Late invoices are often treated as a routine administrative problem. For institutional investors, however, they can point to wider questions about cost, control, and the quality of service received from a custodian.
Our Global Custody Survey found high satisfaction with core custody and relationship governance. Beyond those headline measures, the activities surrounding the core service tell a more uneven story.
Billing errors, reduced documentation support, manual data extraction, and FX costs with limited independent review can all affect an institution’s operating model. While these may appear to be isolated service issues, their cumulative effect can increase costs, absorb internal resources, and weaken operational control.
The costs institutions may not see
Some 61% of respondents reported delays in receiving custodian invoices, while 39% had received inaccurate invoices. Reported errors included incorrect fee rates or asset values, charges for services that had not been requested, and, in some cases, continued billing for closed accounts.
Without regular reconciliation, these errors can persist across several billing periods.
FX presents a less visible concern because spreads rarely appear as a separate charge on an invoice. More than half of respondents had no formal process for assessing whether their FX rates were competitive, while 39% did not know whether a defined spread agreement was in place with their custodian.
This leaves an important question: if the terms are unclear and the rates are not independently benchmarked, how can an institution determine whether it is receiving fair value?
Routine gaps can create wider pressure
Custodians continue to invest heavily in technology, but 47% of respondents still obtain data by downloading PDF or Excel files from a custodian portal. Only 11% said their custodian’s technology always reduced manual work.
Technology alone cannot resolve every service issue. Data must be delivered in a form that fits the client’s operating needs, supported by people who can explain the tools available and respond effectively when problems arise.
The survey found a similar tension in private asset reporting. Some 57% of respondents rely on their custodian to maintain a private book of record, yet half believe the reporting they receive still has room for improvement. For institutions with private asset allocations, delays or inconsistencies can affect records, reporting, and confidence in the information used by investment teams.
Documentation is creating pressure too. Half of respondents had experienced reduced custodian assistance with global documentation. Internal knowledge gaps and difficulty completing market-specific documents were the most common tax reclaim challenges, potentially adding to internal workloads and delaying the recovery of funds.
Long-standing relationships remain valuable, but tenure alone does not confirm that services are accurate, cost-effective, or suited to current needs. Some of the most consequential custody risks may sit outside the core service, in routine activities where small gaps can accumulate without attracting senior attention.
Global custody in focus: Insights from the Global Custody Survey examines how institutional clients experience custody across invoicing, data, tax reclaim, private assets, relationship management, and FX oversight.
