Korreferat zum Vortrag „Finanzindustrie: Das Dilemma zwischen Kontrolle und Vertrauen“ von Prof. Enste und Prof. Fetchenhauer Dr. Benjamin Braun Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Zum empirischen Befund „Ich vertraue meiner Bank, aber nicht dem Bankensektor“ Ø Gennaioli/Shleifer/Vishny (2015), Money Doctors: „In our view, financial advice is a service, similar to medicine. We believe, contrary to what is presumed in the standard finance model, that many investors have very little idea of how to invest, just as patients have a very limited idea of how to be treated. … in our model money doctors help investors make risky investments and are trusted to do so even when their advice is costly, generic, and occasionally self-serving. And just as many patients trust their doctor, and do not want to go to a random doctor even if equally qualified, investors trust their financial advisors and managers.“ Ø Kay (2015), Other People’s Money: „… a book which advised readers to be their own doctor or lawyer would be an irresponsible book; yet a recommendation to be one’s own investment adviser is comparatively sound advice. The best and certainly least risky way to better returns is to pay less in fees and charges to the finance sector.” 2 „The growth of finance“ – zwei Interpretationen Reflektiert wachsendes Vertrauen o Mehr Sparer nutzen den Investmentkanal weil sie Vertrauen in die beteiligten Akteure haben (Gennaioli/Shleifer/Vishny, 2014; 2015) Reflektiert sinkendes Vertrauen o “there has been an explosion of intermediation in equity investment, driven both by a desire for greater professionalism and efficiency and by a decline in trust and confidence in the investment chain” (The Kay Review of UK Equity Markets and Long-Term Decision Making, 2012) o Bsp. des Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA, 1974): Ø „replaced the figure of the prudent man by that of the prudent expert“ (Montagne 2007) Ø Trug maßgeblich bei zur Transition von „managed intermediation“ zu „transparent intermediation“ (Kay 2015, Other People’s Money) 3 Die Investmentkette, oder: Warum Standardlösungen für Prinzipal-Agenten Probleme an ihre Grenzen stoßen 1. Mündige Konsumenten 2. Reputationsmechanismen und Marktdisziplin 3. Regulierung: Anreizkompatibilität und Transparenz 4 Die Investmentkette, oder: Warum Standardlösungen für Prinzipal-Agenten Probleme an ihre Grenzen stoßen 19 Lusardi and Mitchell: The Economic Importance of Financial Literacy 1. Mündige Konsumenten? Panel 1C. Financial literacy by education group —(percent providing correct answers to all three financial literacy questions) USA 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 63.8 80 69.8 60 44.3 31.3 12.6 Netherlands 40 19.2 28 35.1 Less than HS High-school Some college College Postgraduate Upper secondary Higher vocational University 70.1 72 Post-secondary Tertiary 41.7 0 Primary Lower secondary 43.1 44.9 26.6 Vocational Upper secondary Middle secondary Germany 68.9 Primary or lower secondary 55.4 20 Switzerland 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 54.4 Tertiary 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 51.6 52.4 55 Upper secondary non-GDR GDR 21.7 Lower secondary Quelle: Lusardi/Mitchell (2014: 19) 5 Die Investmentkette, oder: Warum Standardlösungen für Prinzipal-Agenten Probleme an ihre Grenzen stoßen 1. Mündige Konsumenten 2. Reputationsmechanismen und Marktdisziplin Ø “A policy of ‘naming and shaming’ is ineffective if everyone has been named and shamed” (Kay 2015: 261) Ø Oligopolistische Konzentration bei Asset Managern, Investment Consultants, Proxy Voting Services 3. Regulierung: Anreizkompatibilität und Transparenz 6 Die Investmentkette, oder: Warum Standardlösungen für Prinzipal-Agenten Probleme an ihre Grenzen stoßen 1. Mündige Konsumenten 2. Reputationsmechanismen und Marktdisziplin 3. Regulierung: Anreizkompatibilität und Transparenz Ø Intermediationskette immer komplexer: Zunehmend unklar, wer wessen Prinzipal Ø Zunehmend unklar, wer wem gegenüber treuhänderische Pflichten hat (Bsp. Consultant vs. Broker/Dealer) 7 Die Investmentkette, oder: Warum Standardlösungen für Prinzipal-Agenten Probleme an ihre Grenzen stoßen 3. Regulierung: Anreizkompatibilität & Transparenz Who is the principal? The share owner. Who is the share owner? Whose name is on the share register? Often a nominee For whose benefit are the shares held? e.g. a pension fund trustee Who makes the decision to buy or to hold a stock? Normally an asset manager Who determines how the votes should be cast? The pension fund trustee or the asset manager or a proxy voting firm Who holds the economic interest in the security? Individual savers Quelle: Kay Review (2012: 30) 8 3. Regulierung: Anreizkompatibilität & Transparenz Proxy voting firms Capital BlackRock Vanguard Top-20: 42% Capital Capital Institutional investors This “transparent intermediation” the result of the failures of “managed intermediation”? Fees Investment consultants Fees S a v e r s ISS Glass Lewis Fees Financial advisers Mercer Towers Watson Top-10: 82% Asset Managers Broker/ Dealers F i r m s Das Dilemma zusammengefasst Komplexe Finanzmarktstrukturen ... ... erschweren Schaffung von Vertrauen ... sind das Ergebnis eines Mangels an Vertrauen “The chain of investment should be shortened. … [I]n an environment in which trust and confidence are lacking, the process of hiring advisers to review the work of other advisers can multiply indefinitely, creating a self reinforcing cycle of mistrust and complexity. (Kay Review 2012: 46) 10 Wodurch würde sich die Investmentkette verkürzen? Einige spekulative Diskussionspunkte • Rapides Wachstum im ETF Sektor • Robo Advisors? • Umlagefinanzierte Rente: Not so bad after all? 11
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc