The web sites of canada’s mutual fund firms have to be many things to many people.
They must appeal to clients, prospects and occasional visitors, but they also have to be an effective business tool for advisors.

The last can be tough to pull off and, judging by a new report on the sites, most firms have a lot of work ahead of them. Dalbar Inc., a financial services research firm with offices in Toronto and Boston, recently released a study of the Web sites of 13 of Canada’s largest fund firms that distribute their products through the broker/dealer community. The mandate of the survey was to evaluate each site from the perspective of a financial advisor.

A perfect score in the survey is 100 points, with 80 to 100 points considered “excellent,” 70 to 79 points “very good” and 60 to 69 points “good.”

Unfortunately, none of the firms merit the top category and only three are rated “very good.” Mackenzie Financial Corp.
(www.mackenziefinancial.com) wins top
marks, closely followed by Fidelity Investments Canada Ltd. (www.fidelity.ca) and AIM Funds Management Inc.(http://advisor.aimtrimark.com).

“Although several companies in Canada serve advisors’ needs extremely well, Mackenzie’s site currently sets the standard of excellence,” Dalbar says in its 16-page report.

Five sites scored less than 50 points, with the two lowest marks going to Brandes Investment Partners & Co.
(www.brandesinvestments.ca) and Dynamic Mutual Funds Ltd. (www.dynamic.ca).

Dalbar’s methodology is straightforward.
Each Web site can earn up to 50 points for “functions,” which encompass the quality and range of capabilities it provides advisors. A maximum of 25 points is allotted to “usability,” which measures the ease with which an advisor can enter and navigate the site to find important information, while a further five points are geared to each site’s ability to adapt to the needs of its visitors.

The remaining 20 points, for “consistency,” are given to all 13 firms. However, points are deducted when the evaluators experience inconsistency in content, image or getting around the site. Marks are also taken off when a site’s content proves untimely or irrelevant.

Here are the survey’s key findings:

> The key strength of top scorer Mackenzie is the breadth of information it provides advisors regarding clients’ accounts. “Mackenzie’s site receives full points in this area, along with those of CI Mutual Funds Inc.(www.cifunds.com) and Fidelity,” Dalbar says. “The site provides advisors with full balances [and] electronic statements, and also allows advisors to view client accounts held at other companies.”

The asset allocation of each account is displayed on the site, as well as bar graphs showing past value. Advisors can also print out their clients’ tax slips. When it comes to sales and marketing, Mackenzie outperforms the others, Dalbar says, because it offers downloadable PowerPoint presentations and prospecting letters, as well as lots of sales ideas. Dalbar also applauds the number of online calculators on the site.

> “AIM Trimark’s site is the only one of the 13 evaluated that allows advisors to compare AIM funds to those of other companies,” Dalbar says. “This is one of the features that helps the company’s site place first in product information. AIM Trimark’s site also lists third-party [Morningstar’s] ratings for all its funds. Fidelity and CI are the only other companies to do this.”

> AIM Trimark leads in offering advisors continuing education credits, particularly as its site mentions how many points each course generates and how long the course takes to complete.

> Fidelity, AGF Funds Inc. (www.agfadvisor.com) and AIC Ltd. (www.aic.com) score the highest marks for offering advisors the most flexibility. AIC’s site garners special mention for its ability to print out new account applications that contain the client’s name and biographical information, a bonus that is “extremely convenient and is not seen elsewhere.”

> A few sites, notably AIC’s, were given kudos for allowing advisors to e-mail documents directly to clients. Many sites still make advisors save the documents to their own computers, then open their e-mail services and type messages to accompany the documents.

> The only Web site to lose points for consistency was Manulife Investments (www.manulifeinvestments.ca), which is penalized 2.4 points and finishes in tenth place overall.

> Six sites have been dinged with deductions for untimely or irrelevant content. The penalties are fractional for four firms, but Brandes gets hit for 2.1 points and Dynamic for 1.4 points.