Picture this: a high-net-worth client with a portfolio of ₹50 lakh in equity mutual funds approaches you, expressing interest in a sophisticated Specialized Investment Fund (SIF) strategy that uses derivatives for hedging. As you review the strategy, the client questions why the fund manager prefers exchange-traded futures over bespoke forward contracts. For a distributor, the answer lies in the structural mechanics of liquidity, which directly impacts how quickly a fund can adjust its market exposure without incurring significant transaction costs or price impact.
Market liquidity is primarily driven by three factors: the number of active participants, the degree of contract standardization, and the existence of a central clearing mechanism. In the Indian equity derivatives market, futures are standardized by the exchange, meaning every contract for a specific underlying asset has the same expiry date and lot size. This uniformity allows a vast number of market participants, including institutional investors and proprietary traders, to trade seamlessly.
Because there is a high density of buy and sell orders at any given moment, the bid-ask spread remains tight, ensuring that the fund manager can exit positions without eroding the scheme’s net asset value through high impact costs.
In contrast, forward contracts are bilateral agreements negotiated privately between two parties. If a fund manager enters into a forward contract, they are effectively tethered to that specific counterparty until the contract matures. If the manager suddenly needs to liquidate the position to meet redemption requests, they cannot simply walk into an open market and trade. They must either renegotiate with the original counterparty or enter into a new, offsetting contract, both of which are cumbersome and often expensive.
For an SIF investment strategy, relying on illiquid instruments could leave the manager unable to rebalance the portfolio during periods of high market volatility, potentially threatening the interests of the investors.
As a distributor, your ability to explain these trade-offs is a hallmark of professional suitability assessment. When you recommend a strategy, you are essentially vetting the manager’s operational toolkit. If a strategy relies heavily on illiquid, bespoke instruments, the associated liquidity risk should be clearly articulated to the client. Understanding that liquidity is not just about the underlying asset but also the structure of the instrument itself ensures that you can guide your clients toward strategies that are transparent and operationally robust.
Ultimately, liquidity is the bridge between market opportunity and effective portfolio management. By prioritizing strategies that utilize exchange-traded instruments, you advocate for a level of transparency and efficiency that protects the client from unnecessary frictional costs and counterparty uncertainty.
Nuance
Check Your Understanding
An SIF strategy uses forwards to hedge a portfolio of mid-cap stocks. The distributor notices that the fund frequently struggles to adjust its hedge during periods of market stress. What is the most likely reason for this difficulty?
Which factor most significantly contributes to the superior liquidity of futures contracts compared to forwards for institutional fund management?
This is a companion read for Section 15.5 — Differences between Forwards and Futures from Pass Certification Examination for Mutual Fund - Specialized Investment Fund Distributors by Akhilesh Gururani, available on Amazon Kindle.
Copyright © 2026 Akhilesh Gururani. All rights reserved.