Archive for the ‘Sponsors’ Category

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!

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.

Breakaway Trends – Which Way is Up?

Monday, October 4th, 2010

Everyone (well it seems like everyone) seems to like to opine on whether the breakaway trend will continue, whether wirehouses will recover their places of prominence, etc. While the topic is interesting, a recent survey which concluded that the breakaway surge is over had what I thought were some much more interesting results that were buried in the fine print.

The study I am referring to is a recent one by Cogent Research, which interviewed 1,560 registered reps and advisors. The study found that advisor satisfaction is up 15% over last year, led by Merrill. The article rightly pointed out that the large retention bonuses paid advisors after the Bank of America merger probably had a lot to do with this – and that these bonuses were unsustainable. Hardly a seeming end to a trend…..

Advisor satisfaction at Merrill is now a whopping 49% – considering that advisor satisfaction at the regionals is 81%, I would hardly be jumping up and down if I was in management at Merrill. As I said above, I don’t personally read a lot into these numbers that indicates the trend to breakaways is over.

But I found a few other things in the article much more interesting:

– For the first time, the majority of revenues of those surveyed which were derived from fees surpassed 50% for the first time – reaching 54% in fact.

– While fee income lagged at banks, which was not surprising, the fact that fees only accounted for 35% of revenue at the regionals did surprise me – I thought the number would be higher. Given the number of large producers that have joined regionals over the past few years (regionals have also benefited at the expense of the wirehouses), I would expect this percentage to increase quickly.

– Finally, the number of advisors forming partnerships leveling off at 22% overall – it was 31% at the wirehouses and 37% at RIAs. Again, I would have expected both a higher percentage and an upward trend.

I will refrain from opining on the breakaway trend lest I become one of those referenced above; however, regardless of where an advisor sits, there seems to be little doubt that the trend toward fee-based income increasing at the expense of commissions is undeniable and irreversible.

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’s Holding Back UMA Programs?

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

Published on August 31, 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 growth of unified managed account (UMA) programs has been far slower than many industry experts had predicted when the investment vehicles were first introduced. Assets under management in the investment vehicles stood at $79.5 billion at the end of the first quarter, compared to $566.2 billion in separately managed accounts (SMAs) and $317 billion in programs where the advisor acts as the portfolio manager, according to Cerulli Associates. What are the reasons why the UMA has so far failed to live up to its potential?

To start with, a current focus of many UMAs – to provide a model-based investment solution – goes against two important trends:

1) The bias of top-end advisors to migrate away from “packaged products.”

2) The desire for top-end advisors to position themselves at the center of relationships and to provide many of the services that UMAs do – namely rebalancing and tax-advantaged investing.

The events of the last two years have only increased the importance of advisors retaining control of their client relationships. This has only made the road even tougher for UMAs.

I mention top-end advisors because they generally have larger clients and far greater assets under management. In fact, UMAs are more appealing to smaller accounts, where access to a diversified portfolio of individually managed accounts is not available. However, in this space for smaller accounts, UMAs are competing with – and at a cost disadvantage to – emerging exchange-traded-fund programs and established mutual fund wrap programs at most brokerages.

Another reason for the disappointing growth of UMAs is that the industry has not been able to truly make these accounts as all-encompassing as first hoped. For example, alternative investments and other less-liquid investments still do not work in the typical UMA structure. If advisors still have to do their own work to provide comprehensive client-level reporting, a main rationale for investing in UMAs disappears.

A further twist is that what some consider to be the next generation of managed accounts – the unified managed household (UMH) – is really a client-level reporting vehicle rather than an investment vehicle per-se. If, as I believe, this type of total-client reporting and functionality is what top-end advisors really desire, the growth and development of the UMH bodes poorly for the future of UMAs as well.

In order to differentiate themselves and attract larger clients, advisors must be able to demonstrate their value-add on an ongoing basis. Packaged products are a commodity, and while they have their place, successful advisors don’t build their practices on a foundation of such offerings.

In addition, the industry has not done itself any favors by selling UMAs as a primarily model-based solution and by melding their SMA programs into UMAs, as some firms have been doing recently. Pushing UMAs as a by-product of reducing the number of products you offer may increase assets under management in these programs. However, it will not really make the UMA the product the industry has long touted. UMAs seem stuck between SMAs and the next generation UMHs with no place to go.

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!

Who Controls the Client Experience?

Friday, August 20th, 2010

I wasn’t surprised to see that Raymond James just announced that it was hiring a Director of Client Experience. What was surprising is that the design of this position is to communicate directly with clients. The firm acknowledged the slippery slope that it is now embarking on – how to directly interact with clients without upsetting its advisors.

This should be an interesting “experiment.” Personally, I like the idea of hiring a Director of Client Experience, but would rather have this person work with the training department to help provide advisors the resources to enhance and promote the activities that they do to make their individual client experience unique – this is part of each advisors unique value proposition and is a point of differentiation between them and their competitors.

Especially scary is the analogy the new Director made to Starbucks and how they have been able to institutionalize the client experience. (The article mentions that Starbucks is famous for bringing fast, fun friendly service to customers on a highly consistent basis.) Most sophisticated clients choose their advisors for the services they provide first and the hope that they will become long-term partners; the firm they work for, or the broker/dealer they are associated with is usually far less important. Given that fact, I for one do not see the value-added of the firm engaging in this new enterprise, and in fact see it doing potentially a lot more harm than good if it alienates enough advisors.

Call me an old dog – and I may be proved wrong – but institutionalizing client service deemphasizes the importance of the individual advisor and is more of a strategy aimed at the mass market – successful advisors today are reducing the number of client relationships that they have, concentrating on fewer larger relationships where they can make a difference. I am not sure how this new strategy can help top advisors.

Am I missing something?

Social Media and the Financial Services Industry

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

Needless to say, I am a believer in the important role that social media has in helping to build a financial services business; it has helped me in my practice tremendously. I reviewed the best book that I have read on the topic – The Digital Handshake by Paul Chaney – in this blog on March 13th. I still think you should read the book for a great overview of the many social media outlets that are available and how they might be relevant to your particular business.

For those that are ready to jump in though, I wanted to introduce an exciting new online resource called Jarupa. Jarupa offers online courses in learning WordPress, Email Marketing, Social Media, Search Engine Optimization and much more. Click here to learn more about Jarupa. Now – for purposes of full disclosure – Jarupa is the brainchild of Angela Nielsen, a strategic partner with AK in Zenith Creative Group.

Take a look for yourself – investing a few hours of your time in an on-line class is the quickest way to make social media work for you!