Cad 3 will hit asset manager profits, says Mercer Oliver Wyman
The European Union’s proposed third capital adequacy directive (Cad 3) will force European asset managers to hold significantly more capital than at current levels. This will reduce their profitability, and could prompt a shake-out in the industry, according to new research by consultants Mercer Oliver Wyman.
“We estimate that the average asset manager not deemed to be exempt would have to hold back around 10% of profits over the next three years to build up the minimum capital requirements,” said Mercer Oliver Wyman. This means banks with asset management subsidiaries will take an implied return-on-equity hit that might make them “reassess the attractiveness of the business”, the company said.
The consultancy also believes some asset managers may try to relocate outside of the EU.
But Mercer Oliver Wyman takes a bullish view of the situation, saying non-exempt asset managers that upgrade their risk management procedures in line with the EU directive could promote their strong risk disciplines as an area of competitive advantage over their peers.
Cad 3, which largely draws on the new capital adequacy framework, Basel II, being drafted by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, is set for implementation by the end of 2006.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma won’t soften regulatory expectations for cloud and AI
CCP supervisory chair signals heightened scrutiny of third-party risk and operational resilience
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve