España archivos - Funds Society

Despite Concerns, Evergreen Funds Continue to Gain Traction

The growing adoption of semi-liquid strategies has transformed the alternative investments landscape in recent years, opening the door for high-net-worth clients and wealth management channels to access portfolios and returns that were once reserved for large institutional investors. And although developments in large private credit funds have raised questions about liquidity and the ability to meet sustained redemption requests, the industry still sees demand remaining strong.

“Some media outlets have warned that recent redemptions in certain evergreen private credit funds could trigger a cascading effect. However, net flows into U.S. evergreen strategies have in fact remained healthy,” specialist asset manager Neuberger Berman noted in a recent report.

According to the firm, investor interest has remained resilient. Through the end of last year, the private equity evergreen fund industry recorded 60 consecutive months of positive flows, from 2021 through 2025. A similar trend occurred in private credit vehicles, although that streak ended in December last year when net flows turned negative.

This demand has fueled significant growth in the semi-liquid segment. For example, evergreen fund launches reached their highest level in a decade last year, with 123 new vehicles introduced, according to data from private markets specialist Preqin.

In addition, assets in evergreen funds reached 530 billion dollars by the end of 2025, an increase of more than 100 billion dollars compared with 2024. The most popular structures were BDCs (Business Development Companies), while alternative credit strategies accounted for the largest share of activity.

Given that alternative credit was also the segment at the center of liquidity concerns, it naturally became the focus of market attention. “The final quarter of 2025 and the opening months of 2026 have seen a wave of headlines surrounding actual and potential redemptions in several credit funds, including some managed by the industry’s most prominent firms,” Morningstar noted in a recent analysis.

The Liquidity Question

Rather than extinguishing interest in the evergreen format, however, Morningstar argues that these episodes “ultimately reflect a structural reality of which investors are becoming increasingly aware.”

Specifically, “outside of interval funds, the liquidity terms of semi-liquid structures remain at the discretion of fund boards and allow redemption restrictions during periods of market stress, and managers will exercise that ability when they believe it is in the best interest of the fund.”

The bottom line, according to the financial services firm, is that liquidity is not guaranteed, and it is the responsibility of asset managers to protect investors from destabilizing events. That said, liquidity management has become a reputational risk that investment firms must carefully consider.

In this regard, Morningstar data show that semi-liquid private equity funds hold, on average, 15% of their portfolios in liquid assets, while private credit funds hold roughly half that amount.

This is where managers face a delicate balancing act. “If they hold too little cash or too few easily marketable assets, they may struggle to consistently meet oversubscribed redemption requests. Holding too many liquid assets, however, can weigh on returns,” the firm warned.

Market Sentiment

Although liquidity concerns are centered on the intersection between wealth management channels and alternative investment structures, demand remains strong.

According to a survey of global private banks conducted by Hamilton Lane at the end of last year, 86% of clients plan to increase their allocation to alternative investments this year.

The experience of alternative investment platform CAIS supports that trend. Based on nine advisor-focused events held this year, the firm says it has observed a structural shift.

“As the alternatives landscape has expanded and implementation has become more accessible, the conversation around portfolio construction has evolved,” the company noted.

Advisors now have access to a broad range of strategies across private equity, private credit, real assets, and structured investments, moving beyond the traditional practice of grouping everything under a single “alternatives” umbrella.

Looking ahead, the expectation is that wealth management channels will continue gaining ground within the alternative investment ecosystem. Estimates from consulting firm PwC suggest that total investable global wealth could reach 481 trillion dollars by 2030, with two-thirds of that amount linked to the mass affluent and high-net-worth individual (HNWI) segments. According to PwC, these pools of capital are expected to grow at compound annual growth rates of 5.7% and 6.5%, respectively.

Geopolitics or Monetary Policy: Which Matters More for the Evolution of Gold Prices?

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

During the first six months of the year, gold’s performance has been remarkable, delivering a year-to-date return of 5%. After decisively breaking through previous psychological barriers, gold reached an all-time high on January 29, 2026, touching $5,595.42 per ounce. In the months that followed, the market began to stabilize and gradually correct as central banks maintained—or even increased—interest rates to contain inflation.

“The precious metal became, to some extent, a victim of its own success: significant profit-taking emerged, particularly in U.S. ETFs, while some central banks—such as Turkey’s—had to draw on their reserves to support their currencies,” acknowledges Diego Franzin, Portfolio Manager of Strategies at Plenisfer Investments (part of Generali Investments). However, he notes that the asset is still widely perceived as the “ultimate solution” for diversifying and protecting portfolios against market risks.

Price Dynamics

In Franzin’s view, gold price dynamics remain closely linked to developments in the Middle East and the trajectory of black gold.

“Any stabilization of the geopolitical landscape could ease the economic pressure stemming from energy costs and moderate expectations of further rate hikes, a scenario that would likely reduce gold’s short-term appeal, given that it does not generate income. Beyond short-term volatility, we believe gold will continue to play a structural role in portfolios thanks to its function as a store of value and a tool for financial independence in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment,” he argues.

However, Charlotte Peuron, Precious Metals Portfolio Manager at Crédit Mutuel Asset Management, believes that gold prices are influenced more by monetary policy than by geopolitical risks.

“Currently, gold prices are being driven more by changes in real interest rates and monetary policy than by geopolitical risks. The oil supply crisis, together with its potential economic and inflationary consequences, has effectively eliminated expectations of further rate cuts by the Federal Reserve, which is also weighing on precious metals prices. Given the current situation, this volatility is likely to persist until these uncertainties are resolved,” she says.

This view is also shared by UBS Global Wealth Management. Its experts note that while gold has historically benefited from safe-haven demand during periods of heightened geopolitical tension, this time the precious metal has come under pressure due to concerns that elevated energy prices could prompt a more restrictive monetary policy stance from the Fed and other central banks, thereby increasing the opportunity cost of holding gold.

Nevertheless, they acknowledge that although headwinds for gold have intensified recently, the metal could regain momentum as concerns about future Fed rate hikes begin to fade.

“We remain positive on the outlook for gold and continue to view the precious metal as a source of diversification within portfolios. While short-term performance may remain sensitive to headlines related to the United States and Iran, energy prices, U.S. bond yields, and the dollar, the medium-term bullish thesis continues to be supported by central bank demand, reserve diversification, elevated global debt levels, and the prospect of a more accommodative Fed later this year,” says Mark Haefele, Chief Investment Officer at UBS Global Wealth Management.

Gold in Portfolios

Both experts agree that gold is becoming increasingly entrenched in investor portfolios.

“If inflation becomes entrenched, gold is likely to regain its role as a safe-haven asset following the new cycle of rate hikes. Conversely, if the conflict with Iran ends quickly without triggering a surge in inflation, the Federal Reserve could seek to stimulate the economy by resuming its rate-cutting cycle. Both scenarios are favorable for gold. Finally, currency weakness driven by fiscal deficits and rising public debt has supported gold prices in recent years. In the current environment, some governments may expand deficits even further, which would likely be positive for gold,” adds the Crédit Mutuel AM specialist.

Meanwhile, UBP notes that investor activity in gold and the broader precious metals complex has stalled since the end of February.

“IMM futures data remain virtually unchanged, indicating that institutional investor interest in gold has leveled off. Open interest has also remained flat. ETFs experienced significant outflows in March—the largest monthly decline since 2021—and since then, inflows have slowed to a trickle. Retail interest in gold has also declined substantially overall,” the firm states in its latest report.

For the experts at UBP, the data and overall market sentiment point to a substantial decline in short-term appetite for long positions in gold. “However, the longer-term outlook for gold remains constructive, suggesting that the recent weakness is best viewed as a pause within gold’s broader upward trend,” they note.

Global Economic Outlook Wavers Between Geopolitical Headwinds and the Momentum of AI

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

Global economic prospects have deteriorated sharply in recent weeks, according to the latest edition of the World Economic Forum’s Chief Economists’ Outlook. Nearly nine out of ten chief economists surveyed expect global growth to weaken over the next 12 months, reversing the cautious optimism seen at the beginning of the year, as conflict in the Middle East and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz fuel fears of a major global economic shock.

Chief economists now view the current duration of the Strait of Hormuz closure as significantly more disruptive than last year’s tariff-related turbulence. If the closure extends into the second half of the year, they believe its impact could approach the severity of the COVID-19 crisis, triggering knock-on effects across global supply chains as well as energy and food costs. An overwhelming 94% of respondents expect global inflation to rise over the coming year.

“Just a few months ago, the community of chief economists was cautiously optimistic. The conflict in the Middle East has changed that, and the economic scars from the situation so far are already expected to persist in the months ahead,” said Saadia Zahidi, Managing Director of the World Economic Forum. “The longer the disruption lasts, the greater the long-term cost for those least able to afford it.”

An Uneven Regional Outlook

The consequences are expected to be particularly severe in the Middle East and North Africa region. After being viewed only a few months ago as one of the world’s most dynamic economic regions, 88% of surveyed chief economists now expect weak or very weak growth there, representing the largest regional downgrade in the study.

Elsewhere, the outlook is mixed. Inflation expectations have risen sharply in Sub-Saharan Africa, which now records the highest levels among all regions, while Europe faces increasing stagflation risks amid weak growth and rising inflationary pressures. In contrast, India and the United States are showing greater resilience, supported by domestic demand and investment.

Low Recession Risk, but High Volatility

Despite the significant deterioration, the survey does not point to a major recession. Most chief economists do not expect a recession over the next 12 months, although neither do they foresee a clear improvement in economic resilience in the near term.

Developments will depend largely on the duration of the disruption: a short-lived shock could allow for recovery, whereas a prolonged closure would intensify pressure on the global economy.

Financial markets are also expected to face increased stress. A total of 79% of respondents anticipate greater volatility in private debt markets over the next year amid signs of strain in private credit. Meanwhile, 74% expect higher volatility in government bond markets and 68% foresee increased volatility in equity markets.

Optimism on AI, but More Measured

Artificial intelligence continues to act as a positive force for the global economy, with 92% of chief economists expecting greater AI adoption over the next year.

However, optimism regarding the speed of productivity gains from AI adoption has become more restrained. Significant productivity improvements are now expected to take longer to materialize across almost all sectors compared with forecasts made in January 2026.

Only the information technology and education sectors maintain stable expectations, while the largest delays in productivity gains are expected in engineering, construction, utilities, healthcare, and care services.

The Market Is Anticipating an Overly Benign Scenario

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

Markets had chosen to ignore the latest U.S. military strikes against Iran, anchored to the narrative of an imminent agreement that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Brent crude fell from $104 per barrel on Friday to $93.7 per barrel, while equity markets consolidated gains, with the S&P 500 reaching a new high during Tuesday’s session.

The problem is that market optimism far exceeds the available evidence. A preliminary agreement—featuring a 60-day ceasefire, the lifting of the naval blockade, and the start of nuclear negotiations—faces difficult obstacles, including frozen Iranian assets, Israel’s position, demands regarding the nuclear program, and the fragility of any lasting regional peace framework.

The agreement reported by Axios on Thursday, which would extend the truce for an additional 60 days, would require Iran to remove mines from the Strait in order to restore normal maritime traffic. However, the probability that such an arrangement will lead to lasting peace is not particularly high. In our view, the market is pricing in an excessively benign scenario relative to the actual balance of risks.

The S&P 500 responded to the Axios report with a modest gain of 0.58%, while the Bloomberg Global Equity Index rose 0.41%. Since the ceasefire announcement at the end of February, global equities have gained 7%, led by cyclical stocks and technology. Is it possible that the market has already priced in the good news?

This assessment has also been shared by prominent European Central Bank officials, including Philip Lane, Olli Rehn, and Luis de Guindos.

The Cumulative Cost of Three Months of Closure

We have now spent nearly three months with the Strait of Hormuz effectively closed, and the cumulative impact on the global economy is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. Crude oil remains above $90 per barrel, while gasoline prices in the United States are approaching the record highs seen after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

The impact, however, extends well beyond the energy sector. It affects fertilizers, petrochemicals, sulfur, and helium, disrupting supply chains whose consequences are only beginning to appear in macroeconomic data.

U.S. GDP, released on Thursday and weighed down by net exports, is growing at an annualized rate below the economy’s long-term potential (1.6% versus 1.8%) and below consensus expectations (2%). Consumer spending is also beginning to show signs of strain, as household income lags expenditure (personal income was flat compared with March, while nominal spending rose 0.05%). The gap is being financed through savings, which at 2.6% are starting to run thin.

Possible Scenarios and Positioning

The situation is extremely difficult to manage. If the memorandum referenced by Axios does not materialize, another two or three months of closure would exhaust available reserves, force refinery cutbacks, and ultimately lead to demand destruction and a global recession. The political incentive to resolve the situation is clear: with the midterm elections on the horizon, the Trump administration cannot afford to let energy prices continue to erode consumer confidence, which, according to the latest University of Michigan survey, is at historic lows. In light of recent developments, the possibility of an “escalate to de-escalate” strategy cannot be ruled out—briefly resuming attacks in order to force Tehran back to the negotiating table. If that tactic were to succeed and the Strait of Hormuz were reopened, the decline in oil prices could be just as dramatic as the previous surge.

Our six- and twelve-month outlook is that both oil prices and bond yields will be lower than current levels. The key positioning question lies in the path we will have to travel to get there.

The Federal Reserve at a Historic Crossroads

These uncertainties do not affect only investors. The inflationary environment has created one of the most challenging monetary policy situations in years for central banks, and particularly for the Federal Reserve.

Core inflation has rebounded sharply: the Final Demand Producer Price Index, excluding food and energy, currently stands at 5.25%. At the same time, the yield on the two-year Treasury note has risen above the federal funds rate, a signal that has historically preceded interest-rate increases over the past thirty years.

The Taylor Rule also suggests room for a 25-basis-point rate hike in December, a move to which the market currently assigns a 72% probability.

The Federal Reserve finds itself at a crossroads. If it raises interest rates, it will put pressure on equity valuations and weigh on economic growth. If it refrains from doing so, the bond market could conclude—as it did in 2022–2023—that the central bank has fallen behind the curve. In either scenario, equities would likely react negatively.

That said, there are important nuances. Core inflation excluding housing has remained close to the Fed’s 2% target for nearly three years. The recent increase in the housing component reflects a statistical effect linked to the government shutdown the previous year and should reverse in the coming months.

At the same time, unemployment continues to rise across most G10 economies, reducing the risk of a wage-price spiral.

And although household spending-intention surveys indicate caution in response to persistently higher fuel prices, tax refunds associated with the OBBA plan have so far offset that effect, according to estimates from Brown University.

According to the Tax Foundation, as of April 3, 2026, the cumulative value of refunds issued by the IRS totaled 241.7 billion dollars, 30.7 billion more than during the same period in 2025. The agency processed 69.8 million tax returns, compared with 67.7 million the previous year, and nearly 70% of filed returns resulted in refunds.

Taken together, these refunds amount to approximately 1.7% of U.S. GDP, compared with an estimated negative impact of 0.7% from higher fuel prices.

Cross-Border Investment Funds Reach 8.5 Trillion Euros While

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

The 2026 edition of the ALFI-Broadridge study on cross-border fund distribution provides a comprehensive analysis of the latest trends shaping the international distribution of UCITS and other cross-border fund vehicles.

The study concludes that cross-border assets increased to 8.5 trillion euros in 2025, with a record 16% now coming from outside Europe. Luxembourg continues to lead the global cross-border fund landscape, representing 42% of worldwide cross-border assets under management. The report highlights how the industry is becoming increasingly global, concentrated, and competitive, driven by scale, the growth of ETFs, and evolving investor preferences.

After Europe, the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region continues to be the fastest growing, with Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan driving demand for cross-border products. Meanwhile, markets in the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America are showing growing adoption of UCITS structures, reflecting sustained confidence in European regulatory standards and investor protection frameworks.

The report also points to a clear shift in investor behavior. Although exposure to North American equities remains significant, investment flows are increasingly favoring broader diversification, including European and emerging market equities. At the same time, new themes linked to geopolitical resilience, security, and defense are gaining traction, particularly through ETFs. Product innovation also continues to accelerate, with new fund launches closely aligned with evolving investor demand.

Britta Borneff, Chief Marketing Officer at ALFI, stated: “Cross-border distribution is entering a new phase of maturity and internationalization. Luxembourg continues to play a central role, supported by its strong regulatory framework, deep international expertise, and robust distribution infrastructure. As investor demand evolves and markets become more complex, the ability to deliver trust, innovation, and operational efficiency at scale will become increasingly important.”

Nigel Birch added: “The cross-border industry continues to demonstrate its resilience and global relevance. Investor demand is broadening geographically and becoming more selective, while scale and passive investing continue to redefine the competitive landscape. In this environment, high-quality market intelligence is essential to understand where flows are heading and which long-term trends are emerging.”

ALFI and Broadridge will present the study’s conclusions during a webinar on May 28, 2026, at 10:00 CET.

BBVA AM Takes Another Step Forward in Asset Tokenization Alongside Hamilton Lane, Allfunds Blockchain, and Apex Group

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

Hamilton Lane, a private markets investment firm, has announced the launch of a new tokenized share class providing access to the Hamilton Lane Global Private Assets Fund (GPA), developed in collaboration with Allfunds Blockchain, the digital innovation division of Allfunds, and Apex Group. BBVA Asset Management has committed to participate as the first investor and initial exclusive distributor for institutional portfolios of this new tokenized share class.

According to the firms, the launch marks a significant milestone in the evolution of private markets accessibility, leveraging blockchain-based distribution models to deliver a more efficient, transparent, and flexible investment experience. The tokenized share class will be available through the Allfunds platform and supported by Allfunds Blockchain as the technology provider and Apex Group as transfer agent, enabling end-to-end digital subscription, administration, and servicing.

In addition, as part of the agreement, BBVA Asset Management will benefit from a three-month exclusive distribution period, reinforcing the asset manager’s commitment to innovation and its active role in exploring new digital distribution models for private market assets in Europe.

A New Milestone

With this launch, Hamilton Lane expands its track record of broadening institutional access to private markets through technological innovation and continues to play a pioneering global role in the tokenization and digitalization of private market products.

Hamilton Lane GPA is an evergreen fund designed to provide investors with diversified exposure to private markets through a single investment commitment.

“As part of our ongoing effort to expand access to private markets through technology, the launch of this tokenized share class brings the diversification benefits of private markets to investors in a more cost-effective, better, and faster way. Working with established partners such as Allfunds Blockchain and Apex Group has enabled us to deliver an efficient and scalable solution, and we are pleased to welcome BBVA as the first investor in this initiative,” said Victor Jung, Head of Digital Assets at Hamilton Lane.

For Ruben Nieto, Managing Director at Allfunds Blockchain, the project demonstrates how blockchain can deliver real and tangible efficiency improvements to the fund industry. “Our collaboration with Hamilton Lane and Apex Group enables a new digital operating model that simplifies distribution, enhances transparency, and ultimately benefits both managers and investors. We are proud to help bring this market milestone to life,” he said.

BBVA Asset Management emphasized its commitment to driving innovation in financial services: “This initiative reflects our conviction in the potential of tokenization to enable more efficient access to sophisticated investment opportunities. We are pleased to participate as the first investor and distributor of this new tokenized share class and to continue exploring digital solutions that can enhance the client investment experience.”

Finally, Peter Hughes, Founder and CEO of Apex Group, stated: “Tokenization is transforming the way investors access private markets. At Apex Group, we are building the digital infrastructure that enables this shift at scale. Working with leading partners such as Hamilton Lane and Allfunds is helping us deliver a more efficient and transparent model for investor access.”

Global Dividends Increased 8.2% to Reach 419 Billion Dollars

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

Photo courtesyAlexandra Haggard, Head of Asset Class Services for Europe and Asia-Pacific at Capital Group

Global dividends started 2026 on a strong note, rising 8.2% to a record 419 billion U.S. dollars in the first quarter, driven by foreign exchange movements and significant one-off special dividends, according to the latest Dividend Watch report, part of the Capital Group Global Equity Study¹. The first-quarter underlying growth rate was 5.2% year over year, a more representative measure of dividend momentum that was also reflected in the average growth of dividends per share.

A shift in the commodities cycle made mining companies the main driver of first-quarter growth, following years of cuts caused by weak profitability. The sector accounted for one-fifth of the global increase during the quarter, with gold mining standing out in particular. The broader financial sector (+16.2%), semiconductors (+10.2%), software (+9.5%), and machinery (+8.9%) also recorded strong underlying growth.

The three sectors that paid the largest dividends during the first quarter—pharmaceuticals, banking, and energy—posted slower distribution growth than the broader market. Energy sector dividends rose only 3.1%, reflecting pressure on earnings prior to the oil crisis, as well as the impact of share buybacks, while banking sector distributions were held back by cuts in China, Brazil, and Sweden in particular. Pharmaceutical sector dividends increased 4.3% on an underlying basis; no company in Capital Group’s index² reduced its dividend, but some of the largest payers recorded only modest increases.

Regional Trends

Among the major regions, the fastest growth was recorded in Australia, India, the United States, and Canada, while the United Kingdom, Europe, and China lagged behind. Generally, in Japan, most of Asia and Europe, as well as in some emerging markets, dividend distributions are relatively limited during the first quarter, meaning local growth rates are less representative of what may be expected for the full year.

The Spanish dividend market started 2026 strongly, posting underlying growth of 13.7%, above the global average, during a seasonally quiet first quarter. Total dividend distributions reached 4.7 billion dollars (4.1 billion euros). The overall growth figure of 50.5% was driven by foreign exchange effects and supported by the addition of an Ibex 35 company to the index.

For the remainder of 2026, Capital Group has maintained its dividend forecast unchanged at 2.20 trillion U.S. dollars, representing year-over-year growth of 5.1%. However, the contribution from special dividends and foreign exchange movements remains greater than previously anticipated, implying underlying growth of 4.7%, slightly below the headline figure.

Alexandra Haggard, Head of Asset Class Services for Europe and Asia-Pacific at Capital Group, said: “What these trends highlight is that active managers with strong research capabilities are increasingly well positioned to identify companies with both the ability and commitment to pay and grow dividends over time. Over the last decade, global dividends have more than doubled, driven by rising corporate earnings and a growing culture of dividend payments across markets.

The start of 2026 has been encouraging, even amid heightened geopolitical uncertainty and ongoing cost and energy pressures. While these challenges increase costs for some companies, dividend-paying businesses can help provide stability to portfolios when markets become more volatile. In this environment, deep research and stock-selection capabilities are critical, and active managers are well positioned to identify those companies best placed to sustain and grow dividends over the long term.”

Christophe Girondel (Nordea AM): “As Mark Carney Said, If You Don’t Have a Seat at the Table, You’re on the Menu”

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

In the view of Christophe Girondel, Global Head of Institutional and Wholesale Distribution at Nordea AM, the asset management business is moving faster than it may appear at first glance. “I like to recall Mark Carney’s famous quote at the World Economic Forum, where he said, ‘If you don’t have a seat at the table, you’re on the menu.’ So what we want is to have a seat at the table; that is our primary objective, and to achieve it we are developing our range of solutions,” he says.

We spoke with Girondel during his visit to Nordea AM’s Madrid office about how to maintain that “seat at the table” and how the fund distribution business has evolved in its two key markets—Europe and Latin America.

How do you see the relationship between asset managers and institutional distributors? What has changed over the course of your career, and what is the priority today?

Twenty years ago, your clients, distributors or intermediaries, were looking for the best possible product and were interested in finding the latest innovation. The question was: what is the next product that is going to work? The industry was searching for innovation; now we are in a phase of consolidation.

Distributors and intermediaries have become much more efficient players. They now build their own strategies, model portfolios, and discretionary portfolios, so their central question is how to construct their own portfolios. Another important factor is that many have realized that having the best product is not as important because products move in cycles. The priority is having a strong partner to work with—one that will still be there over the next ten years, regardless of market cycles, while providing solid services.

How does AI fit into this part of the business?

Artificial intelligence can essentially help analyze clients, identify trends, and manage information, but I do not believe it will ever connect with clients in the same way people do.

What matters to clients is having someone alongside them from the beginning of their analysis process on how to build portfolios, and in my opinion, that requires a very close relationship.

The firm operates in both Europe and Latin America. What are the differences between these two businesses and their distribution models?

They are very different. In Spain and the broader Iberian region, for example, everything is more structured around large institutions, whereas Latin America has a much larger presence of what we would call independent financial advisors and wealth managers.

Banks certainly play a role there, but it is less dominant than in Europe. As a result, the business model is somewhat different. In Latin America, you want to stay close to advisors and wealth managers spread across the region, and naturally also in Miami. There are a few key platforms where you want to be present, but then you also need to reach individual advisors and wealth managers directly.

In Europe, banks are at the center of the system, so product distribution happens through large banking institutions. In Latin America and Miami, distribution is driven by advisors and partnerships with local distributors.

In terms of products, what differences do you see between these regions when it comes to promoting one strategy versus another?

The product we are currently focusing on is our quantitative BetaPlus solution. The reason is simple: it works everywhere.

Markets have become highly concentrated, so clients do not want to take on excessive risk, which is why we are witnessing a resurgence of quantitative strategies. Honestly, four years ago nobody was interested in them, even though it is a product we have always offered and where we manage around 80 billion. Now, quantitative strategies have become a focus for everyone.

Speaking of differences, in Europe we do see greater interest in fixed-income strategies because clients do not want to take on too much risk. We are trying to help clients understand that they need uncorrelated strategies, including within fixed income.

From a thematic perspective, we are also seeing strong interest in a strategy focused on Europe’s empowerment, where we already have 900 million euros invested. The strategy invests in companies that benefit from energy resilience and, naturally, includes exposure to defense.

Another theme we see beginning to revive is climate-related investing. The reason is that for a long time climate was viewed as a way to improve quality of life; now it is increasingly seen as an element of independence.

These strategies tend to be more diversified and long term. Do you think the long-term investing narrative has lost ground amid the ETF boom?

I think it has.

The industry has reached a level of maturity where investors distinguish between holding an investment and trading it. Investors can certainly look every day at how their defense ETF is performing, for example. But if you want to invest with a longer-term horizon, it is preferable to be in more diversified products.

In that context, active management also makes more sense relative to passive management. Active management ultimately means being invested in a strategy like our Europe empowerment strategy and saying, “Now is the time to be more exposed to this theme rather than another.”

Let’s talk about alternatives and private markets. How do you see them entering client portfolios? Is this just a trend or something structural?

At Nordea AM, we have built solutions that allow clients to gain exposure to private markets.

I think this is a very complex area because there is a risk that investors do not fully understand the illiquidity of these assets. It is true that redemption windows can be created, but investors must understand that these are illiquid assets.

This is particularly important for retail investors. For institutional investors, the shift has been much smaller because they were already invested in this asset class.

For both groups, one of the lessons I have learned throughout my career is that you cannot fake an asset’s liquidity; investors need to understand that it is illiquid. In this respect, I am pleased to see that many intermediaries and wealth managers are very aware of this and are doing a good job.

For this asset class, it is important that investors do not have a negative experience, so the best advice is to take the time to understand it thoroughly before investing.

Do you think private assets should represent a specific allocation within portfolios?

I do not know what the ideal percentage is.

When valuations were very low, private assets were highly attractive because they could generate very strong returns. When valuations are higher, it becomes more difficult.

I believe their role within portfolios is maturing, and investors are becoming increasingly selective.

Considering the trends and reflections we have discussed, what are Nordea AM’s objectives in this environment?

First, I would say that we are operating in an extremely competitive industry, so the focus must remain on our objective: staying close to our clients and growing our business alongside them.

This is important because I believe we are moving toward a future where clients will work with fewer asset managers. Our objective is to ensure that we have a “seat” with them.

I like to remember Mark Carney’s comment at the World Economic Forum: “If you don’t have a seat at the table, you’re on the menu.”

So what we want is a seat at the table—that is our main objective. To achieve it, we are continuing to develop our range of investment solutions, including those related to artificial intelligence and absolute return strategies.

From Maradona to Mbappé: 40 Years of Soccer Inflation

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

When Diego Maradona joined SSC Napoli in 1984 for around 12 million dollars, the transfer was considered an unprecedented financial extravagance. Four decades later, the global soccer market moves figures that would have seemed unreal even to the great sports magnates of the 1980s.

The evolution of transfers in professional soccer reflects much more than a sporting change: it is the story of the financialization of the global entertainment industry. Local contracts and free-to-air television gave way to an ecosystem dominated by sovereign wealth funds, private equity, streaming platforms, global commercialization, and digital attention economies.

Today, soccer is an industry in which a single transfer market can exceed 13 billion dollars annually.

The Maradona transfer that broke the market

In 1982, Diego Maradona left Boca Juniors to join FC Barcelona for approximately 7.3 million euros, adjusted retrospectively. Two years later, his move to Napoli raised the world transfer record to nearly 12 million dollars.

The scale of that figure can only be understood in context. According to retrospective analyses by specialized media outlets and historical transfer databases, Maradona’s move was worth several times the average transaction value of the era.

In reality, the Maradona case marked the beginning of a new logic:

The soccer player as a global asset
The club as a commercial platform
The transfer as a strategic investment

Italian Serie A dominated the global soccer economy at the time. Italy concentrated industrial capital, growing television rights revenues, and financial capacity far greater than the rest of Europe. Clubs such as Napoli, Juventus, Milan, and Inter began an inflationary race that would redefine the market.

Television Changed Everything

The real economic explosion arrived in the 1990s with the expansion of satellite television and massive broadcasting contracts. The creation of the Premier League in 1992 marked a turning point. The new centralized model for audiovisual rights radically transformed the revenues of English clubs.

This phenomenon coincided with the commercial globalization of sports, the liberalization of the European market following the 1995 Bosman ruling, and the growth of multinational sponsors. Transfer fees began to rise rapidly: Alan Shearer broke records in 1996, Ronaldo Nazário surpassed the market once again in 1997, and from the 2000s onward, Real Madrid CF’s so-called “Galácticos” era turned transfers into global media events.

The case of Luis Figo in 2000 — from Barcelona to Real Madrid — not only broke financial records; it demonstrated how the commercial and political value of a transfer could be just as important as its sporting value.

Neymar and the Definitive Break

If Maradona inaugurated the modern era of the transfer market, Neymar’s move to Paris Saint-Germain in 2017 completely redefined the economic scale of soccer. The 222 million euros paid to Barcelona remains the largest transfer fee in history.

The deal had structural implications: it accelerated price inflation, altered valuation benchmarks, and consolidated the entry of state-backed and geopolitical capital into European soccer. From that point on, prices stopped growing linearly and began behaving more like highly speculative financial assets.

According to the CIES Football Observatory, transfer market inflation in Europe’s major leagues exceeded annual rates of 26% during certain periods over the last decade. The same observatory documented that clubs in Europe’s five major leagues increased their transfer spending from 1.5 billion euros in 2010 to more than 6.6 billion euros in 2019.

Mbappé and the New Financial Order

The figure of Kylian Mbappé symbolizes another important transition: the growing power of the player as an independent financial actor.

Although the French star was involved in one of the most expensive moves in history when he joined PSG, the real economic earthquake came years later with his essentially free transfer to Real Madrid.

The case highlighted a central transformation in the modern market: salaries, signing bonuses, image rights, loyalty bonuses, and agent commissions can now be more important than the transfer itself.

In other words, part of soccer’s inflation is no longer reflected solely in the transfer fee, but in much more sophisticated contractual structures. The growth of commissions has also become explosive. Recent FIFA reports show how payments linked to intermediaries and agents have become a structural component of the global soccer financial ecosystem.

Soccer as a Global Financial Asset

Soccer inflation cannot be understood solely as a sporting phenomenon. It is deeply linked to:

Global liquidity
The expansion of broadcasting rights
The entry of sovereign capital
Digital monetization
The international valuation of sports brands

Today, clubs such as Manchester City FC, Chelsea FC, Paris Saint-Germain, and Real Madrid CF operate as global platforms for entertainment, branding, and content. The CIES Football Observatory reported in 2025 that the 100 clubs with the most expensive squads in the world had accumulated investments exceeding 29 billion euros.

Financial concentration has also intensified. England currently dominates the global soccer economy thanks to the commercial strength of the Premier League. FIFA data show that English clubs once again led the world in both transfer spending and transfer income in 2025, with 3.82 billion dollars spent and 1.77 billion dollars received.

Is There a Bubble?

The major question within the industry is whether soccer is experiencing a structural bubble or simply a new phase of global appreciation. Supporters of the model argue that global audiences continue to grow, streaming will expand monetization opportunities, and premium sports brands continue to increase in value.

However, there are also signs of pressure from factors such as rising debt, dependence on television revenues, operating deficits, and increasing wage costs. The CIES Football Observatory itself has warned about the increasingly speculative nature of the transfer ecosystem.

At the same time, regulations such as UEFA’s Financial Fair Play seek to contain part of this escalation, although with limited success in the face of virtually unlimited capital inflows.

From Romanticism to Soccer Capitalism

The gap between Maradona’s soccer and Mbappé’s is not only economic—it is structural. In the 1980s, a record transfer represented an extraordinary exception. Today, the global player market operates under dynamics similar to those of highly competitive financial industries:

Asset valuation
Accounting amortization
Contractual engineering
Digital monetization
Global brand expansion

What began as a deeply local sport has evolved into one of the most sophisticated entertainment businesses on the planet. And while today’s figures may seem extreme, recent history suggests that soccer inflation has yet to find its ceiling.

“The ETF Structure Does Not Replace Active Management; It Improves the Way It Is Distributed”

| By Marta Rodriguez | 0 Comentarios

Photo courtesyJulie Gunts, Head of ETF Strategy & Partnerships en AllianceBernstein.

“ETFs are a central piece of our long-term strategy for Europe.” The statement comes from Julie Gunts, Head of ETF Strategy & Partnerships at AllianceBernstein, in an exclusive interview with Funds Society. The firm recently entered the European active ETF market with the launch of three fixed-income strategies, and the plan is to continue expanding its capabilities at a steady pace, as Gunts confirms: “We plan to continue expanding our UCITS ETF range over time, guided by client demand, market needs, and the areas where we believe AB can deliver truly differentiated solutions.”

AllianceBernstein already has an active ETF platform distributed across the United States, Asia (Taiwan), and Australia, with 18 billion dollars in assets under management. “Our primary focus is on building a high-quality, long-term ETF business rather than setting a specific short-term asset target. We believe that if we continue delivering differentiated and compelling strategies that resonate with clients, assets will follow over time,” the executive explained.

AllianceBernstein has recently entered the European active ETF market. Why did you choose active fixed-income ETFs as your entry point?

Fixed income felt like a natural starting point for our active ETF offering in Europe, driven by clear client demand and interest in accessing these strategies through an ETF structure. The initial products are designed as core fixed-income building blocks, providing efficient and diversified exposure to corporate bond markets while seeking attractive and repeatable sources of additional active return, with a risk profile broadly aligned with benchmark indices. These strategies are supported by AllianceBernstein’s systematic fixed-income platform, backed by more than 20 years of proprietary data, predictive technology, and deep analytical capabilities.

That said, fixed income is only the beginning. The launch of our ETFs in Europe represents the first phase of building a broader regional ETF offering over time, supported by continued investment in local resources. With the imminent launch of two active equity ETFs, we are continuing to expand the platform to provide clients with a broader range of active solutions in ETF format, reflecting growing demand for active exposure across different asset classes and reinforcing our long-term commitment to the European ETF market.

AllianceBernstein already has four years of experience marketing active ETFs in the United States, Australia, and Taiwan. What lessons have you learned from that experience?

In the United States, Australia, and Taiwan, investors use our active ETFs in different ways, ranging from core portfolio building blocks to income-generation solutions and thematic allocations.

One of the key lessons has been seeing that investors increasingly expect active strategies to be available through flexible and easy-to-use vehicles. Another important point is that ETF adoption varies significantly across regions, reinforcing the importance of adapting products to local market needs rather than applying a uniform global strategy. This is especially relevant in Europe, where markets such as Iberia start from different levels of ETF adoption.

What kind of feedback are you receiving from your European clients?

The response has been very positive so far. We have been discussing our plans to launch active ETFs in the European market with clients for quite some time. We have observed that client demand for ETFs has accelerated, as investors use them for both strategic and tactical allocations. This has fueled rapid growth in the European ETF market.

In our conversations with European clients, including those in Iberia, we see that investors value specific ETF advantages such as improvements to core portfolio building blocks, differentiated satellite exposures, real-time price transparency across asset classes, and new solutions delivered through an efficient structure. At the same time, in markets such as Spain, ETFs are often considered alongside existing mutual fund allocations rather than as a replacement for them. As a result, our goal is to expand the ways in which we deliver AB’s capabilities within this framework.

Are European investors demanding active ETFs only for cost reasons?

Cost is certainly one factor, but it is far from the only driver. European investors are attracted to active ETFs because of their transparency, liquidity, ease of access through brokerage platforms, and suitability for digital investment models.

In markets such as Spain, where mutual funds remain widely used, these characteristics are often valued alongside existing structures, and ETFs are viewed as a complementary tool rather than purely as a low-cost alternative. We are fully aware that fees matter, especially in the ETF space. Our goal is to offer competitive pricing while maintaining high-quality active management and analytical capabilities, with a value proposition and outcomes that are meaningful to our clients.

In markets such as Spain, where investors often compare ETFs with actively managed mutual funds, the focus is also on delivering value in terms of the role they play within portfolios and the outcomes achieved, not solely on nominal cost.

AllianceBernstein is widely known for its active investment philosophy. How do active ETFs fit within this approach?

Active ETFs are a very natural extension of the active investment philosophy that AB has developed over decades. Our ETFs are manager-led and supported by fundamental research, with portfolio management teams responsible for security selection, portfolio construction, and risk management.

The ETF structure does not replace active management; it improves the way it is distributed, combining AB’s investment capabilities with greater transparency, intraday liquidity, and operational efficiency. For investors in markets such as Spain, this provides an additional avenue to access active management alongside traditional fund structures.

What criteria do you use to determine where it makes sense for AB to offer ETF structures to clients?

For us, innovation must have a clear purpose. ETFs are not about repackaging everything we already do, but rather about responding to specific client needs through the most appropriate structure.

We carefully analyze where the ETF structure genuinely adds value, whether in terms of accessibility, flexibility, transparency, or distribution reach. Any strategy we launch must make sense alongside our existing fund range and complement it, especially in regions such as Iberia, where mutual funds continue to play a central role in portfolio construction.

In some cases, this means launching new outcome-oriented strategies directly in ETF format. In others, it may involve offering an ETF share class for an existing strategy when there is clear client demand. Conversely, there may also be strategies for which offering an ETF share class simply does not make sense.

More broadly, our global ETF strategy is guided by client preferences and usage trends in each local market, ensuring that launches are both relevant and complementary.

Are U.S. investors showing interest in UCITS active ETFs?

Our active ETFs in the United States are domiciled there and are not structured under the UCITS framework. In addition, our global strategy is to offer solutions aligned with local preferences and client needs. If we look at our global ETF offering across Taiwan, Australia, and the United States, there are always products specifically designed for each local market.

That said, in the United States there is also a segment of investors who invest through offshore structures, such as international accounts or vehicles, where UCITS products may be relevant.

More broadly, we are seeing interest in our UCITS ETF platform from investors across Europe, including Iberia, as well as in regions such as Latin America and Asia, where UCITS vehicles are often the preferred structure for cross-border investments. This highlights the importance of having a global ETF platform capable of adapting to different regulatory frameworks and investor preferences.

How do you think the active ETF universe will evolve over the next five years?

We believe active ETFs will coexist with traditional active mutual funds rather than completely replacing them. Different clients have different needs, and each vehicle is better suited to specific use cases. Over time, we expect active ETFs to play an increasingly important role, especially as distribution continues shifting toward digital and brokerage platforms.

For asset managers, this means offering choice: delivering strong active management capabilities through the structure that best fits client needs.