The performance of subadvised funds versus those managed in-house is a mixed bag, according to Lipper. Only municipal bond subadvised funds consistently outperformed their in-house counterparts in the one-, three- and five-year periods.

Although higher expenses for subadvised funds are partly to blame, farming out the management of funds makes for good business, according to Lipper, since a subadvised arrangement almost always leads to more assets under management. While subadvised funds typically offer breakpoint discounts, thereby lowering the profit spread of fund companies, the benefits of the new assets far outweigh the lower margins, according to Lipper.

Subscribe Now

Access to premium content including in-depth coverage of mutual funds, hedge funds, 401(K)s, 529 plans, and more.

3-Week Free Trial

Insight and analysis into the management, marketing, operations and technology of the asset management industry.