One of the features that sets collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) apart from other structured credit sectors is the addition of active management. Each CLO has the constant attention of a CLO manager, who can actively trade the underlying portfolio during the reinvestment period in order to maximize the value of the trust. CLO managers have different trading styles and investment strategies, which may or may not align with the interests of the investors in the deal. This differentiation requires CLO investors to analyze manager behavior and often leads to investors creating an approved list. More quantitative approaches include a variety of rankings based on portfolio risk, market execution, liquidity, manager reputation or some combination of the aforementioned factors. These rankings can then lend themselves to categorization in the form of tiering, and in the CLO world, the CLO manager universe is typically classified into three tiers.
Analytical platforms such as Intex offer plenty of data on manager behavior and analyzing this information can be a critical component for successful CLO investors. However, many investors prefer to go beyond the data and take time to meet with managers in person, either at conferences, at the manager’s office or even through Zoom, to ask pointed questions that may not be covered in typical CLO manager pitch books or investor calls. This more qualitative or personal side of manager due diligence can also affect manager tiering. With the amount of time this manager analysis takes, investors might be tempted to use a “set it and forget it” approach to their manager lists and rankings. However, this week’s chart demonstrates that manager tiering is quite dynamic and deserves a refreshed analysis on a regular basis. For those investors who lack the resources to conduct their own manager analysis internally, some Wall Street researchers, such as those at Wells Fargo, regularly publish excellent analysis and rankings on CLO managers.
At Penn Mutual Asset Management, we conduct our own internal CLO manager analysis, and part of that analysis includes a risk ranking. This risk ranking incorporates several credit metrics and gives us a feel for how much risk CLO managers are generally taking in their CLOs. We then rank and tier the managers accordingly. This week’s chart shows how the risk ranking and tiering changed from 2019 to 2020, taking into account the effects of the pandemic in recent months.
Compared to other structured credit sectors, CLOs enjoy the enhancement of active management provided by CLO managers. However, investment style and skill can vary materially between managers. This differentiation between managers lends itself to analysis, various rankings and manager tiering. However, research shows that as managers jockey for position in the CLO landscape, their risk profiles can change quite a bit over time. The dynamic nature of CLO manager behavior requires investors to regularly refresh their analysis used to rank and tier managers.
The material provided here is for informational use only. The views expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Penn Mutual Asset Management.
This material is for informational use only. The views expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Penn Mutual Asset Management. This material is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and it is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy.
Opinions and statements of financial market trends that are based on current market conditions constitute judgment of the author and are subject to change without notice. The information and opinions contained in this material are derived from sources deemed to be reliable but should not be assumed to be accurate or complete. Statements that reflect projections or expectations of future financial or economic performance of the markets may be considered forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ significantly. Any forecasts contained in this material are based on various estimates and assumptions, and there can be no assurance that such estimates or assumptions will prove accurate.
Investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information referenced in preparation of this material has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but accuracy and completeness are not guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the information and Penn Mutual Asset Management shall have no liability for decisions based upon such information.
High-Yield bonds are subject to greater fluctuations in value and risk of loss of income and principal. Investing in higher yielding, lower rated corporate bonds have a greater risk of price fluctuations and loss of principal and income than U.S. Treasury bonds and bills. Government securities offer a higher degree of safety and are guaranteed as to the timely payment of principal and interest if held to maturity.
All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. This material may not be reproduced in whole or in part in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission.