Issue link: https://resources.envestnet.com/i/1541917
3 FOR HOME OFFICE AND ADVISOR USE ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO THE PUBLIC. Multiple Asset Classes While operations staff like UMAs for their ability to scale up to support hundreds of thousands of accounts, they add complexity to the billing process. In some cases, there are different billing approaches and fee schedules applied to individual equity positions that are part of an SMA versus income-generating assets such as fixed income or real estate. Tracking these differences within a single billing routine can be a complicated process. Cash Movements Across Sleeves A best-of-breed UMA billing system must be able to capture sleeve level cash flows to ensure that manager payments are correct. This includes deposits, withdrawals, dividends, interest and cash movements due to portfolio rebalancing. Multiple Third-Party Managers Any UMA billing system needs to support separate fee schedules for each money manager on the platform, to calculate fees and return the analysis of how the fees were calculated. But it is not uncommon for even the largest sponsor programs to have some manual steps in the middle of their billing processes, which can lead to miscommunications and errors. UMA sponsors should provide a high level of transparency in their UMA sleeve billing so their investment managers can easily identify billing discrepancies. This includes both underpayment and overpayment of managers. Why is UMA Billing so Complex? Along with all of the positive features of UMAs comes a potential negative — the complexity of the billing process. There are a number of underlying reasons behind this. █████████████████ Ì20000F904;Î