Vidrio Blog

For firms that desire continuity across all their teams, the multi-function single-vendor solution is a reasonable choice for the benefit of reporting alone. This level of centralization helps prevent discrepancies in data, reduces the drag of transferring information and work between systems, and promotes collaboration and transparency. The system dashboard becomes the information source for clients, prospects, and team members, instead of the limited data capture. This way, if you need more information to answer a question, you can do it in real-time.

One of the most widely used solutions capable of catering to an array of individual specialties is a combined patchwork of disparate tools and services for each functional need. While this approach seemingly allows allocation firms to leverage each area of expertise, it can be a hindrance to collaboration, accuracy, timeliness, and efficiency. Additionally, the costs can be insurmountable to set up all the necessary integrations and maintain with a growing staff and escalating service fees.

While there are trillions of dollars in the finance world managed on spreadsheets, there are a select few who choose to take on the task of creating their own custom-built software solution for portfolio management. 

The reasons to do so are the same as any other solution. 

• Sophisticated investors want a clear view of performance and risk across asset classes. 
• Robust data and analytics powered by software allow asset allocators to make better investment decisions. 

Spreadsheet software such as Excel may be the de facto system for financial institution's portfolio management, but should they be? With increasing staff, volumes of data, assets, and client responsibilities, spreadsheets quickly decay. The alignment between tables of information precariously poised on formula integrations and manual updates.

In the current pandemic environment, while some of the funds that asset allocators are invested with are finding ways to profit, many funds are performing poorly. Some will close as a result. Across the board, we see allocators needing to redeem and reallocate as turbulent market conditions persist. 

Covid-19 and a crash in the oil markets have triggered a bear market that may lead to a recession. While the complexion of this bear market is different from 2008-9, there are applicable lessons from the last recession that can be helpful to Allocators in 2020.

Year after year, Agecroft does an excellent job bringing together a mix of funds, allocators, and service providers for their hedge fund allocator conference. Here are the top takeaways from Agecroft's "Gaining the Edge" in 2019:

Vidrio is a Technology Enabled Service for fund allocators. We collect a full range of data from external managers for our clients so they can focus on more value-added tasks. We use all this data to power a range of functions that let fund allocators live on one screen to perform research, portfolio management, and operational tasks. We offer unrivaled depth in data servicing and cutting-edge technology for managers of managers.

Vidrio is the first Technology Enabled Service for allocators. We’re also undoubtedly the oldest. The origins of Vidrio go back to 1994 when we established one of the early funds of hedge funds. Along the way, we developed technology to support portfolios that allocate to external managers of all types and transferred the data collection staffing and processes we used to create the innovative technology enabled service we offer today.

Regardless of what a firm invests in, Excel cannot be the cornerstone system of your investment team. Know the warning signs when you've outgrown spreadsheets and why you should move onto another solution. Learn about all of Excel's deficiencies and how you can benefit from a more powerful, modern approach. Read on LinkedIn >

Also check out Fund Allocator's Solution Series: Spreadsheets

Investment managers traditionally develop custom internal technology or implement multiple vendor solutions to manage their investments. Historically, these were the only products that could provide mature products across all mission-critical parts of the business. They were supported by a costly technology teams trained to support very specific use cases. These solutions were expensive and tend to decays as soon as they were implemented.