Technology streamlines a messy, time-consuming
process, but some still like to get their hands dirty.
In the beginning, it was a process. High-level
advisors (and those who wanted to be) embraced investment management
consulting and the various steps of the process to add value to the
client relationship and, ultimately, to the portfolio. They performed
all of the steps, one by one, for each client. Yes, it was
time-consuming, but it was easier to demonstrate value and justify
fees.
They continued to study, add designations to their
names, attend conferences, learn the benefits of SMAs and market to the
high-net-worth individual. But, as time went on, many consultants
realized that they needed more time to maintain and service their
existing clients and to capture more assets. Fortunately, technology
stepped in and allowed them to automate many of the steps in the
process.
Was this a good thing? Or did it take away from the
value that advisors and consultants provided the client? It's a
thought-provoking question. To understand the challenges and the
solutions, let's take a step back in time.
What's History
Got To Do With It?
It was a long and arduous journey that led to the
acceptance and practice of the value-added process. The early pioneers
borrowed the disciplined and systematic investment method from the
institutional money managers and, after a time, were able to pass along
the opportunity to individual investors. Not only was it a political
battle at the time, but it also was an almost impossible feat to
overcome the administrative, technological and compensation/fee issues
surrounding the implementation of separately managed accounts for the
high-net-worth individual.
The evolution of technology was a major factor in
the continued advancement of the consulting industry, and the
development in the early days (late 1970s/80s) was slow. Platforms were
crude and procedures for doing due diligence, monitoring the managers,
generating performance reports and other responsibilities were long and
laborious. But the die-hard "consultants" persisted through trial and
error, doing everything themselves, because they knew it was in the
client's best interest. And they knew that, as a fiduciary, they had to
rely on their own constant research and supervision of the managers
they hired, do their own asset allocation, create their own performance
reports, rebalance and the numerous other responsibilities. In other
words, "the buck stopped" there.
With the development and use of the PC, firms began
creating their own performance reporting systems and outside vendors
sprang up to provide other or better capabilities. Effron created a
database system called Plan Sponsor Network (PSN, now part of Informa
Investment Solutions) that was still focused on the large institutional
plan sponsors. CDA (the mutual fund tracking service, now
CDA/Wiesenberger) sold their system to consultants, which consisted of
manager data collected and input into a Lotus spreadsheet that could be
manipulated. Industry veteran and visionary Robert L. Padgette of Klein
Decisions founded the legendary Mobius and its M-Search and M-Watch
products, releasing in 1989 the first PC-based database that provided
true manager search capabilities. (It was the largest database
available at the time, and included 300 managers and 900 sets of
returns.)
Technology Aids The Investment Process For Consultants
Even though major technology breakthroughs were made
and it became more efficient over time for advisors and consultants to
use the process, many dedicated and skilled professionals continued to
do their own research. They searched for, and evaluated, the
independent money managers before choosing them, they did all of the
asset allocation, manager monitoring and performance monitoring (which
became second nature), performance reports and rebalancing-the client
meetings were quarterly events to look forward to. Clients seemed to
appreciate all of the hard work and personal attention they received.
Fees were justified.
The first step-the manager search aspect of the
consulting process-was the initial major hurdle to conquer. Narrowing
down a major list to just a handful of appropriate managers represented
a considerable investment in time and money, because the managers first
had to be located, then investigated (mostly through in-person
interviews), and performance numbers needed to be analyzed, etc. In
trying to streamline this process by developing manager search
capabilities, pioneer John Brock (now principal at Birmingham,
Ala.-based Brock Hazzard Investment Group) took a major step in the
1980s and hired an M.B.A. as an analyst who personally gathered ADVs
from more than 200 investment managers. Brock's team did its own
proprietary research manually, but used the newly introduced PC
computer to aid in its computations.
Another veteran consultant, Rod D. Hennek, managing
director and branch manager of Morgan Keegan & Co. Inc., went
through similar experiences in building his team and the technology
systems to support its consulting business. Hennek came on the scene in
the mid-'80s when the large firms still had regional technology centers
and manager databases were crude or nonexistent. He says that any
information a consultant wanted about managers, "you pretty much had to
solicit [from your peers] and develop of your own accord." His team
would do its own research by sending out questionnaires to various
managers on a regular basis, compile all the data and do all the
follow-up themselves. This required hours and hours of manpower, which
made the entire process painstaking and expensive.
The Thrill Of The Hunt
Now, after more than two decades of technology
advancements and industry participation, investment management
consultants and institutional-caliber money managers are accessible to
almost any financial advisor.
Turnkey Asset Management Programs (TAMPs) are
proliferating and software programs offer everything from manager
searches, manager analysis, reports, portfolio and marketing analysis,
asset allocation and much more. Even so, many of the veteran
consultants, and an increasing number of newer consultants, still opt
to do their own initial manager research. In light of the time that
technology frees up to maintain and service current relationships and
to capture new assets, why would anyone want to spend a minute longer
in front of a computer reading manager profiles and analyzing numbers?
Why indeed. According to Daniel R. Bott, president
of Bott and Associates of Wachovia Securities in Scottsdale, Ariz., he
can explain it in three words: He loves it. Bott, the author of The Art
and Science of Investment Management Consulting, was one of the first
consultants in the business as well as cofounder of IMCA and IIMC. He
says, "The majority of advisors are opting to go with the short list
[some up to 40 managers] at their firms. And the independents who use
Lockwood, Schwab or Wachovia, for example, have a short list and a
broad list [some with up to 800, but with limited manager information].
I find that a number of advisors don't have the time, or the
inclination, they can't make the decisions when faced with hundreds or
thousands of manager prospects, so they just default to the short
list." He goes on to explain that he is searching for good, consistent
performance from smaller, less visible managers in order to add more
value for his clients, and that's why manager resources (like online
databases) are valuable to him.
The common thread that runs through consultants like
Bott, Brock, Henneck and others is simply this: They LOVE doing the
research and the satisfaction they derive from it. And if they have to
spend a few more hours in the day doing it, so be it-they schedule it
in, hire an associate to make client calls or other marketing work, and
go about doing what pleases them and their clients.
Comments From The Wizards
Consultants and advisors can take advantage of a
variety of online tools and resources. Some are cost-prohibitive;
others are relatively affordable. Most large firms subscribe to the
more expensive services and allow their advisors to benefit from these
unlimited tools and resources, which frees up their time, while smaller
firms and independent one-and two-person shops rely on the basic
manager search and report databases.
Online manager databases help the advisor sell a
manager, says respected industry veteran and technology expert Jamie
Waller, CEO of Family Wealth Report and a partner in Rockaway Partners.
"Morningstar became the validator of mutual funds. An advisor could
refer to the star ranking system. The current challenge to SMAs is that
there is no such authoritative voice. If you don't work for a major,
you have to go with what your platform offers or be big enough to offer
managers on a more open platform basis. This is heavy lifting for the
average advisor just getting into it."
Trivium Consulting LLC President Scott A. MacKillop
(formerly president of US Fiduciary Services) believes that it is
challenging for some advisors to do their own manager search, even
though they may love doing it. "It's difficult to sort through online
data of separate account managers because of less regulation of
reporting requirements, plus advisors need a fair amount of
understanding of what is 'behind' the numbers," says MacKillop. He says
that most all of the platforms subscribe to the comprehensive services
such as Mobius and Nelson's Information Services. "Prima Capital has an
excellent tool, as well. But if you are determined to go it alone, roll
up your sleeves, get your hands on the process, a good online manager
database is one good resource. These types of advisors are good
candidates for these services. But if you are focused on asset
gathering and servicing, then outsourcing is the best option."
Waller agrees and adds, "There are many advisors who
'sell' managers and are value-added, CIMA-types. Others will rely on
the home office to build a better MDA-type offering. The centralized
approach has not worked well in other walks of life and will not work
in the investment world. Each generation of products create an
innovator's dilemma for somebody. In this case, the "mutual
fund-ization of wrap" continues to confuse the real issue: how can an
advisor really help their clients? How do you offer custom solutions
without a descriptive database and common language around SMAs? The
databases will eventually have to take on this issue. The challenge to
the SMA database universe is that SMAs are different than funds, of
course. Dealer agreements are much more focused and consequently many
products/managers may not be available on the platforms that an advisor
is affiliated with. Most TAMPS do not offer as many choices in SMAs."
With all of this advice (and history) in mind, if an advisor is
determined and skilled to move ahead with his or her own manager
searches, it is a good idea to research the available online databases
that are available and do a comparison of features and costs. Here is a
rundown of a few of the most popular online manager databases that
advisors and consultants (and their clients) have reported using on a
regular basis, along with a few of the larger, more sophisticated
services.
Managerreview.com
Peter Walker, founder and president of Money Manager
Review, (www.managerreview.com), an online guide to the nation's top
money managers, explains the benefits of his service to an advisor or
consultant. "It is one of the best ways to obtain information on a
manager you want to hire, if your firm does not provide that for you.
We feature approximately 600 managers and about 1,700 products. Our
manager reports are in-depth and each has about four charts/graphs. In
total, our service offers more than 3,000 manager reports." In addition
to manager search, Walker's service offers style rankings, manager
profiles, watch lists, free editorial reports, news bulletins, and
regular manager interviews that are archived on the site.
Adds Walker, "Our users are consultants and
advisors, brokerage firms-approximately 5,000 institutions and
businesses utilize our service including plan sponsors, foundations and
charities." He says that their database uses ADV-registered private
money managers with at least one year's performance and at least $15
million under management. The Web site was rated one of the Best 25
Online Resources for Investors by Barron's. At $295 per year, it is
affordable for most any advisor or consultant.
WrapManager.com
Gabe Burczyk, president and founder of six-year-old
WrapManager Inc. (www.wrapmanager.com), says his service is used by
both advisors and investors. Though their target market is the high-end
investor, to whom they offer a manager matching service which boasts
access to more than 800 managers, about 30% of their traffic includes
the advisor looking to do his or her own research. Burczyk says that
advisors use the information either to compare information, pass it on
to a client or research a competitor. Explains Burczyk, "We are
different from a company like PSN/Mobius (Investor Solutions) or
Morningstar, because those companies provide data on the managers, but
they do mostly consulting rather than matching client to money
manager."
WrapManager.com will perform due diligence upon
request of the client, but he says that many of their clients just want
help creating a relationship with a money manager and aren't as
interested in the due diligence. They're rolling out two new services
soon, "moneymanagerregistry.com" to accommodate the client who wants
information on money managers, and "moneymanageradvocate.com" which
will offer research-oriented information in addition to asset
allocation and money manager advice.
Nelsons.com
One of Nelson's key products is the quarterly
World's Best Money Managers. On its Web site, www.nelsons.com, the
World's Best Money Managers presents the latest investment performance
results compiled from 6,500 investment products or composites from more
than 1,500 investment management firms. Elizabeth Johnson, Director of
Commercial Support, Thomson Financial Content Group, says "We're
objective in that as long as the money manager is doing discretionary
money management, we'll collect data on them."
The Nelson division of Thomson Financial collects
information from about 1,600 money managers. (About 2,100 managers have
profile data on the site, but they have in-depth information on about
1,600.) Nelson does quarterly rankings based on various performance
categories. While they market primarily to money managers, many
advisors and consultants find this Web site a wealth of information.
They can subscribe to Nelson products, including the MPWeb online
product, as well as the various directories. The Web site states that
if you register you'll gain free access to the World's Best Money
Managers section of Nelson MarketPlace. They have several print
products including the Directory of Investment Managers and The World's
Best Money Managers. Their nearest competitor is Morningstar and
Informa Investment Solutions.
Informais.com
Informa Investment Solutions (www.informais.com) made an asset purchase
from Check Free Investment Services (which acquired Mobius in 1999) in
February of this year and which now represents the combination of the
widely used Mobius and PSN databases.
Jay Kimple, vice president of marketing and client relations for
Informa, explains that they are not a due diligence provider, nor a
consulting firm. They are an information services company. "We collect
information from investment managers, compile that information,
generate analytics based on the information we collect and distribute
that information," he says. They follow more than 2,000 different firms
and 10,000 products, and have been tracking SMAs for more than 20
years.
While Informa's major clients are organizations that sponsor SMA
programs, most advisors and consultants are familiar with and/or have
used the Mobius and PSN databases as part of their firm's provided
resources. Their major competitor is Morningstar (which now owns
InvestorForce.com).
InvestorForce.com
Jamie Ott, client relations and marketing associate
for Morningstar Inc., says her firm purchased InvestorForce in August
of this year. The acquisition included both the AltvestTM database, one
of the first and largest online databases covering active hedge funds,
managers and data, along with InvestorForce's extensive institutional
separate account database. InvestorForce's separate account database
will add approximately 1,500 separate accounts to the Morningstar
database, bringing the total coverage to about 6,000. It also includes
several online software applications for manager search, research and
reporting.
Among the Morningstar offerings are two products
designed to support financial advisors: Morningstar Advisor Workstation
and Morningstar Institutional Investor Exchange. Says Ott, "For
financial advisors looking to provide for their high-net-worth and
institutional clients more customizable investment vehicles through
separately managed accounts, Morningstar Institutional Investor
Exchange is an effective, Web-based due diligence platform." She
explains that it provides accurate data, flexible screening tools,
client-ready reports, analytics and an automated RFP center.
Subscribers may screen investments on firm, strategy and vehicle level
data points such as manager background, performance history, portfolio
characteristics and assets under management. Data providers update
performance and AUM on a monthly basis and portfolio holdings on a
quarterly basis through an online survey. The service is supported with
Morningstar separate account, commingled fund and mutual fund data and
product training resources.
In addition, their Morningstar Advisor Workstation
provides a Web-based investment planning platform for financial
advisors that features in-depth research, robust client reports and
portfolio management.
The Last Word On The First Step
The controversy over whether a true hands-on approach to the consulting process is the best, or whether the use of technology adds the real value for the client, will continue. While it frees you up to bring the value of your professional interpretation of the data to your clients, you first need to understand "how" to interpret the data and what to do with the numbers. You must consider the amount of "grunt work" you have to do compared to managing relationships with your clients. If the grunt work can be taken out and the process made increasingly quicker with more efficient technology, then everybody wins. If you don't consider it grunt work, you enjoy it and your clients benefit from your exploration and discovery of unique managers, then it's time to dust off that old Lotus spreadsheet.
We welcome any suggestions of online manager databases we have not
covered, and will be happy to review them in a future issue. Many
thanks to Minnetonka, Minn., journalist and researcher Sheri Lear for
assisting with the research for this article.