A Tale of Three Cities: Oslo, Riyadh, Singapore

A VCII Thought  Piece: What Norway’s GPFG, Saudi Arabia’s PIF, and Singapore’s GIC each do uniquely well, and how their value creation moats really work

If you want the full spectrum of sovereign investing models in 2025, start with Oslo, Riyadh, and Singapore. Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global is the world’s largest, a benchmark for transparency and stewardship. Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund is a nation-builder, wiring capital into industrial policy and new-economy platforms. Singapore’s GIC is the quiet compounding engine, a disciplined whole-portfolio allocator that treats liquidity, risk, and time as its core instruments. Together they show where sovereign wealth funds converge with private equity and where they never will.

Oslo: The universal owner and steward

Superpower: Scale, transparency, and policy stability that compound trust
Forte: Low-cost exposure to global beta with active ownership and exclusion rules that shape markets

Norway’s GPFG sits near the top of every ranking by size and publishes more data than most asset owners on earth. It reported a 5.7 percent return in the first half of 2025 and a fund value of about 19.6 trillion kroner at mid-year, with a live database of every holding and twice-yearly updates. That evidence culture is itself an edge.   

Its governance is explicit. Ethical guidelines drive exclusions and observations, and the 2025 climate action plan sets expectations for stewardship, risk, and engagement. The design choice is clear: be the universal owner that can hold the whole market and still move company behavior. That makes GPFG a natural anchor for exits, IPOs, and secondaries because buyers trust its process and its data lineage.  

Moat in one line: Radical transparency plus policy continuity equals the lowest friction cost of capital in sovereign investing.

Riyadh: The nation-builder and catalyst

Superpower: Mandate plus speed, with domestic platform building at scale
Forte: Turning industrial policy into investable assets, then crowding in global capital

Saudi Arabia’s PIF is the operating arm of Vision 2030. It backs giga-projects and sector platforms in tourism, housing, logistics, sports, semis, and healthcare, while growing internationally where it can accelerate capability transfer. The official program targets and PIF’s own reporting show rapid asset growth, rising annual deployment, and a clear tilt to local value creation.  

The fund’s 2024 annual communication highlighted AuM near 0.9 to 1.0 trillion dollars and set up 2025 for even higher yearly deployment, while external trackers now estimate PIF above 1.1 trillion. The signal is consistent even if sources differ on precise figures. The direction of travel is scale, domestic pipes, and co-investment partnerships with global managers across equity and private credit.  

Moat in one line: Proprietary deal flow from nation-building plus willingness to underwrite greenfield risk creates assets others cannot source.

Singapore: The total-portfolio optimizer

Superpower: Liquidity discipline and whole-portfolio construction across cycles
Forte: Compounding through reference portfolios, risk budgeting, and patient alternatives

GIC measures itself on rolling 20-year real returns. In its 2024-25 report it printed a 20-year real return of 3.8 percent and a 20-year nominal USD return of 5.7 percent, reinforcing its identity as a reserve manager first and stock-picker second. It leans into a reference portfolio approach, keeps public disclosures tight, and emphasizes diversification and liquidity even as it grows alternatives.  

The practical effect is a consistent allocator that can be quick on secondaries, infrastructure, and private credit without losing sight of ballast. GIC’s conservatism can look understated compared with operator-builders, yet the combination of liquidity discipline and deep analytics is a real edge when exit windows narrow.  

Moat in one line: A total-portfolio operating system that converts liquidity, time, and diversification into staying power.

How their value creation levers really differ

• Mandate and clock
  GPFG optimizes risk-adjusted exposure with stewardship across liquid markets. PIF optimizes national capability and jobs while seeking financial return, so it funds platforms others will not. GIC optimizes real purchasing power across decades, which pushes it to balance drawdowns and dry powder. The Santiago Principles give all three a shared governance language, but the mandate is the decisive variable.  

• Control and leverage
  GPFG rarely seeks control and runs limited leverage at portfolio level. PIF is comfortable as a sponsor or catalyst with platform control when it drives national outcomes. GIC often prefers minority stakes or fund partnerships, reserving control for specific strategic assets. Public profiles and reporting cadence reflect those choices.  

• Operating model
  GPFG’s edge is cost, data, and voice as a universal owner. PIF’s edge is building things that did not exist yesterday, from giga-projects to new financial pipes, often with international partners. GIC’s edge is reference-portfolio discipline and a willingness to be boring when markets are noisy.  

• Exit engineering
  GPFG is the exit, frequently the natural buyer or liquidity provider. PIF manufactures exits by creating domestic listings and sellable platforms. GIC’s liquidity rules and pacing let it be a steady counterparty in secondaries and consortiums when others flinch.

Where they quietly converge in 2025

• Bigger private-markets footprints
  All three have been growing exposure to illiquid alternatives and private credit, using data and operating telemetry to underwrite and monitor assets. The global sovereign cohort shows rising allocations to fixed income for ballast, steady equities, and material alternatives exposure. 

• Data and evidence culture
  GPFG publishes holdings and exclusion rationales. GIC sharpens the 20-year lens and moves capital with a whole-portfolio view. PIF’s annual reports, program dashboards, and partner mandates make progress legible to global markets and domestic stakeholders. Different styles, same direction: more evidence, faster.

• Partnership as a growth multiplier
  Riyadh anchors regional funds with global managers, Oslo co-votes as a universal owner, Singapore forms long-run partnerships in infrastructure and secondaries. In each case, the partnership creates optionality when primary exits pause. 

What this means for company leaders and co-investors

• Match the mandate
  If you are building an industrial platform or domestic capability, PIF is the catalytic sponsor with the highest tolerance for greenfield risk. If you are preparing a buyer-grade evidence pack for a broad market exit, GPFG sits on the other side as a natural owner that values transparency and policy stability. If your business needs a patient minority investor who will not force a clock, GIC fits the profile.

• Bring operating proof, not theater
  Across Oslo, Riyadh, and Singapore, the signal is the same as in our VCII work: publish the playbook, instrument unit economics, run a weekly cadence, and show buyer-grade proof early. Cohorts, contribution dollars, price realization, working capital, and data lineage beat glossy decks every time.

• Engineer optionality
  Treat liquidity like a product. Club structures, continuation options, and staged listings give each of these funds a path that fits their clock. It also gives you leverage in volatile windows.

The bottom line

Three cities, three different moats. Oslo’s edge is trust at scale. Riyadh’s edge is nation-building turned into investable platforms. Singapore’s edge is total-portfolio discipline that keeps compounding when conditions are rough. If you align to the right moat and bring operating evidence, you can turn each model into a superpower for your deal.

Copyright © 2025 VCI Institute. All rights reserved.

Selected sources

• NBIM half-year 2025 results, fund value, and investment database. Norges Bank Investment Management+2Norges Bank Investment Management+2

• NBIM climate action and ethical exclusions framework. Norges Bank Investment Management+1

• PIF program targets, annual report 2024 communication, and giga-project mandate. Saudi Vision 2030+2pif.gov.sa+2

• PIF deployment and partnerships with global managers. Bloomberg.com+1

• GIC 2024-25 report and performance methodology. gic.com.sg+1

• Invesco Global Sovereign Asset Management Study 2025 on asset allocation trends. Invesco

• Global SWF ranking data for comparative context. globalswf.com