- ALM & Regulatory Capital Strategist
United Kingdom, Intermediary
Change
The views expressed are those of the author at the time of writing. Other teams may hold different views and make different investment decisions. The value of your investment may become worth more or less than at the time of original investment. While any third-party data used is considered reliable, its accuracy is not guaranteed. For professional, institutional, or accredited investors only.
Is it time for insurers to embrace tactical credit allocation?
Against a new environment of higher inflation, greater volatility and lower liquidity, insurers may wish to consider whether their current approach to credit provides enough flexibility to capture tactical opportunities.
Our research shows that with careful guardrails and both top-down and bottom-up analyses, introducing a tactical credit approach has the potential to enhance returns without meaningfully impacting risk levels or capital requirements.
How a tactical approach to credit could benefit insurers now
Unlike the past 20 to 30 years, there is now a clear trade-off between growth and inflation. Since the global financial crisis, central banks have generally acted to suppress volatility; moving forward, they are more likely to act to generate it. This will create more volatility going into and out of market cycles and cause a greater number of dislocations within global credit markets, such as mispricings or idiosyncratic spread-widening events, which may create tactical opportunities for credit investors.
Credit plays a critical role for insurance balance sheets, especially in the investment-grade category, which has historically offered steady income with relatively low default rates. The asset class often benefits from low turnover in portfolios as well as favourable accounting treatment, both factors that limit the impact of price volatility.
Insurers typically steer their credit exposures through their strategic asset allocation. As a portfolio strategy, setting a strategic asset allocation achieves three key goals for insurers: firstly, it identifies long-term investment opportunities; secondly, it ensures that overall risk is consistent with the insurers’ risk appetites; and thirdly, it provides reassurance that capital is deployed efficiently.
However, the long-term nature of strategic asset allocations itself means portfolios are unable to accommodate swift changes that might arise from unexpected events, such as a pandemic, or from market dislocations. This makes it difficult to fine-tune credit exposure up or down promptly, which limits the amount of income that insurers can generate, which in turn can impact shareholders’ return on equity.
Assessing the opportunity: from theory to practice
Given our belief that the new macro regime calls for a greater use of tactical allocation in credit, we decided to analyse the impact of adding a tactical approach to a typical insurance credit portfolio. Our case study tested various scenarios using quantitative methods. The results: a positive impact on income of between +0.1% to +0.5% per annum and an increase on return on equity of between +0.5% and +2% per annum. Crucially, our proposal preserves the philosophy and goals underpinning insurers’ strategic asset allocations: low probability of incurring credit losses, limited profit and loss volatility, and minimal capital consumption.
Step 1: identifying a tactical opportunity
We started our analysis by creating an initial credit portfolio based on a European insurer’s typical allocation (Figure 1). The next step was to evaluate whether amending any of these characteristics could potentially improve on the return, risk profile and capital requirements of the initial portfolio. Once we identified this potential opportunity, we tested it under multiple conditions and evaluated the results.
Figure 1
Step 2: selecting an appropriate high-yield exposure
We identified credit quality as a variable that could make the credit strategy enhance returns without introducing excessive incremental risk or capital required. Based on this variable, we tested the possibility of creating a new credit strategy by tactically adding high-yield exposure when the opportunity arose. We focused on the segment of the high-yield spectrum adjacent to the initial credit portfolio: BB-rated, with maturities of between one and three years.
It was important to establish a process to determine when to introduce the tactical component (Figures 3 and 4). To do so, we relied on our quantitative assessment of relative credit valuation, meaning that the expected spread return for the new credit strategy, taking credit losses into account, had to exceed that of the initial portfolio by a certain margin, which for our example was 2%. When that hurdle was cleared, we allowed a 10% allocation of the initial portfolio to the high-yield assets identified above. These values can be customised, based on individual insurers’ risk preferences.
As Figure 2 shows, both returns and volatility from spreads in these high-yield bonds are normally above those in the initial portfolio. However, there is only a small difference in Solvency II capital requirements between the initial portfolio and the new high-yield exposure.
Figure 2
Step 3: assessing the results
To evaluate the results, we needed to answer a key question: does introducing a tactical component to the credit strategy help improve returns without adversely effecting other characteristics? We tested the tactical approach under different assumptions. By backtesting both portfolios using historical data, we evaluated the results on an absolute basis (Figure 3) and relative to their capital requirements (Figure 4).
Key conclusion 1 — The results show that based on historical data and simulated past performance over 15 years, the portfolio with the new credit strategy would have generated around 15 basis points (bps) of incremental return with comparable risk, on an absolute basis. This corresponds to an increase in income of about 7% through profit and loss.
Figure 3
Key conclusion 2 — Relative to capital requirements, the average return on equity increases by 152 bps, with volatility largely unchanged.
Figure 4
Key conclusion 3 — The turnover from introducing this kind of tactical approach was minimal; in the simulation period the average turnover was 14%, which is comfortably below the 50% specified for the initial portfolio.1
Final considerations
The case study demonstrates the potential benefits of including a tactical component within a strategic credit investment while adhering to the typical restrictions and goals of insurers. Our goal was to show that increasing credit flexibility does not necessarily entail increasing risk. In conducting our study, we prioritised risk control, focusing on lower risk segments of the credit market, such as short duration, and carefully selecting our high-yield exposure. However, starting points, new exposures and constraints all can be customised to accommodate different risk preferences and balance sheet configurations.
It is important to note that the only source of increased return in our example is asset allocation, which understates the size of the potential income enhancements. In practice, by leveraging a fundamental approach, in addition to the quantitative one employed in our example, the portfolio could generate additional income from sector, issuer and security selection.
Successfully capitalising on tactical opportunities requires rigorous and timely analysis. But insurers who look to employ a tactical allocation to credit (on top of their strategic allocation) may find their approach enhanced in an environment of higher volatility, lower liquidity and wider bid-ask spreads.
1Forward-looking statements should not be considered as guarantees or predictions of future events. Past results are not a reliable indicator of future results. Holdings vary and there is no guarantee that a portfolio has held or will continue to hold any of the securities listed.
Important information
The hypothetical performance referenced above is based upon the firm’s backtest of the model portfolio applying the following assumptions. The model was created out of the universe of US corporate credit rated BBB 3 – 5 years for investment grade and US high yield rated BB 1 – 3 years for high yield. The model was rebalanced monthly. Turnover was not constrained. The model used in the backtest is proprietary and intended to estimate expected returns from credit over a 12-month horizon. Some assumptions were made for modelling purposes and may not be repeated. Changes in assumptions may have a material impact on the simulated returns presented. The performance period for the model was chosen based on availability of data and is deemed to be long enough to reflect performance over several cycles. Other periods selected would have different results, including losses. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Actual performance may differ substantially from the hypothetical backtested performance presented. Live portfolios are constructed using specific securities and are subject to transaction costs. In our model, we have not considered transaction costs which might overstate the outperformance of the model over the market. We have not considered any additional returns that might arise from security selection. We believe these two effects offset each other and that the backtest is an accurate reflection of what a live strategy would have delivered.
Except where indicated, simulated performance results are gross of commissions and other direct expenses, advisory fees, custody charges, withholding taxes, and other indirect expenses. If all expenses were reflected, the performance shown would have been lower.
Expert
Related insights
Showing
of
Insights Posts
Battle for the supply side of the economy: US election implications
Continue reading
5
min
Article
2025-04-30
URL References
Related Insights
Stay up to date with the latest market insights and our point of view.
Related Insights
Showing
of
Insights Posts
Weekly Market Update
What do you need to know about the markets this week? Tune in to Paul Skinner's weekly market update for the lowdown on where the markets are and what investors should keep their eye on this week.
4
min
Video
2025-12-31
Bonds in brief: making sense of the macro — March issue
What's driving global bond markets and what are the investment implications? Read the latest "Bonds in brief" for Wellington Investment Director Marco Giordano's monthly assessment of risks and opportunities within bond markets.
4
min
Article
2025-04-30
Battle for the supply side of the economy: US election implications
Starkly different policy agendas from Biden and Trump are examined in terms of how they may affect the supply side of the US economy.
5
min
Article
2025-04-30
Four questions for investors after Japan’s historic hike
With the Bank of Japan having finally moved out of negative rates, Macro Strategist John Butler identifies the four key questions he believes investors should focus on.
5
min
Article
2025-04-30
Do fundamentals support a risk-on tilt?
Surprisingly strong economic growth, declining inflation, easy financial conditions — can it get any better for markets? Members of our Investment Strategy & Solutions Group offer their outlook, including their latest views on equities, bonds, and commodities.
Article
2025-03-31
FOMC: Stable policy amid market volatility
The Fed is holding steady amid market turmoil. See our quick notes on the FOMC's March policy statement, forecasts, and the Fed chair's press conference.
Quick Take
2025-03-31
Agency MBS key questions for 2024
Is there room for mortgage spreads to tighten further? Brian Conroy and Joseph Marvan examine this and seven other questions that will be significant for the agency MBS market in 2024.
Quick Take
2025-03-31
Is there opportunity for high yield in today’s new economic era?
Is there opportunity for high yield in today’s new economic era? Portfolio Manager Konstantin Leidman explores.
Article
2025-03-31
The Trump/Biden rematch: Market implications of unprecedented policy divergence
Macro Strategist Juhi Dhawan discusses six key areas of policy debate in this year's US election that she expects will matter most to markets, from the tax and spending plans to trade and geopolitics.
Article
2025-03-31
Is the US economy really that different since COVID?
US economists have been touting the resilience of the post-COVID economic rebound. Brij Khurana dissects several key economic indicators to see what's really changed since 2019.
Article
2025-03-31
URL References
Related Insights
Monthly Market Snapshot — February 2024
A monthly update on equity, fixed income, currency, and commodity markets.
By
Brett Hinds
Jameson Dunn