Posts Tagged Westwood Trust
Trust Firms’ Profits Stay Positive in First Quarter
Posted by Scott Martin in News on May 1st, 2010
Full-service banks are still fighting headwinds, but business is booming in their trust departments. More specialized trust companies are making a lot of money.
It was another bumpy season for the big banks, but when you drill down into the numbers, the trust business is ramping up in terms of both activity and profits.
Most of the publicly held names in the trust industry booked a solid first-quarter profit as trust fee income expanded by about 20% to 25%. Northern Trust, Washington Trust and Westwood Trust all improved their bottom line.
The best performers attribute the improvement to a mix of tactical business development and old-fashioned organic growth. For example, Westwood Holdings, the parent of Dallas-based Westwood Trust, boosted its trust income 24% to $3 million in the quarter.
“We’ve hired a new trust officer and are hoping he will help us grow,” William Hardcastle, the company’s chief financial officer, told me.
“But about 3/4 of our new cash flows are from referrals or new assets from existing clients,” he added. “Clients are not quite as afraid as they were. That’s very welcome.”
Northern Trust reported a 25% increase in trust and other fees. Washington Trust bumped up its wealth management revenue by 16%.
|
Selected Trust Institutions: |
|||||||
|
|
Fiduciary |
Fiduciary Revenue |
|||||
|
Institution |
12/31/09 |
Change from 12/31/08 |
12/31/09 |
Change from 12/31/08 |
|||
|
Northern Trust (IL) |
$3.9 trillion |
20% |
$2.2 billion |
-4% |
|||
|
Wilmington Trust (DE) |
$185 billion |
10% |
$288 million |
96% |
|||
|
Bessemer Trust (NY) |
$47 billion |
4% |
$284 million |
18% |
|||
|
Wellington Trust (MA) |
$31 billion |
25% |
$188 million |
-4% |
|||
|
Glenmede Trust (PA) |
$18 billion |
10% |
$80 million |
25% |
|||
|
Boston Trust (MA) |
$4 billion |
14% |
$20 million |
26% |
|||
|
Lehman Bros. Trust (NY) |
$3 billion |
9% |
$18 million |
-29% |
|||
|
Haverford Trust (PA) |
$3 billion |
13% |
$13 million |
7% |
|||
|
Washington Trust (RI) |
$2 billion |
15% |
$1 million |
19% |
|||
|
Westwood Trust (TX) |
$2 billion |
29% |
$10.3 million |
-6% |
|||
|
Legacy Trust (MA) |
$1.7 billion |
38% |
$8.5 million |
23% |
|||
|
Trust Co. of Toledo (OH) |
$1.7 billion |
21% |
$4 million |
22% |
|||
|
Unified Trust (KY) |
$1.6 billion |
30% |
$13.5 million |
26% |
|||
|
Philadelphia Trust (PA) |
$1.3 billion |
18% |
$6 million |
19% |
|||
|
Source: Trust Performance Report, A.M. Publishing, Chicago, IL. and SEC website. Representative sample only; not a comprehensive list. |
|||||||
Drilling down
That’s nice for the big institutions, but most trust companies aren’t publicly traded and don’t announce their results. To get the score on smaller trust operations, we got in touch with the expert number-trackers at Trust Updates in Chicago.
First-quarter numbers are just trickling in now, but Bernard Garbo, publisher of the company’s Trust Performance Report, told me that if early indications are any guide, the rising tide is still lifting all the boats.
“Larger institutions seem to be doing fairly well, but the rest are reporting that assets are up as well,” he says.
Garbo sees the best growth potential in institutional markets like employee benefits programs and other corporate trust services. However, the biggest trend he’s noticed is that the trust companies that can squeeze the most profits out of their assets tend to be specialists.
“Institutions that tend to specialize in fewer account categories are often the most profitable,” he told me.
“That’s not to say that some full-service operations aren’t making money, but especially among the independent trust companies, it seems difficult to be all things to all clients,” he added.
Trust works when lending fails
If specialists are reaping big rewards, the reverse also seems to be true. Full-service banks where trust is only a slice of a larger service platform don’t seem to be doing so well.
Among the big integrated trust banks, Wilmington Trust lost $29 million and Marshall & Ilsley lost $140 million. Both confessed that problems in their loan portfolios dragged their results down, but it wasn’t the trust departments’ fault. In fact, both banks singled out their wealth management operations as a bright spot.
Bank analyst Richard Bove at Rochdale Securities told me this is a natural part of the business cycle.
“The trust business is all about regular fee income and incremental growth,” he says.
“Because of this, it rarely suffers when the market does poorly, and in fact can provide a buffer when the environment turns against an institution’s riskier activities.”
Wilmington has tweaked its business to take advantage of the trend. The bank saw its core trust revenue climb 11% in the first quarter and its assets under administration surge 22%, thanks in part to an aggressive new sales campaign.
“Our reputation as a superior fiduciary and service provider continues to serve us well,” Mark Graham, executive vice president of Wilmington’s wealth advisory services unit, told me, adding that new account activity is up 34% over last year.
Scott Martin, contributing editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Steven Maimes contributed to the research.
Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/earnings
Westwood Trust’s “Common Trust Funds” Emerge as Bellwether Business Model for Advisors
Posted by Jerry Cooper in News, Practice Management on January 22nd, 2010
Exclusive
CEO says new funds can be started in minutes, not months, at a fraction of the cost of a mutual fund.
Earlier this month The Trust Advisor reported Westwood Holdings Group, Inc. (NYSE: WHG), through its trust company unit Westwood Trust, helped forge gains by landing large new accounts while other firms sat on the sidelines. Westwood managed to bring in $2 billion in new assets during the toughest year in recent financial memory.
As part two of our report on Westwood Trust, I had an opportunity to chat once again with Brian Casey, President and CEO of Westwood, to drill down into the topic of interest to most wealth advisors – common trust funds.
New Money from an Old Idea
Simply stated, common trust funds or “CTFs” permit the commingling or pooling of investors’ money into one account (known as a common fund) for the purpose of creating a single investment. In other words, they are much like a mutual fund. They actually pre-date mutual funds so they are an old concept. Since they are a bank product, CTFs are not required to be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and they are not considered to be a security under state and federal securities laws. They are regulated under OCC Regulation 9 (12 CFR 9.18) and are supervised by state or federal bank regulators.
Casey says there are two types of CTFs. The first are common trust funds or CTFs, a product of a bank or trust company established as a convenience to the trust client. The second are collective investment funds or CIFs. These are utilized primarily by large qualified plan sponsors who are seeking institutional pricing for a large pool of retirement assets such as 401ks. They strike an NAV daily and trade on Fundserve. Casey adds, “We actually have one of these that we developed for a Fortune 100 company 401k plan and the data is available in Morningstar.”
But Westwood’s power products are the CTFs, common trust funds. They are private and only available to clients of Westwood Trust. Casey says that “they are only available to our clients who have a bona fide personal trust relationship with the trust company.” Their minimum account size is $2 million which can be either a taxable or retirement account. But, in other words, to benefit “you have to be a trust client and have seven figures with us to be part of the club.”
According to the Westwood’s 10K quarterly report for the year ending September 30, 2009, $1.4 billion of its $9.5 billion or 15% of its assets under management are held in common trust fund relationships.
The Strategies
Westwood runs 31 separate common trust funds which are based on 15 asset classes. Casey adds, “With institutional quality and thoughtful asset allocation, the client is given a better shot of achieving what it is that they’re trying to do than picking a mutual fund off a list.”
To the client, “expenses matter.” With a CTF the only charge is a management fee. There is no legal, accounting, transfer agent or fund supermarket fees that are normally part of a mutual fund fee structure.
Westwood offers five different “flavors” of value. This includes small-cap, all-cap, large-cap , mid‑cap and smid-cap value. As for income, they offer five types of income products including investment grade bonds, REITs, High Yield and two unique income funds.
They have an esoteric type of fund called the Income Opportunity Fund. This allows them to participate in a company through different parts of its capital structure. This might include, for example, a high dividend paying common stock, a preferred stock, or part of a company’s debt in the form of a bond. Or, they might own royalty trusts or MLPs.
They just started a popular Global Diversification Fund CTF. The strategy on this vehicle is to focus on investor purchasing power protection. Casey remarks, “As U.S. citizens, we have a lot of obstacles that could diminish the purchasing power of our savings, like inflation or the potential decline of the U.S. dollar.” This fund might hold global TIPs or treasury inflation protected securities, global bonds, gold, and other types of commodities.
While Westwood manages all of the domestic value and income funds, Westwood employs outside subadvisors chosen by Westwood’s investment committee with assistance from an outside consulting firm. To manage the domestic growth funds, Westwood uses William Blair in Chicago as their subadvisor.
For International Value, Westwood uses Lazard based in London and for International Growth, Westwood employs Martin Currie based in Scotland. The fees paid to subadvisors come out of Westwood’s pocket as opposed to any additional fee to the client. Casey says, “Asset allocation is critical to long-term investment success.”
Westwood is a world-class investor in the value and income space, but we recognize that investors need access to both domestic and international strategies to complete their asset allocation plan. We have a talented consultant on retainer and an experienced investment committee to help us identify best in class subadvisors.”
Technical Items
A major part of hosting a selection of common trust funds servicing close to $1.5 billion is the technology platform. The two major factors that must be considered for any common trust fund trust accounting systems are (1) to keep track of each investors holding and (2) to be able to strike a daily NAV calculation for each fund.
Westwood uses a trust accounting system called Infovisa. Casey said they have been working with Infovisa for over 10 years and they deliver a “great system.” He remarked that the folks that started Infovisa came out of SunGard.
SunGard offers two trust accounting systems to support CTF processing. The two systems are: Charlotte, which is utilized primarily by firms with zero to US$2 billion in trust assets. Customers include smaller community banks and private trust companies as well as startup firms. The other is AddVantage, which is typically used by large regional and national banks, with no theoretical size maximum in terms of assets, transactions, or users.
Each of the systems has been designed to work in conjunction with SunGard’s wealth management platform solution, Wealth Station. The trust platforms are also able to utilize the trade execution and compliance tools of the SunGard Transaction Network (STN).
Advent also offers a common trust fund system. It is actually a mutual fund system, but may be used to keep track of CTFs.
Taking Action
Common trust fund arrangements offer clients lower fees than mutual funds. That together with the enormous flexibility to create a pooled investment vehicle in minutes means that CTFs are likely to become an important part of the investment landscape.
The ease with which a trust company can be established in South Dakota, Nevada or Delaware by investment managers, has made inroads to this field, establishing a kind of “turnkey” service, which allows investment managers and plan administrators to easily establish new common trust funds arrangements.
Advisors Institutional Services (www.advisorsinstitutional.com), which I support, helps wealth managers, advisors, broker-dealers, law firms, and pension plan administrators create and operate trust companies in South Dakota and Nevada. This can permit an advisor to replicate the Westwood Trust business model.
The firm offers a complimentary special report called Launching a South Dakota Trust Company Guide to Operating Nationwide which is available on-line at (www.advisorsinstitutional.com/s/southdakotareports.asp).
Jerry Cooper, senior editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Steven Maimes contributed to the research.
Westwood Trust Shines Helping Advisor Pull In $2 Billion in New Accounts During Meltdown
Posted by Jerry Cooper in News, Sales and Marketing on January 8th, 2010
In a year when registered investment advisors have faced impossible challenges to stay ahead, one wealth management firm in Texas found opportunity and success.
Westwood Holdings Group, Inc. (NYSE: WHG) through its trust company unit Westwood Trust, helped forge gains by landing large new accounts while other firms waited, worried, and sat on the sidelines.
Last summer my research team noticed a blip on our radar screen when looking for firms that stood out during the meltdown. These are firms that increased managed assets for the year September 30, 2008 to September 30, 2009.
The firm that stood out was Westwood Holdings Group, company with little press attention, listed on the New York Stock Exchange, and a top performing wealth manager.
Last month I had an opportunity to chat with Brian Casey, President and CEO of Westwood, to discuss how his firm managed to bring in $2 billion in new assets during the toughest year in recent financial memory. Reviewing SEC reports, I looked at money managers that weathered the meltdown and it was not hard to understand how Westwood was able to mark this achievement.
The Secret
Although Westwood has been in business since 1983, its strategies were illuminated when it became public in 2002. But, the true story of Westwood Trust began in 1998.
Westwood Trust’s mission is to provide high quality products and services to its high net worth clients. Casey calls it “offering a competent investment professional to assist them with structuring a portfolio, and meeting the objectives whatever they may be trying to accomplish.”
Westwood is not a financial planning trust company that provides directed trusts, dynasty trusts or self-settled trusts. It is basically an eloquent investment store for a catered high end investment business segment.
In the past five years Westwood’s managed assets have grown from $4.5 billion to $9.5 billion.
The reason for this growth was due largely to the way the firm had been structured. Many channels of diversification contributed and provided a continuous and steady growth.
Casey, a native Texan for 40 years, describes Westwood as a diversified wealth management organization with three different business lines. The first, Westwood Management Corp., began its investment business in 1983 as an institutional money manager. Next, its trust company, Westwood Trust, a fully licensed and chartered trust company based in Texas that has been up and running for 12 years. Third, its mutual fund business called WHG Funds, which has been in business for four years.
The story of success is credited, in part, to Westwood Trust. Casey noted while other firms sat on the sidelines Westwood got its sales team out and prospected for new accounts.
The result of course is recorded history. Offsetting Westwood’s market losses experienced by most firms in the industry, Westwood was able to show net asset gains of $2 billion going from $7.5 billion at 9/30/08 to $9.5 billion at 9/30/09.
Casey attributes this influx of new accounts to one concept: “high quality.” Westwood knew it would have to rely on its high net worth business in order to sustain its asset levels, so it used its trust company as a main vehicle to reach new investors.
The notion of providing an institutional quality product to its institutional clients, and having access to that through its trust company, created a unique combination of delivering quality to the marketplace to high net-worth clientele.
I asked Casey whether he described the business at Westwood Trust as “retail.” He did not feel comfortable with that word and said that his customers would not like to consider themselves retail customers. He prefers to call them private wealth investors—meaning the average account size for Westwood Trust is $2 million.
How Did They Do It?
Casey says that they’re constantly on the lookout for new customers in a way that’s different for most RIAs. They primarily work through referrals and referral sources but have no wholesalers. Casey adds “If you’re looking for the client that has $2 million or more you’re not going to find him answering an ad. He’s going to have to come through a referral or direct call.”
He adds that clients are doctors, professionals and entrepreneurs that have accumulated wealth over a lifetime but who see Westwood Trust as a shop that puts value and income first.
Of particular importance is the fact that Westwood Trust offers common trust funds or commingled trust funds. These are funds that act and behave like mutual funds and what Casey calls the precursor to mutual funds. “They are a tremendously efficient way of delivering institutional-quality investment products to clients.”
He adds, “Commingled or common trust funds is a tool that allows us to deliver a well-diversified institutional-quality product at a more reasonable fee than by trying to cobble together some outside mutual funds along with a separate account.”
About Westwood
When looking at Westwood it’s best to view Westwood in comparison to its peers. The quick take snap shot provided by Morningstar gives Westwood stellar financial grades. There are only three firms in the group which include Franklin Resources and T. Rowe Price that have “A” financial health ratings.
Westwood’s market cap is only $268 million while the market cap of T. Rowe Price is $14 billion and Franklin’s is $25 billion. So for a small company being managed efficiently they have done quite well in comparison to their peers. Westwood is also accorded a “B” rating in profitability from the Morningstar analysis.
All this being said, Westwood is an interesting story to follow both from the point of being a stellar asset manager, and owner of a trust company, and using that trust company in a way that allowed it to bring in important new accounts and new assets at a volatile time.
Next week more about Westwood, its operations, and an acquisition.
Jerry Cooper, senior editor, The Trust Advisor Blog.
Story Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/westwoodtrust1
Advisor Managed Common Trust Fund Accounts Disappear as Fiduciaries Fear Risk
Posted by Jerry Cooper in News on November 13th, 2009
Trust Advisor Survey: Surge in ERISA lawsuits, 2008 Advisor Performance Prompts Trustees to Turn Down New CTF Business; Regardless of Risk Compelling Benefits Remain
Exclusive Report
Common trust funds aren’t so common anymore. Wall Street’s on‐again off‐again love affair with common fund pooling arrangements appears to be on the rocks (at least for the time being), according to research conducted by The Trust Advisor Blog since the beginning of the year.
Chicago‐based Northern Trust, known to be a CTF platform provider of third‐party hosting arrangements for RIAs, reported “they no longer offer their platform for managers,” said Anna Jamroz of Northern Trust’s Global Fund Services group. Several other major banks have also ended the practice of permitting third‐party investment advisors to direct the portfolios held in common trust fund accounts.
These arrangements permit the CTF’s to re‐create mutual fund portfolios. Typically, this helps investors by lowering operating costs. Common fund accounts don’t require the expensive operating costs of a mutual fund such as printing, compliance, call centers, etc. All of this translates into lower expense ratios which benefit investors. Both Morningstar and Lipper maintain databases of over 1,000 funds for the purpose of tracking performance. Most of these CTF’s are hosted by banks or trust companies that also serve as investment advisor to the fund.
The history of common trust funds, or CTF’s, dates back to the Jules Verne era and they are almost as old as Wall Street itself. In simple terms, these arrangements permit the comingling or pooling of investors’ money into one account (known as a common fund) for the purpose of creating a single investment.
In other words, they are much like a mutual fund. However, CTF’s are not required to be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and they are not considered to be a security under state and federal securities laws. They are regulated under OCC Regulation 9 (12 CFR 9.18) and are supervised by state or federal bank regulators.
Just 16 months ago, collective funds were the darlings of Wall Street. They were featured in a July 24 article in The Wall Street Journal, “‘Collective Funds’ Gain Traction in 401(k)”. The WSJ reported “collective funds pool investors’ assets and invest in stocks, bonds and other securities. The chief difference: Collective funds are typically available only in retirement plans. Because they aren’t sold directly to the general public, they generally aren’t regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.” The story added, “Collective funds tend to be substantially cheaper than mutual funds, largely because they don’t have to comply with SEC regulations or market to retail customers. That’s driving 401(k) plans to embrace these products, which are offered by big fund providers like Fidelity Investments, Vanguard Group and Charles Schwab Corp.”
Risky Third Party Arrangements
In a typical CTF setup, there is a trust and a trustee. The investors are called participants which are similar to shareholders. But because of the very nature of the arrangement as a trust, the trustee maintains full fiduciary responsibility. This includes responsibility for the profit or loss of the fund. The trustee cannot unload, delegate or bifurcate investment responsibility to a third party investment advisor without liability. In other words, the trustee is liable and responsible for the investment decisions of the advisor. If the common trust fund loses money, the trustee may be on the hook to make the investor whole in the event of a claim against the fund for a recovery.
All of this makes trustees very nervous when it comes to serving as trustee of a CTF managed by an investment advisor whose track record may have sustained losses. Since most advisors sustained double‐digit losses last year, it’s easy to see why trustees are scared.
In recent years, trustees have prided themselves on opting into roles that expressly limit their liability. These include directed trusts which permit the trustee to bear no responsibility for investment decisions as long as a directed trust is properly constructed and administered.
The Next Bull Market Scenario
A serious market recovery, renewed investor confidence and a boost in retirement wealth may spark another round of CTF mania in the coming years. If it does, there are mutual benefits for both the investor and the provider.
For the investor: he gains the ability to participate in fractional shares of managed accounts normally reserved for ultra‐high net worth investors who are prepared to put in $3 million to $4 million. With a common trust fund, an investor with as little as $100,000 or $200,000 can buy a share of a managed account and participate in the strategy and the gains (or losses) of a best‐of‐breed advisor.
Models that Work Now
According to reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Westwood Trust‐owner Westwood Holdings Group (WHG) of Dallas, TX hosts multiple common trust fund accounts. In this case, Westwood is also an investment advisor and also owns a trust company. This all‐in‐one arrangement does not put the responsibility of third‐party risk on its shoulders since the parent/owner is familiar with the strategy of the advisor and owns the trust company.
In a situation where the investment advisor owns a bank or trust company, CTF’s can make a lot of sense. Since there is no outsourcing of risk, the advisor feels comfortable about its strategy and therefore is willing to accept the additional responsibility associated with maintaining the CTF account.
In another scenario, Davidson Trust of Montana is a combined trust company and investment advisory firm which offers its customer CTF accounts of pre‐approved and selected portfolios. I spoke to Davidson Trust Vice President Dennis West, who told me that their CTF accounts are popular with their investors. The firm has six different portfolios to choose from. Although the loads are somewhat heavy for smaller accounts of $1 million or less, the fees become lower when you leave Davidson more funds to work with. For more information, you can reach Dennis West at 1‐888‐389‐8001.
As more investment advisory firms begin to integrate trust operations, it makes more sense to also host common trust funds for these purposes. Given the compelling benefits these arrangements can yield investor savings and an ability to get into a fund with a best‐of‐breed strategy for a lower entry charge.
Jerry Cooper, senior editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Steven Maimes contributed to the research.


Recent Comments