At the Hubbis India Wealth Management Forum 2026, the panel examined the accelerating interest among Indian investors in building wealth beyond the domestic market. The discussion considered whether this represents a temporary response to currency and market performance or a more permanent change in how wealthy families think about diversification, opportunity and geographic risk.

The conversation also explored the practical routes available to investors, the growing sophistication of offshore products, the distinction between investing globally and genuinely externalising wealth, and the emerging role of Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT City). Across these themes, the panel presented a client base whose ambitions, family connections and opportunity set are increasingly international, even as regulation continues to shape how capital can move.

Chair: Brett Kennedy, Managing Director – Investments, Hubbis

Panellists

  • Anuj Kapoor, MD & CEO – Private Wealth and Alternatives, JM Financial

  • Moin Ladha, Partner, Corporate and Commercial, Regulatory Practice, Khaitan & Co

  • Nirav Dinesh Kumar Shah, Founder and Managing Director, FAME Advisory DMCC

  • Clarence Chan, Singapore CEO and Head of Investment Oversight and Client Solutions, APAC, BNY Investments

  • Vikas Satija, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Shriram Wealth

  • Manish Kathuria, Chief Business Officer, Kotak Neo

 

Key Takeaways

  • Global diversification is increasingly becoming a structural component of Indian family portfolios rather than simply a tactical response to rupee weakness or relative market performance.

  • The rise of the global Indian is reinforcing this trend as education, residence, business interests, consumption and family relationships increasingly extend across borders.

  • Indian investors are looking offshore not only for geographic diversification, but also for sectors, strategies and investment structures that may be difficult to access domestically.

  • The Liberalised Remittance Scheme (LRS) remains an important route for resident individuals, but regulatory limits mean larger families need to distinguish carefully between global investment, dollarisation and genuine externalisation.

  • Offshore investment products are evolving beyond traditional feeder funds towards exchange-traded funds (ETFs), bespoke strategies and increasingly accessible separately managed accounts (SMAs).

  • Technology and scale are helping bring some institutional-style investment solutions to private clients at lower minimum investment levels.

  • Families with surplus capital following business exits, listings or private-equity transactions are increasingly considering how that wealth should be diversified rather than automatically redeployed into the operating business.

  • GIFT City is developing as a useful platform for international investment and inbound capital, but should not be treated as synonymous with moving family wealth permanently outside India.

  • Greater retail participation could become an important next stage in GIFT City’s evolution, particularly through frameworks that facilitate access to global securities and products.

  • The new offshore playbook is therefore becoming more layered: advisers need to establish the client’s objective first and only then determine the appropriate jurisdiction, route, structure and investment solution.

 

Global Diversification Is Becoming Structural

The panel opened by considering whether the current enthusiasm for offshore investing is principally a reaction to the rupee and recent relative market performance.

While those factors have accelerated interest, the broader view was that something more durable is taking place.

Family offices that might only occasionally have discussed international allocation several years ago are increasingly treating it as a standard portfolio question. The attraction is not simply the recent performance of one market against another, but the breadth of investments available globally.

Certain sectors and themes may have limited representation in India, while global markets can provide access to businesses, technologies and investment strategies unavailable domestically. Artificial intelligence, semiconductors and other specialist industries were cited as examples of opportunity sets that can encourage investors to look beyond their home market.

“Market performance may accelerate the conversation, but it is no longer the reason for the conversation,” said a panellist. “Families increasingly see global diversification as something that should exist regardless of which market happens to be leading today.”

The panel therefore expected international allocation to remain relevant even if the rupee stabilises or Indian markets return to stronger relative performance.

The argument is fundamentally one of diversification. A family whose business, property, financial assets and economic exposure are already concentrated in India may increasingly see international investments as a way to reduce that concentration rather than as a judgement against the domestic market.

The Global Indian Is Pulling Portfolios Overseas

The shift is also being driven by changes in the families themselves.

Children are increasingly educated overseas, careers and businesses extend into other countries, and travel and consumption have become more international. For many wealthy families, the distinction between a domestic life and an offshore portfolio is therefore becoming less meaningful.

“The family’s world has already become global,” said a panellist. “The portfolio is now starting to catch up with the way the family actually lives.”

This has particular relevance for the next generation. Younger family members may study abroad, establish businesses overseas or eventually become resident in another jurisdiction. Planning for those possibilities can begin well before a permanent move takes place.

At the same time, substantial pools of liquidity are being generated through business exits, listings, private-equity transactions and partial stake sales. Where that capital is no longer required inside the operating business, families face a broader question about where and how it should be deployed.

Rather than reinvesting everything domestically, some are looking internationally for a wider range of options and a more geographically balanced family balance sheet.

The panel emphasised that Indian equities themselves represent only part of the global investment universe. For families with sufficient scale and sophistication, international exposure can therefore be viewed as an expansion of the opportunity set rather than a rejection of India’s growth story.

Sending Money Overseas Is Not the Same as Investing Globally

One important distinction in the discussion was between moving capital and designing an international investment strategy.

For resident individuals, the Liberalised Remittance Scheme (LRS) provides a well-established route through which capital can be remitted overseas within regulatory limits. The current limit is USD250,000 per resident individual per financial year.

The panel also pointed to the increasing use of LRS for investment purposes. Approximately USD2.6 billion was remitted for overseas equity and debt investments during the 2025–26 financial year, reinforcing the broader direction of travel.

But sending money abroad does not in itself constitute an investment strategy.

Families still need to establish what they are trying to achieve. The objective might be geographic diversification, currency exposure, access to a particular sector, provision for children living overseas or the creation of a genuinely international family wealth structure.

“You have to distinguish the route from the objective,” said a panellist. “Getting money from one country to another is not the same thing as deciding what that capital is supposed to do once it gets there.”

That distinction becomes more significant as wealth increases. Regulatory frameworks around LRS, Overseas Direct Investment (ODI) and Overseas Portfolio Investment (OPI) each have specific requirements and should not be treated as interchangeable mechanisms for moving private family capital offshore.

For advisers, the first task is therefore to determine the purpose of the international allocation before identifying the appropriate route.

The Offshore Product Set Is Expanding

The investment proposition available to global Indian families is also becoming considerably broader.

Traditional feeder funds and cross-listed products remain part of the landscape, but global asset managers are increasingly offering ETFs, customised mandates and more targeted investment solutions.

Active ETFs have become one area of development, allowing established investment strategies to be packaged in formats that can be accessed through international exchanges.

At the same time, larger clients and financial intermediaries are increasingly seeking curated strategies built around a particular opportunity, investment outcome or portfolio requirement rather than simply selecting from an existing range of funds.

“The evolution is from saying, ‘Here is our global fund,’ to asking, ‘What exposure or outcome are you actually trying to create?’” said a panellist.

That represents an important development for Indian private wealth.

As clients become more sophisticated, the offshore proposition can move beyond gaining generic exposure to US or global equities. Portfolios can potentially target particular sectors, geographies, risk profiles or return objectives, providing advisers with more flexibility when integrating international investments into the wider family portfolio.

The geographic opportunity set can also change over time. The dominant conversation today may involve US technology or AI-related businesses; future opportunities could emerge from Japan, Korea, Europe or other markets.

The structural case for going global therefore rests partly on access to a changing world of investment opportunities rather than any permanent preference for a single offshore market.

Institutional-Style Solutions Are Moving Down the Wealth Curve

The panel also highlighted how technology and product innovation are changing access to investment structures once reserved for the largest clients.

Separately managed accounts (SMAs), for example, have historically been associated with ultra high net worth (UHNW) investors able to commit very substantial amounts to an individual mandate.

That threshold is beginning to come down for some strategies.

Technology, operational scale and investment platforms can allow customised or separately managed solutions to be offered in smaller denominations, making them relevant to a broader segment of private wealth.

This does not eliminate minimum investment requirements, nor does every institutional strategy lend itself to smaller portfolios. But the direction is significant.

“Solutions that once required tens of millions of dollars can increasingly be delivered in smaller pieces,” said a panellist. “That begins to change what private clients can realistically access.”

For global asset managers, this also alters the partnership model.

Rather than simply supplying a fund, managers can work with banks, wealth firms and other intermediaries to design and operate investment solutions while the client-facing institution retains the primary relationship.

That combination of global manufacturing and local advice could become increasingly important as Indian investors demand more sophisticated offshore exposure without wanting to assemble every component independently.

Externalisation Requires a Different Conversation

The panel was careful to distinguish portfolio diversification from genuine externalisation of family wealth.

A resident Indian investing overseas through an approved route remains in a different position from a family that has developed an international business footprint, has non-resident family members or is building a longer-term offshore structure.

That distinction matters because the available regulatory routes, tax considerations and planning objectives are different.

Families establishing businesses internationally may have legitimate commercial reasons to use ODI structures, while other investors may access overseas securities through permitted portfolio routes. But neither should be described as an unrestricted mechanism for transferring private family wealth outside India.

The panel therefore framed offshore planning as an objective-led exercise.

For some families, international investment exposure may be sufficient. Others may want to create assets for children who have become non-resident, support an overseas business or develop a more permanent international family footprint.

“Global investment, dollarisation and externalisation are three different conversations,” said a panellist. “The right solution depends on which of those the family is actually trying to achieve.”

That becomes particularly important where future relocation is involved. Families need to plan with an understanding of both Indian regulations and the legal and tax framework of the destination jurisdiction rather than treating the departure itself as the beginning of the planning process.

GIFT City Is a Bridge, Not a Substitute for Offshore Planning

GIFT City occupied much of the latter part of the discussion, with panellists broadly positive about its development while also stressing what it can and cannot currently do.

The GIFT International Financial Services Centre (GIFT IFSC) has expanded considerably as an ecosystem for funds, asset managers and other financial institutions. Official figures cited in the transcript’s editorial research show 233 registered fund management entities and 406 schemes as at 31 March 2026, with USD39.08 billion of cumulative commitments. The majority of investment activity remains directed into India.

For Indian investors, the centre can provide a platform through which certain international investments and foreign-currency exposures become more accessible.

However, the panel resisted treating it as equivalent to permanently externalising family wealth.

“GIFT City can give investors international exposure and a route to dollar-denominated assets,” said a panellist. “That does not make it the same as creating an offshore family structure.”

This distinction reflects the regulatory architecture. GIFT IFSC is regulated by the International Financial Services Centres Authority (IFSCA), while Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and foreign-exchange rules can still apply to resident remittances and relevant transactions.

The panel nevertheless saw considerable potential as the framework matures, more managers establish themselves there and longer operating track records emerge.

Retail Participation Could Be the Next Catalyst

The next stage of GIFT City’s development may extend beyond family offices and high net worth (HNW) investors.

Panellists identified retail participation as a potentially important differentiator, particularly as infrastructure develops for access to international securities.

The regulatory framework for Global Access Providers was highlighted in this context. These providers can facilitate access to foreign-listed products within the applicable IFSCA framework, although resident participation remains subject to relevant foreign-exchange and LRS requirements.

If that ecosystem develops successfully, international investing could become more accessible to a substantially larger pool of Indian investors.

“The real change may come when global access stops being something associated mainly with family offices and the very wealthy,” said a panellist. “Retail participation has the potential to broaden the market considerably.”

The panel did not suggest that this transition would happen immediately. GIFT City remains an evolving financial centre, and regulatory stability, product development, operating track records and investor familiarity will all take time.

Global managers are accustomed to seeing markets open gradually, and the discussion suggested that India is likely to follow a similar progression rather than move directly to a fully liberalised model.

The New Offshore Playbook Starts With the Objective

The panel ultimately rejected the idea that taking wealth global can be reduced to choosing between India and offshore markets.

For some families, the requirement is simply a diversified international portfolio. For others, it is access to sectors and strategies that are difficult to replicate domestically. Some need foreign-currency exposure, while others are preparing for children, businesses or family structures that will genuinely sit outside India.

Each objective can lead to a different route.

LRS, GIFT City, global funds, ETFs, SMAs, ODI, OPI and offshore structures all have potential roles, but they are not substitutes for one another and do not solve the same problem.

The adviser’s role is therefore to establish the purpose first, understand the regulatory boundaries and then build the investment or structural solution around them.

Global diversification may have been accelerated by recent market and currency conditions, but the panel’s broader conclusion was that the change runs deeper. Indian families themselves are becoming global, the investment universe is already global, and product access is becoming progressively more sophisticated.

The new offshore playbook is therefore less about sending money abroad than deciding which part of a family’s wealth should become global, why it should do so and which route can achieve that objective effectively.