Portfolio and fee diagnostics

In financial services, “performance” is rarely just about markets. It is often the compounded effect of fee layering, product selection, platform and custody economics, trading friction, FX spreads, and governance discipline.

When those elements are not mapped properly, firms and clients can end up paying for overlap, legacy structures, and hidden cost leakage without realising it until performance disappoints or a regulator, board, or client asks uncomfortable questions.

​

A portfolio and fee diagnostic is designed to solve that problem. It is a structured review that builds a single, coherent view of total cost of ownership across the entire investment chain, then turns that into practical actions.

The output is deliberately plain language: what is being paid, to whom, for what, and what can be improved without compromising suitability, service quality, or operational control.

Regulators are also pushing hard on cost and charges clarity, accuracy, and disclosure discipline, which is why doing this well has become a governance requirement rather than a “nice to have”.

Most firms can tell you the headline product fee. Fewer can confidently explain the full fee and friction stack across the end-to-end client journey.

We typically see leakage in five places:

1.    Product and mandate layer
OCF/TER, performance fees, underlying fund-of-fund layering, structured product embedded costs, and “quiet” share class issues (e.g., not using the lowest cost clean share class where available). Morningstar’s work on asset-weighted fees shows how wide the fee gap remains between active and passive funds on average, which helps explain why cost discipline matters even before you discuss manager skill. 

2.    Platform, custody and administration layer
Custody fees, platform charges, reporting costs, wrapper fees, ticket charges, custody minimums, and sub-custody. Often this is where firms can renegotiate economics or restructure the operating model if the AUM and operational footprint supports it.

3.    Trading, implementation and FX layer
Bid/offer spreads, market impact, turnover, stamp duties / transaction taxes where applicable, and FX spreads on conversions, dividends, coupons, and rebalancing. These costs rarely show up neatly as “fees”, yet they are real and persistent.

4.    Counterparty and governance layer
Concentration by bank/custodian, sub-custody chains, cash management, securities lending terms, and operational dependencies (e.g., one provider controlling data, reporting, and client experience). This is not just cost; it is control.

5.    Disclosure and client communication layer
Costs and charges disclosures can be technically “produced” but still fail the real test: are they fair, clear, not misleading, and based on complete, accurate inputs? Regulators have been explicit that firms must capture implicit and explicit costs and disclose inducements properly

The commercial reality is simple: if fees are not understood, they cannot be managed. And if they are not managed, they compound quietly.
 
The point is not “active is bad” or “passive is good”. The point is that fee drag is measurable, persistent, and often avoidable. You can still use active management where it genuinely earns its place, but you should be confident you are paying for skill, not leakage or convenience.

​

Again, the practical lesson for a wealth manager, asset manager, EAM or advisory firm is governance: if the probability of long-term outperformance is hard to sustain, then controlling costs, controlling implementation, and controlling suitability discipline becomes even more important.

​

This is the “quiet killer” inside portfolios: small numbers that feel immaterial in year one become material over a decade. The diagnostic makes that visible, then gives you a route to action.

We run this as a structured, evidence-led project, not a generic slide deck.

​

Step 1: Build the fee and friction map (single source of truth)
We gather the fee schedules, platform/custody terms, product data, trading and FX cost assumptions where available, plus the current client reporting outputs. Then we create a waterfall that separates explicit fees (known charges) from implicit costs (implementation, FX, turnover, spreads). This becomes the baseline.

​

Step 2: Identify root causes and “quick wins”
Typical examples include share class optimisation, rationalising overlap in mandates, eliminating redundant administration, reducing unnecessary turnover, tightening rebalancing rules, renegotiating custody tiers, improving cash and FX handling, or changing operating processes that are generating avoidable friction.

​

Step 3: Governance upgrades that stick
You receive a plain-English summary for senior management or the board, plus a working pack: recommended changes, sequencing, owners, KPIs, and a monitoring cadence. This is where many providers fall short: they diagnose, but do not create the operating rhythm that keeps costs controlled.

Most firms do not need “more advice”. They need clarity, control, and someone to carry the work through without turning it into a six-month corporate exercise led by rotating juniors.

CGI is built to be smaller, senior-led, and commercially direct. You tell the story once, we translate it into a cost and control plan, then we stay accountable to delivery.

Clients should feel comfortable because the output is decision-ready: you can act on it, defend it, and explain it to clients, boards, or regulators without hiding behind jargon.

We are UAE-centric in our delivery mindset and network, but the work is global by design: platforms, product wrappers, custody chains and cross-border governance are not constrained by one jurisdiction.

If you want a portfolio and fee diagnostic that produces an implementable fee map, prioritised actions, and a governance cadence your team can run, send over a sample portfolio/reporting pack (redacted is fine) and we will scope the diagnostic and define deliverables before any work starts.