Foto cedidaFlorian Komac, gestor de inversiones dentro del equipo de crédito global de GAM.. GAM IM incorpora a Florian Komac como especialista en crédito y refuerza su equipo global de renta fija
GAM Investments appointed Florian Komac as investment manager on the Global Credit Team.
He joined the team on 16 September 2019. Komac is based in Zurich and works closely with Christof Stegmann and Dorthe Nielsen. The team reports to Jack Flaherty in New York.
Komac comes from AXA XL (formerly XL Catlin) in New York, where he focused on corporate bonds as a portfolio manager. Previously, he was a portfolio manager at Swiss Re in Zurich and London and a buy-side credit analyst at Activest (now Amundi) in Munich.
“According to Matthew Beesley, the incorporation of Florian highlights GAM’s commitment to have a global organization within its investment team, which positions the Global Credit to increase GAM’s fixed income experience in Zurich, New York and London. This offer complements GAM’s Global Strategic Bond team.
On November 7th, Miami will host the ALTSMIA Annual Investor Forum. ALTSMIA is developed and led by the CFA Society of Miami, CFA Society of South Florida, CAIA Miami and Miami Finance Forum.
With their guidance and oversight, this one-day event will provide participants with an educationally focused agenda and will feature leading practitioners from the fields of private equity, venture capital, real estate, hedge funds, cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence and other sectors of the alternative investment market
Over 700 participants will gather at the JW Marriott Hotel, on 1109 Brickell Avenue.
For more information, you can contact Paul Hamann at +1 347-308-7792 or Paul.Hamann@marketsgroup.org.
You can visit the ALTSMIA Annual Investor Forum page with this link.
Foto: Banxico. Presupuesto 2020: Los riesgos de fallar en los pronósticos macroeconómicos
On September 8th, Mexican IRS (SHCP by its Spanish initials) delivered the 2020 Budget to Congress. As expected, most of the fiscal discipline lines remained unchanged: 1) Fiscal surplus of 0.7% (although below 1.3% presented in the pre-criteria); 2) Lower expected growth for this year (0.9% vs. 1.6% of the pre-criteria); 3) Financial requirements of the public sector (RFSP) deficit without much change (2.6% of GDP by 2020); 4) Indebtedness (Historical balances of the RFSPs) at 45.6% of GDP by 2020 (0.5% above those published in the pre-criteria).
A precise estimation of these macroeconomic criteria is of vital importance since income and expenditure relay entirely on them. To err when estimating them could mean falling short to carry out the spending program that the government wants to execute.
An example of the above was announced in recent months, which was endorsed in the text of the 2020 Budget: the use of the Budget Income Stabilization Fund (FEIP, by its Spanish initials) for an amount of $ 129.6 billion (43.8% of the resources available in the fund) to alleviate the lower income received during 2019. This means that the government errs in making its calculations of macroeconomic variables and revenues in the 2019 budget will fall short. However, there is no problem, that is the intention of the FEIP: to be a “cushion” that allows to stabilize the budgetary income if the calculations fail.
However, the FEIP has a limit, and to err constantly might carry out the extinction of the fund, leaving public finances to the sway of global and local shocks. In this sense, after the “bite” that the government will give to the FEIP this year, the stabilization fund will be reduced by 2020 and will have a balance of $ 166.4 billion. Is this enough to face the risks of a sharp fall in income the following year? The answer is not so obvious.
The General Criteria for Economic Policy (CGPE, by its Spanish initials) presents a sensitivity exercise of income and expenditures to the different macroeconomic variables (Graph 1). Let’s see how sensitive the numbers are to “realistic shocks” in the macro variables.
GDP growth
The relationship is quite direct. Greater economic growth means greater activity and, therefore, greater tax collection. In fact, for every 0.5% change in economic growth, revenues would move in the same direction $ 17,247.1 million.
I see a problem here. The SHCP is forecasting 2% growth of the economy by 2020, but I think that is a bit optimistic. In the latest Banxico survey, the forecast for 2020 is only 1.39%, and historically, growth forecasts have tended to fall as time goes by, which is not far-fetched to assume for the future if trade war problems continue. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, I will assume that next year’s growth turns out to be 1%. This would imply a reduction in estimated revenues of $ 34,494.2 million.
Oil price
If the price of a barrel increases by US$ 1, the oil-related revenue will increase by $ 13,775.80 million pesos. However, if we fall into an economic slowdown due to a slowdown in the US, prices will tend to fall. In fact, the government is assuming this could happen as they lowered the estimated price of a barrel from US $ 55 in the pre-criteria to US $ 49 in the 2020 Budget.
However, the downside risk should not be that worrisome because of the oil hedges that the government have bought this year. Now, if the exercise price of these hedges is at US $ 49 (same as the Budget), then the risk is minimal. If the strike price is lower, then there is a risk in which money could be lost if the price of the barrel falls.
For the purposes of this exercise, we will assume that the government has perfect coverage, and the estimated price of the barrel is what they will receive, that is, US $ 49. Therefore, this macroeconomic variable does not affect us for the calculation of sensitivities.
Exchange rate
The exchange rate plays a double role in income / expenditure sensitivities. On the one hand, a depreciation (appreciation) of the exchange rate would increase (decrease) oil revenues; on the other hand, the same depreciation (appreciation) would increase (decrease) expenditures in the form of financial cost due to the interest that must be paid in foreign currency. What effect is stronger?
The effect related to oil revenues is greater, in fact, the size of the effect of the financial cost represents only 10% of the total effect of the change in oil revenues. Given this, that the exchange rate depreciates is positive for the 2020 Budget.
However, the estimated average exchange rate in CGPE is $ 19.9 per USD, slightly above that estimated by the market ($ 19.8 per USD). However, an appreciation greater than that estimated by the market is not difficult to imagine given the restrictive course the Fed has begun to follow. Remember that when the Fed cuts rates, emerging markets benefit. On the other hand, if the commercial war between the US and China continues, Mexico would benefit in terms of exports to the US, strengthening its currency.
In this sense, thinking of an average exchange rate of $ 19.5 per usd is not that difficult, so if we had an appreciation of $ 0.40 per usd in the peso, we would stop receiving $ 13,675.6 million.
Oil production
I believe that this is one of the most critical parts of the assumptions made by the SHCP. The Budget assumes an increase in oil production of 224 mbd, which implies a growth of 13%. Given the current conditions of Pemex, it is difficult to think of an increase of that size.
The government argues that the rounds made during the last government will begin to bear fruit, however, it is likely that this will only stabilize the drop in production we have experienced month by month.
For the sake of the exercise, and being more pessimistic than in the other points, I will assume that production stabilizes, that is, it does not grow in 2020. This would imply a loss of 224 MBD, that is, a decrease of $ 73,012.35 million in the income of 2020.
Interest rate
The interest rate directly hits the expenditures, especially, the part of the local debt that is referenced at a variable rate: the higher the rate, the higher the interest-derived expenditure.
The budget assumes that the average nominal rate in the year will be 7.4%. In this area I believe that the government has been quite conservative. The consensus expects that Banxico rate to be 7.5% at the end of 2019, with the possibility of continuing to lower its rate. In fact, the consensus assumes that by the end of 2020 Banxico will have the reference rate at 7%.
Given the above, thinking about a lower rate makes sense. For this exercise I will assume that the average rate of the year will be 7.10%, so the expenses will be reduced by $ 5,843.37 million. Oil hedge
It should be remembered that the FEIP also serves to contract the oil coverages mentioned in the second point. These coverages have had an average cost of $ 16,000 million in the last 5 years, so we will assume that by 2020 this average cost remains.
Conclusion
We see that “small changes” in macroeconomic variables could bring a cost of $ 131,338.78 million in the 2020 Budget, which is no small matter. On the other hand, the balance of the FEIP will be 166,400 million, so, although it could help to alleviate the negative effects of a bad estimate in the Budget, it would leave the Public Treasury in a very precarious position to be able to take countercyclical measures in case the income decreases further.
The government is approaching a crossroads. Extraordinary measures to alleviate income shortfalls are limited and we are running out of them. In my opinion, the next logical step should be the implementation of a comprehensive tax reform that is not popular but is very necessary.
Column by Franklin Templeton México , written by Luis Gonzalí, CFA
Pixabay CC0 Public DomainJeremy Bishop. Jeremy Bishop
Years ago, it would have been unthinkable to contemplate that Interest rates, which are the cost of money, could ever be negative. What this means is that the lender, or investor, will have to pay in order to lend his money, in short, he is assured of a loss, which doesn’t make any sense at all; yet the problem is that this is now a fact in developed economies.
Almost 1/3 of the global bond market (US $16 trillion) offers returns below 0%. Both short- and long-term bonds issued by the governments of Germany, Denmark, Finland and Switzerland offer negative rates. These governments are rewarded for issuing debt, as they will have to return to bond buyers less money than they collected. Even more surprising, the third largest bank in Denmark called Jyske Bank has begun to grant 10-year mortgage loans with annual rates of -0.5%, the bank must now pay consumers, and to put the cherry on the cake, approximately 3 % of global bonds offer interest rates greater than 5%, something never seen before.
How did we reach this point? It all started when, in 2012, Denmark’s central bank reduced its reference interest rate to 0.20%. Later, the European Central Bank and the Central Bank of Japan reduced their rate to –0.10% in 2014 and 2016, respectively. Today, “the negative interest rate policy” (NIRP) is another tool in the arsenal of unconventional monetary policies of central banks to face deflationary pressures, unwanted appreciation of currencies, and disappointing rates of economic growth. It’s no coincidence that central banks covering about ¼ of the world’s GDP have negative benchmark rates.
The only one not currently treading this unchartered territory is the United States. However, interest rates in the world’s largest economy have fallen dramatically and are not indifferent to the global environment. The 10-year treasury note currently offers a yield of 1.7%, accumulating falls of about 100 basis points during the year, in August alone the fall amounted to 40 basis points.
At the moment, the inflection point is still out of sight, the fixed income market is becoming increasingly riskier and less attractive, and if you want to obtain good returns on traditional investments you must be prepared to assume a fair amount of risk. So where can investors find attractive returns? Private debt is an interesting option.
This asset class shines in an economic environment of high uncertainty, high levels of volatility, and low, and even negative returns, because it provides benefits such as low volatility with deviations below 2%, solid collaterals, excessively low default rates, stable returns, and low correlation with traditional markets.
The Katch Global Lending Opportunities (GLO) fund offers these and other benefits, such as short duration, as the term of the loans is normally between three and nine months, being little sensitive to the movement of interest rates and with a lower credit risk, with more predictable economic environment, financial stability and credit profile of the borrower. On the other hand, all the fund’s loans have solid guarantees and the amount borrowed does not exceed 70% of the value of the asset that backs it.
Loan terms, such as those mentioned above, largely help to explain the low default rates. For example, in the commercial financing strategy, the default rate in the last 15 years, including the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, has been 0.1% vs. 3.5% of that in high yield bonds. Additionally, the recovery rate is high, close to 75%.
Diversification is another great feature of the Katch GLO fund, with exposure to different strategies (factoring, bridge loans, commercial financing, amongst others) with no correlation between them and different geographies, such as Brazil, the largest economy in Latin America, which, although it contracted by 6% in 2015, during the strongest recession in at least 50 years, the default rates in factoring remained below 1%.
In conclusion, in an environment of low, and even negative,interest rates, private loan funds such as the Katch GLO fund, are quite attractive, thanks to their characteristics such as a very low correlation with traditional financial markets because they operate in completely different niches, the strong guarantees that substantially reduce credit risk and allow for very high recovery rates in cases of default, as well as to high and very stable returns with very little volatility, are a great option to complement investment portfolios.
Tribune of Pascal Rohner, CIO at Katch Investment Group, and Diego Agudelo, research analyst.
Foto cedidaPhoto: Bernardo Lozano is the new Senior Director of Global Distribution at Participant Capital. Photo: Bernardo Lozano is the new Senior Director of Global Distribution at Participant Capital
Participant Capital, a leading South Florida private equity real estate investment firm, with over US$2.5B in projects under development, has announced the appointment of Bernardo Lozano as the new Senior Director of Global Distribution. He will support the firm’s efforts in bolstering global distribution capabilities and building strategic partnerships with institutional and individual investors.
“Bernardo is a seasoned professional with a proven track record in building multiple internationally-focused sales teams,” said Claudio Izquierdo, Chief Operating Officer of Participant Capital. “I am confident that we have assembled a dynamic and experienced leadership team uniquely qualified to support our investment portfolio as well as help our company expand its focus across the globe.”
Prior to Participant Capital, Bernardo served as Head of Business Development at ASG Capital where he consulted an extensive network of investment advisors on securing and expanding third-party distribution. A significant part of his career was also associated with MFS International and its parent company Sun Life of Canada where he helped build a multibillion-dollar sales organization for offshore funds and investment contracts.
This year, Participant Capital expanded its operations and representatives throughout Latin America, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Its Growth Fund is being registered in Colombia, France, Switzerland, and is approved for distribution in the UAE.
About Participant Capital
Participant Capital is a private equity real estate investment management firm specializing in large-scale, mixed-use developments. As an affiliate of Royal Palm Companies, a developer with an extensive track record of more than 40 years, Participant Capital allows institutional or individual investors to invest in real estate projects alongside experienced developers from the ground-up at the developer’s cost basis.
One year and nine months after it was made public that the Mexican Pension Funds would be able to invest in international mutual funds, the Amafore, the Mexican Pension Managers’ Association, released a list with 42 mutual funds from 11 asset managers, the afores will be able to choose from. This list will be updated on a monthly basis, adding other funds to it.
The list of authorized managers consists of:
AllianceBernstein
Amundi
AXA
BlackRock
Franklin Templeton
Investec
Janus Henderson
Morgan Stanley
Natixis
Schroders
Vanguard
Salvador Moreno, Head of Mexico Sales & Distribution, at AXA IM told Funds Society: “AXA Investment Managers is very pleased to be selected by the Mexican Pensions Association (MPA) for three of our active thematic equity funds focused on robotech, the digital economy and evolving trends. We are proud that our forward-looking approach to bring these top-tier, innovative funds to market has been well received by the MPA given the evolving investment landscape in Mexico. The country is increasingly welcoming high-tech and automation companies, leading sophisticated investors in Mexico to explore new economy strategies that were not previously available to them. Given our deep understanding of the Mexican market as well as our global, multi-asset scale and expertise, we are confident these funds provide a differentiating set of solutions tailored to investor needs in the region.”
Juan Hernández,Vanguard Mexico’s Country Manager told Funds Society that, in this first selection, three of his funds were authorized by the Amafore and that before the end of the year they expect to have 10 Vanguard funds authorized. For the manager, this is a very positive step “so that Afores can continue to diversify their portfolios … Afores are now very focused on changing their Siefore funds to target date funds, and are on a very aggressive timeline… I think that once they finish that, is when we will begin to see activity in mutual funds.”
Gustavo Lozano, Amundi Mexico’s CEO mentioned that they are excited to have had authorized a range of funds that “we believe will complement the investment solutions for the pension sector in Mexico. This is one more step in our history in Mexico and the region.”
Hugo Petricioli, regional director for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean at Franklin Templeton added that “we are very happy for the approval of two funds from our SICAV family and congratulate the Amafore for the effort. More options for Afores mean more opportunities for the workers. The approval of Luxembourg funds is no accident, they have an excellent regulation and that is why they are the largest in Europe and by far, we have seen many competitors coming to Mexico to offer everything, including products with strange regulation. Amafore will have a great responsibility in approving products and in seeking the best standards and practices. Whatever is done well today, will save many headaches in the future.”
According to Amafore, the funds in the list comply with all the regulator’s requests and “this change allows Afores to have more options and a more diversified portfolio, in order to access international markets, and the possibility of improving their members’ pensions through higher yields … The list of funds was shared with Afores by the Amafore Specialized Analysis Center (CAE). “
The long-term success (or otherwise) of the Eurozone’s first go at quantitative easing is still up for debate. Nevertheless, it was an instant hit in some quarters and now hints from Mario Draghi, president of the European Central Bank (ECB) have its fans clamouring for more, says Aberdeen Standard Investments in a recent analysis.
Why does the Eurozone need a sequel?
In the decade since recovery from the global financial crisis, the Eurozone’s economy has grown at only a very slow pace, peaking at a year-on-year rate of 2.8% in the first quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2017. Figures for the first three months of 2019 show expansion of just 1.2% and more recent data are pointing at a sharper slowdown to come. Inflation in the region has also been determinedly sluggish.
Couple these with faltering German industrial production and the bloc’s position in the middle of the US-China trade dispute and it’s easy to see why the ECB recently downgraded its growth and inflation expectations to levels that highlight the need for more stimulus.
It now expects growth of 1.4% next year, above Aberdeen Standard Investments’ expectations of 1.1%. Its inflation predictions for 2020 and 2021 are 1.4% and 1.6% respectively. Again, based on the amount of spare capacity in the Eurozone economy, “we think these forecasts are too high”, says the analysis.
In June, the ECB stopped short of a rate cut, but Draghi stated that “additional stimulus will be required” if economic performance continues in the same vein. Since his speech in Sintra, markets have moved quickly to price in a sharp slowdown in inflation. An important gauge of inflation expectations, the five-year forward five-year German inflation swap at 1.2% is now well below the central bank’s forecast of 1.6% in 2021.
In the past, such low expectations have triggered asset purchases from the ECB. Since the ECB needs to generate confidence in its ability to reach and maintain inflation at 2%, it’s very likely that, once again, QE will be a key part of its approach to raising inflation expectations.
Which assets will benefit from it?
Already, government bond yields are collapsing to lower levels. Negative-yielding debt is valued at $15.2 trillion globally. This trend is likely to continue and, with the ECB forecast to cut the deposit rate once again, a move towards -0.5% for 10-year bunds cannot be ruled out. Investors’ search for yield, therefore, is leading them increasingly to longer-dated corporate bonds.
This should continue to support European credit, which has performed well over the first half of 2019. It is expected to continue to do so, supported by strong returns from government debt and a narrowing spread.
This dynamic is also likely to lift UK credit – European issuers make up just over 20% of the UK market. As the yield hunt intensifies, subordinated financial and non-financial hybrid bonds could also do well.
This time, it’s different…
There are also likely to be some subtle differences from QE’s first European outing. The ECB might adjust its self-imposed maximum limit on how much it can purchase from each government. If it does, it might choose to make 50% of the total purchases from the German market.
And because it will be keen to avoid political fallout from buying too many bonds from countries such as Italy, corporate bonds could get a much higher billing this time around. “It still seems unlikely that the ECB will buy financial bonds, though”, says Aberdeen Standard Investments.
The search for yield continues
While European corporate bonds have their attractions, it’s important that UK investors don’t forget what is driving the need for this second instalment of quantitative easing in the Eurozone. The region’s troubles also put a spotlight on slowing UK growth and the increasing risk of recession.
It is not an environment in which credit would typically thrive. “We are looking to add to funds companies that have proven track records of coping well in downturns. Good asset quality and good governance are among the best indicators of star quality”, concludes the analysis.
PxHere CC0. Riesgo en Inversiones Privadas, Parte 1: “Cuál es el rendimiento esperado?”
Potential investors always ask the all-important question – what is the expected return? And if the answer is appealing in today’s low yield environment, the other important questions become less important to most investors.
However, the smartest investors follow up with the most important question – how do you make that return? The answer is often a multi-faceted one and should inform of the investment decisions. Is the return driven by excessive use of leverage, to make up for the high auction price paid for the company? Is the return driven by a multiple expansion assumption, which late in an economic cycle is not a solid bet? Is the return driven by the hope of an IPO with a too-lofty expected valuation? Or is the return driven by genuine value creation: company building, exploiting an inefficient market, not paying high entry prices, using truly conservative assumptions, applying unwavering operational discipline, and in some cases, very responsible use of low cost, fixed rate leverage which under no circumstances can implode the company?
Private investors demand quality and most demand a track record, but how deeply do they look beyond the brand name of the firm and the expected return numbers presented in the marketing materials? Do they perform a multi-dimensional attribution analysis? Do they reference the partners to understand if they truly led the value creation process? Do they deeply reference the sourcing process to understand if it was and will be sustainable and repeatable, or did they just get lucky? Do they meet with the teams and take the time to understand how specifically they add value? Is due diligence completed only by reading documents in the data room, or is there more that is done beyond the customary 2-4 week process most investors have?
Deep down in our hearts we all know what the right answers are to these important questions and we also know it is truly difficult to find those private fund strategies that truly do things the right way, without cutting corners, and do not take excessive risk to deliver a promised return. We just have to find them. And they do exist.
These fund managers may not visit you with their polished sales forces and menu of funds that they will make available to you. They may not send their founders on their private jets to dine with you and make you feel special with the expectation that you will invest. They may not even have a name you recognize. And they may not know who you are because the only thing they are focused on is their investment portfolio.
To find the lower risk, appealing return strategies, we must first ask the hard questions and eliminate the strategies that, by their actions, increase risk instead of mitigating it. Then we must find the inefficient sectors and sub sectors, the dislocated markets that will depend on private capital to thrive. If successful, we must then identify and vet the best and most experienced managers within those sub sectors to make certain we understand how they create value, how they avoid risk, and what they do when things go wrong. Only after we know these things, can we entrust our own and our clients’ AUMs to their stewardship. There is a better way to invest in risk mitigated private investments. The process is not easy, but well worth it in the long run.
Michael Mithoff has joined Americana Partners as Managing Director and Head of Private Equity. in his new role, Mithoff will advise families in connection with portfolio allocation and management, specifically with respect to alternative investment strategies. He will be based in Houston and reports to Jason Fertitta, President of Americana Partners.
Launched on April 29, 2019, Americana Partners is the largest breakaway of the year and the largest single team to join the Dynasty Network. The firm has offices in Houston, Austin, and Dallas and has longstanding ties to Texas. The team at Americana Partners previously managed $6 Billion in client assets.
“I have had the pleasure of working with Michael for fifteen years and I am delighted to have him join Americana Partners as our Head of Private Equity,” said Fertitta. “He is well-respected in the industry, has deep ties to Houston and brings considerable alternative investment expertise to Americana Partners. Our clients are increasingly seeking private equity investment opportunities and we are looking forward to having Michael take the lead.”
Prior to Americana, he served as a Managing Director in a similar role at HighTower Texas (formerly Salient Private Client), since November 2013. Mr. Mithoff also founded and managed a private equity advisory firm Teton Strategic Investments, Inc. and he currently serves as President of Wasatch Strategic Investments, L.L.C., which he founded in 2018. He served as Outside Chairman of the Advisory Board of Houston Global Investors, LLC until March 2013.
Mithoff is Vice President of the Mithoff Family Foundation. He serves on the Board of Directors of The Houston Museum of Natural Science (including former roles with the Executive & Investment Committees), Men of Distinction, The University of Texas Development Board, The University of Virginia Capital Campaign Committee and Harris County Hospital District Foundation. He has spent the past 15 years in a variety of leadership roles with The Children’s Museum of Houston, including his ongoing role on the Board. He also served as an advisor on the Steering Committee of Legacy Community Health Services’ $15 million Capital Campaign.
Mithoff received a B.A. in History from the University of Virginia in 1994 and a J.D./ M.B.A. from The University of Texas School of Law and Graduate School of Business, respectively, in 2000.
Americana Partners has also added three new financial advisors to their team: Gabe Cassell, Bobby Jones and Robert Muse. The firm now has a total of eight financial advisors.
According to Fertitta, “I am proud to announce that we have successfully added three more advisors to Americana Partners. In addition to all three having amazing personal networks, these advisors will have an opportunity to immediately support our current advisors with the overwhelmingly positive reception we have had from clients and prospects. We are looking forward to announcing some more critical hires shortly.”
Gabe Cassell is currently a Private Wealth Advisor with Americana Partners. Gabe was a Financial Advisor with Morgan Stanley since 2017. Prior to joining Morgan Stanley, Gabe worked in sales management for 5 years. He earned a B.S. degree from Stephen F. Austin State University where he also lettered two years for the Baseball team.
Bobby Jones is a Managing Director / Private Wealth Advisor with Americana Partners. Prior to joining Americana, he was Chief Investment Officer for a Texas-based family office. His prior work experiences include T.A. McKay & Co., a distressed credit hedge fund, Morgan Stanley and the United States Department of the Treasury. He graduated from Texas Christian University with a BBA and earned an MBA at the University of Texas at Austin.
Robert Muse is a Managing Director / Private Wealth Advisor with Americana Partners. Prior to that, he spent 20 years with Simmons & Company International in institutional equity research, sales and trading. Mr. Muse founded and was the Managing Director for Simmons’ European Institutional Securities business in London from 2000-2016. He earned a B.B.A. in Finance and Accounting from the McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin.
Americana Partners is a member of the Dynasty Financial Partners Network of independent advisory firms.
Eduardo Antón, courtesy photo. Andbank nombra a Eduardo Antón responsable de gestión de carteras para América y Latinoamérica
Eduardo Anton got promoted to Head of Portfolio Management America and LatAm at Andbank. Funds Society learned that his main function will be the coordination of the Portfolio Management and Advisory teams in the Latin American Jurisdictions where Andbank has a presence: Miami, Mexico, Panama, Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina.
Eduardo maintains its functional dependence on Jose Caturla Head of Asset Management and Portfolio Management at the Group level.
Graduated in Economics from the Universidad Anahuac of Mexico and MBA from the Instituto de Estudios Bursatiles (IEB) in Madrid, Eduardo joined the Group in 2014 as Portfolio Manager in Miami with responsibility for the entire portfolio management of Andbank Advisory.
Before joining Andbank, Eduardo developed his career at Inversis Banco since 2010 where he was part of the Asset Management department. It was also in this entity co-responsible of developing the ETFs platform for the bank, leading its entry and growth in Spain and achieving a position of leadership with a market Share of 20%
In Andbank, he is also member of the Global Investment Committee, President of the Fund Managers Committee and chairs the Latam Markets Committee.
