In our response to ESMA on its review of the guidelines on stress-testing parameters for Money Market Funds (MMFs), EFAMA cautions against using overly simplistic assumptions.
The EU fund product landscape is deep, diverse and dynamic. Since the birth of the UCITS framework in 1985, European institutions have progressively refined it into a global “gold standard”, one that successfully balances strict regulatory requirements with the flexibility required by manager to meet evolving client demands. The successful evolution of UCITS was followed by the creation of alternative investment funds (AIFs) under the 2011 AIFM Directive, adding a second important pillar to EU fund/manager regulation. Building on this second pillar are further ambitious EU fund products, such as EUSEFs, EUVECAs and ELTIFs. EFAMA has helped guide all of these key regulatory developments, informing policymakers and regulators on their main merits and drawbacks, while also keeping a close eye on their respective review initiatives.
EFAMA strongly supports a fundamental review to the ELTIF regime, in view of broadening its eligible investment universe and adapting it to better meet retail investor needs. We are also closely monitoring the review of the AIFM Directive from a product regulation standpoint, including possible spillover effects on the UCITS Directive requirements. Further work involves keeping pace with relevant ESMA initiatives, such as the work around the Common Supervisory Action on costs and fees for UCITS.
EFAMA welcomes the European Securities and Market Authority’s continuous commitment to creating a single market for investment funds, confirmed by the draft regulatory standards currently under consideration. These RTS/ITS would further harmonise information that asset managers should provide to their national competent authorities before marketing or managing an investment fund on a cross-border basis, thus facilitating intra-EU product distribution.
The European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) has published its response to the European Commission’s targeted consultation on the functioning of the EU Money Market Fund Regulation (MMFR).
The European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) has today published its latest monthly Investment Fund Industry Fact Sheet, which provides net sales data of UCITS and AIFs for October 2020*.
Bernard Delbecque, Senior Director for Economics and Research commented: "Net sales of UCITS equity funds, although remaining positive, fell to a very low level in October against the backdrop of increases in Covid-19 cases and new lockdown measures."
The main developments in October 2020 can be summarized as follows:
The European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) has today published its latest quarterly international statistics, tracking and analysing trends in worldwide regulated open-ended fund assets and flows for Q3 2020.
The European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) has today published its Quarterly Statistical Release describing the trends in the European investment fund industry
The report aims to provide a unique and comprehensive set of facts and figures on the state of the industry at the end of 2018 but also to highlight the fundamental role of asset managers in the financial system and wider economy.
The pandemic-induced market events experienced in March 2020 have marked the first true ‘stress-test’ for European MMFs, following the introduction of the EU Money Market Fund Regulation (MMFR) in 2017. Despite the severity of the liquidity stress in the secondary market for short-term instruments and the significant outflows experienced by European MMFs across all three of the MMFR-identified categories (public debt CNAV, LVNAV and VNAV), funds proved resilient.
Through its ETF Task Force, EFAMA has produced an Investor Education Guide intended to draw out, in a simple form, the defining features for the three main types of ETPs (Exchange-traded products) listed across European markets. The association hopes this guide will primarily assist investors in having a clearer understanding of different ETPs and help investors appreciate the differences between them, especially from a risk and product complexity viewpoint.