Editorial: Round one of AoV

The first round of the FCA’s ‘Assessment of Value’ regime is over and some firms have reduced fees on certain funds after deciding that value was not always given to the end customer. But what appears to be the regulator’s success on behalf of the consumer now has to be reflected upon, because the quality of methodologies and reporting by asset managers is greatly varied.

As our article shows, the FCA’s decision to offer pointers rather than cast-iron templates for how fund boards assess value in fund ranges has led to differences in approach that have impacted how firms report performance, fees, and charges.

Performance measures and cost indicators can be conflicted. Added to this is sometimes confusing jargon. It is still difficult for investors to assess value, therefore, albeit there is evidence that many firms have invested heavily in the process and take it seriously.

The value regime as it evolves will call for fund boards – particularly independent non-executive directors who are chiefly steering the initiative at the corporate level – to compare not just their funds’ performance and charges with peer groups, but their whole strategy for scrutinising value and delivering the objectives of the Assessment of Value regime.

Nick Fitzpatrick, Group Editor, Funds Europe

© 2020 funds europe

HAVE YOU READ?

THOUGHT LEADERSHIP

Innovative US companies are providing some of the solutions to the climate crisis and transition to a more sustainable economy. We see potential opportunities in areas including renewable energy and…
FIND OUT MORE
This white paper outlines key challenges impeding the growth of private markets and explores how technological innovation can provide solutions to unlock access to private market funds for a growing…
DOWNLOAD NOW

IRELAND SPOTLIGHT

Visit our dedicated Ireland channel for all the latest news and analysis on the country's investment industry.
READ MORE

PRIVATE MARKETS FUND ADMIN REPORT

Private_Markets_Fund_Admin_Report

LATEST PODCAST