For the last decade, a steady 70% percent of real estate investment has been going to G7 countries, concentrated in just 10 cities worldwide. But during that period the share of global GDP from these countries has dropped from 45% to 29%. The smart money in the mature economies says that these Asian markets are not transparent and that the traditional primary investment cities will hold top value for another three decades. The fastest growing cities based on GNP are in Asia with the majority of them in India such as Surat, Agra, Bengaluru, Hyperpad. In Africa, Tanzania is growing at 8.1% but Nairobi Kenya is the only city that is in the top 20 that is not in Asia. Experts forecast that as early as 2027, the combined GDP of all Asian cities will exceed that of North American and European cities combined. By 2035 cities in Asia will be 17% higher than the US and Europe.

The default is to continue investing in these same cities in the same countries. To continue doing the same things and expect a different outcome. This should mean that the real estate industry is in the midst of total strategic rethink concerning global investment, trends, valuations, asset classes, and diversified global markets. Example In both pre -2008(QE) and 2014 cross border volume was on the upswing and has been declining since as (QT) home bias lending increased.

(“There is a strong link between gross flows and the literature on home bias in international portfolios. It has been a longstanding stylized fact that international portfolio diversification has occurred much less than implied by models of risk sharing. Lucas (1990) compares international diversification to that predicted by a portfolio model and reviews a range of possible sources of home bias. Kraay et al. (2000) incorporate sovereign risk in such a model to reconcile the predictions of the model to the data. Home bias is thought, broadly, to reflect frictions to capital reallocation; thus, a key aspect of financial integration. (World Bank).