Foto: Tax Credits
. Dos filiales de Citigroup pagarán 180 millones de dólares para liquidar cargos por fraude de hedge funds
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that two Citigroup affiliates have agreed to pay nearly $180 million to settle charges that they defrauded investors in two hedge funds by claiming they were safe, low-risk, and suitable for traditional bond investors. The funds later crumbled and eventually collapsed during the financial crisis.
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (CGMI) and Citigroup Alternative Investments LLC (CAI) agreed to bear all costs of distributing the $180 million in settlement funds to harmed investors.
An SEC investigation found that the Citigroup affiliates made false and misleading representations to investors in the ASTA/MAT fund and the Falcon fund, which collectively raised nearly $3 billion in capital from approximately 4,000 investors before collapsing. In talking with investors, they did not disclose the very real risks of the funds. Even as the funds began to collapse and CAI accepted nearly $110 million in additional investments, the Citigroup affiliates did not disclose the dire condition of the funds and continued to assure investors that they were low-risk, well-capitalized investments with adequate liquidity. Many of the misleading representations made by Citigroup employees were at odds with disclosures made in marketing documents and written materials provided to investors.
“Firms cannot insulate themselves from liability for their employees’ misrepresentations by invoking the fine print contained in written disclosures,” said Andrew Ceresney, Director of the SEC’s Enforcement Division. “Advisers at these Citigroup affiliates were supposed to be looking out for investors’ best interests, but falsely assured them they were making safe investments even when the funds were on the brink of disaster.”
According to the SEC’s order instituting a settled administrative proceeding:
The ASTA/MAT fund was a municipal arbitrage fund that purchased municipal bonds and used a Treasury or LIBOR swap to hedge interest rate risks.
The Falcon fund was a multi-strategy fund that invested in ASTA/MAT and other fixed income strategies, such as CDOs, CLOs, and asset-backed securities.
The funds, both highly leveraged, were sold exclusively to advisory clients of Citigroup Private Bank or Smith Barney by financial advisers associated with CGMI. Both funds were managed by CAI.
Investors in these funds effectively paid advisory fees for two tiers of investment advice: first from the financial advisers of CGMI and secondly from the fund manager, CAI.
Neither Falcon nor ASTA/MAT was a low-risk investment akin to a bond alternative as investors were repeatedly told.
CGMI and CAI failed to control the misrepresentations made to investors as their employees misleadingly minimized the significant risk of loss resulting from the funds’ investment strategy and use of leverage among other things.
CAI failed to adopt and implement policies and procedures that prevented the financial advisers and fund manager from making contradictory and false representations.
CGMI and CAI consented to the SEC order without admitting or denying the findings that both firms willfully violated Sections 17(a)(2) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933, GCMI willfully violated Section 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, and CAI willfully violated Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rules 206(4)-7 and 206(4)-8. Both firms agreed to be censured and must cease and desist from committing future violations of these provisions.
China’s desperate efforts to enhance its competitiveness are putting a lot of pressure on its Asian neighbours. This is why currencies in the region are tumbling: the South Korean won, the Australian dollar, the Thai baht and the Taiwanese dollar have all, amongst others, fallen sharply against the greenback, said Patrice Gautry, Chief Economist at UBP.
“Once again we find ourselves facing a deflationary shock. China is a heavyweight in international trade and, whilst we do not expect a repeat of the 1997 crisis, the rest of the global economy was much more vibrant back then, and the only country not to devalue its currency was China itself. Nowadays, in a world where demand is already sluggish, these beggar-thy-neighbour policies could have a lasting impact on growth and earnings”, says UBP.
“For the last two years we have not recommended holding or buying bonds in local EM currencies; this has also been true for yuan-denominated securities. We recommend continuing to have no exposure to these securities”, the experts add.
They remain highly cautious on EM equities, as what they have outlined above is going to have a negative impact on margins, earnings and cash flows. “EM equities will continue to underperform, so we recommend staying markedly underweight, as it is too early to go back into them”.
And the impact in DM?
“We have to assess the impact on developed equity markets of this reversal of policy in China. Might it shift when the Fed starts to normalise its monetary policy? For now, we do not know, although it will undoubtedly weigh on import prices and consequently on inflation figures. Central banks are on alert, ready to provide more liquidity should the markets and risk assets come under too much pressure. Nevertheless we recommend maintaining equity and risk-asset allocations at the levels recommended by the Investment Committee, but no higher than that”. Developed equity markets are still on an upward trend, but their momentum is weakening.
Context
China’s move to weaken its currency on Tuesday morning came as a surprise. The size of this first devaluation may appear insignificant, but it represents a u-turn in the country’s currency policy. The dollar peg was seen as a tool to attract foreign investment – luring it in with a stable currency – but it also helped the yuan to gain the status of a reserve currency; it went on to form part of central banks’ forex reserves around the world.
“Growth is slowing down quickly in China”, according to Gautry “The Chinese government was hoping to kick-start domestic consumption thanks to a vibrant stock market, which translated into wealth effects for Chinese households. With the recent crash and the panicked official reaction to counter it, these hopes have been dashed. The fall in commodity prices around the world (these are currently at their lowest levels in twelve years) is undoubtedly linked to recent events in China, where much slower economic growth has meant lower demand for commodities in general”.
The only option left was to boost exports – which fell sharply recently – by devaluing its currency. Recently, the yuan has been under pressure and, in order to maintain its peg, the PBoC had to sell dollars, which explains why its domestic reserves have fallen significantly since the beginning of the year. Weakening the currency could be seen as a cheap way to boost exports, but that signal will push many investors and corporations to sell even more yuan, making it harder for the PBoC to oversee a steady depreciation of the yuan.
Foto: Davide D'Amico
. Londres se mantiene como mayor centro financiero mundial, por delante de Nueva York
Registration is now open for the CFA 2015 European Investment Conference, held in London on 26–27 November. This year’s conference, which will deliver technical workshops for investment practitioners and valuable insights on the region’s most pressing economic developments, includes sessions with the following speakers:
Lord Sebastian Coe, executive chairman at CSM Sport & Entertainment and former chairman of the London Organising Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Anne Richards, chief investment officer and head of the EMEA region at Aberdeen Asset Management.
Tim Harford, behavioral economist and columnist at the Financial Times.
Michala Marcussen, CFA, head of global economics at Societe Generale Corporate and Investment Banking.
At last year’s European Investment Conference, James Montier made his case against shareholder value maximization, Philippa Malmgren explained how geopolitical conflicts are connected to economic pressures, Elroy Dimson examined John Maynard Keynes’ track record as an investor, and a panel of experts discussed economic prospects for China and India.
Bolsa de París. Foto: Francisco J.González, Flickr, Creative Commons. Una consolidación temporal que no afecta al potencial alcista de las acciones europeas
China’s Central Bank has taken steps to devalue the renminbi. The initial direct impact on eurozone equities is fairly limited but certain sectors and companies have more pronounced exposure.According to Martin Skanberg, European Equities Fund Manager at Schroders, debate has raged surrounding the rationale behind China’s currency devaluation. One interpretation puts this week’s moves down to political considerations, with China seeking to create a more market-driven exchange rate that would allow its currency to gain admission to the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket -an international reserve asset, created by the IMF, which member countries can use to supplement their official reserves-.
“Nonetheless, markets have focused on the possibility of further steep declines in the renminbi, and we are mindful that the change in Chinese monetary policy may also be indicative of weaker fundamentals and the deteriorating health of the economy. Slowing GDP growth is backed up by anecdotal company feedback which points to a considerable contraction in Chinese trade data, with export and import levels both meaningfully lower. As a result, global risk premia may need to adjust higher to reflect lower global growth. This could see an acceleration of emerging market stress which is likely to continue to have a negative impact on commodities and energy prices”.
Risk of deflationary pressure
One consequence is that we may see deflationary pressures re-emerge. These are also in evidence from lower factory gate prices (producer price index) in China which are currently at -5% year on year. Emerging market contagion, currency wars and the potential for spill over into the Asia Pacific basin represent a wider risk to European equities. A more pronounced period of competitive devaluations cannot be entirely ruled out as the renminbi is generally regarded to be some 5-10% overvalued against the dollar, but the gap is much more considerable against other emerging market currencies, says the expert.
On the other hand, another scenario is that imported deflationary pressure into the eurozone and adjacent economies such as the UK could lead the European Central Bank to extend its quantitative easing policy. This would likely be supportive for sentiment towards eurozone equities. Additionally, the risk of an extreme devaluation would be nullified if the authorities’ intention is simply to create a more flexible exchange rate.
Eurozone exposure to China is moderate
Around 6% of total eurozone exports go to China, with some 10% of the region’s imports coming from China (source: Citibank). While this is not immaterial, the overall level is fairly moderate and highlights the fact that domestic intra-eurozone trade is far more important to eurozone GDP. Further currency devaluations would act as a headwind to export pricing, but cheaper imports may offset this and support domestic consumption in the eurozone.
“Moreover, we need to ensure that perspective is retained over the Chinese devaluation. Given the euro’s weakness against the dollar over the past year, the euro has in fact depreciated by c.2% against the renminbi over the last 12 months and is nearly 9% weaker over the past two years. Consequently, eurozone exporters are still enjoying currency tailwinds at current levels”.
“In terms of eurozone equity exposure, detailed data is limited. It is estimated that c.12% of market cap weighted sales (for Eurostoxx 50 companies) go to the Asia Pacific region, with only 2% going directly to China. We should note that these figures capture only direct sales, and do not fully reflect value added domestic sales that may ultimately become China exports. However we would estimate the exposure to earnings to be slightly higher, approximately 6%. Once again, this demonstrates the reliance on domestic European trade (c.59%). Hence we anticipate only a moderate impact from the foreign exchange move on the wider eurozone markets”.
Luxury goods and autos among the most affected sectors
That said, within this there are sectors and companies that have significant exposure. These include sectors such as luxury goods, technology, automotive, capital goods and materials (mining and chemicals in particular). “For these, translated profits will be impacted but it is also possible that competitive transactional disadvantages may emerge due to revitalised competition (for example, this could impact some industrial and chemical companies which face strong Chinese competition)”.
According to the fund manager, whilst the dispersion is wide across the eurozone, there are many domestic industries that have by definition limited or no direct exposure including banks, insurance, travel, media, utilities and telecom services to name but a few.
Domestic eurozone exposure is preferred
“In terms of our positioning, we have a clear preference for stocks with eurozone exposure, including banks, which have improving momentum amidst the domestic recovery. Meanwhile, consumer resilience in the eurozone is well underpinned thanks to the stimulus offered by low or negative interest rates, cheap oil, rising bank credit impulse and pent-up demand from the recovery of peripheral Europe. By contrast, we have limited exposure to luxury goods and automotives which should prove beneficial if these sectors continue to lag the wider market.
As ever, we remain on the lookout for mispriced opportunities, and future foreign exchange induced stockmarket volatility may well lead to exaggerated movements which can be exploited by active managers”.
Foto: Jonathan, Flickr, Creative Commons. Julius Baer nombra a Jimmy Lee nuevo responsable para Asia Pacífico
Jimmy Lee will join Julius Baer on 1 October 2015 to become Head Asia Pacific and a member of Bank Julius Baer’s Executive Board with effect from 1 January 2016. In the past 25 years, Jimmy Lee has had a proven track record in the private banking industry in Asia and thus brings a wealth of expertise to Julius Baer.
Having worked at Credit Suisse Group for a total of eleven years, he was most recently Market Group Head Hong Kong at Credit Suisse. Previously, he acted as Chief Executive Officer Asia of Clariden Leu from 2009 to 2012 and headed the integration of the bank into Credit Suisse in the Asia Pacific region in 2012/13. Prior to that, Jimmy Lee was Head Private Wealth Management Southeast Asia / South Asia at Deutsche Bank for five years and also held a number of other top management positions in the financial industry in Asia.
After successfully building up and leading Julius Baer’s business in Asia Pacific for ten years and managing the seamless integration of Merrill Lynch’s International Wealth Management business (IWM) into the Bank’s local operations, Dr Thomas R. Meier, current Region Head Asia Pacific, has expressed the wish to return to Switzerland to continue his distinguished career at the Group’s headquarters. As of 1 January 2016, he will be non-executive Vice Chairman Wealth Management, reporting to Chief Executive Officer Boris F.J. Collardi. As part of this new role, he will take over various key tasks at the Group level.
Boris F.J. Collardi, Chief Executive Officer of Julius Baer, commented: “I am very pleased that we have been able to win Jimmy Lee and warmly welcome him to Julius Baer. With Jimmy’s vast experience and his extensive network, we will launch the next phase of growth and take our presence in Asia to the next level.”
Boris F.J. Collardi added: “In the past ten years, Tom Meier has led our operations in Asia Pacific from modest beginnings to being one of the major players in this most important growth market today. I would like to thank him for this truly extraordinary achievement. In his new role as non-executive Vice Chairman, we can continue to draw on Tom’s vast and valuable private banking knowledge.”
Today, Asia is Julius Baer’s second home market with nearly a quarter of the Group’s assets under management globally. After the successful integration of the IWM business in 2014, Julius Baer is now one of the leading international wealth managers in the region.
Photo: Francis Bijl . iShares Is Preparing a New ETF Tracking the Barclays Global Aggregate Index, Expanding its Fixed Income Strategies
iShares has filed for a fund that will be the international answer to its iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF, as well as the main competitor of the Vanguard Total International Bond ETF.
The iShares International Aggregate Bond ETF will track the Barclays Global Aggregate ex USD 10% Issuer Capped (Hedged) Index, a currency-hedged index of nearly 8,000 non-USD investment-grade fixed-income securities issued in 55 developed and emerging countries.
The Vanguard Total International Bond ETF is the only fund of its kind at the moment; it also provides broad exposure to the non-U.S. investment-grade bond space with a currency hedge. It was launched in 2013 and has accumulated nearly US$ 3.5 billion in assets under management. When Vanguard launched the ETF along with an emerging markets bond ETF, there was a great deal of investor interest, as it was the first time that the fund provider had delved into the international fixed-income universe.
Since bond exchange traded funds were first launched in 2002, US-listed bond ETFs have grown to approximately US$ 320 billion in assets, becoming an increasingly important part of financial advisors’ portfolios due to their low cost, tax efficiency, and competitive performance.
Alexander Darwall, gestor del fondo Jupiter European Growth. Foto cedida. Jupiter: “Las compañías de éxito con catalizadores de crecimiento seculares se verán recompensadas”
Alexander Darwall, fund manager of the Jupiter European Growth Fund, explains in this interview with Funds Society that he does not invest depending on the macro evironment: he looks for successful companies that, tapping into secular rather than simply macro growth drivers, will be well rewarded. And he follows this 3 long term trends: global growth; application of digital technology; and change in regulations.
How optimistic are you regarding Europe’s growth, and what about European companies?
We are optimistic about European companies that put their expertise to use to develop world-leading products and services. Our aim is to build a portfolio of such world-class companies that tap into long term structural trends such as the impact of technology, globalisation and changes in regulation rather than taking a view on the macroeconomic cycle.
Will the credit boost be the main driver of the economy recovery? Which other factors?
Improving credit conditions in Europe are welcome news. However, we believe that the liberalisation of markets, ongoing globalisation and structural reforms are required to sustain economic growth. Our focus is to try to find companies with the entrepreneurial drive to bring new products and services to market that consumers willingly pay for.
How could the growth picture affect equity markets in the next months? Do you expect a rally in European equities?
We do not take a view about where equities will trade in the next few months. We look for strong, proven business models whose success is determined to a large extent by their own efforts rather than by the general macro environment. These companies tend to tap into multi-year structural drivers, such as the rising incidence of diabetes or the application of new digital technologies, such as digital payments. By way of example, 7 holdings with an average weight of 29% have been in the portfolio for over 7 years (as at 31 July 2015), demonstrating that we do not sell a sensible business model when market sentiment turns negative, which it periodically does. This is where our focus on meeting corporates rather than the sell-side is crucial – as a team we meet 200 or so corporates a year – as the stock market is prone to panic at the top and bottom of the market. In summary we are confident that with a good degree of patience, successful companies tapping into secular rather than simply macro growth drivers will be well rewarded.
There is much consensus about the attractiveness of European equity at the moment… Could this be dangerous?
We look for market leaders with a favourable market structure, focussing on the fundamentals, and do not spend our time worrying about the macro picture and short term market volatility. Valuation is intrinsically difficult and we approach the subject with due humility. Our view is to try to identify companies that have the ingredients for success that we look for and to subsequently decide what we are willing to pay for them. This is the key difference between an investor and a speculator; an investor invests in a business imagining it to be unlisted and with a view to never selling it, while a speculator’s focus is to find someone to buy the asset off you at a higher price and to forecast changes in market sentiment. Deciding on price before choosing what it is we want to buy is not an approach we favour.
Our starting point for an investment is to ensure that a company is managed for the benefit of minority shareholders. We then look for the right ingredients, which are summarised in the following 4 sequential steps: The ‘right’ company (the company offers a core competence that differentiates it from competitors and which it can monetise. Typically, we are drawn to companies that are less capital intensive and have more intellectual property); The right management (the business is presided over by an excellent management team and has a strong corporate governance and company culture); Structural trend (the company has a number of growth options and taps into clearly identifiable multi-year structural trends); Valuation (we are of the belief that where we are right about the first three steps, we tend to have positive surprises, which is the inverse of the ‘value trap’, where we are wrong about the inputs).
Are Central Banks helping to generate a bubble in European equities?
Our view is that quantitative easing does not address Europe’s more fundamental structural problems. We are confident that companies offering a special product will be well rewarded, if we exercise the right degree of patience.
Do you think last corrections due to the Greek crisis could generate opportunities to buy?
Greece or its consequences for stock markets has no direct bearing on our portfolio, as we try to be invested in companies for whom the outcome is not a pressing concern.For all our investments, first we identify what assets we would like to own; then we decide on price. We have nothing against Greece, but we have not identified the ‘right’ companies there: world-beating companies offering differentiated products that consumers are willing to pay for. As such, we do not have any holdings listed in Greece. Most of the companies in the portfolio are global in nature. As at end of June 2015, approximately 80% of the portfolio is invested in global businesses that happen to be listed in Europe; the remaining 20% of the fund in invested in companies that operate in Europe. No single company in the portfolio has any significant exposure to Greece.
How do you see Greece agreement with Europe and what do you think it could mean to the markets?
Typical concerns for the companies in the portfolio are the impact of technology, regulations, consumer habits, as well as managing the lifecycle of their product, commoditisation, and motivating employees in the Research and Development department. Predicting the macro is extremely difficult, so our focus is to stick to our strengths: identifying successful business models, looking for patters of success across sectors from our investment experience.
How does the Euro contribute to the impulse of the markets and in which levels do you see it vs dollar?
As with the macro, we spend no time trying to predict foreign exchange, as we try to be invested in companies for whom the FX is not a pressing concern. Most of the companies in the portfolio sell their wares globally, so at any one time they are gaining and losing from FX; they tend to take translation risk rather than transaction risk. These companies do not rely on the exchange rate to succeed. Instead, their priority is bringing the best product or service to market. Many companies have been in the fund for many years, during which time they have benefited and suffered due to the FX, but that has not been the key determinant of their success.
In which companies or sectors do you have more convictions?
As investment specialists, we look for companies with similar characteristics across sectors, such as a differentiated product, free pricing, high barriers to entry, Intellectual Property over Capex and a proven track record. We do not tend to find companies with these characteristics in utilities (regulated pricing) or in commodities, real estate and mainstream financials (lack of differentiation). The areas in which we find many of my ideas are technology, healthcare, industrials and the media.
While we aim to put together a portfolio of unique, uncorrelated companies, the holdings can be loosely grouped under three structural long term trends: Global growth (companies tapping into global growth, such as healthcare); Application of Digital technology (for example, business benefiting from the growth in ecommerce); and change in regulations (for example, disruptive business models that are benefiting from the mainstream banks being capital constrained).
How positive are you on banks? Why?
Historically, the fund has been structurally underweight the financial sector. We have tended to be underweight the mainstream banks and insurance companies. To us, banks have an undifferentiated offer, they have a lack of pricing power and they rely on macro factors that are out of their control such as interest rates move, monetary policy, currencies etc. We favour ‘alternative financials’ that are benefiting from changes in regulation. There is an unmet demand for credit and while mainstream banks are rebuilding their balance sheets and retrenching from non-core areas. For example, Provident Financial offers financing to non-standard lenders in the UK which they would otherwise not receive from the mainstream banks.
Core Europe or peripheral? And what’s about Spain?
It is never for me a question of core Europe versus peripheral Europe but rather more whether my analysis of a company demonstrates that it has excellent long-term growth prospects, is exposed to growth in global trade and productivity and has a future, as far as is reasonably possible that depend on their own efforts and not on factors beyond their control.
Spanish-listed companies accounted for around 7.6% of our portfolio as at 30 June 2015. We have two companies with headquarters in Spain, Amadeus and Grifols. Amadeus is a global software leader offering a Global Distribution System to airlines and travel agents across the world. They derive less than 50% of their revenues in Europe. Grifols is another global pharma leader manufacturing plasma-derived (blood) products. More than 60% of the company’s revenue is generated in the US. These companies tend to operate globally which offers proof of concept for a company offering a differentiated product or service.
The above commentsrepresents the views of the fund manager at the time of preparation (August 2015) and may be subject to change. Readers should be aware that they should not be interpreted as investment advice. Every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of any information provided, but no assurances or warranties are given.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrCasper von Koskull y Torsten Hagen Jørgensen, de izquierda a derecha. Foto cedida. Nordea nombra a Casper von Koskull nuevo CEO del grupo y a Torsten Hagen Jørgensen nuevo COO
The Board of Directors of Nordea Bank AB (publ) has appointed Casper von Koskull new president and Group CEO and Torsten Hagen Jørgensen new Group COO and deputy Group CEO.
The new leadership team will succeed Christian Clausen who has decided to step down after more than 8 years as CEO of Nordea. The change will take effect 1 November 2015. Christian Clausen will continue in an advisory role until the end of 2016, when he will retire.
Casper von Koskull (54) joined Nordea in 2010 as head of Wholesale Banking and member of Group Executive Management. He came to Nordea following a long career in international banking in Frankfurt, New York and London, most recently as Managing Director and Partner at Goldman Sachs.
Torsten Hagen Jørgensen (50) has held the position as head of Group Corporate Centre and Group CFO in Nordea since January 2013. He joined the bank in 2005 and has been a member of Group Executive Management since 2011.
“I would like to thank Christian Clausen for his invaluable contribution to Nordea’s development into a large, successful international bank. His leadership, customer focus and international outlook are unmatched in banking. I have enjoyed our cooperation the past 4 years, and I am very happy that Christian will accept to be nominated to the Board of Sampo, Nordea’s main shareholder. I fully respect his decision to step down as CEO now, and I wish him the best in the next phase of his active career”, says Björn Wahlroos, chairman of the Board of Directors. The appointments are the outcome of a thorough process run by the Board of Directors.
“With the appointment of Casper von Koskull and Torsten Hagen Jørgensen Nordea will have the ideal team to lead Nordea successfully going forward, combining world class relationship banking and operational excellence competences”, says Björn Wahlroos.
“We look forward to continuing the work to create the Future Relationship Bank. It will be a continuation of our strong customer focus and the crucial focus on compliance as well as on simplification of our processes, cooperating as one Nordea team with our colleagues across the bank”, says Casper von Koskull.
Gerhard Winzer, Chief economist at Erste Asset Management, talks about the transformation process in China’s economy; away from growth driven by production and investment, to growth carried by service and consumption. He also explains how this transformation has negatively affected other emerging markets, specifically the commodity-exporting countries and what to expect in terms of economic growth for the rest of the world.
In his assessment about Chinese economy he highlights the decline of the industrial production: “Even though the GDP growth rate in China increased in the second quarter, thetrend of investment growth and of the growth of industrial production has been on the decline, and exports are shrinking. This suggests that the transformation process in China is the reason for the weakness of the commodity prices, of industrial production, and of the emerging markets: away from growth driven by production and investment to growth carried by service and consumption. The third dimension of this transformation shows that the process has been a bumpy one: the forces of a market economy are to be strengthened at the expense of a centrally planned economy for the allocation of resources.”
On the stocks markets, he mentions the extensive intervention of Chinese government to avoid major problems in their economy: “The government bailed out the markets with extensive interventions when the Chinese equity markets slumped in the wake of strong gains that were not fundamentally justified (e.g. by earnings development). Similar examples in history suggest that further crashes may be avoided but that governmental interventions cannot produce sustainable gains. The fourth dimension, i.e. the internationalisation of the renminbi, will probably also be a bumpy one. It will still take some time before the Chinese currency becomes fully convertible and it can truly assume a function of value storage for foreign capital. In the meantime the emerging markets will remain in a process of adjustment that could continue to depress the currencies.”
On his assessment of economic growth for the rest of the world, he clarifies: “Global GDP growth has probably only increased marginally in the second quarter after the very weak first quarter. Economic activity has thus remained disappointingly weak on a global scale.
At least the US economy managed to recover from the de facto stagnation in the first quarter. According to the initial estimate for the second quarter, the GDP had grown by an annualised 2.3% relative to the previous month. The core inflation rate (q/q) has accelerated to 1.8%. If the economic reports in the coming months suggest a continued recovery, the US central bank will raise the Fed funds rate this year by a slight degree.
The Eurozone, too, has produced positive economic news. For example, the business climate index increased in July, and the banks have loosened their lending guidelines again in Q2. The Greek crisis has apparently not caused the sentiment to decline. The indicators suggest a continued moderate recovery.
The “rest” of the world, however, is facing a further deterioration of the economy, in particular in the emerging countries where many economic indicators have been sliding. Interestingly, with Brazil and Russia two large commodity-exporting countries are currently stuck in a recession.
The manufacturing sector is generally weak across the world, with industrial production shrinking on a global scale. The real exports and imports of goods, too, are on the decline in most regions. Export prices have been receding drastically on a year-on-year basis. We can observe such developments particularly in the Asian emerging markets. Many commodities, especially oil, steel, and copper as well as the precious metals silver and gold have incurred losses.”
After rising sharply in the first quarter of 2015, most equity markets fell back slightly later. The surge in bond yields, the prospect of a tighter monetary policy in the United States, and uncertainties over the future of Greece as well as economic growth in China all contributed to investors’ nervousness and increased their aversion to risk. But despite greater volatility, there has been little change in the economic and financial environment, says Guy Wagner, chief investment officer of Banque de Luxembourg, in an analysis published on BLI’s blog Greece and China et cetera: update on our investment strategy.
“In keeping with recent tradition, the International Monetary Fund has just revised its growth forecasts downwards, this time citing the ‘unexpected weakness in North America’. This revision only illustrates the structural brakes hanging overgrowth and point towards growth significantly below the historic average in the coming months. In this context, there is little prospect of a steady rise in interest rates. Meanwhile, low interest rates will continue to render obsolete the principles that have historically guided asset allocation between equities and bonds.
First of these is the principle that considers equities as risk assets and bonds (at least government bonds) as risk-free (or very low risk). In normal times, an environment like the present, dominated by economic uncertainties, weak growth and contained inflation, would suggest an allocation favouring bonds over equities. Today, however, the situation is such that to obtain any sort of decent yield on bonds, you have to make major concessions on debtor quality. But, making this kind of concession in a world dominated by massive debt and weak growth (which reduces the capacity to service this debt) could prove very dangerous. In fact, it amounts to replacing a risk of volatility by a risk of permanent loss (on the bond markets, you are by definition dealing with leveraged companies). Where long-term investing is concerned, volatility is not the best definition of risk.
So, in terms of financial investments, there are no obvious alternatives to equities, provided they are not valued at ridiculous levels. What about current valuations? The fact is that, depending on the ratio that one uses, it is possible to arrive at the conclusion that equities are cheap, expensive or somewhere in between. Firstly, any valuation method based on current interest rate levels shows that equities are undervalued. Secondly, and generalising somewhat, ratios using current or forecast earnings for the next 12 months show that equity valuations are close to their historic average. And thirdly, according to turnover, equity capital, asset replacement value or normalised profits, equities look expensive. The conclusion of all this could be that the return one might expect from equities in future years will be below the historic average but without there necessarily being a major decline”.
Equity bias but with realistic expectations
In his blog, the expert explains that, in the current conditions, a strategic asset allocation between equities, bonds and cash is bound to favour of place to equities. “This is true even for portfolios whose objective is to generate income rather than capital gains. As Glenn Stevens, Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, said recently, the big question is how can an adequate flow of income be generated for the retired community in the future in a world in which long-term nominal returns on low-risk assets are so low? The answer is that there is no miracle solution and you have to be prepared to take more risks to achieve the desired return.
However, this should not be interpreted as an endorsement of passive management. The fact is that, given the historically low level of bond yields, there is little point in making major adjustments between asset classes (increasing/ reducing equities to the detriment/in favour of bonds) unless one were to bet on short-term movements in these asset classes. This type of market timing is always a hazardous exercise, even though it seems to be the main concern of many fund managers (or their clients). The market fluctuations over recent weeks as the Greek situation unfolded are a good illustration of the futility of this approach. Despite daily movements up and down of varying degrees, the market has remained virtually unchanged overall. Changes in the allocation between equities and bonds based on more tangible elements, such as the relative valuation of the two asset classes, are harder to assess while bond yields are so low, unless a particularly excessive valuation or very unfavourable earnings prospects were to suggest a negative return on equities. But that isn’t the case yet”.
Active management combining quality and dividends
And he defends: “Active management within asset classes, especially equities, is therefore all the more vital. While the economic and financial environment remains weak, it is particularly important not to make concessions in terms of thequality of the companies in which one invests. Since no fund manager would admit to buying poor quality companies, we will just focus here on reiterating what makes for a good quality company. We define it as a company with a sustainable competitive advantage which gives it an edge over the competition and allows it to create entry barriers to its markets. This gives companies better control over their destiny and enables them to capitalise on their strengths, thereby creating a virtuous circle. Such companies are characterised by a high return on equity, little debt and low capital intensity. Note too that in the current context, there is a particularly wide gap between their return on equity and cost of financing, theoretically justifying much higher valuation multiples.
A second investment theme, closely linked to quality, is thatof dividends. One of the investment strategies that has produced the best results over the long term consists of buying companies combining a high dividend yield and a low payout ratio. The high dividend yield makes these companies particularly attractive for investors seeking regular income, while the low payout ratio is reassuring with regard to the sustainable nature of the dividend, and even its potential to increase”.
