Justin
Ong, Ivan Perfiliev
PricewaterhouseCoopers, Singapore
December 2005
"Growth is the only evidence of
life."
Cardinal John Henry Newman
Much has been written lately about the
high rate of growth in the number of Singapore-based
hedge fund managers. A conducive regulatory
environment coupled with the relatively
low cost of operations have both contributed
to the unprecedented growth of hedge funds
in Singapore over the last couple of years.
Yet, notwithstanding these, gaining critical
mass still seems to be an elusive goal for
many Singapore-based hedge funds. In this
regard, Singapore lags substantially behind
vis-à-vis its peers in Hong Kong
and Japan (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Assets under Management
in US Dollars
Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers/Eurekahedge
research, August 2005
About 30% of Singapore-managed hedge funds
have less than US$10 million of assets under
management (AUM) as compared to about 13.5%
for Hong Kong and 23% for Japan. The approximate
break-even point for a Singapore hedge fund
manager (ie the point at which the fund's
management fees cover the expenses incurred)
occurs at around approximately US$20 million
in AUM. This means that about one third
of Singapore-based hedge fund managers currently
do not fully cover their operating costs,
resulting in many being financed through
shareholder capital injections or loans.
At the other end of the spectrum, the larger
funds with the assets under management of
over US$100 million are still not very prevalent
they comprise about 21% of Singapore-managed
hedge funds versus 32% in Hong Kong and
42% in Japan. However, there is a marked
improvement over the last year (Figure 2)
in the growth of those larger funds.
Figure 2: Assets under Management in US
Dollars
Singapore-managed hedge funds are relatively
new in the financial services scene as their
boom commenced only three to four years
ago. In Hong Kong and Japan however, hedge
fund activities started in the mid to late
80's. Historically speaking, allocators
making stops in Asia would more likely have
chosen Hong Kong and Tokyo; however, things
are changing. Singapore is starting to make
its mark, especially as it is increasingly
regarded as the place which attracts "lifestyle"
professionals, offers high standards of
living at a reasonable cost, and provides
a favorable environment to raise a family.
What then are some of the possible steps
that hedge fund managers could take to raise
their funds' AUM above the break-even point
and into the profit zone?
There are a few options
One approach may be to partner up with a
seeder fund, ie a fund that specialises
in giving capital to fledging hedge fund
start-ups. The caveat of this option however,
is the need to give up a percentage of ownership
in the fund management company to the seed
capital investor. Relinquishing part of
the stake, ie management control, is never
an easy decision for start-ups who have
a vision of being their own masters.
Attending investor conferences, making
presentations, pitches and face-to-face
meetings with allocators globally, are also
common strategies undertaken. Anecdotal
evidence suggests that the "legwork"
can pay - some successes relate to managers
who raised respectable sums after circling
the globe several times over, if one were
to add up the air miles clocked. This however,
requires a significant amount of time investment
and effort.
Some hedge funds have taken a less aggressive
stance to their business model. They believe
that concentrating on performance at the
outset, rather than fundraising, is more
important, and that the performance should
speak for itself in the eyes of the allocators
in the longer term. This approach of course
requires deep confidence in the ability
to generate excess returns in the short
to medium term, and of course, high cash
reserves and/or a very low burn rate.
The AUM "chicken-and-egg" scenario
is, unfortunately, still a common issue
for Singapore hedge fund managers. Principally,
if they start small, the large institutional
players may refrain from investing in them
because of the risk of becoming a majority
shareholder of the fund. On the other hand,
if the hedge fund managers cannot attract
large investors, they are unable to grow
the fund to a critical size either. This
self-perpetuating vicious cycle is hard
to break.
So what exactly can be done to promote
faster growth in hedge fund AUM so as to
boost the Singapore hedge fund industry?
For one, enhancing existing rules such
as the "80/20 rule" would go a
long way in promoting such growth. Among
other things, the current "80/20 rule"
requires that hedge funds managed out of
Singapore to maintain at least 80% or more
of foreign-sourced AUM.
Earlier this year, the Monetary Authority
of Singapore relaxed the rules by exempting
new start-up funds from the "80/20"
requirement for the first year of operations.
However, getting all the systems in place,
recruiting personnel, finding office space
and more, may take a hedge fund manager
up to six months. After which, the manager
only has half a year to make sure the foreign
investors contribute more than 80% of the
fund. This is not an easy task, considering
that the hedge fund managers are more often
than not the fund's initial investors.
As tax rules take into consideration residency
in addition to the citizenship for the "80/20
rule" test, a non-Singaporean fund
manager seeding his own fund that he manages
out of Singapore would constitute 'Singapore-sourced'
money in this test. Clearly, one year may
not be sufficient, and extending the "80/20"
rule holiday for perhaps up to three years
would help new start-ups to get going. On
a more aggressive note, removing the "80/20"
rule altogether would be a big booster,
and it may change the nature of how the
funds are invested. With a sizable number
of individuals in Singapore who meet the
"accredited investor" criteria,
relaxing the rule would allow those individuals
to bring their investible dollars onshore
into Singapore, and thus encourage more
hedge funds to be set up. At present, many
of these individuals invest into funds abroad
due to the limitations described above.
Encouraging prime brokers to set up in
Singapore would also be a key contributing
factor in growing the hedge fund industry
locally. Prime brokers provide many services
for a hedge fund such as brokerage, stock
lending, margin financing, custody and more.
As the majority of prime brokers used by
Singapore-managed hedge funds are currently
located in Hong Kong, local hedge funds
need to go through Hong Kong to get the
service they require. Certainly, more can
be done to entice the prime brokers to move
their core operations to Singapore, thereby
creating more critical mass for funds to
operate and be managed out of Singapore.
Globally, hedge funds have begun to define
themselves as an asset class that merits
allocations even from the perceivably conservative
investors, such as corporates and pension
funds. In addition, allocations to hedge
funds no longer stream solely from the high
net worth individuals and funds of hedge
funds. Indeed, these have become a global
phenomenon:
Shell pension fund in Netherlands allocated
eight per cent to hedge funds back in
2003; California Public Employees' Retirement
System ("CALPERS"), the world's
biggest pension fund operating out of
the United States, has recently approved
a substantial increase to its hedge fund
investment allocation;
Last April, the Rail Pension Scheme
in the UK declared it was going to invest
more than £700 million in hedge
funds;
Closer to home, Toyota Motor Corp's
pension fund, for example, already invests
some ¥20 billion, or about 5% of its
total assets, in alternative investment
products.
As more statutory boards, government, institutional,
pension and corporates allocate a percentage
of assets to hedge funds, these will certainly
boost the local hedge fund industry.
Overall, Singapore-based hedge fund managers
have their part to play as well. As a result
of the low AUM and thus low management/performance
fees, local players have yet to meet the
level of corporate governance and responsibility
that has become a norm for their European
and American counterparts. First and foremost,
Singapore-based hedge funds need to build
up credibility and investor confidence in
their in-house risk management and control
environment through emphasis on segregation
of duties, independent directors' involvement,
compliance responsibilities, portfolio risk
management and more. Demonstrating their
good corporate governance and transparency
will elicit greater confidence by potential
investors in them as a respectable asset
class. The size of operations is, of course,
a key consideration which may see more hedge
funds merging or consolidating to build
sufficient scale to meet these needs.
While Singapore hedge funds have managed
to increase their average AUM since the
previous year, there is still significant
room for improvement before they are able
to catch up with their peers in Hong Kong
and Japan. These managers must start to
look into taking a more pro-active role
in promoting their product and themselves,
or risk being in the low-AUM doldrums for
a longer period of time despite good performance.
If you have any comments about or contributions
to make to this newsletter, please email
editor@eurekahedge.com