Quote Originally Posted by mark100 View Post
True they aren't a pure fund manager but they still collect an ongoing fee.

They have around $3.7b in funds under management, advice and administration. Based on them posting revenue of around $30m for the FY that means they are collecting around 80bps average on this money which sounds about right. If they were only collecting a fee on the inflow they would not get anywhere near $30m revenue. I also note they are forecasting steady growth which to me indicates they aren't reliant soley on inflows for revenue.

On PTM, true fantastic margins and they will need to improve fund performance if they want to maintain that size fee. The funds outperformed in Jan (although still lost money) so will be interesting to see if the outperformance can continue in this tricky market.

Usually fund managers don't take a fee on new inflows, whereas fund advisory firms like FPS may do.

Hence, if inflows fall (ie: people hold back from investing) FPS could be disproportionately affected. Say half of it's 80bps total return is generated due to new fund inflows (a wild guess), if fund inflows stop, it loses half its revenue.

80bps seems extremely high for someone who just passes the money on to someone else to manage. Fund managers only charge slightly more than that - maybe 1-1.5bps?