Regulatory Competition in European Partnership Law: A Case of Alternative Investment Funds

This contribution deals with the implementation of Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2011 on Alternative Investment Fund Managers and amending Directives 2003/41/EC and 2009/65/EC and Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009 and (EU) No 1095/2010 into Czech legal system. The main aim of the contribution is to confirm or disprove the hypothesis that entity in Section 15 of Act no. 240/2013 Coll, on Investment Companies and Investment Funds, as amended, is an alternative fund according to the Directive 2011/61/EU and that Directive 2011/61/EU was not transposed in Czech Republic properly. Author used to confirm or disprove above mentioned hypothesis scientific methods, especially comparison, induction and deduction. This contribution also looks at the Directive 2011/61/EU evaluation of its effectiveness and possible development of regulation in this area.

Download Full-text

13 Listings of Private Investment Funds as a Means of Mitigating the Governance Challenge

10.1093/law/9780198807247.003.0013 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Spangler Timothy

Keyword(s):

Stock Exchange ◽

Private Investment ◽

Investment Fund ◽

London Stock Exchange ◽

Investment Funds ◽

Fund Managers ◽

Potential Market ◽

Securities Exchanges ◽

Regulatory Functions ◽

Alternative Investment

This chapter explains how the admission to listing of private investment funds on a recognized exchange can provide a means to address the governance challenge. It first considers the regulatory functions of securities exchanges before turning to the Irish Stock Exchange (ISE), taking into account three areas relevant to the governance challenge faced by private investment funds: general obligations of disclosure, notification of interests and key developments, and communications with unitholders. It then examines how an ISE listing can provide a potential market-oriented solution to the governance challenge. It also discusses listing-related developments at the London Stock Exchange, Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive depositories, and limitations on the effectiveness of exchange listings.

Download Full-text

An update on the EU securities financing transactions regulation

Journal of Investment Compliance ◽

10.1108/joic-02-2017-0003 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

pp. 78-83 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

William J.G. Yonge

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Design Methodology ◽

Law Firm ◽

Investment Funds ◽

Content Type ◽

Eu Regulation ◽

Detailed Explanation ◽

Total Return Swaps ◽

The Eu ◽

Alternative Investment

Purpose To provide an update and detailed explanation on the EU Regulation on Transparency of Securities Financing Transactions and of Reuse (“SFTR”). Design/methodology/approach Examines the SFTR, its key measures and requirements. Findings Concludes with a number of considerations and recommendations. For example, it advises managers of Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities (UCITS) and alternative investment funds (AIFs) to prepare to disclose details of their use of securities financing transactions and total return swaps. Originality/value Offers information on the SFTR and explains its requirements and scope. It has been written by a partner at an international law firm.

Download Full-text

Alternative Investment Funds in Europe

10.1093/law/9780199657728.001.0001 ◽

2014 ◽

Keyword(s):

Investment Funds ◽

Alternative Investment

Download Full-text

The Risk-Adjusted Performance of Alternative Investment Funds and UCITS: A Comparative Analysis

International Journal of Economics and Finance ◽

10.5539/ijef.v10n7p23 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (7) ◽

pp. 23 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Silvio John Camilleri ◽

Ritienne Farrugia

Keyword(s):

The Other ◽

Sample Period ◽

Investment Funds ◽

Regulatory Frameworks ◽

Out Of Sample ◽

Overall Performance ◽

Focus Strategy ◽

Over Time ◽

Selection Of ◽

Alternative Investment

This study evaluates the performance of a selection of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs), and Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities Funds (UCITS) which followed a global geographic focus strategy during the period 2010-2016. These two fund structures are governed by different regulatory frameworks, which have evolved and re-shaped over the years. Various yardsticks are employed to evaluate the risk-adjusted performance of the sampled funds, and Monte-Carlo simulations are used to gauge the possible out-of-sample returns. Most of the sampled funds underperformed the benchmark index in terms of their Sharpe and Treynor ratios. Whilst UCITS registered a better overall performance, AIFs outperformed UCITS towards the end of the sample period. This suggests that investors should not assume that one fund structure is inherently superior to the other, since the relative performance may vary over time.

Download Full-text