The performance of the underlying funds have been relatively...

The performance of the underlying funds have been relatively lackluster since the IPO and FUM mainly follows performance. ie. You can be growing funds quickly and have massive inflows chasing that performance. The old double whammy. Obviously in the early 2010's the performance was far better (percentage-wise). Hard to say for sure if this was skill, luck or the advantages of running much smaller fund sizes. I suspect a combination of all three. That's really what it comes down to. It's hard to see those percentage-type gains being repeated again with much bigger fund sizes and not literally starting at the bottom of a market post-crash, but I don't think we need it to still do reasonably well.