{"id":36802,"date":"2020-05-18T10:02:56","date_gmt":"2020-05-18T10:02:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/staging.consileon.de\/external-asset-manager-und-ihre-depotbanken\/"},"modified":"2022-03-26T16:20:45","modified_gmt":"2022-03-26T16:20:45","slug":"external-asset-managers-and-their-custodians","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.consileon.de\/en\/blog\/2020\/05\/18\/external-asset-managers-and-their-custodians\/","title":{"rendered":"External asset managers and their custodians"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Regulatory projects such as the upcoming implementation of the European MiFID II Directive are causing upheavals in the market and require both external asset managers (EAMs) and their custodian banks to rethink their approach. Price increases, changes in ownership and IT changes are putting additional strain on the relationship between external asset managers and their custodian banks. In this environment, regional banks, direct banks, traditional private banks, major national and international banks, and specialized fund custodians vie for mandates and play a special role in the triangular construct of EAM, custodian, and end client. But how satisfied are external asset managers with their custodian banks and where do they see weaknesses? What are the services with which a custodian bank can stand out from the competition?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The EAMs participating in our survey are generally satisfied with their custodian banks. Nevertheless, there is some potential for improvement. The following are particularly criticized<\/p>\n\n\n\n