Standard 3.A.1 All actual, fee-paying, discretionary portfolios must be included in at least one composite.
Fair enough. Then:
Standard 3.A.9 If a firm sets a minimum asset level for portfolios in a composite, the minimum must be applied consistently.
So what happens if the firm has a handful of really small accounts which are fee-paying and discretionary, but unsuitable based on size for any of the composites? Must the firm establish another set of composites to accommodate the small accounts?作者: justin88 时间: 2011-7-11 19:21
yes, don't be shy to establish any number of extra composites, these new composites should probably no set a minimum asset level to sweep up the tini-tiny ones.作者: Colum 时间: 2011-7-11 19:21
and this happens in practice. where i work there are tons of composites for gips purposes that are too small/customized to ever be readily marketed (with the proper format of course), but they still exist for the purpose of compliance.
