Vault Series: David Ranson, HCWE & Co.

David Ranson provided an enlightening presentation during the second part of CFA Society Chicago’s new Vault Series held on March 15 in the Vault Room of 33 N. LaSalle. Ranson is President and Director of Research at HCWE & Co., an independent investment research firm that was formerly a division of H.C. Wainright & Co. Ranson presented a simple, but effective model–based on his extensive research into capital market returns and correlations–that his firm uses to advise clients on tactical asset allocation. Their process uses historical market price movements to uncover predictive relationships between leading indicators and, highly-correlated, consistent outcomes.

The model’s simplicity derives from viewing the investment universe as comprising just four primary asset classes (exhibit 1):

  • Domestic bonds
  • Gold
  • Domestic equities
  • Foreign assets and physical assets (commodities, real estate, etc.)

Ranson 1_Page_02

(It’s important to note that the model considers gold as uniquely different from all other commodities.)

Ranson began by describing the role of capital migration in investment performance (exhibit 2). Capital migrates away from countries or markets characterized by economic stagnation, lower asset returns, declining new investment, and rising unemployment, and will flow to areas where the opposite conditions apply. Causes of the poor performance can be excessive government spending, taxation, and regulation, and “regime uncertainty” stemming from secretive or unpredictable policies.  These are difficult to quantify, but are usually accompanied by two more easily measured indicators: currency weakness, and rising economic anxiety (i.e., market stress).  These two indicators are the primary market signals the model relies on.  The price of gold serves to measure a currency’s value, and credit spreads measure economic anxiety.Ranson 1_Page_03

Ranson described four economic scenarios arrayed in quadrants defined by the change in the rates of economic growth and inflation (exhibit 3). Accelerating growth occupies the two lower quadrants and declining growth the top two, while accelerating inflation resides in the two right-hand quadrants and decelerating inflation on the left side. The scenarios (quadrants) determine the best performing assets.  Haven assets (bonds and gold) do best in the two upper scenarios when economic growth declines.  Risk assets (equities and commodities) stand out in the lower half of the array when economies accelerate.  When viewed laterally, financial assets (Ranson called them “soft” assets) that struggle against inflation reside on the left side of the array and those that do better against rising inflation (“hard” assets) reside on the right side.  Hard assets include gold, other commodities, real estate, and foreign equities.  (All foreign equities fit into this category because the model assumes they would perform comparatively well when an investor’s home currency is weak.) Putting the model together, shows gold as the preferred asset in the upper right quadrant (decelerating growth with rising inflation) and bonds preferred in the upper left quadrant (both growth and inflation decelerating). Domestic equities shine in the lower left quadrant (rising growth and decelerating inflation) while commodities and real estate are best in the lower right quadrant when both growth and inflation rise.Ranson 1_Page_04

Ranson presented statistics to support his model (exhibit 4). Separating the past 45 years of available data for the United States, he showed that when the rate of GDP growth accelerated from the prior year, the returns on equities and commodities always improved, while returns on treasury bonds and gold worsened.  When the rate of GDP growth slowed from the prior year, the reverse relationships held: returns on equities and commodities fell, and those for bonds and gold improved.Ranson 1_Page_05

Looking at inflation rates revealed similarly intuitive results (exhibit 6). When the CPI accelerated in a year, financial assets (both stocks and bonds) exhibited weaker returns, and gold and commodities did better than in the prior year.  When the CPI decelerated, financial assets enjoyed improved returns, while gold and commodities worsened.

Putting it all together (exhibit 11), Ranson presented an Asset-Allocation Compass with north pointing to heightened business risk, increasing investment anxiety, weakening economic growth and widening credit spreads. South points to the exact opposite conditions. East points to a weakening, or unstable, currency (measured by the price of gold) and west to a strengthening currency. He then filled in the best asset classes for eight points around the compass. His four primary asset classes occupied the diagonal compass points, corresponding to their positioning in the quadrant array:

  • Gold in the northeast
  • High quality bonds in the northwest
  • Domestic equities in the southwest
  • Hard assets in the southeast

Ranson 1_Page_12

Ranson assigned the primary points of the compass to sub-groups of the primary classes. The most intuitive one was Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) pointing west (declining inflation, strengthening currency). Pointing south toward strengthening growth were risk assets: B-rated junk bonds, MLPs, and developed market foreign equities. Pointing east (rising inflation and a falling currency) were commercial real estate and C-rated junk bonds, assets exhibiting little influence from changing spreads and more from the price of gold. The distinction between B and C-rated junk bonds may be surprising but Ranson’s research has shown that while they are correlated to each other, C’s are much better correlated to the gold price while B’s correlate more to credit spreads.

The compass had nothing listed for north (weakening growth and heightened risk perceptions). Ranson noted that he was not aware of an asset class that would fit well in this slot but, like a gap in the periodic table of the elements, he could describe the attributes he expected it to exhibit. It would have to respond positively to widening credit spreads, and be little effected by the price of gold (or value of the dollar).

In response to a question following his presentation, Ranson pointed out that the correlations his model depends on often take several years to manifest themselves, so the model works best for patient investors with very long investment horizons.

CFA Society Chicago Book Club:

The Gray Rhino: How to Recognize and Act on the Obvious Dangers We Ignore by Michele Wucker

thegrayrhino-3D-coverOverlooking or underestimating obvious dangers is a timeless tradition. A man is terrified of planes but gets in his car every day and drives with no seat belt. A woman pays the fire insurance premium on her home religiously but doesn’t floss her teeth. People play the lotto but don’t take advantage of their employers’ 401(k) matching contributions. Organizations, including governments, are as bad or worse.  Passengers remove their shoes at airports to prevent a shoe bombing, which has been attempted once in human history—unsuccessfully—while infrastructure is allowed to crumble to the point of collapse, such as the I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota, that collapsed under the weight of normal traffic and killed 13 people. That catastrophe didn’t occur because it was rare, hard to predict or even unpredictable, a black swan in modern parlance from Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s 2007 classic of the same name.  Instead, those dangers are obvious and imminent; much like the danger of a charging gray rhino, from which Michele Wucker’s The Gray Rhino: How to Recognize and Act on the Obvious Dangers We Ignore (2016) derives its name.

In February of 2017, the CFA Society Chicago’s Book Club had the privilege of hosting Ms. Wucker in person to discuss her Book. The conversation was wide ranging and included water shortages, global warming, the Challenger Shuttle disaster, and many other topics. Why do we spend resources worrying about and preventing rare events but ignore or do nothing about obvious, preventable dangers? Ms. Wucker has several explanations from the social sciences: taboos about raising alarms, groupthink, anchoring and confirmation biases. She notes the origins of the sobriquet Cassandra, an unflattering term used to describe people who warn others about potential dangers. The original Cassandra was given the power of prophecy from the god Apollo. When she didn’t reciprocate Apollo’s affections, he threw a curse on her that prevented others from believing her prophecies, including her prophecy that the Greeks would attack Troy, which is what ultimately happened. The negative connotations that are associated with the name of someone who correctly warned others about impending danger speaks to deep seated cultural aversions to raising alarms. That negativity combined with the fact that Cassandra was a woman who was punished for shunning the advances of a male superior is a similarly depressing statement about society.

With the manifold existence of Gray Rhinos and their causes firmly established, the question turns to their taxonomy and life-cycle. Ms. Wucker identifies eight types and five stages of a Gray Rhino.  The eight types include the “Inconvenient Truth” Gray Rhinos that are widely recognized but not acted upon due to denial, including manufactured denial, and high costs to fix.  Global warming is the classic example of an Inconvenient Truth Gray Rhino. There are also the “Creative Destruction” Gray Rhinos such as Kodachrome, where acceptance and orderly unwinding are the only tenable solutions. It was not mama but the inevitable march of time that took our Kodachrome away. For each of the eight types in the taxonomy, all follow a life cycle of five stages. The first stage is denial, the second is muddling or kicking the can down the road, followed by haphazard diagnostic exercises, the third, panic, the fourth, and finally action.

Ms. Wucker’s Taxonomy and Stages are invaluable contributions to the ongoing policy discussion. The Taxonomy and Stages also need to be viewed in the context of organizational motivations and individual incentives, though. A good example is the Challenger disaster that Ms. Wucker opens her book with.  When making go/no-go decisions, it’s helpful to look at data from previous failures as well as data from previous successes. Space shuttles relied on re-usable solid rocket boosters for their initial launch. The boosters were built in segments and each segment had o-rings that were supposed to keep hot gas from escaping. When o-rings get too cold, they become brittle and fail allowing hot gasses to escape, which is what caused the Challenger disaster. On the morning of the launch, one engineer spoke up against the launch. The coldest successful launch took place when the temperature was 53 degrees. In that launch, gas escaped passed the first ring and caused corrosion on the backup ring, but the backup ring contained the gases. Below 53 degrees, there were no data. On the morning of the Challenger launch, the temperature was 35 degrees.

On January 28, 1986, NASA got an additional data point. The backup ring failed and seven astronauts died.  The Challenger disaster didn’t happen because the world’s smartest people didn’t understand the threat of cold weather to the proper function of o-rings. It happened because of the tremendous pressures on NASA to proceed with the launch. The space shuttle was originally conceived as a way to easily and cheaply launch people into space and return them in a re-usable ship.  The term “space bus” was even used. In practice, the program proved to be more costly and inefficient than the shuttle’s predecessors. NASA was under tremendous pressure to demonstrate the viability of the program.  In addition, the Challenger was going to launch the first teacher, Christa McAuliffe, into space. Millions of people were tuned to their television sets to see a launch that had already been delayed several times.  The organizational and public relations pressure to proceed with the launch overwhelmed good judgement.

Organizational pressures and incentive structures are that root of several Gray Rhinos. Scarce public funds either can be used to pay teachers or fix bridges that seem to work fine (until they don’t). Publicly traded companies struggle to look past obstacles beyond meeting quarterly numbers. Politicians aren’t incentivized to deal with any problem such as global warming whose most detrimental effects are likely to occur after a two, four, or six year term.

The assembled Book Club members and Ms. Wucker did offer several solutions to the Gray Rhino problem.  First, align incentives. Executive compensation should vest fully over a period of years or even decades.  Investors should similarly hold companies to account for long term performance and be more forgiving of short term volatility. Allowing US banks to hold stocks as banks do in Japan and Germany might allow more steady capital into capital markets and reward longer term performance, too. Second, break the problem into small pieces. There’s an old expression: “How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.” The same logic applies to Rhinos. Instead of trying to fix all the nations crumbling infrastructure, prioritize. Fix one bridge at a time, starting with the most dilapidated. Third, to combat groupthink and denial, include diverse perspectives in one’s circle and allow multiple channels of access to leaders and decision makers.  Related to that third point, the group discussed the competing leadership styles of Presidents Reagan and Kennedy. President Kennedy’s administration followed a spokes-on-a-wheel format where multiple influencers had direct access to the President, which could explain his successful resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis. President Reagan, on the other hand, had a more linear chain of command with multiple bottlenecks and chokepoints, which could explain how in the Iran-Contra Affair a few rogue elements of his administration where able to conduct arms sales and a covert war without knowledge or involvement from either the State or Defense Departments.

The Gray Rhino is a welcome addition to current policy debates and compliments established organizational behavior and social science literature well. At 304 pages, it’s also a manageable and enjoyable read. The Society is very grateful to Ms. Wucker for her book and for her attendance at our meeting.

Volunteer of the Month: March 2017

volunteer-1888823

Spencer Kelly

Thank you to all the dedicated CFA Society Chicago volunteers who give selflessly of their time and talents! This month the Professional Development Advisory Group is recognizing Spencer Kelly.

New Candidate member Spencer Kelly joined the Society in November 2016 and hit the ground running with his volunteer participation. Spencer joined the Professional Development Advisory Group and signed up to help plan Industry Roundtables, one of the Society’s notable member-only events. He worked with a subcommittee to secure 12 roundtable hosts to discuss their respective sectors in the investment industry.

Please join the Society and the Professional Development Advisory Group in thanking Spencer for his contributions.

Distinguished Speaker Series: Richard Driehaus, Driehaus Capital Management LLC

DSC_3546

The Distinguished Speaker Series hosted Richard H. Driehaus at the Metropolitan Club Oak Room on March 1st, 2017. Mr. Driehaus is founder, chief investment officer and chairman of Driehaus Capital Management LLC. In 2000 he was named to Barron’s “All-Century” team whose players were deemed the most influential in the mutual fund industry over the past 100 years. Mr. Driehaus aim was to divide his presentation into three sections: Early Years, Investing, and Industry Trends.

DSC_3548He began his presentation by referencing the difficulties his father had in developing a residential lot his family owned. Although his father had a steady paycheck as a mechanical engineer, he was not able to afford his goal of developing the land for his expanding family. Mr. Driehaus at that point began thinking about how he would make sure to achieve his goals.

When he was 13, Mr. Driehaus spotted the NYSE quotes in a local newspaper. DSC_3533When informed about what the NYSE quotes meant, he became fascinated and soon found that his calling was the investment industry.

Mr. Driehaus argues that the principals of Taoism are applicable to the stock market. Taoism stresses living in harmony with the universal laws of nature. Nature has given man both a creative and analytic side to his brain. You must be able to use both sides of your brain to understand the market.

Mr. Driehaus shared the following market insights:

  • Stock price will almost always never equal a company’s intrinsic value. The valuation process is flawed.
  • It is better to concentrate in sectors as certain sectors will have better outlooks than the market as a whole.
  • More money is made by buying high and selling higher (positive relative strength).
  • Hit home runs, not singles and avoid striking out (cut your losses).
  • High turnover reduces risk; take a series of small losses but not a big loss.
  • Standard deviation is a poor measure of investment risk.
  • The greatest long term risk is not having enough exposure to risk.

Mr. Driehaus emphasized that continuous observation is needed for investment analysis.  Knowledge gained must then be applied in the context of a rapidly changing environment. You must maintain belief in your core principles for the long-term to succeed.

DSC_3541Mr. Driehaus had the following observations of the industry and current equity market:

  • A 60/40 equity/bond allocation will not be aggressive enough for retirees due to longer life spans.
  • As inflation becomes hotter bonds will be less attractive than stocks.
  • Active managers have been losing assets due to the lower fees associated with indexing.
  • Meaningful alpha generation is not easy in this environment but still doable.
  • Active management will outperform when interest rates normalize as equity dispersion will be greater.
  • Expect a greater shift to international equities.

Following his presentation Mr. Driehaus fielded questions on a number of topics:

  • Investing in growth stocks allowed him to prove himself more quickly.
  • Hedge funds are paralyzed because they want safety; they are not taking on enough risk to differentiate themselves.
  • Look closely at volume when you’re thinking about selling one of your winners.
  • His philanthropy emphasizes that architecture is very important. Big box retail has killed a number of small communities and failed to protect the “sense of place”.

CFA Society Chicago Progressive Networking Luncheon

DSC_3527

CFA Society Chicago’s Progressive Networking Luncheon held on February 22nd at Petterino’s was an opportunity with a different flavor than other networking events.  Featuring a three-course meal, each course provided an intimate opportunity to chat and really get to know fellow table guests.  As the course changed throughout the lunch, so did your table guests! The format transformed the networking from one with challenges to begin conversations to one in which fellow diners were a part of the flow of topics. It made it remarkably easy to ask questions, gain insights from others and provide your own food for thought.

The attendees were delightfully varied as well. In addition to attendees from industry mainstays such as Northern Trust and William Blair, others from further afield industries, yet still very much in finance roles, provided interesting insights. Students also had the opportunity to learn from potential future colleagues.

Join us next time to enjoy a great meal while networking with interesting people!

Distinguished Speaker Series: Charles Evans, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago

Evans 7_PingHomeric

Charles Evans, President and Chief Executive Officer, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Photo courtesy of Ping Homeric)

Charles Evans, president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, addressed approximately 250 members and guests of the CFA Society Chicago on Thursday, February 9th at the Standard Club. The event was also webcast for those who could not attend the luncheon. Mr. Evans spoke about the U.S. economy, fiscal stimulus and monetary policy. He completed his presentation with responses to questions from the audience.

Mr. Evans expects a modest acceleration in economic growth to the 2.0% to 2.5% rate, and a rise in inflation to near 2.0% over the next several years. As a result, the Fed’s most likely course of action is three 0.25% increases in the Fed Funds rate in each of the next three years. These increases would elevate this rate to near 3.0% by the end of 2019. The primary risk to this outlook is that inflation does not rise to 2.0%.

Evans Board_PingHomeric

Chicago Fed President Charles Evans and CFA Society Chicago Board Members (Photo courtesy of Ping Homeric)

Fiscal policy could positively impact growth by near 0.25% a year. Lower tax rates might contribute to higher growth over the intermediate term. Additionally, optimistic consumer sentiment, resulting from healthy employment data, should contribute to growth. Average monthly gains of 180K employees over the past year have reduced the unemployment rate to 4.8%. A constraint has been business investment during the recovery, which shows no real sign of improvement.

Mr. Evans expects a decline in the unemployment rate to 4.25% by late 2019. His forecast is slightly lower than Fed’s consensus of 4.5%. The natural rate appears to be near 4.7%. A decline to the 4.25% to 4.50% range would suggest a Fed move from ease to neutral to tightening over the next several years. The downside risk to this outlook is weak foreign economies. The upside would be a greater boost from fiscal policy and regulatory ease.

Inflation has averaged 1.5% since 2009. The “Core” rate has moved up to 1.7%. Mr. Evans expects core inflation to reach 2.0% over the next three years. The downside risk is low global inflation and a strong dollar.

The structural equilibrium neutral Fed Funds rate has fallen to a lower level. Low interest rates, throughout the world, provide the central banks with less room for ease in the next downturn. The Fed has typically lowered the Fed Funds by greater than 5.0%, during easing periods and currently believes that the neutral rate is near 3.0% (1% real and 2.0% inflation). Therefore, they may not have as much room to lower rates during next recession. The secondary tools would be quantitative easing and guidance for how long rates would remain low. These non-conventional methods are “second best” to the ability to lower rates.

DSC_3486

Distinguished Speaker Series featuring Charles Evans

 

From 1960 to 2000, the economy grew at a 3.5% annual rate. Post 2000, the growth rate has been lower. The labor force participation rate has fallen over the past 15 years; because of retiring baby boomers, passing the peak inflow of women into the labor force, and a falling rate of employment for 18 to 24-year-old individuals. The potential real GDP growth rate has probably fallen to near 1.75%.

During the questions and answers segment, Mr. Evans addressed the following topics:

  1. CFA-Society-Cindy-Anggraini-from-Indonesia-010917-PingHomeric-0G1A5073

    President Charles Evans responds to questions from the audience.              (Photo courtesy of Ping Homeric)

    Long-term interest rates have risen 0.50% since the election, suggesting that the markets expect some positive impact from fiscal and regulatory policies. He noted that changes in tax policy (i.e. eliminate deductions, border adjusting tax, etc.) can be disruptive in the intermediate term, even though positive in the long-term.

  2. The Fed’s balance sheet grew from $800 M to $4.5 T. Eventually, this level is likely to fall back to near $1.5 T. The Most likely path would be through not re-invest principal payments.
  3. The impact of technology on productivity was apparent in 1995 to 2005 data. Since then, it has not been. He referenced the “gee-wiz” nature of more recent new technologies and quick obsolescence.
  4. The Fed chose not to use negative interest rates, even though the Taylor Rule suggested -4.0% at the low point. The Fed chose quantitative easing instead- sold short bonds and bought long. He noted some positive effect in Europe, which could influence future Fed boards.
  5. Finally, he noted that more global trade is better, provided it’s fair. Trade increases competition, which encourages higher productivity. The United Kingdom is likely to face a complicated period ahead to exit from the EU and establish new trade agreements.

Distinguished Speaker Series: Will McLean, CFA, Northwestern University

DSC_3297

The Endowment Model in a Low Return World

On January 24th the Distinguished Speaker Series held its first luncheon of the year welcoming one of our own, Will McLean, CFA. Mr. McLean is Vice President and Chief Investment Officer at Northwestern University, and is responsible for managing the University’s $9.7 billion endowment portfolio. Mr. McLean gave an engaging presentation to a sold out crowd over lunch at the W City Center.

Mr. McLean’s presentation centered on the challenges endowments face given the low expected return environment. McLean explained that Northwestern University follows the Yale Model of endowment investing. The Yale Model is an investment philosophy developed by David Swensen, the Yale University Chief Investment Officer. This model deviates from the traditional asset classes (stocks, bonds, and cash) and uses modern portfolio theory to invest in alternative and non-liquid assets in the form of private equity and hedge funds.

Mr. McLean laid out five principles used to manage the University’s portfolio:

  1. Diversification – this concept is straightforward. As a portfolio becomes more diversified there is typically less correlation, and the risk of the portfolio is reduced. McLean advised issues could arise if a portfolio becomes overly diversified. Excessive diversification spreads capital thinly and causes an excellent investment to impart a marginal influence on the total value of the portfolio. Over diversification could also cause investment standards to be lowered – when anything can be added to the portfolio, standards are more likely to loosened.
  2. Equity oriented portfolios need to provide a higher than average return. Given the makeup of the portfolio and the annual needs of the University, the expected return of the portfolio is in the 7-8% range.
  3. Take advantage of the illiquidity premium. The time horizon of the University’s portfolio is near perpetuity. Therefore, it is reasonable to invest in illiquid / inefficient markets.
  4. Use active managers – invest in stock pickers in the right markets. Northwestern’s investment management team and board of trustees believe active management adds value, and more uncertainty should be good for active management. Different asset classes offer different dispersions. It makes little sense to invest in the large cap equity space when the difference between the top and bottom quartile manager is not significant. Seek out alternative asset classes with bigger dispersions of returns.
  5. Ensure that your manager’s interests aligned with your own. When engaging in manager selection find out who owns the investment management firm that is under consideration. What is the owner’s motivation? McLean advised that it had been his experience that when a manager takes their firm public with an IPO, the manager’s performance underperforms. Their motivation changes from client enrichment to self-enrichment.

Due diligence should also take into account other aspects besides the manager’s performance record. Consider the internal split of management fees; do they flow to a select few individuals? How much career advancement is available to junior employees at the investment firm?  Are employees likely to be nurtured and grow or leave the firm? Negative answers to any of these questions the long-term viability of the manager to produce alpha.

DSC_3299Once his prepared remarks were concluded, Mr. McLean took a number of questions from the audience.

How do you manage board expectations of returns?

Many board members are former money managers, thus they are well versed in the risk vs. return dynamic, and they have rational market expectations.

How do you manage spending over bad returns?

There is a spending policy, which is a board level decision. The portion of the University budget funded by the endowment does not vary much from year to year.

Does Northwestern University take a view on asset allocation?

The University does not believe in market timing or tactical investing.

What is the thought process of the allocating AUM to the hedge fund asset class?

The University’s current allocation is for a 20% weighting to hedge funds. In general, 1/3 goes to long/short, and 2/3 goes to uncorrelated macro and market neutral strategies. Overall Northwestern University views hedge funds as an uncorrelated piece of the portfolio.

How does one incorporate human phycology / behavior into choosing an investment manager?

The University has a standardized approach for manager selection. Behavioral patterns at the manager firm are collected and evaluated. The manager selection team has been trained (by outside sources) to ask the right questions during the interview process, and to evaluate the manager’s non-verbal answers. Current and former employees are also interviewed for their points of view. Overall, you must train yourself to consider the all aspects of the manager’s answers and behavior.

Starting Your Own RIA Firm

DSC_3379

Many talented professionals some day dream of having their own business. In the financial industry this usually means being the trusted advisor and investor on behalf of individuals and small businesses. The CFA Society Chicago and its Professional Development Advisory Group assembled a panel to offer insights for people who are considering exploring this possibility.  This panel of experts was composed of the following RIA professionals:

Jenifer Aronson, CFA – Ms. Aronson, moderator of the panel, is managing partner with Mosaic Fi, LLC. Ms. Aronson is a member of the Steering Committee for the CFA Women’s Advisory Group. She works with family offices and high net-worth individuals. Prior to Mosaic, Ms. Aronson has over 20 years of experience with Northern Trust and Brinson Partners.

Chris Abraham, CFA – Mr. Abraham is founder of CVA Investment Management. Prior to founding CVA, he held positions at Nuveen Investments, Anderson Tax, Mercer Investment Consulting, Intel Corporation, and Ariel Investments. Mr. Abraham left Ariel to found his own investment firm.

Gautam Dhingra, CFA – Mr. Dhingra founded High Pointe Capital Management. Prior to founding High Pointe he spent most of his career at Hewitt Associates. Mr. Dhingra has served as a Lecturer of Finance at Northwestern, Chairman of CFA Society Chicago, and on the Board of Regents for CFA Institute. Mr. Dhingra left Hewitt to found High Pointe.

Robert Finley, CFA, CFP – Mr. Finley is Principal of Virtue Asset Management. Prior to founding Virtue, he held positions in wealth management at LaSalle Bank and at TIAA-CREF’s Trust Department. Mr. Finley founded Virtue after leaving TIAA-CREF.

GJ King – Mr. King is President of RIA in a Box. Prior to RIA in a Box, Mr. King held positions at Goldman Sachs serving as an advisor to high net worth entrepreneurs, families, and foundations. RIA in a Box currently assists nearly 1,500 RIA’s in helping to overcome the compliance challenges of having your own RIA firm.

Ms. Aronson began the discussion by asking a series of questions of the panel members. Below is a list of those questions and the responses of the panel.

DSC_3357

Why did you start and what was your biggest concern about starting?

The panelists were certain that they could provide a better investing experience for their clients. The people they were recommending on behalf of their employers appeared to add little value. Their corporate jobs were becoming more demanding, but their salaries were not reflecting the added responsibilities. They expressed a fascination with the markets and a drive to obtain upper quartile performance for clients who would put their trust in them.

Their biggest concerns revolved around their families and the fact that they would not have a reliable paycheck for some time.

How did you develop your firm?

Panelists talked about a wide range of service providers that can be utilized. Interviewing managers and hiring the right legal help is critical. It is important to determine what fee structure will be needed given your costs. If you need a Bloomberg machine, that is a significant cost.  You can find firms that can provide all the services you need, or you can parcel it out.

What is a day in the life like?

The panelists stressed that there are two separate but critical roles, marketing and investing.  People with investing talent tend to spend too much time in that role. More time is needed in marketing which means finding potential clients amenable to your sales pitch. You must be able to separate cold leads from warm leads. Traveling is also essential to meet clients and evaluate companies you are thinking of investing in.

What questions should people ask themselves before starting an RIA?

Do you want to be an entrepreneur? You must be motivated to sell and be willing to hustle to accumulate assets. Has your family bought in? The few years will be difficult; can you handle the ups and downs? There is a leap of faith to leave an established firm.

What would you do different?

Look for partners, mentors and advisors, don’t be afraid to engage others. A trusted partner to share the burden would be a valuable asset. Don’t be afraid of compliance, but keep it lean. The client is trying to evaluate if he can trust you, you must be able to show responsible reporting and compliance.

What was your biggest surprise?

Institutions can be more short-sighted than individuals. Retail clients will be more loyal. The ups and downs were tougher than the panelists first thought they would be. People will be more helpful than you think. You must be disciplined in spotting bad deals and being able to say no.

How did you build your book?

The panelists stressed that you must be adept at marketing, or find someone who is. Friends, family, ex-colleagues, and people you have had relationships with over the past five years are potential clients. Walk-ins must be able to find you. How do you differentiate yourself from your competitors? If you have an edge in substance and style they will remember you. Can you get to the point where you can withstand a 50% hit in a bear market?

Current Market & Regulatory Environment

GJ King of RIA in a Box pointed to three regulations that directly impact this industry and that may see significant modification in the near future.

  1. DOL Fiduciary Rule. This rule will require that most advisors must be in a fiduciary role for their client. If implemented this should have little effect on RIA’s, but may be more disruptive to broker/dealers. This rule is facing delay and possible modification.
  2. Repeal of Dodd Frank. Modification may include that funds that previously were required to register with the SEC may be relieved of this burden.
  3. A new Form ADV will be required by October 1st. RIA’s will be required to reveal more about their company.

DSC_3374

Mr. King also spoke briefly about the need for a chief compliance officer (CCO) for every RIA firm. Typically the CCO is also the principal of the company. Companies with over $500 million in assets under management are required to have a full time CCO.

There was a brief Q&A session following the panel’s presentations that touched on the following topics:

  • CFAs are exempt from passing the Series 65 exam in Illinois.
  • Liability insurance is relatively cheap and does make sense.
  • Disgruntled clients can be avoided by doing quality control on prospective clients. Agree up front on what is expected of you.
  • Robo Advisors have not been disruptive to this industry. They have affected the brokerage industry.
  • Although the target market may be 60 years of age or above who have the most accumulated assets who are 60 years of age and above, do not leave their children out of the discussion as they are future clients.

Annual Celebration 2016: New Member and Volunteer Recognition

DSC_3337

CFA Society Chicago Advisory Group Co-Chairs

CFA Society Chicago held its annual celebration for new members and volunteers on Thursday, January 26, 2017. The site was a unique one–the dress circle lounge at the Chicago Opera House, which was filled to near capacity. The event provided a wonderful opportunity for new members to build their professional networks, and a time for everyone to reconnect with friends and colleagues.

Chairman of the Society, Doug Jackman, CFA, led off the official portion of the event by welcoming everyone, and thanking the many volunteers for their hours of effort that make the CFA Society Chicago a success. The Society currently has more than 225 volunteers who make the 100 plus events over the year possible. Jackman gave a special welcome for the new members and encouraged them to seek out the members of the various advisory groups represented at the meeting and to consider joining one to assure the continued success of the society’s programming:

  • Annual Dinner Advisory GroupDSC_3308
  • Communications Advisory Group
  • Distinguished Speaker Series Advisory Group
  • Education Advisory Group
  • Membership Engagement Advisory Group
  • Professional Development Advisory Group
  • Social Events Advisory Group
  • CFA Women’s Network

Executive Director Shannon Curley, CFA, then stepped to the mic and announced the list of volunteers recognized for their outstanding contributions during 2016 to each advisory group:

DSC_3327 - Copy

CFA Society Chicago Volunteers – Outstanding Contribution 2016

Annual Dinner – Melissa Binder, CFA

Professional Development – Shai (Shy) Dobrusin, CFA and Samantha Grant, CFA

Communications – Brad Adams, CFA

Education Seminars – Jeanne Murphy, CFA and Cindy Tsai, CFA

Distinguished Speakers Series – Alan Papier, CFA

Membership Engagement – Gerald Norby, CFA

Social Events – Taylor Champion, CFA

Curley continued by thanking the co-chairs of the advisory groups for the extensive time and energy they put into making the events the society offers so valuable to our membership. All recognized volunteers received a gift from the society in appreciation of their service. The final piece of official business was the drawing of raffle prizes (to some the highlight of the event). This year, everyone could choose to enter their choice of three drawings, each offering a combination of dining, entertainment and hotel vouchers. With the official business completed, the socializing continued for the remainder of the event.

DSC_3341

DSC_3340  DSC_3345

Diversity Improves Your Bottom Line and How You Can Achieve More of It: Andie Kramer and Al Harris

Recognizing the benefits of a diverse workforce, and overcoming the challenges to it (which are often subtle and hidden below the surface) was the theme of the presentation Andie Kramer and Al Harris made to the CFA Society Chicago on January 18. Andie and Al are practicing attorneys, and also business partners working to build awareness of the benefits of expanded diversity–especially gender diversity–in the workplace. Their starting premise is that teams of diverse members will be more productive because the differences among the members requires that they be more careful in their deliberations, more thoughtful about what they say, more collaborative with each other, and in the end, more productive and innovative. So, increased diversity is not just morally and ethically right, it can also lead to improved results and profits.

If greater diversity is so good, why is it difficult to achieve? Mainly because it takes us out of our comfort zones. We naturally prefer to associate and work with people who are like us in many ways. Reaching consensus with people of differing perspectives can be difficult, so we tend to avoid diverse groups to reduce tension and conflicts. Improving diversity requires addressing several areas, first among them is the challenge of bias which Kramer and Harris define as an unconscious belief, preference, or inclination that inhibits impartiality. Bias in turn is shaped by stereotypes which ascribe behavioral characteristics to someone based on an easily observed characteristic (such as gender, age, race, etc.). These stereotypes form our perceptions and expectations about people even before we know them. Our challenge is to invalidate these misperceptions with real evidence.

Kramer and Harris pointed out two types of personality characteristics that stereotypes assign by gender. Stereotyping considers communal characteristics such as compassion, affection, modesty, sympathy, and warmth to be feminine. Conversely, agentic, or action-oriented characteristics such as aggressiveness, confidence, risk acceptance, and independence are masculine. We naturally consider successful leaders to be agentic, and if we consider those characteristics to be masculine, we create a bias toward men as leaders. Gender bias is often manifested through “micro-aggressions” such as subtle putdowns (verbal and nonverbal), sarcasm, and dismissive gestures.  In Kramer and Harris’s view these provide the scaffolding for workplace discrimination.

What can men and women do to improve this situation? Men must first learn to recognize gender bias, using the indicators of micro-aggressions, and object to it firmly. They should “think slow”, using their rational brains more than the emotional. They should advocate for women as mentors (whether formal or not), and embrace differences. Women need to perform a balancing act: recognize the importance of agentic characteristics, but temper them with the communal.

Organizations can improve diversity by recognizing that gender bias exists and that by holding back women, it leads to sub-optimal results. They should strive to make hiring and promoting practices fair and equitable. An important step toward this is removing subjectivity from the evaluation process as much as possible (for example, eliminating open-ended questions in interviews). Finally, managers should seek feedback on their efforts from employees or external experts.