España archivos - Page 66 of 170

For Convertibles, Franklin Templeton Likes Technology, Health Care, and Consumer Discretionary Spending

“En convertibles, hemos identificado temas clave para invertir relacionados con el crecimiento secular en áreas como tecnología, salud y consumo discrecional” — Foto cedidaAlan Muschott, courtesy photo. For Convertibles, Franklin Templeton Likes Technology, Health Care, and Consumer Discretionary Spending

With a clear long-term focus and very selective and active management, Alan Muschott manages the Franklin Global Convertibles fund, the largest strategy for active management of convertible bonds in the United States. In this interview with Funds Society, Muschott explains the assets’ advantages.

Why can convertibles work well in this market environment? What characteristics does this environment have that are positive for the asset?

In our view, convertibles can be attractive during various types of market environments, including rising markets, due to the potential asymmetric price relationship with the underlying common stock. Often called “balanced” convertibles, those with deltas (a measure of their equity sensitivity) near the middle of the range from 0.0 to 1.0 can participate more with an issuer’s equity upside than they do with the downside. These are the types of convertibles we prefer, as we feel this is the most appealing aspect of the asset class. We believe this ability to adapt to a myriad market conditions can make convertibles an attractive vehicle for increasing a portfolio’s level of diversification.

Why can convertibles work well in an environment of rate increases? Are you protected against the interest rate risk?

Amid expectations that US interest rate increases could accelerate, many fixed income investors in particular have asked for our view on the prospects for convertible securities. It’s an understandable concern as bonds tend to lose value when interest rates rise. In our research, during prior periods of rising interest rates, convertibles have historically performed better than 10-year US Treasuries. Therefore, in a rising-rate environment, we think convertibles can be a favorable place for fixed income investors to be. That said, it’s a bit incomplete to compare the performance of convertibles to other fixed income investments given their characteristics. Convertibles are a unique asset class, offering investors features associated with bonds and the growth potential of common stocks.

Convertibles are generally structured as a form of debt (bonds, debentures) or preferred shares with an embedded option that allows conversion into common shares under predetermined conditions. That embedded conversion option provides capital appreciation when the underlying common stock rises. In a rising-rate environment where interest rates are rising for the “right” reasons—for example, strong economic and corporate earnings growth—equities tend to perform well. If the underlying common stock in a convertible security rises with the market, the convertible should also increase in value because of the conversion option.

Historically, convertibles typically have exhibited a low correlation to fixed income and demonstrated imperfect correlation with stocks. This creates the potential for an investor to help enhance portfolio diversification, dampen volatility and improve a portfolio’s overall risk profile. Note, diversification does not guarantee profit nor protect against risk of loss.

What do you expect from the central banks? It seems that the measures for the monetary restriction have stopped… how do you value it?

Many central banks have tempered growth expectations in recent weeks in the midst of continued uncertainties stemming from geopolitical factors and other regional challenges which weigh on economic sentiment. Within the US, the Federal Reserve has also indicated a more patient approach to future rate hikes in the current subdued inflation environment.

We don’t manage our strategy based on expectations of monetary policy shifts or other macro variables. Instead we evaluate investments on the basis of the fundamentals of the companies themselves, their respective industry growth profiles and competitive positioning. Our focus is on identifying investments which we believe offer long-term prospects for capital appreciation; by investing in convertibles, we aim to capture an attractive amount of the equity upside while mitigating downside risk, thus generating compelling risk-adjusted returns over time.

Why is volatility good for convertibles? How does it help the behavior of the asset?

Since the US stock market selloff in the fourth quarter of 2018, many investors have asked us how convertible securities performed during the upheaval. Issued by companies looking to raise capital, these hybrid investments are generally structured as some form of debt or preferred shares with an embedded option that allows conversion into common shares under predetermined conditions.

According to our analysis, convertible securities generally outperformed their underlying stocks during the fourth quarter when the US equity market saw its steepest declines. That’s no surprise to us considering that convertibles have tended to perform well during periods of above-average market volatility. Since the beginning of 2019, as markets have moved higher, so have convertibles, broadly speaking, given their performance link to the underlying equity prices. During periods where the overall stock market is declining, the fixed income component in convertible securities tends to provide some protection against erosion of value. Conversely, when a company’s common stock rises, the convertible security should participate in the rise in value because of the conversion option. As long-term investors, our overall view on convertible securities doesn’t change from quarter to quarter or during periods of market volatility.

Now, is it better to invest in a protection component and less exposure in the equity component, or just the opposite?

Ultimately, orienting toward protection or equity should be driven by an investor’s needs in the context of their specific investment goals. It is fair to say that our Fund is oriented to the equity component. Our view is that a company’s underlying equity appreciation will drive returns in the convertible. Generally speaking, convertibles do not increase as rapidly in value as stocks during rising markets; nor does their downside protection equal that of bonds during market declines. However, historically they have delivered attractive long-term risk-adjusted returns compared with both stocks and bonds.
In the asset class, which markets do you favor by geographies, sectors…etc?

With a focus on balanced convertibles, those that tend to demonstrate asymmetric reward/risk profiles relative to other segments of the convertible bond market, our strategy seeks to participate in more of a company’s underlying equity price appreciation than depreciation. Interestingly, many balanced convertibles can be found in the North American market, in growth-oriented industries, and across market capitalizations.

The average life of a convertible security is about five years before it converts, and we often will hold a convertible to maturity, regardless of market gyrations in the interim. We spend a great deal of time on fundamental research, as we take a long-term approach to our investments. We seek to differentiate ourselves from others in the market through our security selection.

Key themes that we have identified for inclusion in our portfolio are related to secular growth in areas like technology, health care, and consumer discretionary spending. We see technology as increasingly becoming a non-discretionary expense for a wide range of companies and industries. In particular, we like certain convertible securities within themes like on-demand software. Many companies often lack the expertise, personnel and resources to develop this technology in-house, which creates opportunities for firms in the cloud computing and software-as-a-service areas.

Elsewhere we continue to see opportunities among companies showing high levels of innovation in the health care space. With accommodating regulators and novel new drug delivery methods and targets, we see a continuing wave of innovation in the health space. These are sectors that have performed well in the equity markets and which have, in turn, contributed to the returns we’ve generated within our Fund.

How is the market in terms of supply? Will there be new issues this year or is the relationship between supply and demand adjusted?

With a value of over US$300 billion at the end of 2018, the global convertible securities market is a sizeable player in the world’s capital markets. The United States accounts for over half that amount, followed by the Europe, Middle East, Africa (EMEA) and Asia-Pacific regions, respectively. Perhaps more important is the ample room for growth.

Following a peak in 2007, issuance declined through 2011 as companies took advantage of low yields, a high equity risk premium relative to credit spreads and strong flows into the credit markets to issue straight debt rather than convertibles. The perception was that raising capital through straight debt was relatively cheap, even when convertible securities were issued at slightly lower rates due to the added concern of share dilution. Companies were also hesitant to issue convertible securities as equity valuations were inexpensive relative to historical levels.

Over the last few years, more robust issuance trends have been driven by better equity market performance, a rise in interest rates and higher spreads. Thus far in 2019, we’ve seen solid issuance trends as well. We believe the factors that drive convertibles issuance, particularly those related to cost-effective financing (lower cost than straight debt; equity valuations at robust levels for many issues), can continue to support a healthy marketplace for convertibles.

What returns can be expected from the asset in 2019?

Our approach is long-term in nature and we typically hold our securities for much of their (on average) five-year maturities; thus we don’t generally make predictions of price returns over calendar year periods. Our outlook for equities continues to be positive. We believe earnings growth can support further price appreciation from today’s levels in a number of equity sectors.

We do believe it’s important to be selective. As a group, convertibles have historically presented an attractive risk/reward profile, but within the group there is considerable variation in the level of risk, sensitivity to movements in the underlying stock, and upside participation potential. Because of this, we believe active management is an important element within convertibles investing.

In your fund, what is the selection criteria that you follow? How many names do you invest in? What is the delta of the portfolio? Please comment on the main characteristics of the fund

The Franklin Convertible Securities Team have utilized convertible securities to various degrees across a number of strategies throughout the years. We seek to take advantage of the compelling, asymmetric risk/reward profile offered by balanced convertibles. Balanced convertibles are those securities that tend to offer greater upside participation than downside potential, leading to an asymmetric return profile.
As a global firm with deep experience across asset classes, styles, and regions, Franklin Templeton possesses a strong potential to develop what we believe to be unparalleled insights in the convertibles market. Equity and credit research analysts usually meet with company management, then build valuation models and form an opinion of an issuer regardless of whether they have outstanding convertibles. Our portfolio managers continuously monitor the convertibles market and new issuance trends. When the team sees a new company come to market, they are typically already familiar with these businesses, their equity potential, and credit metrics.

We seek to offer pure convertibles exposure. We don’t buy common stock, and in case of conversion, seek to sell equity in our portfolio as soon as an attractive exit point presents itself. One can expect our portfolio delta to fall in the range of balanced convertibles (0.4-0.8); we will typically have 60-80 issues within the Fund; our preference is to reasonably equal-weight our holdings so that each has an opportunity to have impact on portfolio performance. Our credit quality, market cap, regional and sector exposures will typically reflect what we see in the broader balanced convertibles universe; where we seek to differentiate ourselves and the portfolio’s returns is through security selection.

Three US Cities, Amongst the Best Ones to Live In

| For Gabriela Huerta | 0 Comentarios

Las mejores ciudades para vivir en 2019 — Wikimedia CommonsPhoto: 1971markus. Three US Cities, Amongst the Best Ones to Live In

If you’re looking to live in a place with affordable housing, ample work opportunities and a reasonably pleasant environment, it’s time to pack your bags and move to London.

According to a global survey conducted by Resonance, a consulting group, London is the best city to reside in 2019. That’s thanks to having all the things mentioned above and more.

But if you want to stay in the United States, you’ll be happy to know that three cities in this country were included in the top 10.

While Miami ranked 26th worldwide, New York City came in third. Chicago and San Francisco ranked seventh and tenth respectively.

To reach its conclusion, Resonance described the profile of 100 of the cities with the best performance in the world based on 23 different factors, including the affordability of housing and employment opportunities, the quality of the environment (both natural and artificial), the quality of institutions, diversity, economic prosperity and the quality of culture, gastronomy and nightlife.

The top 10 is made up of:

London, United Kingdom
Paris, France
New York, USA
Tokyo, Japan
Barcelona, Spain
Moscow, Russia
Chicago, USA
Singapore, Singapore
Dubai, UAE
San Francisco, USA

If you’re thinking about making a change, or just want some inspiration to travel, check out the full list here.

MMT – Modern Monetary Theory. Should We Bear it in Mind? Implications for the Financial Markets

| For Beatriz Zúñiga | 0 Comentarios

Teoría Monetaria Moderna (MMT) y sus implicaciones para los mercados financieros: ¿hay que tenerla en cuenta? — Foto cedida. MMT – Modern Monetary Theory. Should We Bear it in Mind? Implications for the Financial Markets

This recent heterodox economic theory has many financial market participants spooked. I will try to explain what it entails (it takes some effort to understand) and the potential impact it could have on the various markets should it be put into practice, chiefly because it shifts our understanding of how the economy works (inflation, interest rates, debt, currencies, etc). Also, regardless of the fact that its strict implementation may turn out to be extremely complicated in real life, it is a good idea to try to understand what it is all about in the event that an attempt is made to partially adopt it. Fundamentally, it is an approach to economic management with no ideological basis. However, it is true that increasing numbers of economists with ties to the left are arguing in favour of putting it into practice.

MMT is based on two premises: 1) a country that issues its own currency can print money limitlessly without the risk of default; and 2) public spending is independent of financing and it has the ultimate goal of guaranteeing full employment.

The primary message being sent is that monetary policy makes little sense because it involves wasting real resources by associating it with high rates of unemployment throughout the cycle. Fiscal policy, therefore, is the centre of economic management for a country. Public spending should focus on maintaining full employment, while taxes should be used to slow the economy when necessary and to combat inflation. Furthermore, public debt would be used to manage money supply, interest rates and the level of capital investments. And this would all be with a floating exchange rate regime.

Inflation is seen as a consequence of having reached the country’s maximum productive capacity and, therefore, it marks the theoretical limit of public spending. In this case, a reduction to public spending or a tax increase would be implemented.

Why is this theory growing in support? My feeling is that, on the one hand, the world has gotten used to a model of continuous stimuli and, on seeing that QE has reached breaking point (we need only look at the mess in which the markets found themselves in the last quarter of last year due to fears about QT), at such a late stage in the economic cycle, the debate about turning the screw from a fiscal policy perspective is necessary for the political class. And on the other hand, MMT directly targets one of the greatest negative impacts of QE, the growing inequality at certain levels of society – another handy argument for the political class.

To try to discern the impact that MMT could have on the financial markets (and this is by no means an exhaustive analysis), we could start by looking at the large increase in public spending to meet the mandate of achieving full employment. This is public spending financed by printing money, which lowers interest rates. In this scenario, capital and financial investments would surge. The beginnings of inflationary pressures would start to be felt and the government would begin increasing bond issues to raise the interest rates. At some point, interest expenditure would exceed nominal growth. In all likelihood, inflation would not fall, so few investors would want this debt. A good many investors would go abroad, which would speed up a sharp devaluation of the currency and bring about the need to print yet more money. Here is where we would begin to see massive hyperinflation. As Minsky said, anyone can create money, the problem lies in getting it accepted.

The effects on debt and the currency are clear, but what about equities? It is obvious that because equities are real assets, they would behave better than nominal assets. But it may be better to invest outside the country, also in real assets, bearing in mind that the government’s need to raise taxes could even come to be considered confiscatory.

As I mentioned, it is good to consider that the application of MMT would, to begin with, mean the creation of a tax authority (similar to a central bank) that is independent of the government, something that seems very difficult. But, in any case, we can see partial efforts being made to put the theory into practice, chiefly through fiscal stimulus policies that are partially or fully monetised. Here it will also be important to invest in real assets (due to inflation expectations), such as the stock market, but by carefully selecting the securities with pricing power capacity.

Column by Luis Buceta, CFA. CIO Banco Alcalá. Head of Equities Crèdit Andorrà Financial Group. Crèdit Andorrà Financial Group Research.

If Things Take A Turn For The Worse, Are There Expansionary Measures To Follow Those Adopted By The Central Banks? Modern Monetary Theory

| For Gabriela Huerta | 0 Comentarios

Si las cosas empeoran, ¿existen medidas expansivas que sigan a las adoptadas por los bancos centrales?: la teoría monetaria moderna — Courtesy photo. If Things Take A Turn For The Worse, Are There Expansionary Measures To Follow Those Adopted By The Central Banks? Modern Monetary Theory

At the start of 2019, we saw a rally in risk assets thanks to the fact that investors have been focused on the more dovish signals coming from the central banks rather than on the weakening growth trend. Recently, the OECD warned that economic outlooks were now weaker in almost all G20 countries, particularly in the euro zone, with the heaviest negative impact being seen in Germany and Italy. The organisation also lowered global growth by -0.2% to 3.3%.

In the last meeting of the ECB, Draghi indicated a weak environment full of uncertainty: the rise in protectionism that has brought about a slowdown in trade and global production; political risk, with an emphasis on Brexit; and the vulnerability of the emerging markets, in particular China. In this regard, Draghi announced new measures. These included maintaining rates unchanged until at least the end of 2019 (in a previous address there had been talk of this going on until the summer. As it is, Draghi will be the first ECB president not to change rates as his mandate ends in October), and a further series of targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTRO-III), which would begin in September 2019 and run until March 2021 with a maturity of two years and with a view to facilitating the continued flow of credit in the economy.

The extraordinary measures implemented by the main central banks to overcome the financial crisis are set to take hold. The Fed, which had begun monetary normalization, stopped the expected rate hikes in their tracks and it intends to bring an end to its balance sheet reduction sooner than planned; the Bank of Japan is continuing with quantitative easing and has kept rates around 0% for the last 10 years; and the ECB is implementing new measures in the hope of making the euro zone economy more resistant.

Although the central banks remain cautious in sticking to monetary normalisation, it seems that the available margin is smaller than when they began. Note the evolution of Draghi’s words, which have gone from his famous saying in 2012: “The ECB will do whatever it takes to preserve the euro, and believe me, it will be enough”, to his words in the last ECB meeting in March 2019 with reference to the economic context: “In a dark room you move with tiny steps. You don’t run, but you do move”. Can you see the difference? It was possible to run at the start, but now we can only take tiny steps.

Better coordination between fiscal and monetary policy would be helpful to the economy during a slowdown. In the US, Trump has already implemented an expansionist fiscal policy following years and economic growth and, in Europe, depending on the results of the European elections in May, there may be more pressure to adopt these fiscal benefits despite the mechanisms agreed to by European countries to contain the deficit and control the debt.

But nowadays the debate in the US focuses on the so-called Modern Monetary Theory, the greatest defenders of which come from within the Democratic party (Bernie sanders, who is leading the polls for the US presidency, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, well-known activist and bright new star in Congress). They essentially propose printing money (or nowadays simply pressing a button) and, instead of buying bonds like during QE, using it to finance social, environmental and infrastructure projects and the like. Proponents of this theory argue that provided they borrow in their own currency and they can print money to cover their obligations, they cannot fail and the limit would depend on rising inflation.

In this scenario, in which fiscal spending would be injected directly into the real economy instead of using a more indirect QE route, inflation should rise. However, everything we know about macroeconomics is being called into question because, until now, the deficits have not caused out-of-control inflation or a flight from the bond markets. Even with this in mind, it seems reasonable that implementing these measures would mean higher debt, which would affect the solvency of countries. Also, with more debt, rates would move upwards and affect bonds and the assets that would predictably do better would be real estate and investments in infrastructure or commodities like gold.

Column by Josep Maria Pon, Director of Fixed Income and Monetary Assets at Crèdit Andorrà Asset Management. Crèdit Andorrà Financial Group Research.

Didier Saint Georges (Carmignac): “My Greatest Fear is What will Happen to Debt Once Economic Growth Slows Down”

| For Beatriz Zúñiga | 0 Comentarios

Didier Saint Georges (Carmignac): “Mi mayor miedo es qué va a suceder con la deuda cuando se ralentice el crecimiento económico” — Didier Saint Georges, Managing Director and Member of Carmignac’s Investment Committee. / Courtesy Photo . Didier Saint Georges (Carmignac): “My Greatest Fear is What will Happen to Debt Once Economic Growth Slows Down”

In mid-2018, the IMF warned that, for the first time in history, global debt had reached 225% of world GDP. Due to central banks’ QE, global debt is today more than three times higher than the level of 20 years ago. The staggering level of debt is not a minor issue, as was pointed out by Didier Saint Georges, Carmignac’s Managing Director and member of its Investment Committee, during an informative meeting in Paris. “My greatest fear is what both public and private debt will do when economic growth slows down.”

In his opinion, the main difference today between strong countries and weak countries is precisely that: their debt. In the US, for example, private debt is low, but public debt is very high. In total, 72 trillion dollars, which is not only a record amount, but which surprises considering the country’s continued economic growth and its very low unemployment rate. But Saint Georges warns: “The problem is global, and the cycle is changing.”

From this perspective, sovereign bonds have become safe-haven assets for Carmignac, with priority over the Asian and European debt against the US bond. Meanwhile, corporate debt markets continue to be penalized, especially in the high-yield segment. “In developed country bonds, we have a history of convergence and the spread is reflected by the risk undertaken by the investor,” explains Saint Georges.

In fixed income investment, however, there is an asset that has become especially relevant in recent times: Liquidity. “Cash” trades bullish while waiting for better opportunities in the market, but the expert acknowledges that this also comes at a price. “We are concerned about the cost of liquidity and growth,” he says.

Is there opportunity in Italian Bonds?

In Italy, investors are faced with the dilemma of undertaking political and economic risk in exchange for a high return potential. For some it’s worth it, for others, not so much. According to Saint Georges, “there is nothing to worry about in the short term, in bonds of short durations, but we should be more cautious with those with long durations. The issue with Italy is not political, it’s purely economic.”

The big issue, however, is if the market starts to fear a recession. “The economy’s current performance doesn’t warrant that fear, except for the high debt. The markets, however, may be sensitive to a recession,” he adds.

Brexit and globalization

According to Saint Georges, “Brexit will be bad for everyone even if a negotiated agreement is reached” and, in the case of a “hard” option, he believes that the potential victims are Germany and France. “The referendum voters forgot to think about their pocket and made an emotional decision,” he says. Investors, he adds, are quite worried and have started 2019 thinking just the opposite than they did in early 2018, in panic mode.

The backdrop is rebellion towards globalization, which according to Saint Georges, is what has made China grow strong and has benefited Italy, France and Germany. However, “even though globalization is facing more and more difficulties at the political level, as an economic catalyst it is too strong to retreat from. There is a certain rejection against globalization. My fear of that is that it was globalization which drove China’s strong growth, in turn benefitting Italy, France and Germany. However, it is too strong to retreat from now.” He concludes.

201 Global Asset Managers Can Now Try to Woo Mexican Pension Funds

| For Gabriela Huerta | 0 Comentarios

201 gestoras podrán ofrecer sus fondos a las Afores — Photo: Shenandoah National Park. 201 Global Asset Managers Can Now Try to Woo Mexican Pension Funds

It is official, Afores can now invest in international mutual funds. The meeting and authorization of the Risk Analysis Committee (CAR) that international managers, afores and the regulator have been waiting for since 2017, has already taken place and, as a result, the guidelines by which afores can invest in mutual funds with active strategies can be consulted in only 12 pages.

In summary, in order to be elegible the manager should have at least 10 years of experience managing investment vehicles or investment mandates, as well as at least 50 billion dollars in assets under management. The same amount that applies to managers looking for an investment mandate. According to the CAR document, this requirement, which is fulfilled by the 201 largest asset managers in the world, can be modified by the Investment Committees of the Pension Funds by “considering criteria such as the experience of the administrator in the management of assets in the international markets of the strategy object of investment, the performance of the Fund, as well as additional criteria determined by their own Investment Committees.”

The fund in particular must have at least 2 years of operation since its inception and more than 100 million dollars in assets. In addition to being open funds of an Eligible Country for Investments and having a benchmark.

Although the guidelines do not indicate that the daily composition of the funds should be known, a condition with which several players were not comfortable, they do mention that the net value of the assets of the fund should be known daily.

The fund itself may use derivatives to reduce costs, manage liquidity, marginally facilitate the replication of the index or sub-index or for risk management but not to increase returns, leverage or synthetically replicate the benchmark.

In addition, to preserve the active nature of the strategy, investment in other funds or ETFs will not be allowed.

This resolution marks a milestone in the way Afores can invest and has been in the process for several years, as well as the increase of the 20% limit on investment in foreign securities, which the CONSAR confirms that they are still working to achieve. For this to change, there needs to be change to the law, which is now underway, but without a doubt, the approval of the investment in international funds will change the market in Mexico and the way of investing the afores, for the benefit of the workers.

Over Seven Million Delinquencies

| For Gabriela Huerta | 0 Comentarios

Más de siete millones de morosos — Wikimedia CommonsCourtesy photo. Over Seven Million Delinquencies

A decade ago, during the financial crisis of 2008-2009, more than 5.5 million Americans were unable to pay their car loan instalments and were more than 90 days late with their payments. Now there are more than seven million people in the United States who can’t pay their car loans, seemingly illogical in the current situation of economic growth and very low unemployment (4% compared to 10% in 2009).

Around 86% of Americans use a private car to get to work. This gives you an idea of how important it is to have a car in most parts of the United States and why most people prioritise payment of their car loans over their mortgage.

As a result, some economists warn that these loan default figures published by the New York Federal Reserve Bank could be just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to problems in the economy and that we could find ourselves in a situation similar to that of the subprime mortgage crisis.

Some significant data: 90% of the value of new vehicle sales is paid through a financial instrument (a loan or a lease); The total outstanding car loans in the USA is more than a trillion; the number of new loans for vehicle purchases in 2018 was $584 billion (the highest nominal figure in 19 years); according to sector reports, the average price of a new car is approaching $36,000, while the average family income in 2018 was $62,000; the average length of a vehicle purchase loan has grown to 64 months.

At first sight, all these figures can sound alarming and reminiscent of the 2008-2009 financial crisis. However, as with any statistical data, we need to put them in the appropriate context and look at the whole picture. To do this, it is important to emphasise that, despite the fact that the absolute number of defaults has increased, the non-performing loan ratio ended 2018 at 4.5%, below the 5.3% peak reached in 2009. Another key factor in evaluating the situation of vehicle loan debt is the quality of the creditors: new loans were mainly granted to people with a higher credit score, which means that 30% of outstanding car purchase loans were given to borrowers with the highest credit score.

Neither should we ignore the fact that the increase in the absolute number of loans is due to the good health of the economy and has gone hand-in-hand with an increase in car sales, meaning that the percentage of financed purchases has remained relatively stable. Finally, we need to put into the context the size of the vehicle purchase loan market (just over a trillion dollars) by comparing it to the mortgage debt market ($12 trillion).

It is undeniable that, by analysing all the figures in-depth, we can reach conclusions on the unequal access to economic growth for certain population sectors (for example, the increase in non-performing loans in the population under 30, a sector also overburdened by student loans) or on the need for infrastructure to facilitate public transportation. However, it seems unreasonable to assert that an increase in non-performing vehicle loans is leading us to the threshold of a global financial crisis such as that of 2008-2009 caused by the selling of subprime mortgages.

Column by Meritxell Pons, Director of Asset Management at Beta Capital Wealth Management, Crèdit Andorrà Financial Group Research.

Asian Countries Dominate When It Comes to Passport Power in 2019

| For Beatriz Zúñiga | 0 Comentarios

Japón, Singapur y Corea del Sur: los pasaportes más poderosos del mundo en 2019 — Pixabay CC0 Public DomainPamjpat. Asian Countries Dominate When It Comes to Passport Power in 2019

Japan goes into the new year holding 1st place on the Henley Passport Index, with citizens enjoying visa-free/visa-on-arrival access to 190 destinations. In a further display of Asian passport power, Singapore and South Korea now sit in joint 2nd place, with access to 189 destinations around the globe. This marks a new high for South Korea, which moved up the ranking following a recent visa-on-arrival agreement with India. Germany and France remain in 3rd place going into 2019, with a visa-free/visa-on-arrival score of 188.

The US and the UK continue to drop down the Henley Passport Index — which is based on authoritative data from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) — and now sit in joint 6th place, with access to 185 destinations. This is a significant fall from the 1st place position that these countries held in 2015. Denmark, Finland, Italy, and Sweden now hold joint 4th place, while Spain and Luxembourg are in 5th. As they have done for much of the index’s 14-year history, Iraq and Afghanistan remain at the bottom of the ranking, with access to just 30 visa-free destinations.

Turkey’s recent introduction of an online e-Visa service has resulted in some interesting changes to the overall rankings. As of October 2018, citizens of over 100 countries (including Canada, the UK, Norway, and the US) must apply for an e-Visa before they travel to Turkey, instead of being able to do so on arrival. While this specific change means that a number of countries have dropped slightly in the rankings, it does not alter the overwhelmingly positive effect of the wider global tendency towards visa-openness and mutually beneficial agreements. Historical data from the Henley Passport Index shows that in 2006, a citizen, on average, could travel to 58 destinations without needing a visa from the host nation; by the end of 2018, this number had nearly doubled to 107.

Dr. Christian H. Kälin, Group Chairman of Henley & Partners and the inventor of the Passport Index concept, says this latest ranking shows that despite rising isolationist sentiment in some parts of the world, many countries remain committed to collaboration. “The general spread of open-door policies has the potential to contribute billions to the global economy, as well as create significant employment opportunities around the world. South Korea and the United Arab Emirates’ recent ascent in the rankings are further examples of what happens when countries take a proactive foreign affairs approach, an attitude which significantly benefits their citizens as well as the international community.”

Citizenship-by-investment countries consolidate their respective positions

As in 2018, countries with citizenship-by-investment (CBI) programs continue to hold their strong positions. Malta, for instance, sits in 9th spot, with access to 182 destinations around the world. St. Kitts and Nevis and Antigua and Barbuda hold 27th and 28th spot respectively, while Moldova remains in a strong position at 46th place, with citizens able to access 122 countries. A recent agreement signed between St. Kitts and Nevis and Belarus, due to come into effect in the coming months, will further strengthen the St. Kitts and Nevis passport, and enhance the travel freedom of its citizens.

Dr. Juerg Steffen, the CEO of Henley & Partners, says: “The enduring appeal of investment migration programs shows that more and more people are embracing alternative citizenship as the best way to access previously unimagined opportunities and improve their passport power. Additionally, it is no surprise that countries are increasingly looking to launch CBI programs, which attract talented individuals and bring enormous economic and societal benefits.”

You can consult your country’s position in the following link.

Multi-Asset Funds did Not Work in 2018 because they Largely Replicated what Advisers Were Doing Themselves

| For Meritxell Sedo | 0 Comentarios

Multi-asset funds failed to protect investors from the impact of volatile equity markets in 2018, according to the Natixis IM Global Portfolio Barometer.

Adviser portfolios delivered negative returns across all regions, driven by falls in equity markets. But the analysis of investor portfolios in seven markets, conducted by the Natixis Portfolio Research & Consulting Group, found that multi-asset funds did not provide diversification as expected, and instead had very high correlations to adviser portfolios. This suggests multi-asset funds largely replicated what advisers were doing themselves.

Equities were the largest contributor to negative returns in all regions, costing around 3-5% on average – except in Italy, where advisers had much lower equity allocations. However, multi-asset funds were the second largest detractor, costing 0.5-2% on average, and particularly affecting France, where these funds have traditionally been very popular.

Alternative investments, like real estate and managed futures, were more resilient to volatility than traditional asset classes, but still contributed marginally to portfolio performance at best, due to lacklustre performance and low allocations. Real assets contributed little except in the UK, where property funds were a positive contributor to portfolios.

Matthew Riley, Head of Research in the Portfolio Research and Consulting Group at Natixis IM, commented: “It’s natural for investors to seek shelter from volatile markets by diversifying portfolios, but it is clear from our analysis that, in 2018, the majority of multi-asset funds fell short and largely failed to diversify, which only added to portfolio losses”.

“Our findings show that investors really need to look more closely when selecting a multi-asset fund, ensuring that the fund is aligned with their investment objective. This due diligence should include checking the fund’s correlation to their existing portfolios, as well as to bonds and equities, to make sure it will improve the risk-return profile of the portfolio.”

Italy showing most resilience to volatile markets

In stark contrast to 2017, advisers in all regions suffered negative portfolio performance in 2018 with the impact of falling equity markets and muted fixed income returns taking their toll. Italy was the most resilient market, with estimated losses of 3.2% for the average adviser portfolio, due to a much lower allocation to equities. Advisers in Italy had an average equity exposure of just 20%, while the UK and the US had a more bullish stance, with equity weightings of over 50% in moderate risk portfolios.

Currency risk continues to weigh on portfolios

In 2017, the Global Portfolio Barometer revealed the impact of currency risk on performance. And, while slightly reduced, it remained an important factor in 2018, benefitting European investors compared to their US counterparts. Currency moves remain an often overlooked area of risk, but when considering a more internationally exposed portfolio, not paying attention to it can have a significant impact on overall returns. For instance, in 2018 a European investor allocating to US equities would have experienced a small positive return of 0.3% in euro terms – a US investor would have lost 5%.

The quest for true diversification continues…

In short, the findings of the Global Portfolio Barometer highlight the impact that the return of volatility had on markets and investor portfolios, with portfolio risks potentially rising from the extraordinarily low levels seen in 2017. Multi-asset funds simply failed to provide diversification, which should be food for thought when considering the relationship between diversification, risk and returns in adviser portfolios.

Inverco pronostica que el patrimonio de los fondos de inversión crecerá un 5,2% en 2019

| For Beatriz Zúñiga | 0 Comentarios

En 2018 el patrimonio de las IICs en España se situó en 454.761 millones de euros, una 2% menos que en 2017. Además, el número de partícipes y de accionistas ha continuado incrementándose en el año y se situó a finales de 2018 en 13,9 millones, un 6,8% más que el año anterior.

La renta fija ha continuado reduciendo su peso en la cartera y ya supone menos de la mitad (47,8%). Por su parte, la posición en renta variable en cartera ha continuado incrementándose en el periodo y supone el 15,6% frente al 14,3% de 2017. “Vamos hacia una normalización desde la asignación a renta fija corto plazo a la renta variable, pero todavía estamos lejos de países como Reino Unido donde el 50% está en acciones”, ha argumentado Lázaro de Lázaro, presidente de la agrupación de IIC de Inverco, durante un encuentro con periodistas.

En cuanto a rentabilidades, la elevada volatilidad presente en los mercados financieros durante 2018 ha llevado a los fondos de inversión a registrar rendimientos negativos en el año, siendo la rentabilidad interanual para el conjunto de fondos del -4,81%.

Perspectivas para 2019

Inverco pronostica que la rentabilidad de las IIC (Instituciones de Inversión Colectiva) en 2019 se sitúe entre el 2% y el 2,5% y las suscripciones netas continúen con la tendencia positiva de los últimos años. La patronal espera, además, que los fondos de inversión incrementen su patrimonio en torno a 13.500 millones de euros, un 5,2% más, alcanzando a finales de este año los 271.000 millones de euros. Por su parte, las IIC extranjeras incrementarían su patrimonio hasta los 176.000 millones de euros, lo que supone un incremento del 4,8%.

En cuanto al volumen de los fondos de pensiones podría aumentar en 2019 en casi 3.000 millones de euros (un crecimiento del 2,8%), cerrando el año en un patrimonio de 110.000 millones de euros. Además, se espera que la rotación hacia activos de más riesgo se traduzca también en rentabilidades más altas en el medio y largo plazo. “Los fondos de pensiones mixtos han pasado de representar el 29% al 58% y esto en el largo plazo va a producir mayores rentabilidades. Hay un poquito más de apetito por el riesgo y eso se ve en los planes de pensiones”, explica Juan José Cotorruelo, director de Vida y Pensiones de Caser.

Una tendencia que también se observa en fondos de inversión. Mientras que en 2007 casi el 64% del patrimonio de los fondos de inversión pertenecía a vocaciones conservadoras (39% monetarios y renta fija a corto plazo y 25% garantizados), en diciembre de 2018 apenas el 31% del ahorro en fondos se canaliza a través de este tipo de instrumentos.

¿Quién invierte en fondos de inversión en España?

Como novedad este año Inverco ha analizado el tipo de inversor que adquiere fondos de inversión entre los distintos países europeos. Así, por ejemplo, mientras que en España el 62% del volumen de activos total de los fondos pertenece a los hogares, en países como Francia o Alemania este porcentaje es del 26%, donde la mayor parte del patrimonio de los fondos está en manos de inversores institucionales.