Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 331

Listed bond funds leap into market gap

Let’s start with a quick physics lesson. The phrase, ‘nature abhors a vacuum’, is based on Aristotle’s observation that there are no real vacuums because nature will fill the space by creating an immediate force due to differences in pressure. ‘Abhor’ means ‘regard with disgust’.

In contrast, fund managers love a market vacuum, especially when it creates an issuing opportunity. If there is demand for a type of investment, fund managers will supply ‘an immediate force’ to fill the gap. In fact, the risk is that as more issuers join the party, there may be an oversupply and the once-vacant space becomes crowded.

The new range of fixed income Listed Investment Trusts

The best example of meeting a new demand or market gap in the last two years is the range of listed fixed interest Listed Investment Trusts (LITs) now available on the ASX. It was not long ago that investors wanting bond exposure were restricted to the unlisted market, which required direct investment with the fund manager through a painful application procedure, or access via a platform with additional fees.

Many investors, and particularly SMSFs, prefer the easier access and administration of buying a fund in the same simple way as buying a share on the exchange. With no extra paperwork, fixed interest funds were suddenly a couple of clicks away, giving instant diversification and another asset class to consider. As the chart below shows, fixed income LITs barely registered in September 2017, and while equities still dominate, fixed income is a healthy $4 billion and soon $5 billion.

Source: ASX Investment Products Report, September 2019

Of course, the reason for the gap in the market was the miserable rates available on term deposits and cash, which once dominated the conservative allocation in a balanced portfolio. For example, SMSFs in pension mode are required to withdraw at least 4% a year, forcing a fund earning 1% to draw down capital. Enter listed fixed interest funds taking greater risk to deliver 4% to 5% or more. With these investments, the perceived security of bonds holds appeal for those who cannot bring themselves to put more into the higher-yielding equities which deliver even more risk.

In fact, in the Listed Investment Company (LIC) space, most equity funds are trading at significant discounts to their Net Tangible Assets (NTA), with many struggling to gain investor support. Meanwhile, the fixed interest LITs are holding their value and in some cases trading at small premiums. To date, the investment experience has been good.

Here is the range of fixed income LITs available on the ASX as at September 2019:

Source: ASX Investment Products Report, September 2019 plus trust reports.

Also listing soon is KKR Credit Income (ASX:KKC) with a global portfolio of company loans. The competitor exchange to the ASX, Chi-X, has launched its first actively-managed fixed income Quoted managed Funds (QMFs) with the ActiveX Kapstream Absolute Return Income (CXA:XKAP) targeting a return of RBA plus 2-3%, and other QMFs will follow.

The high market capitalisation of these funds shows that they have received strong support. Partners Group claims it received bids worth $1.2 billion and it closed early at $550 million, and KKR has raised over $800 million. Neuberger Berman, issuer of NBI, pushed the amount on issue close to $1 billion with a recent issue to existing shareholders.

What do these funds do and what are the risks?

The table above shows the wide range of bonds, debt instruments, loans and asset-backed securities managed by the LITs. However, most retail investors would not be familiar with the types of exposures taken, and it is difficult to assess the differences.

One fact for certain is that if a bank term deposit or government bond paying 1% is the risk-free rate, then a fund paying 3% to 7% more is taking a greater risk. The returns listed in the table are more like manager aspirations, and are certainly not guaranteed.

Although many of the LITs are managed by established global or Australian fixed interest teams, most retail investors have not heard of them, so there is a leap of faith in the long-term credentials. Every fund is different and it takes some serious effort to identify the nuances of the risks.

As a sign of the complexity, here are 10 quick questions to consider:

  1. Does the fund manager have a long-term track record managing bond, loan and credit risk through different cycles?
  2. What is the maximum exposure to any one investment?
  3. Are the investments rated, and if not, what is the due diligence process before the fund manager lends to a company?
  4. Where does the investment sit in the capital structure? For example, senior secured debt ranks higher than subordinated debt, and some of the funds can invest in mezzanine loans and even distressed debt.
  5. What is the historical default level of the type of assets bought by the fund?
  6. How is the performance fee calculated and is it easy to exceed the chosen benchmark and push up fees?
  7. Is leverage possible by borrowing to lift returns, adding to both performance and risk?
  8. How will the portfolio be valued, given that many of the assets are privately issued or unlisted, yet the LIT trades on the exchange each business day and issues regular estimates of its Net Tangible Assets.
  9. Is there any currency exposure in the global LITs?
  10. Is the LIT trading at a discount or premium to the value of its investments?

At the moment, the fixed interest funds are trading well post-IPO, but as with equity LICs, these are closed-end vehicles where liquidity for a seller comes from the market rather than the fund manager selling assets. This is appealing for preservation of permanent capital but also means the issues can drift into a discount if buyer demand evaporates in difficult market conditions.

This sector of the ASX is young and has not been tested over a full credit cycle. Overall, it is a useful addition to the investment options for a diversified portfolio. Investors should recognise the added risk and potential volatility and not treat these LITs as the same risk as a bank term deposit.

As a final note of caution, consider the words of legendary investor, Howard Marks of Oaktree Capital, in an interview with Bloomberg on 23 October 2019:

“The record amounts of debt and unusually high leverage ratios imply that eventually there will be a bunch of defaults and a bunch of bankruptcies, as there always have been in the three debt crises that I’ve lived through in the last 30 years.”

For completeness, it’s worth noting that a broad range of fixed income Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) is also listed on the ASX, attracting strong flows based on their lower fees, but without the potential to deliver the higher returns of most of the funds listed above.

 

Graham Hand is Managing Editor of Firstlinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor, and there are no recommendations made here. Investors should seek independent advice if not familiar with the risks. Data is correct as at end of October 2019.

 

3 Comments
Trevor
November 10, 2019

These are generally not products for punters and certainly shouldn't be the only fixed income in a portfolio. Unfortunately the fund managers (broadly speaking in equities) have used LIT and LICs as a means of gouging high fees on permanent capital, they would find distribution through advisers challenging, as they're wised up to the fees. I also don't think investors quite understand just how illiquid these things are and what happens when the asset price falls AND liquidity dries up at the same time, you get the double whammy of drawdown and discount. Add to that the behavioural tendency to sell in panic and you will have tears when this credit cycle changes and it will eventually. 

Don McLennan
November 08, 2019

LIT's come in many forms similar to shares
Very few have been listed for two years.
The targeted return with some is inspirational
Most have no track record.
Perhaps one should wait until some runs are made.
Don Macca

SMSF Trustee
November 06, 2019

All of them are high risk fixed income and their fees are not cheap for the type of assets in which they invest. In my SMSF I've got much better quality unlisted funds in the high yield sector for a similar fee and corporate bond funds at a much cheaper fee.

For a commercial real estate loan portfolio to be getting 8% they have to be investing in poor credit quality loans. The standard rate for good quality borrowers in good properties at modest Loan to Valuation Ratios is cash plus around 3%. And no way should you be paying 1.5% to get a portfolio of commercial loans.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Corporate bonds: why now and in what structure?

Who's next? Discounts on LICs force managers to pivot

Fewer new LICs and LITs in 2019, but more funds raised

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Five ways the Retirement Review points to new policies

The Retirement Income Review goes much further than an innocent-sounding 'fact base', and is sure to guide policies in the run up to the next election. It will change how we think about retirement incomes.

Graeme Shaw on why investing is at a pivotal moment

Company profits have not improved for many years but higher valuations have been driven by falling rates and excess liquidity. Conditions do not suit a value and contrarian manager but here are some opportunities.

Retirement Review gives strong views on hoarding of super

The Review includes some profound findings, most notable that retirement income should include drawing down far more capital. Expect post-retirement products to proliferate under a Retirement Income Covenant.

11 key findings on retirement dreams during the pandemic

A mid-pandemic survey of over 1,000 people near or in retirement found three in four are not confident how long their money will last. Only 18% felt their money was safe during a strong economic downturn.

Bank scorecard 2020: when will the mojo return?

Banks severely cut dividends in 2020 but are expected to improve payments in 2021. History provides clues to when the banks will return to their 2019 levels of profitability, but who is positioned the best?

Generational wealth transfers will affect all investors

It's not only that 60 is the new 40, but 80 is the new 60. Many Baby Boomers spend up in retirement and are less inclined to leave a nest egg to their children. The ways wealth transfers will affect all investors.

Latest Updates

Shares

Hamish Douglass on big tech and life after COVID

On the sidelines of the Morningstar Conference, the Magellan co-founder reflects on the pandemic and which sectors are set to gain and lose. He says we were lucky the pandemic hit when it did (videos and transcripts).

Superannuation

Cost of running an SMSF receives updated judgement

Administration costs can rise for complexity, especially owning property in an SMSF, but fees are highly competitive from a wide range of service providers. The break-even cost is less than previously reported.

SMSF strategies

Three areas SMSFs should consider outsourcing

SMSF trustees often cite ‘control of my investments’ as the number one motivation for setting up their own fund. But it still makes sense to outsource some parts of a well-diversified portfolio.

Retirement

Apparently, retirees should learn to SKI

The Retirement Income Review demonstrated limited understanding of the risks faced by self-funded retirees implementing rational human behaviour. Spending to qualify for the age pension is not a solution.

Retirement

7-point checklist for managing the uncertain timing of death

Average life expectancies are a weak predictor of individual outcomes, and it's better to consider a range of probable lifespans. A plan that lasts to the average will disappoint every second retiree.

Exchange traded products

'Quality' ETFs under the microscope

Interest in 'quality' factor ETFs has increased this year, helped by very attractive returns. However, not all ETFs are created alike and there are divergences in portfolio traits which investors can identify.

Shares

Is growth of zombie companies real or fiction?

Much has been written about the rise of 'zombie firms' which should have gone bankrupt, but new research should be comforting to economists and investors alike, with focus on a particular segment.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2020 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use.
Any general advice or class service prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, has been prepared by without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. Refer to our Financial Services Guide (FSG) for more information. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.