Poll: Which Statement Best Reflects Your Opinion on Unconstrained Bond Funds?
As interest rates continue their descent and hover near record lows, fixed-income investors are understandably nervous. Not surprisingly, they have been receptive to an alternative to traditional bond funds, which are typically vulnerable to rising interest rates.
Unconstrained, or nontraditional, bond funds have surged in popularity recently because their flexible mandates allow them to invest in a broad range of assets, including sovereign debt, bank loans, real estate, currencies, derivatives, and even stocks. Advocates are drawn to the prospect of skillful managers being able to navigate diverse markets and deliver better returns.
Critics argue that these funds are merely replacing interest rate risk with risks related to credit quality, currency fluctuations, and liquidity. Furthermore, the increased correlation to equities means these funds aren’t providing investors the counterbalance they expect from their fixed-income portfolios.
We asked CFA Institute Financial NewsBrief readers for their opinions on unconstrained bond funds. Of 679 respondents, 47% think they are poorly understood, with their risks underestimated by most investors. About 17% consider them a marketing creation that should be looked at with skepticism. The prospect of stronger returns because of the funds’ “go anywhere” mandate appeals to 15% of respondents, whereas 12% regard them as a welcome innovation for investors.
Which statement best reflects your opinion on unconstrained bond funds?
Do you want to participate in future polls? Sign up for the CFA Institute Financial NewsBrief.
If you liked this post, don’t forget to subscribe to the Enterprising Investor.
All posts are the opinion of the author. As such, they should not be construed as investment advice, nor do the opinions expressed necessarily reflect the views of CFA Institute or the author’s employer.