Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Legal Matters The Company is regularly involved in litigation and arbitration as well as examinations, inquiries and investigations by various regulatory bodies, including the SEC, involving its compliance with, among other things, securities laws, client investment guidelines, laws governing the activities of broker-dealers and other laws and regulations affecting its products and other activities. Legal and regulatory matters of this nature involve or may involve but are not limited to the Company’s activities as an employer, issuer of securities, investor, investment adviser, broker-dealer or taxpayer. In addition, in the normal course of business, the Company discusses matters with its regulators raised during regulatory examinations or is otherwise subject to their inquiry. These matters could result in censures, fines, penalties or other sanctions. The Company accrues for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. Significant judgment is required in both the determination of probability and the determination as to whether a loss is reasonably estimable. In addition, in the event the Company determines that a loss is not probable, but is reasonably possible, and it becomes possible to develop what the Company believes to be a reasonable range of possible loss, then the Company will include disclosures related to such matter as appropriate and in compliance with ASC 450, Loss Contingencies. The disclosures, accruals or estimates, if any, resulting from the foregoing analysis are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impact of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter. Based on information currently available, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Company believes that the outcomes of its legal and regulatory proceedings are not likely, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, cash flows or its consolidated financial condition. However, in the event of unexpected subsequent developments and given the inherent unpredictability of these legal and regulatory matters, the Company can provide no assurance that its assessment of any claim, dispute, regulatory examination or investigation or other legal matter will reflect the ultimate outcome and an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods. Regulatory Matter As previously disclosed, in December 2014 the SEC announced a settlement with F-Squared Investments (“F-Squared”), an unaffiliated former subadviser, which settled charges that F-Squared had violated the federal securities laws as described in Investment Advisers Act Release No. 3988. The settlement related to F-Squared’s inaccurate performance information for the period of April 2001 through September 2008, including indices that certain Virtus mutual funds tracked beginning in September 2009 and January 2011. As part of the SEC’s non-public, confidential investigation of this matter, the SEC staff informed the Company that it was inquiring into whether the Company had violated securities laws or regulations with respect to F-Squared’s historical performance information. In November 2015, without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, the Company consented to the entry of the order which found that the Company violated certain Sections of the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Company agreed to pay a total of $16.5 million, which it paid in the fourth quarter of 2015. In re Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. Securities Litigation; formerly styled as Tom Cummins v. Virtus Investment Partners Inc. et al On February 20, 2015, a putative class action complaint alleging violation of the federal securities laws was filed by an individual shareholder against the Company and certain of the Company’s current officers (the “defendants”) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On April 21, 2015, three plaintiffs, including the original plaintiff, filed motions to be appointed lead plaintiff. On June 9, 2015, the court entered an order appointing Arkansas Teachers Retirement System lead plaintiff. On August 21, 2015, plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Consolidated Complaint”) amending the originally filed complaint. The Consolidated Complaint was purportedly filed on behalf of all purchasers of the Company’s common stock between January 25, 2013 and May 11, 2015 (the “Class Period”). The Consolidated Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the defendants disseminated materially false and misleading statements and concealed material adverse facts relating to certain funds subadvised by F-Squared. The Consolidated Complaint alleges claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5. The plaintiff seeks to recover unspecified damages. The Company believes that the suit is without merit and intends to defend it vigorously. A motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint was filed on behalf of the Company and the other defendants on October 21, 2015. Briefing of the motion was completed on December 4, 2015 and oral argument was held on December 17, 2015. The motion is pending. The Company believes that there is not a material loss that is probable and reasonably estimable related to this claim. Mark Youngers v. Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. et al On May 8, 2015, a putative class action complaint alleging violations of certain provisions of the federal securities laws was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California by an individual who alleges he is a former shareholder of one of the Virtus mutual funds formerly subadvised by F-Squared and formerly known as the AlphaSector Funds. The complaint purports to allege claims against the Company, certain of the Company’s officers and affiliates, and certain other parties (the “defendants”). The complaint was purportedly filed on behalf of purchasers of the AlphaSector Funds between May 8, 2010 and December 22, 2014, inclusive (the “Class Period”). The complaint alleges that during the Class Period the defendants disseminated materially false and misleading statements and concealed or omitted material facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading. On June 7, 2015, a group of three individuals, including the original plaintiff, filed a motion to be appointed lead plaintiff. No other motions to be appointed lead plaintiff were filed. On July 27, 2015, the court granted the motion, appointing movants as lead plaintiff. On July 27, 2015, the court issued an order to show cause requiring lead plaintiff to explain no later than July 31, 2015, why his claims should not be transferred and consolidated with the In re Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. Securities Litigation action discussed above. On October 1, 2015, plaintiff filed a First Amended Class Action Complaint which, among other things, added a derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty on behalf of Virtus Opportunities Trust. On October 19, 2015, The United States District Court for the Central District of California entered an order transferring the action to the Southern District of New York. On January 4, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint. Defendant's filed a motion to dismiss on February 1, 2016. The Company believes the plaintiff’s claims asserted in the complaint are frivolous and intends to defend it vigorously. The Company believes that there is not a material loss that is probable and reasonably estimable related to this claim. Lease Commitments The Company incurred rental expenses, primarily related to office space, under operating leases of $4.3 million, $3.7 million and $3.4 million in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Minimum aggregate rental payments required under operating leases that have initial or remaining non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2015 are as follows: $4.8 million in 2016; $5.0 million in 2017; $4.5 million in 2018; $2.9 million in 2019; $2.4 million in 2020; and $3.2 million thereafter.

Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Matters

The Company is regularly involved in litigation and arbitration as well as examinations, inquiries and investigations by various regulatory bodies, including the SEC, involving its compliance with, among other things, securities laws, client investment guidelines, laws governing the activities of broker-dealers and other laws and regulations affecting its products and other activities. Legal and regulatory matters of this nature involve or may involve but are not limited to the Company’s activities as an employer, issuer of securities, investor, investment adviser, broker-dealer or taxpayer. In addition, in the normal course of business, the Company discusses matters with its regulators raised during regulatory examinations or is otherwise subject to their inquiry. These matters could result in censures, fines, penalties or other sanctions.

The Company accrues for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. Significant judgment is required in both the determination of probability and the determination as to whether a loss is reasonably estimable. In addition, in the event the Company determines that a loss is not probable, but is reasonably possible, and it becomes possible to develop what the Company believes to be a reasonable range of possible loss, then the Company will include disclosures related to such matter as appropriate and in compliance with ASC 450, Loss Contingencies. The disclosures, accruals or estimates, if any, resulting from the foregoing analysis are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impact of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter. Based on information currently available, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Company believes that the outcomes of its legal and regulatory proceedings are not likely, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, cash flows or its consolidated financial condition. However, in the event of unexpected subsequent developments and given the inherent unpredictability of these legal and regulatory matters, the Company can provide no assurance that its assessment of any claim, dispute, regulatory examination or investigation or other legal matter will reflect the ultimate outcome and an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.

Regulatory Matter

As previously disclosed, in December 2014 the SEC announced a settlement with F-Squared Investments (“F-Squared”), an unaffiliated former subadviser, which settled charges that F-Squared had violated the federal securities laws as described in Investment Advisers Act Release No. 3988. The settlement related to F-Squared’s inaccurate performance information for the period of April 2001 through September 2008, including indices that certain Virtus mutual funds tracked beginning in September 2009 and January 2011. As part of the SEC’s non-public, confidential investigation of this matter, the SEC staff informed the Company that it was inquiring into whether the Company had violated securities laws or regulations with respect to F-Squared’s historical performance information. In November 2015, without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, the Company consented to the entry of the order which found that the Company violated certain Sections of the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Company agreed to pay a total of $16.5 million, which it paid in the fourth quarter of 2015.

In re Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. Securities Litigation; formerly styled as Tom Cummins v. Virtus Investment Partners Inc. et al

On February 20, 2015, a putative class action complaint alleging violation of the federal securities laws was filed by an individual shareholder against the Company and certain of the Company’s current officers (the “defendants”) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On April 21, 2015, three plaintiffs, including the original plaintiff, filed motions to be appointed lead plaintiff. On June 9, 2015, the court entered an order appointing Arkansas Teachers Retirement System lead plaintiff. On August 21, 2015, plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Consolidated Complaint”) amending the originally filed complaint. The Consolidated Complaint was purportedly filed on behalf of all purchasers of the Company’s common stock between January 25, 2013 and May 11, 2015 (the “Class Period”). The Consolidated Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the defendants disseminated materially false and misleading statements and concealed material adverse facts relating to certain funds subadvised by F-Squared. The Consolidated Complaint alleges claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5. The plaintiff seeks to recover unspecified damages. The Company believes that the suit is without merit and intends to defend it vigorously. A motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint was filed on behalf of the Company and the other defendants on October 21, 2015. Briefing of the motion was completed on December 4, 2015 and oral argument was held on December 17, 2015. The motion is pending. The Company believes that there is not a material loss that is probable and reasonably estimable related to this claim.

Mark Youngers v. Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. et al

On May 8, 2015, a putative class action complaint alleging violations of certain provisions of the federal securities laws was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California by an individual who alleges he is a former shareholder of one of the Virtus mutual funds formerly subadvised by F-Squared and formerly known as the AlphaSector Funds. The complaint purports to allege claims against the Company, certain of the Company’s officers and affiliates, and certain other parties (the “defendants”). The complaint was purportedly filed on behalf of purchasers of the AlphaSector Funds between May 8, 2010 and December 22, 2014, inclusive (the “Class Period”). The complaint alleges that during the Class Period the defendants disseminated materially false and misleading statements and concealed or omitted material facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading. On June 7, 2015, a group of three individuals, including the original plaintiff, filed a motion to be appointed lead plaintiff. No other motions to be appointed lead plaintiff were filed. On July 27, 2015, the court granted the motion, appointing movants as lead plaintiff. On July 27, 2015, the court issued an order to show cause requiring lead plaintiff to explain no later than July 31, 2015, why his claims should not be transferred and consolidated with the In re Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. Securities Litigation action discussed above. On October 1, 2015, plaintiff filed a First Amended Class Action Complaint which, among other things, added a derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty on behalf of Virtus Opportunities Trust. On October 19, 2015, The United States District Court for the Central District of California entered an order transferring the action to the Southern District of New York. On January 4, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint. Defendant's filed a motion to dismiss on February 1, 2016. The Company believes the plaintiff’s claims asserted in the complaint are frivolous and intends to defend it vigorously. The Company believes that there is not a material loss that is probable and reasonably estimable related to this claim.

Lease Commitments

The Company incurred rental expenses, primarily related to office space, under operating leases of $4.3 million, $3.7 million and $3.4 million in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Minimum aggregate rental payments required under operating leases that have initial or remaining non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2015 are as follows: $4.8 million in 2016; $5.0 million in 2017; $4.5 million in 2018; $2.9 million in 2019; $2.4 million in 2020; and $3.2 million thereafter.