The active fund management industry is going through an odd patch at the moment and showing signs of insecurity after a decade of confidence.
Despite the economic crisis ten years ago, the fund management industry has generally ridden a prosperous wave as markets have been propelled ever upwards, with much thanks due to quantitative easing. According to The Investment Association, the trade body for the fund management industry in the UK, assets under management have doubled to £8.1 billion by 2017. The FCA estimates that operating margins have on average been 36%, comparing favourably against the broader economy where the average operating margin for all UK listed companies, including asset management, was 16%. This is partly due to increasing assets under management growing revenues much faster than costs, again improving margins.
With the rise in profitability, the industry has seen a rise in regulation with the Markets in Financial Instruments (MiFID) II being introduced in January 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulation coming in May.
So as assets under management and profitability rise, with greater controls through regulation, why is there insecurity in the industry?
There is a growing consensus from the fund management community that the decade-long bull market in real assets may be stalling and returns in 2018 will be negligible at best. Peer group investment performance has narrowed as many fund managers appear to be making similar market calls. Market veterans have seen this before and long-term investors will digest the current hiatus with no more than a slight hiccough.
Does the insecurity exist because of what could be a crossroads of profitability and greater transparency on costs and performance? Research from Invesco PowerShares, a passive fund provider, suggested that 67% of institutional and sophisticated investors believe that MiFID II will result in increased use of exchanged traded funds (ETF) by institutional investors in Europe. The research cites transparency of low costs and management fees being the top reason given for the expected increased flows into passive investments.
It might feel insecure about the future and facing margin pressure, but the fund management industry must have the confidence to set out its views on the investment markets, no matter how painful it might seem. Active managers should not worry how they look compared to their peers or the passive competition, but to explain clearly the headwinds they are prepared for and the ones they will let go. They should also be more explicit about the positives of successful active management over passive or ETFs in terms of counterparty and momentum risk.
Clarity on costs and performance is good for investor confidence. Managers must demonstrate conviction on their distinctive investment approach, so clients can make a more informed choice between them. If they cannot achieve this, the managers’ profits will suffer as clients move their money elsewhere.