My Zimbio

NPI Pensions | Abbey Life Pensions | Fund Choice and Investment Risk

January 18th, 2010 richard Posted in Abbey Life, Equitable Life, NPI News | Comments Off

More Ways To Find Out If You Have a Duff Pension Plan And The Action You Can Take To Solve It.

Over the past couple of weeks (yup I know we have just come past Christmas) I have been speaking to more and NPI Pension Owners. This is good news because many have been sadly lacking in advice for some time.

I have produced a list of Poor Pension Providers and these are here. Please fee free to look around the list and contact me should you wish to discuss (informally) any of them.

Abbey Life Pensions/Pension Planning Risk Profile/Investment Funds

For those of you that do not know me, I am a Pensions Expert, with a particular dislike of some of the poorer pension providers in the market place. My Abbey Life Pension Pages are here. And there is an option to find out some further information on this page.

This brief summary is an outline of one of the really big pitfalls and where most Financial Advisers/Banks and Building Society Advisers get it V E R Y wrong. Just look at what some Financial Advisers have been saying on one of their own forums.(Please note this is an external link)

Asset Allocation Rule – Don’t put all of your (investment)Eggs in one basket(or managed fund).

One of the vitally important parts of any Investment Planning (and this includes Pensions) is the correct Asset Allocation.

An explanation is below.

“The process of dividing investments among different kinds of assets, such as stocks, government bonds, property and cash, to optimize the risk/reward trade off based on an individual’s or specific situation and goals. A key concept in financial planning and money management” explained by Investor Words.com

Now even with some of the poorer Pensions Providers in the market place there is a range of available investment funds, however the quality of the advice received initially is often limited and usually there is only one fund chosen. For many of you with these Pension Plans (see list) Have a look at your own Pension Statement, one or two funds within the fund could indicate a poor deal indeed.

Your Provider may not have a range of funds that are remotely usable and this is often the case.

Which of course means that the Asset Allocation rule cannot be used correctly in any instance.

Lets consider the reasons behind this rule – Investment Risk.

There is no right or wrong level of risk; it is just personal preference. An acceptable level of risk to you may be unacceptable to others. As a rule of thumb, the higher the potential returns the higher the risk.

Your attitude to risk may change throughout your life and you should review your investments as this happens.

There are five main types of investment risk are:

Market risk – the risk that market-linked investments lose value when markets fall

Interest rate risk – the risk that investments will lose value when interest rates rise

Inflation risk – the risk that your investment will not keep pace with the cost of living

Credit risk – the risk that the provider may not be able to meet their obligations

Currency risk – the risk that your investment may be affected by changes in exchange rates. The level of investment risk your money is subject to increases if either, you invest in a single type of share, a limited geographical area or a specific part of the economy.

When I am making Pension Investment recommendations the above rules are used as part of the decision making process.

So how does this fit in with your current Pension Plan.

Has your adviser provided you with a range of funds to invest in?

Does your Pension provider even have a range of suitable funds to invest in (not forgetting issues like charges and administration standards)?

If you do have a range of invested funds when was the last time these were reviewed?

I fully understand that you would like some further informatin which is why I have produced a free report and outlining some of the issues here.

Please contact me when you require some further advise, or consider downloading our Pensions Review document, a free report outlining the important points.

Richard Smith

0845 226 9106

Similar Links

Abbey Life Pension Review

Free Pension Review

High Charge Pensions


Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

With Profits Investment | Investment Adviser | The Finance Zone.co.uk

January 5th, 2010 richard Posted in Equitable Life, General Financial News, Investments, Pearl Pension | Comments Off

It is quite amazing to me that the regulator, the Financial Services Authority, has allowed the biggest single sector of the UK investment market to end up in a big mess mess.

When considering With-Profits investments, and finding the correct advice via an Investment Adviser  both as a concept and in reality, should be simple, however is  often completely fudged by providers (Life Assurance Companies).

Despite the obligation for With-Profits providers to publish a PPFM (Principles and Practices of Financial Management) it is still often impossible to uncover all the relevant facts and figures. The PPFM documents themselves are often crammed with impassable terminology and detail and, like With-Profits in general, appear designed to make things as unclear as possible.  It is also interesting to note that many Investment Advisers also still get it very wrong.

The approach of many With-Profits companies with regard to transparency is often nothing short of appalling, and is in direct conflict with the FSA’s “Treating Customers Fairly” initiative.

It is hard to believe that in the modern investment world With-Profits still plays such a large part. It is clear that the concept of With-Profits has been mis-sold, allowing Insurance Companies and their sales people to present With-Profits as something it is not (not all IFA’s are wholly innocent either). With-Profits has undoubtedly regularly been sold as a direct alternative to deposit accounts.

There remains somewhere in the region of £300 billion invested in With-Profits, many are trapped by redemption penalties (often called, MVR’s, MVA’s etc.) but the funds themselves continue to deliver appalling results.

However, a small minority of providers  (Step forward – Prudential, Aviva, LV= and Wesleyan) have achieved positive and very acceptable results for their plan holders. These companies aren’t rocket scientists, they simply applied the original principles and benefits of with-profits, not chasing market trends and fashions, and investors with these companies are likely to be pleased with the results. Although there are another few companies who have achieved, at best, reasonable returns, somewhere in the region of 40% of all With-Profits investors are in funds that are doomed to underperform substantially in the future.

One of the many contradictions for With-Profit investors is that those in good plans with good companies, achieving good results, are likely to be in a position where redemption penalties (MVR’s, MVA’s, or some other element of the With-Profiits alphabet soup) do not apply, and they can move out of the fund quite easily. Sadly, this is another opportunity for the unscrupulous sales person to lump all With-profits funds under the same umbrella. In a nutshell, the poor funds usually have the highest penalties, the good funds often have no (or very low) penalties.

Yet another contradiction is that the good funds, with the best results, are usually those that have the highest asset allocations in shares and property which, ironically, makes them more vulnerable to market downturns and less suitable for the cautious investor that they are aimed at. Help !

If you have a With-Profits based investment, or are considering investing in one, take advice now and of course I will be pleased to help.

The reality is these investments are often not what they seem and there are a lot of lazy Financial Advisers out there that continue to use what in the modern world is clearly a little out of date.

Over here I pride myself on making sure that all investments fit completely with your overall Risk Profile and use an Independent System (that has been tested) in order to ensure my recommendations fit.

Richard Smith

0845 226 9106

You can contact me here

Related Links are below.

Abbey Life – Poor Pension Providers

Poor Pension Providers – Free Review

With Profits – Investment Advisers

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The Finance Zone | Self Employed Pensions | Abbey Life Personal Pension Planning |

December 28th, 2009 richard Posted in Abbey Life, Equitable Life, NPI News, Pearl Pension, Royal Sun Alliance, Scottish Provident, Windsor Life | Comments Off

The self employed  rapidly  becoming   marginal  in the world of  pensions , under-provisioned  and not seen by most recent governments and political parties, many it seems will arrive at  pensionable age with very little income..

There are a couple of  issues facing the self employed face when building up a retirement pot.

They are entitled only to the Basic State Pension, whereas employees  manage to obtain  both the Basic State Pension and an additional earnings related scheme now known as the State Second Pension (it was known as  SERPs). The overall limit  is capped at £151 per week (2008/09 Tax Year), which is equal to just over £7,800 a year.

Today (December 2009)the Basic State Pension is currently £95.25 per week or £4,953 per year. This is somewhat below poverty line levels and whilst anyone without private savings would be eligible for Pension Credit (provided of course this remains in place) which would take their income up to £130 a week (£6,760 per year) this is still not going to provide any kind of standard of living to aspire to. So the state isn’t giving much to the self employed and is only giving a little more to the employed).

Another issue they face is that by definition they don’t have an employer’s pension scheme on offer. In company pensions the contribution rates are typically split two thirds from the employer and one third from the employee, so the absence of an employer contribution makes a big difference. When it comes to contributions to private pensions, the self employed are lagging behind again. Even  the attitude from the UK treasury via the Inland Revenue seems to be against the Self Employed.

The final outcome is that the lack of state or employer pension support means that the self employed are at risk of spending retirement with very little there is also a more than outside chance that they will be working long than planed.

For many self employed there is the option of selling the business at retirement and the cash from sale making up for the shortfall in conventional pension planning, however try selling a local firm of Plumber’s or Electricians and you will find the world not really being that interested. The same also applies to Freelance Journalists and a range of other occupations.
One of the first rules of investment planning is of course not to put all of your eggs in one basket and of course this applies to your business along with conventional stocks and shares.

I strongly recommend  in the first instance you consider carefully the level of state support in relation to your Pension, and you can do this here.
You do have some choices, and planning is of course needed sooner rather than later.

In the first instance a review of your existing plans will be the starting point, and then some further reviews of the rest of your business planning and the making of a Retirement Plan in order to ensure your retirement is financially sound will be the best way forward.

Richard Smith

0845 226 9106

Related Links

Abbey Life Personal Pension Reviews

Allied Dunbar Pension Reviews (plus some others)

High Charge Pensions

Pension Survey Please Help

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Retirement Ages Changing | Pensions Advice | Richard Smith – thefinancezone.co.uk

December 7th, 2009 richard Posted in Abbey Life, NPI News, News - Updates, Pearl Pension, Pensions - News, Royal Sun Alliance, Scottish Provident, Windsor Life | Comments Off

Anyone born  on or between April 7 1955 and April 5 1960, will see the minimum age at which they can retire increase with effect from April 2010.  The effect of this is that you will only be able to draw pension benefits in 5 years time at the minimum age of 55.

So if you are approaching this retirement age you have a limited window in which to get some advice, make some decisions and move your planning forward. It is likely of course that any future change in government will move this retirement age out even further.

You must therefore take advice as soon as possible. The shocking number of people affected by this (some 4 million) will not able to obtain advice between now and April so sooner rather than later seems to be call from me.

The next  question is should you look to take your pension benefits ahead of the rule change? Clearly there is no hard and fast answer here, except to say that probably yes for many that will be the right action. Securing early access to your pension savings.

You will need to take action  and get some Pension Advice advice.

For those of you with Personal Pensions have a look at this list “Poor Pension Providers” Is yours on it? Please contact me immediately to discuss the options. There is some further information for you, along with a Free Report “Free Personal Pension Review

Or you can contact me here [Contact-1]

Richard Smith http://www.thefinancezone.co.uk

Advice on Pension Planning Matters

0845 226 9106

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Pension Planning – The Finance Zone – Advice and Ongoing Help

November 24th, 2009 richard Posted in Abbey Life, Equitable Life, NPI News, News - Updates, Pearl Pension, Pensions - News, Royal Sun Alliance, Scottish Provident | Comments Off

I have been busy of late helping many of you with very poor pension providers. Doing the things that they should be  doing for you, and with this in mind I have just published a mini article which you may find of interest.

The link to this is here >>

Richard Smith

0845 226 9106

For those of you with Personal Pensions With Natwest or other High Street Names you may want to see this post.

Or any one on this list (Abbey Life Pensions included)

My Free Pension Report is still available

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The Finance Zone | Equitable Life Pension | A Few Reasons To Review Your Pension Now

November 10th, 2009 richard Posted in Abbey Life, Equitable Life, News - Updates | Comments Off

Equitable Life Personal Pension Plans Some further Guidance Richard Smith – Independent Financial Adviser

Following some further work I have carried out for some policy holders of Equitable Life Pension and Investment Plans I am pleased to provide an overview and a brief guide to your options.

Equitable Life closed to New Business in 2000, prior to this they were not one of the greatest providers of Investment and Pension Products, investment performance was just about acceptable, and the level of charges within the plans was on the high side of higher than average, but certainly not the worst.

If we compare the find information and statsistics (source FT.com/Lipper) you will see that the overall level of Ranking (this source Lipper) puts Equitable Life somewhere between 1 and 2 based on a good score of 4 or 5. This is based on the Managed Fund Performance. There is similar data and supporting evidence for the rest of the Equitable Life Funds.

Other reasons to consider:-

Charges – Most of the Equitable Life Pension Plans reviewed by us in recent months carry a policy fee (a monthly non refundable fee) of £3.00 per month, however we have seen some of these as high as £5.00 per month or more.

When compared with a modern Pension Contract these charges are certainly not the norm.Very few providers now charge a policy fee at all – likely saving £40 per year or so (x 20 years £800 give or take a few pennies).

What about other charges? There are many that may apply and these are dependent on the specific contract,
some of these are outlined below.

Equitable Life Pension Contracts made great play of Capital Units on some of their contracts. These are designed to confuse and obfuscate the real level of charges within a Pension Plan

Capital Units which were commonly used by many Life Assurance and Pension Providers during the 70’s and 80’s are now virtually outlawed by the regulator and certainly would not be allowed to be used in a modern Pension Plan.

Capital Units could account for up to 80% of your first 5 years Pension Contributions which of course means you will have suffered guaranteed losses on these plans during this period, combined with poor investment returns you could expect your retirement to be substantially worse with a plan that levies Capital Units.

There are of course a range of other charges levied on your fund, Bid Offer Spread paid on new investments (every premium you pay will have this charge levied) in the main it is usually around 5% .

As the Business is now operated as Closed Fund we can expect the investment performance to start to worsen as the Funds Under Management Contract. A small fund, and reducing is harder to manage than a large investment fund.

Do you want me to go on more, look the reality is this Equitable Life are one of the poorest performing, highest charging Pension providers in the UK. There some others that also need to be considered but that is not for here.

By taking some action now you could be increasing your Pension at Retirement by several thousands of points (often 10’s of thousands) by moving your plan to another provider, reducing charges and increasing investment performance. Potentially the direct cost you will be nothing, importantly there

You will also benefit from a more flexible contract along with a good level of advice from ourselves – Independent Financial Advisers.

The initial cost to you for a formal review of your Pension Plan will be Nil or Nothing. We need to fully review the plan before we can provide any advice in any case, this is always Free Of Charge.

I promised not to go on and on about Equitable Life Pension, however they are SO bad, and they really don’t care about you, if they did they would do better.

Please contact me today for a formal review of your options, no charge or obligation.

Please use the form below to obtain some details, to send me an email click here.

Free Pension Review

A list of Poor Pension Providers (Including Equitable Life)

High Charge Pensions

For further information without obligation please use this box below and we will email you some important information and our Free Pension Report. We hate spam more than, therefore do not share or loan your details with any third party provider.

First Name:
Email address:
Last Name:
Address:
City:
Postcode:
Year of Birth:

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The Finance Zone | Pearl Pension | A Few Reasons To Review Your Pension Now

November 10th, 2009 richard Posted in Pearl Pension, Pensions - News | Comments Off

Pearl Personal Pension Plans Some further Guidance Richard Smith – Independent Financial Adviser

Following some further work I have carried out for some policy holders of Pearl Pension and Investment Plans I am pleased to provide an overview and a brief guide to your options.

Pearl closed to New Business in 2000, prior to this they were not one of the greatest providers of Investment and Pension Products, investment performance was just about acceptable, and the level of charges within the plans was on the high side of higher than average, but certainly not the worst.

If we compare the find information and statsistics (source FT.com/Lipper) you will see that the overall level of Ranking (this source Lipper) puts Pearl somewhere between 1 and 2 based on a good score of 4 or 5. This is based on the Managed Fund Performance. There is similar data and supporting evidence for the rest of the Pearl Funds.

Other reasons to consider:-

Charges – Most of the Pearl Pension Plans reviewed by us in recent months carry a policy fee (a monthly non refundable fee) of £3.00 per month, however we have seen some of these as high as £5.00 per month or more.

When compared with a modern Pension Contract these charges are certainly not the norm.Very few providers now charge a policy fee at all – likely saving £40 per year or so (x 20 years £800 give or take a few pennies).

What about other charges?

Pearl Pension Contracts made great play of Capital Units on some of their contracts. These are designed to confuse and obfuscate the real level of charges within a Pension Plan

Capital Units which were commonly used by many Life Assurance and Pension Providers during the 70’s and 80’s are now virtually outlawed by the regulator and certainly would not be allowed to be used in a modern Pension Plan.

Capital Units could account for up to 80% of your first 5 years Pension Contributions which of course means you will have suffered guaranteed losses on these plans during this period, combined with poor investment returns you could expect your retirement to be substantially worse with a plan that levies Capital Units.

There are of course a range of other charges levied on your fund, Bid Offer Spread paid on new investments (every premium you pay will have this charge levied) in the main it is usually around 5% .

As the Business is now operated as Closed Fund we can expect the investment performance to start to worsen as the Funds Under Management Contract. A small fund, and reducing is harder to manage than a large investment fund.

Do you want me to go on more, look the reality is this Pearl are one of the poorest performing, highest charging Pension providers in the UK. There some others that also need to be considered but that is not for here.

By taking some action now you could be increasing your Pension at Retirement by several thousands of points (often 10’s of thousands) by moving your plan to another provider, reducing charges and increasing investment performance. Potentially the direct cost you will be nothing, importantly there

You will also benefit from a more flexible contract along with a good level of advice from ourselves – Independent Financial Advisers.

The initial cost to you for a formal review of your Pension Plan will be Nil or Nothing. We need to fully review the plan before we can provide any advice in any case, this is always Free Of Charge.

I promised not to go on and on about Pearl Pension, however they are SO bad, and they really don’t care about you, if they did they would do better.

Please contact me today for a formal review of your options, no charge or obligation.

Please use the form below to obtain some details, to send me an email click here.

Free Pension Review

A list of Poor Pension Providers (Including Pearl)

High Charge Pensions

For further information without obligation please use this box below and we will email you some important information and our Free Pension Report. We hate spam more than, therefore do not share or loan your details with any third party provider.

First Name:
Email address:
Last Name:
Address:
City:
Postcode:
Year of Birth:

Pearl as a Pension Provider causes concerns on several levels, in terms of charges they are just not competitive, in terms of short and medium term investment returns they are a long way off what would be considered good. In simple terms if you have an Pearl Pension or Investment Contract you should review it immediately. You can call today on 0845 226 9106 for a no obligation review.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The Finance Zone | Abbey Life Pension | A Few Reasons To Review Your Pension Now

November 10th, 2009 richard Posted in Abbey Life, Pensions - News | Comments Off

Abbey Life Personal Pension Plans Some further Guidance Richard Smith – Independent Financial Adviser

Following some further work I have carried out for some policy holders  of Abbey Life Pension and Investment Plans I am pleased to provide an overview  and  a brief guide to your options.

Abbey Life closed to New Business in 2000, prior to this they were not one of the greatest providers of Investment and Pension Products, investment performance was just about acceptable, and the level of charges within the plans was on the high side of higher than average, but certainly not the worst.

If we compare the find information and  statsistics (source FT.com/Lipper) you will see that the overall level of Ranking (this source Lipper) puts Abbey Life somewhere between 1 and 2 based on a good score of 4 or 5. This is based on the Managed Fund Performance. There is similar data and supporting evidence for the rest of the Abbey Life Funds.

Other reasons to consider:-

Charges – Most of the Abbey Life Pension Plans reviewed by us  in recent months carry a policy fee (a monthly non refundable fee) of £3.00 per month, however we have seen some of these as high as  £5.00 per month or more.

When compared with a modern Pension Contract these charges are certainly not the norm.Very few providers now charge a policy fee at all – likely saving £40 per year or so (x 20 years £800 give or take a few pennies).

What about other charges?

Abbey Life Pension Contracts made great play of Capital Units. These are designed to confuse and obfuscate the real level of charges within a Pension Plan

Capital Units  which were commonly used by many Life Assurance and Pension Providers during the 70’s and 80’s are now virtually outlawed by the regulator and certainly would not be allowed to be used in  a modern Pension Plan.

Capital Units could account for up to 80% of your first 5 years Pension Contributions which of course means you will have suffered guaranteed losses  on these plans  during this period, combined with poor investment returns you could expect your retirement to be substantially worse with a plan that levies Capital Units.

There are of course a range of other charges levied on your fund, Bid Offer Spread paid on new investments (every premium you pay will have this charge levied) in the main it is usually around 5% .

Abbey Life have been owned by Deutsche Bank since 2007 and the actual management of the funds within Abbey Life have been outsourced to Scottish Widows, who are well placed to do a better job than Abbey Life could. I have an interesting question for you. Why would a major European Bank want to purchase a Closed Life Assurance Business ( closed means that it no longer accepts new business) for a sum of £977 million? If you want the answer here it is:-

The business does not need to be serviced properly

It takes no management time to run.

It has very light touch in terms of regulation.

It is fantastically profitable given the level of charges levied within these plans.

The last sentence tells you all you need to know, by they way Lloyds TSB also badly needs the money (well it did then and more so now).

As the Business is now operated as Closed Fund we can expect the investment performance to start to worsen as the Funds Under Management Contract. A small fund, and reducing is harder to manage than  a large investment fund.

Do you want me to go on more, look the reality is this Abbey Life are one of the poorest performing, highest charging Pension providers in the UK. There some others that also need to be considered but that is not for here.

By taking some action now you could be increasing your Pension at Retirement by several thousands of points (often 10’s of thousands) by moving your plan to another provider, reducing charges and increasing investment performance. Potentially the direct cost you will be nothing, importantly there

You will also benefit from a more flexible contract along with a good level of advice from ourselves – Independent Financial Advisers.

The initial cost to you for a formal review of your Pension Plan will be Nil or Nothing. We need to fully review the plan before we can provide any advice in any case, this is always Free Of Charge.

I promised not to go on and on about Abbey Life Pension, however they are SO bad, and they really don’t care about you, if they did they would do better.

Please contact me today for a formal review of your options, no charge or obligation.

Please use the form below to obtain some details, to send me an email click here.

Some more links are here

Free Pension Review

A list of Poor Pension Providers (Including Abbey Life)

High Charge Pensions

For further information without obligation please use this box below and we will email you some important information and our Free Pension Report. We hate spam more than, therefore do not share or loan your details with any third party provider.

First Name:
Email address:
Last Name:
Address:
City:
Postcode:
Year of Birth:

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Abbey Life Pensions | Change To Minimum Retirement Age

October 30th, 2009 richard Posted in Abbey Life, NPI News, Pearl Pension, Pensions - News, Royal Sun Alliance, Scottish Provident, Windsor Life | Comments Off

CHANGE TO MINIMUM RETIREMENT AGE Important Update For Abbey Life Pension Holders (and others).

Some Abbey Life Personal Pensions have a very limited options in relation to the way that Retirement Benefits can be taken, effectively this means that if you do not make the choice to move your Pension on the Selected Retirement date you could end up with a Pension that is considerably worse than you could expect had you taken the benefits elsewhere.

The affected Abbey Life Pension Plans are:-

  • Abbey Life Personal Pension Plan
  • Abbey Life Retirement Plan
  • Abbey Life Executive Pension Plan
  • Abbey Life Pension Annuity Plan
  • Abbey Life Personal Retirement Account.

There is a some action you can take in order to move forward with your Pension Plans, and an urgent review should be carried out with immediate effect.

Firstly you only have until 6/4/10 in order to draw benefits “earlier than 55” as the minimum retirement age is increasing to age 55 with effect from then 55 is the minimum age at which you can draw benefits after 6th April 2010.

This is important for many reasons, however given the level of charges under all of the Abbey Life Pension Plans, the almost dire investment returns from the available funds under management  and this new change it is vitally important that you at least review your options with a suitably qualified Financial Adviser.

Key points to review are:

The level of charges within the plan.

Options at normal retirement date

Overall investment returns.

These areas need to be compared with the available plans in the market place currently and if appropriate a transfer of benefits made to another provider.

There are of course several other providers of Pension Plans that are equally as bad and some of these are detailed here.

For those of you reading that would like see my other posts on the subject of Abbey Life Pensions these are below.

Abbey Life Pension Plan Review Service

General Pension Review Service

Abbey Life | Allied Dunbar Pension | NPI Pension | Pearl Pensions | And others important action!

Please contact me should you wish to discuss any of your Pension Planning, in particular if your provider is on the list.

You can contact me here or call on 0845 226 9106

Richard Smith

Independent Financial Adviser

Want to be updated when this page changes send us your details below

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Finance Zone | Stock Market Commentary

September 24th, 2009 richard Posted in General Financial News, Investments, News - Updates | Comments Off

Richard Smith – The Finance Zone – Market Commentary – September 2009

Equity markets have rallied sharply since early July, during what is usually a quiet time of year (whatever happened to “sell in May and go away”?), encouraged by a better than expected earnings on both sides of the Atlantic and by signs that most developed economies were emerging from recession. The rallies continued to be confined mostly to the “up and down” sectors which had both plunged and bounced fastest in the past year, financials, mining stocks and industrials. More recently, however some of the more defensive sectors have also joined the party.

Central banks have been at pains to say that monetary policy will not be tightened prematurely, which, given their role as guardians against inflation, underlines the strong desire to avoid repeating last winter’s brush with the risk of a full blown economic depression. They have also emphasised the many risks to the recovery. These include too much personal debt, too little bank capital and too much public borrowing. Central bankers clearly believe that domestic inflation pressures will remain contained by the spare capacity created by the recession. It is less certain whether the same applies for imported inflation, since commodity prices may be more sensitive to the rapid growth rates in emerging economies and therefore accelerate before growth is buoyant in developed economies. There could come a time when inflation from this source forces tighter policy in developed economies while they still have spare capacity, one of the downsides of globalization.

Although there are risks to the steepness and persistency of the recovery, central bankers appear set to continue to fund the overall strategy until it is clear that the recovery in confidence is sustainable. Given that there is still a significant lack of certainty over the outlook, it is fair to ask if equity markets are too easy-going in their “everything back to normal” approach. At the very least, greater care will be needed, now that the bargain basement prices have all been mopped up.

EQUITY MARKETS

United Kingdom

The UK has been slower to recover from the steeper than expected fall in output last year and early this. This has prompted the Bank of England to extend its quantitative easing policy, in turn meaning that they take a more cautious view of the recovery than the equity markets. Partly this is due to the equity market expecting recovery in 2010, and pricing that in in advance. The markets clearly expect that the reflationary policies put in place by the Bank of England will work. A revival in hopes for global growth have been reflected by forecasts for the UK, albeit slightly later for UK plc, which expect a turnaround from this year’s fall to a modest, but improving, growth rate in 2010.

The spectre at the feast remains the enormous gap in public finances which even politicians have had to acknowledge as they furiously attempt to defer difficult decisions until after the election. The markets must have their confidence maintained in the government’s commitment to sustainable fiscal policies or they will stop making money available to fund the recovery. That is forcing all parties to admit that significant cuts in public spending, and tax rises, will be needed to close the fiscal gap in a reasonable timeframe. The ratings agencies have warned that the UK will put its AAA status at risk if it does not announce significant public spending cuts in the pre-Budget report. Economic recovery and the natural ending of fiscal easing measures will not alone be sufficient to stabilise and reduce public debt burdens over the medium-term.

Given the inevitability of such fiscal policy tightening at a time when consumers are also trying to reduce personal debt and rebuild savings, the UK seems likely to be less buoyant than the global economy generally. The current competiveness of Sterling should help the usual sectors able to take advantage of this (exporters, tourism etc.).

USA

The US economy is responding to the mind-bogglingly enormous fiscal and monetary stimulus put in place over the past year. This has been helped by the fact that parts of the economy, in particular housing and the motor industry, have effectively been in recession since 2006 and may have reached the absolute low point of the cycle. Like in the UK, the absence of any real controlling process for managing ongoing budgets is likely to cause problems to investors as the economy recovers. The US political system remains open to lobbying and shows little inherent commitment to fiscal restraint, in fairness this is fully representative of US consumers, who seem to believe that the new president is installing a communist state ! The emphasis, and the easier “sell” from the Democrat-dominated Congress, remains focused on increasing spending.

The financial system appears to be rapidly weaning itself off the special support measures put in place last year, with the main remaining vulnerability being to real estate lending. This suggests that the special measures and low interest rates will remain in place for some time yet. The signs of the housing market turning up are important and, as in the UK, have the potential to be confidence inducing and self-fulfilling, as those who have waited to buy now see the market near its bottom and banks can afford to be more patient with borrowers in difficulty. Although the remaining consumer debt overhang remains a similar barrier to the UK’s problem, recovering house prices would enable savings to be rebuilt and allow a faster rate of economic growth while this was maintained.

Europe

Some European economies including, most importantly, France and Germany emerged from recession in the early summer, while others, in particular Spain and Ireland have remained weak. It is notable that both Spain and Ireland were effectively economic “one-trick ponies”, with both economies built primarily on property development and the finance thereof. There remains some concern that job losses in France and Germany have been delayed by their relatively inflexible labour laws and possibly also by the imminent German election. Rising unemployment could therefore be more of a drag on growth and output in 2010 than in countries where employment responded more rapidly to the downturn and where the worst might soon be over. If recovery arrives more rapidly in the exporting economies, such as Germany, than those that are struggling to remain competitive, such as Italy, or those whose economies grew on a financial bubble, such as Spain and Ireland, there could be renewed significant strains on the Euro. The most likely outcome of such strains is probably even greater fiscal and monetary easing rather than the end of the Euro.

Japan

The Japanese economy has begun to recover from the absolute cliff-fall in output last winter, which wiped out 25 years of output growth. The popular discontent with this crash which, let us not forget, came after nearly 20 years of stagnation, led to a political sea-change, with the opposition DPJ winning by a landslide and ending 51 years of almost exclusively one-party LDP rule. Markets are still unsure what to make of this. The new government’s policies are determinedly reflationary and are focused on reviving the domestic economy rather than targeting and relying on export growth. If they can pull this plan off, whilst still addressing the enormous legacy high-debt and high-deficit public finances, the prospects would be bullish for Japanese equities. The key issue is whether their policies can actually revive growth, which in turn would make the fiscal tightening more acceptable and politically feasible or whether they are forced by a lack on international confidence to tighten first, in which case the recovery could fail to start, yet again.

Far East Ex Japan / Emerging Markets

Emerging markets have contributed their positive growth this year, as developed economies have shrunk and, not surprisingly, they seem set to contribute the majority of recovery in 2010. In that respect, decoupling has taken place to some extent, as they have moved on being dependent on the prosperity of western markets to taking on an increasing role in actually driving the global economy. In addition to generally having a younger workforce, confidence has been boosted by general improvements in corporate governance, which has helped to attract inward investment from more conservative investors. The Asian crisis of the 1990’s led to more conservative financial policies, so emerging markets are much less dependent on foreign capital than they were before and in some cases, the dependence has actually reversed. They (in particular China) have the assets and it is the G7 countries that have the debts. The transfer of economic power from the West to the East appears increasingly inevitable.

Bonds

The last few months have seen gilt prices being pulled in opposite directions. On one hand, prices have fallen when investors have focused on the strength of the economic data suggesting that recovery will occur earlier than previously expected. On the other hand, prices have risen over the past month as investors are once again reviewing the possibility of deflation occurring over the next few years, which would clearly benefit fixed interest products. To cloud the issue further, the Monetary Policy Committee recently extended their programme of purchasing government bonds, which in turn boosted the gilt market. The money market’s perception of risk has declined substantially since earlier this year. The yield spread between 3 month LIBOR (the rate at which banks lend to each other) and Bank of England base rate has fallen back to the levels recorded before the financial crisis (about 0.15%). At the height of the financial crisis in September 2008, banks were afraid to lend to one another, fearing bank failures, and the spread widened to nearly 2%.

The performance of corporate bonds has been lively since their low point earlier in the year. In March 2009 the average difference between the returns on bond and gilts was at its widest point for eighty years at 4.4% p.a. This difference has now narrowed to 2.2%, effectively providing a total return from corporate bonds of more than 20% in 6 months. Because of this clearly corporate bonds no longer offer such exceptional value although the yields on offer are still relatively attractive when compared to those available prior to the financial crisis.

Commercial Property

UK commercial property is about to become very attractive to foreign buyers, if it isn’t already. Real values have fallen by up to 50% in some cases and the pound by nearly 30%. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund has stated its intention to invest in UK property as has the US fund manager LaSalle investment, the Australia Future Fund (who recently spent £210m on 1/3 of the Bullring shopping centre in Birmingham). These investors alone will have the potential to arrest the fall in the commercial property markets but, in addition, the major UK house-builders and property developers are looking to raise big money through the stock market in the next few months to ensure they are ready to benefit from any upturn. Although there are still major obstacles for the sector to overcome, not least the shortage of affordable finance, the sector looks sensibly priced at least.

CONCLUSION

Investors correctly understand that, over the long run, equities have delivered, and should continue to deliver, superior returns to those generated by any other asset class. They also appreciate that these returns come with much higher levels of uncertainty in any given period. During the unprecedented period we have just experienced, it is not surprising that inexperienced investors bailed out until “things settled down”. Have they “settled down” now ?

The answer is No. Things never “settle down”. The investment environment remains difficult for investors, because that is the nature of the beast. The key factor is not to have all your eggs in one basket (that inevitably lead to “bubbles”) regardless of what the experts say, and to take a long term view.

Things may well look better now than they did 6 months ago (what wouldn’t !) but in the same way that investors should not be tempted to sell what they wish they had sold a year ago, they should not be looking to buy now what they wish they had bought six months ago.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook

AddThis Social Bookmark Button