Stringer Asset Management shared some thoughts on fixed income, monetary policy, and the economy. The firm notes that while inflation has remained stubbornly above the Fed’s desired levels, it will move closer to the Fed’s target over time. One factor is that the M2 money supply is starting to decline, which is a leading indicator of inflation. Another is that fiscal stimulus effects are finally waning.

Thus, Stringer still sees rate cuts later this year, although it’s difficult to predict the timing and number of cuts, creating a challenging environment for bond investors. During this period of uncertainty, it favors active strategies to help reduce risk and capitalize on inefficiencies. Active managers are also better equipped to navigate a more dynamic environment full of risks, such as the upcoming election and a tenuous geopolitical situation.

Stringer recommends that investors diversify their holdings across the yield curve and credit risk factors. It favors a balance of riskier credit with Treasuries. This is because the firm expects the bond market to remain static until the Fed actually cuts. It’s also relatively optimistic for the economy given that household balance sheets are in good shape, corporate earnings remain strong, and the unemployment rate remains low. These conditions are conducive to a favorable environment for high-yield debt. 

Finsum: Stringer Asset Management believes that fixed income investors should pursue an active approach given various uncertainties around the economy, inflation, and monetary policy in addition to geopolitical risks.

There is a subtle distinction between fee-based and fee-only advisors. Fee-only advisors exclusively offer financial advice but don’t sell any products with commissions. Fee-based advisors also mainly offer financial advice, but they may also sell other non-investment products with commissions, like insurance. This means that they cannot market themselves as being ‘fee-only’. 

Many advisors are moving to these models due to their simplicity, while there has been an increase in regulations around the fiduciary standard. In fact, the industry as a whole is seeing fewer broker-dealer accounts and growth in investment-advisory accounts. As a result, many products can now be bought in investment-advisory accounts without a commission, such as annuities and alternative investments. 

An important consideration for an advisor going independent is responsibility for compliance. This requires registering with the state regulator or the SEC if there are more than $100 million in assets. It also means responding to regulatory inquiries, developing a compliance program, and having a system to ensure compliance. 

This additional burden highlights the challenge of running an independent shop. Another is that there is less time for clients, especially during the initial stages. Even afterwards, the additional responsibilities will lead to less time and energy for client service, prospecting, marketing, etc. By choosing a fee-only or fee-based model, advisors can have less of a regulatory burden.

Finsum: Many advisors are moving towards a fee-only or fee-based model. The biggest reason is that it simplifies and reduces the compliance demands for advisors.

Bonds have weakened to start the year, given increasing uncertainty about the direction of the economy and monetary policy. Weitz Investment Management notes that credit spreads have tightened even while long-term yields move higher. Thus, the firm believes there is greater potential for losses if inflation meaningfully picks up from current levels or credit spreads widen.

It also believes that massive fiscal deficits are an indication that the inflation issue is not going to disappear anytime soon. It notes that over the last 4 years, deficits have averaged 9% of GDP, which was only seen before during wars. Currently, the national debt is increasing by $1 trillion every 100 days. And this is a major reason why the Fed’s aggressive hikes have not resulted in a recession. It also means that Treasury issuance will continue to be elevated as debt will need to be refinanced at higher rates. 

Amid this backdrop, the firm notes that there is considerable complacency among investors. It notes that credit spreads declined across the board in Q1 and are now at 10-year lows. It believes this is likely a result of strong demand for bonds as new issues have been oversubscribed and there has been a flattening of yields in the credit curve. 

To combat these risks, Weitz recommends looking for opportunities in fixed income across the spectrum and beyond the benchmarks. It recommends diversified and broad exposure, including fixed and floating-rate securities. Ultimately, investors need to be nimble and prepare for various scenarios, such as the economy continuing to be robust, inflation resuming its ascent, or the economy stumbling into a recession.

Finsum: Weitz Investment Management sees considerable complacency within fixed income while also noting some risks. It recommends investors seek broad and diversified exposure to the asset class and pursue a more active and nimble approach. 

In Q1, inflows into active fixed income ETFs exceeded inflows into passive ETFs at $90 billion vs. $69 billion. This is a remarkable change from last year, when active fixed income ETFs had net inflows of $19 billion vs. $279 billion for passive bond ETFs.  

Two major factors behind this development are an increase in uncertainty about the economy and monetary policy and yields above 5% for some of the most popular offerings. According to Ryan Murphy, the head of fixed income business development at Capital Group, this is the beginning of “a longer multi-quarter and potentially multi-year trend out of cash. Investors are getting the best compensation on fixed income in 20 years.” 

Flows could accelerate into bond funds as there is $6 trillion in money market funds once the Fed actually starts cutting rates. Yet, the current ‘wait and see’ period is challenging for fixed-income investors, but it’s an opportune moment for active strategies given opportunities to find distortions in prices and credit quality. Stephen Bartolini, portfolio manager at T. Rowe, notes, “The ability to not just blindly buy the index but be smarter and choose around security selection is critical at the moment.” 

Finsum: Active fixed income inflows were greater than inflows into passive fixed income ETFs. It’s a result of attractive yields and heightened uncertainty about the economy and monetary policy.    

A major milestone occurred at the end of 2023 as assets in index funds exceeded assets held by active funds. The major factor behind this shift is an increasing preference for ETFs, while mutual funds are falling out of favor. While there has been much focus on the impressive growth rates of active ETFs, the larger narrative is that ETFs are displacing mutual funds, both active and passive. 

According to Cerulli Associates, active ETFs had $129 billion of inflows last year, while there were $65 billion of inflows into passive mutual funds. In contrast, passive ETFs had inflows of $463 billion, while active mutual funds had net outflows of $576 billion.

A major factor is that ETFs have lower costs while also offering more transparency and liquidity. They are also more tax-efficient than their mutual fund counterparts. Additionally, many advisors are now focusing more on asset allocation than security selection, which is also contributing to growth of ETFs. 

Cerulli also noted that more advisors are moving to independent firms from large broker-dealers. “Those advisors, according to our data, believe less in the merits of active investing,” remarked Matt Apkarian, Cerulli’s associate director of product development.

Another trend is that some portion of outflows from active mutual funds are going into active ETFs. Some new issues in the category have been gaining traction, and more asset managers are jumping on the trend. 

Finsum: Last year, there were net inflows into active and passive ETFs and passive mutual funds. But there were huge outflows from passive mutual funds. A major factor is that ETFs are increasingly in favor due to lower costs and more transparency and liquidity.