Moneylife » Markets » Regulations » Entry load on Mutual Funds and Sebi's double role
Entry load on Mutual Funds and Sebi's double role
- 2 comments
- + COMMENT
| 11/08/2012 02:56 PM |
Follow @mldigital
The Economic Times wrote a few days ago that the mutual fund advisory committee has suggested a 2% entry load. Business Standard wrote today that no such thing was discussed and the minutes were doctored. If true, this only shows lawlessness inside SEBI. Here is a video discussion between Sucheta Dalal and Debashis Basu both of whom were in SEBI committees in the past, about how the committees function and the whole issue of entry load
Welcome to another Moneylife Discussions this time on the mutual fund industry and the whole issue of entry load. Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor of Moneylife and Debashis Basu, Editor and Publisher of Moneylife discuss the issue.
CB Bhave, former chairman of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) scrapped the entry loan on MFs. However, this was an abrupt decision. There is no public record of who said what in the Advisory Committee meeting at that time. There is a lack of transparency as to what is happening in SEBI. “They should publish the minutes of the Advisory Committee meetings. It will also ensure that if a committee member is partisan—that becomes public,” said Mr Basu who himself has served as member of the SEBI advisory committee on mutual funds.
According to Ms Dalal, in all committees, whether it is advisory committees or expert committees, the majority representation is from industry or intermediaries, lawyers, chartered accountants, company secretaries—who all derive revenue from the industry. While the entire effort of everybody is to ‘sell’ products to retail investors, their representation is limited to one or two persons.
“Entry load is not correlated to the growth of the industry,” said Mr Basu, adding that there is one thing alone that can bring back investors—excellent performance and committed outreach. “Most of the fund companies don’t beat the benchmark. Mutual fund companies do not engage the savers and prefer to sell through third-party. They also need to tighten their belts,” he said.
More in Moneylife
Sensex Rally: Winners and Losers as the index challenges the high of 2010 +2137 views
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
VIDEOS
Keep your Money Safe: Avoid money traps and MLM
LATEST COMMENT
MORE
Garnering money has never been easy as regulators are still in slumber!
Do companies care at all about SEBI’s diktat regarding 25% free float?
|
|
|
- Phaneesh Murthy: Let off by Infosys, sacked by iGate over sexual harassment charges
- Is the interest in Gold ETFs waning?
- OMCs to stop LPG deliveries to houses with multiple-connections from 1st June
- BSE to shift 29 scrips to T group category for failure to comply with demat norms
- Sun TV Networks announces 11% jump in its net profit
- COMPAT orders cement cos to pay 10% of the Rs6,307 crore penalty
- S&P cautions India of rating downgrade; retains negative outlook
- ITC net profit up 19.4%, aided by non-cigarette and agri-business segments
- Vikram Pandit to buy stake in JM Financial, to head its proposed banking arm
- MMM India, another MLM taking people for “double-your-money” ride
- RBI tells HDFC Bank not to make up its own KYC verification rules
- Why I-T returns of Pawar, Jindal and Gandhi are exempted from RTI?
- The draconian LBT: Local Body Tax explained
- How much longer can the FM, RBI ignore HSBC in India?
- Aadhaar: Private ownership of UID data- Part I
- Aadhaar: Who owns the UID database? –Part II
- Did HSBC Bank resort to toxic churning and illegitimate transactions to earn commissions?
- PNB Metlife refunds Rs25,000 to the correct policyholder: another Moneylife victory
- The draconian LBT: Local Body Tax explained
- Goa’s Advocate General is the highest paid across the country, reveals RTI
- Mass mis-selling: 59,000 investors in Kolhapur are alleged to have lost money in LIC ULIPs
- Do FIIs buy high and sell low – I? Maximum buying at peak index levels
- Investors lost Rs1 lakh crore due to poor regulation. Will there be a CBI probe?
- Directors of public sector banks: The ground reality
- Do FIIs buy high and sell low–II? Momentum-chasing
- Do FIIs buy high and sell low–III? Panic-selling during declines
- Has Rakesh Maria tried to salvage his image through Ram Gopal Varma’s film on the 26/11 attack?
What's your say?
What you said
Thanks for casting your votes! View Previous Polls
Join 22, 000 Others
Membership Benefits
- Daily & Weekly newsletters
- Access to www.moneylife.in to comment, create alerts
- Your own profile in Moneylife.in
- All special mailers
- Basic membership to MSSN, our new initiative
- Free ebooks
- Invitation to events
- Invitation to round-table meets
- Access to Insurance helpline
- Access to counselling sessions
- Access to Reading room in Mumbai
Foundation Events
Comment
Sandeep Consul 10 months ago
Yes, its true that there are lot of schemes which don't beat the benchmark. But there are even more which beat benchmark just by a whisker. There was a recent interview of a senior official of Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund (India) that our objective is to beat the benchmark by 2-3%. So if benchmark is down by 25% a -23% performance fetches bonus for the fund manager. Is that why Fund Managers are paid Salary in Crores just to beat the benchmark by 2-3% ? Is this the whole idea of "Fund Management" business ? To beat a benchmark in which stocks are included when there prices are in 4 digits (Zee, Satyam, Unitech) and excluded when the price drops to double digit - does this require specialized skills to "buy high" and "sell low"? Foreign trips of Distributors is still continuing with daily mailers to distributors for achieving certain targets to qualify for these.
You are absolutely right - unless the Mutual Funds focus on the performance (and tht also -absolute-not just against the benchmark)-its difficult to get the investors back. When you meet these fund managers you are shocked to see how complacent they have become (realizing what a no brainer its to beat the stupid benchmark). They easily scare away their sales team or distributors asking any intelligent question or questioning the poor performance by throwing some technical jargon at them. The foucs must shift on the "Performance" rather than "Entry Load" etc.
More often than not a fund manager manages more than one scheme - for example a star fund manager of a very big fund house is managing three different mid cap schemes (which itself is funny - and the fund house employees literally put their foot in their mouth justifying having three mid cap schemes). Simply by law of averages one scheme will be a an outperformer three years down the line, one will be an average performer and the third one will be a poor performer. Investors will probably end up loosing money in 2 out of 3 schemes but the fund manager will be able to save his job beacuaue of one outperformer. The sales team will go ga ga about this scheme and say oh ! you should have invested in scheme A (a no brainer post mortem) - see last three years return. They will market this scheme A to all the investors showing last 3 years performance. More often than not Scheme B or C will outperfom for the next 3 years, fund manager has something to show to save his job and the investors are the only loosers in this game. Ideally a fund manager should manage only one scheme and should be full accountable for its performance.
Debashis Basu 10 months ago in reply to Sandeep Consul
Thanks Sandeep,
But most of them do not even beat the benchmarks. And what benchmarks are we taking about. Did you know that scam-tainted shell company HFCL is among the India's top 500 companies? It is in NSE500 and BSE500