Advisers at risk over asset-based feesBY BEN COLLINS | THURSDAY, 10 JAN 2013 2:55PMAdvisers might need to change the way that they charge asset-based fees, which can create conflicts of interest, said finance consulting group The Fold. |
Editor's Choice
Is demand for active ETPs genuine beyond outlier conversions?
As the active exchange-traded product (ETP) market continues to grow, new Rainmaker Information research asks whether demand has genuinely improved or if it is underpinned by conversions from three investment managers delivering "three exceptional months of work"?
Schroders nabs Lazard's Australian portfolio manager
Aaron Binsted will join Schroders Australia in early November as a portfolio manager and analyst after 24 years at Lazard Asset Management.
IFM targets growth opportunities with new global office
IFM Investors has opened its first office in Singapore to capture growth opportunities in a region "under allocated" by institutional investors.
HNWIs demand outperforming, mission-driven endowment funds
High-net-worth investors' (HNWIs) increasing demand for philanthropy vehicles with robust governance, a clear mission and can outperform in equal measure is helping fuel the rise of endowment funds such as the Aspect Impact Fund.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile
Sarah Shaw
GLOBAL PORTFOLIO MANAGER
4D INFRASTRUCTURE
4D INFRASTRUCTURE
It wasn't confidence that prompted Sarah Shaw to walk away from established investment houses and co-found 4D Infrastructure in 2015. It was something she believes is far more important: courage.







The only good news I got about my investements in the GFC was that my adviser's fees had come down along with the asset values - thank goodness. Now that's what I call in my best interests.
It never ceases to amaze me that some people cannot work out that a set dollar fee will always equate to a percentage of a portfolio, regardless of how you dress it up. Its simple mathematics. Sorry folks, some people need to go back to primary school.
If advisers should not charge as a % of assets then the rest of the funds management industry should not do so either. Our firm divides an ongoing fee between strategy advice (dollar based) and investment / AA advice (% based fee). Our implementation fees are project / time based. For investments, you have to have skin in the game to build a clients portfolio. On the business side, would you rather have your fees increasing over time at CPI, or linked to the markets? I know what is more profitable in the long term.