Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 279

Identifying value for money in active management

With the proliferation of cheap passive and factor-based product being sold to retail investors, the importance of demonstrating ‘value for money’ has never been more important for active fund managers.

The recent decision by US fund manager Fidelity to offer an index product for free (zero fee!) clearly hit the mark when it comes to an effective marketing campaign. In the first month, this strategy reportedly raised over US$1 billion. Clearly loss leading, but Fidelity will make money lending the stock to the ‘short-sellers’ and by attracting fee-paying clients to their client brokerage platform and asset management products.

Aside from the impact on the established index providers, consider the effect on ‘active’ portfolios on their platforms that run a traditional ‘benchmark aware’ approach. Regulators are also interested. Late last year, the New York Attorney-General and the UK Financial Conduct Authority proposed rules to crack down on closet indexers. The spotlight is firmly pointed on what represents true value for money when it comes to charging retail fees.

Institutional mindset

Benchmark aware or closet index managers run low tracking error and lower active share strategies largely for commercial reasons.

Institutional investors (pension funds) traditionally hired a fund manager to deliver investment returns aligned with an allocated risk budget, which is based on a broader strategic asset allocation decision. The unintended consequence has been a proliferation of benchmark hugging. So, what is wrong with that? Outcomes for clients have largely been achieved within a tight range. The problem lies with the cost for that offering in the retail market. If a client is paying small institutional fees, a reasonable return is still possible. However, such an outcome net of fees falls rapidly for retail clients, who are generally charged higher fee levels for the same portfolio.

Brand risk versus investment risk

For an asset management organisation with a mature client base and a strong reputation, running a retail strategy with a lower tracking error can be a way to harvest fee revenue. By constructing a portfolio with tight constraints around a benchmark, if the manager has a bad year they won’t underperform so much that their investors get nervous. Will clients fire the manager if they return the benchmark +2% or -2%? Probably not, if they have a strong brand.

Running a portfolio with low tracking error and low active share can mean a large proportion of the portfolio is already represented in the index. As a result, an unattainably high percentage of the ‘active’ stock decisions must be correct to deliver any outperformance after fees. That said, there have been many examples of highly-skilled fund managers running large portfolios in well-established institutions, who can achieve this consistent outperformance. Constraining a manager places greater emphasis on the consistency of correct decisions and discipline of process. It could be argued these individuals would be better suited to running a less-constrained approach with capped levels of assets in their own boutique investment management environment.

The true cost for retail investors is opportunity cost

The impact of limiting a skilled manager can be displayed in a simple theoretical model [Klement 2016]. The chart below shows the best and worst excess return outcomes (using a 95% confidence interval which implies a 2 standard deviation as shown in the chart) for a fund manager who has a reasonable level of skill and ability to outperform. In more technical language, the skill in this example is an 'information ratio' of 0.5, implying consistent performance above the index relative to the active risk taken. This manager is managing two theoretical portfolios, one with a tracking error of 2% (light blue) and a second portfolio with a tracking error of 4% (dark blue).

Theoretical model – best and worst return outcomes

Source: Fidante Partners

In the worst possible case, with this manager underperforming, the lower tracking error results in the underperformance of the fund being halved. This is a reasonable outcome for the client and has protected some of the downside. However, the real cost of constraining a skilled manager is that the client upside is effectively halved if the manager performs well. In this theoretical example, in any given year the upper limit of the best possible scenario is reduced from 9.8% outperformance to 4.9%. The impact is over 20% when compounded over ten years.

Value for money in active management comes back to the skill of an investment manager

Core to this example is selecting a skillful manager that will consistently outperform over the longer term. If a retail investor can identify a skillful manager who has freedom to exercise that skill, this is likely to lead to the best outcome for retail investors. Conviction, skill and a consistent and disciplined process are key attributes Fidante Partners look for when partnering with boutique investment managers.

 

Tim Koroknay is a Senior Investment Specialist at Fidante Partners, a sponsor of Cuffelinks. This article is for general information only and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

For more articles and papers from Fidante, please click here.

9 Comments
Angus McLeod
November 11, 2018

"Core to this example is selecting a skillful manager that will consistently outperform over the longer term."

And there's the rub. According to the S&P SPIVA Report, such a manager does not exist. After fees, there's no real outperformance to be found among active managers. And what exactly is "the longer term"? Equity investors should be looking at decades rather than years as their investment horizon over which time the compounding effect (against them) of fees, which are not mentioned in this article, is significant.

If some special skill exists to select - ex ante - the elusive outperforming manager then please put me in touch with that person.

Graham Hand
November 11, 2018

Hi Angus, in the interests of putting both sides, here's a recent article casting doubts on the accuracy of the SPIVA research: https://cuffelinks.com.au/issues-australian-spiva-scorecard/

Tim Koroknay
November 09, 2018

Thank you for all the comments.

In response to Warren's comments about security lending, the Fidelity Zero Funds prospectus states one of the key risks, and in fact a principal investment strategy for the funds is security lending. It is conducted to defray fund expenses, with "the majority" from the securities lending program goes to fund shareholders. It is noted the funds don't pay Fidelity any fees associated with securities lending. So Warren is correct, the sentence above should read "the Fidelity Funds will generate income from lending the stock to short sellers to offset costs."

In response to a number of the other comments, the message of this article is this: if you do decide to invest with an active investment manager, ensure that the fund manager managing the fund is taking adequate active risk, given the fees being charged. If not, it can significantly cap the upside for investors.. (assuming they are good investors, which granted is not always the case!). The boutique advantage is a powerful one, and from our experience a great environment for the best investment talent to flourish.

Ashley
November 08, 2018

Good read. News to me that Fidelity is making money stock lending to short sellers to pay for the free ETFs.

Warren Bird
November 08, 2018

Indeed. I have an ethical issue with using investor funds in a way that enhances returns, but siphoning those returns off as a hidden fee. From what I can see on Fidelity's web sites, they don't do this, so perhaps the author of the article needs to back that claim up or withdraw the comment.

We had a securities lending program in our bond funds at Colonial for a while, but the income earned went into the fund.

Though to be honest, the amount earned was trifling in the scheme of things and the return enhancement wasn't even worth mentioning in client reports most of the time. So it was no great loss when the program stopped.

Peter Thompson
November 07, 2018

"Core to this example is selecting a skillful manager that will consistently outperform over the longer term. If a retail investor can identify a skillful manager..."

Therein lies the problem. The average investor has basically no chance of being able to assess, up front, whether an active manager can outperform their benchmark over the longer term...

(see this research from Morningstar - https://www.morningstar.com/content/dam/marketing/shared/pdfs/Research/HowLongGoodFundUnderperformBenchmark.pdf)

Paul
November 08, 2018

Similarly, plenty of research suggests 85% of active managers cannot beat the index over 5 years.. good luck finding the 15%..

Ian Bradford
November 08, 2018

Just one of the reasons I love the FGX/FGG funds run by Wilson Asset Management. I do like the idea of getting the best managers working for me (with no fees), but I trust WAM to do a much better job of selecting the fund managers than I could too! The fact that 1% gets donated to charity is a fantastic advantage when you consider that its also the carrot that gets the fund managers on board.

SMSF Trustee
November 07, 2018

Is this manager a person, a team, a firm, a process or something else?

Not arguing against what you've said, but what is it exactly that you've said?

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Choosing your investment strategy is like a road journey

Careful what you wish for chasing franking

Retail investors can invest like institutions

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Three steps to planning your spending in retirement

What happens when a superannuation expert sets up his own retirement portfolio using decades of knowledge? He finds he can afford much more investment risk in his portfolio than conventional thinking suggests.

Finding sustainable dividend stocks on the ASX

There is a small universe of companies on the ASX which are reliable dividend payers over five years, are fairly valued and are classified as ‘negligible’ or ‘low’ on both ESG risk and carbon risk.

Among key trends in Australian banks, one factor stands out

The Big Four banks look similar but they are at fundamentally different stages as they move to simpler business models. Amid challenges from operating systems, loan growth and neobank threats, one factor stands tall.

How inflation impacts different types of investments

A comprehensive study of the impact of inflation on returns from different assets over the past 120 years. The high returns in recent years are due to low inflation and falling rates but this ‘sweet spot’ is ending.

Why mega-tech growth are the best ‘value’ stocks in the market

They are six of the greatest businesses ever and should form part of the global portfolios of all investors. The market sees risk in inflation and valuations but the companies are positioned for outstanding growth.

How to manage the run down in your income in retirement

The first of five articles on modern retirement income products that aim for an increasing pension that lasts for life and on average should not decline in real terms. They are not silver bullets but worth a look.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Retirement income promise relies on spending capital

The Government has taken the next step towards encouraging retirees to live off their capital, and from 1 July 2022 will require trustees - even SMSFs - to offer a retirement income product to protect longevity risk.

Superannuation

How retirees might find a retirement solution in future

Superannuation funds need to establish a framework that offers retirees a retirement income solution that lasts a lifetime. It will challenge trustees to find a way to engage that their members understand and trust.

Investment strategies

Dividend investors, your turn is coming

Dividend payments from listed companies, depended on by many in retirement, have lagged the rebound in share prices over the past year. Better times are ahead but sources of dividends will differ from previous years.

Investment strategies

Four tips to catch the next 10-bagger in early-stage growth

Small cap investors face less mature companies with zero profit that need significant capital for growth. Without years of financial data to rely on, investors must employ creative ways to value companies.

Investment strategies

Investing in Japan: ready for an Olympic revival?

All eyes are on Japan and the opportunity to win for competing athletes. After disappointing investors for many years, Japan is also in focus for its value, diversification and the safe haven status of its currency.

Fixed interest

Five lessons for bond investors from the Virgin collapse

The collapse of Virgin Australia not only hit shareholders, but their bond investors received between 9 and 13 cents in the $1. A widely-diversified portfolio can tolerate losses better than a concentrated one.

Investment strategies

The 60:40 portfolio ... if no longer appropriate, then what is?

The traditional 60/40 portfolio might deliver only 1.5% above inflation in future without diversification benefits. Knowing an asset’s attributes rather than arbitrary definitions is better for investors.

Retirement

Two factors that can transform retirement investing

Retirees want better returns but they have limited appetite to dial up their risk exposure in order to achieve it. Financial advice and protection strategies in portfolios can enhance investment outcomes.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 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. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.