Category: Chart of the Week

Private Credit: Consistency is Key

We are all familiar with adages like “consistency is the key to success” and “excellence is mundane”. For private credit, consistent returns achieved in a straightforward way bring these statements to life. Recent data1 has shown that from 2004 to 2021, U.S. private credit has generated positive or flat performance throughout the economic cycle – from expansion, to late cycle cooling, through a recession and into a turnaround. The same cannot be said for U.S. high yield and leveraged loans, which have historically contracted during recessionary periods. Private credit has outperformed both high yield and leveraged loans during expansionary and late cycle stages, only underperforming in the turnaround phase when the ISM Manufacturing Index is less than 50 and rising. The straightforward, perhaps ordinary nature of these loans, loans to businesses from non-bank lenders, makes the asset class even more interesting in our opinion. Marquette advocates allocating to private credit in order to capture two premiums – yield premium and structure premium – which are especially compelling in today’s low interest rate environment. Moreover, the data shown in the chart above gives quantifiable evidence that the asset class is also a solid diversifier to a traditional fixed income allocation. We continue to find attractive managers and strategies in the market for investors who already have a dedicated private credit allocation and would be happy to further discuss with others interested in the space.

1https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/global/en/insights/market-insights/guide-to-alternatives/mi-guide-to-alternatives.pdf

Print PDF > Private Credit – Consistency is Key

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

Taking the PEPP Out of the Eurozone’s Recovery?

Amid concerns over the Delta variant and signs of a sharp slowdown in the global economic rebound, many central banks have signaled that they will keep monetary policy loose over the near-to-medium term. U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, at the annual Jackson Hole summit on August 25th, maintained that rate hikes were not imminent. Though, on the spending front, Powell did indicate tapering bond purchases may be on the horizon, as long as economic progress continues. We expect to hear a similar narrative at this Thursday’s European Central Bank meeting, with a subtle caveat. Given how well the European economy has rebounded, the ECB is expected to slow the pace of their €1.85 trillion asset-buying program — the Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme (PEPP) — in the fourth quarter.

The chart above shows monthly net bond purchases made under the PEPP since its inception in March 2020. There was a substantial injection in the first four months of the pandemic, which then decreased as the first wave waned and lockdown measures relaxed. Bond purchases remained at or below €70 billion for the next seven months. However, in response to rising bond yields, the ECB increased PEPP purchases in March 2021 and has kept them at a higher pace since. At the coming meeting, ECB officials are likely to agree to trim PEPP bond purchases to roughly €60 billion per month for the remainder of 2021, a 25% drop from the current pace of €80 billion per month.

What impact will this modest tightening have on the European Union’s economic recovery? The pan-European market benchmark, the STOXX 600 Index, posted its seventh straight month of gains in August, the longest winning streak since 2013, on the back of strong corporate earnings, lower unemployment, an adult population that is 70% fully vaccinated, and continued accommodative fiscal measures. We expect ECB hawks to argue for the need to curtail the current inflation trajectory, citing its potential to outpace expectations given supply chain bottlenecks and resurgent household demand. Inflation, as measured by the Eurozone HCIP, was 3% at August month-end, above the ECB’s 2% target. On the contrary, more dovish members will likely be more concerned with ramping up the existing ongoing asset purchase program once PEPP ends. As COVID-19 variants test the need for further abatement measures and restrictions in Europe and around the world, central banks are under increased scrutiny. Monetary policy decisions, particularly the pace of tapering and rate increases, will have lasting effects on global markets for the remainder of 2021 and the next several years.

Print PDF > Taking the PEPP Out of the Eurozone’s Recovery?

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

The Turn of the SKEW

Domestic stock indices have rebounded from pandemic-induced lows exhibited in the spring of 2020 with relative ease, and U.S. equity market volatility has remained largely muted since that time as a result. The CBOE Volatility Index (“VIX”), a popular measure of expected volatility in the S&P 500, ended August at a level of 16.6, below the index’s 30-year average of 19.5. Based solely on recent performance and volatility levels of broad-based indices, the investor outlook for U.S. stocks going forward appears mostly positive. That said, other gauges of sentiment may indicate more discord among market participants. The CBOE SKEW Index (“SKEW”) is one such barometer. Unlike the VIX, which uses at-the-money S&P 500 Index options to assess expectations of near-term market fluctuations, the SKEW examines the implied volatility of out-of-the-money options to gauge perceived U.S. equity market tail-risk, or the chances of an extreme price change in the index. The SKEW Index ended August at a level of 155.9 after reaching an all-time high of 170.6 in late June of this year — both figures are well above the 30-year average for the index of 120.5. The recent upward movement in the SKEW indicates that investors have grown increasingly wary of an outsized move in domestic equity indices in the last several months.

It is important to note that an elevated SKEW Index is not necessarily a harbinger of a tail-risk event. Since 1990, the average 30-day return for the S&P 500 Index subsequent to the SKEW spiking into the 90th percentile of its history was roughly 0.9%. The inverse is also true — extreme S&P 500 returns are not always precipitated by an elevated SKEW Index. In the two years leading up to the Tech Bubble Crash and Global Financial Crisis, the SKEW averaged levels of 115.4 and 116.6, respectively, both of which are below the long-term mean for the index. All of that said, there are obvious risks currently facing markets that could lead to pullbacks and may be contributing to heightened SKEW measures. For instance, valuations of most U.S. equity indices remain elevated relative to historical norms and heightened inflation could ultimately prove less transient than currently expected by market participants. Additionally, the S&P 500 Index has experienced a maximum drawdown of just 4.1% so far this year, well below the median annual drawdown for the benchmark of 9.7% going back 30 years. While this data point alone does not portend a correction, a near-term drawdown is certainly possible given the myriad factors at play. In light of the current landscape, we believe it is imperative for investors to remain diversified across the asset class spectrum in order to gain exposure to a potential continuation of recent positive equity performance while also helping to protect portfolios in the event of a correction.

Print PDF > The Turn of the SKEW

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

What Does the Labor Shortage Mean for Inflation?

Employers have faced a number of challenges throughout the COVID-19 pandemic — most recently, a labor shortage. As of the end of June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported a record high of more than 10 million job openings (including either newly created or unoccupied positions where an employer is taking specific actions to fill those positions), and as of the end of July, 8.7 million people looking for employment (people who are without work, currently available for work and seeking work), creating a disconnect in the labor market.

While this is not the first time job openings have exceeded the number of people looking for work, the imbalance is more meaningful now as companies attempt to fulfill pent-up demand caused by the pandemic with sharply less labor availability. To help combat this shortage, states have started to cut unemployment benefits, though these actions so far seem to have had minimal effect. Employers must now find a way to incentivize workers to apply to openings and accept offers. This is likely to put upward pressure not only on wages but on consumer prices. In order to protect profitability, companies will have to pass on the additional costs to the consumer, adding to inflationary pressures. While many signs point to higher inflation being transitory, the labor shortage — which could continue even after extra unemployment benefits expire, given demographic trends and a shift toward the gig economy — could be a longer-term issue. We will continue to monitor inflation, its underlying drivers, and the potential impacts to our clients’ portfolios carefully.

Print PDF > What Does the Labor Shortage Mean for Inflation?

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

Where is Inflation Headed?

Despite a number of commodity prices, including lumber, corn, and pork, retreating from recent highs, inflation remains a key focus for investors, especially as the Delta variant rages on and vaccination rates slow. Our chart this week looks at what the data can tell us about where inflation is headed.

Actual inflation, as measured by year-over-year growth in the headline Consumer Price Index (CPI), is shown in green in the chart above. CPI ran hot in 2008 just before the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), fell into negative territory in 2009, and then peaked twice before turning a corner, declining in 2011 and normalizing from 2012 to 2014.

The market’s expectations for average annual inflation are shown above in purple and teal, over the next two and five years, respectively. The breakeven inflation rate measures the difference in yield between U.S. Treasury bonds and Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) of the same maturity. This difference is the return that the TIPS provide to protect from inflation, or the inflation rate where an investor would be indifferent between owning the two instruments.

What do these three lines tell us? First, actual CPI does loosely follow, on a lag, the two-year and five-year breakeven rates. Both breakeven rates fell and recovered ahead of CPI in 2008 and 2009. The difference between the two-year breakeven and five-year breakeven also provides critical information. In the post-2008 GFC recovery, the five-year breakeven remained higher than the two-year breakeven from 2009 to 2011, with the market expecting inflation to rise and be higher on average over the next five years than over the next two years as the global economy continued to recover. In 2011, the five-year breakeven fell below the two-year breakeven, showing that the market began to forecast that average inflation over the next five years would be lower than average inflation over the next two years. Actual CPI peaked not long after that, declining and normalizing from 2011 to 2014.

What could these indicators mean for inflation going forward? Actual CPI is again running hot at 5.4% in both June and July. However, the two-year breakeven, despite characteristically falling faster than the five-year breakeven at the height of the COVID panic in 1Q20, is already higher than the five-year breakeven, a leading indicator of CPI peaking and something that didn’t happen after the GFC until 2011. Additionally, both the two-year and five-year breakeven appear to be plateauing. Both breakeven rates have been fluctuating around 2.5%, meaning the market believes annual inflation will settle around an average 2.5% over both the next two and five years, supporting the idea that heightened near-term inflation is more transitory. While this market-based data does have its limitations, it is a helpful input as we look to help our clients prepare for the future.

Print PDF > Where is Inflation Headed?

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

Chinese Equities Sold Off in July

In 2020, China was a top performer in the global equity market, returning 29.5%. In 2021, however, Chinese equities have struggled relative to peers. In July, the MSCI China Index lost 13.8%, dragging the broader MSCI Emerging Markets Index to a 6.7% loss for the month.

On July 23rd, the Chinese government, as part of its efforts aimed at boosting a declining birth rate, announced that private for-profit education companies were no longer allowed to make a profit. Among other restrictions, these companies are now required to transform into non-profit entities. As a result, two of the largest education companies — New Oriental Education and TAL Education — were down 73.5% and 75.9%, respectively, in July. This dramatic change is a recent event in a series of regulatory actions that have been taken by the Chinese government over the last nine months. Previous changes predominately impacted internet-based businesses.

Chinese equities have sold off as investors assess the risks of the new regulatory climate and the potential impact to future profitability of several key industries. From here, the market will likely remain jittery on Chinese stocks, especially within regulated industries. However, this is not a new phenomenon. We have seen the Chinese government increase regulations in the past after periods of unchecked growth. The online gaming industry, for example, came under pressure in 2018 when the Chinese government imposed a curfew for minors as a means of limiting gaming consumption. In those past instances, the market recalibrated to the new regulatory environment and the resulting winners and losers were identified. We anticipate a similar outcome in this case.

Print PDF > Chinese Equities Sold Off in July

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

What Might an Earnings Peak Mean?

S&P 500 earnings growth of nearly 30% year-to-date has completely eclipsed that of the last 10 years. This is in stark contrast to the previous two years, when 18% and 31% market gains were almost entirely driven by multiple expansion. The 2021 rebound in earnings follows last year’s sharp COVID-induced decline and has some investors wondering what an almost inevitable slowdown from here could mean.

As of the end of June, FactSet analysts had estimated second quarter earnings to be up 63.1% year-over-year. Of the 345 S&P 500 constituents that have reported so far, approximately 87% have surprised to the upside. Despite this strength at the bottom line, many of these companies have seen their stock prices fall post-reporting, implying true expectations, following the historic 41% run over the last year, were actually higher. Reopening optimism started to drive stocks, and multiples, higher in late 2020, ahead of earnings growth, and now investors are trying to determine how much future earnings growth is already priced in. We saw something similar after the Global Financial Crisis in 2009 and 2010. As the economy began its initial recovery, strong returns in 2009 preempted 40%+ earnings growth, and a sharp correction in multiples, in 2010. Importantly, in the years that followed, despite a slowdown in earnings growth, the market continued to post positive annual returns until the late-year drawdown in 2018.

This year, we may see earnings growth peak in the second quarter, but it isn’t necessarily cause for concern. Company earnings are expected to remain stable as regions continue to reopen and overcome supply and demand shocks. And, more importantly, active investment managers who have struggled to keep up with a sentiment-driven market could see an improved stock picking opportunity set. To the extent optimistic exuberance is in the rearview, stocks should be more driven by company-specific fundamentals than by macro-centric tailwinds, a positive for many of our recommended managers.

Print PDF > What Might an Earnings Peak Mean?

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

Private Equity Staying Rational with Fund Sizes

Despite strong fundraising numbers in recent years, private equity managers in the U.S. have stayed consistent with subsequent fund size step-ups. Through the first half of 2021, 72% of private equity managers launched funds with increased size targets, in line with the average over the last decade. The median fund size step-up in the first half of the year was 48%, modestly above the 40% average increase over the last decade, but in line with the industry average over the last five years.

Fund size is a critical factor for private equity investors to consider, as it can push a manager outside their strategy, require additional resources, require purchasing larger businesses that are more efficient, and/or take managers longer to deploy. That said, modest fund size growth is healthy for a private equity organization, allowing for internal growth, giving existing investors the ability to scale their allocations, and creating opportunities to bring new investors into the fund. Risks related to increased fund size can be mitigated by managers via scaled resources, targeting more portfolio companies, reducing the amount of co-investment offered, and/or reducing leverage — all things we look for in our due diligence process. We believe modest growth is healthy and to be encouraged if done responsibly, but we do carefully evaluate the magnitude of a fund size increase relative to our assessment of a manager’s capacity and strategy.

Print PDF > Private Equity Staying Rational with Fund Sizes

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

PE Tapping Public Market Strength

Private equity exits are set to break record numbers in 2021. In 2020, there were 947 exits worth $367 billion, and in 2019 there were 1,111 for a total $323 billion. Already this year, in the first half of 2021, there have been 676 exits for $356 billion. At this pace, the year is on track to surpass both the previous highs of 1,328 exits in 2015 and $421 billion in exit value in 2018.

Along with the number of exits increasing overall, the percentage of exits via IPO has increased significantly this year. In 2019, the fear of a recession kept private companies from wanting to go public. Once a private company hits the market, PE sponsors keep their shares, now subject to public market dynamics, for an average of three years. Risk of a looming recession or lack of confidence in the public market can deter private company owners from pursuing this path. Alternatively, the increased use of public market exits year-to-date may represent private owners’ more bullish outlook on the market. We will continue to look to leading indicators like private market sentiment to help inform our own market expectations and client recommendations.

Print PDF > PE Tapping Public Market Strength

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

Welcome Back…to the Grind

Uncertainty lingers in the office sector against a backdrop of extended office closures across the U.S. Average occupancy rates have dropped over the past year and net absorption further declined in the first quarter of 2021. The national average vacancy rate for the office sector rose to 16% in Q1 2021, up 100 basis points quarter-over-quarter and 370 basis points year-over-year.¹ The ongoing rate of deterioration in office fundamentals has been somewhat surprising given the rebound in the labor market as the economy has reopened. Although office rents have been sticky so far, questions remain about the longer-term demand for office space, with some property owners offering leasing concessions in primary markets hit hardest by vacancies.

The second half of the year should provide some clarity with the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in full swing and more and more employees expected to return to work. The long-term extent of remote working on office demand is the biggest outstanding question. Average days in the office has fallen from 4.6 days a week to 3.6 days a week.² Employers are re-evaluating office space needs, looking to balance a flexible work environment with the benefits of workplace collaboration and productivity. Rising new supply combined with more than a year of minimal leasing activity will also continue to put downward pressure on office rents and occupancies in the near term. From here, we may see office demand stabilize, setting the stage for an uptick in leasing activity, or we may realize we are facing a new normal. We will continue to look for and recommend to our clients real estate managers that we believe are best positioned to navigate this evolving dynamic.

Print PDF > Welcome Back…to the Grind

¹ Cushman & Wakefield, KPMG, The 2021 KPMG CEO Outlook Pulse Survey, Clarion Partners Investment Research, June 2021.
² TA Realty, Defining Themes of 2021

 

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.