positioning

A Sea of Sameness: Marketing Multi-Asset Class Solutions

In recent years survey after survey has shown that both asset managers and institutions alike anticipate significant growth in multi-asset class solutions (MACS). BlackRock has projected MACS to account for 25% of net new business within five years. It’s no surprise, then, that more and more firms (FundFire login required) are investing in their MACS businesses.

However, one element that appears to not be getting enough focus from the industry is the actual positioning and messaging of MACS. So I dissected how 11 high-profile providers initially introduce their capabilities. The result? Differentiated messaging is almost non-existent.

The goal was not to be exhaustive in analyzing the stories, nor to dig through tertiary details, but instead to catalogue the central elements. The sameness across the firms became apparent quickly:

macs-messaging

Despite the perceived opportunity, firms repeatedly fall back on consistent elements in messaging MACS. Trumpeting a collaborative process, a focus on client needs, or the size of the investment team does very little to distance one firm from the next.

Of course there are exceptions. For example, two of the firms provide strong specificity on risk management up-front in presenting MACS. But they are the exceptions. And so while there is a major opportunity to pursue with MACS, thus far the marketing does little to reflect that.

Reflation

The Positioning Impact of Launching ETFs

Last week OppenheimerFunds rebranded the recently-purchased RevenueShares ETF lineup as the Oppenheimer Factor Weighted ETFs. Given that the firm is new to the smart beta ETF space, a simple question crossed my mind: how do they now introduce themselves as a firm?

Traditional (for lack of a better word) actively-managed, mutual fund-oriented firms face a number of important strategic marketing and positioning questions when entering the ETF space. But among the most fundamental is figuring out how to adjust the messaging of who they are and what they do.

In many cases there is an established, legacy messaging platform that emphasizes elements – active management, specific investment philosophy or process tenets – that fail to mesh seamlessly with the expanded product line. As a result the new ETFs appear to be more of an opportunistic “bolt-on” than something grounded in the core beliefs of the firm.

OppenheimerFunds’ illustrates one approach to trying to overcome this issue, namely via a tagline (The Right Way to Invest) and four key principles that focus primarily on themes that are vehicle and strategy agnostic. But there are several firms whose stories fail to match up with their newly-expanded offerings. They, and the anticipated entrants into the ETF universe, will need to reconsider how they primarily want to define themselves and communicate their capabilities to the market.

[ image courtesy of Tony Hall ]