There’s no getting away from it: the relationship between the performance measurement team and the front office can be combative at times. Fund managers have their own—indicative—performance and risk systems, and do not always enjoy being challenged with inconsistency.
BISAM was pleased to present at last week’s Portfolio Risk and Performance Measurement forum hosted by Financial Research Management. Our presentation focused on integrated performance and risk, and the role technology has played (and continues to play) in shaping the topic. We presented a number of options a firm should consider as they deploy performance and risk technology, and the pros and cons of each option.
Not long ago, the notion of an investor requesting multi factor attribution on their fixed income portfolios was unheard of. To a near lay-person, the concept of explaining the movements of a portfolio sensitive to interest rates was crazy. Multi factor attribution was for the front office, and its value was hampered by the limitations of the solutions at that time - unofficial results driven by lackluster data quality, without the ability to control data sources (outside of what the vendor chose for you).
At the same time, vendors and solutions providers were working hard to convince the industry that one attribution methodology was better than the other. Lehman (then Barclays and finally Bloomberg) had ”Hybrid Attribution,” other vendors provided “Key Rate Duration”, while still others tried to convince the industry they what they needed was ”Custom Attribution.” I’ll let you in on a secret: 90% of the time the same story is told in the same way. The brand name of a methodology is actually a marketing exercise.
The global asset manager featured in today's customer success story collaborated with BISAM to get support for three key objectives: 1. Multi-asset attribution calculations, 2. Reduce manual processing and operational risks, and 3. Set up a scalable and timely process for performance data calculations and delivery.
Topics: Performance & Attribution
The FTF Performance Measurement Americas conference kicks off this afternoon in New York City, and BISAM is pleased to once again participate alongside our PMAR industry colleagues and customers. Our own Sean Murray, BISAM's Director of Product Strategy, will moderate the closing discussion on Thursday afternoon, and in today's BISAM Insights blog post, he shares a sneak peek of what participants can expect from the panel.
Topics: Performance & Attribution
I recently saw the movie La La Land, and it got me thinking about the current state of technology in our industry. You’re probably thinking “he’s nuts - how could a blockbuster musical possibly align with technology in our industry?” Easy: the elegance of simplicity.
An article published recently on FT.com detailed the rise in use of ETFs as an alternative to actively managed (or passively managed) Mutual Funds. The piece, ETFs are Eating the Stock Market, notes that the reasons investors choose ETFs over Mutual Funds are well understood, and can be summarized as broad investment allocation across segments with low fees. The article goes on to surmise that ETFs are here to stay, even with a presumed turnaround in active management in 2017. So for those firms selecting ETFs as a quick and easy way to gain exposure to a specific segment, what might be the overall impact on your portfolio, and how can you prepare for the potential of hidden (and unintended) risks?
Today’s blog post summarizes how BISAM collaborated with the performance team and their front office counterparts at a large global insurance firm to deliver a robust performance and attribution platform for complex data management, performance measurement, reporting and multi-asset attribution. The resulting solution enabled the performance team and portfolio managers to evaluate and enhance their investment strategies, while maintaining high levels of security, transparency, process control and operational scale.
A couple of months ago, Peter Ellis, renowned PMAR expert and valued advisor to BISAM, took the decision to retire at the end of this year. Or as he put it, “it’s more of a semi-retirement, as I will continue to advise the industry here and there.” We will miss Peter’s insights and contributions, but we are pleased for him and wish him well on his adventures in retirement. In the following post, Peter reflects on his time at BISAM and the ever-evolving performance and risk industry, and offers words of encouragement for the future. I hope you enjoy reading it as much as I did. And now, here's Peter...
The added value of performance and risk analysis continues to be realized across the value chain, not only by asset managers, but also their clients. As a result, the buy-side is under far more pressure to deliver more and differentiated result sets to their investors, with transparency into the correlation between investment risk and portfolio performance. And while the unification of performance and risk is not a new idea, its practical application is still a work in progress for many firms. So what does integration mean for investment decision-making, risk analysis and performance reporting, and how should firms evolve their systems, processes and teams to adapt?