American exceptionalism, a notion that investors have largely accepted for the past 150-200 years, is under threat, as the US administration moves to make drastic changes on matters including immigration, tariffs, climate change and the deregulation of financial markets.

These proposed changes have the potential to disturb the proven formula for exceptionalism but the new geography of investing, a term coined by Capital Group to describe the approach of evaluating companies based on where they do business rather than where they are domiciled, creates opportunities for asset owners to tap into the US market, at potentially lower valuations, via companies based outside the US.

According to Andy Budden, investment director, Capital Group, there are still attractive opportunities in the US market, with the foundational pillars underpinning the strength of the US economy firmly intact.

“The first foundation is absolutely productivity growth, which is based on this huge domestic market, and the US continuing to be a global hub of innovation,” he said, citing developments in technology and healthcare as examples.

“But it’s not just about productivity growth, which has accounted for two thirds of economic growth since the Second World War, it’s also that the US offers a very attractive proposition for shareholders, underpinned by supportive government policy. It is partly because the financial incentives are very high that [the US] attracts the best talent.”

“Companies are also really good at carefully managing their share count so they don’t dilute shareholders, and the regulators are quite pro-growth, especially compared to regulators in, for example, Europe.”

This formula for exceptionalism has underpinned the strength of US economy for hundreds of years, and remains intact, according to Budden.

However, American exceptionalism comes at a price. US equity market valuations are relatively high compared to most other equity markets, though this has in a large part been driven by certain sectors such as technology, which has been at the center of the sharp rise in market concentration in recent years.

For discerning long-term stock pickers, Budden said the US still represented interesting opportunities but not because of the Trump administration’s strategy to bring opportunities home.

“There’s certainly a case for [investing in] domestically oriented companies but reshoring is something that will take quite a long time so it’s also very important to evaluate companies based on where they do business rather than where they are listed,” he said, citing Capital Group’s concept of the new geography of investing.

Based on Capital Group’s philosophy, where a company is domiciled and receives its mail is increasingly meaningless.

What’s more important in terms of understanding a company and constructing an investment portfolio and assessing risk is understanding how it does business, including where it derives its revenue.

“Most of the best companies are large multi-nationals that do business around the world,” Budden said.

“For a stock picker, that’s a really good opportunity to identify, for example, a great US or Chinese business that’s growing quickly but is listed in Europe and may be potentially benefiting from a lower valuation.”

Despite plenty of discussion, particularly in more recent times, about deglobalisation and countries becoming more insular and self-reliant due to political forces, Budden said the new geography of investing had enduring relevance.

In the US, S&P 500 companies generate 40 per cent of their revenue offshore, according to Capital Group. In Europe, it’s closer to 60 per cent. In Japan, the split is more or less even.

Europe opportunities

For investors looking to capture opportunities in Europe, Budden said investors had cause for optimism, notwithstanding significant challenges in the region.

“Europe is quite disconcerting at the moment for obvious reasons. Geopolitics in the region is a swirl and there are other fairly obvious challenges including a pretty poor track record of productivity growth and a shrinking population,” Budden said.

While these conditions generally don’t bode well for investors, Capital’s view through the lens of the new geography of investing means companies domiciled in Europe could still outperform.

“There are great global businesses inside a ‘European wrapper’ and also remember that countries need to defend themselves so defence spending around the world, including Europe, will increase,” Budden said.

“Europe also needs to fuel itself and it’s likely that it needs to reindustrialise itself as well, so that has the potential to drive an investment super cycle. Europe actually has a really big industrial sector so a lot of these companies could really benefit from these powerful secular trends.”

Asia

As the world’s second largest economy, China is a major global influence, however, China is grappling with a myriad of challenges, particularly a slowdown in economic growth.

Furthermore, China stands to be significantly impacted by the potential for higher tariffs on Chinese imports being touted by the US administration.

For investors, ongoing volatility in the Chinese and Hong Kong markets is expected, Budden said, although it’s not all bad news.

While economic growth is expected to slow amidst headwinds including demographic changes, a housing market downturn and high debt levels, there are attractive opportunities, particularly in technology, and companies that cater to the increasingly sophisticated needs of the Chinese consumer, he said.

“We are absolutely going to see a lot of news flow on geopolitics and tariffs, which is going to take the wind out of the sails of China and Hong Kong, so investors need to be ready for that and stay focused on the long-term,” he said.

Technology, travel and healthcare

Countries and regions aside, Budden cited longer term secular trends and opportunities in a number of sectors, including technology, travel and healthcare.

He likened the rise of AI to the rise of the internet in the early 1990s.

“It is interesting to draw parallels between what we’re experiencing today with AI and what we experienced in the early days of the internet. In those early days, it was all about the on-ramp to the internet and today it’s all about the on-ramp to AI,” Budden said.

“AI requires vast amounts of processing power and we know what that has meant for semi-conductor companies in recent years and, more than likely, going forward.”

“We’re particularly interested in companies that will be first to use AI to improve existing products and services, so really extracting greater productivity from existing products. This is a really important opportunity for investors.”

In other areas, Budden observed a global trend to pursue experiences and not just accumulate more stuff, which has fuelled growth in the travel sector.

“The world is going through a transition. People used to spend most of their money on goods and material possessions but increasingly that money is being spent on experiences and that’s quite an exciting area for investors,” he said.

Published in partnership with Capital Group.

Wellcome Trust is holding nearly 10 per cent of its £37.6 billion portfolio in cash and bonds. The charity focused on health research established in 1936 with legacies from pharmaceutical magnate Sir Henry Wellcome is sitting on the sidelines and waiting for sufficiently interesting long-term investment opportunities to arise – namely a big fall in public equities that would absorb large-scale funds quickly.

The last time Wellcome had a similarly large allocation to cash and bonds was in September 2008 on the eve of the GFC.

“A market fall of sufficient scale would reveal plenty of great companies in public markets that Wellcome Trust would like to own – or own more of,” chief investment officer Nick Moakes tells Top1000funds.com.

“Public market valuations in the all-important US market are stretched and at some point, are likely to normalise either through market falls or an extended period of sideways market movement while earnings catch up.”

Wellcome has been steadily pruning lower conviction holdings since at least 2020 which has contributed to the accumulation of cash in the portfolio. But he notes it is risky holding such a large amount in cash, even though returns are better than in the recent past and the opportunity cost of holding cash is lower.

Wellcome currently receives around 2 per cent real return after inflation on its cash pile, but this is not enough to meet its minimum long-term target return of 4 per cent (after inflation) needed to at least preserve, and preferably grow, the real value of the portfolio. In its latest results the portfolio returned 5.2 per cent  – 3.5 per cent after inflation.

“It does present a risk. We also have to manage counterparty risk carefully,” says Moakes who will retire as CIO at the end of this month, with Lisha Patel and Fabian Thehos stepping up as co-CIOs from April.

Fortunately, some opportunities are starting to appear. Wellcome is deploying significant cash into subdued real estate assets and the team is beginning to see opportunities in private equity too where Wellcome has a 32 per cent allocation to buyout, venture, direct and co investments of which venture is the biggest.

He notes GPs are increasingly open to co-investments and many LPs do not have sufficient liquidity. “Private equity and venture capital valuations are less stretched than they were in 2021 but there is still some excess from that period to be worked through. Essentially too many poor companies were funded and now need to be merged or closed.”

Still, in the shorter term he doesn’t expect the cash flows in Wellcome’s PE portfolio to turn positive until the IPO route to public listings has fully opened and the logjam of VC and PE backed companies waiting to list clears.

An area he won’t be investing is private credit. Like many others Moakes flags looming risks in private credit where he says huge amounts of capital has been sucked as investors attempt to juice returns in their fixed income portfolios.

“Lending standards are very loose with covenant-light loans and compressed spreads. If and when the US economy slows significantly, these vehicles are likely to suffer substantial losses and investors will not be able to find liquidity.” However, he says there is unlikely to be a systemic impact as there was in the GFC because investment has flowed into LPP structures rather than leveraged bank balance sheets.

It leads him to reflect how other investor risks lie in the emergence of large alternative investment managers running many different portfolios.

“Certain large managers of alternatives run private equity, private credit, real estate, and hedge funds and have gone public. They have created a self-contained ecosystem lending to each other’s equity or real estate vehicles. These are great businesses, but their public listing means that interests are not fully aligned with LPs in the underlying funds as public markets value AUM over returns on capital.”

Moakes says another “big issue” in public markets is the momentum trade where passive funds buy the biggest stocks in the market, creating a headwind for active managers of all sorts. The impact has shown up in Wellcome’s actively managed equity portfolio where neither the internally manged portfolio nor Wellcome’s external managers have kept pace with MSCI ACWI since 2020. Although the £16.8 billion public equity and equity long short portfolio returned 13.0 per cent last year that trailed the broader market by a wide margin due to the highly concentrated nature of market returns.

He warns that if markets go into reverse and funds are withdrawn from passive vehicles, there is a risk of a disorderly market move. Although he reflects “in the long-term” passive will continue to dominate the market.

The main winners in the active space have been the platform hedge funds, who are finding alpha and leveraging it up to deliver returns. “The best are very good indeed, but the rise of secondary players means there is a risk that this becomes a crowded space below the top tier of managers.”

He believes bond market volatility is symptomatic of an economy with structural twin deficits – current account and fiscal. However, the fact that it is not just happening in the UK suggests there is something broader going on. “Inflation is still a risk, and it seems more entrenched than central banks would hope, while most governments are having to issue vast quantities of fresh bonds. This is testing the market’s patience.”

Wellcome has no exposure to bonds beyond very short-dated paper held as part of the cash pile.

“There is no direct read across to our portfolio unless equity markets are affected. However, when currency markets are affected, as GBP has been for an extended period, there is an impact on our mark-to-market valuations,” he concludes.

Migros-Pensionskasse (MPK) the CHF29.4 billion ($31 billion) pension fund for Switzerland’s largest retailer, Migros, is in a robust state of health. A coverage ratio of 132.8 per cent means chief investment officer Stephan Bereuter is comfortably taking on more risk via a boosted equity allocation, and last December MPK was able to increase its pay out to beneficiaries.

“We paid an additional 2000 francs to every pensioner. We’ve got letters from people saying how much it meant to them,” he tells Top1000funds.com in an an interview from MPK’s Zurich offices.

Bereuter, who was promoted to CIO in 2022 after a year at the fund which he joined from head of asset management at insurance group Generali, attributes much of the success to internal management (90 per cent of the fund is managed internally) and a dynamic top down/bottom up investment strategy that allows the investment team to buy and sell assets outside the strategic asset allocation in a reactive and flexible approach to opportunities.

Like in May 2023 when MPK invested in insurance-linked securities in an allocation that is not part of MPK’s SAA.

The asset class had struggled since 2017 and by 2022 many investors had thrown in the towel and divested. But it was at this point Bereuter saw the opportunity.

“Spreads had risen and become very high for the risk investors were taking. We were being well compensated and decided to allocate,” he recalls.

Even recent storms in the US haven’t negatively impacted the portfolio which returned 16.5 per cent last year, underscoring the robust attachment point and structure of the investment.

Still, a large part of the return is driven by the long-term strategy, adjusted in an ALM study every four years and an area Bereuter is most focused today. He is increasing the equity allocation via small tweaks to 30 per cent (from 28 per cent) via small tweaks to the portfolio, and boosting the allocation to gold to 3 per cent.

MPK’s equity allocation is below average compared to peers and he believes that in the long run equities will perform well.

“From a strategic point of view, it makes sense to increase equities,” he says.

But the strategy is also indicative of a new caution in US tech stocks that has driven returns for passive investors. Now the boosted allocation will comprise a new, internally managed 3 per cent sleeve that shifts away from US tech stocks to focus instead on companies that have a strong dividend yield and stocks with strong balance sheets and cash flows rather than a pure value approach.

“I don’t think many managers who make active decisions could have outperformed a benchmark portfolio because performance was driven by such few stocks. But we now hope the dividend approach will add diversification, and not be as dominated by tech stocks.”

Gold’s appeal

MPK’s allocation to gold sits with custodian banks and holds compelling fundamental and liquidity benefits.

The precious metal has steadily climbed due to central bank buying, inflation and geopolitical tension and Bereuter also likes the allocation as a hedge against increasingly concerning government debt levels. He argues that even though interest rates are higher, central banks are still in a phase of expansive monetary policy in an ongoing monetary experiment.

“Central Banks have printed so much money in the last decade and Switzerland is a world champion in this regard.”

Given 39 per cent of assets under management are in illiquid allocations to infrastructure and real estate, gold also provides valuable liquidity benefits alongside a cash portfolio and super-high quality issuers. But he says even government bonds have proved illiquid in recent years.

“During Covid government bonds had liquidity issues, but gold didn’t behave the same way. We need gold to provide a bucket of liquidity in stress scenarios.”

Timing real estate

Corners of MPK’s 9 per cent allocation to international real estate are also beginning to show signs of recovery. For example, after three years in the doldrums, he notices core real estate is beginning to re-price to create pockets of value.

“We are in a position to allocate money again,” he says, hoping the team’s experience in actively managing the portfolio will once again pay off.

Successful divestment of the core international allocation to more opportunistic, externally managed strategies in early 2022 on the eve of core being clobbered by lower cap rates and a spike in inflation and interest rates that left many investors struggling to exit was timed perfectly.

“We are now looking at core real estate again. Cap rates have gone up and you can get nice returns moving forward.”

He is still not keen on office but likes data centres and notices opportunities beginning to appear in residential and logistics – although he is also mindful of an economic downturn hitting logistics. “There is over supply in some pockets already.”

Despite the hot money flowing into data centres he believes returns look solid because it is still early in the cycle, although he does favour projects in the near future with clear visibility “It’s not too late to play this investment,” he says.

The internally managed allocation to Swiss real estate accounts for 24 per cent of the total portfolio and he describes the allocation as the “backbone” of the pension’s stable income returns of above 3 per cent.  It is a senior portfolio characterised by long term ownership in strong locations that is now benefiting from rent increases. The portfolio returned 2.5 per cent, 4.80 per cent and 5.7 per cent for its 1-, 3-, and 5-year return, as of September 2024.

At a recent board meeting, trustees at Alaska’s sovereign wealth fund APFC garnered insights on governance from recent turmoil at PSERS’ and Ohio State Teachers.

With the benefit of hindsight, the governance crisis at $73 billion Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System (PSERS) that exploded in 2021 to catch everything in its path and result in criminal and regulatory investigations and legal fees running into millions of dollars, was painfully obvious.

Drawing on widely reported stories in the media at the time, Tiffany Reeves, partner, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, laid out PSERS governance issues to gathered trustees at the $82 billion Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation’s (APFC) during a recent board meeting at the Juneau-based fund.

Two-hatted elected officials sat on PSERS board and there was a lack of clarity on the different roles of board and investment staff, she said.

New ideas were blocked by the absence of any succession plan (the board chair had been in situ for 25 years) and the roles and responsibilities of oversight committees was unclear. Trustees regularly fielded multiple designees, creating crowded and unruly board meetings. Staff took lavish trips paid for by money managers leading to conflicts of interest and in another misstep, a material calculation error left beneficiaries having to pay more into their pensions.

Board books – so thick they resembled ‘War and Peace’ – were dropped on the board a few days before meetings, compounding trustee’ fears of looking foolish and unease that the investment team weren’t giving them the information they needed. Dissatisfied factions leaked information to the press and a culture bereft of decorum flourished, characterised by a lack of civility, over-zealous inquiry, interpersonal conflicts, withholding information, defensiveness and politicking.

Reeves said that PSERS’ widely reported governance challenges showed that no matter the value of assets under management, state treasurer, pension fund or sovereign wealth fund, poor governance is caused by recurring and consistent themes.

“When you see these patterns of behaviour, name it and address it swiftly. If you don’t a compounding effect with erode the culture of your organisation. Culture is defined by the worst thing you tolerate,” she said.

In contrast good governance can result in outperformance of 1-3 per cent relative to peers.

Reeves’ presentation marked APFC continuing its efforts to advance and modernise governance practices and align with industry best practices after governance at the fund has come under the spotlight. Last year, leaked emails revealed investment staff had come under pressure to invest in particular strategies from trustee Ellie Rubenstein in a clear conflict of interest. In 2022 “materially below par” compensation linked to budget constraints led to the fund struggling to fill staff vacancies, and in 2021 board members unexpectedly ousted former executive director Angela Rodell.

What is fiduciary duty

Reeves began by addressing the concept of fiduciary duty. Fiduciaries encompass all professionals who make or have the authority to make discretionary administrative or investment decisions related to the fund, encompassing board members to investment managers and investment advisors.

Core fiduciary duties include prudence and loyalty. For example, fiduciaries have a duty to diversify, a duty to provide information; understand trust law, ensure transparency and avoid conflict of interest. Prudence involves a total portfolio perspective rather than focusing on any individual asset class in isolation; the need to consider economic conditions, liquidity and the preservation of the appreciation of capital.

The duty of loyalty means that trustees act only for the beneficiaries. “If the public get annoyed you won’t do something, it’s because they misunderstand what your fiduciary duty is and how you are confined,” she said.

She added that fiduciaries are judged on the prudence of the process behind decision making. Fiduciaries are guided by the material factors that inform decision making at the point in time decisions are made in a defined process – they don’t make decisions and then “reverse engineer” prudence.

Shooting from the hip doesn’t work

Good governance is the bridge between fiduciary duty and the process/implementation – or, as Reeves explained, “the how.”

Governance is rooted in foresight rather than making it up as you go, she said. It supports fiduciaries duty of loyalty and care, and provides guardrails that support decision making, and establishes decision making in advance of challenging situations.

“I can’t stress enough how important it is to establish the rules of the road before a crisis. Shooting from hip doesn’t work.”

Stay in your lane

Good governance also depends on clarity of the different roles of the board and staff. Only this way can board and investment teams stay in their lane.

“It’s hard when you don’t know what your lane is,” she says. Referencing the CFA’s OPERIS governance framework, Reeves said a board role is high level; involved in setting goals and objectives, oversight and monitoring. In contrast, the job of the investment team is to implement and execute.

“The framework is very clear on the powers that are for the board and the powers that are for staff,” she said, adding that the board approves key decisions, sets policy and prudently delegates – although the board is not in a position to delegate oversight.

Trustees should have a line of sight and can drill down when they think it’s appropriate. But they should not go on “a hunting mission” that delves into investment staff decision making. Instead a robust reporting and compliance function should gives trustees comfort and bring access to information and line of sight.

The problem of two hats

Governance gets challenging when fiduciaries wear two hats. For example, fiduciaries might be members of a sponsor organisation, a member of a state employer or political appointees. It’s possible to navigate this conflict by keeping beneficiaries front and centre, she said.

“When you are making decisions, you can only consider beneficiaries.”

There is always tension between what is best for an organisation and what is best for the executive when organisations have state appointees, she continued. A typical area of conflict between state politics and board decisions comes when pension funds seek to recruit internal expertise and pay more than government pay grades. In such cases, trustees must stay mindful of fulfilling their fiduciary duty to grow the trust by hiring qualified individuals.

Fiduciaries have to think what is the best policy for the fund and what will be the long term consequences if the legislature doesn’t support those policies. Reeves reassured that the best decision will arise out of these conflicts. The governance construct will inform the best decision, and she said group decisions are generally better.

Moreover, by filling positions with experts teams can trust they have the governance ability to understand which hat to wear.

She said board members also owe fiduciary duty to each other. They need to actively participate in decision making and maintain effective working relationships and decorum. Board members are liable for the conduct of other trustees and in this way, the board acts as a collective body.

She concluded that in periods of uncertainty, it is more important than ever to have trust because high trust organizations are more resilient.

This article was corrected on 8th March to highlight Tiffany Reeves’ description of the governance challenges at PSERS was wholly drawn from media reports at the time. Reeves has no direct knowledge of the events at PSERS, and this part of the presentation was based on media and public reports.

Only two years into the top investment job at OMERS, Ralph Berg has made his mark, dramatically re-engineering the investment programs, adjusting the geographical focus and getting ready to buy as M&A markets open up. Amanda White reports.

Ralph Berg, chief investment officer at OMERS for nearly two years, brings a fresh perspective to pension fund management with a history and work pedigree different to what you might expect from a Canadian fund investment boss. He was born in the United States to German parents and grew up in Argentina, and while he works for a Canadian fund he lives in London. An economist and lawyer by training, he describes himself as “essentially an M&A banker”. And he’s used that vast and varied experience to revamp the C$138.2 billion ($97.2 billion) fund’s approach to investing.

After nearly 20 years in investment banking, at Deutsche Bank and then Credit Suisse, in 2013 he moved to Borealis, OMERS’ infrastructure arm, to run infrastructure globally and then head the capital markets team.

In the relatively short time he has been CIO, Berg has rejigged the operating model from a “loose federation of very independent platforms” to a consolidated group of six programs.

“There were loosely defined mandates and guidelines for risk and asset classes which caused duplications and triplications,” Berg says of the investment operating model in an interview with Top1000funds.com.

“As CIO if I wanted to take the balance sheet to a desired state – for example 25 per cent in equities – I needed to flick 17 switches across global equities, quant strategies, Asian equities, multi asset; I had credit in seven different programs. There was no total portfolio view or management team… and we had an excessive number of programs.”

Berg’s stamp

Now the separate programs have been consolidated into six streams; three public and three in private investments.

OMERS created a single equities program of managed from New York, with the research and portfolio management in separate functions.

There is also now only one global credit group which manages any style of credit including investment grade, leveraged finance, high yield, private credit, external private credit and structured credit. The majority of the 27-people team are in Toronto but there are also people on the ground in NYC and Singapore.

The third public investments group is the global multi asset strategies group whose activities include an absolute return quant approach which runs very efficiently.

“It is efficient as a vehicle and very swift,” Berg says. “If I want to make big sudden changes in the balance sheet that’s the place.”

Under Berg a new total portfolio management unit has been formed, which includes the trading team and a newly created capital allocation team, that advises Berg on the best asset mix to achieve the desired returns.

That team also includes portfolio analytics (that explores for example the role technology, AI and data can play) and a strategy team to support the total portfolio management team and the CIO’s office.

The dominance of unlisted assets

OMERS is a very mature fund, crossing the Rubicon of paying more than it receives about three years ago. This naturally means the investment team needs to be especially careful with cash.

“We have to live off the capital base of what we have, and protect what we have,” Berg says.

It’s somewhat of an anomaly that a fund which has liabilities greater than its assets, putting liquidity risk front and centre, would have so much invested in unlisted assets. Now about 55 per cent of the fund is invested in infrastructure, real estate and private equity (PE), and a very strong and long heritage in infrastructure and real estate underpins the fund.

“We have one of the top 10 players in infra globally, I would argue we have the best of the directs in infrastructure, with the very big advantage of being early in that space,” Berg says.

The fund has been invested in infrastructure for 18 years. What started small as a sandbox experimental exercise, turned into a symbiotic relationship between the fund and the social infrastructure needs of the municipalities of its membership. OMERS would build the hospital and then lease it back to the municipality agreeing to a fixed payment.

“This would deliver a very high-quality asset with low risk and volatility, and this became the early model of Borealis,” Berg says. “It was a naturally-aligned client.”

That model continued to thrive and then in 2003 OMERS made its first large scale infrastructure investment, allocating C$1 billion in a power plant in Ontario buying it from British Energy, a forced seller.

“That was the step where we stopped doing [small deals] and moved to very large infrastructure projects,” he says. “Because of the scale it is much more efficient to manage those assets, so the implications for the portfolio was very positive.”

A gas network in the UK became its first international investment in 2003 and expansion followed with offices in London, New York and Sydney. Today it owns 33 infrastructure assets with C$36 billion in AUM, or 23 per cent of the total fund. Each asset is about C$1 billion so the investments are larger and more efficient, with no individual market more than 35 per cent of the infrastructure portfolio.

Oxford Properties is the OMERS real estate business with more than 65 years of investment experience and a focus on Canada, US, UK, Australia, France and Germany.

“That’s been a very stable and very successful business for us with a strong component of cash generation which is a natural fit for the pension plan,” he says. “The fundamentals we like in real estate and infrastructure are the long-term nature – predictable returns, low risk, and the return that comes in the form of cash.”

Private equity is the final piece of the puzzle with investments dominated by the buyout program. In September last year, after analysing performance and deal flow, Berg decided to switch to fund investing in Asia and Europe and to focus on buyouts in North America.

“I came to the view based on data and performance we don’t have the scale to afford the quality origination and asset management required to efficiently do control deals in Asia or Europe,” he says. “We decided to focus on our buyout efforts in North America.” That group employs around 65 people across New York and Toronto.

The fund also recently formed a new external funds management group within private equity, called private capital headed by Michael Block. This is where the historical group of OMERS Ventures, which had some success in financing pharma in particular, and a legacy portfolio in green tech, will now be housed. Through this new group it will continue to invest in life sciences and venture capital and invest with external partners in funds and co-invest.

Future opportunities

While the fund is heavily invested in private markets, a one balance sheet approach which focuses on three things: returns (performance), risk (volatility), and liquidity  is front and centre for Berg.

He meets regularly with a group made up of the six business heads plus the head of risk and head of total portfolio management to focus on funding, capital allocation and risk.

For many years the returns from the fund’s unlisted assets provided a predictable cash return to derisk the public markets. OMERS, like many, has taken a hit with the repricing of assets but Berg believes the “lion’s share of the adjustment has taken place”.

“We are starting to see green shoots in the M&A market, investor interest in auctions, and bids at fuller multiples,” he says.

“Financial markets and the banking system is in great health and the lending market remains extremely supportive. One area we have been successful in the last 18 months is in refinancing debt in investee entities in PE and infra, which allows very immediate value creation. The credit market has not seen a lot of primary supply, and we have not seen a lot of deals. We are starting to see LBO [leveraged buyout] activity pick up again. I think we have gone through the worst. Could I say the adjustment is completed, no, because the last mile in the fight towards reducing inflation is always the hardest one.”

While in recent history central banks have been synchronised, now different growth and jobs levels in different countries means a different approach to interest rates, with US the standout, Berg says.

“It is our expectation the US will go from strength to strength in the near to medium term while Europe, Canada and the UK will lag,” he says.

The portfolio has been adjusted geographically to reflect those views with the US about 53 per cent of the portfolio, followed by Canada (19 per cent), Europe (17 per cent), Australia,  Asia and the rest of the world (11 per cent).

“Asia and Australia are at the lowest levels. We think there will be great opportunities to add again in Asia and Europe and we are ready for that. There is no doubt in the next couple of years as M&A markets open up it will be a buyer’s market.”

 

Investors have plenty of reasons to be bullish about China’s financial markets in 2025, according to one of the country’s top economists, as tech stocks continue to rally and expectations grow that the central government will soon shift to a looser macroeconomic policy stance. 

The Hang Seng tech index, which tracks the 30 largest tech companies listed in Hong Kong, has gained 35 per cent since the beginning of the year while Nasdaq 100 dropped 2 per cent. This stellar run came after Chinese start-up DeepSeek stunned the world by unveiling how it trained an advanced AI model at a fraction of the cost of its US competitors.   

Yao Yang, who is professor and director at Peking University’s China Center for Economic Research, is hopeful the boom will spur IPOs and attract more investments into Chinese tech companies, which would be a welcome development for a sector dealing with waning levels of funding and strict regulation in recent years.  

“The high-tech sector is going to become quite vibrant this year or in the years to come,” Yao says in an interview with Top1000funds.com. While it is unlikely to become a growth engine for China’s economy like real estate, as tech would not employ nearly as many people, Yao says it is still “very investible”.

“Before 2018, we were not talking about the seven tech companies in the US, we were talking about the three in China,” he says. This was the trio collectively known as BAT – Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent, and are companies touted to reap the most benefits from rising online consumption. 

For Chinese tech companies to return to these “glory days”, Yao says there needs to be more private investment and the government, which accounts for 90 per cent of the venture capital market in China, needs to step back. 

Yao’s comments come as Beijing is seemingly shifting to a more favourable attitude towards the private sector, after Chinese president Xi Jinping held a workshop with the nation’s prominent business leaders this month. He promised to “remove obstacles” to fairer market competition and make financing easier and less expensive for private companies, according to state media. 

There was a notable appearance at the workshop by Alibaba’s Jack Ma, who has retreated from public life, widely believed to be because of his criticism in 2020 that Chinese regulators and banks are stifling the financial markets. Other entrepreneurs attending included Xiaomi chief Lei Jun, DeepSeek founder Liang Wenfeng and Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei. 

“The workshop sends a strong signal [to support the private sector], but it’s just a signal,” Yao said. “To make a credible commitment, the government has to put money on the table. 

“It mentioned the local governments need to pay the debts owed to private enterprises – private enterprises have done a lot of projects for local governments, but they haven’t got paid.  

“But they [local governments] don’t have money. Central government has to bail them out – that’s real money. 

“[Local government debt is] a bigger problem in the Chinese economy, and that number is huge.” 

All eyes on the Two Sessions 

Yao is one of the most prolific academics and authors in China and has attended government forums to present socio-economic opinions to the Communist Party’s senior leadership, including Xi.  

While Yao is bullish on Chinese financial markets’ performance, he is neutral on the broader economy’s outlook. The upcoming annual meetings of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and National People’s Congress – dubbed the Two Sessions – is an important timestamp for investors.  

Yao, alongside many other economists, is hoping that the Two Sessions will allow for more aggressive stimulus to shore up demands in the economy. Yao believes monetary policies will be “progressive”, as the central government announced last December it will shift from a “prudent” to “appropriately loose” stance, but the fiscal policy support has come up short to date.  

“When people don’t have confidence, and you only use monetary policy to boost the economy, the effects are going to be quite small,” he says.  

“Then we’re going to end up with money circulating within the financial sector, so we have to use more aggressive fiscal policy to stimulate the economy.” 

Yao is critical of the stimulus package the Chinese government released in November last year, whose centrepiece was a debt-swap program aimed to reduce the “hidden debt” of local governments by 12 trillion yuan ($1.65 trillion) in the next three years. Hidden debts are off-balance-sheet debt related to Local Government Financing Vehicles (LGFVs) which invest on behalf of provinces and cities.  

The debt swap means local governments issue long-term bonds to repay their LGFV debts, Yao says; however, the repayment of long-term government bonds is mandatory. 

“This means the local governments’ repayment burden has been increased, not reduced,” he says. 

“We are talking about expanding China’s domestic demand, but what Ministry of Finance actually is doing has this contractionary merit. 

“I don’t understand. The only explanation is the Ministry of Finance really doesn’t have any economists who understand the macroeconomic consequence of debts,” he quips.  

US-China future 

The future of US-China trade relations is still uncertain in Yao’s view, but he believes it is too early to declare a trade war. This month, US President Donald Trump directed the US foreign investment committee to restrict investments from “foreign adversaries” like China in critical sectors such as technology, critical infrastructure, and healthcare. 

This came after the US slapped a 10 per cent tariff on Chinese goods and ended the de minimis exemption, which allowed for packages valued less than $800 to enter the US duty-free. China has responded with reciprocal tariffs on selected US-originated resources and machinery.  

Yao says the best agreement in his view is China would tolerate the tariff and import more agriculture products, while the US would agree to open up its market for investment and potentially call upon China to help with peace talks in Ukraine.  

The worst-case scenario is both sides fail to reach an agreement and the US might increase tariffs on certain Chinese products to 80 or even 100 per cent, he says.  

“The time window is between now and April, because in April the US is going to finish the 301 review on China,” he says. 

“In the Trump administration, probably Trump is the only China friend. If you look at the other guys, they’re all China hawks.  

“[If an agreement is reached] Trump then becomes kind of a peace president. I think this scenario is what he wants.”