AIFMD: How Independent Are Your Valuations?
Asset managers who this week submitted applications explaining how they are complying with the European Union's (EU) Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD), and the industry at large, are eager to see what response they receive from the regulators and whether much-needed additional guidance will be forthcoming.
AIFMD, which is intended to create a harmonized, EU-wide framework for supervising risks posed by alternative investment fund managers and alternative investment funds, was published in the EU's Official Journal on July 1, 2011, transposed into UK law on July 22, 2013, and completed its transition period in EU member states this July 22. However, a number of questions about its implementation still remain, particularly regarding valuation procedures.
AIFMD requires asset managers to use independent valuations for the alternative funds they manage. They can do this in two ways: by employing the services of an external valuer or by putting in place procedures to ensure their internal valuations team is independent of the rest of the business.
At first glance, outsourcing the valuation function seems like an attractive path to compliance. However, requirements that the external valuer accepts unlimited liability for their valuations has put off pricing vendors and fund administrators who might otherwise be expected to take on the task.
In the absence of an external valuer, asset managers will have no choice but to go down the internal valuation route, creating procedures to segregate internal valuation teams from deal-making and front-office activity.
For Tier 1 institutions that already employ large valuation teams, this may not be a major overhead. However, many of those affected by AIFMD are smaller institutions and questions have been raised about how an asset manager that employs a team of 10, for example, can possibly demonstrate that internally generated valuations are independent.
It will take some time for regulators to sift through the mound of AIFMD applications they received this week. Once they have done so, many will be waiting to see what comments applicants receive, what practices are deemed acceptable and whether the regulations might be amended in some way.
Certainly, as things stand, you have to wonder whether the regulators have made the goal of independent valuations unattainable in many cases, by making it so unattractive for third parties to take on the role of external valuer.
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@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: https://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com 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@waterstechnology.com
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@waterstechnology.com
More on Data Management
Editor’s Picks: Our best from 2025
Anthony Malakian picks out 10 stories from the past 12 months that set the stage for the new year.
Market data costs defy cyclicality
Trading firms continue to grapple with escalating market data costs. Can innovative solutions and strategic approaches bring relief?
LSEG partners with Citi, DTCC goes on-chain, AI on the brain, and more
The Waters Cooler: Trading Technologies buys OpenGamma, CT Plan updates, and the beginning of benchmarking in this week’s news roundup.
AI & data enablement: A looming reality or pipe dream?
Waters Wrap: The promise of AI and agents is massive, and real-world success stories are trickling out. But Anthony notes that firms still need to be hyper-focused on getting the data foundation correct before adding layers.
Data managers worry lack of funding, staffing will hinder AI ambitions
Nearly two-thirds of respondents to WatersTechnology’s data benchmark survey rated the pressure they’re receiving from senior executives and the board as very high. But is the money flowing for talent and data management?
Data standardization is the ‘trust accelerator’ for broader AI adoption
In this guest column, data product managers at Fitch Solutions explain AI’s impact on credit and investment risk management.
As AI pressures mount, banks split on how to handle staffing
Benchmarking: Over the next 12 months, almost a third of G-Sib respondents said they plan to decrease headcount in their data function.
Everyone wants to tokenize the assets. What about the data?
The IMD Wrap: With exchanges moving market data on-chain, Wei-Shen believes there’s a need to standardize licensing agreements.