Wed, Aug 24, 2016
A A A
Welcome Guest
Free Trial RSS
Get FREE trial access to our award winning publications
Asia Pacific Intelligence

Australia's Zenith asks if the perceived expense of funds of funds is accurate

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Daniel Liptak

Zenith Investment Partners' Daniel Liptak examined the widely debated theory that funds of hedge funds are dead in this month's issue of their alternatives newsletter. Starting from a piece in the March issue of InvestHedge by Greg Fedorinchik of Mesirow, Liptak reports that the article looked at the cost of accessing hedge funds through four approaches: Investment in a commingled FoHF; Investment in a single investment fund (fund of one) managed by an external expert; Direct investment in hedge funds with the help of a generalist consultant; Direct investment in hedge funds with the help of a specialist hedge fund consultant.

Liptak reports that the costs required to invest directly in hedge funds are those that an indirect approach can reduce. Principally, these costs are the level of service provided by the consultant, the cost of internal staff to execute and monitor the investments. For Fofs, the key costs are considered the management fee and the type of structure - commingled or fund of one. And importantly, the scale of the Fof in negotiating fees with underlying managers.

Fedorinchik argues that the fee negotiating ability of a Fof can result in meaningful cost reductions in the form of better terms with the underlying managers, which often includes lower management and performance fees as well as use of incentive fee hurdle rates. These reductions are usually not available to small direct investors.

Liptak found that for a smaller allocation a Fof can offer the cheapest access point and that even for a larger investment there is not a huge difference between investing through a Fof or directly into a hedge fund. "There are of course risks that this analysis does not consider" Liptak writes. These risks include:

Complexity and implementation risk. The added complexity of hedge fund investing can create additional burden on back and middle office of the investor.

Implementation time, a direct program will take longer to implement than a turnkey Fof.

Switching and unwinding will be longer in a direct approach.

However, Fofs offer indirect benefits, which include:

Research and depth of coverage. Large Fofs and specialist advisors typically have teams scattered around the world and therefore should be in the front line when new information is released about a manager or strategy. An in-house team typically is less well-resourced with smaller data and operational support.

Live track record is readily available for a Fof, but not so for a new internal team.

Access to closed or unique managers, Fofs often have long term relationships with such funds and may have capacity agreements in place.

Customisation and service evolution. Investors need to understand which partner or program has the deepest knowledge and ability to customize portfolios as needs change.

Liptak concludes that there is very little difference between the cost of a Fof and investing directly. The issue of the double layer of fees may not be the whole picture given the savings from negotiating fees coupled with some of the benefits listed above.

(This piece first appeared in Opalesque, May 13th.)

 
This article was published in Opalesque's Asia Pacific Intelligence our monthly research update on alternative investments in the Asia-Pacific region.
Asia Pacific Intelligence
Asia Pacific Intelligence
Asia Pacific Intelligence
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. Opalesque Exclusive: Algorithms platform aims to target typical challenges found in quantitative hedge funds[more]

    Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque Geneva: Last month, Quantopian received investments from Point72 Ventures, the new venture capital arm of Steven Cohen’s Point72 Asset Management.

  2. LatAm hedge funds surge in 1H to +24.4%, emerging markets assets rise[more]

    Komfie Manalo, Opalesque Asia: Hedge funds investing in Latin America posted strong gains through mid-2016, reversing declines in four of the past five years, including the last three years, to lead all areas of hedge fund performance through the first half of 2016, according to the latest HFR Em

  3. Opalesque Roundtable: Low and high fee investments often better than mid fee hedge funds[more]

    Komfie Manalo, Opalesque Asia: Hedge funds that charge the low and high fees stuff often provide better returns than "those sort of mid-fee investments", said Keith Haydon, chief investment officer of Man FRM. (Alternative) investment managers who charge high fees would often provide the most int

  4. Hedge fund investors pull $5.7 billion in July[more]

    From Bloomberg.com: Hedge funds suffered a third consecutive month of outflows in July as investors withdrew $5.7 billion, according to industry tracker Eurekahedge. Redemptions totaled $20.7 billion in the three months through July, with money managers betting on equities suffering $18.4 bill

  5. …And Finally - Police contact Catholic Church after baffling ‘poltergeist’ report[more]

    From Telegraph.co.uk: Police officers in Scotland have called in representatives from the Catholic Church after investigating reports of “disturbing incidents” of a "poltergeist" at a family home. A mother and her teenage son were said to be “extremely distressed” after experiencing what the D