(Washington)

There is a currently a great deal of confusion surrounding the fiduciary rule, and understandably so. The rule is technically in force, but not fully, and there is even confusion over the interpretation of the rule and how it should be implied. With that in mind, lets clear up a few myths. The first and biggest myth is that the rule compels advisors to offer the lowest cost investment. It does not. It also does not mean advisors need to choose the “best” investment. While best interest is the rule, this does not mean advisors need to try to attain an impossible standard. Under the best interest contract, the three goals to meet under DOL rules are: “compensation paid to the broker-dealer and adviser is reasonable, recommendations must be in the best interest of the customer, and communications with the customer may not be misleading”. In terms of defining what “best interest” itself means, “’best interest’ requirement says that the recommendation must be prudent, take into account relevant information about the customer, and put the customer’s interests above those of the broker-dealer and the adviser”.

FINSUM: The confusion over the half-baked rule is very understandable, especially given the overall leadership vacuum surrounding its half-implementation.

(New York)

If ever there was a “5 stock” piece that investors might want to read, this is probably it. Barron’s has published an article naming five stocks which will do well as rates rise. Interestingly, these choices are not based on macroeconomics (e.g. REITS do poorly as rates rise), but based on the actual underlying financial obligations of the companies, with pension obligations being the key factor. The five names that come out when one looks at the situation that way are companies which investors will be very familiar with: GM, Ford, Xerox, American Airlines, and General Electric. The piece summarizes the benefits this way, saying “In general, as the health of pension plans improve, so should balance sheets, cash flows, and earnings due to lower pension contributions and costs”.

FINSUM: These look like very good calls because they are not obvious, but the benefits will be in time. Very interesting to see GE on there given its struggles lately.

(New York)

With rates looking likely to rise there are increasing concerns that the US housing market might be in for a rough patch. Rising rates mean more expensive mortgages, and combined with the lowering of the interest deduction threshold in the new tax package, real estate could be in for a rough ride. However, the opposite may be the case. The reality is there is low inventory and little new construction, leaving many buyers chasing a shortage of homes. Prices have risen steadily since the Crisis, but with the exception of a few coastal markets, have not surged, meaning pricing still looks reasonable. “Housing is in the third or fourth inning of a nine-inning game”, says one portfolio manager.

FINSUM: All the risk is in mortgage rates. If the Fed hikes very aggressively then it will hurt the market, but if things keep moving at this leisurely pace, housing will likely do just fine.

(New York)

Despite the rally, stocks are still down 5% from the January peak. But Invesco, it is down around 15%, which Barron’s argues presents a great buying opportunity. Invesco’s mutual fund business will earn less income if stocks fall, but unlike others, it may be a big beneficiary of the next bear market. Two reasons for this include Invesco having a strong balance sheet to make low-priced acquisitions when times are tough (as it did during the Crisis) and the fact that it has a great smart beta business, which should do well in tough times. The stock currently trades at a 44% discount to BlackRock on an earnings multiple basis, making the price attractive.

FINSUM: Invesco seems like it would be good to use in a pair trade in a down turn as its relative performance should be better than competitors.

(New York)

PIMCO, perhaps the most famous bond investor in the world, has just published a piece covering their view of where yields are headed. Their conclusion is that they do see the risk for rates rising as the US budget deficit grows and the economy strengthens, but that on the whole they are not too concerned about a big jump. Their view is best summarized in their own words, “Nevertheless, we believe powerful forces are working against a permanent increase in the trajectory of economic growth in the U.S., including the aging population, productivity trends, sovereign indebtedness, credit growth, and an imbalance between savings and investments”.

FINSUM: Our readers will have noticed that this view exactly matches what we have been saying about bond yields.