AIFMD hardly benefited industry, says panellist
07 February 2019 London
Image: Shutterstock
The Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) has brought little benefit to the industry, according to one panellist at this year’s Fund Marketing & Distribution Europe Conference in London.
Panellists discussed how AIFMD had changed the industry since its introduction in 2011, to which they agreed that there is a 50 percent blend between the use of UCITS and AIFMD, globally.
One speaker stated: “UCITS has developed in to a brand. In that respect, AIFMD has potential of developing a similar brand. These two juridictions blend together, you know what you’re getting.”
But one panellist explained that she didn’t think AIFMD had benefited the industry enough.
She explained: “AIFMD was supposed to reduce overall risk with over-leveraging and it was expected it would mean more money flowing toward small and medium-sized enterprises, but this simply hasn’t been achieved.”
She added: “The question is higher transparency. But to whom? Who is benefitting from this transparency? Has it done what it was supposed to? I don’t think so.”
“I’m critical of AIFMD because it is over-the top and there’s this ‘shoes we had to fill’ notion concerning it. I know it’s only seven years old, but there’s still a long way to go before we see progress.”
The three panellist briefly discussed Brexit to which one said: “There are no panics from distributors or end investors, that I’m seeing anyway.”
She added: “There’s some hesitance to invest but not a lot. It’s largely business as usual.”
Panellists discussed how AIFMD had changed the industry since its introduction in 2011, to which they agreed that there is a 50 percent blend between the use of UCITS and AIFMD, globally.
One speaker stated: “UCITS has developed in to a brand. In that respect, AIFMD has potential of developing a similar brand. These two juridictions blend together, you know what you’re getting.”
But one panellist explained that she didn’t think AIFMD had benefited the industry enough.
She explained: “AIFMD was supposed to reduce overall risk with over-leveraging and it was expected it would mean more money flowing toward small and medium-sized enterprises, but this simply hasn’t been achieved.”
She added: “The question is higher transparency. But to whom? Who is benefitting from this transparency? Has it done what it was supposed to? I don’t think so.”
“I’m critical of AIFMD because it is over-the top and there’s this ‘shoes we had to fill’ notion concerning it. I know it’s only seven years old, but there’s still a long way to go before we see progress.”
The three panellist briefly discussed Brexit to which one said: “There are no panics from distributors or end investors, that I’m seeing anyway.”
She added: “There’s some hesitance to invest but not a lot. It’s largely business as usual.”
NO FEE, NO RISK
100% ON RETURNS If you invest in only one asset servicing news source this year, make sure it is your free subscription to Asset Servicing Times
100% ON RETURNS If you invest in only one asset servicing news source this year, make sure it is your free subscription to Asset Servicing Times
