Financial research and analytics firm Cerulli Associates finds managed account programs are more resistant to fee compression than other commonly used qualified default investment alternatives.
A new report from Cerulli Associates explores one of the most
frequently asked-about issues among the firm’s clients: Why has there been very
little price change in the explicit fees consumers pay for managed accounts?
“Within the managed accounts practice at Cerulli, the
questions most frequently asked by our clients relate to fees,” explains Tom
O’Shea, associate director at Cerulli. “Since 2008, there has been very little
price change in the explicit fees that consumers pay for subadvisory separate
accounts, mutual fund accounts, rep-as-portfolio-manager services, and rep-as-adviser
accounts.”
According to Cerulli, the explicit costs of all types of managed account programs, with the exception of unified managed accounts (UMAs), varied only three to six
basis points between 2008 and 2014. In a sharp contrast, the explicit fee
for UMAs dropped 20 basis points during the same time period.
O’Shea notes Cerulli began tracking fees for UMAs in 2007,
when the product category was fairly new and saw little competition between providers. “Since then,
several firms have entered the space, including direct-to-consumer firms, which
have driven down the explicit cost of UMAs,” he explains.
The Cerulli research indicates managed account clients are
often confused by the fees they pay for advice—one potential explanation for why prices have remained steady—though the wider industry trend is toward
greater understanding of the cost of advice. Interestingly, a 2014 survey by
the firm shows 51% of consumers “were not sure how they paid for investment
advice or thought they did not pay for it,” down from a high of 64% in 2010.
O’Shea feels new entrants into the managed account space “might
heighten consumers’ sensitivity to fees,” and thereby kickstart more fee compression beyond the UMA category.
“Perhaps the most intriguing and powerful force to open
clients’ eyes to the cost of investing has been electronic [registered investment advisers], or robo-advisers
as they are dubbed in the trade press,” he says. “As these alternative
approaches to financial advice grow in popularity, especially with the
Millennial generation, they could slowly destabilize the equilibrium price for
managed accounts.”
The findings are from the first quarter 2015 issue of “The Cerulli Edge –
Managed Accounts Edition.” More information about obtaining Cerulli reports is here.
Last
week, I asked NewsDash readers, “Aside from a salary increase, what workplace
benefit boost would you most like this year?”
‘Richer
retirement benefits’ was the top selection of responding readers, garnering
31.2% of the vote. This was followed by ‘more vacation days,’ selected by 21.9%
of respondents. Nearly 16% of respondents indicated they would like more flexible
work hours or more telecommuting, while 6.2% want richer health benefits and
3.1% would appreciate additional perks such as gym membership, on-site daycare
or transportation subsidies.
No
responding readers selected ‘additional insurance benefits not currently offered
by my employer’ or ‘more professional development opportunities.’ Some readers
who selected ‘other’ (21.9% total) wrote in more detail about their other
choices—“better company match,” “any type of retirement benefits,” “a Rule of
80 that eliminates the ERF in our DB plan,” and “more flexible time during down
time.”
‘Other’
responses also included better dental insurance, more sick days and the ability
to carry them over, more staff or more competent staff, more competent
management, longer paid maternity leave and more flexible return to work
options, ability to transition to 3/4 time in the years leading to retirement,
on site doggie day care, ability to travel to conferences for training, ability
to sell vacation days, on-site massages, “to be relieved of having to generate
a set number of billable hours per year when I am not in a position to create
my own work,” and “a Congress that is less bent on political points and in
actually getting the job done.”
Among
posts from readers who chose to make comments were some new benefit ideas—“And
a sabbatical every five years would be nice,” “I suppose I can’t hope for a
full bar on Friday afternoons?” A few readers indicated there’s nothing aside
from a salary increase they want, and a few said they would want all or most of
the choices listed. However, there seems
to be a handful satisfied with the benefits/perks at their workplace. Editor’s Choice goes to the reader who
said: “I believe that after years of hard work all individuals deserve a fully
funded defined benefit plan that will allow them the right to enjoy their years
of retirement.”
A big thank you to
everyone who participated in the survey!
Verbatim
I'd
like to see a DC plan in addition to better match/ER contributions.
Certain
times of the year are crunch times in meeting definite deadlines. There is a
lot of overtime worked and not being paid during this crunch time. Once the
crunch time is over, I would like to see more flex time given for all the
overtime that was worked but not paid for.
I
believe that after years of hard work all individuals deserve a fully funded
defined benefit plan that will allow them the right to enjoy their years of
retirement.
My
employer provides many of the workplace benefits noted in this survey; the
problem is that because of my position I can't always take advantage of them.
The free gym is above my head and I can't make it upstairs. Telecommuting is an
option except that I usually need to be in the office, so am here for about 12
hours a day to avoid the worst traffic hours. If I need to take a mid-week day
off I work on Saturdays to compensate. Therefore, I want richer retirement
benefits - there's got to be a very bright light at the end of my tunnel!
Human
Resources doesn't easily lend itself to telecommuting, but flexible work hours
could be accommodated. Particularly when you have the majority of the work
force on shift work. Seems like a sensible shift, though not against the 9-5
mentality in our office!
I
do not currently have access to an employer-sponsored retirement savings plan.
Everything
listed in item #1 sounds great, but the reality of the workplace is, that fewer
people are handling greater responsibilities, and the vaunted "work life
family balance" remains out of reach for many.
I
was going to say 'more vacation days', but given the excessive workload I
carry, that would just mean I'd stop accruing days sooner.... 🙁
WITH
CHILDREN OUT OF STATE I WOULD LIKE MORE TIME OFF SO I COULD VISIT THEM
THROUGHOUT THE YEAR
Most of the above,
frankly, but we are a small business, and the benefits we have now are already
more generous than what similar firms are offering.
Verbatim
(cont.)
We
currently get 7 sick days a year, which actually are personal days because we
can use them to take care of a sick child or other family member or doctor
appointments. But they are use them or lose them. I wish we were able to carry
them over every year just in case you need surgery some year. I also feel that
because they are "use them or lose them" people tend take them when
they don't need to in order not to miss out on the benefit.
I
think companies should be more liberal about allowing employee unpaid time off.
It would be a very minimal expense (maybe having people trained to fill in
during an absence - but then the company is only paying one person at a time to
do the job). For most exempt jobs - the work is waiting for us when we get
back, so why not allow an extra week or two of time off??
I
guess I must have great benefits because of none of the choices really strike a
chord. I have very good health benefits, a fantastic retirement plan, more
vacation days than I can use, fairly flexible work schedule, reserved parking
and professional development. A part-time schedule would be nice, but it would
need to be accompanied by a part-time workload.
Our
DB plan was frozen, so the chances of this are the same as a snow ball's in
hell
And
a sabbatical every five years would be nice. . .
I'm
hoping my company maintains its defined benefit plan - considering that we're a
recordkeeper for many DB plans!
I
already have most of the benefits on the list and are pleased with them;
however, I am at a time in my life when making sure I can retire before they
find me dead of old age at my desk is a bit of a priority
Although
better health benefits comes in a direct 2nd, most people want a good
retirement plan.
I
know pay was not one of the choices but that is what I really need. I haven't
received a raise in several years. Being a single homeowner it is impossible to
make ends meet on just one income.
What I would really
like is for the company to unfreeze the DB plan and make up the
"lost" pay credits from 2012; but that won't happen. How about
on-site doggie day care (we work in an industrial park). It's justifiable under
"wellness" benefits since walking your dog during the day has
documented health benefits.
Verbatim
(cont.)
I
suppose I can't hope for a full bar on Friday afternoons?
From
my perspective the story showed exactly what is "wrong" - the
management thought they knew it all but really had no concept of what employees
need/want. Any of the above choices would be good changes, depending upon what
your company already offers. The real problem is that executive management
doesn't care about employees when making decisions and implementing change,
only the bottom line. Making the bottom line better by depriving employees
seems to be the method of choice at most companies. All the rhetoric in the
world doesn't disguise that fact or fool the employees. And adding benefits
only upper management want and can benefit from while having no money for wage
increases for the general workforce is a slap in the face to the rank and file!
There
is no aside from, a salary increase would be most appreciated.
Working
from home in my jammies one day a week would make me smile.
Higher
employer match on our 403(b) plan.
Scarce
time off will be the reason I retire early. I like my job, but not the chintzy
PTO policy.
Lower
deductibles in HDHP offerings.
I
work for an awesome employer with great benefits, good pay, and a very
collegial work environment. And I telecommute 100% of the time. However, I am
expected to bill x hours per year, even though my projects are assigned to me
by others and I am not in a position to generate my own billable work. Plus, I
have been doing this work for over 30 years now, so I work quickly and
accurately. Why doesn't that count for something? Being an outstanding employee
no longer counts as much as putting in tons of overtime...
Vacation
- More time away from my job so I can look for a new one -
Other than health
insurance is getting too expensive, I can't really complain about our benefits.
They are great! What I really would like is less government regulation in
everything we do as it is really adding to the workload, without additional
staff!
Verbatim
(cont.)
All
the benefit stuff is nice but look what benefit packages have done to the cost
of funding local, state, and federal governments. It's not sustainable.
Within
three years of retirement
And,
I would also like to be able to take the vacation days I have earned but my
current workload is precluding that option!
Our
401K match was halted at mid-point of the year - would like to see the company
not touch that benefit going forward
Ironic
you used the word "appreciate". So true, how soon we forget just a
few short years ago we we're "glad I have a job". Seems the iwants
and owesmes are back in town.
We
have healthcare with a $5000 deductible. Seriously? Good thing I'm not sick!
I
don't get a chance to use the vacation days I have, and am fairly healthy,
knock on wood, so weekly or monthly massages on site would be great....
NOTE: Responses reflect the opinions of
individual readers and not necessarily the stance of Asset International or its
affiliates.