Thu, Jul 24, 2014
A A A
Welcome Guest
Free Trial RSS
Get FREE trial access to our award winning publications
Industry Updates

EFAMA report shows European fund managers retain 42% of total expense ratio

Friday, November 11, 2011
Opalesque Industry Update - Today shareholders have access to mutual fund expense information via point of sale documents, prospectuses, fund company websites and external data providers. While these sources allow fund shareholders to determine the total expense ratio (TER), deconstructing that ratio to fees collected by distributors, administrators and custodians, and what is retained by fund management is not possible through current disclosure.

...Data made available to Strategic Insight in the EFAMA members’ survey provides valuable information about the various components of investment management fees and the total expense ratios. Seventeen EFAMA corporate members, accounting for over EUR 1 trillion in EU-domiciled equity and bond funds as of year-end 2010, were surveyed for this report. Key findings:

  • In Europe, a retail equity fund shareholder pays about 175 basis points in average total annual expenses (reflected by the TER) and a retail bond fund shareholder pays about 117 basis points annually. 
  • TER allocations: fund managers retain 42% of TER. Through retrocessions, distributors are paid 41% of the total expense ratio. The balance of 17% is used for operating services such as custody, administration, transfer agency, etc. 
  • Management Fee allocations: Within the bank and insurance distribution channels, stock and bond fund managers retain on average 47% and 45% of annual management charges (AMC) as net investment management fees, respectively. A greater proportion, 53% and 55% respectively, is paid to distributors through retrocessions. Among survey participants, the bank and insurance distribution channels account for nearly 75% of assets. 
  • After fee retrocession to distributors, net investment management fees retained by European mutual fund managers average roughly 74 basis points (asset-weighted) among retail actively managed equity funds and 49 basis points among bond funds. 
  • Asset-weighted average net investment management fees in Europe are only about 3 basis points greater than management fees in the U.S. when excluding the three largest U.S. fund managers (managing $600 million to $1 trillion each). The influence of these mega firms distorts the composite asset-weighted results often used to compare smaller firms. Additionally, one of the managers applies an at-cost pricing model in setting fees for its fund line-up. Even when including these mega sized managers, management fees in the U.S. are approximately just 11 basis points less than net management fees in Europe. 
  • Over 50% of U.S. fund sales through Financial Advisors (FAs) were enabled by assetbased fees of 1.0-1.5% charged in addition to the funds’ TER. This is important to note when comparing European funds’ TERs to U.S. TERs and total shareholder costs. 
  • As the European fund industry expands and matures, operational efficiencies should enable the reduction of fund expenses. Such evolution could be helped through greater clarity and transparency of retained net investment management fees versus distribution/advisory charges. In particular, UCITS IV promises to facilitate scale efficiencies through cross-border mergers and master-feeder structures, although key tax barriers are yet to be addressed. Meanwhile the UK’s Retail Distribution Review (RDR), ban on commissions, and shift towards advisor charging models are prompting the creation of new lower fee funds. The RDR echoes a worldwide trend in regulatory thinking, seen in markets such as Australia, India, and the U.S., which is expected over time to influence EC level initiatives and thus affect fee trends in Europe more broadly.
The full report can be downloaded here: Source

- FG

What do you think?

   Use "anonymous" as my name    |   Alert me via email on new comments   |   
Today's Exclusives Today's Other Voices More Exclusives
Previous Opalesque Exclusives                                  
More Other Voices
Previous Other Voices                                               
Access Alternative Market Briefing
  • Top Forwarded
  • Top Tracked
  • Top Searched
  1. Events – AIMA Australian Hedge Fund Forum, Sept. 16, Sydney[more]

    AIMA Australia invite you to join us at our annual Hedge Fund Forum on Tuesday 16th September 2014 at the Sofitel Sydney Wentworth. The AIMA Australian Hedge Fund Forum is a non-profit hedge fund conference organised by the industry for the industry, featuring quality Australian and internation

  2. Opalesque Exclusive: Loeb, Grantham cite growing economic concerns in letters[more]

    Bailey McCann, Opalesque New York: Hedge fund manager Daniel Loeb, head of Third Point, and Jeremy Grantham of Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co. have both released their quarterly investor letters today. While news is positive on some fronts, and both men see pockets of opportunity, they also h

  3. Investing – Hedge funds expect Netflix earnings to catapult forward, Third Point's Loeb takes stakes in Fibra Uno, YPF, Royal DSM, Lake Capital in talks to back Engine Group[more]

    Hedge funds expect Netflix earnings to catapult forward From Investing.com: Netflix has made major strides forward in 2014 despite ongoing battles with the FCC and cable companies over the issue of net neutrality. The FCC has now received over 500,000 comments from the public on its pend

  4. Opalesque Roundtable: Success in hedge fund marketing not linked to performance, but investor appetite[more]

    Komfie Manalo, Opalesque Asia: Success in marketing a fund is not linked to the performance, but to investor appetite, to the way you can market the fund, and to how much time you can spend to raise assets, said Antoine Rolland, the CEO of incubator and seeding firm

  5. Hedge fund manager Winton Capital making headway with long-only strategy[more]

    From PIonline.com: North American investors are helping Winton Capital Management Ltd. make progress — albeit slowly — toward its founder's goal of becoming a $100 billion company. The firm's ticket to quadrupling its assets under management is unlikely to be one of its scientifically designed manag