Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple Car playing Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Cleveland Fed names former Goldman partner as president. Beth Hammock will be starting on August twenty first. The incoming Cleveland FED chief left Goldman Sachs in early of twenty twenty four.
So following up on that news for the Cleveland Fed, let's check out with Steve Matthews, Fed, a reserve reporter for Bloomberg News, joining us from Atlanta via zoom. Steve tell us about the news coming out of the Cleveland Fed.
So, Beth Hammick is the co head. Recently, it was the co head of the global financing at Goldman Sachs. And she will be joining the Cleveland Fed as president in August, and she will be a voter this year, so it should be interesting. The Cleveland Fed has been kind of a leader among the twelve FED banks in diversity. The first woman ever to have had a FED bank was at the Cleveland Fed. This is a fourth woman following.
She replaces Loretta Mester, who was very much a force to be reckoned with on the FED and generally viewed as moderately hawkish. So we don't really know how Hemmick is going to going to be. But it's also a note and you know, this will probably cause some discussion, possibly even on my Congress, but this will be the third significant FED hire from Wall Street. I mean, the Saint Louis FED just hired someone who from a hedge fund background, and of course Neil Cashcari at one point
worked at Pimco, So it's interesting. You know, the FED obviously cares a lot about transmission of monetary policy and understanding the nuts and bolts of Wall Street and regulation is really important. So this is a kind of a deep Wall Street background and understanding that she'll bring to the job.
Yeah, talk a little bit more about her resume, because not only Goldman, but she was also a part of TABAC right the Treasury what's my acronym here on this one? But I know that because I interviewed her talking about that was the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee. What is that?
Like?
How did you play a role in that?
That's right. I mean, it's essentially it's kind of a committee that deals with the Treasury Department and advising them, and she led that committee, and she was considered that Goldman as a leading candidate to be chief financial officer.
She didn't get that job a few years ago, but she's had like a ton of different high ranking positions at Goldman, and you know, certainly her experience dealing with regulators and understanding the regulatory background that's going to be helpful at the FED, which is a big bank regulator, including of Goldman, although she presumably would not be involved. That's done by the New York FED.
It just enlighten me, Steve. Is there any approval process here for this appointment or is it no?
There is? I mean the way the process works, they started a search nationwide search last November. It involved the six directors other than the bankers. The bankers on the who are directors of the Cleveland FED are not involved. And then after they select a candidate, that candidate then has to be interviewed by the board of Governors. And right now Chris Waller is the governor who used to work for the Saint Louis FED and was appointed by Trump.
He kind of leads the effort to discreen presidents, but the board will vote on them and they have to be approved by the FED Board of Directors, the Board of Governors.
We've interviewed her on TV before she was still a Goldman. She's such a firecracker. She's only fifty two. Such a firecracker. Walkers through sort of the district of Cleveland, like not the actual city, but in terms of the FED, Like, how is that region doing?
The Cleveland region has always been kind of a min it's a US about region Ohio. It's not one of the uh, you know, each of the twelve regions are different, but this is a region that's that's more suffering and more struggling, and there are a lot of issues like with education and uh, you know, with with not having the best jobs, and so it's a tough it's a tough district, Steve.
I mean, you know, she's a wall streeter, as you mentioned before, and there's been a couple of those in the past. Is does that get pushed back anywhere? I mean, but I'm not sure who would rather have than somebody from financial services at a federal reserve job. But where do they typically come from.
There has been some pushback. I mean, there are there are groups that are kind of the more some of the liberal think tanks, and I think Elizabeth Warren has occasionally weighed in h of the Senator in opposition of there being too many uh you know, Goldman in Wall Street alums. I mean the uh that there have been quite a few.
Uh.
The former head of the New York Fed uh was a Goldman economist, and uh Robert Kaplan, who was with the Dallas Fed uh was a Goldman Uh you know, alum. So it's like sometimes there has been criticism that you know,
the FED is like too close to Wall Street. But you know, as you say, I mean that that the flip side is you really need to understand the nuts and bolts if you're going to regulate it, if you're going to understand monetary policy transmission and all the the ins and outs of of q E and QT and those kinds of things.
I mean, we know that Mester has been on the more hawkish side of the FED. Best guess and I know you said we don't know, so okay, best guess is to where Methamma, good lie.
But best guess is that she would be hawkish. And that's just because there seems to have been those presidents that have come in from Wall Street have tended to lean a little bit hawkish, and the Cleveland Fed over the years has leaned hawkish, and sometimes the directors of
the fed banks like the tradition. So it's like, for example, Kansas City is almost always leaned hawkish, and it's like you go back a year after year after year, and whoever the president is, they're leading hawk and that's been true at Cleveland as well. So it's like if you were betting, the odds would be well over fifty percent that she's going to be hawkish.
Very good, Steve Matthews, I thank you so much. We appreciate Steve Matthews, fored Reserve reporter for Bloomberg News. Again, the feder Reserve Bank of Cleveland a point at Beth Hammock, a Goldman Sachs Group a veteran, as its next president. Hammock, who was most recently co out of global Financing at the Wall Street Heavyweight, has more than three decades of
experience in finance, capital markets, and risk management. She replaced Loretta Mester, who was stepping down June thirtieth, after eight decade in the post.
It's interesting because we've also reported a lot about the revolving door of women executives over at Goldman Sachs and sort of the why behind it and kind of where they wind up going. And now we know where one of them goes up to the Velt.
Yep, very cool.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple car Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business Act. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Let's pivot to oh, I don't know energy, there's some stuff. Can you take the ball here?
Because oh yeah, okay, So the latest. So yesterday we got the news that the Hash shareholders approved the able with Chevron. There's still an excellon situation there with the right of first refusal for an ACCID in Guyana. However, today we get another big deal Conicco Phillips buying Marathon Oil for twenty two and a half billion dollars and that's including about four billion dollars in debt. I'm getting
a slew of analyst notes coming out. It's quite interesting because the question seems to be does this make Conic go bigger or better? And I think that's a really interesting point because a lot of them and a that we've seen has been making them better and bigger, and you have to wonder what the distinction is here with Conico. So Vincent Piazza is Boomberg Intelligence senior equity research analysts for oil and gas. He joins us, what do you think, bigger or better?
I think a little bit of both. It makes them better in certain basins because it does consolidate opportunity set in places like the Delaware, the Bak and even the Eagle Forward, but it does extend the franchise into other areas that probably dilutes some of that narrative. You know, the narrative has been consolidate streamline leverage to what you do best. We saw that in the Permian. We saw that for natural gas as well, with Southwestern and Chesapeake
likely getting together. So in this case, you have some pieces of that Marathon pie that don't really may not work as well within the broader Conico platform, but that's an opportunity set to divest some of those pieces and really concentrate around Texas and the Bakan. But the bocket itself is maturing as well. What you're really getting here
is a ton of free cash flow as well. You know, this is consistent with the formula, the theme, the narrative that we've heard and seen in the past, the acquirer you U being a slightly higher multiple to do an all stock transaction by the company, bring those assets, those cash flow generating assets into the platform, lower the spend, generate that free cash flow, be able to boost the ordinary dividend and also the supplemental dividend, and support the
stock by buying back shares as well. And in this case financially, financially, engineering wise, it actually works out right.
Hey, Vince, I noticed there's a lot of M and A stuff going on in your energy world here. Do the regulators care about this stuff?
Oh yeah, oh yeah, they definitely do care. They will take a look at this. Look we wrote about this this morning earlier this morning. This will take a They will take a serious look at this. They will increase the scrutiny of all of these deals. I know that they're looking to close this by four q twenty two, twenty four. I think that's kind of tight. We have seen other deals close Exxon closing Pioneer around that same time as the as As a projected closing date as well.
But there are other deals that may be prolonged. And this will be a rather large entity. It's going to be roughly, you know, two point two million barrels a day of production, so it will get scrutiny. It will get scrutiny more broadly, but in general it's really not sizeable in those particular basins that they are consolidated.
So to that point, do we see another bitter come in? So Bloomberg has reported that Devin was also interested in Marathon Oil. Do you think we see this happening now?
Well, you know they were looking at it. When you work out the numbers, it would have been kind of difficult to make it work. But the increation here Conico Marathon probably works out best, actually works out better for Marathon holders. It's interesting because within the first three years of the deal, Conico suggests that they'll buy back as much stock as the entire market cap of Marathon, including a boosted dividend for legacy Conical holders, and new holders from the the marathon purchase.
You know, it's an all stock deal, which all right, I get my M and A fee, Alex, but I don't get to do the high heel piece which chooses mynd here. So I'm not really happy with an all stocks it's evercore.
I think that led kind of go on this one.
Yeah.
I looked at M A go, but they did not have the M and A advisors. They're a little bit slow on that.
Vince.
Are we going to see more of this? I mean we're going to be talking to you more about M and A in your space.
Yeah, we've seen it across the Permian. We've seen it in natural gas as well. Haven't seen it as much in natural gas, but I think that'll pick up as well as we're seeing, you know, a big here for Henry Hub and various prices across the regions. When you have a commodity that is in the crosshairs or industry that is in the crosshairs of both civic and political leaders, the one way to survive is to consolidate and get bigger. If you're not able to grow organically.
Who's still next on what to buy? Endeavor was one that's being taken out. There were a few others also, you Born, which I'm not that familiar with. It's a private company, but that was kind of on the list. Who are the top targets now.
Well, I think you've mentioned the two top private entities in the Permian Look you can you can also have You can also see still more consolidation across Appalachia and also the Hainesville. There's some fragmented spaces there that can be consolidated, you know, Chesapeake and Southwestern. Likely it's done. Devin was looking at Marathon, you know, there's there they could still do. They could still do do something in the industry as well, trying to block up more space
for their Permium platform. You have a lot of smaller players across the basin that still need to address their size. Again, this is about consolidating to grow inorganically because the big players they've blocked up the takeaway, they've blocked up the services at reasonable prices, so it becomes more difficult for some of the smaller players across gas and oil.
All Right, Vince, thanks so much for joining us. We appreciate getting your insight and analysis there. Vince Piazza senior equity research. Channel's covering all the energy space for Bloomberg Intelligence again, Knicco bidding for Marathon Oil, another M and a trade in the oil patch. Good to be an energy M and a banker.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apocarplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
I'm Alex Stee alongside Paul Sweeny and John Tucker. This is Bloomberg Intelligence Radio. We bring you all the top news and economics and finance and business through a lens of our Bloomberg Intelligence analysts. They cover two thousand companies and one hundred and thirty industries worldwide. Also, once an hour we go outside of Bloomberg Intelligence and get the read on the market. And today we're going to cattery to Seminetti, Senior and Vice president, Private Wealth Advisor, Morgan
Stanley Private Wealth Management. She is joining us from Philadelphia. So we're looking at a market here and the excuse, I say excuse, we're seeing a sell off because the takedown, the two and the five year supply yesterday in the bond market was really tepidomy of the seven year today, and all of a sudden everyone's worried about is there enough demand for treasuries? And then that's why stocks are selling off? Is that narrative, right, Alex?
You know, there is such a cross fire of news coming at us lately. Investors, you know, are not sure which side they're on. You know, on one day they're worried about the FED action, another day they're excited about the market. And what we are trying to keep them focused on is that the long term narratives should be the balance and the correct approach that should align with
their goals. That the balance of their portfolios should not really be dependent on what is happening day to day with the treasury market or whether FED is going to have two rate cuts or three rate cuts or no cuts at all. It should be a longer term approach in making sure that the income and quality of their portfolios reflect their objectives of what they're trying to accomplish with their investments.
All right, So given that Backdropkkaterina, when you talk to a perspective client, how do you and yet you know, say they've got a twenty plus year kind of investment horizon. Is it sixty forty stocks, bonds or have alternatives in there? What's kind of a monol portfolio looking for you guys more extaning these days?
Well, pull the benefit of the current environment is for the first time in many years, we're actually seeing good yields in the short term investments, so our emergency points cash, you know, should be earning adequate yield. I mean, this is just such an incredible opportunity. The second part of it is really the quality and health of the fixed
income portfolio. This is the time to really improve that side, to make sure that we are as diversified with fixed income, both in treasuries, municipal, corporate bonds, high yield preferreds as we can be, because this is a unique opportunity to really align the portfolios for twenty years out and take advantage of the higher quality and higher interest rate environment.
And last, but not least, is really the stock part of the portfolio and the trap there is to fall into this excitement about AI and tech and all of a sudden, you know, we see portfolios that are lumps that are not balanced in the way that they should be. And while we believe in AI and the fact that it will increase profitability and will have a profound effect on the performance and like really efficiency of all the sectors and outside of technology, we think that portfolios need
to remain balanced. So healthy profit taking, you know, would be good here.
So going to the fixing come allocation. Is it credit risk or is a duration risk that's most appealing to you?
Well, really both, Alex. You know, when when you look at the inverted yield curve, you know, we see very clearly that going out, you know, as much as we would love to, you know, lock in these higher rates for you know, as long as possible, you know, there is a time horizon there that is reasonable, which is, you know, somewhere there in the middle, we are concerned about the duration risk, but most important factor in our
opinion is really the quality. This is the time where you know, we don't have to compromise the quality of the fixed income portfolios in order to get higher yields.
How do you think about valuation here, Katerina and the equity market, So we've had obviously a big, big move in equity market prices off those October levels, and we've had good earnings certainly in that period as well, But have you earnings been enough to support kind of the valuations right here do you think.
Well, there's a lot of pressure and earnings. The reality that we might be in the higher interest rate environment for longer is hitting both consumers you know, and their spending patterns, but also the profitability and the long term
outlook before the companies. We're seeing the slow down in the labor market, we're seeing just general, you know, the slow down in the economy, and while with the stimulus, we think that the longer term outlook is actually quite positive, and we're positioning portfolios for quality, and we are looking at the sectors like industrials, consumer, stables, financials, and you want to make sure that the portfolios are well represented
in the dividend things. We still are, of course concerned about the fact that this economy is very much showing the signs of the slowdown and are trying to make sure that portfolios are protected.
So what is protection right now within the equity market, Alex.
It's emphasis on quality and it always has been the case, but more so now. And what is unique about this market is the companies with very clear competitive positioning are somewhat evident. This is definitely a stock picker's market. This is where are owning the portfolio of good quality names that are showing healthy balance sheets and are positioned well to improve and continue to grow their earnings and really the support the valuations and that that we're seeing right
now versus the broad index. This is the time that to definitely own this very individually crafted portfolios and pick individual names.
Hey, Keterine, it it's an action year and you know likely there will be a lot of noise around that in the second half of the year. Here when you're actually question to you do your clients call you up and say what do I do for my portfolio? And an election year? Is that a concern for your clients?
Well? Absolutely, And the questions that we get usually is how one or another outcome of the election would affect their portfolios and should we do anything at all to really position the portfolios for the outcome of the election.
And of course, you know, our crystal ball is a little marky these days and it's so hard to predict, and we tell the investors that they really should keep their eye on the price that the balance and allocation of their portfolio should not be dependent on who is in the White House or you know, the really even the Fed action. It should be on the current economic environment.
They should be well balanced. The asset allocation and diversification is really the key, you know to the long term ho look, but also rebalancing, you know, it's just staying that with that balance, right, you know, making sure that we take advantage of the buying opportunities in the market, that we take some growth of the table that makes sense and refocus it in the sectors that has not have not had you know, the run yet, which is really something that is going to ensure the longer term
performance of the portoli.
Is Katerina, thank you so much for joining us. Katerina sam Eddi, Senior vice president in Private wealth Management at Morgan Stanley.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecar Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Another story that we're obviously following that's really important is the latest and President Donald Trump's hush money trial. I gotta tell you, the traffic coming to work the last couple of days have been terrible, and I don't know if that's because of the trial, but it's something I'm kidding.
Sounds a little bit dicey because I guess he's staying at Trump Tower. Yes, this makes sense there so I had to go to the store near there yesterday it was kind of congested.
This is important stuff to know. We also want to know, like what happens now, so we have closing arguments, what's going on with the jury with the judge in terms of timing as well joining us in the studio as David boorakas he's a legal reporter for Bloomberg News. What is the TikTok? What happens now?
The judge has been instructing the jury this morning on how to apply the law to the evidence. This was after more than eight hours of closing arguments yesterday. Once the judge finishes his instructions, the jury will begin to deliberate on thirty four felony counts against Donald Trump, and at some point in the near future will have a verdict.
And he thought as to how long this type of trial may take in terms of deliberations, is measured in days or.
Longer anyone It's anyone's guess. Really, I would think it would be at least a couple of days, but there's no way to know for sure. There's a lot of evidence to go through, there's some fairly complicated law to apply to that evidence. It seems to have been quite a serious jury who's been paying close attention. They have five weeks of testimony, twenty two witnesses to review, and an awful lot of exhibits.
What has the judge told the jury about things today?
The judge has told them essentially to put aside any political beliefs they have. He's also instructed them on how election law applies to this case, and that they can have any of the evidence read back to them or played back to them. He's essentially setting them up so that they can enter this little world where it's just them and they make a rational decision on guilt or innocence. On the thirty four counts, would these normally be felony counts.
These counts of falsifying business records under New York law would normally be misdemeanors. But are elevated to felonies. If the jury decides that Trump intended to violate either state or federal election law or state tax law, he doesn't actually have to have accomplished that, only that he intended to do that. So a lot of this is going to turn on Donald Trump's intent, and the instruction is going to focus on how jurors can decide Trump's intent.
So can he be found guilty or not guilty on some counts and some different on the other counts, or is it all kind of one big package.
He definitely could be found guilty on some counts but not others. If the jury buys the prosecution's theory, which was that these repayments was to conceal damaging personal information that would have influenced the twenty sixteen election, it's more likely than not that he would be convicted on all accounts. But one way the jury might split the difference is that there are eleven checks involved. Two of them were signed by his former CFO, Ellen Weiselberg and by one
of his two sons. The other nine were signed by Trump when he was president in twenty seventeen. And they may say, well, we'll convict on these nine counts because Donald Trump himself signed the checks. There's also counts involving invoices from Michael Cohen and vouchers that were in the Trump organization system. It may be that they conclude, dude, that Trump didn't know about those invoices or vouchers, but they he knew about the checks that he signed.
Way, how did things go yesterday? How are closing arguments and how that kind of sets them up?
It was a pretty dramatic day. It went on for a long time. It started at nine thirty and didn't end until eight pm last night, and it was kind of grueling to follow it all. But it was an excellent overview. I would say both sides were able to put their best foot forward and make the best arguments they had.
What's the Is there an informed opinion out there in the legal world as how this might go in terms of a decision.
Non partisan informed legal opinion?
Yeah?
Is there anything? Is there any kind of consensus in your reporting that you guys have found.
I would say that generally legal analysts believe the case against Trump is strong, but it's hard to know whether there are supporters on the jury for an acquittal and so I think generally the consensus is that a conviction is more likely than an acquittal, but that a hung jury is a real possibility.
And then I guess appeals will happen, but as jail time a real possibility.
With this judge, I know, he.
Really takes seriously, it seems white collar convictions, right.
This judge, one Mershawan threatened a couple of times, and the second time more seriously to jail Donald Trump if he continued to violate a gag order against him, threatening witnesses or members of the prosecution staff. But he never actually put Trump in jail. And so that's the real open question that if he were convicted, would he actually sentence Trump to jail. Well, he faces up to four years in prison if convicted.
Wow, A lot of unpack on that one. All right, we really appreciate it. Thank you very much. I know it's a lot to get through. David Mariaco's a Bloomberg legal reporter. Joining us.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecar Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa, from our flagship New York station. Just say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
All right in a fixed income markets, folks, I don't think I need to be a hero here. I can get the two year treasuring kid right around five percent. That's not bad, folks, And you think about where we were the last ten fifteen years. That's a that's a living I think. But maybe our next cast will get me to be a little bit more adventurous and take some credit risk out there. Jerry Kudzel, he's a group
managing director and generalist portfolio manager TCW boy. He's been stuck at a bond market his entire career, by side sellside, no creativity whatsoever, no equities. Just Jerry, you're like mister bond person out there. So I guess TCW is a great place to be because you guys are a serious bond shop out there. So, Jerry, how about my two percent? How about my five percent on the two year treasury? Is that such a bad thing?
It's it's not a bad thing. There's something for everybody, as as you mentioned. I mean five percent on a on a two year treasury risk free in a world where you know a couple of years ago, you would have you know, you you would have reached for one and a half percent in a ten year. Note that's not so bad. That's not so bad. I think we
would we would agree. I think we would probably tell you not a bad time to think about, you know, moving out the curve a little bit, you know, three and five year but you know, earning five percent over two years for risk pre rate, that's that's pretty attractive.
What do you make of what's going on right now?
Though?
Because the excuse is like, oh that two in the five year yesterday was not great. We get the seven year or forty four billion coming today at one that might not be that great, and the markets are trading heavy because that does that not hold water for you?
No, it it might. I think, Look, technicals will be what they'll be in the short term, and you know, that'll maybe create a slightly better entry point, you know, for for for investors. I think what we would I think, Alex, what we would what we would say? You know, if you think about the real question is okay, if you're in a higher for longer environment, what might that mean?
Essentially kind of kind of overall, I mean, whether whether you put a little bit of pressure and you can buy it to your note at five percent or four ninety five or you know, rates rates move five five bps higher. That's not really the story. The story is going to be when's the FED gonna move, what's the pace of the move, and what's that going to mean for you know, kind of for risk kind of broadly so.
So, Jerry, what is the TCW call on the Fed?
Well, our view is that simply inflation is is moving in the right direction. I think it's doesn't ever come down in a straight line, you know. I think as as we see it, I think simply stated and we and we as we look at it, we think that the jobs market, the employment market is just it's softening, you know, real time. Whether you think that's going to roll over and create a recession, and we think, why don't.
We focus on that?
What does that ultimately mean? Is that ultimately all inflation will need to be sustained by by wages, and real wages are you know, kind of scratching positive still at the moment, but you have a real uh, you have a real stretch consumer uh. And ultimately, our our view is that rates are going to come down, Uh, looks like that, you know, we're in a little bit of
a higher for longer environment. Looks like it might get extended out a little bit, but ultimately, once the Fed goes, they're going to have to go at a pace that's faster than what was priced into the market today.
So when you're looking at the curve, for example, how much duration do you want to take on, Like do you like fixed income for its yield or for its price?
We would say that there's probably a little bit. It's a little bit of a nuanced answer. We like going out a little bit into the kind of intermediate part of the curves. You know, maybe as a as a bond guy, that's exciting, you know, Paul to mention, you know, in my career the bond market, my whole career, maybe not as an equity person, I'd say extending out the curve into kind of ten and thirty year duration, we're
not as uh, not as excited about that. But I think in two and five year we think you're supposed to be moving out the curve at least into the intermediate part of the curve, and that could actually be a real that could give you kind of income today and then also give you a little bit of price appreciation to the extent that the curve does normalize, does begin to steepen out, and you do get to see some more cuts that are priced into the marketplace.
Alex, when I was a sell side analyst, I'd go to TCW all time because they're like a really big account. You have to get their I I vote one day, I got off the elevator and the wrong floor with all the bond people is a disaster convexity.
Duration god, and you ran. You fear for your life in the jargon world, I had to get back to the floor.
We could talk pees and stuff like that. Jerry, do I take credit risk here? Or you know, people like you were telling me that the spreads are so tight, I'm really not getting paid for it. How do you think about credit and opportunities there?
Yeah, that's that's the you know, that's really the question. The question is why is there all this demand for credit? Right, it'll be private credit. You have the public markets issue. It's almost at all time highs. It just about every segment of the marketplace, investment, great high yield, and so the question is technicals are really strong, but we think what's driving the interest in credit is really the risk re rate. It's not the eighty basis point you're receiving
an investment great credit. It's not the three hundred basis points you're receiving in high yo credit. Actually, those historically look really hyph doesn't mean they can't get tighter, doesn't mean they can't sit here for quite some time, but they don't look attractive from a total return perspective. As a matter of fact, prospective returns when you consider starting spreads today, they.
Get challenged all over time.
So we don't think you're supposed to be reaching out the risk spectrum in credit broadly.
That we do do think there are plenty of opportunities.
It's just if you're trying to say broadly, what are you supposed to do?
They moved out their.
Risk spectrum, you know, into riskier parts of the credit markets.
We don't think it's being compensated for that.
I feel like I'm gonna ask a verbontan question, but typically when I'm looking at the risk free rate, that's the tenure. Is the tenure still the risk free rate?
Yeah? Look, I think you have to think about you have to think about the entire curve at this point, and it's a it's a it's an interesting question given the pronounced and prolonged inversion of the curve and what that has meant or really hasn't meant, uh for the economy, and whether or not this inflation signal, you know, this recession signal is dead in terms of the inverted inverted curve, Whether or not our star is higher, you know, terminal rate and is all that so?
So where so where are you?
Where are you supposed to look? We still we still think that's we still think that's the right place to look out. But it's I think you have to you definitely have to consider all parts of the curve. And there's some plumbing changes that have happened historically and the you know, in the marketplace that we don't need to get into. But what we would say is you're probably you probably need to look at the whole curve. You got probably got to look a little bit more holistically today.
All right, Jerry, thanks for so much for joining us. Really appreciate it. As always, Jerry Kutzel, Group managing Director and generalists over there at TCW Good Folks in Los Angeles.
This is the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast, available on apples, Spotify, and anywhere else you'll get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday, ten am to noon Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the iHeartRadio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal