Managers’ Risk Appetite Bounces Back Sharply in February

Investment managers’ risk appetite bounced back sharply in February, as they now see the U.S. macroeconomic environment as its most supportive for equities in more than two years, according to S&P Global’s Investment Manager Index, which surged to 13% in February from -4% in January.

“Investor concerns over a reduced stimulus to equities from fewer central bank rate cuts have been trumped by expectations of improving corporate performance on the back of brighter economic prospects,” said Chris Williamson, executive director at S&P Global Market Intelligence, in a release, adding that “the tech sector in particular has regained investor favor.”

However, Williamson added, “as equity markets test new highs, concerns over valuations have limited investor expectations of further near-term market gains, and the possibility of rates staying higher for longer has dented appetite for real estate and financials.”

The index’s survey is based on monthly replies from a panel of about 300 respondents working for firms that represent approximately $3.5 trillion in assets under management combined.

Want the latest institutional investment industry news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters. 

S&P Global noted that the rebound is in sharp contrast to just a few months ago, when the U.S. economy was seen as a net drag on equities. While the broader global economy is seen as a negative for U.S. equities, according to S&P Global, this perception has moderated to its lowest level in almost a year due to the reduced risk of recession, particularly in Europe.

The survey also found that investors are expecting contributions to equity performance in the near term from shareholder value and equity fundamentals to greatly improve and that corporate performance will also rally due in part to the economic environment strengthening. As a result, the survey showed that earnings estimates for the next quarter have been revised upward for the first time in more than two years.

The improvement in risk sentiment, according to S&P, comes despite central bank policy now being perceived for the first time in three months as weighing down equity returns, when just last month it was seen as the biggest driver of returns. S&P attributed the abrupt change to investors pulling back their expectations of when the Federal Reserve will begin cutting interest rates; they now expect fewer cuts, which will come later in the year.

Because of investors’ lowered expectations for rate cuts, the real estate sector is now the worst-performing sector in terms of investor sentiment, while financials also saw a big drop in sentiment, according to the survey.

On the other end of the spectrum, health care topped investor sentiment for the third month in a row, while the tech/IT sector saw the biggest improvement, as investor sentiment swung in February to its highest point since November 2021 from a negative position in January. Sentiment also rose sharply for communications services.

NY State Pension Returns 6.2% in Fiscal Q3, Cashes Out Another Public Equity Fund

Increased Investor Risk Appetite Spurs Endowment Index Q2 Rebound

Tags: Chris Williamson, Economic Outlook, Equities, recession risk, Risk appetite, risk-on, S&P Global Investment Manager Index

Institutional investors buy equities much better than they sell them. That is due to a lack of care in the selling process—and results in lower returns on the divestments, according to Michael Ervolini, former CEO of Cabot Investment Technology, now a subsidiary of FactSet Research Systems Inc.

These investors could gain 100 basis points annually for their portfolios, in 85% of the cases studied by Cabot, if they were wiser about selling. The study by Cabot, which advises institutions, found that only 29% describe their selling procedure as highly disciplined, using research and backtesting to track how they did.

For investors, fixing loose selling practices is more important than ever because actively managed mutual and exchange-traded funds—which stand in as a proxy for the entire investing field—are dwindling in importance as passive continues to outperform active. This outperformance has gone on for 20 years, with the performance gap growing.

Making the problem even more acute now: Assets held by passive funds moved ahead of actives’ holdings in 2023, by $13.3 trillion versus $13.2 trillion, according to a Morningstar study. Hence, this returns-lag subject is top of mind lately among active managers.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news. 

Ervolini, author of a book that explored the subject, “Managing Equity Portfolios,” notes that often investors hold onto a stock well past its peak, so by the time that they sell it, the asset fetches far less than it could have. FactSet bought Cabot in 2021, and until recently Ervolini served as a “distinguished fellow” at the company.

Psychologically, buying is more enticing than selling, states Ervolini, quoting Terrance Odean, an economist at the Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley. Odean told him: “Buys have no baggage. A manager picks a buy in terms of what it can deliver in future performance.”

By contrast, old stocks may disappoint. Investors “hold onto winners longer than they should,” Ervolini says. And sometimes they chuck out more recent purchases before it’s clear how they will do over time. “Selling too quickly or too late can cost the portfolio as much or more alpha than what is generated from buys,” he warns.

Often, failure to assess what went wrong and what went right with long-term holdings steers investors into a ditch full of regrets, in Ervolini’s estimation. Academic journals seldom cover selling, with buying receiving the bulk of consideration, he laments.

How should investors go about selling? First, look at the record to see what worked, Ervolini advises. Next, before an upcoming sale, he says, “slowing down and thinking twice” helps avoid a rash move. Afterward, he adds, get “timely feedback” from others.

Of course, allocators always are selling, whether they have strong active trading programs, or concentrate on following indexes—they still have to rebalance to synch up with index shifts.

Asset allocators tend to be passive investors, although their approaches vary. For passive, the exemplar is the largest U.S. pension program, California Public Employees Retirement System. Some 70% of CalPERS’s liquid securities are passively managed.

On the other hand, the Florida State Board of Administration has the opposite method for its asset management of liquid securities. College and university endowments are more likely to pursue active management than pension funds do.

Regardless of the type of institutional strategy, the lack of attention devoted to selling, Ervolini says, leaves “this important skill difficult to appropriately understand and improve.”

Subscribe to a free PW Newsletter!