Category: Investment

The Future of Asset Management, by Jeroen van Oerle and Patrick Lemmens

2016-08-28 posted by

Executive Summary:

 During the past decade, the asset management industry was mostly occupied with regulatory changes dictating costly compliance procedures. The increase in regulatory burden was mainly felt by small asset management firms. In addition to increased regulatory costs, fee pressure has had a large impact on the industry as well.

In the coming years we believe these two forces will remain top of mind, but they have different drivers now. Technology has entered the asset management industry. This will add costs because asset managers have to live up to ever-increasing customer demands regarding immediacy, connectivity and ubiquity. At the same time, this leads to an increase in fee pressure due to growing transparency, comparability and competition from nonfinancial companies. We think the asset management pie is still growing strongly, but not everyone is invited to take a piece.

Read More

“The Rise of Indices Is Changing the Face of Investing”, by Angana Jacob and Sunjiv Mainie, CFA

2016-08-28 posted by

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A confluence of factors including technology, regulation, investor skepticism of manager skill, and fee-consciousness, has favored the rise of index investing. The pace of growth and complexity of change make it difficult for investors and managers to stay informed about these critical trends. In this report, we provide an overview of the rise of indexing, as well as its impact, both realized and potential, on the asset management industry.

The first half of the paper outlines the key trends in indexing and fund management, specifically:

1. Fees are under pressure. Changes in technology and economies of scale have helped commoditize beta;

2. Product scope is continually broadening, with index-based investing making inroads into active management. Smart beta and the growing interest in hedge fund beta paves the way for further growth of passive index funds at the expense of active management; and

3. Technology advances allow for mass customization and an increased focus on outcomes. The outcomes required by individual and institutional market participants are becoming critical—index funds may benefit due to their low cost and heightened transparency.

Read More

”Will better corporate governance boost Japanese equity returns?”

2016-08-05 posted by

Despite the fact that many folks are still pessimistic as to whether corporate governance reforms will bring a surmountable positive change to the Japanese economy, there has been some notable changes as the writer of this article, Louise Dudley, Hermes Global Equities Portfolio Manager, below puts it. It will take time and patience but will be worth it in the end.

Read More

”Corporate Governance: The role of institutional investors will become crucial”

2016-07-28 posted by 1 Comment

In the article below, Mr. Mayajima Hideaki, a faculty fellow at the Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry ( REITI) reviews the characteristics of ownership structures in Japanese companies and examine what conditions are necessary to ensure the effective operation of the  corporate governance code that has been in place for a year now.

He explains how institutional investors will increasingly play a key role in dissolving cross-sharing arrangements and increasing shareholder influence.

Read More

”How are Japanese companies becoming better stewards of capital? Improving corporate governance”

2016-06-17 posted by

Japanese corporate profits are way up, even if real GDP is not.

”If you were to use just one measure, such as real GDP, to assess how Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was performing, you would conclude his policies are clearly not working: real GDP itself is flat to slightly negative since he took office.

On the other hand, if you look at the aggregate operating profit of Tokyo Stock Exchange Price index constituents as a reflection of corporate profits, it has grown more than 60% since he took office.

Read More

Discussion Paper by Hideaki Miyajima et al : ”Does Ownership Really Matter?: The Role of Foreign Investors in Corporate Governance in Japan”

2016-06-13 posted by

”Abstract. After the banking crisis of 1997, corporate ownership in Japan shifted from an insider-dominated to an outsider-dominated structure. This paper analyzes the impact of dramatic changes in the ownership structure on corporate governance and firm value, focusing on the role of foreign institutional investors. There are two competing views on the role of increased foreign ownership. The positive view is that foreign investors have had high monitoring capability, and encourage improvements in the governance arrangement of firms, resulting in higher performance.

Read More

Financial Times: ”String of scandals puts Japanese investors on edge”

2016-06-03 posted by

The FT comments on what seems to be a string of scandals in Japan.  It is our opinion that such governance or compliance issues are not necessarily more frequent than in other developed nations – it is difficult to compare – , but (1) they arise from different gaps in governance and management structures; and (2) whistle-blowing is becoming more frequent in Japan.

”From carmakers and electronics groups to housebuilders and the constructors of the nation’s roads and runways, a government-led transparency drive has accelerated a record surge of accounting and data fraud scandals across corporate Japan.

Read More

Paula Loop & Paul Denicola: ”Investors and Board Composition”

2016-05-31 posted by

”In today’s business environment, companies face numerous challenges that can impact success—from emerging technologies to changing regulatory requirements and cybersecurity concerns. As a result, the expertise, experience, and diversity of perspective in the boardroom play a more critical role than ever in ensuring effective oversight. At the same time, many investors and other stakeholders are seeking influence on board composition. They want more information about a company’s director nominees. They also want to know that boards and their nominating and governance committees are appropriately considering director tenure, board diversity and the results of board self-evaluations when making director nominations. All of this is occurring within an environment of aggressive shareholder activism, in which board composition often becomes a central focus………”

Read More