Q & A Database

The GIPS Standards Q&A database contains questions and answers (Q&As) on various searchable topics that provide additional interpretation on an issue. Q&As are considered to be authoritative guidance and must be followed in order to claim compliance with the GIPS standards.

Content from prior Q&As was included in the GIPS Standards Handbook as much as possible and many Q&As were archived. Change the Status drop-down filter to "Archived" to see the archived Q&As.

The GIPS Standards Helpdesk is available for individual questions and typically responds to inquiries within 3 business days.

Search by category, status, date range, and/or keyword.

Category

Advertising Aggregate Method Alternative Investments Asset Owner Assimilating Assets Benchmarks Calculation Methodology Carve-Outs Cash Cash Flow Changes to the Standards: 2006 GIPS Client Reporting Client Updates Composite Calculations Composite Changes Composite Construction Consultant Questionnaires Corrections to the 2006 GIPS standards Creation Date Currency Definition of the Firm Disclosures Discretion Dispersion Early Adoption Effective Dates Error Correction Fees FINRA Firm Assets Firm Notification Requirement Fixed Income Fundamentals of Compliance General/Miscellaneous GIPS Reports GIPS® Trademark Guidelines Inception Date Incubator Funds Information Outside of GIPS Reports Leverage/Derivatives List of Composite Descriptions Lists of Composites and Pooled Funds Minimum Asset Level Model Results New Portfolios/Accounts Non-fee-paying Portfolios Overlay Strategies Partial Period Returns Performance Examinations Performance History/Track Record Pooled Funds Portability Private Equity Providing GIPS Reports Real Estate Recordkeeping Risk Securities Lending Sub-Advised Assets Sub-Advisors Supplemental/Additional Information Terminated Portfolios Total Asset Owner Assets Total Fund Definition Trade-Date Accounting Valuation Verification Wrap Fee Portfolios

Status

Organization Type

Effective

Keyword

1 Result

Archived

Effective: 1 June, 2010 - 31 October, 2012

Categories: Cash Flow

Source: GIPS Executive Committee

We are in the process of establishing our significant cash flow and large cash flow levels for each composite. We understand that establishing a significant cash flow policy is optional whereas for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2010, firms must define the level of large cash flow for each composite to determine when portfolios in a composite must be valued. Can the level used to define large cash flows and significant cash flows be the same? If not, does the level established for significant cash flows need to be greater than the level used for large cash flows?

The GIPS standards define large cash flow as the level at which the firm determines that an external cash flow may distort performance if the portfolio is not valued. Firms must define large cash flow levels for each composite to determine when portfolios in that composite must be valued. Portfolios that experience a large cash flow remain in the composite. The determination of the large cash flow level may be influenced by a variety of factors such as the nature of the strategy, historical and expected volatility of the strategy, and the targeted cash level of the strategy.

The GIPS standards define a significant cash flow as the level at which the firm determines that a client-directed external cash flow may temporarily prevent the firm from implementing the composite strategy, thereby causing the portfolio to no longer be representative of the composite strategy. Firms that choose to adopt a significant cash flow policy for certain composites must define the significant cash flow level on a composite-specific basis. Portfolios that subsequently experience a significant cash flow are then temporarily removed from the composite. The determination of the significant cash flow level may be influenced by a variety of factors such as market liquidity and by the trading capabilities of the investment manager.

It is not expected that the level used to define large cash flows and significant cash flows will be the same. It is expected that the level used to define large cash flows will be less than the level established for significant cash flows, as the cash flow amount that would cause a portfolio to need to be valued because performance may be distorted typically does not rise to the level that disrupts the implementation of the investment strategy.

Please also see updated Q&A