The IPE Real Estate Global Awards 2026 entry process will open in December 2025.

Writing a winning entry

Make your entry easy to read, evidence-led and directly relevant to the category. Judges want a clear idea or strategy, put in the context of your fund’s objectives — not marketing copy. Use concise language, show outcomes with supporting data, explain any shortfalls and describe the actions you took in response. Include only focused supporting documents (short charts, tables, or slides).

Need help?

IPE offers confidential advice on category selection, structure and drafting — including interview-style entries we can draft for you. Contact Alice O’Brien: +44 (0) 7827 157336 or alice.obrien@ipe.com

Success in the IPE Real Estate Global Awards depends on how clearly you make your case. This guidance, drawn from IPE’s experience reading entries and working with judges, explains what judges look for and gives practical tips to help you submit the strongest possible entry.

IPE staff are happy to help at any stage — from category selection to structuring and drafting your submission. We can also conduct interview-style entries where we interview you and draft the presentation. All work is handled in strict confidence.

For help, contact Alice O’Brien: +44 (0) 7827 157336 or alice.obrien@ipe.com.

Note: IPE can offer advice and editorial support, but the entry remains yours — you control content and sign-off.

Judge panels are made up of experienced pensions and real-estate professionals. They look for clear, convincing evidence of excellence, innovation and long-term thinking — not just a list of routine activities.

Key points judges want to see:

• A standout concept, strategy or improvement, explained in context. Exceptional annual returns help but are not required. Long-term benefits and strategic thinking are highly valued.

• Evidence, not unsubstantiated claims. Use numbers and outcomes where possible.

• Honest explanation of poor or negative results and, importantly, how you reacted and what you learned.

• Relevance to the fund’s objectives: how changes have affected funding level, liability management, member outcomes, risk appetite, etc.

Judge your own entry

Read your entry as a judge would. If anything raises a question for you, address it in the text — judges will ask the same questions. Answer all mandatory data fields or explain why you cannot supply a figure.

Give context: Explain who you are (short history), objectives, structure, membership and assets under management. Place strategies and outcomes in the fund’s broader context.

Be specific: When asked about investment strategy, answer that question — don’t substitute unrelated material like your business plan or benefits schedule.

Show outcomes and evolution: Where you changed strategy or implemented initiatives, show the before/after and explain the link to performance, risk and member outcomes.

Be honest about numbers: Performance looks best when presented in context — benchmarks, funding level impact and links to strategy. If you lack a specific figure, explain why in the relevant field.

Negative results are OK: Explain causes and show the measures you put in place to recover or manage downside risks. Judges reward clear, timely action plans.

Write like a single, flowing article. Treat overview, strategy and themed award answers as continuous—each should support the other.

Keep the focus: Stick to the topic of the category. Avoid marketing fluff and unnecessary jargon. Explain any local regulatory or legal terms a non-local judge may not know.

Use plain language and structure: 

• Short paragraphs

• Headings and subheads where helpful

• Bullet points for clarity

• No repetition — don’t use valuable word count twice

Word count: Use the allotment sensibly. A well-written 400-word answer is better than a padded 750-word entry. Judges prefer clarity over length.

Attach concise, relevant supporting materials (charts, tables, short presentations). Large annual reports or lengthy documents may be removed and can work against you — judges prefer focused, easily digested evidence.

Before submitting:

• Have you answered the question asked?

• Have you provided mandatory figures or explained why not?

• Have you demonstrated outcomes and linked them to strategy?

• Is your submission concise, coherent and easy to read?

• Have you included a short history and context for your fund?

Three Essentials

Fluency — it should read smoothly.
Coherence — every part should support the main argument.
Relevance — everything included must be relevant to the category.

We include mock entries inspired by previous winners to show the level of detail judges expect. We welcome any feedback on this guidance.

For help or to discuss your entry, contact Alice O’Brien on +44 (0) 7827 157336 or alice.obrien@ipe.com