Blackrock, as per the entire mutual fund industry, is incentivized to gather as large an asset pile as they can to make money off the fees -- regardless of whether size hurts performance, which is not much of an issue for closet indexers / asset allocating benchmark huggers anyhow. This is not the same thing as being performance based. For certain now, my last post on this thread.
When cars enter the freeway, they must use the on-ramp. When new money enters your fund, it seems obvious that it must be deployed through the next strategy entry. If the investor is too impatient to allow you to deploy their capital using your strategy, they might not be your kind of client. "You're not my kind of client"........ -Bill Dunn
The answer is to grow to a large enough mass that subscriptions and redemptions are less than a basis point or are negligible.
My clients would be fine since I'm a young fund manager, and my expertise is in trading and making money, not in the technicalities of fund accounting.
It messes up the break even points and thus, the fund performance would be slightly less than what it could have been.
And when new money comes during a slight drawdown before a new run-up it will increase performance. The aggregate effect on performance is likely negligible over time.
But you are on marked to market so break evens are really just yesterday's price, not your entry price.