The collapse of several banks has heightened recession risk nd is likely to lead to tighter credit conditions for both businesses and consumers. Nanette Abuhoff Jacobson returns to the podcast and shares her thoughts on inflation, a looming recession, and how central banks around the world are grappling with the same issues.

Julie I have to laugh. What a beginning to 2023. Right? We, we came off a year everybody was ready to forget from an investment standpoint in 2022 and boom, right out of the shoots we’re like, good, that’s behind us. January was great. Then February hit, then SVB roll on down the pike and the banking systems in trouble. And it always seems like there’s something. But in the midst of that, you and I had a conversation about checking our financial statements at the end of the month and going, Wow, where did that number come? Oh my gosh, Savings accounts in money markets are actually paying real money again. So, like, there’s all these things going on right now, you felt the same way?

Oh, absolutely. I feel like I’m just hoping for a boring day. Just one, is all I would take at this point, because there is so much excitement and so many moving parts. And frankly, it’s kind of hard to put all the pieces together right now.

Well, and I think for for financial professionals, one of the hardest things to do, but one of the most important things to do is set proper expectations in the minds of our clients. Right? And I don’t mean trying to predict exactly what’s going to happen, but conditioning them for the long run. Right. Trying to lengthen that time horizon. But I think that every time we talk to Nanette Abuhoff Jacobson from Wellington, our chief investment strategist, I think she really gives us some great perspective in order to set those expectations.

I couldn’t agree more. She although her crystal ball is murky like the rest of ours has so many great ideas to share for looking forward on the 6 to 12 month time horizon and just thinking about this logically in what the opportunities are out there.

So, Julie, for folks who have never spoken to Nanette or heard her speak, why don’t you tell our audience a little bit about her?

Nanette Abuhoff Jacobson is the managing director and multi-asset strategist at Wellington Management Company and global investment strategist for Hartford Funds. With more than 25 years of experience in the capital markets. Nanette has held a variety of roles spanning the major asset classes as the global investment strategist for Hartford Funds. She analyzes and interprets markets and investment opportunities for the mutual funds that are sub advised by Wellington Management and shares those views with Hartford Funds Sales Organization, the financial professional community and major broker dealers and distributors. She also advises Wellington Management’s institutional clients, including pension funds, insurance companies, endowments and foundations and central banks consulting on strategic asset allocation issues to develop multiasset investment solutions.

So now we invite you in to listen to a conversation that Julie and I recently had with Nanette about where she believes the markets stand at this point in 2023.

Hi, I’m John.

And I’m Julie.

We’re the hosts of the Hartford Funds Human-Centric Investing Podcast.

Every other week, we’re talking with inspiring thought leaders to hear their best ideas for how you can transform your relationships with your clients.

Let’s go.

Welcome back to the Human-Centric Investing Podcast. Nanette, we’re so happy to have you here with us today.

It’s a pleasure to be here, Julie.

So now I know that, you know, the world has grappled over the past month or so with the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. And I think as Americans, certainly as investors, sometimes we want to kind of box up these crises and say they’re behind us.

But I guess a two part question. One is, is are the problems associated with Silicon Valley Bank, those similar problems? Are they really over or and secondly, how has the whole kind of banking disruption has it changed anything as we go forward in from your standpoint?

Well, thanks, John, for the question. And I do think that there’s a lot of mystery surrounding what happened to the banks and why those banks, Why not other banks? So I’ll try to explain the way I see it. I think that there were certain unique features of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, and most of that related to the percentage of uninsured deposits. There were well over the FDIC limit of 250,000. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of their deposits were uninsured. So that was a particularly unique part of the story of the banks that failed. However, I would also say that there are certain common features of what’s going on in those banks as well as other banks, and that is this mismatch in assets and liabilities. The fact that these banks, you know, they have invested in treasuries and mortgage backed securities, and those are much longer in maturity than deposits, deposits, you know you can go to your bank and pull out your deposits, you know, with your banking app. So that mismatch is probably common to many, many banks. But what the Federal Reserve did was really impactful because they extended liquidity to any bank to prevent what happened to SVP and Signature, which was, you know, a good old fashioned run on the bank. I would also say that, you know, what makes these things possible is the fact that you do we all have the banking app where we can withdraw money with a click of our fingers on our phones. And of course, social media plays a part, too, because rumors get alarming Headlines can move across the Internet in a split second. So I think those are just parts of modern society that we just have to remember. You know, that said, looking at the situation today, I think that a crisis has been averted. But we do think this is going to have an impact on the U.S. economy. And the impact is that we’ve seen deposits l eave the the smaller banks and go into bigger banks. And when you have less deposits, you lend less. So if every bank starts to lend less, that’s going to slow economic activity. And that’s what we think is going to happen regardless of whether there’s another bank that collapses. We do think credit is going to slow and U.S. growth will slow.

It’s so interesting Nanette when you have one data point, I think often we as humans then start to relate that to experiences we’ve had in the past. And we all have vivid memories of the financial crisis and how bad things got and how quickly that happened. And obviously this isn’t the first bank failure that we’ve experienced. I mean, if

you reflect back to the savings and loan crisis in the eighties and nineties, I mean, 32% of savings and loan associations failed, which is just a mind boggling and staggering number to even think about. But what’s interesting is if we think about those and maybe separate what’s happening today in our minds, could you talk to us a little bit today about some of the similarities and maybe more importantly, the differences between this crisis and what we’re experiencing right now versus bank failures and crises of the past?

Yeah, sure. You know I mean, the what’s most vivid in my memory is the financial crisis in 2008 and 200 7 and eight. And I do think that it’s quite different because what we were dealing with in the financial crisis were exotic structured credit products that were levered. They had a lot of leverage in them. They were based on subprime borrowers. So borrowers and housing that was kind of rated higher by the rating agencies than they were in reality. And then the banks were much more levered than they are today, too. So what you had is just so many like a web of connections through the financial system when it turned out that those subprime loans were going bad. And that just rippled through the financial system. So here we’re dealing with very simple instruments. We’re just we’re dealing with an asset liability mismatch. But the assets are not, you know, exotic, funky, structured credit. It’s mortgages and government bonds, you know, the most plain vanilla, highest rated assets. So I think today what makes it the situation is much simpler than it was in 08, 09. And the you know, to cure it, the Federal Reserve said, okay, we’re not going to mark to market those assets. We’re going to say that your treasuries and mortgage backed securities, full faith and credit of the government, and we’re going to give you full credit. Not, you know, not we’re not going to take into consideration the losses and we will let you lend against that collateral at its full value. Well, that was just a huge, huge plus for liquidity and gave depositors confidence that if they wanted to withdraw their money, they could. So I do think it’s quite a bit simpler and straightforward. But as I said, I think there is a but in that banks are going to be much more cautious when they lend because they also don’t know what kind of regulation is going to come down the pike. You’ll remember that in 2018, the rule that required banks of smaller banks to have the same capital requirements as bigger banks that was rolled back. And so banks only if you were a bank with $250 billion in assets or higher, were you subject to that rule? So SBP signature these banks had under that amount of assets, which is still big, and they did not have to abide by that capital rules. So I think that is going to be one of the changes that comes through. But the banks, of course, they don’t know what change that will be. As a result, it it’ll make them more cautious about lending.

Well, Nanette as I as I heard your comments there, it kind of makes me think that when you think of how much the world has changed with the ability to transact electronically with social media, as you mentioned, probably kind of putting gas on the flames of of potential bank run, so on, so forth, maybe the rules that they wrote decades ago don’t apply anymore. Maybe it’s with good reason they’re relooking at some of these things.

Yeah, well, what we and I guess what we always say in markets is regulators are always curing the past problems. They they have a complete inability to look forward.

Well, let’s talk about looking forward for a second with another venerable institution, the Federal Reserve. So as if the Fed weren’t in a tight spot before SVB. Right. Trying to walk the line between economic growth and taming inflation now you have banks coming under pressure because of the rate hike scenario. I guess the question

Yeah, I think, you know, we have to put this in perspective. I, I called the last three months macro madness because we have had such a change in views about where the world is going and where the global economy is going. You know, if you remember, we entered the year, you know, feeling pretty good about growth and Europe was doing better, China was doing better. And the Fed opened the door to hiking 50 basis points in March. So then we had these two bank failures and then Credit Suisse also, you know, being taken over by UBS. And, you know, the whole world changed. So now the market is pricing in about 100 basis points of cuts by the end of January in 2024.

Wow.

So And you know, the Fed. They certainly did not hike rates in March by 50 basis points. They hiked them by a smaller 25 basis points. And now everyone’s debating what’s going to happen in May. I, I think I think it doesn’t really matter. Let’s say they do 25 basis points because inflation is still high. So I think they want to, you know, continue to have their inflation fighting credentials. But the reality is that they’re closer to the end of hiking. And whether it’s one more hike or no more hikes, we’re pretty much at the end. So the question is then what? After May, then what? And the market, as I said, is pricing in multiple cuts, 100 basis points of cuts. I don’t know whether, you know, the Fed is in and you alluded to this, John, they’re really in a tight spot because not only do they have a dilemma choosing between growth or inflation, which one are they going to fight? They have what some have called a trilemma, which is which do they fight? Growth, inflation or financial instability? And the Fed showed their cards right. They were very quick to act to preserve financial stability. The problem with that is that they may be sowing the seeds once again of inflation by adding so much liquidity into the system.

So at this point in time, the risk would be that the Fed doesn’t cut what the market is anticipating or and they stay higher for longer or even raise from here. Or the other risk is maybe they cut deeper. Who knows who has a crystal ball. But it’s interesting. I guess the the message is closer to the end than the beginning, which is probably good news for most people.

Yeah, I think that’s what the markets think. What I’m just I’m hearing a little bit of uncertainty into this equation because if the Fed does immediately pivot, which I don’t think they will, but if they start cutting rates, we’re going to be exactly in the same inflationary environment that we’ve been in. And instead of inflation going down, it’s going to go back up again and then we’re going to be looking at hikes again. So it’s just not a straightforward picture at all. And I think the Fed’s got its work cut out for for them.

Well, I think what the word trilemma probably says it all when you think about that. But, you know, Nanette when I’ve been talking with financial professionals and their teams, I’ve been calling 2023 the year of Re. And what I mean by that is restoring team bonds, reengaging with clients and and maybe recycling processes or systems that worked pre-pandemic that we need to bring back to the forefront. But there’s also that other re word out there recession. And so maybe this is crystal ball time once again we’ll hold you to this. Of course not but thinking about you know, the year ahead, what are your thoughts on a recession? Will the US go into one? And if so, well are we looking at something that’s mild, moderate or severe in your opinion?

Yeah. So I, I sort of set the foundation for what my views are. I do think that the central nervous system of the economy is lending, and lending is kind of the you know oxygen to the blood supply of business activity and consumer activity. If you want to open a store or you want to do a home renovation or buy a house, it’s all based on borrowing. And if banks are pulling back from lending, that’s going to slow business and consumer activity. So that’s my premise. And we as a firm at Wellington do think that the likelihood of recession has gone up and we’re looking at recession within the next 12 months. I think that you know in terms of modest or severe recession, we’re calling for a modest recession, but that still has big implications for markets, for earnings, for spreads. And so we are you know, we are we’re not like super bearish, but we are recommending a slightly defensive posture in portfolios.

So that if I could get a little bit more granular on equities for a moment, you know, 2022, it didn’t matter where you were equities or fixed income, it was no fun.

Yeah, I think it’s a particularly tough question because if we’re headed for recession, there is an argument to be made for favoring growth. Growth has been following and when I say that, I’m really talking about the tech sector. You know, interest rates have been a really important part of driving tech with ten year yields going down. That has really been highly correlated to tech stocks doing well and vice versa.

2022 we saw ten year yields rise. We got to around 4% and tech stocks got completely hammered and and growth as well, value way outperformed. So going forward, you know I think that there are reasons longer term for value to have some persistent outperformance. But clearly over the short term, I mean, if we are looking at recession, slower growth, lower yields, it’s going to be tough. I mean, growth could outperform in that environment. Longer term, though, I’m looking at valuations, I’m looking at the persistence of higher inflation, which is really a different regime than we’ve been in the past. And from that perspective, and then, you know, also just supply demand imbalances in commodities, the fact that the green transition is going to favor materials, infrastructure, you know, more economically sensitive areas of the market. So longer term, I’m still in the value camp, but short term, it’s going to be more touch and go.

And it even seems shorter term that, you know, when we read the headlines, you’re starting to see that downsizing is happening in the tech sector. Right. And that I wouldn’t say they’re necessarily truing up to where they need to be, but certainly they’re making some economic adjustments in their business model. Wouldn’t you agree?

Yeah, that’s a really interesting point. John there talked about efficiency and we’ve seen the layoffs. I would say, though, that they are not done normalizing back to the growth rates that we should be looking at. Remember that these companies so overinvested people right. CapEx during the pandemic, you know, and have they right sized yet? Well, they’ve done a little bit, but I would say that there is still going to be earnings pressure on these companies and particularly outside of the mega caps. You know, that’s one story. But if you look at smaller tech companies, they are really getting

squeezed. And actually those companies have done very poorly. They have not been lifted by the mega caps. So you have to be really careful which companies you choose. But I would say generally they are going to still have to adjust their at very lofty valuations. And I think there’s downside on the earnings side.

I think it’s a really good point that we have to take the long term perspective to think about where many of these companies came from. To your point about investment and perhaps over investment over the years.

It’s interesting then that let’s maybe shift gears into international versus

U.S. stocks. And as we know, international has underperformed the U.S. for over a decade. But maybe some signs of life are starting to come about as it as it pertains to international stocks. They’re still cheaper than U.S. stocks. But again, that’s nothing new either. What in your mind and from your perspective would be some compelling reasons to invest internationally right now beyond just the valuations?

Yeah, no, that’s a great question, Julie, because you’ve been listening to my webcast too long and you know that valuations do not drive performance sometimes, not even over the long term. But you know, there’s certainly it’s certainly one ingredient that I look at. But, you know, you need a catalyst, I would say, for valuations to correct or to mean revert. So what is the story for international? You know, I think that. On the banking front. European banks. A positive is that the capital requirements have been very strong and you don’t have this inconsistency within the banking sector. Some banks don’t have to meet those capital standards the way you have in the U.S.. But that said, we did see Credit Suisse come under pressure. So obviously, investors are looking for weak links in the financial system. I think that. What Europe has going for it is certainly the decline in energy prices is a big support as well as China reopening because Europe is a big trading partner of China. Still, we prefer Japan to Europe. And the reason is that inflation in the eurozone is running higher than in the United States. And so we think the ECB is really not nearly done. We just talked about the Fed being almost done and the ECB is not done. So the you know, I think the tension there is just if the ECB has to continue to tighten, that’s that’s going to tighten financial conditions. And really isn’t that great for for the equity market. So that’s where we see the tension there. What we like and we’re we think they’ll be a stealth performer is Japan equities. Here policy is you know, the big debate is is the Bank of Japan going to let go of the cap on ten year yields? They’re clearly not doing that yet, even though they have a new BOJ, Governor. And it looks as though ten year JGB yields have come down. So they’re not under any pressure by the market to raise that cap. And there are a lot of really good structural things happening in Japan, the labor force, whereas our participation rate in the states is below where it was pre-pandemic. In Japan, they’ve increased the participation rate in the labor force by getting women back into the labor force. And now women, their participation is higher than all 38 OECD countries, which is quite a remarkable statistic. So there’s that. There’s the fact that inflation just isn’t as bad for Japan as it is in other regions. And of course, valuations are very attractive in Japan. The other area and I don’t know if we’re going to talk about emerging markets, but the other high conviction view that we have is on China. I’ll stop there for now because I’m sure you have follow up questions on that area.

No, I think that’s a I think that’s a good place to transition to Nanette because we came off a period where China was experiencing, you know, some of the most challenging economic conditions they’ve had in a while, let alone the COVID lockdown, so on, so forth. We know that, you know, the headlines tell us China’s reemerging. We know they’ve got some demographic headwinds. But where where does

China stand, in your view? And, you know, when we talk about a potential recession in the United States, is is strength in China enough to overcome that for emerging markets economies?

Yeah, no, it’s a great question. And I want to clarify that my view is a 12 month view when I talk about China and all of these recommendations or with a 12 month view in mind. And I think there are good reasons for skeptics out there who think, you know, China is much more of a state interventionist, that the government is applying more and more control to the economy, to companies, to sectors. I agree with all that. So I think there are, you know, and I think it requires a bigger risk premium if you’re thinking about long term. That said, over the next year, I do think there’s a big reopening opportunity in China, and the reopening is really being led by the consumer. We’re tracking subway ridership in China and it’s just off the charts. You know, people are moving around, they’re shopping, they’re traveling. And so the engine of this China reopening will be with Chinese consumers. And we have above consensus projection for GDP growth. So that’s a non consensus view. We think China will be stronger than the consensus thinks. And even the real estate market is really showing signs of bottoming. So, so optimistic that Chinese equities will stage a comeback. And of course, that’s going to have really positive ripple effects on other parts of Asia. So, you know, the way economies work is they’re very much in proximity. So emerging markets, Asia, I’m talking about South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, you know, all these countries, Vietnam. Malaysia, Indonesia. They all benefit from a Chinese recovery, not the least of which is tourism to those countries like Thailand, for instance, and even Japan. You know that 25% of Japan’s tourism comes from Chinese tourists. So they’re going to get a benefit from that, too. You know, we’ve done some work on looking at China’s correlation to global equities. And interestingly, China beats to a different drummer. China’s correlation is very low relative to other equity markets.

Appreciate that. Thanks.

Are there any other opportunities outside of China and Asia that you see in the next 6 to 12 months, even amongst the possibility of our deteriorating economic conditions?

Yeah, well, I’m a fan of fixed income these days. I have you know, I’ve been talking about the ten year yield staying in a range. And we’ve gone back and forth. We’ve seen the most volatility I’ve ever seen these past you know month or so, especially in the two year. But even on the ten year, we’re at around three and a half percent ten year yields. And of course, with the backdrop of the US recession, that really does imply the ten year yield could rally from here. And so I see several positives for the ten year. One is the yields. The absolute yields is fairly attractive. Number two is that I think the diversification benefits of fixed income relative to equities will come back to the fore. And if equities do poorly, fixed income will do well. And then finally, is the chance for capital appreciation if we are headed for slower growth. I’m fairly confident that ten year yields are not going to be a three and a half percent. They’ll be lower. So, you know, I think high quality fixed income could be government bonds, could be investment grade corporates, municipal bonds. These are all high quality proxies that that asset allocators and investors can use to express that view.

So Nanette I know you talked to a lot of advisors and about their investors, and so have advisors out there wondering, you know, what should I be

counseling my my investors about even from a setting the right expectations And what I have in mind, you just mentioned about volatility, right? Nothing drives our clients crazy like volatility. My guess is from what you said, we shouldn’t expect a letup any time soon. But would you agree that in volatility there’s also opportunity?

Oh, absolutely. You know, we have you know, there are different types of volatility. Too much volatility is not, you know, is very unsettling. And so when we saw that on March 8th and ninth this year, I do think, though, that what happens when you have a spike in volatility is that, you know, sellers can be completely undiscriminating and they throw the baby out with the bathwater to use a terrible expression. But what it means is that rather than thinking through which company is better than another, they just discount the whole lot. And I do think that whether you’re looking at regional differences in equity markets or within sectors differences, what we really want to look for are quality balance sheets, earnings, resilience, because inflation is still a problem. And and debt, of course, and the companies with the most free cash flow and most cash are going to be able to weather any environment that we foresee. So, you know, when active management has actually been proving itself recently. Active managers have outperformed. And I think that’s testament to the fact that active management can still add value.

Well, Nanette, we kind of got to hit you with a lightning round of economic questions there. But now we get to the favorite part of that, Julie and I, in terms of what we do on the podcast, this is that human-centric investing podcast and what we like to do towards the end of our episodes is ask our guest what we call a number of lightning round questions, which are top of the mind questions, kind of of a personal nature, just to help our listeners learn a little bit about a little bit more about Nanette, who she is, and kind of how she thinks. So if your game, Julie and I are going to start to pepper you with some more questions.

Absolutely. Go for it.

Go ahead Julie, you start.

Okay. So this is one of my favorites. On a scale of 1 to 10 Nanette how good of a driver are you? Right out the shoot.

AHH HAHA I think I’m a pretty good driver. I mean, I, I, you know, I love driving and it’s a shame that they don’t make manual shift cars for. I mean, it’s very hard to find a manual shift car. And I at least I used to be able to drive one. I don’t know if I can anymore, but even on my little I have an Audi A3. It’s such a peppy car and you can shift it to a manual transmission. It’s fake, but I do it anyway. And I love doing it.

Any more than that. I don’t know about you, but I can’t even find the stick shifters in some of these cars where they, you know, they put them on dials and buttons and everything else. So, you know.

So what I’d.

Like to know are a scale of 1 to 10. Where did you come out on that one?

Oh, I don’t know. I’m not going to.

We’re not letting you off easily.

We’ll make it an eight. How about that?

Nobody has been below a seven yet.

Just I don’t know that my husband would agree, but.

John she’ll answer any question about the economy. But she won’t rate herself on driving.

I love it.

How about are you a morning person or a night owl?

Morning person all the way. Oh, my God. Yeah, Yeah. No, I. In fact, I try. Someone gave me this advice. Try to schedule your, you know, most important thinking meetings or thinking time when you have the most energy and you’re most alert.

So I actually try to follow that and schedule my day to the extent I can so that I could be, you know, that my my mind is more acute in the morning then, you know, as as the day goes goes on.

I think that’s so smart tapping into your natural strengths, right, and leveraging those. I think that’s so smart. I love that advice. Yeah. So what is the best age?

Oh, that the question ends there. I thought the best age to. You know, I like my current age, which I will not share. But I, I think, you know, it’s kind of all part of mindfulness, like to appreciate the now. And I will tell you that I’m more comfortable in my own skin now than I have ever been. And I think that, you know, you can project that in a work environment and social environments, You know, as you know, and I do a lot of music on the side and, you know, even in performing situations there, I, I just I just feel more confident. It took a lot of years to get there. But but for anyone watching, you have that to look forward to. But if you can accelerate the process and I would say and just realize what your strengths are and embrace them and you know, and realize you have just a lot to offer people, I think, you know, that that would help us all project more confident and truly be more confident.

Now. That’s awesome. So here’s my question, which would be, would you rather binge a TV show or watch a movie?

Oh. That’s a good one. I’m going to say. Oh, I don’t know. I think. I think. Watch a movie. Mm hmm. Because I like the idea of going on a journey within a specified time frame. And for the arc of the story to complete in a satisfying way. I don’t know about you, but how many Netflix series have you seen where they either you can’t get through the 12 seasons or you get through them and you’re like, what exactly?

Too many.

Or you get through the first six and you go, Where is this going? But you wind up watching the last six as you’re already invested.

Yeah, Yeah. So I think I think I go with movie.

Would you rather travel to the past or into the future?

Oh, my. I guess I’m a little nostalgic for the past. I see my kids and all the things they worry about. You know, getting a job. The climate. Crime, homelessness, I mean, just so many things and so. Yeah. So like, you know, I think there I feel like maybe there wasn’t, but I feel like there may have been I don’t know when I’d have to figure out when that would be, because, of course, every time has its troubles. But that’s my that’s my initial reaction.

Nanette, that we know how busy you are. So we really appreciate you coming on the podcast today. But in connection with that paper to do list or digital tool to help you track your to dos.

Oh, I am. I have paper to do list. I’m digital, everything else. But I don’t know if I don’t see it like on a piece of paper, it doesn’t get done. Plus the satisfaction of crossing it off my list with a pen is just something you cannot replace with, you know, word.

I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been known to add the item to my list after I’ve done it, even if it wasn’t on the list just so I can have the satisfaction. So I’m right there with you. Well, one of my other favorite questions. Are you a dark chocolate or a milk chocolate fan? Really important information.

Oh that’s easy, totally dark chocolate. I could go up to 90% is a little too much, but I every night I eat 85% dark chocolate. The higher the cocoa content, the better.

And Nanette to round out our questions today. Question Julie and I are always very interested in. Are there any causes or charitable organizations, things that are kind of on the top of your list? What drives Nanette in terms of, you know, meaning and purpose, even outside of our day to day work jobs?

Well, thank you for asking me the question, John. I am passionate about one particular cause, which is mental health. And I am a member of the board of the Brookline Community Mental Health Center here in my hometown in Brookline, Massachusetts. Brookline, Massachusetts. And their mission is to provide affordable mental health care to the community and beyond. As you know, mental health has over the decades carried quite a stigma. It’s not something you can see, which makes it very hard to diagnose and to carry with you. Fortunately, the stigma, I think, is being broken down. And sadly, we all know that since COVID, the mental health crisis in the United States and frankly all over the world has just skyrocketed. I am most concerned about teens and kids. And I you know, when I think that it’s it’s a very tough problem. And we know anxiety and depression is almost at epidemic levels. So so I think it’s really important. I really think it needs to be held at the same status as any other medical issue. And I hope that we get the service providers, the clinicians, which were at an extreme. I think there’s a shortage actually, of 55,000 social workers right now compared to the demand for care. So it’s a big, big problem. And yeah, I really am dedicating myself to that cause to the extent I’ve got time.

Right. Yeah. Appreciate you sharing.

Yes. Thank you, Nanette. And thank you. We appreciate everything you do for us here at Hartford Funds. And in the limited time that you have to be able to give back to this really important cause. And I could barely sleep last night because we have a surprise that we would like to share with you today. And I love surprises, but in honor of May being Mental Health Awareness Month, we at Hartford Funds are going to donate all of the proceeds from our upcoming Hartford Funds Golf outing to Brookline in honor of all of the work that you do. So we wanted to share. That with you today.

OH MY GOD! wow. That is unbelievable.

Yeah. It’s great to be able to all pull on the same oar. And we we wholeheartedly agree that in our communities, mental health is really something many of us have had family members, friends impacted, and really Nanette it’s the least we could do. And so thanks for making us aware of your passion and we certainly look forward to supporting you in return.

Well, I am eternally grateful. This is really a surprise. My gosh and I know the Brookline Center will just be completely flawed, floored by by this. So thank you so much from the bottom of my heart.

Absolutely. We’re delighted to be able to do it. And for those listening today, if you’re interested in hearing more about Nanette’s views and ideas for the future, please visit Hartford Funds dot com. She just recently wrote an article called Onto the Next Crisis Glimpsing a Post SVB World. Thank you again, Nanette, for being here with us today.

My pleasure and thank you, John and Julie. It’s always fun talking to you.

Thanks for listening to the Hartford Funds Human-Centric Investing Podcast. If you’d like to tune in for more episodes, don’t forget to subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and follow us on LinkedIn.

Twitter, or YouTube.

And if you’d like to be a guest and share your best ideas for transforming client relationships, email us at guest booking at Hartford Funds dot com. We’d love to hear from you.

Talk to you soon.

Investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. Foreign investments may be more volatile and less liquid than U.S. investments and are subject to the risk of currency fluctuations and adverse political, economic and regulatory developments. These risks may be greater, and include additional risks, for investments in emerging markets • Different investment styles may go in and out of favor, which may cause underperformance to the broader stock market. • Fixed income security risks include credit, liquidity, call, duration, and interest-rate risk. As interest rates rise, bond prices generally fall. • Municipal securities may be adversely impacted by state/local, political, economic, or market conditions. Although municipal securities are generally exempt from federal income taxes, investors may be subject to the federal Alternative Minimum Tax as well as state and local income taxes. Capital gains, if any, are taxable. • Diversification does not ensure a profit or protect against a loss in declining market.

The views expressed here are those of the guest. They should not be construed as investment advice. They are based on available information and are subject to change without notice. Portfolio positioning is at the discretion of the individual portfolio management teams; individual portfolio management teams and different fund sub-advisers may hold different views, and may make different investment decisions for different clients or portfolios. This material and/or its contents are current as of the time of writing and may not be reproduced or distributed in whole or in part, for any purpose, without the express written consent of Wellington Management or Hartford Funds.