It is important, first of all, to define a fiduciary. Despite voluminous literature, there is no ready answer and the fiduciary relationship remains ‘a concept in search of a principle’. In general terms, it is possible to divide fiduciaries into two categories, status-based fiduciaries and fact-based fiduciaries.
The status-based category includes a core of well established relationships such as trustee-beneficiary, guardian-ward, director-company, principal- agent, solicitor-client, employer-employee, and partner-partner. They are relationships which are regarded by equity as fiduciary per se. It is debatable as to what is the common denominator behind these relationships but it is not a matter of concern here. Read the rest of this entry »
Given that the primary obligation of a trustee is to hold properties belonging to others and to preserve them for the benefit of the beneficiaries, it is no surprise that trustees are generally expected ‘to use such due diligence and care as men of ordinary prudence and vigilance would use in the management of their own affairs’. When investing, they are expected ‘to take such care as an ordinary prudent man would take if he were minded to make an investment for the benefit of other people for whom he felt morally bound to provide’. This focus on integrity rather than ability ties in with the conventional wisdom that `[t]he importance of preservation of a trust fund will always outweigh success in its advancement’ . Read the rest of this entry »
As the manager is in a contractual relationship with the unitholders, it may have a contractual duty of care under the express or implied terms of the contract as contained in the unit trust deed. Historically, the court has chosen the contract as a medium of control over the conduct of people giving professional services. Invariably, the court will imply a duty of skill and care into a contract for professional services. However, as Deane J in Hawkins v. Clayton has reminded us, the preconditions for implying a term into a contract include that the term must be necessary for the efficacy of the contract, and the term must have been intended by the parties to form part of the contract. Read the rest of this entry »
Currency swap: Contract that commits two counterparties to exchange streams of interest payments in different currencies for an agreed period of time and to exchange principal amounts in different currencies at a pre-agreed exchange rate at maturity.
A currency swap has three stages:
An initial exchange of principal: the two counterparties exchange principal amounts at an agreed exchange rate. This can be a notional exchange since its purpose is to establish the principal amounts as a reference point for the calculation of interest payments and the re-exchange of the principal amounts.
Exchange of interest payments on agreed dates based on outstanding principal amounts and agreed fixed interest rates.
- Re-exchange of the principal amounts at a predetermined exchange rate so the parties end up with their original currencies.
- Again this may be done to hedge risk, to speculate on changes in exchange rates, or to attempt to lower the cost of borrowing by borrowing in the currency in which the most favourable interest rates are available and then swapping into the currency that the firm needs to carry out its business. Whether this will be cheaper will depend among other things on the bid—offer spread.
Read the rest of this entry »
Despite the huge growth of mutual funds, the marked shift in fund types and the creation of new distribution channels, the concentration of market share within the fund management industry remained remarkably stable during the 1990s. The industry has continued to be led by 10 fund managers with 45% to 55% of all mutual fund assets under management and 25 managers with 70% to 75% of all mutual fund assets under management. But many of the leaders changed places over the decade—some because of strong performances and others due to mergers and acquisitions. At the same time, the number of fund complexes overall has continued to increase as new fund managers have taken advantage of the mutual fund industry’s low barriers to entry.
1. Overall industry concentration and turnover In 1990, there were 464 mutual fund complexes, of which the top 10 managed 56% of total industry assets and the top 25 managed 76% of total assets. By the end of 2000, the mutual fund industry was modestly less concentrated at the top. There were 654 complexes at that date, with the top 10 accounting for 46% of total assets and the top 2, accounting for 71% of total assets.The list of top 25 fund complexes has changed significantly, with some complexes dropping out and others stepping in. Read the rest of this entry »
In addition, the composition of equity funds changed during the 1990-2000 period. According to Strategic Insight, broader investment objectives such as growth and growth & income experienced a decrease of 7.7 percentage points in share of equity funds during the decade. The decrease was offset by an increase in more specialized funds, with higher management fees, such as sector funds and international funds. In particular, emerging market and country funds went from a half-percent share of funds 110P available in 1990 to almost 3% in 2000. At the same time, there was a substantial increase in lower management fee products such as index funds, which were almost nonexistent in 1989.
2. Number of funds During the 1990s, fund choices grew alongside assets at a rapid pace as the number of mutual funds increased from around 3,000 to over 8,000.
Implications of this tremendous increase in the number of funds for management fees depend on the resulting trends in average and median fund size, as shown in Table 2 (which defines a fund to include each class of a multi-class fund). Read the rest of this entry »
1. Asset growth In 1990, the mutual fund industry was a relatively small industry among financial intermediaries, with just over $1 trillion in assets, or 12% of the total sector (see Table 1). By contrast, depository institutions had almost five times the assets, or 56% of the sector (of which commercial banks accounted for $3.3 trillion or 38%, and assets of life insurance companies equaled $1.4 trillion or 16%).
By the end of the 1990s, the mutual fund industry had become a major player among financial intermediaries, with almost $7 trillion in assets and 39% of the overall sector. Although mutual fund assets slightly lagged those of all depository institutions taken as a whole-at $7.6 trillion, Read the rest of this entry »
James M. Clash
A wave of consolidation is washing over the mutual fund business. So far this year funds totaling more than $125 billion in assets have changed hands. To hear the consolidators tell it, mergers are good because they bring fund investors economies of scale and breadth of choice within a fund family. Will these promises be fulfilled? It is instructive to consider some of the bigger recent mergers. The results are not encouraging.
Take the Dreyfus funds, purchased in December 1993 by Pittsburgh’s Mellon Bank. In the three years before the merger, the 12 domestic stock funds at Dreyfus performed, on average, on a par with the S&P 500 index. In the three years since, these funds, on average, have underperformed the index by a stunning seven percentage points a year.
Then there’s the American Capital/Van Kampen merger in August 1994. In the 26 months prior to the marriage, the 11 stock funds here outperformed the S&P 500 index by an average of two points annually. In the 26 months since the merger, the funds have underperformed, Read the rest of this entry »
