2024 has started off with a bearish tone for the energy sector amid concerns of a supply glut and weakening demand. On Monday, crude oil prices dropped 4% as Saudi Arabia reduced prices for Asian customers by $2 per barrel. 

This is leading to speculation that Saudi Arabia could be looking to regain market share by punishing US producers and undercut cheaper Iranian and Russian oil. It could lead to a similar situation as 2020 when oil prices collapsed as Saudi Arabia flooded the market to punish other producers. Currently, the US is producing 13.2 million barrels per day of oil and has been restocking inventories and increasing exports. Others see it more as the consequence of a weak demand environment and a reflection of a decelerating economy. 

Energy prices had been higher to start the year amid an increase in geopolitical tensions. These include Houthi rebels attacking commercial vessels in the Red Sea and the escalations in the war between Israel and Hamas which could turn it into a larger, regional war. However, these concerns are being dwarfed by the supply and demand picture as evidenced by West Texas crude oil at $70 per barrel. 

Finsum: Oil prices dropped as Saudi Arabia announced that it would be reducing prices for Asian customers. Some believe that the country could be acting to protect market share. 

There’s been an ongoing debate about passive strategies vs active strategies in equities and fixed income. While passive strategies have generally proven to outperform in equities, the same is not true for fixed income. In fixed income, active managers have outperformed. Over the last decade, the average active intermediate-term bond fund has outperformed its benchmark, 60% of the time. 

According to Guggenheim, this can be partially attributed to risk mitigation strategies which are not available in passive funds. Another factor is that the equity markets are much more efficiently priced than fixed income since there is more price discovery, publicly reported financials, and a smaller universe of securities. Equities are also dominated by market-cap, weighted indices.

Relative to equities, there is much less information about fixed income securities, less liquidity and price discovery, a larger market at $55 trillion vs $44 trillion, and many more securities especially when accounting for different durations and credit ratings. Additionally, less than half of fixed income securities are in the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index (Agg) benchmark. All of these factors mean that there are more opportunities to generate alpha by astute active managers. 

Finsum: There is an ongoing debate on whether active or passive is better for fixed income. Here’s why Guggenheim believes that active will outperform against passive. 

Institutional investors and money managers came together at the annual PERE America Forum and shared some thoughts on the private real estate market. The overall sentiment is that conditions will remain challenging until 2025 due to a large amount of commercial real estate debt that needs to be rolled over or refinanced at much higher rates.

According to John Murray, the head of PIMCO’s global private commercial real estate team, the situation is as bad as the Great Financial Crisis in terms of dislocations in capital markets. He notes that Fed policy is the major headwind, and its ‘crushing’ sentiment and liquidity. 

Sajith Ranasinghe, head of real estate at Church Pension Group, remarked that price discovery has been limited so investors are focusing more on income. He also expressed interest in private REITs which are down over 30% since rates began moving higher in 2022. 

Saul Lubetski, the vice-chairman of Harbor Group International recommends a ‘scalpel approach’ as $1.5 trillion of maturities are set to expire by 2025. He notes that the refinancing has already begun, albeit at a smaller and slower pace which should accelerate this year. However, it’s increasingly evident that borrowers are finally making peace with higher rates. 

Finsum: At the annual PERE conference, institutional investors and money managers gathered to share some thoughts on the private real estate market.

Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have revolutionized the asset management landscape over the past decade, and their rise shows no signs of slowing. As Oliver Wyman's 2023 report, "The Renaissance of ETFs," underscores, ETFs have become the single most disruptive trend in the industry. By the end of 2022, total ETF assets under management (AUM) in the US and Europe reached a staggering $6.7 trillion, propelled by a 15% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) since 2010.

While passive ETFs currently dominate the market, holding 59% of assets (at the end of 2022), Oliver Wyman predicts a surge of active strategies. The report posits that the ETF landscape is entering a "next stage of growth," fueled by the emergence of innovative active ETFs.

Several factors contribute to the enduring appeal of ETFs in the US. Compared to mutual funds, ETFs enjoy lower investment minimums, typically lower expense ratios, and attractive tax advantages, making them highly accessible and cost-effective options.

Oliver Wyman projects this momentum to continue, with ETF growth remaining in the 13-18% annual range for the next five years. By 2027, they expect ETF AUM in the US and Europe to reach an impressive $12-$16 trillion, solidifying their position as a powerful force shaping the future of asset management.

Finsum: Active ETFs are poised to fuel the growth of this popular investment vehicle, according to global consultancy Oliver Wyman.

The U.S. Department of Labor's proposed redefinition of what triggers fiduciary status for retirement plan advisors and providers is drawing intense scrutiny from industry professionals, with concerns about its potential impact on information access and plan creation.

Prior to the January 2nd deadline for public comments, prominent figures like Ed Murphy, president and CEO of Empower, have voiced their opposition. A central worry surrounds the chilling effect of the new definition on certain conversations between providers/advisors and plan sponsors/participants. Fear of inadvertently triggering fiduciary status may lead many to withdraw from such communication, effectively cutting off a crucial source of information for those navigating retirement and plan decisions.

Murphy's point, highlighted in a recent planadviser.com article, illustrates this concern: "The proposal would create obstacles to plan creation and could effectively ban many sales conversations between providers and plans or individuals."

However, Tim Hauser, the DOL's deputy assistant secretary for program operations, maintains that the proposal is not meant to regulate routine "hire me" (sales) discussions. He has actively sought industry suggestions on language revisions to better clarify this intent.

Finsum: Defined Contribution professionals share their concerns with the Department of Labor regarding their proposed rule regarding what communication triggers fiduciary status.