Beyond Assets under Management: A Comparative Framework for Measuring Fiduciary Service Quality

Abstract

Assets under management (AUM) is widely used to describe the reach of fiduciary institutions, yet it measures the volume placed inside an arrangement rather than the quality with which entrusted functions are performed. This structured comparative review examines fiduciary architectures in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Singapore, and China across personal trusts, pensions, collective investment arrangements, corporate trusteeship, and restructuring uses. It develops a function–state–evidence framework that evaluates five core functions—asset segregation, administration, discretion, monitoring, and transition—under normal operations, conflict, stress, and termination. Evidence is organized into legal design, operating process, and realized outcomes. Seven quality dimensions follow: legal integrity, mandate fidelity, competence, operational reliability, transparency, accountability, and resolvability. The review argues against a universal scalar ranking because fiduciary mandates differ in purpose and state dependence. It instead proposes a modular dashboard with minimum gates, functionspecific indicators, and stress-state tests. The framework separates fiduciary capacity from asset volume and provides a common measurement language for regulators, beneficiaries, researchers, and service providers.

Author abstract from the research manuscript. Typography and line breaks have been normalized; the linked source may show a different manuscript version.