Resource Search

For investors with private allocations, how one incorporates them into the policy benchmark will materially impact the portfolio’s relative performance, making the choice key to informed decision making.

The “Recession 2020” talk is omnipresent in the financial press, but productivity developments—which are no longer a manufacturing phenomenon—may extend the party. After years of stagnation, the stage is set for a cyclical upturn in productivity that would restrain labor costs, limit inflation, and allow profit margins to remain elevated.

Benchmarking is a critical component of a successful investment program; however, measuring private investment performance vexes even the most sophisticated investors.

While trade finance is among the oldest forms of institutionalized credit, it has only recently become an accessible market for most institutional investors. Providing high liquidity, good return premiums over cash, and a predictable risk profile, it can play a valuable role in portfolio strategy. However, as a fairly new option for most investors, its characteristics are not well-known. In this report, we explain the nuances of trade finance, including its evolution, basic mechanics, typical features, available strategies, and portfolio allocation implications.

Many institutional investors have long sought to promote social equity through grant making and other philanthropic endeavors. With the field of impact investing maturing, these institutions are now increasingly seeking investment solutions to accomplish the same goal. Yet this effort raises important questions: What is social equity investing? What does it look like in practice? And how do social equity investments fit in a portfolio?

The 2018 U.S. Trust Insights on Wealth and Worth® study asked nearly one thousand high-net-worth individuals about their approach to building wealth and the extent to which they are using it to achieve their goals and support the causes they care about most. The study found that while wealth provides the freedom to do more, it also brings increased obligations, expectations and demands.

Investors generally dislike uncertainty, and Trump’s unpredictability would seem to be a depressant on investor optimism.

It is normal for different individuals or institutions to make varying assessments of a particular situation. In a sense, this is a fundamental driver of financial markets, making it possible for there to be both willing buyers and willing sellers simultaneously. Differing perceptions may also help prevent, through restraining the growth of a herd mentality, extreme market swings. With a number of caveats, one can argue for tempered optimism with a glass half full.