Tag Archives: investing

Q1 Asset Class Returns

The first question we had to ask ourselves after looking at the returns in March was, “Are the asset classes becoming increasingly correlated?” Here’s what happened in March by the numbers: 7 of the 8 Asset Classes recorded positive returns in March 4 of the 8 Asset Classes posted significant returns in March (Above 4%) 10.32% – The return of Real Estate in March 4 – Number of slots Real Estate moved up in the asset class scoreboard after March 2nd place – Where Managed Futures currently ranks despite a down month in March Real Estate: A double-digit return in a month is something you cannot ignore. What’s with Real Estate? The ETF we use (NYSEARCA: IYR ) tracks 100 different real estate companies , but the rebound could have something to do with another asset class… bonds (interest rates). Bonds: Depending on what Bond Market you watch, it was a big month. With the ETF we use is only up around 3% on the year, but the High Yield bonds cracked the Top 25 for best all-time monthly performance {Disclaimer: Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results}. For those that have been following along the low interest rate environment we’ve been living in for almost a decade, low interest rates are good for people looking to purchase a home or refinance their mortgage. World Stocks, U.S. Stocks, and Commodities: Is the fact that these three asset classes all moved in tandem in March a coincidence or are these markets showing their true colors or being highly correlated? Last Week, we charted the current rolling 30 day correlation of the S&P 500 has to Crude Oil and not only has the correlation been increasing, 2016 has shown the highest correlation over a two year period. Managed Futures: Finally, Managed Futures had a tough month with the U.S. Dollar experiencing a choppy downward market. Combine that with the $VIX returning to the lows we saw constantly throughout 2014 and some of 2015 , and it was a struggle for managers to capture trends in choppy markets. We know the managers that we work with were long commodities but late reversals in the markets took away any gain made earlier in the month. The good news is that combined with the strong first two months of 2016 is enough to keep Managed Futures in 2nd place, despite a down March. Here’s the full look at the Q1 performance of 8 asset classes. Click to enlarge Click to enlarge (Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.) Source: All ETF performance data from Morningstar.com Sources: Managed Futures = SGA CTA Index, Cash = 13 week T-Bill rate, Bonds = Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (NYSEARCA: BND ), Hedge Funds= IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy (NYSEARCA: QAI ) Commodities = iShares GSCI ETF (NYSEARCA: GSG ); Real Estate = iShares DJ Real Estate ETF ( IYR ); World Stocks = iShares MSCI ACWI ex US Index Fund ETF (NASDAQ: ACWX ); US Stocks = SPDR S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY )

Driving In Neutral

By Neuberger Berman Asset Allocation Committee So far, 2016 has been characterized by stomach churning swerves in market direction with little actual change in levels. When the Asset Allocation Committee recently met to update our views for the coming 12 months, most participants felt that a variety of factors was in effect, setting a speed limit on big directional market moves. The most obvious of those factors is the Federal Reserve (Fed), which now looks set to deliver only two rate hikes this year, when as recently as December the market expected as many as four. FOMC policy makers seem willing to let the dollar act as a substitute for further tightening while they await stronger economic data and evidence of core inflation growth that’s closer to their 2 percent target. The coupling of oil and equity prices is acting as another governor on higher valuations, making it hard for risk assets to sustain advances. Elsewhere, other major central banks are seemingly stuck in neutral against an uninspiring economic backdrop. European Central Bank (ECB) chief Mario Draghi received a chilly response in suggesting no further rate cuts would be coming after unveiling a new easing package in early March. In Japan, there is a genuine crisis of confidence in quantitative easing efforts now that negative rates have only produced similarly negative feedback. Meanwhile, China is caught between the need for additional stimulus and adherence to its reform agenda, increasing the risk of a significant devaluation of the yuan. In light of these constraints, the Committee believes that the recent rebound in equity prices, while welcome, needs evidence of rising earnings and improving economic fundamentals to continue. At the same time, we observe that the market has been experiencing rapid rotations among sectors and across asset classes, creating significant divergences that may yield opportunities to add value within and across individual categories. As such, with little visibility over the coming three to six months, we favor an approach of continued selectivity in pursuing risk asset opportunities through trades within asset classes rather than large directional bets, and to wait for pullbacks to consider adding to positions. Outside of non-U.S. developed market equities, the Committee maintained its neutral stance on U.S. and emerging market equity and adjusted its outlook for master limited partnerships (MLPs) to a neutral position. We are maintaining an underweight view of most developed market government securities because of our view that low yields do not compensate for the risk of higher rates, and remained cautious on emerging market debt with a bias toward hard currency sovereigns. Global Equities Among Few “Slightly Overweight” Calls History has shown that U.S. equities (as measured by the S&P 500) have often benefited when the Fed is in the midst of a tightening cycle. The main reason is that corporate earnings tend to rise as the economy strengthens, offsetting the impact of higher borrowing costs. But if you look at what’s happening during this cycle, average price-to-earnings ratios have declined by a full percentage point in the face of tepid to flat earnings growth. This fact was not lost on the Committee, which voted to maintain its neutral stance on U.S. equities even as most members expressed their belief that the country will avoid another recession for the time being. On the other hand, the Committee believes that global equities–and particularly those in developed markets outside the U.S.–may provide more opportunities over the coming 12 months. Despite the latest ECB posturing on rates, evidence is growing that past stimulus is providing a tailwind for growth. Business confidence continues to be decent, credit demand is rising, and corporate profits have yet to recover to post-crisis levels as they have done in the U.S. Among fixed-income assets, the Committee continues to favor high yield given current prevailing yields and the outlook for credit quality. But given the likelihood for ongoing fallout from weakness in the energy sector, we continue to prefer short-duration issues and higher-rated credits, at least for the near term. We feel clients looking for additional fixed-income exposure may want to consider shifting their exposures in assets such as core European bonds, burdened by negative yields, to high yield and select portions of the emerging market debt universe. Move to “Neutral” on MLPs The move to neutral from slightly overweight on MLPs was a difficult one given our prevailing belief that investors had unfairly punished the asset class amid ongoing weakness in energy markets. Many market participants have been caught off-guard by both the depth and persistence of that weakness, and the Committee feels that further declines in commodity prices in recent months have increased the potential for additional restructuring in the energy sector and added to the downside risks faced by midstream operators in particular. Broader Array of Risks The Committee agreed that a step-devaluation of the Chinese yuan remains the centerpiece risk in the investment outlook over the coming 12 months, but other downside scenarios featured more prominently. Chief among these was the risk that the Fed proceeds with tightening too quickly and undermines confidence in market liquidity, and that emerging markets such as Brazil create a contagion effect for developed market risk assets. Political risks are also rising, including the possibility of “Brexit” as the UK holds a June referendum on membership in the EU, and uncertainty around the U.S. presidential election. Driving in neutral can still get you down the road, but not without shifting into “drive” from time to time. In the months ahead, we believe it will be important to be vigilant for opportunities to add during market pullbacks and pursue trades within broad asset categories when the associated risks are acceptable. We believe the value of active management may be more evident during periods when asset allocators have little cause for conviction, and we anticipate that a firm hand on the wheel over the coming months will be key in helping navigate this uneven terrain. This material is provided for informational purposes only and nothing herein constitutes investment, legal, accounting or tax advice, or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold a security. Information is obtained from sources deemed reliable, but there is no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, completeness or reliability. All information is current as of the date of this material and is subject to change without notice. Any views or opinions expressed may not reflect those of the firm as a whole. Neuberger Berman products and services may not be available in all jurisdictions or to all client types. Investing entails risks, including possible loss of principal. Investments in hedge funds and private equity are speculative and involve a higher degree of risk than more traditional investments. Investments in hedge funds and private equity are intended for sophisticated investors only. Indexes are unmanaged and are not available for direct investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The views expressed herein are generally those of Neuberger Berman’s Asset Allocation Committee which comprises professionals across multiple disciplines, including equity and fixed income strategists and portfolio managers. The Asset Allocation Committee reviews and sets long-term asset allocation models, establishes preferred near-term tactical asset class allocations and, upon request, reviews asset allocations for large diversified mandates and makes client-specific asset allocation recommendations. The views and recommendations of the Asset Allocation Committee may not reflect the views of the firm as a whole and Neuberger Berman advisors and portfolio managers may recommend or take contrary positions to the views and recommendation of the Asset Allocation Committee. The Asset Allocation Committee views do not constitute a prediction or projection of future events or future market behavior. This material may include estimates, outlooks, projections and other “forward-looking statements.” Due to a variety of factors, actual events or market behavior may differ significantly from any views expressed. A bond’s value may fluctuate based on interest rates, market conditions, credit quality and other factors. You may have a gain or a loss if you sell your bonds prior to maturity. Of course, bonds are subject to the credit risk of the issuer. If sold prior to maturity, municipal securities are subject to gain/losses based on the level of interest rates, market conditions and the credit quality of the issuer. Income may be subject to the alternative minimum tax (NYSE: AMT ) and/or state and local taxes, based on the investor’s state of residence. High-yield bonds, also known as “junk bonds,” are considered speculative and carry a greater risk of default than investment-grade bonds. Their market value tends to be more volatile than investment-grade bonds and may fluctuate based on interest rates, market conditions, credit quality, political events, currency devaluation and other factors. High Yield Bonds are not suitable for all investors and the risks of these bonds should be weighed against the potential rewards. Neither Neuberger Berman nor its employees provide tax or legal advice. You should contact a tax advisor regarding the suitability of tax-exempt investments in your portfolio. Government Bonds and Treasury Bills are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States Government as to the timely payment of principal and interest. Investing in the stocks of even the largest companies involves all the risks of stock market investing, including the risk that they may lose value due to overall market or economic conditions. Small- and mid-capitalization stocks are more vulnerable to financial risks and other risks than stocks of larger companies. They also trade less frequently and in lower volume than larger company stocks, so their market prices tend to be more volatile. Investing in foreign securities involves greater risks than investing in securities of U.S. issuers, including currency fluctuations, interest rates, potential political instability, restrictions on foreign investors, less regulation and less market liquidity. The sale or purchase of commodities is usually carried out through futures contracts or options on futures, which involve significant risks, such as volatility in price, high leverage and illiquidity. This material is being issued on a limited basis through various global subsidiaries and affiliates of Neuberger Berman Group LLC. Please visit www.nb.com/disclosure-global-communications for the specific entities and jurisdictional limitations and restrictions. © 2009-2016 Neuberger Berman LLC. | All rights reserved

Q1 ETF Asset Report: Safe Havens Pop; Currency Hedged Drop

The first quarter of 2016 was all about heightened global growth concerns, oscillating oil prices and ambiguity over the interest rate policy of the Federal Reserve. In particular, the acute plunge in oil prices took a toll on a number of assets worldwide. Most economies across the world, be it China, Japan, the Euro zone or the otherwise improving U.S. economy, were harried by fears of a slowdown. Most of the central Bank meetings turned out dovish and oil producers tried to strike an output freeze deal. All these efforts helped the broader market to recover in March and end the quarter on the positive note. Let’s see how a ghastly start and an upbeat ending to Q1 impacted asset growth in the ETF industry (as of March 29, 2016) (per etf.com ): It Was All-About Gold A flight to safety following a spike in volatility brightened the demand for the safe-haven asset gold (despite deteriorating fundamentals). Investors should note that a round of downbeat U.S. economic data in the early part of Q1 and the possibility of a slower-than-expected rate hike trail undermined the greenback in the first quarter, pushing most commodities ETFs (including gold) higher. Not only bullion, gold mining stocks also received considerable investor attention in the quarter. As a result, the fund tracking the gold mining equities, the Market Vectors Gold Miners ETF (NYSEARCA: GDX ), emerged as the winner in asset accumulation in Q1. GDX scooped up about $6.30 billion in assets while the yellow metal SPDR Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: GLD ) pulled in $5.15 billion in assets in Q1 (read: Gold Mining ETF Investing 101 ). U.S. Treasury bonds: Another Safe Refuge Needless to say, U.S. treasury bonds were the other winners as these offer safety. Global growth issues dragged down yields on 10-year Treasury notes by 43 bps to 1.81% (as of March 29, 2016) in the quarter, leading Treasury valuation to soar. Thanks to this trend, the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: TLT ) and the iShares 7-10 Year Treasury Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: IEF ) amassed about $2.55 billion and $1.86 billion in the quarter (read: 5 ETFs for Portfolio Safety, Stability and Diversification ). Junk Bond ETFs Garner Attention The drive for high income and occasional improvement in the oil patch brought junk bond ETFs back into business in Q1. Plus, reasonable valuation after two soft years fetched substantial investors’ money in the quarter. Investors poured more than $2 billion and $1.7 billion respectively in the SPDR Barclays Capital High Yield Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: JNK ) and the iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: LQD ) . Apart from these, the iShares Core Total U.S. Bond Market ETF (NYSEARCA: AGG ) gathered over $3.4 billion in assets in Q1, being the third seed in the asset-gatherer list. Japan Currency Hedged-Equities ETFs: Justified Loser Currency-hedging technique failed in the quarter due to a falling U.S. dollar. This was truer for the Japan equities, as yen added more strength by virtue of its safe haven nature. Plus, Japan is an export-driven economy, being more susceptible to this adverse currency translation. This sort of movement in currencies must haven dented currency-hedged Japanese equities ETFs like the WisdomTree Japan Hedged Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: DXJ ) which has seen assets worth $2.57 billion flowing out. The problem was the same with the WisdomTree Europe Hedged Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: HEDJ ) . The fund lost $2.11 billion in assets in Q1. U.S. Equities Tumble In tune with the other risky assets, investors fled the U.S. equities’ space. The trend was more pronounced for growth equities ETFs. Tech laden Nasdaq-based PowerShares QQQ Trust ETF (NASDAQ: QQQ ) lost about $2.04 billion in the quarter, taking the third position in the asset losers’ list. The ETF was followed by the iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (NYSEARCA: IWF ) which redeemed about $1.96 billion in assets. Other growth sector ETFs like the First Trust NYSE Arca Biotechnology Index ETF (NYSEARCA: FBT ) and the First Trust DJ Internet Index ETF (NYSEARCA: FDN ) saw outflows of $1.76 billion and $1.32 billion in assets, respectively. Finally, the ultra-popular SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) also entered the losers’ list. The fund lost around $1.23 billion in assets in the quarter. Link to the original post on Zacks.com