Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney, alongside
Speaker 1: my co host Matt Miller. Every business day, we bring
Speaker 1: you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts, along
Speaker 1: with essential market moving news. Find the Bloomberg Markets Podcast
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts, and
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I want to get
Speaker 1: some good tech ideas for two and so I said, hey,
Speaker 1: let's get Dan ives On. Um, I'm sure he's, you know, somewhere,
Speaker 1: it's either skiing or on the beach somewhere, but we're
Speaker 1: here hard at work. But maybe we can get Dan
Speaker 1: ives On. He's the yes, senior tech analyst for web Bush.
Speaker 1: He's been doing us for a long time. Dan, thanks
Speaker 1: so much for taking a time here, my friend. What
Speaker 1: are your best ideas that you're talking to your clients
Speaker 1: about right now? Yeah, And I think there's obviously some
Speaker 1: nervousness or divisiveness in terms of where tex Head and
Speaker 1: I think some of the themes, regardless what happens with
Speaker 1: the ten years said they're going to continue to I
Speaker 1: think the massive I mean one Apple and we talked
Speaker 1: about Apple glass today and we be that that comes
Speaker 1: out in two thousand twenty two, along with what's the
Speaker 1: supercycle playing out? Despite the chip short, I think apples
Speaker 1: anywhere between the three to three and a half trillion
Speaker 1: dollar mark cap two tho, so that continues to being
Speaker 1: where the top your names in the large cap along
Speaker 1: with Microsoft is our favorite cloud play, and then we
Speaker 1: love cyber security names like z Scale or Cannibal, cyber
Speaker 1: Arc or some of our fevers. I think those are
Speaker 1: the themes. And then just to put a bow around it,
Speaker 1: electric vehicles Tesla, followed by our supply chain play which
Speaker 1: is life Cycle and e V. There's sure top picks
Speaker 1: this week going to next year. So a lot of
Speaker 1: those are huge. Obviously, Apple is a two point eight
Speaker 1: trillion dollar company and change Microsoft is worth more than
Speaker 1: two and a half trillion dollar. Ears. Um, let me
Speaker 1: pull up Tesla or what's Tesla looking at right now?
Speaker 1: Like billion Tesla? Wow, one point zero four trillion, so
Speaker 1: they're massive. Um, what do you think about the competitors?
Speaker 1: What do you think about ribby in and Lucid and
Speaker 1: the Bollinger and all of these you know haven't yet
Speaker 1: sold a lot of products. Competitors, Well, I think Ribby
Speaker 1: In is the one along with Ford and GM, you
Speaker 1: know which I think a reratings. I think Ribbyan is
Speaker 1: the real deal. I think now it's obviously to be
Speaker 1: coming out of the box that's been given a high evaluation,
Speaker 1: but in my opinion, and a tough climate right with
Speaker 1: no chips. Well, but but as me and you and
Speaker 1: the team have talked about, I'm not looking at the
Speaker 1: next six twelve months. When I look at the next
Speaker 1: three four to five years, Ribby and I think a
Speaker 1: category changer in terms of pickup trucks and stvs, in
Speaker 1: terms of what are Jane the team have done in
Speaker 1: the vertically integrated front, and really it's the it's the
Speaker 1: only company that's come out on e VS vertically integrated
Speaker 1: that now you could put in the same potential breadth
Speaker 1: as Tessa if they execute over the next years. If
Speaker 1: that happens, then we're looking at the two to three
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollar market for a name that you know today.
Speaker 1: I think it's just still in the early days of
Speaker 1: building this out. Hey, Dan, I'm sure your institutional investor
Speaker 1: clients are asking you, how does tesla Um fit into
Speaker 1: a more competitive EV market over the next several years.
Speaker 1: What's your response? So I don't view it as a
Speaker 1: zero sum game. It's not Tessa or because Tessa is
Speaker 1: going to continue dominating evs. My view is it's a
Speaker 1: five trillion dollar greing tide away. Two and a half
Speaker 1: trillion of that is Tesla's in terms of where that
Speaker 1: market heading, especially with more and more compe pacity coming
Speaker 1: on with you look at Brewin in Austin. Those are
Speaker 1: significant protesting at two million vehicles per year, but when
Speaker 1: you look over all the v s, it's still three automobiles.
Speaker 1: That's why I think you're going to see more and
Speaker 1: more the Fords of gm US and others benefits. All right, Dan, Hey, um,
Speaker 1: we're gonna let you go at that moment. We'll touch
Speaker 1: base with you soon. Dan, i'ves web Bush Security Senior Technology.
Speaker 1: Let's bring in Ian Lyndon. He's a managing director and
Speaker 1: head of US rate strategy at Femail Capital Markets. UM
Speaker 1: in great to get you on the program. I just
Speaker 1: want to quickly get the auction my auction questions out
Speaker 1: of the way. First, we have another auction today, thirty
Speaker 1: year auctions that I think one o'clock. We get the
Speaker 1: headlines yesterday, we had the ten year, I think the
Speaker 1: three year the day before, and people are paying more
Speaker 1: and more attention ever since seven year auction went off
Speaker 1: the rails if months back, how do you think they're
Speaker 1: doing well? I think that's a great question. I think
Speaker 1: we need to look at it in two ways. First,
Speaker 1: we have seen more of a concession at auction, so
Speaker 1: the auctions have been tailing more than they had previously,
Speaker 1: but the bitter composition has been more typical than the
Speaker 1: headlines would have suggested. More importantly, it's very difficult to
Speaker 1: argue that there's not sponsorship for US treasuries when ten
Speaker 1: year yields are below one fifty and thirty year yields
Speaker 1: are below two percent. So while there might need to
Speaker 1: be greater moments of concession, particularly on the curve, to
Speaker 1: take down these incrementally um smaller than they were auction sizes,
Speaker 1: I think the fact of the matter is that there's
Speaker 1: plenty of end user demand for treasury products at this point. Alright, So, Ian,
Speaker 1: I've got a federal reserve, you know, pulling back on
Speaker 1: the tapering, maybe even faster than initially thought. Rate increases,
Speaker 1: next year, rate increases in But then I looked down
Speaker 1: in my tenure and I'm stuck at one point four
Speaker 1: eight percent. Should I be surprised that that shouldn't be higher? Well,
Speaker 1: if we didn't believe the FED had the tools and
Speaker 1: the willingness to combat inflation in the long run and weren't,
Speaker 1: and the FED wasn't able to keep inflation expectations anchored
Speaker 1: in that situation, one should expect that the curve would
Speaker 1: be steeper and ten and thirty year yields would be higher.
Speaker 1: I'm certainly sympathetic to the idea that on an outright basis,
Speaker 1: ten year yields below one fifty contain a fair amount
Speaker 1: of sticker shock, and I think part of that has
Speaker 1: to do with the assumption, which has been proven to
Speaker 1: be um tricky at this point in the cycle, that
Speaker 1: longer end treasury yields tins and thirties should be a
Speaker 1: function of US growth and inflation fundamentals. The reality is
Speaker 1: that long che treasuries are a function of global growth
Speaker 1: and inflation fundamentals. And so while the US might be
Speaker 1: recovering well from the pandemic, we're seeing high inflation numbers,
Speaker 1: we're seeing continued growth. The reality is that there are
Speaker 1: different pockets in different regions in the world who are
Speaker 1: recovering at a much slower pace, and that adds to
Speaker 1: the structural demand that we continue to see for treasures.
Speaker 1: All right, so what do you think we're gonna see
Speaker 1: in two with all of those variables? I note that
Speaker 1: you were ranked first in the two thousand eighteen Institutional
Speaker 1: Investors survey for US rate strategists, strategists and technical analysts.
Speaker 1: Big deal. Yeah, well appreciate that one to Yale. So
Speaker 1: that's also pretty pretty smart. I think, Um, what do
Speaker 1: you think we're gonna see? I mean, is are we
Speaker 1: still going to see inflation coming back down to normal
Speaker 1: levels in the middle of next year? Are we gonna
Speaker 1: see rate increases in the second half? Are we going
Speaker 1: to see the actual rates numbers normal? Lies? So I
Speaker 1: think that we are going to see the base effects
Speaker 1: in Q two two become relevant because the upside that
Speaker 1: we saw, the bulk of the upside in the realized
Speaker 1: inflation was in the second quarter of this year. It
Speaker 1: was driven by new and used auto prices. It was
Speaker 1: driven by airfares as well as oh we are or
Speaker 1: rents and shelter costs that materially raises the bar for
Speaker 1: Q two of next year for the pace of inflation
Speaker 1: to accelerate. So my baseline assumption is that while there
Speaker 1: will continue to be a fair amount of inflation the system,
Speaker 1: the shock of the headline year over year figures will
Speaker 1: start to moderate. I do think we get to rate
Speaker 1: hikes in twenty two and the bigger risk, and I
Speaker 1: think that this is really important when we think about
Speaker 1: the way that the rates market plays out. The bigger
Speaker 1: risk is what does the market ultimately believe the terminal
Speaker 1: rate for this cycle is want to be. The FETE
Speaker 1: has told us that they expected all else to be
Speaker 1: equal to be two and a half. Now, if we
Speaker 1: think about the last cycle we struggled to get We
Speaker 1: got to two and a half, but we had to
Speaker 1: quickly reduce to one seventy five. So there are two
Speaker 1: camps at the moment, the lower terminal and the higher
Speaker 1: terminal camps that are going to drive the debate and
Speaker 1: that will dictate where the five year sector goes at
Speaker 1: the beginning of next year. So we're leaning more bearishly
Speaker 1: on the treasury market than we have in the past
Speaker 1: with the five years sector poised to underperform, and so
Speaker 1: that means that five thirties will continue to flatten. Five
Speaker 1: tins will flatten as well. But all of this within
Speaker 1: the context of a higher overall rate range. So I
Speaker 1: could easily see ten year yields touching two next year
Speaker 1: in the first half thirty year yields back above to fifty.
Speaker 1: And this has to do with the fact that the
Speaker 1: economy is growing and that the labor market is improving
Speaker 1: and inflation is back in the system. Hey, and there
Speaker 1: was an argument, you know, over the last several months
Speaker 1: that perhaps the FED was falling behind the market, falling
Speaker 1: behind perhaps other central banks. Did they allay those concerns
Speaker 1: by that pivot we saw, you know, a week or
Speaker 1: two ago in terms of the tapering in the rate conversation,
Speaker 1: they certainly did seem to come in line with what
Speaker 1: we're seeing with other major central banks. I will off
Speaker 1: the caveat though, that the other central banks that were
Speaker 1: a bit more hawkish were ones that had different exposures
Speaker 1: to energy prices. So the Reserve Bank of Australia, the
Speaker 1: Bank of Canada, for example, higher energy prices have decidedly
Speaker 1: different ramifications for those economies than what we see here
Speaker 1: in the US. And then the Bank of England has
Speaker 1: a different relationship with imported inflation prices as well or
Speaker 1: imported costs, just because of the nature of their economy.
Speaker 1: So while it made sense to see coordination in terms
Speaker 1: of central banking banking moves at the beginning of the
Speaker 1: pandemic when we were all responding to the uncertainties associated
Speaker 1: with the coronavirus, on the way out, we shouldn't actually
Speaker 1: be expecting in the same degree of coordination because each
Speaker 1: economy is performing differently and responding to some of the
Speaker 1: pandemic dislocations in a different manner. All that said, I
Speaker 1: do think that the that that power made it very
Speaker 1: clear that the hawkish pivot is going and has come
Speaker 1: to fruition. We're going to see an acceleration of tapering
Speaker 1: next week and that will set up the FED to
Speaker 1: have more flexibility in when and how they choose to
Speaker 1: normal normalize policy rates next year. When when you look
Speaker 1: at the economy and the economic growth as it's affected
Speaker 1: by rates, clearly monetary policy is still loose even if
Speaker 1: they're tightening um When does it start to affect When
Speaker 1: do we start to see um uh financial conditions really
Speaker 1: get tighter because of higher rates? Since I don't think,
Speaker 1: you know, two or three rate hikes from zero is
Speaker 1: that much. So if you decompose the if you break
Speaker 1: down the financial condition index, what we actually see is
Speaker 1: over the last decade decade and a half, the biggest
Speaker 1: driver has been the has been equity volatility and to
Speaker 1: some extent, the dollar. And so if we see a
Speaker 1: run up and equity volatility, which only occurs when stock
Speaker 1: sell off, that in and of itself will tighten financial conditions.
Speaker 1: And that gets us back to the Powell put that
Speaker 1: has been talked about a great length and certainly still exists.
Speaker 1: So I'm less concerned about the incremental rate hikes per
Speaker 1: se and how they translate through to financial conditions, and
Speaker 1: I'm more worried about whether or not record or near
Speaker 1: record high equity price is are able to absorb a
Speaker 1: FED that has gone from being, as you point out,
Speaker 1: extremely accommodative to moving forward with a slightly tighter policy stance.
Speaker 1: And but you think the power put is still there, Yes,
Speaker 1: I do think the power put is there, but it's
Speaker 1: not an outright number. It doesn't matter. So let's put
Speaker 1: it this way. If the uh SMP five ended next
Speaker 1: year off, that wouldn't trigger a FED response. But if
Speaker 1: the SMP dropped ten or fift over the course of
Speaker 1: two days or three days, that's that's the spike of
Speaker 1: volatility that didn't gets the set involved. So it isn't
Speaker 1: an outlete number as much as it is the trajectory,
Speaker 1: and that's going to be I think an important background
Speaker 1: story for in Lyin. Thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 1: Really appreciate getting your thoughts in Lngin, Managing director in
Speaker 1: head of US rate Strategy at BEMO Capital Markets Fixed
Speaker 1: Income Strategy Team. Let's get back to the plane vanilla
Speaker 1: market in a way, although really I want to talk
Speaker 1: about E t F strategies. Ross Klein as the founder
Speaker 1: and chief investment officer at change Bridge Capital, he manages
Speaker 1: E t F strategy sustainable and long short UM at
Speaker 1: Ross tell us first of all about the UHUM, the
Speaker 1: sustainable portion of that it's become. It was a fad
Speaker 1: that seems to have become now really a strategy that
Speaker 1: you can't ignore. What do you how do you? How
Speaker 1: do you execute that? Yeah, Hey, Paul, hey Matt, thanks
Speaker 1: for the time today. Um change Bridge manages uh C
Speaker 1: B s e change Bridge Capital Sustainable Equity e t F.
Speaker 1: Our approach to E s G investing is neither exclusionary
Speaker 1: nor passive. Uh. We believe E s G investing is
Speaker 1: highly nuanced and requires a lot of analysis from active
Speaker 1: portfolio managers. We manage thirty to forty securities. It's a
Speaker 1: high conviction portfolio where we understand the holdings incredibly well.
Speaker 1: We talked to management teams. We identify companies that are
Speaker 1: making real progress, and we're finding opportunities in small cap
Speaker 1: space where the rating agencies haven't necessarily picked up coverage
Speaker 1: yet and the companies are showing a mutually beneficial relationship
Speaker 1: between their efforts to improve their relationship with all stakeholders
Speaker 1: and their bottom line performance. And so that's a fantastic
Speaker 1: breeding ground for us to identify idiosyncratic, unique investing opportunities
Speaker 1: for clients. Hey, well share with us if you will,
Speaker 1: kind of one of your your bigger holdings, your higher
Speaker 1: conviction names that's in your sustainable E t F and
Speaker 1: why it's in there. Yeah, absolutely, Um, so you know
Speaker 1: I'll give you one that you might not suspect is
Speaker 1: an E s G type holding. UM Skyline Champion is
Speaker 1: is Takr sk Y, our largest holding in that portfolio.
Speaker 1: Skyline Champion manufacturers manufactured housing. In the environment that we're in,
Speaker 1: where affordable housing is effectively in a crisis, they're a solution. UH.
Speaker 1: The average manufactured house is more than two hundred thousand
Speaker 1: dollars less expensive than the average stick built house for
Speaker 1: an equivalent home. UH, They're able to produce them more efficiently.
Speaker 1: They're able to produce the more environmentally friendly ways than
Speaker 1: an outdoor stick built home. UH. We believe that this
Speaker 1: is an opportunity for investors to recognize they can buy
Speaker 1: a house that's more environmentally friendly, built more efficiently, more affordable,
Speaker 1: and find a company that actually benefits from those trends.
Speaker 1: As folks start to shift towards rural and more suburban housing.
Speaker 1: They are beneficiary of this environment. The company is in
Speaker 1: a effectively a duopoly with Clayton. There are not a
Speaker 1: lot of other manufacturers. Demand is ramping incredibly. They've made
Speaker 1: tremendous strides in their ability to UH have a diverse workforce. UH.
Speaker 1: They made um a focused effort to diversify the range
Speaker 1: of backgrounds and opinions for years and this has really
Speaker 1: helped them manage the company through what's been a tumultuous.
Speaker 1: You know twenty four months, is it the biggest holding
Speaker 1: in CBL as as well? It is yes. When we
Speaker 1: have high conviction and a security and we understand it well, Um,
Speaker 1: you'll see that we own it in size in both
Speaker 1: portfolios generally. Hey, Rolls, thanks so much for joining us,
Speaker 1: really appreciated. Ross Klein their founder and chief investment officer
Speaker 1: of chain Bridge Capital LLC. They're an active et F
Speaker 1: manager running two strategies again to sustainable strategy in a
Speaker 1: long short strategy as well. Want to Skyline is one
Speaker 1: of their names. I want to plug. Also his UH nonprofit,
Speaker 1: Ross is on the advisory Advisory Council for Graceful Gears,
Speaker 1: which is a nonprofit that provides elite automobile experiences to
Speaker 1: people's serious medical conditions. So bringing joy to people who
Speaker 1: who need it, um with sweet cars and I think
Speaker 1: that's pretty awesome. Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up. Matt.
Speaker 1: Let's bring on the next guest, Matt Tammy. Hey good.
Speaker 1: She's a vice president and financial advisor at UBS and UH.
Speaker 1: She created the Impact Investment Group at UBS. Let's talk
Speaker 1: E s G investing. It's just one of the fastest
Speaker 1: growing areas within investing and Tammy, thanks so much for
Speaker 1: joining us here. I'd love to get your thoughts on
Speaker 1: what really makes a good representative E s G stock
Speaker 1: in your mind. Him, I'm happy to be on with
Speaker 1: you today. Uh. Yes, that's the question that many of
Speaker 1: my clients come to us and ask. And what we're
Speaker 1: looking at for E s G is um the totality
Speaker 1: of a company and what that means is that they're
Speaker 1: not only doing what they do well in terms of environmental, social,
Speaker 1: and government, but they have an intentionality of improving. So
Speaker 1: we don't want to play goatch you with companies. We
Speaker 1: want everybody to um feel like they can participate in
Speaker 1: E s G. But we look for companies that are
Speaker 1: moving in the right direction moving whether is moving more
Speaker 1: to carbon capture or whether is um on on the
Speaker 1: social as that really go deaving into those diversity inclusions
Speaker 1: and government issues. So you created the Impact Investment Group
Speaker 1: at UBS will walk us through what impact investing is
Speaker 1: as opposed to you know, other E s G investing
Speaker 1: or activists investing. Well, that's a great question. Uh. Ten
Speaker 1: years ago we started the Impact Investment groups, so we
Speaker 1: were a little bit ahead of the curve on this,
Speaker 1: And what we try to do is we try to
Speaker 1: advise our clients across an umbrella of um financial activities,
Speaker 1: whether it's market rate, securities, are alternatives, or philanthropy. And
Speaker 1: our real position on this at the Impact Investment Group
Speaker 1: is that you want to target those areas that you
Speaker 1: are interested in influencing, and you want to target them
Speaker 1: with each one of those lasers, if you will, the
Speaker 1: market rate, securities, the the alternative, and also with your
Speaker 1: philanthropy and and make something of the umbrella that that
Speaker 1: at least has some targeted point of view on the
Speaker 1: way you want to impass the world. So so that's
Speaker 1: our approach. So Temmy, when my financial advisor approaches me
Speaker 1: with an idea, you know, Mike, silly question, or maybe
Speaker 1: the only question is all right, what kind of return
Speaker 1: can I expect here? But are you when you talk
Speaker 1: to your clients, are you getting more and more of
Speaker 1: your clients saying, talk to me about the E. S
Speaker 1: G aspects of this idea you're bringing to me. Because
Speaker 1: I don't think about it that way, but I think
Speaker 1: I'm increasingly in the mind party. Well, you know, I
Speaker 1: think that there are people that at the very forefront
Speaker 1: of their minds, have the E s G or the
Speaker 1: social investment screen that they think about. But I've yet
Speaker 1: to need a person that doesn't care about the quality
Speaker 1: of the water that they drink or the air that
Speaker 1: they breathe. And so I break it into two groups.
Speaker 1: I break it into the evangelist group of people that
Speaker 1: really UM want to talk about UM this and have
Speaker 1: studied it right. And then I break it into more
Speaker 1: of the lay person that wants to have investments that
Speaker 1: have a positive impact on their future and their kids
Speaker 1: and choos UM and and want to do things that
Speaker 1: aligned with that. Now you mentioned return, and I think
Speaker 1: that that's an interesting question because UM, over the last
Speaker 1: let's say five to seven years, the return on E
Speaker 1: s G has been it's higher than that of the
Speaker 1: SMP five hundreds simply by deleting UM fossil fuels. So, Tammy,
Speaker 1: we don't have enough time, but I want to get
Speaker 1: you back on because I'd love to ask you kind
Speaker 1: of an off script question. But I noticed you studied
Speaker 1: You got your j D in securities and tax law,
Speaker 1: which makes sense for your industry, But you studied physics
Speaker 1: and electrical engineering at Tuskegee and I just wonder what
Speaker 1: kind of impact that has had on your career and
Speaker 1: how you have designed um uh, you know, your program
Speaker 1: at UBS. So I hope we can get you back
Speaker 1: on again because I think it's really fascinating to me.
Speaker 1: Hey Good there is vice president and financial advisor at UBS.
Speaker 1: She created the Impact Investment Group. Thanks for listening to
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Markets podcast. You can subscribe and listen to
Speaker 1: interviews with Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast platform you prefer.
Speaker 1: I'm Matt Miller. I'm on Twitter at Matt Miller three
Speaker 1: and on Fall Sweeney. I'm on Twitter at pt Sweeney
Speaker 1: Before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide at
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Radio