I also note from the two sources you gave that you are focusing on your own findings while ignoring that they are contradicted by some of your co-authors in other publications, including one I mention in this article (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2597259).

You state, as an introduction to your Journal of PE article: In a recent paper, “Demystifying Illiquid Assets – Expected Returns for Private Equity,” Ilmanen, Chandra and McQuinn (of AQR) give a perspective on the past, present, and expected future performance of private equity. They conclude that “private equity does not seem to offer as attractive a net-of-fee return edge over public market counterparts as it did 15-20 years ago from either a historical or forward-looking perspective.”

So these researchers agree with me, and disagree with you. That could be what upsets you so much.

The fact that your findings contradict the findings of other scholars gives even more credence to ther conclusions of this four-part series. In PE, because data are so unreliable, researchers can litterally say everything and its opposite. To repeat myself, complexity leads to incomprehensibility.