Structuring Routes
Core Comparison: AMC, Fund or Managed Account
Each route packages an investment strategy differently — changing what the investor owns, who they are exposed to, how far the product can be tailored and how quickly it can reach the market. None is right for every mandate. Orpheus does not advocate for any one approach.
| Feature | Actively Managed CertificateAMC | Managed FundUCITS, AIF, mutual fund or ETF | Managed AccountSegregated mandate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal Structure | A debt security (structured note) whose value is linked to an actively managed strategy | A pooled collective investment scheme with its own legal and regulatory framework | An individual portfolio governed by an investment management agreement |
| Asset Ownership | The investor owns a certificate issued by the issuer or SPV — not the underlying assets | The investor owns shares or units in the fund; the fund owns the assets | The investor directly owns the underlying securities |
| Counterparty Risk | YesExposure to the credit risk of the issuer, which may be mitigated where the structure is collateralised | LimitedAssets are typically ring-fenced and held by an independent depositary or custodian | LimitedAssets are held in the investor’s own brokerage or custody account |
| Customisation | Mandate-levelThe strategy can be bespoke, but terms are the same for every holder of the certificate | StandardisedIdentical terms for all shareholders within a share class | Very highTailored to the individual client’s tax, ESG or other requirements |
| Minimum Investment | MediumTypically set per certificate by the issuer and investor classification | Low to mediumRetail share classes can have very low minimums; institutional classes are higher | HighUsually suited to larger allocations, given the cost of a dedicated portfolio |
| Time to Market | FastOften weeks rather than months once all parties are aligned | SlowMonths or longer, depending on regulatory authorisation | Quick per clientOnce the management agreement and custody account are in place — repeated for each investor |
Why counterparty risk matters for an AMC. Because the investor holds a debt security rather than the assets themselves, the issuer’s creditworthiness and any collateral arrangements are part of the investment case. Orpheus addresses issuer selection and collateral questions as part of the structuring assessment.
This comparison is a general overview for discussion purposes. Actual minimums, timelines, costs and risk characteristics depend on the issuer, jurisdiction, investor classification, service providers and underlying assets. It is not investment, legal or tax advice.