Investment Adviser Oversight Survey of Investment Adviser Preferences. November 2011

Similar documents
Regulatory Notice 17-34

Self-Regulation in Colombian Securities Markets

Introduction of a Land Registry service delivery company

ISDA AUGUST 2012 DF PROTOCOL QUESTIONNAIRE 1

PROFESSIONAL EXPECTATIONS PLEDGE

ISSUE 1 Fourth Quarter, REALTORS Commercial Alliance Series HOT TOPICS ANSWERS TO CURRENT BUSINESS ISSUES TENANTS-IN-COMMON INTERESTS

Lack of supporting evidence It is not accepted that there is evidence to support the requirement of Sec 56 (2) Housing Act 2004

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)

PART 2.7 DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES REAL ESTATE REGULATION

8 March 2012 Update. Real Estate

What are the accounting requirements for typical real estate lease, property, and investment property activities?

Market Trends in Title Agency & Settlement Services

Chief Appraisers Roundtable May 12, David Rosenthal, MAI, FRICS President & CEO

Building Control (Amendment) Regulations. ASFP Ireland Fire Protection Module At FMI Conference & Exhibition. RDS 6 March 2013

Guidance on the Scope of Practice Of Property Service Providers JANUARY 2017

Federal Government Shutdown Survey

THE INTRODUCING BROKER (IB) AGREEMENT

Proposed Framework for Multi-Residential Rental Property Licence. Tenant Issues Committee Licensing and Standards Committee

FINAL DOCUMENT. Global Harmonization Task Force. Title: Registration of Manufacturers and other Parties and Listing of Medical Devices

Policies & Procedures

JANUARY 2018 CONSUMER SENTIMENT REPORT. What does 2018 have in store for Indian Real Estate?

Superintendent of Real Estate Ministry of Finance Vancouver

Together with Tenants

Manufactured Homes Program

2015 Member Profile Florida REALTORS Report

Appraiser Trends Study

2015 Member Profile Texas Association of REALTORS Report

New Appraisal Requirements Practical Advice on Compliance

November 27, 2012 ADVISORY OPINION

2016 Member Profile Florida REALTORS Report

Real Estate Council of Alberta. An introduction 1

Husker Ag, LLC Trading System Rules and Procedures

There were 560 responses to the survey and the average completion time of the survey was approximately 18 minutes.

BUILDER SURVEY REPORT

REALTORS CONFIDENCE INDEX SURVEY

REALTORS CONFIDENCE INDEX SURVEY

Scottish Parliament Social Security Committee Social Security Support for Housing Written Submission from ARLA Propertymark March 2019

AICPA Valuation Services VS Section Statements on Standards for Valuation Services VS Section 100 Valuation of a Business, Business Ownership

RACINE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS: Soliciting a Commercial Real Estate Broker for Southside Industrial Park

Domestic Energy Assessor Quality Assurance Requirements England & Wales and Northern Ireland Regions Effective Date 1 st August 2012

Five Oaks Investment Corp.

Earnings Call NYSE: WTR

Industry Update on the Consolidated Audit Trail An industry update on the progress of the Consolidated Audit Trail National Market System Plan

EMBRACING THE ONLINE REAL ESTATE MARKET Original Research Commissioned by: Yahoo! Real Estate. July2008

MLS: EVOLVED Q&A FOR BROKER AND AGENTS

Canadian Standards and Quality Valuations an AIC Advantage. Dan Brewer AACI, P. App AIC President

Propertymark Qualifications: Level 2 Award in Introduction to Residential Property Management Practice (England & Wales) Qualification Specification

FINANCIAL OVERVIEW RACHEL GLASER. Analyst & Investor Day 2014 May 22, 2014 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR REAL ESTATE BROKER SERVICES FOR

Municipal Advisor or Underwriter?

2017 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers

Testimony of Beth Mellen Harrison Supervising Attorney, Housing Law Unit Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia

Adam Brett - Eric Urban market update

Form of Amendment to Master Securities Forward Transaction Agreement to Conform with FINRA 4210

New Appraisal Requirements Affect Lenders and AMCs

HUD Office of Housing Counseling Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Housing Counseling: New Certification Requirements

Section I CODE OF ETHICS

City of Winnipeg Housing Policy Implementation Plan

Survival Guide for Condo Directors. Phase 1 of the Condominium Act Amendments

CITY OF HONDO, TEXAS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR REAL ESTATE BROKER SERVICES TO SELL CITY PROPERTY RFP#

INVESTOR PRESENTATION MAY 2013

Registered as a Scottish Charity - No. SC030751

Developing a Consumer-Run Housing Co-op in Hamilton: A Feasibility Study

LEASEHOLD MANAGEMENT POLICY

Ministry of Justice Contact Person: Ms. Galina Elizarova

CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF BLANDFORD-BLENHEIM REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES Sale of Property Owned by the Township of

Intangibles Goodwill and Other (Topic 350), Business Combinations (Topic 805), and Not-for-Profit Entities (Topic 958)

In light of this objective, Global Witness is providing feedback on key sections of the 6 th draft of the national land policy:

Valuation Methodology of Unregistered Properties in East Africa

City of Alameda Rent Review Ordinance

propertymark QUALIFICATIONS LEVEL 3 AWARD IN RESIDENTIAL TENANCY DEPOSIT PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT (ENGLAND AND WALES) QUALIFICATION SPECIFICATION

Land Conservation Agreements Project Guidance

Housing and Supportive Services Request for Proposals (RFP) Ohio s COMMUNITY TRANSITION PROGRAM

RIBA Chartered Practice Membership

National Association of REALTORS 2015 NAR Commercial Innovation Grant Executive Summary

Texas Association of REALTORS

2018 Member Profile Texas Association of REALTORS Report

RESULTS OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED RULES. Summary Report November 2017

Kansas Ethanol, LLC Trading System Rules and Procedures

Proposed Amendments Expediting Enforcement Options to Improve Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Hotels. September 17, 2014

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE MAY 1, 2018

1. Introduction. 1. Formal Disposition 2. Authorization 3. Approval. ESRD, Public Land Management, 2014, No.2. Effective Date: January 30, 2014

Residential MANAGING BROKER APPLIED PRACTICE COURSE TOOLKIT. component three

CMC Firm. An ICMCI Project STANDARD DOCUMENTATION

Leasing & Asset Backed Lending 05 th 06 th Nov, 2015 Delhi India

ADDENDUM I 1 TO ISDA AUGUST 2012 DF PROTOCOL QUESTIONNAIRE

2017 Tulane Corporate Law Institute Current Issues in Private Equity. March 31, 2017

TRADEMARK POLICY AND BRANDING GUIDELINES

Report on Inspection of PricewaterhouseCoopers Kyoto (Headquartered in Kyoto, Japan) Public Company Accounting Oversight Board

Welsh Government Housing Regulation

CPE regulations require online participants to take part in online questions

Definitions. CPI is a lease in which base rent is adjusted based on changes in a consumer price index.

VILLAGE OF HORSEHEADS CHEMUNG COUNTY, NEW YORK

THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT,

Commercial Land For Sale

Boise City Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing. April, 2016

Networking Questions in Commercial Real Estate. John Highman Real Estate Coach and Author

AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.

Implementing Tenants First: TCHC Scattered Portfolio Plan and an Interim Selection Process for Tenant

Broker Survey on Syndication Issues

Transcription:

Investment Adviser Oversight Survey of Investment Adviser Preferences November 211

Survey context and objectives The Boston Consulting Group ("BCG"), a global management consulting firm, was engaged by a group of organizations with Investment Adviser ("IA") stakeholders to help inform the discussion on IA regulatory oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission's s ("SEC") Section 914 study, which was required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and released in January 211, outlined three recommended options for increasing oversight of IAs. The specific objectives of this study are to establish an economic fact base, informed by publicly available information. In addition, a broad base of IAs based in the United States were surveyed to better understand their preferences. This document contains the survey results, while the results of the economic analysis are described in the accompanying prose report: "Investment Adviser Oversight: Economic o c Analysis s of Options". BCG designed the questions for the survey, managed its execution, and analyzed the results. The survey was administered online in November 211. A survey link was distributed via email to the targeted population of IAs. 424 survey responses were received. The profile of respondents was compared to the US IA population to ensure adequate representation across relevant IA sub-segments. segments. The BCG team involved in this effort was not involved in any prior BCG work for related organizations. Further, the BCG team conducted this analysis independently of any prior related work performed by the firm. The SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA") were not interviewed or consulted as part of this effort. They did not provide any input, feedback or guidance on the materials or on the analysis contained in this report. The results contained in this document reflect the views of the survey respondents only. This report, any statement made therein, or any statements made by BCG or by any other organization regarding this report, does not constitute a BCG endorsement or recommendation of any of the specific IA oversight scenarios referenced in this report or of any specific approach to IA oversight more generally, and should not be interpreted as such. Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved. IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 1

Respondent profile (I) Respondent Firm Size What are the total assets under management (AuM) at your firm? (n=424) Respondent Registration: Dually Registered Is your firm registered with FINRA as a broker-dealer? (n=424) Respondents (%) n Respondents (%) >$5B 14 1 3% 1 1% $25-5B 6 5% $5-25B 23 11% 8 $1-5B 46 8 8% $5M-1B 33 63% 6 25% $1-5M 6 17 4 4 2% $3-1M 85 13% 2 2 7% 26% <$3M 11 18% Firm Size Dual Registration No Previously Affiliated Yes n 267 54 29 74 Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved. IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 2

Respondent profile (II) Respondent Client Mix: Institutional Clients Respondent Roles Does your firm advise institutional clients (e.g., mutual funds, hedge funds, private investment funds, venture capital funds) and/or individuals with total investments of at least $25 million? If you answered "Yes" to the above question, what % of your firm's AuM are owned by institutional clients and/or individuals with total investments of at least $25 million? (n=424) Respondents (%) 1 8 6 4 2 4% 2% 5% 2% 1% 22% 64% Institutional Clients >9% 76-89% 51-75% 25-5% <25% Don t Know No n 16 6 6 7 22 95 272 Respondents (%) 5 4 3 2 1 47% CEO / President What is your role at your firm? Please select all that apply. (n=424) 31% Chief Compliance Officer 3% General Counsel 34% IA Rep 9% B-D Rep # = 199 132 13 144 37 69 IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 3 16% Other Note: Sum of responses exceeds 424, as many respondents selected more than one role Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved.

Respondent profile (III) Respondent engagement level How actively have you followed the ongoing discussions surrounding regulatory oversight of investment advisers? (n=424) Respondents (%) 1 n 2% Never 7 13% Once or twice 53 8 6 4 2 24% Once/month 1 25% Once/2 weeks 17 37% Once/week 157 Engagement Frequency Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved. IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 4

User/membership fee scenarios provided to respondents depending on respondent firm size SEC vs. FINRA-IA SRO Respondent Firm Size, AuM SEC FINRA-IA SRO <$3M $16 $21 $3M - $1M $35 $46 $1M - $5M $1,6 $2,1 $5M - $1B $4, $5,25 $1B - $5B $16, $21, $5B - $25B $8, $15, $25B - $5B $2, $262,5 $5B+ $265, $35, Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved. IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 5

Respondent preference for SEC vs. FINRA-IA SRO All respondents Base case: Given the following annual user/membership fees, would you personally prefer the SEC or FINRA as the inspection/examination body for your firm? (n=424) 81% express preference for SEC 19% express preference for FINRA-IA SRO After base: If the annual fees for the SEC were higher, while the annual fees for FINRA remained the same, would your preference shift from the SEC to FINRA? (n=345) After base: If the annual fees for FINRA were higher, while the annual fees for the SEC remained the same, would your preference shift from FINRA to the SEC? (n=79) 1 5 81% (345) 68% (287) How to read: 46% would still prefer the SEC as their inspection/examination body even if the SEC users fees were 3 times the membership fees charged by a FINRA-IA SRO 58% (246) 48% (25) 46% (196) Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x SEC price multiple vs. FINRA-IA SRO ME (+/-)= 3.7% 4.9% 5.2% 5.3% 5.3% How to read: At a 95% confidence level, between 77.3% and 84.7% of the surveyed population prefer the SEC over a FINRA-IA SRO as their examination/inspection body 1 5 19% (79) How to read: 4% would still prefer a FINRA-IA SRO as their inspection/examination body even if the membership fees for a FINRA-IA SRO were 3 times the user fees charged by the SEC 15% (63) 8% (36) 5% (22) 4% (17) Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x FINRA-IA SRO price multiple vs. SEC ME (+/-)= 3.7% 7.8% 6.2% 4.9% 4.3% Note: Respondents were initially asked to select the SEC or FINRA at a base case, after which they were queried about their willingness to pay for the previously selected organization at increasing relative price levels. Margin of error (ME) was calculated at the 95% confidence level. Source: BCG IA Survey (211) IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 6 Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved.

Respondent preference for SEC vs. FINRA-IA SRO >$1M AuM respondents Base case: Given the following annual user/membership fees, would you personally prefer the SEC or FINRA as the inspection/examination body for your firm? (n=23) 82% express preference for SEC 18% express preference for FINRA-IA IA SRO After base: If the annual fees for the SEC were higher, while the annual fees for FINRA remained the same, would your preference shift from the SEC to FINRA? (n=188) 1 5 82% (188) 67% (155) How to read: 45% would still prefer the SEC as their inspection/examination body even if the SEC users fees were 3 times the membership fees charged by a FINRA-IA SRO 58% (133) 48% (11) 45% (14) Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x SEC price multiple vs. FINRA-IA SRO ME (+/-)= 5.% 6.7% 7.1% 7.1% 7.1% How to read: At a 95% confidence level, between 77% and 87% of the surveyed population prefer the SEC over a FINRA-IA SRO as their examination/inspection body After base: If the annual fees for FINRA were higher, while the annual fees for the SEC remained the same, would your preference shift from FINRA to the SEC? (n=42) 1 5 18% (42) 18% How to read: 4% would still prefer a FINRA-IA SRO as their inspection/examination body even if the membership fees for a FINRA-IA SRO were 3 times the user fees charged by the SEC 17% (4) 17% 1% (24) 1% 6% (14) 4% (1) Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x FINRA-IA SRO price multiple vs. SEC ME (+/-)= 5.% 11.5% 9.3% 7.2% 6.2% Note: Respondents were initially asked to select the SEC or FINRA at a base case, after which they were queried about their willingness to pay for the previously selected organization at increasing relative price levels. Margin of error (ME) was calculated at the 95% confidence level. Source: BCG IA Survey (211) IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 7 6% 4% Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved.

User/membership fee scenarios provided to respondents depending on respondent firm size FINRA-IA SRO vs. New-IA SRO Respondent Firm Size, AuM FINRA-IA SRO New-IA SRO <$3M $21 $25 $3M - $1M $46 $55 $1M - $5M $2,1 $2,5 $5M - $1B $5,25 $6,3 $1B - $5B $21, $25,2 $5B - $25B $15, $126, $25B - $5B $262,5 $315, $5B+ $35, $42, Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved. IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 8

Respondent preference for FINRA-IA SRO vs. New-IA SRO All respondents Base case: Given the following annual user/membership fees, would you personally prefer FINRA-IA SRO or a new IA-specific SRO as the inspection/examination body for your firm? (n=424) 75% express preference for New-IA SRO 25% express preference for FINRA-IA SRO After base: If the annual fees for the SRO were higher, while the annual fees for FINRA remained the same, would your preference shift from the SRO to FINRA? (n=317) After base: If the annual fees for FINRA were higher, while the annual fees for the SRO remained the same, would your preference shift from FINRA to the SRO? (n=17) 1 75% (317) 7% (297) 6% (256) 53% (224) 48% (23) 5 5 25% (17) 8% (35) 4% 3% 3% (18) (13) (12) Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x New-IA SRO price multiple vs. FINRA-IA SRO FINRA-IA SRO price multiple vs. New-IA SRO ME (+/-)= 41% 4.1% 5% 5.% 54% 5.4% 55% 5.5% 55% 5.5% ME (+/-)= 41% 4.1% 52% 5.2% 38% 3.8% 33% 3.3% 31% 3.1% Note: Respondents were initially asked to select FINRA or a new IA-specific SRO at a base case, after which they were queried about their willingness to pay for the previously selected organization at increasing relative price levels. Margin of error (ME) was calculated at the 95% confidence level. Source: BCG IA Survey (211) IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 9 1 Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved.

Respondent preference for FINRA-IA SRO vs. New-IA SRO >$1M AuM respondents Base case: Given the following annual user/membership fees, would you personally prefer FINRA-IA SRO or a new IA-specific SRO as the inspection/examination body for your firm? (n=23) 73% express preference for New-IA SRO 27% express preference for FINRA-IA SRO After base: If the annual fees for the SRO were higher, while After base: If the annual fees for FINRA were higher, while the annual fees for FINRA remained the same, would your the annual fees for the SRO remained the same, would your preference shift from the SRO to FINRA? (n=167) preference shift from FINRA to the SRO? (n=63) 1 5 73% (167) 69% (159) 57% (131) 5% (114) 43% (98) Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x Base case 1.5x 2.x 2.5x 3.x New-IA SRO price multiple vs. FINRA-IA SRO FINRA-IA SRO price multiple vs. New-IA SRO ME (+/-)= 58% 5.8% 7% 7.% 75% 7.5% 76% 7.6% 75% 7.5% ME (+/-)= 5.8% 7.3% 5.5% 4.5% 4.5% Note: Respondents were initially asked to select FINRA or a new IA-specific SRO at a base case, after which they were queried about their willingness to pay for the previously selected organization at increasing relative price levels. Margin of error (ME) was calculated at the 95% confidence level. Source: BCG IA Survey (211) IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 1 1 5 27% (63) 1% (22) 5% (12) 3% (8) 3% (8) Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved.

Dually registered broker-dealer respondent preferences All dually registered broker-dealer respondents 61% of dually registered B-D respondents express preference for SEC over FINRA-IA SRO Base: Given the following annual fees, would you personally prefer the SEC or FINRA as the inspection/examination body for your firm? (n=74) 5% of dually registered B-D respondents prefer a FINRA-IA SRO over a New-IA SRO Base: Given the following annual fees, would you personally prefer FINRA-IA SRO or a new IA-specific SRO as the inspection/examination body for your firm? (n=74) 1 1 5 61 SEC 39 FINRA-IA SRO ME (+/-)= 11.1% 11.1% ME (+/-)= 11.4% 11.4% 5 5 FINRA-IA SRO 5 New-IA SRO Note: Respondents were initially asked to select the SEC or FINRA at a base case, after which they were queried about their willingness to pay for the previously selected organization at increasing relative price levels. Margin of error (ME) was calculated at the 95% confidence level. Source: BCG IA Survey (211) IAO-Survey-Results-5Dec11-vf.pptx 11 Copyright 211 1 by The Boston Consultin ng Group, Inc. All rights re eserved.