The ‘Changing Structure of Alternative Asset Management’ report, conducted by research house IFI Global, found the directive a particular challenge for smaller boutique managers.
“Smaller managers are still reluctant to call in outside help,” the report reads, adding however that 85% of asset managers think there is a shortage of qualified people able to provide adequate risk supervision.
Changing attitudes
Despite this, the report also illustrated how attitudes towards the AIFMD have changed over the past 12 months, with larger asset managers u-turning on their view that the directive would have a significant impact on their business and would add hefty new costs.
Most managers also said wholesale changes to their systems were not required, despite the directive demanding they include extra items in their risk reporting.
Meanwhile, the report found that only a quarter of European managers had installed new systems to cope with the quantity of additional reporting required under the directive.
Not so severe
Graeme McArthur, chief executive of corporate service provider Crestbridge – which sponsored the research – said the change in attitudes in certain areas, particularly risk management and reporting, are interesting.
“Overall, the majority of managers are focusing more on risk management as a result of AIFMD, though the impact is perhaps not as severe as they first thought,” he said.
“Nevertheless, despite increases in risk reporting and concerted efforts to formalise policies, there still seems to be little additional strategic thinking on risk management, and there are real questions on just how much, if any, of this additional activity will be of benefit to investors.”
EU-wide framework
Alternative investment funds include hedge funds, private equity funds, retail investment funds, investment companies and real estate funds, among others.
The directive establishes an EU-wide framework for monitoring and supervising risks posed by alternative investment fund managers and the funds they manage.
