finyork.com

Tag: commercial real estate

  • What is a Prime Brokerage and Who Uses Their Services?

    A prime brokerage is a bundled group of services offered by investment banks and other financial institutions. Investment banks may offer these services to hedge funds and other large investment clients that have a need to be able to borrow securities (or cash), in order to engage in “netting” to achieve “absolute returns”.

    What is Netting?

    Netting refers to offsetting the value of multiple positions, or payments, due to be exchanged between two or more parties. Typically, it’s used to determine which party is owed compensation in a multiparty contract.  Additionally, utilized as a method of reducing risks in financial contracts by combining or aggregating multiple financial obligations to arrive at a net obligation amount. Netting reduces settlement, credit, and other financial risks between two or more parties.

    What is an Absolute Return?

    An absolute return indicates the return an asset receives over a specific period. This measure looks at the appreciation/depreciation that an asset – such as a stock or mutual fund – has achieved over time. Absolute returns differ from relative returns in that there’s no benchmark comparison. The absolute return is concerned with the return of that specific asset over a period of time. An easier way to think of an absolute return is by its other reference, total return. Therefore, the gain or loss of an asset or portfolio is measured independent of any other standard. Absolute returns may be positive or negative and they may also bear no correlation to other market activities.

    Who Typically Utilizes Prime Brokerage Services and Who Provides Them?

    Hedge funds would amongst the first category of prime brokerage clients. Legally, clients may not access prime brokerage services for less than $500,000 in equity, even though it’s typical for clients to have over $50M in equity. High net worth private investors are another popular category of prime brokerage clients.

    On the other hand, prime brokerage services are generally offered by large investment banks. These institutions benefit from economies of scale to bundle multiple financial service offerings with more efficiency, at a cheaper cost. Some of the most notable firms who offer prime brokerage services include Goldman Sachs, BAML, JPMC, Citigroup, and BNY Mellon. Services bundled include largely “back office” tasks like asset custody, financial reporting, cash/securities lending, investor introductions, and risk consulting.

    Historically, Goldman Sachs has been known as the most reputable prime brokerage. However, their prime brokerage agreements are such that smaller hedge funds would have difficulty meeting their expected capital requirements. More recently, Pershing – an elite BNY Mellon subsidiary – has become the backbone of the prime brokerage street business. Combining the custodial services BNY Mellon is renowned for, with Pershing’s uniquely skilled investments and alternatives specialists, gives the duo a unique marketing position within the prime brokerage business. Pershing’s “prime services” are highlighted by risk management consulting. Additional offerings include securities lending, financing solutions, trade execution, technology, liquid alternative investments, and more. Within the alternative investment niche, which is extremely frequently accessed by hedge funds, Pershing has built an impeccable reputation.

  • What is a Prime Brokerage and Who Uses Their Services?

    A prime brokerage is a bundled group of services offered by investment banks and other financial institutions. Investment banks may offer these services to hedge funds and other large investment clients that have a need to be able to borrow securities (or cash), in order to engage in “netting” to achieve “absolute returns”.

    What is Netting?

    Netting refers to offsetting the value of multiple positions, or payments, due to be exchanged between two or more parties. Typically, it’s used to determine which party is owed compensation in a multiparty contract.  Additionally, utilized as a method of reducing risks in financial contracts by combining or aggregating multiple financial obligations to arrive at a net obligation amount. Netting reduces settlement, credit, and other financial risks between two or more parties.

    What is an Absolute Return?

    An absolute return indicates the return an asset receives over a specific period. This measure looks at the appreciation/depreciation that an asset – such as a stock or mutual fund – has achieved over time. Absolute returns differ from relative returns in that there’s no benchmark comparison. The absolute return is concerned with the return of that specific asset over a period of time. An easier way to think of an absolute return is by its other reference, total return. Therefore, the gain or loss of an asset or portfolio is measured independent of any other standard. Absolute returns may be positive or negative and they may also bear no correlation to other market activities.

    Who Typically Utilizes Prime Brokerage Services and Who Provides Them?

    Hedge funds would amongst the first category of prime brokerage clients. Legally, clients may not access prime brokerage services for less than $500,000 in equity, even though it’s typical for clients to have over $50M in equity. High net worth private investors are another popular category of prime brokerage clients.

    On the other hand, prime brokerage services are generally offered by large investment banks. These institutions benefit from economies of scale to bundle multiple financial service offerings with more efficiency, at a cheaper cost. Some of the most notable firms who offer prime brokerage services include Goldman Sachs, BAML, JPMC, Citigroup, and BNY Mellon. Services bundled include largely “back office” tasks like asset custody, financial reporting, cash/securities lending, investor introductions, and risk consulting.

    Historically, Goldman Sachs has been known as the most reputable prime brokerage. However, their prime brokerage agreements are such that smaller hedge funds would have difficulty meeting their expected capital requirements. More recently, Pershing – an elite BNY Mellon subsidiary – has become the backbone of the prime brokerage street business. Combining the custodial services BNY Mellon is renowned for, with Pershing’s uniquely skilled investments and alternatives specialists, gives the duo a unique marketing position within the prime brokerage business. Pershing’s “prime services” are highlighted by risk management consulting. Additional offerings include securities lending, financing solutions, trade execution, technology, liquid alternative investments, and more. Within the alternative investment niche, which is extremely frequently accessed by hedge funds, Pershing has built an impeccable reputation.

  • Financial Markets Are Suffering, But What About Real Estate?

    As recent signals that the Fed’s “soft landing” recession isn’t going to come to fruition, financial markets responded accordingly. In addition to covering financial markets impact, we’re going to look into real estate. The DOW Jones and S&P 500 both dropped steadily Friday 10/7. The S&P has been on such a steady decline, the last 12 months of gains have officially completely canceled out. While some have speculated that we’re at a “bottoming out” in the equities market, which is supported by historic S&P 500 trends, market participants don’t seem to fully buy in. In fact, quantitatively the Top 5 stocks by market cap in the S&P 500 (Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, and Alphabet Inc/Google, i.e., “Big Tech”) have been overpriced for years, compared to S&P 500 P/E [Price-to-Earnings] averages.

    Either way, turmoil is very likely to continue for capital markets and equities investors. Even if the net result is positive, there will be a lot of sleepless nights in the process. Let’s shift gears and take a look at a completely different, but critical (remember 2008) market: real estate.

    The Real Estate Market was Effectively COVID-proof; is it Recession-proof?

    This is the ultimate question for investors will look at real estate – both passive and active investments – in the longer-term. Foreign investors are already starting to see massive benefits to American real estate investments. That’s certainly one of the primary catalysts for steadily high real estate prices, while other assets are devalued. While we’re going to address the current and future state of the real estate market, the heading was rhetorical. Never forget 2008. That’s going to be a critical lesson investors takeaway from this coming recession, as well. 

    Real estate and related assets are certainly not recession, or even depression proof. It’s always good to be reminded of this fact: real estate is the world’s largest asset class. That means the most money (in all forms of currency, worldwide) is being spent in this market, as compared to any other segment in global finance. With real estate-related securities, we now know we must pay extra close attention to the value of the underlying assets. That goes back to a key differentiator when you’re discussing real estate in the context of an investment strategy. People and families will always need shelter. The landscape may have been altered due to COVID-19, but corporations still need office buildings.

    Physical Real Estate Will Always Have Some Value

    The critical point is real estate will continue to have some value, regardless of what happens in financial markets. Moving away from the combination of greed – both on the part of homeowners and lenders – that led up to the 2008 financial crisis, real estate is still something society will always need. Remember how truly heartbreaking some of the stories of families losing their homes during that 2008 recession was? When tangible assets that we get daily utility from as in the equation, it’s an entirely different scenario from an illiquid financial asset. The types of investors are different, their goals are different, their interests vary, etc. This is all to say that while there’s no doubt there’s a level of positive correlation between financial markets and real estate prices, by no means is it absolute. The dynamics are far too dissimilar.

    However, not being recession-proof is actually one of the common denominators that always holds true for the pair. 

    The Pandemic Housing Boom

    As we’ve recently shared, experts started questioning how long this “seller’s market” we’ve seen explode since COVID-19 will last. Since then, there have been major developments. First and foremost, from the Fed. In late September 2022, the Fed announced they are going to “reset” the real estate market through a ‘difficult’ correction. In June 2022, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said he sees spiking mortgages rates fizzling out the Pandemic Housing Boom as a “good thing”. During what’s referred to as the Pandemic Housing Boom, housing prices soared in growth by 42%. We’ll now certainly see some of those gains erased.

    With increased rates, we should expect to see a diminished potential buyer pool. In April 2022, prices peaked at 21% – according to Zillow’s home value index – however by this fall they fell to just 14%. According to Zillow senior economist Jeff Tucker, “it’s too soon to tell” how big of an impact the reset will have on home prices. In July 2022, the S&P Case-Shiller index, which measures house prices in 20 US cities, recorded its first monthly decline in a decade, dropping by 0.44%. Mortgage rates (30-year, fixed rate) are currently sitting at roughly 6.7%, according to guarantor Freddie Mae. Just a year ago however, the same 30-year, fixed rate mortgage was 2.99%.

    The Impact of the Current Correction in Housing Market Prices

    “The market is shifting, but a correction was needed”, said real estate agent Junior Torres. “It was not a sane market, what we were having in the pandemic”. This is causing sellers, who were driving the early 2020s pandemic market, to face a new reality. Fewer properties are receiving fewer offers. Sellers are going to continue getting more and more ‘desperate’ the longer the correction lasts. In other words, until we’ve reached a point where supply and demand is back at an equilibrium price, median selling prices will continue to decrease.

    Additionally, a correction in the housing market typically incentivizes homeowners to ‘stay put’. Investors and home flippers might feel pressure to sell quickly, however homeowners will simply keep their house. If we do reach that point sometime in 2023 – but more likely 2024 – they will then reassess their situation. However, when the Fed is verbally communicating that rates aren’t down – the opposite – homeowners have frankly no incentive to sell. According to the latest numbers from Zillow, the median stay in a US home is 12 years.

    Concisely, housing market prices are going to continue decreasing while rates remain at this level. From Fed statements, this is expected to continue through 2023. This should result in housing market prices continuing on the same trajectory. Committed sellers and investors will feel pressure to act quicker. Those not ‘forced’ to sell for unexpected reasons (new job, for example) will very likely remain in their homes. This will obviously decrease supply, but again primarily due to the current and expected mortgage rates in the short-term, we should expect to see below average demand.

  • Financial Markets Are Suffering, But What About Real Estate?

    As recent signals that the Fed’s “soft landing” recession isn’t going to come to fruition, financial markets responded accordingly. In addition to covering financial markets impact, we’re going to look into real estate. The DOW Jones and S&P 500 both dropped steadily Friday 10/7. The S&P has been on such a steady decline, the last 12 months of gains have officially completely canceled out. While some have speculated that we’re at a “bottoming out” in the equities market, which is supported by historic S&P 500 trends, market participants don’t seem to fully buy in. In fact, quantitatively the Top 5 stocks by market cap in the S&P 500 (Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, and Alphabet Inc/Google, i.e., “Big Tech”) have been overpriced for years, compared to S&P 500 P/E [Price-to-Earnings] averages.

    Either way, turmoil is very likely to continue for capital markets and equities investors. Even if the net result is positive, there will be a lot of sleepless nights in the process. Let’s shift gears and take a look at a completely different, but critical (remember 2008) market: real estate.

    The Real Estate Market was Effectively COVID-proof; is it Recession-proof?

    This is the ultimate question for investors will look at real estate – both passive and active investments – in the longer-term. Foreign investors are already starting to see massive benefits to American real estate investments. That’s certainly one of the primary catalysts for steadily high real estate prices, while other assets are devalued. While we’re going to address the current and future state of the real estate market, the heading was rhetorical. Never forget 2008. That’s going to be a critical lesson investors takeaway from this coming recession, as well. 

    Real estate and related assets are certainly not recession, or even depression proof. It’s always good to be reminded of this fact: real estate is the world’s largest asset class. That means the most money (in all forms of currency, worldwide) is being spent in this market, as compared to any other segment in global finance. With real estate-related securities, we now know we must pay extra close attention to the value of the underlying assets. That goes back to a key differentiator when you’re discussing real estate in the context of an investment strategy. People and families will always need shelter. The landscape may have been altered due to COVID-19, but corporations still need office buildings.

    Physical Real Estate Will Always Have Some Value

    The critical point is real estate will continue to have some value, regardless of what happens in financial markets. Moving away from the combination of greed – both on the part of homeowners and lenders – that led up to the 2008 financial crisis, real estate is still something society will always need. Remember how truly heartbreaking some of the stories of families losing their homes during that 2008 recession was? When tangible assets that we get daily utility from as in the equation, it’s an entirely different scenario from an illiquid financial asset. The types of investors are different, their goals are different, their interests vary, etc. This is all to say that while there’s no doubt there’s a level of positive correlation between financial markets and real estate prices, by no means is it absolute. The dynamics are far too dissimilar.

    However, not being recession-proof is actually one of the common denominators that always holds true for the pair. 

    The Pandemic Housing Boom

    As we’ve recently shared, experts started questioning how long this “seller’s market” we’ve seen explode since COVID-19 will last. Since then, there have been major developments. First and foremost, from the Fed. In late September 2022, the Fed announced they are going to “reset” the real estate market through a ‘difficult’ correction. In June 2022, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said he sees spiking mortgages rates fizzling out the Pandemic Housing Boom as a “good thing”. During what’s referred to as the Pandemic Housing Boom, housing prices soared in growth by 42%. We’ll now certainly see some of those gains erased.

    With increased rates, we should expect to see a diminished potential buyer pool. In April 2022, prices peaked at 21% – according to Zillow’s home value index – however by this fall they fell to just 14%. According to Zillow senior economist Jeff Tucker, “it’s too soon to tell” how big of an impact the reset will have on home prices. In July 2022, the S&P Case-Shiller index, which measures house prices in 20 US cities, recorded its first monthly decline in a decade, dropping by 0.44%. Mortgage rates (30-year, fixed rate) are currently sitting at roughly 6.7%, according to guarantor Freddie Mae. Just a year ago however, the same 30-year, fixed rate mortgage was 2.99%.

    The Impact of the Current Correction in Housing Market Prices

    “The market is shifting, but a correction was needed”, said real estate agent Junior Torres. “It was not a sane market, what we were having in the pandemic”. This is causing sellers, who were driving the early 2020s pandemic market, to face a new reality. Fewer properties are receiving fewer offers. Sellers are going to continue getting more and more ‘desperate’ the longer the correction lasts. In other words, until we’ve reached a point where supply and demand is back at an equilibrium price, median selling prices will continue to decrease.

    Additionally, a correction in the housing market typically incentivizes homeowners to ‘stay put’. Investors and home flippers might feel pressure to sell quickly, however homeowners will simply keep their house. If we do reach that point sometime in 2023 – but more likely 2024 – they will then reassess their situation. However, when the Fed is verbally communicating that rates aren’t down – the opposite – homeowners have frankly no incentive to sell. According to the latest numbers from Zillow, the median stay in a US home is 12 years.

    Concisely, housing market prices are going to continue decreasing while rates remain at this level. From Fed statements, this is expected to continue through 2023. This should result in housing market prices continuing on the same trajectory. Committed sellers and investors will feel pressure to act quicker. Those not ‘forced’ to sell for unexpected reasons (new job, for example) will very likely remain in their homes. This will obviously decrease supply, but again primarily due to the current and expected mortgage rates in the short-term, we should expect to see below average demand.

  • The World’s Oldest and Largest Custodian Bank – BNY Mellon – Builds Platform to Revolutionize Digital Asset Custody Services

    BNY Mellon, founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1784 – the first US Treasury Secretary – has announced they are continuing to build out a highly advanced, robust, and secure digital assets custody business.

    “Touching more than 20% of the world’s investable assets, BNY Mellon has the scale to help our clients reimagine financial markets through blockchain technology and digital assets. We are still in the early days of this evolution, but the possibilities are exciting. Today’s announcement marks a step in what we see as an ongoing innovation journey for our firm, our clients and the rest of the financial industry.”

    -Robin Vince, CEO of BNY Mellon

    BNY’s custodianship business is based on some of the very principles Hamilton wrote about in the late 1700s. They are both the largest and the oldest custodian bank in the world, with approximately $45T (Trillion) in Assets Under Custody (AUC). With their experience, brand recognition, and unique ability to utilize economies of scale – coupled with what appears to be a recent renewed peaking interest in digital assets – this move is an example of exceptional business strategy.

    The Timing of BNY Mellon’s Announcement

    The timing of the announcement is interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly (likely the primary reason), the Sibos Update conference, which initially lasted from 10/10-10/13. BNY had a very large presence and rolled this news out in parallel. Secondly, we’re at an absolutely critical point in macroeconomic policy. Will the Fed’s decision to hike up rates to deflate the inflation work? Did they start too late? What’s the impact on US and global financial markets? Presently, those questions are central to investors every single day.

    Generally, during recessionary cyclical economic times, at-risk assets don’t do well (to say the least). Cryptocurrencies and digital assets are in the heart of today’s at-risk assets category – though that may be slowly changing. Regardless, during such a time of economic uncertainty, rolling out a high-tech, revolutionary custodianship service for digital assets is interesting. That leads me to the next timing overlap.

    The SEC’s Ongoing Persistence of Rejecting Bitcoin Spot ETF Proposals

    The SEC has been on a roll with rejecting Bitcoin spot ETFs. Coverage of this began intensifying when they rejected Grayscale GBTC’s conversion request from a SEC-approved Bitcoin Trust to an SEC-approved Bitcoin spot ETF. Grayscale immediately retained Donald Verrilli Jr., who subsequently filed a quick appeal. Verrilli is best known for making a successful oral argument to the US Supreme Court in favor of the ACA (Obamacare). Afterwards, any new Bitcoin ETF – especially spot ETFs – were widely covered by the media and enthused investors. This announcement came on October 11th, 2022, the same day WisdomTree’s Bitcoin spot ETF application was rejected by the SEC, which is also coincidentally the same date the SEC had a deadline to respond to VanEck’s appeal of their previously rejected Bitcoin spot ETF. To note, the SEC has now missed their 45-day deadline to respond.

    Bear in mind, VanEck is not heavily exposed in digital assets at all. They are a highly reputable institutional investment firm, with one SEC-approved Bitcoin Strategy ETF on the market. As all other currently SEC-approved Bitcoin ETFs, VanEck’s Strategy ETF is a Bitcoin futures ETF. Nonetheless, BNY Mellon – very likely coincidentally, admittedly – announced this launch on the same day as two highly anticipated SEC rulings on digital asset products.

    Expected Impact for the Digital Asset Market

    The impact, especially in the longer-term, is potentially massive. Let’s remember the primary, above-and-beyond, number one reason the SEC is rejecting Bitcoin spot ETFs: security. Grayscale’s SEC-approved GBTC Bitcoin Trust advertises and details the product’s custodianship. The custodian is Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC. In other words, at least from the branding, the custodian of the cryptocurrency product is a cryptocurrency-specific custodian. Continuing with the Grayscale example, this makes their rebuttal to the SEC more difficult. Is there any remotely tangible security added if a cryptocurrency product is in the custody of another cryptocurrency-specific firm? I don’t doubt Grayscale’s ability to make a compelling and technically robust argument, but I seriously doubt the SEC’s acceptance.

    What if the scenario remains the same, with the only change being the custodian. With very few exceptions, in my opinion nothing really changes. That is, unless the custodian is BNY Mellon. Some, including myself, might argue that turns the dynamic in the other direction. If GBTC is held in the custody of BNY Mellon, would the SEC still cite security concerns? Unimaginable. BNY Mellon’s brand is iconic when it comes to custodianship services in global banking. Through this core offering, BNY Mellon alone winds up touching over 20% – or more than 1 out of every 5 USD (or global currency equivalent) – throughout the entire world. That’s astounding. Keeping in mind they are the oldest bank and the oldest publicly traded company, BNY must be doing something right in custodianship services.

    Security Has Always Been Paramount in Custodian Banking

    With custodianship banking generally, security is definitely mission critical. BNY has provided this service, highly successfully, arguably longer than any other service offered by any institution. They’ve been evolving the custody banking sector since the late 1700s. Back to the SEC, if I’m looking at GBTC in the custody of BNY Mellon, I don’t see any compelling argument for security concerns. If anything, I’d see that as more of comical reasoning. The SEC could always pivot to another, more plausible concern if (when) that were to happen, but it’s still a huge win for the digital asset market – as well as BNY Mellon.

    As a final note here, the SEC is rejecting Bitcoin spot ETFs at an increasing rate, meaning applications are growing. More and more firms are attempting to get SEC-approved Bitcoin products into the marketplace. Clearly, they’re prognosticating an increase in investor demand for digital asset products and are attempting to respond accordingly. Let’s also be clear – investors and investment firms aren’t required to get SEC clearance to sell Bitcoin derivatives.

    That said, of course it’s highly preferred. In an asset class still largely plagued by uncertainty, SEC approval is an immediate, gigantic game-changer. BNY Mellon holding custody of digital assets on an in-house, BNY Mellon digital assets custody platform changes cryptocurrency market dynamics. It also likely puts cryptocurrency-specific custodians out of business, amongst other market effects. One would think it’d have to alter the SEC’s position substantially and broadly on digital assets. In turn, that should similarly substantially and broadly alter investor perception of digital assets.

    Could Anything Go Wrong?

    Always. On a more serious note, even Alexander Hamilton was famously quoted saying, “I never expect a perfect work from an imperfect man”. From my perspective, BNY Mellon is not only the biggest risk-taker here; they are the biggest by a landslide. This is a company that was founded by the first US Treasury Secretary and has only improved their initial, core offering over time. The SEC also isn’t raising concerns over security as a completely illegitimate excuse. We’ve seen Ethereum wallets hacked, viruses created to successfully steal Bitcoin, cyber-attacks against crypto exchanges, and more. BNY Mellon will have the sole responsibility to ensure none of that occurs on their watch, so to speak. What if they fail? That’s exactly the point at which this could all go terribly wrong.

    BNY Mellon built a brand with the core focus on custodian banking spanning the course of over 225 years. They are widely considered to be the most prestigious and critical institutional investment services firm in the world. Now they’ve made a major move into the digital asset space, an admittedly enticing and potentially extremely lucrative strategy. However, in banking, all it takes to bring down a reputation built over 225 years is one mistake in seconds.

    To be sure, there’s added nuance here. Digital assets are naturally going to be more susceptible to evolving technologies as digital assets themselves are an evolving technology. Cybersecurity preventability measures and the sophistication of cybersecurity attacks have both increased. In the age of digital transformation, I believe this is a correctly calculated risk for BNY Mellon.

    Extent a Momentary Error Could Hurt BNY Mellon’s Core Business

    While there can be little to no doubt a security issue coming from BNY’s digital asset custody platform would be detrimental to the company – potentially in a very large way – the same can be said for the likelihood of that instance actually bringing down what BNY’s built in over 225 years. Even if the world’s most secure custodian has a security malfunction, I don’t believe it would even impact their current business model. It may take them out of digital asset custody services – I think even that is reaching – but again, I don’t see it majorly tarnishing the brand.

    All-in-all, this is a win-win scenario, statistically speaking. Yes, something could go wrong. When this platform is ready for go-live and it’s used broadly, we’ll get a better sense of the impact. But BNY especially would not dramatically – out of character – launch a futuristic digital assets custody platform that didn’t meet the mark from a technology perspective.

    There shouldn’t be doubt BNY made budgetary concerns a main priority, or even an obstacle, of this project. The team they’ve assembled is comprised of the brightest, most experienced, innovative SME’s in their respective areas. This continuing work-in-progress originated in 2019 and is just now starting to be publicly rolled out in a significant way. BNY likely took 3 years to ensure they had capacity to build a product worthy of publicly announcing is work-in-progress. They notably take perfection seriously; I doubt many disbelieve they’re going to rollout an incredible product. Whether perfection in digital assets custody is attainable is a separate discussion, but if anyone could, it’s BNY Mellon.

  • The World’s Oldest and Largest Custodian Bank – BNY Mellon – Builds Platform to Revolutionize Digital Asset Custody Services

    BNY Mellon, founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1784 – the first US Treasury Secretary – has announced they are continuing to build out a highly advanced, robust, and secure digital assets custody business.

    “Touching more than 20% of the world’s investable assets, BNY Mellon has the scale to help our clients reimagine financial markets through blockchain technology and digital assets. We are still in the early days of this evolution, but the possibilities are exciting. Today’s announcement marks a step in what we see as an ongoing innovation journey for our firm, our clients and the rest of the financial industry.”

    -Robin Vince, CEO of BNY Mellon

    BNY’s custodianship business is based on some of the very principles Hamilton wrote about in the late 1700s. They are both the largest and the oldest custodian bank in the world, with approximately $45T (Trillion) in Assets Under Custody (AUC). With their experience, brand recognition, and unique ability to utilize economies of scale – coupled with what appears to be a recent renewed peaking interest in digital assets – this move is an example of exceptional business strategy.

    The Timing of BNY Mellon’s Announcement

    The timing of the announcement is interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly (likely the primary reason), the Sibos Update conference, which initially lasted from 10/10-10/13. BNY had a very large presence and rolled this news out in parallel. Secondly, we’re at an absolutely critical point in macroeconomic policy. Will the Fed’s decision to hike up rates to deflate the inflation work? Did they start too late? What’s the impact on US and global financial markets? Presently, those questions are central to investors every single day.

    Generally, during recessionary cyclical economic times, at-risk assets don’t do well (to say the least). Cryptocurrencies and digital assets are in the heart of today’s at-risk assets category – though that may be slowly changing. Regardless, during such a time of economic uncertainty, rolling out a high-tech, revolutionary custodianship service for digital assets is interesting. That leads me to the next timing overlap.

    The SEC’s Ongoing Persistence of Rejecting Bitcoin Spot ETF Proposals

    The SEC has been on a roll with rejecting Bitcoin spot ETFs. Coverage of this began intensifying when they rejected Grayscale GBTC’s conversion request from a SEC-approved Bitcoin Trust to an SEC-approved Bitcoin spot ETF. Grayscale immediately retained Donald Verrilli Jr., who subsequently filed a quick appeal. Verrilli is best known for making a successful oral argument to the US Supreme Court in favor of the ACA (Obamacare). Afterwards, any new Bitcoin ETF – especially spot ETFs – were widely covered by the media and enthused investors. This announcement came on October 11th, 2022, the same day WisdomTree’s Bitcoin spot ETF application was rejected by the SEC, which is also coincidentally the same date the SEC had a deadline to respond to VanEck’s appeal of their previously rejected Bitcoin spot ETF. To note, the SEC has now missed their 45-day deadline to respond.

    Bear in mind, VanEck is not heavily exposed in digital assets at all. They are a highly reputable institutional investment firm, with one SEC-approved Bitcoin Strategy ETF on the market. As all other currently SEC-approved Bitcoin ETFs, VanEck’s Strategy ETF is a Bitcoin futures ETF. Nonetheless, BNY Mellon – very likely coincidentally, admittedly – announced this launch on the same day as two highly anticipated SEC rulings on digital asset products.

    Expected Impact for the Digital Asset Market

    The impact, especially in the longer-term, is potentially massive. Let’s remember the primary, above-and-beyond, number one reason the SEC is rejecting Bitcoin spot ETFs: security. Grayscale’s SEC-approved GBTC Bitcoin Trust advertises and details the product’s custodianship. The custodian is Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC. In other words, at least from the branding, the custodian of the cryptocurrency product is a cryptocurrency-specific custodian. Continuing with the Grayscale example, this makes their rebuttal to the SEC more difficult. Is there any remotely tangible security added if a cryptocurrency product is in the custody of another cryptocurrency-specific firm? I don’t doubt Grayscale’s ability to make a compelling and technically robust argument, but I seriously doubt the SEC’s acceptance.

    What if the scenario remains the same, with the only change being the custodian. With very few exceptions, in my opinion nothing really changes. That is, unless the custodian is BNY Mellon. Some, including myself, might argue that turns the dynamic in the other direction. If GBTC is held in the custody of BNY Mellon, would the SEC still cite security concerns? Unimaginable. BNY Mellon’s brand is iconic when it comes to custodianship services in global banking. Through this core offering, BNY Mellon alone winds up touching over 20% – or more than 1 out of every 5 USD (or global currency equivalent) – throughout the entire world. That’s astounding. Keeping in mind they are the oldest bank and the oldest publicly traded company, BNY must be doing something right in custodianship services.

    Security Has Always Been Paramount in Custodian Banking

    With custodianship banking generally, security is definitely mission critical. BNY has provided this service, highly successfully, arguably longer than any other service offered by any institution. They’ve been evolving the custody banking sector since the late 1700s. Back to the SEC, if I’m looking at GBTC in the custody of BNY Mellon, I don’t see any compelling argument for security concerns. If anything, I’d see that as more of comical reasoning. The SEC could always pivot to another, more plausible concern if (when) that were to happen, but it’s still a huge win for the digital asset market – as well as BNY Mellon.

    As a final note here, the SEC is rejecting Bitcoin spot ETFs at an increasing rate, meaning applications are growing. More and more firms are attempting to get SEC-approved Bitcoin products into the marketplace. Clearly, they’re prognosticating an increase in investor demand for digital asset products and are attempting to respond accordingly. Let’s also be clear – investors and investment firms aren’t required to get SEC clearance to sell Bitcoin derivatives.

    That said, of course it’s highly preferred. In an asset class still largely plagued by uncertainty, SEC approval is an immediate, gigantic game-changer. BNY Mellon holding custody of digital assets on an in-house, BNY Mellon digital assets custody platform changes cryptocurrency market dynamics. It also likely puts cryptocurrency-specific custodians out of business, amongst other market effects. One would think it’d have to alter the SEC’s position substantially and broadly on digital assets. In turn, that should similarly substantially and broadly alter investor perception of digital assets.

    Could Anything Go Wrong?

    Always. On a more serious note, even Alexander Hamilton was famously quoted saying, “I never expect a perfect work from an imperfect man”. From my perspective, BNY Mellon is not only the biggest risk-taker here; they are the biggest by a landslide. This is a company that was founded by the first US Treasury Secretary and has only improved their initial, core offering over time. The SEC also isn’t raising concerns over security as a completely illegitimate excuse. We’ve seen Ethereum wallets hacked, viruses created to successfully steal Bitcoin, cyber-attacks against crypto exchanges, and more. BNY Mellon will have the sole responsibility to ensure none of that occurs on their watch, so to speak. What if they fail? That’s exactly the point at which this could all go terribly wrong.

    BNY Mellon built a brand with the core focus on custodian banking spanning the course of over 225 years. They are widely considered to be the most prestigious and critical institutional investment services firm in the world. Now they’ve made a major move into the digital asset space, an admittedly enticing and potentially extremely lucrative strategy. However, in banking, all it takes to bring down a reputation built over 225 years is one mistake in seconds.

    To be sure, there’s added nuance here. Digital assets are naturally going to be more susceptible to evolving technologies as digital assets themselves are an evolving technology. Cybersecurity preventability measures and the sophistication of cybersecurity attacks have both increased. In the age of digital transformation, I believe this is a correctly calculated risk for BNY Mellon.

    Extent a Momentary Error Could Hurt BNY Mellon’s Core Business

    While there can be little to no doubt a security issue coming from BNY’s digital asset custody platform would be detrimental to the company – potentially in a very large way – the same can be said for the likelihood of that instance actually bringing down what BNY’s built in over 225 years. Even if the world’s most secure custodian has a security malfunction, I don’t believe it would even impact their current business model. It may take them out of digital asset custody services – I think even that is reaching – but again, I don’t see it majorly tarnishing the brand.

    All-in-all, this is a win-win scenario, statistically speaking. Yes, something could go wrong. When this platform is ready for go-live and it’s used broadly, we’ll get a better sense of the impact. But BNY especially would not dramatically – out of character – launch a futuristic digital assets custody platform that didn’t meet the mark from a technology perspective.

    There shouldn’t be doubt BNY made budgetary concerns a main priority, or even an obstacle, of this project. The team they’ve assembled is comprised of the brightest, most experienced, innovative SME’s in their respective areas. This continuing work-in-progress originated in 2019 and is just now starting to be publicly rolled out in a significant way. BNY likely took 3 years to ensure they had capacity to build a product worthy of publicly announcing is work-in-progress. They notably take perfection seriously; I doubt many disbelieve they’re going to rollout an incredible product. Whether perfection in digital assets custody is attainable is a separate discussion, but if anyone could, it’s BNY Mellon.

  • Financial Markets Outlook Q4 2022 – Thoughts on Late September/Early October Bear Market Rally

    As the sell-off of stocks intensified into late September 2022, the S&P 500 lost all gains from the previous calendar year in September 2021. Coupled with an annual slump of 24% – the lowest since November 2020 – many were quick to point out the likelihood of a short-term bear market rally. This wasn’t (and isn’t) unjustified at all. During inflationary periods, as we entered this year by definition after two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth, current stock market trends seemed to point to a classic “bottoming out”. An asset that has “bottomed out” reached its low point and could be in the early stages of trending upward. That’s the real question most investors are asking. Given all the global financial market dynamics that have been putting downward pressure on prices, are they ready to rebound? Will it be a short-term bear market? Will there be any noticeable rebound at all? What are the chances of a long-term bear market cycle? These are all questions investors are keen on getting more insight into daily.

    How Are Financial Markets Looking for the Remainder of Q4 2022?

    Shaky and unpredictable, at best. Specifically looking back at the S&P 500 trends, October, like September, tends to be a comparatively volatile month. This is coming off a year where more than half the trading days saw movements above or below 1%, indicating high general volatility.

    Before we get to the Fed policy, let’s quickly mention something many people are overlooking; current problems plaguing the UK. When we’re talking about the general trend of global financial markets, the US and UK generally follow similar patterns. In 2008, when the US recession hit, did the UK not feel the impact too? Ominously, the UK has already been in recession for a full year. Furthermore, S&P Global is predicting a “tough winter” for EU markets. Add that to the ongoing currency crises the GBP and EUR are currently experiencing and one would not be out of line at all to believe that the UK, as well as struggling countries in the EU, will fall into an even deeper recession. Surely – if that were to happen – it would obviously not bode well for US financial markets.

    But more realistically, actions taken by the Fed regarding inflationary concerns are what investors are eyeing more closely. Let’s take a deeper look at the Fed’s policy to combat inflation and how that’s impacting financial markets.

    The Fed’s Continuously Shifting Narrative on Inflation

    It’s important to first point out the Fed’s inflation narrative and, accordingly, their policy has shifted dramatically the past year. In fact, just last year Fed officials said inflation “wouldn’t be a problem”. Shortly later, the Fed promised us it would be “transitory” inflation. Now, they’re shifting to a “soft landing” inflation for the economy, amidst hiked up rates and economic downturn. As evidence of the deflationary attempts being rejected mounts, the Fed will undoubtably continue to move the bar.

    Why is that concerning for financial markets and moreover, market participants? Generally – intuitively, this should be especially true during times of economic uncertainty – investors often look to the Fed for guidance. Meaning, the majority of market participants will react to news from the Fed in real time. Even more specifically, they’ll take a bearish or bullish position based on what the Fed is saying at that time. David Schassler, Head of Quantitative Investment Solutions for VanEck, noted the same.

    “Market participants have been slow to catch up with the party line — and that’s reflected in the wild volatility. The market has failed to recognize the threat of inflation. Unfortunately, we think the idea of a soft landing is a bit of a fairy tale, and investors can expect a lot more volatility”.
    -David Schassler, VanEck Investments
    Tweet

    But what’s more concerning is that even the Fed knows, for deflation to be successful, there also has to be a drop in demand. It doesn’t appear, nor is anyone really reporting, that there is any drop in demand. That’s starting to have – quite significant at that – ramifications on the global supply chain. Regardless of the reason – it could be the “COVID-10 lockdowns” J.P. Morgan hypothesized – at this point we know we are heading towards a global supply chain “crisis”. On top of a potentially botched deflation, we could see increased – rather than decreased – demand meet supply shortages, which would equal very rapid, upward prices until demand swings back down. Factoring back in how shaky the global economy looks at present, I think it’s extremely difficult to confidently say we’re definitely not going to have a financial crisis-like recession sometime in 2023. As many have said, time will tell.

    Conclusion for Q4 2022

    Concisely, we’re likely entering even darker waters than we’ve been in. That goes for capital markets, equities, indices, and related securities. Savvy investors will start looking at alternative investment products, while at-risk assets continue to have a negative long-term outlook. During times of financial uncertainty, investments in real estate (physical assets, more broadly) are usually a better value risk. High-value commodities, like gold, are known to do well in recessions (no, not Blockchain technology). High-value commodities such as gold in general are a quintessential hedge against a deflating dollar (USD) value.

    While we want to make it abundantly clear if there is a bear market, we expect it to be a short-term bounce back. To reiterate, the long-term macroeconomic outlook right now looks bleak. However, we also don’t want to give the incorrect impression that we are predicting a 2008-like financial collapse. Many have speculated that today’s CDOs are the mid-late 2000’s MBS products that led to the widespread 2008 financial collapse, however the comparison is a false equivalency.

    The safeguards we’ve put in place since 2008 prevent the kind of collapse we witnessed during that time. We have new volatility ratios that dual-acting (depository/investment) banks must strictly maintain. We have new regulatory reporting and compliance procedures banks have entire departments of staff dedicated to. The biggest investment banks in the world have literally thousands of dedicated employees specifically for regulatory reporting and compliance projects. My genuine belief is most active market observers understand we’re smart enough to learn from 2008 and avoid a repeat.

    However – needless to say – we’re still imperfect. With the way the global financial system now operates, there can only be winners if there are also losers. That dynamic is becoming more apparent at an upward trajectory. The biggest winners are becoming bigger (wealthier) and the biggest losers are becoming poorer. Interestingly, according to Fox, the last few recessions have statistically benefitted the “rich of the rich”.

  • Corporate Actions – Dividend Arbitrage – Cumex “Cum-Ex” Transaction Litigation

    Corporate Actions are well defined by Investopedia. A corporate action is any activity that brings material change to an organization and impacts its stakeholders, including shareholders, both common and preferred, as well as bondholders. When a publicly traded company issues a corporate action, they are initiating a process that directly affects the securities issued by that company. Therefore, the board of directors is generally always involved, with shareholder involvement sometimes even required. In the event of a major takeover possibility, for example, shareholders may be required to submit a response giving their input. After researching, it seems the most common corporate actions can be condensed into dividends, stock splits, mergers, acquisitions, and spinoffs.

    According to Institutional investor, BNY Mellon has been the largest custodian in the world for the last 8 years. Given that fact, corporate actions can be of particular interest to them. Again, due to their custodianship business, one can imagine how a poorly executed or thought-out take-over, for example, could affect not only the entire company, but furthermore spread to other very large investment institutions, brokerages, hedge funds, etc. that would otherwise be solvent.

    What is Dividend Arbitrage?

    Options traders in the tri-party repo market would also be familiar with dividend arbitrage. Dividend arbitrage is an arbitrage strategy that may seem complex, but once you break it down it’s relatively straightforward. To understand this strategy, you first need to understand an ex-dividend date. Secondly, I would point out this strategy is typically exercised by options traders. The arbitrage occurs whereby, the options trader buys both the stock and the equivalent number of put options before ex-dividend, then waits to collect the dividend before exercising his put. Let’s look at a hypothetical example to understand that better.

    FinYork stock is trading at $90 per share and is paying a $2 dividend tomorrow. A put with a striking price of $100 is selling for $11. Here, an options trader can enter a risk-less dividend arbitrage by purchasing both the stock for $9000, as well as the put for $1100, for a grand total of $10,100.

    A second, seemingly more complicated way to engage in a dividend arbitrage occurs using “covered writes”. On the day before ex-dividend date, you can do a covered write by buying the dividend paying stock, then simultaneously writing an equivalent number of “deep in-the-money” call options on it. The call strike, price plus the premiums received, should be equal or greater than the current stock price. On ex-dividend date, assuming no “assignment” takes place, you will have qualified for the dividend. While the underlying stock price will have drop by the dividend amount, the written call options will also register the same drop, since “deep-in-the-money” options have a delta of nearly 1. Then, one can sell the underlying stock, buy back the short calls at no-loss and wait to collect the dividends.

    The risk in using this strategy is that of an “early assignment” taking place before the ex-dividend date. If assigned, one would not be able to qualify for the dividends.

    Litigation Against “Cum-Ex Transactions”; A Form of Dividend Arbitrage

    There have been a number of these lawsuits now, especially civil cases, largely in Europe from my research. However, I believe the litigation has now also spilled over into US courts. From my findings, litigation against “cum-ex transactions” originated in Germany. More specifically, in 2019, in Germany it was reported over 100 banks were being investigated for “cum-ex” or “Cumex” transactions involving ‘huge volumes’ leading up to 2012. A cum-ex transaction is a complex form of dividend arbitrage or dividend stripping.

    “For the purpose of dividend arbitrage, traders in alternative tax jurisdictions trade shares around dividend dates. Cum-ex trades specifically serve as a mechanism allowing both the buyer and seller of shares to recover capital gains tax (CGT) paid only once on dividend income. The transactions involve acquiring shares ‘cum dividend’ (including dividend right) just before a dividend is due, and then selling ‘ex dividend’ (without dividend right) after the dividend record date. The various steps are processed very quickly, making it difficult to identify the true owner of the shares, thus enabling multiple parties to claim tax credits or tax compensation payments for CGT paid only once. This process often involves the original owner of the shares, the bank or broker that sells them short, and the buyer who purchases them on dividend day. It has been common for the parties to split the proceeds of the tax refunds.”
    -Yorick M Ruland, International Bar Association

    As Yorick spells out, this form of dividend arbitrage requires the involvement of corrupt shareholders and brokers alike. Considering the processes complexity and the capabilities to catch perpetrators of these financial schemes alike, many go unaccounted for. That hasn’t stopped the ones who do get caught from facing both criminal and civil penalties.

  • How CRE Investors Can Still Create Value Amidst Rising Rates

    As we’ve covered in the last couple weeks, the current trend seems to be moving towards the buyer’s direction. Rising rates and other consequences from inflation are certainly a motivating factor. However, that does not mean there is no room for the average investor to make money. This is particularly true for CRE (Commercial Real Estate) investors. There’s always money to be made in the real estate market, that is, if you’re a seasoned and skilled buyer.

    “You can’t add value to bonds — and unless you own a VC firm or you’re Warren Buffett or Elon Musk, you really can’t create value by owning stocks. Other than owning a company or a franchise, only real estate allows investors to roll up their sleeves, either physically or metaphorically, and create value in an investment.”
    -John Chang, Marcus & Millichap
    Tweet

    Not only that, but in the CRE marketplace specifically, investors have so many options. From REITs, REIGs, non-traded REIT sponsors, mini-tender offers, all the way to even direct CRE property management. The latter is what Chang illuded to in his quote above. Having a “do it yourself” attitude in real estate can allow to you avoid hiring FTE’s. Thus, you’re much more likely to have room for a positive return. What will every intelligent macroeconomist suggest to businesses when monetary policy is geared towards inflationary times, or a potential recession? Minimize business costs (Wan, CloserIQ). That applies directly to CRE investors too. If you can minimize your business cost, by acting as your own property manager for example, you are undoubtably more likely to succeed irrespective of turbulent financial times.

    With an official from the Fed quoted as saying he sees the Fed raising rates through the end of 2023, investors should prepare for a tightening economy (Saphir & Dunsmuir, Reuters). Rising prices with relatively unchanged labor market conditions. If you invest in FX, that likely means the dollar will be disadvantaged. But in CRE, as in the whole real estate asset class, positive returns are always on the table. To reiterate, investors who are willing to cut costs will make out well in a recessionary economic period.

  • Is India’s UPI (Unified Payments Interface) Technology Worth Selling Overseas and to Western Countries?

    The Unified Payments Interface (UPI) was created by the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) for purposes of “enabling digital payments and settlement systems in India, is an initiative of RBI and IBA”. As announced in Bloomberg in June 2022, the NPCI is looking to take UPI to overseas markets. This implies that a) the technology has been tested thoroughly and successfully in Indian markets and b) there is currently no real competitor to UPI in overseas markets. At one point, NPCI CEO Ritesh Shukla compared it to a “home-grown alternative to SWIFT”. For those who aren’t familiar, SWIFT is a Belgium-based cross-border payments system operator.

    Has the Product [UPI] been Thoroughly Tested in Indian Markets?

    Based on our research, yes UPI has been tested both rigorously and successfully in Indian markets.

    “We have displaced cash in India to a large extent and are now looking to repeat the success in cross-border corridors. Overseas Indians can use our rails to remit money inwards straightway into their bank accounts, and for the markets where Indians travel frequently, we will build acceptance for our instruments.”
    – NPCI CEO, Ritesh Shukla
    Tweet

    Not only has the technology behind UPI been proven and tested, but the methodology has also succeeded. At least that’s the quantitative claim Shukla’s making. The World Bank data seems to support the analysis too. Indians overseas remitted $87 billion in 2021; the biggest inflow for any country that was tracked by the World Bank.

    Under the RBI’s “Liberalized Remittance Scheme”, all resident individuals (including minors) are allowed to freely remit up to USD $250,000 per year. This is from April-March, for any permissible current or capital account transaction, or a combination of both. Further, resident individuals can avail of the foreign exchange facility, for specific purposes within the limit of USD $250,000 only. The RBI’s “Scheme” was introduced on February 4, 2004, with a limit of USD $25,000 (BusinessDesk, Bloomberg). Since then, the LRS limit has been revised in stages consistent with prevailing macro and micro economic conditions. Notably, the “Scheme” is not available to corporates, partnership firms, HUF, Trusts etc.

    Are there Any Notable Comparisons to India’s UPI Abroad (not factoring in SWIFT)?

    Of the $87 million in remittances India received in 2021, the US was the biggest source (World Bank). According to the World Bank, US remittances to India accounted for over 20% of the $87 million in 2021.

    “Flows to India (the world’s largest recipient of remittances) are expected to reach $87 billion, a gain of 4.6 per cent with the severity of COVID-19 caseloads and deaths during the second quarter (well above the global average) playing a prominent role in drawing altruistic flows (including for the purchase of oxygen tanks) to the country”.
    – World Bank Spokesperson, World Bank Migration and Development Brief, 2022
    Tweet

    In terms of total global remittances, India is followed by China, Mexico, the Philippines, and Egypt (World Bank). In India, remittances are projected to grow 3% in 2022 to $89.6 billion. This is reflective of a drop in overall migrant stock, as a large proportion of returnees from Middle Eastern countries are still awaiting return (World Bank).

    Remittances in low-and-middle-income countries are projected to have grown a strong 7.3% to reach $589 billion in 2021 (World Bank). This “return to growth” is far more robust than earlier estimates. Following the same resilience of flows in 2020, when remittances declined by only 1.7% despite a severe global recession due to COVID-19, according to estimates from the World Bank’s Migration and Development Brief. Lastly, the brief in its entirety can be found here, from the World Bank’s website.

    Outside of evaluating the micro-differences to SWIFT, there are no current notable competitors to India’s UPI we could find. Without any doubt, no possible comparisons would come close in terms of size or scale.