With Sentiment in the Negative, Family Offices Focus on Risk Management and Increasing Diversification

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

Geopolitical uncertainty has become the primary concern for family offices (FOs) globally, significantly influencing capital allocation decisions. At the same time, overall sentiment has turned negative, driven by growing concerns over trade disruptions and increasing geopolitical fragmentation. In this environment, allocations to private credit and infrastructure are rising, and there is growing interest in partnering with external managers, particularly in private markets.

These are the key findings of BlackRock’s Global Family Office Survey 2025, titled “Rewriting the Rules”, with the subtitle: Family Offices Navigate a New World Order.

“Investors are increasingly turning to private markets as a way to achieve greater diversification with the potential for higher returns,” the report states, adding that the global alternative assets industry is expected to exceed $30 trillion in assets under management by 2030, according to Preqin.

The report states that FOs are “in risk management mode.” 84% highlight the current geopolitical environment as a key challenge and an increasingly critical factor in their investment decisions; 68% are focused on increasing diversification, and 47% are increasing the use of various sources of return, including illiquid alternative assets, equities outside the U.S., liquid alternative assets, and cash.

“Family offices globally entered 2025 cautiously, a stance expected to continue through 2026, as geopolitical tensions, policy changes, and market fragmentation affect overall sentiment,” said Armando Senra, Head of Institutional Business for the Americas at the firm.

“With 60% of family offices pessimistic about global prospects, confidence has been further impacted by the new U.S. tariffs. They are now prioritizing diversification, liquidity, and a structural reassessment of risk to build resilience in their investment portfolios,” he added.

This cautious economic outlook—but relatively optimistic view regarding their ability to meet return objectives—shifted after “Liberation Day,” when the U.S. administration announced tariffs on all its trading partners.

Before these announcements, the majority (57%) of family offices were already pessimistic about the global outlook, and many (39%) were concerned about a potential U.S. economic slowdown. After April 3, those figures rose to 62% and 43%, respectively, and FOs expressed greater concerns about higher inflation, rising interest rates, and slower growth in developed markets.

A significant majority of FOs had already made or planned to make allocation changes prior to the tariff announcements. Nearly three-quarters (72%) have made or plan to make portfolio allocation changes, and nearly all (94%) are either making changes or seeking opportunities to do so.

The survey was conducted by BlackRock and Illuminas between March 17 and May 19, polling 175 single-family offices that collectively manage over $320 billion in assets.

Alternative Investments Step Forward

To meet the goal of building resilient portfolios, alternative assets are “more important than ever,” according to BlackRock. The survey shows that this type of investment now represents 42% of family office portfolios, compared to 39% in the 2022–2023 survey.

Within this segment, private credit and infrastructure are the most preferred alternative assets. According to the 2025 survey, nearly one-third of family offices plan to increase their allocations to private credit (32%) and infrastructure (30%) in 2025–2026. Within private credit, the preferred strategies are special situations/opportunistic and direct lending.

Infrastructure is gaining momentum. 75% of respondents have a positive view of its outlook. These types of investments are attractive for their ability to generate stable cash flows, act as portfolio diversifiers, and offer resilience.

Over the next year, respondents plan to increase allocations to both opportunistic (54%) and value-add (51%) strategies, due to their higher return potential, favorable momentum, and flexibility.

“The sustained demand and interest in private credit and infrastructure from family offices reflects the illiquidity premium and differentiated return opportunities in today’s environment. Access to the right opportunities and strategies is becoming increasingly important as these assets move from niche strategies to core pillars of client portfolios,” said Francisco Rosemberg, Head of Wealth and Family Offices for BlackRock in Latin America.

However, 72% of family offices cited high fees as a major challenge for investing in private markets, a significant increase from 40% in the previous survey. For many families, the issue lies not so much in the compensation model itself but in the relationship between cost and value received. FOs remain willing to commit to partners and strategies they trust and that are well-positioned to seize specific opportunities.

On the other hand, fewer than one in five are taking on risk, while many more are diversifying and managing liquidity as much as possible, including building up cash positions, moving to the front end of the yield curve, and exploring secondary markets.

From Calm in Financial Markets to Sensitive Assets: What Is the Message Amid the Middle East Conflict?

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

In less than 24 hours, we have gone from a possible military escalation in the Middle East—following the hostilities between Iran, Israel, and the U.S.—to an announcement of a “ceasefire” and a certain de-escalation of tensions. According to investment firms and international asset managers, this geopolitical situation is clearly reflected in oil prices, but what stands out most is the apparent calm observed in financial markets.

According to Thomas Hempell, Head of Macro and Market Research at Generali AM (part of Generali Investments), on Monday, markets in general reacted with risk aversion, with rising oil prices and falling equity markets.

“Surprisingly, the U.S. dollar initially rose, but that quickly faded, reinforcing concerns about its weakening status as a safe haven. Still, this marks an improvement over the U.S. dollar’s negative response to the growing trade tensions in recent weeks. In fact, a sharper increase in energy costs would hurt energy importers (including the eurozone and Japan) the most, while the U.S. has become a net oil exporter,” Hempell noted. In his view, Treasuries (and bunds) also failed to act as safe havens, with 10-year U.S. debt yields trading around 4.40%.

Meanwhile, stock markets are reacting positively to the Middle East de-escalation, while oil prices fell 3% on Tuesday, and in Europe, gas prices dropped 11%. “The muted Iranian response and rapid ceasefire point to a scenario of de-escalation in the coming days, which will shift attention back to the tariff moratorium—set to expire in 15 days—and to the negotiations over the U.S. tax reform currently in the Senate,” analysts at Banca March acknowledged in their daily report.

“Military conflicts are always unpredictable. Even Middle East experts struggle to anticipate how this war will unfold and what its consequences will be in the coming days, weeks, or months. Before the war between Israel and Iran began, the evolving world order and changing geopolitical landscape—marked by tariffs and trade wars—were already adding uncertainty to expected returns across all asset classes,” analysts at AllianceBernstein noted.

Most Sensitive Markets and Assets

According to Kerstin Hottner, Head of Commodities at Vontobel, and portfolio managers Regina Hammerschmid and Renato Mettler, although there was a widespread expectation of rising oil prices and a flight-to-safety sentiment to start the week, the European market reaction was quite different. “Brent crude futures opened with a sharp increase in Asia at $81, before retreating ahead of the European open and trading just above Friday’s close at around $77.10. Risk aversion was moderate across all asset classes, with equities and bond yields slightly down and the U.S. dollar strengthening. Curiously, gold demand was limited despite rising geopolitical tensions. The muted response suggests markets are in a wait-and-see mode, particularly focused on how Iran will respond in the coming days. So far, the U.S. has announced a 12-hour ceasefire. What happens next will be crucial,” said the experts at Vontobel.

Ebury analysts believe the Israel-Iran war will dominate the currency market following U.S. involvement. In this context, “the U.S. dollar appears to be maintaining its status as a safe-haven currency during times of severe geopolitical instability and has risen against all major global currencies,” they explained. They also noted that the euro is trading almost entirely in response to external events—particularly the war between Israel and Iran—and “is broadly affected by rising oil prices and the fact that Europe is a large net energy importer, whereas the U.S. is an exporter,” the Ebury analysts pointed out. They expect the same trend to persist this week: “The euro opened lower as oil prices continue to climb.”

No Rushing to Conclusions

According to U.S.-based asset manager Payden & Rygel, tensions in the Middle East captured investors’ attention this week, causing market movements just weeks after U.S. equities had recovered from an 18.9% decline. However, they advise staying calm amid the turmoil.

“First, a review of geopolitical crises since 1939 suggests the average market drop from geopolitical events is only 5.6% and lasts just 16 days. Second, markets tend to recover quickly. In 60% of cases, the S&P 500 regained losses within a month of the bottom, and in 80% of cases within two months. Exceptions are usually crises that trigger or coincide with a recession or persistent inflation that keeps federal funds rates elevated, like the 1973 oil embargo. Third, the average return 12 months after a geopolitical crisis was 14%, well above the S&P 500’s average annual return during ‘normal’ times. In other words, unless a recession or rate hike by the Fed is expected in the next 6 to 12 months, a long-term view and looking beyond short-term volatility is advisable,” they said.

A similar message comes from Gregor MA Hirt, Global CIO of Multi Asset at Allianz Global Investors: “Investors should prepare for short-term turbulence in energy prices and inflation expectations. However, as in past crises, excessive market moves could offer compelling opportunities. Central banks—particularly the Fed—may need to reconsider their policy paths if inflation accelerates while growth slows.” For MA Hirt, the coming days will be key in assessing damage to Iranian nuclear facilities, the scale of Iran’s response, and the stance taken by the international community. “All of this will shape market sentiment in the short term,” he added.

Furthermore, Dan Ivascyn, CIO at PIMCO, reminds investors that uncertainty can be a tailwind for fixed income. Ivascyn acknowledges that the market may be witnessing a reversal of U.S. exceptionalism and that other markets may become more profitable, creating an opportunity to diversify away from the U.S.

“This year’s price movements and news are an example of how uncertain the macroeconomic environment is. It’s always important to remind investors that current income drives a significant portion of fixed income returns. Despite high volatility, returns have been quite solid—especially if holding a global portfolio with non-dollar-denominated assets and higher-quality emerging markets. At PIMCO, we take a long-term orientation, use all tools at our disposal, acknowledge great uncertainty, reinforce portfolio resilience, and strive to deliver highly attractive returns for our clients,” Ivascyn stated.

Resilient Portfolios and Caution

Asset managers also emphasize that predicting the outcome is not the game to play, which is why they focus on building resilient portfolios. “The coming weeks present multiple risks to markets, including developments in U.S. tariffs and other policies—but these are two-sided risks, as markets could also ‘climb the wall of worry’ once they pass,” argued Salman Ahmed, Global Head of Macro and Strategic Asset Allocation at Fidelity International.

In his view, from an asset allocation perspective, this is a time to stay broadly neutral toward risk while taking more granular views across regions and asset classes—buying and selling very selectively. “Diversification remains key, as does the flexibility to actively manage risks—including currency positions and selective hedges (e.g., gold),” he noted.

Meanwhile, Michaël Nizard, Head of Multi Asset and Overlay, and Nabil Milali, Multi Asset and Overlay Manager at Edmond de Rothschild AM, acknowledge that in this context, they maintain a cautious view of equity markets amid ongoing economic and geopolitical uncertainty—especially as valuations have returned to high levels. “As for fixed income investments, we hold a neutral duration stance and continue to favor carry strategies, while the dollar’s failure to reclaim its safe-haven status reinforces our negative view,” added the Edmond de Rothschild AM experts.

BoE, BoJ, and Fed: Three Meetings That Highlight the Divergence Among Central Banks

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

Central banks take center stage this week, as the Bank of England (BoE), the Bank of Japan (BoJ), and the U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) will hold their respective meetings. These three monetary institutions have been less active than the European Central Bank (ECB), which has cut interest rates by 25 basis points at each meeting since last September, so expectations for further changes are low.

How have these central banks behaved so far? The BoE’s monetary policy has positioned itself between that of the Fed and the ECB. “Rates have been lowered by 25 basis points per quarter, but concerns about inflationary pressures—exacerbated by rising regulated prices and increases in employment-related taxes—have slowed a faster pace of monetary easing, amid divided opinions among BoE policymakers. A more decisive rate cut is likely approaching, given signs of declining employment, unfilled vacancies, and wage growth, but a cut as early as June would surprise the market,” notes Sean Shepley, senior economist at Allianz GI.

In contrast, the BoJ remains a case apart: while other central banks have hesitated to lower rates in a persistent inflation environment, the BoJ has been reluctant in recent months to raise rates from its current ultra-loose policy, despite inflation exceeding its target. “The institution remains focused on shifting domestic inflation expectations away from levels close to zero and sees risks to growth as potential obstacles to achieving that goal. All indications suggest that, for now, this inaction will remain the BoJ’s prevailing stance,” adds Shepley.

Since December, the Federal Reserve has kept its monetary policy unchanged, after swiftly reducing its target rate from 5.25% to 4.25% over the last four months of 2024. For this meeting, it is expected to maintain the status quo, as it has shown reluctance to take new action.

According to Erik Weisman, Chief Economist at MFS Investment Management, the only point of interest may come from the new set of forecasts in the Summary of Economic Projections (SEP), which could point to slightly slower growth, combined with slightly higher inflation.

“We’ll also be watching the dots—the Fed’s interest rate forecasts—which could shift to indicate only one rate cut this year. Overall, none of this is likely to surprise investors. The Fed will probably acknowledge that the backdrop remains uncertain, and that the best course is to do nothing. As for potential rate cuts, it’s fair to assume they’ve been delayed, and none is likely before the fourth quarter of this year,” Weisman argues.

Focus on the Fed

Although no changes or cuts are expected from the Fed, investment firms agree that the pressure on Powell and the central bank has increased. “One of the hallmarks of U.S. President Donald Trump’s two terms has been his willingness to publicly challenge the Fed Chair whenever he believed interest rates were too high or that the institution had acted too slowly. In fact, Trump has claimed he should participate in monetary policy decisions and has attempted to undermine the central bank’s authority. Moreover, before taking office, U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent even said that if the government announced in advance who the next Fed Chair would be, it could weaken the current chair’s power,” notes the senior economist at Allianz GI.

These pressures are compounded by the complex geopolitical environment. “If not for exogenous shocks, tariffs, and oil, it seems the Fed has successfully concluded the post-pandemic monetary policy cycle, to borrow Christine Lagarde’s phrasing about the ECB two weeks ago. May’s U.S. CPI data was particularly encouraging. While it’s highly likely that the Fed will reaffirm its ‘wait and see’ stance this week, the FOMC’s dot plot for 2026 and 2027 could show some divergence among members, with hawks and doves emerging, divided over the risks of persistent inflation in the U.S. We wouldn’t be surprised if only one rate cut is shown in the new dot plot. However, we believe the longer-term dots will be more interesting,” says Gilles Moëc, Chief Economist at AXA IM.

According to his estimate, assuming the median projection remains unchanged from March, three cuts (to 3.37%) are expected in 2026. “However, the dispersion around the median might be more telling than the median itself. In fact, we could see a group of doves pushing for quicker cuts and faster convergence toward neutrality,” he adds.

Will the Fed Make More Cuts?

Philip Orlando, Senior Vice President and Chief Market Strategist at Federated Hermes, sees potential for the Fed to cut rates twice this year. “CPI and PCE inflation indicators have declined year-to-date through April and are now at four-year lows. The Fed’s June 18 monetary policy meeting includes an updated summary of economic projections. Officials will need to reconcile their restrictive monetary policy—since the upper bound of the federal funds rate is currently at 4.5%—with the fact that nominal CPI is only 2.3% year over year,” he explains.

In his view, there is significant room to lower rates to 3% over the next 12–24 months, and he expects two quarter-point cuts later this year: “The most likely timing would be September and December, and we expect the Fed to set the stage for these cuts at its June and July 30 FOMC meetings, as well as at its Jackson Hole summit in Wyoming from August 21 to 23. With the prospect of lower rates and no recession on the horizon, we maintain our target of 6,500 for the S&P 500 this year and 7,000 in 2026,” he says.

Markets Watch the Dot Plot

Finally, Harvey Bradley, Co-Head of Global Rates at Insight Investment, notes that beyond Fed Chair Powell’s press conference, markets will closely watch the Fed’s quarterly dot plot for signals on how and when the central bank might resume its cutting cycle.

“In both March and December, the median projection was for two rate cuts by year-end, which is roughly what markets are currently pricing in. Given the uncertainty facing markets, it’s difficult to predict whether the forecasts will change significantly. On one hand, Fed members may now factor in a higher effective tariff rate, with early signs of tariff-related inflation beginning to show. On the other hand, less volatile—or ‘stickier’—sources of inflation, especially in major categories like rent, are showing impressive and potentially sustainable signs of disinflation. The labor market is also showing some cracks, with continuing jobless claims at cycle highs. This could help the Fed continue normalizing its monetary policy. Altogether, the projections may remain largely unchanged,” he argues.

Insight’s base case is for two cuts this year, followed by further reductions in 2026 toward a terminal rate of 3%, driven by below-trend growth outcomes—a landing zone the Fed would likely describe as “broadly neutral.” “In any case, while the Fed remains on hold, we believe this could be a good opportunity for investors to lock in relatively high yields in fixed income while they are still available,” concludes Bradley.

VanEck and Mexican Firm Finamex Casa de Bolsa Sign an Alliance

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesy

Global investment manager VanEck and Mexican firm Finamex Casa de Bolsa have announced the signing of a strategic alliance. Finamex, one of Mexico’s leading brokerage firms, will act as the official liquidity provider for several VanEck ETFs listed on the Mexican Stock Exchange (BMV).

“For many years, Mexican investors have sought greater exposure to global strategies—particularly thematic and U.S.-based solutions—but have faced challenges such as limited liquidity, wide spreads, and inconsistent execution on local exchanges. With this alliance with Finamex Casa de Bolsa, VanEck aims to enhance the daily trading experience, ensuring that its ETFs listed on the BMV are more accessible, efficient, and transparent for all investors,” both firms stated in a joint release.

“Our goal is to create real and lasting value for investors in Mexico and across the region,” said Jan van Eck, CEO of VanEck. “That goes beyond listing products: it means removing friction, deepening liquidity, and building trust through education, strategic partnerships, and local insight.”

This collaboration strengthens VanEck’s mission to expand access in Latin America to high-quality global investment strategies, while also supporting the development of local ETF markets.

Currently, VanEck offers both active and passive strategies with innovative exposures backed by robust investment processes. As of April 30, 2025, VanEck managed approximately $116.6 billion in assets, including mutual funds, ETFs, and institutional mandates. Its solutions range from core investments to specialized approaches aimed at achieving greater portfolio diversification. Active strategies are based on bottom-up analysis; passive ones prioritize investability, liquidity, and transparency.

Finamex Casa de Bolsa is a Mexican firm specialized in financial services and access to the local securities market. It offers a range of products and services to individual, corporate, and professional investors, including access to money markets, equities, derivatives, and foreign exchange. Finamex is distinguished by its technology-driven specialized services and its focus on medium- and long-term investments.

AI Washing: The New Concern for Institutional Investors and Wealth Managers

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Image Developed Using AI

A new global study by Robocap, a fund manager and investor specializing in robotics, automation, and artificial intelligence (AI) equities since 2016, reveals that 37% of pension funds, insurance asset managers, family offices, and wealth managers—with a combined total of $1.183 trillion in assets under management—are very concerned about false claims made by some companies regarding their use of artificial intelligence and its purported positive impact on operations. An additional 63% expressed moderate concern about this issue.

Based on their experience, Robocap identifies “different types of AI washing.” This may include companies that claim to use AI when they are in fact relying on less sophisticated algorithms. It may also involve overstating the effectiveness of their AI compared to existing techniques or falsely asserting that their AI solutions are fully operational.

Looking ahead, 26% of the professional investors surveyed believe AI washing will worsen slightly over the next three years, while 3% expect it to worsen considerably. However, nearly two-thirds believe the issue will diminish, and 7% think it will remain unchanged.

Robocap is a thematic equity fund focused on pure-play publicly listed companies operating in the global robotics, automation, and artificial intelligence space. This fast-growing theme includes AI-powered cybersecurity, AI software, general automation, industrial robotics, healthcare robotics, drones, autonomous vehicles, key components, semiconductor automation, space robotics, logistics automation, and a wide range of AI applications throughout the entire value chain.

Robocap’s pure-play approach means it invests only in companies where at least 40% of revenues are related to robotics, automation, and AI. Currently, 85% of the portfolio’s revenues are directly tied to this theme. The fund manager is supported by a team of experienced investors and an advisory board of leading technology experts and entrepreneurs who help guide investment decisions.

The Robocap UCITS Fund, launched in January 2016 and managed by a specialized team based in London, aims for a 12% annual return over an economic cycle. It has achieved a net annualized return (CAGR) of 11.84% and a net return of 181% since inception.

Following the release of the study, Jonathan Cohen, founder and Chief Investment Officer (CIO) of Robocap, stated:
“Much like greenwashing, AI washing is a real issue for investors seeking exposure to companies that truly benefit from the growth and operational efficiencies AI can offer. We believe there is a significant misunderstanding and misuse of the term ‘AI,’ as well as a wide gap between technological innovation and the actual revenue derived from it. When selecting investment opportunities, we look for companies with solid underlying exposure to the AI, robotics, and automation theme, a strong business model supported by excellent technology, a good management team, and attractive valuation.”

Israel-Iran Conflict and the Oil Risk: Economic and Geopolitical Impacts

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Image Developed Using AI

The escalating conflict between Israel and Iran has significant implications for the global oil market. Although Israeli attacks have so far mainly targeted military facilities and nuclear infrastructure, any expansion of the conflict into oil-producing areas—particularly if it affects Iraqi output—could remove around 5 million barrels per day from the market.

This would represent a critical reduction, considering that the spare capacity of OPEC+Russia, estimated at about 7.5 million barrels per day, would shrink by nearly 70%.

Such a scenario greatly increases the risk of a major global supply shock, potentially pushing oil prices back toward the psychologically significant $100 per barrel level.

Political Strategies and Likely Scenarios

While the most plausible scenario is that Iran will seek to preserve what remains of its nuclear capabilities and eventually return to negotiations with the United States, the current U.S. administration under Trump—marked by relative passivity and permissiveness toward Israel—creates the possibility of an intensification of the conflict.

Israel might view Iran’s current weakness—resulting from the damage inflicted on key allies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Assad’s former regime in Syria—as a unique opportunity to permanently neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat.

Some political analysts even suggest that Trump may have deliberately enabled this scenario in an effort to force a definitive resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue. However, an extreme escalation would inevitably provoke retaliation from Iran, especially if the survival of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s regime is perceived to be at stake.

A possible Iranian response could include attacks on Saudi oil facilities or a blockade of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which between 18 and 20 million barrels of crude oil and refined products transit daily. Such a situation would likely force the U.S. to reconsider its strategy, balancing the goal of eliminating the nuclear threat with maintaining a degree of regional stability under the current Iranian regime.

Economic and Financial Consequences

A severe oil supply shock would significantly increase global energy costs and slow down global economic growth. The impact would be particularly acute for economies heavily reliant on imported oil, such as Europe and China. A slowdown in China would be especially concerning given its central role in the current global economic context and its strategic interest in preventing further Middle Eastern tensions.

The United States, on the other hand, would be in a relatively more favorable position thanks to the energy independence it has achieved over the past decade. Nevertheless, it would not be immune to the secondary effects of a deep global slowdown. In this context, the perception of the U.S. dollar as a safe-haven asset could be strengthened, relatively favoring dollar-denominated assets—especially Treasury bonds and U.S. equities—compared to more vulnerable regions.

Market Reaction and Perception

In recent days, market risk indicators seem to have priced in the peak of the conflict, as reflected in relatively restrained movements across key assets. U.S. Treasury yields have risen slightly, while the dollar and gold have shown downward trends. Meanwhile, stock indexes have maintained surprising stability, seemingly downplaying the severity of potential risks.

This apparent calm could be supported by the reduced intensity of oil usage in global production compared to previous decades and the belief that the remaining spare capacity, although limited, could partially offset a temporary supply disruption from Iran and Iraq.

Complacency Risks in the Markets

However, the current stability may be overlooking critical factors. A sustained disruption of supply from the Middle East would be difficult to manage without causing significant price tensions, given the limited real spare capacity of OPEC+Russia in a prolonged conflict scenario.

Moreover, a genuine escalation could trigger important second-round effects, such as significant inflationary pressures that would force central banks to maintain restrictive monetary policies for a longer period, further slowing global economic activity.

Conclusion and Outlook

The Israel-Iran conflict has the potential to trigger a major global economic shock, the exact impact of which will largely depend on the duration and depth of the conflict, as well as the response capacity of key players in the international energy market.

The prevailing uncertainty requires close monitoring of developments in the Middle East. The complacency seen in the markets so far could be quickly reversed if tensions escalate further, once again highlighting the region’s critical importance to global economic stability.

For investors, maintaining defensive and diversified positions—especially in safe-haven assets—may be a prudent strategy while the evolution of the conflict and its geopolitical and economic implications become clearer.

Gold as a Strategic Asset

In this context, gold is an attractive asset. Despite its strong performance since 2023, our valuation model shows a slight deviation from its theoretical price.

 

Since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2023, gold has become a strategic asset. Since then, countries like Russia, Turkey, India, and China have increased the gold holdings in their reserves, diversifying away from the U.S. dollar.

The percentage of international reserves invested in gold has risen from 20% to 24%, and it continues to grow. The potential for gold to remain a structural source of demand is clear when considering differences in country-level positioning. China, for example, has only invested 7% of its total foreign currency deposits in gold, meaning its purchases could support gold prices. Additionally, it’s worth noting that approximately 60% of gold demand comes from central banks and financial investments, and the appetite of central banks for this commodity is relatively insensitive to price fluctuations, as they do not seek economic returns.

Pessimistic About the U.S., Financial Advisors Increase Allocation to Global Investments

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

The survey reveals that 42% of the independent financial advisors surveyed are investing more in stocks outside the U.S., while a similar number (40%) are reducing clients’ exposure to U.S. stocks.

The Interactive Brokers 2025 Advisor Sentiment Survey shows that these decisions reflect growing market skepticism: 62% of advisors report a more bearish outlook than 12 months ago, while only 12% say they are more optimistic.

Recent increases in market volatility and economic uncertainty have caused advisors to temper their enthusiasm for the U.S.: 36% of respondents identify as bearish, while 31% consider themselves bullish.

In contrast, advisors have a more favorable outlook on global markets: 38% describe themselves as bullish on them, and only 11% consider themselves bearish.

Advisors cite tariffs and changes in U.S. policy as their main concerns regarding markets and the economy. More than half (52%) state that their clients are particularly worried about the impact of current market volatility on their portfolios, and one in five (20%) indicate that clients’ main fear is their retirement.

In addition to shifting clients’ equity exposure toward global markets, advisors are also reallocating assets in other ways:

  • 29% are increasing investments in fixed income

  • 28% are investing more in commodities

  • 27% are increasing exposure to foreign (non-U.S.) currencies

  • 37% are boosting their positions in cash (U.S. dollars)

Despite uncertainties, advisors remain highly optimistic about their business growth this year: 61% are confident their firm will grow, and of those, 17% feel extremely confident.

“Advisors are acting as strategic buffers for their clients right now, managing risk through global diversification,” said Steve Sanders, Executive Vice President of Marketing and Product Development at Interactive Brokers. “They are navigating market volatility and client anxiety while also handling increased business, as more investors tend to seek professional advice during unstable market cycles.”

Interactive Brokers surveyed its independent financial advisor clients to assess their outlook on their firms’ operations in the current market environment. The global email survey, conducted in April 2025, was completed by 113 fee-only financial advisors, who have an average of 19.4 years of experience. Respondents reported working at firms with an average of $120.2 million in assets under management.

The SEC Appoints New Leaders With Crypto Ties for Its Investment Management and Trading & Markets Divisions

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

The SEC announced that Brian Daly will be the new Director of the Investment Management Division, effective July 8, and that Jamie Selway will serve as Director of the Trading & Markets Division, a role he will assume on June 17. The regulator also reported that Kurt Hohl was appointed Chief Accountant and that Erik Hotmire is returning to the SEC as Chief External Affairs Officer. All announcements were made on Friday, June 13.

Daly has advised on cryptocurrencies, and Selway briefly worked at Blockchain.com, so their appointments are seen as a more crypto-friendly approach by the regulator, driven by President Donald Trump.

Brian Daly brings decades of experience in senior roles at global law firms and investment management companies, advising fund managers and sponsors on regulatory compliance.

For the past four years, he has been a partner in the investment management practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP in New York, where he advised investment advisers and other clients on legal and compliance programs, policies and procedures, and provided guidance on fund and management company formation, operational and business matters, enforcement issues, and management company transactions, the SEC said in a statement.

“Brian’s deep knowledge across all levels of the investment management industry will be of great value, and I look forward to working with him to achieve smart and effective oversight of the industry and its relationships with investors,” said SEC Chairman Paul Atkins. “I look forward to collaborating with Brian on common-sense regulation that does not impose unnecessary burdens and truly respects the public comment process,” he added.

Daly stated: “I have always respected and valued the SEC’s commitment to regulatory oversight while advising clients on compliance and providing public comments from the investment management perspective during the agency’s rulemaking process. I am optimistic about this new chapter at the SEC and eager to work with Chairman Atkins and my new colleagues to ensure regulatory compliance by investment advisers and fund managers, while tailoring regulation to our legal authority.”

Before joining Akin, Daly spent nearly a decade as a partner in the investment management group at Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, advising investment advisers and fund managers on legal, compliance, and operational issues. He was also a founding partner at Kepos Capital, a quantitative investment management firm, where he served as General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer. Among other past roles, he was General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer at Millennium Partners (a liquid markets fund manager under the Carlyle Group) and at Raptor Capital Management. Additionally, he taught legal ethics at Yale Law School and served on the board of the Managed Funds Association.

Jamie Selway, for his part, is a prominent leader in financial markets. “I want to welcome Jamie to the SEC,” said Paul Atkins. “He brings decades of experience in market structure and across multiple asset classes, which is essential for this role. I look forward to working with him to protect our markets and ensure that the agency’s regulations strike the right balance between costs and benefits,” he added.

Selway most recently was a partner at Sophron Advisors, where he advised clients on capital markets issues. He was also a board member at Protego Holdings, board chair at AllofUs Financial and Skew, and an advisor to several fintech companies.

Previously, he was Managing Director and Head of Electronic Brokerage at Investment Technology Group, a global institutional brokerage firm. He co-founded institutional brokerage firm White Cap Trading, where he served as Managing Director and President. Early in his career, he was Chief Economist at Archipelago, worked in equity derivatives research at Goldman Sachs, and was Associate Director of Research at the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), which later became FINRA.

The appointments indicate that the SEC is shifting its stance on the digital space since Chairman Atkins took office in April. Under his leadership, the regulator has withdrawn or suspended several major lawsuits against cryptocurrency companies. The agency dropped cases against Coinbase, Cumberland DRW, and Richard Heart, founder of Hex, PulseChain, and PulseX. In March, the SEC held its inaugural roundtable of the crypto task force to discuss future regulation of digital assets, signaling what appears to be a new era under the Trump administration.

Open Outlook for Rate Cuts

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Photo courtesyJerome Powell, presidente de la Fed.

At its June meeting, the Fed kept interest rates unchanged—for the fourth time—and acknowledged that uncertainty has declined, although it still sees it as “elevated.” According to global asset managers, while the Fed’s actions were in line with expectations, its updated economic projections leave the door open for two rate cuts before the end of the year.

The case for placing two rate cuts on the radar is based on the Fed recognizing that economic uncertainty has “eased,” which could pave the way for rate cuts if inflation remains under control. “A more relaxed stance on economic uncertainty could signal greater openness to rate cuts in the second half of the year, as long as other macroeconomic indicators remain stable,” says Bret Kenwell, an analyst at eToro in the U.S.

“Powell emphasized the role of impending tariff hikes in worsening economic prospects and the importance of the Fed not acting prematurely before the full effects of trade policy are understood—in a meeting that was otherwise uneventful. However, for a growing number of members, ‘waiting’ now implies not cutting rates at all this year. Somewhat surprisingly—given the potentially negative long-term impact of tariffs on growth and employment—the Fed has revised down its forecast for rate cuts in 2026 from two to one,” adds Paolo Zanghieri, Senior Economist at Generali AM (part of Generali Investments).

Cuts in 2025?

Ray Sharma-Ong, Head of Multi-Asset Investment Solutions – Southeast Asia at abrdn Investments, points out that the dot plot from Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) members still projects two rate cuts for 2025. However, he notes that projections for 2026 and 2027 have been revised, and only one cut is expected in each of those years. Moreover, Sharma-Ong believes that given current uncertainty around economic outlook and trade policy, the Fed might ultimately implement only one—or even no—cut this year, contrary to the two cuts indicated in the dot plot for 2025.

“This is due to a lack of clarity about the final form of tariffs, the evolution of tariff pauses, and trade negotiations. These developments remain uncertain and will impact economic, inflationary, monetary, and market sentiment outcomes,” notes the abrdn expert.

Simon Dangoor, Head of Fixed Income Macro Strategies at Goldman Sachs Asset Management, explains that FOMC members continue to expect short-term inflation to be largely transitory, and their tolerance for rising unemployment remains low. As a result, he states: “We expect the Fed to hold its stance at next month’s meeting, but believe a path could open up for the Fed to resume its easing cycle later this year if the labor market weakens.”

Dan Siluk, Global Head of Short Duration & Liquidity and Portfolio Manager at Janus Henderson, believes this moderate decision by the Fed indeed leaves the door open for rate cuts in the second half of 2025. “The Fed is clearly signaling it’s in no rush but is prepared to act if inflation continues to moderate and labor market weakness deepens. The upward revision in inflation forecasts may temper expectations for aggressive easing, but maintaining the rate path for 2025 reassures markets that the Fed remains flexible,” he explains.

He also adds that “markets will now look to Powell’s Q&A for greater clarity on the Fed’s reaction function, particularly how it weighs recent moderate inflation data against persistent geopolitical and tariff-related risks.”

Doubts Remain

However, other investment firms are less confident about future rate cuts. “We believe the Fed will remain on hold with no interest rate changes this year, but we foresee gradual rate cuts next year under the leadership of a new Chair.

The conflicting risks to growth and inflation make keeping rates steady the logical choice for the Fed this year. The August review of monetary policy could lead to some changes in the Fed’s operations, but we believe the impact will be limited. The appointment of Powell’s successor will carry greater importance. Under new leadership, we think the committee will use next year’s inflation moderation as an opportunity to start moving toward a more neutral policy,” says George Brown, Senior Economist at Schroders.

This view is echoed by Raphael Olszyna-Marzys, International Economist at J. Safra Sarasin Sustainable AM, who believes Powell’s repeated assertion that the economy remains strong carries significant weight, despite the uncertainty and tariff impact. “As Jerome Powell stated, ultimately the cost of tariffs must be paid, and some of it will fall on the end consumer. We know that’s coming, and we want to see these effects before making premature judgments. This implies it is unlikely the Fed will resume its rate-cutting cycle—unless the labor market suddenly weakens—at least until September,” notes Olszyna-Marzys.

Key Decision Drivers

Allison Boxer, Economist at PIMCO, highlights that revisions in the Fed’s economic projections point to a more uncertain outlook. “Fed officials made stagflationary revisions to their forecasts, with median forecasts for both inflation and unemployment rising, while growth projections fell. Their outlook implies that both sides of the Fed’s dual mandate—price stability and maximum employment—are moving in the wrong direction. Given this contradiction, the projections showed Fed officials split on rate outlooks, with most divided between holding rates steady or cutting by 50 basis points by year-end,” Boxer explains.

PIMCO’s view also sees diverging paths for the Fed: cutting gradually or minimally if the labor market proves resilient, and cutting more significantly if labor weakens. “Given recent labor data and rising uncertainty, our base case is for a return to a gradual rate-cutting pace later this year,” adds the economist.

Jean Boivin, Head of the BlackRock Investment Institute, explains that the Fed has long faced a delicate balancing act between supporting growth and containing inflation. “Powell stated that he expected tariffs to generate significant inflation in the coming months. And although the Fed’s base case seems to be that tariffs will have a one-off inflationary impact rather than a lasting one, it is clearly acknowledging the potential for more persistent inflation, depending on the size and duration of tariffs. It has slightly revised its inflation forecast upward for the coming years. Still, we believe the Fed is underestimating the magnitude of future inflationary pressures,” says Boivin.

Another factor some firms believe could come into play is the leadership change at the Fed, with Powell having 11 months left in his term. “Looking ahead to 2026, we expect leadership changes at the Federal Reserve to further shift the policy landscape. Jerome Powell’s term ends on May 15, 2026, and a new chair is expected to be appointed. Potential successors—such as Kevin Hassett, Kevin Warsh, and Scott Bessent—are viewed as more moderate and aligned with President Trump’s pro-growth, low-rate agenda. Moreover, four of the twelve voting FOMC members will also rotate next year. This shift could support the economy ahead of the midterm elections scheduled for November 3, 2026. Consequently, we expect the Fed’s projected rate cuts for 2026 and 2027 to evolve as we approach 2026,” says Sharma-Ong.

83 Trillion at Stake: How Securitization Can Help Capture the HNWI Heir

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

In a financial environment marked by evolving generational preferences and constant technological innovation, asset securitization emerges as a strategic tool for the new generation of asset managers. As younger investors gain access to financial advice earlier—and with different demands—managers face the need to adapt products, operating models, and distribution channels. Securitization, traditionally associated with complex structures and institutional investors, is finding renewed relevance in service of this transformation, according to FlexFunds.

During 2024, the growth in wealth and the population of high-net-worth individuals (HNWI) worldwide was solid, with increases of 4.2 % and 2.6 %, respectively. However, the real inflection point for the sector is the imminent, massive wealth transfer to Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z—collectively known as next‑generation HNWIs. It is estimated that by 2048, more than US $83.5 trillion will have been transferred to these cohorts, marking a structural shift in the wealth‑management landscape.

According to Capgemini’s World Report Series 2025: Wealth Management, this phenomenon is occurring alongside a strong stock‑market rebound which, despite macroeconomic volatility, drove sustained growth in HNWI wealth levels over the past year.

This new scenario also implies a profound shift in investment profiles. Bank of America’s 2024 study confirms that younger HNWIs are reshaping their portfolios with a more diversified, digital, and alternative mindset:

  • Only 47 % of their portfolios are in traditional equities and bonds, compared to 74% for those over 44 years.
  • 17% already invest in alternative assets—versus 5% in older generations—and 93% plan to increase that exposure.
  • 49% own cryptocurrencies, and another 38% are interested in acquiring them, making crypto the second-largest growth opportunity after real estate.
  • Physical gold also draws interest: 45% already hold it, and another 45% are considering adding it to their portfolio.

These figures reflect not just new preferences, but a structural transformation in wealth-building.

A new client, a new challenge for managers

Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning and Progress study, cited by the CFA Institute, shows that younger generations in the U.S. seek financial advisors at an earlier age. The average Baby Boomer began that relationship at age 49, Generation X at 38, and Millennials at just 29 (see Figure 1).

 

Figure 1: Age at which clients begin working with a financial advisor

 

Source: Northwestern Mutual Planning and Progress Study 2024

 

The great wealth transfer demands new strategies

The imminent generational wealth transfer represents an unprecedented opportunity—but also a significant threat for traditional managers. Over 80% of next‑generation HNWIs say they would change firms within the first two years after inheriting if their values and expectations aren’t met.

Each HNWI generation has specific needs. Faced with this structural shift, managers must deeply review their engagement strategies, products, and services to effectively meet more sophisticated and segmented demand.

 

Additionally, young investors state that they prioritize products with environmental or social impact, while others lean towards digital and customizable solutions. This presents a dual challenge for emerging managers: meeting sophisticated expectations and building portfolios combining performance, purpose, and transparency.

In this context, new advisors must focus on building relationships and offering personalized, results-oriented services—understanding and delivering what new investors genuinely value and are willing to pay for.

This new approach implies rethinking the perception of financial advice to emphasize a connection-based approach, which will help attract younger investors.

Securitization: From technical instrument to enabling strategy

Securitization allows transforming liquid or illiquid assets into tradeable financial instruments. Traditionally used by banks or large managers to package mortgages, loans, or income streams, specialized platforms like FlexFunds are democratizing its use—enabling independent or boutique managers access to this financial engineering with greater agility.

“Securitization can be a pathway for asset managers and investment advisors to create customized investment vehicles that allow them to repackage investment strategies, and enhance global distribution by facilitating capital raising on international banking platforms—all without requiring costly structures or complex infrastructure,” says Emilio Veiga Gil, executive vice president of FlexFunds.

This flexible packaging capability allows managers to:

  • Convert personalized strategies into listed securities (ETPs).
  • Include alternative assets in structures tailored to different risk profiles.
  • Align investment vehicle time horizons with young clients’ goals.

Democratization and scalability

Securitization also supports scalability, a critical factor for new managers. Many operate from agile, non‑bank structures and seek efficient solutions to enter new markets. By using investment vehicles, they can scale distribution without sacrificing personalization.

According to the II Annual Report of the Securitization Sector 2024–2025 by FlexFunds and Funds Society, 56% of advisors surveyed have managed an investment vehicle—demonstrating solid expertise in the field—while 40% have yet to use this tool, highlighting a growth opportunity.

Transparency, traceability and trust

Another key advantage is the traceability provided by investment vehicles. In an environment where young people value transparency, audited structures with validated periodic information become a reputational asset.

New generations have more access to information—and greater skepticism. Offering products with clear structures and transparent return flows builds trust and loyalty.

Today, next generation HWNI seek investments aligned with their values (sustainability, technology, social impact). Through securitization, asset managers can repackage alternative assets—such as renewable energy, green loans, or digital assets—into accessible listed securities, meeting new investor preferences within the regulatory framework.

To adapt to this new client profile, managers should prioritize:

  • Customized, diversified investment portfolios
  • Promoting geographic diversification through offshore solutions
  • Developing value‑added services focused on wealth and tax planning
  • Implementing personalized concierge services; next‑generation HNWIs expect services beyond finance: health, education, cybersecurity, travel, etc.
  • Bridging the digital gap and modernizing communication channels
  • Educating heirs and strengthening their connection to the firm

A more open future, if managed with vision

The key for securitization to become a competitive advantage lies in its strategic use. It’s not just about bundling assets, but rethinking how these products can broaden access, enhance young investors’ experience, and build sustainable business models.

Mass personalization and digital integration will be key differentiators. Managers who can combine financial engineering with purpose and digital intelligence will have the edge in winning young clients.

Asset securitization has ceased to be an exclusive instrument for large institutional players—it is transforming into an enabler of innovation, scalability, and trust for the new generation of managers. In a context where young investors seek advice earlier and with higher expectations, this tool can bridge structural sophistication with the ease of use demanded by the future of asset management.