Global CIO Jeff Hussey discusses why we believe investors should consider a multi-asset approach in today’s low-return environment.
Some argue that active management is a zero-sum game, so investing passively—relying on the wisdom of crowds—is better. How strong is that logic?
Stock market volatility in 2017 has been so low that it’s been hard to miss. This unusual tranquility may be sowing the seeds of future turmoil.
The debate between active and passive management in fixed-income continues. We take a look at both sides of the coin for investors.
We’re in a late-cycle, momentum-driven market, where valuation is at an extreme. Momentum can drive markets beyond fundamentals for an extended period. No investment process is going to pick the peak in the cycle, but we’d lean out as the risks increase.
With $504 billion flowing into passively managed products and $316 billion fleeing actively managed mutual funds in 2016 in the U.S., the active-versus-passive debate appears to be tipping in favor of passive management.
It’s time for our mid-year update to our 2017 Global Market Outlook. And the short story is that we’re not changing many of our views from our annual outlook.
The Trump agenda was an ambitious one. Senior investment strategist Paul Eitelman breaks down its progress piece by piece and shows the potential impact on markets and investors.
Although we’re just five months into 2017, I’ve focused on the notion of building a foundation in the new year, as well as looking to the future. It’s with these concepts in mind that I’ve approached my 2017 reading list and come up with a selection of books that encompasses economic fundamentals, modern international economics, and the art of market forecasting.
We all know that investing is inherently risky and that diversification is one way to help to manage risk. Most investors or advisors—who know just how important a diversified portfolio can be—would not go all fixed income, or all value stocks, or put all their money in a single company.