Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 164

Align by design: Steps for success in fund manager engagement

Investors tend to focus predominantly on investment capabilities and operational strength when assessing whether to engage or retain a fund manager. These are important factors, but something often overlooked is alignment, or the extent to which fund managers, acting in their own interest, can also act in the best interests of their investors.

Attention to fund manager alignment is part and parcel of good governance.  As an investor, you want to know to what extent the two of you are ‘in the same boat’ – whether your partner is shoulder-to-shoulder with you or is paddling broadly in the same direction but from a separate vessel.  The difference becomes most evident when the waters aren’t smooth.

We identify three key parties:

  • funds management firm (including the owners)
  • portfolio managers and investment staff
  • investors (including advisers).

Biologists might call this scenario ‘obligate disjunctive symbiosis’, where two or more species live separately but depend on each other for survival. Each party does not necessarily benefit equally, although that is surely a worthy goal for a successful long-term relationship.

Benefits of alignment

To quote Charlie Munger of Berkshire Hathaway fame: “Show me the incentives and I’ll show you the outcome.”

Incentives drive human behaviour and we underestimate them at our peril. It’s not that the majority of fund managers don’t fundamentally want to deliver good outcomes for their clients. Rather, Munger’s quote highlights the importance of embedding a natural proclivity for that to happen.

The right alignment structure:

  • motivates the investment team to ‘go the extra mile’ to the benefit of all parties
  • creates an atmosphere where there is less second-guessing as to what the other party is doing and what their motives are
  • should result in less fund manager switching over time. Changing managers is typically costly, time-consuming and subject to transition risk – in short, where possible it is best avoided.

Steps to improve alignment

Co-invest for success

Assume you have a large amount of money to invest. Would you want your portfolio manager to have a significant amount of their own money similarly invested or not have that sort of skin in the game? Why would they not invest in the same product?

A significant co-investment supports the notion that the manager is going to actively manage the risks in addition to pursuing as much upside as possible.

It’s more the exception than the norm to see disclosure details on co-investment, but it does happen.  To quote an actual factsheet of an equity manager: “The portfolio manager has $100,000 invested in the fund, and staff have $1.5 million invested in the fund, as at quarter-end.”  We can make a judgement call as to how meaningful such amounts are to the staff concerned.

Share a mutual timeframe

As an investor, do you have a long-term investment mentality and have you discussed it with your fund manager? A lot tends to get assumed.

If a portfolio manager detects that his/her client base is likely to react to short-term outcomes, they are not encouraged to make longer-term strategic decisions that may well be in the best interest of clients. Good investments often require patience and a side benefit is lower trading costs from lower portfolio turnover.

Defer a portion of rewards

If your portfolio manager performs well and gets a bonus – preferably reflecting a multi-year outcome – then great. But what should happen to that bonus? Would you rather it was released straight away as cash, or half of it was invested in the investment product for a minimum of say three years?

Most of us would take some comfort if the manager had that sum locked away for a while. Then there’s less inducement to take risks in the portfolio which may pay-off in the short term but ‘come home to roost’ later.

Support board independence

As an investor, would you want the board of the funds management entity to have independent directors or consist entirely of internal executives?

Some board independence helps balance the interests of the three parties referred to earlier – shareholders, staff, and stakeholders such as clients. While their presence is no guarantee that investor interests will be at the fore, they offer an increased chance of broad representation at the board table.

Think strategically about fees

When it comes to fees it is useful to establish some principles:

  • Fund managers are entitled to rewards that reflect the true value of their skills
  • As an investor you want to reward skill, though the real question is how much is too much?
  • When it comes to performance-based fees (PBFs) the devil is often in the detail, but a well-designed structure will help create an alignment of interests. This means a benchmark-like performance will receive a lower fee while a great performance should garner a higher fee due to higher investor returns.

Fund managers generally prefer their performance to be judged over a period of years rather than months, as that is the timeframe over which their efforts can crystallise. This is fair enough, though by the same logic, it makes most sense for PBFs to accrue based on a similar time period, as depicted in the area towards the top-right in the chart below. The longer the period, the higher the confidence that skill rather than luck is being rewarded.

Discourage personal trading

There’s plenty of merit in your portfolio manager co-investing in a product, but would you want them to be able to trade in the same asset class separately on a personal account?

In part this represents a compliance issue (prohibiting or making transparent certain trade activity), but even if personal trades are cleared through internal compliance teams, the scope for conflict of interest is hard to eliminate.  And, as a fund management firm, why open up the risk in the context that, as a general statement, portfolio managers are fairly well compensated for their ‘day jobs’.

Consider the ownership structure

Where investment staff have an ownership stake in the firm, does that promote alignment?

On the positive side, ownership by key individuals can help with staff retention, amplify incentives for the business to succeed, and help foster a longer-term mindset.

On the other hand it ties individuals more directly to the interests of the business, being the total revenue picture, rather than the out-performance of a certain product per se. This is particularly relevant if the product you are invested in does not represent a large part of the overall business, i.e. the success of the firm may not be closely tied to how well that product does. And there is an issue of what to do if a staff member is a shareholder but the strength of their contribution diminishes. Arrangements can be a bit hard to unwind, even though parting company may be the best outcome for the business and for clients.

Hence we can regard the self-ownership model as positive in many respects for alignment purposes, but not purely so.

Implementation issues

Some challenges present themselves when trying to execute material change to alignment structures. Many investors are not big enough, relative to the size of a manager’s total client base, to have meaningful influence. Existing fee structures may be so ingrained that there is little chance of affecting change. In some cases, managers have been so successful that they do not feel obliged to be flexible on arrangements – ‘there is plenty of demand so if you want to invest with us, these are the terms’.

The reality is that negotiation is mostly evident when (a) the investor is large and/or prestigious and (b) the manager or strategy is in its relatively early stages – as they saying goes, he who is most hungry is most flexible. In some cases, smaller or boutique-type firms are well-placed to apply flexibility given relatively smoother pathways to implementing internal policy changes.

Notwithstanding some implementation challenges, fund managers should be open to ways to improve mechanisms for stronger investor alignment.

Conclusion

While it is not realistic to expect every fund manager to tick every alignment box, investor interests need to be at the forefront of the manager selection process.

To sum up, well-structured alignment arrangements:

  • underpin a sense of partnership between investors and fund managers
  • promote strong performance and risk management, and
  • minimise costs related to intensive monitoring and changing managers.

 

David Scobie is a Principal in Mercer’s Investments business, based in Auckland. David advises institutional clients on their investment policies and structures. He is also involved in evaluating fund managers, linking in with Mercer's research capability in Australia and globally.

For a copy of the more detailed paper on manager alignment, click on this link.

 

1 Comments
Tony Hansen
July 14, 2016

Outstanding piece on one of my pet subjects.

 

Leave a Comment:

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Latest Updates

Planning

Will young Australians be better off than their parents?

For much of Australia’s history, each new generation has been better off than the last: better jobs and incomes as well as improved living standards. A new report assesses whether this time may be different.

Superannuation

The rubbery numbers behind super tax concessions

In selling the super tax, Labor has repeated Treasury claims of there being $50 billion in super tax concessions annually, mostly flowing to high-income earners. This figure is vastly overstated.

Investment strategies

A steady road to getting rich

The latest lists of Australia’s wealthiest individuals show that while overall wealth has continued to rise, gains by individuals haven't been uniform. Many might have been better off adopting a simpler investment strategy.

Economy

Would a corporate tax cut boost productivity in Australia?

As inflation eases, the Albanese government is switching its focus to lifting Australia’s sluggish productivity. Can corporate tax cuts reboot growth - or are we chasing a theory that doesn’t quite work here?

Are V-shaped market recoveries becoming more frequent?

April’s sharp rebound may feel familiar, but are V-shaped recoveries really more common in the post-COVID world? A look at market history suggests otherwise and hints that a common bias might be skewing perceptions.

Investment strategies

Asset allocation in a world of riskier developed markets

Old distinctions between developed and emerging market bonds no longer hold true. At a time where true diversification matters more than ever, this has big ramifications for the way that portfolios should be constructed.

Investment strategies

Top 5 investment reads

As the July school holiday break nears, here are some investment classics to put onto your reading list. The books offer lessons in investment strategy, financial disasters, and mergers and acquisitions.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.