Luxembourg-based asset manager Shelter Investment Management (Shelter IM) is celebrating its tenth anniversary. At the helm are two Belgians: Chairman of the Board Benedict Peeters and CEO Tim Vanvaerenbergh.
Shelter IM does not invest directly for end clients, but instead works through brokers and agents. The firm provides them with “technical and operational support and management,” Peeters and Vanvaerenbergh explained in an interview with Investment Officer. “We deliver high-quality, competitive solutions without offering a one-size-fits-all approach.”
“Ten years ago, we recognized the need for an asset manager that doesn’t necessarily claim to be superior at investing, but instead assembles meaningful portfolios from a wide range of offerings,” said founder Benedict Peeters. “We provide an independent view on strategic asset allocation without engaging in detailed ‘line-by-line’ management ourselves.”
Current CEO Tim Vanvaerenbergh joined Shelter three years after its founding. Together with Peeters, he holds the full share capital of the company. “That means we have no ties to any bank or financial institution, which allows us to operate in a truly neutral and transparent way.”
On the topic of transparency, Peeters emphasizes that at many of Shelter’s competitors, (part of) the money often ends up in their own products. “We are truly independent. We can purchase stocks and bonds for those who want them, but our focus is primarily on selecting third-party products.”
What types of investments do you prefer?
Vanvaerenbergh: “We avoid expensive big-bank products. We often recommend broad, low-cost index funds or ETFs because of their global diversification and low fees. In addition, we select funds from niche players with deep expertise, such as Scandinavian bonds via a Finnish asset manager.”
Peeters: “A portfolio should be diversified both regionally and by sector. Not everything needs to be liquid. We also offer semi-liquid and illiquid investments, such as third-party private equity and real estate projects with external developers.”
How financially healthy is Shelter?
Vanvaerenbergh: “Since last year, we have been managing over one billion euros in assets. We are profitable and continue to grow strongly. Even during tougher years, we remained in the black. Our margins are lower than those of asset managers with end clients, given our partnership-driven model.”
Peeters: “We operate in a highly regulated environment in Luxembourg, where we’re based and subject to strict oversight. Despite our smaller size, we are fully subject to the same national and European regulations as large asset managers. We hold a full license, which enables us to offer the entire spectrum of services without relying on third parties: funds, all MiFID services, and alternative asset management.”
Why base the company in Luxembourg?
Vanvaerenbergh: “Luxembourg is the global hub for UCITS funds and AIFs. Here, we find the best service providers to support Belgian (and other) clients. The regulatory environment is stable and internationally respected. Just like someone working in biotech would set up shop in Ghent rather than Limburg, it makes sense for us to be here.”
How do you see the sector evolving?
Vanvaerenbergh: “We’re seeing a clear shift in the landscape for those seeking asset management and financial solutions—from large banks to independent financial advisors. As a partner to those advisors, we’re part of that shift. It gives us strong tailwinds. There’s also huge pressure on fees, which are often too high. That hasn’t affected us much because we’ve always operated with a very competitive fee structure.”
Peeters: “Large financial institutions have become far less accessible. Yet clients still expect personalized service for their wealth. At the same time, technology is becoming crucial. Without investments in automation and cybersecurity, you’ll get buried under increasingly complex regulation and administrative burdens in our industry. That’s why we’re investing heavily in those areas.”
Vanvaerenbergh: “Our growth is thanks to efficiency and technology. We’ve heavily automated, including compliance reporting. Our team now consists of fifteen people, which makes us more efficient than comparable managers.”
What are your plans for the future?
Vanvaerenbergh: “Our growth has always been organic, prudent from a business perspective. We’ve never taken out loans to finance acquisitions. We operate on our organically generated positive cash flow, and that works very well. We haven’t paid out any dividends. We take a pragmatic, step-by-step approach with a two-year vision, staying flexible along the way.”
Peeters: “We’re not aiming for rapid expansion. My son has joined the company, so a quick sale is off the table. That said, we’re open to partnerships and expansion, for example into France or the Netherlands. The B2C segment or smaller institutional clients may also become interesting down the road. In addition, we want to make illiquid products more accessible to a broader audience—for example, through ELTIF structures or private investment companies. That’s how we guide clients toward the ‘specialty department’ of the financial supermarket.”
Finally, how do you view today’s markets and geopolitical climate?
Peeters: “No one has a crystal ball. We assess scenarios based on a particular outlook, but ultimately, it’s a roll of the dice. Market timing is nearly impossible. That’s why we stick to investing in quality with global diversification—like ‘hammock investors.’ Diversification is the only free lunch.”
Vanvaerenbergh: “Sure, that may sound boring. Investors sometimes want to go all-in on a single number, but that doesn’t help them. They benefit more from someone who stays calm, implements a vision, and builds scenarios that aren’t overly risky.”
Peeters: “The current geopolitical situation is not a black swan, but the risk of escalation is significant. One risk that shouldn’t be underestimated is cyberattacks. I believe we still underestimate the consequences of a bank becoming a serious victim of one. Or a key player in our financial infrastructure—say, Microsoft. That could trigger catastrophic, cascading effects. Finally, I’m deeply concerned about the accumulation of debt and the reckless behavior around it at a supranational level.”