FMA releases active versus passive report

The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) has published an independent report into the passive and active investment management styles used by KiwiSaver providers. [+ REPORT]

Monday, August 24th 2020, 9:43AM 2 Comments

The FMA commissioned MyFiduciary to test the extent that KiwiSaver providers were active or passive managers of their funds, whether this aligned with any claims to be “active” or “passive” managers, and how this compared with the fees being charged.

The report found most KiwiSaver providers’ funds were “true to label” in terms of their approach to investment management.

Liam Mason, FMA director of regulation, said: “The report found that there is not a significant relationship between the level of active management employed by providers and the fees they charge. The report shows there are a small number of funds where the high price doesn’t necessarily match the level of active management being claimed.”

This report is part of FMA’s broader focus on value for money in KiwiSaver. KiwiSaver providers have told the FMA that the way they manage their investors’ money is a critical part of their value proposition for their members.

In assessing the level of active management delivered among the 26 schemes considered, versus what was promised, two-thirds described themselves as mainly active but varied considerably in how active they were, with some of these appearing relatively passive.

The remaining schemes described themselves as mainly passive or mixed, and were generally true to label.

The report shows that active management can be offered without higher fees, the FMA said. It also highlighted that some providers were offering expensive funds that were not actively managed. Given this, there were a small number of providers that appeared to be poor value for money relative to other providers, based solely on activeness and fees charged.

But the regulator said there were aspects of “value” to customers beyond levels of active management.

MyFiduciary established its own criteria, in consultation with the FMA, for assessing the levels of active management. The report helped provide an independent measure and assessment of whether active management was a key factor in how managers determine their fees.

The FMA said the report raised a number of issues that it would be following up through its supervision and monitoring of providers, and by producing new guidance for the industry to improve disclosure and outcomes for investors.

It would engage with those managers where fees were high and the level of active management was relatively low.

It will also produce industry guidance covering expectations around KiwiSaver fees and the statutory requirement for fees not to be unreasonable.

The FMA said the requirement for KiwiSaver fees to not be unreasonable was an ongoing obligation that providers should periodically review, to ensure compliance and that they were acting in the best interests of their members from a value for money perspective. The FMA has regulatory tools available to take action in this space, including consequences under KiwiSaver manager licences.

The FMA has separately considered where and how information on investment style is being disclosed and if that information is sufficiently accessible to KiwiSaver members. There is a requirement in the regulations to disclose investment strategy to investors in important documents such as Product Disclosure Statements (PDS), Statement of Investment Policy and Objectives (SIPO) or other communications materials.

The FMA said its view was that insufficient information was readily available in the PDS for investors to make meaningful decisions about their funds based on whether they were actively or passively managed. The FMA will consider covering this aspect in its planned guidance.

Mason said: “We were pleased to see the report showing a wide variety of choice available to investors and that in a number of cases there are passive funds offering a lower cost product, and in other cases that active management is being offered at a competitive price.

“From the information in this report, it appears that investment management style is not necessarily a key factor in how providers, or consumers, are determining value for money for the majority of funds on offer. We’ll be doing further work in the future to explore how KiwiSaver providers are delivering value for money.”


Tags: Active v Passive FMA KiwiSaver MyFiduciary

« Money Week an opportunity to reach out, Financial Advice NZ saysFMA not backing an investment style despite report »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

On 24 August 2020 at 9:57 am Pragmatic said:
A timely report by MyFiduciary & the FMA - with consumers entitled to receive enhanced value for an active premium paid. If fund managers are struggling to add value (and continuing to charge active fees) then perhaps they should default to mediocrity (aka passive) with the appropriate low pricing.
On 24 August 2020 at 4:14 pm Davidvs said:
Nice to see the myFiduciary findings align with the recent Findex study on KiwiSaver though possibly stated in the necessarily overly polite manner. 'Overall, our results suggest that value for money in some KiwiSaver products is not as high as it
could be. With greater competition and scrutiny, we would expect over time to see fees more
closely aligned to the investment strategy, and lower KiwiSaver fees overall.' However the rise in average % fee levels paid by members as KiwiSaver FUM has trebled in size, global fee levels have fallen significantly and the majority of active KiwiSaver fund managers have shown little ability to beat their own benchmarks adds up to a unsatisfactory situation that deserves more examination.

Sign In to add your comment

© Copyright 1997-2021 Tarawera Publishing Ltd. All Rights Reserved