Insights

How does your work differ from that of other portfolio managers? What do you particularly enjoy about it?

While traditional portfolio managers often analyse individual stocks or bonds, we focus on funds and ETFs. We delve deep into the respective strategies in order to work out how they differ – and above all in which market environment that approach offers added value. The portfolios of our fund strategies are focused, but nevertheless cover a wide range of companies thanks to the broad diversification within the selected funds. The challenge lies in the intelligent combination of these strategies – in terms of weights, correlations and characteristics. This makes our work particularly exciting. In addition, there are client meetings in which we develop individual solutions, as well as discussions with fund managers from a wide range of market segments. These perspectives broaden our view and feed directly into our platform.

How do you approach the selection process for investment funds, especially for active fund managers? In your opinion, what characterises a good fund manager?

Our selection process is multi-staged and focused on identifying strategies that can draw from past successes via a structured investment process. Starting with quantitative analysis, we evaluate historical data using specialised tools – including our own analysis tool that we developed in-house. On this basis, we hold discussions with the managers of the most promising funds. We are not only interested in the analytical results, but also in understanding the mindset, motivation and consistency of the management. A good fund manager convinces through a clear process – and the ability to implement this in a disciplined manner.

Besides active funds, you also analyse ETFs. When do you prefer ETFs, and when active funds? What is important when choosing ETFs, apart from the costs?

We do not take a dogmatic approach, neither proactive nor propassive. The decisive factor for us is which strategy enables us to implement an investment case most efficiently and sensibly in terms of costs. ETFs are ideal for implementing tactical considerations, especially in efficient markets or for managing quotas. However, we rely on active strategies to generate alpha. Although ETFs are generally regarded as simple, the devil is often in the detail. In addition to the costs, tax considerations, the method of replication and the place of issue play an important role. Particularly in the apparently homogeneous market of S&P 500 ETFs, such details can lead to performance differences of 20bp or more. This is another area where we have the potential to create real added value for our investors through product selection.

A trend from the US is spilling over into Europe: more and more “active” ETFs are coming onto the market. What is behind this development, and does it blur the boundaries between active and passive investing?

Classic ETFs replicate a benchmark as closely as possible – passively and rule-based. Active ETFs, on the other hand, aim to beat this benchmark. To achieve this, they deliberately deviate in their selection. In contrast to traditional funds, however, their scope is often more narrowly defined – for example via bandwidths or factor specifications. Therefore, they are often rule-based approaches with an active approach. In the US,this trend is encouraged by tax advantages; in Europe, growth is somewhat slower but steady. These new active ETFs combine the transparency, tradability and cost structure of an ETF with active elements – a concept that definitely has potential

In June, Berenberg launched the new fund-based asset management strategy “Berenberg Go”. What makes this strategy special and who is it suitable for?

“Berenberg Go” combines our in-house expertise with the flexibility and efficiency of ETFs. The active management of asset class quotas is a central element of the investment strategy. Furthermore, we focus on specific Berenberg fund solutions and combine these with ETFs. This allows us to integrate gold and commodity investments alongside equities and bonds, and broadly cover the multi-asset universe. The result is a modern, cost-efficient and dynamically managed strategy. The strategy is aimed at discerning investors who are looking for professional asset management with discretionary control and targeted alpha opportunities – and who rely on a well-thought-out combination of active and passive components

How does “Berenberg Go” differ from the classic “Berenberg Multi Manager” fund strategy?

The main difference lies in the range of funds used. While “Berenberg Go” works with internal funds and ETFs, “Berenberg Multi Manager” also incorporates selected strategies from external providers – following a best-in-class approach. However, both strategies share the same philosophy: active quota management, strategic inclusion of alternative investments such as gold, and a structured selection process. They are therefore two variants of the same basic conviction – differing in the depth of implementation.

How has the fund landscape changed in recent years? Which trends are currently still underestimated?

The ETF trend has changed the fund landscape considerably. Today, many markets and themes can be mapped cost-efficiently – and can be managed flexibly thanks to exchange trading. The field of active ETFs is particularly dynamic. Even if their growth in Europe is slower than in the US, their potential should not be underestimated. In addition, I see a renaissance of active funds – particularly in the bond sector, but increasingly also in equities. This is because the market is becoming more selective: the dominance of a few large technology stocks could become less important. This creates more opportunities for active management. However, it remains challenging to identify strategies that add value. Herein lies our claim – and our task.