Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

David Prosser: A new danger from an unexpected quarter

Thursday 14 April 2011 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Outlook The investment management industry, by and large, was a bit-part player in the financial crisis, but that does not mean it is a risk-free enterprise. Indeed, risk is often to be found in unlikely places – such as exchange-traded funds (ETFs), it now turns out.

ETFs were invented by fund managers to address their own failings. Since active funds so often fail to beat the average performance of the markets in which they invest, customers frequently complain about the high charges they pay for the privilege. An ETF, by contrast, simply replicates the performance of a given index and with no expensive manager to pay, the funds are cheap, too.

So far, so good. But, as the Financial Stability Board (FSB) warned yesterday, fund management firms just can't help themselves – and while the humble ETF is a relatively straightforward product, the variations on the theme subsequently invented may be less so.

The first problem is that while ETFs used to deliver the performance of the index by buying all its constituents, some fund managers now prefer to buy derivative contracts from an investment bank that promises to pay the required returns. So what happens should the bank in question not be able to make good on its promise?

Moreover, the derivatives-based ETFs tend to hold collateral as part of the deal, which can be sold to meet redemptions from the fund if necessary. But the FSB warns a growing number of ETF providers are taking a risk by choosing illiquid collateral that might be difficult to sell in a hurry.

Even some of the simple ETFs are taking some risks. Many of them earn an income by lending out the stocks they hold to other parties. Again, what happens if the loans are not repaid?

It looks as if new rules may be necessary to address some of the vulnerabilities in the ETF sector. There has already been a crackdown in the US, where the Securities and Exchange Commission became concerned about these issues 18 months or so ago, but in Europe, ETFs come under the collective investment regulations, which are less stringent.

That potential loophole needs to be addressed. The largest investors in ETFs in Europe are institutions, who one would hope have had the wherewithal to conduct some due diligence, but there is a rapidly growing retail market too. It needs protecting.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in