Lazard Emerging Markets Debt
Transcription
Lazard Emerging Markets Debt
Lazard Emerging Markets Debt 11/14 Platform Review Performance Summary as of 30 November 2014 (All data in US dollars; %, unless otherwise noted) Benchmark-Aware Strategies Annualized 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years Since Inception (1 December 2010) 8.66 9.40 2.52 8.38 7.83 9.97 10.53 2.44 7.36 6.93 -50 -131 -113 +8 +102 +90 Emerging Markets Debt – Local Debt -1.36 0.97 0.43 -2.48 2.45 2.70 JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index -1.31 0.22 -0.33 -3.46 1.62 1.93 -5 +75 +76 +98 +83 +77 1 Month YTD Emerging Markets Debt – Core -0.41 JPMorgan EMBI Global Diversified Index 0.09 Excess Return (bps) Excess Return (bps) Since Inception (1 October 2011) Emerging Markets Debt – Blend -0.76 3.90 4.11 -0.09 5.64 6.40 50% JPM EMBI Global Diversified/50% JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified Index -0.61 5.03 5.01 -0.51 4.52 5.17 -15 -113 -90 +42 +112 +123 Excess Return (bps) Benchmark-Unaware Strategies Emerging Markets Debt – Total Return Since Inception (1 December 2010) -0.48 5.46 5.74 3.10 6.22 5.33 Since Inception (1 November 2011) Emerging Markets Debt – Corporate -1.50 3.15 3.83 1.35 6.21 5.41 Performance is preliminary and presented gross of fees. The performance quoted represents past performance. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Please refer to the Important Information section for a brief description of each composite. Outlook The single largest event that affected emerging markets returns in November was the collapse in oil prices (9% declines for the near-term Brent contract) leading up to the OPEC meeting at month-end. Unfortunately (for emerging markets countries), there was no announcement of an oil production cut by the cartel, resulting in commodity prices continuing their free fall in the last calendar days of the month. While emerging markets analysts are sorting the bodies (Russia, Venezuela, Nigeria, Ecuador, Angola, Ghana, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Colombia, Mexico) from the recent oil price crash, it is important to stay ahead of the market in what is likely to be a historic stimulus announcement at the 22 January 2015 European Central Bank (ECB) meeting. Key to that meeting will be the magnitude of stimulus announced, the form it will take, and the likely effect on emerging markets debt assets. The rest of this outlook addresses those key topics. First, it is important to define quantitative easing (QE), why it is used, and the history of this financial weapon since the onslaught of the global financial crisis. QE has come to be RD12170 known as the purchase of securities by a central bank in an attempt to stimulate domestic demand. It has only been used as a last resort, when central banks have already cut overnight rates to near zero (also known as the zero bound). The implementation of QE is relatively rudimentary; essentially the central bank “prints money” and uses those funds to purchase securities from financial institutions or public markets. Those financial institutions receive cash for their securities and, in effect, the monetary base of the economy increases. The hoped-for side-effects of this policy are numerous: (a) with liquid cash instead of sometimes hard-to-sell securities, banks will choose to increase lending which will increase the velocity of money, (b) if QE involves the purchase by the central bank of long-term risk-free securities, it will depress long-term yields and, in effect, will boost asset prices through a lower discount rate, (c) if QE involves the purchase of risk securities by the central bank, it will boost the value of those securities and hopefully trigger “animal spirits” which in turn will trigger growth in investments and perhaps even increases in inflation. 2 ended commitment to purchase $85 billion a month of both MBS and long-term US Treasury bonds until labor market conditions improved in the United States. Spread over the span of nearly two years, this equated to just over $1.5 trillion of additional stimulus, resulting in the largest QE to date. Exhibit 1 Quantitative Easing Has Significantly Increased the US Monetary Base ($T) 4.5 QE2 3.0 Operation Twist QE3 QE1 1.5 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 As of 3 December 2014 Source: Bloomberg (US Monetary Base ARDIMONY) In the United States, QE was first introduced in late 2008 in an attempt to ease policy significantly, given that the US Federal Reserve had reached its lower bound of 0.25% on the federal funds target rate. QE1 was directed to thaw the then-frozen real estate lending market; the Fed announced the purchase of $600 billion of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) as its instrument of choice (Exhibit 1). The Fed later (in 2009) expanded QE1 to buy more MBS in addition to $300 billion of short-term US Treasury bonds. In 2010–2011, the Fed rolled out QE2, which served a different purpose; namely the suppression of the longer-end of the US Treasury curve through the purchase of $600 billion of long-term Treasury bonds. The hope was that asset prices would increase via a lower discount rate, which would boost spending and inflation. In 2011, the Fed aimed to further suppress the long-term risk-free yield curve through the purchase of another $400 billion (later extended to $627 billion) of long-term US Treasury bonds. However, this time it was done in a monetary base-neutral manner by selling an equal number of short-term bonds (hence the moniker “Operation Twist”). Given that there wasn’t any monetary base impact from this move, its effect was more muted than the rest of the QE attempts. Finally, in late 2012, the Fed rolled out an open- European QE has been discussed in markets since the global financial crisis, but the lack of legal jurisprudence to implement this policy has held the ECB back. That began to change when Chairman Draghi became the head of the ECB in November 2011. Draghi has proven to be more forceful then his predecessor (Chairman Trichet) and more willing to use (or talk about) experimental monetary policy to achieve the central bank’s goals. In the 6 November 2014 ECB meeting, Draghi talked about expanding the ECB’s balance sheet by a factor of approximately €1 trillion. This was notable because the only European securities market with a volume large enough to achieve this goal is the roughly €8.7 trillion sovereign bond market. Later, on 21 November 2014, Draghi gave a speech reminiscent to his “anything to save the euro zone” speech from 2012 in which he left open all monetary options. The disease that Dr. Draghi is trying to cure is two-fold: first, persistently-low levels of inflation and second, declining manufacturing and service indicators across core Europe. To solve both, stimulus is needed, and likely includes more than just the purchases of risk-free securities (i.e. German Bunds). Instead, Draghi will need to roll out a large (€1 trillion certainly qualifies) program that hopefully is openended in duration, but one that significantly boosts animal spirits and which hopefully manifests into higher inflation expectations. The next obvious question is: what is the effect of a large, perhaps open-ended, sovereign buying program by the ECB on emerging markets assets? To answer this, we divide the emerging markets assets into their requisite parts (US dollar-denominated debt, US dollardenominated high yield debt, local currency debt, emerging markets currency, and the euro itself). Rather than use factor models to determine outcomes, we believe that the past is prologue and the very same results from QE3 (the most similar type of US-led quantitative easing) will likely repeat (Exhibit 2). External debt markets are likely to rally on any credible announcement of European QE, with the riskier part Exhibit 2 QE3 Led to an External Debt Rally EM External Debt Returns post QE3 (Index +3.5% vs. HY Index +5.3%) 860 680 +3.5% +5.3% 835 665 EMBIGD 810 650 EMBIGD HY 785 635 760 620 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sept 2012 Oct 2012 Jul 2012 As of 3 December 2014 Source: Bloomberg and J.P. Morgan (JP Morgan EMBIGD Index and HY sub-component; July 2012–October 2012) Aug 2012 Sept 2012 Oct 2012 3 Exhibit 3 Emerging Markets Currency Appreciation Will Drive a Local Debt Market Rally EM Local Returns post QE3 (Index +3.2% vs. EMFX Index +2.5%) 98 312 +3.2% 306 96 +2.5% JPM GBI-EMGD JPM EMCI 300 94 294 92 288 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sept 2012 Jul 2012 Oct 2012 Aug 2012 Sept 2012 Oct 2012 As of 3 December 2014 Source: Bloomberg and J.P. Morgan (JP Morgan GBI-EMGD Index and JP Morgan JPEMCI Index; July 2012–October 2012) (high yield) of the asset class outperforming. The rally will likely be a result of market forecasters increasing expected GDP growth rates in Europe and hence higher growth rates for emerging markets countries that trade with the continent. The mark-to-market moves from the past have tended to be rapid, with most gains realized within the first six weeks after stimulus. Local debt markets are also likely to rally, but emerging markets currencies will make up the bulk of the return. Note that in the example of QE3, the foreign currency spot rally was the dominant move versus muted returns from rates (Exhibit 3). Also notable in a likely currency rally is the quicker speed that the rally occurs (about twice as fast as external debt). Emerging markets currencies are likely to rally, once again, due to the pass-through effect of the hope of stronger European growth. As has been noted in our previous monthly platform reviews, emerging markets exports (in aggregate) are roughly equal to those of the euro zone and the United States. Hence, what is good for European growth is good for emerging markets exports, which is good for emerging markets currencies. It is important to note, however, a key distinction between potential easing in Europe versus what has been tried repeatedly in the United States. Because the emerging markets local debt index is denominated in US dollars (and not in euros), one must adjust returns for any potential euro/US dollar depreciation that is likely to occur due to added stimulus. In the case of QE3, the host country’s currency (defined by the location of QE) tends to depreciate versus trading partners, as the market recognizes such monetary policy action to be another form of easing. As such, because this likely easing will occur in Europe, we expect the euro to depreciate against the US dollar, thus mitigating some of the strong local index returns shown in previous graphs (Exhibit 4). In recent history, we have witnessed significant depreciation of the Japanese yen (-10% in five weeks) after Japan’s surprise QE announcement on 31 October 2014. The net result of a credible, sizable stimulus by the ECB in the first quarter of 2015 will likely be a strong, higher push for risk assets in the three to six weeks after such announcement. In addition, given Draghi’s modus operandi of hinting at future policy action, we believe Exhibit 4 A Weak Euro May Dampen Strong Local Index Returns EUR/USD Spot Rate EUR/USD Spot Rate post QE3 (+4.4%) 1.32 +4.4% 1.28 1.24 1.20 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sept 2012 Oct 2012 As of 3 December 2014 Source: Bloomberg (EUR/USD spot rate; July 2012–October 2012) that emerging markets assets will begin to rally prior to the meeting date. We must caution, however, that the addition of external and local risk to capture these potential positive returns is purely a tactical shift in our strategies that is unlikely to persist for more than one quarter. Rather, history has proven the short-lived longevity of monetary stimulus, and the first round typically leads to follow-on attempts in the quarters and years ahead. As such, we intend to add local debt across the multi-asset class portfolios in the weeks leading up to what we believe will be a strong European stimulus announcement; the form of local market buys will likely be heavily weighted to foreign currencies versus bonds, and when possible, will be hedged with shorts against the euro. We will likely focus the additional currency exposure on non-Euro bloc currencies and high-beta emerging markets currencies. In external debt, we intend to add exposure to Euro bloc sovereigns, in addition to maintaining current large positions in high yield sovereign and corporate emerging markets debt. 4 Strategy Positioning and Performance Core negative return being entirely due to currency depreciation (-2.6%). Duration exposure contributed positively to the index’s performance as yields generally declined thanks to lower inflation expectations. The Lazard Emerging Markets Debt – Core strategy underperformed the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Diversified Index in November. Even though index returns were essentially flat, November saw a widening of spreads as a confluence of negative factors affected many emerging markets. For the first time since February, the index spread crossed the 300 basis point (bps) threshold, ending the month at 310 bps. Those losses were fully offset by further, albeit modest, tightening of US Treasuries. As a result, there was a notable divergence in returns between the investment-grade component of the index, whose returns were positive, and the high yield component, whose returns were negative. In currencies, the drop in oil prices made the Russian rouble, the Nigerian naira, and the Colombian peso the three worst-performing currencies, due to the heavy exposure of these countries’ exports to oil. On the other hand, the best emerging markets currency performers included the Turkish lira, the Polish zloty, and the South African rand. Both the lira and the rand are expected to be beneficiaries of lower oil prices due to the sizable share of oil in their import bill. Meanwhile the zloty benefited from a relatively resilient performance of the euro in November, as well as a surprise decision by the central bank to keep rates unchanged, against consensus expectations for a 25 bp interest rate cut. The precipitous and deeper-than-expected fall in oil prices was the dominant theme during November, culminating in OPEC’s decision against cutting supply on 27 November. Steep losses in Venezuela were the largest detractor from relative performance. The strategy was overweight Venezuela based on country-specific valuation considerations, given that spreads were near default levels. Also, we took the view that—after falling 23% in four months—oil prices would stabilize given that the slowdown in China and Europe has already been fully incorporated in expectations. Further, we did not fully anticipate the importance of geopolitical drivers in OPEC’s decision. These views were clearly wrong. Emerging markets local rates mostly tracked the decline in G10 yields, in line with the disinflationary environment generated by lower oil prices. The best-performing local markets were those markets where the benefits from lower oil prices should be seen the most, notably Turkey, India, and South Africa. Local rates markets in Brazil and Colombia also performed well. In the case of Brazil, the rally was mostly in the back end of the curve, on expectations that the recently re-elected President Dilma Rousseff would appoint a more marketfriendly finance minister who would focus on fiscal consolidation. In Colombia, falling oil prices and a more dovish central bank have now prompted expectations for a potential rate cut next year, pushing the front and middle part of the local curve considerably lower. Meanwhile, the worst-performing local rates markets in November were Nigeria and Russia. Nigeria and Russia saw very heavy currency pressure from capital outflows, which in turn pushed local yields higher on the back of higher inflation expectations and credit risk premia. The second-largest detractor from performance was the strategy’s longstanding underweight to investment-grade credits, which benefited from the continued rally in US Treasuries. Among investment grade credits, oil importers fared well, especially Indonesia and South Africa. Russia, where the strategy exposure is market weight, took another major hit in November, as the credit is impacted by both sanctions and oil prices. Even the Russian government is revising its growth projections for next year, and is now forecasting a recession and higher inflation. Spreads on Russia, where the government has essentially no debt, ended November at the same level as some of the African oil producers whose policy frameworks and resilience to shocks is far more dubious. Corporates were the third-biggest contributor to underperformance. We have held off-index exposure, on average 15% of the portfolio, since June. Poor performance has been driven by the strategy’s nearly 25% allocation to oil companies. Given the new realities, we are in the process of reducing our exposure to oil sovereigns, including Ecuador, Angola, Bahrain, Venezuela, and Azerbaijan. We are replacing those positions with investment-grade credits and exposure to countries that will be clear beneficiaries of lower oil prices, such as Indonesia and Turkey. In addition, we are encouraged by the reduction in subsidies announced in November by the new administration, which will make room for much-needed investment-related expenditures. Turkey, despite its less than ideal political backdrop, is also likely to benefit from lower energy prices, as already evident in the ongoing narrowing of its current account deficit. Local Debt The sharp drop in oil prices in November was the key driver of returns in emerging markets local bonds in November. On aggregate, the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index was down 1.31%, with the Within the GBI-EM Global Diversified Index, the best performers in rates were Turkey, Colombia, and Indonesia. Indonesia performed well as local yields declined, largely due to the Jokowi administration’s decision to partially eliminate fuel subsidies, which was received positively by the market. Indonesia also delivered higher returns because of the country’s longer duration in the index. The worst performers in the rates markets were Nigeria, Russia, and Malaysia, mainly due to the drop in oil prices. Lazard’s local strategy performed in line with the index in November. The biggest contributors to performance were an underweight position in the Nigerian naira, an overweight in Indonesian rates, and an underweight in Malaysian rates and its currency. We underweighted the naira on valuation grounds, which were exacerbated by the persistent drop in oil prices, forcing the central bank to accept a downward currency adjustment. In Indonesia our active performance benefited from an overweight position in local rates. This position was driven by our view that positive sentiment about the reform agenda of the incoming Jokowi administration—which could have very positive structural implications for Indonesia’s fiscal, inflation, and competitiveness dynamics, along with a relatively orthodox central bank—should benefit both the currency and the local rates curve. The biggest detractors from performance were our underweight position in Turkish local rates, our overweight position in Mexican rates and its currency, and our overweight position in Brazilian rates. In Turkey 5 we had already reduced part of our underweight rates exposure in October, as we saw falling oil prices as beneficial for Turkey’s inflation and external outlook, but had not eliminated it fully due to the apparent persistence of underlying inflation pressures. In any case, oil prices fell even further in November, and quite sharply, prompting a fresh rally in Turkish rates. In Mexico the currency was challenged by the drop in oil prices and concerns that the difficult security environment in Mexico, which prompted protests against the government, would undermine the political capital President Peña Nieto’s administration. The peso depreciated in November, raising expectations of higher inflation, which in turn translated into the underperformance of the local rates curve. In Brazil our underperformance was driven mainly by security selection, notably our structural preference for inflation linkers, which underperformed in November as breakeven inflation declined in November, partly due to the fall in oil prices. In addition, our preference for shorter-term tenors, which had been driven by our expectation that the front part of the curve reflects too many central bank hikes, hurt our active performance as the back end of the curve rallied disproportionately, partly due to investor expectations for the appointment of a more orthodox Minister of Finance. Going into December, we believe the environment remains challenging for emerging markets currencies due to uncertainty about global demand, notably in the euro zone and China, the impact of falling commodity prices on emerging markets currencies, and the timing and pace of the Fed’s tightening cycle. We therefore retain our overall long US dollar position, expressing it mainly by funding with euros but also by being long currencies such as the Indian rupee, where we believe there is positive idiosyncratic risk, or the Mexican peso, where we believe valuation remains attractive. In rates, we see potential structural opportunities in Indonesia and Brazil and we still see potential for further cyclical-related duration gains in Hungary. In Indonesia the structural opportunity arises from the central bank’s stated commitment to a lower inflation target, which is currently being helped by lower global oil prices. The government’s decision in November to partially eliminate fuel subsidies should also help reduce the historically high volatility in inflation, lowering the term premium in Indonesia’s rates. In Brazil, we continue to see opportunity in local real yields and also some potential upside on the fiscal front from the more orthodox appointments at the ministry of finance. In Hungary, we believe that the low inflation environment, along with additional action from the ECB, should benefit local rates further, particularly longer-term tenors that have higher yield. In Mexico we continue to favor local rates on the grounds of potential spread convergence with US yields, however the recent depreciation of the peso could undermine the inflation convergence process in the near term, and we have reduced our overweight rates position. Blend The Lazard Emerging Markets Debt – Blend strategy underperformed the 50% J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Diversified/50% J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index in November. In what was a repeat of October’s performance, the strategy realized positive alpha from the top-down macro allocation position, however the strategy lost more than it gained due to poor bottom-up security selection. The overall top-down view was little changed during the month, with historically high allocations to external debt. The strategy remained at 70% external debt versus 30% local debt in November and ran a slight overweight duration position. This positioning is due to our continued view that emerging markets currencies are going through a negative adjustment period, which will likely manifest in cheaper currency valuations (versus the US dollar) in the near term. Meanwhile, in the external part of the portfolio, the 15% overweight to corporate debt detracted from performance as the strategy’s underlying investments underperformed the corporate space in general. This was largely due to an overweight to the oil and gas sector, which underperformed due to the near-20% fall in Brent oil prices during November. The secondlargest detractor of performance was the long-held overweight in Venezuelan sovereign bonds, which was the market’s worst performer for the month. The strategy ended November with a 70% allocation to external debt versus a 30% allocation to local debt and an overall duration equal to that of the index. Total Return The Lazard Emerging Markets Debt – Total Return strategy declined 0.48% in November, in what has been a three-month period of choppy returns. Overall, we maintained roughly constant positions throughout the month, thus introducing very little turnover into the strategy. Net exposure was 90% at month-end, which consisted of a 95% net long position in external debt versus a -5% net short position in local debt. We continue to favor external debt due to our view that global yields will continue to fall as commodity and other cost pressures are reduced through year end. Local debt yields are also attractive, however, most of the carry of the asset class is likely to be erased by depreciating emerging markets currencies over the near term. It should be noted that the portfolio was able to protect against a larger drawdown in the asset class because of currency hedges on its local positions, along with a basket of long duration investment-grade bonds as part of the strategy’s external debt positioning. Corporate The Lazard Emerging Market’s Debt – Corporate strategy declined 1.50% in November as emerging markets credits, particularly in the high yield space, continued the prior month sell-off. As US Treasury yields declined during the month, emerging markets corporate spreads widened 10 bps for investment-grade credits and over 30 bps for high yield credits.1 The risk-off sentiment was fueled by the continuing slide in oil prices, corruption scandals in Brazil, and a collapse of the rouble, which signaled deterioration in Russian credits. Following no agreement among OPEC members to cut oil production at the 27 November meeting in Vienna, oil prices ended the month at $68.50/ bbl, the lowest level in nearly five years. Investors reacted by selling credits with exposure to the oil and gas sector. High yield oil and gas credits returned -1.6% for the month and investment-grade credits were down 0.5%. The strategy’s exposure to Russian corporate credits detracted 50 bps from performance. Russian corporate credit spreads reached 600 bps at the month end surpassing the spread moves in March and April of this year when Russia annexed Crimea and faced Western sanctions. Finally, Brazilian authorities initiated a corruption probe into Petrobras, the state-owned oil and gas company, and several construction companies. The allegations against these companies are that their top executives overcharged Petrobras for several construction projects in amounts that are estimated to be several billion dollars. Overall, Brazilian corporate credit returned a negative 2.14% for the month.2 6 Despite the volatility in emerging markets corporate markets, several issuers brought successful new issue deals, particularly in investmentgrade credit, as investors were looking to diversify away from high yield and energy credits. One such deal was brought by an investmentgrade issuer, Gruma, which is the world largest corn flour and tortilla maker based in Mexico. Gruma has a well-diversified portfolio of products as well as sales outlets and holds market leader positions in Mexico and the United States with over 25% market share. Over the past couple of years, Gruma’s management team has focused on deleveraging its balance sheet and reducing the cost of the company’s debt. The company reduced its leverage from 4.8 in 2012 to 1.9 as of the fourth quarter of 2014. During our meeting with the company, the new management team, which has been in place since 2012, reiterated the company’s focus to maintain a strong balance sheet going forward and bring leverage closer to 1.5 total debt over EBTIDA.3 The company has been successful at cutting expenses and reducing working capital needs. As a result, Gruma has become a highly cash-generative business with over US $400 million in free-cash flows annually. Should the company’s plans for a successful IPO materialize in 2015, we expect its leverage to reach 1.5 as the company’s management team plans to commit the proceeds from the IPO to further strengthen the company’s balance sheet. The key credit risk is the company’s plan to expand in Europe where it is likely to acquire targets and/or assets and thus spend cash, negatively affect the company’s liquidity profile. The company is also planning to introduce a dividend going forward (expected US $50 million) thus also affecting its liquidity profile. Finally, while the company claims to be able to pass any corn costs to its consumers, we believe that in the case of weak macro-economic or demand conditions, the company may experience significant lags with which it can pass on raw material (corn) costs to its customers. Given the strong credit profile of the company, investors showed strong interest in Gruma’s new issue deal (a total of US $400 million issued) and order books were several times oversubscribed. The newly issued notes were in favor in the secondary market as well as spreads compressed over 35 bps in just a few days following the launch of the new issue. Overall, we expect continued volatility in emerging markets corporate credit as we approach year end as investors remain unwilling to take on risk. However, we believe that corporate credits have now priced in lower energy prices and deterioration in Russia and Brazil. Sincerely, Denise S. Simon Managing Director, Portfolio Manager/Analyst Arif T. Joshi, CFA Managing Director, Portfolio Manager/Analyst George V. Varino Managing Director, Client Portfolio Manager 7 Emerging Markets Debt – Core Sector Allocation Characteristics Lazard Yield to Maturity1 (%) 6.50 5.27 Duration (yrs) 7.39 7.03 Average Coupon (%) 6.31 6.20 Cash 1.3% External Corporate 15.0% Benchmark3 External Quasi 8.2% External Sovereign 75.6% Key Hard Currency Exposure Sovereign and Quasi-Sovereign Lazard O/W or U/W (%) Venezuela 2.0 Bahrain 2.0 Côte d’Ivoire 1.8 Bolivia 1.7 Pakistan 1.5 Honduras 1.2 Mozambique 1.1 Iraq 1.0 Belarus 1.0 Croatia -2.0 Uruguay -2.1 Chile -2.1 Malaysia -2.4 Peru -2.5 Lebanon -2.7 Philippines -3.3 South Africa -3.3 China -3.5 Quality Distribution (%) 60 54.7 42.1 40 23.2 24.2 0 13.6 Investment Grade Lazard BB B 9.2 6.7 CCC 4.0 0.8 Not Rated J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Diversified Index Performance Attribution3 Sovereign Hard Currency Corporate 21.6 20 Overweight/Underweight 1 Month (bps) YTD (bps) 1 Year (bps) Since Inception² (bps) -40 -43 -10 129 -34 -41 -16 129 Russia 2.2 -6 -2 6 -2 Mexico 2.0 Local Debt 0 -3 -3 -16 China 1.7 Rates 0 0 0 15 Chile 1.4 Brazil 1.3 Nigeria 0.9 Guatemala 0.7 Vietnam 0.6 Egypt 0.5 Indonesia 0.5 Security Selection FX Corporates 0 -3 -3 -31 -10 -63 -70 -16 Cash 0 -23 -29 -7 Total -50 -131 -113 90 As of 30 November 2014 1 All yields are calculated assuming yield-to-worst. 2 Inception date: 1 December 2010 3 Relative to the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Diversified Index. The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. Attribution is based upon a representative portfolio and is versus the benchmark noted. Attribution analysis is provided for illustrative purposes only, as values are calculated based on returns gross of fees. Performance would be lower if fees and expenses were included. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Lazard receives credit quality ratings on the underlying securities of the portfolio from two major reporting agencies – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. The credit quality breakdown is provided by Lazard by using the S&P rating when both agencies assign the same rating to a security. In the event the ratings differ, Lazard will use the lower of the two ratings. Lazard converts all ratings to the equivalent S&P major rating category for purposes of the categories shown. Bonds rated BBB and above are considered investment grade. Bonds rated below BBB are generally referred to as speculative grade securities. Bonds rated BB, B, or CCC are regarded as possessing a speculative capacity to pay debt service because of the negative factors or uncertainties for which there are no compensating positive factors. Ratings from BBB to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within each of the major rating categories. An N/R category consists of rateable securities that have not been rated by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO). Unrated securities do not necessarily indicate low quality. Ratings and the portfolio’s credit quality distribution may change over time. The portfolio itself has not been rated by an independent rating agency. Source: Lazard, J.P. Morgan 8 Emerging Markets Debt – Local Debt Characteristics Lazard Benchmark3 (%) 6.62 5.01 6.23 4.87 Average Coupon (%) 6.37 6.49 Maturity1 Yield to Duration (yrs) Gross Currency Exposure Sovereign and Quasi-Sovereign India Mexico Indonesia Russia Turkey Kenya Brazil Serbia Chile Sri Lanka South Africa Philippines Colombia Poland Romania Nigeria Peru Thailand Malaysia Singapore Hungary Euro Key Duration Exposure Kenya China Sri Lanka Mexico Romania Brazil Serbia Thailand Colombia Chile Turkey Indonesia Philippines Gross Regional Allocation (%) 30 28.4 24.7 23.6 21.0 20 10 Lazard O/W or U/W (%) 0 3.0 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.6 -0.7 -1.0 -1.1 -1.5 -1.5 -1.6 -4.6 Eastern Europe Latin America Middle East & Africa Gross Sector Allocation (%) 100 91.6 50 0.7 0 4.9 0.6 7.7 0.0 -5.4 -50 Sovereign Quasi-Sov Corporate Inflation Interest Forwards/ Bonds Bonds Bonds Linked Rate Swaps NDFs/ Options USD Cash Gross Quality Distribution (%) 60 Lazard O/W or U/W (yrs) 5.3 4.1 2.8 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.2 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.7 -1.0 -1.2 Asia 57.8 54.5 38.5 40 26.0 20 0 9.0 7.0 6.9 0.2 BB 0.0 B and Below 0.0 AAA/A BBB Not Rated Lazard J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index Performance Attribution3 1 Month (bps) YTD (bps) 1 Year (bps) Rates -6 32 33 8 FX 1 43 43 69 -5 75 76 77 Total Since Inception² (bps) As of 30 November 2014 1 All yields are calculated assuming yield-to-worst. 2 Inception date: 1 December 2010 3 Relative to the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index. The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. Attribution is based upon a representative portfolio and is versus the benchmark noted. Attribution analysis is provided for illustrative purposes only, as values are calculated based on returns gross of fees. Performance would be lower if fees and expenses were included. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Lazard receives credit quality ratings on the underlying securities of the portfolio from two major reporting agencies – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. The credit quality breakdown is provided by Lazard by using the S&P rating when both agencies assign the same rating to a security. In the event the ratings differ, Lazard will use the lower of the two ratings. Lazard converts all ratings to the equivalent S&P major rating category for purposes of the categories shown. Bonds rated BBB and above are considered investment grade. Bonds rated below BBB are generally referred to as speculative grade securities. Bonds rated BB, B, or CCC are regarded as possessing a speculative capacity to pay debt service because of the negative factors or uncertainties for which there are no compensating positive factors. Ratings from BBB to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within each of the major rating categories. An N/R category consists of rateable securities that have not been rated by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO). Unrated securities do not necessarily indicate low quality. Ratings and the portfolio’s credit quality distribution may change over time. The portfolio itself has not been rated by an independent rating agency. Source: Lazard, J.P. Morgan 9 Emerging Markets Debt – Blend Historical Allocation Characteristics Lazard Benchmark3 Yield to Maturity1 (%) 7.03 5.75 Duration (yrs) 6.70 5.95 Average Coupon (%) 6.55 6.35 Hard Currency (%) 69.10 50.00 Local Currency (%) 30.90 50.00 (%) 75 50 Key Country Distribution 1.9 Brazil 1.7 Honduras 1.1 Mozambique 1.1 Bahrain 1.1 Pakistan 1.0 Slovenia 1.0 Senegal 1.0 Peru -0.7 Serbia -0.8 Indonesia -0.8 Uruguay -1.0 Philippines -1.5 Lebanon -1.6 South Africa -1.6 Romania -2.2 Poland -2.4 Thailand -3.3 Hungary -4.1 Malaysia -6.2 Sep 14 Local Currency Exposure Sector Allocation (%) 50 49.3 27.4 25 14.9 4.2 0 0.8 0.6 2.0 0.1 0.7 Cash 2.0 Venezuela Mar 14 Forwards/NDFs Iraq Hard Currency Exposure Sep 13 Local Inflation Linked 2.2 Mar 13 Local Corporate Bonds Côte d’Ivoire Sep 12 Local QuasiSovereign 2.3 Mar 12 Local Nominal Sovereign Russia Sep 11 Corporate Bonds 2.6 External Quasi Mexico 25 External Sovereign Lazard O/W or U/W (%) As of 30 November 2014 1 All yields are calculated assuming yield-to-worst. 2 Inception date: 1 October 2011 3 Relative to a blended index consisting of 50% J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Diversified/50% J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index. The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. Attribution is based upon a representative portfolio and is versus the benchmark noted. Attribution analysis is provided for illustrative purposes only, as values are calculated based on returns gross of fees. Performance would be lower if fees and expenses were included. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Lazard receives credit quality ratings on the underlying securities of the portfolio from two major reporting agencies – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. The credit quality breakdown is provided by Lazard by using the S&P rating when both agencies assign the same rating to a security. In the event the ratings differ, Lazard will use the lower of the two ratings. Lazard converts all ratings to the equivalent S&P major rating category for purposes of the categories shown. Bonds rated BBB and above are considered investment grade. Bonds rated below BBB are generally referred to as speculative grade securities. Bonds rated BB, B, or CCC are regarded as possessing a speculative capacity to pay debt service because of the negative factors or uncertainties for which there are no compensating positive factors. Ratings from BBB to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within each of the major rating categories. An N/R category consists of rateable securities that have not been rated by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO). Unrated securities do not necessarily indicate low quality. Ratings and the portfolio’s credit quality distribution may change over time. The portfolio itself has not been rated by an independent rating agency. Source: Lazard, J.P. Morgan 10 Emerging Markets Debt – Blend Quality Distribution (%) 80 Performance Attribution2 1 Month (bps) YTD (bps) 1 Year (bps) Since Inception1 (bps) 17 43 52 98 -15 -81 -85 -2 -17 -56 -52 27 2 -25 -33 -29 -27 -71 -80 7 Local Debt 10 -4 23 20 Rates -12 -18 -9 -19 FX 22 15 34 39 Total -14 -113 -90 123 Overall Allocation – Hard vs. Local Sovereign Hard Currency Overweight/Underweight Security Selection Corporate Hard Currency 60 73.9 57.5 40 16.3 15.6 20 16.7 6.8 0 Investment Grade Lazard BB B 5.6 3.3 CCC 3.8 0.4 Not Rated 50% JPM EMBI Global Diversified/ 50% JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified Index As of 30 November 2014 1 Inception date: 1 October 2011 2 Relative to a blended index consisting of 50% J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Diversified/50% J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index. The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. Attribution is based upon a representative portfolio and is versus the benchmark noted. Attribution analysis is provided for illustrative purposes only, as values are calculated based on returns gross of fees. Performance would be lower if fees and expenses were included. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Lazard receives credit quality ratings on the underlying securities of the portfolio from two major reporting agencies – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. The credit quality breakdown is provided by Lazard by using the S&P rating when both agencies assign the same rating to a security. In the event the ratings differ, Lazard will use the lower of the two ratings. Lazard converts all ratings to the equivalent S&P major rating category for purposes of the categories shown. Bonds rated BBB and above are considered investment grade. Bonds rated below BBB are generally referred to as speculative grade securities. Bonds rated BB, B, or CCC are regarded as possessing a speculative capacity to pay debt service because of the negative factors or uncertainties for which there are no compensating positive factors. Ratings from BBB to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within each of the major rating categories. An N/R category consists of rateable securities that have not been rated by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO). Unrated securities do not necessarily indicate low quality. Ratings and the portfolio’s credit quality distribution may change over time. The portfolio itself has not been rated by an independent rating agency. Source: Lazard, J.P. Morgan 11 Emerging Markets Debt – Total Return Currency Exposure Characteristics United States Lazard (%) Lazard Yield to Maturity1 (%) 6.49 Duration (yrs) 7.07 Average Coupon (%) 6.21 Long Exposure (%) 118.27 Short Exposure (%) 28.30 Net Exposure (%) 89.97 Gross Exposure (%) 146.57 Cash (%) 0.00 Key Hard Currency Exposure Sovereign and Quasi-Sovereign Net % of Market Value Corporate Net % of Market Value Total Net % of Market Value Brazil 7.42 3.43 10.85 CDX 7.52 — 7.52 Mexico 1.51 4.81 6.32 Russia 1.74 3.09 4.83 China — 3.84 3.84 Iraq 2.50 1.30 3.79 Colombia 2.01 1.60 3.61 Portugal 3.51 — 3.51 Paraguay 2.51 0.31 2.82 Bahrain 2.50 — 2.50 Venezuela 2.34 — 2.34 Côte d’Ivoire 2.26 — 2.26 99.29 India 6.37 Indonesia 5.97 Mexico 2.91 Brazil 2.09 China 2.07 Chile 1.01 South Africa 0.54 Serbia 0.16 Kenya 0.16 Sri Lanka 0.11 Romania 0.01 Russia -0.01 Philippines -0.16 Canada -0.52 Taiwan -0.83 Hungary -1.06 Japan -1.32 Peru -1.36 Malaysia -2.33 Thailand -3.10 Singapore -5.84 Euro -9.59 Key Local Debt Positions Bond (%) IRS (%) FX (%) % of Total Market Value Mozambique 2.24 — 2.24 India — — 3.74 3.74 Ecuador 2.22 — 2.22 Indonesia 2.45 — 0.88 3.33 Kazakhstan 1.00 1.14 2.14 Brazil 1.34 — 0.75 2.09 1.27 — 0.71 1.98 0.16 Panama 1.75 0.31 2.06 Mexico Indonesia 1.00 1.02 2.02 Serbia 0.92 — -0.76 Bolivia 2.00 — 2.00 Kenya 0.16 — — 0.16 Turkey 2.00 — 2.00 Malaysia 0.45 — -2.00 -1.55 Angola 1.98 — 1.98 Singapore — — -4.15 -4.15 Euro — — -8.08 -8.08 Key Relative Value Exposures % of Market Value Indonesia 2.64 India 2.63 China 2.07 Thailand 2.05 Singapore 1.69 Chile 1.01 Mexico 0.93 Canada -0.52 Euro -1.51 As of 30 November 2014 1 All yields are calculated assuming yield-to-worst. The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. 12 (%) 50 Hard Currency YTD (bps) 1 Year (bps) Since (bps) -61 392 415 363 Long Sovereign 11 427 438 277 Short Sovereign -4 -67 -67 -6 Quasi-Sovereign -12 23 24 32 Long Corporates -56 9 19 60 Short Corporates 0 0 0 -1 Local Debt Long Rates Short Rates 10 86 91 130 11 158 167 158 0 -1 -1 -4 Long FX -20 -77 -92 -52 Short FX 19 5 16 27 4 68 69 40 Relative Value 41.6 31.7 24.1 25 0 Asia 0 0 0 0 (%) Total -48 546 574 533 60 Latin America Middle East & Africa 50.9 40 Historical Gross Exposure Allocations Eastern Europe Gross Sector Allocation Cash (%) 180 49.2 Inception1 29.8 20 0.7 0.0 0.0 Interest Rate Swaps 0.0 CDS Hard Currency Sovereign 90 1.3 CDX 0 Local Corporate Bonds Relative Value 135 11.7 7.4 Local QuasiSovereign Bonds Short Local 4.9 Local Inflation Linked Bonds Long Local 6.6 Local Nominal Sovereign Bonds Short Credit Hard Currency Corporate Long Credit Hard Currency Quasi-Sovereign Cash 0.0 Cash Performance Attribution 1 Month (bps) Gross Regional Allocation FX/NDFs/Options Emerging Markets Debt – Total Return 45 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Historical Long/Short Exposures (%) 160 Short Net 124 110 111 111118 109108 101 98 95 95 97 96 96 91 84 92 90 92 89 89 88 86 86 90 88 83 85 83 81 79 79 83 85 76 76 80 69 75 94 80 80 89 67 66 68 66 65 100 86 62 53 60 82 56 88 51 72 70 74 63 78 64 68 77 67 64 71 74 80 59 60 63 67 36 57 49 53 64 55 56 60 57 52 63 47 71 47 46 51 44 34 42 52 36 35 30 23 51 0 -4 -1 -3 -3 -5 -11 0 -6 -5 -11 -12 -10 -14 -12 -10 -8 -15 -15 -16 -17 -16 -22 -19 -18 -21 -15 -21 -28 -23 -23 -21 -24 -24 -23 -31 -25 -27 -31-28 -28 -33 -36 -31 -52 -43 -53 -58 -61 -65 -80 Nov 10 Dec 10 Jan 11 Feb 11 Mar 11 Apr 11 May 11 Jun 11 Jul 11 Aug 11 Sep 11 Oct 11 Nov 11 Dec 11 Jan 12 Feb 12 Mar 12 Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 Aug 12 Sep 12 Oct 12 Nov 12 Dec 12 Jan 13 Feb 13 Mar 13 Apr 13 May 13 Jun 13 Jul 13 Aug 13 Sep 13 Oct 13 Nov 13 Dec 13 Jan 14 Feb 14 Mar 14 Apr 14 May 14 Jun 14 Jul 14 Aug 14 Sep 14 Oct 14 Nov 14 Long As of 30 November 2014 1 Inception date: 1 December 2010 There is no benchmark for this strategy as it has an absolute return investment objective. The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. Contribution is based upon a representative portfolio. Contribution analysis is provided for illustrative purposes only, as values are calculated based on returns gross of fees. Performance would be lower if fees and expenses were included. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. 13 Emerging Markets Debt – Corporate Characteristics Lazard Yield to Maturity1 (%) 7.81 Duration (yrs) 4.41 Average Coupon (%) 7.35 Gross Sector Allocation (%) 100 94.7 50 0 Hard Currency Corporate Bonds Total Country Distribution 2.0 3.3 Hard Currency Quasi-Sovereign Bonds Cash Lazard (%) Mexico 13.5 China 12.3 Russia 9.1 Brazil 9.1 Nigeria 6.6 Indonesia 4.9 Chile 4.6 Singapore 3.9 Colombia 3.1 Peru 3.1 Venezuela 2.8 Iraq 2.7 Bulgaria 2.6 Guatemala 2.5 Ghana 2.4 Gross Quality Distribution (%) 30 Financial 24.2 Oil & Gas 23.6 15.7 10 0 4.4 Investment Grade BB B CCC Not Rated Gross Regional Allocation (%) 50 25 41.7 25.1 15.7 14.2 3.3 0 Asia Eastern Europe Utilities 8.7 TMT 8.5 Real Estate 6.7 Consumer 6.0 Metals & Mining 5.3 Transport 3.5 Pulp & Paper 3.2 Industrial 3.1 Investment Grade Infrastructure 2.0 Below Investment Grade Other 2.0 Cash 3.3 Latin America Middle East & Africa Cash Performance Attribution Corporate Quasi-Sovereign Investment Grade 1 Month (bps) YTD (bps) 1 Year (bps) Since Inception² (bps) -128 343 409 540 -17 74 82 178 -111 269 327 362 -22 -28 -26 1 0 5 5 -33 -22 -33 -31 34 Cash 0 0 0 0 Total -150 315 383 541 Below Investment Grade As of 30 November 2014 1 All yields are calculated assuming yield-to-worst. 2 Inception date: 1 November 2011 There is no benchmark for this strategy as it has an absolute return investment objective. 27.9 20 Industry Exposure Lazard (%) 29.3 22.7 The allocations and specific securities are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. Contribution is based upon a representative portfolio. Contribution analysis is provided for illustrative purposes only, as values are calculated based on returns gross of fees. Performance would be lower if fees and expenses were included. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Lazard receives credit quality ratings on the underlying securities of the portfolio from two major reporting agencies – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. The credit quality breakdown is provided by Lazard by using the S&P rating when both agencies assign the same rating to a security. In the event the ratings differ, Lazard will use the lower of the two ratings. Lazard converts all ratings to the equivalent S&P major rating category for purposes of the categories shown. Bonds rated BBB and above are considered investment grade. Bonds rated below BBB are generally referred to as speculative grade securities. Bonds rated BB, B, or CCC are regarded as possessing a speculative capacity to pay debt service because of the negative factors or uncertainties for which there are no compensating positive factors. Ratings from BBB to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within each of the major rating categories. An N/R category consists of rateable securities that have not been rated by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO). Unrated securities do not necessarily indicate low quality. Ratings and the portfolio’s credit quality distribution may change over time. The portfolio itself has not been rated by an independent rating agency. Lazard Emerging Markets Debt Notes 1 Source: J.P. Morgan CEMBI Index 2 Source: J.P. Morgan CEMBI Brazil Index 3 Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization Important Information Published on 16 December 2014. Information and opinions presented have been obtained or derived from sources believed by Lazard to be reliable. Lazard makes no representation as to their accuracy or completeness. All opinions expressed herein are as of 30 November 2014 and are subject to change. Lazard Asset Management LLC is a US registered investment advisor and claims compliance with the Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). To receive a complete list and description of Lazard Asset Management’s composites and/or a presentation that adheres to the GIPS standards, please contact Henry F. Detering, CFA at Lazard Asset Management, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, New York 10112-6300 or by email at [email protected]. Provided below are descriptions of each of the composites, the performance of which appears on the preceding pages. The Emerging Markets Debt – Core strategy seeks to outperform the benchmark, the J.P. Morgan Emerging Market Bond Index Global Diversified (EMBI Global Diversified), by +2%–4% p.a. over a market cycle, with a tracking error of 2%–4%. The majority of the portfolio (typically 75%–100%) will be held in hard currency emerging-market debt. Typically, 0%–25% may be held in local currency emerging market debt. Despite being benchmark-aware, the strategy is free to invest out of the benchmark (maximum non-benchmark exposure is 40%) to allow the investment team to exploit the full universe of evolving opportunities. Key drivers of return for this strategy are moves in US Treasuries and credit premiums. The Emerging Markets Debt – Local Debt strategy seeks to outperform the benchmark, the J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index-Emerging Markets (GBI-EM) Global Diversified, by +2%–4% p.a. over a market cycle, with a tracking error of 2%–6%. The majority of the portfolio (typically 80%–100%) will be held in local currency debt. Typically 0%–20% may be held in hard currency debt. Despite being benchmark-aware, the strategy is free to invest out of the benchmark (maximum non-benchmark exposure is 50%) to allow the investment team to exploit the full universe of evolving opportunities. Key drivers of return for this strategy are currency appreciation/depreciation and interest-rate moves. The Emerging Markets Debt – Blend strategy seeks to outperform the 50/50 benchmark of the J.P. Morgan Emerging Market Bond Index Global Diversified (EMBI Global Diversified) and J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index-Emerging Markets (GBI-EM) Global Diversified by +2%–4% p.a. over a market cycle, with a tracking error of 2%–5%. The portfolio may hold 25%–75% in either hard currency or local currency debt, depending on the outlook for each asset class. Despite being benchmark-aware, the strategy is free to invest out of the benchmark (maximum non-benchmark exposure is 40%) to allow the investment team to exploit the full universe of evolving opportunities. Key drivers of return for this strategy are moves in US Treasuries, credit premiums, growth, and inflation expectations within emerging-market countries. The strategy may hold up to 25% in corporate securities. The Emerging Markets Debt – Total Return strategy has no benchmark and uses a “best ideas” approach. The investment team looks across the entire emerging-market debt universe — hard currency sovereign debt, hard currency quasi-sovereign debt, local currency sovereign debt, local currency quasi-sovereign debt, corporate debt, etc. — positioning the portfolio in the specific asset classes and countries in which the team sees value. This is in contrast to the team’s benchmark-aware approaches, in which countries are overweighted or underweighted. The Emerging Markets Debt – Total Return strategy is a long-biased approach that seeks to capture upside performance and minimize negative performance. The strategy is allowed some leverage (up to 200% maximum gross exposure) and shorting. It has typically been run with a 60%–90% net exposure and 100%–140% gross exposure. The team may invest in all emerging-market debt asset classes, but also has the ability to allocate tactically to cash, if the team has no conviction in the market. The Emerging Markets Debt – Corporate strategy is a long-biased approach, that seeks to capture upside performance and minimize negative performance. The strategy is allowed some leverage (up to 200% maximum gross exposure) and shorting. It has typically been run with a 60%–90% net exposure and 100%–140% gross exposure. The team may invest throughout the EMD corporate asset class, but also has the ability to allocate tactically to cash if the team has no conviction on the market. Emerging-market securities carry special risks, such as less developed or less efficient trading markets, a lack of company information, and differing auditing and legal standards. The securities markets of emerging-market countries can be extremely volatile; performance can also be influenced by political, social, and economic factors affecting companies in emerging-market countries. Specific to the political and military unrest in Ukraine, and as described in this presentation, there exists a heightened risk of armed conflict and subsequent economic, political, and social repercussions to all parties involved. The strategies invest primarily in emerging-market debt positions. The strategies will generally invest in debt investments denominated in either US dollars or emerging-market local currencies. As such, an investment in the strategies is subject to the general risks associated with fixed-income investing, such as interest rate risk and credit risk, as well as the risks associated with emerging-market investments, including currency fluctuation, devaluation, and confiscatory taxation. The strategies may use derivative instruments that are subject to counterparty risk. Investments in global currencies are subject to the general risks associated with fixed-income investing, such as interest rate risk, as well as the risks associated with non-domestic investments, which include, but are not limited to, currency fluctuation, devaluation, and confiscatory taxation. Furthermore, certain investment techniques required to access certain emerging-market currencies, such as swaps, forwards, structured notes, and loans of portfolio securities, involve risk that the counterparty to such instruments or transactions will become insolvent or otherwise default on its obligation to perform as agreed. In the event of such default, an investor may have limited recourse against the counterparty and may experience delays in recovery or loss. The strategies will invest in securities of non-US companies, which trade on non-US exchanges. These investments may be denominated or traded in both hard and local currencies. Investments denominated in currencies other than US dollars involve certain considerations not typically associated with investments in US issuers or securities denominated or traded in US dollars. There may be less publicly available information about issuers in non-US countries that may not be subject to uniform accounting, auditing, financial reporting standards, and other disclosure requirements comparable to those applicable to US issuers. The allocations, investment characteristics, and specific securities mentioned are based upon a portfolio that represents the proposed investment for a fully discretionary account. Allocations and security selection are subject to change. The securities mentioned are not necessarily held by Lazard for all client portfolios, and their mention should not be considered a recommendation or solicitation to purchase or sell these securities. It should not be assumed that any investment in these securities was, or will prove to be, profitable, or that the investment decisions we make in the future will be profitable or equal to the investment performance of securities referenced herein. There is no assurance that any securities referenced herein are currently held in the portfolio or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities mentioned may not represent the entire portfolio. All index data is shown for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to reflect the performance of any product or strategy managed by Lazard. This material is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to, and does not constitute financial advice, fund management services, an offer of financial products or to enter into any contract or investment agreement in respect of any product offered by Lazard Asset Management and shall not be considered as an offer or solicitation with respect to any product, security, or service in any jurisdiction or in any circumstances in which such offer or solicitation is unlawful or unauthorized or otherwise restricted or prohibited. Australia: FOR WHOLESALE INVESTORS ONLY. Issued by Lazard Asset Management Pacific Co., ABN 13 064 523 619, AFS License 238432, Level 39 Gateway, 1 Macquarie Place, Sydney NSW 2000. Dubai: Issued and approved by Lazard Gulf Limited, Gate Village 1, Level 2, Dubai International Financial Centre, PO Box 506644, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Registered in Dubai International Financial Centre 0467. Authorised and regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority to deal with Professional Clients only. Germany: Issued by Lazard Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbH, Neue Mainzer Strasse 75, D-60311 Frankfurt am Main. Hong Kong: Issued by Lazard Asset Management (Hong Kong) Limited (AQZ743), Unit 30, Level 8, Two Exchange Square, 8 Connaught Place, Central, Hong Kong. Lazard Asset Management (Hong Kong) Limited is a corporation licensed by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission to conduct Type 1 (dealing in securities) and Type 4 (advising on securities) regulated activities. This document is only for “professional investors” as defined under the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571 of the Laws of Hong Kong) and its subsidiary legislation and may not be distributed or otherwise made available to any other person. Japan: Issued by Lazard Japan Asset Management K.K., ATT Annex 7th Floor, 2-11-7 Akasaka, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107-0052. Korea: Issued by Lazard Korea Asset Management Co. Ltd., 10F Seoul Finance Center, 136 Sejong-daero, Jung-gu, Seoul, 100-768. Singapore: Issued by Lazard Asset Management (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., 1 Raffles Place, #15-02 One Raffles Place Tower 1, Singapore 048616. Company Registration Number 201135005W. This document is for “institutional investors” or “accredited investors” as defined under the Securities and Futures Act, Chapter 289 of Singapore and may not be distributed to any other person. United Kingdom: FOR PROFESSIONAL INVESTORS ONLY. Issued by Lazard Asset Management Ltd., 50 Stratton Street, London W1J 8LL. Registered in England Number 525667. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). United States: Issued by Lazard Asset Management LLC, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10112.