In a recent article for John Hancock’s Recent Viewpoints, Steve L. Deroian, Head of Asset Allocation Models and ETF Strategy offered his take on why active fixed-income ETFs provide value. Deroian noted that while active ETFs have slowly gained traction since they first appeared in 2008, there have been recent signs that investors are becoming more interested in gaining exposure to active management in ETFs. In fact, since 2008, the number of active fixed-income ETFs has grown exponentially. In John Hancock’s opinion, one factor behind the rapid growth is the changing composition of the U.S. bond market over the past ten years. Passive strategies have become much more concentrated in government debt. At the end of December, Treasuries accounted for over 40% of the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, while the duration of the index has risen and is now at more than six years, indicating passive fixed-income ETFs carry a fair amount of interest-rate risk. Active fixed-income ETFs, on the other hand, aren’t required to track the benchmark. They can instead shift duration based on the manager’s outlook for interest rates. The management team can also manage sector allocation based on its ability to find relative value opportunities. Since the range of returns between fixed-income sectors can often be large, this creates an opportunity for active managers to add value over time.

Finsum:The number of active fixed-income ETFs has grown exponentially and John Hancock’s Steve L. Deroian believes one reason for that is the concentration of government debt in passive bond ETFs that carries a fair amount of interest-rate risk.

According to Morningstar's separate account/collective investment trust database, the top-performing fixed-income managers in 2022 managed to post positive returns during a historically tough year for the asset class. Five of the top 10 managers were in Morningstar's ultrashort bond category, while three were in the multisector bond category. The remaining two included one in the non-traditional bond category, and one, which was the top overall, in Morningstar's muni national long bond category. That top-performing strategy was the 16th Amendment Advisors LLC's Vicksburg strategy, which posted a gross return of 46.03% for the year. John J. Lee, a co-founder and managing member of the firm, said in an email to Pension & Investments, that the strategy benefited from a "cautious and bearish outlook on interest rates in general. Further, it took advantage of the disarray in the marketplace due to sharply rising rates and historically volatile markets." Lee said that it “holds investment-grade municipal bonds, corporate bonds, and their hedges in a strategy that is targeted to investors looking for non-correlated high-grade fixed-income exposure.” The second-ranked strategy was T. Rowe Price's dynamic global bond strategy, which returned 4.66% for the year. The strategy falls into Morningstar's non-traditional bond category and holds U.S. and international debt securities.

Finsum:According to Morningstar's SMA/CIT database, five of the top ten performing fixed-income managers were in the ultrashort bond category, three were in the multisector bond category, while the top two overall were in the muni national long bond category and the non-traditional bond category.

According to Investment Metrics' most recent fee analyzer report, active management fees dropped last year after underwhelming returns. U.S. fixed-income managers saw the largest reduction in fees, with a 7% average annual cut. In fact, post-negotiated fees for active managers decreased in most categories last year. The report was based on the analyses of almost 490 distinct accounts and co-mingled funds. According to Investment Metrics, the fee reduction trend appears to correspond to poor performance of active managers as most categories fell short of beating their standards. Scott Treacy, a research consultant at Investment Metrics, wrote the following in the report, “Normally, the fixed-income asset class protects investors when equity markets crater, but that did not happen in 2022.” He added, “Active U.S. fixed income disappointed in particular. Unfortunately, at a median level, active managers were not able to perform well in this environment.” While active managers had a chance to demonstrate that their expertise could shield portfolios during the downturn, the underwhelming results may put greater pressure on active strategies. Treacy concluded that “Those active managers that were not able to perform in the down market of 2022 will most likely see their assets go to passive strategies, or to other active managers that performed well in this difficult environment.”

Finsum:Active management fees dropped last year after managers produced underwhelming returns, with U.S. fixed-income managers seeing the largest reduction in fees.