smart beta

What Happens When Big Ideas are Worth Less?

Consider a hypothetical industry:

  1. Competition is intensifying.
  2. Organizations are investing heavily in analytical capabilities, both in terms of people and tools, in an attempt to find a new strategy that will give them an edge.
  3. Unfortunately for the innovators, new ideas and strategies are often quickly digested and leveraged by numerous competitors.

I happen to be talking about baseball, an industry so competitive these days that someone was just sent to prison for 4 years for hacking another team’s data. (Yes, with Spring Training starting I have a little too much baseball on my mind).

But the competitive realities in baseball – and their implications – parallel what is happening in asset management. Competition is rising. Firms continue to search for new business and distribution strategies in part by utilizing Big Data. And the window for firms to capitalize on new ideas is increasingly short.

Smart beta provides a good example. Though the ideas have been around for a long time, for the most part firms did not perceive smart beta as a major opportunity until the last few years. Then, rapidly, there was a pivot. In short order the idea that smart beta is not just a niche but a potential core strategic effort for many firms took hold. Today it’s to the point where there are 800+ smart beta ETFs and mild concerns about it being a “market fad run amok.”

Smart Beta Assets

What does this mean for firms? What if your next new idea can be understood and cloned/tweaked by the competition almost immediately?

I think the first obvious step is simple acceptance that this will be reality moving forward. In the parallel baseball universe one writer called this “the devaluation of new ideas.” Firms need to accept that their big ideas are going to get out there faster than they’d like.

The second step is more critical. It involves firms placing a greater emphasis on execution over strategy. Coming up with the idea first matters less; implementing the idea as creatively, uniquely, and efficiently as possible becomes paramount.

While this is somewhat of a broad, abstract concept, I find the notion interesting in light of the varied effort we see invested in strategy definition and innovation across our clients. A shift in an organization or team’s fundamental mindset can have an important impact on approaches to everything from product development to distribution tactics.

A To-Do List for Marketing Smart Beta

Sound familiar?

  • A new category of investment products emerges as an attractive alternative to long-established strategies
  • Asset managers flood the market with product to appeal to the retail (advisor/investor) market
  • AUM takes off, with highly-optimistic long-term growth projections

Five years ago this was the storyline for liquid alts. And while the story is far from complete and optimism remains in pockets, the last few years have taken some air out of this high-flying balloon.

  ft-alts-graph Source: Financial Times

The path of liquid alts comes to mind based on the explosion of attention, products, and assets in smart beta. An ETF.com survey showed that 99% of advisors expected to maintain or increase smart beta usage in 2016, and BlackRock recently projected smart beta AUM to nearly quadruple by 2020.

The industry has gotten off to a strong start in marketing smart beta to retail audiences. Education is a central element, and firms have made good progress:

  • Establishing ‘smart beta’ as a baseline term, then using proprietary terminology to support proprietary offerings
  • Utilizing similar nomenclature and definitions for key factors (e.g., value, momentum, low volatility, etc.)
  • Differentiating smart beta strategies in general from traditional active and passive

Of course there is a long way to go with marketing just one of the myriad factors that will impact the long-run success of the category. So what areas represent the next opportunities for improving the retail marketing of smart beta? I see three:

1. Providing Market Context

Once the definition of the underlying components of smart beta are understood, the next step lies in helping advisors and investors understand the context surrounding factor performance. This is an important topic in part because of how the outcomes associated with individual factors vary over time (i.e., market conditions).

invesco-chartSource: Invesco PowerShares

Much in the way we’ve seen asset managers map mutual funds to investor needs and desired outcomes, firms can begin to provide similar context on different factors and factor combinations (and therefore strategies). Even something as high-level as this table from BlackRock gives an advisor or investor a valuable anchor as they learn about smart beta.

blk-brochure-1Source: BlackRock

The need for context relates directly to the next messaging opportunity – implementation.

2. Addressing Implementation

Where some progress has been made in putting context around the different approaches to smart beta, firms have been less successful in communicating how smart beta should be integrated into existing portfolios (which is actually something often done well on the institutional side). With liquid alts, most firms started with a simple message that referenced:

  • Improving diversification (via assets not correlated with traditional stocks and bonds)
  • Targeting a specific (and modest) allocation

A straightforward analog with smart beta is largely missing, and some of the concepts used today are likely too complex for much of the retail market.

blk-brochure-2Source: BlackRock

Crafting a digestible, clear message on how to apply smart beta will help firms capitalize on the current wave of interest and assets.

3. Clarifying the Brand

I’ve touched on this before so won’t dwell on it here. And while it obviously doesn’t apply to every firm, the many established firms that have recently entered the ETF and smart beta space face a unique challenge in merging this effort with longstanding brand messaging.

As the lines between passive and active investing continue to blur, there’s an opportunity, or more frankly a need, for individual firms to recast how they want to position themselves in the minds of clients. Branding is a long-run consideration, but one that several firms have largely neglected (or deferred) so far.

[ banner image via Stephen Dann ]

Two Thoughts on Smart (or Strategic) Beta

A few weeks back I commented in a story on OppenheimerFunds’ move into the smart (or strategic) beta realm. Let’s be generous and say that my quote was among the more generic in the story. So I thought I’d take a second to lay out two thoughts based on points within the article.

1. Smart beta WILL be successful

The parade of managers lining up to launch smart beta strategies is a pretty good indication, despite some mixed results in asset gathering. The simple fact though is that there is a sizeable gap between the philosophies of traditional active and passive strategies. There is no reason that strategies that include elements of both shouldn’t be successful as well. The idea that these strategies are solely a marketing gimmick is disingenuous.

If the asset management industry is a (somewhat uneven) barbell with passive at one end and active at the other, I believe the eventual (long-term) outcome is a more evenly-distributed pipe where the middle has significant or even as much traction as the endpoints.

2. Smart beta should align itself with active

To some degree I’ve always felt that the “passive” label for investments is a misnomer. These are still purposeful strategies designed by human beings based on their ideas. So while the day-to-day decision-making on holdings are removed from a portfolio manager, the underlying guidelines remain very much human. These are not robotic strategies divorced from the thoughts of people.

This is even more evident with smart beta strategies, which exist wholly because people think they can improve upon (or at least offer alternatives to) traditional passive. Many smart beta managers regret the prevalence of the word ‘beta’ in the category name; even so, few push to align these strategies explicitly with active. That should (and I believe will) happen more, especially since many of the market entrants are traditional active players. If nothing else, it’s a more accurate way to present what these strategies are.

[ Image courtesy of ValueWalk ]