<p>Fidelity Investments is a corporation which manages investments on behalf of clients.   It does not own &quot;its&quot; assets under management. Those assets belong to its clients.</p>
<p>In order to manage its clients' assets, it will have some assets of its own, eg offices and computer systems.  But the total value of the assets it owns will be a tiny proportion of the total value of its assets under management.</p>
<p>It would be a fallacy therefore to apply the estimated 24.5% owned by Abigail Johnson to the total of assets under management.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-14T21:10:14.967Z
2021-12-14T21:10:14.967Z
Adam Bailey
<p>Could you help me to understand the connection between assets under management and net worth?
In my understanding, if a corporation has <span class="math-container">$X$</span> dollars Assets Under Management, and if a shareholder owns <span class="math-container">$Y\%$</span> of that corporation, then this contributes <span class="math-container">$\frac{X\cdot Y}{100}$</span> dollars to the net worth of the shareholder.</p>
<p>However, on the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidelity_Investments" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia page</a>
of Fidelity Investments I see that this corporation has AUM more than <span class="math-container">$4$</span> trillion dollars. At the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_Johnson" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia page</a>
of Abigail Johnson, it says that she owns approximately <span class="math-container">$24.5\%$</span> of the corporaton. So this would contribute 1 trillion dollars to her net worth. But the same <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_Johnson" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia page</a> states that her net worth is only <span class="math-container">$25.8$</span> billion dollars.</p>
<p>So clearly I have some misunderstanding. Could you help me to understand the connection between AUM and net worth, and how it relates to this example?</p>

<stock-market><corporate-finance>
Connection assets under management and net worth
Riemann
# Connection assets under management and net worth

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-14)

Could you help me to understand the connection between assets under management and net worth?
In my understanding, if a corporation has $X$ dollars Assets Under Management, and if a shareholder owns $Y\%$ of that corporation, then this contributes $\frac{X\cdot Y}{100}$ dollars to the net worth of the shareholder.

However, on the [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidelity_Investments)
of Fidelity Investments I see that this corporation has AUM more than $4$ trillion dollars. At the [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_Johnson)
of Abigail Johnson, it says that she owns approximately $24.5\%$ of the corporaton. So this would contribute 1 trillion dollars to her net worth. But the same [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_Johnson) states that her net worth is only $25.8$ billion dollars.

So clearly I have some misunderstanding. Could you help me to understand the connection between AUM and net worth, and how it relates to this example?

**Tags:** stock-market, corporate-finance

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2021-12-14. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

Fidelity Investments is a corporation which manages investments on behalf of clients. It does not own "its" assets under management. Those assets belong to its clients.

In order to manage its clients' assets, it will have some assets of its own, eg offices and computer systems. But the total value of the assets it owns will be a tiny proportion of the total value of its assets under management.

It would be a fallacy therefore to apply the estimated 24.5% owned by Abigail Johnson to the total of assets under management.


---

