Apollo Pushes Back: Asset Manager Defends Ties with Insurer Amid Rising Regulatory Heat

In a climate of heightened scrutiny, the private equity giant argues rivals face bigger exposure, shifting the focus of debate over insurers’ related-party assets.

August 2025 – Private equity powerhouse Apollo Global Management has launched a sharp rebuttal to growing criticism over the close links between its asset management business and Athene, the life insurer it acquired control of in 2022. In a new investor filing, Apollo defends the structure as “strategically sound and aligned with long-term policyholder security,” while pointing the regulatory spotlight squarely on its rivals.

The move comes as U.S. life insurers face increasing questions from regulators and policymakers about the safety of so-called “related-party assets.” These are investments placed by insurers into affiliated asset managers or vehicles, a practice that has mushroomed since private equity groups began acquiring large insurance platforms.

Rising Tensions Between Regulators and Insurers

In recent months, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) and state regulators have signaled unease over the concentration of policyholder premiums in complex, often opaque, private credit strategies. The concern: insurers may be taking on hidden risks by steering billions into affiliated funds rather than spreading exposure across more traditional, diversified markets.

Apollo, whose insurance arm Athene manages roughly $300 billion in assets, has long been a poster child for the marriage of private equity and insurance. Its model has attracted both admiration and suspicion. Critics argue the firm’s structure creates conflicts of interest, as the asset manager profits from fees while the insurer bears potential downside risk.

In its latest filing, however, Apollo contends that its practices are both conservative and transparent. “Apollo and Athene maintain rigorous firewalls and oversight processes,” the firm wrote, emphasizing that “independent governance mechanisms ensure investment decisions prioritize policyholder obligations.”

Rivals in the Crosshairs

Rather than dwell on its own operations, Apollo’s filing devotes significant space to pointing out that other major U.S. life insurers—several without private equity ownership—have built even larger related-party portfolios. Without naming names, Apollo’s statement alludes to rivals whose exposures are “two to three times the level” of Athene’s, highlighting the irony that scrutiny has disproportionately fallen on private equity–backed platforms.

Industry analysts note that while Apollo is unusually vocal, it is far from alone in facing questions. KKR, Blackstone, Carlyle, and Brookfield have all pushed heavily into insurance, seeking steady streams of capital to support private market strategies. The tension lies in whether these models align with the traditional regulatory expectation of conservatism in the life insurance business.

Policyholder Security vs. Market Innovation

For regulators, the balancing act is delicate. On one hand, private equity ownership has given insurers new tools for yield generation in an era of persistently low interest rates. On the other, the shift raises fears that insurers may one day struggle to meet obligations if riskier bets sour.

“Apollo is trying to frame the debate as a competitive fairness issue,” said Emily Crawford, a financial policy researcher at Georgetown University. “But regulators are more concerned with systemic stability. If related-party investments distort incentives, it doesn’t matter whether the exposure is concentrated at Apollo or elsewhere—the risk is shared across the market.”

Investors Caught in the Middle

For institutional investors, including pension funds and sovereign wealth funds that commit capital to Apollo’s strategies, the filing serves as both a defense and a warning. The company insists its model is misunderstood, but by naming competitors it also signals an industry-wide vulnerability that could reshape regulations in the months ahead.

Markets have so far reacted cautiously. Apollo’s shares held steady following the disclosure, though analysts at JPMorgan warned that “regulatory overhang remains a significant factor for the sector through 2026.”

Looking Ahead

With Washington increasingly skeptical of private equity’s reach into “Main Street” businesses, the insurance industry is likely to remain in the crosshairs. Apollo’s counteroffensive suggests the firm will not passively absorb criticism, but whether its arguments resonate with regulators remains to be seen.

For now, the spotlight is widening beyond Apollo to the entire life insurance sector. If regulators move toward tighter limits on related-party holdings, the consequences could ripple across Wall Street and beyond—reshaping how retirement savings are invested, and who ultimately benefits from the vast pools of capital insurers command.