Wealth Management
(Washington)
In what seemed an inevitable development, House Democrats are starting their push against the SEC’s Regulation Best Interest. The House Financial Services Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship and Capital Markets will devote a hearing next Thursday to the SEC’s new rule proposal. The chairwoman of the committee is Maxine Waters, who was a champion of the defunct DOL Rule. Waters has commented on the SEC BI Rule that “When you have investment advisers who are not acting in [clients'] best interests but acting in their own best interests, it does not bode well for our senior investors in particular”.
FINSUM: We think the SEC BI Rule is a long way from ever getting enacted and will likely experience significant redrafting before implementation.
(New York)
As our readers will know, we have been covering some of the best funds we met at February’s Inside ETFs conference. Today we want to profile a great service we found that we think would be useful to our readers. The service is a new ETF screener and research tool called ETF Action. The service was built by an experienced team from a major distributor and their experience shows in the design of the system. We were offered a free trial for their screener and found the user interface and functionality of the system very appealing. It was not only fast, but it was also useful to compare different funds side by side and search for new ones. For instance, we compared various dividends funds to help choose the best for our purposes, and the platform offered easy-to-access and multifaceted information for doing so. We preferred the system to the numerous other ETF screeners we have used. The company is building out the tool as a paid service and they have promotional pricing for advisors.
FINSUM: We really liked ETF Action and were impressed with the functionality. The management team clearly knows what they are doing and have in-depth industry experience, which is invaluable when it comes to thoughtfully building the system.
(New York)
If there was ever a stat that really represented the big changes underway in the wealth management industry, it is this one: a new survey shows that broker-dealers are earning more revenue from fees than they are commissions. That is a major shift for the group, who until recently existed mostly as commission engines. The stat also reflects the growing trend towards dually-registered B-D/RIAs, allowing advisors to perform both functions.
FINSUM: The regulatory trend and customer trend is moving towards fee-based payment. This stat reflects just how pervasive the model is becoming.
More...
(Washington)
One of the most contested parts of the 2010 Dodd-Frank legislation was the legal mandate the act gave to regulators to create pay caps for Wall Street. The industry has fought tooth and nail to block their imposition, successfully curbing any changes for nine years. The last major push to cap pay was in 2016, but nothing has happened since then. Now a consortium of regulators, including the Fed, FDIC, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Federal Reserve are coming together to create new rules. The most likely target are high ranking executives, but talks in the past have extended to rank and file employees.
FINSUM: Caps for top executives will be anathema to some, but restrictions for regular employees are a whole other issue that will cause a major uproar.
(New York)
Fund fees are a hot area, and not just in terms of them falling in absolute terms. While everyone is aware of Fidelity’s new zero fee index funds and the price war going on in top line fees, there are also new and interesting fund structures emerging. One kind of new fee model is called a fulcrum structure, where fees are low (ETF-like) unless the funds outperforms its benchmark, in which case the provider gets a performance fee. This kind of structure is more popular with mutual funds and can offer the best of both worlds—low fees for ordinary performance, or outperformance that comes with active management.
FINSUM: We think these kinds of funds offer a better alignment of interest while offering multi-sided benefits. However, the risk is that managers are incentivized to take excess risk in an effort to boost performance over the fulcrum threshold.
(New York)
A fool-hardy travesty is the word that came to mind when we read the headline that Bank of America was dropping Merrill Lynch branding. Our worst fears were allayed when we saw the move was only for the investment banking brand, not wealth management. Yet the change stills begs big questions and seems like a poor idea for B of A. Bank of America had little in the way of a strong investment banking brand before it bought Merrill Lynch, so the change is an interesting (read “odd”) one. It also makes one wonder if the Thundering Herd is safe from its own B of A rebrand in the near future.
FINSUM: We have to believe B of A will be smart enough not to drop the Merrill Lynch name from the wealth management business, but even the current move is an exceptionally poor idea. Members of our team worked in investment banking at “Bank of America Merrill Lynch” and can say from experience that the first part of that name didn’t carry much weight. To be honest, Bank of America would have done better to drop its own name!