Unlocking Real Value Blog

Poll: Most Assets Follow Advisors to New Firm - July 1st, 2009

Published in FUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
By Gregory Shulas

Wealth advisors who leave for a new wealth management firm can expect to bring over the bulk of their existing clients’ assets during the transition. That’s according to a majority of FundFire poll respondents.

Roughly 62%, or 351 voters, said that half or more of an advisor’s assets move with them upon switching firms. That made it the top sentiment expressed in the FundFire poll on the percentage of assets that follow advisors who switch firms.

The majority sum included 42%, or 236 respondents, who said 50% to 75% of the advisor’s book make the jump to the new firm, as well as 20%, or 115 voters, who said 75% or more of assets come over during such transitions.

In contrast, 38% of the respondents, or 214 voters, indicated that less than 50% of assets follow an experienced advisor leaving for a new firm.

Of the minority tally, nearly one-third, or 167 voters, said 25% to 49.9% of existing assets leave the old firm with the departing advisor, while just 8%, or 47 voters, said less than 25% of client assets make the switch.

The FundFire poll’s findings contrast with a recent Wall Street Journal report that suggested only 25% of client assets are following departing advisors, compared to 50% in the past. This, the Journal said, coincides with a trend where clients are reportedly sticking with wirehouses when advisors depart, instead of moving with them.

High-net-worth investors are increasingly having second thoughts about making such transitions with their advisors, says Andy Klausner, founder of AK Advisory Partners, a strategic consultancy serving the wealth management industry. The hesitance can be attributed to how the credit crisis has decimated investor confidence levels, he says.

“Before, clients would go with advisor without thinking about it. Now they are giving a lot of thought to this,” he says. “Clients are becoming smarter. The trust factor is not what it was.” However, Klausner notes that most advisors will not leave a firm if they know at least 50% of clients won’t go with them.

As of 3 p.m. Tuesday, 565 FundFire subscribers participated in the survey.

Participants were self-selected and were only able to vote once. While wealth advisors were the poll’s main target, other FundFire readers had the ability to vote. The publication’s overall audience consists of asset managers, institutional investors, consultants, financial advisors and service providers.

Is Open Architecture in Danger of Cuts? - June 8th, 2009

Published inFUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
Written by Andy Klausner, CIMA, CIS, the founder of AK Advisory Partners LLC., a strategic consultancy serving the wealth management industry.

Open architecture should not be a victim of the current financial crisis. This form of investing has been synonymous with offering best-of-breed choices to clients. For sponsor firms, to cut back or hold off on this important competitive advantage in a reactionary manner would be a mistake.

Certainly wirehouses, RIAs, family offices, banks and regional brokerages, among others, have felt the pinch of the economic crisis – many if not all have made expense cuts to counteract reduced revenues, and staff downsizing has been all too common. There have also been cuts to product managers and product specialists who play a key role in strengthening fee-based open architecture platforms and getting advisors to use them. And no doubt many platform expansion efforts, such as unified managed account and unified managed household rollouts, that were planned before the crisis have been pushed back due to wider cost-cutting initiatives.

But as the economy has begun to shows signs of recovery over the past few months, many firms have begun to look forward and plan for the future. We have been encouraging clientsto begin talking more about their “Rebound Plan” – a forward-looking effort to demonstrate toclients how the firm has successfully weathered the economic turmoil and positioned themselves for long-term success. Bank of America’s reported decision to attempt to sell its proprietary money management arm, Columbia Management, while keeping a large minority stake in BlackRock, is an example of how a company can strategically plan for the future in a pro-open architecture way.

But uncertainties do remain. One example is the continuing ambiguity surrounding Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, where it is unclear whether the combined operation will sell proprietary product from Morgan Stanley Investment Management. Wealth management sponsors that have made smart and necessary cuts can and should still offer open architecture as part of their value proposition. Remember, as firms look to grow in the future, the winners will be able to pick up advisors (whether through acquisition or recruiting) at the expense of those firms that have deemphasized investment platforms. Top-notch advisors are used to operating in an environment of open architecture platforms. I do not believe that they will settle for anything less in the future.

Realistically, wealth managers that find it necessary to cut or hold off on offering vital services will probably be forced to merge with a rival or be sold outright. I believe that small to medium-sized firms are going to find it harder and harder to offer top-notch products and services as stand alone organizations. Clients are scrutinizing their advisors and the firms they do business with more carefully. Explaining “smart” reductions should be easy; but if your product and service offerings are not competitive, you are at great risk of losing clients.

Two RIA Buyers Hone Focus to High-End Firms - March 13th, 2009

Published inFUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
By Tom Stabile

Two outfits rooted on opposite sides of the country are basing future growth on acquiring uppercrust independent advisor firms, and both plan to close more deals this year.

Denver-based First Western Financial recently bought an independent registered investment advisor (RIA) firm in California, and has three more acquisitions set to close in the next three months. And Samoset Capital Group of Darien, Conn., has been ramping up to obtain majoritystakes in RIAs or to lift-out wirehouse teams, in both cases focusing on advisors with $500 million to $3 billion in assets.

Both are targeting advisors who roughly serve the $2 million to $25 million investor. Each outfit also offers an open architecture platform for most or all investment vehicles. And one firm already has private banking and trust services; the other plans to add those capabilities in-house.

First Western and Samoset are each aiming at a “sweet spot” of advisors that cater to investors who are “too big” to get tailored attention at a broad-based wealth manager but “too small” to fit into elite environments, such as multi-family offices, says Andrew Klausner, principal of AK Advisory Partners, a strategic consultant in Boston.

“The RIA marketplace has been and will continue to be a driver of growth in wealth management,” Klausner says. But he adds that while it’s a good time to have a growth model based on buying RIAs, these firms need to ensure they are presenting a unique value proposition, both to the advisors they want to acquire and to the investor end-clients.

First Western’s most recent acquisition is its seventh of an RIA, says Scott Wylie, the boutique bank’s chairman and CEO. Wylie is a former chairman and CEO of Northern Trust Bank of Colorado, and he co-founded First Western with Warren Olsen, who is vice chairman and CIO and a past president of Morgan Stanley’s mutual fund business.

First Western closed on its acquisition of GKM Advisers of Los Angeles, an RIA with $353 million in assets under management, on April 30. It now has three offices in California, one in Arizona, and five in Colorado. And it intends to continue growing in the Southwest and Western regions by acquiring more RIAs, Wylie says.

“It’s definitely an integral part of our strategy to expand into new markets,” he adds. “We’re a pretty unique strategic buyer, and that was true two years ago, it’s true today, and it will be true two years from now.”

The First Western model entails acquiring the RIA and then adding private banking and trust specialists, along with its technology infrastructure, which includes proprietary systems and a trust operations platform. Each location operates as a local boutique with its own board andofficers, but it takes on the parent name.

The firm has $2.5 billion in assets under management, focusing on the $2 million to $20 million client, Wylie says. He adds that the firm has capital in place to continue making acquisitions, with a focus on the Western U.S., in part because of a belief that the market is distinct from the East Coast version.

Wylie says while private banks on the Eastern side of the country work with a lot of intergenerational clients and families with “19th Century” wealth, the focus in the West has more of a first-generation flavor, with entrepreneurs and other “wealth creators.” And he says that begets a different culture, because clients in the East tend to want to have their wealth “taken care of,” while Western clients are more likely to want private bankers who treat them as partners.

First Western’s investment approach, overseen by in-house staff, combines proprietary strategies – largely separately managed accounts (SMAs) for domestic equities and fixed income – with similar third-party manager options, as well as outside managers for alternative investments and specialty asset classes.

Back East, Samoset’s inaugural acquisition closed last year, but it was an anomaly, says Peter Milhaupt, head of sales and new business development. The outright purchase of Baldwin & Clarke Advisory Services, an RIA with $120 million in assets under management, doesn’t fit the core model Samoset intends to employ, which will focus on obtaining stakes of 51% to 75% of advisor firms.

“We’re leaving a meaningful equity position with the partners,” Milhaupt says. “It’s built around the premise that we’re truly partnering with RIA firms.”

That original deal, self-financed by Samoset’s 15 partners, helped to jump-start its platform, which combines asset management with financial planning, estate planning and insurance services. Samoset also intends to acquire a private banking and trust division, Milhaupt says.

Two pending acquisitions are now in “active discussions” and others are in earlier stages, both with existing RIAs and with wirehouse advisor teams eyeing a move, Milhaupt says. Samoset will offer them elements such as an open architecture investment lineup, built with an internal due diligence team; succession planning financing; a client planning and reporting system that can take in liquid and illiquid assets; and a suite of advisor practice systems to handle matters such as portfolio accounting and trade order management.

Samoset will also handle central matters such as compliance and human resources, as well as marketing and best practice research. The firm plugs into five custodial partners.

While the model is akin to “holding companies” that had been active buying up RIA firms in recent years, Samoset appears to be aiming more exclusively to high-end firms than its peers. It also will offer access to its platforms on a private-label basis to similarly focused RIA firms.

Milhaupt says the goal is to create a national brand, though the early focus will be on the East Coast. The plan entails opening 10 to 12 “beachhead” offices that will serve as hubs for other offices, including acquired RIA firms, within their regions. “The last thing we want is to have hundreds of offices dispersed around the country that need to be managed individually,” he says.

Crisis Hurts Small Managers Most - March 7th, 2009

Published inFUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
Written by Andy Klausner, CIMA, CIS,  the founder of AK Advisory Partners LLC., a strategic consultancy serving the wealth management industry.

While no segment of the financial services business has been shielded from the devastating effects of the credit crisis, the outlook for many smaller investment management firms seems particularly dire. As such, I believe that the next 12 to 18 months will be characterized by a wave of mergers and firm closings.

Particularly hard hit will be small firms (managers with $1 billion or less under management) and mid-size firms ($1 billion to $2 billion under management). While many managers above that threshold will continue to lay-off staff and reduce costs, many in this larger segment of the marketplace should survive relatively intact and perhaps become more diverse as they buy up some of the firms that can no longer remain freestanding.

My bleak outlook for smaller and mid-sized investment managers results from the fact that these firms are being squeezed on multiple fronts.

  • These managers will be impacted externally by the significant changes taking place among their distribution relationships. As the larger sponsor firms continue to consolidate on both the retail – Smith Barney and Morgan Stanley– and institutional – Callan Associates and Mercer– sides of the business, opportunities for smaller andmid-size managers will inevitably decline. In addition, there will probably be few opportunities for managers to add additional strategies or enter new programs with  these merging wealth management sponsors until the current sponsor integration process is complete. The same goes for managers seeking to stand out to institutional consultants who are integrating their operations together.
  • These shops will also be impacted internally by the economic reality of lower revenues (resulting from lower AUM) and higher operational costs (resulting from theincreased need for transparency). This will affect their internal profitability and thus their long-term viability.
  • Last but not least there is of course the issue of performance. Any manager thathas not performed in line with its peer group is especially vulnerable in today’s market environment. Firms that are smaller and have only one or two strategies will find it hard to survive.

On the retail side, as trends lead to fewer but significantly larger sponsor firms (with tens of thousands of advisors), the pressure on managers to have larger marketing teams will also increase. And as more advisors join or start their own registered investment advisor firms, the independent distribution channel’s decentralized nature will add to a manager’s cost of sales support and client service. Advisors and clients will also continue to need a lot of handholding and they will increasingly look to their managers for support – both in-person and via value-added materials. The annual cost to compete in this marketplace may just become too high for firms with limited resources.

On the institutional side, standards for new managers will continue to increase. There will be stronger demand for increased transparency, verifiable operationalcapabilities, and well-documented compliance procedures. Firms with greater resources available to them will be better equipped to satisfy the increasing scrutiny of institutional consultants and sponsors. Those firms without the staffing and systems to rise to the occasion will face dwindling prospects.

For all managers, it is more important than ever that they be able to clearly articulate their value-added proposition and demonstrate why they should be considered for particular assignments.

Nevertheless, for all of the above reasons, it seems clear that the investment management market of the future will be characterized by fewer and larger firms. Along the way, all firms will see pain. Smaller firms will have to merge or close. Larger firms will also have a rough time – witness Harvard Management Company’s recent decision to lay off 25% of its staff.

But the larger firms have the resources to survive. They will emerge as the winners. Whether bigger will be better for clients long-term will not be known for many years.

How Vital Are Wholesaler Credentials? - February 23rd, 2009

Published in Ignites – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
Written by Andy Klausner, CIMA, CIS, the founder of AK Advisory Partners, a strategic consultancy serving the wealth management industry.

The more impressive the credentials wholesalers possess, the greater the chance that they will be able to meet with and form a meaningful relationship with top producers. This is especially the case in today’s tumultuous times, as producers have little time to waste. The key for any wholesaler is establishing credibility with the branch office’s gatekeeper and the top producers. As the number of wholesalers has increased over the past decade, it’s not a given that every wholesaler will be allowed into branches.

The best way to remain on the list of people allowed to visit the branch office is to develop these key relationships. And in that first meeting, the firm you work for is as important as your sales pitch in communicating the value that you will be able to add on an ongoing basis. Especially with larger producers, those with clients with varied and complicated needs, a wholesaler’s ability to “talk the talk” and “walk the walk” is very important. So whether it’s an advanced educational degree such as an MBA or certifications such as the CFP, the more the wholesaler can exhibit a firm industry knowledge base, the easier establishing credibility will be.

Also, remember that the first question a large producer will ask wholesalers is if they have ever been in production. For those that have not, impressive credentials are the next best things to highlight.

New Outfit Marries Wealth Advisory, Law Firm - January 6th, 2009

Published by FUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
By Tom Stabile

A new wealth firm with offices in Florida and Ohio launched last month catering to high net- worth clients with investment and family office services, as well as an affiliated law practice. The three partners – former private bankers and directors with National City Bank and its Sterling multi-family office division – opened shop on Dec. 18 aiming to serve clients with more than $5 million.

Willow Street Advisors, based in Naples, Fla., is adding a twist to the relatively uncommon affiliation of wealth advisory and law practices. Such set-ups usually start with established law firms, but the new firm’s core focus is wealth management. The law practice might only break even, says Christopher Bray, managing director and co-founder in Florida for Willow.

“We see growth in the independent channel, especially from clients leaving the traditional firms,” Bray says. “Even though asset values have gone down so much, people realize they want and need professional advice.”

The timing for an independent start-up is probably good, given the financial markets havoc, says Andrew Klausner, principal of AK Advisory Partners, a strategic consultant in Boston.

“If they have the financial backing and a good initial client start-up and prospect list, it’s not a bad time to be starting,” Klausner says. “Unhappy clients are going to continue to move [away from traditional firms] and look for alternatives.”

Bray says Willow is awaiting the transfer of $120 million in assets from its initial 15 to 20 clients, and expects to have about $200 million in assets by the end of the first quarter. It has a few $30 million clients, and has taken on a few investors with portfolios as low as $2 million from prior relationships, but Bray says Willow aims to stick to a $5 million minimum after the first year. The three partners have put forth all start-up capital, Bray says.

The firm will offer both proprietary portfolio management and investing throughseparately managed accounts (SMAs), alternative funds, and other investments. It signed on this week with Fortigent, a turnkey asset management platform provider that focuses on product sets and portfolio construction for high-net-worth clients.

The mixed approach stems from the roots of the founding partners, who came out of both National City’s private banking arm, which runs proprietary products, and Sterling, which uses open architecture.

Bray and co-founder Richard Stevens, who is Willow’s CIO, had both worked forNational City’s private bank in Florida before they left in 2007. Bray previously had worked with the Sterling division in Pepper Pike, Ohio, and when he moved to Florida, a colleague named David Kearns took his slot. Kearns is now Willow’s third co-founder, and works out of Akron, Ohio.

Stevens, who in the past had managed money for the Bacardi family through the Bank of Bermuda, serves as portfolio manager for Willow clients who want in-house asset management. Bray says initially only a few clients are tapping into the Fortigent platform, with about 25% of the firm’s asset base, but he adds that he expects the share to grow to 40% in a few years.

Investment management will be Willow’s basic offering but it will add in family office services – such as tax, estate, and generational succession planning – for larger accounts.“The family office world is the main space we want to play in,” Bray says.

The firm has seven staffers on the wealth management side, but only Bray and Kearns will staff the boutique law firm they are calling Kearns Bray. That’s because it ispositioned as an extra service for Willow clients, though Bray says it could also generate some referrals to Willow. The two partners, both of whom are attorneys, will only spend about 20% of their time on the law practice, Bray says.

Many professional practices have opened wealth management arms, but most are accounting firms. Many of the top 100 regional accounting firms have wealth practices, with a handful topping the $1 billion mark in assets. The practice is less common with law firms, though Boston has various examples, such as Nixon Peabody Financial Advisors, an offshoot of the Nixon Peabody law firm, and Silver Bridge, which was renamed last year but remains affiliated with WilmerHale, a large law firm.

Willow and Kearns Bray will be separate entities so that Stevens can have a full stake in the wealth management arm, Bray says. He would not be able to hold a stake in the law firm because he is not an attorney, Bray says.

The idea of starting up a law firm simultaneously is unique, says AK Advisory’s Klausner. He says a key to making the model work is ensuring that the partners offer referrals to other practitioners from either practice in case some clients have concerns about conflicts of interest.

“The partnering approach is certainly right for this marketplace,” he adds. “Clients are looking for trusted advisors.”

Cleveland-based National City, battered by the recent financial markets tumble, was recently acquired by PNC Financial Services Group of Pittsburgh in a deal that closed at year’s end.

What Wealth Managers Are Burned By Crisis? - January 6th, 2009

Published inFUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
Written by Andy Klausner, CIMA, CIS, the founder of AK Advisory Partners LLC., a strategic consultancy serving the wealth management industry.

Few if any wealth managers escaped 2008 without significant damage to their portfolios, their client lists, or both. Just by the very nature of the market’s decline, any business that relies on, or is impacted, by assets under management will be down at least 30% – 40% and in many cases more as 2009 begins.

For wealth managers, those hardest hit include those that did not have their clients properly diversified. Firms with less than stellar client service were also impacted. The quality of client servicing is very important to high-net-worth investors, and the fourth quarter of 2008 was a time for wealth managers to prove themselves in this area. The more proactive wealth managers were in contacting clients and providing calm and rational advice, the more likely that those clients will stay put with their assets. Even if clients felt compelled to sell out of the market, if their advisor partnered with them in that decision and remained attentive, there’s a good chance that these investors will come back to that advisor.

Also vulnerable are wealth managers that were not proactively prospecting over the past few years and have simply benefited from their revenue growing as their current client’s AUM grew. These advisors are likely to come back slowly as they have to reinvent their businesses once again and refocus on marketing and asset gathering.

Wealth managers that excelled in both of these areas – asset allocation and client servicing – havethe greatest chance of coming back the quickest. However, even those that did everything correctly are still facing a tough 2009 as lower assets under management totals translate into reduced fees, squeezing income. Still, keep in mind that there will be many unhappy clients and many making switches. Wealth managers that take advantage of these likely movements and have well thought out marketing plans should be able to attract new clients more quickly.

In terms of the wealth management model that stands out, the RIA and independent B-D channels definitely emerged as the early winners from the financial sector turmoil. Negative press about the wirehouses, coupled with dramatic falls in their share prices – which released advisors from the golden handcuffs that had previously tied them to these firms – made it more attractive for larger advisors to go independent. While this trend is likely to continue, the pendulum may swing back a little in the other direction as the reality of large losses in fee-based revenue will probably make some of those advisors who were considering going independent rethink their choice. For these advisors, being able to concentrate full time on rebuilding their businesses and revenue, without having to assume some of the administrative duties associated with going independent, may be the best interim solution. Furthermore, the negative press associated with large broker-dealers has somewhat dissipated.

Mutual Funds and Risk - December 15th, 2008

Full Title: What can or should mutual funds do to counteract likely new attitudes about risk and the fear clients have about unexpected worst-case events?
Published in Ignites – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
Written by Andy Klausner, CIMA, CIS, the founder of AK Advisory Partners LLC., a strategic consultancy serving the wealth management industry.

Faced with today’s uncertainty, mutual fund companies must effectively address investors’ new attitudes toward risk as well as the natural inclination to flee to seemingly more attractive investments. Most importantly, they should continue to manage as they are mandated to. Next, their marketing focus should be on counseling advisors on the types of investors and portfolios their particular offerings are appropriate for. Fund companies — as well as everyone else in our industry, for that matter — should continue to stress the importance of assuring that the clients they advise are invested correctly given their goals, objectives (particularly cash flow needs) and risk tolerance levels.

For an individual fund company, it’s crucial to clearly articulate the characteristics of the firm’s product offerings. Ensuring an advisor and end-client that a particular fund fits into a diversified investment strategy is crucial toward building and maintaining long-term relationships. If a fundstresses only performance or gets defensive in its marketing efforts in the face of alternative strategies, it will not be successful.

While it does not sound very exciting and is not flashy, stressing the fundamentals is exactly the right strategy to keep clients focused. This strategy will help reduce the likelihood that a client will seek alternative strategies that have already had their 15 minutes of fame.

Remember that the worst time to consider changing investment strategies is in the midst of difficult times such as those we face today. Frustrated by the recent failure of ―buy and hold and asset allocation- based strategies to protect assets, many investors are tempted to seek alternative investment methodologies. While success stories are rare this year, frustrated investors will naturally gravitate to them in desperation. But strategies that bet on positioning oneself to take advantage of rare events are by definition rarely successful themselves. It reminds me of Murphy’s Law — are not those investors who run to alternative strategies in the midst of uncertainty doing the exact wrong thing at the exact wrong time?

What SMA Sales Efforts Take Priority? - October 30th, 2008

Published inFUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company
Written by Andy Klausner, CIMA, CIS , the founder of AK Advisory Partners LLC., a strategic consultancy serving
the wealth management industry.

In an environment where many money managers are seeing their distribution resources cut, I believe it’s important to look at the following key areas:

  • Sponsor firms that managers have existing relationships with and multiple products with
  • Distributors with unified managed account platforms
  • Breakaway advisors and independent RIA firms, including custodians such as Charles Schwab, LPL, Pershing, TD Ameritrade and Fidelity

Remember that now is a good time to re-evaluate sponsor relationships. The ideal model is to work with fewer sponsors, but to have more products with these sponsors. This places a premium on large existing relationships where a sponsor’s advisors use a manager’s separately managed accounts, mutual funds or exchange-traded funds. Years ago, it used to be that money manager would attempt to be on as many platforms as they could. But in the current climate, having to service multiple relationships across multiple market segments can be seen as cost burden for sales and marketing teams. Increases in sponsor-related service costs also makes unified managed account programs more attractive to managers. Keep in mind that UMA programs call on the sponsor to take control over SMA operations, driving down the manager’s costs in that area. This is particularly beneficial for new managers who have not yet spent money on back-office functions.

In engaging the RIA/breakaway advisor, it can be wise for managers to allocate some resources away from the broker-dealer segment and toward the independent channel. At best, it’s wise to spread resources more evenly between the two. Remember that the quality of the RIAs going independent has increased in conjunction with the problems many large financial firms are having this year. This is another reason why RIAs should be targeted, particularly since these higher quality advisors are more likely to do fee-based business. For smaller managers who find the RIA space to be too fragmented, focusing on the custodian platforms (i.e., Schwab, LPL) is a smart move. Passing muster with the due diligence gatekeepers at these sponsors should be a top priority.