Posts Tagged unified managed accounts

Outsourced Portfolio Programs Now Hot Item with Trust Banks and Wealth Advisors

Performance isn’t everything when it comes to selling an asset management program. Leading consultants say providers that make an effort to keep working with advisors after they seal the deal can win big.

On paper, it’s a marriage made in heaven. Advisors are hungry for ways to farm out the investments, and asset managers are eager to sell their plug-and-play expertise.

But with just about everyone in the industry hawking their portfolio management solutions, it can be hard for advisors to pick through the noise and find the perfect partner.

“Many advisors think that once they get the operations — the plumbing — right that they are done,” says Paul Ahern, a principal at Winslow Capital Group.

“Not so. In fact, they are only halfway to success.”

To help Trust Advisor readers get a better sense of the plumbing their practices need, we’re putting together an in-depth map of the market listing who’s out there and what they offer advisors in particular.

“America’s Most Advisor Friendly Outsourced Asset Management Programs” will be ready for you on July 15.

We’re already hearing from advisors and consultants alike that outsourced portfolios are as hot as ever, but a lack of standardized jargon makes it hard for RIAs, family offices and independent brokerage reps to truly compare apples to apples.

UMA, SMA, TAMP

While “unified managed accounts,” or UMAs, are the current market darling, more traditional separately managed accounts (SMAs) and turnkey asset management programs  (TAMPs) still have their fans.

The distinction between them is really more tactical than anything else.

SMAs were structured as a new asset class, making them easy to incorporate into an existing advisory platform and fill out with stocks, bonds, mutual funds or what have you.

UMAs tend to import all the security selection, strategic allocation and rebalancing across the portfolio, effectively importing the skill of third-party managers the advisor picks out.

Unlike an SMA, the assets remain under the advisor’s custody, making bookkeeping and fiduciary compliance relatively straightforward, even across asset classes.

And for advisors looking to farm out the entire investment management function, a “turnkey” TAMP program provides the entire bundle, from due diligence through to the back office billing.

While the details vary, the underlying business proposition is the same: outsourcing is cheaper than doing it yourself, says Robert Ellis, a consultant at Fast Track Advisors.

“Outsourced asset management programs allow advisors to focus on what they do best, which is work directly with their clients,” he explains.

“When advisors sit on the same side of the table with clients and select the managers and programs, they improve the value add they provide, while reducing their direct responsibility for investment performance.”

Picking an advisor-friendly program

But to get back to Paul Ahern’s “halfway to success,” delegating one of the core traditional functions of the advisory profession — the security selection — can be a tense affair.

The advisor needs to let go.

And once the grip has loosened, it needs to stay loosened.

No constant second-guessing. No coming up with your own model portfolios “just in case.”

With the right program, even the due diligence is built in, so there’s not even any need to pick the right managers.

That’s when a third-party program really starts freeing advisors up to become pure relationship managers and work with clients and prospects.

“When an advisor affiliates with a TAMP relationship for access to open architecture, they are not just taking on another product line,” Ahern says.

“Rather, they are committing to an equivalent of a restructuring of their wealth management business model,” he adds. “If a TAMP is only ‘bolted on’ to an existing advisor product set and just another product among many, then all the advisor has achieved in increased complexity and cost.”

“Friendly” is relative

To achieve that level of commitment and trust, it helps to know that the vendor won’t seize on the relationship as an opportunity to prospect your clients away.

Not many asset protection programs work that way, and even if they did, the provider is unlikely to alienate everyone in the business by stealing one retail account.

Even at their most “unfriendly,” UMA and TAMP providers simply aren’t bound by the conflicting interests that might get a captive trust company or product provider, for example, into trouble.

Instead, the “friendliest” vendors distinguish themselves by going out of their way to give advisors more: more service, more options, better performance.

At a minimum, they need to have competent technology, a stable operating environment and a responsive client culture.

From there, execution is everything. They need to work with advisors to manage the transition from in-house to third-party management, Paul Ahern says.

And after that, they need to keep working with you to capture new efficiencies.

Maybe you can charge clients more than you do now in order to pass on the value you now add in the form of improved investment performance — or charge prospects less because your overhead is lower.

A good partner will help advisors work out the details there, as well as make suggestions on workflow changes, new policies and compliance implications.

In other words, a truly advisor-friendly asset protection program will function as an “advisor to the advisors,” playing a consultative role.

This is not a one-time transaction. It’s a long-term relationship, and unless everyone at the table understands that, the real benefits will remain elusive.

If you are a SMA, UMA, TAMP or other outsourced asset management program provider and would like to be included in this report, simply click here

Scott Martin, senior editor, The Trust Advisor.

Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/advisorfriendlytarp ‎

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Networking and Tech Gadgets Attract Wealth Advisors to Big ABA Trust Convention This Week

American Bankers Association wealth management and trust conference brings cutting-edge technologies together with the industry’s decision makers under the banner of building stronger client relationships and enhancing business.

In a few days, an elite 500 or so bankers and other financial professionals will be in Scottsdale, Arizona hammering out the future of high-net-worth advice, and open architecture investing will be front and center.

The American Bankers Association is the elite trade group representing the industry. Just attending the three-day conference can count as a full year of continuing education credit for certified financial planners.

And on average, the people there manage well over $1 billion apiece.

With that kind of firepower packed into one place, the talking points are likely to set the tone for wealth managers and trust companies over the next year.

The “holistic” era is here

If the list of exhibitors is any guide, this is the year giants and niche players alike aggressively roll out solutions that give advisors a 360-degree view of their clients’ finances while keeping the assets under direct supervision.

“Our goal this year — as always — is to give trust companies the tools they need to be as effective, profitable and client-centered as they can be,” says Jonathan Flitt, director of Citibank’s Investor Services unit. 

Flitt’s team will be coaching the crowd at booth 312 how true front-to-back open architecture solutions are finally available and already transforming the business.

The linchpin here is Citi’s “unified managed household” structure, which aggregates data across all accounts- — trust and brokerage, throughout a client family’s financial life — and then gives the advisor the keys to that fully loaded car.

Naturally, a clearer view of the data means more efficient wealth management practices.

And as these solutions move toward the center of the industry, Flitt says early adoption can get firms ahead of both the learning curve and the earning curve.

“Wealth managers who are already thinking in these terms can definitely grow their assets at the expense of competitors who aren’t,” he says

Once niche products, the unified managed account structures that make those efficiencies possible are already hitting the mainstream — and again, there will be plenty of UMA vendors exhibiting their wares at the ABA conference.

The proposition driving advisors to adopt UMA structures is simple. By importing the best investment ideas the industry has to offer, even a small institution can give its clients best-of-breed portfolio management without breaking the budget.

And unlike conventional “separately” managed accounts that export the assets to the third-party managers to trade, UMAs let a trust company or other fiduciary retain direct custody.

The money doesn’t move. Only the investment models come in to be “overlaid” on your client’s wealth.

One product they’ll be talking about in Scottsdale is Smartleaf’s model distribution service, which promises to streamline both sides of the overlay relationship.

“This will make it much easier for wealth managers to bring in outside models, track the ideas they’re using and automatically receive updated models as they change,” says Jerry Michael, the company’s present.

Once the web-driven version of this product rolls out, you can think of Smartleaf as the “app store” of investment strategies for participating advisors to load with all the third-party models they need.

As the “idea store,” Smartleaf handles the billing and the bookkeeping. And because participation is open to any manager willing to sign up, the architecture is completely open.

Naturally, the relationship can go both ways, Michael tells me.

He has a few customers who push one or two in-house specialty strategies back out for other firms to buy while importing the models that run the other allocations in their clients’ portfolios.

As a result, he says, if the flows work out right, that push/pull approach to overlay management can become both a cost-saving measure and a bona fide profit center — a promise few wealth managers can pass up.

Automating the back office

Smartleaf is also deepening its own “holistic” capabilities to let participating advisors automate basic tax strategies across third-party allocations, ensuring that the right shares are sold to match capital gains to losses.

Automation is also in the air in the trust accounting space.

Infovisa is coming off a record-breaking sales year and is eager to demonstrate its new automated account review and risk management systems at the ABA show.

“Prospective clients who currently use similar products offered by our competitors have also told us it is more functional and user-friendly,” says Mike Dinges, the company’s president.

One edge here is integration. Infovisa runs those risk management tools right in the accounting platform, eliminating the need to run two applications at once and pass data between them.

This, in turn, cuts down on the amount of babysitting that staff have to do and lets the automation actually save labor instead of creating new work.

And as for 2013, Dinges tells me he’s got a true industry smash moving toward the launch pad: mobile applications.

By this point, just about everyone in the business who wants a tablet computer has one — and if not, vendors like Citi are giving iPads away.

But even in high-powered groups like the ABA, mobile interfaces have lagged the hardware. Next year, once the account structures are in place, that may finally change.

Scott Martin, senior editor, The Trust Advisor.

Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/aba

, , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

UMA Providers Dazzle Wealth Advisors with New Upgrades that Manage Market Volatility Risk

As global markets buckle on fears of new financial meltdown, managed accounts vendors entered the scene promoting new technology to allow better allocation and diversification of client accounts to minimize damage in worst-case scenarios.

Last week, VIPs from the unified managed accounts industry met in Boston to announce new product offerings and a shift in direction when it comes to advisor support.

The Trust Advisor was there to talk to some of the most influential leaders in this area.

“Keep it simple” was the rallying cry for the managed account industry as platform providers finally see their efforts to liberate model-only investing from a once-impenetrable maze of jargon start paying off. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

Must-Attend Managed Accounts UMA Summit Coming to Boston Sept. 12

Unified managed accounts are already making SMAs look like a flash in the pan, industry gurus say on the eve of high-profile, high-level conference.

In just the last few years, cutting-edge wealth managers have embraced the use of third-party investment models as the key to efficiency and scale — and now the industry is taking notice.

“We went through a lot of trial and tribulation with people trying to understand what model-only management was all about, but it’s certainly becoming the standard now,” says David Gardner, an external project director of Depository Trust Company, DTCC Wealth Management Services. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Confidence in Banks Falls to New Low; Farming Out Investment Decisions to Top Advisory Firms Seen as Best Way to Restore Trust

UMAs offering best of breed managers are now in fashion for bank distribution channels while bank crisis refuses to go away.

According to a new poll by Gallup released last week, 36 percent of Americans now say they have “very little” or “no” confidence in U.S. banks, the highest percentage on record since Gallup first started tracking that data.

Safe to say it’s been a tough year in the banks’ public relations departments. The nation’s five largest mortgage firms — Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial — have been the focus of a federal investigation into whether they defrauded taxpayers in their handling of foreclosures.

All of this coupled with market turmoil are good reasons for UMAs (unified managed accounts) to restore image and help clients properly diversify, rebalance portfolios and soothe nerves.

Investors scarred by one of the worst decades in market history are still finding plenty of reasons to be a little edgy, and they’re leaning harder than ever on their advisors to ease their nerves.

Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Citigroup Adds Trust Services to Its UMA Platform

Unified managed accounts no longer just “nice to have” but essential for trust companies looking to stay competitive. Citi in particular is working to take the UMA model to the next level.

This may be the year of the UMA as wealth managers embrace a high-tech approach that was considered too esoteric and complicated even a few months ago.

Back in August, we reported that unified managed accounts were not getting traction with advisors who considered these programs poorly documented and supported.

At the time, 80% of the advisors out there had no plan to integrate UMAs into their business.

But since then, several top-tier providers have gotten into the UMA space or deepened existing programs to make them more immediately useful to outside wealth managers.

Just this weekend, we saw UMA provider GlobalBridge launch an aggressive marketing program to advisors — mere days after Citigroup widened its UMA platform to support trust services, operations outsourcing and custody.

Throw in big moves over the last few months from Fidelity and TD Ameritrade on the RIA custodian side, and there seems to be a gold rush into UMAs building here.

Widening the space on both ends

As usual in the UMA world, a lot hinges on the definitions.

At the core, a unified managed account is simply an accounting solution that enables advisors to build a client portfolio out of securities from multiple asset classes and hold them on the same platform.

But more sophisticated UMA systems provide a menu of third-party investment ideas that advisors can then “overlay” on their client accounts.

The goal is to give clients access to the best investment ideas out there while letting their advisors stop spending a fortune to match the trades the best talent on Wall Street can come up with.

This is the flavor of UMA that Citi’s Global Transaction Services team says now makes the difference between a competitive trust industry and extinction.

“If technology was previously considered more of a ‘nice to have,’ Citi asserts that truly integrated wealth management is simply impossible without a cutting edge wealth management technology,” the company recently stated.

In fact, Citi now integrates trust management and custody into its established UMA platform to let advisors monitor and manage their clients’ wealth across all household accounts: taxable and non-taxable, held in trust and otherwise.

After all, as the trust officers that Citi talked to ruefully point out, the clients themselves are already operating out of a unified household-level perspective and want to make sure their paid advisors can spot inefficiencies across accounts faster than they can.

Jonathan Flitt at Citi tells me that the newly enhanced UMA is an obvious fit for private bankers in particular, since they’re most likely to have ultra-high-wealth clients who’d benefit from this kind of all-inclusive approach.

Meanwhile, on the RIA side, the mere fact that UMAs — with or without overlay — are rolling out at all is noteworthy.

Fidelity, for example, seemed almost grudging back in January when it added UMAs as an option for its high-net-worth clientele, largely as a tax planning strategy.

But while innovation is good, it seemed like a missed opportunity to keep the job of creating these unified portfolios “in the family” in the form of captive RIA Strategic Advisers.

TD Ameritrade, on the other hand, has promised that it’s happy to add third-party managers to its UMA platform if enough advisors nominate a particular strategy for inclusion. This is a true open architecture solution, and one that has the potential to earn the UMA approach the spotlight it deserves.

Scott Martin, contributing editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Jerry Cooper and Steve Maimes contributed to the editing and research.

Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/umaboom

, , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

Why Aren’t Overlay Providers Closing the Sale?

Cerulli survey says wealth managers don’t understand and aren’t buying UMA overlay capabilities. One firm, Smartleaf, bucks the trend and continues to close deal after deal. Here’s why.

When industry research firm Cerulli Associates released its latest benchmarking report on unified managed accounts (UMAs), the headlines screamed that advisors just weren’t buying into these theoretically advisor-friendly investment vehicles.

According to Cerulli analyst Jeff Strange, less than half of the financial advisors he surveyed have ever used unified management accounts and roughly 80% have no plans to rely on UMAs more in the future.

“They still don’t understand why UMA is beneficial to their process,” Strange tells the Trust Advisor. “A big part of that is still just that the providers haven’t taken off the training wheels yet.”

While about $80 billion is now managed on UMA platforms, new flows have been stubborn to capture. Only $1.7 billion in new money came to UMAs in 2008 and while aggregate AUM in these vehicles jumped 70% in 2009, most of that growth was simple appreciation in a bull market year.

Overlay providers fire back

Statistics like that are frustrating for companies that sell UMA software and investment models on the premise that UMAs are better for trust companies, banks and advisors than either traditional mutual funds or separately managed accounts (SMAs).

Both UMAs and SMAs tap the expertise of third-party managers to build a customized investment portfolio. However, while an SMA exports the assets to the outside managers to run, UMA assets never leave the sight of the bank or advisor that landed the client in the first place. Instead, the UMA imports the manager’s expertise and applies it to the assets in what’s called an “overlay.”

Trust officers and other advisors can then tinker with the overlay to improve tax efficiency, balance out clients’ outside holdings or obey restrictions against investing in various types of companies—tobacco, for example.

While the combination of flexibility, best-of-breed investment models and custody of the underlying assets should be a win with advisors, most overlay providers still have well under 100 clients on their platforms.

But those narrow client lists—and the Cerulli data—disguise the fact that while the typical RIA may not be eager to sign up, the institutions that are adopting overlay approaches tend to be banks and other relatively big wealth managers.

While a vendor like Smartleaf may only have about 50 clients running its overlays, those elite four dozen institutions still manage about $31 billion in AUM between them. This effectively makes Smartleaf the leader in the bank UMA marketplace.

Most of our clients are banks now, says Smartleaf president Jerry Michael. And many of those banks are pretty big names like BB&T, BBVA Compass and, most recently, Bank of Hawaii’s $6 billion investment services group.

Scale is a big part of the UMA value proposition. Specialized vendors like Smartleaf (which provides the back office software that supports these accounts) and Placemark (which gathers the proprietary investment models) cater to firms that already have accounting systems, trading systems and the dedicated IT staff to keep them talking to each other.

Resellers like Concord Wealth Management and others, package and resell Smartleaf with enhancements into an integrated solution for smaller players like the archetypal independent broker fresh out of the wirehouse.

If you’ve got 100 clients, you can probably build them customized portfolios yourself. But as Placemark CEO Lee Chertavian tells me, going the overlay route looks a lot more cost-effective if you’re running $5 billion in 13,000 client accounts.

“Overlay management can be as simple as an accounting solution to combine separately managed assets or as complicated as a system that helps an institution make better investment decisions,” he explains. “We’re on the far end.”

The real buyers don’t need to be sold

Banks that have the scale and the sophistication to benefit from true UMA programs rarely need much of a sales pitch, Smartleaf’s Jerry Michael says.

“Often as not, they approach us,” he notes. “Firms with strategic objectives requiring change tend to see it as a must-have product. Firms looking for incremental improvement are more reluctant.”

The ability to bring in outside expertise while retaining ultimate discretion is especially attractive for trust companies and other fiduciaries, Michael says. Farming out the assets in an SMA approach rubbed too many banks—not to mention RIAs reluctant to “share” their hard-won clients—the wrong way.

“SMAs just didn’t work for banks,” he explains. “They like being fiduciaries. They wanted to remain fiduciaries, but they needed to open up their wealth management to outside research. This lets them have their cake and eat it.”

Of course, concentrating on the bank channel contains its own challenges. The only client Smartleaf has lost in its 10-year history was when Regions Financial bought Union Planters and threw out its UMA systems.

That’s true of the advisor channel as well. Jeff Strange at Cerulli acknowledges that much of advisors’ distrust for UMAs comes from the notion that overlays are not portable from one broker-dealer to another, and too complex for the typical independent operator to run on his own.

“You can take the mutual funds and the underlying securities with you, but the tax management and other features are not transferable,” he says. “Same with the specific mix of asset managers you have running the portfolio.”

For Jerry Michael, the important thing is clearing up the vagueness surrounding these accounts and what they do.

“I personally twinge when I hear the word UMA,” he says. “It’s too confusing.”

“There’s one type of UMA that’s really just a souped-up SMA that helps the institution monitor what the outside managers are doing in all the separate accounts. Then there’s what we do, where the outside managers’ brainpower is brought in to sit on that truly unified internal account.”

Scott Martin, contributing editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Steven Maimes contributed to the research and the editing.

Rate this story, click here.

Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/uma

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Comments