IconAssociations & Institutes
IconBBBEE Consulting and Verification Agencies
IconBenefit Administrators & Investment Managers
IconBusiness Chambers
IconBusiness Process Management
IconBusiness Process Outsourcing
IconConsumer Protection
IconCorporate Governance
IconCredit Bureaus
IconDebit Order Collection Facilities
IconEducation and Training
IconHuman Resources
IconInformation Technology and Software Partners
IconPension Fund Trustee Liability Insurance
IconPension Fund Trustee Training
IconPension Funds Adjudicator
IconPolicy Administration
IconPolicy Trading
IconRegulatory Authorities
IconRetirement Funds registered by the FSB
IconRetirement Products
IconSocial Grants (Government)
IconSurveys and Research
IconTraining Courses & Workshops
IconTrust Establishment & Management
IconWellness Programs
  Subscribe To »

Pension Fund Management Costs






Company Listing: Today's Trustee »

When is a 0,4% management fee not a 0,4% management fee? Sygnia explains, and is challenged




Allan Greenblo, Editorial Director
Today’s Trustee



The offer of a 0,4% management fee is enticing. Before biting, retirement funds should examine it carefully in the context of other fees and rival contentions.

By an extensive and expensive advertising campaign, which highlights the offer of its funds at an all-in fee of 0,4%, Sygnia has sought the image of being the “disruptor” in asset management. But this 0,4% claim is not to go unquestioned, without reference to the various Sygnia funds’ fact sheets, and certainly isn’t left unchallenged in a vigorously competitive industry.

Rather mischievously, on its website Sygnia produces an illustrative ‘Compare us’ table. It shows the net replacement ratios of two Sygnia umbrella retirement funds (SURFs) against five other umbrella funds. None are identified, so they cannot counter the claims. Neither can it be known whether like is being compared to like in the sense of relative sizes (the larger the fund, the greater the potential for reduced costs) and strategies (which impact on performance).

In a general comment, John Gilchrist of Old Mutual Investment Group points to “incremental changes” already disrupting the industry and that he expects to accelerate: increased use of indexation (passive investing); factor investing (smart beta); responsible investing (for compliance with codes and regulation), and management of risk (going beyond the simple diversification of a balanced fund).

For its part, Sanlam Umbrella Solutions maintains that the standard of effective annual costs (EAC) – introduced by ASISA for retail products (TT April-June ’16) – should similarly be applied to umbrella funds. “An industry-agreed standard method for comparing charges on investment-savings products would allow employers to make better, more informed decisions,” urges chief executive Irion Terblanche.

Specifically on the SURFs, Sygnia’s 0,4% claim is confused by its own fact sheets. For example, the fact sheet for the Sygnia Skeleton 70 fund as at last October shows annual management fees at 0,4% but, inclusive of other fees, a total expense ratio of 1,09%. When transaction costs of 0,17% are added, the total investment charge is 1,26%.

There appears to be less disclosure of fees in the same fund’s fact sheet as at last December. It shows only management fees at 0,39% and says that performance fees are “charged by some appointed managers”. Nothing more.

“Why does Sygnia charge a performance fee in this fund when it is marketed as a passive fund?” inquires Steven Nathan of 10X Investments. “And where does Sygnia disclose the fees it earns on its own hedge funds?”

Asked which funds are offered to clients at a 0,4% total fee, John Anderson of Sygnia explains:

All of the Sygnia unit trusts (specialist index-tracking and risk-profiled global balanced funds) offered to retail clients charge an annual Sygnia management fee of 0,4% including vat. Importantly, all our savings wrappers (retirement annuities, preservation funds and living annuities), where the funds are invested in Sygnia portfolios, are offered at nil administration fee.

Where 0,4% is not the total, what additional fees are added and to what extent can these additions affect the total fee?

Hence you can invest in an RA and a Sygnia Skeleton Balanced 70 unit trust, as an example, at a total management fee of 0,4% pa.

Where 0,4% is not the total, what additional fees are added and to what extent can these additions affect the total fee?

The 0,4% is the management charge levied by Sygnia for the products mentioned. The recent ASISA disclosure standard, applicable to all retail savings products, has mandated the disclosure of all the costs (e.g. administration, custody) that may apply. They include transaction costs incurred in the normal operation of unit trusts. No performance fees are paid on any of our index-tracker funds.

Which Skeleton fund is offered on the SURF? Is it the Skeleton 70 fund or the Skeleton 70 Balanced fund?

SURF clients have always had the option of investing in the institutional versions (with institutional fees) of either the Skeleton 70 fund (unitised life) or the Skeleton 70 Balanced fund (unit trust). With effect from January, the institutional versions of Skeleton are only provided in SURF on a unitised life basis (via Sygnia Life). SURF clients can choose either the Skeleton 70 unitised life fund excluding hedge funds, or the Skeleton 70 unitised life fund including hedge funds.

The choice should be based on comparing the benefits of including hedge funds (which, over time, reduce volatility without compromising the returns after taking all costs into account), and in doing so accepting that overall costs are higher (compared to a desire to reduce costs to a minimum but accepting that with this option the volatility of the portfolio increases by excluding hedge funds from the asset allocation).

The default for SURF clients is the Skeleton 70 without hedge funds. However, clients can select the version including hedge funds after understanding the overall cost implications. They can discuss the pros and cons with us.

Indeed they should, and not only with Sygnia, for the sake of valid comparison where cost needn’t be the sole determinant. Trustees of retirement funds have a broader range of options available from service providers than they could have imagined even a year ago.

Source: Today’s Trustee
« Back to previous page Print this page » |

Breaking News »

Fais and Changes to Regulatory Exam Questions

The long anticipated amended “Determination of Fit and Proper Requirements for Financial Services Providers, 2017” was finally printed in December last year. The amended determination comes into effect ...
Read More »


Fais and Key Individual Operational Ability

The Fit and Proper Requirements 2017 published recently, also provides stipulations on operational ability. Billy Seyffert, COO of Moonstone Compliance and Risk Management, pointed out an important consideration ...
Read More »


Fais and Continuous Professional Development

Under the old dispensation, Continuous Professional Development (CPD) was the third leg of the journey towards becoming a true professional, after successfully completing the level 1 and 2 regulatory examinations ...
Read More »


Sanlam Investments Market Review: December 2017

                Carl Roothman, CE of Sanlam Investments Retail Business                 Cape ...
Read More »


More News »


Healthcare »


Investment »


Life »


Short-term »

Advertise Here
Advertise Here

From The Glossary »


Accident Year:

The financial year in which an accident or loss occurs.
More Definitions »

By using this website you agree to the Terms of Use.
Copyright © Stoker Risk & ICT (Pty) Ltd 2004 - 2018.
All Rights Reserved.





Contact IG


Media Pack


RSS Feeds