Annual report on LuxFLAG labelled MIVs€¦ · MIVs as it has been annually scrutinised by a panel...
Transcript of Annual report on LuxFLAG labelled MIVs€¦ · MIVs as it has been annually scrutinised by a panel...
Annual report on LuxFLAG labelled MIVs
IV Edition – July 2012
2
About LuxFLAG - Luxembourg Fund Labelling Agency
LuxFLAG is an independent and neutral, non-for-profit association created in
Luxembourg in 2006. LuxFLAG supports the financing of sustainable development
by providing clarity for investors through awarding Labels. Its objective is to reassure
investors that the labelled MIV/EIV actually invests, directly or indirectly, in the
microfinance/environment sector. The MIV/EIV may be domiciled in any jurisdiction
that is subject to a level of national supervision equivalent to that available in
European Union countries.
LuxFLAG - Luxembourg Fund Labelling Agency
12, Rue Erasme, L-1468 Luxembourg
B.P. 206, L-2010 Luxembourg
Tel: +352 22 30 26 - 1 Fax: +352 22 30 93
E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.luxflag.org
3
Preface
LuxFLAG labelled MIVs Performance Report has now reached its fourth edition.
During the past years we have witnessed several changes in the Microfinance
industry. This period has been characterised by substantial growth in terms of
volume and outreach, turmoil due to the public relations issues and more recently a
dose of optimism towards the future. In this context MIVs have played an important
role in terms of standardising their operational processes as well as efficiently
communicating on their business. On the other side LuxFLAG has played an
important role in building confidence among the investor community by promoting
transparency through its LuxFLAG Microfinance Label. Its main objective is to
reassure investors that the labelled MIVs invest directly or indirectly, in the
Microfinance sector. The LuxFLAG Microfinance Label also gives credibility to the
MIVs as it has been annually scrutinised by a panel of independent experts against
internationally recognised standards in the Microfinance sector, and that it
demonstrates an actual commitment to the “double bottom line” approach by
providing financial as well as social returns from the investments. Through this
report, we have tried to encompass the current issues related to the Microfinance
industry, in specific to the 24 LuxFLAG labelled MIVs.
4
Table of contents
pageI. Introduction
1. Microfinance 52. Evolution of Microfinance industry 63. Microfinance Investment Vehicles 64. Microfinance crisis in Andhra Pradesh 8
II. Performance of LuxFLAG Labelled MIVs
1. Financial section
1.1 Introduction 101.2 Regional distribution 101.3 Total Assets and Microfinance Portfolio 111.4 Liquidity 141.5 Foreign Exchange Risk 161.6 Portfolio at Risk (PAR) 171.7 Net Asset Value (NAV) 181.8 Conclusion 20
2. Social section
2.1 Importance of Social Performance from the investors’ perspective 212.2 Industry initiatives 222.3 MFIs’ Social Performance 262.4 Initiatives pursued by LuxFLAG 27
III. Conclusion 28IV. Bibliography 31V. Information sources 33VI. Acronyms 34VII. Glossary 35VIII. Appendices
1. Eligibility criteria 372. Luminis press release 383. Funds’ cards 39
4. LuxFAG labelled MIVs overview 63
5
I. Introduction
1. Microfinance
Conceived in the initial years as a popular instrument to assist poor people in
developing countries by providing financial services, the Microfinance industry has
seen exponential growth unprecedented for a sector which was seen as a mere
philanthropic activity only a couple of decades ago. The Microfinance sector now
provides a wide range of financial services to millions of people, in particular in the
developing countries.
It has been creating a measurable social impact by helping to democratise access to
financial services to poor people in developing countries, resulting in a promising
step towards the alleviation from poverty. By offering a stable financial return with a
very low correlation to financial markets, in recent years the Microfinance industry
has positioned itself as an alternative asset class for commercial investors.
As of December 2011, the Microfinance Information eXchange (MIX) reports two
thousand Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) with more than 92 m of borrowers and 80
m savers, with a total asset volume of approximately 70 bn USD. These numbers are
growing by 20% per year, even more in some countries.
The Microfinance industry is mainly financed by the commercial Microfinance
Investment Vehicles (MIVs), International Development Finance Institutions (DFIs)
and local commercial banks in several countries.
Nevertheless, in recent years, the Microfinance sector faced severe criticisms due to
its commercialisation, considerably high financial returns, suspicious lending
practices, weak corporate governance and a possible mission drift from the double
bottom line approach in investments. This being said, the Microfinance industry has
reached to a turning point where the action plan for the future of microfinance
business is on a higher priority than tackling the issue of the impact of the global
financial crisis on the Microfinance industry.
Microfinance in figures
‐ Total population living under 2 USD/day: 2.7 bn*
‐ Total estimated potential customers: 1.5 bn*
‐ Total estimated Microfinance loans outstanding: 65 USD bn*
‐ Estimated funding gap: 235 USD bn*
6
‐ Total number of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs): approximately 4500
‐ Total number of Microfinance Investment Vehicles (MIVs): approximately 125
*source: IAMFI (2011)
2. Evolution of Microfinance
If on the one side the demand for Microcredit is growing more and more, on the other
side the range of other financial services provided by the Microfinance are
increasing, in order to create a more customised approach.
It is possible to group these services into two main categories:
‐ financial (microcredit, microinsurance, money transfers, savings, remittances,
etc.);
‐ non-financial (skill building trainings, technical assistance for small and
medium enterprises, counselling, education, health services, etc.).
It could be interesting to focus in particular on microinsurance and remittances.
Microinsurance is a quite diversified sector itself. It includes: life insurance, health
insurance, crop insurance, livestock insurance, Islamic insurance (takaful), etc.
which are all in a way, need for an micro-entrepreneur.
Remittances represent a more recent segment for Microfinance actors. Lately, some
MFIs have entered into arrangements with companies specialised in remittances in
order to facilitate the remittance payments in remote areas through their sale points.
Remittances can be an important source of income for poor households, especially
for the most vulnerable ones. While international remittances and domestic money
transfer services are generally accessible to urban clients, they are increasingly
expanding into rural areas. There are still important issues regarding remittances
sent to rural areas, such as the cost, safety and speed of transfer. Nonetheless they
may offer to MFIs a mean to expand their services, source of income and outreach.
3. Microfinance Investment Vehicles
Microfinance Investment Vehicles (MIVs) appeared in the 1990s and since then, by
making the sector accessible to private investors, they have managed to
substantially increase the available funds. However, amounts are still limited and
7
financial exclusion consequently remains high: in developing countries a more
democratic access to financial services is still a long way off.
Microfinance Investment Vehicles (MIVs) invest both public and private investors’
money in Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) or in other MIVs. The variety of missions,
structures and investment strategies of MIVs (debt, equity, guarantees) grants a
wide range of investment options, allowing investors to choose depending on their
profile and targets. Moreover, the development of MIVs and their increasing
specialisation are attracting an increasing number of institutional investors.
Since the beginning, MIVs has succeeded to achieve good financial returns due to
the stability of interest rates for loans to MFIs. The repayment rate is close to 100%
also indicates the funds have almost no investment losses. Finally, the absence of a
secondary market ensures that the value of the debt, recorded at its historical cost,
remains stable. These factors make it clear why the SMX (Symbiotics Microfinance
indeX, used to track Microfinance debt) is stable, in particular in 2008, while in the
same period the JP Morgan EMBI (Emerging Markets Bond Index, tracing the yields
of debt instruments exchanged on emerging markets) fell by 11%.
Source: Syminvest Source: ForexBlog
On the other hand, the small decline in yields during the beginning of 2009 shows
that MIVs’ performance was affected by the financial crisis. In the beginning of 2009
the high volatility in exchange rates increased foreign exchange hedging costs and
generated losses for the MIVs which had invested in local currencies. At the same
time, there was a fall in demand for financing from MFIs which had anticipated a
8
slowdown in their activities. The resulting rise in liquidities brought down MIVs’
yields.
The following chart shows the trend of MFIs’ Portfolio yields.
Source: Syminvest website
4. Microfinance crisis in Andhra Pradesh
The Microfinance sector in Andhra Pradesh (a state in India) witnessed series of
unfortunate events in fall 2010. After the news of number of micro borrowers
committing suicide due to over indebtedness and bad recovery mechanism used by
the field staff of MFIs, the local government in Andhra Pradesh introduced stringent
regulations for the microfinance sector. This resulted in immediate reaction by
commercial banks in turning off the funding tap for MFIs and by micro borrowers by
abandoning the repayments to MFIs.
Local commercial banks are one of the major sources of funding for MFIs in India.
The Reserve Bank (Central Bank) requires that public and private-sector banks
provide as much as 40% of their net credit to so-called priority sectors, which include
micro-enterprises and excluded sections of society. Of that, 18% must go to
agricultural sectors. This has been hard for banks to deliver on, but pushing their
own loans through microfinance institutions could help them reach those targets.
This approach of local commercial banks encouraged MFIs to exponential growths
leading to over indebtedness in several regions.
9
Subsequent to the Andhra Pradesh ordinance, in January 2011 the Reserve Bank of
India (RBI) - Malegam Committee came out with a recommendation list which gave a
positive direction to resolve this issue. In May 2011, RBI issued the much awaited
guidelines1 - based on the Malegam Committee’s recommendations - on the
Microfinance sector. The guidelines have come positively in favour of MFIs and have
given the much needed legitimacy to the MFI sector.
An analysis of the Indian Microfinance industry was conducted by MIX (2011), which
presents data on over 90 Indian MFIs in order to understand the impact of the crisis
on the whole sector.
The overall result is that there was portfolio quality deterioration in the Microfinance
market through March 2011, and a decline for a smaller group of institutions
reporting data through June 2011. Moreover, MIX forecasts that growth in the region
will remain slow or in decline for some time. The impact of the Andhra crisis is clearly
evident as the positive growth, experienced until March 2011 in states outside AP,
turns into a decline during the following quarter.
The following chart shows the LuxFLAG labelled MIVs which do invest in India.
MIV Amount invested As of
Azure Global Microfinance Fund (FoF) Indirectly investing
Dexia Micro‐Credit Fund 12.275.399 Dec 2011
responsAbility Global Microfinance 18.772.174 Dec 2011
responsAbility Microfinance Leaders 10.747.420 Jun 2011
responsAbility Mikrofinanz‐Fonds 4.931.003 Jun 2011
Rural Impulse Fund 1.485.047 Dec 2011
Rural Impulse Fund II 6.499.827 Dec 2011
Triodos Microfinance Fund 2.364.647 Jun 2011 Note: all figures are expressed in USD
Source: LuxFLAG applications + MIX Market
1 All bank loans to MFIs would be treated as priority sector lending, if the requirements to be considered qualifying assets are fulfilled (household income limit, loan amount cap, total indebtedness, loan term, repayment frequency, interest rate cap, margin cap, etc.).
10
II. Performance of LuxFLAG labelled MIVs
1. Financial section
1.1 Introduction
The following section of the survey focuses more on LuxFLAG labelled MIVs. Thus
we analyse a total of 24 MIVs through the period December 2008 - December 2011,
considering figures at six-month intervals in order to offer a more detailed insight.
In particular we report the evolution of Total Assets, Microfinance Portfolio, Liquidity
and Net Asset Value.
It is important to notice that, given the lack of standardisation in MIV reporting, cross
comparison of fund figures are difficult. Hence we limit our analysis to the trend of
each fund, without cross evaluation.
1.2 Regional distribution
As it is evident from the following chart, continuing the trend from previous years
Eastern Europe & Central Asia (40%), and Latin America & Caribbean (35%) regions
cover significant part of the Microfinance Portfolio of MIVs.
Compared to our past year survey, there has been no substantial change in the
distribution: Europe & Central Asia (38%), Latin America & Caribbean (35%), East
Asia & Pacific (8%), South Asia (7%), North America (excluding Mexico) & Others
(6%), Sub-Saharan Africa (5%), Middle East & North Africa (1%).
Source: Syminvest website (data as of 2011)
40%
35%
9%
9%
2% 5%
Eastern Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
South Asia
Middle East and North Africa
Sub‐Saharan Africa
11
Whereas, the MFIs’ regional breakdown is shown in the following chart.
Source: Syminvest website (chart as of 2011)
1.3 Total Assets and Microfinance Portfolio
The following chart shows the growth trends in amount of Total Assets and
Microfinance Portfolio for the MIVs domiciled in Luxembourg. As we can observe,
there are some turning points.
‐ The rapid growth of Microfinance investment seen in the past years took a hit
in 2008 as the financial crisis started ramping up and investors became
cautious, questioning the resilience of Microfinance against the global
financial market;
‐ in 2009 there was a new negative trend, that can be explained by two main
factors: MIVs had to build loan loss provisions to cover potential defaults in
distressed markets, and currency volatility increased MIVs’ costs of hedging
foreign exchange risk;
‐ in 2010 another negative event left its mark on the Microfinance sector: the
crisis in Andhra Pradesh (India).
Nonetheless, according to CGAP, this negative tendency has been counteracted
thanks to new investment approaches, such as expanding to new markets (in
particular Africa and Asia), funding in local currency, taking equity positions, reaching
beyond the top tier of MFIs (MicroCapital Monitor, 2001) and improved risk
management processes. Indeed the chart shows a quite stable growth from 2011
onwards.
42%
40%
8%
6%
2% 2%
Eastern Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Sub‐Saharan Africa
South Asia
Middle East and North Africa
12
Source: Syminvest website
The two following tables depict the evolution of Total Asset and Microfinance
Portfolio of LuxFLAG labelled MIVs for the period 2008-2011.
MIV Dec
2008Jun
2009Dec
2009Jun
2010 Dec
2010 Jun
2011Dec
2011Access Africa Fund 2,8 6,7Dexia Micro‐Credit Fund 428,6 510,7 524,4 481,3 528,5 516,1 394,4Dual Return - Vision Microfinance 113,7 123,3 119,4 99,3 132,3 119,7 113,1
Dual Return Fund ‐ Vision Microfinance Local Currency 16,0 30,1 32,2Etimos Fund 4,8European Fund for Southeast Europe 790,5 870,8 912,0 748,2 911,2 1.036,2 1.033,7FEFISOL 8,0
Finethic Microfinance 51,3 67,0 68,1 68,0 KCD Mikrofinanzfonds ‐ I 27,9 26,6 47,3 51,0 KCD Mikrofinanzfonds ‐ II 15,6 17,9 22,0 22,3
Luxembourg Microfinance and Development Fund 7,8 8,0 9,0 11,7 12,6
Microfinance Enhancement Facility 56,0 123,6 131,1 134,9 163,3 222,0
Regional MSME Investment Fund 22,4 26,1 60,8
responsAbility Global Microfinance Fund 377,9 423,3 489,4 469,2 498,3 532,9 542,0
responsAbility Microfinance Leaders 200,8 176,2 166,6 145,8 170,8 158,7 147,1
responsAbility Mikrofinanz‐Fonds 74,5 148,6 146,7 141,1 136,6 167,9 165,5
Rural Impulse Fund 33,4 34,0 36,2 38,0 38,3 40,2Rural Impulse Fund II 19,4 53,3Selectum Microfinance 36,3 46,2 Triodos Microfinance Fund 36,9 52,7 56,8 82,4 82,7 117
13
Wallberg Global Microfinance Fund 12,0 20,7 40,6 49,6 52,1 40,9 33,4
Sep
2008Mar
2009Sept 2009
Mar 2010
Sept 2010
Mar 2011
Sept 2011
Advans 13,1 13,1 22,4 23,5 31,30 33,3 Azure Global Microfinance Fund 3,1(Oct)
responsAbility Financial Inclusion 42,0Note: all figures are expressed in USD
Source: LuxFLAG applications + Syminvest
MIV Dec
2008Jun
2009Dec
2009Jun
2010 Dec
2010 Jun
2011Dec
2011Access Africa Fund 2,5 5,3Dexia Micro‐Credit Fund 352,9 367,7 384,5 375,4 439,0 464,5 355,5Dual Return - Vision Microfinance 82,4 98,9 101,4 84,1 99,0 86,3 93,7
Dual Return Fund ‐ Vision Microfinance Local Currency 9,6 23,2 25,0Etimos Fund 4,5European Fund for Southeast Europe 403,5 435,7 429,8 336,2 484,3 455,8 568,2FEFISOL 4,4
Finethic Microfinance 61,3 62,3 KCD Mikrofinanzfonds ‐ I 21,8 42,9 46,7 KCD Mikrofinanzfonds ‐ II 15,6 18,1 19,6
Luxembourg Microfinance and Development Fund 1,2 3,1 5,5 5,7 8,7
Microfinance Enhancement Facility 30,3 87,5 85,0 90,2 130,1
Regional MSME Investment Fund 16,2 22,6 43,4
responsAbility Global Microfinance Fund 285,9 317,8 338,5 349,3 385,3 429,8 436,1
responsAbility Microfinance Leaders 157,9 149,7 138,3 115,5 131,9 134,8 121,5
responsAbility Mikrofinanz‐Fonds 62,1 89,6 102,9 106,8 123,3 124,3 122,1
Rural Impulse Fund 32,9 32,7 33,8 34,2 33,3 38,8
Rural Impulse Fund II 13 46,2Selectum Microfinance 42,0 Triodos Microfinance Fund 12,5 31,7 51,2 67,9 83,7 92,1Wallberg Global Microfinance Fund 10,4 17,5 29,8 39,4 44,6 32,6 31,1
Sep
2008Mar
2009Sept 2009
Mar 2010
Sept 2010
Mar 2011
Sept 2011
Advans 8,9 9,6 13,9 19,4 24,4 29,3 Azure Global Microfinance Fund 2,7(Oct)
responsAbility Financial Inclusion 27,7Note: all figures are expressed in USD
Source: LuxFLAG applications + Syminvest
14
1.4 Liquidity
“Investors’ earlier concerns with liquidity and funding have eased with the passing of
the crisis”2. Ranked as the second biggest risk in 2010, liquidity risk appears at the
16th rank in 2011 according to the “Microfinance Banana Skins” Two years ago, the
main threat posed by excessive liquidity was that it could push some MIVs into
relaxing lending standards. Fortunately, more MIVs are now increasingly demanding
with the Social Performance of MFIs.
A company's liquidity is its ability to meet its near-term obligations, and it is a major
benchmark of financial health. Liquidity can be measured through several ratios, the
most used ones are current and quick ratio. The current ratio is the most commonly
used. It estimates a company's ability to meet its short-term liabilities with its short-
term assets. A current ratio greater than or equal to one signifies that current assets
should be able to satisfy near-term obligations. A current ratio of less than one
means that the firm might have liquidity issues. The quick ratio is a more valid
instrument to test liquidity. It eliminates certain current assets such as inventory and
prepaid expenses that may be more difficult to convert into cash. Like the current
ratio, having a quick ratio above one means that a company should have no or little
problem with liquidity. The higher the ratio, the more liquid it is, and the better able
the company will be to ride out any downturn in its business. It is, nonetheless,
important to underline that excess of liquidity can be tricky as well.
Liquidity is no longer a concern in the Microfinance industry as it used to be in the
wake of the financial crisis. However, even today, availability of liquidity depends on
region and maturity of the financial institutions.
As well, many markets were flooded with high liquidity and availability of funding
which some experts say led into over indebted MFIs resulting in over indebted
clients.
In general current and quick (excluding share capital and retained earnings) ratios
are helpful.
2 CSFI (2011). “Microfinance Banana Skins. The CSFI Survey of Microfinance Risk”.
15
Additionally, in LuxFLAG labelled MIVs since 2008 the cash buffer is stable - if not
reduced - over the years. It will also justify the growth in number of investees or
volume of investments.
Liquidity risk is diminishing. There is enough liquidity in the market after the crisis
(capital generating from several sources), not all MFIs have access to this liquidity,
but just the most efficient and mature ones.
In several jurisdictions, the regulatory requirements of cash reserves at the central
bank result in reducing the percentage of Microfinance Portfolio with respect to Total
Assets.
As described in the 2010 report:
‐ liquidity constraints increased drastically in 2009 due to the effects of the
global financial and economic crises on the Microfinance environment.
Indeed, small and medium MFIs were struggling a lot with liquidity issues,
especially those which didn’t mobilize savings;
‐ in 2010 liquidity levels in the Microfinance industry reached new highs. Indeed
most funds increased their provisions to protect themselves against a
potential liquidity risk. Even though this measure was taken on a temporary
basis, it had a real impact on the whole industry.
In 2011 the proportion of liquidity in Total Assets decreases thanks to better
forecasts on the future economic context.
16
1.5 Foreign Exchange Risk
“Within the frame of financial risks, particular attention is given to exchange rate
fluctuations and to issues dealing with measurement and analysis of qualitative as
well as quantitative aspects of foreign exchange risks affecting nonfinancial firms
and chiefly those extensively involved in international activities. The focus then shifts
to the assessment of foreign currency risk exposure by the firm as well as to
managing foreign exchange risks and to the instruments and techniques involved”3.
As there is substantial demand from the market, several Microfinance Investment
Vehicles (MIVs) have started offering loans to MFIs in local currencies in many
jurisdictions. This results in creating the so-called foreign exchange risk for them,
defined as the potential loss - or gain - due to exchange rate variations between two
currencies. If not properly managed, this risk can result in losses. In addition to the
risk of rate changing, foreign exchange risk includes also the danger that carrying
the currency transactions becomes unfeasible because of market disruptions or
government interventions.
To overcome the foreign exchange risks, hedging options are available in the
market, however often as an expensive option with limited choice.
It appears to be consensus that foreign exchange risk represents a potential threat to
the sustainability of MIVs. Experiences with foreign exchange crises have highlighted
the vulnerability and potential for disruption in operations in un-hedged local
currency. Foreign exchange risk is an issue that needs to be addressed in order to
guarantee the stability of the Microfinance sector.
3 Mauri, A. & Baicu, C.G. (2007). “General Remarks on the Assessment of Foreign Exchange Risk Exposure of Firms”. Analele Universităţii Spiru Haret, Seria Economie (7).
17
1.6 Portfolio at Risk (PAR)
Portfolio at Risk is the most important and popular performance indicator widely used
by Microfinance practitioners. It is “The value of all loans outstanding that have one
or more instalments of principal past due more than a certain number of days. This
item includes the entire unpaid principal balance, including both past-due and future
instalments, but not accrued interest. It also does not include loans that have been
restructured or rescheduled. Portfolio at Risk is usually divided into categories
according to the amount of time passed since the first missing principle”4.
PAR > 30 is a the most commonly used indicator.
As we can see from the chart below, PAR 30 (the portion of the portfolio whose
payments are more than 30 days past due - note that PAR 30 above 5 or 10% is a
sign of trouble in Microfinance) does remain at acceptable levels, and it is most of
the times well below that of classic banks. This means that MFIs remain self-
sufficient from an operational and financial point of view and their profitability
remains positive. Thanks to amelioration in governance systems, they have been
able to face the crisis and adapt their activities. They are tightening their loan
policies, focusing on less risky products and reviewing their business plan in order to
optimise the management of their liquidities.
4 CGAP (2003). “Microfinance Consensus Guidelines. Definitions of Selected Financial Terms, Ratios, and Adjustments for Microfinance”.
18
Source: Syminvest website (February 2012)
1.7 Net Asset Value (NAV)
The Net Asset Value (NAV) correspond to the per-share amount of the fund,
calculated by dividing the total value of all the securities in its portfolio, less any
liabilities, by the number of fund shares outstanding.
In the table hereafter we show the NAV evolution of LuxFLAG labelled MIVs. Funds
may have several share classes, depending on the number of sub-funds, minimum
investment amount and currency.
MIV Sub-fund Dec 2008
Jun 2009
Dec 2009
Jun 2010
Dec 2010
Jun 2011
Dec 2011
Access Africa Fund
Advans
Azure Global Microfinance Fund A ($) 1.032
B (CHF) 983
C (€) 1.000
Dexia Micro‐Credit Fund CHF Cap (CHF) 11.926 12.119 12.163 12.188 12.284 12.242 12.235
EUR Cap (€) 12.666 12.923 12.994 13.023 13.161 13.150 13.259
USD Cap ($) 16.450 16.801 16.895 16.936 17.125 17.100 17.182
Dual Return - Vision Microfinance A EUR Dis (€) 100 102
B EUR Dis (€) 100 103
I CHF Cap (€)
I EUR Cap (€) 1.078 1.102 1.121 1.146 1.150 1.155 120
I USD Cap ($) 100
P CHF Cap
P EUR Cap (€) 1100 1114
P USD Cap ($)
Dual Return Fund ‐ Vision A €D (€) 97
Microfinance Local Currency B €D (€)
I $C ($) 104 105
I €C (€) 105 104 103
P €C (€) 106 104 102
P CHF Cap (CHF) 1.043
P EUR Cap (€) 1.093 1.114 1.130 1.151 1.116 116 120
Etimos Fund (€) 1.007 1.027
European Fund for Southeast Europe
Class A (€)
Class B (€)
Class C (€)
100,000 25,000
vv.
100,000 25,000
vv.
FEFISOL (€) 93
Finethic Microfinance C1 ($) 1276 1303
H3 (CHF) 1.349 1.237
S1 ($) 986 984
KCD Mikrofinanzfonds ‐ I (€) 100 102 103 104 103 108
19
KCD Mikrofinanzfonds ‐ II ($) 102 104 104 106 105 107
Luxembourg Microfinance and Class A (€) 25 25 24 24
Development Fund Class B (€) 101 101 99 99
Class C (€) 101 101 101 101
Microfinance Enhancement Facility ($) 99.582 100.000 100.000 100.000 100.000 100.000
Regional MSME Investment Fund A Dis
B Dis
C Dis
responsAbility Financial Inclusion
responsAbility Global Microfinance Fund CHF Cap (CHF) 112 112 112 113 114 115 117
EUR Cap (€) 119 120 121 121 122 124 128
USD Cap ($) 127 128 128 129 130 133 136
responsAbility Microfinance Leaders I USD C ($) 101 103 104
S CHF C (CHF) 101 102 102
S EUR C (€) 102 103
responsAbility Mikrofinanz‐Fonds A Dis (€) 106 103 104 101 103 103 103
Rural Impulse Fund ($) 100 106 134 137 144 145 155
Rural Impulse Fund II A Dis (€)
B Dis (€)
Selectum Microfinance B1 (€) 10.037
B2 (€) 1.007
Triodos Microfinance Fund B Cap (€) 25 25 26 26 26 27
B Dis (€) 25 25 25 26 25 26
I Cap (€) 25 25 26 26 27 28
I Dis (€) 25 25 25 26 25 27
KB Cap (€) 24 23 22 25
KB Dis (GBP) 19 20 20 21
KI Cap (GBP) 20 20 21 21 21 22
KI Dis (GBP) 20 20 20 21 19 20
KR Cap (GBP) 20 20 21
KR Dis (GBP) 20 20 20 21 19 20
R Cap (€) 25 25 25 26 26 27
R Dis (€) 25 25 25 26 25 26
Wallberg Global Microfinance Fund I Dis (€) 998 1.024 1.044 1.002 1.026 1.016 1.037
P Cap (€) 100 102 104 104 107 107 110
Source: LuxFLAG applications + Finesti
20
1.8 Conclusion
This analysis shows some clear elements:
‐ Eastern Europe & Central Asia together with Latin America & Caribbean
regions cover a significant part of the Microfinance Portfolio of MIVs;
‐ the negative tendency experienced in particular in 2010 has been
counteracted thanks to new investment approaches, funding in local currency,
taking equity positions, reaching beyond the top tier of MFIs, and improved
risk management processes;
‐ liquidity is no longer a concern in Microfinance industry;
‐ foreign exchange risk is an issue that needs to be addressed in order to
guarantee the stability of the Microfinance sector;
‐ MFIs remain self-sufficient from an operational and financial point of view and
their profitability remains positive (as shown by PAR 30);
‐ NAV evolution for LuXFLAG labelled MIVs is quite constant over time.
21
2. Social section
2.1 Importance of Social Performance from the investors’ perspective
While Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) continue their crusade for more accessible
and affordable financing, little information is freely available to the public regarding
the due diligence required when evaluating Microfinance Investment Vehicles
(MIVs).
The main challenge in this sense is to design a common model allowing all types of
investors (institutional, private, other MIVs, etc.) to standardise the level of due
diligence, thus being able to make informed investment decisions in meeting both
social and financial goals while achieving rational and sustainable industry growth.
When examining an MIV from an investor’s perspective, the main issues are:
‐ management and ownership structure
‐ investment strategy, philosophy and process
‐ risk management process and controls
‐ operations
‐ investment returns
‐ structural issues
Thus, the first investigation has to do with the people who are involved in the MIV.
Essentially, this means looking at all the key actors: general partners, owners (with
their backing and reputation), fund managers (with their experience in the sector and
track record within the asset class), investment committee members.
Afterwards, it is important to consider the investment strategy, philosophy and
process in order to assess whether the MIV’s due diligence process is solid and
extensive. In particular, the things which matter are the portfolio (structure,
management and goals), the geographic diversification and the due diligence
process - as mentioned above.
As well, risk management processes and controls, credit evaluation process, country
risk, regulatory risk, Foreign Exchange Risk management and liquidity management
are all of fundamental importance.
Moreover, it is substantial to look at the operations of an MIV, at the kind of back
office support it has, at the accounting and reporting procedures, at who is
22
responsible for valuing the portfolio, by what method they are valuing the portfolio,
the regularity of reports sent to investors (and their contents).
Doubtlessly, potential investors consider returns, the historical performance of the
MIV and the robustness of the return model behind the fund. It is important to
underline that they do not take return forecasts at face value, but at the fair value.
Of course, there are also structural issues that come up with an MIV: namely
conflicts of interest, fee structures and other related aspects.
2.2 Industry initiatives
There are several initiatives encouraging responsible practices in Microfinance. The
main ones can be listed as it follows.
‐ Smart Campaign Client Protection Principles: appropriate product design and
delivery, prevention of over-indebtedness, transparency, responsible pricing,
fair and respectful treatment of clients, privacy of client data, mechanisms for
complaint resolution
‐ Social Performance Task Force: engaged with microfinance stakeholders to
develop, disseminate and promote standards and good practices for social
performance management and reporting
‐ GIIN Impact Reporting and Investment Standards: it developed a standard set
of performance measures for describing social and environmental
performance that facilitates comparisons of impact data across investments.
‐ Principles for Investors in Inclusive Finance: to ensure that financial access is
provided in a healthy and responsible manner (range of services, client
protection, fair treatment, responsible investment, transparency, balanced
returns, standards)
‐ CERISE Social Performance Indicator: to target the poor and the excluded,
adapt services and products to the target clientele, improving clients’ social
and political capital, maximizing the MFI’s social responsibility
This kind of initiatives also makes it possible to implement rating systems which
assess the social performance of MFIs. It is, therefore, possible to make an
investment choice based on social criteria as well.
23
In this context, it is worth to underline that the majority of LuxFLAG labelled MIVs
have developed their own Due Diligence Tools, based on the recommendations
provided by the initiatives mentioned above. The most interesting ones are listed
here below.
‐ Access Africa Fund: CARE'S Consumer Protection Code of Conduct in
Microfinance, meant to protect the rights of clients and partners, ensuring that
they are treated with dignity and respect, and that they are provided with the
best quality products and services. The principles are: to promote
empowerment, to work with partners, to ensure accountability and promote
responsibility, to address discrimination, to promote the nonviolent resolution
of conflicts, to seek sustainable results.
‐ Dexia Micro-Credit Fund: SPIRIT (Social Performance, Impact Reporting &
Intelligence Tool). It differentiates between SP and Social Impact, and SP
management at the MIV and MFI level. It measures MFIs’ Social Performance
along 5 dimensions (look at the box below). Using the information collected
through it, the staff also conducts some econometric analysis to explore the
relationship between financial and social performance.
‐ Dual Return - Vision Microfinance (both funds): Symbiotics’ MFI Social
Responsibility Report. It shows the extent to which an MFI contributes to
sustainable socio-economic development and acts responsibly towards all its
various stakeholders. It considers 7 dimensions (social governance, labour
climate, financial inclusion, client protection, product quality, community
engagement, environmental policy).
‐ Finethic Microfinance: Symbiotics’ MFI Social Responsibility Report (see
above).
‐ Fonds Européen de Financement Solidaire: Social and Environmental
Management System (SEMS), which includes 4 approaches (transparent
reporting to governance bodies and to microfinance networks, and being
signatory to leading microfinance consumer protection and S&E initiatives;
monitoring the company’s strategic objectives; target entities S&E risk
assessment; target entities S&E monitoring).
‐ Microfinance Enhancement Facility: SPIRIT (see above).
24
‐ Regional MSME Investment Fund for Sub-Saharan Africa: Symbiotics’ MFI
Social Responsibility Report (see above).
‐ responsAbility (all funds): responsAbility Development Effectiveness Rating
(rADER), enabling the development-related aspects of their activities to be
evaluated, monitored and managed at the portfolio level. It takes into account
5 dimensions (empowerment, efficiency, financial inclusion, poverty and
outreach).
‐ Rural Impulse Fund (both funds): Incofin’s ECHOS, a methodology not
depending on the input of third parties (such as the MFI itself), since applied
directly via an investment officer.
‐ Triodos Microfinance Fund: Sustainability Management System to apply a
Triple Bottom Line approach (people, planet and profit). It considers: number
of clients with loans or savings, average loan amount, percentage of female
clients and percentage of rural clients.
‐ Wallberg Global Microfinance Fund: Symbiotics’ MFI Social Responsibility
Report (see above).
Dexia Micro-Credit Fund’s social scorecard
25
All of this represents a priceless contribution to the development of Microfinance as a
socially responsible asset that judiciously combines financial and social objectives.
Social Performance matrix
26
2.3 MFIs’ Social Performance
Social performance can be defined as the way in which the social objectives of an
institution are put into practice, following commonly-shared social values. Especially
in Microfinance, the social values concern the process of enhancing the lives of the
clients and their families, as well broadening the spectrum of opportunities for
communities through financial services.
To create these values, the social objectives of a Microfinance Institution (MFI)
should incorporate:
‐ offering financial services to an increasing number of traditionally-non-
marketable people in an on-going and sustainable way, both by broadening
and by deepening outreach;
‐ bettering the quality and adequacy of these services in order to target clients
through the systematic assessment of their specific needs;
‐ creating benefits for microfinance clients, their families and communities that
are related to social capital and social links, assets, reduced vulnerability,
income, access to services and the fulfilment of basic needs;
‐ ensuring the social responsibility of the MFI towards its employees, clients
and the community it serves.
Social Performance is not simply focusing on the estimation of objectives and
outcomes, but also - and mainly - on the actions and corrective measures
undertaken by an MFI to generate such outcomes. Social Performance concerns the
extent of their success in meeting these goals, but it cannot only concentrate on the
ultimate result: it also provides a framework to analyse the process by which social
objectives are achieved. The aim is to state if the institution has the necessary tools
to accomplish its mission, by giving a constant close look to the improvements made
in that direction and seizing how to use the information collected in order to take a
step forward in the activities.
There is a wide range of methods that can be used to address various Social
Performance issues. They differ from each other because of the kind of information
they provide. The main categories are:
27
‐ quantitative information on individuals, generally obtained via surveys. These
produce data points to be analysed using a statistical approach, in order to
assess the outreach and the impact performance of the activity;
‐ qualitative information on individuals, generally extracted via in-depth
interviews or case studies. Such techniques generate descriptive information,
that offers an accurate overview about the way clients use the services and
how different dimensions of impact may be occurring;
‐ information on groups, generally collected via Participatory Rapid Appraisal
(involving participants to generate information, but not to analyse and use it)
or Participatory Learning and Action (meant to expand skills and ownership
among participants and increase their ability of planning, implementing,
monitoring and evaluating their own initiatives).
2.4 Initiatives pursued by LuxFLAG
In this context, LuxFLAG would like to emphasise the importance of monitoring the
social impact from Microfinance investments. It is important to consider the social
impact on clients’ life on two levels: first at the level of the micro entrepreneur’s
business and second at the level of the clients personal well-being and that of his
family.
LuxFLAG believes that the prime objective of Microfinance programmes should be to
improve the lives of the rural poor by facilitating sustainable access to a variety of
financial services (e.g. credit, savings, insurance, remittances). In this framework,
assessing the social performance of Microfinance programmes is a key priority for
LuxFLAG. With this idea in mind, LuxFLAG integrated a social criterion to its
Microfinance Label eligibility criteria. The objective is to be sure that LuxFLAG
labelled MIVs pursue a double bottom line approach by achieving both financial as
well as social returns.
Moreover LuxFLAG - together with the US based MFI rating agency MicroRate -
launched Luminis in May 2010. It is a web-based analytical service that provides
professional investors and researchers with the necessary tools to identify, assess
and monitor MIVs that meet their individual requirements. The vision of Luminis is to
promote the flow of funds from capital markets to Microfinance by increasing
28
transparency and growth in the global Microfinance community. Nowadays Luminis
is perfectly operating, providing access to more than 80 Microfinance fund profiles,
making side-by-side comparisons of key fund data, and offering a preview of PRSM
fund profiles on Performance, Risk, Social and Management. Subscribers can
benefit from additional services.
To learn more about Luminis, visit www.luminismicrofinance.com or contact
III. Conclusion
Even though the financial and economic crisis left its sign worldwide, in 2011 the
total assets of the 10 largest MIVs increased, reaching 4 USD bn (showing a growth
rate of 7.2%). This figure is encouraging if compared to the 4.1% of 2010, but it is
still below pre-crisis levels (31% in 2008 and 23% in 2009). This increase in growth
rates is primarily due to the increased demand for capital - in particular for local
currency loans - coming from MFIs.
Throughout the year, MIVs continued to face several challenges, including a grown
credit risk in some countries and lower returns. Nonetheless, the overall investment
market was more active than in the previous year, showing a renewed capital
appetite from Microfinance services providers and a bigger focus on underserved
markets.
New microfinance funds were created in 2011, including four which were granted the
LuxFLAG Microfinance Label: Azure, Etimos, FEFISOL, responsAbility Financial
Inclusion.
Most of the new funds are managed by existing Microfinance investment managers.
They are invested mainly in debt instruments, even if the interest in equity
investments is growing.
MIVs are focusing more and more on underserved regions, such as Sub-Saharan
Africa, Asia and rural markets. Usually these efforts are supported by Development
Finance Institutions (DFIs). LuxFLAG labelled MIVs viz. FEFISOL and Rural Impulse
II, were created specifically with a purpose to focus on financial access in rural
markets.
29
On the other hand, fund managers are increasing their focus on Social Performance
and end-client issues, to ensure more responsible placement of their capital. The
industry is putting effort in order to promote transparency and accountability, and to
avoid contributing to overheated markets. This is witnessed by the increasing
number of MIVs which joined the several initiatives encouraging responsible
practices in Microfinance, some of them have developed their own Social
Performance measurement tools- and by the constantly growing amount of
institutions publically sharing transparent information (e.g. through MIX, Syminvest,
Luminis, etc.).
Just to mention one example, in 2011, 162 institutions provided confidential
information to Micro Banking Bulletin compared to 28 in 1997. For over 2000 MFIs
basic profiles and data is now available on the MIX Market’s website.
30
Disclaimer
This document was prepared with the greatest possible care. Neither the author nor
LuxFLAG offers any guarantee with regard to content and completeness and does
not accept any liability for losses which might arise from the use of this information.
The opinions expressed in this document are those held at the time of writing and
may be changed at any time without notice. This document is for information
purposes only. No part of this document constitutes either an offer or a
recommendation to acquire or sell financial instruments or banking services, nor
does it relieve the recipient from the responsibility of making his or her own
assessment. No reliance should be placed on this document for the purpose of
subscribing to any MIVs described herein. In particular, the recipient is advised to
assess the information in respect of its compatibility with his or her own
circumstances as well as its legal, regulatory, tax and other implications. The present
document may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of
LuxFLAG.
Acknowledgements
LuxFLAG would like to express its gratitude towards the labelled MIVs for their
assistance in providing the data and for their valuable inputs.
Contributors
Chiara Cariddi, Intern - LuxFLAG
Sachin Vankalas, Operations Officer- LuxFLAG
31
IV. Bibliography
Arunachalam, R.S. (2011). “Journey of Indian Micro-Finance”.
CGAP - El-Zoghbi, M. & Gahwiler, B. & Lauer, K. (2011). “Cross-border
Funding of Microfinance”.
CGAP - El-Zoghbi, M. & Martinez, M. (2011). “Measuring Changes in Client
Lives through Microfinance: Contributions of Different Approaches”.
CGAP - Glisovic, J. & González, H. & Saltuk, Y. & Rozeira de Mariz, F.
(2012). “Volume Growth and Valuation Contraction. Global Microfinance
Equity Valuation Survey”.
CGAP - Glisovic, J. and Moretto, L. (2012). “How Have Market Challenges
Affected Microfinance Investment Funds? Highlights from the CGAP Market
Scan”
CGAP - Hashemi, S.M. & de Montesquiou, A. (2011). “Reaching the Poorest:
Lessons from the Graduation Model”.
CGAP - Reille, X. & Forster, S. & Rozas, D. (2011). “Foreign Capital
Investment in Microfinance: Reassessing Financial and Social Returns”.
CGAP (2003). “Microfinance Consensus Guidelines. Definitions of Selected
Financial Terms, Ratios, and Adjustments for Microfinance”.
CGAP (2010). “Do MIVs need a new investment strategy?”.
CGAP (2010). “Microfinance Investment Vehicle Disclosure Guidelines”.
CSFI (2011). “Microfinance Banana Skins. The CSFI Survey of Microfinance
Risk”.
Governance Across Borders (2011). “Andra Pradesh Microfinance Crisis”.
IAMFI - Trant, J. (2011). “Microfinance Investment: Dual Diligence for
Financial and Social Returns”.
IFAD (2006). “Assessing and Managing Social Performance in Microfinance”.
IMF (2011). “World Economic Outlook. Tensions from the Two-Speed
Recovery”.
Mauri, A. & Baicu, C.G. (2007). “General Remarks on the Assessment of
Foreign Exchange Risk Exposure of Firms”. Analele Universităţii Spiru Haret,
Seria Economie (7).
32
MicroCapital - Stanisljevic, Z. (2009). “Successful Due Diligence When
Evaluating Microfinance Investment Vehicles”.
MicroRate - von Stauffenberg, D. & Rozas, D. (2011). “Role Reversal
Revisited. Are Public Development Institutions Still Crowing Out Private
Investment in Microfinance?”.
MicroRate (2011). “The State of Microfinance Investment. 6th Annual Survey
& Analysis of MIVs”.
MIX MicroBanking Bulletin - Gaul, S. (2012). “Diamonds no Longer Forever”.
MIX MicroBanking Bulletin - González, A. (2011). “Defining Responsible
Financial Performance: How to Think About Social Performance?”.
MIX MicroBanking Bulletin - González, A. (2011). “Sacrificing Microcredit for
Unrealistic Goals”.
MIX MicroBanking Bulletin - Krell, M.W. & Pistelli, M. (2012). “Field Staff
Compensation at Indian MFIs: a New Perspective on the Crisis in Andhra
Pradesh”.
MIX MicroBanking Bulletin - Tulchin, D. & Sassman, R. & Wolkomir, E.
(2009). “New Financial Ratios for Microfinance Reporting”.
MIX MicroBanking Bulletin - Viada, L.A. & Gaul, S. (2012). “The Tipping Point:
Over-indebtedness and Investment in Microfinance”.
MIX Microfinance World - Gaul, S. (2010). “How Has the Growth of Indian
Microfinance Been Funded?”.
MIX Microfinance World - Shyamsukha, R. (2011). “India: Post-crisis Results”.
Symbiotics - Audran, J. & Berthouzoz (2009). “Microfinance, an Opportunity
for Socially Responsible Investment”. What Balance Between Financial
Sustainability and Social Issues in the Microfinance Sector? (3).
Symbiotics (2011). “MIV Survey Report”.
Vision Microfinance (2011). “Situation der Microfinanz in Indien”.
Women’s World Banking (2004). “Foreign Exchange Risk in Microfinance”.
World Bank (2011). “Global Economic Prospects”.
33
V. Information sources
Centre for Study of Financial Innovation: a forum for well-informed debate and
research about the future of the financial services sector. Its main activities
are: written research, live discussion groups and networks, all focused on the
latest developments in international finance.
Consultative Group to Assist the Poor: an independent policy and research
centre dedicated to advancing financial access for the world's poor. CGAP
provides market intelligence, promotes standards, develops innovative
solutions and offers advisory services to governments, financial service
providers, donors, and investors.
Finesti: a subsidiary of the Luxembourg Stock Exchange and a global hub for
the collection, management and dissemination of investment fund data and
documents.
International Association of Microfinance Investors: it helps commercially
oriented Microfinance investors achieve their goals by collecting and
disseminating data, establishing industry best practices, and working with
stakeholders to promote sustainable investment.
International Fund for Agricultural Development: an international financial
institution and specialised UN agency, working with poor rural people to
enable them to grow and sell more food, increase their incomes and
determine the direction of their own lives.
International Monetary Fund: an organisation of 188 countries, working to
foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate
international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic
growth, and reduce poverty around the world.
Luminis: a web-based analytical service of MicroRate and LuxFLAG that
provides professional investors and researchers with the necessary tools to
identify, assess and monitor MIVs that meet their individual requirements (see
page 38: Luminis press release - May 10, 2012”).
Microfinance Information Exchange: a source for objective, qualified and
relevant Microfinance performance data and analysis. Committed to
34
strengthening financial inclusion and the Microfinance sector by promoting
transparency, it provides performance information on MFIs, funders, networks
and service providers dedicated to serving the financial sector needs for low-
income clients. MIX fulfils its mission through its online platform (MIX Market)
and its publications (MicroBanking Bulletin and MIX Microfinance World).
Syminvest: Symbiotics’ online platform for Microfinance and small enterprise
impact investments. At the moment the biggest online research and
brokerage platform in the whole Microfinance industry.
World Bank Institute: a global connector of knowledge, learning and
innovation for poverty reduction. It connects practitioners and institutions to
help them find suitable solutions to their development challenges. With a
focus on the "how" of reform, it links knowledge from around the world and
scale up innovations.
VI.Acronyms
CGAP: Consultative Group to Assist the Poor
CSFI: Centre for Study of Financial Innovation
EMBI: Emerging Markets Bond Index
IAMFI: International Association of MicroFinance Investors
IFAD: International Fund for Agricultural Development
IMF: International Monetary Fund
MFI: Microfinance Institution
MFPF: MicroFinance PortFolio
MIV: Microfinance Investment Vehicle
MIX: Microfinance Information eXchange
NAV: Net Asset Value
PAR: Portfolio At Risk
SICAR: Société d’Investissement en CApital à Risque
SICAV: Société d’Investissement à CApital Variable
SIF: Specialised Investment Fund
SMX: Symbiotics Microfinance indeX
35
SP: Social Performance
TA: Total Assets
WBI: World Bank Institute
VII.Glossary
Direct microfinance portfolio: direct investments into MFIs or loans to non-
specialised financial intermediaries, specifically used to fund microloans
directly.
Double bottom line: contrary to the traditional bottom line, the double bottom
line considers both financial and social consequences before reaching a
business decision.
Indirect microfinance portfolio: investments in other MIVs or loans to non-
specialised financial intermediaries, specifically used to fund MFIs.
Microfinance institutions: an MFI is an organisation that provides financial
services to the poor. This very broad definition includes a wide range of
providers that vary in legal structure, mission and methodology. However, all
share the common characteristic of providing financial services to clients who
are excluded from the traditional credit market.
Microfinance investment vehicles: an MIV is an independent investment entity
specialised in microfinance with at least 50% of its portfolio invested in
microfinance. It intermediates capital from private and public investors to
microfinance providers operating in emerging markets and/or to other MIVs.
Microfinance portfolio: it corresponds to the amount of the portfolio invested in
microfinance. A microfinance portfolio can be invested directly or indirectly
Net asset value: it is the statement of the value of the MIV’s assets, minus the
value of its liabilities.
Social performance: it measures how well an institution has translated its
social goals into practice. A solid SP is the first step towards achieving a
positive social impact. It includes an appropriate answer to client needs and
ensured responsibility toward the employees and the community.
36
Société d’investissement à capital variable: a SICAV is an open-ended
collective investment scheme, common in Western Europe. The investor is
entitled at all times to request the redemption of his units and payment of the
redemption amount in cash.
Société d’investissement en capital à risqué: a SICAR is a regulated, fiscally
efficient structure designed for private equity and venture capital investments.
There are neither investment diversification rules, nor lending or leverage
restrictions.
Specialised investment fund: a SIF is a regulated, operationally flexible and
fiscally efficient multipurpose investment fund regime for an international,
institutional and qualified investor base. The SIF is characterized by greater
flexibility with regard to the investment policy, broadening of the sphere of
investors and a more relaxed regulatory regime.
Total assets: they represent the total amount of money which a fund
manages.
37
VIII. Appendices
1. Eligibility criteria
38
2.Luminis press release
39
3. Funds’ cards (LOGO???)
Access Africa Fund, LLC
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Domicile USA
Date of incorporation July 2010
Legal form Limited Liability Company
Address 151, Ellis St. NE Atlanta GA 30303
End of financial year 30 June
Types of investors Single-owner entity leveraged with government-funded debt (OPIC)
Minimum investment Class A: Class B:
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
To invest in and acquire securities of microfinance institutions located in developing countries in Africa that extend financial services to small and micro-sized enterprises and banking services to un-banked and poorly banked individuals located in their respective country of operation.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter CARE International
Asset Manager MicroVest Capital Management, LLC
Auditor Grant Thornton LLP REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Sub‐Saharan Africa
40
Advans SA
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation August 2005
Legal form SICAR (fund with unlimited duration)
Address 69, route d'Esch L-1470 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 March
Types of investors Institutional, professional, well-informed
Minimum investment Class A/M: 1,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Company’s focus is to invest in the creation of new MFIs in Eligible Countries, especially in Africa and Asia. The Company will also invest in existing MFIs which either need further funding and assistance to become sustainable or are already sustainable but seek a strong lead shareholder to support them in their development. The Company’s objective is to achieve a total return on its investments that meets or exceeds historical returns achieved in the microfinance industry in Eligible Countries. The Company will take long term view on its investments. It has no intention of seeking a quick exit for its equity investments. The Company will remain the lead shareholder for as long as it is necessary to turn start-ups into profitable, sound and lasting operations. Once this goal is achieved exit may be considered either through selling top institutional investors, such as banks (local or international), or, if possible, through listing the MFI on a publicly regulated stock-exchange.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Horus Development Finance
Asset Manager Horus Development Finance
Auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Sub‐Saharan Africa
East Asia & Pacific
Equity
Cash
41
Azure Global Microfinance Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class A-USD: LU0668571820 Class B-CHF: LU0668573857 Class C-EUR: LU0668575144
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation August 2011
Legal form SICAV - SIF (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, qualified, well-informed
Minimum investment
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Sub-fund seeks as its investment objective to provide Shareholders with an attractive risk adjusted return through exposure to a diversified portfolio of Target Microfinance Funds investing in MFIs and other microfinance investments. In particular, the Sub-fund aims at providing its Investors with: (a) a diversified and, to the extent possible, safe exposure to MFIs and microfinance investments through investments in Target Funds investing in MFIs (Target Microfinance Funds) located in emerging countries; (b) exposure to the best Target Microfinance Funds; (c) exposure to the best special purpose vehicles containing packages of first rate loans and sub-loans to MFIs without enhancement by derivatives; (d) a meaningful social return in addition to credible financial returns.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Azure Partners S.A.
Asset Manager Board of the fund
Auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America &Caribbean
Europe & CentralAsia
Others
East Asia & Pacific
Africa
South Asia
Debt
Equity
42
Dexia Micro-Credit Fund: BlueOrchard Debt Sub-Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class USD: LU0091117944 Class CHF: LU0136928586 Class EUR: LU0164081316
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation September 1998
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 69, route d'Esch L-1470 Luxembourg
End of financial year 30 June
Types of investors Institutional, retail
Minimum investment Class USD/EUR: 10,000 USD/EUR Class CHF: 15,000 CHF
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Company aims principally at offering to investors a higher return compared to money market rates whilst contributing to the refinancing of small entities involved in the financing of micro-companies in emerging country economies. Latin America, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Europe shall constitute the main investee geographic areas of the Company. The principal objective of the Sub-Fund is to invest in debt instruments issued by micro-banks designed to ensure a maximum safety in the legal framework and soundness in the financial background. The portfolio of the Sub-Fund consists of 2 different parts: micro-banks’ debt and liquid assets.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Banque Internationale à Luxembourg
Asset Manager BlueOrchard Finance S.A. Dexia Asset Management Luxembourg SA
Auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
North America
South Asia
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Middle East & NorthAfrica
Debt
Others
43
Dual Return Fund (SICAV) - Vision Microfinance
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Class A-EUR: LU0563441798 Class B-EUR: LU0563441954 Class I-CHF: LU0306116830 Class I-EUR: LU0306115196 Class I-USD: LU0306116160 Class P-CHF: LU0236783907 Class P-EUR: LU0236782842 Class P-USD: LU0646936202
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation April 2006
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 1/B, rue Gabriel Lippmann L-5365 Munsbach
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, retail
Minimum investment
Class A-EUR: 1,000 EUR Class B-EUR: 125,000 EUR Class I-EUR/USD: 125,000 EUR/USD Class I-CHF: 150,000 CHF Class P-EUR/CHF/USD: 1,000 EUR/CHF/USD
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The principal objective of the Company is to enable investors to have an involvement in the microfinance industry. This comparatively new sector is distinguished by its strong growth and holds great promise for the development of emerging capital markets in the next few years. The essential objective of "Vision Microfinance" is to conclude loan transactions. This is done directly by holding bonds of carefully selected MFIs in the areas described above or indirectly through collateral debt obligations (CDOs). The Sub-fund can contribute to refinancing MFIs, by directly holding bonds, or indirectly through CDO structures which are issued by such credit institutions and which potentially encompass warrant rights concerning a stake in the capital of the credit institutions, or by loans being granted directly to those credit institutions which specialise in refinancing MFIs.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Bank im Bistum Essen eG
Asset Manager Absolute Portfolio Management GmbH
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsiaLatin America &CaribbeanEast Asia & Pacific
South Asia
Others
Debt
Cash
44
Dual Return Fund (SICAV) - Vision Microfinance Local Currency
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Class A-EUR: LU0591909972 Class B-EUR: LU0591910129 Class 1-EUR: LU0533938022 Class 1-USD: LU0548652287 Class P-EUR: LU0533937727 Class P-USD: LU0646936384
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation September 2010
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 1/B, rue Gabriel Lippmann L-5365 Munsbach
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, retail
Minimum investment
Class A-EUR: 1,000 EUR Class B-EUR: 125,000 EUR Class I-EUR/USD: 125,000 EUR/USD Class P-EUR/ USD: 1,000 EUR/ USD
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The principal objective of the Company is to enable investors to have an involvement in the microfinance industry. This comparatively new sector is distinguished by its strong growth and holds great promise for the development of emerging capital markets in the next few years. The essential objective of "Vision Microfinance Local Currency" is to conclude loan transactions in local currency. This is done directly by holding bonds of carefully selected MFIs in the areas described above or indirectly through collateral debt obligations (CDOs). The Sub-fund can contribute to refinancing MFIs, by directly holding bonds, or indirectly through CDO structures which potentially encompass warrant rights concerning a stake in the capital of the credit institutions, or by loans being granted directly to those credit institutions which specialise in refinancing MFIs.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Bank im Bistum Essen eG
Asset Manager Absolute Portfolio Management GmbH
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Debt
Cash
45
Etimos Fund Global Microfinance Debt
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0605440857
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation January 2011
Legal form SICAV - SIF (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 12, rue Eugène Ruppert L-2453 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Qualified
Minimum investment 125,000 EUR per investor
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
ETIMOS FUND is a socially responsible fund and the sub-fund has its specific investment objective, strategy, policy and structure. The overall objective of the Sub-Fund is to offer to socially responsible investors financially and socially sound investments to contribute to the sustainable development of emerging market economies by facilitating investments in micro and small enterprises and producers. The Sub-Fund seeks to achieve this purpose investing in microfinance institutions providing financial services to low-income people and boosting micro, small and medium enterprises, and in producers’ cooperatives fair trade oriented and/or organic oriented. The Sub-Fund has the aim to combine an attractive and competitive financial return while delivering an effective social impact in developing and transition countries through the encouragement of the entrepreneurial spirit.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Consorzio Etimos S.c.
Asset Manager Consorzio Etimos S.c.
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Middle East & NorthAfrica
Europe & CentralAsia
Debt
Cash
46
Finethic Microfinance S.C.A., SICAR
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0262965956
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation July 2006
Legal form SICAR (fund with unlimited duration)
Address 24, boulevard Royal L-2449 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, qualified
Minimum investment All classes: 5,000 USD/EUR/CHF
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The investment objective is primarily to finance unlisted microfinance institutions (MFI), located especially in emerging countries and developing countries, either directly or by means of other investment vehicles or UCIs; secondarily to invest in listed investment vehicles. The investment policy is to finance targeted MFIs directly (by providing debt financing) or indirectly (by investing in investment vehicles active in the field of microfinance).
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Finethic S.à r.l.
Asset Manager Fundo S.A.
Auditor Ernst & Young S.A.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
South East Asia
Others
Middle East
Africa
47
Fonds Européen de Financiament Solidaire (FEFISOL), S.A. SICAV-SIF
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation July 2011
Legal form SICAV - SIF (closed-end fund with limited duration: 10 years)
Address 4, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 March
Types of investors Institutional, qualified
Minimum investment 125,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Company's investment objective is to provide loans and guarantees and carry out a limited number of equity investments to a diverse group of African MFIs and, to a lesser extent, to APEX and Pos. Financing will be provided in particular to rural Target Entities and will focus on medium to long term financing in local currency, reflecting the present financial needs of the Target Entities. 100% of FEFISOL’s Investment portfolio will be invested in Africa and at least 75% in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Company’s strategy is to support organisations with high added value in rural areas.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter
Alterfin S.c.r.l. Consorzio Etimos S.c. Solidarité Internationale pour le Développement et l’Investissement (SIDI) S.A.
Asset Manager SIDI
Auditor Mazars LLP
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Sub‐Saharan Africa
North Africa
Debt
Equity
Others
48
KCD Mikrofinanzfonds (FIS) - I
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0412316290
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation February 2009
Legal form SICAV - SIF (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 4, rue Thomas Edison L-1445 Luxembourg-Strassen
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional
Minimum investment 125,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund invests in assets that are associated with microfinance institutions or other companies offering financial services to the poor. The investment objective of KCD is to achieve a reasonable return on invested capital while the social objective is to promote poverty alleviation.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Bank im Bistum Essen eG
Asset Manager Bank im Bistum Essen eG
Auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers S.á.r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Others
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Debt
Cash
Equity
Others
49
KCD Mikrofinanzfonds (FIS) - II
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0412316373
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation February 2009
Legal form SICAV- SIF (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 4, rue Thomas Edison L-1445 Luxembourg-Strassen
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional
Minimum investment 125,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund invests in assets that are associated with microfinance institutions or other companies offering financial services to the poor. The investment objective of KCD is to achieve a reasonable return on invested capital while the social objective is to promote poverty alleviation.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Bank im Bistum Essen eG
Asset Manager Bank im Bistum Essen eG
Auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers S.á.r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America &Caribbean
Debt
Cash
Others
50
Luxembourg Microfinance and
Development Fund SICAV - Social Venture Capital Sub-Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class A: LU0456965887 Class B: LU0456966935 Class C: LU0456967404
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation October 2009
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 2, place de Metz L-1930 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 March
Types of investors Retail, institutional, public (according to the class)
Minimum investment Class A: 25 EUR (price per share, conditions applied)Class B/C: 100 EUR (price per share, conditions applied)
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund aims at contributing to the alleviation of poverty in developing countries through the provision of permanent and adapted financial services to marginalised communities and individuals. Its objective is to help promising microfinance institutions ("MFIs") that have a positive social impact towards achieving financial autonomy. In pursuance of its objective, the Fund may invest in MFIs, in networks or associations of MFIs, in regional funds, in microfinance investment vehicles ("MIVs") and in other microfinance-related products. The Fund has two principal objectives, social and financial: help socially-oriented MFIs to become long term viable enterprises that reach more poor people and offer better services, and generate sufficient income to sustain its own operations and give its Shareholders a financial return that at least compensates for inflation. The Fund will strive to provide tailor-made and innovative solutions to needy MFIs, coupling its own financial assistance with technical support from external consultants. It will deliberately focus on niche activities, activities where potential needs of MFIs are large, but current supply is scarce.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter ADA a.s.b.l. Ministère de Finances (Luxemoburg)
Asset Manager Self-managed
Auditor BDO Audit S.A.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America &Caribbean
Sub‐Saharan Africa
East Asia & Pacific
North America
Others
Debt
Cash
Equity
51
Microfinance Enhancement Facility S.A., SICAV-SIF
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation February 2009
Legal form SICAV - SIF (fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Development banks
Minimum investment Class A/B/C: 125,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund aims to support economic development and prosperity globally through the provision of additional development finance to micro-enterprises, via qualified financial institutions. In pursuing its development goal the Fund will observe principles of sustainability and additionality, combining development and market orientations. The Fund aims principally at contributing to the debt financing of microfinance institutions ("MFIs") which are institutions that provides microfinance services, including (without limitation) credit, savings deposits, insurance, remittances, and housing loans, to the working poor in developing countries. Such institutions may offer other financial services in addition to microfinance services, and these other services might represent a greater percentage of the institution’s overall business than the microfinance services. Microfinance should represent over the next years an important area of development for the capital markets of emerging economies. At the same time, it offers numerous investment opportunities.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter KfW Bankengruppe International Finance Corporation
Asset Manager BlueOrchard Finance S.A. responsAbility Social Investments AG Cyrano Management
Auditor Ernst & Young S.A. REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET A OCATION
Eastern Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
52
Regional MSME Investment Fund
for Sub-Saharan Africa SA, SICAV-SIF (REGMIFA)
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation December 2009
Legal form SICAV - SIF (fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Public sector, institutional and private
Minimum investment Class A/B/C: 500,000 USD
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund will seek to invest in a balanced portfolio of MFIs and local commercial banks or other financial institutions, established in Sub Saharan countries providing funding to MSMEs. The fund aims to increase over time the percentage of investments in smaller and less developed PLIs which are not commonly served by existing microfinance funders. The Fund will target exclusively regulated and/or non-regulated micro finance institutions and/or local commercial banks and/or other financial institutions, established in Sub-Saharan African countries providing funding to MSMEs, (each a partner lending institution - “PLI”). The Fund aims to increase over time the percentage of investments in smaller and less developed PLIs which are not commonly served by existing microfinance funders.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter KfW Bankengruppe
Asset Manager Symbiotics Asset Management S.A.
Auditor Ernst & Young S.A.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Debt
Equity
53
responsAbility
Global Microfinance Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class USD: LU0180189770 Class CHF: LU0180190604 Class EUR: LU0180190273
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation November 2003
Legal form FCP - Part II (unincorporated fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 March
Types of investors Retail, institutional
Minimum investment Class CHF/EUR/USD: 1,000 CHF/EUR/USD
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The amounts entrusted to the Fund aim at achieving a real increase in value over the long term; at the same time, by promoting entrepreneurial activity they seek to contribute to reducing poverty in developing and transition countries. For this purpose the Fund invests its money so that local, successful and promising financial service providers – so-called microfinance institutions (MFIs) – can provide specific financial services for the designated target group over the long term and, depending on demand, are in a position to achieve meaningful growth.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Credit Suisse Group AG
Asset Manager Credit Suisse Microfinance Fund Management Co
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Middle East & NorthAfrica
Debt
Cash
Equity
54
responsAbility SICAV (Lux)
Financial Inclusion Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0656658084
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation July 2011
Legal form SICAV - SIF (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional
Minimum investment
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The amounts entrusted to the Fund aim at achieving a real increase in value over the long term; at the same time, by promoting entrepreneurial activity they seek to contribute to reducing poverty in developing and transition countries. For this purpose the Fund invests its money so that local, successful and promising financial service providers – so-called microfinance institutions (MFIs) – can provide specific financial services for the designated target group over the long term and, depending on demand, are in a position to achieve meaningful growth.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Credit Suisse Group AG
Asset Manager responsAbility SICAV (Lux)
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l. REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America & Caribbean
Central‐western Asia
Africa
Others
South‐east Asia
55
responsAbility SICAV (Lux)
Microfinance Leaders (Subfund)
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class I-USD: LU0520962514 Class S-CHF: LU0520962605 Class S-EUR: LU0520963082
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation November 2006
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional
Minimum investment Class USD/CHF/EUR: 1,000,000 USD/CHF/EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The amounts entrusted to the Fund aim at achieving a real increase in value over the long term; at the same time, by promoting entrepreneurial activity they seek to contribute to reducing poverty in developing and transition countries. For this purpose the Fund invests its money so that local, successful and promising financial service providers – so-called microfinance institutions (MFIs) – can provide specific financial services for the designated target group over the long term and, depending on demand, are in a position to achieve meaningful growth.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Credit Suisse Group AG
Asset Manager responsAbility SICAV (Lux)
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Middle East & NorthAfrica
Debt
Cash
Equity
Others
56
responsAbility SICAV (Lux) Mikrofinaz-Fonds (Subfund)
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0302153209
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation May 2007
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Retail, institutional
Minimum investment 1,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The amounts entrusted to the Fund aim at achieving a real increase in value over the long term; at the same time, by promoting entrepreneurial activity they seek to contribute to reducing poverty in developing and transition countries. For this purpose the Fund invests its money so that local, successful and promising financial service providers – so-called microfinance institutions (MFIs) – can provide specific financial services for the designated target group over the long term and, depending on demand, are in a position to achieve meaningful growth.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Credit Suisse Group AG
Asset Manager responsAbility SICAV (Lux)
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Debt
Cash
57
Rural Impulse Fund II SICAV-SIF
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN LU0530331726
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation May 2010
Legal form SICAV - FIS (fund with limited duration: 10 years)
Address 5, rue Jean Monnet L-2180 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Qualified private sector, development finance
Minimum investment Class A: 125,000 EUR Class B:
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund is a microfinance investment fund that targets commercial microfinance institutions (MFIs) providing financial services to the rural poor. The Fund’s objectives are both financial and social: 1. providing an attractive financial return to Investors; 2. strengthening the rural MFIs’ financial structure and capacity; 3. improving the outreach and impact of rural MFIs and providing opportunities to the rural poor, who represent three quarters of the world’s poor.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Incofin scbs
Asset Manager Incofin Investment Management Comm. VA
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America &Caribbean
South Asia
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & CentralAsia
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Others
Cash
58
Rural Impulse Fund S.A. Sicav-SIF
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class A: LU0320358681 Class B: LU0320358848
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation August 2007
Legal form SICAV - FIS (fund with limited duration: 10 years)
Address 11, rue Aldringen L-1118 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Qualified private sector, development finance
Minimum investment Class A: 250,000 USD Class B: 500,000 USD
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund aims at contributing to the alleviation of poverty in rural areas undeserved by the microfinance industry by making debt and equity investments in MFIs which provide financial services to the rural excluded. The Fund focuses on the essential goal of microfinance, which is the financial inclusion of the poor.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Incofin scbs
Asset Manager Incofin Investment Management Comm. VA
Auditor Deloitte & Touche LLP
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Latin America &Caribbean
Sub‐Saharan Africa
South Asia
East Asia & Pacific
Others
Cash
59
Latin America & Caribbean
South‐east Asia
Caucasus
Selectum SICAV SIF - BL Microfinance
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class B1: LU0558146782 Class B2: LU0558149455
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation October 2010
Legal form SICAV - SIF (sub-fund with limited duration: December 2013)
Address 14, boulevard Royal L-2449 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, qualified
Minimum investment Class B1/B2: 125,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The SICAV-SIF’s objective is to offer shareholders the opportunity to participate in a professionally managed portfolio of securities and/or other financial assets as defined in the investment policy for each Sub-Fund. The investment objective of the Sub-Fund is to achieve regular income. The fund invests principally in short-term secured and unsecured debt instruments issued by microfinance institutions. The fund may also invest in debt securities issued by governments and corporations in emerging markets throughout the world.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Banque de Luxembourg
Asset Manager BLI - Banque de Luxembourg Investments S.A.
Auditor Mazars LPP REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET A OCATION
60
The European Fund for Southeast Europe
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN vv.
Date of incorporation December 2005
Legal form SICAV - SIF (closed-ended fund with unlimited duration)
Domicile Luxembourg
Address 31, z.a. Bourmicht L-8070 Bertrange
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, qualified
Minimum investment 100,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Fund aims to foster economic development and prosperity in the Southeast Europe region and in the European Eastern Neighbourhood region through the sustainable provision of additional development finance, notably to micro and small enterprises ("MSEs") and to private households, via qualified financial institutions. In pursuing its development goal the Fund will observe principles of sustainability and additionality, combining development and market orientations.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter KfW Bankengruppe
Asset Manager Oppenheim Asset Management Services S.à r.l.
Auditor Ernst & Young S.A.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe &Central Asia
Debt
Cash
Equity
61
Triodos Sicav II - Triodos Microfinance Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN vv.
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation March 2009
Legal form SICAV - Part II (sub-fund with unlimited duration)
Address 69, route d'Esch L-1470 Luxembourg
End of financial year 31 December
Types of investors Institutional, HNWI, qualified, retail (DK & LU)
Minimum investment Class Cap: 100,000 EUR Class Dis: 500 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The Company is a socially responsible investment fund, the objective of which is to invest the funds available to it in risk-bearing assets (equity and quasi-equity, and/or other assets permitted by law) and senior debt instruments, in line with the general objective of Triodos Group to finance companies, projects and financial institutions, that benefit people and the environment, to encourage the development of socially responsible, ecologically sustainable and innovative business, while affording its Shareholders a fair return from the management of its assets. The overall objective of the Sub-fund is to offer investors a financially sound investment in the microfinance sector mainly through investments in MFIs. The Sub-Fund has the project of an attractive financial return combined with the opportunity for the investors to make a pro-active, measurable and sustainable contribution to the development of the microfinance sector into an inclusive financial sector in which the majority of people have access to financial services.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Triodos Bank N.V.
Asset Manager Triodos Investment Management B.V.
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
South Asia
Europe & CentralAsia
Sub‐Saharan Africa
Debt
Cash
Equity
Others
62
Wallberg Global Microfinance Fund
GENERAL INFORMATION
ISIN Class I: LU0375612404 Class P: LU0375612230
Domicile Luxembourg
Date of incorporation October 2008
Legal form FCP - Part II
Address 4, rue Thomas Edison L-1445 Luxembourg-Strassen
End of financial year December 31st
Types of investors Institutional, retail Minimum investment Class I/P: 1,000 EUR
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND POLICY
The objective of the Fund's investment policy is to provide poor, economically active sections of the population in developing countries and emerging markets with access to the financial and credit markets and to enable both institutional and private investors. These investments are made either directly or indirectly after careful assessment of the MFIs concerned.
THIRD PARTIES
Promoter Wallberg Invest S.A.
Asset Manager Symbiotics Asset Management S.A.
Auditor KPMG Audit S.à r.l.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWN ASSET ALLOCATION
Europe & CentralAsia
Latin America &Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
Sub‐Saharan Africa
South Asia
Middle East & NorthAfrica
Debt
Others
63