Transparency
Every investment product claims to be transparent. Very few actually are. Here is what to look for — and what to be sceptical of.
What real transparency includes
Independently verified custody statements you can reconcile to your account.
Regular performance reporting with a stated benchmark and methodology.
Clear disclosure of the fee waterfall — subscription, management, performance, high-water mark, hurdle.
Named counterparties (custodians, prime brokers, auditors) with regulator identifiers.
Written risk factors that describe what can actually go wrong, not just marketing softeners.
Fee transparency in particular
'No fees' rarely means no fees. Look for spreads, funding costs, execution mark-ups, and performance fees. A performance-only fee model is honest when it is genuinely the only fee, calculated on net profits above a high-water mark, and paid periodically — not accrued in ways you cannot verify.
Red flags that mimic transparency
Screenshots of P&L instead of independently custodied statements.
Marketing 'audits' from firms that do not name a regulated auditor.
Aggregate performance without a stated methodology or benchmark.
Fee schedules described as 'flexible' or 'depending on relationship'.
Answers to risk questions that emphasise process (e.g. 'we hedge everything') without disclosing what happens when the hedge fails.
How Vision Bank approaches it
The programme publishes its fee mechanics (10% performance fee on positive net trading profits, no subscription/management/withdrawal fees), names its custody and execution partners, and provides periodic statements clients can reconcile. That is the floor — not the ceiling — of what investors should demand from any provider.