The global private credit market, an alternative source of financing for small and medium sized enterprises, is flourishing, with institutional capital supporting increased lending in Europe in particular, according to a report by the Alternative Credit Council (ACC), a private credit industry body affiliated with the Alternative Investment Management Association (AIMA), and Deloitte, the business advisory firm.
The private credit market has grown from $440 billion last year, to $560 billion today. The research, Financing the Economy 2016, found that institutional capital is boosting lending in Europe and much of this growth has been driven by demand from European businesses. However, the US still remains the largest private credit market, both in terms of overall assets under management, and new assets raised in 2015.
The research is based on a survey of alternative lenders, representing assets under management totalling $670 billion, of which $170 billion is allocated to private credit strategies.
Stuart Fiertz, the Chairman of the ACC and President of Cheyne Capital, said: «As the recovery from the financial crisis continues, business innovation and demand for credit shows no signs of slowing. Alternative lenders are primed and ready to continue to fill the lending gap, but this is not necessarily at the expense of the traditional lenders. We see a cooperative relationship occurring between banks and alternative asset managers.»
Floris Hovingh, Head of Alternative Capital Solutions at Deloitte, said: «In the last couple of years, alternative lending has seen huge growth in Europe and is likely to accelerate over the next 24 months as a result of Brexit. As trade negotiations get underway, alternative lenders could be well positioned to navigate the increased risk in the market and price this accordingly.”
87% of global alternative lenders surveyed prior to the UK’s referendum said that the best lending opportunities are currently in the UK. This is followed by France (62%), Germany (54%), Spain (54%) and the US (50%).
Pension funds were cited by 57% of respondents as the biggest investor category, while a further 30% said pension funds were their second biggest source of capital. Insurance companies, endowments, foundations and sovereign wealth funds were other investor types cited as sources of capital for private debt funds.
The research found that most financing is going to businesses with pre-tax profits of $10 million or more. Most loans are greater than $5 million in size and half are in the $25m-$100m range. In comparison, bond market financing, a common form of non-bank finance for larger corporates, is in the $100m-$300m range.
The research also found that most private credit funds use little or no leverage, have low default rates and are structured in a way to prevent liquidity mismatches, bank-style runs and other financial stability problems. Fund managers said growing demand was partly driven by the flexibility, responsiveness and expertise of alternative lenders.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrFoto: AedoPulltrone, Flickr, Creative Commons. Jupiter ficha a Magnus Spence para su nuevo puesto de responsable de Inversiones Alternativas
La gestora Jupiter ha anunciado en un comunicado el nombramiento de Magnus Spence como responsable de Inversiones Alternativas. En esta nueva posición creada en la entidad, Spence, que se unirá el 30 de agosto, será responsable de desarrollar y expandir las capacidades de Jupiter en esta clase de activo que la entidad considera estratégica.
Spence se centrará en un principio en el actual rango de fondos de renta variable long-short UCITS, como los fondos Jupiter Europa y Jupiter Global Absolute Return, y el trust de retorno absoluto domiciliado en Reino Unido. Pero, a medio plazo, su foco estará en ampliar el rango de productos alternativos de la gestora a través de diversas clases de activos, regiones y países.
Reportará a Stephen Pear, CIO de la firma, y trabajará de cerca con James Clunie, responsable de Estrategia de Retorno Absoluto y del resto del equipo de inversiones.
Spence cuenta con 15 años de experiencia en la industria de gestión alternativa. En sus puestos más recientes, ha trabajado como responsable de Producto en Fidante Partners (antes Dexion Capital), desde principios de 2015, con un rol relacionado con el desarrollo de una plataforma de productos líquidos alternativos. Antes, Spence fue Chief Executive y Managing Partner de Dalton Strategic Partnership LLP de 2011 a 2014, firma especialista en renta variable que co-fundó en 2002. En su papel, fue clave en el desarrollo de los negocios de hedge funds, fondos de renta variable especiales y cuentas segregadas dirigidas tanto a clientes británicos como internacionales.
“Hay un gran potencial de crecimiento en el espacio alternativo tanto desde un punto de vista doméstico como internacional. Jupiter tiene los ingredientes adecuados para convertirse en un jugador líder en el campo de los alternativos”, asegura Spence.
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrFoto: LinkedIn. Thomas Zanios se incorpora a Gemspring Capital como managing director
Thomas Zanios se ha incorporado a Gemspring Capital como managing director. A lo largo de los últimos 12 años, Zanios ha invertido en leverage buyouts, desinversiones corporativas, adquisición de activos a través de bancarrotas, founder recaps, e inversiones de capital para el crecimiento en numerosas industrias, incluyendo servicios sanitarios, servicios a empresas, seguros, industrial, fabricación y alquileres locales, y ha participado en más de 25 adquisiciones a lo largo de su carrera.
Antes de incorporarse a Gemspring Capital, en Westport, Connecticut, Zanios era principal en Odyssey Investment Partners. A lo largo de sus nueve años en la firma, participó en todos los aspectos del proceso inversor, desde la originación, a la due diligence, la estructuración de la transacción o la ejecución. En este etapa, también formó parte del consejo de Safway Group Holdings y del de One Call Care Management.
Con anterioridad, trabajó para H.I.G. Capital, y para el negocio de banca de inversión especializada en sanidad del grupo Banc of America Securities, y para Ramius Capital.
Foto: Elliot Harmon
. Uno de cada cuatro de los mejores RIAs prevé realizar adquisiciones antes de año y medio
Mientras la mayoría de las firmas de asesoramiento veían cómo sus niveles de ingresos se estancaban, la élite de losasesores de inversión registrados (RIAs, por sus siglas en inglés) han experimentado un crecimiento significativo como resultado de una gestión y estrategia más exitosos, según el estudio 2016 Elite RIA, realizado por InvestmentNews y BlackRock.
El estudio concluye que los RIAs mayores y más productivos de la industria aumentaron sus ingresos en un 23% durante el último año, mientras que el negocio de la empresa independiente tradicional se mantuvo estable.
«Mientras que el marco regulatorio y los mercados han supuesto dificultades para la mayoría de las empresas, la élite de los RIAs están empezando a diferenciarse de la manada», dice Mark Bruno, editor asociado de InvestmentNews. «Ellos ven una oportunidad en la diferenciación de su negocio en este momento – ya sea a través de los servicios que prestan, o de sus operaciones internas, y están haciendo movimientos agresivos para aumentar su cuota de mercado».
En particular, el estudio señala que los RIAs de la élite están centrados en hacer crecer su base de clientes, enfatizando especialmente la consecución de ultra-high-net-worth -o grandes patrimonios- y clientes institucionales. Al mismo tiempo, aprovechan estratégicamente la tecnología, y utilizan estructuras de organización específicas y escalables que permiten ofrecer un servicio y un soporte superior al cliente, además de dotarlos del potencial de absorber nuevos asesores y clientes a través de fusiones y adquisiciones.
El estudio afirma que este grupo de RIAsestá invirtiendo en operaciones y especialistas en cumplimiento normativo: casi el doble de RIAs en este grupo cuenta con personal específico de cumplimiento -o compliance- que el resto de firmas de asesoramiento (58% frente a 34%). Otro punto clave es que el 73% de los componentes de este grupo construye y gestiona carteras de inversión a medida para cada cliente, en comparación al 54% del resto de firmas, lo que supone una parte central de su propuesta de valor y diferencia competitiva. Otros factores que citan como clave para su futuro a corto medio plazo (12-24 meses) son: «El uso eficaz de la tecnología» (mencionado por hasta el 57%) y «el crecimiento y retención de los clientes existentes» (por el 51%).
El estudio también revela que uno de cada cuatro RIAs de la élite está considerando una adquisición en los próximos 12-18 meses y que el 48% de ellos considera el asesoramiento tecnológico como una oportunidad, muy por encima del 39% que lo veía así hace tan sólo un año.
According to Detlef Glow, Head of EMEA research review at Thomson Reuters Lipper, and considering the rough market conditions during the first half 2016 and the concerns about a possible “Brexit” vote in the United Kingdom, it was not surprising that the assets under management in the European mutual fund industry decreased from the record level of €8.88tr (December 31, 2015) to €8.76tr at the end of June 2016.
This decrease of €126.7bn was mainly driven by the performance of the underlying markets (-€156.2bn), while net sales contributed net inflows of €29.5bn to the overall change in assets under management in the European fund industry.
Other findings include:
Bond funds enjoyed the highest net inflows (+€38.8 bn) during first half 2016.
Bond Global (+€7.1 bn) was the best selling long-term mutual fund category over the first half 2016.
BlackRock (€593.8 bn) at the end of June accounted for more assets under management than the following two fund promoters together.
BlackRock led the sales table for first half 2016 with net sales of €18.1 bn.
Foto: 401(K) 2012
. ¿En qué ciudades se gestiona mejor, y peor, el dinero?
Los residentes del área metropolitana de Los Ángeles son los que mejor gestionan su dinero de Estados Unidos, mientras que los de Baltimore son los que peor lo hacen, según muestra un estudio realizado por CreditCards.com.
El trabajo compara la calificación crediticia media en las mayores 25 urbes del país con la estimación que CreditCards.com obtiene analizando ingresos locales, edad, paro y formación. La hipótesis era que las poblaciones con mayores ingresos medios, edad y formación, junto la menor tasa de paro, tendría la mejor puntuación, pero no siempre ha sido así.
En el caso de Los Ángeles, la calificación crediticia media resultó ser 16 puntos por encima de lo esperado por la firma que realizó el estudio. En este caso en concreto, las 25 localidades que conforman el área metropolitana tienen uno de los porcentajes más bajos de graduados en High School y sus ingresos medios son los décimo segundo mayores.
Tras los Ángeles, aparecen Minneapolis/St. Paul, que tiene la mejor media de calificación crediticia del país, haciendo que la media de la ciudad supere en 15 puntos la media esperada por CreditCards.com y Nueva York, Chicago y Boston, que completan las cinco con mejor puntuación.
En el extremo opuesto, Baltimore y su vecino Washington, D.C., aparecen en las dos últimas posiciones, pues a pesar de sus elevados ingresos y su alto nivel de educación la calificación media es 17 y 14 puntos peor de lo que la firma hubiera esperado. Tras ellas, Tampa, Miami y Atlanta completan el grupo de las cinco peores.
Foto: Paulo Valdivieso
. El 62% de los clientes "promotores" seguiría a su advisor a otra firma
El 62% de los inversores millonarios se apoya en asesores financieros para gestionar y proteger su riqueza, y las referencias de estos clientes satisfechos generan el 48% del nuevo negocio de los advisors.
En su octava edición, el Fidelity Investments’Millionaire Outlook Study estudió la situación en que se encuentran las relaciones entre inversores y asesores, y descubrió que el 55% de los millonarios son «promotores», es decir, son leales a sus asesores y propensos a recomendarlos a otras personas; de hecho, de esos promotores, el 65% habla de a sus asesores como “amigos”.
Sin embargo, a pesar de reconocer el valor del asesoramiento financiero profesional, el 45% de los millonarios no recomendaría sus asesores financieros a sus amigos o compañeros de trabajo. De hecho, hasta el 20% de los clientes son «detractores», o lo suficientemente insatisfechos como para dejar a su asesor actual o desanimar a otros que piensen trabajar con él.
«Estamos en una economía de `referencias´, donde nosotros, como consumidores, mejoramos compartiendo las personas y cosas que valoramos de nuestra vida a través de nuestras redes sociales y profesionales”, dice Bob Oros, director del negocio con RIAs de Fidelity Clearing & Custody Solutions.
Otros hallazgos del trabajo muestran que el 69% de los millonarios leales a su advisor lo recomendó en el último año, y que los clientes “promotores” tienen el 71% de sus activos con su asesor financiero principal, mientras que los “detractores” tienen aproximadamente la mitad (el 48%) de sus activos con un advisor; Por otro lado, los datos también ponen de manifiesto que los “promotores” van por delante en la consecución de sus metas financieras: el 25% de ellos siente que está por delante de los planes en la consecución de sus metas financieras, mientras que sólo el 7% de los “detractores” se siente de esa manera.
El 75% de los millonarios que recomendarían a su asesor consultaría con él qué hacer con unos ingresos significativos y repentinos, mientras que sólo el 36% de los detractores lo haría. De hecho, el 45% de los “detractores” invertiría por su cuenta, sin consultar con su asesor.
Por último, el estudio concluye que el 62% de los clientes “promotores” seguiría a su advisor si este cambia de firma, mientras que solo lo haría el 17% de los detractores.
The global, sustainable corporate bond fund ERSTE RESPONSIBLE BOND EMERGING CORPORATE has clearly passed the threshold of EUR 100mn of assets under management. A perfect occasion to take stock. Christian Schön, member of the board of directors of Erste Asset Management, explains what role sustainable investments play in emerging markets, especially in the corporate bond segment.
Question: How do sustainability and emerging markets go together? Schön: Very well, actually. Responsibility and growth are not mutually exclusive. Let me take China as example: between 2006 and 2012 energy consumption per unit of GDP was reduced by almost a quarter. By 2020, CO2 emissions are to be cut by 40 to 45% per GDP unit. On top of that, the government plans to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in energy consumption to 15%. The entire industry benefits from this green policy. In China alone, more than EUR 500bn have been invested in renewable energy and measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions over the past five years. In South America, too, we can see enormous progress as far as sustainable business practices are concerned. At the same time corporate bonds from emerging economies continue to pay significantly higher yields than their peers from developed countries. This scenario holds opportunities for sustainable investors, especially in the emerging markets corporate bonds segment.
Q: From your point of view, what is the added value of an emerging markets bond fund that is managed on the basis of sustainable criteria? S: The application of sustainable criteria in company research facilitates an improved risk assessment, particularly for emerging economies. Imagine that in addition to traditional company valuation, you are using another magnifying glass that provides you with new insights into the respective company and its governance. This is particularly essential for the assessment of corporate governance criteria including the risk of corruption. This expanded analysis is done against the backdrop of the stringent ethical criteria, which we as sustainable investors apply with regard to the upholding of human rights or in connection with the problem of child labour.
Q:What criteria play a role in the investment process for emerging markets bonds? S: Especially in a dynamic environment such as emerging markets, an ongoing research process is a crucial element of success. We have been developing our approach for 15 years. It combines all methods of analysis and selection that are available to sustainable investors into one integrated management approach. In addition, we complement our in-house expertise with the know-how of renowned research partners. On the basis of this method, we develop an initial ESG investment universe, which is then used for the individual investment process of the individual funds. The ERSTE RESPONSIBLE BOND EMERGING CORPORATE fund for example invests in the bonds of emerging markets companies that have successfully gone through our ESG screening. It also taps the high-yield segment while requiring a rating of at least B-. However, BBB bonds account for the biggest share of the portfolio. Foreign exchange risks are largely hedged against the euro. This multi-step process ensures the compliance with criteria of sustainability and the opportunity of surplus return.
Q: How has ERSTE RESPONSIBLE BOND EMERGING CORPORATE fared since its launch, and what is its outlook? S: Since the launch of the fund in December 2013 we have recorded a compound annual growth rate of 4.25% in spite of a relatively difficult market environment. We have seen investors return to the emerging markets segment especially as a result of the current low interest rates. The capital inflow into our funds testifies to the fact that sus-tainable criteria play an ever-greater role in this area as well.
Earnings disappoint again, but markets stay resilient. With the U.S. party conventions out of the way and Hillary Clinton polling more strongly, investors may divert their attention, at least for a while, away from politics to focus on economic and company fundamentals.
If they do, will they subscribe to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s view that they should follow him and sell out of equities?
Markets Have Been Remarkably Resilient They’d have to reckon with just how resilient markets have been lately. Equities bounced back from Brexit at the end of June. They even sailed through July’s bear market in oil, which briefly slipped under $40 per barrel last week.
At the beginning of the year, the oil price was one of the major factors driving extreme risk aversion. This time, the impact has been muted. Even energy sector high-yield spreads are pretty much where they were when oil hit its recent high at the beginning of June.
Still, underneath these low yield-supported valuations the economy remains sluggish. As last Friday showed, the U.S. continues to post healthy jobs data. And yet the second quarter U.S. GDP print seriously undershot expectations at 1.2% real and 2.4% nominal growth. You have to go back to the first quarter of 2010 to find a report that weak. Household spending was strong and a lot of the weakness came from inventories being run down, but it wasn’t so long ago that economists were forecasting 3% real GDP growth for the second half of this year.
Three-quarters of the way through the second quarter reporting season, we can see that this is a tough environment in which to eke out earnings growth.
Another Weak Earnings Season Year-over-year, we are on course for a 2% drop in earnings. Take out the energy sector and earnings are up around 2%-3%. That would be false comfort, however. A year ago, the consensus estimate for 2016 S&P 500 earnings per share was $130. Three months ago it was around $123. Now, we’ll be lucky to make $118. That was what U.S. equity investors got in 2014 and 2015, too; three years of flat earnings suggests this isn’t just about oil, but low investment across industry in general.
It’s a similar story in Europe. We’ve pointed to the quiet outperformance of European macro data over recent months, and both second quarter GDP growth and July inflation data came in ahead of expectations. Corporate earnings have been even weaker than in the U.S., however. We are looking at double-digit year-over-year declines for the second quarter.
It’s true that, if we strip out Europe’s banks, we might expect earnings growth of 3%-4% overall. However, stripping out banks in Europe is even more questionable than stripping out energy companies in the U.S. These banks lost a third of their value between the two stress tests of 2014 and 2016 and remain poorly capitalized, weighed down by nonperforming loans and overexposed to sovereign credit issues, which, in an economy as dependent on bank credit as Europe’s, is a serious impediment to growth.
Mixed Signals Create ‘Confused Apathy’ To sum up, the slight improvement in corporate earnings over the last couple of quarters cannot disguise how disappointing the figures are, given the easing off of the China, oil and, for U.S. companies, strong-dollar headwinds that we have been describing since the spring.
A phrase I have heard to describe investment psychology at the moment is “confused apathy.” Active managers struggle to generate alpha; beta looks tired, stretched and expensive; bond yields are incredibly low; the political environment is unpredictable. But wasn’t that what we were saying two years ago when the S&P 500 was 15% cheaper and earnings were exactly the same?
In other words, this is not an ideal way to invest, given the long-term, common sense correlation between earnings and market valuations, but ordinary investors that are patiently trying to grow their wealth arguably can ill afford to ditch equities, especially with bond yields so low. Monitoring risk is sensible, but trying to time this market makes about as much sense as, let’s say, building a wall around Mexico.
Institutional investors across Europe are steadily increasing proportional investment exposure via mutual funds, even where mandates could be demanded, according to the latest issue of The Cerulli Edge – Global Edition.
Cerulli Associates, a global analytics firm, says statistics suggest that, while insurers are leading the way, the trend in Europe is pan-institutional. For example, German pensions’ proportional exposure via funds rose from 41.3% in 2011 to 50.1% in 2015.
«In the search for better investments, insurers are turning to less familiar asset classes–prompting the use of funds rather than segregated accounts to make their investments. There is clearly a greater willingness to have commingled investments,» says David Walker, director European institutional research at Cerulli.
He notes that early allocations to less well-trodden asset classes will be smaller, and therefore the volumes involved may not justify, in either the insurer’s or asset manager’s eyes, a separate account. That said, even in some of the more familiar yield classes–for instance high yield and emerging market debt–certain insurers prefer funds as these are easier to enter and exit compared with being in a segregated account.
«One manager Cerulli interviewed uses geography to split his insurer clientele’s preference for commingled/pooled structures, or investing via mandates. He has mutual funds more generally in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, but mandates typically in the UK and Europe’s north,» says Walker.
He notes that some institutions are not willing to forfeit the influence over the strategy/risk exposures and the briefings that are part and parcel of a mandate-based relationship. For some institutions, not knowing the identity of the other coinvestors in a broader pooling vehicle is a step too far.
«Some insurers seeking prize investment assets such as buildings or infrastructure projects in this yield-starved environment argue that they lose competitive edge by ‘sharing’ them with rivals in a pooled structure,» says Walker.
