2 June 2009
The ongoing and very timely debate continues... who's better suited to weather the financial storm - the small, nimble boutique manager or the larger institutional manager? Jarrod Brown, CEO of Bennelong Funds Management, discusses why it's substance not size that really matters.
No one is immune to the global financial crisis - regardless of reputation, size or previous long-standing success. Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch and Babcock & Brown (to name a few) were all headline examples.
The Australian-sourced investment management market fell 10.7% or $345B during the December 2008 quarter. This marks a drop of 21% since the market peak in December 2007. FUM is now at the same level as September 2006.
Likewise, contributions into superannuation fell 24% from peak levels when the ‘Better Super' changes were introduced1.
Clearly, our industry faces challenges but while the halcyon days seem to have passed, opportunities will continue to exist.
Debate around who will survive these tough market conditions and emerge strong enough to seize subsequent opportunities is escalating. In the funds management arena, discussion is focused on size: will the small, nimble boutique or the larger institutional manager with sizeable funds under management weather the financial storm?
As the demise of the dinosaurs showed, size alone is not a determinant for survival, let alone success. When it comes to fund manager resilience, it's substance, not size that counts.
A sustainable business model
There are key factors beyond business size that can help ensure a fund manager's long-term survival. Embracing a sustainable business model is critical.
There are several acknowledged fundamentals of a successful fund manager.
Quality people are paramount
The high degree of key person risk in an asset management team is well documented. We're not surprised when the departure of an asset management head is followed by outflows from the fund they once managed.
This key person risk means finding the right people with strong cultural alignment and water tight reasons to remain with the team (eg. part ownership, co-investment in the fund) will be critical. In their absence, staff retention and achieving alignment with investors will be challenging.
The rise of boutiques
The surge of new boutiques over recent years suggests that, at the very least, there's some dissatisfaction with the larger institutional players. Perhaps more importantly, the growth in boutiques has served to illustrate a continued desire to work in an entrepreneurial culture free from many institutionally-common distractions.
Respected industry figures, however, are predicting consolidation in the Australian funds management industry.
Whilst fund manager consolidation may be inevitable, the defining factor will be the business model; those with a sustainable business model will be the survivors and the institutional versus boutique issue will ultimately have little input into the outcome.
Once business sustainability has been challenged, all other characteristics of both institutional and boutique models should be open to review and assessment on their own merits.
At Bennelong Funds Management, our focus is not only on performing in today's economic climate, but equally on building a robust funds management business for the future.
Navigating through these turbulent markets is, undeniably challenging. But there are still plenty of opportunities in the marketplace and we remain focused on these.
1 Rainmaker Roundup, Edition 45, December 2008
If you enjoyed this article, please share to help others find it.