J.P. Morgan Advisors is empowering brokers with increased autonomy over unified managed accounts (UMAs), enabling independent investment selection without explicit client approval, in line with industry shifts. 

Marc Turansky, head of advisory programs, highlights this as a response to evolving standards and client preferences for advisor autonomy. Similarly, Janney Montgomery Scott introduces full discretion options for UMAs, echoing broader industry trends. Janney's advisory accounts hold $73 billion, while J.P. Morgan Securities manages $212 billion.

 UMAs have surged to $2.1 trillion in client assets industry-wide, outpacing other advisory programs. J.P. Morgan Wealth Management, says this change reflects an evolving industry standard and caters to clients who trust their advisors' understanding of their financial objectives, thus comfortable delegating decision-making. 

Finsum: UMAs are giving advisors more flexibility than other accounts, which can translate to meeting clients needs more effectively.

The last 40 years have been defined by lower inflation, creating a generous tailwind for fixed income. Now, AllianceBernstein believes that we are in the midst of a transition to a new regime that will feature lower growth and higher inflation. In this environment, the firm believes that fixed income investors need to make appropriate adjustments. 

It believes that inflation will be structurally higher in the coming decades due to deglobalization and demographics. Deglobalization means that supply chains will be reshored, undoing some of the deflationary trends of the last 40 years, and it will result in higher inflation due to greater manufacturing costs and wages. With an aging population, there is a smaller pool of available workers, which will also contribute to inflationary pressures. Both deglobalization and demographic trends will weigh on economic growth as well. 

Due to these factors, AllianceBernstein forecasts that 2% inflation is now the lower bound rather than a target. It believes that frequent spikes in inflation, as experienced from 2021 to 2022, will also become commonplace. This is a consequence of governments with large amounts of debt and future liabilities. Policymakers will be incentivized to ‘inflate’ away the debt rather than make painful cuts to spending. Additionally, lower rates will help contain financing costs.

Finsum: The last 40 years were great for fixed income due to inflation trending lower along with interest rates. AllianceBernstein believes this era is over, and we are moving into a new period defined by lower growth and higher inflation.

When it comes to recruiting deals, there is much to analyze and understand beyond the upfront figure. In fact, how the deal is structured can be even more important in the long term, as this will dictate longer-term outcomes like growth, portability, succession planning, and compensation. 

Typically, the upfront payment is calculated based on 125 to 175% of trailing 12-month production. This portion is guaranteed and taxed at lower rates, so it’s understandable why so much attention is paid to this figure.

Many firms still offer back-end bonuses, which are generally around 25 to 50% of trailing 12-month production, although these are being phased out. These bonuses are only paid out if advisors successfully transition and achieve pre-defined metrics. Unvested deferred compensation replacement is another element becoming less common as this is increasingly folded into the overall package. However, this represents the amount that an advisor would lose out on by switching firms.

Finally, many deals will also include a ‘sunset program’ so that a retiring advisor can cash out of the business at market value. With this, there are many factors to consider, such as terms, requirements, and financing. For younger advisors, this might be less relevant, but it could be a deciding factor for those closer to the end of their careers. 

Finsum: There are many components of a recruiting deal that go beyond the headline amount. In fact, the structure of a deal can be more important when it comes to making the right choice.

According to Bloomberg senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas, there is only a 25% chance that the SEC approves a spot ethereum ETF. He points to the lack of SEC engagement on the topic and the absence of any positive signs or chatter on the subject, which is a departure from the lead-up to bitcoin’s approval. Balchunas believes this lack of engagement is ‘tactical’ rather than ‘procrastination’. 

The crux of the issue is how ethereum should be classified. There are indications that the SEC is leaning towards treating it like a security based on subpoenas to crypto companies that have interacted with the Ethereum Foundation. 

However, there are some dissenting voices who are more optimistic about approval. Craig Salm, Grayscale’s Chief Legal Officer, says the SEC’s reticence is due to most issues already being cleared up during the bitcoin ETF approval process. He believes both ETFs are nearly identical, except for the underlying asset. He also pointed to the approval of an ethereum futures ETF and its classification as a commodity future as a favorable sign. 

Currently, several asset managers have filed for approval for an ethereum ETF, including Blackrock, VanEck, ARK 21Shares, Fidelity, Invesco Galaxy, Grayscale, Franklin Templeton, and Hashdex. The most immediate deadline is May 23 for VanEck.

Finsum: Over the next couple of months, the SEC will decide on an ethereum ETF. Reading the tea leaves, Bloomberg’s Eric Balchunas is not optimistic that it will be approved. 

Oil prices have continued to defy Wall Street analysts. Last year, the consensus view was that prices would weaken as the US economy slipped into a recession, with the rest of the world facing a sharper contraction in economic growth. While growth did slow, the US economy continued to expand, and global oil demand increased more than expected. In Q1, the IEA upped its forecast for US oil demand by 110,000 barrels per day due to stronger than expected economic data. 

Additionally, despite predictions from EV boosters, there has been no material impact on oil demand from increased adoption. Similarly, China’s economy has been mired in a slump, yet Chinese oil demand also defied expectations and increased more than expected. In fact, a major lesson of the post-pandemic period is the inelasticity of oil demand. 

On the supply side, US production also surpassed forecasts and made up for any production cuts from OPEC. A major factor is increasing well productivity due to newer drilling techniques. 

Looking ahead, many were skeptical that OPEC+ would remain disciplined, given individual countries’ incentives to increase revenues by boosting production. So far, the cartel has managed to successfully reduce production, which is contributing to the current tight market and a major factor in oil’s upward move YTD. 

Finsum: Last year, many analysts got it wrong when it came to oil. Overall, they were too bearish on the economy and overestimated how much a weak economy would impact oil demand.