zero just four years ago.
3. Inflation expectations are anchored
Despite pandemic-era inflation shocks, the professional consensus is that long-term inflation will sit near the Fed's 2% target. The Horizon survey shows a 41-firm inflation consensus of 2.4% with a range of just 2.0% to 3.0%. Northern Trust's 2026 report forecasts 2.3% US inflation over 10 years. This is the narrowest spread of any variable in the entire dataset.
Where They Disagree — and Why It Matters
US equities: the biggest debate in finance
The 4.5 percentage point spread on US equities is wide enough. But it gets wider. GMO — excluded from our main table because they use a 7-year real-return framework — expects US large cap to return negative 4.0% per year (nominal, after adding 2.5% inflation to their -6.5% real forecast). Including GMO stretches the range to 11.6 percentage points.
And BlackRock publishes three macro scenarios, not one. Their US Risk Premia scenario (US valuations revert, international markets hold up) puts US equities at just 3.2%. Their AI Productivity Boom scenario puts it at 16.7%. Even within a single firm, the acknowledged uncertainty range spans 13.5 percentage points.
Emerging markets: one major outlier
Most providers cluster EM equities between 6.7% and 8.5% — a reasonable 1.8 percentage point range. Then there's Morningstar, at 9.9%. Their proprietary methodology appears to assign significant upside to EM valuations. Without Morningstar, the EM spread drops from 4.0 to 2.6 percentage points.
At the low end, BlackRock's 5.9% and Verus's 6.7% reflect more cautious views on China's growth trajectory and EM governance risks.
Why the Experts Disagree: Three Schools of Thought
The disagreements aren't random. They reflect three distinct philosophies about what drives long-term equity returns:
| Approach | Advocates | US Large Cap | Core Belief |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equilibrium / building blocks | JPM, Northern Trust, Callan | 6.7-7.3% | Revenue growth, margins, and buybacks support returns |
| Valuation-driven | Research Affiliates, GMO | 3.1% / -4.0% | Starting valuations dominate 7-10yr returns |
| Factor / risk premia | AQR, BlackRock | 5.2-6.3% | Systematic premia (equity, value, quality) persist |
The building-block view
J.P. Morgan, Northern Trust, Callan, and most consultants decompose equity returns into building blocks: revenue growth, buyback yield, dividend yield, profit margin change, and valuation impact. Northern Trust uses a modified Grinold-Kroner model; J.P. Morgan uses their own equilibrium framework. These approaches tend to produce forecasts in the 6.5-7.5% range because they anchor to economic growth and corporate fundamentals, which have been structurally positive.
Northern Trust's 2026 report breaks their 6.8% US equity forecast into: revenue growth 3.5%, share change 0%, profit margin expansion 1.6%, valuation contraction -0.5%, and dividend yield 2.0%. They explicitly argue that AI-driven productivity gains justify continued US earnings growth despite elevated valuations.
The valuation view
With the Shiller CAPE ratio near 34 — roughly double the long-term average — valuation-focused firms see a powerful headwind. Research Affiliates expects partial mean reversion, yielding 3.1%. GMO takes this further, expecting near-full reversion: their -6.5% real return (-4.0% nominal) makes them the most bearish institutional forecaster available.
Invesco's 4.7% — their lowest US large cap forecast since they started publishing CMAs in 2017 — also reflects significant valuation caution. They note that “margins are at record highs which we expect to erode” over the next decade. (For a deeper dive into exactly how these two philosophies produce such different numbers, see our J.P. Morgan vs Research Affiliates comparison.)
The factor view
AQR and BlackRock use risk-premia models that decompose returns into systematic factors: equity risk premium, value, quality, momentum. Their forecasts land in the middle — less constructive than the building-block firms, less bearish than the valuation camp. Both account for valuations but don't assume full mean reversion.
It Gets Wider: BlackRock's Three Scenarios
BlackRock publishes three macro scenarios with different return assumptions but identical volatility. This gives us an unusually honest view of the uncertainty range within a single firm:
| Scenario | US Large Cap | US Small Cap | Private Equity | Theme |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starting Point (base) | 7.7% | 6.1% | 14.6% | Baseline |
| AI Productivity Boom | 16.7% | 8.0% | 23.1% | US tech dominance |
| US Risk Premia Reset | 3.2% | 1.5% | 10.5% | US valuations revert |
The spread within BlackRock alone — 3.2% to 16.7% on US large cap — is 13.5 percentage points. Wider than the full range across our 14 other providers. This isn't forecasting disagreement between firms — it's an honest acknowledgment that the future depends heavily on which macro narrative plays out.
Note that BlackRock's probability-weighted expected return (5.2%, as reported by Morningstar) sits below their Starting Point scenario (7.7%), suggesting they assign meaningful probability to the bearish US Risk Premia outcome.
The Quiet Consensus: Fixed Income
While equities steal the headlines, fixed income shows remarkable agreement across 13 providers:
| Provider | US Agg | High Yield | Cash |
|---|---|---|---|
| BlackRock | 4.1% | — | 3.4% |
| BNY Mellon | 4.3% | — | — |
| Invesco | 4.5% | 5.7% | — |
| Morningstar | 4.5% | — | — |
| PGIM | 4.7% | 4.8% | — |
| Verus | 4.7% | 5.7% | 3.7% |
| Callan | 4.7% | 5.7% | 3.7% |
| J.P. Morgan | 4.8% | 5.3% | 3.1% |
| Schwab | 4.8% | — | 3.3% |
| AQR | 4.9% | 5.0% | 3.7% |
| Meketa | 4.9% | 6.3% | 2.8% |
| Northern Trust | 5.0% | 5.5% | 3.3% |
| Research Affiliates | 5.1% | 4.7% | 3.5% |
| Spread | 1.0pp | 1.6pp | 0.9pp |
The 1.0 percentage point spread on US aggregate bonds is narrower than any equity asset class by a factor of two to four. Why? Bond returns are largely determined by starting yields, which are observable. There's less room for philosophical disagreement when the dominant input is a number everyone can see on a Bloomberg terminal.
The Horizon survey confirms this pattern. TIPS has the tightest consensus of any asset class across 41 firms: a spread of just 1.8 percentage points.
How the Consensus Has Shifted
The Horizon survey gives us 5 years of trends. The biggest story is the post-2022 regime change in fixed income:
| Asset Class | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| US Large Cap | 6.2% | 5.8% | 5.9% | 6.8% | 6.4% |
| Intl Developed | 6.8% | 6.4% | 6.6% | 7.5% | 7.1% |
| US Core Bonds | 2.6% | 2.1% | 2.6% | 4.7% | 4.9% |
| Cash | 1.6% | 1.2% | 1.5% | 3.4% | 3.7% |
| Private Equity | 9.1% | 8.8% | 9.1% | 9.5% | 9.2% |
Core bonds went from 2.1% expected return in 2021 to 4.9% in 2024 — more than doubling. Cash went from 1.2% to 3.7%. Meanwhile, equity expectations have been remarkably stable. The 60/40 portfolio has been rehabilitated not by higher equity forecasts but by the revival of fixed income.
What This Means for Your Portfolio
1. Don't trust any single forecast
If 16 of the world's most respected investment firms can't agree within 4.5 percentage points on the most important asset class, your portfolio shouldn't depend on any one number being right. Build for a range of outcomes, not a point estimate.
2. Use the disagreement as a stress test
Run your portfolio through multiple assumption sets. If your retirement plan works under J.P. Morgan's 6.7% US equity forecast but breaks under Research Affiliates' 3.1%, you have a concentration risk problem regardless of who's right. Our CMA comparison tool makes this easy.
3. Over-weight the consensus, not the outliers
Where 18 firms agree — bonds around 4.5-5.0%, international above US, inflation near 2.4% — those numbers carry significant evidential weight. Where they disagree violently (US equities, EM), treat both extremes with appropriate skepticism.
4. Geography matters more than ever
The most powerful consensus in the equity data isn't a number — it's a direction. All 13 providers with both US and international forecasts expect international developed equities to outperform. This includes J.P. Morgan, BlackRock, Schwab, Callan, and BNY Mellon — firms that are generally constructive on US equities. When even the US bulls expect international to win, it's worth paying attention.
5. The 60/40 portfolio works again — but differently
With bonds yielding 4-5% instead of 1-2%, balanced portfolios have been rehabilitated. The Horizon survey average for a hypothetical 60/40 pension plan is 7.0% over 20 years — almost exactly the typical institutional return target. But with wide equity uncertainty, diversification beyond a simple 60/40 remains essential.
Explore the data yourself.
Our free CMA comparison tool lets you compare expected returns from J.P. Morgan, BlackRock, Research Affiliates, GMO, and AQR across 42 asset classes — including BlackRock's three macro scenarios.
See every asset class, side by sideFree, no signup required
A Note on Methodology and Comparability
Comparing capital market assumptions across providers requires care:
Time horizon: Most providers in our sample use 10-year horizons (J.P. Morgan, Northern Trust, Schwab, Verus, Callan, Meketa, and others). AQR uses 5-10 years. GMO uses 7 years. Invesco's publication is titled “2025” (10-year from late 2024). Shorter horizons tend to produce more extreme forecasts because starting valuations have a larger impact.
Return type: All figures in this article are nominal geometric (compound annual) returns unless otherwise noted. Some providers publish real returns (GMO publishes real; we add 2.5% inflation). Some publish arithmetic returns (Verus and Invesco publish both; we use geometric).
Asset class definitions: “US Large Cap” maps to S&P 500 for most providers but to MSCI USA for Northern Trust and Russell 1000 for others. “International Developed” is typically MSCI EAFE or equivalent. These differences are generally minor but not zero.
Data sources: J.P. Morgan, BlackRock, Research Affiliates, GMO, and AQR data comes from our CMA comparison tool. The Morningstar cross-firm comparison comes from their “Experts Forecast Stock and Bond Returns: 2026 Edition” Excel dataset. Schwab, Invesco, Northern Trust, Verus, and Meketa data was extracted from their publicly available PDF reports. Callan data was read from their interactive web charts. BNY Mellon, PGIM, and Amundi figures come from publicly available summaries of their 2025/2026 outlook publications.
Effective dates: Most data is from late 2025 / early 2026. The Horizon survey is from early 2024. Meketa and Invesco are titled “2025” (based on late 2024 data). Specific numbers shift year over year, but the structural patterns — where agreement and disagreement lie — are remarkably stable.
Summary
Across 16 of the world's leading investment firms, three things are clear:
Bonds are back. With a 1.0 percentage point spread and a 4.7% median, fixed income has been rehabilitated after a decade in the wilderness.
International should beat the US. All 13 providers with both forecasts agree. The average expected outperformance is 1.4 percentage points per year — which compounds to a meaningful gap over a decade.
US equities are genuinely uncertain. The 4.5 percentage point spread across 14 firms — stretching to 11.6 including GMO — reflects real intellectual disagreement about valuations, AI-driven productivity, and the sustainability of US corporate margins. (Notably, none of these 18 firms publish formal assumptions for Bitcoin — we explain how to build a credible Bitcoin return estimate from first principles.)
This isn't a failure of forecasting. It's an honest reflection of genuine uncertainty. The right response isn't to pick the forecast you like best — it's to build a portfolio that works across the range.
Explore the data yourself.
Our free CMA comparison tool lets you compare expected returns from J.P. Morgan, BlackRock, Research Affiliates, GMO, and AQR across 42 asset classes — including BlackRock's three macro scenarios.
See every asset class, side by sideFree, no signup required
Capital Market Assumptions by Firm (2026)
The same numbers, grouped by provider, for readers who arrive looking for one firm's view. All figures are 10-year nominal geometric returns in USD from the editions listed under Sources; a dash means the firm does not publish that figure.
BlackRock capital market assumptions
US equities 5.2%, international developed 6.8%, emerging markets 5.9%, US aggregate bonds 4.1% (CMA 2026). BlackRock publishes three macro scenarios rather than one path; 5.2% is the probability-weighted expected return per Morningstar's comparison.
Vanguard capital market assumptions
US equities 4.2% to 6.2% (VCMM, run of 30 June 2026). Vanguard publishes probability-weighted ranges rather than point estimates, so it appears in the US equity table but not the four-asset comparison.
AQR capital market assumptions
US equities 6.3%, international developed 6.9%, emerging markets 7.4%, US aggregate bonds 4.9% (CMA 2026).
Research Affiliates capital market assumptions
US equities 3.1%, international developed 7.7%, emerging markets 7.5%, US aggregate bonds 5.1% (Asset Allocation Interactive, January 2026). The most bearish US equity forecast of the fourteen firms compared here.
Schwab capital market assumptions
US equities 5.9%, international developed 7.0%, emerging markets 8.1%, US aggregate bonds 4.8% (Long-Term CME 2026).
Northern Trust capital market assumptions
US equities 6.8%, emerging markets 6.9%, US aggregate bonds 5.0% (CMA 2026). Northern Trust publishes regional equity forecasts rather than a single developed-international figure.
Morningstar capital market assumptions
US equities 5.3%, international developed 7.5%, emerging markets 9.9%, US aggregate bonds 4.5% (2026 Forecast). The 9.9% emerging markets figure is the highest in the comparison.
Invesco capital market assumptions
US equities 4.7%, international developed 5.9%, emerging markets 8.5%, US aggregate bonds 4.5% (CMA 2025, USD).
PGIM capital market assumptions
US equities 5.2%, international developed 6.7%, emerging markets 7.5%, US aggregate bonds 4.7% (Strategic Asset Allocation 2026).
Verus capital market assumptions
US equities 5.4%, international developed 6.8%, emerging markets 6.7%, US aggregate bonds 4.7% (CMA 2026).
Amundi capital market assumptions
US equities 6.1%, international developed 7.5%, emerging markets 7.9% (CMA 2026). Amundi does not publish a US aggregate bond figure in this format.
Meketa capital market assumptions
US equities 6.4%, international developed 7.2%, emerging markets 7.1%, US aggregate bonds 4.9% (Capital Market Expectations 2025).
Callan capital market assumptions
US equities 7.3%, international developed 7.6%, emerging markets 8.2%, US aggregate bonds 4.7% (CMA 2026).
BNY Mellon capital market assumptions
US equities 7.6%, international developed 7.8%, emerging markets 8.1%, US aggregate bonds 4.3% (Secular Outlook 2025). The most bullish US equity forecast in the comparison.
Sources
- J.P. Morgan Long-Term Capital Market Assumptions, 2026 (30th Edition)
- BlackRock Capital Market Assumptions, 2026 (3 scenarios)
- Northern Trust Capital Market Assumptions, 2026 Edition (released Dec 2025)
- Schwab Long-Term Capital Market Expectations, 2026
- Invesco Capital Market Assumptions, 2025 (USD)
- Verus Capital Market Assumptions, 2026
- Meketa Capital Markets Expectations, 2025 (Condensed)
- Callan Capital Market Assumptions, 2026 (interactive chart)
- Research Affiliates Asset Allocation Interactive, January 2026
- GMO 7-Year Asset Class Forecast, January 2026
- AQR Alternative Thinking 2026 Issue 1: Capital Market Assumptions
- Morningstar “Experts Forecast Stock and Bond Returns: 2026 Edition”
- BNY Mellon Secular Outlook 2025 (Visions of the Future)
- PGIM Strategic Asset Allocation Assumptions, 2026
- Amundi Capital Market Assumptions, 2026
- Vanguard Capital Markets Model (VCMM), 2026
- Horizon Actuarial Survey of Capital Market Assumptions, 2024 Edition — 41 respondents, free download
Every house, in detail
One page per firm, each stating the edition its figures came from, the method behind them, and where the published document sits. Sorted most cautious first on US equities.
Figures are the 10-year nominal US equity forecast. “n/p” means the firm publishes assumptions but not a point estimate for US equities.
All houses in one table →Glenn Cameron, CFA
Founder, Portfolio Lab. 25+ years in institutional portfolio management.