Conversations with Institutional Investors

In this special edition of the [i3] Podcast, in collaboration with the UTS Finance Department, we explore how the neoliberal model of economics, which largely ignored politics and focused on financial metrics, has eroded over time and made way for the rise of populism, which has exerted its influence on economies around the world. Why did the guardrails that neoliberalism provided slowly disappear and what are the consequences of this? Is there any model that will replace it? Political Economist Elizabeth Humphrys, Geopolitical Specialist Philipp Ivanov and UTS Industry Lecturer Rob Prugue delve deep into this fascinating topic as part of the Circle the Square roundtable series. __________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on  Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights __________ Overview of Podcast 00:00 – Introduction Wouter introduces the special i3 Podcast edition, produced with UTS Finance. He outlines the episode's theme: how the post-war neoliberal guardrails that long supported economic certainty have eroded, creating persistent uncertainty in markets. He introduces guests Elizabeth Humphrys, Philipp Ivanov and Rob Prugue. 03:04 – Origins of Neoliberal Guardrails (Rob) Rob explains the emergence of post-WWII guardrails: Bretton Woods institutions, NATO, the World Bank, IMF and other frameworks enabling stability and collective economic growth. They created a predictable environment but gradually weakened. 06:05 – Australian Context & Rise of Neoliberalism (Elizabeth) Elizabeth describes the long boom after WWII, its collapse in the 1970s, and neoliberalism's emergence. She explains how the Hawke Government in 1983 implemented major reforms—floating the dollar, tariff cuts, privatisation—enabled by strong political capital and union involvement. 10:09 – Global Perspective (Philipp) Philipp explains the Cold War dynamic: US-led order versus the Soviet bloc, with non-aligned states largely weak. Post-1970s Soviet stagnation and 1990s globalisation cemented US dominance, setting the stage for the "golden age" of the neoliberal order. 14:21 – Pax Americana and the Peace Dividend Rob discusses how guardrails encouraged discipline: countries deviating too far politically were penalised by markets. But global shifts, manufacturing loss and deindustrialisation gradually hollowed out these systems. 16:02 – Contestation of Neoliberalism & Social Impacts (Elizabeth) Elizabeth stresses that neoliberalism was contested from the start. She highlights social movements in the Global South, rising inequality, and sharp pain in Eastern Europe during rapid liberalisation. Domestic consequences—job losses, wage stagnation—fuelled political distrust. 22:03 – Globalisation, Inequality & a Multipolar World Wouter links globalisation to economic displacement. Philipp outlines four major geopolitical mistakes after the Cold War: Assuming China would remain benign Dismissing Russia Taking the developing world for granted Ignoring the power of nationalism and inequality 27:26 – Where Are We Now? Have the Guardrails Fully Collapsed? Rob argues that the guardrails can't simply be rebuilt—political divisiveness and grievance-driven politics are now embedded. Trust in US institutions and commitments (e.g., AUKUS) is eroding. 30:45 – Are We Heading Toward Chaos? (Elizabeth) Elizabeth argues capitalism is resilient but political legitimacy is collapsing. The promise of neoliberalism—trickle-down prosperity, stable institutions—failed large groups of people, fuelling anti-politics, housing unaffordability and climate-related tensions. 37:17 – Beyond Traditional Politics Elizabeth notes the breakdown of mass-membership parties and unions. Declining voter turnout and low trust create fertile ground for populism and fragmented political identities. 40:13 – Global Fractures & Major Trends (Philipp) Philipp highlights five converging forces shaping today's uncertainty: Economic fragmentation Great-power competition Societal divisions Climate change Technological revolution (especially AI) 45:28 – Technology as an Amplifier Rob and Philipp discuss how technology intensifies divisions but is ultimately a human-driven tool. AI raises the stakes of geopolitical competition, especially between the US and China. 53:14 – What Could Future Guardrails Look Like? Rob foresees three emerging forces: Rise of nationalistic policymaking Oligarchic influence filling the institutional vacuum A tri-polar world (US, Europe, BRICS) 55:24 – Can Australia Rebuild Guardrails? (Elizabeth) Elizabeth doubts that politicians currently have the vision for a new national project. She emphasises conflicts between economic growth, climate needs and powerful resource sectors. 59:24 – The Populist Base Rob asks whether a new base of disillusioned voters is forming. Elizabeth agrees: anti-politics creates a vacuum easily filled by opportunistic populists, on either left or right. 1:02:03 – Role of Media Rob highlights how politically aligned media ecosystems widen the vacuum and intensify division. 1:03:10 – Conclusion Wouter closes by noting the episode doesn't provide solutions, but maps the journey from stable post-war neoliberalism to today's entrenched uncertainty. Full Transcription of Episode 125 Wouter Klijn  00:00 Welcome to a special edition of the [i3] Podcast, produced in partnership with the University of Technology of Sydney's Finance Department, which includes the Anchor Fund, an educational investment fund managing real money, which is run by students and overseen by Associate Professor of Finance, Lorenzo Casavecchia of UTS. So this episode aligns with the second instalment of the UTS Circle The Square sessions, which are a thought-provoking series of roundtables on economic, financial and political ideas. You can find them on YouTube, and of course, [i3] is very happy to support them. So today we will delve into the neoliberal model, which, post-war, has provided guardrails for economics to operate in and allow investors to focus on the usual numbers, earnings, inflation and growth. But these guardrails have been eroding under the influence of various forces, including the rise of populism, and this has led to an almost permanent state of uncertainty. And of course, we all know markets don't like uncertainty. So how did we get here? What has changed, and why did a neoliberal model held together for such a long time in the first place? So this episode sits a little bit outside of our usual investment talk. It's more about the system underneath the data, applied political economics, and we're asking why the guardrails that once held in place neoliberalism have been thinned out and what is left behind. So I'm joined here today with three panellists. So first off, we have Elizabeth Humphrys, who is the Head of Discipline for Social and Political Sciences at the University of Technology Sydney. Elizabeth is a political economist who focuses on the impact of financial crisis and climate change on labour relations. She is the author of the 2019 book 'How Labour Built Neoliberalism'. We're also joined by geopolitical strategist Philipp Ivanov. Philipp has been globally recognised as an expert on international relations, particularly China and China-Russia relations, and he has worked in Russia, in China and the United States. So he will provide us with a global view on this issue. He's also an Industry Fellow at UTS. And finally, we've got Rob Prugue, who is an Honorary Industry Lecturer at UTS, but who most of you probably know as the former CEO of Lazard Asset Management for the Asia-Pacific region. He's one of the driving forces behind the Circle The Square roundtable series. So welcome everyone. Okay, so we're looking at uncertainty in markets, which, to a large extent, has been caused by the dismantling of the guardrails in which the political debate have moved. Now let's start at the beginning. What were those guardrails and what kept politics out of the market for such a long time?   Rob Prugue  03:04 I think the best way to explain this is it's it's nascent, and where I least I see it began, and it probably began post-WW2, when the West in particular, needed to rebuild itself after near a decade long World War and the destruction that obviously it needed to be addressed, and having learned the lessons of previous mistakes such as League of Nations or working in a bilateral World, the West appreciated early on. In order to counter the Soviet force, it needed to unify, and as part of that, it needed to build a system that would rebuild an economy by lifting the ship rather than individually handing out life preservers and life jackets to sectors, or worse, certain people. As a result, guardrails were built to make sure that this was a system that benefited the totality, rather than specific groups, and over time, that worked well. This is not to suggest that neoliberalism didn't have its challenges. Of course, we had wars. Of course, we had economic cycles. Of course, we had large unemployment. But when you compare it to pre-1946, and the fact that you know now, the world had access to nuclear destruction, all things considered, neoliberalism certainly post-WW2 had its benefits, and that peace brought a national prosperity. The guardrails were there, not necessarily as instruments of curtailing growth, but think of it as. Golf rules. I'm not a golfer, but when you go out in the golf there are certain etiquette and rules that are applied. The guardrails have that. But then they built systems and infrastructure to again, manage that. It's as simple as the World Bank, Bretton Woods, World Bank and IMF, the United Nations, the international scope, the World Health Organisation, to name but a few. But then progressively, even domestically, you had these guardrails, and that despite its shortcomings relative to pre-1946, level allowed the W

In this episode, I'm speaking with James Richards, Co-portfolio Manager of Fidelity International's Transition Materials Strategy. James runs a strategy that invests in stocks of companies that are exposed to materials that will play a crucial role in the energy transition. And it's not all about copper or lithium. James keeps his investment universe wide and includes commodities, such as animal fats and wood chips. We discussed the spike in rare earth materials earlier this year. We also look at why this is a super-cycle, but unlike the previous, China-led one. And finally, we explore whether this strategy correlates with the Australian economy and its emphasis on materials and style factors, including value. Enjoy the show. Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on  Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights Overview of podcast with James Richards, Fidelity   01:00 What are transition materials? 04:00 This was an analyst-driven idea, based on common themes emerging in different materials, rather than a product team idea 06:00 This is a different supercycle from the China-driven supercycle 07:00 There is a school of thought that says iron ore is benefiting from the transition. I don't really believe that 9:00 The energy transition will have an element of decommoditisation to it. There will be pockets of price premiums 11:00 Rare earth prices spiked earlier this year as generalist investors came into this market 14:00 In the first six months of this year, China has installed as much wind and solar as 90 per cent of all wind and solar ever built in the US. 17:00 Are we experiencing a uranium/nuclear renaissance? 21:00 This is not a commodity strategy; you invest in equities. Why? 24:00 We are looking to expand the universe rather than contract it, because we think the opportunity set is wider than even we envisaged. Chemicals is an interesting area. 25:30 Correlations with the commodity-heavy Australian industry. 29:00 You can see the way the world is heading, but when we get there is often unclear. You can lose a lot of money investing in a great demand stories that are just uninvestable at this time 31:00 Is this a value play?   Disclaimer: The content in this podcast is for institutional and wholesale investors and is not for distribution to retail investors.  This podcast has been prepared without taking into account any person's objectives, financial situation or needs. It is provided for general information purposes only and is not intended to constitute advice of any kind. References to specific stocks is for illustrative purposes and is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold those stocks. You should consider the relevant PDS and TMD for any Fidelity Australia product mentioned before making any investment decisions, available at www.fidelity.com.au. Full Episode Transcript Wouter Klijn  01:16 James, welcome to the show.    James Richards Hi. Wouter, thanks very much for having me.   Wouter Klijn So let's start at the beginning. What are transition materials and why should institutional investors care?   James Richards  02:15 You know, I think that the transition is one of the big structural thematics of the next couple of decades, and transition materials are what I call a wide range of commodities and materials that benefit from the process of the transition, and in many cases, the demand driven from the transition, coupled with the fact that it is never been so difficult to bring on new supply of a number of commodities, will create the conditions where, you know what I think could be the next super cycle for a wide range of commodities. And this is a very, very investable thematic, in my view,   Wouter Klijn  02:49 Before we get to the super cycle, can you tell me a little bit about where this idea came from? Because I understand this was more of an analyst driven idea to set up the strategy. Is that right? Yeah.   James Richards  03:00 I mean, you know, I think normally ideas are born in this, in the product team, and, you know, then they go and find a portfolio manager, you know, this one is something that came out through, you know, hours and meetings and the sort of the work that we were doing around, around the commodity space, and the same themes, you know, started to come up again and again, first of all, in copper. But then, you know, we began to get increasingly excited when we saw the same themes coming up across a wide range of commodities, and, you know, as far afield as vegetable oil and animal fats. And it was then that we saw that there was a sort of wide ranging, quite diversified, investable thematic here.   Wouter Klijn  03:41 So what's the story with animal fats?   James Richards  03:45 Well, animal fats is so the renewable diesel chain, you know, particularly in the US, but also also wide. What are more widely, you know, is sealed by animal fats and vegetable oil. And you know, there is a, there is a fine, a finite supply of these things, and so you have to incentivize it. And the only way to incentivize new suppliers through price and, you know, the demand that is in there's been created by stricter regulatory standards and and stepping up of requirements, you know, really places a challenge on those supply chains.   Wouter Klijn  04:22 Yeah. So is that in your portfolio animal fats and oils?   James Richards  04:26 We certainly think that the vegetables animal fats is a very interesting long term thematic,   Wouter Klijn  04:30 yeah. Okay, interesting. So coming from themes that you saw in copper and copper is, of course, a key material in electrification. So is this transition the story to renewable energy? Is it just about electrification, or are there themes involved in this as well?   James Richards  04:51 So I mean electric, if you look at the sort of the current opportunity set, electrification is an obvious one. You know, it has various aspects. You know. Renewables is one obvious aspect. Electric vehicles is another. And if you think about sort of the grid requirements of the increased demand for electricity, you know that that that that also has some pretty found profound implications. But it's not just electrification. If you think about sort of hard to abate areas like like steel production, maritime fuels, aviation fuels, you know, the circular economy is a very is a very interesting area. You know, it's a much, much wider area than just electrification.   Wouter Klijn  05:38 And I think you've mentioned digitization and urbanisation, as to key thematics that are related to the transition materials. In particular,   James Richards  05:47 I think one of the one of the interesting aspects that you get here is that you get demand that is driven by the transition but then you have a lot of other structural demand drivers that are also facing in the same direction and pulling on the same commodity demand chains. And so, for instance, AI and data centres will drive demand for copper and other and other commodities, but also the industrialization of India and Southeast Asia as they start to hit levels where commodity intensity picks up quite dramatically. You know, they're essentially being competition with the transition and data centres for scarce supply of commodities and, you know, and that is quite exciting, I think, in terms of compromises will have to be made. I mean, if you look at the sheer population size in India, and you put a sort of average peak commodity intensity on it, like the numbers are mind boggling. And so, you know, compromises are going to have to be made. And the only way that you get those compromises made, and the signal that you get to to get substitution, and all the ways to get the numbers to work. You know, the only way you can get there is through price.   Wouter Klijn  07:03 So there's a couple of big trends involved. You just mentioned one around the super cycle in commodities. So when you sort of look back over time, have we had some of these super cycles before?   James Richards  07:16 I mean, I do have a history degree, but not much of a history student, so I'm kind of more focused on, on the most recent, which is, you know, the early, the early years of my career were with the China driven super cycle. And, you know, that was one of the reasons, where I saw, you know, clear echoes of what I was seeing, you know, today, you know, versus what I was seeing there are seeing above trend demand for commodities driven by China hoovering up, you know, pretty much every commodity in sight. And you know, decades worth of under investment in commodities at the time. So you had a relatively curtailed supply side. And that's really important is, you know, in order to make money in commodities, the supply side has to struggle to keep up with demand. And so, you know, commodity with 20% demand, keiger, you're not necessarily going to make money if the supply side is a lot, is it elastic? And so, you know that supply side is really, really important, but it is a different super cycle, I think, from from the China driven super cycle. In the the China driven super cycle, I think mainly had winners, whereas in this super cycle, I think, you know, there are clear winners and losers in terms of in terms of demand, you know, and you know, the transition kind of gives the clue to that in thermal coal, demand should decline over time. All demand should decline over time. You know, we're talking, we're talking longer term here. And you know, there are areas like, I think, although there are some demand benefits for steel, you know, the process of decarbonizing steel is quite, is quite difficult and expensive. And so I think there is, there's some difficulties around that. And you know, I'm in Australia, and you know, there's a school of thought which, which says that iron ore is benefited by the transition. I don't really believe th

Note: This episode was recorded before the release of ASIC's Private Credit Surveillance Report 820. The ASIC report mentioned in the podcast relates to the Private Credit in Australia Report 814, released in September 2025. In this episode of The [i3] podcast, I'm speaking with Linda Cunningham, who is the Head of Debt and Alternatives for Cbus Super. We talk about some of Linda's core beliefs when it comes to debt investing, including the banking 101, to be very careful when borrowing short and lending long at the same time. We discuss the importance of cash flows and ensuring the ability of a borrower to pay their interest. We discuss liquidity mortgage funds and private credit funds aimed at retail investors, as well as the occasional funky fee structure. We even talk about how Linda once provided a loan to finance a catamaran called the soggy moggy. Enjoy the show! __________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on  Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights _____________ Overview of podcast with Linda Cunningham, Head of Debt and Alternatives, Cbus   03:00 My father was a bank manager and I wanted to get into banking at an early age 04:00 In year nine, I had a discussion with a teacher about the difference between a bank and a building society 05:30 Late 80s, the property market was booming, but interest rates were high. One of my jobs was to drive to Geelong and go through the credit files. One of the lessons out of that was how important cash flow is for a loan. Where is the interest coming from to pay you? 11:30 Matching liquidity profiles, the case of AXA products marketed to retail clients. "Having daily liquidity is great, until it is not" 17:30 You can finance anything, I've financed a catamaran, but it is about where it sits in the portfolio 18:30 Setting up the internal credit capability for Cbus. "You are coming from a bank and so you don't think about who is going to communicate with the borrower what the interest rate is" 19:30 "I started in 2016, but we didn't write our first loan until 2019" 20:30 Financing a catamaran, the 'Soggy Moggy'. 22:30 Debt is not like equities; you can't just go out and buy a ready-made portfolio 32:00 There is no pressure for us to allocate money [to loans], we can give that money to managers 34:00 On occasion, we are seeing some 'funky [fee] structures'. 36:00 Private credit is not new; there have been mortgage funds operating in Australia for at least 30 years 38:00 What is getting more focus is: where is the private credit sector getting its money from? 40:00 I do worry about the flow-on effect from what is happening in retail products 41:30 The market is very competitive on loan transactions at the moment, are people pricing risk appropriately? 45:00 It takes someone really strong, who gets paid on funds under management, to say no to the funds, whereas at Cbus we don't have that tension. I can look at other credit managers 49:00 On the internal front, we would like to do a little more construction deals. We think there is going to be a little more residential over the next year or so 50:00 We are not sure if in affordable housing equity is the way to go. But we do think that with debt you get an appropriate return for your risk Full Transcript of Episode 123 Wouter Klijn  01:16 In this episode of The [i3] podcast, I'm speaking with Linda Cunningham, who is the head of debt and alternatives for Cbus Super. We talk about some of Linda's core beliefs when it comes to debt investing, including the banking 101, to be very careful when borrowing short and lending long at the same time. We discuss the importance of cash flows and ensuring the ability of a borrower to pay their interest. We discuss liquidity mortgage funds and private credit funds aimed at retail investors, as well as the occasional funky fee structure. And of course, we delve into the state of the private credit market and ASIC's recent comments on the sector. We even talk about how Linda once provided a loan to finance a catamaran called the soggy moggy. Enjoy the show!   Linda Cunningham  02:06 Linda. Welcome to the podcast. Thanks for having me, Wouter.   Wouter Klijn  02:09 So your journey started a bit unusually compared to maybe some of your peers. I believe you started in the industry when you were just 15 years old. How did that happen?   Linda Cunningham  02:20 That's correct look, and I'm going to age myself here, but we are talking, you know, the early 1980s I had grown up. My father was a bank manager, so I had, from a very early age been exposed to banking, and by the time I was finishing year 10, I had a decision to make, which was, you know, Did I did I want to go on to year 12? Did I want to go on to university? I knew I wanted to end up in banking. Superannuation funds didn't really exist at that time, but I knew I wanted to get into the lending side of things, and I had the opportunity to actually start working in the local branch at the bank, a different bank to where my father was, and I enrolled to do a TAFE course. So I did a Gosford Teik, an accounting course three nights a week for four years. So once I finished that, I enrolled in doing my degree by we'll call it remote learning. In those days it was called by a correspondence. Yeah. So by the time I was 23 I had been working for eight years, three years in a branch and five years in the corporate banking area, yeah. And I had my degree.   Wouter Klijn  03:40 Excellent. And I think there was an anecdote where you even on the school playground would discuss monetary policy or something.   Linda Cunningham  03:49 Look, I do remember, in a commerce class in year nine, having a debate with my teacher about the difference between a bank and a building society. And apparently I was, I was quoting the Banking Act of 1959 in those discussions to tell him there was a difference, right?   Wouter Klijn  04:09 Right. Not your average conversation, I think, for a teenager.   Linda Cunningham  04:12 No. But look, it had been something that had always interested me. And look, I still now people have various dreams. One of my dreams is always rolling coins. So yeah, rolling up the 20 cent pieces and 50 Cent pieces into the pieces of paper. I can still do that in my head,   Wouter Klijn  04:31 Very good. There's probably muscle memory comes into play with that one. So having started relatively young, you've seen probably a few financial crisises. I think the 1990 collapse of the Geelong based pyramid building society was one of them. Can you share some of your learnings from some of these downturns with us in terms of how it shaped your outlook on investing?   Linda Cunningham  04:56 And look, that was absolutely a very interesting time to be in the lending space. I had moved from New South Wales to Victoria with my work. And, you know, late 80s, everything was booming in property, everything was booming everywhere. But you also had interest rates pretty high. And, you know, the market was, was, was very hot, and the bank I was working for had exposure to all of the pyramid associated companies. So there were actually four building societies there. And we were actually doing what these days would be called a warehouse loan. So we're effectively providing them, you know, with the loan, 80 cents in the dollar, based on a, on a on a pool of mortgages, and those loans, the underlying loans, would be some commercial property. They'd be residential. It'd be a whole mix of things. And one of my jobs I got to do was to get on the freeway and head to Geelong every few months and actually sit there and look through the credit files. There was you couldn't get them on Excel. You couldn't log into a data room. You'd actually go in and sit there in the premises and look through those credit files. And I think for me, one of those, the sort of lessons out of that was, was really how important cash flow is for a loan. You know, if you are, you know, in our case, we're expecting, you know, the borrower being, say, pyramid building society, to still pay our interest. But you know, if you've got a pool of loans that are in there, that are just secured against a vacant block of land or a non income producing property, where is the where's the income coming from, where's the interest coming from, to actually be able to pay you? And I think that was, that was probably one of the strongest sort of lessons that I actually had, was really how critical income is. And I would say that was even important. If you looked across, you know, the banks books at that time, and a couple of other names you've got to mention from that era. You can't not mention the state mortgages tri Continental, all of the state banks, like I work for State Bank of New South Wales, which actually was in a pretty good state, but we're probably still in that time whereby we actually had a large proportion of our property based loans, which were from an LVR perspective, we had breaches, right? And it was one of those situations where you we actually did okay, like those loans were were pretty good, because the income was still solid on them. The borrowers were still earning enough income from these assets to actually be able to pay the interest. But, you know, they suddenly went from having a loan to valuation of, you know, 60% to 80 or 90% breaching covenants, etc, just really because of the rapid change in interest rates in the market and the impact on on property values,   Wouter Klijn  08:02 yeah, and I think that importance of knowing where the income come from and the underlying assets that sort of carries through through time. Because I think we recently spoken about a loan, and we won't name any names, but it basically looked like a term deposit. But when you looked under the hood, it was something very different, with very different liquidity profile,   Li

In Episode 122 of the [i3] Podcast, Conversations with Institutional Investors, we speak with Maroun Younes and James Abela, co-portfolio managers of the Fidelity Global Future Leaders strategy, about the attractiveness of small and mid-cap investments, a $12 trillion market with significant growth potential.  They acknowledge the recent underperformance of small caps due to market concentration in large caps, particularly in US tech, but point out that people are starting to wake up to the risks associated with those concentrations. Are we in an AI bubble, driven by these large caps? The conversation starts at a high level, discussing the importance of quality, value, transition, and momentum, and then we do a deep dive into specific investments, such as Arista and FICO-score provider Fair Isaac Corporation.  We also come back to AI and see how it can be used by asset managers. ________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights ________ Disclaimer: The content in this podcast is for institutional and wholesale investors and is not for distribution to retail investors.  This podcast has been prepared without taking into account any person's objectives, financial situation or needs. It is provided for general information purposes only and is not intended to constitute advice of any kind. References to specific stocks is for illustrative purposes and is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold those stocks. You should consider the relevant PDS and TMD for any Fidelity Australia product mentioned before making any investment decisions, available at www.fidelity.com.au. Podcast Overview 04:00 Large caps outperforming small caps in the US is unusual; historically small caps have outperformed over time. But people are waking up to the risk of concentration, both at a stock level and sector level 07:00 We are not too concerned about US exceptionalism, because we don't see a huge break point going forward 07:30 It is always hard to tell whether we are in a bubble, but there are early signs of a formation (of an AI bubble). There is a lot of spending in this area and at this stage we don't see that return on capex coming through 09:00 Fidelity webinar on AI 10:30 We have four focus areas: quality, which is the love quadrant, value is a neglected quadrant, transition is the quadrant of hope and momentum is the hot quadrant 13:30 We have guardrails for allocating to the different areas: 40 per cent quality, plus or minus 10, value 30 per cent, transition 20 per cent and momentum 10 per cent, 17:00 The case of Arista, looking for a catalyst to unlock value 20:00 Another case study, Fico credit scores 23:00 On selling discipline 28:00 We are not looking to make a big market call, but are looking to participate in the continued rally 31:30 We mainly have exposure to China in the healthcare sector. Most Chinese tech companies are too large for us 32:30 Getting compared to the QSML exchange traded fund 37:00 Looking but not buying; the case of Deckers and the Hoka shoe 44:00 White paper on Lessons Learned over the years 45:00 Using AI in our work; you can get to a working knowledge of a company in a matter of minutes For the Fidelity webinar, 'Navigating the AI boom: A framework for investing', please see here. For the Fidelity white paper, 'Discovering tomorrow's global future leaders, today', please see here. Full Transcript of Episode Wouter Klijn  00:00 Welcome to the show.  James and Maroun Thank you, Hi.  Wouter Klijn  So why small and mid caps? What got you started in this particular space of investing. James  00:21 Well, for me, I started in the Australian market, in Aussie mins and smalls, but we were asked by clients to move into the global space. That's where Marouns joined me to attack this global market, which is huge. The tractions are significant. There is a very, very big market. The size of the market is 9 trillion US, which is huge. So 12 trillion Australian so it's 5x the size of the Australian market. So the opportunity set is significant. The breadth and depth of stocks is very significant. So the number of stocks you can own in the universe, in each sector or in each theme, is quite broad and diverse. Valuations are very attractive, and one of the other key things is that they are still under researched, and in many cases, under appreciated for what they actually have in terms of quality. So that allows moon and I to find ideas that are often 15 to 20% EPS growth on 15 to 20% roes trading on very reasonable multiples, compared to things that are more discovered in large caps and the size we can now go up to is about 60 billion US, which is our universe scope, which gives us quite a long runway in terms of years of holding stocks before they are large caps. They're all the key attractions. So it is a very attractive space. Wouter Klijn  01:32 So we've seen a lot of concentration, in particular US equity markets. And we did see that earlier this year's small and mid caps have underperformed a bit. Are the two linked? Is the concentration in the market affecting the smaller mid cap space? Maroun  01:47 Yeah, absolutely. So they're two sides of the same coin. So you've basically had in the US market a concentration of maybe half a dozen stocks, predominantly in the technology sector, and they've been doing incredibly well. So they've propelled the market a lot higher, and they've they've allowed large caps to outperform small caps. That's quite unusual. Small caps historically, if you look back 25 - 30, years, small caps historically, have outperformed large caps. They're smaller. They're growing off a smaller revenue base. It's much easier for them to double and triple in size over time, but certainly over the last maybe five or six years, that's not been the case. So it has tempered some enthusiasm, I guess, in the past, for smaller mid caps. But I think you're also starting to see people now waking up to the risks associated with the concentration levels, both at a stock level as well as a sector level, and people actively now looking to diversify away from that. Wouter Klijn  02:44 Yeah. So you don't see it as a structural change. This, the small cap premium is still out there. It might be just a temporary dislocation. Maroun  02:51 I think so. If you look back in history, there has been periods in time where, where large caps have done quite well. If you look back to the nifty 50, back in the early 70s, there was that there was a handful of stocks that did incredibly well, predominantly at the top end. So we do go through periods every so often. I think this is another one of those episodes. Wouter Klijn  03:09 Yeah. So might be a nice buying opportunity then?  Maroun Absolutely, yeah, we definitely think so, yeah.  Wouter So we've looked a lot at US exceptionalism, a lot of talk around that, especially the Magnificent Seven. But you know, is it the broader market, or is it just the Magnificent Seven that are exceptional? Or do you see that also extended to the to the smaller mid cap space? James  03:35 Yeah, with US exceptionalism, it's a very big topic area. So what we focus on, I guess, in our world is returns, and the return profile of the mega caps is quite high. Still, during that 20% level, in terms of roa's or Reich's return on investor capitals, our index is still around a 15 to 16% level, which is quite high, and also the US in aggregate compared to the rest of the world, is very high. So 15 to 20% returns on capital, compared to the world average of around nines to 10s, whatever you want to call it like, the US, is 50% better on average, in terms of returns on capital to the rest of the world. So we are still, you know, half of our fund, at least, is in the US. There's a lot of talk about the US builds great businesses. The Chinese build great manufacturing, and European builds great regulation. It's a well known kind of cliche, but the fact is that the US does have great businesses, whether they're whether whatever you is you want to say, the cause of that is, and that's expected to continue, especially for the next few years. Yeah, so we don't think it is a one off, and it's not just the mag seven either. Mag seven are symptomatic of the US being a leadership marketplace, and we find that's why we find it very attractive, because in global mids and smalls, we've built a portfolio which has returns on capital of in the 20% range as well, and still a very reason. Or valuations. So, you know, we aren't too concerned about that concept of us exceptionalism, because we don't think it's there's a huge break point that's obvious coming forward.  Wouter Klijn  05:10 So there has been a lot of talk around whether we are in an AI bubble or not, and whether the Mag Seven isn't a symptom of that. What's your take on it? Do you have any views on whether we're in a bubble, just in an expensive period. Maroun  05:22 Yeah, it's always hard to know whether you're actually in a bubble or not, but certainly there, there are signs, early signs of formation. There's a lot of spending going into this area, and at this stage, we're not seeing the return on that, that increased capex come through now it may still Come, come come further down the track, and in which case, all this spending is justified. And you know, things continue as they are, but when you're seeing an increasing level of CapEx, I mean, some of these companies in the mag seven are spending 10x the amount of CapEx they were 10 years ago. So they were capital like businesses, and now they're quite capital intensive. Businesses spending a lot more money, that money needs to earn an attractive rate of return, because one of the things these businesses have done historically is deliver very high rates of return. So when you're investing a whole lot more money and you're large and you're dominant, the hurdle rate for

In this episode of the [i3] podcast, I'm speaking with Mary Power, who is the Head of Property Research at asset consultant Jana. We cover the struggles of the property market in the early 90s, when Mary started out in the industry, and the learnings from that time. We take a look at how investors have dealt with 13 consecutive rate rises, starting in 2022 and we cover portfolio construction issues, including blending listed and unlisted property assets, the convergence of real estate and infrastructure, while Mary also predicts that up to 50% of Australian property money might be reallocated to international assets as super funds grow bigger. ________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights __________ Overview of podcast with Mary Power, JANA 03:00 Getting into the industry 04:30 The early 1990s was a dramatic period in the office market and as a young person in the industry that experience was fascinating 07:00 I think we have turned a corner in terms of unlisted property 8:00 In June 2022, we headed into 13 interest rate rises, which was a significant head wind for the property sector. 10:00 The REIT sector is very sensitive to interest rates 11:00 Are REITs equities or properties? 12:30 Property people don't price off the cash rate; they price off the 10-year bond rate 14:00 The Melbourne property market is still a little bit difficult 16:00 People aren't getting their forward projections of labour seating in offices right 19:00 I think it is very hard to promise quarterly, ongoing liquidity in a portfolio with large assets 25:00 There is a big push for the build-to-rent sector to mature in Australia 31:00 Super funds could move up to 50 per cent of Australian property money offshore Full Transcript of Episode 121 Wouter Klijn 02:01 Mary, welcome to the podcast. Mary Power 02:04 Thank you very much, pleasure to be here. Wouter Klijn 02:07 So you've been with Jana for more than 15 years. What got you into property investing or property research in the first place? Mary Power 02:16 Oh, I might have to let you in on a little secret. I I've actually had two stints at Jana. I was actually at Jana in the between '94 and 2000 as well. So yes, I was how did I get into property? It's a great question. I had a friend whose father was a valuer, and I commenced the property valuations course at RMIT, and he got me a cadetship at Urbis, known as at Cox then, and I was hooked. I was enjoyed it immensely. And love the idea of the commerce and the built form coming together. Yeah. So I, I really enjoyed it. And I, I joined at a time when the property market was exuberant in the late 80s, and then it went into the early 90s, which was the recession we had to have. So I saw the best and the worst at the time. And I always say I learned all my skills over those eight or nine years. Wouter Klijn 03:12 Yeah, and apart from the environment at a time, has the investment side changed much? I mean, do do the valuation practices change the deals, change the structures. What's that like? Mary Power 03:26 It's a great question. In fact, a lot of it's changed, and a lot of the fundamentals remain the same. So lots of change, lots of so if you went into the early if you went into the early 90s and we had that recession, which absolutely impacted the office sector. In Melbourne alone, there were six office buildings that were built, and they would have been built on, not with pre commitments that you would have today, so built by developers who then had to entice tenants in. So a mill, we say, a million square feet, or square metres of Office became was built, and then the rest became vacant. So vacancy rose to about 25% and in fact, rents halved. So it was a really dramatic period in the office market. And it was, you know, as a very young person learning it was, it was, it was fascinating. What had happened over that period. We didn't have a Funds Management basis. Then the I think, as we headed into the 90s, I think amp and national mutual were about the only funds managers that were available. Most of property was held within a Balanced fund. And of course, over the course of the next few years. If you fast forward to 2025 the Mercer survey is, in fact, about 94 billion. That's without Goodman, I think that adds another 18 billion on. So, you know, you're a very substantially funds management platform has emerged over that period, over that last 30 years. And you know, it. It now consists of specialist sector managers plus diversified managers. So it's been amazing. Wouter Klijn 05:05 Yeah, sounds like the office sector has gone through a few problematic periods and more exuberant ones, because we've seen, of course, with covid and as well that it got strongly impacted we were working from home. Did that experience earlier on help you going through the covid period? Mary Power 05:26 I think covid, I always say covid was a black swan event. No one had, noone had predicted it, but the balance sheets and corporates and and employment data was all in good shape. It wasn't the same. In the early 90s, we had very high unemployment, up to 11% most people I knew had someone had lost their jobs, and these were very smart people, and we had a lot of corporate issues going on in the early 90s. That wasn't the case in covid. We were in pretty good shape going into the into the covid. So I think whilst it was annoying, and we hadn't seen it before, it was nothing like what I'd seen in the in the early 90s. So that gave me some comfort at the time, yeah. And of course, we had, you know, the new phenomena of working from home, which was something we hadn't had before. And of course, you know, various states had different lockdown periods. Melbourne had a very severe lockdown period. And of course, it's taken some time for people to return to the office. Yeah. Wouter Klijn 06:28 Fair enough. So if we fast forward to today's environment, I looked recently in sort of the superannuation returns for the full financial year, and spread out by the different asset classes. And what sort of struck me is that unless that has been relatively poor performer in recent years, last two years, negative, this year, low, single digit, but at the other side, first time it's single digits again with positive results, have we turned the corner there? Mary Power 07:01 I think we have, and I think you know what happened in 2020? Was covid occurred, and there was this, you know, significant lockdown over quite a long period of time. Never good for the built form that have leases in place. They have contractual leases in place, but you still need people to buy things at shopping centres and office buildings to be occupied for those leases to be sustainable and and of benefit to the tenant. So I think that was very difficult period. I mean, I'm would, I would call the Property Council at the time, they had to negotiate with tenants, 1000s of and come up with a code of conduct of how to interact with a tenant during this, you know, significant period of disruption. And to their credit, they did do that within a reasonably short period of time. On the other hand, infrastructure asset had one contract with talking about 1000s of contracts through the property sector. So it was, it was very, a very difficult period, but I think they did a great job. And then, of course, we headed into in June 22 the start of 13 interest rate rises, which, of course, was a significant headwind to the property sector, because it had performed quite well, even through covert up until the mid, mid 2022 and then we started facing into to higher interest rates. And the higher interest rates, in fact, had been quite difficult for cap rates at the time as a differential. So we know what happened. Cap rates expanded, capital values went down in most cases, the income line, the leasing line was was not too bad that that sort of stood up. You know, it was really the rapid interest rate rises 13 right? Interest rate rises in a short period of time. That really was the problem for the property industry, yeah. Wouter Klijn 08:50 And then if you look at the listed side of the property sector, somehow they did much better. So I looked at Australia's property that increased by 13.8% and then I think international listed property went more than 9% why is there such a strong difference between the listed space and the unlisted space over that period? Mary Power 09:12 So I think, you know, the listed is highly correlated to equities, so you have a big influence. You know, I go back to March 2020, and the a rate sector fell by 46% so that was a very, you know, that was a very stark fall compared to what the unlisted property index was doing at the time. So the A rates are, you know, they've got some interesting characteristics. For instance, the Goodman group makes up about 39 40% of the a rate index. So that will rise and fall depending on on how government have performed over over a period of time. So I think the other thing is that, you know, the a the rate sector, while it is very much correlated to to equities, it's very interest rate sensitive. So you get interest rate, you know, interest rate. Cuts like we've had attractive, very attractive for for the rate sectors, you know, good for repricing of debt. Good indicate, lead indicator. And I think, yeah, the rates can be a good lead indicator for unlisted property. Yeah. Wouter Klijn 10:15 So do you subscribe to the idea that REITs are equities in the short term and property in the long term, or are they just always equities? Mary Power 10:24 Yeah, I think that's a great question. I think over the long, long term, you'd think that they do. You do have a quite a strong correlation, you know, to property over the long term. I think though, you need to be able to withstand having them in the portfolio. You do need to be able to

In this episode, I speak with Ashby Monk, who is Executive & Research Director at Stanford Long-term Investing, a part of Stanford University in California. Ashby has been advising most of the large superannuation funds in Australia on governance, organisational efficiency and knowledge management. He is a regular visitor to our country, and has been here 55 times. We discuss the future of the superannuation industry and the role of innovation. Unsurprisingly, this means that we spend a fair amount of time talking about artificial intelligence and the changes it might bring to the industry. Ashby is of the opinion that it will be transformational, while initial problems such as hallucinations are quickly being dealt with. What does AI mean for the super industry? Well, consultants might be in trouble as AI systems will come to play a critical role in providing alternative views or in red teaming. Asset managers, too, will come to feel the heat, and boards might want to add directors with deep technological knowledge. Enjoy the Show! ________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on  Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights ________ Overview of Podcast with Asby Monk, Stanford University   03:30 I've never met a pension fund with an R&D unit. 09:00 I've seen Australia as the future of pensions 10:00 People in Australia don't quite know how cool it is, the member first culture 12:00 There is no professional School of Investing in the world; it is an apprenticeship 16:00 The secret sauce for a pension fund is in understanding your own advantages, weakness and goals 20:00 You can have a culture of knowledge sharing or a culture of secrecy and I don't think you need to do much more than to say those words to understand what is implied 22:30 What attracted me to the asset owner industry is that it is a mission-driven culture 26:00 The AI boom…, everybody acknowledges that particularly our industry is going to be transformed 28:00 AI for knowledge management; the hallucinations are starting to go away. We are very close 32:00 Red teaming with AI; ask to replicate what your analysts are doing to see if you get a different view 33:00 Consultants might be in trouble, unless they move fast towards AI 34:00 Anybody who provides advice…, even me, you could probably ask an AI: 'How would Ashby respond to this idea?' 36:00 The big asset managers that we can think of right now, their existence is threatened 37:30 There are about eight Australian super funds that can be world role models 39:00 I often ask: 'Who on your board has technological expertise?' and the answer is often 'none'. 41:00 Deep thoughts to conclude   "The 'Investor Identity': The Ultimate Driver of Returns" by Ashby Monk and Dane Rook, 2023   Full Transcription of Episode 120 Wouter Klijn Ashby, welcome to the show. Ashby Monk  02:27 Thank you so much. It's an honour to be here. Truly. I think that if I didn't have my job, I would want your job. Wouter Klijn  02:35 It's pretty fun.  Ashby Monk  02:39 Yes, you know, because the investment Innovation Institute almost sounds like my life's work, but you've already got it, so I'll have to find something else. But it's, it's a it's a pleasure to be here, in large part because I think you and I are working on very similar things. Wouter Klijn  02:57 Thank you very much for that. And you also have your own podcast, which has an interesting name of 'Don't get fired'. Why did you choose this title, Ashby Monk  03:05 Don't get fired Podcast, yeah, so that is meant to celebrate the heroic nature of innovation and institutional investment. Oftentimes, I'm sure you're aware the pathway to doing creative things, especially as it relates to the asset owner side of things, that pathway generally flows through a courageous person that is deciding, I'm going to do things differently, and in the process, generally takes career risk. And so the don't get fired podcast is meant to be somewhat funny, but it's also meant to acknowledge, like, we don't have standard pathways of innovation in this industry. You know, I've never met a pension fund with, like, a well formed R and D unit. Oftentimes, it's just a person who is ready to take on a challenge and and I think we do need R and D units, and so the podcast is all about different pathways to innovation. Wouter Klijn  04:06 Yeah, yeah. It's interesting because I think that's my cat.  Ashby Monk 04:13 Hello Kitty. That's a perfect that cat wants to talk to us about innovation, Wouter Klijn  04:16 Exactly, but yeah, no, it's, that's, that's interesting because I listened to your last episode with Mark Delaney, and he made a reference to that where, I think, before he joined the superannuation industry and became CIO, now of Australian super, he worked for an insurance company. And he said, he sort of made his remark that at the beginning, when he worked, there was one of the most innovative companies in Australia, and then over time, they became scared of innovating, and it actually ended up collapsing. And he for part of it was because of a lack of innovation, which is basically goes to the core of your premise with the podcast.  Ashby Monk  04:57 I mean every, every, long-lived organisation faces this challenge around how much to exploit and how much to explore. So you exploit the assets, you have to generate performance, and then you also have to explore in order to, you know, go out and find new things to exploit in the future. And there's a balance, and I think it was the Winner's Curse, or the winner's winner's dilemma, maybe, where those organisations that are very successful often end up in a pattern of exploitation, and then that ultimately sows the seeds of their demise, those organisations that go on for generations. So these family owned companies that you know, go hundreds of years into the future. They build very deliberate innovation practices and and the funds that you and I study, these are funds that have stakeholders rather than shareholders. We know these funds are going to live for centuries. You know, like obviously, many of the super funds are fairly new on that time scale, but University endowments, sovereign funds, etc, they're looking out 100 years into the future. Those organisations are going to have to balance that exploitation, exploration dilemma. And I'm not sure most of them are ready for that. Wouter Klijn  06:24 Yeah, it's sort of a fine balance between sticking with a winning formula and doing enough innovation to stay relevant, I suppose. And you're right, the super funds are relatively young, so maybe they are a bit scared to, you know, do too much innovation and and mess it up, but, yeah, it's a developing industry, but one of the things that I thought was quite interesting when when you spoke to Mark, is that you mentioned you've known him for 13 or 14 years. And I know you have been advising a number of funds here in Australia, but your interaction with the funds goes back quite some time. How did you first get involved with the Australian funds? Ashby Monk  07:04 Well, my mentor, my academic mentor, is a guy named Professor, Gordon Clark, who is Australian who, I think you probably know Gordon, I think he still comes down to Melbourne once a year, for a month. He might even teach a class at Monash, one or two classes every year. And really, he was the one who introduced me to the Australian superannuation industry. And as somebody you know, obviously very interested in the future of pensions, you can't help but be blown away by what's happening in Australia. So I would argue the accumulation side of the equation is basically solved in Australia. Now, the de accumulation, the retirement side of things, there's still some challenges, and people are working on those challenges, but the superannuation industry, by and large, feels like the future for the rest of the world defined contribution, so you're not taking that longevity risk pooled, so you're getting the best asset management the lowest cost. And then also there's the regulatory aspects, where you know you have to contribute, so there's that mandate, and so that combination of everybody contributing professional management and really getting this accumulation running puts Australia in a very rare community in the world where it feels like you got your pensions organised. The Canadians seem pretty good, but those are mostly DB plans and so we all wonder what happens when the nanobots get injected and we live for 200 years? How are we going to manage that? They would tell you that they can manage that through maybe renegotiation. But in the Australian case, you won't have to. People are just going to have to work for longer because there won't be as much money there. And so, you know, obviously I'm, I'm talking like a true Stanford engineer. People are going to live forever with nanobots, but, but really, politicians everywhere are trying to figure out how to manage the unfunded liabilities for old age retirement security, and so you have that there. And so I know there's a long winded answer, but going back 14 years, I was introduced to the Australian super folks. And really, as sad as this is to say out loud, I think I've been back 55 times. Wow. I owe a lot of trees to the world. I got to plant some trees, but that's largely because I've seen Australia as the future of pensions. Wouter Klijn  09:42 Yeah, yeah, it's an interesting system, because my background is Dutch, so I grew up in defined benefits schemes as well, and I know that my dad retired in his late 50s with 70% of his last earned wage for the rest of his life. So that's that's not really working, if you and is he still going? Lift to 100 he's still going. He's still there. Ashby Monk  10:04 Yeah, pretty great if you can get it, Wouter Klijn  10:07 yeah, although it did require along the way

In this episode of the [i3] Podcast, I'm speaking with Richard Brown, who is a Client Portfolio Manager with Janus Henderson Investors. And today we are going to talk about global small caps. We look at whether small caps are affected by the increasing concentration of the equity markets, particularly in the US, where technology stocks have dominated returns in recent years. We talk about catalysts for unlocking the current small cap discount versus large caps, including the rate environment and the current business cycle. And we take a look at a few case studies of where to invest and where not, involving fuzzy pandas, Italian industrial stocks and JB Hi Fi. This episode was sponsored by Janus Henderson Investors, and as such, the sponsor can make suggestions for topics, but the final control remains with the Investment Innovation Institute. __________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights ________ Overview of Podcast with Richard Brown, Client Portfolio Manager, Janus Henderson Investors 02:00 The appeal of small caps and the case for egg producers 08:00 Does the concentration in equity markets and the increasing value of the Magnificent Seven require you to adjust valuation models for small caps? 09:30 The small cap discount to large caps has reached quite an extreme by historical standards 11:30 More clarity on the direction of rates would help small caps 13:30 There is an opinion that if rates stay higher for longer, then that would be bad for small caps. That is something we fundamentally disagree with. 14:00 The consensus view that small caps have underperformed as rates have gone up, that just hasn't been true versus history 18:00 About 30 per cent of small cap companies in the US has had a negative EPS over the last two calendar years 20:00 The two catalysts for small caps: clarity on rates environment and confidence in business cycle 23:00 Are the future small caps all about AI? 26:00 Examples of AI small caps; filling in doctor's insurance papers 36:00 Healthcare, REITs and the dangers of playing the sector game 41:00 Examples of what not to invest in: the case of an Italian industrial company 43:00 Fuzzy panda, short-selling and meme stocks 45:00 Is there a small cap premium in the Australian market? Maybe, but JB Hifi has been one of our strongest performers   Full Transcription of Episode 119 Wouter Klijn  00:00 In this episode of the [i3] Podcast, I'm speaking with Richard Brown, who is a Client Portfolio Manager with Janus Henderson Investors. And today we are going to talk about global small caps. We look at whether small caps are affected by the increasing concentration of the equity markets, particularly in the US, where technology stocks have dominated returns in recent years. We talk about catalysts for unlocking the current small cap discount versus large caps, including the rate environment and the current business cycle. And we take a look at a few case studies of where to invest and where not, involving fuzzy pandas, Italian industrial stocks and JB Hi Fi. This episode was sponsored by Janus Henderson Investors, and as such, the sponsor can make suggestions for topics, but the final control remains with the Investment Innovation Institute. Richard, welcome to the podcast. Richard Brown  02:10 Hi Wouter. Thank you. Delighted to be here. Wouter Klijn  02:14 So why small caps? How did you get involved in this particular area of investment? Richard Brown  02:18 Look, I think small cap is one of the most interesting areas you can be involved in, in capital markets, in truth, huge inefficiencies available for active stock pickers. You know that can certainly peak at peak interest. But you also end up looking at some very bizarre and unusual areas of the market. You know, egg producers, other companies working in particularly niche areas of the market. And you know that that that sort of area of small cap has always sort of piqued my interest and draw me to this area within within investment. So, yeah, I've been working with in the equity market since 2010 and really for the vast majority of that time, it's been with a focus on the small cap area. Wouter Klijn  03:00 So is there a current investment egg produces? Richard Brown  03:04 Well, actually, after a long standing investment there, we've actually had to just take profit after we saw some very strong returns driven by a strong pricing environment that states on the back of an outbreak of bird flu over there. But so I was quite sad to leave that investment, but it was a good one to us. So that's a good reason to be selling a stock. Wouter Klijn  03:24 Yeah, it would be interesting doing due diligence on a company like that, but maybe we can bring it a little bit to a higher level the current environment for small caps. I mean, I think markets are in a very interesting stage at the moment anyway, because we've seen a huge concentration in the US markets. We have it a little bit here in Australia, with a lot of money going into one particular bank, CBA, that seems to crowd out a lot of stocks. How do you look at the current environment for small caps in sort of in that environment where you have this domination of the Magnificent Seven. You got other stocks in, you know, Taiwan with TSMC. Do they still have a chance? Richard Brown  04:07 Yeah, I think so. And you know, undoubtedly, this is a question that comes up time and time again recently, because the vast majority of asset allocators attention are towards the mag seven. And look, that's hardly surprising, as it gets given this huge AI innovation wave that we're really only just beginning to understand. But for me, what's quite interesting is, you know, a lot of people preface that discussion by saying, well, small caps have underperformed large caps, and I think it's quite important to pick that apart, because what we focus on is really the operational performance of small caps, and that's what attracts us to this area, because it's been very strong and high growth for a long period of time. And actually, if you look at this period of so called underperformance versus large caps, actually that operational performance has been fine. It's been very solid. It's been roughly on the same trend as what we've seen over the last sort of 50 or 60 years. Yes. So it's really a case of those returns in large cap being super normal. And for me, you know that that's certainly something that I find quite reassuring as a small cap investor, that if we just continue plotting this sort of steady course, this AI innovation wave is going to, is is going to is going to chug along there in the background. But you know, small caps can still play their part, and indeed still are for asset allocators in their portfolio. Yeah. Wouter Klijn  05:29 So we've seen strong returns in equity markets in recent years, and I think it hasn't happened too much in history that the s, p5, 100 at three consecutive years of double digit returns and four years is even rarer. But what do you think this environment does to the valuation of small caps? Does it? Did you need to adjust how you evaluate small cap models in this current climate? Richard Brown  05:55 No, we are quite dogmatic in our approach in truth. So our valuation models are totally unchanged. And really what we do is we focus on looking for high return businesses that have positive incremental returns that are not yet reflected in their underlying valuation. And we would do that at the crop of markets, and we would do that even when markets maybe appear to be overheating. So indeed, that hasn't really changed the way that we're valuing stocks at this moment in time. And you know, when we take a step back and say what the valuations look like for the asset class as a whole, like you say, it's been a it's been a period where a number of other asset classes have been making new all time highs and potentially reaching bubble territory in certain areas of the market. So small cap, we're on roughly our long run average, if you're just looking at forward forward PE and that's true of most regional markets as well as global small cap markets as a whole. So what that has ultimately meant is that the small count, small cap, sorry, discount versus the large cap area, the market has reached really quite bizarre, extreme by historical standards. And you know, the real catalyst for that came through the aggressive rate cycle that we saw through 2122 if you look back prior to that. And again, this applies to most regional small cap markets across the world. Small caps were trading on a premium versus large cap, because that strong, operational, higher level of earnings growth that small caps tend to achieve was 10 tended to be rewarded with it with a higher valuation. Yeah, as we stand here at this point in time, we've had that aggressive rate cycle come through now, now a massive discount applied to the small cap space. So I think is a good time to be looking at it. Wouter Klijn  07:39 So is there any sort of market event or as a catalyst that might unlock the discount and bring it more in line with historical averages? I mean, you were talking a little bit. Maybe we're getting to bubble territory in large gaps. Do we have to wait for sort of a correction in those stocks? Or could there be something else that would bring the discount closer to historical averages? Richard Brown  08:03 Yeah, it's a great question, and in truth one that we've sort of been scratching our heads about a little bit already over the course of the last 12 or 18 months, as we would have expected that valuation discount to already been narrowing, but we haven't really seen that at all yet. For us, it's really going to come down to two main catalysts, I think, to see asset allocators really move back into this space. And the first is cl

In this episode of the [i3] podcast, "Conversations with Institutional Investors", we speak with Mary Manning, Chief Investment Officer of the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation, a recently established $15 billion fund that has been set up to promote the manufacturing industry in Australia. We speak with Mary about the investment objectives and how to balance investing in innovative new technologies, such as the fund's investment in quantum diamonds, that is industrial diamonds, not the fancy ones, with the risk profile of the fund, Mary reveals that they have over 900 applications for funding and are now looking for the best opportunities to invest, but also how to balance the strategic asset allocation and avoid being exposed to too much equity holdings. We also discuss what sets the NRFC apart from other government funding and investment vehicles such as the Clean Energy Financing Corporation and the Future Fund. Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights Overview of the interview with Mary Manning: 02:00 What is the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation? 08:00 Focusing on the seven sectors of priority: red tram 13:00 One of the risk of having a broad mandate is that you are trying to do everything all at once and not achieve much at all 15:00 We need to be a self-sustaining organisation, so we need to have some sort of dividend income stream 17:30 We have made 10 investments to date; the largest is a $200 million investment commitment in Arafura Rare Earths Limited to help finance the Nolans Project in the Northern Territory 19:30 Investing in quantum diamonds 21:30 The point of the NRF is to manufacture things 23:30 We get a lot of dual-use technologies that overlap between defence and enabling technologies 26:00 We do have certain funding targets for the seven sectors, but you might also notice that they don't add up to $15 billion 28:30 We do have some restrictions, but they are not necessarily old economy. We have a focus on manufacturing and some of that includes old economy type businesses 34:30 A great problem to have is that we've had over 900 proposals (for funding) 36:30 The Act does not allow us to have control positions 40:00 There is some confusion about what the NRF does and what the Clean Energy Finance Corporation does. 44:00 When I started it was a bit like drinking out of a fire hose for quite some time. Full Transcript of Episode 118: Wouter Klijn  00:00 In this episode of the [i3] podcast, "Conversations with Institutional Investors", we speak with Mary Manning, Chief Investment Officer of the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation, a recently established $15 billion fund that has been set up to promote the manufacturing industry in Australia. We speak with Mary about the investment objectives and how to balance investing in innovative new technologies, such as the fund's investment in quantum diamonds, that is industrial diamonds, not the fancy ones, with the risk profile of the fund, Mary reveals that they have over 900 applications for funding and are now looking for the best opportunities to invest, but also how to balance the strategic asset allocation and avoid being exposed to too much equity holdings. We also discuss what sets the NRFC apart from other government funding and investment vehicles such as the Clean Energy Financing Corporation and the Future Fund. Let's get started. Mary, welcome to the show. Mary Manning 02:18 Thank you so much for having me. It's a pleasure to be here, Wouter Klijn  02:21 No problem. So can you tell us about what actually the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation is? Because I understand it's created to help diversify and transform Australia's industry and economy, but it also has a return objective. You've been asked to take a commercial mindset to the organisation. Is it as a sovereign wealth fund, a government corporation, a subsidisation vehicle? What is it? Mary Manning  02:47 Great, great place to start. So the National Reconstruction Fund, or the NRF, as we call it, is a sovereign fund. It was set up by the government about 18 months to two years ago, and the purpose is to device diversify and transform the Australian economy. But maybe we can dig a little into what, what that means and and why the NRF was was set up. So the impetus for the National Reconstruction Fund and similar funds around the world, there are a number, that have have been established, was perhaps in the wake of some geopolitical events, and then certainly in the wake of COVID that governments realise that countries need to have some sovereign capabilities. So globalisation meant that, you know, there was a lot of changes in the world, but it also meant that a lot of countries lost sovereign capabilities in in certain areas. And one area where Australia's sovereign capability had been on the decline for some time was manufacturing. And so the Australian economy as as you're well aware, and your listeners will be well aware, you know, lots of very impressive sectors in terms of mining and commodities and digging stuff up, and, you know, putting it on on ships and sending it elsewhere, but not a lot of processing or value add or the manufacturing of those types of minerals, and similarly, a very vibrant services economy, But manufacturing in terms of actually making things in Australia had been on the decline, and, you know, an economy that's structured this way carries certain risks. So covid is probably the best example in terms of, if there's a shock to the global economy and supply chains get disrupted, it's a very uncomfortable and vulnerable place for a country to be to not be able to make certain things. So I guess medical sciences is a great example. During the pandemic, Australia could manufacture hand sanitizers or certain vaccines or, you know, let alone semiconductors and aspects like this. So part of the reason the NRF was was set up, was to make sure that we have these sovereign capabilities. And those are some of the companies that that we're investing in. The next part that I'll add is those are some of the push factors about why the NRF was set up. But in terms of pull factors, as you may know, Australia has amazing research and innovation inside our our universities and world class startups and scale ups, but a lot of these, I. Sort of companies or ideas that are in universities are not making the jump to commercialization, and then a lot of startups and scale ups are actually going offshore because they can't find the financing in Australia. And so another aspect of the NRF is to make sure that these domestic companies or Australian born companies or Australian born ideas stay in Australia and benefit Australia and Australians going forward. So that's a brief intro to the NRF, and I'm sure we'll get into some more of the specific factors in the rest of the podcast.  Wouter Klijn  05:31 Now it's interesting that you mentioned that, that it sort of came out, that COVID realisation, that a lot of manufacturing had disappeared overseas, and we've seen a lot of discussions around reshoring, friend-shoring, but it seems to be more about supporting industry from the ground up. Mary Manning  05:49 Yes, that's exactly true, supporting industry from the ground up and also helping to create new industries. So you know, one of the areas which is a focus for the National reconstruction fund is quantum and you may be aware, but Australia is a global leader in quantum computing and in the supply chain that goes around quantum computing, it's a Centre for Excellence in terms of people who work in the quantum industry. And so this is not sort of a industry that used to be great and then got offshore. This is an emerging industry which is really exciting for Australia, and so that's part of our job also, is to make sure that those new industries emerge and become as important and as powerful as they can be. Wouter Klijn  06:30 Yeah, so we delve straight into some of the thematics in your portfolio there, quantum computing. How did you identify that? Is that something that the team came up with as a thematic or is that part of sort of a policy push into this sector? How does the opportunity get identified? Mary Manning  06:50 Maybe I will take a step back and just outline, sort of the the investable universe of the national reconstruction fund, and then I can go on to where quantum fits inside that. So the NRF has seven priority sectors across the economy in which we can invest. And seven is a lot. So we made up an acronym to to remember the the seven, and it spells red tram. So if you can't remember what the remember red tram. So the R, the first R is renewables and low emissions technologies. The E is enabling. Capabilities. So this is kind of a broad brush term for a lot of aspects of technology. It's AI, machine learning, robotics, space, biotechnology, etc. The D is defence, the T is transport, the second R is resources. The a is agriculture, fisheries and forest trees, and the M is medical science. So if you add up all those seven red tram sectors, it is a huge part of the economy. And one of the things that I did when I started was back to your very first question about sort of sovereign capability and why the NRF was was set up. If you look at those red tram sectors, some of them are sectors or industries where Australia already has a very strong competitive advantage globally. So resources, AG, renewables would would definitely be in that category. And the idea is just to value add more improve those industries and integrate them more into a manufacturing supply chain. The other ones, defence is probably the best example, and medical science is also. These are our areas where you have to have sovereign capability, regardless of whether you have a competitive advantage or not, because it's i

In this episode, I'm speaking with Dr Alan Dupont, who is the founder and CEO of Cognoscenti Group. Alan is a highly respected geopolitical strategist and has advised a wide range of governmental and commercial organisations, including the Northern Territory Government, Asia Society, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and Outcomes Australia. He has advised several Australian ministers of defence and foreign affairs, and in 2013 established and led the Abbott government's defence white paper team. Alan started his career in government, including as an Army officer, intelligence analyst and diplomat. In this episode, we take a look at the geopolitical turmoil around the world and its impact on economies and investment markets. We discuss the disintegration of Pax Americana, where the US had the balance of power since the Second World War. And we look at the redistribution of power around the world, including the potential of non-state actors to play a role. We examine US President Trump's use of tariffs and the dollar as financial weapons, and ask the question whether the performance of The Magnificent Seven is related to the tech war between the US, China and Russia. __________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights __________ Overview of Podcast with Dr. Alan Dupont   04:00 Early interest in geopolitics and working with Michael Hinze at CQS 06:00 We are slap bang in the middle of moving from Pax Americana to another system, which is yet to emerge. 08:30 Kondratiev Cycles and why they are important 10:00 Are we moving into the national security era, where security takes primacy over trade and commerce? 13:00 I don't think we are on the eve of a new world war. Putin is constrained in what he can do. 17:00 The scope of a fruitful relationship with China is limited by the very nature of its system  20:00 If Australia has to choose between the US or China, then we will get a polarised, deglobalised world and we will have to forfeit a lot of economic benefits from globalisation, which are considerable 21:30 There is a technological and financial war going on 23:00 Trump decided to weaponise the dollar for geopolitical reasons 24:30 Geoeconomics: the use of economic and financial power for geopolitical objectives 28:00 Alan, you called the Iran tensions a few days before the rocket launches happened. What gave you this insight? 32:30 China has its nose in most of the key technologies of the future world. But they are not ahead in the most important one: AI 39:30 Is the technology war part of the reason why the Magnificent Seven have performed so strongly in recent years? Full Transcription of Episode 117 Wouter Klijn  00:00 Hello and welcome to the i3 podcast: 'Conversations with Institutional Investors'. My name is Wouter Klijn, and I'm the Editorial Director for the Investment Innovation Institute. For more information about our educational forums for institutional investors, please visit our website at www.i3-invest.com. That's the letter i and the number three at invest.com. There, you can also subscribe to our complimentary newsletter. I3 insights in which we discuss investment strategy and asset allocation questions with asset owners from around the world. Now, as you all know, we love our disclaimers in this industry, so here's ours. This recording is for educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice and is intended for institutional and wholesale investors only. Please enjoy the show  In this episode, I'm speaking with Dr Alan Dupont, who is the founder and CEO of Cognoscenti Group. Alan is a highly respected geopolitical strategist and has advised a wide range of governmental and commercial organisations, including the Northern Territory Government, Asia Society, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and Outcomes Australia. He has advised several Australian ministers of defence and foreign affairs, and in 2013 established and led the Abbott government's defence white paper team. Alan started his career in government, including as an Army officer, intelligence analyst and diplomat.  In this episode, we take a look at the geopolitical turmoil around the world and its impact on economies and investment markets. We discuss the disintegration of Pax Americana, where the US had the balance of power since the Second World War. And we look at the redistribution of power around the world, including the potential of non state actors to play a role. We examine US President Trump's use of tariffs and the dollar as financial weapons, and ask the question whether the performance of The Magnificent Seven is related to the tech war between the US, China and Russia. Let's get started. Alan, welcome to the show.   Alan Dupont  02:36 Thanks very much. Wouter, pleasure to be here.    Wouter Klijn  02:40 So I had a little bit of a look at your background, and you have quite a varied background, including starting as an Army officer and intelligence analyst. Is that sort of where your focus on geopolitics today come from? Or is it more related to sort of your study? I think you studied international relations. How does one become a geopolitical strategist?   Alan Dupont  03:06 Well, good question, and actually started probably earlier than you think. I always was interested in global affairs when I was even a student at secondary school, and that flowed through into my time as an intelligence analyst, which really whetted my appetite for international affairs, because I was the Vietnam desk officer, and, you know, I was briefing ministers and involved in high level geopolitics from a very early age. And so I re credentialed myself after I got out of the army, I went back to university and decided this is what I wanted to do for the rest of my life. Then the question was, well, how would I be able to do that and earn a sufficient money to keep in the lifestyle that I wanted? Right? So anyway, it all worked out okay, eventually, with a few detours on the way. Yeah, fair enough. So you have a wide range of advisory roles, also to government. But one thing that stood out for me as well is that you are involved with a hedge fund. Michael Heng says, CQ, s, so there's a bit of an investment angle there. What's What's your role with the hedge fund? Yes, well, the the context is that later in life, I was appointed to the chair at Sydney University, and the chair was funded by Michael hinsey. And when I first met him, I said, Michael, do you understand that this is this is actually national security, not financial security? And he smiled as Yes, as I fully understand that. So that began a sort of a long association with Michael, and then one thing led to another, and he invited me to come on to his advisory group to give a geopolitical dimension to his investment decisions, which was quite path breaking at the time. So I agreed to do that, and I served on that advisory group for nearly 10 years. Learned a lot about investment head. Funds, what they do, and I hopefully they learn something about geopolitics. So that was how it all happened.   Wouter Klijn  05:07 I think CQ s is global macro, isn't it? So it's more of a more in common with geopolitics than than, say, other types of in strategies.   Alan Dupont  05:15 Well, well, Michael would tell you there, there's sort of, it's sort of a multi asset investment platform where geopolitics has taken into the decision making in a way that most other hedge funds don't. But, you know, really, I really think it's on the edges, because it's very hard to find a geopolitical trade, per se. You have to be aware of what's going on the world, but what's the trade? You know, it's quite difficult, so it took us a while to work that one out. But no, no, he's been quite sort of bit of a thought leader in the sense that he has brought the two dimensions together to the benefit of both. You know, so, and I think more and more investment companies platforms are starting to factor in geopolitics now for pretty obvious reasons.   Wouter Klijn  06:03 Yeah, we've seen a lot of developments in that space. And you and I have spoken a little bit over the year about this concept of the end of Pax Americana, the great American Peace, and that there will be a redistribution of powers and potentially multiple power centres coming up, even maybe non state actors. Where are we in that shift away from Pax Americana?   Alan Dupont  06:30 So where? Where we are at the moment is right, slap bang middle in the most disruptive part of this process of moving from one system to another one, which is clearly yet to emerge. So if you look at this historically, there are these great wave cycles that macro cycles that shape history. And every 80 to 100 years or so, the existing system starts to break down, and you get a lot of turbulence and unpredictability, just as we're experiencing now. And the bad news is it often lasts for 10 and 20 years before the new system emerges. So Max taxi, Americana, the American Peace is a system that was set up by the victors of World War Two in 1945 all our institutions and our norms were shaped by essentially United States and the West, and now that's under threat from authoritarian challenges and and even under threat from the US president himself, Donald Trump. I mean, in a way, he's trashing the legacy of his predecessors all the way back to 1945 and he's the guy who's really shaking up taxi Americana and saying, we're not going to be global cop anymore. We're not going to carry the burden for everyone else. We're going to look after ourselves, America first, and the rest of the world has to stand up and do what we've been doing. And you can understand why he's doing that, but that's that's another reason why Pax Americana is fragmenting. But will we see a Pax Sinica that is

In this episode of the [i3] podcast, Conversations with Institutional Investors, we speak with Danny Latham, Partner and Head of Australia and New Zealand for Igneo Infrastructure Partners. We discuss the evolution of infrastructure assets, termed "Infrastructure 2.0," which includes renewable energy, digitalisation, and waste management.  Danny highlights the shift from traditional infrastructure to more dynamic, B2B-focused assets, emphasising the importance of cash flow predictability and regulatory risks. He also touches on the role of gas as a transition fuel, the potential of hydrogen, and the integration of water management in infrastructure projects.  Finally, Danny explains his investment strategy, which involves active management, matching up hard assets with good people, and leveraging mid-market opportunities for value creation. Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  Overview of podcast with Danny Latham, Igneo Infrastructure Partners 02:00 The Four C's of Lending: capacity, capital, collateral and character 04:00 Funding versus financing; there is plenty of capital in the world, but are people prepared to pay for services and products? 05:30 My first venture into infrastructure was actually a prison in rural Victoria 09:00 Changes in the infrastructure over the last 30 years 13:30 There used to be a perception that these assets looked after themselves 17:00 Infrastructure 1.0 versus 2.0 18:30 Theoretically, infrastructure 1.0 should be a little less risky, but you are trading demand risk for regulatory risk 24:00 Are people taking more risk because of the odd YFYS benchmark? Yes, we are seeing that 26:00 Atmos Renewables, a key example of how Igneo invests 27:00 We've moved away from large caps, because we see more opportunities, better bolt-ons and better bilateral deals in the mid-market space 30:00 Today, our focus is on taking ownership stakes of 50 - 100 per cent, so we are driving the bus 35:00 Large, hyperscale data centres today are probably more frothy than other parts of the market 36:30 Australia's power consumption will double between now and 2050. Where is that power going to come from? The potential conflict between energy transition, decarbonisation, and the reliability and affordability to support growth is a huge thematic across the globe. 38:00 Natural gas does have a long term role as a transition fuel 41:30 In the UK, the last coal-fired power plant has been shut down. In fact, one of the last assets we've acquired in the UK was a waste-to-energy asset that is located on an old coal-fired power plant site. 44:00 In a waste-to-energy model, you get paid for your fuel. So it is quite a different model. 46:30 In Australia, we are actually not that good at recycling water. One of our businesses takes wastewater and uses that to water the McLaren Vale wine region. 50:00 Adjacency benefits: Amazon has just bought the plot of land next to our waste-to-energy plant in the UK 54:00 AI and infrastructure; is it all about data centres?   Full Transcript of Episode 116 Wouter Klijn  00:00   Hello and welcome to the i3 podcast: 'Conversations with Institutional Investors'. My name is Wouter Klijn, and I'm the Editorial Director for the investment Innovation Institute. For more information about our educational forums for institutional investors, please visit our website at www.i3-invest.com. That's the letter i and the number three at invest.com. There, you can also subscribe to our complimentary newsletter. I3 insights in which we discuss investment strategy and asset allocation questions with asset owners from around the world. Now, as you all know, we love our disclaimers in this industry, so here's ours. This recording is for educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice and is intended for institutional and wholesale investors only. Please enjoy the show   This episode of The i3 podcast was sponsored by Igneo Infrastructure Partners. As such, the sponsor may make suggestions for topics, but final control over the podcast remains with the investment Innovation Institute.    Welcome to Episode 116, of the [i3] Podcast, Conversations with Institutional investors. In this episode, I'm speaking with Danny Latham, who is a partner and head of Australia and New Zealand for Igneo Infrastructure Partners, a manager that's owned by First Sentier Group. Danny and I are discussing the new wave of infrastructure assets, also referred to as Infrastructure 2.0. What is this and how does it fit in with an existing portfolio of assets? Are they riskier than traditional core assets, and what's their return profile? We take a look at assets such as waste to energy in the UK, where Amazon has just bought a plot next to Igneo's plant, we will discuss gas as a longer term transition asset and the national security aspects of it. Finally, we talked about capturing and repurposing wastewater and of course, AI, please enjoy the show.   Danny, welcome to the show.   Danny Latham  02:26 Thank you very much.   Wouter Klijn  02:27 So tell me a little bit about your background before we get into all the details of the deals and the pipes and everything. Why investing and why particular infrastructure?   Danny Latham  02:37 Sure. Yeah. So thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. So in some respects, sort of my, my journey to infrastructure really started with, I guess my first exposure to the investment industry was more in mortgage securitization, okay, so back in the sort of the early 90s. So yeah, been around a little while, and so as part of that sort of evolution. So been involved in sort of a lot of the, I guess, a lot of the foundations around, sort of credit analysis and the like and, and I guess, sort of some of those learnings for being sort of good stead for, I guess, sort of the subsequent career in infrastructure. And I guess, sort of some of those principles around, if you like the four C's of lending,   Wouter Klijn The four C's?   Danny Latham  The four C's, yeah, so capacity, capital, collateral and character.   Wouter Klijn Okay, so last one is a bit different than the first three?   Danny Latham  Absolutely. And I think this is sort of a, I think it's probably an hour, an area that's sort of less focused on. But when it comes to investment, investing, whether it be in the public markets or the private markets, a lot runs, we are still fundamentally a people business. And so as part of that people business, character becomes important, right? So who are you dealing with? Who are you backing? What are their values? What are their ideals, in terms of, sort of managing money as part of that fiduciary responsibility, in terms of whether it be in the infrastructure world, about or even in my previous life, in the mortgage securitization world, is, if you lend someone money, are they going to pay it back?   Wouter Klijn  04:20 Yeah, yeah. It's kind of important. What about the other three C's?   Danny Latham    04:29 Yeah. Well, I think that is actually a very direct correlation across to sort of investing in all its guises. So it's understanding where the cash flows are coming from the variability of those cash flows, the capacity of the business to to pay. And this is sort of, I touch on, sort of in other aspects, but it's also about this sort of financing versus funding sort of ability. So I think, as a general rule, there's plenty of money out there to. Finance things. But in a cost of living pressured world, are people prepared to pay for the for the services and the products, and whether it be infrastructure, whether it be anything, so that's sort of that, I think that that funding capacity is often sort of under, under appreciated and and so it doesn't matter what you put into a model you need to under underpin that was sort of saying, what is the partly comes back to the character, what is the ability and propensity of people to pay?   Wouter Klijn  05:32 Yeah, yeah. So we'll go a bit deeper into the investment process later on as well. But do you still remember your first infrastructure deal?   Danny Latham    05:42 I do actually, and and essentially. So if I sort of segue from my journey from sort of mortgage securitization, yeah, into infrastructure. Mortgage securitization was great, and was lending, it was getting people into houses and so forth. But fundamentally it was, it was sort of just financing, yeah, and so for me, I guess intuitively, it was about sort of what's what's more real, and infrastructure became something that is more real. And so I grew up on a farm. My dad was a builder, so a lot of my sort of upbringing was about real stuff. Yeah, yeah, tangible stuff. So that sort of segued into, sort of my, my jumping from sort of financing, which was a little bit less real, into something much more real and tangible. And my first opportunity, as I sort of looked at the as I jumped into that sort of infrastructure space, was actually a social infrastructure asset in in rural Victoria, basically the sale of a prison. So, so a very atypical journey into, sort of jumping into that sort of infrastructure space. But then sort of that was sort of a more of a lending type deal, the real big sort of infrastructure. First asset was the Melbourne City Link deal, where it was, it sort of quite interesting this sort of, we were the, we were the underbidder to what became Transurban, yeah, sort of way back there in the in the 90s. So, so that was sort of the, if you like, that, sort of that start of definitely something real in the context of of a new build toll road, in a fundamental piece of infrastructure in Victoria. Yeah.   Wouter Klijn  07:32 So how do you go from mortgages to a prison, which is a form of housing, to a toll road?   Danny Latham    07:39 Yeah, good question, because if you unpick it all, it all goes back t

Ben Darwin is the Co-founder and General Manager of Corporate at Gain Line Analytics and in this episode we're going to take a look at what makes teams successful and stay successful. Ben is a former Wallaby player, having played 28 test matches for Australia. He's a former coach and a performance analyst, having worked with a number of rugby teams, including a Japanese team, the NTT Shining Arcs and Suntory Sungoliath, he started Gain Line in 2013 out of a desire to introduce a greater degree of empirical analysis into professional sports.  But his research goes broader than just sports, it also goes into the dynamics of professional teams across industries and the cultures they foster. In this podcast, we're looking at how this has implications for investment teams and also for super fund organisations.   Overview of Podcast with Ben Darwin, Gain Line Analytics   03:00 I was always interested in Australian sports punching above its weight 05:00 I realised that my efforts as a coach did not necessarily have any influence on the outcomes 08:30 We would find that teams that didn't buy new talent and held on to the players they didn't want did better 11:50 Attribution bias, we overly attribute performance to the individual 13:00 With cohesion, I'm trying to measure the attributes that drive people's understanding of each other 14:00 We all misattribute what change does 18:30 When people try to make things better, they usually make things less cohesive 20:30 The dangers of growing organisations (super funds) too quickly 23:30 Growth is really hard 27:00 Cohesion is not the same as culture 37:30 Is it possible to build cohesion in a team with a high level of turnover? 44:00 The tumble down effect: one change causes more changes, which causes even more changes 48:30 Cohesion can drop 50% in a week, but it can't grow 50% in a week. It grows maybe five per cent a year 52:00 My experience is that economies of scale are vastly overrated 1:05:00 Often we are dealing with a competent person who works in a structure that makes them look like they are incompetent 1:06:00 Building interpersonal trust is great, developing clarity is better   Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights Full Transcription of Episode 115 Wouter Klijn  00:00 Hello and welcome to the [i3] podcast, conversations with institutional investors. My name is Wouter Klijn, and I'm the director of content for the investment Innovation Institute. For more information about our educational forums for institutional investors, please visit our website at www.i3-invest.com There, you can also subscribe to our complimentary newsletter, [i3] Insights, in which we discuss investment strategy and asset allocation questions with asset owners from around the world. Now, as you all know, we love our disclaimers in this industry, so here's ours. This recording is for educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice and is intended for institutional and wholesale investors only. Please enjoy the show. Welcome to the [i3] podcast, conversations with institutional investors. I'm here today with Ben Darwin, who is the co founder and general manager of corporate at Gain Line Analytics. And today's topic is a little bit different from our normal investment focus podcast, because we're going to take a look at what makes teams successful and stay successful. So Ben is a former Wallaby having played 28 Test matches for Australia. He's a former coach and a performance analyst, having worked with a number of rugby teams, including a Japanese team, the NTT shining arcs and Centauri Sun Goliath, he started gain line in 2013 out of a desire to introduce a greater degree of empirical analysis into professional sports. But as research goes broader than just sports, it also goes into the dynamics of professional teams across industries and the cultures they foster. So in this podcast, we're going to have a look at how this has implications for investment teams and also for super fund organisations. So Ben, welcome to the show.   Ben Darwin  02:21 Thank you so much.   Wouter Klijn  02:22 So tell me a little bit about the origin story behind gameline. I just mentioned why you started it, but can you tell us a little bit about the history of it?   Ben Darwin  02:31 I suppose I have to begin in a way, and I apologise to go back, but with my own history in that not being Australian and coming from the UK, I always sort of had a bit of a always felt like a bit of an outsider in my view of the world and becoming sort of, then part of Australian Rugby. I was always confused by this idea of, like, people say to me, you know, I go to the UK. Oh, geez. They breed them big in Australia. Actually, I was born in crew in the Midlands, like, I'm not even from Australia. And they would say, you know, you Australians, you're so good at sport and things, and I'd be like, I don't, I don't quite understand why. And so I was always interested by this idea about Australian sport punching above its weight, and why rugby particularly punched above its weight, and also why countries like England or France for that matter, or just generally, larger countries would would have all the resources in the world and not necessarily be as successful. And I remember a particular phrase by Peter Fitzsimons talking about England coming out to play, and thinking, is this the best they can put together? Because with, you know, they've they have a million rugby players. For example, in England, Ruffin, I think we have 60,000 so it's like, how's it, how's this taking place? So as a player coming into that environment, I was a little bit confused by it. And then you become, you know, one of the problems with sport is we all see things. So magically, we all see and we, you know, we see individuals as heroes, and not sort of think of them as everyday people. So you then sort of become part of that environment, and you meet the coaches, and you meet people as part of the system, and think, well, like, how is this successful? It doesn't, doesn't make sense. And not that people aren't talented, but the people you're up against being just as talented, if not more, talented, and not understanding why. So then I became a then I became a coach, because I had a spinal injury 2003 so I got very young into coaching, and the first club I was ever a part of, I don't think I won a game as a coach, so I'm like, Okay, I'm a terrible coach. And then I went to another club, which was the Western Force, which was a startup team, and we didn't win anything. And then I went to Japan and didn't lose for two years. Then I come back and coach somewhere else and win there. And then I coached again in Japan and didn't lose. And thinking, okay, maybe it's just me in Japan, but then I'd have other teams in Australia to do well or poorly. So I began to understand that that my influence on a team was sometimes good, sometimes bad, but that didn't necessarily lead to outcomes, and I've got so probably my worst coaching I ever did was in a team that did not lose the whole year. So my son. I was trying to derail them, and almost did derail them, to be honest, but they won despite me. And once you bounce around enough organisations, you start to kind of see some causality around performance. And sometimes teams win with good coaches. Sometimes they win despite good coaches. Sometimes they lose with good coaches. You talk to enough people with enough experience, they'll tend to tell you the same thing. So the last team I was part of, from a coaching perspective, I also became a data analyst, and that was the Melbourne rebels, and that one of the questions they asked me was after two years, because we spent a lot more than the market. We basically spent double what the market had in terms of talent, but we didn't win a lot of games. And so the question came up for me as an analyst, how long is it gonna take for us to win? So that question led me down this path, and I did one more stint, sorry, approaching at Suntory, like I said, and I came back to Australia and basically started the business because I didn't want to work in sport anymore, because I could not control the outcomes at all. Yeah, the team that last job I had as a coach, I was literally fired after we went undefeated. So I'm like, okay, bugger this. I could this is not working. So gameline is basically a consultancy company because then, because you see a lot of people in sport, when they lose their jobs, or in business, they become a consultant to kind of fill the time. This is basically that option. It's just gotten out of hand, but it's a stock gap that's gotten out of hand now for 13 years.   Wouter Klijn  06:28 Yeah, it's got out of hand in a good way.   Ben Darwin  06:30 Yeah, in a good way. So that's kind of how I arrived that point. But the original idea for the business was actually not cohesion analytics, as we call it. It was actually something entirely different, which was a model whereby clubs would come to us, and we would tell them who was, who was off contract. And the way I arrange the data is I always arrange the data visually so I could just easily find a player, and I arranged them by team, but I would couple all the all the players in that team together, and then I would notice contractual changes year to year between teams. And there was one particular team that that basically came to us and said, We want to gut the whole team. Can you help us find new players? And we tried to help them do that. And then they came back and said, We're really sorry. The owners got financial problems. We have to keep the players we don't want. So we knew what they wanted and didn't want, and it wasn't what they had they didn't want. And the next year, they went from, I believe, second last in the year they

Michael Block is Chief Investment Officer of Bellmont Securities and Adjunct Industry Professor at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), where he helped establish the UTS Anchor Fund. The UTS Anchor Fund is a live investment portfolio managed by students to give them hands on experience with managing portfolios. In this episode, we take a look at Michael's extensive career in investing, spanning roles with Future Plus, Nambawan Super, Australian Catholic Superannuation & Retirement Fund and now Bellmont Securities, and discuss the lessons learned during this time and how you can condense this experience in a course for students. We talk investment theory & philosophy, impact of regulations, meeting your investment heroes and the Michael Block Roadmap to investing. Enjoy the Show! Overview of podcast with Michael Block 02:00 I'm just a nerd with a PC, interested in investments 05:30 I once was an analyst working for the government looking at money laundering, where I saw the bust of a bikie gang and they confiscated a live alligator 08:00 The greatest accolade I can have is that the people I've [mentored] are now achieving in the outside world 09:00 Getting involved with the UTS Anchor fund 11:00 The UTS Anchor fund helps students 'from go to woah!' 13:00 The Graveyard of Good Ideas – There are many good ideas that super funds can't do 16:00 A super fund of the future will look massive and passive 17:00 Changes in the wealth space can be glacially slow 20:00 There will never be another super fund that fails the [YFYS] performance test again, because they will never take enough risk for that to occur 26:00 The Michael Block roadmap: 1 Set an age appropriate SAA 27:00 Funds that don't believe in lifecycle just want to put everybody into a balanced fund. That is lazy 28:30 The Michael Block roadmap: 2 Only move away from the SAA under extreme circumstances 30:00 The Michael Block roadmap: 3 Decide when to be active and when to be passive 35:00 Your time horizon is what matters; LTCM became insolvent but was ultimately proven right 40:00 Super funds are faced with an activity bias 42:00 I rather be vaguely right, then precisely wrong 44:00 I'm a purist so I believe there are only two asset classes: equities and bonds 48:00 Mean/variance optimisation is like driving in a car looking only in the rearview mirror 55:00 On Jeremy Grantham and other heroes __________ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  The [i3] podcast is available on Apple Podcast, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, or your favourite podcast platform.  

Eduard van Gelderen is Head of Research for Focusing Capital on the Long Term (FCLT), an organisation that was established in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis, or Great Recession as it is known in the US, to move away from a so-called "quarterly capitalism", which arguably contributed to the crisis, and towards a true long-term mind-set. Van Gelderen joined FCLT in 2024, after spending over six years as the Chief Investment Officer of pension fund PSP in Montreal, Canada. He is also well-known for his role as CEO of APG Asset Management, the investment arm of pension behemoth APG, in the Netherlands. In episode 113 of "Conversations with Institutional Investors", Van Gelderen discusses whether private equity can be a model for long term investing, dealing with concentration in portfolios, decarbonisation and the rise of A.I. Enjoy the Show! Overview of podcast with Eduard van Gelderen, FCLT 03:00 In 2026, FCLT celebrates its 10 year anniversary 04:00 When I was CEO of APG AM, we became one of the first members of FCLT 05:00 Three things are important to me: innovation, strategic thinking and having an impact 07:00 Dominic Barton of McKenzie and Keith Ambachtsheer and long term investing 08:00 If corporates are too short-term focused, then they will not invest enough in truly value generating projects 11:30 I do like the private equity model, but they still look to exit in about five years. Is that really long-term investing? 13:00 One of the nice things to see when I moved to Canada is the difference in board composition 17:00 Is passive investing leading to fragmented ownership and therefore less stakeholder engagement? 18:00 If you really understand the business models of the companies you invest in, then you can be much more concentrated and still be diversified 20:00 Diversification is possible, not with a small number [of assets], but definitely with a more limited number of names than the index 23:30 Sectors that are carbon intensive will need to do something or they will be punished, weather it is by governments, or regulators. For investors this means there is a financial reality here 24:00 But at this point the carbon price is too low for investors to make a decision 25:00 If I diversify over different sectors, then I need to use the less intensive sectors to hedge what I do in the carbon intensive sectors. That is a portfolio construction question 26:00 Stranded business models: It has happened before. The ones that reacted to all the opportunities that the internet offered became the winners, but there were certainly companies that completely missed the boat. I'm convinced that we are going through the same cycle again. 29:00 I don't think A.I. is just a toy; I think it is going to disrupt a lot of things that we take for granted 31:30 How will A.I. impact the business model of an investment manager? There will be operational efficiencies, but where managers are not yet very advanced is about 'How can we do advanced analytics?' And it is not just about alpha generation, it is also about portfolio construction, risk management and trading 35:30 I do think we need to rethink diversification in the current uncertain environment 39:00 Upcoming research projects: future fit boards and proxy voting  43:00 I truly believe that public and private markets will merge at some point; it is really a data issue Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  

Suhail Shaikh is Chief Investment Officer of Fulcrum Asset Management and is the portfolio manager of Fulcrum's Discretionary Macro and Diversified Absolute Return strategies. In today's incredibly volatile environment of tariff wars and deglobalisation, investors tend to be more sensitive about the level of their absolute returns, than their performance against the benchmark. In this episode, we delve into the philosophy of absolute return investing, we talk about the role of skill versus luck, the use of Nowcasting, learnings from the COVID-19 pandemic and the ever controversial topic of market timing. Enjoy the show! 02:00 Started off working on the intranet and taught myself HTML 02:30 Internship at Goldman Sachs 03:30 A lot of well-known global macro traders made their money during equity market crashes 05:00 If you are constantly looking for the next accident, then 90 per cent of the time you are wrong. It is important to make money while the sun is still shining 10:00 Crisis risk offset and momentum during COVID 13:30 Leaving the model aside 15:00 Using Nowcasting for analysis 18:30 AI has been more useful to us in portfolio construction, risk management, scenario analysis and stress testing. I'm more sceptical about AI being helpful in alpha generation. 22:30 Behavioural finance and Fulcrum paper: 'Don't Bet the Ranch' 23:30 To determine whether someone is skilled or lucky, look at the number of views they take over time 31:30 Sizing [trades] is a complex topic 33:00 The role of dynamic asset allocation 34:00 "The biggest accidents in asset management happen when, in a draw-down, people don't know whether they are benchmarked or absolute return" 35:00 "Dynamic asset allocation is market timing" 40:00 Global Macro and the Magnificent Seven 42:00 Bitcoin and momentum strategies 44:30 Some clients explicitly prohibit us from investing in Bitcoin The paper "Don't Bet The Ranch: Hit ratios, asymmetry and breadth" can be found at: https://fulcrumasset.com/insights/investment-insights/dont-bet-the-ranch-hit-ratios-asymmetry-and-breadth/ Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights

In episode 111 of the [i3] Podcast, we speak with Michael Weaver, who is the Head of Global Real Assets with the Australian Retirement Trust. We discussed the role of real assets in the context of a multi-asset, pension portfolio, the ever-lurking threat of inflation, the return of office property and more. Please enjoy the show! Overview of Podcast with Michael Weaver, Head of Global Real Assets, ART 02:00 Role of real assets in a multi-asset portfolio 03:30 We don't call them mid-risk, but it is a similar philosophy 06:30 Inflation: what we are most worried about is unexpected inflation 08:00 We would expect to grow our infrastructure portfolio in Australia, but also internationally. 09:00 Benefits of larger scale, post merger 12:00 Massively expand the real asset team, no. But expand yes. 16:00 Retail and Office property: we are actively looking at new investments 20:00 Did Covid wobble your confidence in airports? Wobble is probably a good word. 25:00 Impact of data centres on power generators 27:30 Multi-family, build-to-rent property 33:00 Energy transition assets Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  

In episode 110 of the [i3] Podcast, we speak with Jamie Newton, Head of Global Fixed Income Research and Deputy Head of Sustainability at Allspring Global Investments. We discuss why now is a good time to add duration to fixed income portfolios, concerns over the lack of experience with high default rates in private credit and opportunities in data centres and other digital assets. Enjoy the Show! Overview of Podcast with Jamie Newton: 02:00 I was not going to spend 16 weeks looking through a microscope 04:00 I grew up in the go-go days of the internet 05:30 Is 2025 the year of Riding the Curve? 08:00 US Economy: 'All in, we're okay' 09:00 Will we ever see 19pc mortgage rates again? Highly unlikely 11:00 Recession: I think the risk has increased a little bit 12:30 Do leading indicators lag too much in today's fast moving world? 13:30 We like ABS in general, especially in USD assets 15:00 FI opportunities in data centres and fiber assets 17:00 Concentration is not so much an issue, as there is a limit to upside in FI 20:00 Artificial intelligence and fixed income 21:30 Popularity of Private credit 22:30 Lack of experience with defaults is absolutely a concern 26:30 Green bonds 28:00 Thoughts on the Australian market Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  

In episode 109, we are back with Will Liang, Executive Director at MA Financial, to discuss the introduction of DeepSeek and the impact on the future development of artificial intelligence and the global economy. Are tech firms going to scale back their investments due to this low cost model, or is it all a bit of a hype? Enjoy the Show! Overview of Podcast with Will Liang on DeepSeek 01:00 First impressions of DeepSeek 03:00 Is DeepSeek really a revolution? 04:00 OpenAI did not spend billions of dollars developing one model 04:30 DeepSeek and memory saving 08:00 Mag Seven and investment plans 10:00 Jevons' paradox in AI and related industries 11:00 I don't think DeepSeek is a distilled model 13:30 Should we be worried about data being fed back to China? 16:30 DeepSeek has released a lot of LLM secrets to the public 18:00 Applications of DeepSeek in the investment industry 22:00 You will see a lot more distilled models of DeepSeek 25:00 A wake up call for the investment industry Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  

Private credit has evolved significantly since the global financial crisis, and Brendan Carroll, Senior Partner at Victory Park Capital, has been at the forefront of that transformation. In this episode, we explore how private credit investments are adapting to meet the needs of insurers, the growing role of asset-backed lending, and why insurance companies are becoming the fastest-growing investor base in the space. Brendan also shares insights on navigating competitive market dynamics, the resilience of private credit through economic cycles, and the implications of Victory Park Capital's acquisition by Janus Henderson Investors. Plus, a look at ChatGPT and the future of real-time data in investment management. Tune in for a deep dive into the past, present, and future of private credit investing! Overview of podcast with Brendan Carroll, Victory Park Capital 01:00 Getting started in investing 03:00 Setting up the firm in GFC 06:00 Asset backed lending 07:30 Insurance-friendly strategies 09:00 Insurers are the fastest growing LP types 13:00 The industry has always been competitive 17:30 Historic data sees through cycle 18:30 Business review triggers 28:00 The Janus Henderson acquisition 31:00 Developing ChatVPC (not a spelling mistake!) Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  

In episode 107 of the [i3] Institutional Investment Podcast, we speak with Scott Donald, Associate Professor at the School of Private and Commercial Law of the University of New South Wales, about his research into governance and the now mandatory annual member meetings of superannuation funds. How do funds field questions from members? How can we check they answer all questions? What impact do these meetings have on the corporate culture and brand of a fund? After collecting nearly five years of data, Scott shares his insights into these interactions with members. Overview of Podcast with Associate Professor Scott Donald: 02:00 Researching the intersection of Annual Member Meetings and governance 03:00 Five years ago a rule came into effect that funds needed to hold annual member meetings. Do funds see it as a box ticking exercise, or do they take the opportunity to build a brand through these meetings? 6:30 The Q&A process in these meetings are way more specified than in a (listed company) AGM 09:00 Member meetings don't have the disciplinary effect that an AGM has 10:30 How do we know if the chair has identified some of the more uncomfortable questions? 11:30 There isn't really a mechanism for a member to say: 'Hey, I asked this question and you didn't really give an answer' 13:00 Most questions get asked about fund returns 16:00 Climate risk questions are the second biggest in terms of the number of questions, after returns. We were interested to see whether all of those questions were from activists 17:30 What signal do we take from the questions being asked? I think there is a danger of misinterpreting that signal 23:00 Inconvenient questions for members 26:00 I hope funds will take a more bespoke and thoughtful approach to member meeting, rather than a this-is-best-practice and move on 27:30 False and misleading statement risk 30:00 Legitimacy is an issue in super and member meetings are a way of putting a face to super 31:00 We don't know the extent to which the regulator is switched on to all these questions being asked 32:30 We are close to finalising the fifth season of member meetings and we will write that up 35:00 Upcoming research might look at the use of AI in super funds Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights  

In episode 106 of the [i3] Institutional Investment Podcast, I speak with Craig Dandurand, Chief Investment Officer of the Tuckwell Family Office. Craig has an impressive career in the investment industry that spans time with US pension fund CalPERS and Australia's the Future Fund. We talked about his background in credit investing, setting up a hedge fund program and the world of private wealth. Enjoy the show! Overview of Podcast with Craig Dandurand 01:00 You initially worked in the legal profession. How did you get into investing? 02:00 Starting at CalPERS 03:00 The hedge fund team was the least bureaucratic part of a very bureaucratic organisation 06:30 What has changed in hedge funds compared to 20 years ago? They got more boring 10:00 During the GFC, I remember sitting in a coffee house writing something with a headline that said: 'Capitalist Manifesto', which is the kind of overblown thing you write in a coffee house. But it resulted in three key aspects we wanted hedge funds to focus on: alignment, control and transparency 15:00 CalPERS was at a scale that led some hedge fund managers not wanting to engage with us 16:00 The optimal size of an asset owner is probably between $5 - 30 bn.  20:00 What was most disorientating coming to Australia was my currency exposure 26:30 Learnings from the COVID-19 crisis 29:30 To do a total portfolio approach well at a large asset owner is an incredible labour intensive exercise 32:00 The Future Fund had a clear investment target, but when you join a family office you need to find out what their needs, values and desires are (pardon the thunder in the background). Before you can invest the money, you need to know why you are doing it 34:00 Graham Tuckwell invented the gold ETF and, therefore, has a good understanding of how markets work 35:30 The concept of 'ten ETFs and a 9 iron'. Often people confuse complexity for quality 42:00 Catering to different needs and life stages within family offices 48:00 I'm a credit junkie and that probably comes from being a bankruptcy lawyer 49:00 I find the growth of private credit over the last few years fascinating and slightly unnerving 53:00 Best and worst investment: investing in Worldcom bonds Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin Subscribe to our Newsletter Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights