View more on these topics

FCA forces fund managers to prove value

The FCA has introduced new rules forcing fund managers to ensure their products provide value for the end investor.

As part of its asset management market study, the FCA has published final policy changes today after consultation last year.

It has decided to press ahead with new rules to strengthen regulation intended to make fund managers act in the best interests of their investors.

In its original consultation, the FCA proposed that each fund’s value for money should be assessed relative to a set of factors including the cost of delivering it and the quality of service, making this public each year and asking managers to take action if funds are found to be poor value for money.

After receiving feedback, the FCA has opted for final rules under which fund managers will still have to produce an annual value statement, but this will not be described in value for money terms after industry responses criticised the wording for being too focused on charges and not on the wider benefits of the product.

The FCA writes: “We have found that fund managers generally do not consider robustly whether they are delivering value for money, despite their existing obligations.

“There was broad support for our view that value is at the heart of the asset management proposition and that, as agents, fund managers owe duties to their underlying beneficiaries, the investors in the fund. Only a minority of respondents felt we should not introduce an obligatory assessment of value at all.

“We accept that our draft rules could be seen as too focused on fund managers’ costs rather than the full value proposition of funds, which was not our intention. We have redrafted our final rules to clarify that fund charges should be assessed in the context of the overall value delivered, rather than using the term ‘value for money’”

The FCA has also given managers longer to meet this requirement, with rules coming in in 18 months time as opposed to the 12 months originally consulted on.

The regulator has also introduced new rules today mandating that fund managers have at least two independent directors on their boards and that independent directors make up a minimum 25 per cent of board positions.

The FCA said it would continue to consider whether trail commission should continue to be allowed after respondents to the consultation were split on the issue.

Recommended

Royal London drawdown sales spike

A spike in drawdown sales has helped Royal London report a 68 per cent increase in individual pension business. The provider says that as “customers continued to take advantage of the pension freedoms”, new business sales of individual pensions including income drawdown in 2017 grew from £3.8bn to £6.3bn. Royal London chief executive Phil Loney […]

Chris Budd
2

Bristol IFA sells firm as staff set to share in profits

Ovation Finance founder Chris Budd has sold his firm, opting for a model that allows staff to control the business without owning shares. Shares in the company are being sold to an employee ownership trust. As Budd explains in an Adviser Lounge article, the trust doesn’t currently have any money because it is newly established […]

Identifying best-in-class UK stocks — Mark Martin, Neptune UK Opportunities Fund

FE Alpha Manager Mark Martin assumed management of the multi-cap UK Opportunities Fund at the beginning of February. As manager of the highly regarded UK Mid Cap Fund, Martin has begun restructuring the new portfolio to focus on our very best UK stock ideas from across the FTSE All-Share Index. In this video, update Martin addresses:

– Themes informing the UK Opportunities Fund
– The multi-cap structure of the fund
– UK equity valuations

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 3 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Jonathan Willis 5th April 2018 at 8:34 am

    Wouldn’t it be good if someone regulated the cost of a builder being value for money, or a plumber or mechanic or any service offer you might take up. How does someone who is not in the field no if they are getting value for money when u have no one telling you whether the quality of the work is up to standard, a good price etc etc.

  2. I have to admire the way the FCA are trying (hahaha bloody HA) to distance the reasoning for this away from costs/money being the main yard stick for value !

    Yet it is blindingly obvious to the rest of us…. “value” is the one thing in our industry which becomes apparent over many years, yet the FCA seem to think its instantaneous, like its tangible, we are not selling cars here, we are not selling coffee where one would be able to ascertain value pretty much immediately.

    So the only thing is….. the FCA is determining “value” on the basis of the “cost/money” or what it believe’s to be expensive, about right, or cheap.

    Something they painstakingly try to avoid in the article…

    All this from a public champion, who’s own salary bill comes (which the clients of our industry pay for) in at around £101,000 per head…..
    Value ?

  3. Wish I could get regulate the ‘value’ levels of the fees I have to pay! 🙁

Leave a comment