Two different views of China

There appear to be two different views when it comes to the outlook on China: In Thursday's Australia Financial Review Louis-Vincent Gave of Hong Kong's GaveKal Dragonomics outlined why he describes himself as a "massive China bull". The article went on to explain that Gave believes the global investment community is underexposed to Chinese stocks and bonds, and as a result will be compelled to increase its exposure over the coming 3 years as Chinese financial assets begin to be included more fully in the global benchmarks that passive, and many active institutional investors track.

That certainly could occur, and one should never ignore markets which rise on the back of the pure weight of money which either has to invest, or can find little reason not to. For an example of the latter, just consider the recent bull run in Australian bank and high yielding shares. However it doesn't necessarily mean that the fundamentals of the underlying Chinese economy, or the companies operating there are investment grade or secure.

Taking the other view is this article entitled China is Choking on its Own Debt which drew attention to the release earlier this month of the People's Bank of China's (PBoC) first quarter Monetary Policy Report. The report somewhat alarming given the authoritative source, in that it points out that:

1. China has too much debt
2. The government has relied too heavily on investment for growth
3. Credit expansion is no longer possible
4. The economy is inevitably decelerating as a result

If all of that is alarming in itself, so is the reason that the report received so little media exposure: Given that the conclusions are not new for most avid watchers of China the fact that it has yet to be published in an English language version perhaps suggests why didn't hit the headlines, most probably because the Chinese government didn't want it to.

As the article points out the PBoC website has somewhat of a history of being less than transparent when it comes to posting English language versions of articles, citing April as an example when 32 stories were posted in Chinese while only 12 made it to the English version. There are many conspiracy theorists who believe that the level of influence exerted by the Chinese government on economic statistics are, not to put it too mildly, relatively well controlled.

Which of the two opinions play out in the future remained to be seen, and to be fair the Chinese authorities' manipulative attitudehas been known to work in the long run. However a combination of the above, and anecdotal evidence of massive margin lending at street level as well as corporate, will keep the risk factor high.

Specific results received this week include the following LATEST PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Bennelong Long Short Equity Fund performance in April was flat (0.03%), however long term performance remains sound with since inception (Jan 2003) returns of 17.33% pa (Index 8.56%) and a volatility of 11.79% (Index 12.86%).

The Pengana Absolute Return Asia Fund had a strong performance of 3.87% for the month of April, bringing the annualised return since inception to 11.43%.

Allard Investment Fund increased 1.50% during the month of April, to bring the Fund's last twelve month performance to 27.08%.

Chris

CEO

AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter

Australian Fund Monitors are helping to raise awareness to support research into prevention and cure for cerebral palsy. For more information visit www.cpresearch.org.au or contact me by email.

Hedge Funds show their mettle

Every cloud has a silver lining, or so they say, so the volatility in Australia's equity market in the last couple of weeks, and which saw the ASX 200 drop 1.7% in April following a negative (albeit small) fall of 0.06% in March has probably played into the hands of hedge fund managers. Local equity-based hedge funds have gained around 1.2% over the past two months, and have now outperformed the index by 2.5% percent over a rolling 12 month period.

Globally it is no different. Industry newsletter Hedgeweek reported this week that hedge fund managers may be showing their mettle as global financial and geopolitical volatility continues, with the hedge fund industry beginning to beat popular indexes, according to eVestment's just-released April 2015 Hedge Fund Performance Report.

There has been a very long and very active debate over the value of hedge funds, but the popular opinion of hedge funds as being highly risky is simply not borne out by the facts. In a strongly rising market the protection taken by hedge fund managers on the short side frequently sees them underperforming, but when volatility increases and markets fall, their short positions come into their own.

This is not always the case, and there are someexceptions to the rule with a handful of fund managers behaving or performing according to the myth. Thankfully there are others, and many more of them, who outperformed the market in both positive and negative markets. By definition this is difficult to do as they have to actively short stocks or the market to drive performance, rather than just to reduce risk. Part of the skill when selecting the best manager to suit the end investor's objective therefore is to analyse both their up and down capture ratios.

Talking of risk, it seems that twenty years after bringing down major British bank Barings (which listed amongst its historical credits funding the Napoleonic wars), the SMH reports that rogue trader Nick Leeson is sounding alarm bells about China. Unless the country reforms its stock markets, he warns, it's only a matter of time until his earlier disaster repeats itself on a larger scale. So it  is not only rogue traders that create risk, but underlying government controls or lack thereof. The level of speculative trading in China driven by retail investors (or should that be punters?) funded by margin trading is, unless they are very, very careful, going to lead to inevitable volatility, and a repeat of the damage witnessed in 2008.

Finally Hedge Clippings can't resist mentioning something about this week's budget. It was certainly better than last year's, but we can't help feeling that it's really all about job protection - those of Treasurer Joe Hockey, and the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott. The real issue we see with the budget, was its lack of commitment to tackle major issues for the future. For example, consider the estimate that in 10 year's time the tax concessions on superannuation will cost the nation double that of the age pension - which the superannuation system was orginally designed to reduce.

Specific results received this week include the following LATEST PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Optimal Australia Absolute Trust Fund reported a net positive return in April of 1.96%, compared to the ASX200 Accumulation Index of -1.70%

The Bennelong Kardinia Absolute Return Fund fell 0.59% in April to bring the Fund's annual performance since inception to 13.08% compared to the ASX200 Accumulation benchmark's 5.61%.

Monash Absolute Investment Fund had a flat April (0.0%), while the Australian equity market had its second consecutive negative month (-1.70%).

Chris

CEO

AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

We might apologize for being boring, but the budget shouldn't be!

Each Friday the Hedge Clippings team cast their collective minds over the economic activity of the previous seven days, taking note when we can of happenings relevant to the absolute return and hedge fund sector. Uppermost in our thinking is trying to remain relevant and informative while trying not to bore the socks off our readers, not to mention ourselves, at the same time.

You might think we shouldn't be so indulgent as to worry about whether we're the ones bored or not, but it does concern us. Given that there's been an unrelenting theme of QE, central bank intervention, and low and falling interest rates across financial markets for so long now, it's been difficult to avoid being boring, as we're sure you might have noticed.

The net result of the these conditions has been, as we've mentioned before, the rise of the TINA, or There Is No Alternative, investment strategy that has seen equity market valuations pushed and stretched to dangerous levels as noted this week by no less than US Fed head honcho, Janet Yellen.

It is ironic therefore that at a time when the RBA reduced rates by a further 25 bps to an unheralded 2%, 10 year bond yields both in Australia and overseas start to rise, and rise quite sharply, with the result that equity markets, and particularly the high yielding banks, retreated sharply.

For the record the ASX 200 Accumulation Index fell 1.7% in April (compared with early indications of equity-based hedge funds rising 0.52%) and has fallen a further 2.5% since, including the largest one-day fall for a couple of years.

Whether this was the start of a much anticipated pullback, or just a pause remains to be seen, but it was certainly an indication of what could, or should happen in response to rising bond yields.

And while on the subject of boring, PM Tony Abbott has promised Australia a boring budget next week. For his part it might be wishful thinking, hoping perhaps that the electoral response to Joe Hockey's second budget will be boring, unlike last year's. Unfortunately a boring budget is not what is required, and it is gratifying to see that there is an increasingly widespread opinion that long-term vision and strong management, rather than pandering to interest groups and personal political survival, are what's required.

Specific results received this week include the following LATEST PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Alpha Beta Asian Fund generated a return of -1.16% during March, to bring the Fund's annual return since inception to 6.77% p.a.

Signature Quantitative Fund 2.80% for March, to bring the annual performance since inception to 15.99%.

The KIS Asia Long Short Fund returned of2.59% during March, bringing the Fund's annual return since inception to 14.91% p.a

Supervised High Yield Fund rose 0.45% during March to bring the Fund's annual return since inception to 10.23%. In the same time frame the RBA Cash Rate returned 3.49%.

Chris
CEO,AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

23 out of 27 Economists can't be wrong - could they?

The Aussie dollar's brief resurgence above 80 US cents this week would not have pleased the RBA governor Glenn Stevens. Or maybe it would have pleased him, given that he will have one more justification to cut rates at the bank's next board meeting.

He is not alone in thinking that the A$ is too high, and it seems that 23 out of 27 economists surveyed by Bloomberg this week (that's an increase of one since the previous survey) are of the view that a 25 bps cut to just 2% is in store at 2:30 on Tuesday. The consensus is that the only thing preventing the rate cut is the red-hot property market, particularly in Sydney, where the median house price is now over $900,000.

That is over 12 times the annual average full time wage of $74,724 so no wonder there is concern over housing affordability. Granted there are regional differences both in property prices and wages, but housing prices in Sydney have risen 16% over the past 12 months to the point where just over 35% of a Sydneysider's income is spent on mortgage repayments.

Other statistics this week indicated that a significant proportion of the housing push, particularly in Sydney, is coming from overseas buyers, particularly from Asia. The reality of course is that overseas buyers have been pushing the price of real estate up in Australia, since the First Fleet landed in 1788 with only the occasional pause for a recession, and there hasn't been one of those for close to 20 years.

However it does mean that for a significant portion of the population the great Aussie dream of a house on a quarter acre block will remain just that - a dream.

While most of the focus on the effect of a rate cut next week will be on housing affordability and mortgage rates, spare a thought for the number of people dependent on term deposits for their income. As Philip Carden from the Supervised High Yield Fund pointed out this week, the current one-year bank term deposit is 2.65%, and one can safely assume that that will fall below 2.5% if or when the RBA moves. Meanwhile ten-year Australian Treasury Bonds are already yielding less than this at 2.25%.

With the current debate over superannuation and concerns about "wealthy" retirees with million-dollar lump-sum payouts, consider that the income on $1 million in the bank doesn't provide income equivalent to the aged pension.

Therein lies part of the Treasurer's challenge when he hands down his second budget in a couple of week's time. Joe Hockey and the government are between a rock and a hard place, albeit much of their own making given they failed to grasp the nettle this time last year.

Specific results received this week include the following MARCH PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Allard Investment Fund increased 0.90% during March, to bring the Fund's last twelve month performance to 25.22%.

Over the quarter to the end of March, Cor Capital Fund returned 4.20%, bringing the Fund's 12-month return to 7.70%.

The Insync Global Titans Fund decreased 0.50% in March bringing the Fund's prior 12 month performance to 18.55%.

The Paragon Fund  returned 2.10% (ASX 200 Accum -0.09%). The Fund's annual return since inception has been 21.54% p.a. versus the Index's 11.95% p.a. 

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

Superannuation: Time to go back to basics?

It is a sad reality that from a great concept, Australia's superannuation system, much admired by many governments around the world, has become a dog's breakfast - complicated, messy and not really recognisable from its origins. And without going into graphic details of what happens to a dog's breakfast when it is repeatedly consumed, and then regurgitated - well, I think you understand the picture.

Our understanding of the original concept of superannuation was that the government of the day recognised that looking into the future, funding the ageing population was going to impose significant budgetary issues.

By forcing either employees or their employers to pay a proportion of all wages into a compulsory retirement scheme the intention was that, coupled with the magic of compounding returns, after 40 years a large proportion of the population would be self-sufficient in their retirement, thereby reducing the drain on the public purse.

Understanding that there are two sure ways to try to alter behaviour - generally known as the carrot or the stick approach - Keating's concept was quite simple: Legislate to enforce a basic level of compulsory contribution (the stick) and then provide attractive taxation benefits (the carrot) to encourage those able to do so to make additional contributions.

To gain acceptance, and to ensure both individuals and their employers could get used to the process, the Superannuation Guarantee Levy or SGL commenced at 3%, and has steadily risen since to 9.5%. Most economists understand that to be really effective the SGL should be 15%, but at least at 9.5% it is getting there.

So far so good.

Unfortunately for whatever reason successive governments have comprehensively tinkered around the edges, making the taxation rules, processes and conditions associated with superannuation unbelievably complicated. At the same time they have created an uneven playing field, making superannuation significantly more attractive for some in the community than others.

This is probably par for the course for all governments and bureaucrats, and it may well be far-fetched to think that this or any other government will return to the basic concepts while making superannuation simpler fairer and as a result more economical for both retirees and the country as a whole.

By all means provide the carrot of a concessional tax rate for super contributions, and to encourage people to make additional contributions, but either at the time of making a contribution or when eventually in retirement. However having a concessional tax rate when making the contribution and a zero tax rate in retirement seems unnecessarily generous.

Equally allowing retirees to take 100% of their superannuation as a lump sum on retirement, rather than as an annuity to replace or supplement the aged pension defies logic.

While Australia has a poor record when it comes to the complexity of its taxation system, it is disappointing that when introducing something as well-meaning and logical as self-funded retirement they didn't take the opportunity of making it both effective and simple. Added to the problem of complexity (as noted above)is the constant change introduced by successive governments, each in turn further complicating the system.

And in case you think this is just Hedge Clippings having a typical Friday afternoon whinge, here's a link to the Charter of Superannuation Adequacy and Sustainability and Counsellors Superannuation Custodians (itself a monumental mouthful) report to the government in 2013, Chapter 3, entitled Constant Change.

Specific results received this week include the following MARCH PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

The Aurora Fortitude Absolute Return Fund returned 0.55% to bring its annual performance since inception to 7.32%.

Avenir Value Fund rose 0.78% in a down equities market (-0.09%).

The Bennelong Kardinia Absolute Return Fund returned 1.24% bringing the Fund's annual performance since inception to 13.29% compared to the ASX200 Accumulation benchmark's 5.87%.

Morphic Global Opportunities Fund rose 1.61% in March as its benchmark (MSCI AC World Total Return in AUD) rose 0.87%, resulting in out-performance of 0.74%.

Totus Alpha Fund had a strong performance in March of 5.50%, compared to the ASX200 Accumulation Index of -0.09%.

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

*estimated

Bond yields fall to all time lows - or less - on inflation expectations

This week saw the first instance of a negative interest rate bond issue by the Australian government. Now while the bond market in Australia is not as well understood or as large as it is overseas, and as such it didn't make the front pages of even the financial press, the event is pretty significant.

For the record the actual negative interest rate was -0.07%, so in actual terms it's pretty marginal, as was the size at $200m of the actual issuance. Equally the 10 year bond yield traded at an all time low yesterday of 2.27% per annum yesterday. However the reality is that some investors have bought Australian government bonds on which they will effectively PAY the government 0.07% per annum for the privilege. As the good doctor would once have said: "why is it so"?

Our understanding is threefold: firstly various investors and institutions in Australia are required to hold a portion of their assets in government bonds. In that event they have no choice, although they do have a choice of which issue to invest in.

Secondly, overseas investors believing that their currency (such as the Yen) might actually fall vs the A$ will be playing the currency trade.

Finally the fact that this issue attracts a negative interest rate is an indication that inflation, (currently 1.7% pa) going forward is expected to fall further, and remain below the RBA's official cash rate. This historically low inflation rate is a real concern for the government and the economy, even though it may be welcomed by sections of the community, simply because it indicates limited, or potentially zero (or worse) economic growth.

Which leads us to the government's more immediate issue, namely the forthcoming budget.

One somewhat tricky point for the government while trying to manage the economy is that they comprehensively fluffed last year's budget to the extent that various measures have yet to pass the Senate. So lopsided, and in our humble opinion, poorly devised and subsequently communicated was last year's budget that many of its key features have had to be abandoned, and in doing so any element of political capital the government might have had has now evaporated.

So just when the country is in desperate need of long-term thinking and budgetary reform, it is unlikely we are going to get it. Having just announced a tax White Paper the Prime Minister has already ruled out various options (including the abolition or scaling back of negative gearing) that might have been recommended simply because they would be politically unacceptable to the government's support base.

Equally it would appear that any change to the GST, whether by increasing the current rate from 10 to 15%, to bring it more in line with most other developed countries, or by broadening it to include the other half of the economy which is currently GST free, would seem to be a bridge too far for the government's current standing in the opinion polls. Hence the only real GST debate we are currently seeing is the squabbling between State premiers, which make them look much like siblings or cousins at the reading of great aunt Thelma's will.

As a result it looks like this year's budget will include the usual tinkering around the edges, some of which will be unpopular and some popular, but all with an eye on how many votes might be won or lost as a result. Sadly what we need is a strong and reforming government which can make the hard but necessary decisions to overcome the current budget woes and set the country on the course of a sustainable economic footing.

Specific results received this week include the following MARCH PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

The Bennelong Long Short Equity Fund returned 3.59%, to being the performance over the latest 3 months to 6.40%.

Laminar Credit Fund rose 0.54%, to bring the Fund's annual performance since inception to 19.33% pa.

The Monash Absolute Investment Fund returned 1.1% in March, when the Australian Equity Market fell slightly -0.09%.

QATO Capital Market Neutral Long/Short Fund rose 3.12%, bringing the Fund's performance for the last 6 months to 25.16%.

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

Absolute Return: Chasing Yield - high risk, but is there no alternative?

A recently published report from S&P Dow Jones comparing Index versus Active Funds gained (not surprisingly) some coverage this week, primarily as it showed that in the six months to December 2015 Active funds had underperformed Index funds (and therefore presumably the index itself). The S&P scorecard showed that 8 out of 10 Australian active funds had underperformed their benchmark in all the major sectors barring domestic small caps.

However Active funds come in all shapes and sizes, and AFM's figures for equity based Absolute Return funds for the 12 months to December 2014 show that 60% outperformed the ASX200 accumulation index. To be fair that percentage has dropped somewhat for the 12 months to March 2015, thanks largely to the market's return of almost 7% in February, taking the YTD return to 10.29%.

A swift response from Epoch Investment Partners ensued pointing out the distorting effect of QE which was creating a false investment environment, and that talented active "stock-picking" managers would prove their value again once QE had passed. Actually, QE has already finished in the US, although the effects are lasting longer than imagined, while in other parts of the world it is ongoing.

In Australia QE was avoided, probably in part thanks to the mining boom which most will have noticed is long gone, and now in bust mode, relatively speaking. However interest rates remain in a downward trajectory, with the economy appearing close to stagnation, with Sydney's property boom probably the only thing preventing the RBA from cutting rates a further 25 bps earlier this week.

However, investor's obsession with the yield play, described by Optimal Australia's George Colman in their most recent performance report as TINA, or "There Is No Alternative" is indicative of the distorting effect of the current interest rate environment, which is making it difficult, or at least expensive for long/short managers to either short poor stocks which are benefitting from the rising tide, or be comfortable holding good stocks at seemingly unattractive prices.

As many managers, including Optimal, are pointing out, this must all end in tears eventually, and even though portfolio insurance is a difficult and costly exercise, this is certainly no time to drop it. As an example, even though only 28% of results are to hand for March, equity based hedge funds returned 1.39% for the month, against the market's flat (-0.09%) return.

Specific results received this week include the following RECENT PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Alpha Beta Asian Fund rose 0.45% to bring the Fund's return since inception to 21.40%.

The KIS Asia Long Short Fund was flat (0.09%) in February. Since inception the Fund's annual return was 14.61% p.a.

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

Perception versus Reality

Shock horror in the life insurance sector this week with the suggestion that trailing commissions should be limited or banned, and that the overall level of sales payments to life agents should be curtailed.

Given the recent debate over the potential conflicts caused by commissions for sales of financial services and products, and the overall debate over FoFA, it is hardly surprising that the spotlight has finally fallen on life insurance. The problem is real, and the concept of providing a product or solution that is in the best interest of the client, as opposed to the advisor/sales person, equally real.

However, in the vast majority of cases advisors put their clients' best interests first, in spite of the high profile failures, which have dominated headlines over the past couple of years at the big end of town at CBA and NAB. These of course have tarnished the whole industry, and headlines in the media have only helped - along with some opportunistic comment from politicians of one persuasion or another - to create the perception that there's no such thing as independent when it comes to the provision of financial advice.

It doesn't take much for the perception of an industry to become the reality in many people's minds, and once that occurs only drastic action, or regulation, and the passage of time will change it.  

Elsewhere this week there are ongoing signs that although the search for yield in the current low to negative real interest rate environment will inevitably continue, the resulting stretched valuations in asset prices - equities and real estate in particular - are a cause for concern. The chairman of ANZ, David Gonski, was reported to be suggesting that the RBA should cease further rate cuts, while others have suggested that for the Australian banking sector things are about as good as they get.

Bank margins are being squeezed by low rates, and while asset growth outside the housing sector is low or limited, housing prices are overly stretched, and are being pressured further by population growth and the emphasis on lending for investment as opposed to owner occupiers. Investment in the mining and resources sector has fallen sharply (probably an understatement!) as a result of falling commodity prices, which in itself is not helping the government's budget woes.

Australia is not alone in facing structural problems, with the recent announcement that inflation in the UK is officially negative for the first time in history. We are certainly living in uncertain times, and the effects of 2008, and the reaction of central banks and QE since then, suggest that we are in uncharted waters.

Specific results received this week include the following PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Avenir Value Fund rose 7.8% during February to bring the Fund's Annual Return since inception to 17.00% per annum.

The Bennelong Long Short Equity Fund performance in February was flat (0.05%) following a 3-month gain of 8.85%.

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn, Twitter

What difference a word makes!

Everyone understands that markets are waiting for the inevitable rate rise in the US, but it was not until this week that it became apparent that those same markets are hanging out not just for the latest economic statistics, nor for the latest pronouncements from the US Federal Reserve. What became apparent this week was that markets are reacting (or should that be overreacting?) to the slightest nuance in Fed speak.

This time it was the Fed's removal of the word patient from their statement, although it was helped along by a lowering of their economic and inflation outlook. This saw market expectations for rate rise pushed out by two or three months. As a result the US dollar's recent rise came to an abrupt halt, and equity markets soared.

So the question is that if markets can react so dramatically on the basis of the removal of one word, and the delay of the inevitable rate rise of somewhere between one and three months, how are they going to react when that inevitability turns to fact?

As much as Janet Yellen and her US Central Bank colleagues would like to smooth and calm markets by managing their expectations, all the indications are that the herd is likely to break from a trot into a stampede when she finally makes her move.

Locally the ASX200 has risen over 12% year to date, approximately double its rise in 2014 as a whole, as investors' expectations for a rate cut remain on track, in spite of the slump in commodity prices, and the longer term outlook for the federal budget deficit which only Tony Abbott himself now seems to see as a problem.

We remain concerned about the government's seeming inability to communicate effectively at nearly any level, be it one on one in the Senate, or more broadly with the electorate via the media where their credibility seems limited at best, and a boring budget in a couple of months won't help. Consumer and business confidence is significantly at risk as a result.

Specific results received this week include the following PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter

IMR moves a little closer, and what's Joe Hockey up to?

This week we're pleased to see that a little more than five years after the Johnson Report's recommendation, Treasury has announced Element 3 of the Investment Management Regime, or at least draft legislation relating thereto, and is inviting comment on the design of the amendments, the purpose of which is to enable offshore investors to invest via local fund managers without being penalised as a result of Australia's peculiar, if not unique, managed fund tax structures.

For those wanting more information, please click here.

Regular recipients of Hedge Clippings would be well aware that our weekly commentary can stray from the topic of managed funds, occasionally commenting on the economy, markets, regulations, and even politics, or at least the impact of our various political masters on such matters, although we do try to keep on track (up to a point).

There are reasons for this, including the obvious one that such matters, particularly regulations, do impact on markets and therefore managed funds. There are others of course, including the fact that our Friday lunchtimes are spent writing and editing Hedge Clippings, and thus we might possibly still be appropriately focussed, while many recipients of Clippings will hopefully be significantly more realxed, or well on thier way to getting there.

So for those less interested in the IMR mentioned above, has anyone else been concerned that our erstwhile treasurer, Joseph Benedict Hockey, seems to have spent the best part of the past week in court defending his reputation, rather than attending to the business of running the country's finances?

Maybe it's because his first budget, introduced a full ten months ago, was so inept, imbalanced, and, even according to his own colleagues, poorly sold (sorry, "communicated" to the electorate) that it has yet to be passed in full, while many of the more contentious issues have been dropped that he's trying to divert attention away from his performance as Treasurer.

Maybe, in spite of the fact that as a long term (although maybe not that much longer) politician he really is so thin skinned that he was genuinely offended by the suggestion that allowing some lucky constituents to pay $22,000 for the benefit of having privileged access to him questioned his integrity.

Maybe it's because payments received as a result of successful defamation actions are, we understand, not taxable.

Whichever or whatever it is, we're not sure the electorate is getting its money's worth.

Specific results received this week include the following PERFORMANCE UPDATES:

KIS Asia Long Short Fund returned -0.35% in January bringing the Fund's annual return since inception to 14.83%.

Chris
CEO, AUSTRALIAN FUND MONITORS

Connect with me on LinkedIn Twitter