Mutual fund trading on bourses fails to attract investors

The NSE and the BSE recently launched mutual fund trading platforms. However, after the initial euphoria, trading volumes on both the bourses are on a decline.

The National Stock Exchange's (NSE) new platform for mutual fund trading has still not gathered volumes; in fact, there has been a decline in volumes since the platform was launched on 30th November. According to data from the NSE's website, on 22nd December, the exchange recorded 11 subscription orders valued at Rs2,40,000 while for redemption, there was just a single order worth Rs4,877.77! Compare this with the opening day's transactions and one can see a huge drop in volumes. On 30th November, there were over 300 transactions, valued at around Rs78 lakh.

The Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) launched its BSE StAR MF platform on 4th December. On 22nd December, BSE StAR MF recorded 23 subscription orders worth Rs6,25,500 while there were two redemption orders valued at around Rs52,82,565, taking total trades for the day to Rs59,15,565. On 4th December, BSE StAR MF recorded 251 orders worth Rs8.44 crore.

Out of the total 37 asset management companies (AMCs), only 10 AMCs have registered on the NSE-Mutual Fund Service System (MFSS) platform. On the other hand, BSE StAR MF has seven AMCs with a total of 103 schemes, and it has received confirmed participation from more than 20 MF houses. The Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI) is also planning to come up with its own MF trading platform by March 2010.

Describing the difference between the two rival platforms, an analyst said, “The BSE platform is mainly browser-based, providing access anywhere, while the NSE operates on the NEAT system, a dedicated point-to-point connectivity-based system.” Could this be the reason for lower transactions on the NSE’s platform?

MFSS is an online order collection system provided by the NSE to its eligible members for placing subscription or redemption orders on the MFSS, based on orders received from investors.

Market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) banned entry load charges on MF units with effect from 1st August. With no income, many distributors almost stopped selling equity schemes of MF houses. The platform offered by bourses was seen as an alternative to investors to buy or sell units. However, looking at the fall in transactions, it is clear that investors have not yet adopted the new offering from the two bourses.

Like the NSE, the BSE has waived all charges till April 2010 to attract investors. After that, investors will have to pay the stipulated brokerage as well capital gains tax if they sell the units within 12 months. If the units are held for 12 months or less (short term), the same would be liable to tax at the rate of 15% plus cess.

While SEBI’s move to allow brokers to deal in mutual fund products was meant to serve investor interests, it looks more likely that investors may end up shelling out more than they bargained for, if they were to buy or sell units through stock-exchange brokers or depository participants.

This is evident from the huge difference in transaction costs an investor would incur under the existing and new models. Under the present model, where investors approach distributors or apply to funds directly, only registrar and transfer agent (R&TA) costs are incurred by the investor. This boils down to per folio cost roughly amounting to Rs70 per annum. Whereas, industry sources reveal that under the depository or stock-exchange trading-member model, costs will shoot up to between Rs540-Rs790 per folio per annum. In other words, the cost per folio would be eight times higher under the new model!

Industry experts indicate that brokers could charge between 0.25%-0.50% of the value of any buy and sell transaction involving mutual fund units. However, it is not yet clear how additional costs such as securities transaction tax and stamp duty would be levied. Brokers may even charge separately for investors who want advisory or support services.
 

User

COMMENTS

Radhika Giri

7 years ago

I don't think so. As it is very early to comment on such a new model. However, in any business finance/consumer / or any thing ... distributor plays vital role to make the business sucessful for manufacturer as well as consumer / customer and if he doesn't get farily for whatever he is doing that industry will not grow. No one is here for charity. I hope, this is good tool for retail investor to invest in the market specially small town people.

Ashit Kothi

7 years ago

It will be very helpful if you can give comparative cost for investment of say Rs.1.00 lac by an investor. Pls also consider what was the cost incurred by investor before the ban on upfront commission. Also provide the info as to the view on costing is whose? of MF AMC , RTA / TA or Author of the article? Also request you to cover cost benefit to AMC if any and whether the same would translate into lower AMC trans. charges and higher NAV. awaiting your response

ADB grants $150-million loan for India’s khadi reforms

The move is estimated to benefit around 60,000 artisans, and will allow khadi institutions to sell their products at market-determined prices

The Indian government has signed a loan agreement with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) under which the multilateral funding agency will provide $150 million (Rs717 crore) for developments and reform of about 300 khadi institutions across the country.

This loan is expected to benefit around 60,000 artisans who in turn will allow khadi institutions to sell their products at market-determined prices. The artisans will be directly benefited by this programme and the setting up of a marketing organisation will also help in improvement in the sales of khadi products in the country.

Under the agreement, ADB will provide the loan to State-run India Infrastructure Finance Co Ltd (IIFCL) in four tranches.

During FY09, the khadi and village industry employed around 1.03 crore people with a production value of Rs1,733.90 crore.
 

User

Is there something seriously wrong at SHCIL?

An employee from SHCIL's Secunderabad office committed suicide, after saying that she was being stalked by a customer-stockbroker. Did her SOS call to SHCIL’s management fall on deaf ears?

The suicide by a lady employee of the Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd (SHCIL) has thrown up some serious issues related to the entity’s human resources (HR) policies and guidelines. A few days ago, an employee from SHCIL's Secunderabad office committed suicide, after saying that she was being stalked by a customer-stockbroker.

In her suicide note, A Ananda Lakshmi blamed a company customer-stockbroker Janardhan Rao for her death, saying that he had been harassing her for about two-and-a-half years. According to media reports, Medchal's police sub-inspector (PSI) C Yadender has said that the employee had informed her husband about the harassment and also complained to her manager at SHCIL.

The suicide of Mrs Lakshmi, however, has raised questions about the functioning of SHCIL. Any organisation is supposed to protect its employees—especially women employees—from outsiders. We contacted SHCIL, asking, "What kind of an organisation is the Stock Holding Corporation of India, where a customer-stockbroker can harass an employee and drive her to suicide?”

Vishnu Shinde, the security and vigilance head at SHCIL, replied, “The matter has been reported to the police, who have registered a criminal case under Section 306 of the IPC. The police have since arrested Janardhan Rao, a member of the public. We feel that we should wait for the outcome of (the) police investigation to know the truth behind the suicide rather than prejudging the issue. The SHCIL management is extending all necessary assistance to (the) police and the bereaved family."

But we think that SHCIL could have very well saved Mrs Lakshmi’s life if they had provided all the help that they are now offering, much earlier.

We sent a mail to SHCIL’s top management asking them about the complaints which had been filed by Mrs Lakshmi, but we still haven’t received any reply from them.
 

User

COMMENTS

Aruna Lakshmi

7 years ago

It is apparent they didn't know or care for 2.5 years and now are pretending to be supportive. What nonsense ! There seems to be clear case of contributory negligence by SHCIL authorities.

Bharat Momaya

7 years ago

I am shocked to read about the sad incident.

Save SHCIL

7 years ago

Really a very sad incident. We all should introspect and try to ensure that such a incident does not occur again.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)