The “Stiftungsmonitor” survey conducts an annual survey of topics of particular relevance to Austrian foundations. In the 2025 survey, one of the key focuses was again on asset management. In total, over 300 individuals from the foundation sector participated in the survey. The central question of this year’s survey was: What return expectations do foundations have for their asset management, and are these in line with expectations based on their defined strategy?

Self-image: transparent, professional, return-oriented

The “Stiftungsmonitor” survey provided the following key findings regarding investment organization and asset management:

• The professionalism of the investment organization is rated 2.5 (1-very good / 5-unsatisfactory).
• The transparency of internal decisions received a high rating of 1.3.
• 32 % of foundations invest dynamically (30 % bonds / 70 % stocks).
• 39 % invest conservatively (70 % bonds / 30 % stocks), 29 % invest in a balanced manner (50 % bonds / 50 % stocks).
• Half expect a long-term return after costs and taxes of over 4 % in real terms (after inflation).

In particular, the target return of over 4 % in real terms makes it clear that many foundations aim not only to preserve capital but also to achieve real asset growth. This goal is understandable – after all, only real returns can ensure the foundation’s purpose is fulfilled over the long term. Yet this is precisely where a discrepancy between aspiration and reality becomes apparent.

The reality: Structure and results do not align

Many portfolios are evidently invested more defensively than the return targets would suggest. Anyone seeking to achieve more than 4 % per annum after inflation over the long term requires – given a long-term inflation target of 2 % per annum in the eurozone and after asset management costs – a return of at least 7 % per annum.

Historically, such a target has only been achievable with equities (MSCI World from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2025: 7.1 % per year in EUR). Conservative portfolios consisting primarily of fixed-income securities, as well as balanced portfolios, do not realistically allow for this return target.

If 50 % of foundations expect real returns of over 4 % but are predominantly invested in conservative or balanced portfolios, the question arises as to how professional the investment organization actually is.

Reporting to monitor goal achievement or a meaningless collection of numbers?

Ongoing monitoring of target achievement only yields accurate results if investment targets have been defined that are realistic and consistent with the risk profile. Reporting should clearly illustrate asset performance, enable an objective assessment of investment results, explain any deviations from the investment target, and document the results of risk and cost monitoring.

The core conflict: self-perception versus reality

Against the backdrop of the survey results, the foundations’ positive self-assessment regarding transparency and professionalism raises the question: Does this perception align with reality?

What needs to be done?

1. Define the investment objective realistically: Capital preservation or real asset growth? What are the foundation’s guidelines? What financial goals are necessary to fulfill the foundation’s purpose?
2. Review the investment strategy: Is the strategic asset allocation suitable for realistically achieving the return target? How has this performed in the past, and what are market expectations?
3. Sharpen risk understanding: Higher real returns require a higher tolerance for market fluctuations. Short-term interventions in the strategy driven by unexpected results during volatile market phases should be avoided.
4. Monitor results: Continuous monitoring of portfolio performance allows deviations to be identified early and appropriate measures to be taken.
5. Professionalize reporting: Reporting should not only measure performance but also highlight and explain any deviations of the results from the strategy.

Only when objectives, risk profile, and investment strategy are aligned can reporting fulfill its function and enable efficient asset management. However, as long as structural questions regarding asset management are not honestly addressed, the foundation’s assets will remain caught between aspiration and reality.