Raymond James's takeover of Charles Stanley is expected to complete in December, following regulatory and court approvals.
In the interim results published today (November 18), Charles Stanley reported a pre-tax profit of £4.7m, down from £4.8m last year, but this included about £4m of exceptional costs relating to the offer by Raymond James.
Had it not been for these, pre-tax profits would have been up 41 per cent at £9.3m in the six months to September 30.
Total revenues rose by 12.2 per cent to £91.9m, up from the £81.9m posted in the first half of the firm's 2021 year to March.
The group said it saw “record levels” of funds under management, up 7 per cent to £27.4bn at the half year end.
The update follows an announcement in July where Raymond James struck a deal worth £278.9m to buy Charles Stanley.
The boards of Raymond James and Charles Stanley at the time said they had reached an agreement on the terms of the acquisition, which will see Raymond James acquire the entire issued share capital of Charles Stanley.
In the results, net assets on the balance sheet were up by 2.8 per cent to £126.7m compared to March 31, while the cash balance fell to £93.4m from £105.4m.
Paul Abberley, chief executive of Charles Stanley, said: “The group has performed well, aided by the improvement in investor confidence following the onset of the coronavirus vaccination programme and global economic recovery.
“We are continuing with initiatives to enhance our customer proposition, including a streamlined digital offering.”
Meanwhile, Charles Stanley said it had continued to keep control of underlying expenditure after it increased by £7.2m to £82.4m.
Of this figure £5.9m was attributable to increased remuneration.
The wealth management group said underlying costs excluding staff costs rose by £1.5m and this rise reflected a full six months of outsourced IT costs, which amounted to £0.9m.
Business transformation projects have also contributed £0.7m in costs.
It said: “We are also in the process of enhancing the digital proposition for clients which has resulted in additional expenditure in the period.”
What do you think about the issues raised by this story? Email us on FTAletters@ft.com to let us know