Investors Seek Cost Cuts Amid Return Challenges

In particular, “alternative” investment classes are playing an increasingly important role in the effort to meet necessary portfolio returns, Cerulli finds.

According to new research from Cerulli Associates, institutions that were once able to meet their target returns by investing in mostly long-only equity or fixed income are being forced more into “risk assets.”

In particular, “alternative” investment classes are playing an increasingly important role in the effort to meet necessary portfolio returns, Cerulli finds.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

“Across the U.S. institutional landscape, investors are feeling the impact of weak investment returns and the prolonged low-interest-rate environment,” Cerulli reports. “As the pressure to meet assumed return targets continues for all types of institutional asset owners, many investors have been forced to look at different options in an attempt to reach their desired objectives.”

According to Cerulli, institutions have at the same time “begun exploring a variety of ways to make their portfolios more efficient.” Chris Mason, senior analyst at Cerulli, suggests much of the focus has been on ways to reduce administrative costs as well as investment management costs, including the fees paid to third-party managers.

“Insourcing is one of the ways in which some institutions have attempted to reduce their investment management costs,” Cerulli researchers explain. “Institutions choose to bring investment management responsibilities in-house for a portion of the investment portfolio to save on costs of external management, particularly in traditional equity, fixed income, and derivatives instruments.”

Of course, there are additional expenses to consider with this model, such as technology upgrades, as well as systems to handle portfolio management and administrative capabilities.

“Insourcing is considered most common for larger institutional investors, but there is no minimum size necessary,” says Mason.

NEXT: Cost cutting can be complicated 

The Cerulli report goes on to argue that insourcing and outsourcing both have important applications for different types of institutional investors.

“One of the major advantages of outsourcing investment responsibilities is a faster decision-making process and the transfer of monitoring responsibility that can free up time for professionals to focus on their organizations," adds Mason. “Despite the many benefits of outsourcing, providers and investors still have a variety of concerns, such as potential conflicts of interest for firms that offer proprietary products or strategies.”

Another popular way that institutions have tried to mitigate investment management fees is through passive investing, the Cerulli report shows. Although many institutional asset managers indicate that competition with passive management is “very challenging” to growing institutional assets, Cerulli believes the use of passive investments compared to active investments is “not the either/or proposition it has become among individual investors and retirement plans.”

In fact, after several years of strong inflows, recent data suggests institutional demand for passive strategies may be easing, Cerulli concludes.

These findings are from Cerulli's latest report, “U.S. Institutional Markets 2016: Reassessing Opportunities for Growth Across Multiple Institutional Asset Pools.” More information is available here

Financial Advisers Can Build On Strong Base of Trust

A new study by Spectrem Group highlights increased trust of financial advisers among wealthy investors, and it offers guidance on how advisers can enhance their relationships with clients.

Affluent investors place more trust in their financial advisers than they do in their lawyers and accountants, according to a new study by the Spectrem Group. 

Even though the level of trust placed in advisers remains lower than it stood before the Great Recession, the survey indicates improved satisfaction with advisers, as some investors are ranking them as high as their primary care physicians in terms of trust.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

The report, “Advisor Relationships and Changing Advice Requirements,” outlines how trust is a crucial factor in determining how investors choose and work with financial advisers. It also highlights ways in which advisers can enhance their relationships with clients. The study focused on mass affluent investors with a net worth between $100,000 and $1 million (not including primary residence), the millionaire investor with a net worth between $1 million and $5 million, and the ultra high net-worth (UHNW) investor, with a net worth between $5 million and $25 million.

“Affluent investors often carry the burden of sustaining and building their family’s wealth, sometimes for generations, which is why it is critical that their relationship with an adviser be built on long-term trust,” says Spectrem Group President George H. Walper Jr. “Because their hard-earned money is at stake, that trust will literally have to be earned, and frequent and proactive communication by advisers is key to nurturing an enduring relationship built on trust.”

Lack of communication and proactivity were cited as the biggest driving factors in terminating relationships with advisers. Sixty-one percent of mass affluent investors said that an adviser’s failure to return phone calls in a timely manner will cause them to end their relationships. Sixty-three percent of millionaires and 71% of UHNW investors said the same.

Preferences regarding communication varied among wealth classes. The study found that 45% of mass affluent investors want their adviser to initiate contact with them on a quarterly basis. Nineteen percent would prefer that this happen monthly. Thirty-five percent of UHNW investors expect their adviser to return phone calls within two hours, and nearly 68% consider a returned call the next day unacceptable.

Trust is also a major factor in determining who investors choose to work with. The study found most investors initiate relationships with advisers following referrals from other people they trust. Fifty-one percent of mass affluent investors, 47% of millionaire investors, and 53% of UHNW investors are initially introduced to an adviser through the referral by a family member or friend.

However, nearly six in 10 Millionaires and almost half of UHNW investors believe their advisers are biased toward certain groups of products, and are more interested in pushing those products than they are in offering advice that will benefit them for the long term.

Additional insights on the three wealth segments examined in the report, as well as information about other Spectrem studies, are available at Spectrem.com.

«