Monday, April 5, 2010
Are mutual fund investors ready to pay a fee to distributors?
Mutual fund (MF) distributors across India are finding new ways to remain in the business. They are now thinking of charging their clients for investing in MFs.
However, this uniform fee model would not be relevant across India for all distributors. The charges are likely to differ from one distributor to another depending on the advisory. As of now, distributors are thinking of charging anywhere from 1% to 2% of the total investment from their clients. SEBI had earlier mandated that the upfront commission to distributors shall be paid by the investor to the distributor directly. — Ra
“I have kept my clients informed about what is happening in the industry. The 0.50% commission paid by the asset management company (AMC) will not continue for a long time. AMCs are bleeding. I charge 2% from my clients. We are able to charge only our existing customers who know our quality of services. It’s difficult to charge a new customer,” said Thiru Murugan, CEO, Wealth Creation & Management Services.
“I know a typical case where a person who went to deposit Rs10 lakh was sold ten different ULIPs (unit-linked insurance plans) for the entire family. Next year he received a notice that he has to pay Rs10 lakh as renewal. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) says that it is protecting investors, but I don’t know who will regulate banks,” adds Mr Murugan.
But there are others who feel that if the fund does not perform well, then investors will rush to their office to demand a return of the fee.
“Customers only pay to banks and big institutions. Clients invest Rs5,000 initially after taking advice and then invest Rs1 lakh directly. If an MF doesn’t gives good returns then clients will come and ask me to pay back the fees,” said a certified financial planner (CFA).
A distributor gets Rs6 as commission for a client investing Rs500 per month in a systematic investment plan (SIP) for one year (a total investment of Rs6,000). Distributors are finding it unviable to continue providing service to such clients. There are talks among the IFA community of charging a uniform rate. IFAs are planning to come up with a rate card enumerating various charges.
Industry AUM dips in March
The assets under management (AUM) of the mutual fund industry dipped once again in March after having risen in February. The industry's total AUM stood at Rs 7,43,783.24 crore, a fall of 4.28 per cent compared to its end-February figure.
In January, the fund industry's AUM had dipped 4 per cent compared to its December AUM. However, in February it rose to 7,81,154.27 crore, up 2.65 per cent compared to the end-January figure.
Of the 37 (out of the total 38) fund houses whose AUMs were made available by the Association of Mutual Funds of India (Amfi), 22 witnessed a decline in their AUMs. In January, too, an equal number of fund houses had seen their AUMs decline, while in February the number had been only 14.
The fund house that saw the highest decline in AUM in March was JP Morgan: it lost 23.68 per cent of its AUM. The next biggest loser was AIG, whose AUM declined by 20.62 per cent. In addition, eight fund houses saw their AUMs decline by more than 10 per cent.
The larger fund houses too saw their AUMs erode. Reliance Mutual Fund's AUM stood at Rs 1,10,412.71 crore at the end of March, a decline of 4.61 per cent. Other large fund houses suffered similar losses. HDFC's AUM fell 6.69 per cent to Rs 88,779.84 crore while Birla Sun Life's assets fell 5.97 per cent to Rs 62,367.11 crore.
ICICI Prudential and UTI, however, managed to buck the trend of declining AUMs. Their AUMs grew 0.57 per cent and 1.14 per cent respectively during March.
In terms of percentage change, the latest entrant into the industry, Peerless Mutual Fund, witnessed the highest increase in AUM -- 149.88 per cent. In February its AUM stood at Rs 121.10 crore while in March it rose to Rs 302.60 crore.
In January, the fund industry's AUM had dipped 4 per cent compared to its December AUM. However, in February it rose to 7,81,154.27 crore, up 2.65 per cent compared to the end-January figure.
Of the 37 (out of the total 38) fund houses whose AUMs were made available by the Association of Mutual Funds of India (Amfi), 22 witnessed a decline in their AUMs. In January, too, an equal number of fund houses had seen their AUMs decline, while in February the number had been only 14.
The fund house that saw the highest decline in AUM in March was JP Morgan: it lost 23.68 per cent of its AUM. The next biggest loser was AIG, whose AUM declined by 20.62 per cent. In addition, eight fund houses saw their AUMs decline by more than 10 per cent.
The larger fund houses too saw their AUMs erode. Reliance Mutual Fund's AUM stood at Rs 1,10,412.71 crore at the end of March, a decline of 4.61 per cent. Other large fund houses suffered similar losses. HDFC's AUM fell 6.69 per cent to Rs 88,779.84 crore while Birla Sun Life's assets fell 5.97 per cent to Rs 62,367.11 crore.
ICICI Prudential and UTI, however, managed to buck the trend of declining AUMs. Their AUMs grew 0.57 per cent and 1.14 per cent respectively during March.
In terms of percentage change, the latest entrant into the industry, Peerless Mutual Fund, witnessed the highest increase in AUM -- 149.88 per cent. In February its AUM stood at Rs 121.10 crore while in March it rose to Rs 302.60 crore.
Assets Under Management | |||||||
Assets (Rs Cr) | |||||||
Fund House | Mar-10 | Feb-10 | Change (%) | ||||
Peerless Mutual Fund | 303 | 121 | 149.88 | ||||
Edelweiss Mutual Fund | 149 | 114 | 30.43 | ||||
DSP BlackRock Mutual Fund | 21,491 | 19,934 | 7.81 | ||||
Quantum Mutual Fund | 93 | 88 | 5.61 | ||||
ING Mutual Fund | 1,606 | 1,527 | 5.20 | ||||
Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund | 2,257 | 2,176 | 3.73 | ||||
SBI Mutual Fund | 37,417 | 36,072 | 3.73 | ||||
Bharti AXA Mutual Fund | 549 | 537 | 2.23 | ||||
Mirae Asset Mutual Fund | 251 | 246 | 2.01 | ||||
Sahara Mutual Fund | 635 | 624 | 1.79 | ||||
UTI Mutual Fund | 80,218 | 79,310 | 1.14 | ||||
Sundaram BNP Paribas Mutual Fund | 13,878 | 13,733 | 1.06 | ||||
ICICI Prudential Mutual Fund | 81,018 | 80,555 | 0.57 | ||||
Escorts Mutual Fund | 203 | 203 | 0.20 | ||||
Franklin Templeton Mutual Fund | 34,034 | 33,998 | 0.10 | ||||
Fidelity Mutual Fund | 7,790 | 7,795 | -0.05 | ||||
L&T Mutual Fund | 2,511 | 2,538 | -1.05 | ||||
IDFC Mutual Fund | 25,775 | 26,568 | -2.99 | ||||
Tata Mutual Fund | 21,935 | 22,621 | -3.03 | ||||
Reliance Mutual Fund | 110,413 | 115,753 | -4.61 | ||||
Taurus Mutual Fund | 2,307 | 2,429 | -5.00 | ||||
HSBC Mutual Fund | 6,215 | 6,563 | -5.29 | ||||
Axis Mutual Fund | 3,552 | 3,754 | -5.38 | ||||
Birla Sun Life Mutual Fund | 62,367 | 66,330 | -5.97 | ||||
HDFC Mutual Fund | 88,780 | 95,144 | -6.69 | ||||
Canara Robeco Mutual Fund | 9,220 | 10,017 | -7.96 | ||||
LIC Mutual Fund | 40,665 | 44,727 | -9.08 | ||||
Religare Mutual Fund | 12,945 | 14,841 | -12.78 | ||||
Fortis Mutual Fund | 7,904 | 9,138 | -13.50 | ||||
Benchmark Mutual Fund | 1,999 | 2,312 | -13.54 | ||||
Kotak Mahindra Mutual Fund | 34,787 | 40,466 | -14.03 | ||||
Principal Mutual Fund | 6,997 | 8,273 | -15.43 | ||||
JM Financial Mutual Fund | 7,997 | 9,507 | -15.87 | ||||
Deutsche Mutual Fund | 10,477 | 12,525 | -16.35 | ||||
Shinsei Mutual Fund | 367 | 459 | -19.93 | ||||
AIG Global Inv Grp Mutual Fund | 1,138 | 1,433 | -20.62 | ||||
JPMorgan Mutual Fund | 3,541 | 4,640 | -23.68 | ||||
Grand Total | 743,783 | 781,154 | -4.28 | ||||
Source: AMFI |
Deutsche MF Unveils Global Agribusiness Offshore Fund
The scheme offers regular plan with dividend and growth option. Further, the dividend option offers payout and reinvestment facility. The scheme would allocate 80% to 100% of assets in units / securities issued by overseas mutual funds or unit trusts with medium to high risk profile. Moreover, it would allocate upto 20% of assets in debt instruments that includes government securities as well as corporate debt, money market instruments (including cash and units of domestic money market mutual funds) with low to medium risk profile. The scheme shall initially invest predominantly in the units of DWS Invest Global Agribusiness Fund, domiciled in Luxembourg or similar mutual funds at the discretion of the Investment Manager. | ||
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
For Transparent Insurnace-Let insurers go public early.
Insurance companies going public should be transparent in disclosing their assets and liabilities to prospective investors. So should all companies raising money from the public, for which regulation already exists. For the insurance industry, the sector regulator, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, has identified the specific kind of disclosures needed.
These relate to the companies' assets and liabilities, intrinsic value of their present business, agreements with foreign promoters, product offerings and investment performance of unit-linked insurance plans and so on. Companies that do not comply with the regulator's norms should be debarred from going public.
The government should, in addition, ease the rule that mandates an insurance company to go public only after 10 years of operations. Insurance companies need a lot of capital to grow their business. A larger life insurance business will mean more people taking life covers.
This will improve insurance penetration in this sorely underinsured country. More money will also be available to finance construction of roads, ports, airports, towns and other infrastructure. Infrastructure needs long-term funds and a large chunk of the needs can be met only by insurers and pension funds, whose liabilities have a long maturity profile.
The money raised through public offers would give insurance companies the capital they need to grow their business. A growing insurance business would generate investible funds for long-gestation infrastructure projects. There would be positive spinoffs for domestic promoters of insurance joint ventures as well — they would not have to depend on their foreign joint venture partners to bring in funds.
It would also widen choice for retail investors. The capital market regulator also has to be a facilitator and allow insurance companies to raise money from the public, even if these companies make losses. The regulator allows other lossmaking companies to go public if they follow the compulsory book-building method for price discovery.
A similar facility can be accorded to the insurance industry as well. Discerning investors can be trusted to deal with the risk associated with such issues.
Retail investors also need to make sense of the disclosures. It would help if institutional investors and credit rating agencies analysing the financial strength of insurance companies make the analysis public.
These relate to the companies' assets and liabilities, intrinsic value of their present business, agreements with foreign promoters, product offerings and investment performance of unit-linked insurance plans and so on. Companies that do not comply with the regulator's norms should be debarred from going public.
The government should, in addition, ease the rule that mandates an insurance company to go public only after 10 years of operations. Insurance companies need a lot of capital to grow their business. A larger life insurance business will mean more people taking life covers.
This will improve insurance penetration in this sorely underinsured country. More money will also be available to finance construction of roads, ports, airports, towns and other infrastructure. Infrastructure needs long-term funds and a large chunk of the needs can be met only by insurers and pension funds, whose liabilities have a long maturity profile.
The money raised through public offers would give insurance companies the capital they need to grow their business. A growing insurance business would generate investible funds for long-gestation infrastructure projects. There would be positive spinoffs for domestic promoters of insurance joint ventures as well — they would not have to depend on their foreign joint venture partners to bring in funds.
It would also widen choice for retail investors. The capital market regulator also has to be a facilitator and allow insurance companies to raise money from the public, even if these companies make losses. The regulator allows other lossmaking companies to go public if they follow the compulsory book-building method for price discovery.
A similar facility can be accorded to the insurance industry as well. Discerning investors can be trusted to deal with the risk associated with such issues.
Retail investors also need to make sense of the disclosures. It would help if institutional investors and credit rating agencies analysing the financial strength of insurance companies make the analysis public.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Market looks beyond fourth quarter for leg up
Market looks beyond fourth quarter for leg up
Analysts and market watchers are already looking beyond corporate results for the fourth quarter even though it has a full week to go.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
IPO GREY MARKET PREMIUM HEARD ON THE STREET
Company Name | Offer Price (Rs.) | Premium (Rs.) |
DQ Entertainment (Inter.) | 80 | 48 to 50 |
PradipOverseas | 100 to 110 | 15 to 16 |
ILFS Transportation | 242 to 258 | 32 to 34 |
Persistent Sys. | 290 to 310 | 132 to 135 (Buyer) |
Shree GaneshJewellery | 260 to 270 | 10 to 12 |
InfrasoftTechnology | 137 to 145 | 58 to 60 |
GoenkaDiamond & Jewellery | 135 to 145 | 8 to 9 (Seller) |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)