There is a number buried in this fund’s name that most investors never stop to decode. Allianz Dynamic Multi Asset Strategy SRI 75 manages €5.5bn. The annual fee (OCF) on the share class most private investors end up in is 2.39%. And nobody really explains what the 75 means.
What the number actually means
The 75 is a risk-budget target — not an equity allocation, not a return objective, and not a percentile ranking. It means the fund is managed to carry risk equivalent to holding 75% of its portfolio in global equities and 25% in bonds. Think of it as the fund saying: at any given moment, I will feel about three-quarters as volatile as a pure equity fund.
This matters for two reasons. First, it’s dynamic. If equity markets become more volatile, the manager trims equity exposure to keep the risk reading near 75 — and adds it back when volatility falls. The 75 is a ceiling on how equity-like the fund behaves, not a fixed split. Second, it sits on top of an SRI screen. SRI stands for Sustainable and Responsible Investment — a rules-based filter that removes companies failing certain environmental, social, and governance criteria. In practice that narrows the investable universe, particularly in energy, mining, and certain financial stocks, which shifts the asset mix relative to a conventional multi-asset fund.
A conventional 60/40 multi-asset fund — 60% equities, 40% bonds, no screen — would typically sit around a risk target of 60, not 75. The SRI overlay here is doing something perhaps counterintuitive: by excluding certain defensive income stocks and commodity producers, the remaining portfolio skews slightly more towards growth-oriented equities to hit the 75 risk budget. The screen doesn’t just shrink the universe; it reshapes where the risk sits.
The share-class problem — and it is a problem
There are three share classes of this fund in circulation. The underly ing strategy is identical across all three. The fees are not.
The CT (EUR) share class — the one most retail investors encounter on standard platforms — charges an annual fee of 2.39%. The I (EUR) institutional class, available to institutional buyers, charges 0.98%. The IT2 (EUR) class, also institutional, goes further at 0.89%.
To be clear: the I and IT2 classes are not available on a normal investment platform. You cannot buy them through a standard ISA or SIPP account. They exist for pension funds, insurance mandates, and other institutional buyers with large minimum investments. If you are a private investor finding this fund on a platform, you are in the CT class and paying 2.39%.
The 75 tells you how much risk you’re taking. The CT class tells you how much you’re paying for someone to manage it. Both numbers deserve attention.
A 150-basis-point gap between what retail and institutional investors pay — for the same strategy, the same holdings, the same SRI screen, the same risk target — is worth pausing on. Over ten years, that compounding difference in fees is material. It doesn’t make the fund bad; active multi-asset management with a sustainability overlay isn’t cheap to run. But an investor who doesn’t notice the share class suffix is leaving the fee question entirely unasked.
What to watch next
Three things are worth tracking if you hold or are considering this fund. First, equity-market volatility — when that rises sharply, the manager has to reduce risk-budget exposure, which means selling equities into a falling market. How quickly and how cleanly the fund does that is a real test of the 75 mechanism. Second, the SRI screen’s evolution: sustainable-investment classification rules in Europe are tightening, and any reclassification of the fund’s SFDR status could shift the underly ing universe and the asset mix. And third, platform availability of cleaner share classes — fee compression across the active fund industry has brought some institutional-lite tiers into retail reach in other fund ranges. Whether that happens here for the I or IT2 classes is the development that would most change the fee conversation.
Funds Benchmark provides research and tooling for institutional and private investors. Nothing in this note is investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any specific fund. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results.