I85PREP
⌘ K
BSEC Authorized Representative study materials
BSEC Authorized Representative study resources

The Fund's Liquidity Squeeze and the NAV That Wasn't

BSEC Authorized Representative · Put your knowledge to work in context.

All case studies

The Fund's Liquidity Squeeze and the NAV That Wasn't

A BSEC-registered open-end mutual fund, Bright Future Growth Fund, holds 18% of its net assets in a single unlisted private company, Horizon Agro. The fund's prospectus caps unlisted securities at 10% of net assets. Horizon Agro has missed two profit projections and its auditor has flagged going-concern uncertainty. The fund manager, Tanvir, does not mark the holding down, arguing that "there is no market price, so we value it at cost." The fund's published NAV therefore shows a 9.2% year-to-date return. Redemptions have accelerated: BDT 400 million redeemed in the last month, against BDT 1.2 billion in net assets. To meet redemptions, Tanvir sells the fund's most liquid blue-chip holdings and, in two cases, pays redeeming investors using subscription money from new investors rather than from liquidated assets. A prospective investor, seeing the strong NAV, is about to invest BDT 3 million.

1. Identify the valuation, concentration, and disclosure breaches, and explain why the published NAV is misleading.

Read the worked answer

Concentration breach:

  • The prospectus caps unlisted securities at 10% of net assets; the fund holds 18% in Horizon Agro. This is a direct breach of the fund's own investment restrictions and of the diversification principle that protects unit holders.

Valuation breach:

  • "No market price, so value at cost" is not an acceptable valuation method. Unlisted holdings must be fair-valued using defensible methods (comparable transactions, discounted cash flow, independent appraisal), reviewed regularly.
  • Horizon Agro has missed projections and has a going-concern flag - objective evidence of impairment. Carrying it at cost overstates NAV.

Why the NAV is misleading:

  • The 9.2% YTD return is inflated by an overstated asset value. A prospective investor seeing that return is being induced to invest on a false picture.
  • The NAV also fails to reflect the liquidity mismatch: the fund is selling liquid blue chips to fund redemptions, degrading the remaining portfolio's quality while the illiquid 18% stays marked at cost.
  • The true NAV is materially lower than published.

Disclosure breach:

  • The fund has not disclosed the concentration breach, the valuation uncertainty, or the auditor's going-concern flag. Investors are entitled to accurate, timely NAV and portfolio disclosure.

2. Tanvir used new subscription money to pay redeeming investors. How should this be characterized, and what should BSEC do to protect the prospective investor and existing unit holders?

Read the worked answer

Characterization: paying redeeming investors with new subscription money rather than from liquidated assets is a liquidity-mismatch abuse - using incoming investor funds to cover outgoing obligations. It transfers risk to new investors, who buy into a fund whose assets are less liquid and less valuable than the NAV suggests. It is a serious breach of the duty to treat all unit holders fairly and to manage the fund in accordance with its stated liquidity profile.

Protection for the prospective investor:

  • The BDT 3 million investment should not proceed on the current NAV. BSEC should require suspension of new subscriptions until the NAV is restated, or require prominent disclosure of the valuation uncertainty and the concentration breach.
  • The investor must receive the corrected NAV and the auditor's going-concern disclosure before investing.

Protection for existing unit holders:

  1. Independent revaluation of Horizon Agro and restatement of NAV.
  2. Suspend redemptions or impose a gate if the fund cannot meet redemptions fairly; a suspension protects remaining investors from a run on liquid assets.
  3. Replace or supervise the fund manager pending investigation; Tanvir's valuation stance and payment practice are incompatible with his role.
  4. Restore compliance - bring the unlisted holding within the 10% cap over a defined period.
  5. Compensate investors harmed by the overstated NAV and the use of subscription money.
  6. Enforcement against the manager and the trustee/custodian for failing to detect the concentration and valuation breaches.

Principle: NAV integrity is the foundation of the fund regime; once it is compromised, the priority is to stop new money entering on a false price and to protect those already invested.