CLOSE

We permit the publication of our auditors’ report, provided the report is published in full only and is accompanied by the full financial statements to which our auditors’ report relates, and is only published on an access-controlled page on your website https://www.hermes-investment.com, to enable users to verify that an auditors’ report by independent accountants has been commissioned by the directors and issued. Such permission to publish is given by us without accepting or assuming any responsibility or liability to any third party users save where we have agreed terms with them in writing.

Our consent is given on condition that before any third party accesses our auditors’ report via the webpage they first document their agreement to the following terms of access to our report via a click-through webpage with an 'I accept' button. The terms to be included on your website are as follows:

I accept and agree for and on behalf of myself and the Trust I represent (each a "recipient") that:

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) accepts no liability (including liability for negligence) to each recipient in relation to PwC’s report. The report is provided to each recipient for information purposes only. If a recipient relies on PwC’s report, it does so entirely at its own risk;
  2. No recipient will bring a claim against PwC which relates to the access to the report by a recipient;
  3. Neither PwC’s report, nor information obtained from it, may be made available to anyone else without PwC’s prior written consent, except where required by law or regulation; and
  4. PwC’s report was prepared with Hermes Property Unit Trust's interests in mind. It was not prepared with any recipient's interests in mind or for its use. PwC’s report is not a substitute for any enquiries that a recipient should make. The financial statements are as at 25 March 2017, and thus PwC’s auditors’ report is based on historical information. Any projection of such information or PwC’s opinion thereon to future periods is subject to the risk that changes may occur after the reports are issued and the description of controls may no longer accurately portray the system of internal control. For these reasons, such projection of information to future periods would be inappropriate.
  5. PwC will be entitled to the benefit of and to enforce these terms.
I accept
CLOSE

1. Select your country

  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Luxembourg
  • Netherlands
  • Norway
  • Singapore
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • USA
  • Other

2. Select your investor type

  • Financial Advisor
  • Discretionary Investment Manager
  • Wealth Manager
  • Family Office
  • Institutional Investor
  • Investment Consultant
  • Charity, Foundation & Endowment Investor
  • Retail Investor
  • Press
  • None of the above

3. Accept our terms and conditions

By clicking Proceed I confirm I have read the important information and agree to the terms of use.

Proceed

The Hermes Investment Management website uses cookies to remember your preferences and help us improve the site.
By proceeding, you agree to cookies being placed on your computer.
Read our privacy and cookie policy.

Hermes: How tech and female tenacity could shake up US politics (and the investment industry, too)

Home / Press Centre / How tech and female tenacity could shake up US politics (and the investment industry, too)

Eoin Murray, Head of Investment
05 November 2018
Macro Economics

In his latest note, Eoin Murray, Head of Investment at Hermes Investment Management, discusses how on November 6, the US takes to the polls to decide which party will control its House of Representatives and Senate:

In a bad-tempered mid-term race, echoing the current state of US (and global) politics, both major parties are going all out to gain or retain control of the two legislative chambers. As with every US election in history, who wins either or both houses will have an impact on financial markets.

Analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch have outlined their projections in a red, blue or split house scenario – and I am inclined to generally agree with them. Should the Democrats take full control of the House and Senate, expect a bearish dollar, US equity market and a flatter yield curve on the ten-year treasury. Should the two chambers be split, expect much of the same, but with a slightly brighter outlook. Should the Republicans retain control of both houses, however, expect a steeper yield curve, bullish dollar, but while equities will get a bit of a boost, it is unlikely to be a sustained stellar trajectory, BAML said.

BofAML chart
Source: Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Strategy Snippet, An equity guide to the midterm election

But beyond the traditional political bickering and potential market impact, there is a lot going on in the run up to this mid-term election that is worth noting.

First, it will be interesting to see if the tech giants stay true to their word and help weed out potential meddlers.

In September, executives from Facebook and Twitter acknowledged in front of US lawmakers that their platforms had been used to influence political opinion by (often foreign) agents seeking to sway the 2016 presidential race. They stated that they would do better in the future and clean up their acts in time for the mid-term elections. Will they come good on this promise and clean up what is permitted to be posted online? Yes, it will take significant investment and corporate rearrangement to do so, but the potential consequence for failure is great, too.

Asian tech giants are lining up to take great swathes of international social media market share – the last thing Facebook, Google and Twitter need is punitive regulation restricting how they operate.

Investors, too, increasingly concerned about corporate governance and their personal impact on society, need to feel comfortable they are not part of an anti-democracy problem. The second, and potentially more impactful, point to be made about the US mid-terms is the number of female candidates.

More than 500 women have put themselves forward to run for the both houses, breaking records by some margin. Around a half of those who ran won their primary.
If that doesn’t sound noteworthy, consider that five senate races will be contested with only women as major party candidates. This has never happened before.

What has been the catalyst? I spoke with Jana Lynne Sanchez, Democratic candidate for Texas’ 6th Congressional district. She said that looking back, before the election of President Trump, “women were not as engaged politically as [we] would have liked”.

Look at what happened since: Exhibit A - the Women’s March in early 2017. Some estimates put more than 5 million people in the US having taken to the streets, equal to 1.6% of the population, not just protesting the president’s election, but advocating women’s (amongst others) rights.

Around the world women marched, too, as female political engagement has taken hold. The recent confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court has likely only served to harden that interest. Political commentators believe that women now hold the key to the outcome of the elections – not just in the US, but globally.

When Mexico’s new congress assembles in December, women will make up roughly half of both the lower house and the Senate. Similarly, in France, the cabinet boasts a more even gender split, while in Iceland, much of the leadership both in government and the banking industry has transferred to women post the Global Financial Crisis.

What does this all mean for finance? Aside from any impact the outcome of the elections has on markets, there is a fundamental shift happening – one that our industry needs to note.
Compared to the recent shift seen in US politics, the demographic makeup of financial services looks archaic.

The latest paper by the Diversity Project and New Financial found1 that just 22% of the UK asset management sector workforce is female. Just one in ten fund managers is a woman. An extensive study published by think tank New Financial in September examined the barriers to women taking up fund management roles. The study found these barriers to be entirely societal, rather than anything to do with capability (who knew?).

From a purely social standpoint – women make up 51% of the global population – this equation seems out of kilter, but, as investors, let’s look at it another way. What if improved gender diversity is one of the last free lunches of diversification? Research, both academic and commercial, shows gender-diverse companies perform better overall. A 2015 MSCI study2 showed companies with at least three female board members had a superior ROE. The agency produced another study more recently showing an explicit link to economic growth and productivity.3

As an industry, we are continually searching for alpha, alternative beta or even just keeping pace with the market and throw millions, if not billions of dollars at it every year. Could it be the best and brightest minds in the industry have missed something that has been staring us in the face all along?

Jana Lynne Sanchez in Texas told me that the people who have the power must give others a chance. “It must come from the top,” she said. There is a movement for change within the investment industry, but I don’t think we should have to wait until there are marches on The City before it is acknowledged across the board.

If we truly believe in the theory of diversifying risk to maximise return, isn’t it about time we put it into action?

 

  1. 1 Diversity in Portfolio Management, September 2018 The Diversity Project and New Financial https://diversityproject.com/sites/default/files/resources/Diversity-in-Portfolio-Management-Report-New-Financial.pdf
  2. 2 Women on boards: Global trends in gender diversity, 2015 MSCI https://www.msci.com/www/blog-posts/women-on-boards-global-trends/0263383649
  3. 3 https://www.ft.com/content/b83c74f4-2209-11e8-add1-0e8958b189ea
Share this post:
Eoin Murray Head of Investment Eoin is Head of Investment and a member of Hermes’ senior leadership team. Eoin also leads the Investment Office, which is responsible to clients for the investment teams’ consistent delivery of responsible, risk-adjusted performance and adherence to the processes which earned them their ‘kitemarks’. Eoin joined Hermes in January 2015 with over 20 years’ investment experience. Eoin joined from GSA Capital Partners, where he was a fund manager. Before this, he was Chief Investment Officer at Old Mutual from 2004 to 2008 and also held senior positions at Callanish Capital Partners LLP and Northern Trust Global Investments. He began his career as a graduate trainee at Manufacturers Hanover Trust (now JPMorgan Chase) and subsequently performed senior portfolio manager roles at Wells Fargo Nikko Investment Advisors (now BlackRock), PanAgora Asset Management and First Quadrant. Eoin earned an MA (Hons) in Economics and Law from the University of Edinburgh and an MBA from Warwick Business School. Eoin is a Freeman of the City of London, and a Liveryman of the Worshipful Company of Blacksmiths. He is a member of the Exmoor Search and Rescue team, a fully qualified Swift-water Rescue Technician and a Flood Water Incident Manager.
Read all articles by Eoin Murray

Find posts by author

  • Alex Knox, ACA
  • Amy Wilson
  • Andrew Jackson
  • Andrew Parry
  • Claire Gavini
  • Dr Michael Viehs
  • Emeric Chenebaux
  • Eoin Murray
  • Geoffrey Wan, CFA
  • Harriet Steel
  • Ilana Elbim
  • Ingrid Holmes
  • Jonathan Pines, CFA
  • Joseph Buckley
  • Kimberley Lewis
  • Louise Dudley
  • Mark Sherlock, CFA
  • Martin Todd
  • Maxime Le Floch, CFA
  • Michael Russell, CFA
  • Michael Vaughan
  • Neil Williams
  • Nick Spooner
  • Nina Röhrbein
  • Peter Hofbauer
  • Philip Nell
  • Saker Nusseibeh
  • Silvia Dall’Angelo
  • Tatiana Bosteels
  • Tim Crockford
  • Tommaso Mancuso
  • Yasmin Chowdhury

Find posts by category

  • macro economics

Press contacts