Source: eFront: The value of a systems check
GPs are already bullish on outsourcing, both as clients and investors, largely because their business is not getting any simpler. Contracting a service provider allows them to focus on generating returns, yet the increasing complexity of LP demands and regulatory requirements only ups the stakes for getting this collaboration right.
eFront’s Ludovic Legrand and Iain Robertson believe today’s asset servicing firms have the talent and technology to significantly improve a firm’s operations, but only if managers take the time to create the right system for working with their chosen service provider.
[Q] What is creating this boom in asset servicing providers? How attractive is the value proposition for private equity firms?
Ludovic Legrand: Managers are well aware of how much of a difference asset servicers can make in their own business, but a combination of ever-increasing investor demands and pressure on the resources necessary to meet those demands, we think, are the major factors. Asset servicers now have the domain expertise and technology available to help them.
Iain Robertson: I would add that there is still room for the industry to grow. Many GPs continue to periodically send their investor reporting in PDF format, thereby making it difficult and labour-intensive to access the raw data. Also, the granularity and consistency of data that LPs can get varies significantly from one GP to another.
Many LPs want to conduct proper risk and performance analysis, but this usually remains wishful thinking.
In their defence, historically, a number of elements prevented LPs from conducting in-depth analysis that really added value, such as the varying timeliness and quality of data as well as a lack of uniform data definitions to encourage like-for-like comparisons
Now LPs are looking for a system where all GP data will be centralised and easily exported into their own centralised reporting systems, enabling LPs to conduct in-depth analysis such as cashflow forecasting, performance contribution and Value at Risk.
[Q] Why not build that centralised reporting system in-house?
LL: They certainly can, but at the moment there are so many qualified asset servicers that they do not need to spend the upfront time and cost to build one from scratch. Today’s fund administrators and custody banks sit at the heart of the industry’s data. Traditionally, data quality and consistency has been a significant challenge for private equity, largely due to the lack of formalised standard practices to manage non-homogeneous data in a consistent manner.
However, the alternative investment market has really evolved in recent years to meet investor expectations. One example in the private equity market is the increasing adoption of ILPA templates and guidelines, particularly on notices, such as calls and distributions, capital account statements and fees. Many fund administrators and custody banks have helped to push these market best practices to a much higher level.
IR: Furthermore, GPs are expecting that if they do outsource, the service provider will be able to aggregate data from multiple sources into the firm’s own in-house system. The best service providers will be able to manage both structured and unstructured data. Although, as the industry matures, the amount of structured data will increase as more and more reporting standards are adopted. And the more predictable, or structured, the data is, the more it will drive an AI revolution in the sector.