German institutional investors not very familiar with most asset managers

Only the top five brands are well known among institutional investors, research by Fundamental Media found 

Key points: 

• The overall familiarity with asset managers is not high among institutional investors in Germany. 

• The top ten strongest asset management brands consist of three local managers and seven international managers.  

• Brand recall is positively correlated to propensity to buy, with 90% of companies mentioned in propensity to buy also being recalled for specific asset classes and management styles. 

The overall familiarity with asset managers is not high among institutional investors in Germany, according to research by Fundamental Media. 

Only the top five brands are well known by most respondents, with 60% being either very or quite familiar with the two leading brands.  

This is one of the key findings from the Germany Institutional Global Brand Survey 2024, which is based on the responses from 46 institutional investors in Germany. To understand their perception of asset managers’ brands, we have developed a Brand Equity Index using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods across four pillars: recall, familiarity, propensity to buy and distinctiveness.  

In Germany, the top ten strongest asset management brands consist of three local managers and seven international managers.  

Institutional investors were asked which managers they associate with 15 different asset classes and management styles. At least one local asset management firm was in the top three of recalled companies in all of these, apart from North American equities, global equities, emerging market equities, alternatives and smart beta. 

Brand recall is positively correlated to propensity to buy, with 90% of companies mentioned in propensity to buy also being recalled for specific asset classes and management styles.  

However, only 15% of the 120 recalled brands were also mentioned in propensity to buy. This suggests that the number of companies considered in requests for proposal (RFPs) is limited and multiple factors will play a role for the selection. 

Respondents were asked to mention up to three asset managers which they are likely to consider for RFP over the next 12 months, which was used to calculate each manager’s score for propensity to buy. We also asked respondents what values they attribute to those managers and what makes them want to consider them for RFP.  

This revealed that the brands with the highest propensity to buy scores had the most comments on ‘product/know-how’ (53%), focusing on the quality of the investment team, expertise on specific asset classes or strategies, and cost efficiency. A further 30% of comments were related to ‘brand’, focusing on transparency, integrity, positive appearance and reliability.

For more information on our Global Brand Survey and to obtain a copy, please visit our dedicated webpage.