CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Roberta Schonborg. Scared of Defaults? Don’t Worry, There’s a Bright Side
It’s hard to talk about high-yield bonds today without addressing defaults. So here’s our take on the matter: Default rates will rise over the next few years. But don’t fret: returns are likely to rise, too.
Defaults have been below average for years, so an increase shouldn’t come as a huge surprise. High-yield bonds have always been riskier than other types of bonds. And it’s not uncommon for some issuers to default as the credit cycle winds down and borrowing costs rise.
But a higher average default rate doesn’t mean returns have to suffer—provided you’ve been selective about your exposures. Over the past two decades, jumps in the average default rate have usually been followed by big increases in returns (Display).
The reason is tied partly to investor psychology. Defaults usually aren’t spread evenly across the high-yield market, which includes many different regions and sectors. Nonetheless, investors tend to respond to a rise or an expected rise in defaults by punishing the whole high-yield market.
The result: plenty of sound credits trading at very attractive valuations. For example, a large share of defaults in 2001 and 2002 were telecom companies that had borrowed heavily but ran into trouble when the dot-com bubble burst. That led to selling across the US high-yield market. But investors who bought bonds in nontelecom sectors in the years after 2002 did well. In 2003, US high-yield returns soared to 29%.
Beyond Energy, Values Look Compelling
We think something similar is going on now, with energy, metals and mining companies standing in for telecoms. With the price of oil near multidecade lows, we expect these types of companies to account for a large share of defaults over the coming years.
Many investors have reacted to recent volatility as they did in 2002—by bailing out of the market altogether. As a result, some non–energy sector bonds now offer higher yields than they have in years.
That’s important, because starting yield—now above 8% on average—is one of the best predictors of what investors can expect to earn over the next five years. In 2009, high-yield defaults hit a record high—but so did high-yield returns. At one point that year, the average yield on the Barclays US Corporate High Yield Index exceeded 20%.
Even so, investors can’t afford to be cavalier about the market and its risks. It’s critically important to be selective, even among higher-quality bonds. That’s especially true in US high yield, which is in the later stages of the credit cycle, and Asian high yield, which is already in contraction. A global, multi-sector approach makes sense, since different regions and sectors are at different stages of the cycle.
But we think it would be a mistake to abandon high yield altogether. The biggest risk today isn’t a rise in defaults—it’s pulling out of the market prematurely and missing the opportunity to buy before it rebounds.
Gershon M. Distenfeld is director high yield at AB.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Rede Brasil Actual. For Brazil, No Glimmers of Light Yet
With so many headlines recently over politics and economics in Brazil, Eaton Vance wants to provide an update on recent events and the market volatility that has followed.
Over the past two years, Brazil’s economy has suffered from a terms-of-trade shock as well as simultaneous fiscal and political crises. These shocks have led to seven straight quarters of economic contraction (the longest recession since at least the Great Depression era of the 1930s) and multiple credit rating downgrades, leaving Brazil’s sovereign credit rating back in “junk” territory by all of the major ratings agencies.
With the exception of large currency depreciation, says Matt Hildebrandt, Global Credit Strategist at Eaton Vance, Brazil’s progress adjusting to these shocks has been limited. Fiscal deficits have grown larger and public debt levels higher with no sign of debt sustainability in sight. To make matters worse, President Dilma is currently defending herself in congressional impeachment hearings while former President Lula and the heads of both of the lower and upper houses of Congress have been implicated for corruption from testimony received from the ongoing Operation Carwash investigations.
According to the expert, Brazilian assets have rallied the last few weeks, as the market has interpreted negative news related to President Dilma as positive for the country. The thinking is as follows: Dilma’s removal may ease the political gridlock currently paralyzing the policy process, which would allow the government to develop and implement a plan that puts the country’s debt trajectory on a sustainable path and that improves the economy’s competitiveness. Such thinking may prove correct in the long run, but impeachment will likely be a messy process and even if Dilma is removed, the political establishment will still be plagued by unscrupulous personalities, vested interests and party factions. The path to debt sustainability and greater economic competiveness will be a long one.
From a long-run perspective, Eaton Vance thinks Brazilian assets offer a lot of attractive opportunities. But, the recent market rally has priced in the best possible near-term outcome even though the outlook is fluid and uncertain.
“Expect more market volatility in Brazil in the months to come until the government, regardless of who is running it, is able to articulate and implement a more coherent policy path forward. Only at that point will we be able to say that there is some light emerging at the end of the tunnel”, concludes Hildebrandt.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Michael J. Kelly, CFA, global head of multi-asset at PineBridge Investments. PineBridge: “Asset Allocation Is The Biggest Decision In Every Portfolio”
As volatility increases throughout global markets and returns lower, investors are facing a turning point. Michael J. Kelly, CFA, global head of multi-asset at PineBridge Investments, explains why asset allocation -along with a dynamic approach- is more important than ever.
What is going on in markets now?
Today’s volatility is the result of forces that have been building for a while. For many years, the global savings rate was relatively stable. Then, just before the global financial crisis, it stepped up. We saw extreme caution from businesses, central banks, and investors. Far fewer people and institutions were investing.
This was one of the biggest ever tailwinds for financial assets. Too much money was chasing too few opportunities. Meanwhile, central banks were growing their balance sheets relative to global economic growth. So they’ve been adding liquidity on top of naturally formed liquidity – another huge tailwind for financial assets.
This caused a global liquidity surge, which caused many investors to lean on growth assets, weighing down prospective returns. However, this challenging market environment also created opportunity for investors who can selectively identify attractive insights and dynamically shift their investment mix.
Now is a good time for investors to start thinking ahead and realizing that the next several years won’t be easy. Unlike during the crisis, which was extremely painful but ended relatively quickly, this will be a slow drip. Expect more risk and not enough return to meet investors’ expectations. And the answer is not diversification alone, but optimal allocation across the investment universe while expressing convictions.
This brings me to asset allocation. This is the biggest decision in every portfolio. It’s not a new concept, but many investors still don’t pay it enough attention.
And that has been fine so far – investors have been playing it safe with few consequences – but the time is coming when markets will reach an inflection point, and investors will need to use asset allocation to help them navigate a world of much lower returns but continued high expectations.
What’s the danger for investors in playing it safe?
We’re entering a period of slowly rising interest rates, and it’s been a while since markets have had to deal with that. For a long time, we’ve been in markets dominated by falling interest rates. You can play it safe without much of a penalty in that world. In periods of disinflation, the correlation between capital conservation assets and growth assets becomes negative. The effectiveness of one to hedge the other goes up. So playing it safe has worked really well as rates have dropped.
But what happens when rates are no longer falling? They’re either flat or rising. While play-it-safe investing lowers the risk, it carries quite a penalty in returns. When inflation and rates are flat and rising, that negative correlation actually becomes positive. We have already started to see this, for instance, in the fourth quarter of 2015, as the market anticipated higher rates by the US Federal Reserve. The effectiveness of those two to balance each other out goes down while the cost goes up, since the differential of returns is much higher.
How can investors best position their portfolios in this environment?
We do see some opportunities, but to explain, let’s go back to the idea of diversification. If you own a little bit of everything in a market capitalization sense, that means you own the slope of our Capital Market Line (CML). The CML is our firm’s five-year forward-looking view into risk and return across the asset class spectrum. Right now we consider its slope to be disappointingly positive.
But there is a silver lining: The dispersion of dots around the line has widened over time, and it’s the widest we’ve seen since we began constructing the CML. This means that the upcoming period will have more winners and more losers. So for investors, it’s a matter of picking more of the winners and avoiding the losers – which, of course, is not as easy as it sounds.
How do you do that?
With more opportunistic investing along with an intermediate-term perspective. You need to be much more opportunistic if you’re going to deliver an outcome over a three-, five-, seven-, or 10-year horizon.
In a world of policy-distorted markets that have created this massive tailwind, we think it’s relatively easy as the environment unwinds to avoid the asset classes that have been helped the most, those that might have the biggest tailwind.
How do you and your team approach asset allocation?
Our approach focuses on growth assets – trying to get growth-asset-like returns with 60% or less of the risk that normally accompanies them. We think the only way to do this is to be much more opportunistic in moving between markets and between growth assets, shifting between growth and capital conservation when necessary. That shift, in fact, can sometimes be as dynamic as a rotation, which we witnessed in the financial crisis.
So I believe in a balance of approaches. But there’s going to be really no alternative in a lower return world with flat or rising rates to being more opportunistic in the growth assets that you pursue. We expect this to lead to investors’ “scavenging” for alpha, which presents its own challenges. The market has grown in terms of people looking for alpha within infrastructure, within stocks, within bonds. Before the crisis, looking for alpha between asset classes was basically talked about and not employed. How are investors gearing up to do that? The answer is not just getting more alpha out of security selection, but finding better, more efficient ways to allocate assets that provide a more consistent alpha source.
Opportunistic investments are providing the unexploited source of alpha to fill in the gap between market returns and investors’ expectations. In the current environment, everyone’s investing in more assets, in more areas of the world. So to get us to those windows of opportunity, we need to move more toward seeking returns through asset allocation.
This information is for educational purposes only and is not intended to serve as investment advice. This is not an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to purchase any investment product or security. Any opinions provided should not be relied upon for investment decisions. Any opinions, projections, forecasts and forward-looking statements are speculative in nature; valid only as of the date hereof and are subject to change. PineBridge Investments is not soliciting or recommending any action based on this information.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Aristipo Crónica Popular. Oil: Up, Up And...?
The New Year began in disastrous fashion for the oil market with Brent crude touching 12 year lows in January, which followed a year to forget in 2015. Confidence in the prospects for the oil price seemed irreversibly low when the decision to lift Iranian sanctions was announced and Chinese economic growth statistics continued to paint a rather bleak picture for global growth. However, oil has undergone a swift and material recovery since bottoming out on 18 January. The bounce in sentiment has not been exclusive to oil, with iron ore, copper and coal also experiencing a surge in their respective prices. The key question from here remains: is the rise in oil sustainable, or is it little more than a short squeeze which lacks any fundamental basis?
As outlined in our ‘Multi-Asset Brief’ in January, we believed the tide was beginning to turn in oil and that Brent crude touching a low of US$27.88 per barrel in January was not justified. Since that paper’s release we have witnessed a few interesting developments, not least of which has been a tentative agreement between Saudi Arabia and Russia over a planned production cap. While the deal itself was viewed as having little impact on supply over the short term, as it was predicated on other key producers (including Iran) also capping production, it was symbolic that a deal by a Saudi-led Opec is still possible in the current environment. The oil cartel had previously refrained from limiting supply, despite the weak market conditions, preferring to keep the market oversupplied to implicitly drive out incumbent shale producers.
The much publicised end to Iranian sanctions finally came on 16 January when a nuclear deal was struck between Iran and six of the world’s western powers. There was little doubt within the market that the easing of Iranian sanctions would cause a significant uptick in oil supply, although the jury is still out on how much and how quickly Iran can increase its production to anything that resembled its pre-sanction high. Since the sanctions were lifted, the increase in Iranian output has significantly undershot consensus market expectations, driven by ageing infrastructure and lack of investment, which has reduced its capacity to increase production for the time being. The oil market has also benefited from a drop in oil production in Iraq and Nigeria, with the former experiencing the largest decline due to a stoppage in flow along a pipeline carrying oil across the Kurdish border.
In a phenomenon which began in October 2014, the US oil rig count has continued to transition lower, falling approximately 72% from its peak. At the same time, global oil capital expenditure (capex) has also decreased, with Simmons forecasting it to fall approximately 50% in 2016 which followed a similar reduction in 2015. While the fall in rig count and capex has been swift and material, the drop in US oil production has been modest in comparison, although we began to see consistent declines being recorded in February. We believe the market over anticipated the speed at which production would decline in response to the falling capex, which exacerbated the downward pressure on oil prices, as production remained stubbornly high. Nonetheless, our view is for US production to follow a similar path to the fall in rig counts for the remainder of the year and into 2017, as we believe shale producers will be reluctant to increase drilling spending with prices below their respective marginal costs of production.
A looming factor that has the potential to jeopardise the recent rally in the oil market is the historically high level of oil inventories. The above-trend level of inventories has been caused by two main factors:
Oil supply strongly exceeding oil demand
A steep forward curve which acts as a strong incentive to build inventories. However, recently we have seen the forward curve flatten, thus minimising the incentive to build inventories as the premium received from doing so is comparatively less. A flattening forward curve, as oil inventories are high, in the short term should see new supply come online, which theoretically threatens an already oversupplied market. While we are obviously cognisant of this risk, we believe consistently falling inventories will be supportive of a more stable oil market.
We held the view earlier in the year that an oil price at sub US$28 per barrel was not sustainable over the longer term and not in line with fundamentals. The recent recovery has been swifter than even our expectations. In light of the current uncertainty in the market, we believe the path over the short term for oil will be volatile, particularly as the threat of inventories swamping the market is very real. However, over the longer term, we are more constructive on both the stability of the market and its eventual price, as falling capital expenditure and rig counts begin to have a more pronounced impact. Similarly, the tentative agreement by Opec members to freeze production, while complex and contingent on a number of factors, is still a potential positive for controlling supply over the longer term. As for the positioning of our portfolios, we are conscious of the short-term risks that lie ahead, although we do believe there are genuine factors which are now supportive of a higher oil price.
Philip Saunders is co-Head of Multi-Asset at Investec.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Matthew Grange. Standard Life Wealth Strengthens Investment Team
Standard Life Wealth, the discretionary fund manager, has announced the recent appointment of Matthew Grange and Matthew Burrows as Senior Portfolio Managers based in London. Both are working with UK and International clients and report to Charles Insley, Head of International for Standard Life Wealth.
“We are delighted that Matthew Grange and Matthew Burrows have joined Standard Life Wealth. They both have very strong investment backgrounds and have joined us to work with UK and International clients. As long term investors we offer clients investment strategies across the full risk spectrum and have an investment process that focuses on gaining exposure to secular growth drivers, which we believe will out-perform the broader market over the long term. Both Matthew Grange and Matthew Burrows are excellent additions to the team and bring valuable insight and institutional expertise to our investment process,” said Charles Insley, Head of International, Standard Life Wealth.
Matthew Grange has over 18 years of private client and institutional investment management experience. He spent over twelve years managing institutional UK equity portfolios for ABN Amro Asset Management and the corporate pension schemes for Lafarge and Reed Elsevier. In addition to his experience managing substantial UK equity portfolios, Matthew has experience of many other asset classes, particularly commercial property and private equity.
Matthew Burrows has five years of experience in the management of discretionary portfolios for charities, trusts, pensions and both institutional and private clients’ portfolios. He has managed portfolios for both UK and international clients at Falcon Private Wealth and Sarasin & Partners LLP, covering the full spectrum of traditional asset classes, as well alternatives and derivatives.
Standard Life Wealth, with offices in London, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Bristol and Leeds, and an offshore presence in the Channel Islands, provides both target return and conventional investment strategies private clients, trust companies and charities.
. CTA & Merger Hegde Funds Insulated From Rotations
The Lyxor Hedge Fund Index was down -0.9% in February. 3 out of 11 Lyxor Indices ended the month in positive territory. The Lyxor CTA Long Term Index (+2.2%), the Lyxor Merger Arbitrage Index (+0.5%), and the Lyxor LS Equity Long Bias Index (+0.4%) were the best performers.
“In a make-or-break environment, we recommend keeping some directionality through tactical styles. We would remain put on relative-value strategies, but focusing in areas least correlated to current themes.” says Jean-Baptiste Berthon, senior cross asset strategist at Lyxor AM.
Brexit risk helped Global Macro funds recoup some of the losses endured early February. It was a hill-start for the strategy, which suffered on their short bond and long European equities exposures (we note that positioning divergence among managers remained elevated). The collapse of the pound below $1.39 then allowed Global Macro funds to regain some of the lost ground. Indeed, London mayor Boris Johnson throwing support to the exit cause led markets to implement stronger protection against a risk of Brexit. The relative economic and monetary pulses between the UK and the US also played out. Funds remain slightly long in European equities. In bonds, they are long US and short EU bonds. Their top plays remain on their long dollar crosses.
The rally by mid-February triggered multiple macro and sector rotations. The selling pressure exhausted by mid-month. The rally in risky assets unfolded in poor trading volumes as most market players were initially reluctant to join in. An unstable market tectonic and multiple downside fundamental risks kept investors – hedge funds included – on the cautious side. In that context, CTAs outperformed, hoarding returns in the early part of the month, while remaining resilient thereafter thanks to stubbornly low yields. Besides, the longest bias strategies enjoyed a V-shape recovery. By contrast, those exposed to the rotations suffered the most.
L/S Equity: volatile and dispersed returns, skepticism prevails. Long bias funds enjoyed a V-shape recovery over the month and ended up slightly positive. They continued to generate strong alpha. Variable bias funds pared losses on the way down thanks to their cautious stance, but they underperformed on the way up. The rotation out of defensive back into value stocks proved costly. Market Neutral funds were the worst performers. They were hit by multiple sector and quant factor rotations, amid high equity correlation, while keeping their leverage steady. They endured a double whammy through untimely portfolio shifts.
Overall Lyxor L/S Equity funds slightly raised their market beta mainly through short covering. But skepticism prevails as to the sustainability of the rally. Interestingly, a number of funds are increasingly tactical in their stock and sector positioning.
Merger Arbitrage continued to defy risk aversion. The performance of Special Situation funds mirrored that of broader markets. They suffered in the early part of the month – especially in their healthcare and telecom positions – before recouping most of their losses. The returns of Merger Arbitrage funds were less volatile. Deal spreads initially factored higher macro risks, before settling down. Short duration operations with small P&L to lock in continued to lure managers. They maintained their elevated long exposures, reflecting their confidence in the current merger opportunity set.
The underperformance of European credit hurt L/S Credit strategies. The pressure mounting on global banks, and in particular European institutions, hurt some funds. Underperforming junior debt in Europe, and concerns about coupons suspension in contingent convertibles took a dent in some funds (as a reminder, “cocos” convert into shares if a pre-set trigger is breached – the level of solvency ratios for example. These securities were designed to enhance capital levels and provide investors with greater safety). BoJ venturing into negative yield regime also hurt Japanese and Asian issues.
Perfect conditions for CTAs, which continued to outperform. Continued de-risking in the early part of the month was beneficial to most CTAs. They kept on making strong gains in their long bond positions, their equity and energy shorts. In the second part of the month, most of the gains were made in EU long bonds and on GBP. The recovery in risk appetite led their models to shave off their most aggressive bearish positions. They reduced their short on energy and brought their equity allocation up to neutral. Their main vulnerability lies with their long bond exposure.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Todd Chandler. Foreigners are Interested in Participating in the Mexican Asset Management Marketplace
The interest of foreign operators to enter the Asset Management business in Mexico keeps on growing.
Late last year, the Swiss bank Julius Baer completed the acquisition of 40% of the Mexican company NSC Asesores, a firm that serves as an independent financial advisor in Mexico since 1987. BNP Paribas Investment Partners Mexico last month announced its foray into the Mexican market through mutual funds and mandates.
The Azimut Group expects to receive authorization in the near future to become a fund operator. Azimut Group acquired Mexican Más Fondos owns more funds (founded in 2002) which is the largest integrated distributor of investment companies in Mexico.
A few days ago we read in the news that Afore XXI Banorte finally funded the two mandates it gave BlackRock and Schroders back in 2013. BlackRock received 320 million dollars and Schroders 220 million dollars.
This business has very interesting numbers, where many firms want to enter but only five have been able to do since only two Afores have participated in this type of vehicle. Although CONSAR allowed mandates since 2011, Afore Banamex was able to fund the strategy until 2013 and Afore XXI Banorte just in the last month.
According to updated information of the regulator (Consar), US$ 2.2 billion have been promised to five Global Asset Managers: BlackRock, Pioneer, Schroders, Franklin Templeton and Banque Paribas. Approximately 60% of the resources allocated come from Afore Banamex and 40% from XXI Banorte. If all Afores diversify using a mandate, this amount is equivalent to only 8% of the US$28.4 billion that the 20% limit allows. Currently the Afores manage about US$142 billion in assets.
The appetite for having a presence in Mexico is due to a growing market with increasingly sophisticated needs; as well as confidence in the country, given Mexico has become a very attractive market in Latin America, as well as a sizeable potential revenue.
Some firms are redefining their business in Latin America as in the case of Deutsche Bank which will sell or close its business in 10 countries, five of them in Latin America -including Mexico, however, from my point of view, the reason for this has more to do with specialization than with a disdain for the region.
Considering the appetite to enter the Mexican market, local and foreign participants who are already present, can not sit and wait it out while strong competition is displayed. In fact, there is speculation that there are a couple of signatures embedded in evaluation processes and more advanced in local authorizations.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Glyn Lowe. Nikko Asset Management Receives Two Awards from Asia Asset Management
Nikko Asset Management has been recognized for excellence in two categories by the Hong-Kong based publication Asia Asset Management. The firm won the Best of the Best Award for both the Japan: Most Innovative Product and the Singapore: Best RQFII House categories for 2015. This is the second consecutive year for Nikko Asset Management to win the Singapore: Best RQFII House Award.
The Tokyo-headquartered asset manager was recognized with the Japan: Most Innovative Product Award for one of its most innovative products in 2015, the Global Robotics Equity Fund. Launched in August, the fund attracted over 300 billion yen of inflows within three months, driven by Japanese investors’ demand for greater exposure to robotics-related equities. The firm’s research uncovered that fast-growing robotics companies were not well captured with a traditional sector-focused approach to investing. The Global Robotics Equity Fund was the first in Japan to focus on cross-sectoral robotics companies.1
“It’s an honor to be recognized for our excellence in product development and innovation. I believe it’s a strong testament to our firm’s ability to not only recognize global investment trends but to provide our clients with the ability to benefit from them,” said Hideo Abe, director and executive vice chairman at Nikko Asset Management.
The firm was also awarded the Singapore: Best RQFII House Award for its leadership in RQFII solutions. Nikko Asset Management launched Singapore’s first retail China Onshore Bond Fund in July 2014. The fund opened up a highly regulated market with limited foreign investor access to Singaporean investors. Following the launch of the fund, investors were able to participate in the potential growth prospects of China’s onshore bond market. The firm has been a pioneer in the offshore RMB bond fund market in Singapore since 2010.
In September 2015, the firm launched the Nikko AM China Equity fund in Singapore, offering retail investors the opportunity to benefit from the growth potential of the China A-shares market.
“This recognition as Singapore’s best RQFII house validates our position as the industry leader in providing our clients with direct access to China, which is expected to account for 20 percent of global GDP by 2020 and become the world’s largest economy within the next 15 years,” said Eleanor Seet, President of Nikko Asset Management Asia, a subsidiary based in Singapore of Nikko Asset Management.
Photo: Tristan Hanson . M&G Investments Appoints Tristan Hanson To Its Multi-Asset Team
M&G Investments, a leading international asset manager, today announces the appointment of Tristan Hanson as Fund Manager to its Multi-Asset team, starting on 21st March. Tristan will be responsible for developing the team’s absolute return proposition and will report to Dave Fishwick, Head of Multi-Asset.
Tristan has 15 years’ experience in asset management and joins M&G from Ashburton Investments, where he was Head of Asset Allocation with responsibility for global multi-asset funds. Prior to this, Tristan worked as a Strategist at JP Morgan Cazenove covering equities, fixed income and currencies.
Graham Mason, Chief Investment Officer at M&G Investments, says: “We are very pleased to welcome Tristan to our team. He has extensive experience across multi-asset strategies and will play a key role in broadening our capabilities around absolute return products. This will strengthen our Multi-Asset team and meet increasing demand from our clients.”
Over the past 15 years, M&G’s 16-strong Multi-Asset team has successfully developed a robust investment approach by combining valuation analysis and behavioural finance.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Matthieu Duncan, new CEO of Natixis Asset Management. Matthieu Duncan Becomes Natixis Asset Management CEO
The Natixis Asset Management Board of Directors met today, chaired by Pierre Servant, to appoint Matthieu Duncan as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Natixis Asset Management following the resignation of Pascal Voisin. This new appointment will take effect on April 4, 2016. Until that date, Jean François Baralon, Natixis Asset Management’s Deputy CEO, will serve as interim CEO of Natixis Asset Management.
Matthieu Duncan will be looking to accelerate the international growth of Natixis Asset Management and to continue to integrate Natixis Asset Management within Natixis Global Asset Management’s global multi-affiliate business model.
The Board of Directors would like to thank Pascal Voisin for his role over the past eleven years leading Natixis Asset Management’s operational management. He brought new life to the company internationally and successfully contributed to the development of Natixis Global Asset Management’s multi-affiliate model by taking majority equity interests in H2O Asset Management and Dorval Asset Management and by using Natixis Asset Management’s expertise to create Seeyond and Mirova.
A dual French and US citizen, Matthieu Duncan completed his studies at the University of Texas (Austin) and the University of California (Santa Barbara). He began his career in the financial industry at Goldman Sachs, where he held various positions in the capital markets sector in Paris and London between 1990 and 2003. Since 2004, he has held various positions in the asset management area in London: Chief Investment Officer (CIO) Equities at Cambridge Place IM, Head of Business Strategy and member of the Board of Directors of Newton IM (a Bank of New York Mellon company), and Chief Operating Officer (COO) and member of the Board of Directors of Quilter Cheviot IM.
