Foto: Jonathan, Flickr, Creative Commons. Julius Baer nombra a Jimmy Lee nuevo responsable para Asia Pacífico
Jimmy Lee will join Julius Baer on 1 October 2015 to become Head Asia Pacific and a member of Bank Julius Baer’s Executive Board with effect from 1 January 2016. In the past 25 years, Jimmy Lee has had a proven track record in the private banking industry in Asia and thus brings a wealth of expertise to Julius Baer.
Having worked at Credit Suisse Group for a total of eleven years, he was most recently Market Group Head Hong Kong at Credit Suisse. Previously, he acted as Chief Executive Officer Asia of Clariden Leu from 2009 to 2012 and headed the integration of the bank into Credit Suisse in the Asia Pacific region in 2012/13. Prior to that, Jimmy Lee was Head Private Wealth Management Southeast Asia / South Asia at Deutsche Bank for five years and also held a number of other top management positions in the financial industry in Asia.
After successfully building up and leading Julius Baer’s business in Asia Pacific for ten years and managing the seamless integration of Merrill Lynch’s International Wealth Management business (IWM) into the Bank’s local operations, Dr Thomas R. Meier, current Region Head Asia Pacific, has expressed the wish to return to Switzerland to continue his distinguished career at the Group’s headquarters. As of 1 January 2016, he will be non-executive Vice Chairman Wealth Management, reporting to Chief Executive Officer Boris F.J. Collardi. As part of this new role, he will take over various key tasks at the Group level.
Boris F.J. Collardi, Chief Executive Officer of Julius Baer, commented: “I am very pleased that we have been able to win Jimmy Lee and warmly welcome him to Julius Baer. With Jimmy’s vast experience and his extensive network, we will launch the next phase of growth and take our presence in Asia to the next level.”
Boris F.J. Collardi added: “In the past ten years, Tom Meier has led our operations in Asia Pacific from modest beginnings to being one of the major players in this most important growth market today. I would like to thank him for this truly extraordinary achievement. In his new role as non-executive Vice Chairman, we can continue to draw on Tom’s vast and valuable private banking knowledge.”
Today, Asia is Julius Baer’s second home market with nearly a quarter of the Group’s assets under management globally. After the successful integration of the IWM business in 2014, Julius Baer is now one of the leading international wealth managers in the region.
Photo: Francis Bijl . iShares Is Preparing a New ETF Tracking the Barclays Global Aggregate Index, Expanding its Fixed Income Strategies
iShares has filed for a fund that will be the international answer to its iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF, as well as the main competitor of the Vanguard Total International Bond ETF.
The iShares International Aggregate Bond ETF will track the Barclays Global Aggregate ex USD 10% Issuer Capped (Hedged) Index, a currency-hedged index of nearly 8,000 non-USD investment-grade fixed-income securities issued in 55 developed and emerging countries.
The Vanguard Total International Bond ETF is the only fund of its kind at the moment; it also provides broad exposure to the non-U.S. investment-grade bond space with a currency hedge. It was launched in 2013 and has accumulated nearly US$ 3.5 billion in assets under management. When Vanguard launched the ETF along with an emerging markets bond ETF, there was a great deal of investor interest, as it was the first time that the fund provider had delved into the international fixed-income universe.
Since bond exchange traded funds were first launched in 2002, US-listed bond ETFs have grown to approximately US$ 320 billion in assets, becoming an increasingly important part of financial advisors’ portfolios due to their low cost, tax efficiency, and competitive performance.
Alexander Darwall, gestor del fondo Jupiter European Growth. Foto cedida. Jupiter: “Las compañías de éxito con catalizadores de crecimiento seculares se verán recompensadas”
Alexander Darwall, fund manager of the Jupiter European Growth Fund, explains in this interview with Funds Society that he does not invest depending on the macro evironment: he looks for successful companies that, tapping into secular rather than simply macro growth drivers, will be well rewarded. And he follows this 3 long term trends: global growth; application of digital technology; and change in regulations.
How optimistic are you regarding Europe’s growth, and what about European companies?
We are optimistic about European companies that put their expertise to use to develop world-leading products and services. Our aim is to build a portfolio of such world-class companies that tap into long term structural trends such as the impact of technology, globalisation and changes in regulation rather than taking a view on the macroeconomic cycle.
Will the credit boost be the main driver of the economy recovery? Which other factors?
Improving credit conditions in Europe are welcome news. However, we believe that the liberalisation of markets, ongoing globalisation and structural reforms are required to sustain economic growth. Our focus is to try to find companies with the entrepreneurial drive to bring new products and services to market that consumers willingly pay for.
How could the growth picture affect equity markets in the next months? Do you expect a rally in European equities?
We do not take a view about where equities will trade in the next few months. We look for strong, proven business models whose success is determined to a large extent by their own efforts rather than by the general macro environment. These companies tend to tap into multi-year structural drivers, such as the rising incidence of diabetes or the application of new digital technologies, such as digital payments. By way of example, 7 holdings with an average weight of 29% have been in the portfolio for over 7 years (as at 31 July 2015), demonstrating that we do not sell a sensible business model when market sentiment turns negative, which it periodically does. This is where our focus on meeting corporates rather than the sell-side is crucial – as a team we meet 200 or so corporates a year – as the stock market is prone to panic at the top and bottom of the market. In summary we are confident that with a good degree of patience, successful companies tapping into secular rather than simply macro growth drivers will be well rewarded.
There is much consensus about the attractiveness of European equity at the moment… Could this be dangerous?
We look for market leaders with a favourable market structure, focussing on the fundamentals, and do not spend our time worrying about the macro picture and short term market volatility. Valuation is intrinsically difficult and we approach the subject with due humility. Our view is to try to identify companies that have the ingredients for success that we look for and to subsequently decide what we are willing to pay for them. This is the key difference between an investor and a speculator; an investor invests in a business imagining it to be unlisted and with a view to never selling it, while a speculator’s focus is to find someone to buy the asset off you at a higher price and to forecast changes in market sentiment. Deciding on price before choosing what it is we want to buy is not an approach we favour.
Our starting point for an investment is to ensure that a company is managed for the benefit of minority shareholders. We then look for the right ingredients, which are summarised in the following 4 sequential steps: The ‘right’ company (the company offers a core competence that differentiates it from competitors and which it can monetise. Typically, we are drawn to companies that are less capital intensive and have more intellectual property); The right management (the business is presided over by an excellent management team and has a strong corporate governance and company culture); Structural trend (the company has a number of growth options and taps into clearly identifiable multi-year structural trends); Valuation (we are of the belief that where we are right about the first three steps, we tend to have positive surprises, which is the inverse of the ‘value trap’, where we are wrong about the inputs).
Are Central Banks helping to generate a bubble in European equities?
Our view is that quantitative easing does not address Europe’s more fundamental structural problems. We are confident that companies offering a special product will be well rewarded, if we exercise the right degree of patience.
Do you think last corrections due to the Greek crisis could generate opportunities to buy?
Greece or its consequences for stock markets has no direct bearing on our portfolio, as we try to be invested in companies for whom the outcome is not a pressing concern.For all our investments, first we identify what assets we would like to own; then we decide on price. We have nothing against Greece, but we have not identified the ‘right’ companies there: world-beating companies offering differentiated products that consumers are willing to pay for. As such, we do not have any holdings listed in Greece. Most of the companies in the portfolio are global in nature. As at end of June 2015, approximately 80% of the portfolio is invested in global businesses that happen to be listed in Europe; the remaining 20% of the fund in invested in companies that operate in Europe. No single company in the portfolio has any significant exposure to Greece.
How do you see Greece agreement with Europe and what do you think it could mean to the markets?
Typical concerns for the companies in the portfolio are the impact of technology, regulations, consumer habits, as well as managing the lifecycle of their product, commoditisation, and motivating employees in the Research and Development department. Predicting the macro is extremely difficult, so our focus is to stick to our strengths: identifying successful business models, looking for patters of success across sectors from our investment experience.
How does the Euro contribute to the impulse of the markets and in which levels do you see it vs dollar?
As with the macro, we spend no time trying to predict foreign exchange, as we try to be invested in companies for whom the FX is not a pressing concern. Most of the companies in the portfolio sell their wares globally, so at any one time they are gaining and losing from FX; they tend to take translation risk rather than transaction risk. These companies do not rely on the exchange rate to succeed. Instead, their priority is bringing the best product or service to market. Many companies have been in the fund for many years, during which time they have benefited and suffered due to the FX, but that has not been the key determinant of their success.
In which companies or sectors do you have more convictions?
As investment specialists, we look for companies with similar characteristics across sectors, such as a differentiated product, free pricing, high barriers to entry, Intellectual Property over Capex and a proven track record. We do not tend to find companies with these characteristics in utilities (regulated pricing) or in commodities, real estate and mainstream financials (lack of differentiation). The areas in which we find many of my ideas are technology, healthcare, industrials and the media.
While we aim to put together a portfolio of unique, uncorrelated companies, the holdings can be loosely grouped under three structural long term trends: Global growth (companies tapping into global growth, such as healthcare); Application of Digital technology (for example, business benefiting from the growth in ecommerce); and change in regulations (for example, disruptive business models that are benefiting from the mainstream banks being capital constrained).
How positive are you on banks? Why?
Historically, the fund has been structurally underweight the financial sector. We have tended to be underweight the mainstream banks and insurance companies. To us, banks have an undifferentiated offer, they have a lack of pricing power and they rely on macro factors that are out of their control such as interest rates move, monetary policy, currencies etc. We favour ‘alternative financials’ that are benefiting from changes in regulation. There is an unmet demand for credit and while mainstream banks are rebuilding their balance sheets and retrenching from non-core areas. For example, Provident Financial offers financing to non-standard lenders in the UK which they would otherwise not receive from the mainstream banks.
Core Europe or peripheral? And what’s about Spain?
It is never for me a question of core Europe versus peripheral Europe but rather more whether my analysis of a company demonstrates that it has excellent long-term growth prospects, is exposed to growth in global trade and productivity and has a future, as far as is reasonably possible that depend on their own efforts and not on factors beyond their control.
Spanish-listed companies accounted for around 7.6% of our portfolio as at 30 June 2015. We have two companies with headquarters in Spain, Amadeus and Grifols. Amadeus is a global software leader offering a Global Distribution System to airlines and travel agents across the world. They derive less than 50% of their revenues in Europe. Grifols is another global pharma leader manufacturing plasma-derived (blood) products. More than 60% of the company’s revenue is generated in the US. These companies tend to operate globally which offers proof of concept for a company offering a differentiated product or service.
The above commentsrepresents the views of the fund manager at the time of preparation (August 2015) and may be subject to change. Readers should be aware that they should not be interpreted as investment advice. Every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of any information provided, but no assurances or warranties are given.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrCasper von Koskull y Torsten Hagen Jørgensen, de izquierda a derecha. Foto cedida. Nordea nombra a Casper von Koskull nuevo CEO del grupo y a Torsten Hagen Jørgensen nuevo COO
The Board of Directors of Nordea Bank AB (publ) has appointed Casper von Koskull new president and Group CEO and Torsten Hagen Jørgensen new Group COO and deputy Group CEO.
The new leadership team will succeed Christian Clausen who has decided to step down after more than 8 years as CEO of Nordea. The change will take effect 1 November 2015. Christian Clausen will continue in an advisory role until the end of 2016, when he will retire.
Casper von Koskull (54) joined Nordea in 2010 as head of Wholesale Banking and member of Group Executive Management. He came to Nordea following a long career in international banking in Frankfurt, New York and London, most recently as Managing Director and Partner at Goldman Sachs.
Torsten Hagen Jørgensen (50) has held the position as head of Group Corporate Centre and Group CFO in Nordea since January 2013. He joined the bank in 2005 and has been a member of Group Executive Management since 2011.
“I would like to thank Christian Clausen for his invaluable contribution to Nordea’s development into a large, successful international bank. His leadership, customer focus and international outlook are unmatched in banking. I have enjoyed our cooperation the past 4 years, and I am very happy that Christian will accept to be nominated to the Board of Sampo, Nordea’s main shareholder. I fully respect his decision to step down as CEO now, and I wish him the best in the next phase of his active career”, says Björn Wahlroos, chairman of the Board of Directors. The appointments are the outcome of a thorough process run by the Board of Directors.
“With the appointment of Casper von Koskull and Torsten Hagen Jørgensen Nordea will have the ideal team to lead Nordea successfully going forward, combining world class relationship banking and operational excellence competences”, says Björn Wahlroos.
“We look forward to continuing the work to create the Future Relationship Bank. It will be a continuation of our strong customer focus and the crucial focus on compliance as well as on simplification of our processes, cooperating as one Nordea team with our colleagues across the bank”, says Casper von Koskull.
Gerhard Winzer, Chief economist at Erste Asset Management, talks about the transformation process in China’s economy; away from growth driven by production and investment, to growth carried by service and consumption. He also explains how this transformation has negatively affected other emerging markets, specifically the commodity-exporting countries and what to expect in terms of economic growth for the rest of the world.
In his assessment about Chinese economy he highlights the decline of the industrial production: “Even though the GDP growth rate in China increased in the second quarter, thetrend of investment growth and of the growth of industrial production has been on the decline, and exports are shrinking. This suggests that the transformation process in China is the reason for the weakness of the commodity prices, of industrial production, and of the emerging markets: away from growth driven by production and investment to growth carried by service and consumption. The third dimension of this transformation shows that the process has been a bumpy one: the forces of a market economy are to be strengthened at the expense of a centrally planned economy for the allocation of resources.”
On the stocks markets, he mentions the extensive intervention of Chinese government to avoid major problems in their economy: “The government bailed out the markets with extensive interventions when the Chinese equity markets slumped in the wake of strong gains that were not fundamentally justified (e.g. by earnings development). Similar examples in history suggest that further crashes may be avoided but that governmental interventions cannot produce sustainable gains. The fourth dimension, i.e. the internationalisation of the renminbi, will probably also be a bumpy one. It will still take some time before the Chinese currency becomes fully convertible and it can truly assume a function of value storage for foreign capital. In the meantime the emerging markets will remain in a process of adjustment that could continue to depress the currencies.”
On his assessment of economic growth for the rest of the world, he clarifies: “Global GDP growth has probably only increased marginally in the second quarter after the very weak first quarter. Economic activity has thus remained disappointingly weak on a global scale.
At least the US economy managed to recover from the de facto stagnation in the first quarter. According to the initial estimate for the second quarter, the GDP had grown by an annualised 2.3% relative to the previous month. The core inflation rate (q/q) has accelerated to 1.8%. If the economic reports in the coming months suggest a continued recovery, the US central bank will raise the Fed funds rate this year by a slight degree.
The Eurozone, too, has produced positive economic news. For example, the business climate index increased in July, and the banks have loosened their lending guidelines again in Q2. The Greek crisis has apparently not caused the sentiment to decline. The indicators suggest a continued moderate recovery.
The “rest” of the world, however, is facing a further deterioration of the economy, in particular in the emerging countries where many economic indicators have been sliding. Interestingly, with Brazil and Russia two large commodity-exporting countries are currently stuck in a recession.
The manufacturing sector is generally weak across the world, with industrial production shrinking on a global scale. The real exports and imports of goods, too, are on the decline in most regions. Export prices have been receding drastically on a year-on-year basis. We can observe such developments particularly in the Asian emerging markets. Many commodities, especially oil, steel, and copper as well as the precious metals silver and gold have incurred losses.”
After rising sharply in the first quarter of 2015, most equity markets fell back slightly later. The surge in bond yields, the prospect of a tighter monetary policy in the United States, and uncertainties over the future of Greece as well as economic growth in China all contributed to investors’ nervousness and increased their aversion to risk. But despite greater volatility, there has been little change in the economic and financial environment, says Guy Wagner, chief investment officer of Banque de Luxembourg, in an analysis published on BLI’s blog Greece and China et cetera: update on our investment strategy.
“In keeping with recent tradition, the International Monetary Fund has just revised its growth forecasts downwards, this time citing the ‘unexpected weakness in North America’. This revision only illustrates the structural brakes hanging overgrowth and point towards growth significantly below the historic average in the coming months. In this context, there is little prospect of a steady rise in interest rates. Meanwhile, low interest rates will continue to render obsolete the principles that have historically guided asset allocation between equities and bonds.
First of these is the principle that considers equities as risk assets and bonds (at least government bonds) as risk-free (or very low risk). In normal times, an environment like the present, dominated by economic uncertainties, weak growth and contained inflation, would suggest an allocation favouring bonds over equities. Today, however, the situation is such that to obtain any sort of decent yield on bonds, you have to make major concessions on debtor quality. But, making this kind of concession in a world dominated by massive debt and weak growth (which reduces the capacity to service this debt) could prove very dangerous. In fact, it amounts to replacing a risk of volatility by a risk of permanent loss (on the bond markets, you are by definition dealing with leveraged companies). Where long-term investing is concerned, volatility is not the best definition of risk.
So, in terms of financial investments, there are no obvious alternatives to equities, provided they are not valued at ridiculous levels. What about current valuations? The fact is that, depending on the ratio that one uses, it is possible to arrive at the conclusion that equities are cheap, expensive or somewhere in between. Firstly, any valuation method based on current interest rate levels shows that equities are undervalued. Secondly, and generalising somewhat, ratios using current or forecast earnings for the next 12 months show that equity valuations are close to their historic average. And thirdly, according to turnover, equity capital, asset replacement value or normalised profits, equities look expensive. The conclusion of all this could be that the return one might expect from equities in future years will be below the historic average but without there necessarily being a major decline”.
Equity bias but with realistic expectations
In his blog, the expert explains that, in the current conditions, a strategic asset allocation between equities, bonds and cash is bound to favour of place to equities. “This is true even for portfolios whose objective is to generate income rather than capital gains. As Glenn Stevens, Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, said recently, the big question is how can an adequate flow of income be generated for the retired community in the future in a world in which long-term nominal returns on low-risk assets are so low? The answer is that there is no miracle solution and you have to be prepared to take more risks to achieve the desired return.
However, this should not be interpreted as an endorsement of passive management. The fact is that, given the historically low level of bond yields, there is little point in making major adjustments between asset classes (increasing/ reducing equities to the detriment/in favour of bonds) unless one were to bet on short-term movements in these asset classes. This type of market timing is always a hazardous exercise, even though it seems to be the main concern of many fund managers (or their clients). The market fluctuations over recent weeks as the Greek situation unfolded are a good illustration of the futility of this approach. Despite daily movements up and down of varying degrees, the market has remained virtually unchanged overall. Changes in the allocation between equities and bonds based on more tangible elements, such as the relative valuation of the two asset classes, are harder to assess while bond yields are so low, unless a particularly excessive valuation or very unfavourable earnings prospects were to suggest a negative return on equities. But that isn’t the case yet”.
Active management combining quality and dividends
And he defends: “Active management within asset classes, especially equities, is therefore all the more vital. While the economic and financial environment remains weak, it is particularly important not to make concessions in terms of thequality of the companies in which one invests. Since no fund manager would admit to buying poor quality companies, we will just focus here on reiterating what makes for a good quality company. We define it as a company with a sustainable competitive advantage which gives it an edge over the competition and allows it to create entry barriers to its markets. This gives companies better control over their destiny and enables them to capitalise on their strengths, thereby creating a virtuous circle. Such companies are characterised by a high return on equity, little debt and low capital intensity. Note too that in the current context, there is a particularly wide gap between their return on equity and cost of financing, theoretically justifying much higher valuation multiples.
A second investment theme, closely linked to quality, is thatof dividends. One of the investment strategies that has produced the best results over the long term consists of buying companies combining a high dividend yield and a low payout ratio. The high dividend yield makes these companies particularly attractive for investors seeking regular income, while the low payout ratio is reassuring with regard to the sustainable nature of the dividend, and even its potential to increase”.
The Standard Life Investments Property Income Trust has purchased a portfolio of three offices, plus a retail warehouse in cities across the UK. The two separate deals represent a total investment of over £18 million, bringing the Trust’s overall portfolio to just over £300 million.
The offices – in York, Milton Keynes and Dartford – have a total value of £13.25m, reflecting an initial yield of 7.4%. All the offices are fully let to prime tenants with strong covenants.
The retail acquisition is a Halfords retail warehouse, part sublet to Maplin, and a car show room in Bradford. The asset was acquired for £5.1 million at a yield of 9.5%. It is located next to the dominant retail warehouse park in Bradford.
Jason Baggaley, Fund Manager of the Standard Life Investments Property Income Trust, commented: “These investments demonstrate our confidence in UK regional property markets where we continue to find high quality assets across sectors. The office acquisitions should provide an attractive return on income plus rental growth, while the retail investment offers an attractive running yield with plenty of asset management potential.”
. Los asesores independientes de EE.UU. (RIAs) alcanzan cifras récord de crecimiento y rentabilidad
As many independent registered investment advisor (RIA) firms surpass the 20 years-in-business mark, their revenue and profitability have achieved all-time highs according to results from Charles Schwab’s 2015 RIA Benchmarking Study. Nearly half of firms (42%) participating in the Study have doubled their revenue since 2009, and assets under management (AUM) have increased by 75 percent for half of firms in the Study over the same time period, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.1 percent. Along with AUM growth, profitability – measured as standardized operating margin – has risen 36 percent over the last five years and now stands at 27 percent for the median firm in the Study. Moreover, the gap in profitability has decreased between the most profitable and least profitable firms as the industry continues to mature and more firms adopt best practices and technology-led innovations.
Now in its ninth year, the Study includes responses from more than 1,000 firms collectively managing nearly three-quarters of a trillion dollars in assets. In addition to record revenue and profitability, the data also shows that RIA firms have achieved an effective combination of growth and improved operating margins as they are increasingly institutionalizing operations and making strategic decisions around talent – not only to manage their recent growth, but also to be better positioned to succeed into the next decade and beyond. The results indicate that the sustained, rapid growth trajectory over the past five years has also helped build considerable value in many firms. The benchmarking data indicates firms are not only increasing assets under management through both client acquisition and organic growth but are also enjoying high client and employee retention – attributes of business health and value.
“More than half of the RIA firms in the Study are now embarking on their third decade in business and the data shows that they are doing so from a position of competitive strength,” says Jonathan Beatty, senior vice president, sales and relationship management, Schwab Advisor Services. “As RIAs and the industry-at-large continue to mature, firms are learning from each other and sharing best practices to help build scale and fuel growth. The independent model is clearly winning today amonghigh-net-worth investors, and RIAs are also preparing themselves to capture future opportunities.”
With more than $23 trillion in high-net-worth investor assets still held outside of the industry in other advice models, independent advisors have an immense opportunity at hand.
Over the past five years, the number of new clients has surged by more than 24percent for half of the Study participants, and in 2014 alone, top-performing firms added ten percent or more new clients, while the median firm added five percent more clients. Firms are also taking on larger clients; the average account size is now $1.9 million, and $3.9 million among the top-performing firms.
Beyond new client acquisition, firms are also successfully winning and keeping the trust of existing clients as evidenced by a median 97 percent client retention rate year-over-year. Furthermore, among existing clients, firms are increasing share of wallet – top-performing firms increased share of wallet by four percent in 2014.
The Study shows that the combination of new assets and larger account sizes has helped drive firm revenues over the past five years, with the median firm seeing revenue CAGR of 13.6 percent rate and top-performing firms experiencing 18.8 percent revenue CAGR. Larger account sizes have also resulted in improved revenue per professional. The median firm reported $554,000 revenue per professional in 2014 while the top-performing firms indicate revenue of more than $800,000 per professional.
Foto: Doug8888, Flickr, Creative Commons. La industria mundial de fondos alcanza nuevos récords, liderada por EE.UU., Europa, Australia, Japón y Brasil
Investment fund assets worldwide stood at a new all-time high of EUR 37.8 trillion at end March 2015, reflecting growth of 13.7 percent during the first quarter. In U.S. dollar terms, worldwide investment fund assets increased 0.8 percent to stand at USD 40.35 trillion at March 2015, reflecting the depreciation of the euro vis-à-vis the US dollar during the first quarter of 2015, according to the European Fund and Asset Management Association (Efama). Efama has released its latest international statistical release containing the worldwide investment fund industry results for the first quarter of 2015.
Worldwide net cash inflows increased in the first quarter to EUR 574 billion, up from EUR 495 billion in the fourth quarter of 2014, thanks to increased net inflows to equity, bond and balanced/mixed funds.
Long-term funds (all funds excluding money market funds) recorded net inflows of EUR 585 billion during the first quarter, a 54 percent increase from the previous quarter (EUR 379 billion).
Equity funds attracted net inflows of EUR 157 billion, up from EUR 138 billion in the fourth quarter. Bond funds posted increased net inflows of EUR 173 billion, up from EUR 87 billion in the previous quarter. Balanced funds also registered a large net inflow of EUR 213 billion, up from EUR 120 billion in the previous quarter.
Money market funds registered net outflows of EUR 12 billion during the first quarter of 2015, compared to net inflows of EUR 116 billion in the fourth quarter of 2014. This result is largely attributable to net outflows in the United States (EUR 70 billion), whereas Europe registered net inflows during the quarter of EUR 43 billion.
At the end of the first quarter, assets of equity funds represented 40 percent and bond funds represented 21 percent of all investment fund assets worldwide. Of the remaining assets, money market funds represented 11 percent and the asset share of balanced/mixed funds was 17 percent.
The market share of the ten largest countries/regions in the world market were the United States (49.2%), Europe (32.5%), Australia (3.9%), Japan (3.8%), Brazil (3.2%), Canada (3.1%), China (2.0%), Rep. of Korea (0.9%), South Africa (0.4%) and India (0.4%).
Foto: Montecruz Foto
. ¿Dejarán las gestoras de fuera de la UE de comercializar sus vehículos alternativos en Europa debido a AIMFD?
Preqin’s latest survey of global hedge fund managers reveals that most UK- and Europe-based hedge fund managers are AIFMD-compliant: Almost all (90%) of UK-based firms, and 82% of fund managers across the rest of Europe. By contrast, there has been slow uptake among firms beyond the EU’s borders; a quarter of hedge fund managers based across Asia and Rest of World currently comply, and only 15% of firms based in the US.
A large proportion (42%) of fund managers based outside the EU do not plan to raise capital from EU investors in the near future; of this group, 59% are avoiding the region due to concerns about the AIFMD. Many managers based outside the EU are relying on investors to approach them through reverse solicitation. Even so, 38% of US managers have chosen to avoid the EU completely, with most citing compliance costs and the risks arising from uncertainty and lack of guidance surrounding the directive.
The negativity surrounding the AIFMD has reduced over the past six months, with 45% of respondents to Preqin’s June 2015 survey believing the Directive will change the hedge fund landscape for the worse, compared to 58% as of December 2014.
Despite the majority of UK firms being compliant, not a single UK hedge fund manager surveyed expected the AIFMD to have a positive impact on their firm in the coming year. This compares to 55% of non-UK EU hedge funds that believe it will have a positive impact.
Two-thirds of firms globally reported that the costs of complying with the AIFMD are higher than expected. No fund managers reported the costs as lower than expected.
The largest fund managers are more likely to be compliant with the AIFMD regulation; 46% of fund managers with more than $1bn in AUM are compliant, compared to 19% of those with less than $100mn. Forty percent of firms with less than $100mn in AUM will not be marketing a fund within the EU at all.
“As we approach the 22nd July anniversary of its implementation, the AIFMD has had a varied effect on the hedge fund industry. While general negativity towards the regulation has fallen over the past six months, 45% of fund managers still believe the AIFMD will change the industry for the worse, and only 23% feel it will have a positive impact. Although in Europe most hedge funds are AIFMD-compliant, only a relatively small number of fund managers from beyond the EU’s borders have acquired compliance status. Despite having one of the highest levels of compliance (90%), not a single UK-based fund manager felt the directive will have a positive impact on their business.
Many non-EU fund managers are choosing to avoid investment from the region completely, which may result in a reduced choice of funds available for investment for EU-based investors. The leading concern hedge fund managers have about the new regulation is the increased costs of complying with the EU directive, with two thirds of those managers that have acquired the passport stating the costs have been higher than they originally expected”, said Amy Bensted, Head of Hedge Fund Products, Preqin.
