by Alexander Karais

In the realm of global finance, few topics are as intriguing and elusive as the world's largest family offices. These private wealth management firms, catering to ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWI) and families, operate in a sphere of secrecy and complexity that defies easy analysis. Attempting to compile a definitive list of the largest family offices is a task fraught with challenges, misconceptions, and hidden realities. This article aims to shed light on the reasons behind this opacity and present a more nuanced understanding of the true landscape of global wealth.

The absence of a universal reporting standard for private wealth is a significant obstacle in identifying the world's largest family offices. Each country has its own regulations regarding financial disclosure, and many jurisdictions prioritize privacy over transparency. For instance, in Switzerland, the concept of banking secrecy has been a cornerstone of its financial system for centuries. While recent international pressure has led to some reforms, Swiss banks still maintain a high degree of client confidentiality.

This patchwork of rules creates significant gaps in our understanding of global wealth distribution. For example, the true extent of wealth held by Russian oligarchs became more apparent only after the imposition of international sanctions following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The difficulty in tracing assets held through complex networks of shell companies and offshore accounts highlighted the challenges in accurately assessing private wealth.

Fancy entrances, but what is behind, often stays unknown.

Over the years, many publications and researchers have relied on recycled information, perpetuating potentially outdated or inaccurate data. Few organizations possess the sophisticated business intelligence and deep industry knowledge required to truly understand the intricate world of family offices.

For instance, the widely cited Forbes Billionaires List, while comprehensive, relies heavily on public information and estimates. The methodologies used by such lists often fail to capture the full extent of private wealth. A notable example is the wealth of Vladimir Putin, which Forbes does not include in its rankings due to the difficulty in verifying his assets as well as a certain "political correctness". Some estimates place Putin's wealth as high as $200 billion, which would make him one of the wealthiest individuals globally, yet he doesn't appear on most wealth rankings accounting for many more examples.

Rankings exists around the world, most famously by Forbes, Fortune, Bloomberg, Bilanz or Manager Magazin lists. But often times they appear to be accurate, but are often times only scratching at the surface. One of the reasons is, that the authors often times are journalists and not member of the UHNWI- and Family-Office Scene. Even highly skilled analysts and researches only have a limited view inside this hidden world. Furthermore, there is a certain "national view". In general, they are more excellent marketing and business development tools, which is perfectly fine, rather than accurate insights.

Picture: David Suarez

Many wealth rankings rely heavily on public data, such as stock market valuations and publicly disclosed shareholdings. While this information is readily available, it often fails to capture the true extent of an individual's or family's wealth. Stock valuations can be volatile and may not reflect the actual liquidity or usable wealth of the owner.

Consider the case of Elon Musk, whose net worth is largely tied to his Tesla and SpaceX shareholdings. In 2022, Musk's net worth fluctuated by tens of billions of dollars due to Tesla stock price volatility. This highlights how public market valuations can create a distorted picture of an individual's actual wealth.

Furthermore, internal family agreements, prenuptial agreements or shareholder contracts may restrict the use or sale of these assets. For example, the Walton family, owners of Walmart, have a significant portion of their wealth tied up in Walmart stock. However, they cannot freely sell large portions of their holdings without potentially affecting the stock price or their control over the company.

Teslas Stock going up and down riding the roller coaster, here a last 3 years perspective

Some of the world's wealthiest individuals remain virtually unknown to the public. For instance, an individual owning 10,000 debt-free apartments in New York City for three decades would likely rank among the global top 100 in terms of wealth, yet might never appear on a public list. (most likely fully intended indeed)

A real-world example of this phenomenon is the Cargill-MacMillan family. Despite being one of the wealthiest families in America, with an estimated net worth of over $50 billion, they maintain a low profile. Their wealth is primarily tied to Cargill, Inc., the largest privately held company in the United States. Because Cargill is not publicly traded, the family's wealth is harder to track and often underestimated in public rankings. Similar examples exist in many countries, such as Dieter Schwarz, owner of Lidl and Kaufland, probably one of the Top 3 richest in Germany and after the Walton's one of the largest retailers in the world, yet not sufficiently listed, not transparent.

The ownership of real estate is one of the most deliberate. Most countries do not openly share property ownership information, and a whole industry of lawyers and specialized companies work on hiding the true origin of the beneficial owner. It is globally not uncommon, that families own 5.000, 10.000 or even 20,000 flats and other commercial buildings in top tier cities. The amount of wealth accumulated here is mind-blowing, taking into account that real estate is usually only a part of a diversified portfolio. Furthermore, building the wealth sometimes started 50 or even 100 years ago, so the appreciation in wealth having bought in the 60ties in London, New York or Munich is enormous and usually not know at all to the public and included in rankings. Experiment: try to find out the largest property owners in New York.

Picture: By Tom Ritson

Not every billionaire family employs a dedicated single family office. Some may manage their wealth through an embedded family office within their primary business, while others might rely on a combination of personal oversight and outsourced services.

For example, the Mars family, owners of the Mars confectionery empire, manages their wealth through a combination of structures. While they have a family office, much of their wealth is tied up in the privately held Mars, Incorporated. This diversity in wealth management structures makes it challenging to identify and compare family offices consistently. Another example would be the heirs of the Siemens Fortune, the von Siemens family members, not sharing a combined family office, not even well known individual ones. 

Inherited wealth presents a unique challenge in wealth estimation. Consider a scenario where an individual inherited $1 billion in 1980 and invested it wisely, achieving an average annual yield of 10%. After 44 years, this fortune would have grown to an astounding $62.6 billion.

A real-world example of this is the Pritzker family. Their wealth originated with Nicholas Pritzker, who founded the Hyatt hotel chain. Over generations, the family has diversified its investments, and different branches have pursued various business ventures. Today, there are several Pritzker billionaires, but tracing the growth of their collective wealth over time is extremely challenging due to the compound effect and the diversification of their assets.

A European example is the German von Finck Family, deriving back to Wilhelm von Finck, one of the main industrialist families of his time. Since the early 20th century, the family can be considered billionaires and all heirs belong to the wealthiest Europeans, but details are little known.

Wilhelm von Finck, his family, son August von Finck Senior and August von Finck Junior are closely connected to such huge business empires as Allianz Insurance, Munich RE Insurance, Rothschild and Dreyfus private Bank, von Finck Private Bank, Löwenbräu, Mövenpick, Degussa, SGS SA and many more holdings and family members accounting for a potential Hollywood movie story on its own.

Picture: Wikipedia

The wealth of political leaders and ruling families in certain countries blurs the line between personal and state assets. For instance, the Al Saud family in Saudi Arabia or Vladimir Putin in Russia control vast resources that are challenging to quantify or separate from state funds.

The case of the Al Saud family is particularly illustrative. As the ruling family of Saudi Arabia, their wealth is inextricably linked to the country's vast oil resources. The Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco), most likely the real world's most valuable company, is majority-owned by the Saudi government. Determining what portion of this wealth can be attributed to the royal family versus the state is virtually impossible.

Moreover, sovereign wealth funds like Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF), with assets of over $700 billion, could be considered the world's largest family offices in a sense. The PIF, while technically a state entity, is chaired by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and plays a crucial role in managing the country's (and by extension, the royal family's) wealth.

New Signs of Power and a global leadership perspective. Al-Faisaliah Tower in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Picture: Omar Al-Ghosson

Land ownership, particularly in prime locations, presents another valuation challenge. The Duke of Westminster, Hugh Grosvenor, owns substantial portions of London through the Grosvenor Group and Estates. The value of such holdings is not only immense, but also difficult to accurately assess due to the unique nature of prime real estate.

Let's delve deeper into this example:

The Grosvenor Estate owns approximately 300 acres of prime London land, primarily in Mayfair and Belgravia. This land is held through a combination of freehold (outright ownership) and leasehold arrangements. Leasehold properties generate income through ground rents, but the real value lies in the buildings on the land and their rental income.

To estimate the value of this land:

• 300 acres is equivalent to approximately 1,214,000 square meters.
• Prime London real estate can be valued at around £20,000 ($25,000) per square meter.
• A rough calculation: 1,214,000 m² x £20,000 = £24.28 billion ($30.35 billion)

This estimate is for the land value alone and doesn't account for:

• The value of buildings on the land
• Rental income from properties
• The premium associated with owning contiguous plots in prime locations
• The strategic value of controlling such a significant portion of central London

When these factors are considered, the true value of the Grosvenor Estate's London holdings could be several times higher than the land value alone. This example illustrates the extreme difficulty in accurately valuing land-based wealth, especially when it involves historic and prime real estate holdings.

A similar example in the UK are the Reuben Brothers, Simon and David, being known for a vast ownership of property globally. A counterpart exists in Hong Kong as well, the Hong Kong Land Cooperation or the holding behind it the Jardine Matheson Holdings that is being controlled by the 5th Generation of the Scottish origins Keswick family. The family is listed on the Forbes Hong Kong Top 50 list on rank 34 with a fortune of estimated $ 2.35 billion, which seems to be ridiculously wrong and proves another time the critical thinking needed in this field of research and public articles.

Eaton Square, one of the most prestigious assets within the Grosvenor Estates.

Picture: Alamy

The rise of cryptocurrencies has introduced a new dimension to wealth calculation. The pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, is believed to hold around 1 million bitcoins. At current prices, this would equate to tens of billions of dollars, yet this wealth remains unclaimed and unaccounted for in traditional wealth rankings.

To put this in perspective:

• As of October 2024, 1 million bitcoins would be worth approximately $64 billion (assuming a bitcoin price of $64,000).
• This would place Satoshi Nakamoto among the world's top 100 wealthiest individuals.
• However, these bitcoins have never been moved, and the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto remains unknown. 

This situation raises several questions:

• Should potential cryptocurrency wealth be included in wealth rankings?
• How should dormant cryptocurrency fortunes be valued?
• What are the implications for wealth distribution if these large cryptocurrency holdings are ever mobilized?
• What role do so-called "Crypto Whales" play? Users that hold significant amounts of crypto money, often hidden and not transparent, that can move hole markets as well as up and down the ranking latter in one day.

The Satoshi Nakamoto case exemplifies how new forms of wealth creation can challenge traditional methods of assessing and ranking global fortunes.

The role of so-called "Crypto Whales" and their exact fortune and influence remains largely unknown.

Picture: ii7017

Families in all parts of the world like the Rothschilds and Rockefellers have built vast, diversified wealth over centuries. Accurately assessing their current holdings is extremely challenging due to the complex web of investments, private companies, and assets accumulated over generations. Not even taken the changes of history into account.

The Rothschild family, for instance, has been influential in global finance for over 200 years. Their wealth is spread across multiple branches of the family and numerous business interests:

• Banking and financial services (e.g., Rothschild & Co)
• Wine production (Château Lafite Rothschild)
• Real estate holdings across Europe
• Art collections and other valuable assets

Estimating the collective wealth of the Rothschild family is nearly impossible due to:

• The family's policy of privacy
• The division of wealth among numerous family members
• The diversification of assets across multiple countries and industries
• The historical nature of some assets, making valuation difficult

Some estimates place the Rothschild family's collective wealth at over $400 billion, but this figure is highly speculative. The challenge of assessing such multi-generational wealth highlights the limitations of traditional wealth ranking methodologies.

A classic status symbol of old money is the ownership of vineyards, here in Tuscany, Italy. But the transparency and valuation of such in the old money family ownership spectrum is extremely difficult.

Picture: John Goerend

Some of the world's largest fortunes remain hidden from public view due to the secretive nature of their owners. For example, the Mulliez family, owners of Decathlon, Auchan, and Leroy Merlin, are among the wealthiest in France and Europe, yet their full wealth is rarely accurately reported.

The Mulliez family empire includes:

• Auchan (hypermarkets and supermarkets)
• Decathlon (sporting goods retailer)
• Leroy Merlin (home improvement and gardening retailer)
• Kiabi (clothing retailer)
• Norauto (car parts and services)

The family's wealth is managed through the Association Familiale Mulliez (AFM), a complex structure that includes over 700 family members. Estimates of the family's collective wealth range from €30 billion to €50 billion, but the true figure is difficult to ascertain due to:

• The private nature of their main companies
• The complex ownership structure through AFM
• The family's policy of reinvesting profits into the business
• The geographical spread of their operations across multiple countries

Similarly, the family of Arthur del Prado, founder of ASM International, has spawned multiple billion-dollar companies like ASML and BE Semiconductor Industries, creating a vast but often underreported fortune. ASML, in particular, has become a crucial player in the global semiconductor industry, with a market capitalization exceeding $320 billion as of 2024.

The del Prado family's wealth is challenging to estimate because:

• Much of it is tied up in publicly traded companies, but ownership is dispersed
• The family maintains a low public profile
• The tech industry's volatility affects the valuation of their holdings

These examples highlight how some of the world's largest fortunes can remain relatively obscure due to complex ownership structures and a preference for privacy. No talking about money and power, a tricky topic in our society. ASML is probably one of the most powerful and important companies in the world, as without their unique machines, no chip production in the world for high-end computer chips would be possible.

The IKEA business and private wealth behind the owning Kamprad family is another family empire the public knows little about. That Forbes Magazine lists the family at a private wealth around $3.5 Billion. That is a perfect example of this article. When analized and researched in more detail, at least one zero behind the three appears to be missing, even though if restrictions to the wealth apply, as some research states.

Picture: Adam Kolmacka

While wealth rankings often celebrate the richest individuals or families due to public fascination with extremes of fortune, it's crucial to consider the broader implications of such concentrated wealth. The aspect of power that accompanies immense wealth deserves more attention in these discussions.

Billionaire Influence: The Case of US Plutocrats

The outsized influence of American billionaires on democratic processes warrants closer examination. Take Elon Musk as an example: his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter (now X) granted him control over a major platform for public discourse. This move exemplifies how vast wealth can translate into the power to shape information flow and, by extension, public opinion.

However, the influence extends far beyond media control. The US political donation system allows for significant financial contributions to political campaigns and parties. In 2020, for instance, the top 100 individual donors contributed $1.6 billion to federal candidates and groups, according to OpenSecrets. This system can create a quid pro quo dynamic, where large donors may expect favorable policies or even appointments to key governmental positions.

The "revolving door" between business and government further complicates this picture. For example, former Goldman Sachs executives have frequently held high-ranking positions in the US Treasury Department across multiple administrations. This intertwining of financial and political power raises questions about whose interests are truly being served in policy-making processes.

Moreover, billionaires like Bill Gates, through philanthropic organizations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, wield enormous influence over global health and education policies. While often well-intentioned, this level of individual influence on matters of public concern presents challenges to democratic decision-making processes.

Billionaires in Governance: A Global Comparison

The presence of billionaires in governing bodies worldwide offers a stark illustration of wealth concentration in political spheres. In China, the phenomenon is particularly pronounced. As of 2023, it's estimated that the National People's Congress (NPC) includes over 100 billionaires among its roughly 3,000 members. This means that about 3.3% of NPC members are billionaires, in a country where billionaires represent a tiny fraction of the population.

In contrast, the United States Congress, while certainly wealthy, has a lower concentration of billionaires. As of 2023, there were three billionaires in Congress out of 535 members (about 0.6%). However, it's worth noting that over half of Congress members are millionaires, still representing a significant wealth disparity compared to the general population.

The German Bundestag presents a different picture altogether. While precise data on billionaires in the Bundestag is not readily available, Germany generally has stricter rules on political donations and less wealth concentration in its parliament. The "Nebeneinkünfte" (side income) disclosure rules provide some transparency, though the system is not without its critics.

These disparities raise important questions about representation. When governing bodies are populated by individuals whose wealth places them in a different economic stratum from the vast majority of citizens, how effectively can they represent the interests of the general population? The concentration of billionaires in China's NPC, in particular, seems at odds with the country's nominally socialist principles and highlights the complex relationship between economic and political power in the modern world.

In conclusion, these aspects - hidden wealth, billionaire influence, and the presence of extreme wealth in governing bodies - underscore the need for a more nuanced understanding of global wealth distribution. Beyond mere rankings, we must consider the implications of wealth concentration on democratic processes, policy-making, and global power dynamics.

The launch of a Space-X rocket. Besides the highly influential businesses like Tesla or X by Elon Musk, he has close ties to the possible next President Donald Trump and might be granted an official government position. His business Space-X, dominating the rocket launching and space industry, might though be a far larger power play in the near future.

Picture: Cody Board

Art collections represent another layer of complexity in wealth assessment. Collectors like Reinhold Würth, with over 20,000 pieces, many worth millions, pose a unique valuation challenge. Similarly, centuries-old collections, like that of Prince Max of Liechtenstein, contain priceless works that defy easy monetary valuation.

Reinhold Würth's collection includes:

• Works by Picasso, Munch, Kirchner, and other renowned artists
• Over 20,000 pieces spanning 500 years of art history
• Multiple dedicated museums house the huge collection

Valuing such a collection is problematic because:

• Many pieces are considered priceless or have no comparable sales
• The collection's value as a whole may exceed the sum of its parts
• Art market valuations can be highly subjective and volatile

If we conservatively estimate an average value of $100,000 per piece (which is likely far too low for many of the masterpieces), the collection would be worth $2 billion. However, this figure could easily be several times higher, given the quality and rarity of many pieces.

The challenge of valuing art collections extends to other wealthy individuals and families. For instance, the British Royal Family's art collection, the Royal Collection, is one of the largest and most important art collections in the world. It includes:

• Over 1 million objects
• 7,000 paintings
• 30,000 watercolors and drawings
• 500,000 prints

The value of this collection is inestimable, not only due to its size, but also because many pieces are considered national treasures and would never be sold. This exemplifies how some forms of wealth, particularly those tied to cultural and historical significance, defy traditional valuation methods.

The Gurlitt Collection, was a collection of around 1.500 art works inherited by Cornelius Gurlitt, the son of one of Hitler's art dealers, Hildebrand Gurlitt (1895-1956), and which was found to have contained several artworks looted from Jews by the Nazis. It contained amazing pieces of art from masters like Monet, Renoir, Gauguin, Kandinsky or Chagall. The value was estimated at over € 1 Billion. An extreme example of hidden art values, in this case even illegal.

Picture: Max Liebermann, Zwei Reiter am Strand, Wikipedia

An additional layer of complexity in assessing global wealth comes from legal structures that are not transparent and publicly known, such as trusts, Stiftungen (foundations in German-speaking countries), and other types of foundations and endowments. The estimated wealth owned and controlled by these entities is often unknown or difficult to trace.

A prime example is the Aldi fortune, controlled by the Albrecht family. The family's wealth is largely held through various Stiftungen, including:

• Markus Stiftung
• Siepmann Stiftung
• Jakobus Stiftung

These foundations serve multiple purposes:

1. Wealth preservation: They protect the family's assets across generations.
2. Tax optimization: Foundations can offer favorable tax treatment in certain jurisdictions.
3. Privacy: They provide a layer of anonymity, making it difficult to ascertain the true extent of the family's wealth.
4. Control: They allow the family to maintain control over their business interests while distancing themselves personally from ownership.

The Aldi case illustrates the challenges:

• Aldi is one of the world's largest retailers, with over 10,000 stores in 20 countries.
• The company is privately held, making its true value difficult to assess.
• The wealth is divided between two main branches of the Albrecht family, further complicating valuations.
• Estimates of the family's wealth vary widely, from $30 billion to over $50 billion, but the true figure remains unknown due to the opaque nature of their holdings.

Other examples of wealth held through foundations include:

• The Bertelsmann Stiftung, which controls 80.9% of the Bertelsmann media conglomerate.
• The Robert Bosch Stiftung, which holds 92% of Robert Bosch GmbH, one of the world's largest automotive suppliers.
• The Stichting INGKA Foundation, controlling large parts of IKEA and the Kamprad family.

These legal structures present significant challenges for wealth assessment:

1. Limited public disclosure requirements
2. Complex ownership chains that can span multiple jurisdictions
3. The ability to separate economic benefits from control rights
4. The potential for foundations to own other foundations or companies, creating nested structures that are difficult to unravel

The use of such structures is not limited to German-speaking countries. Similar arrangements exist worldwide, such as:

• Family trusts in common law jurisdictions
• Fideicomiso in Latin American countries
• Waqf in Islamic countries

The prevalence of these opaque legal structures adds another layer of complexity to the task of identifying and ranking the world's largest family offices and private fortunes.

What do the town of Nortorf, the small town in Schleswig-Holstein in Germany, and Trader Joe's, the famous retail brand in the USA, have in common? The Albrecht family's secretive Markus Foundation has its official headquarters in Nortorf. Little is known to the public about values, distributions or other ownership. Foundations in Germany are not yet obliged to be transparent.

Picture: Adobe Stocks, Stadt Nortorf

The case of Muammar Gaddafi's lost billions exemplifies the complexities of tracking wealth at the highest echelons of power. After the fall of his regime in 2011, estimates of Gaddafi's hidden wealth ranged from $50 billion to $200 billion. This vast discrepancy alone illustrates the challenges in quantifying such fortunes.

According to various investigations, including those revealed in the Panama Papers, Gaddafi's wealth was dispersed across a labyrinthine network of shell companies, real estate holdings, and bank accounts spanning the globe. While some assets have been recovered - such as $1.1 billion found in a South African bunker in 2013 - the majority remains unaccounted for.

Speculation abounds regarding who might control these lost billions. Some suggest that former regime loyalists, international facilitators, or even Western financial institutions may be safeguarding portions of this wealth. The ongoing search involves complex international legal battles and diplomatic negotiations, highlighting the enduring impact of hidden wealth long after its original owner's demise.

Many a great fortune has disappeared into the mists of history, and very few will know about the remaining billions. One of the most prominent examples is the fortune of the former desert ruler from Libya, al-Gaddafi.

Given these challenges, any attempt to definitively rank the world's largest family fortunes and their family offices must be approached with caution. The multifaceted nature of wealth, the diversity of asset classes, the complexity of ownership structures, and the varying degrees of transparency across jurisdictions all contribute to the difficulty in accurately assessing and comparing global fortunes.

The examples discussed in this article - from the land holdings of the Duke of Westminster to the art collection of Reinhold Würth, from the crypto-wealth of Satoshi Nakamoto to the foundation-held assets of the Albrecht family - illustrate the wide range of factors that must be considered when attempting to understand the true landscape of global wealth.

Furthermore, the dynamic nature of markets and investments means that these fortunes can fluctuate significantly over time. The rise of new industries, geopolitical shifts, and changes in regulatory environments can rapidly alter the wealth landscape.

In conclusion, the world of family-offices and ultra-high-net-worth individuals remains one of the most fascinating and least understood aspects of global finance. The challenges in accurately assessing and ranking these fortunes highlight the need for more sophisticated analytical tools, greater transparency in financial reporting, and a more nuanced understanding of the diverse forms that wealth can take. At the same time, it appears to be in the nature of large wealth to stay hidden, and many arguments speak in favour of it.

Until more comprehensive and standardized reporting mechanisms are in place, our understanding of the true landscape of global wealth will remain incomplete. This uncertainty leaves room for continued research, speculation, and discovery in this intriguing field, ensuring that our understanding of global wealth distribution continues to evolve and improve.

The table of estimated largest private fortunes and their associated family offices, while based on extensive research, should be viewed as an approximation rather than a definitive ranking. Here's an updated and expanded version of the table, incorporating some of the additional insights from our discussion:

This list, while comprehensive, should be considered an estimate and not complete due to the challenges discussed in the article. Factors such as private asset holdings, fluctuating market values, and opaque ownership structures make precise valuations and ranking difficult. Additionally, the dynamic nature of global wealth means that rankings can change rapidly due to market conditions, business performance, and geopolitical events. 

A special example at the end of the list is Jen-Hsun Huang, famous CEO of NVIDIA, probably right now in 2024 the most valuable and important company in the world. From a private wealth ranking perspective he is an example of how quick these rankings can change, as of a couple of years ago he would not even have been inside, whereas now he probably belongs to the top 20. Keeping that in mind is important, as those rankings in media are often times Zeitgeist and a certain view on politics and the economy as well. 

The complexities highlighted in this article underscore the need for continued research and improved methodologies in assessing global wealth. As our understanding of these intricate financial ecosystems evolves, so too will our ability to accurately map the landscape of the world's largest family offices and private fortunes. This ongoing process of discovery and analysis remains crucial for gaining insights into global economic power structures and wealth distribution patterns.

Very nice at first glance and from the outside, but the truth lies in the overall picture and is reflected in the consideration of “who is asking” and “what purpose” the information serves.

Picture: Joe Pregadio

Comments, criticism and remarks are welcome: 

Alexander Karais: ak(@)familyofficeresearch.de