Archive for the ‘Investment Managers’ Category

The Growing Emergence of Emerging Managers

Thursday, November 11th, 2010

It has traditionally been hard for emerging managers – here defined as having AUM under $3 billion – to convince institutions to hire them. Their shorter track records and relatively low level of assets have excluded them from the minimums set in the search/hiring parameters of many firms. But this trend seems to be changing.

Not only have these managers performed well – emerging managers outpaced the S&P 500 in 5 of the 8 bear quarters over the past five years by a cumulative 3.7% – but as consultants and institutions have looked for new ways to find managers that can add value in the wake of the financial crisis, they have been more willing to consider such managers.

Along with performance, there is now a greater recognition that smaller size may actually present an advantage in some cases; for example, emerging managers may be able to more effectively reduce risk because they can change market positions more easily (given their lower asset levels). In addition, as firms grow, marketing and asset gathering become more important – maybe at the expense of investment execution.

So, given these trends, how does an emerging manager take advantage of today’s environment and succeed? As outlined in a presentation I recently prepared for an Investment Management Institute (IMI) conference entitled Emerging Managers – The Foundation to Growth, if consultants and institutions are willing to “forgive” a shorter track record and lower AUM, then managers must concentrate on the other traditional pillars of due diligence – the strength of the investment discipline, the quality of the investment professionals and the stability of the organization.

Communication and persistence is still as important as it has always been. And for all managers – even those with longer track records and proven success – an important component of success is making sure that consultants and clients are never taken by surprise. Managers must be upfront about changes to their organization or poor stock picks. Honesty is still the best policy. And over-communication is always the best policy.

In some cases it still may be an uphill battle for emerging managers, because regardless of the strength of the discipline, for example, the only real proof of success is in reality longevity. But the playing feel has definitely leveled to some extent, a positive for emerging managers.

New Study – Client Service Matters – Duh!

Monday, November 8th, 2010

A recent study by Chatham Partners and Investment Metrics found that 40% of client satisfaction for institutional investors is attributable to service-related factors. 60% of overall satisfaction is related to investment performance. (I would venture to add that similar if not higher results titled toward client service would be found on the retail side of the business and that the results are applicable to all industry segments.)

My initial reaction is that if any organizations did not know the importance of client services before they read this article, they are in big big trouble. Further, I would guess that these firms have already lost significant assets and are pretty far behind the eight ball. Especially after the markets of the past few years, you have to wonder whether any firm can survive without a solid client service team and strategy.

Now that I have gotten that off of my chest, I did find the following interesting – the study identified five factors that are critical to a managers’ success:

1) Including the market and investment knowledge of the portfolio team;

2) The clarity of the investment reports;

3) The client representative’s problem-solving skills;

4) The frequency of contact for the client service representative; and

5) The timeliness of the manager’s investment reports.

Yes, client service matters – and the companies that succeed are able to incorporate client service into their practices in a systematic and efficient manner. It is worth looking at your own client servicing capabilities to see if there are improvements that can be made.

Early – Very Early – Thoughts on the Election Results

Tuesday, November 2nd, 2010

The election results are starting to roll in – and regardless of whether or not the Republicans win the Senate, it seems pretty obvious that there will be split power in Washington for the next few years. That is good news for the markets, because split power – gridlock – means that it will be very difficult if not impossible to enact major – and expensive – legislation. This is good for the deficit. Now, obviously we need to make some serious progress on the economy over the next few years. But this gridlock scenario helps put a ceiling on spending – and that is a positive. Read more from our last newsletter article entitled Political Gridlock Looms … Markets Cheer!

Pessimism Abounds: Advisors and Managers Beware……

Thursday, October 21st, 2010

Despite the current upward trend in stocks, fueled most recently by good earnings, the economy remains weak. People are still negative on the economy and the economic outlook; this has important implications for how you approach clients as you begin to meet with them one last time before year-end.

To illustrate, the CNBC All-American Survey was just released (You can read about the survey by clicking this link: Americans Growing More Pessimistic About Economy).

To summarize some of the results:

* 92% of respondents feel that that the economy is either doing no better than last year, or doing fair or poor

* Only 37% think the economy will improve over the course of the next year – down 5% from last year’s survey

* Only one in four think wages will rise over the next year, and only one in five that their house will increase in value over this same time period; these are the worst results in the 3 years that the survey has been taken

(There are also some interesting results on the political front in the survey – definitely worth looking at the complete survey.)

Americans are not feeling very optimistic – the official end of the recession and the rising stock market notwithstanding. This means that as you meet with clients, it’s important to realize that empathy is more important than ever. I would hesitate to give client’s only good news – put yourself in their shoes and think about what they might want to hear.

Now more than ever, client’s are looking to their advisors (or money managers) to reassure them. Even if their portfolios are up, it’a obvious that concerns linger. Reassurance and realism will keep them invested. Sugarcoating the situation may lose you a client.

Do You Know Your Niche?

Monday, October 18th, 2010

You know intuitively that you can’t be all things to all people, and your business model should reflect this. The shotgun marketing approach – where you target anyone and everyone – is doomed to fail. Niche marketing allows you to grow your business by fulfilling the needs of one well-defined group.

Our newest White Paper “Find Your Niche – Grow Your Business!” is designed to help you find your niche. The Paper focuses on:

* Why Niche Marketing?

* How Do You Find Your Niche?

* Marketing To Your Niche?

Now is a great time to position your business for 2011 and beyond.

What’s Rationale for Picking SMAs over UMAs?

Tuesday, October 5th, 2010

Published on October 5, 2010 – FUNDfire – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company- written by Andrew Klausner, Founder and Principal of AK Advisory Partners LLC.

The debate over whether unified managed accounts (UMAs) are going to replace separately managed accounts (SMAs) has been raging for a number of years. There is no direct resolution to the debate. There are enough differences between the two that there will be room for both types of investment vehicles. Both products will continue to survive and garner the assets of high-net-worth individuals. This entire debate reminds me of the one that began soon after SMAs were introduced, and revolved around whether mutual funds or SMAs were more appropriate for the wealthy. The answer turned out to be that both were, and still are, depending on the individual circumstances being considered.

Below is my perspective on why SMAs and UMAs each have their unique advantages and disadvantages, depending on the specific advisor and client on hand.

For advisors, the decision of which vehicle to use – or whether to use both – in their practices is related to their overall business philosophy. Some advisors consider their role and value-added proposition as selecting the managers to be used in SMA portfolios and then managing both the rebalancing of accounts as well as providing tax-efficient management. They are thus reluctant to abdicate these duties to someone else, such as situations where those duties are outsourced to a sponsor’s UMA team or a third-party overlay manager.

Some advisors also prefer individually managed accounts over mutual funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) as a general investment philosophy. These advisors presumably have a client-servicing model that eases any paperwork or coordination issues that maintaining multiple investment vehicles and accounts poses. On the other side, some advisors are attracted to UMAs because the pre-selected models reduce the amount of the work that they must do.

For clients, there are three primary differences between SMAs and UMAs. First, many UMAs have ETFs and mutual funds as part of their portfolio makeup. Thus, in many cases, the investment minimum within each investment sleeve is usually much lower than the standard $100,000 to $250,000 level in the SMA world. As a result, clients with fewer investable assets can invest in UMAs and achieve diversification more easily. Secondly, because all of the different investment sleeves in a UMA are in a single client account, there is less paperwork, both initially and on an ongoing basis. Third, UMAs typically include, or have options for, automatic rebalancing and tax-optimized investing. Therefore, the relationship size and the overall importance of these other issues to a particular client will help the advisor determine which vehicle to recommend.

(I haven’t really discussed managers because while there was reluctance on the part of some managers to participate in UMAs when they were first introduced, a lot of this resistance has disappeared as UMAs have become more common. There are enough quality managers in the universes of both UMAs and SMAs.)

In reality, UMAs and SMAs both have a place in the business. An advisor who utilizes SMAs exclusively, for example, and who has high client minimums, might occasionally have a client with fewer investable assets. In that case, the advisor might opt to use a UMA for that client. Or, some clients might themselves have preferences for one or the other based on previous experiences. They might have used SMAs for decades and feel comfortable with the simplicity and customization that such investment vehicles provide. There are enough different clients and client profiles that neither of these investment vehicles are likely to disappear – in the same way advisors still use mutual funds for their wealthy clients after all of these years.

See AK Quote in Article on Social Media – Want-To-Have or Need-To-Have?

Thursday, September 23rd, 2010

Published on September  23, 2010 – Ignites – An Information Service of Money-Media, a Financial Times Company- written by Gregory Shulas

Fund companies may benefit from having a social media presence, but they don’t need a Facebook profile to effectively compete. That’s according to Ignites poll respondents.

Roughly 53%, or 147 voters, believe industry firms have no serious need to participate in social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter. That made it the top sentiment expressed in the Ignites survey about whether competing effectively today requires a social media presence.

Of the majority group, 38%, or 106 voters, said a social media profile is nice, but not a necessity today, while 15%, or 41 voters, were more cynical, calling it just a fad.

In contrast, 47%, or 130 voters, said firms must have a social media presence if they want to be competitive in the marketplace. The minority group includes 9%, or 26 voters, who said a social media presence is vital for a firm’s continued success, as well as 38%, or 104 voters, who believe it is “important” for firms to maintain a presence on social networks.

Ignites has reported on how fund companies are increasingly embracing social media strategies as a means to communicate and strengthen relationships with investors. An informal survey conducted by Ignites found that TIAA-Cref has the most popular industry Facebook site, with 13,000 “fans,” a number that exceeds Vanguard’s 9,500 fans.

Despite industry market leaders’ embrace of social media, many professionals remain cautious about adopting such strategies. Dennis Dolego, Optima Group’s director of research, says that while such platforms seem like the “thing to do” for mutual funds, there are some legitimate reasons why firms have reservations about them.

For example, the primary value a fund company offers is performance, which Morningstar provides data on, he says. So industry executives may legitimately question what real value — beyond performance figures — a fund can offer to investors through a Facebook or Twitter posting, Dolego says.

Additionally, fund companies can face problems if negative information about their product is posted online. “They see it as something to do but they don’t feel comfortable doing it; they see some of the problems involved,” Dolego says.

“Overall, social media is almost like Consumer Reports or referral marketing. You want an objective party to say positive things about what they do,” Dolego says. “The goal is to get the support from the consumer that is independent, objective and unsolicited, and then to build a buzz about products and services.” Negative postings can be counterproductive to such marketing campaigns, he adds.

Andy Klausner, founder of strategic consultancy AK Advisory Partners, disagrees with the 15% who said social media is mainly a fad. In his view, the growth of these social networks is part of a larger shift in information distribution. To succeed in this new age, fund families must be active participants in these social networks, he adds.

“Information flow and marketing has unquestionably changed from pull to push. In other words, rather than pull in clients by delivering the message that we want, clients are demanding information on their own terms — you need to push out your information, show your value-added and inform clients on their terms,” Klausner says.

“Because of this overall change, firms that successfully embrace social media are giving people the information that they want, delivered the way that they want it — and that is not a fad but a distinct competitive advantage,” he adds.

As Referrals Wane, Here Comes Active Marketing

Sunday, September 19th, 2010

Many advisors and advisory firms have relied primarily on referrals to build their business. While this strategy has been quite effective in the past, the market downturn of the past two years has made clients more skeptical and, as a result, this avenue of growth has slowed. The problem is that many advisors and advisory firms – even some very large and successful ones – have either never actively marketed or have not done so for a long time, and are therefore beginning the process from square one. Yes, they must learn how to market.

This phenomenon was confirmed in a study of almost 700 advisors and wealth management firms conducted for Genworth Financial. Almost three quarters of the respondents plan to spend more time on marketing, and half of respondents more money on marketing; the respondents overwhelmingly acknowledge that active marketing will replace referrals as a key driver of growth.

Interestingly, and reinforcing the above point, only 32% of respondents had an actual marketing plan, and only half of these advisors and firms have actually used their plans. As growth rates have slowed with the markets decline, and referrals have waned, the difficult reality is that advisors and firms must become better and more active marketers.

That raises the interesting dilemma many firms face – recognizing that you need to develop a marketing a plan is one thing; actually figuring out how to do so is another matter! Respondents also recognized that other complementary avenues of future growth will include either acquisitions or hiring addition business development staff. Many organizations are budget-constrained today, therefore so while in theory hiring new business development and marketing employees makes sense, this might be a longer-term strategy, which does little to help replace lost assets today.

Another interesting conclusion from this study is that respondents cited delivering top-notch client service and building and maintaining efficient operations as the two top ways to generate business opportunities moving forward. I agree – happy clients will be more apt to begin giving referrals again in the future. And operating efficiently is always important. But this will take time…..

In the end, many companies are going to have to figure out how to become more active marketers – budget constraints notwithstanding – and quickly if they hope to build their assets back to previous levels.

Control Your Own Destiny

Wednesday, September 8th, 2010

We sent out a special issue of our quarterly newsletter today entitled “Control Your Own Destiny.”

Now that Labor Day is past, and vacations for the most part are over, the focus turns to reaching 2010 goals during the remaining months of the year and setting goals for next year.

Despite today’s economic uncertainty, and knowing that there are many things none of us can control (for example, will we have a double-dip recession?), this newsletter highlights three aspects of any business that can be controlled:

* Your Brand

* Your Target or End-Markets

* How Efficiency You Run Your Business

Click here to read the newsletter. Make the rest of the year a good and profitable one!

What Makes For a Good Financial Services Website?

Friday, August 27th, 2010

A recent report by Dalbar (a well-respected research firm in the financial services industry), which ranked the websites of top mutual fund companies, has some interesting implications for the entire industry. (I believe that the findings are germane to all segments of the industry – sponsor firms, investment managers, RIAs, etc. So take notice!)

Let’s start with the overall conclusion – it’s critical that websites are easy to navigate and that content is easy to find. In addition, continuity among the different features being offered is important; for example, the use of social media should complement the functionality of the website and fit naturally.

Poor functionality will lead to frustration on the part of the user and any value-added contained in additional content will be lost. An effective website must have good design (which includes the look as well as the functionality) as well as good content. One without the other is not enough. To quote an executive at a large fund family, “It’s all about getting the right content to the right person at the right time.”

In designing your website, make sure that you dedicate the necessary resources to both design and content!

There were a few other interesting findings in the report as well. The use of mobile, social media and interactive features is increasing. Again, while this is not surprising, it’s important to reiterate that the most effective sites allow clients as well as prospects to utilize the information and access the resources of the company the way that they want to – it’s all about the user! Make it user-friendly!

Finally, the “viral” component – the ability for readers to share the information with others – is growing significantly (the phenomenon is called social sharing.) People want to share content that they find useful, especially when it comes to their finances, and making it easy for them to do so helps spread your brand further – and faster!