BREIT Review: Is It a Good Investment? NAV, Yield, Redemptions

Updated October 14, 2026 — what BREIT is, what it pays, what it costs and whether you can leave. BREIT is Blackstone Real Estate Income Trust, a non-traded NAV REIT: no ticker, not an ETF, shares bought and sold monthly at net asset value. As of August 31, 2026 (the newest NAV on file) aggregate NAV was $57.73 billion and Class I NAV per share was $14.6850. The Class I average annualized distribution rate was 4.6% in the second quarter (Class S 3.8%); Class I total return was 5.2% for the first half of 2026 and 9.4% a year since inception (Form 10-Q, June 30, 2026). Fees: a 1.25% management fee and a 12.5% performance allocation above a 5% total return, plus up to 3.5% upfront and 0.85% a year servicing on Class S-2 and T-2 (Class I pays none). The exit: BREIT fulfilled all repurchase requests in the first half of 2026 ($2.1 billion), 0.6% of NAV a month in the second quarter against a 2% monthly and 5% quarterly cap. Risks the filings show: leverage of 44% on BREIT's own measure, about $5.8 billion of loan principal due in the rest of 2026 and $7.6 billion in 2027, and distributions that ran about 1.6x AFFO in the first half (our arithmetic). The 10-Q reports no material legal proceedings at June 30, and Katharine Keenan signs it as Chief Executive Officer. Our rating stays 3.0 out of 5. As of October 14 nothing newer than the October 5 8-K has been filed: the September 30 NAV and the third-quarter repurchases are still to come.

Updated October 10, 2026 — redemptions: every request paid through June 30, and what is not filed yet. BREIT's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2026 (filed August 7) says that for the six months ended June 30 BREIT “fulfilled $2.1 billion of repurchases requested, which represents all repurchase requests received for the six months ended June 30, 2026.” Repurchases were 0.9%, 0.8% and 0.8% of NAV in January, February and March and 0.6% in each of April, May and June, against a cap of 2% of NAV a month and 5% a quarter; the FY2025 Form 10-K reports the same for 2025 ($6.2 billion, all requests satisfied). The 10-Q also reports $1.1 billion raised against $0.9 billion repurchased in the second quarter, distributions for the first half 100% covered by cash flow from operating activities, and the sale of 79 self storage properties, which BREIT calls its “exit from the self storage segment.” Nothing newer on repurchases exists yet: July, August and September repurchases arrive with the third-quarter 10-Q, and the September 30 NAV with the next Form 424B3 supplement; as of this update the latest NAV filed is August 31. The newest filings are the September 29 8-K (September distribution of $0.0554 gross per share, paid on or about October 20) and the October 5 8-K (an October 1 private sale of Class S-2 shares for about $21.6 million). The month-by-month numbers are in the new section below.

Updated September 30, 2026 — August NAV and a change at the top of Blackstone Real Estate. Per the Form 424B3 supplement filed September 16, 2026, at August 31, 2026 aggregate NAV was $57,730,320,000 across 3,927,992,000 shares and units, and NAV per share was Class I $14.6850, Class S and S-2 $14.6722, Class T and T-2 $14.4170, Class D and D-2 $14.3051, Class C $17.3838 and Class L $14.7388; Class I total return for August was 0.6%. The same supplement reports that on September 8 Blackstone named David Levine and Giovanni Cutaia Global Co-Heads of Blackstone Real Estate and that "Nadeem Meghji, the former Global Head has stepped down and is departing Blackstone at year-end after 19 years with the firm." The eight months of 2026 are in the table below. The forensic analysis further down was built on the March 31, 2026 filings and every figure in it carries its date; the ratings, the gate history and the valuation dispute are unchanged. BREIT has also opened private share-class channels that this review does not cover — see BREIT's eleven share classes.

Update, August 2026: BREIT's Form 10-Q filed August 7, 2026 reports repurchases of 0.6% of NAV in each of April, May and June against a 2%-per-month cap, with all requests satisfied, and a June 30 Class I NAV of $14.5256. Current figures for the whole category are in which non-traded REITs are actually paying redemptions.

Naming note: This review covers Blackstone Real Estate Income Trust (SEC CIK 1662972). A separate, much smaller non-traded REIT — Brookfield Real Estate Income Trust (formerly Oaktree REIT) — is also abbreviated "BREIT." They are unrelated and behaved very differently: Blackstone's pro-rated redemptions for 15 months, while Brookfield's authorized repurchases above its caps rather than gate. Throughout this page, "BREIT" means Blackstone's.

Can you get your money out of BREIT in 2026? Requests and repurchases month by month

BREIT's plan limits repurchases to 2% of aggregate NAV a month and 5% a quarter. Repurchases are made at the transaction price on the repurchase date, which is generally the prior month's NAV per share, except that shares not outstanding for at least one year are repurchased at 98% of that price (the Early Repurchase Deduction, which does not apply to shares acquired through the distribution reinvestment plan). The table lists every month in BREIT's last three filings; each filing states that all repurchase requests were satisfied, so repurchases equal requests.

What the table says. In the second quarter BREIT repurchased 59,313,330 shares, 1.8% of NAV, about 36% of the 5% quarterly cap (our arithmetic), and the 10-Q's footnote reads “All repurchase requests under our share repurchase plan were satisfied.” Repurchases fell from 0.9% of NAV in January to 0.6% in each month of the second quarter. For 2025 as a whole BREIT fulfilled $6.2 billion of requests, all of them. During the 15 months from November 2022 to January 2024 the picture was the opposite; see the gate timeline.

Money is also coming in. The 10-Q reports that BREIT raised $1.1 billion from selling shares and BREIT OP units in the second quarter and repurchased $0.9 billion. BREIT's own July 23 update says the second quarter was its first quarter of positive net flows in nearly four years and that June was the fifth consecutive month of positive net flows; that is the company's statement, not an audited figure.

What the numbers do not guarantee. The same 10-Q says “We have in the past received, and may in the future receive, repurchase requests that exceed the limits under our Share Repurchase Plan,” and that in that case requests are satisfied pro rata after requests due to death, disability or divorce and other limited exceptions, with unsatisfied requests to be resubmitted after the start of the next month or quarter. The board can also modify or suspend the plan. Repurchases for July, August and September will appear in the third-quarter 10-Q; until then, June 30 is the last month on file.

Is BREIT doing well in 2026? The eight months as filed

This is the question the search results ask, and the only honest answer is the company's own monthly numbers, each from its Form 424B3 NAV supplement. Class I is the share class with no selling commission or servicing fee; the other classes return slightly less.

Eight positive months. Class I NAV per share rose 3.9%, from $14.1339 to $14.6850, and with distributions reinvested the eight monthly returns compound to about 7.1% (our arithmetic on figures the supplements round to 0.1%). Aggregate NAV grew by $3.45 billion while the share and unit count grew 2.3%. The 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30 puts the Class I year-to-date total return at 5.2% (Class S 4.7%) and the inception-to-date total return at 9.4% a year, against 9.3% in the FY2025 10-K. On BREIT's own numbers, 2026 has been a good year so far, and the NAV shows it in one line most readers skip: the accrued performance participation allocation, the adviser's 12.5% share of total return above a 5% hurdle, was $152.1 million at August 31, up from $99.9 million a month earlier. In 2023 and 2024 total return did not clear the hurdle and "no performance participation allocation expense was recognized"; in 2022 it was $742.7 million (FY2024 10-K).

What moved in August. The component table in the September 16 supplement shows consolidated real estate down $1.61 billion (to $89.37 billion; the part allocable to BREIT from $80.1 billion to $78.6 billion), consolidated debt down $668 million (to $53.34 billion), and the net equity in unconsolidated entities up $701 million, with BREIT's share of their gross real estate rising from $46.9 billion to $48.2 billion. The supplement does not name the transactions, and we do not guess them. Money raised through its DST program went from $156.3 million to $230.8 million.

Two things a monthly return does not tell you. It is an appraisal-based number set by the adviser and reviewed by an independent valuation adviser, and the dispute over whether it reflects what the assets would fetch today is below. And it says nothing about whether you can leave: the most recent quarter on file (the 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30) shows repurchases of about 0.6% of NAV a month, all requests paid, against a 2% monthly cap. That is the number to watch in each 10-Q, not the monthly return.

Why this review exists: BREIT is the reason "non-traded REIT" became a warning

CrowdfundedWealth has spent 2026 building a forensic map of the non-traded NAV REIT category — the perpetual-life, monthly-NAV vehicles that sit between a public REIT ETF and a private real estate fund. We have covered the vehicles that kept their redemption windows open through the 2022-2024 downturn — JLL Income Property Trust and Nuveen Global Cities REIT, both of which honored 100% of requests and, in Nuveen's case, exceeded its own cap rather than gate — and ranked all of them in our forensic ranking of 14 non-traded NAV REITs, where BREIT's gating record weighs against it. Our NAV REIT vs interval fund guide explains why that discretionary gate is the category's defining structural risk. This review covers the vehicle on the other side of that line, and the largest of them all: Blackstone's BREIT, the fund whose 15-month redemption gate wrote the popular narrative that "non-traded REITs trap your money."

That narrative is half right. BREIT did pro-rate redemptions for 15 months — that part is true and verifiable in the filings. But the lazy version of the story ("Blackstone froze investors") is wrong: BREIT returned more than $15 billion to redeeming investors during the gate, every month, up to its caps. The accurate, useful framing is the one the filings support: the cap stopped being an extreme backstop and became the operating ceiling for over a year, and an investor who needed all of their money on a specific date in 2023 could not get it.

This review is built from primary SEC EDGAR filings under CIK 1662972 — the FY2024 Form 10-K, the 2026 424B3 NAV supplements, the January 2023 8-K announcing the University of California venture, and Blackstone's own shareholder letters — cross-checked against contemporaneous reporting and the independent valuation critiques. The conclusion the filings support is a 3.0: a credibly-sponsored, well-positioned portfolio carrying real, disclosed liquidity and valuation risk that the marketing does not foreground.

The gate: a 15-month timeline, not a one-month headline

The single most important fact about BREIT is the duration of the redemption limit, because the headlines compressed it into a December 2022 event. The filings and contemporaneous disclosures show it ran for 15 months.

Two things to take from this table. First, the pro-ration lasted from November 2022 to January 2024 — 15 months — not the single quarter most coverage implies. Second, even the "recovery" is more nuanced than the press release: in March 2024, one month after the celebrated 100%-fulfillment milestone, requests again exceeded the quarterly cap, and in May and June 2024 they exceeded the monthly and quarterly caps; each time the board had to approve going over its own limit. The honest read is that redemption demand normalized in 2024, but the structural ceiling never went away — it is still there, in the prospectus, waiting for the next stress event.

The necessary fairness point: every NAV REIT has the same 2%/5% caps, and BREIT's are fully disclosed in its offering documents. The caps are legal and were not a surprise to anyone who read the prospectus. What BREIT proved is that in a real run, the caps bind — which is exactly what JLLIPT and Nuveen Global Cities REIT did not let happen, because their lower leverage gave them room to pay.

Why it had to gate: leverage near 50%

BREIT did not gate because Blackstone is careless. It gated because of arithmetic. The vehicle's leverage was 48% at the end of 2022, as the gate began, 47% at the most recent annual disclosure (December 31, 2025) and 44% at June 30, 2026 — on BREIT's own measure, which the filings say would be higher if its pro rata share of debt inside unconsolidated investments were counted. High leverage in a rising-rate environment does two things at once: it amplifies NAV sensitivity to cap-rate moves, and it limits the cash available to fund redemptions without selling assets into a weak market. When the redemption wave hit, a 48%-levered REIT simply had less room to pay than a 21%-levered one. The vehicles that kept their windows open prove the point by counter-example: Ares Industrial REIT (about 31% leverage at the end of 2022), Apollo's ARIS (0.3x debt/NAV at the end of 2025, 0.4x at June 30, 2026), the low-leverage Invesco Real Estate Income Trust (INREIT), and the credit-structured FS Credit REIT all satisfied 100% of requests through the same window — less leverage and, in FS Credit REIT's case, an amortized-cost loan book that never forced asset sales. BREIT was not alone in rationing, though: KKR's KREST (3.4) pro-rated its quarterly tender offers to as low as 48%, and Cantor Fitzgerald Income Trust (2.3) rationed redemptions to about 17% in March 2026 and to 37-52% a month from April to August — the same arithmetic of demand exceeding the caps, in smaller vehicles.

Compounding the leverage is a maturity wall: about $13.4 billion of BREIT's loan principal falls due from July 2026 through 2027 (our arithmetic from the June 30, 2026 10-Q schedule), and its fixed-rate mortgages, much of them originated during the low-rate era, carry a weighted-average rate of 4.0%. Refinancing that debt at 2026-2027 rates is a real, quantifiable headwind to future NAV and distribution coverage. The 10-Q schedule puts the principal due at $5.84 billion for the rest of 2026, $7.60 billion in 2027 and $4.05 billion in 2028, out of $52.97 billion of loans secured by real estate, of which $34.06 billion is variable-rate (BREIT reports $26.2 billion of interest rate swaps and $19.8 billion of caps against its floating-rate debt, and its total weighted-average rate of 5.0% does not include the effect of the derivatives). This is the same CRE debt maturity dynamic pressuring the entire sector, but BREIT's scale and leverage make it one of the most exposed vehicles to it.

The distribution: a return-of-capital tax label, and a payout above adjusted FFO

Here is the fact aggregator reviews of BREIT almost never state plainly: 100% of BREIT's 2025 distributions were characterized as return of capital for federal income tax purposes. Return of capital is not inherently sinister — it is partly a function of depreciation shielding taxable income, which is normal for real estate — and it is a tax label, not a statement of where the cash came from. On cash, BREIT's own FY2025 10-K says 96% of 2025 distributions were covered by cash flow from operating activities and 4% by net gains from investment realizations, with none from borrowings. The tighter test is adjusted FFO: 2025 distributions of $2.37 billion against AFFO of $1.30 billion, about 1.8x (our arithmetic from the 10-K), so the payout ran well ahead of earnings as BREIT itself adjusts them. The first half of 2026 looks better on both tests: the 10-Q shows $1.19 billion of distributions declared for the six months, 100% covered by cash flow from operating activities and none from indebtedness, against AFFO of $727.9 million, about 1.6x (our arithmetic; AFFO is stated for stockholders and OP unitholders). The Class I average annualized distribution rate was 4.6% in the second quarter (Class S 3.8%). BREIT still reported a GAAP net loss of $851.7 million for the six months, against $2.41 billion for the first half of 2025.

The headline Class I rate — a 4.8% average in 2025 — is therefore not a clean operating yield. It is below BREIT's own 5% performance-fee hurdle, and it has been delivered without a formal cut — but the quality of that yield is the weakest part of the BREIT story. An investor comparing BREIT's 4.8% to a public REIT ETF's distribution should understand they are not the same kind of cash flow.

It is also not the rate every BREIT holder receives. That 4.8% is the Class I figure, and BREIT declares one gross distribution and then deducts a different stockholder servicing fee from each share class, so the class you were sold determines how much of the same declared distribution actually reaches you — within BREIT the Class I holder receives 23.50% more per share than the Class S holder on an identical declaration, and our share-class fee calculator shows what that fee takes from each class using the sponsor's own 8-K. Which class an adviser put you in is rarely presented as a decision, and it is one.

The valuation dispute: is the $14.69 NAV real?

The most contested question about BREIT is whether its stated NAV reflects fair value. The bull case is Blackstone's: private real estate should not be marked to the volatile public-REIT tape, and BREIT's appraisal-based NAV is a more stable, arguably more accurate measure of underlying asset value. The bear case is quantified and serious:

For reference, the September 16 supplement lists the weighted-average assumptions behind BREIT's August 31, 2026 discounted-cash-flow valuations: a discount rate of 7.2% and an exit capitalization rate of 5.4% for rental housing, 7.4% and 5.5% for industrial, and 8.7% and 6.4% for data centers. An exit cap rate is an assumption about a future sale, not the going-in cap rate Chilton estimates, so the two are not directly comparable.

The Chilton critique turns on cap rates: it estimates BREIT marks its portfolio at an implied cap rate near 4.3% versus roughly 5.1% for comparable public residential REITs, and applying the public-market cap rate yields a fair value about a third below the stated NAV. MacKenzie's 2023 tender — a real third party offering to buy BREIT shares — cleared at a roughly 38% discount to the contemporaneous stated NAV. Neither is proof BREIT is mismarked; both are independent signals that the market price of liquidity for BREIT shares has been well below the appraisal NAV. As of this writing there is no confirmed SEC enforcement action on BREIT's valuation — law-firm solicitations exist, but no Wells Notice or formal proceeding has been verified. We mark this as a genuine, unresolved dispute, not a finding of fact, which is why NAV Transparency scores 2.5 rather than lower. A striking real-world data point arrived in December 2025: the Bluerock Total Income+ Real Estate Fund, a large real estate interval fund holding appraisal-based private real estate, converted to an NYSE listing (BPRE) and the open market immediately priced its shares about 38% below the fund's stated NAV — the same magnitude of discount the BREIT critics allege. It is not BREIT, but it is the cleanest public test yet of whether appraisal-based private real estate NAVs hold up when an actual market sets the price. And it is no longer the only test: a growing set of formerly non-traded REITs have now met a public market, and the gap to stated NAV has tracked asset quality — SmartStop Self Storage REIT listed about 48% below its board NAV, the net-lease-industrial Modiv Industrial only about 8% below, and the office-heavy Peakstone Realty Trust about 83% below. The implication for BREIT holders is that the size of any eventual discount, if a market ever prices these shares, will likely depend on how resilient the underlying assets prove to be. (For the broader interval-fund category, see also our reviews of the Apollo Diversified Real Estate Fund and the Versus Capital fund (VCMIX).)

The University of California backstop — and why the math no longer works

In January 2023, at the peak of the run, Blackstone announced that UC Investments would commit $4 billion to BREIT Class I shares, with a structure providing UC a minimum 11.25% annualized net return over roughly six years, backed by $1 billion of Blackstone's own BREIT shares pledged as collateral against any shortfall. It was framed as a high-conviction institutional endorsement; critics (ImpactAlpha and others) framed it as a confidence backstop deployed precisely when BREIT needed to "change the narrative."

The forensic problem is the arithmetic of the guarantee. After BREIT returned -0.5% in 2023 and approximately +2.0% in 2024, the compounding deficit against an 11.25% annual hurdle is large. To deliver UC its 11.25% annualized by the early-2028 measurement window, BREIT Class I would need to compound at well above its historical average for the remaining years — a pace it has hit only once (the +30.2% of 2021). The 2025 recovery to approximately 8.1% helps but does not close the gap. The practical implication: Blackstone's $1 billion collateral pledge is increasingly likely to be called upon unless BREIT materially outperforms in 2026-2027. That is a Blackstone balance-sheet risk, not a retail-investor risk directly — but it tells you how far actual returns have fallen short of the number used to market the deal.

Portfolio: the strongest part of the story

The bull case for BREIT is the portfolio, and it is real. At June 30, 2026, BREIT was 89% rental housing, data centers and industrial/logistics by fair value (our sum of the 10-Q's 42%, 27% and 20%) — three of the best-positioned property sectors of the decade — with minimal exposure to the office and retail sectors that drove the CRE crisis. The mix is moving: six months earlier, at December 31, 2025, the 10-K showed rental housing 44%, industrial 22% and data centers 21%, so data centers gained six points of the portfolio by fair value in one half-year. BREIT owned 4,530 properties at June 30, 2026 (excluding 63,081 single family rental homes included in the fair-value amounts), concentrated in the South (35%), West (28%) and East (20%).

This is a genuinely well-constructed portfolio, and it is why Portfolio Quality scores 4.0 — the single highest line in the breakdown. The data-center concentration in particular has been a tailwind: BREIT deployed billions into pre-leased data-center development in 2025. The caveat is that a high-quality portfolio held inside a 44%-levered wrapper that pays out more than its adjusted FFO does not automatically translate into a high-quality investment — the structure sits between the assets and the investor, and the structure is where the risk lives.

Fees

One practical point the table hides: since the current offering began, Class S, Class D and Class T shares are open only to existing holders through the distribution reinvestment plan, so a new investor buying through an adviser is offered Class I, S-2, D-2 or T-2 shares, which carry the same fee schedule (the FY2025 10-K lists up to 3.5% upfront and 0.85% a year for S-2 and T-2, up to 1.5% and 0.25% for D-2; for T-2 it splits the upfront charge into up to 3.0% selling commission and 0.5% dealer manager fee). The servicing fee comes out of the distribution: in the September 2026 declaration, every class had a gross distribution of $0.0554 per share, Class S and S-2 paid $0.0103 of it as servicing fee for a net of $0.0451, and Class I kept all $0.0554, about 22.8% more per share than Class S (our arithmetic).

The 12.5%-over-5% performance fee is the standard marquee-vehicle carry — the same structure BREIT's peers Starwood SREIT charges, and materially more expensive than Nuveen Global Cities REIT, which charges no performance fee at all. One fairness note: because BREIT returned -0.5% (2023) and approximately +2.0% (2024), both below the 5% hurdle, Blackstone earned no performance fee in those years — the structure did what it is supposed to do. But the 1.25% management fee is charged on $57.73 billion of NAV (August 31, 2026) regardless of performance, every year — and 1.25% is no longer the price of admission to this category, because Morgan Stanley now charges 0.50% on the F-share classes of its own net-lease REIT and J.P. Morgan charges 1.00% on a fund whose distribution is covered out of operations rather than out of capital.

How BREIT compares to the NAV REIT peer set

The comparison is the whole point of CrowdfundedWealth's NAV REIT cluster. BREIT has the biggest sponsor and arguably the best-positioned portfolio of the group — but it sits at the bottom on the one axis that defined the category for retail investors over the last four years: did the exit window stay open? It did not, for 15 months. JLLIPT and Nuveen, smaller and far less famous, did keep it open. For an investor, that is the trade BREIT asks you to accept: a world-class sponsor and portfolio, wrapped in the most leverage and the worst redemption record of the comparable set.

ProsCons

The MacKenzie tender clearing roughly 38% below stated NAV is the same discount the open market applies to listed REITs — which raises the structural question every BREIT investor should ask before buying at full NAV: Non-Traded REIT vs Publicly-Traded REIT walks through why the exchange often prices the same buildings cheaper, with daily liquidity.

FAQ

Verdict

Blackstone BREIT earns 3.0 out of 5 in this forensic SEC-primary-source review. It is the most important vehicle in the non-traded NAV REIT category and, simultaneously, the cautionary case the category is now defined by. The bull facts are real: Blackstone is the deepest-resourced real estate sponsor in the world, the portfolio (approximately 90% rental housing, industrial, and data centers) is among the best-positioned of any large REIT, disclosure is full, and BREIT paid redeeming investors more than $15 billion through the gate rather than freezing them.

The rating sits at 3.0 — not lower — because BREIT is neither defunct, fraudulent, nor frozen, and 2025 returns recovered. But it does not sit higher because the structure carries three serious, disclosed, and under-marketed risks: a 15-month redemption gate that proved the caps bind under stress, a 2025 distribution that ran about 1.8x adjusted FFO (our arithmetic) and was 100% return of capital for tax purposes, and a stated NAV that credible independent analysts argue overstates fair value by as much as a third — all wrapped in 44% leverage on BREIT's own measure, with about $13.4 billion of loan principal due from July 2026 through 2027.

For an investor weighing BREIT, the honest comparison is internal to the category. If you want a non-traded NAV REIT and your priority is sponsor scale and portfolio quality, BREIT leads. If your priority is the thing that actually matters when you need your money — the exit window staying open — then JLL Income Property Trust and Nuveen Global Cities REIT earned higher ratings by running less leverage and never gating. Other diversified peers that kept redemptions open through the same stress include the Ares Real Estate Income Trust (AREIT) (3.7) and Hines Global Income Trust (3.2), though the Hines vehicle's distribution coverage from operations fell to 0% in Q1 2026 — a reminder that "never gated" does not guarantee a covered payout. Read the FY2024 10-K and the latest 424B3 NAV supplement directly before relying on any aggregator summary; the distribution-character and leverage disclosures are the figures that actually matter. Generic informational link only. No affiliate. We take nothing from it.

Sources

Primary SEC EDGAR filings:

• Blackstone Real Estate Income Trust — CIK 1662972 EDGAR filings index
• FY2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K
• 424B3 NAV supplements (2026) — monthly NAV and total return, December 2025 to August 2026 (the last one, Supplement No. 6 filed September 16, 2026, also reports the Blackstone Real Estate leadership change)
• Form 8-K filed August 31, 2026 — August 2026 distributions ($0.0557 gross per share)
• Form 8-K filed September 3, 2026 — September 1 private sale of Class S-2 shares, about $26.5 million
• Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2026, filed August 7, 2026 — monthly repurchases, sources of distributions, leverage, FFO and AFFO, portfolio and the self storage exit
• Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2026, filed May 8, 2026 — January to March repurchases
• FY2025 Form 10-K, filed February 27, 2026 — 2025 repurchases ($6.2 billion, all requests satisfied) and the October to December monthly table
• Form 8-K filed July 24, 2026 — BREIT Q2 2026 stockholder update
• Form 8-K filed September 30, 2026 — September 2026 distributions ($0.0554 gross per share)
• Form 8-K filed October 5, 2026 — October 1 private sale of Class S-2 shares, about $21.6 million
• Form 8-K — University of California strategic venture, filed January 5, 2023

Secondary and analytical sources:

• Commercial Observer — BREIT fulfills 100% of redemption requests, March 2024
• InvestmentNews — BREIT lifts redemption limit
• InvestmentNews — BREIT valuation scrutiny / MacKenzie tender
• Chilton Capital Management — forensic analysis of BREIT, April 2025
• University of California Investments — BREIT strategic venture
• Blackstone — BREIT 2025 year-end shareholder letter

BREIT's share classes differ only in distribution compensation, and the gap is large: we work through what a financial advisor actually costs a real estate investor using BREIT's own filed fee schedule.

For the same load question in the 1031 market, see what DST 1031 deals actually charge.