Key Takeaways
- • The Financial Conduct Authority's ongoing consultation into liquidity mismatch in property funds risks losing relevance as asset managers increasingly transition mandates to hybrid fund structures that operate outside the scope of traditional open-ended property fund regulations.
- • The shift toward hybrid models represents a market-driven response to regulatory pressure and investor redemption concerns that emerged following property fund suspensions, effectively circumventing the intended impact of the FCA's consultation process.
- • The FCA's consultation on enhancing fund liquidity risk management, including proposed amendments to COLL rules on transferable security criteria and liquid asset assumptions, may face diminished applicability if the industry continues migrating away from authorised open-ended property fund structures.
- • This dynamic reflects a broader tension in regulatory oversight: the time required to conduct formal consultations and implement rule changes may be outpaced by market participants' ability to restructure products and adopt alternative fund architectures.
Summary
The Financial Conduct Authority's formal consultation into liquidity mismatch within authorised open-ended property funds faces a significant credibility challenge, as asset managers accelerate the migration of mandates toward hybrid fund models. According to Investment Week, this structural shift threatens to render the FCA's consultation "immaterial" by fundamentally altering the regulatory landscape it was designed to address.
The consultation was initiated in response to documented harm caused by liquidity mismatches—where fund structures allowed open-ended redemption terms while holding illiquid property assets—which precipitated a series of high-profile fund suspensions. The FCA proposed amendments to COLL (Collective Investment Schemes sourcebook) rules governing transferable security criteria, liquid asset assumptions, and investor redemption notice periods to mitigate these risks.
However, the industry's proactive response has been to restructure around these proposed regulations entirely. By transitioning to hybrid fund models—which typically blend characteristics of open-ended and closed-ended structures—managers are effectively bypassing the constraints that the FCA's consultation aims to impose. This creates a regulatory arbitrage opportunity wherein the consultation's recommendations may apply to a steadily shrinking asset base.
The timing dynamics underscore a structural limitation in the regulatory process: the duration required for formal consultations, stakeholder feedback, and rule implementation extends substantially beyond the market's ability to innovate around regulatory constraints. Asset managers facing redemption pressure and seeking operational flexibility have adapted their product offerings before formal rules take effect, leaving the regulator addressing a problem that has already migrated to a different architectural framework.
This pattern has broader implications for UK asset management regulation, particularly as the FCA navigates its post-Brexit regulatory evolution and responds to the Asset Management Market Study's recommendations on liquidity risk management and depositary service continuity.
The consultation was initiated in response to documented harm caused by liquidity mismatches—where fund structures allowed open-ended redemption terms while holding illiquid property assets—which precipitated a series of high-profile fund suspensions. The FCA proposed amendments to COLL (Collective Investment Schemes sourcebook) rules governing transferable security criteria, liquid asset assumptions, and investor redemption notice periods to mitigate these risks.
However, the industry's proactive response has been to restructure around these proposed regulations entirely. By transitioning to hybrid fund models—which typically blend characteristics of open-ended and closed-ended structures—managers are effectively bypassing the constraints that the FCA's consultation aims to impose. This creates a regulatory arbitrage opportunity wherein the consultation's recommendations may apply to a steadily shrinking asset base.
The timing dynamics underscore a structural limitation in the regulatory process: the duration required for formal consultations, stakeholder feedback, and rule implementation extends substantially beyond the market's ability to innovate around regulatory constraints. Asset managers facing redemption pressure and seeking operational flexibility have adapted their product offerings before formal rules take effect, leaving the regulator addressing a problem that has already migrated to a different architectural framework.
This pattern has broader implications for UK asset management regulation, particularly as the FCA navigates its post-Brexit regulatory evolution and responds to the Asset Management Market Study's recommendations on liquidity risk management and depositary service continuity.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.