NAV Oversight Is Moving Up the Agenda
Here’s What the Industry Is Talking About
As fund structures, client portfolios, and market infrastructure become more complex, the ability to evidence strong NAV oversight is becoming increasingly important. For many firms, the conversation is shifting from “Have the numbers been checked?” to “Can we demonstrate the governance, controls, and traceability behind them?”
That shift was at the heart of a recent breakfast roundtable co-hosted by KPMG au Québec and Multifonds, bringing together leaders and practitioners from asset management, wealth management, and pension funds to discuss the evolving role of NAV oversight and its implications for operating models, accountability, and technology.
Moderated by Stéphane Gagné, VP & Regional Director at Multifonds Canada & US, the discussion brought together Gabriela Stamate, Morgan Leroy, and Jonathan Hoffee for an engaging exchange on one of the industry’s increasingly critical operational priorities.
NAV oversight is no longer just a fund accounting topic
One of the clearest messages from the roundtable was that NAV oversight now extends well beyond traditional mutual funds and ETFs.
As firms manage a wider range of products, portfolios, and client mandates, the need for stronger valuation oversight is becoming more relevant across the operating model. This includes not only fund-level NAVs, but also broader client portfolios where pricing, positions, transactions, and balances must be reconciled with consistency.
The industry is increasingly seeing NAV oversight as a discipline that supports transparency, accountability, and operational resilience.
Outsourcing does not remove responsibility
Even when valuation or fund administration activities are outsourced, responsibility does not disappear. Firms still need to demonstrate that appropriate oversight and reconciliation processes are in place.
This means having a clear view across positions, transactions, pricing, cash and balances, exceptions, adjustments, and the responsibilities of internal and external parties.
The group discussed how regulatory expectations and asset manager scrutiny continue to intensify. In this environment, firms need to evidence not only that controls exist, but that they are consistently applied and fit for purpose.
Governance is becoming as important as process
The roundtable also explored the growing interest in third-party NAV oversight solutions.
For many firms, the question is no longer whether oversight is needed, but how it should be structured. Technology can play a significant role, but it must be supported by clear governance.
Without this, even a sophisticated process can become fragmented.
The discussion made clear that NAV oversight should not be treated as a periodic check or manual review exercise. It needs to be embedded into the daily operating rhythm, with the right governance model behind it.
Excel-based controls are reaching their limits
Excel continues to play a role in many organizations, particularly where teams need flexibility. However, as volumes increase and oversight expectations become more demanding, manual processes can quickly create risk.
The key challenges are familiar: version control issues, dependency on individual users, difficulty scaling, and limited automated exception management.
Proven technology solutions can help firms move toward a more controlled and scalable model, with stronger auditability, workflow, reporting, and exception-driven oversight. This is especially important as firms face more complex products, shorter settlement cycles, and higher expectations for operational transparency.
Broader industry change is adding pressure
The conversation also touched on several wider trends shaping the future of fund operations.
ETF growth is creating new operational considerations, including market structure, liquidity, and the concentration of market makers. As ETFs become more central to investor portfolios, the infrastructure supporting them needs to keep pace.
Tokenization was another key theme. While the U.S. and Europe are currently seen as moving faster than Canada, momentum is building globally. Tokenized operating models will require firms to rethink how ownership, transactions, investor records, and controls are managed across traditional and digital ecosystems.
The move toward shorter settlement cycles, including T+1 and eventually T+0, also has direct implications for reconciliation, pricing, exception handling, and oversight. As timelines compress, firms will have less room for manual intervention.
Together, these trends show why NAV oversight needs to evolve alongside the market.
Continuing the conversation
The roundtable made one point clear: NAV oversight is becoming a defining test of operational readiness.
As products, portfolios, and settlement cycles become more complex, firms need more than manual checks. They need connected data, clear ownership, and technology that can turn oversight into a scalable, daily control.
Connect with Multifonds to explore how technology can help make NAV oversight more transparent, resilient, and ready for what comes next.
