John Lynch, Mid-Atlantic
David Roda, CFA, Southeast
Cam Hinds, CFA, Great Lakes
Marc Doss, CFA, CFP, California, Nevada
Michael Serio, CFA, CAIA, Mt. Northwest
Sean McCarthy, CFA, Southwest
Kei Sasaki, CFA, Northeast
In this Monthly Market Advisor:
The Federal Reserve (Fed) has implemented innovative strategies attempting to spur consumption, lending, and investment since the financial crisis in 2008-2009. The anticipated spike in economic activity and inflation, however, has been slow to develop. Rather, the primary beneficiaries of this monetary largess have been the owners of riskier assets, such as stocks. Consequently, monetary policymakers find themselves in a conundrum; economic data support the removal of extraordinary measures, yet the combination of low/negative interest rates globally and the seeming dependency of the performance of riskier assets on historically low interest rates suggests that market volatility may escalate even with the slightest constriction of monetary conditions. Investors should take note as diversified and active strategies are likely to benefit as the Fed gradually shifts to a normalized policy.
The Fed: Historical perspective and response to the 2008-2009 financial crisis
The Fed was established in 1914 in an attempt to prevent another financial crisis similar to that experienced in 1907-1908. After several iterations throughout the ensuing century, the modern day Fed has gained independence from the U.S. Treasury and operates under a "dual mandate" of ensuring maximum employment and stable prices. In order to accomplish these objectives, monetary policymakers traditionally established a target for the overnight lending federal funds rate and through open market operations, the purchase and sale of U.S. government securities aimed at keeping interest rates around target levels.
Given the deflationary and global scope of the financial crisis of 2008-2009, however, monetary policymakers had to adjust policy even further, enacting emergency measures, including taking the overnight lending rate to zero and employing three separate quantitative easing (QE) programs. QE is an unconventional policy tool whereby the central bank purchased extensive amounts of government securities in order to lower interest rates and increase the amount of money circulating in the economy. By transferring electronic reserves to primary dealer depository institutions, the Fed essentially "printed money" and placed the purchased assets on its balance sheet, which expanded from approximately $800 billion in the summer of 2008 to $4.5 trillion today. Even though the final QE3 program ended more than two years ago, the Fed has committed to maintaining an elevated balance sheet by taking the proceeds from maturing securities and purchasing newly issued government bonds.
The results of these extraordinary policy measures have been mixed. After eight years, economic growth and inflation remain below historic trends in the U.S. Elsewhere, the combination of China’s transition to a consumption/services economy and the fallout from the financial crisis continues to weigh on economic and financial market activity in developed and emerging nations. Another challenge throughout much of the developed world is that fiscal legislators have not enacted growth-oriented policies commensurate with accommodative monetary stimulus. As a result, confidence in elected officials has waned and boosted support for non-traditional candidates in the U.S. and Europe.
One area where the effects of monetary policy have been indisputable is in the performance of risk assets, like stocks. The S&P 500 Index has climbed in excess of +225 percent since the lows of the 2008 financial crisis,1 while sovereign and corporate bonds have enjoyed solid returns. In contrast, the lack of investor conviction in hard assets, such as commodities, has been evident with a discrepancy in performance between precious and industrial metals.
The surge in global liquidity has also boosted passive investment strategies, where the rising tide has lifted the majority of boats. This increase in correlation of as well as within asset classes has weighed on the performance of active managers in recent years. This phenomenon is most evident in actively managed hedge funds. This group traditionally places bets on low-correlated assets, and has struggled in the environment of expanded central bank balance sheets, low interest rates, low inflation, low volatility, and high correlation of returns.
Will the normalization of interest rates negatively impact investment portfolios?
Considering the reaction of the financial markets to the December 2015 and December 2016 federal funds rate increases, a little perspective is in order. Interest rates remain remarkably low by historical standards. The most recent increase in the federal funds rate, to approximately 0.65 percent, pales in comparison to its average of around 5.0 percent over the past 50 years. Over the same timeframe, GDP has averaged almost 3.0 percent, inflation more than 4.0 percent, and the unemployment rate in excess of 6.0 percent. The benchmark 10-year Treasury, recently trading around 2.50 percent, is still well below its 50-year average of more than 6.50 percent.2
With the U.S. economy and inflation both tracking an annual rate around +2.0 percent, and an unemployment rate near 5.0 percent, it seems clear that monetary officials no longer need to employ emergency measures. Even with the new administration and President-elect Trump’s plans for fiscal spending, rates are well below historical standards. Considering the global challenges that Fed Chair Janet Yellen currently faces, we believe that the normalization of interest rates will be an extremely slow and gradual process that will likely take years, and not months, before even approaching historical averages.
We believe Yellen has several reasons to take the "go slow" approach:
Diversified portfolios may provide the best defense against the gradual normalization of interest rates
As mentioned earlier, we believe that the recent trend for the relative outperformance of passive strategies over active management will lessen, if not reverse, as market interest rates climb higher. In addition, analysis of company fundamentals in active strategies can screen out those businesses that may not be able to outperform their peers due to a variety of reasons, including debt service levels, unique product challenges, and employee costs. As a result, the ability of active managers to pick and choose between who they believe may be winners and losers in a gradually rising interest rate environment, where volatility increases and correlations decrease, suggests favorable tailwinds for active management.
We continue to recommend both active and passive strategies within portfolios, though, because both offer the potential for consistent long-term outperformance. In an environment when interest rates move higher, investors must factor in the associated portfolio impacts, including growth in inflation and market volatility. We continue to position investment portfolios in a diversified strategy employing our four asset class approach of equities, fixed income, real assets, and alternative investments. Each of these areas is expected to experience opportunity and volatility as the levers for growth in the economy and the financial markets transition from monetary to fiscal stimulus.
The impact of higher interest rates on equities should largely be considered a positive development. The idea that the Fed believes economic and financial market conditions are sufficient to withstand a gradual increase in rates bodes well for this asset class as a whole. The challenge, however, is the degree to which market sentiment has been artificially supported by the extraordinary stimulus provided by the Fed. As a result, we suspect bouts of volatility will accompany the periods surrounding each hike in the federal funds rate, though we only expect two more hikes in 2017.
Correlations should continue to decrease as the Fed embarks on its gradual normalization of rates. For example, different sectors will likely experience varying results from higher interest rates. Cyclical sectors like Consumer Discretionary should perform well as incomes, consumption, and inflation move higher. Financials are also expected to perform well as net interest margins for banks begin to climb higher. Industries that have served as bond proxies, however, like Telecom Services and Utilities, may struggle as investors pursue other opportunities as rates shift from historically low levels.
From a valuation perspective, many investors may grow concerned that market price-to-earnings (P/Es) valuations may contract with higher rates. Equity multiples should not be viewed myopically but instead relative to interest rates and inflation. Though the current P/E on the S&P 500 Index is above its historical average, the yield on the 10-year Treasury is over 400 basis points below its long-term average, and inflation measures are approximately 30-40 percent of its traditional reading. Therefore, Wells Fargo Investment Institute believes that multiples still have room to move. Additionally, history has also shown that the P/E ratio for the market typically doesn’t decline until inflation measures exceed +4.0 percent average annual growth rates.
Long-term P/E ratios for the S&P 500 Index under different inflation environments
Clearly the impact of higher inflation and interest rates can weigh on the psyche of investors and the performance of individual bonds. Investors may grow concerned about two things:
Yet similar to equities, a diversified portfolio approach can help mitigate the volatility within fixed income portfolios. For example, even though the yield on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury has climbed more than 100 basis points over the past several months, it still sports an attractive valuation when considered against other benchmark sovereign bonds, including Japanese government bonds and the German bund. But a diversified fixed income portfolio can still benefit from the income-generation phase of the credit cycle, where bids for the benchmark can lead to a period of coupon clipping. Moreover, despite the rise in the 10-year Treasury yields, no stress has been evident in investment-grade corporate bond spreads, which have narrowed despite market volatility. High-yield bond spreads have also come in, though we caution against chasing yield farther out along the risk curve.
This is another group that may see mixed results, suggesting the need for diversification. Periods of rising interest rates tend to weigh on performance for real estate investment trusts (REITs), whose relatively high yields attract investor interest during periods of low interest rates; when rates increase, demand frequently lessens for this asset class. Commodities may experience more mixed performance as the Fed gradually raises interest rates. On one hand, the very need for tighter policy is likely to lead to anticipated growth and inflation, suggesting that industrial metals like copper are increasing in value. Yet a less accommodative Fed, the stronger dollar, and limited demand should impact prices for many precious metals, which are priced in dollars, including gold. Consequently, diversification within asset classes can play a particularly important role in your investment allocation to real assets.
Alternative investments may be the biggest beneficiaries of tighter monetary policy. This space has struggled as the balance sheets of global central banks expanded, resulting in a bid for all risk assets and pushing correlations higher. In an era of gradually tighter policy, even the slightest move in interest rates from historic lows can play a role in reducing correlations among, and within, asset classes. This should provide a variety of strategies within the alternative investments classification to profit from the identification of mispriced assets.
For example, Equity Hedge historically has tended to thrive in an environment that represents a market of stocks rather than a stock market. The latter suggests a rising tide lifting all boats (passive investment strategies) while the former favors active management, where fundamentals matter. The increase in dispersion, or differing returns among equity sectors, for example, indicates an improved environment for gains on both the long and short sides. Likewise, Relative Value can provide investors with improved risk-reward tradeoffs within structured credit than typical fixed income investing. Periods of low/reduced correlations can support Macro strategies too, which tend to benefit when volatility increase, providing diversified portfolios with downside protection.
The last eight years have been among the most eventful in the history of global central banking with many central banks enacting a variety of innovative policy solutions. Dramatic reductions in overnight lending rates, quantitative easing, collaborative approaches to maintain global liquidity, negative interest rates, and the maintenance of elevated balance sheets have all combined to suppress market interest rates. While the Fed’s initial goals of increased consumption, lending, inflation, and investment have not all been met, the Fed is nonetheless in the position to remove emergency measures supporting the U.S. economy.
Ordinarily this would be considered an achievement, but in an era where risk assets have become dependent on policy, the repercussions of slightly higher rates may be felt more acutely at times as policy accommodation is removed. Yet perspective is important when considering the relative moves in interest rates and their impact on investment portfolios. For these reasons, we emphasize the need to remain diversified, where portfolios exposed to a variety of asset classes can benefit from the reduction in correlations and the likely transition to fundamental and active strategies.
1 Source: FactSet, 11/28/16
2 Source: FactSet, 11/28/16
3 Source: Bank for International Settlements, 86th Annual Report, 6/26/16 http://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2016e_ec.pdf
All investing involves risk including the possible loss of principal. Diversification is an investment method used to help manage risk. It does not ensure a profit or protect against a loss.
Different investments offer different levels of potential return and market risk. Stocks offer long-term growth potential, but may fluctuate more and provide less current income than other investments. Bonds are subject to market, interest rate, credit/default, liquidity, inflation and other risks. Bond prices fluctuate inversely to changes in interest rates. Therefore, a general rise in interest rates can result in the decline in the bond’s price.
Investing in real estate investment trusts (REITs) has special risks, including the possible illiquidity of the underlying properties, credit risk, interest rate fluctuations, and the impact of varied economic conditions.
Exposure to the commodities markets may subject an investment to greater share price volatility than an investment in traditional equity or debt securities. The commodities markets are considered speculative, carry substantial risks, and have experienced periods of extreme volatility.
The use of alternative investment strategies, such as Equity Hedge, Event Driven, Macro and Relative Value, is speculative and involves a high degree of risk. These strategies may expose investors to risks such as short selling, leverage risk, counterparty risk, liquidity risk, volatility risk, and other significant risks. In addition, these strategies engage in derivative transactions. Short selling involves the risk of potentially unlimited increase in the market value of the security sold short, which could result in potentially unlimited loss to a portfolio. In addition, taking short positions in securities is a form of leverage which may cause a portfolio to be more volatile. Derivatives generally have implied leverage and may entail other risks such as liquidity and interest rate and credit risks.
This report is not an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell the securities or strategies mentioned. The investments discussed or recommended in the presentation may be unsuitable for some investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial position.
Wells Fargo Wealth Management and Wells Fargo Private Bank provide products and services through Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and its various affiliates and subsidiaries. The information and opinions in this report were prepared by Wells Fargo Wealth Management. Information and opinions have been obtained or derived from sources we consider reliable, but we cannot guarantee their accuracy or completeness. Opinions represent Wells Fargo Wealth Management’s opinion as of the date of this report and are for general information purposes only. Wells Fargo Wealth Management does not undertake to advise you of any change in its opinions or the information contained in this report. Wells Fargo & Company affiliates may issue reports or have opinions that are inconsistent with, and reach different conclusions from, this report.
Wells Fargo affiliates may be paid a referral fee in relation to clients referred to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (the "Bank") offers various advisory and fiduciary products and services. Financial Advisors of Wells Fargo Advisors may refer clients to the bank for an ongoing or one-time fee. The role of the Financial Advisor with respect to bank products and services is limited to referral and relationship management services. The Bank is responsible for the day-to-day management of non-brokerage accounts and for providing investment advice, investment management services and wealth management services to clients. The Financial Advisor does not provide investment advice or brokerage services to Bank accounts, but does offer, as applicable, brokerage services and investment advice to brokerage accounts held at Wells Fargo Advisors. The views, opinions and portfolios may differ from our broker dealer affiliates.
Wells Fargo Investment Institute is a registered investment adviser and wholly-owned subsidiary of Wells Fargo & Company and provides investment advice to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Advisors, and other Wells Fargo Affiliates. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is a bank affiliate of Wells Fargo & Company.
Wells Fargo Advisors is a trade name used by Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC and Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network, LLC, Members SIPC, separate registered broker-dealers and non-bank affiliates of Wells Fargo & Company. CAR# 0117-00580
© 2017 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. All rights reserved.