Author Archives: Phoenix Investor Relations

European Institutional Asset Management Survey

The 11th European Institutional Asset Management Survey (EIAMS), researched by Invesco, found that investors have increased their allocations to fixed income while reducing their equity exposure.  The 2011 survey received responses from 148 investors in 25 countries (mainly Benelux, UK, Ireland, France and the Nordics), with total assets under management of EUR 1,194 billion, or an average of EUR 8.1 billion.

For investor relations officers at public companies we believe the most interesting points are:

1 – European institutions invest most of their equity portfolios internationally while the bulk of their fixed income assets remain in their domestic markets.

2.- The flight to safety has continued with fixed income gaining more ground with investors, but last year’s freefall in equities appears to have been halted with just a small decline, and the sharp reduction in cash suggests that investors are less risk averse.

3. – Fixed income accounts for 58% of institutional portfolios’ assets, compared with 51% in the prior year.

4. – Fixed income looks to gain further ground with corporate bonds the big likely winner at the expense of government debt.  Indeed, 22% of investors are aiming to increase their fixed income component with 30% of investors increasing their exposure to corporate bonds and 31% reducing their government bond holdings.

5. – Allocations to equities have fallen slightly to 27%, down from 2009’s level of 29%, and well below the 32% average allocation reported in 2007.  UK & Ireland remain true to their traditionally high equities weightings, with shares creeping back up to 45% of portfolios this time after slipping to 44% in 2009, though they are still below the 55% weighting seen in 2007.

6. – A small net increase in equity investment is forecast and this is most likely to occur outside of domestic markets. 19% of respondents planned to boost their equity allocations against 15% who signaled an intention to sell.  More marked, though, is the likely swing away from domestic shares towards those in other European countries, the USA, Asia and other markets.  Only 11% of respondents planned to increase equities from their home market, while 21% intended to up the proportion of other European equities as well as those from Asia, while 20% planned to lift USA equity allocations and 23% aimed to boost their “other markets” stock holdings. Institutions are clearly turning away from home markets in equity and fixed income investment. Average domestic equity allocation has fallen to 18% of the total equity slice from 23.5%.

Click on the charts below for a full display.

1


2


3

The top managers of pension fund assets in the UK

The management of most pension fund assets in the UK is often delegated to diversified investment management houses and very few self-managed pension funds still exist.

The key players are:

Rank Pension AUM $m
1. Legal & General 370,014
2. BlackRock 252,814
3. Insight 144,183
4. State Street Global Advisors 57,231
5. Standard Life 56,109
6. Schroder Inv. Mgt. 44,649
7. M&G Investments 42,585
8. Threadneedle 41,080
9. Hermes 40,127
10. UBS Global Asset Mgt. 19,802
11. Baillie Gifford 14,478
12. Aberdeen Asset Mgt. 8,665
13. Newton Inv. Mgt. 7,889
14. Capital International 7,713

Source: Hymans Robertson

It’s interesting to note that significant segments of these assets are managed passively (according to Hymans Robertson at least 40%).

The remaining self-managed funds worth targeting for investor relations outreach activity include; Aerion, BAE Systems, BP Investment, British Airways Pension, British Steel Pension and Universities Superannuation Scheme.

Dividends are back

Aggregate dividents per share for S & P 500 companies

Aggregate dividents per share for S & P 500 companies

S&P 500 dividends per share, which hit a recent low in 2010, are forecast to grow at an annual rate of 9.8% over the next three years, driven by strong earnings and large cash reserves.


S & P 500 dividend actions - 12 months ended February

S & P 500 dividend actions - 12 months ended February

Year-over-year dividend increases are up 57.1%, while decreases and omissions are down 81.7% and 74.8%, respectively.

Peter Kaye – Dalton Strategic Partnership (DSP)

We see evidence for a continuation of the bull market in the US which can be found by looking at the strength in the US economy and US companies. While the headlines on poor housing data and a slowly recovering labour market seem to get the most air time, lead indicators for the US economy are telling a very different story. US companies are in great shape, for several quarters earnings estimates have surpassed expectations by a wide margin. We are now approaching the first quarter earnings season and the most recent releases from Accenture and Oracle imply the surprise trend is still intact and in addition, US corporate balance sheets are pristine. In addition to monetary expansion we have witnessed a rotation by investors out of other assets into equities which will provide fuel for the next stage of the bull market. A key driver for this will be valuation differences between assets. While there are clearly negatives such as the oil price, the level of the US dollar and the \\\’QE2 exit\\\’, we believe there remains much upside to the current US market

we maintain our bullish outlook on the North American equity sector and this seems to be backed up by strong flows into the sector, not only from US investors but also now here in the UK.

Swiss Asset Management

Switzerland is global market leader in crossborder private banking

2_a

Assets managed in Switzerland

CHF 5,600 billion managed in Switzerland

In total, banks in Switzerland managed assets of around CHF 5,600 billion at end-2009, up 3.7% or CHF 200 billion from the previous year. Assets managed include the following items: securities, fiduciary deposits, savings and investment liabilities to clients and term deposits.

2_b

At end-2009, securities holdings at market value came to CHF 4,508 billion; of these, roughly 62% came from institutional investors, 29% from private clients and just under 10% from companies. Custody accounts for foreign clients comprised 55%, for domestic clients 45%. Between September 2009 and October 2010, securities holdings of foreign private investors fell by around CHF 68.9 billion or 9.6%. This was mainly due to currency effects, i.e. the appreciation of the Swiss franc, rather than outflows of client money.

Source: Wealth Management in Switzerland – SBA – February 2011

Global assets

Significant increase in global assets

Global assets at the end of 2009 were USD 111,500 billion (BCG 2010a), roughly the same as the previous high seen in 2007 (see figure 1-1). This represents growth of USD 11,500 billion or 11.5% over the year, mainly driven by the recovery in financial markets. It is estimated that in 2014 global assets will reach USD 147.5 billion.

1_a

1_b

Source: Wealth Management in Switzerland – SBA – February 2011

SWF Update

Sovereign wealth funds are developing more in-house portfolio management teams after the global crisis according to Cerulli Associates. We confirm that this is a trend we have been seeing for some time. While most of the $3 trillion estimated to be managed by SWFs assets continues to be outsourced or passively managed in index replication funds and ETFs, many of the biggest funds have set up in-house Alpha teams with very aggressive return objectives such as doubling their money in three years. This resembles a bar-bell investment approach on a large scale, marrying very cautious outsourcing and passive investing with in-house risk taking in the form of highly concentrated portfolios. The performance of many SWFs was hit particularly hard by the crisis so it is not surprising to see a change in investment approach.

Brokers “sell” meetings with CEOs and CFOs for $4,500 p/meeting at conferences and $7,500-$10,000 p/meeting on non-deal roadshows

No wonder the sell-side is so aggressive in “selling” corporate access to issuers.  The meetings are worth a lot to them, according to an annual survey by Greenwich Associates, as one-third of U.S. equity research commissions are being used to compensate the sell-side for arranging meetings with corporate management teams.  One third of the market in U.S. equity research commissions, estimated to be worth $12.1 billion, equates to $4 billion for corporate access, in the U.S. alone.

50% of U.S. institutions now use commission sharing arrangements but institutional commission payments continue to fall because trading volumes have dropped and the buy-side continues to shift volume to electronic systems.  Nearly 40% of U.S. equity trading is now executed electronically.  This shrinking market has placed increasing pressure on sell-side profitability.

The annual Greenwich survey estimated that brokerage commissions paid by U.S. institutions on domestic equities fell 13% to an estimated $12.1 billion per annum in the first quarter of 2010.  An estimated 53% of these commissions, or $6.4 billion, was for research, corporate access and sales services not related directly to trade execution.  33% ($4 billion) is spent on corporate access, including 19% ($2.3 billion) for facilitating access to corporate management on non-deal roadshows and 14% ($1.7 billion) for conferences.

According to a post on Inside Investor Relations by Brad Allen, The Wall St Transcript (TWST), which provides software for sell-side firms to manage their corporate access programs under the MeetMax CAM name, estimates that 200,000 one-on-ones take place at conferences annually.  On average, a meeting at a conference is worth an estimated $4,500.  Integrity Research, which researches the equity research industry, reported that TWST also put a range of between $7,500 and $10,000 per meeting on the more difficult to estimate non-deal road shows.

As corporate access has become such an important business for the sell-side, how much does it benefit the companies allocating so much of their valuable executive time?  If they are being taken to meet bona fide long-term shareholders and potential shareholders it is clearly worthwhile.  But if valuable executive time is being spent with the wrong investors, there is clearly a problem.

If a hedge fund is effectively paying “your” broker $10,000 to meet with you, what is their agenda and is it in your interest?  Is your company or one of its peers the real subject of the meeting?

And remember, not all investors are paying the broker the same amount.  So who gets priority?  In most cases it’s the investor who pays the most.  The reality of today’s market is that the sell-side is simply not able to treat each investor impartially.  It has a clear conflict of interest between the needs of its client (the investor) and its steed (the issuer).

Issuers should be concerned that the marketing process lacks appropriate transparency and companies are potential victims.  There are clear conflicts of interest among financial intermediaries and there is abuse.  In our opinion the disclosure of trading conflicts is completely inadequate and companies should demand much more transparency from the sell-side.

For the Greenwich report please click on http://www.greenwich.com/Greenwich0.5/CMA/campaign_messages/campaign_docs/naeif-10-GLG.GR.pdf