Portfolio Solutions | Fee Benchmarking & Negotiation
Insurance company, Belgium
Clariance Fee Benchmarking delivers clear, customisable assessments of the fees that clients are paying to asset managers. Reports are informed by live fund manager selection data, not simply the ‘rack rates’ that managers disclose. As well as a different approach to data gathering, reports deliver appropriate comparisons against closely tailored peer groups and insight from senior investment specialists with front-line experience. Negotiation support is also available.
Fee Reviews
Unique fee insights from live market data, manager connections and experience
Depth
40,000+ fee data-points within our proprietary ‘IMP’ database, covering 3000+ managers and 200+ sub-asset classes.
Breadth
Supplemented by industry databases and tailored market - making enquiries as appropriate.
Expertise
Customised by asset class experts, working in partnership with you to identify appropriate peer groups, validate and interpret results.
Practical application
Asset owners seek detailed insights on fees to support a range of objectives including identifying potential savings, re-negotiating prices with providers, validating overall expenses and even strategic reorientation. Since 2012, bfinance has been assisting a limited number of sophisticated clients with outcome-oriented fee benchmarking, leveraging the firm’s extensive proprietary data gathered through manager search and selection consultancy. With reviews contributing to significant fee savings, we are now offering this service on a standalone basis to pension funds, endowments and other investors globally.
A clear picture
bfinance fee reviews deliver actionable insights on the charges that investors are paying to external managers across all asset classes and sectors. Detailed, customised assessments are designed to support each client’s specific goals.
Board-ready fee review packs incorporate multiple layers of analysis including client-customised filters and metrics, expert commentary, identification of key patterns (e.g. variation by mandate size) and insight on relevant trends (e.g. over time).
Further Reading
