Long End of the Curve

Markets are moving into unusual territory. Over the next 6-12 months, I expect US interest rates will be cut significantly, probably more than they should be, on the back of political pressure. Jerome Powell’s speech at Jackson Hole a couple of weeks ago seems to demonstrate a more dovish Fed. These rate cuts will support equity markets if not drive them higher. For investors, it's a clear tailwind for the AI theme and growth stocks more broadly.

My concern is the combination of tariffs and artificially lower interest rates. On their own, either might be absorbed, but together they risk sparking a return of inflation. I do think this is a serious problem ahead, although it will take time for these indicators to flow through the system. At the same time, we need to overlay the deflationary effect of both AI rapidly lowering prices and reducing jobs and many countries now with declining populations. However, that deflationary effect is a longer-term story in my opinion.

The American consumer sits at the crossroads of these forces. For years, US households have surprised economists with their resilience, continuing to spend despite higher interest rates and tighter conditions. But the recent reporting results from big retailers are starting to tell a different story, that all is not well for the consumer. Rising costs from tariffs and increased uncertainty across the board are beginning to weigh on sentiment. This can easily lead to weaker business conditions.

That leads us to the labour market. Any weakening in business conditions elevates the risk that the jobs market deteriorates more quickly than people expect. If that is the case, it's plausible that the potential cuts in interest rates are in fact warranted. Interest rates may be cut to accommodate Trump's heavy-handed approach to the Federal Reserve. Though there is a potential scenario where they end up being needed, and the move will be seen as a pre-emptive stroke of genius.

So, at this point, I am alert to the prospect of inflation in the future, but I am not yet positioning our client portfolios for it. I think that would be premature. There are many forces at play that will influence the outcome. That said, the massive budget deficit and increased spending from the US government, combined with tariffs and much lower interest rates, really are all the fuel inflation needs to run away.

Although the continued rise of the share market would have you believe all is well, there is a clue for what may lie ahead in the long end of the bond market. Despite rates almost certainly coming down in the short term and Fed Chair Jerome Powell bending to pressure on rates with his dovish rhetoric, long term 30-year US bond yields are creeping up closer to 5%. That tells us that the longer-term direction of inflation and, in turn, interest rates may well be higher.

Long term bond yields are rising to multi-decade highs in many parts of the world. The US 30-year is 4.90%, the UK 30-year bonds are at 5.6%, France and Germany are at 4.49% and 3.4% respectively. Even Japan is at 3.3%. With many of these countries all facing massive deficits, the prospect of raising money to fund their budgets not only becomes more expensive, but the competition between nations for funds will push bond yields higher too. That is a discussion for another day.

So, while central banks are likely to cut interest rates over the next 6-12 months, I don’t think it will be long before inflation resurfaces. The bigger risk then isn’t simply an overheated economy with higher prices, that's painful but manageable. The real danger is inflation reemerging as the economy weakens. That’s stagflation, and it leaves government and central banks with no good options.

So, while the prospects for interest rates at Central Banks across the world are lower in the next 6-12 months, I don’t think it will be long after that inflation does rear its head again. The biggest risk I see ahead is not an overheated economy with inflation, which is painful but manageable. Rather, a far worse outcome would be for inflation to rear its head at a time when the economy is weakening despite the rate cuts. Stagflation leaves governments and central banks with no good options.

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Deflation’s Perfect Storm

The AI revolution is under way and it’s not just about ChatGPT writing emails faster or image generators producing ad campaigns overnight. Artificial intelligence is on track to become the most powerful deflationary force we’ve seen since the industrial revolution. AI is moving rapidly from new potential to infrastructure. As it progresses and becomes more integrated, it will drive down the cost of producing almost everything. Not just goods and services, but knowledge and even decision making itself. That will have massive implications for the economy and business, as well as investors in the future.  

AI’s influence will be a persistent tailwind for productivity, removing inefficiencies from business models and supply chains in every sector. Design, engineering and testing can now happen in days instead of months. Manufacturing processes can optimise themselves in real time with minimal human oversight. Customer service can operate around the clock without the cost or fatigue of human staff. This is not a theory for the future. It is already happening in parts of the economy today. The longer-term effect is lower costs across the board, bringing prices down.  

Historically, the deflationary pull of new technology has been masked by population growth, rising demand and loose monetary policy. But AI is arriving at a moment when many of the world’s major economies are entering demographic decline too. Japan has been living with it for decades. China’s population has already peaked and is set to shrink by hundreds of millions over the next 25 years. South Korea and much of Europe are heading the same way. What was once a demographic tailwind for growth is becoming a headwind. More than that, when falling demand in areas with declining populations meets rapidly falling costs, the deflationary impact will be magnified, creating the potential for a significant economic shock. 

AI will affect all industries and skill levels, from blue collar manufacturing roles to white collar professional services, through to creative work. Its reach is so broad and so fast that its impact on prices will be more profound and more global than past innovations. In industries where AI commoditises operations, margins will be compressed as competition intensifies. But there will be areas where it not only reduces costs but opens entirely new markets, and the winners will achieve extraordinary growth. These will be the businesses that use AI to create products or services that were not previously possible, or that own unique data sets that AI models depend on.  

This is where it starts to get tricky because reducing costs will translate into many job losses. We are at a point where almost everyone you talk to is starting to feel some concern about job security in the future because of AI. Either their own job or someone’s in their family. As exciting as the advancements in AI technology are for future productivity, it won’t be long before the psychological shift around job security is felt in the economy. This is not good news for an already weakening economy and job market. If fear around job security starts to become embedded in the economy, then we risk a self-fulfilling spiral downward to much higher unemployment as people slow their spending and businesses suffer. This will compound the actual impact of job losses as AI starts to scale up.  

But deflation on its own is not inherently bad. For investors and business leaders, it will create a bifurcated world where incumbents with legacy cost structures are under constant pressure, while more agile operators with lower fixed costs thrive. The challenge will be working out the sectors where AI driven deflation destroys profitability and those where it fuels entirely new growth. Major technological shifts usually create more wealth over time than they destroy, but the distribution is uneven. The opportunity is in identifying where value will emerge as costs fall, whether that’s in platforms, data ownership, or in the service companies that evolve from and around them. 

AI’s deflationary power will reshape the global economy in ways that are both exciting and uncomfortable. We’re entering an era where capital will matter more than labour, and adaptability more than scale. But its impact won’t unfold in isolation. In the decade ahead, while AI drives costs lower, we will also see demand growth slow as populations age and shrink. That convergence will be disruptive, redistributing wealth and changing the rules of competition. For investors, the winners will be those who understand that the world will be shaped almost as much by shifting demographics as by AI’s technological progress. 

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

First Mover Disadvantage

We’ve all heard of first mover advantage, the prime position earned by the company that innovated before the others. Whether it’s launching a product, claiming market share, or pioneering a new technology, being early is often equated with being better. It's what everyone aims for from company founders through to investors. But history tells a more complex story. There are plenty of examples where being first has effectively been a disadvantage. Understanding this is important for companies, but even more so for investors as they allocate capital for the long term.

What people often forget is that many new technologies, especially those that transform or create new industries, require huge amounts of capital simply to build the underlying infrastructure for the technology to scale and reach the mass market. It means that along the way many of the most exciting companies building towards the vision of mass adoption of a technology fall by the wayside, make too many mistakes or run out of money along the way.

One of the best examples of this in recent times is the rise of the internet. I remember in early 2000, as the massive hype was building, it became clear that this technology was going to be transformative. It was, but the amount of capital needed to get the industry to where it needed to go in those early days was massive. Of course, the dot-com boom helped to ensure that the capital and total investment in aggregate needed to build out the foundations of the industry were raised.

In many of the most transformative industries, from airlines to automobiles, there is a similar pattern. Where the biggest rewards often go to the later entrants. Being first means more risk, more uncertainty, and more cost. It means making many mistakes with no guarantee of a path forward. Meanwhile, fast followers are sitting back, watching, learning, and preparing to strike with better timing, better economics, and fewer mistakes.

This isn’t to say that the first movers never win. They do. But surprisingly, the success stories are the exception, not the rule. Amazon, for example, was an early mover in online retail. By the time traditional retailers caught on, Amazon had already established dominance in infrastructure, logistics, and customer trust. Similarly, Netflix made the leap from DVD rentals to streaming before anyone else was even thinking about it seriously. These companies gained scale, users, and built moats that others struggled to create.

However, there is a much longer list of first movers who never made it. Friendster came before Facebook. AltaVista came before Google. Netscape came before Chrome. Myspace came before Instagram, and Palm Pilots and Blackberry came before the iPhone. First movers have to spend more on R&D and infrastructure, educate the market at their own cost, and make the big mistakes others can learn from as part of building towards mass adoption. Conversely, fast followers can analyse what worked, avoid what didn’t, and capitalise on a more informed and receptive market.

This dynamic is even more pronounced in industries with large capital requirements and slow adoption curves. When the Wright brothers took flight at the turn of the century, they changed the course of history. But it wasn’t until decades later that air travel became a commercial business. Hundreds of airline startups burned through capital before a few major carriers found sustainable models. The same was true with automobiles. Dozens of early manufacturers came and went before Ford revolutionised production with the Model T.

Technologies like the internet, mobile networks, and AI are no different. Being first to market often means bearing the costs of infrastructure, educating consumers, navigating regulatory grey zones, and building products that may not yet have viable markets. Fast followers will have more data, more capital, and the benefit of watching early failures. In many cases, the third or fourth wave of players win by building for a world that’s finally ready.

For investors, the key takeaway is that you don’t have to find the next big thing first. You don't have to rush. You have time. Take that time to understand the industry and where it will be best to invest in the long term. While there will always be companies that garner hype and headlines as new technology emerges, you don't need to rush.

There will always be opportunities throughout the adoption cycle of a new technology. Early-stage companies may deliver great returns when they win, but they also carry immense risk. The middle of the cycle, where demand is more certain and adoption is accelerating, can be just as lucrative with less downside.

AI is a great current example. Dozens of companies are rushing to launch models, tools, and applications. Some are burning through cash just to claim a spot in the conversation. But many of the future winners may not yet exist or will emerge as the business case is clearer and the infrastructure is more robust. Investors need to be patient and remember that being early is not the same as being right.

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Inflation Cocktail

From tariffs and trade deals to his conversations with Jerome Powell or Vladimir Putin. It seems that Donald Trump has made himself the centre of attention when it comes to almost everything going on in the world. Having recently announced trade deals with Japan and the EU, it's been fascinating to watch Trump’s approach to international trade and his negotiation tactics.

Trump’s method of appearing unpredictable in escalating and de-escalating in seemingly random ways has helped land him a clear victory.  Ultimately, he’s worn everyone down to the point where countries and investors alike are happy with 15% tariffs, an outcome that just 4 months ago was sending markets into a meltdown. In effect, markets just want the issue solved so everyone can move on. The psychology here is interesting.

So, in a matter of months, Trump has delivered his ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ and set the framework for redefining international trade. The next stop for Trump is getting interest rates lower. But while Trump’s deal making may well prove to be a masterstroke for the US economy in the short term, the road ahead is more precariously positioned.

He’s made no secret of his desire for lower interest rates in the US. He’s demanding lower rates from the Fed to create cheaper debt and stimulate investment in the US. He’s also made it clear that the independence of the Federal Reserve is a lower priority than getting rates lower. This is a problem in many ways, but how it will alter the landscape for markets and investors in the years ahead is particularly concerning.

Trump is pushing for interest rates to drop to around 1%. He wants to reduce the short-term cost for the US to borrow the trillions of dollars they need each year to fund their deficits. But history tells monetary policy is a balancing act. If you raise rates too high, you risk choking growth. If you cut them too low and you overheat the economy.

The interplay between tariffs, deficits, and interest rates is where the risks multiply. Tariffs are already pushing consumer prices higher, while Trump’s fiscal policies are injecting more money into the economy. If interest rates are forced lower than is prudent, the risk is that inflationary pressures re-emerge far sooner than expected.

For investors, the near term picture looks positive, and markets usually celebrate rate cuts. Share markets may very well continue to rally in 2025 on the expectation of cheaper borrowing and a softer Fed stance. But the outlook beyond that is less comfortable. Artificially low rates, combined with structural deficits and tariffs, create a setup where inflation could return with force. This would push bond yields higher and potentially lead to more volatile equity markets.

While Trump’s current policies might deliver short-term economic momentum, they are potentially sowing the seeds of a more complex and unstable environment ahead. So, as share markets react positively to the prospects of much lower interest rates in the months ahead, investors should keep in mind the prospect of inflation reemerging next.

General Advice Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Car Wars - The Battle Ahead

There is an interesting battlefield emerging in the race to control the next big tech device. Apple saw it coming but shut their project down. Elon Musk was in the lead for a while with Tesla. But it is China who is clearly emerging as the massive winner.

I'm talking about cars.

The humble motor vehicle has been transformed from an analogue machine into the most critical new connected device, combining computers with sensors, microphones, cameras, and remote software controls. Whoever controls this industry will not only shape the future of transport but potentially the future of national security and geopolitics.

China’s BYD is forging ahead with incredible pace, surpassing Tesla in sales and rapidly scaling globally. With more than 4 million vehicles sold in 2024 and a growing foothold in export markets, BYD is forecast to become the world’s leading car manufacturer by the early 2030’s. According to an article in the Australian Financial Review recently, Chinese car brands are projected to account for 43% of vehicle imports into Australia by 2035, up from 17% today.

This is not business as usual. It will be a very different competitive landscape that emerges. The motor vehicle industry has traditionally been fragmented with dozens of manufacturers across continents. But electric vehicles, with their centralised software, battery platforms and connectivity ecosystems, more closely resemble the technology industry in my view. It’s more likely that a handful of dominant players emerge, in a similar way to Apple and Samsung with smartphones or Uber and DiDi in rideshare, to capture the entire market once scale is achieved.

Winning this race isn’t just about cars. It's the future of logistics, automation and surveillance. Modern EVs are rolling data centres. They collect real time geolocation, driving behaviour, voice data and have over the air software update capabilities. In the next decade these vehicles will form the backbone of supply chains, autonomous freight, drone deliver coordination, and potentially military logistics.

This is playing out against the backdrop of deepening US-China tensions. It’s important to be mindful that, despite the noise in the short term around tariffs and trade, the long-term trajectory is economic decoupling and the growing risk of open conflict, be it economic, cyber or military. The recent Microsoft hack, widely attributed to Chinese state backed organisations, highlights how fragile the relationship remains and that these are ongoing risks.

As tensions escalate, Western nations will need to make a decision. Do they continue importing Chinese EVs and risk systemic vulnerability or ban them outright for national security. Regardless of their price or popularity, the risk will simply be too high.

We’ve already seen a preview of this with TikTok. Initially dismissed as a harmless social media app, it has become a flashpoint in debates over data sovereignty and foreign influence. Cars are far more integrated into critical infrastructure. If governments are concerned about a Chinese app on teenagers’ phones, they should be far more concerned about a Chinese operating system embedded in the national transport network.

If China controls this infrastructure in rival nations it creates the potential for coercion, disruption and outright sabotage. Its today's version of controlling the oil supply. Imagine a future where western nations logistics networks are powered by Chinese made electric vehicles, all run on software built and updated in Shenzhen. A single firmware change could bring entire sectors of the economy to a halt. It is a massive strategic risk that is already being embedded in countries around the world.

This is a modern day Trojan Horse. We are welcoming low cost, high tech vehicles into our homes, businesses, and transport systems. These are devices that could one day be switched off, surveilled, or potentially weaponised.

Western carmakers are years behind and without a coordinated industrial strategy, similar to what China has executed for the past decade, there’s a real risk of not being able to catch up. This isn’t a trade issue. It’s not about emissions or consumer choice. It’s about sovereignty. It’s about control. We need to understand that the motor vehicles of the future are not consumer products, but critical infrastructure.

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Unchartered Territory

As I watched markets such as 30-year US and UK Treasuries plummet on Wednesday night it was becoming clear that if Trump followed through as publicly proposed something in the global economy would soon break. It was concerning because without a pause or some kind of intervention, an economic or financial catastrophe was brewing. Whether it was part of his plan or due to pressure from within the Republican Party, he paused and provided the circuit breaker the market needed. It still appears to me, as I outlined last week, that there are two parts to this. It is negotiation in the short term and a strategic repositioning of the US in the long term.

While many are calling Trump pausing most tariffs for 90 days a ‘backflip’ I expect this was part of the plan. Push as hard as you can and at the point at which it looks like something in the system might break hit pause. One of Trump’s advantages in negotiations is his perceived unpredictability. I'm not sure his tactics are a great way to run a country or create stability but purely from a negotiation standpoint it’s effective. The world cheered as he hit pause but in one fell swoop, he set the minimum and maximum parameters and deadline for each country ahead of negotiations.

I'm not pro or anti-Trump in this view; I’m simply looking at it as objectively as I can. My observation is that the anti-Trump camp tends to underestimate him while his supporters tend to overestimate him. I pay attention to what he says and does but also what he doesn't say and do. There are patterns and a method to his madness. He uses hyperbole and misinformation to his advantage, and it keeps people uncertain, so they don’t know what to expect and can't get comfortable. You don’t know if he’s telling the truth or bluffing. You can’t be sure about anything. But that is how he negotiates. All of this gives him control of the negotiation.

With many moving parts to digest and many variables we either don't yet know or don’t know how they will interact. On top of all that at any moment the situation can change, and the goalposts can move. Trump could decide without warning to remove or exempt a country from tariffs. He could extend or truncate the pause in tariffs. Central Banks around the world could start dropping interest rates. The outcome of the escalating trade war between the USA and China will be pivotal. China could adjust its currency or retaliate in an unexpected manner. We don’t know which countries will retaliate, compromise or give in. At any point, there are weaknesses within the global economy or financial markets and these developments can apply additional stress.

There are mixed views on how this all plays out for the global economy. While tariffs are inflationary, they are also likely to negatively impact economic growth. Central banks will soon have to make a very tough choice to make. Do they raise interest rates to fight inflation and potentially destroy the economy or do they cut interest rates to save it and risk adding fuel to the inflationary fire? Unless inflation is running out of control, I believe that a slowing economy will be seen as the biggest pain point, and in the face of an economic slowdown Central Banks will choose to cut interest rates to stimulate the economy and deal with the consequences of high inflation later. There is a long way to go, and patience is key to taking advantage of opportunities as they unfold.

Vladimir Lenin famously said, “There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen.” As this situation continues to unfold and eight decades of trade agreements are upended, it appears that this is one of those times. This is all unchartered territory. I watched an interview with the legendary investor and founder of Oaktree Capital, Howard Marks where he said this is the most significant change he has seen in his illustrious 5-decade career. When someone held in such high esteem in the investment world makes a comment like that, it’s worth being mindful that this is a significant moment that should not be underestimated.

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

The Art of the Tariff

There are a few layers to the tariff conversation that are worth elaborating on given the recent ‘Liberation Day’ tariff announcements and the subsequent share market reaction. Firstly, there's no scenario where you introduce tariffs, and it directly results in better global growth. This is not a positive for the global economic outlook. The share market and company share prices are falling because the prospect of sustained tariffs and potential trade wars are negative for economic growth and business conditions. Investors are no longer under the illusion that Trump is just posturing.

By applying tariffs across the board, he has laid the foundation for every country to effectively renegotiate their existing deals on his behalf and make a better offer. So, in the first instance that is an efficient way to conduct a bulk negotiation. Much simpler than going from country to country one at a time. The tone has been set. Some countries are more in need of the US than others and more amenable to doing a deal. I expect those countries to be rewarded and highlighted to set the tone. Others will simply be opportunistic. Those who retaliate will be penalised.

His policies are changing the shape of global alliances. Europe understands that they can no longer rely on the US and will massively boost defence spending. When there is someone else to do the heavy lifting others will happily take a step back. But once there is not then they become surprisingly capable. So, Europe will be okay with or without the US. The implications here are far reaching and bring into question the USA’s willingness to help allies who have always assumed that they have the US protection if needed. That extends to Australia too.

Prioritising the USA’s national security is more real than ever. The initial phase of the decoupling from China in the USA supply chain saw a range of nations such as Vietnam benefiting. Suddenly imports from China fell and the US was importing more from Vietnam. It looked like the risks in the supply chain were being addressed. But simultaneously Vietnam was importing more from China. There was merely an extra link added to the chain not a new chain. The aggressive tariffs on placed like Vietnam indicate that the US is not only aware of this but very serious about genuinely decoupling from China.

Part of the complication is that the tariffs create far reaching implications across every aspect of the global economy. It will take some time for the consequences to be understood and for the second and third order effects to flow through. These areas range from manufacturing and jobs in the US to the redirection of investment capital across the world. There will be impacts on interest rates, inflation and consumer sentiment. I have concerns about stagflation in the US as this plays out.

The rise of anti-USA sentiment across the world will have an economic impact too.  Travel from Canada to the US is down 70% since the introduction of tariff talks. Will Canadians stop buying US cars like Fords and Teslas? Quite possibly. But will the rest of the world stop buying McDonalds or Coca-Cola? Will they stop using Facebook or Microsoft? I think that is unlikely. However, investors need to consider the implications of all these issues on a case-by-case basis.

Trump’s approach is all about extracting better trade outcomes for the USA in the short term and national security and strategically positioning the USA in the long term. This is all about the USA and the USA’s position in the world in the years ahead. The Trump Administration is clearly of the view that where a country benefits from engaging with the US economy then there is a price to pay to participate. When it comes to defence rightly or wrongly, this is also their attitude. As Winston Churchill once said of the US back in World War II “You can always rely on the USA to do the right thing after they have tried everything else."

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Are your dreams big enough?

I remember many years ago when I was a kid sitting around the dinner table and the family discussion turned to what you would do if you won $1m on lotto. It was always fun imagining what we would do with our newfound fortune. We were talking about buying houses, going on a holiday, selecting a new car, and giving money to our closest family and friends.

But after some quick calculations, it was clear there was not much imaginary lotto money left. Suddenly we were reducing the amount we were giving to family and friends, getting a cheaper car and scaling back the holidays. There was a major problem, but it was not a financial one. It was clear to me that even in our dreams of winning the lottery we had self-imposed financial limits.

I remember saying to mum and dad, “Why don’t we just pretend we won $5m or $10m?” Everyone stopped for a minute and recalibrated. We were rich again now and there was more than enough to go around. That conversation stuck with me for the rest of my life and had a profound effect on my mindset. It was a great insight into the way people limit themselves. It made me realise that if people think like that when they dream, how limiting must their thinking and expectations be in everyday life?

Admittedly, Australia often isn’t the best place to cultivate big ambitious thinking. Tall Poppy Syndrome is alive and well. We love it when people have a go but not when people get too big for their boots. We like people to do well but not too well. I guess it's why we are the ‘lucky country’ and not the ‘massively ambitious overachieving country.’

Too often people with big dreams are discouraged by well-meaning family and friends who haven’t succeeded in achieving their dreams. We limit ourselves to smaller goals because they are more acceptable. If our goals are big, we feel self-conscious about sharing them. I think we learn that at an early age and stop dreaming big and eventually forget how.

For any young people out there, if you have a big dream go for it. But don’t waste time. Don’t get caught up in talking about it. Pursue your dream relentlessly until you make it happen. Don’t do it to impress anyone or do it for anyone but you. Life is too short to spend chasing a goal for someone else.

For any older people out there, if you have a big dream, what’s stopping you? It’s easy to become shackled within the confines of everyday life, especially once you have kids and responsibilities. But life is short and there is no better time than now to start planning to do what you’ve always wanted to do. Find a way to start working on it now so you don’t regret it later.

So next time you hear someone talk about a crazy big dream that makes you raise your eyebrows, why not take a moment to wish them well and remind them to go all in and enjoy the journey ahead. It might just be the encouragement they need at the right time to help them, on their way to becoming the next champion athlete or business success story.

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

What’s Your Plan?

One of the most fascinating parts of my job is meeting people who have accumulated wealth over many years, often without even realising they were doing it. High-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) and families usually have a cornerstone asset or business that provided the cash flow to fund additional investments over time. But in many cases, they never sat down and mapped out a grand plan. Instead, they bought assets here and there, sometimes opportunistically, sometimes out of necessity, and before they knew it, they had built significant wealth.

When it comes time to think about the future, especially retirement, many people aren’t quite sure how their assets should be structured to provide an income. More often than not, something triggers the need for a serious conversation: an asset sale, a divorce, an inheritance. Whatever the catalyst, the process doesn’t need to be overwhelming. You are where you are today, and you want to ensure your wealth supports you in the years ahead. The key is to put a clear, strategic plan in place to make that happen.

Getting the Right Structures in Place

Structuring wealth correctly is essential, but it’s not as complicated as many people assume. Most families I work with have a mix of entities — companies, family trusts, and self-managed super funds (SMSFs). This is where collaboration with accountants is critical to ensure everything is set up correctly from the start. The right structure depends on several factors, but tax efficiency and asset protection are almost always top priorities.

Superannuation, for instance, is often misunderstood. I hear people ask whether super is a good investment, but the truth is, super is just a vehicle, it’s not the investment itself. The real advantage of super lies in the tax treatment: a 15% tax rate while accumulating assets and a 0% tax rate when converted to a pension in retirement. That’s an incredibly effective place to build long-term wealth.

The Often Overlooked Area: Estate Planning

One of the trickiest but most important conversations I have with clients is about estate planning and asset protection. No one likes thinking about their mortality, and as a result, too many people put off making a proper plan. But I’ve seen firsthand the impact of not having these conversations — family disputes, contested wills, unnecessary legal battles.

It’s not always as simple as writing a will. Families can be complicated, and if you have multiple entities or trusts, getting proper legal advice is essential. Every family has its dynamics — whether it’s a vulnerable adult child or concerns about a son or daughter-in-law who might not have the best intentions. The right structures, including trusts and other protective mechanisms, can ensure that your wealth is passed down as you intended, without unnecessary risk.

Looking Ahead: Projecting Your Financial Future

A big part of what I do is helping people project their financial position into the future. That could mean forecasting where they’ll be at retirement or estimating their financial situation in their later years. It’s a simple equation, understanding the assets and liabilities today, projecting income and expenses, and then mapping out how that looks over time.

For example, if you have an investment portfolio spread across cash, bonds, shares, and property, it might generate an income of 4-5% per year, plus capital growth. If you’ve accumulated $5 million in assets, that equates to an income of $200,000-$250,000 per year. With $10 million, it’s between $400,000-$500,000 per year. Ideally, you want enough exposure to growth assets so that your wealth keeps pace with inflation, or better yet, exceeds it.

The Final Piece: Investment Strategy

Once we have the structures in place and a clear understanding of future financial needs, the final step is shaping an investment strategy that aligns with your risk profile and long-term goals. This isn’t about chasing the latest market trend, it’s about building a well-diversified portfolio that provides both stability and growth. The goal is simple: to give you confidence in your financial future, knowing that your wealth is working for you.

Planning ahead isn’t just about protecting what you’ve built, it’s about making sure your money continues to support the life you want to live, now and into the future. If you haven’t thought about your long-term strategy yet, there’s no better time to start.

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

The Rationale of Buying and Selling

Investing is as much about making sound decisions when buying assets as it is about knowing when to sell. At the core of successful portfolio management lies the principle of diversification and the allocation of capital to investments across asset classes and within those classes. As assets grow at different rates, it's critical to manage your portfolio proactively to adjust the exposures to sectors and investments.  

Asset allocation is a critical part of portfolio management. A well-diversified portfolio will include a mix of growth-oriented assets such as property and stocks and defensive assets like fixed interest bonds, hybrid securities, term deposits, and cash. Then there is diversification within each of the asset classes. Most of our long-term client portfolios will hold 15-20 Australian stocks and a similar number of international stocks. This broad exposure helps to mitigate risk while optimising potential returns. 

If a portfolio is set up to have 70% exposure to growth assets and 30% to defensive assets as the growth assets increase over time the growth defensive split will skew high. Left unchecked you end up with the growth assets being a much higher percentage of the portfolio. It's critical to adjust these weightings periodically to ensure that you don't inadvertently end up with a greater exposure to higher risk assets than you intended to or than is prudent. This also applies to the levels of exposure to each asset class and the specific investments within asset classes, such as when an individual stock grows to become a larger part of the portfolio than is prudent.  

A common conversation I have with clients, especially now as stocks have performed so strongly, is around the timing and rationale of selling to take profits and rebalance the portfolio and then identifying entry points for new investments. If a stock's price has increased significantly faster than its profits, it might be an opportunity to lock in profit, reduce your exposure to the stock and reallocate funds to undervalued investments. The market can often overreact, pushing prices beyond reasonable levels. Selling gradually, or "averaging out," helps manage this risk and ensures gains are locked in while leaving room for further upside as you keep the bulk of the holding.  

A good example of this currently is the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA). Over the past year, its share price climbed from $105 to $160, even as its profits fell slightly. There is a disconnect between the share price increase and CBA’s profit growth. Many investors now have an overweight position in CBA and the banking sector. I think it’s prudent to take some profit as the price rises well beyond the stocks fair value. In many cases we’ve sold small amounts for clients at $150 a share and again at $160. This approach retains the bulk of the holding while strategically reducing exposure to an overvalued asset. If the CBA share price goes higher in the short term, I am happy to continue selling incrementally knowing that we’ve prudently derisked and reinvested in better value assets elsewhere.  

Once profits are realised, the next step is reinvesting. This could mean allocating to another asset class, depending on the portfolio's overall balance, or investing in undervalued companies. Opportunities often lie in overlooked or neglected stocks trading below their fair value. While buying into such companies can be challenging, it’s essential to remain focused on their underlying value rather than current market sentiment. Both buying and selling should follow a measured approach. Investing incrementally allows you to spread risk, especially when markets are high and corrections are more likely. Similarly, gradually selling ensures you benefit from further gains while locking in profits. This disciplined strategy prevents overreactions to short-term market movements, both up and down, and aligns with a fundamental long-term investment philosophy. 

Managing a portfolio is a dynamic process that requires balancing opportunities with prudence. Whether it's reallocating capital from overvalued stocks or identifying undervalued opportunities, the goal is always the same: to manage money in the most efficient and effective way possible. By staying disciplined—buying low and selling high—you can navigate the complexities of the market while maintaining a robust and resilient portfolio. 

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Head in the Sand

There are dozens of different types of risks and biases that investors need to consider when making investment decisions. Some such as market risk, concentration risk, credit risk, liquidity risk and time horizon risk are easier to quantify and are well understood. Others such as recency bias, confirmation bias and herd mentality are more nuanced and require some self-reflection to mitigate or offset their impact.

Share markets have been kind to investors over the past several months, and our portfolios have enjoyed solid returns on the back of this. However, the recent buoyancy in share markets has not changed my underlying cautiousness regarding the risks that investors face. I still think the world is precariously placed, even though the share market doesn’t seem particularly concerned now. Wars can escalate, inflation may not be over, the list goes on.

Investors have become complacent and seem to ignore any potential for bad news. Rather than factor in risks more conservatively, the share market has taken an attitude that everything is great until it has been proven that it is not. This binary thinking isn’t very smart because it doesn’t account for the reality that there are indeed risks that exist with varying degrees of probability. These risks need to be factored in.

To make the math simple, let’s imagine there are 2 separate global events, event A and event B. Let’s further assume each event has a 50% probability of occurring in the next 12 months and would result in a 20% decline in the share market. Based on the probability of each of the 2 events happening, the following outlines the combination of possible outcomes and their probabilities of occurring:

1.      25% chance that neither event A nor event B occur.

2.      50% chance that either event A or event B occurs.

3.      25% chance that both event A and event B occur.

Unfortunately, investment markets often misprice event risk. Perhaps it is due to complacency or the intangible nature of assessing risk. Nevertheless, in the absence of an event occurring, the default assessment of these risks by investors in the current market seems to be to ignore it until it happens.

This might turn out to be ok in the 25% chance where neither of the 2 events occurred. But that results in a mispricing of risk until that point because there was a 75% chance of a negative outcome whereby at least one of the events occurs. If the events do occur markets need to adjust much more aggressively. In the basic scenario I outlined above, there is a 50% chance that one or the other event occurs, resulting in a 20% fall. While there is also a 25% chance that both events occur leading to a much larger fall in the share market.

In reality, there are many risks at play of varying probability and consequence. But in today’s complex geopolitical and global economic environment, where there are many more event risks than usual, the prudent assessment of risk is imperative. It’s critical to think differently and ensure you don’t get caught up in the herd mentality as markets throw caution to the wind. Consider the way various biases impact your thinking and assessment of risk.

So, while investment markets and many investors seem to have taken a head in the sand approach to considering these risks, I am happy to carefully consider them. It means that we continue to take profit from time to time as share markets go ever higher. We want to be prepared for the day when one or more of these events do occur because eventually, they will.


General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.