portfolio management vs. asset management

bump

I think it is important to understand that every firm is different in this regard, usually fund specific. Asset managers, in most instances, will not get involved in the portfolio level analysis (with exception to buy/hold analysis). At the portfolio level, portfolio management positions, take into consideration the fund as a whole. In such a position, emphasis is placed on acquisition/disposition, debt strategy, exposure and so forth. As such, you are much less intimate with the physically assets themselves, whereas an asset manager would be dealing with their respective assets on a daily basis. The portfolio view interacts with a little bit of everyone and has a focuses on fund level analytics and scenarios. Both roles provide valuable experience, great to know the asset level underwriting, but also important to know how an investment fund works inside and out.

varies by firm... some places assign an asset manager a portfolio of assets and call them a portfolio manager, but their responsibility stops with day to day operations of those assets. in others, the portfolio manager has discretion over the allocation of capital - making decisions about what to acquire and dispose of - with input from multiple asset managers who have more day to day responsibility for the real estate. in that role, the portfolio manager also likely has responsibilities for managing relationships with clients and raising capital. as such, the pm is senior to the am. in the shops you mentioned above, the portfolio manager (and likely an assistant portfolio manager) are professionals who have worked their way up through Asset Management and/or acquisitions roles and are likely fairly senior professionals in the firm. they may have analysts and associates who work for them who are less experienced on the portfolio management team, as well.

At my current company(multifamily operator/builder/renovator), the portfolio managers work solely on fund-level decisions and do very little with individual assets. except when it comes to timing of sales. They are interested on total portfolio returns to the investors and meeting our hurdles.

Asset managers have specific goals for their individual assets since they typically cover multiple assets across multiple funds. They focus on a lot of operational decisions(replacing equipment, renovation scope, lease pricing, etc). As to the question about whether or not it would set you up for a role in acquisitions, it really depends.

At my current position I have worked with portfolio management, Asset Management, and acquisitions, but in general the asset managers have much more contact with acquisitions than the the portfolio guys. When we are going to purchase something, there will typically be a few site visits and proforma reviews by both acq. guys and asset managers, but the portfolio people just kind of wait on the sidelines until the property closes.

I don't know if that is unique to the company, but that's what I have seen happen here. From my point of view, the portfolio managers have more "prestige", but it is a lot more boring than asset management or acquisitions. Plus, they are stuck in the office every day and never travel unless they are MD's and involved in fundraising.

I work with a family office with about 20 in-house employees, so naturally, everyone is a part of everything. Specifically, our Asset Manager is both an AM and PM as defined in your original post. She deals with leasing, capex, unit turns, updating proformas, quarterly reports, and more. By the same token, our CFO/Director of MF Acquisitions also assists her with some aspects of her day to day, but most of the burden is put on her. Either way, when underwriting a potential acquisition I typically refer to her for expense assumptions if its a market we are familiar with. Even if it's not, she can give insight to how an asset of specific size/age typically performs with our management. Keep in mind, we 3rd party our property level management, but she individually supervises each manager assigned to those properties.

going off the original post, i think PM is more of an end goal. you're not going to be a good PM at a top shop like PREI or Calrion unless you have a good understanding of both Asset Management and acquisitions. so, to answer your question, it depends on my age. if i'm 24, i'd rather pick asset management. if i'm 44, i'd rather pick portfolio management. to set yourself up for acquisitions in the future, an Asset Management role that gives exposure to redevelopments/dispos/refis is probably the best path.