Blog · Coverage and territory · Asset managers
How an asset manager's distribution team measures net flows per strategy by channel from the transfer agent and platform data, sets each strategy's expected channel mix from its own peers in the range, and finds the strategy that is under-distributed in one channel while the range as a whole looks fine, without ever naming an end client.
A head of distribution sees net flows per strategy and net flows per channel. The two tables do not show the cell where a strategy is missing from a channel that its sister strategies are in. The transfer agent file, with the intermediary mapped to a channel, does. This guide sets out channel share per strategy, the expected mix from the range's own peers, and the list that comes out.
Per strategy, per channel, per quarter:
Channel share = net flows in the channel ÷ net flows across all channels, or, where flows net near zero, assets in the channel ÷ total assets
And the assertion:
strategy net flows = Σ channels
An intermediary with no channel fails it and is listed.
Intermediary and strategy identifiers only.
For each strategy, the comparable set is the other strategies of the same asset class and vehicle in the range with at least a stated tenure. The expected channel mix is the median share per channel across that set, from the manager's own data.
Active equity mutual funds, this quarter, assets basis.
| Strategy | Platform | Wirehouse | RIA | Institutional | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peer median | 34% | 28% | 22% | 16% | |
| S-101 | 36% | 30% | 20% | 14% | On mix |
| S-104 | 41% | 38% | 7% | 14% | Under in RIA |
| S-109 | 12% | 8% | 9% | 71% | Institutional by design |
Strategy S-104 has a third of its peers' RIA share. At its assets, the gap to the peer mix is $180m of RIA assets, and the list is the RIA intermediaries that hold two or more of the peer strategies and none of S-104. Strategy S-109 is an institutional strategy and its mix is its own; the report says so rather than flagging it.
Gap in channel = (peer share − strategy share) × strategy assets
And per intermediary in that channel:
Holds peer strategies, does not hold this one, ranked by assets in the peers
That is the wholesaler's call list for the quarter, with a reason on every line.
Channel inferred from the firm name. A firm with both a wirehouse and an RIA arm. Map the intermediary identifier, not the name.
Omnibus not separated. Platform positions counted as direct. Give omnibus its own channel until look-through arrives.
Peer set across asset classes. A bond fund's mix says nothing about an equity fund's. Same class, same vehicle.
Flows on a quarter with redemptions netting to zero. Use assets for the mix when flows are small; state which.
Mapped once, the transfer agent and platform files, the intermediary master and the strategy master produce the mix, the peer norms, the gaps and the intermediary lists every quarter. Covirage builds this from the exports as they are. The asset managers page describes the setup, and the share of wallet guide covers the intermediary-level measure this sits above.
From the intermediary identifier on each transaction, mapped once to a channel in a lookup the distribution team maintains. Platform omnibus positions are a channel of their own until the platform's look-through data assigns them further.
Strategies in the same asset class and vehicle type within the manager's own range: the other active equity mutual funds, say. Their median channel mix is the norm, and it is computed from the manager's own flows, not an industry survey.
No. Intermediary identifiers and strategy codes are enough. The end client never appears, and the intermediary can be a pseudonymised identifier as long as it is consistent across files.