Mercer buyout of Hammond augurs boutiques’ demise

Mercer’s acquisition of US-based Hammond Associates marks the continued trend of a new consulting environment that raises the question of whether boutique firms can survive. Amanda White spoke to Mercer’s US investment consulting leader, Jeff Schutes, about why clients’ demand for deeper resources and knowledge is driving the consolidation, and why large firms are rejecting the risks of the public pension domain. 

For the most part it’s pretty much standard M&A reasoning that’s driving consolidation in the US investment consulting market. Larger players are buying because of a gap in market share according to geography or service offering; and smaller players have reached capacity in their ability to extend their service to the increasingly complex demands of clients.

Indeed, Mercer’s US investment consulting leader, Jeff Schutes, believes the trend in the US for smaller boutique consulting firms to be swallowed by the larger players is being driven by corporate fund and endowment clients’ need for firms with a global presence and deeper resources and knowledge.

“Smaller boutique-ish firms have done well in the past 25 years, but they haven’t been able to grow, they can’t continue to grow, so the trend will continue, we will continue to see consolidation,” he says.

In response to clients’ demands, investment consulting is a beast undergoing change. The services, skills and resources required to meet those demands are not singular in focus, but require a more holistic approach to a client’s investments, liabilities and so funding and strategy.

“In the corporate defined-benefit space in the US, the needs of the plan sponsor are so sophisticated,” Schutes says. “Consultants now need investment banking skills, actuarial and strategic advice type skills. The specialist skills needed in consulting now are more strategic, a combination of actuarial and investment advice. It’s financial consulting to the balance sheet, to control volatility and de-risk.”

Sponsored Content

In addition within investments he says clients are demanding more specialisation so consultants need resources, and so capital, to invest in their teams.

Mercer, for instance has specialty teams for responsible investments, and operational risk assessment; and now with the acquisition of Hammond Associates a dedicated endowment and foundation team.

“In buying Hammond our first priority was to grow market share and expand our revenue stream into the endowment and foundation market,” he says. “We didn’t have much coverage in that space, and it is a growing area that is hard to grow organically.”

From 2005 to 2009 endowment and foundation funds using investment consulting services grew at a compound rate of 10 per cent in the US, compared to 5 per cent annual growth for both corporate and public funds. Hammond, which was founded in 1985 in St Louis by chief executive Dennis Hammond, has more than 200 clients and 120 investment professionals.

Schutes says Mercer will leave Hammond, which is the third-largest consulting firm in the US specialising in this area, as a separate specialised unit.

“They’ll become our centre of excellence for endowments and foundations, they have the client-facing skills and they will continue to manage as they have been.”

In addition, Hammond has specialist skills in alternatives (see for example research here), which Schutes says has helped “fast-track” Mercer’s resources in that area.

But while the trend for consolidation continues – demonstrated also with July’s acquisition of Ennis Knupp by Hewitt Associates – the larger players are also drawing a line in the sand with regard to whom they service.

Towers Watson, for instance, does not service US public pension plans, and now Mercer has also demonstrated they will exit this part of the market.

“Mercer is in a position of luxury where we can sit back and evaluate our business,” Schutes says. “Based on the risk profile we decided to exit the public fund defined-benefit business. Frankly, the risk profile is deteriorating, their funding status is getting worse and the fiduciary risk is too high. Under US law as an SEC investment advisor we are not allowed to have limited liability, so contract terms are not favourable to the consultant.”

This is a difficult situation for public pension funds in the US that probably need good advice more than ever before.

“The two firms with the most expertise are not willing to participate. At a certain point there may need to be legislation addressing the risk,” he says.

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Why integrated reporting makes sense: Robert Eccles

Robert Eccles has been trying to change the nature of corporate reporting for more than 20 years. He has been an advocate for supplementing financials with information on non-financial factors that are leading indicators of financial results – such as product development, customer satisfaction and the development of intangible assets. The premise is those companies

Opportunities in Europe

Investors and academics agree that political developments in Greece are important because they may shape how financial markets will respond to future political situations in the Eurozone. But according to Olivier Rousseau, the executive director of the FFR, the French pension reserve fund, there is more hype outside of the Eurozone on the implications of

More evidence big is better in pension funds

A pension fund that has 10 times more assets under management has on average 7.67 basis points lower annual investment costs according to a working paper from authors at De Nederlansche Bank, that explores the relationship between pension fund size and investment costs. Written by Dirk Broeders, Arco van Oord and David Rijsbergen the paper

European investment plan requires public private collaboration

The two largest institutional investors in the Netherlands, PGGM and APG, have responded to the European Commission’s investment plan, urging the commission to call on institutional investors to collaborate on the investment proposal. However they also warn that institutional investors are not just a “subsidising entity” and the Juncker Plan is best executed as a

Why Andrew Ang joined Blackrock

Andrew Ang believes factor investing is a more efficient way to organise a portfolio as it allows liquid and illiquid strategies to be managed across the portfolio. It also has the added benefit of honing managers on value creation. He’s been working with a handful of investors while Professor of Finance at Columbia University on

The power of engagement

It is called the “CalPERS’ Effect” but it could easily be called the asset owner effect, or the institutional investor effect, or the power of engagement effect. Wilshire, which is a consultant to the $300 billion Californian fund CalPERS, has provided an update on its study measuring the effect of engagement on a targeted list of companies called the Focus List.

Previous