Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Finance & Accounting · Financial decision · 2024

H2O put fund money into illiquid Tennor debt — and settled for €570M

A June 2019 exposé drained €8B from H2O's funds; illiquid Tennor-linked assets went into side pockets. The FCA settlement of August 2024 cost €570M.

H2O Asset Management · 2024-08-07

What happened

H2O Asset Management ran bond funds out of London with €34 billion under management in 2019. In June that year an exposé about the funds' exposure to illiquid private debt linked to Tennor Holding, the vehicle of financier Lars Windhorst, started a run: by mid-July assets had fallen to about €26 billion, and the FCA and France's AMF both opened investigations.

The exit never fully reopened. In August 2020 the AMF suspended subscriptions and redemptions in three H2O funds over valuation and illiquidity, and H2O extended the suspension to its remaining funds. When the vehicles reopened on 14 October 2020, the Tennor-linked assets had been carved into side pockets, and investors stayed locked out of that part.

The FCA later found that between 2015 and 2019 H2O had failed to do adequate due diligence on the 'highly illiquid' investments, had failed to deal with the regulator openly and cooperatively — fabricated documents and misleading information among the findings — and had logged more than 50 undisclosed hospitality items, including superyacht and private-jet hospitality.

The bill arrived on 7 August 2024: no formal fine, but €250 million made available to affected investors and more than €320 million of fees and investments waived — €570 million in total, larger than the FCA's previous record penalty, the £284 million imposed on Barclays in 2015. H2O also agreed to give up its UK permissions by the end of 2024. By then €229 million had already been repaid, and the firm's offer put recoveries for accepting unitholders at an estimated 87–93%.

Why it happened

  • Funds promising liquidity were loaded with highly illiquid private debt; the exposé did not create the mismatch, it revealed it.
  • The due-diligence failure came first; then the disclosure failures — fabricated documents to the regulator turned a fund problem into a conduct case.
  • The settlement avoided a fine by costing more than one: €570 million with waived fees, plus the UK licence.
What it cost€250M redress + €320M fees waived; UK exitcostly

The lesson

A fund's liquidity promise is tested by the least liquid thing it holds. H2O's settlement priced the whole structure — the assets, the disclosures and the licence.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →