Magellan reports drop in performance fees
Magellan has described performance fees for the six months to 31 December as “not meaningful” compared to $11 million a year ago.
For the six months to 31 December, 2021, performance fees had been $11 million while they had been as high as $30 million for the full year to 30 June, 2021.
In a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), the firm did not disclose the exact figure and said: “Performance fees (if any) may fluctuate significantly from period to period”.
Meanwhile, total funds under management (FUM) fell below $50 billion to $45.3 billion after seeing net outflows of $2.6 billion during December.
This included net retail outflows of $0.6 billion and net institutional outflows of $2 billion which brought total funds under management to $45.3 billion.
The biggest loss was seen in a 16% decline in global equities which dropped from $24.6 billion to $20.6 billion.
Infrastructure equities fell from $16.8 billion to $16.2 billion while Australia equities fell from $8.8 billion to $8.5 billion.
Average FUM for the six months ended 31 December, 2022 was $53.8 billion.
Recommended for you
Ten Cap has announced it will launch its first active ETF on the ASX later this month, expanding retail access to its flagship Australian equities strategy.
Flows into cash and fixed income ETFs rose by 46 per cent in October with investors particularly demonstrating a preference for Australian credit ETFs as they move away from AT1 bank hybrids.
Having identified Australia as a growth market, J.P. Morgan Asset Management has collaborated with Betashares to offer two multi-asset managed portfolios on its Direct platform, the first funds on the platform from an external manager.
First Sentier has announced it will transition the Stewart Investors investment management responsibilities to its affiliate investment team in light of three senior portfolio manager exits.


The question is, why are Magellan taking any performance fees when all they've done is lose money for investors and shareholders alike.
If your funds have performed poorly below the index, why are you rewarding yourselves for poor performance ?
I'm not sure but if your funds over the past 12 months don't even mirror the performance of the index, you shouldn't be taking an rewards for poor performance