The managers of those funds make money based on deals and they move on before the deal goes south. Principal agent problem.
EDIT: lordnacho explains better: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36751012
Where does the claim that PE debt is a loser come from?
According to one of the top links on google, state pension returns from PE investments is almost twice that of their stock investments if you look at 2000-2021 (11%/yr vs 6.9%/yr)
https://caia.org/blog/2022/07/20/long-term-private-equity-pe...
We're talking about private Equity debt so I would think the 11% would be cash Returns on loans.
If you make 11% per year return on your lending portfolio over multiple decades, how is that not comparable to your stock market gains?
Sure, resell of loans might be harder, but they're paying cash interest.
You're also starting from the assumption that the deals are bad. Why is that?
I think the real answer is more unsettling for some. PE that has volatility but is on net a profitable investment. You can smooth out volatility with volume and by spreading it around.
This is the only explanation that doesn't depend on a source of dumb money that can never learn buying this debt.
I'd be willing to change my opinion I came across data showing that PE debt has net losses over a multi-decade time scale.