Skip to main content
Monthly Archives

May 2021

Inflation part I – A Key Battle Ground for Markets

By Insights - Financial adviser, Insights - Institutional investor

The battle ground for investors for the remainder of 2021 looks likely to be US inflation, and the associated trajectory of interest rates. Interest rates after all were the saviour of growth assets in 2020, the Fed triggering an almighty equity market recovery inconceivable without its heavy handed intervention.

In the first note in our inflation series we cover the key issues and estimate forward returns on fixed income.

US CPI MoM changes: latest reading of 0.8% most significant since 2013 taper tantrum

The presence of upward readings on inflation has started with the elevated print for April CPI, of 0.8% MoM, significantly above consensus and the highest monthly increase for years. The debate around rates depends upon where one stands with regards to nature of the elevated inflation prints, and their persistence.

Of course, the pick up in inflation isn’t surprising; firstly, base effects, namely the fact that prices were so depressed a year ago as the lockdown hit that a “return to normal” will inevitably involve a significant increase in prices; second, fiscal stimulus.

To understand the role of fiscal stimulus in driving inflation requires a thought experiment: if one were to distribute one million dollars into every bank account in Australia, what would happen to consumer prices? While the magnitudes are naturally a good deal smaller, there can be no doubt as to the inflationary nature of government payments. And this differs necessarily from monetary stimulus, which favours the wealthy with the capacity for increasing their debt to equity.

Now that there is a unanimous acceptance that some inflationary pressures are inevitable, the key issue remains whether these pressures will abate in 2022, or the pre-cursor for a more prolonged and structural rise in prices. For asset allocators on a five-year view, this is the key question.

Inflation is typically associated with negative equity market returns (plot of annual equity market returns (vertical) vs CPI % change (horizontal)) 1973-

The layout of this red hot debate is as follows:

In the red corner: By describing inflationary pressures as transitory, the Fed is alluding to the fact that many of these elevated CPI prints are quarterly one-offs, that will eventually mean revert and drive the index back down to where it has been since the end of the GFC. This perspective justifies their stance on monetary policy. In addition to this, they have stated a shift towards outcomes and away from forecasting in setting monetary policy.

In the blue corner, by contrast we have many institutional investors, mainly hedge funds. Their views are being aggressively vocalised on podcasts and tv interviews, are staunchly of the view that the one-offs could become into structural issues, as the electorate become increasingly addicted to policies favouring mass handouts. This looks akin to the early 70s period, and much of the commentary alludes to this.

Inflation (horizontal axis) is also typically associated with lower profit margins (vertical axis)

Our base case remains that inflation is transitory. The risks however to being wrongfooted are enormous. This is because, as we mentioned, the Fed is focused on outcomes not forecasts.

This means they will wait for inflation to surprise majorly on the upside before acting to fend it off with rate rises. And by then, much of the damage might have been done. Company profit margins will get crimped by wage rises and increased input costs, and disposal incomes for many of the less well off in particular evaporate as the cost of basic items rise. This is the key downside risk for markets.

US Fed Funds Rate (Vertical) typically keeps up with CPI (horizontal) basis, Fed has signalled it will wait to raise rates till after the event?

Q1 2022 looks to be the key data period to determine the stickiness of CPI data. By that stage, the COVID crisis and lockdowns will be rolling out of sample, and we will start to get a sense of whether the supply-demand imbalances have started to reach an equilibrium, or whether 2021 was a sign for what was likely to come – and ultimately whether the red corner or the blue corner is right.

Up until that point, we expect numerous inflation scares to continue, as anxiety levels reach fever pitch. This is especially true of northern hemisphere economies, where lockdowns and distress have been far greater, and where the demand and associated inflation impulse in the second half of 2021 is likely to be strongest.

The US yield curve illustrates how investors are pricing in the trajectory of rates over the next 15 years: we have super-imposed where we think the yield curve should trade, and where it does trade. Despite the sell-off in February, bond market duration looks overbought. As a result, we think it will underperform cash and Australian duration – which is priced far more fairly.

The current US yield curve (orange) is expected to shift up over the next five years (grey) according to the market, our view is that this shift and steepening could be more pronounced (yellow)

In contrast the Australian YC looks much more fairly priced, right on our long term projections.

In Summary, we have a preference for Australian sovereign bonds, although are expected returns are low over global bonds. Global bonds are still not fully reflecting the economic recovery we expect in 2021 let alone any inflation. We have global bonds sharply underperforming cash.

Resonant Asset Management Pty Ltd, ABN 41 619 513 076, trading as Resonant, AFSL No 511759.

Disclaimer: The Information within this article does not constitute personal financial advice. In preparing this document, Resonant has not taken into account your particular goals and objectives, anticipated resources, current situation or attitudes. You should therefore consider the appropriateness of the material, in light of your own objectives, financial situation or needs, before taking any action. You should also obtain a copy of the PDS of any products referenced before making any decisions. The data, information and research commentary in this document (“Information”) may be derived from information obtained from other parties which cannot be verified by Resonant and therefore is not guaranteed to be complete or accurate, and Resonant accepts no liability for errors or omissions. Resonant does not guarantee the performance of any fund, stock or the return of an investor’s capital. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.

The Importance of Investment Adviser Value Proposition

By Insights - Financial adviser

Few would argue that the financial advice industry is undergoing one of its most significant periods of change since its inception. Old business models are dying and new ones are being created.

As is the case with any industry going through transition, industry participants are re-evaluating their service models and their value proposition(s). For financial advisers this is particularly true when it comes to their investment offering.

Here, advisers are facing a number of competing forces. Firstly, the heightened compliance burden across the industry is driving advisers to look at how they can better streamline their investment service offerings, with efficiency and scalability being key considerations. Secondly, Best Interest Duties have resulted in a significant increase in the focus on the “all in” costs to clients. While some may argue that this heightened focus on costs comes at the expense of other benefits, it cannot be ignored. Finally, and most importantly, there is the ever present desire from the majority of advisers to continue to do the best by their clients.

One key outcome has been the shift by advisers towards the use of ETF’s. As most advisers know, ETF’s provide cost effective exposure to underlying asset classes via a listed vehicle that is liquid and easy to access. They are also a perceived antidote to underperformance, with most ETF’s simply tracking a benchmark index.

While ETF’s are an almost essential part of a cost effective diversified portfolio these days, the shift towards completely “passive” portfolios constructed solely of ETF’s does come with some significant trade-offs. Below we talk through some of the considerations:

  • Adviser Value Proposition – As advised investment portfolios across the industry become more homogenous, so too do the benefits to clients. For example, an advice firm may have created a superior risk assessment process, or an adviser may know her client’s core needs much better than her competitors. But can they truly demonstrate they have provided additional value when the resulting portfolios look identical to their competitors across the industry at every risk level? Differentiation for differentiations sake is never an optimal outcome. Conversely however, a one-size-fits-all across an entire industry is rarely an optimal outcome either.
  • The commoditisation of portfolios – Along with a lack of differentiation, comes the commoditisation of portfolios, which limits the ability of advisers to tailor their advice to their client base. It also ultimately results in disruption. In other countries ETF providers are already growing their direct-to-consumer offerings. This is now starting to happen here. The chart below shows the growth of direct-to-consumer “robo” offerings in the US:

Source: CB Insights

  • There will always be a degree of subjectivity in constructing diversified portfolios – While the catch-cry “just buy an ETF” is increasingly heard on social media, it is not a panacea to all the risks that come with active management. This is because there is no generally accepted index for multi-asset class portfolios. So even the process of selecting/weighting ETF’s themselves is an active management decision. Hence investing in a highly commoditised or standardised ETF-only offering still comes with the risk of underperformance vs alternative offerings.

In summary, advisers need to take into account a number of factors when constructing an investment value proposition. Generally speaking, ETF’s are a valuable tool and are likely to form a key component. However, for advisers that want to create a client centric service offering, some deeper thought is required.

Resonant Asset Management Pty Ltd, ABN 41 619 513 076, trading as Resonant, AFSL No 511759.

Disclaimer: The Information within this article does not constitute personal financial advice. In preparing this document, Resonant has not taken into account your particular goals and objectives, anticipated resources, current situation or attitudes. You should therefore consider the appropriateness of the material, in light of your own objectives, financial situation or needs, before taking any action. You should also obtain a copy of the PDS of any products referenced before making any decisions. The data, information and research commentary in this document (“Information”) may be derived from information obtained from other parties which cannot be verified by Resonant and therefore is not guaranteed to be complete or accurate, and Resonant accepts no liability for errors or omissions. Resonant does not guarantee the performance of any fund, stock or the return of an investor’s capital. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.