Informed Decisions are one of Ireland’s only remaining independent financial advice firms. We specialise in retirement & investment planning for successful individuals, so that our clients only have to retire once.
Retire successfully with Informed Decisions.
May 12, 2025
Gillen Markets have built a solid reputation as investment managers and advisors over the past decade and a half, led by founder Rory Gillen. They reportedly manage and advise on over €600m for c.500 families.
They made the headlines last week, having announced that they were selling their business to Quilter Cheviot, a UK and Irish based Discretionary fund manager, for an undisclosed sum.
As these things always do; it piqued interest in terms of the consolidation of yet another firm, but also in Gillen Markets own Gillen Market Fund (GM Fund).
So we are sharing a few thoughts on;
- Market consolidation going on in Ireland
- Analysis of the GM Fund itself (performance, allocation and fees)
Let's dig in!
Approximately €70m of the €600m that Gillen Markets manage and advice on, sits in their own Gillen Market Fund (GM Fund). The balance is in a mix of direct equities, and funds they recommend etc.
The GM Fund has carved out a reputation for solid, research-led investment management. It has a 'medium-to-high risk profile', it allocates heavily to equities across developed and emerging markets.
Here is their latest findable Key Investor Document: KID-The-GM-Fund-A-IE00BD0CNH45-en-IE-20230930_008.pdf
Here is their latest findable Performance Data on the GM Fund.
https://api.kneip.com/v1/documentdata/permalinks/KPP_IE00BD0CNH45_en_IE.pdf
According to their published data, after 'on-going fees' (but not included entry or exit fees) the performance has been:
The 8 year return of the GM Fund, 2017 to 2024 inclusive, was therefore:
This is a reasonably decent-sounding performance figure for a multi-asset, actively managed fund.
And interesting to see positive performance in 2022, when a lot of funds were negative for the year.
Keep reading to hear how it compares to a passive portfolio of similar allocation!
When you want to know about fees of a fund or product, always head straight for the Key Investor Document, or KID for short. Bypass the quoted 'annual management charge' figure which is usually/always incorrect.
The GM Fund have a published KID, the latest available one is here. KID-The-GM-Fund-A-IE00BD0CNH45-en-IE-20230930_008.pdf.
According to the KID, the total maximum annual on-going fees for the GM Fund are 1.96%.
See the ongoing costs section below, €180 euro per €10,000 for management fees, and another €16 per €10,000 for transaction costs. That's 1.96% in percentage terms, annual ongoing fee you pay to the GM Fund owners for having your funds invested there. The KID also states that they can charge a max 0.5% entry fee and 0.5% exit fee - whether they do or don't is another thing.
But for all intents and purposes you are paying max 2% per year there to invest in the GM Fund.
That fee may not sound egregious, but how does the performance and fee stack it up against a globally diversified passive portfolio??
Passive portfolios aren't an elixir for everything, but they have proven robust for the vast majority of scenarios for the vast majority of people!
How have comparable passive portfolios stood-up against the GM Fund?
In the period from 2017 to end 2024, the GM Fund delivered 68% after ongoing fees.
An illustrative 80/20 portfolio of globally diversified equity and globally diversified bonds delivered 104% in the same period. (after fund fee only).
Deduct say another 1% for platform and advisory fee, and you're at c97% net return.
That's 97% for passive 80/20 vs 70% for the GM Fund in that timeframe (which is the longest one that GM has made available to the public).
If you compare it to a slightly more aggressive portfolio of 90/10, the over-performance delivered by passive has been even greater.
122% for a 90/10 - which we'll call 115% after platform and advice fees.
That's 115% for passive 90/10 portfolio vs 70% for the GM Fund.
Here’s the graph illustrating the 8-year investment outcomes:
With €1m invested, you would be €300,000 better-off in an 80/20 portfolio than in the GM Fund, from 2017 to 2024 inclusive.
Facts.
.png)
We can of course tell ourselves that the future may be different/ the world has changed / etc. etc. - but has it? Will it??
Only recently we wrote about how most active managers underperform passive portfolios once you factor in fees and taxes. It’s not an opinion – it’s data. The SPIVA reports, year after year, confirm that the vast majority of active funds underperform their passive peers, particularly over longer periods. That is a global reality, not just an Irish reality.
The GM Fund, while better than some active peers, appears to follow that same pattern. Even with decent absolute returns, it's underwhelming when compared to a diversified low-cost approach. It is also worth noting that during volatile periods, active funds often promise greater protection, but many fail to deliver.
So when an investor hears the promise of outperformance, the real question becomes: 'At what cost? And is the promise realistic or just marketing spin?'
Over the past few years, we've seen a steady stream of mergers, acquisitions, and tie-ups among advisory firms, investment platforms, insurance brokers and asset managers. Foreign giants and private equity firms have been snapping up smaller Irish and UK firms like they’re going out of fashion! Even as 'cheap money' became less cheap when interest rates sky-rocketed in the entire 'west' in past couple of years, the consolidation and PE-backed acquisitions have rolled-on.
Quilter's purchase of Gillen Markets was the latest announcement here in Ireland, with decent coverage here for example. Their research suggested that Gillen Market parent company had revenues of €4m last year.
Who are the winners when an investment company or brokerage is bought-out?
The acquiring firm and their shareholders, no doubt. They gain market share, scale, and access to clients who likely didn’t choose them in the first place. They also often benefit from economies of scale and operational efficiencies that can improve profit margins and streamline service delivery (from their point of view, at least).
The disposing firm and their shareholders also. They get to 'cash-out' to varying degrees. Usually there is a 3-5 year earn-out to get maximum value for their sale - so you'll frequently see sellers hang-around for a few years to aid the transition.
While the PR blurb will talk about 'synergies' and great 'cultural compatibility' between the buyer and seller (which may of course be true!), at the end of the day it is a commerical deal.
I see no reason for anyone to begrudge these deals, provided clients are treated fairly in the following years post-deal....
The losers? It’s potentially the clients. When your broker, advisor or investment manager becomes part of a larger corporate machine, you might lose the bespoke, conflict-free service that attracted you in the first place. Possibly. You may also be shuffled into a new service model, advised into in-house products, or face changes in fee structures, all under the banner of “enhanced client experience” and 'deliverying service'. The buyers will usually want to improve profitability and/or reduce costs to maximise the value from the deal, so this can often happen.
That's when many clients might try to leave that firm, and take their business elsewhere (that hopefully won't be bought-out the following years!!).
There's also the potential for a shift in culture. Where once your advisor or 'relationship manager' may have been focused solely on your financial wellbeing, there may now be sales targets, cross-selling strategies, and product incentives that muddy the waters. All in the interest of improving the outcome for the buying firm.
That's business.
We’re not saying every consolidation is bad. But we are saying this: investors should pay close attention when their adviser gets bought out and in subsequent years.
I do the same thing for our clients. For example, we frequently use a particular advised-platform for our clients invested assets. It offers us secure, reliable, cost effective custody and access to low-cost indices and holdings with a solid service level. It was bought by one of the country's/world's largest insurance companies, 5 years ago. I have been keeping a close eye since then to ensure that our clients are not disadvantaged in any way as a result. If anything, the level of over-sight and protection has gone up, with no changes to terms, so it has been a positive for clients.
Again, consolidation is not necessarily a negative for the 'client' - but keep an eye out!
This isn’t just about returns.
It’s about control, transparency, care and alignment.
With the wave of acquisitions, including Gillen Markets’ sale to Quilter Cheviot, clients may need to revisit some key questions:
When you work with an advisor, you deserve clarity on where their loyalties lie.
Are they aligned with your success, or beholden to their parent company’s targets?
If they are the former, then maybe all will be just fine, and the synergies they speak of are genuinely going to be a win-win for all!
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Paddy.
P.S. If you're wondering whether your portfolio is working hard enough for you – check out our latest piece on how active managers often underperform the market here. Or get in touch.
The content of this site including blogs and podcasts is for information purposes only. Everybody’s financial situation is different and the content we share on our site and through podcasts may not be applicable to you.
The articles, blogs and podcasts are not investment advice. They do not take account of your individual circumstances, including your knowledge and experience and attitude to risk. Informed Decisions can’t be held responsible for the consequences if you pursue a course of action based on the information we share
Informed Decisions are one of Ireland’s only remaining independent financial advice firms. We specialise in retirement & investment planning for successful individuals, so that our clients only have to retire once.
Privacy Policy | Cookies | Disclaimer