Restoring the competitiveness of European banks and asset managers can’t be achieved by tweaking regulations
3 min
After a decade and a half of seeing the U.S. economy pull ahead thanks to its outsize technology sector, European politicians are desperate to fight back in emerging industries such as green energy. One challenge they face is that America also keeps pulling ahead in the business of financing the investments required.
On Thursday, Luxembourg for Finance—a public-private partnership that seeks to promote the financial industry in the low-tax city state—published a report detailing the different ways in which European banks and asset managers might regain an edge relative to U.S. and Asian peers.
This is part of an effort by officials across the European Union to give firms a break. “Old economy” industries such as car manufacturing face rising competition from China and higher energy costs since Russia invaded Ukraine. The U.S. Inflation Reduction Act also has drawn investment across the Atlantic. Last year, the European Commission tasked former Italian prime ministers Mario Draghi and Enrico Letta with drafting a report on European competitiveness.
Luxembourg for Finance Chief Executive Nicolas Mackel echoes a common refrain: “Europe can take the lead in financial services when we eliminate fragmentation.” His report points out that the return on equity of European banks has bounced back in recent years. But it also showcases the gulf that has opened up relative to U.S. financial firms.
European lenders’ return on equity is now around 8%, compared with 12% across the Atlantic and 10% in Asia, in part as a result of stricter regulations following the 2008 banking crisis. Most European banks trade below book value on the stock market, having returned a negative 14% to investors since the April 2009 trough. Large American banks trade above book value and have gained 113%.
In services particularly exposed to international competition, American banks dominate in Europe too: In 2023, they took the top five positions for mergers and acquisitions deals, Dealogic data shows, with France’s BNP Paribas coming in sixth, and the top six spots for issuing equity.
And this isn’t just about banks. In 2007, top European and U.S. asset managers roughly split the global market between them. By 2022, European fund managers had just 22% of total assets under supervision, with only France’s Amundi playing in the big leagues. This reflects their failure to jump on the train of low-fee passive investment as effectively as U.S. giants such as Vanguard and BlackRock. Ironically, the latter’s dominance in exchange-traded funds resulted from its acquisition of iShares from Britain’s Barclays in 2009.
European officials are taking some useful steps. They admitted in 2022 that a directive aimed at harmonising securities markets, known as Mifid 2, has done more harm than good, and have agreed to amend it. New EU-wide savings products give pensioners greater choice, and might help address the lack of sophistication that characterises European individual investors relative to Americans used to managing 401(k)s. Stringent constraints on what asset managers can offer are being relaxed, and the rules governing sustainable finance—where Europe has an edge—are being clarified.
Meanwhile, the fallout from last year’s Silicon Valley Bank debacle will bring U.S. regulation closer to Europe’s.
Such rule changes might narrow the gap, as investors have recognised: The stock-market discount at which European lenders trade compared with American ones has shrunk over the past three years. But it is hard to see the tables fundamentally turning. In the digital era, economies of scale are even more powerful. The European Union comprises many countries with different languages, whose firms and investors have local financial relationships and strong home biases. The obstacles to eliminating fragmentation are huge.
If Europe can’t compete with America’s private financial muscle, it is doubly problematic that its efforts to mobilise industrial investment through the public sector have been meek compared with the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act. Promoting more sustainability-minded funds isn’t an adequate fix.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
Following the successful launch of its Palais Collection, MAISON de SABRÉ has unveiled a new modular handbag system offering more than 720 styling combinations.
Automobili Lamborghini and Babolat have expanded their collaboration with five new colourways for the ultra-exclusive BL.001 racket, limited to just 50 pieces worldwide.
With US$40 million already committed, the Global Talent Fund is attracting investor attention with a strategy focused on building globally scalable consumer brands alongside high-profile talent.
2 min
A new investment fund targeting celebrity-founded consumer brands has secured US$40 million in commitments and is rapidly approaching its US$50 million fundraising target, signalling growing investor appetite for alternative opportunities beyond traditional asset classes.
The Global Talent Fund, which has a maximum raise of US$100 million, focuses on building and investing in consumer businesses alongside celebrities, athletes, and influential personalities who play an active role as co-founders rather than simply endorsing products.
The strategy is based on the belief that changes in consumer behaviour, particularly the rise of social media and digital engagement, have fundamentally altered how brands are built and scaled.
GTF founding partner Jeremy Hunt, who is helping lead the fund’s strategy, said consumers increasingly feel connected to personalities they follow online and are more willing to support products developed by those individuals.
“Consumers are searching for content to engage with, and when a celebrity they like or follow takes them on the journey of creating a product or brand, they genuinely feel part of that process,” he said.
The fund is targeting high-growth consumer sectors including wellness, hydration, beauty and recovery, areas Hunt believes continue to benefit from strong global demand and ongoing innovation.
Rather than backing celebrity endorsement deals, the fund is seeking businesses where talent is deeply involved in product development, brand creation and long-term growth.
According to Hunt, authenticity remains one of the biggest differentiators between successful celebrity-backed brands and those that fail.
“The consumer can see clearly if someone is simply being paid to promote a product,” he said. “The winners are typically the brands where the celebrity has genuinely helped build the business from the ground up.”
The model has attracted support from several prominent Australian investors and business families, reflecting broader interest in alternative investments with global growth potential.
Hunt said consumer brands offered a level of tangibility that many investors found appealing.
“Consumer brands are what we touch, feel, smell and taste every day,” he said. “Our investors understand the growth potential in the model, but they also want to be part of the journey.”
The fund’s rapid progress towards its fundraising target comes amid growing recognition that celebrity influence, when combined with strong commercial execution and scalable business models, can create significant enterprise value.
With several high-profile celebrity-founded businesses generating billion-dollar exits in recent years, supporters of the strategy believe the opportunity remains in its early stages.
