Closet trackers

We continue to review potential closet tracker funds and closet constrained funds as part of our ongoing supervision of UK authorised funds to deliver high levels of investor protection and maintain a competitive market environment.

Some funds make asset allocation decisions, typically setting out to beat a benchmark (active funds) while others strive to track a benchmark (passive funds) and some combine these features.

Closet trackers and closet constrained funds look like and charge fees similar to active funds. Yet they are managed in a way that is similar to passive funds which traditionally charge a much lower fee. Closet constrained funds make active decisions. However their investment strategy is constrained to making restricted decisions around their respective benchmarks. Closet trackers are passive but look and charge like they are active.

Clearer communications to investors

Clear, fair and not misleading promotional material and investment objectives are a priority for us. Find out more in our proposed remedies in the Asset Management Market Study final report.

These changes have a single aim, laid out in our Mission 2017:

  • to achieve a market that works well with firms competing on the value they deliver
  • a market that is fair, transparent and open
  • to ensure that investors, whether they are actively engaged or not, can better understand the investment products they are buying
  • where we discover firms are failing to meet our expectations, we will take appropriate action

What firms should do

A key part of an asset manager’s duty to their investors is to ensure that the products they sell are fair, clear and not misleading. Fund managers are expected to communicate fund investment objectives and policies clearly, including changes to these, even if only clarifying existing disclosures.

It is important that investors have clear information and the best possible understanding of the funds they are looking to invest in or are invested in. Improved disclosures, for example regarding benchmarks, can help investors compare funds more easily.

What we have done

In our Meeting Investors’ Expectations thematic review in 2016, we found that while most funds we looked at were invested in line with their stated strategy, some were not being clear with their investors. In particular, the funds we came across that were not being clear were closet tracker and closet constrained funds.

We have followed up on this work using quantitative and qualitative analysis. By the end of 2017 we had reviewed 84 funds. This included a mix of equity, fixed income and multi-asset funds that had the potential to be closet tracker or closet constrained funds. As part of our ongoing supervision of UK authorised funds, we continue to analyse these types of funds to ensure they are being managed appropriately and have adequate disclosures.

Summary of findings

In summary, 20 of these funds were adequately describing how investors’ money was being managed. Of the remaining 64 funds, we are working together with firms on 42 of them. 22 funds have already made improvements. Often, these fund disclosure changes were not material and only required clarification. Overall, £34m in voluntary payments have been made to funds and investors. Separately an enforcement investigation is ongoing against a firm.

Through our supervision of the firms, harm and potential harm to investors has been reduced. The firms we have worked with have taken adequate steps to ensure that disclosures are or will be clearer.