| Log in

A Curious Case of Commissions — Public v. Private Equity for HNIs

29 September, 2010

Nearly every statistic about flows into public equities from domestic investors from mutual funds is grim. Equity schemes have seen consistent outflows regardless of the fund house since mid-2009.  With indices near all-time highs, sentiment resoundingly bullish, and FIIs singing the India growth story, this is a tough pill to swallow. 

Stretched valuations are clearly not the story, because private equity has seen a very different experience. Domestically, institutional investors such as banks have traditionally favored private equity investments over public equity ones because of restrictions on investments in public equity.  HNI and retail money on the other hand, was a more level playing field.

Of late, however, HNI participation in mutual funds has tapered off while sales of private equity funds, particularly those launched by domestic players, have picked up substantially.

On average, private equity funds launched for the HNI have had more success over the last year than mutual fund NFOs. It’s also hard to believe this difference is because private equity offers a much better value proposition. If anything, mutual funds are one of the most well regulated and transparent investment platforms available in India. The difference is attributable largely to economics. 

HNI fund sales in India are distributor driven for both public and private equity funds.While globally private equity is an asset class for ultra high net worth individuals, in India, private equity funds are sold to individuals starting at ten lakhs, which skims the borderline of HNI.  

This class of HNIs is often unclear what exactly a private equity fund is and how it differs from their standard investments, and relies on the distributor to educate them. As a result, private equity managers like public managers have to depend on distributors for a bulk of their sales, and shape their value proposition accordingly.

Typically private equity funds are structured as closed ended funds with three to five year lock-ins, and can offer the first year or two of management fees as upfront commissions to the distributor. Mutual funds are largely open-ended, and can offer much more limited upfront payments, because there is no certainty about the duration of the investment. Why?  Some would argue that investors are ready to buy a closed ended private equity fund because of the unique value proposition, but are hesitant to lock in money into a public equity fund. 

In fact, the one class of mutual funds that is closed-ended, the three year locked-in equity linked savings scheme (ELSS) does pay higher upfront commissions, and continues to see robust sales.  Moreover, with the ban on entry loads on mutual funds last year, mutual funds have lost a critical sales card, that private funds still have in hand. 

The result? Private equity gets the distributors’ mindshare and the investors’ money, sometimes in cases where the investor, a small HNI, might have been better off with a simple mutual fund.

Private equity does have its space in a portfolio particularly for large HNIs, but the allocation should be driven by investor risk profile not commission economics. This onus is on the investor who needs to understand products on offer, ask intelligent questions, and “buy” products instead of being “sold” them.

(Radhika Gupta is a Founder Director with Forefront Capital Management, a SEBI registered portfolio manager, and India’s first specialized quant manager. She was also a strategy consultant with McKinsey and Company (New York).  Radhika graduated from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.)

View Comments
Public vs. Private — No Returns For More Risk?

Public vs. Private — No Returns For More Risk?

Radhika Gupta 8 years ago
Private equity has been one of India’s fastest growing alternative asset...
How HNIs are driving capital flow into diverse alternative investment funds

How HNIs are driving capital flow into diverse alternative investment funds

Ranjani R 8 months ago
When IIFL Asset Management Ltd went on a fundraising mode earlier this year for...
Why PE firms tapping into local HNIs for fundraising must count the costs

Why PE firms tapping into local HNIs for fundraising must count the costs

Ranjani R 5 months ago
Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) raising capital from domestic wealthy...
Mangesh Hirve . 6 years ago

Thats True Radhika. There has been a significant product peddling shift from MFs to private equity and PMS products. After 3 PE / RE proposals when my financial advisor strongly recommended a PMS offered by large international financial institution offering in India, I toook a closer look at its fees. Lo behold. For the 1st year, even before a paisa of my capital was deployed I would have lost 2.5% management fees and another 4% in entry load. With a minimum corpus of 25 Lakh, this translates to a net dip of 1.5 Lakh.

I fired my advisor the same day.

Anil Kamath . 6 years ago

PE is being sold like a mutual fund which is clearly far from the truth. Besides the misselling, investor is also unaware about the cash flow cycle and the fee structure. Like Mangesh who has commented about the net dip. That is typical of PE funds and the point is to asess the upside to public equities return on a risk adjusted basis. Unfortunately the investor mindset is only on fees and not on risk adjusted returns.

Ram . 6 years ago


You’ve hit the nail firmly on the head. Its been a complete case of misselling to a lot of gullible investors. In fact most of them do not even understand what private equity/ venture funds are.

This is sure to grab the regulator’s attention sooner or later. But in the meantime, distributors (or advisors, if such a breed exists) make hay…..

Whats worse is that there is no tracking mechanism to analyse performances…

A Curious Case of Commissions — Public v. Private Equity for HNIs

Powered by WordPress.com VIP