We offer two main asset management services. First, we build systems that increase return by improving data collection and analysis.
Second, we analyze political, environmental and social risk factors and design innovative, positive solutions to deal with them.
In both cases, we emphasize ease of integration. Our technology systems are built to play nicely with the client's current software; they include clear documentation and source code access. Our analysis is highly detailed, but delivered in plain English.
EXAMPLE: SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE
We architected a new platform for the margining, matching and trade of OTC derivatives using clearinghouses. The platform was fully compliant with new regulations requiring CCPs to be used in these transactions. It can be used for a variety of similar challenges, particularly where energy and agriculture are concerned.
EXAMPLE: TRANSACTION STRUCTURES
We developed a completely unique structure for improving the accounting treatment of rail and port transactions, so that the desired balance sheet effect could find regulatory approval. The backbone of this approach was to use non-financial factors in the valuation process, especially water. It is compliant with new regulations issued in 2015 by FSB and IASB.
EXAMPLE: ESG RISKS
We quantified mining project ESG risks for sovereign wealth fund, market data vendor and research groups. The fund is accountable to public oversight and has an abiding interest in sustainability. We concluded the data was not sufficient to influence stock price movements and the fund was unlikely to see its returns impacted by these issues despite its long-horizon investment strategy.
EXAMPLE: VALUATION AND ANALYSIS
We provided analysis of project finance deals across Australia, the United States, Southeast Asia and Latin America. Typical deal sizes analyzed ranged from US $150-800 million, with capital supplied from limited partners (including pension funds) from the United States and Europe on the expectation of returns within a five-year time horizon. Our recommended rejection of several deals on the basis of environmental or regulatory factors subsequently proved to be significant.