Host: Alex Warren, CFA, CAIA

Guest: Dustin Haygood

June 26, 2023

Episode Length: 13:24

In this episode, we speak with Dustin Haygood, Client Portfolio Manager at Aristotle Capital Management. He shares insights on his recent paper about catalysts and the instrumental role they play in the investment process. The conversation also touches on industry specific nuances, financial engineering, and the time and attention needed to identify catalysts that unlock value and improve businesses.

SHOW NOTES
  • Disclosures (0:00 – 0:30)
  • Host introduction (0:35 – 0:47)
  • Episode introduction (0:49-1:17)
  • Introduction of the episode’s guest: Dustin Haygood (1:20 – 1:56)
  • Diversity of thought and experience on the investment team (1:56 – 2:48)
  • What is a catalyst? (2:49 – 4:33)
  • Where catalysts fit in the investment process (4:37 – 5:24)
  • What are and are not catalysts (5:25 – 7:17)
  • Financial engineering (7:27 – 8:34)
  • Samples of catalysts in action (8:38 – 10:32)
  • Industry specific nuances (10:39 – 11:15)
  • Corporate Transformations (11:16 – 11:46)
  • How does the team assess catalysts after buying a business? (11:49 – 12:53)
  • Conclusion (12:55 – 13:24)
TRANSCRIPT

Alex Warren: The term Aristotle is used to represent a family of affiliates, which is comprised of Aristotle Capital Management, Aristotle Capital Boston, Aristotle Credit Partners, Aristotle Atlantic Partners, and Aristotle Pacific Capital, which collectively operate under a unified platform known as Aristotle. Each firm is an independent investment advisor, registered under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940, as amended.

Welcome to the Power of Patience, Aristotle’s podcast, where we share our views on topics actively explored by our investment teams and across the organization. I’m Alex Warren, Product Specialist at Aristotle, and I’ll be your host today. Coming up on today’s episode, we’ll be speaking with Dustin Haygood, Client Portfolio Manager at Aristotle Capital Management. If you enjoy this podcast, please like and share it on LinkedIn to help spread the word.

Today on the show we’ll discuss catalysts and how they fit into the Aristotle Capital Management investment process, examples of what does and does not constitute a catalyst, and nuances to identifying catalyst in the research process. Without further ado, let’s get started. Dustin, thank you so much for joining me today. To lead off the discussion, can you introduce yourself and provide a brief overview of your role at Aristotle Capital Management?

Dustin Haygood: It’s a pleasure to be on the podcast, Alex and hi, everyone, tuning in. My name is Dustin Haygood and I’m a member of Aristotle Capital Management’s investment team and I’m based here at our headquarters in Los Angeles. I graduated from the University of Chicago’s MBA program a few years ago and I joined Aristotle after grad school. That is a very typical path for our analysts. Prior to business school, I spent a number of years in Washington DC. I worked in politics and one thing that I’ve really admired about our investment team is that we’ve created a very diverse group of individuals.

I’m the only one on the team with a political background and we’re probably lucky for that, but we have others on the team with degrees in engineering, history, and statistics. There are people in their thirties up to their sixties. We have people that have grown up or lived all over the world. There are more than five languages spoken on the team, more than five passports held, and that’s all intentional. If we want to understand businesses from a global perspective, it’s incredibly important to have a variety of backgrounds both professionally and personally. It’s really been great to have joined such a unique team.

Alex Warren: Absolutely. Thank you, Dustin. Now, you recently wrote a paper titled In Search of Catalysts where you noted catalysts are often found at the very intersection of potential becoming reality and where additional runway lies to further improve the business. Can you touch on what a catalyst is?

Dustin Haygood: We want to invest in businesses that are high quality and attractively valued, but those two factors are not enough. The company also needs to have catalysts. Catalyst, it’s a common term you hear thrown around in the industry, but it means something distinctive to us at Aristotle Capital. We define a catalyst as an action or an event that’s both currently underway and within management’s control that we believe will fundamentally improve the business, move a company closer to meeting its potential, and over the long term drive the company’s stock price towards our estimates of intrinsic value. Catalysts, they’re not short-lived events such as a presentation date or an earnings call. They are company-specific improvements that we think will take place over the next three to five years.

Said differently. If you were an owner of a local business, what are the three to five things you would do to make that business better? Those are catalysts. If it’s a local sandwich shop, maybe that means installing a drive-through, so there’s higher throughput, which would increase revenue. Maybe it’s adding beverage flavors to the soda fountain, which will drive more soda sales and increase profitability, since soda is a higher-margin product than food. Maybe it’s the creation of a rewards program to incentivize more repeat customers. These could all be catalysts for us and the publicly traded companies we invest.

Alex Warren: That makes sense. And it sounds like there are a lot of boxes that need to be checked. Now, where do catalysts fit in the investment process and how important are they?

Dustin Haygood: Catalysts are incredibly important, Alex. They are a necessary factor for us to invest. We have three criteria that are all equally important. A business needs to be high quality and needs to be attractively valued and they have to have compelling catalysts. It’s like a three-legged stool. They all need to be present. None of them are superior or inferior in terms of priority. When quality valuation and catalysts line up, we’ll invest. When one of them isn’t present, we’ll wait and continue to study the business and if one of them weakens in a company we own, we’ll step aside and sell that business. It’s a very disciplined process.

Alex Warren: Now, let’s dive in a bit deeper. Would you be able to provide some examples of what are and are not catalysts?

Dustin Haygood: Catalysts, they come in many forms. It could be a company increasing its market share. It could be the restructuring of a business. It could be the divestiture of an unprofitable or underperforming division. It could be a mixed shift towards selling higher margin products or services which would improve profitability, and it could even be something like a newly installed management team that’s brought with it a different go-to-market strategy that might even hurt earnings in the short term but will improve the business over the long term. That means it could be an investment into something. For those out there that are homeowners, we all know that living through remodeling a kitchen or a bathroom, it’s very expensive in the short term. It’s painful, it could take a long time, but when you go to sell that house five years from now, it will add value to it. That would be a catalyst.

To extend the home ownership example, a catalyst would not be property prices going up further from where we are today. Property prices going up broadly, that’s something that might be true, but it wouldn’t tell us which house to buy. Again, these are company specific improvements, not macro, not things like a change in interest rates or a change in commodity prices. We are trying to understand the individual companies, the companies that are doing the heavy lifting and the tough work, that are in control of forging their path forward, their path towards improvement. And if our analysis of improving business prospects is accurate, we lower the probability of falling into a value trap. And that’s because we believe, over the long term, stock prices eventually follow fundamentals.

Alex Warren: I like your home ownership analogy. As someone who’s remodeled their master bathroom, I like to think that the pain and the time that it took will eventually pay off. Let’s switch gears now. Financial engineering has been prevalent in the US markets for the last decade. Would share buybacks or spinoffs be considered catalysts?

Dustin Haygood: Yes. Capital allocation, it’s a critical element to investing and managing a business. And changes in capital allocation, they can be catalysts. There are some businesses that have proven they are the exception and they’re actually able to add value through acquisitions. This could be a catalyst. And it really also depends on the type of company. Companies that are in more consolidated or mature industries, perhaps something like a grocery chain as an example, if they increase their free cash flow generation, we would rather see them return more capital to shareholders through share buybacks or dividends, while there are other businesses out there that are earlier on in their lifecycle and they’re able to deploy capital at a 40 or 50% return. For those types of businesses that are also run by great management teams, we want to see them instead use that capital to reinvest in their business.

Alex Warren: That makes sense. Different approaches for different businesses. Now, can you provide specific examples of catalysts in action?

Dustin Haygood: The most recent purchase across our global, international and value equity strategies is the French tire company, Michelin. Almost everyone is familiar with their mascot, the Michelin man, and it’s a market leader in the industry with about a 15% share of global tire sales. It’s a high quality company that we believe is on the path toward further improvement driven by the catalyst we identified for the business. These catalysts include the mixed shift toward selling a higher proportion of larger diameter tires. These are tires that are 19 or 20 inches on cars, and sold at higher margins and it’s more profitable. They also have a very high loyalty rate amongst Michelin customers. If a car is stocked with 20 inch Michelin tires new, there’s about a 90% chance another set of Michelins is put on the car when they wear out. That means stickier customers and higher recurring revenues.

In 2015, about 25% of Michelin sales were large diameter tires, and today it’s over 40%. We believe this mix shift towards larger diameter tires should increase Michelin’s profitability. It’s something that’s already taking place today. It’s something we can track and we think it will continue. And in addition, when you look at the ongoing adoption and rollout of electric vehicles, EVs, they are heavier than cars with internal combustion engines because of their larger batteries and they have higher torque. That means EVs burn through tires much faster. And because of Michelin’s market leadership, history of product innovation, and expertise in large diameter tires, it makes them uniquely positioned to benefit from the shift towards electric vehicles that are fitted with large diameter tires.

Alex Warren: That’s a fascinating example, and that 90% loyalty figure that you provided is just staggering. Are there catalysts that are more prevalent in specific industries?

Dustin Haygood: Sometimes in the industrials or even material sectors, there are companies that have grown with acquisitions, so simplifying things through streamlining their manufacturing footprint or getting back to focusing on their core competencies, can provide efficiencies and cost savings. That could be a catalyst. In the technology sector, there are companies that have switched from licensing their software to a subscription based model that provides predictable recurring revenues and higher normalized margins. Also, corporate transformations such as M&A and spinoffs, they’ve provided opportunities for us. We have owned several spinoffs that were inside larger businesses. Those spinoffs can often benefit from being independently run, being in charge of their capital allocation decisions, no longer being undermanaged, or having an executive team that was under incentivized. That could help drive better innovation and business structures, which can be a catalyst.

Alex Warren: That makes sense. They’re able to control their own destinies. Now, this has been a great conversation and we have time for one final question. What if a company executes on its catalyst or the catalysts aren’t working? How does the team approach assessing catalysts after buying a business?

Dustin Haygood: We continuously monitor catalysts, just like a business owner is continuously monitoring their business. We come to work every day trying to understand how the companies we own are propelling their businesses forward. That work allows us to see how management teams are developing or improving on their strategies. And the best ones, they are creating new catalysts during our course of ownership. That’s allowed us to own some companies for eight, nine, sometimes 10 plus years as they find new and often interesting ways to improve. While some other companies, they may execute on catalysts more quickly and that’s fine as well, but that’s really the fun part of the job, doing deep research, learning more about a company’s value chain, better understanding how these businesses are changing, and that’s what everyone on our team is so passionate about.

Alex Warren: A passion for the business. I like it. Now, that brings us to the end of this episode. Thank you so much, Dustin, for joining us today. We hope you’ve enjoyed it and learned more about Aristotle. Thank you for listening to the Power of Patience. To learn more about Aristotle, please visit www.aristotlecap.com or follow the link in the show notes. If you enjoyed the show, please rate and review us on Spotify and Apple Podcast. And on behalf of Aristotle, this is Alex Warren, and thank you for listening.

DISCLOSURE

For additional disclosures please refer to www.aristotlecap.com

Host: Alex Warren, CFA, CAIA

Guest: Dominic Nolan, CFA, CEO of Aristotle Pacific Capital

May 11, 2023

Episode Length: 17:55

In this episode, we speak with Dominic Nolan, CFA, CEO of Aristotle Pacific. Dominic discusses the recent addition of the liquid credit specialist to the Aristotle family and what he believes makes Aristotle Pacific unique. He also discusses the Federal Reserve’s battle against inflation, the current state of fixed income markets in 2023 and where he sees potential opportunities for patient investors.

SHOW NOTES
  • Disclosures (00:00 to 00:34)
  • Episode introduction (00:35 to 01:16)
  • Introduction to the episode’s guest: Aristotle Pacific’s Dominic Nolan (01:17 to 01:50)
  • History of Aristotle Pacific (01:51 to 02:41)
  • Genesis of the acquisition of Aristotle Pacific (02:42 to 03:53)
  • Cultural and organizational fit with the Aristotle Family (03:54 to 05:35)
  • Background of Aristotle Pacific’s investment team (05:36 to 07:47)
  • What makes Aristotle Pacific unique (07:48 to 10:21)
  • The battle against inflation: discussion on inflation and Federal Reserve Policy (10:22 to 13:23)
  • Discounting the headlines: discussion on fixed income markets in 2023 (13:24 to 14:14)
  • Areas of the market that may warrant caution (14:15 to 15:37)
  • Outlook and opportunities for credit in the next few years (15:38 to 17:17)
  • Conclusion (17:18 to 17:55)
TRANSCRIPT

Alex Warren: The term Aristotle is used to represent a family of affiliates, which is comprised of Aristotle Capital Management, Aristotle Capital Boston, Aristotle Credit Partners, Aristotle Atlantic Partners, and Aristotle Pacific Capital, which collectively operate under a unified platform known as Aristotle. Each firm is an independent investment advisor registered under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940, as amended. Welcome to the Power of Patience, Aristotle’s podcast, where we share our views on topics actively explored by our investment teams and across the organization. I’m Alex Warren, product specialist at Aristotle, and I’ll be your host today. Coming up on today’s episode, we’ll be speaking with Dominic Nolan, CEO of Aristotle, Pacific Capital. If you enjoy this podcast, please like and share it on LinkedIn to help us spread the word. Today on the show we’ll discuss the introduction of Aristotle Pacific Capital to the Aristotle family, what makes Aristotle Pacific Capital unique, inflation and Federal Reserve policy, and opportunities today for fixed income investors. Without further ado, let’s get started. Dominic, thank you so much for speaking with me today. To lead off the discussion, can you introduce yourself and provide a brief overview of Aristotle Pacific Capital?

Dominic Nolan: Happy to; Dominic Nolan, CEO of Aristotle Pacific Capital, formerly Pacific Asset Management. Joined the firm in 2008, about a month before Lehman Brothers, so it was a bit of dubious timing on our side, and been with the firm since. We started with about a billion in traditional credit, and at the time of acquisition, a little over $20 billion. As it relates to the origin of Aristotle Pacific Capital, it really starts with Pacific Asset Management. I would say even before that with Pacific Life and their relationship with PIMCO, Pacific Life was the parent company of that very large firm for a number of years. In the late 90s, it was sold to Allianz, and there was ownership still retained by Pacific Life, and essentially that was called away. Knowing that was taking place, there was a group from the general account of Pacific Life that approached the parent company, and said we’d like to start an asset manager with a focus on corporate credit, bottom-up corporate credit. Understanding that there was no longer an active ownership stake in PIMCO anymore, granted that, and Pacific Asset Management was born in January of 2007.

So as they built out the team, I believe I was number 10 or so, there was half a dozen from the general account, and then the rest external hires and again, joined in mid-2008.

Alex Warren: Absolutely. You touched on the recent acquisition from Pacific Asset Management. What was the genesis of the acquisition?

Dominic Nolan: We had been in existence now for a good 14, 15 years, and grown from a billion to over $20 billion. One of the catalysts for the sale was an operating agreement between Pacific Asset Management and Pacific Life coming to an end. The timing of that was that we needed to reevaluate that operating agreement, so that’s one. Two, at a high level, the firm had reached scale, I think within asset management, and that’s a very difficult thing to do, but with $20 billion, the momentum of the business was quite strong. We had hit $10 billion in 2018 and had doubled within two to three years. So again, the high growth rate there. Three, Pacific Life was evaluating their businesses and determined they wanted to remain focused on balance sheet centric businesses. And then when you incorporate that, our business model, even though we’re financial services, is really slightly different than the insurance business model. I think you add all that together. Again, timing of the agreement, wanting to focus on balance sheet centric businesses, us reaching scale, it just led to a decision that they wanted to find us a new partner.

Alex Warren: That makes sense. Now, in your opinion, how is the cultural fit, and what did the two organizations bring to the table?

Dominic Nolan: We went through this process really for most of 2022, and as it relates to things that our team and I wanted was first and foremost, we wanted to keep the team together, so finding a partner that was willing to do that was paramount. Number two, we wanted to find a partner that could help us grow. It’s easy to say, doesn’t everyone want to help you grow? There were entities we were speaking with where we were the second or third fixed income team, and I think they just wanted to increase assets, but not really help us grow.

Alex Warren: Got you.

Dominic Nolan: And then the third element is we wanted to maintain our owner operator mentality. Having the proverbial skin in the game was important to us when we struck our deal in the mid-2010s with Pacific Life. We wanted to maintain that, and it was pretty evident, I would say early in the process, that was Aristotle’s operating model. Certainly, welcoming the team, the ability to help us grow, and that owner operator construct was exactly what we were looking for.

And to add to that, then you start to dig into the values of the organization, and how they operated. And I felt Aristotle was very like-minded. They understood it is a people business, not a balance sheet business. And the track record of success with senior management stood out to us, on top of being like-minded. The investment disciplines were very complementary, and distribution had little to no overlap in my opinion. And then all of that wrapped in an experience of eight years of knowing senior management of Aristotle. It worked well, and again, it got to be where there was really only one clear choice in my opinion.

Alex Warren: Those are important considerations, and it makes sense. For the benefit of the listeners, we’re actually in the same building, so it’s a bit of a hand in glove relationship right there.

Dominic Nolan: Yes.

Alex Warren: Now I understand Aristotle Pacific Capital has a deep bench of credit investors. Can you provide some background on your investment team?

Dominic Nolan: As alluded earlier in our discussion, we were founded in 2007. The focus there was corporate credit, and the investment disciplines were around investment grade credit, high yield bonds, floating rate loans. Those disciplines anchor our business today. So back in ’07 when we had about a billion, that’s what we invested in. Fast-forward 15 years, those are the areas we invest in today. Now, we have added structured credit, or CLOs, on top of those disciplines, but the underlying collateral of that business line are floating rate loans. So I’d say 99 plus percent of our business is focused on corporate credit. Now that element as far as how we invest, first and foremost, the portfolio managers make the decisions on their respective strategies. In other words, there is not a firm-wide view on macroeconomics, risk tolerance, sector preferences. That is done at a portfolio management level.

At the same time, our portfolio managers for each strategy, we have more than one portfolio manager, and in our view, a well-executed team can outrun any individual, that’s our view. And that has been in place since the beginning. Another element is from an analyst standpoint, a research standpoint, they really cover an industry. And I’d say many firms in our industry will separate the investment grade team and the leverage finance team, leverage finance is high yield and floating rate loans. Our structure is that our retail analyst is looking at the investment grade companies all the way through, and the thesis there is if you’re going to research retail, you’re best to know what Walmart’s doing in retail as you dig deeper and get to understand that marketplace.

Alex Warren: Yeah.

Dominic Nolan: So we’ve incorporated that since our beginning. So when you look through, it’s a focus on liquid credit. The portfolio managers really are responsible for their strategy. There isn’t a firm-wide macro view or preference of sectors, and our research structure is done on an industry level, and that’s how we’ve approached investing in credit since the beginning.

Alex Warren: That’s fascinating. I know a top-down view is something that you see in many fixed income shops, so that leads well into my next question. What do you believe makes the firm unique?

Dominic Nolan: We have been focused on an area of the market that I think a lot of other firms don’t focus on. That was something that we discovered over the past year or two, and just to give you a sense of that. When you’re a really large fixed income manager, your predominant benchmark is the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Index, and that’s the bellwether index for most investors. The breakdown of that index in high level, it’s about a third U.S. treasuries. It’s about a third mortgage-backed securities, about 25% corporate credit, and the rest is asset-backed securities, and maybe some sovereign debt. When Fannie and Freddie were taken into conservatorship post-crisis, that meant the benchmark was going to be 60% to 70% quasi-government or government, U.S. government backed securities, and as a large fixed income shop, if that’s your benchmark, that means getting that call right on top-down macro duration, etc. It’s going to drive performance.

Our focus has been on the 25% of the benchmark, that investment grade corporate, and then with that, you also have high yield and leveraged loans. Now, when you go below investment grade, that’s a marketplace that has developed uniquely since the crisis, and that the bank constraints post-crisis and the regulations, Dodd-Frank, etc. a lot of lending had changed or the face of lending had changed, and then private markets have become quite prevalent for small and mid-size corporations. Meanwhile, we stuck to the liquid part of the leverage finance market. So as it relates to the firm, we’re actually focused on the third-largest sector in the investment grade world, and we’re focused on the most liquid sector in the below investment rate world. That’s the space we’ve played in, the area we’ve been in for 15 years. As a large firm, we are going to be different, because of our focus on liquid credit relative to a small firm.

A lot of small firms have come about with their focus on private credit. The economics tend to be a little heavier for them, the spreads are higher. Meanwhile, we were plugging away in liquid markets, so fast-forward $20 billion in assets. What we found is very few firms have maintained that focus. I think there have been pressures, whether it be business or on the investment side to deviate, and that’s something that we have remained, I think, well positioned for, because now, again, we have some scale, so we’re not too small, but we’re not a battleship. We’re still able to move pretty quick.

Alex Warren: I think your comment about the Bloomberg Aggregate is fascinating. I didn’t appreciate how little credit was actually in the index itself, so that’s a fascinating point to take away. I’d love to shift gears and get your thoughts about markets. Inflation and Federal Reserve policy have recently presented challenges for fixed income investors. What are your thoughts on the battle against inflation?

Dominic Nolan: Well, it’s been a brutal journey getting here. And just some perspective, last year, the index was down 12%, 13%, around there. Up until last year. The worst year ever was 1994 when it was down about 3%.

Alex Warren: Oh, wow.

Dominic Nolan: So down last year four times.

Alex Warren: Yeah.

Dominic Nolan: The worst year ever. However, there’s a much different rate environment now, so people do get paid to be in investment grade assets, or even paid to be in short-term assets or cash. As it relates to the battle against inflation, obviously, the core of this was one, the Federal Reserve being very aggressive in raising rates, but two, the money that was printed during COVID. So from the standpoint of where it sits right now as we record, the Fed futures are anticipating one more rate hike in May, and actually forecasting a cut in December. So the expectation is the Fed will be cutting before the end of the year. Now that is different than what you’re hearing out of the Fed. Most of the rhetoric coming through is that the Fed intends to leave rates where they are, and the market has been in and out of belief as it relates to what the Fed will do, and there are many market participants that believe inflation’s going to decelerate at a greater pace than what the Fed’s anticipating.

The economy’s going to slow down at a greater rate than the Fed’s anticipating, so thus the Fed will be quasi forced to cut by the end of the year. There’s certainly a camp of investors that believe that, and then there’s a camp of investors that believe inflation’s going to be sticky. The Fed is uber determined to stick to their guns, and they’re going to leave rates where they are. We’ll see. That’s a bit dynamic. Personally, I think the economy is going to slow down more than what the Fed believes. However, where I have pause on the cut is the Fed continues to anchor to a 2% long-term inflation mark. That’s the same level they anchored to prior to COVID. To me, there should be, I think, an adjustment to reflect all the M2, all the money supply that went into the system.

Maybe the long-term rate should go from two to two and a half or three, I don’t know. It’ll take a few years to really get a sense of what should a long-term rate be. However, the Fed has not made that adjustment, so thus it leads me to believe that they’re going to stick to their guns, right or wrong, and leave rates where they are and not cut. However, the new information, and by new, I mean in the past 60 days are the banking issues. We have the second and third-largest failure in our banking history, and as a result, most banks up and down the size, so from money center banks to super-regionals, regionals, community banks, credit unions, etc. I would expect those banks to begin tightening their lending standards, which that tightens monetary policy as well. So if you incorporate that, and fast-forward six to nine months, I believe the economy will slow down. I believe the job market will get worse. Is that enough for the Fed to cut? Right now, it doesn’t seem like it, but it sure would surprise me if it got to that point.

Alex Warren: Broadly speaking, fear and volatility were hallmarks of 2022. Do you think fixed income investors have done a good job in 2023 with discounting the headlines?

Dominic Nolan: In general, I do. And the reason I say that is spreads have held in and rates are moving because the economy’s very difficult to underwrite right now. The recession element has been debated for the past year, and we have not gone into recession. First quarter print on GDP was around 1%, so technically the economy’s holding in, and the job market has been very resilient. So you’ve seen positive returns from a fixed income standpoint. So in general, I’d say they have. Fear and volatility to me from 2022, which is certainly the case, I think has been replaced with just a tremendous amount of uncertainty on the banking situation, and the economic situation.

Alex Warren: Given those uncertainties, are there any areas of the market that give you pause right now?

Dominic Nolan: For me, it’s really the private markets, and when you think about the repricing of assets. So the thing about liquid assets is they’re reflected in their risk premium daily. And when you had a tightening cycle last year, the first thing to reprice were liquid assets. The equity markets repriced, the fixed income markets repriced, those are liquid. Then you start to get into semi-liquid assets, things like office, retail, single family. There’s a lot of uncertainty in single family. I think there’s a lot of certainty that there are struggles happening in the office, commercial property, in particular with office and retail. Certainly, uncertainty on single family and multifamily, but that’s also going through the repricing element. We haven’t quite seen the full repricing in private markets. Private markets are not transparent, and a lot of times they’ll mark the same value, because no one has traded out of it.

And essentially, if you think about what’s the value of your house, well, you arbitrarily assign a number, but you really don’t know unless you sell. In liquid markets, things are selling every day. So you have that transparency. In private markets, I think there’s a lot of price discovery going on, and I don’t believe that’s been, certainly, not fully reflected. I think there’s more to go on the private side, so that gives me pause.

Alex Warren: That’s fascinating, and that’s certainly food for thought. It has been a great conversation and we have time for one final question. What is your outlook for corporate credit over the next few years, and where do you see opportunities?

Dominic Nolan: I’m very much constructive on corporate credit. A few reasons: one, there was a repricing. In investment grade bonds, a year, year and a half ago we were yielding 2%, now they’re yielding 5 plus percent. High yield was yielding sub 5%. Now it’s yielding 8 to 9%. Floating rate loans, with the Fed being aggressive, has discount margins or rate yields of around 9 to 10%. So from an investor’s standpoint, I feel the compensation you’re getting for that risk is substantially higher today. So that’s one. Two, when you look through to implied default rates versus forecasted rates, the markets are already pricing in defaults that are really higher than what Moody’s and S&P are forecasting. Now, that doesn’t mean we won’t get there, but it’s already discounting that in.

So you have that element and then, just when you look through the coupons, those coupons offer significant protection against capital loss, as it relates to credit relative to other asset class, private assets to me haven’t been repriced fully. Meanwhile, you have tightening conditions in an economy that’s slowing down, from an equity standpoint. I think that’s a lot of pressure on the economy and thus equities, whereas at least now in corporate credit, you have coupons to help offset that volatility. So I’m very much in the camp that, structurally, corporate credit, I think, feels pretty good after a decade plus of kind of being secondary to equity returns and private market returns. So I feel the time is quite nice right now for corporate credit.

Alex Warren: A good setup and a challenging environment. Well, that brings us to the end of this episode. Thank you so much, Dominic, for joining us today. We hope you’ve enjoyed it and learned more about Aristotle. Thank you for listening to the Power of Patience. To learn more about Aristotle, please visit www.aristotlecap.com or follow the link in the show notes. If you enjoyed the show, please rate and review us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And on behalf of Aristotle, this is Alex Warren, and thank you for listening.

DISCLOSURE

For additional disclosures please refer to www.aristotlecap.com

At Aristotle Capital Management (Aristotle), we have three core tenets to our investment process: we seek to invest in high-quality businesses, trading at attractive valuations, where there are company-specific catalysts underway to unlock this often-hidden value. While the concept of an investment “catalyst” is, generally, well understood by the marketplace, Aristotle’s specific definition of investment catalysts is often misunderstood.

When applied to the Aristotle investment process, a catalyst is an action or event both currently underway and within management’s control that, we believe, will fundamentally improve the business and propel a company closer to meeting its potential. The Aristotle investment process is to identify good or great companies in good or great businesses that, for some reason, are not yet meeting their full potential.

To read the full thought piece, please use the link below. 

Host: Alex Warren, CFA, CAIA

Guest: Nicholas Daft

April 27, 2023

Episode Length: 24:40

In this episode, we speak with Nicholas Daft, Director and Senior Research Analyst at Aristotle Atlantic. He shares his insights on why he believes cybersecurity is an important secular theme, shedding light on its evolution as businesses embrace digital transformation.

Nicholas highlights the growing frequency, complexity, and cost of cyberattacks, emphasizing why he believes it will necessitate investment in next-generation cybersecurity technology. Lastly, he explains why he believes certain market segments stand to gain from the continued investment in next-generation security software to combat cyber threats.

SHOW NOTES
  • Disclosures (00:00 to 00:34)
  • Episode introduction (00:35 to 01:22)
  • Introduction to the episode’s guest: Aristotle Atlantic’s Nicholas Daft (01:23 to 02:35)
  • Aristotle Atlantic’s unique investment approach (02:36 to 04:11)
  • Why Cybersecurity represents an investible secular theme (04:12 to 06:30)
  • Changes in the digital landscape and the evolution of cybersecurity (06:31 to 09:39)
  • The Internet of Things (IoT) explained (09:40 to 11:55)
  • Common cyberattack techniques and their consequences (11:56 to 14:20)
  • Why cybercrime is a national security concern (14:21 to 17:32)
  • The costs of cyberattacks (17:33 to 20:13)
  • Opportunities for growth in the cybersecurity industry (20:14 to 22:14)
  • Areas of the market that may benefit from the growth of cybersecurity (22:15 to 24:08)
  • Conclusion (24:09 to 24:40)
TRANSCRIPT

Alex Warren: The term Aristotle is used to represent a family of affiliates, which is comprised of Aristotle Capital Management, Aristotle Capital Boston, Aristotle Credit Partners, Aristotle Atlantic Partners, and Aristotle Pacific Capital, which collectively operate under a unified platform known as Aristotle. Each firm is an independent investment advisor registered under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940, as amended.

Welcome to the Power of Patience, Aristotle’s podcast, where we share our views on topics actively explored by our investment teams and across our organization. I’m Alex Warren, Product Specialist at Aristotle, and I’ll be your host today.

Coming up on today’s episode, we’ll be speaking with Nick Daft, Director and Senior Research Analyst at Aristotle Atlantic Partners. Nick’s coverage includes the information technology, energy, and material sectors.

If you enjoy this podcast, please like and share it on LinkedIn to help spread the word.

Today on the show we’ll discuss how the digital transformation of the past decade has led to network vulnerabilities, the growth of cyberattacks and techniques used, the impact of cybercrime and national security and cybersecurity market growth and investment opportunities. Without further ado, let’s get started.

Nick, thank you so much for joining me today. To lead off the discussion, can you introduce yourself and provide a brief history of your role at Aristotle Atlantic?

Nicholas Daft: Absolutely. Thank you, Alex. And hello to everyone listening to the Power of Patience podcast. Let me go ahead and introduce myself.

My name is Nick Daft and I’m a member of the five-person investment team here at Aristotle Atlantic Partners. I have worked in financial services for almost two decades in various roles over the years, but for the past 16 years, I have worked as an investment research analyst with my current team. The team and I, we joined Aristotle Atlantic in 2016 when we made the move from the asset management group of a large bank. Here at Aristotle Atlantic, we manage equity funds across both core and the growth strategies.

Now in my role as a senior research analyst on the team, as you mentioned, my areas of investment focus are the information technology sector, the energy sector and the materials sector, but with my primary focus being the technology sector. And this includes investing in leading companies in the software, semiconductor, and the hardware industries.

Alex Warren: Wonderful. Thank you, Nick.

Now, what do you believe makes Aristotle Atlantic unique?

Nicholas Daft: I would highlight two features that I think make Aristotle Atlantic unique.

One is the industry experience and longevity of the team. The five of us on the team have an average of 26 years of industry experience, and the average tenure of the members of the team is 17 years. We’ve worked together through many different economic cycles and events, and so we have had the benefit of experiencing a wide variety of market conditions, which we leverage as part of our investment process.

Another area of focus I would highlight, it’s the three pillars of our investing process. Those three pillars are secular themes, product cycles, and cyclical trends. We use these three pillars as the foundation for our specific company research. Within these three secular themes is the largest driver of our research process that underpins the portfolio investments.

What we’re looking for is themes, these secular themes that we believe represent significant longer-term shifts in spending across either the public or the private sector. And then within that theme, we use our bottom-up fundamental research to identify specific company investments that we believe will see out-sized returns from those secular theme-driven spending shifts.

And so today’s podcast subject, cybersecurity, it’s one of those secular themes, one of those 20 secular themes in fact that we’ve identified as part of our investment outlook, and we see it as a key beneficiary of increased spending by both business and governments over a multi-year period.

Alex Warren: Wonderful. Thank you, Nick. That leads to my next question.

Can you provide an overview of why you believe cybersecurity represents an investible secular theme?

Nicholas Daft: Absolutely. Happy to. In my research over the past few years, I’ve identified cybersecurity as a leading share gainer in IT budgets, and this has been happening as the digital world continues to transform and evolve at a rapid pace. If you look at companies that are investing in the digital capabilities, these enhance internal efficiencies, and they improve customer experiences and interactions.

As an example, let’s think about team members at companies around the world. They collaborate on work presentations with their colleagues who are also around the world. They’re doing this in real time using software tools such as Microsoft Teams. Or think about how easy it is to bank and shop online through your smartphone, or order groceries through your Alexa speaker, things like that. All of these they’re simple but powerful examples of the role of digital transformation in our everyday lives. But while these investments in digital technologies make our lives easier and more productive, we also have to realize the increased risks that come from this connectivity, and that’s the increased risks from cyber criminals.

The reliance on technology by businesses and consumers, it means more data is created. It’s estimated to be about two megabytes per second per person. And much of this data, it’s stored online in the cloud, which means more areas where data is exposed to attacks and vulnerabilities. And unfortunately, just as you and I benefit from this new technology in our daily lives, there are estimated to be 2000 hacking groups and cyber criminals around the world, and they’re using the same technology, the same technological advancements to increase the frequency and sophistication of their attacks.

So what this means is that businesses, they need to invest in cybersecurity to protect themselves as well as their customers, and they have to continue to invest each year to stay ahead of these cyber criminals, because an obsolete or an ineffective cyber defense, it leaves everyone vulnerable. So that’s why I see so much value investing in cybersecurity, in this secular theme. It’s finding those companies which offer the leading technology that is mission critical in cyber defenses that will ultimately reward investors through attractive, long-term profitable growth.

Alex Warren: Absolutely. That makes sense.

Nick, can you discuss how the digital landscape has changed over the past decade, and how has the cybersecurity market evolved with the rest of the digital market?

Nicholas Daft: Over the past decade, as businesses have shifted spending within their IT budgets as they implement these digital transformation initiatives, so the objective is ultimately to drive better business outcomes, and that’s through improving productivity and efficiency metrics. A study that was done in 2021 by a tech research firm showed the clear financial benefits from digital transformation. Companies that were far along in these initiatives have about twice the revenue growth of those that are early or haven’t even started on a digital transformation journey. It’s real tangible benefits.

So if you look at the Gartner data for worldwide IT spending from 2017 to 2022, it’s increased from about $3.5 trillion to about $4.5 trillion a year. That’s a cumulative 28% increase over those five years. But digging deeper, according to IDC, over that same time period, we see that global spending on digital transformation technologies and services, that spending has increased from just under $1 trillion to almost $1.9 trillion, and that’s cumulative spending growth of over 90%.

Alex Warren: Wow. Those are some big numbers.

Nicholas Daft: Yeah. For sure. For sure.

And so what does that mean? And what have companies done with those dollars to implement that digital transformation?

Well, we’ve seen companies shift from on-premise servers and remote networking access that was done solely through those clunky VPNs – very slow, very unwieldy types of technology, which I think it almost felt like dial up versus what we have now. Now we’ve shifted to this idea of cloud computing and the ability to access from anywhere using any device. Businesses are investing in efficiency tools provided by these infrastructure and platforms-as-a-service vendors, such as Microsoft, Azure, and Amazon’s AWS, and software-as-a-service vendors such as Salesforce.com or Adobe. Businesses have also shifted from using mail and telephone calls as contact points with customers and consumers. And now they’re spending on the engagement platforms that leverage multi-channel communication strategies like Facebook or TikTok or Instagram and Google.

So businesses have benefited with real tangible benefits. They have more data, they have better analytics, automation of workflows, improved work-from-anywhere capabilities and more efficient customer acquisition and retention strategies. But as these businesses have rushed to modernize their network and software infrastructure to capitalize on these benefits, cybersecurity has often lagged behind. And as a result, IT executives… There was a recent study where they disclosed that they have seen an increase in cyberattacks and breach rates because they haven’t kept up. So businesses, they’re tempting to use legacy solutions to protect their new cloud-based infrastructure, and because of that, there are these gaps in defenses, which creates security issues.

Alex Warren: Gotcha. That makes sense. It’s like putting old parts on a new car.

Away from some of the examples that you just shared, software is a service and that, I understand the digital transformation has made its way to industrial companies as well. Can you talk about internet of things?

Nicholas Daft: Yes. I think it’s fascinating to see the transformation taking place in industrial companies specifically. We’re seeing these companies, they’re digitizing their technology stacks and they’re leveraging 5G technology and internet of things (IOT), which just to abbreviated as IOT, they’re using these IOT devices to enhance their operations. These industrial companies, they’re using IOT for automation, remote monitoring of tools, predictive maintenance or supply chain optimization.

Another area where we see growth of IOT devices is also actually in healthcare, where hospitals use IOT for remote patient monitoring. Or in the energy space, where oil and gas producers are using them for monitoring well performance and flow rates or to predict or abnormalities that could be occurring because of pressure changes.

So these are examples of businesses using IOT to drive efficiencies and positive outcomes. And as a result, we’re seeing hyperbolic growth in the number of connected IOT devices around the world. In 2015, there were about 4 billion connected devices. That grew to 13 billion in 2022. And conservative estimates have this growing to almost 30 billion by 2030. So that’s the good news, but here’s the bad news. All these billions of devices they represent billions of new entry points for cyber criminals.

To demonstrate this, a statistic from a 2020 survey that I recently read, it was a survey of global IT professionals, and it showed 84% of organizations have IOT devices on their corporate networks. Of this group, 70%, (seven zero), 70% have had attempted or successful hacks, yet still more than 50% of these organizations are not using security measures beyond the default password. Just astounding to me.

Alex Warren: Yeah. Oh my goodness. I’m thinking about those numbers that you’re mentioning and trying to visualize the chart in my head about how big of a growth in internet of things and connected devices, what that chart must look like. And that brings me into my next question.

What are some of the common cyberattack techniques that companies are trying to protect against, and what are the consequences of these attacks?

Nicholas Daft: The most common attack threats continue to be malware, ransomware, phishing, identity-based attacks, and then denial of service (DDoS) attacks. And the objective with all these attacks is to infiltrate a company’s network and gain access to sensitive data or effectively hold the company’s network ransom for a payment.

So cyber criminals are capitalizing on the larger tax surface and the proliferation of endpoints like smartphones and IOT devices and laptops, and based on current trends, they’re successful most of the time due to the unfortunate fact of human error. There was a Stanford University study that estimated that almost 90% of all data breaches are due to human error and employee mistakes.

Alex Warren: Wow.

Nicholas Daft: Yeah. And these errors, they have massive and far-reaching implications. In 2022, the Uber network was breached when a contractor did not follow security protocols and accepted a malicious email request for two-factor authentication log on. And because of that breach or because of that acceptance, the hackers they gained access to sensitive customer data.

On a much larger national scale, there was the May 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack by a Russia-based cybercriminal group. This, too, was accomplished due to human error. They used a former employee’s password to access a VPN that wasn’t adequately secured by multi-factor authentication. I’m sure you remember, Alex, from the news stories and the photos, as a result, this attack forced the company to shut down the entire pipeline, and this pipeline supplies almost half of the US east coast supply of gasoline.

And so as a result of shutting down the pipeline, there were fuel shortages and traffic jams for people trying to get gas at gas stations because there was a shortage of gas. And this continued until the company paid a ransom to the hackers. It was about $4.5 billion, and they paid it in Bitcoin. Cyber criminals are leveraging Bitcoin. It’s a frictionless and anonymous payment method, and they’re leveraging Bitcoin, which emboldens them further to do more ransomware attacks.

Alex Warren: Absolutely. That makes sense. I can only imagine what the process is for a pipeline operator to go out and try to find or buy Bitcoin. I personally don’t know myself. So that example you gave about the pipeline leads into our next question well.

Why is cybercrime a national security concern?

Nicholas Daft: Yeah, that’s a very prominent issue, and it feels like it’s always in the headlines. It’s really over the past decade that we’ve seen a dramatic increase in state-sponsored cybercriminal activity by groups from China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. These actions are often tied to economic incentive, but now, more often ,there’s an adversarial nature to the threats; corporate espionage, or the attempted theft of national intelligence.

If we go back to 2015, a pretty prominent hack, a group of hackers broke into the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and they stole records associated with all 21 million civilian employees of the U.S. government. These stolen records they had the potential to be used for malicious purposes with a potential threat to state security.

If we look at corporate espionage, an example over a multi-year period, it was a Chinese state-sponsored hacker group known as APT41, and it’s reported that they have successfully stolen hundreds of gigabytes of technical documents and intellectual property. And the data that was stolen, is associated with manufacturing, energy and pharmaceutical companies. And digging even deeper, some of this data relates to fighter jets and missiles, so that is a real national security threat there. And in fact, cybersecurity experts believe that there is evidence that Chinese state hackers, many years ago, began a hacking campaign to steal sensitive data on the U.S. Air Force’s F-35 stealth fighter program. And then this data that was stolen was used to accelerate the Chinese development of their own stealth fighter.

So there’s national security implications, and there’s also a significant economic cost to the country. The FBI has estimated that this type of cyber theft leads to annual losses to the U.S. economy of between $225 billion and $600 billion – so, some real significant numbers.

What this shows, it shows that businesses and governments need to work together to defend against these cyber threats across their daily operations. And that includes critical business operations and national infrastructure. Just thinking about the implications, if you think about state-sponsored cybercriminal groups shutting down regional electrical grids or the US air traffic control system or the New York Stock Exchange, these would have massive negative impacts on the safety and economic life of all Americans.

Fortunately, in good news, the U.S. government is getting more proactive in addressing these increasing threats. And just recently, on March 2nd of this year, the Biden administration released a national cybersecurity strategy, and this will create a more focused plan on defending against cyberattack groups. And based on what I’ve read so far, I think it’s truly a step in the right direction.

Alex Warren: That’s good news. Good news. You gave some great… I guess not great, but more staggering examples or headlines of breaches that have taken place over the years.

What are some of the costs of these cyberattacks?

Nicholas Daft: Sure, sure. Yeah. And as you just said, none of these examples are great, and they’re all unfortunately damaging. The three different types of costs are financial, operational, and reputational, of course.

If we look at the financial side, to put a dollar figure on it: the average cost of a data breach globally in 2022 was $4.35 million. But in the U.S. that went up to %9.44 million. So the U.S. was the highest area in terms of the cost of a breach. And these costs were up over 12% versus 2020.

There are, of course, many examples where costs have been significantly higher. Taking that Uber example that I mentioned earlier: that breach required the company to pay $100,000 to delete the stolen data, but then the company was required to pay $148 million to settle a legal dispute that the company had covered up the breach.

Another attack that has garnered significant headlines recently or in the past few years was the SolarWinds breach. That one impacted an estimated 18,000 customers that used this software. And many of those customers were Fortune 500 companies. The cost of repairing the damage done by that breach, the SolarWinds breach, it’s expected to be in the tens of billions of dollars.

As hackers continue to refine their techniques and gain more advanced technology themselves, and that includes artificial intelligence (AI, there has been a noticeable uptick in ransomware attacks that require companies to pay to unlock their systems that are being held hostage. As we discussed earlier, Colonial Pipeline, they paid $4.5 million to restore their operations. And in the same year, in 2021, can Financial, which is a large insurance company, they paid $40 million to hackers to have their data unlocked after they suffered from a ransomware attack.

Alex, putting this all together, it’s very clear that the economic costs of cybercrime are large and growing. If we look at it on a global scale, a publication from Cybersecurity Ventures, estimated global costs from cybercriminal activity to be $6 trillion. That’s up from $3 trillion in 2015 and growing to over $10 trillion by 2025. And these numbers they shouldn’t leave any doubt that there’s a huge economic cost from cybercrime.

Alex Warren: Absolutely. And those are some massive numbers. I want you to put on your investor hat for a second here.

Where do you see opportunities for growth within the cybersecurity industry?

Nicholas Daft: Yeah. As the global digital transformation has accelerated, the complexity of securing the technology stack across multiple clouds and vendors has also increased. And the cybersecurity industry has, until recently, been quite fragmented with vendors being relatively siloed in their product offerings.

What I mean by this is they’re focused on one area of expertise, and IT departments at companies, they relied on multiple different vendors for the full suite of cybersecurity products. But this status quo, it’s not suitable given the rapid evolutions in cloud computing and network structures that we’re seeing, and particularly when considering the current threat environment. The increased economics of cybercrime means more R&D being spent by criminal groups, as I mentioned in one of the prior answers. This includes the use of artificial intelligence to enhance the effectiveness of their threats.

So businesses and governments they need to respond. And the key areas of investment going forward need to be in four areas of cybersecurity. That’s (1) cloud network and workload security, (2) endpoint security, (3) access management security, and (4) application security. The good news is that the focus on cybersecurity is happening at the board and C-suite level, and businesses are now prioritizing cybersecurity within their IT budgets.

A recent study by Gartner estimates that spending on cybersecurity in total will grow by low-to-mid double digits over the next few years from the 2022 level of $175 billion. And this is while IT budgets themselves will only grow in the low single digits. But within the four key areas of focus that I just highlighted; those four key areas will represent almost two thirds of this total cybersecurity spending growth.

Alex Warren: Nick, this has been a great conversation. We have time for one final question.

What companies or areas of the market do you believe can benefit most from the growth of cybersecurity?

Nicholas Daft: Yeah. In my opinion, the key beneficiaries of this increasing cybersecurity spend are next-generation cloud native companies that are exposed to the four key areas that I mentioned earlier. And these next-gen cybersecurity firms will provide a modular approach to security and integrate AI. This modular approach allows the cybersecurity companies to efficiently innovate and then deploy new defensive products to their customers, and then their customers can seamlessly integrate these new product modules into their network security stack. This facilitates the consolidation of vendors onto fewer platforms. This provides a stronger defense posture for the customer due to the reduction in breach gaps, and it also improves the ROI.

Finally, the best cybersecurity companies will be those that use artificial intelligence and machine learning to detect and prevent threats in real time. One issue that businesses and IT departments face is a shortage of trained cybersecurity experts. And so, while IT security departments will always have human oversight in some form, it is my opinion that it will be imperative for these next-gen cybersecurity providers to integrate advanced AI into their software technology. Using AI will allow for more efficient monitoring of threat signals and proactive threat hunting so businesses can identify and respond to advanced threats before they can cause damage.

So in conclusion, as the digital transformation journey continues, I believe that next-generation cloud native cybersecurity companies will be the key to defending businesses and governments from the increasing threats from malicious cybercriminals and state-sponsored hackers.

Alex Warren: That brings us to the end of this episode. Thank you so much, Nick, for joining us today. We hope you enjoyed it and learned more about Aristotle. Thanks for listening to the Power of Patience.

To learn more about Aristotle, please visit www.aristotlecap.com, or follow the link to the show notes. If you enjoyed the show, please rate and review us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And come back next time for a discussion on Aristotle Pacific Capital. Until then, this is Alex Warren, and thank you for listening.

DISCLOSURE

The term “Aristotle” is used to represent the family of affiliates which is comprised of Aristotle Capital Management, Aristotle Capital Boston, Aristotle Credit Partners, and Aristotle Atlantic Partners; which collectively operate under a unified platform known as Aristotle. Each firm is an independent investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended.

For additional disclosures please refer to www.aristotlecap.com

Markets Review

The U.S. equity market finished higher for the first quarter of the year, as the S&P 500 Index rose 7.50% during the period. Concurrently, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index increased 2.96% for the quarter. In terms of style, the Russell 1000 Growth Index outperformed its value counterpart by 13.36% during the quarter.

Sources: SS&C Advent, Bloomberg
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle Atlantic Focus Growth Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Atlantic Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Seven out of the eleven sectors within the Russell 1000 Value Index finished higher for the quarter, with Communication Services, Information Technology and Consumer Discretionary gaining the most. Meanwhile, Health Care, Financials and Energy were the worst-performing sectors.

Although inflation remained well above its historical average of 3.26%, the pace of price increases moderated during the quarter. As such, for the 12-month periods ending in January and February, annualized CPI figures declined from 6.4% to 6.0%, respectively. The pattern of disinflation was partly driven by decreases in the price of fuel, used vehicles and medical care services. The government also reported a deceleration in U.S. economic growth, as GDP increased 2.6% in the fourth quarter following the third quarter’s 3.2% increase. Weaker consumer spending and business investment were significant factors in the softer results. However, retail sales in January jumped 3%, and the labor market remained tight, with an unemployment rate of 3.6%.

While some economic data points trended in a positive direction, the market was shocked with the regulatory shutdown of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), the second-largest bank failure by assets in U.S. history. The value of SVB’s bond holdings had plunged amid rapidly increasing interest rates, creating a shortfall as clients (largely composed of tech startups) withdrew their deposits, eventually leading to a run on the bank’s deposits. Just days later, regulators also took control of New York-based Signature Bank. The speed and size of the bank failures sent U.S. bank share prices tumbling. To provide stability, the Federal Reserve announced the creation of an emergency lending facility that would allow banks to deposit high-quality assets (e.g., Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities) in exchange for a cash advance worth the face value of the asset (instead of the market value). Additionally, First Citizens Bank announced that it had made an agreement with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for a whole bank purchase with loss share coverage of Silicon Valley Bridge Bank.1

Despite the turmoil in the banking system, the Federal Reserve (Fed) stayed its course, increasing its benchmark rate by 0.25% in March (its ninth consecutive rate hike) to a range of 4.75% to 5.00%. However, noting that banking events may contribute to a more restrictive credit environment, the Fed tempered its stance that further rate increases are necessary to restore price stability and achieve its 2% inflation target. Rather, Fed Chair Powell emphasized the reliance on incoming data to inform the future path of monetary policy, as conditions may have tightened more than economic indices currently suggest.

On the corporate earnings front, results and guidance were broadly underwhelming, with only 68% of S&P 500 companies exceeding EPS estimates (below the five-year average of 77%) and 67% of companies providing negative EPS guidance (above the five-year average of 59%). Overall, the S&P 500 companies reported a decline in earnings of 4.9% as inflation and recession remained prevalent topics, with 332 and 148 companies mentioning those words on earnings calls, respectively. Nevertheless, in spite of the weaker-than-expected results, there have also been positive remarks of cost cutting, moderating input price pressures and better supply-chain dynamics.

Performance and Attribution Summary

For the first quarter of 2023, Aristotle Atlantic’s Focus Growth Composite posted a total return of 13.05% net of fees (13.07% gross of fees), underperforming the 14.37% total return of the Russell 1000 Growth Index.

Performance (%)1Q231 Year3 Years5 YearsSince Inception*
Focus Growth Composite (gross)13.07-16.8012.8610.6810.21
Focus Growth Composite (net)13.05-16.8912.7510.429.95
Russell 1000 Growth Index14.37-10.9018.5813.6512.79
*The Focus Growth Composite has an inception date of March 1, 2018. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle Atlantic Focus Growth Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Atlantic Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Sources: FactSet
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Attribution results are based on sector returns which are gross of investment advisory fees. Attribution is based on performance that is gross of investment advisory fees and includes the reinvestment of income. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

During the first quarter, the portfolio’s underperformance relative to the Russell 1000 Growth Index was due to allocation effects, while security selection modestly contributed. Security selection in Consumer Discretionary and Consumer Staples, as well as an overweight in Health Care detracted the most from performance. Conversely, security selection in Information Technology, Financials and Health Care contributed to relative results.

Contributors and Detractors for 1Q 2023

Relative ContributorsRelative Detractors
NvidiaTesla
MSCIDollar General
IDEXX LaboratoriesDarling Ingredients
CrowdStrike HoldingsNorfolk Southern
ON SemiconductorBio-Techne

Contributors

Nvidia

Nvidia contributed to outperformance, as the company announced better-than-expected fourth quarter earnings driven by a strong rebound in Gaming and an improving outlook for the Datacenter business due to the acceleration of Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) driven Artifical Intelligence (AI) deployment. The company also hosted its Global Technology Conference (GTC) in March where it further highlighted its leading technology being used to develop AI Large Language Models (LLM). The company announced new partnerships with hyperscalers for its AI cloud-based service while also releasing new software and hardware offerings that will support GPU-driven AI growth.  Nvidia continues to see a growing addressable market for its products and services as AI uses become more prevalent.

MSCI

MSCI contributed to performance in the first quarter following better-than-expected fourth quarter earnings results, highlighting the company’s ability to grow despite macroeconomic headwinds. Management continued focusing on expense efficiency gains while investing in long-term growth opportunities. MSCI reiterated its bullish view on its ESG/Climate business outlook.

Detractors

Tesla

Tesla was a negative contributor to performance due to our underweight position relative to Russell 1000 Growth Index, as the company had strong performance in Q1. The strength occurred after the company partially reversed a previously announced price cut for its electric vehicles following a period of strong demand. Tesla also reported better-than-expected results for Q4 2022 during the first quarter. 

Dollar General

Dollar General shares underperformed on a rotation out of more defensive consumer names at the start of the year despite growing concerns of a slowdown in the economy and the coinciding effects on consumer spending.  During the first quarter, Dollar General reported solid comps, as their core lower-income consumer remained resilient despite rising inflation.    

Recent Portfolio Activity

The table below shows all buys and sells completed during the quarter, followed by a brief rationale.

BuysSells
ON SemiconductorHorizon Therapeutics
Tesla

Buys

ON Semiconductor

ON Semiconductor supplies analog, standard logic and discrete semiconductors for data and power management. The company provides industry leading intelligent sensing and power solutions to help its customers solve the most challenging problems and create cutting edge products for a better future. Its extensive portfolio of sensors, power management, connectivity, custom and SoC, analog, logic, timing and discrete devices helps customers efficiently solve design challenges in advanced electronic systems and products. ON Semiconductor’s devices perform power and signal control, and interface functions appear in a wide range of end-user markets including automotive, communications, computing, consumer, medical, industrial, networking, telecom and aerospace/defense. Most of ON Semiconductor’s sales come from the Asia/Pacific region.

We see ON Semiconductor attractively valued and leveraged to attractive areas of end-market growth over the next few years. The company is gaining both semiconductor content and seeing better pricing tailwinds due to demand exceeding supply and more complex semiconductor content. We see these trends continuing to provide 2023 tailwinds and fully expect strong growth rates in electric vehicle penetration over the next five years.

Tesla

Tesla Motors designs, develops, manufactures, and markets high-performance, technologically advanced electric cars and solar energy generation and energy storage products. Tesla sells more than five fully electric cars, among others, the Model X and Y SUVs, as well as the Model S sedan and Model 3 sedan. The company has a growing global network of Tesla Superchargers, which are industrial grade, high-speed vehicle chargers, typically placed along well-traveled routes and in and around dense city centers to allow Tesla owners quick and reliable charging. Tesla offers certain advanced driver assist systems under its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving options. US customers generate nearly half of Tesla’s sales.

We see Tesla as the leading manufacturer of battery powered electric vehicles (EVs). The company has achieved scaled production of EVs before the other large automobile manufacturers.  The company’s technology in battery production and self-driving technology is more mature than competitors’ offerings.  EVs are one of the fastest growing categories within automobile manufacturing. The profit margin in the automotive segment is significantly above automotive competitors which provides the company flexibility to price its vehicles more strategically as the competition eventually scales up their EV production. The direct-to-consumer sales model gives the company more control over its relationship with its customers as well as a source of higher profit margin since there is no dealership share of the profits.

Sells

Horizon Therapeutics

We sold Horizon after Amgen announced their intention to acquire Horizon for $116.50 per share. The deal is expected to close in mid-year 2023.

Outlook

The impact of the Federal Reserve tightening cycle and the banking issues of the past month added to the concern of a potential economic recession. With goods inflation largely under control, labor costs will remain the focal point to achieving the stated goal of 2% inflation. With the labor market still tight, the Federal Reserve may well raise rates another 25 basis points with the peak in Fed Funds at 5.00% to 5.25%. Fed Funds Futures continue to point to the potential for a pivot into an easing cycle and this has supported the rise in equity prices. We believe the most likely outcome is for the Federal Reserve to pause for a period to access the impact to inflation of the rise in interest rates and shrinking of the balance sheet. Equity markets will focus on the impact this has had on the economy and the potential for a contraction in corporate profits. Equity valuation levels remain elevated and with the prospects for a decline in profits this sets up for a difficult path for higher equity prices.  The major support continues to be the prospect of a shift to a Federal Reserve easing cycle. Little progress has been made in dealing with the Debt Ceiling which will add a level of uncertainty and volatility to markets. With the war in Ukraine passing the one-year mark, there has been no progress toward a resolution adding to the uncertainty. With many of the sizable legislative packages passed now entering the phase of rule writing, markets will have more clarity on where these funds will flow. This should be one of the bright spots in a challenging economic outlook. Our focus will continue to be at the company level, with an emphasis on seeking to invest in companies with secular tailwinds or strong product-driven cycles.

1https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2023/pr23019.html

Disclosures

The opinions expressed herein are those of Aristotle Atlantic Partners, LLC (Aristotle Atlantic) and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not a guarantee or indicator of future results. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. You should not assume that any of the securities transactions, sectors or holdings discussed in this report were or will be profitable, or that recommendations Aristotle Atlantic makes in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of the listed in this report. The portfolio characteristics shown relate to the Aristotle Atlantic Focus Growth strategy. Not every client’s account will have these characteristics. Aristotle Atlantic reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs. There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in an account’s portfolio at the time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities discussed may not represent an account’s entire portfolio and, in the aggregate, may represent only a small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. The performance attribution presented is of a representative account from Aristotle Atlantic’s Focus Growth Composite. The representative account is a discretionary client account which was chosen to most closely reflect the investment style of the strategy. The criteria used for representative account selection is based on the account’s period of time under management and its similarity of holdings in relation to the strategy. Recommendations made in the last 12 months are available upon request. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

All investments carry a certain degree of risk, including the possible loss of principal. Investments are also subject to political, market, currency and regulatory risks or economic developments. International investments involve special risks that may in particular cause a loss in principal, including currency fluctuation, lower liquidity, different accounting methods and economic and political systems, and higher transaction costs. These risks typically are greater in emerging markets. Securities of small‐ and medium‐sized companies tend to have a shorter history of operations, be more volatile and less liquid. Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole and other types of stocks.

The material is provided for informational and/or educational purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be construed as investment, legal or tax advice and/or a legal opinion. Investors should consult their financial and tax adviser before making investments. The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication, may be modified due to changes in the market or economic conditions, and may not necessarily come to pass. Information and data presented has been developed internally and/or obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Aristotle Atlantic does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of such information.

Aristotle Atlantic Partners, LLC is an independent registered investment adviser under the Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. More information about Aristotle Atlantic, including our investment strategies, fees and objectives, can be found in our Form ADV Part 2, which is available upon request.  AAP-2304-31

Performance Disclosures

Composite returns for all periods ended March 31, 2023 are preliminary pending final account reconciliation.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance results for periods greater than one year have been annualized. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

Index Disclosures

The Russell 1000® Growth Index measures the performance of the large cap growth segment of the U.S. equity universe. It includes those Russell 1000 companies with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. This index has been selected as the benchmark and is used for comparison purposes only. The Russell 1000® Value Index measures the performance of the large cap value segment of the U.S. equity universe. It includes those Russell 1000 companies with lower price-to-book ratios and lower expected growth values. The S&P 500® Index is the Standard & Poor’s Composite Index of 500 stocks and is a widely recognized, unmanaged index of common stock prices. The Russell 2000® Index measures the performance of the small cap segment of the U.S. equity universe. The Russell 2000 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index representing approximately 10% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 2,000 of the smallest securities based on a combination of their market cap and current index membership. The Dow Jones Industrial Average® is a price-weighted measure of 30 U.S. blue-chip companies. The Index covers all industries except transportation and utilities. The NASDAQ Composite Index measures all NASDAQ domestic and international based common type stocks listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market. The NASDAQ Composite includes over 3,000 companies, more than most other stock market indices. The Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index is an unmanaged index of domestic investment grade bonds, including corporate, government and mortgage-backed securities. The WTI Crude Oil Index is a major trading classification of sweet light crude oil that serves as a major benchmark price for oil consumed in the United States. The 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bill is a short-term debt obligation backed by the U.S. Treasury Department with a maturity of three months.  The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services. While stock selection is not governed by quantitative rules, a stock typically is added only if the company has an excellent reputation, demonstrates sustained growth and is of interest to a large number of investors. The volatility (beta) of the Composite may be greater or less than its respective benchmarks. It is not possible to invest directly in these indices.

Markets Review

The U.S. equity market finished higher for the first quarter of the year, as the S&P 500 Index rose 7.50% during the period. Concurrently, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index increased 2.96% for the quarter. In terms of style, the Russell 1000 Growth Index outperformed its value counterpart by 13.36% during the quarter.

Sources: SS&C Advent, Bloomberg
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle Atlantic Large Cap Growth Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Atlantic Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Seven out of the eleven sectors within the Russell 1000 Value Index finished higher for the quarter, with Communication Services, Information Technology and Consumer Discretionary gaining the most. Meanwhile, Health Care, Financials and Energy were the worst-performing sectors.

While some economic data points trended in a positive direction, the market was shocked with the regulatory shutdown of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), the second-largest bank failure by assets in U.S. history. The value of SVB’s bond holdings had plunged amid rapidly increasing interest rates, creating a shortfall as clients (largely composed of tech startups) withdrew their deposits, eventually leading to a run on the bank’s deposits. Just days later, regulators also took control of New York-based Signature Bank. The speed and size of the bank failures sent U.S. bank share prices tumbling. To provide stability, the Federal Reserve announced the creation of an emergency lending facility that would allow banks to deposit high-quality assets (e.g., Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities) in exchange for a cash advance worth the face value of the asset (instead of the market value). Additionally, First Citizens Bank announced that it had made an agreement with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for a whole bank purchase with loss share coverage of Silicon Valley Bridge Bank.1

Despite the turmoil in the banking system, the Federal Reserve (Fed) stayed its course, increasing its benchmark rate by 0.25% in March (its ninth consecutive rate hike) to a range of 4.75% to 5.00%. However, noting that banking events may contribute to a more restrictive credit environment, the Fed tempered its stance that further rate increases are necessary to restore price stability and achieve its 2% inflation target. Rather, Fed Chair Powell emphasized the reliance on incoming data to inform the future path of monetary policy, as conditions may have tightened more than economic indices currently suggest.

On the corporate earnings front, results and guidance were broadly underwhelming, with only 68% of S&P 500 companies exceeding EPS estimates (below the five-year average of 77%) and 67% of companies providing negative EPS guidance (above the five-year average of 59%). Overall, the S&P 500 companies reported a decline in earnings of 4.9% as inflation and recession remained prevalent topics, with 332 and 148 companies mentioning those words on earnings calls, respectively. Nevertheless, in spite of the weaker-than-expected results, there have also been positive remarks of cost cutting, moderating input price pressures and better supply-chain dynamics a sector basis, nine out of eleven sectors within the Russell 1000 Growth Index finished higher for the quarter, with Utilities, Industrials and Health Care gaining the most. Meanwhile, Consumer Discretionary and Communication Services posted the largest declines and Information Technology rose the least.

Performance and Attribution Summary

For the first quarter of 2023, Aristotle Atlantic’s Large Cap Growth Composite posted a total return of 12.16% net of fees (12.26% gross of fees), underperforming the 14.37% total return of the Russell 1000 Growth Index.

Performance (%) 1Q231 Year3 Years5 YearsSince Inception*
Large Cap Growth Composite (gross)12.26-14.7615.3812.2615.01
Large Cap Growth Composite (net)12.16-15.0414.9511.8314.57
Russell 1000 Growth Index14.37-10.9018.5813.6516.00

*The Large Cap Growth Composite has an inception date of November 1, 2016. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle Atlantic Large Cap Growth Equity Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Atlantic Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Sources: FactSet
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Attribution results are based on sector returns which are gross of investment advisory fees. Attribution is based on performance that is gross of investment advisory fees and includes the reinvestment of income. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

During the first quarter, the portfolio’s underperformance relative to the Russell 1000 Growth Index was due to security selection and allocation effects. Security selection in Consumer Discretionary and Industrials, as well as an overweight in Health Care, detracted the most from relative performance. Conversely, security selection in Information Technology and Health Care, as well as a lack of exposure to Energy, contributed to relative returns.

Contributors and Detractors for 1Q 2023

Relative ContributorsRelative Detractors
NvidiaTesla
ON SemiconductorNorfolk Southern
CrowdStrike HoldingsHome Depot
Tenable HoldingsBio-Techne
UnitedHealth GroupDarling Ingredients

Contributors

Nvidia

Nvidia contributed to outperformance, as the company announced better-than-expected fourth quarter earnings driven by a strong rebound in Gaming and an improving outlook for the Datacenter business due to the acceleration of Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) driven Artifical Intelligence (AI) deployment. The company also hosted its Global Technology Conference (GTC) in March where it further highlighted its leading technology being used to develop AI Large Language Models (LLM). The company announced new partnerships with hyperscalers for its AI cloud-based service while also releasing new software and hardware offerings that will support GPU-driven AI growth. Nvidia continues to see a growing addressable market for its products and services as AI uses become more prevalent.

ON Semiconductor

ON Semiconductors contributed to outperformance, as the company’s fourth quarter earnings were slightly better than expected and the company’s outlook supports continued strength in the Silicon Carbide (SiC) market growth for EV customers. The company also announced another new key customer win to supply BMW with SiC for its EV, and this further builds on the company’s long-term supply agreement pipeline. The company continues to reiterate its SiC growth target for 2023 and expects gross margins to continue to improve, as its new SiC production facilities ramp.

Detractors

Tesla

Tesla was a negative contributor to performance due to our underweight position relative to Russell 1000 Growth Index, as the company had strong performance in Q1. The strength occurred after the company partially reversed a previously announced price cut for its electric vehicles following a period of strong demand. Tesla also reported better-than-expected results for Q4 2022 during the first quarter.

Norfolk Southern

Norfolk Southern underperformed in the first quarter of 2023 following the derailment of a train in Ohio in early February. Although there were no fatalities or injuries in the accident, chemical spills and a controlled burn of the contents of some tanker cars raised concern for long-term environmental impact, the associated cost of the cleanup and the increased risk of more stringent government regulations.

Recent Portfolio Activity

The table below shows all buys and sells completed during the quarter, followed by a brief rationale.

BuysSells
ON SemiconductorHorizon Therapeutics
Enphase EnergyDynatrace
Chart Industries
BioMarin Pharmaceutical
Tesla

Buys

ON Semiconductor

ON Semiconductor supplies analog, standard logic and discrete semiconductors for data and power management. The company provides industry leading intelligent sensing and power solutions to help its customers solve the most challenging problems and create cutting edge products for a better future. Its extensive portfolio of sensors, power management, connectivity, custom and SoC, analog, logic, timing and discrete devices helps customers efficiently solve design challenges in advanced electronic systems and products. ON Semiconductor’s devices perform power and signal control, and interface functions appear in a wide range of end-user markets including automotive, communications, computing, consumer, medical, industrial, networking, telecom and aerospace/defense. Most of ON Semiconductor’s sales come from the Asia/Pacific region.

We see ON Semiconductor attractively valued and leveraged to attractive areas of end-market growth over the next few years. The company is gaining both semiconductor content and seeing better pricing tailwinds due to demand exceeding supply and more complex semiconductor content. We see these trends continuing to provide 2023 tailwinds and fully expect strong growth rates in electric vehicle penetration over the next five years.

Enphase Energy

Enphase Energy designs, develops, manufactures and sells home energy solutions in the U.S. and internationally for the solar industry. The company is the world’s leading manufacturer of microinverters that convert solar-generated D.C. energy to A.C. energy usable in homes and buildings. Enphase introduced the world’s first microinverter system in 2008 and has expanded its offerings to include battery storage systems and proprietary technologies that provide energy monitoring and control services for solar energy systems. It sells its products and solutions directly to solar system distributors, large installers and strategic partners.

We see Enphase having a substantial market share that is gained through a premium product offering, superior customer service and the development of a large and diverse network of solar installers and distributors. The company’s products and services address a growing residential solar market. Coupling battery backup systems with existing and newly installed residential solar systems could accelerate the company’s revenue and earnings growth over the next several years, in our view. Additionally, commercial and international expansion offer additional revenue and earnings upside. Enphase also plans to expand manufacturing capacity in the U.S. during 2023 to benefit from tax incentives related to domestic production included in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

Chart Industries

Chart Industries is a leading independent global manufacturer of highly engineered equipment servicing multiple applications in the Energy and Industrial Gas markets. Its unique product portfolio is used in every phase of the liquid gas supply chain, including upfront engineering, service and repair. Being at the forefront of the clean energy transition, Chart is a leading provider of technology, equipment and services related to liquefied natural gas, hydrogen, biogas and CO2 Capture amongst other applications. Chart’s customers are mainly large, multinational producers and distributors of hydrocarbon and industrial gases. The company generates about half its sales in North America.

We see Chart Industries as a leading manufacturer of highly engineered cryogenic solutions that are used for the production and storage of industrial gases. With the exposure to energy end markets including liquified natural gas (LNG), compressed natural gas (CNG) and hydrogen, the company has the technology to ship gas from oversupplied markets to markets that do not have access to enough energy resources. Hydrogen is gaining traction as a renewable fuel due to the focus on climate change. The recent acquisition of Howden is complementary to Chart’s existing product and service offerings.

BioMarin Pharmaceuticals

BioMarin Pharmaceuticals develops drugs with a focus on rare disease treatments. Its portfolio consists of several commercial products and multiple clinical and preclinical product candidates for the treatment of various diseases. The company’s Vimizim, Naglazyme and Aldurazyme drugs treat versions of the life-threatening genetic condition mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS), caused by a rare enzyme deficiency that prevents patients from metabolizing certain complex carbohydrates. Another drug, Kuvan, is approved to treat enzyme deficiency phenylketonuria (PKU). Additional medicines include Brineura and Palynziq.

We see BioMarin, anchored by their durable enzyme-based therapies, poised to grow from new indications, primarily Voxzogo, the first-approved treatment for Achondroplasia, and Roctavian, a drug awaiting FDA approval for the treatment of Severe Hemophilia A, with gene therapy and the ability to address a large chronically managed patient population. Additionally, the company has an early pipeline outside of these major indications in rare diseases within the usculoskeletal/metabolic, hematology, cardiovascular and CNS therapeutic focus areas. 

Tesla

Tesla designs, develops, manufactures and markets high-performance, technologically advanced electric cars and solar energy generation and energy storage products. Tesla sells more than five fully electric cars, among others, the Model X and Y SUVs, as well as the Model S sedan and Model 3 sedan. The company has a growing global network of Tesla Superchargers, which are industrial grade, high-speed vehicle chargers, typically placed along well-traveled routes and in and around dense city centers to allow Tesla owners quick and reliable charging. Tesla offers certain advanced driver assist systems under its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving options. U.S. customers generate nearly half of Tesla’s sales.

We see Tesla as the leading manufacturer of battery powered electric vehicles (EVs).  The company has achieved scaled production of EVs before the other large automobile manufacturers. The company’s technology in battery production and self-driving technology is more mature than competitors’ offerings. EVs are one of the fastest growing categories within automobile manufacturing. The profit margin in the automotive segment is significantly above automotive competitors which provides the company flexibility to price its vehicles more strategically as the competition eventually scales up their EV production. The direct-to-consumer sales model gives the company more control over its relationship with its customers as well as a source of higher profit margin since there is no dealership share of the profits.

Sells

Horizon Therapeutics

We sold Horizon after Amgen announced their intention to acquire Horizon for $116.50 per share. The deal is expected to close in mid-year 2023.

Dynatrace

We sold the position in Dynatrace as were concerned about the slowdown in cloud spending due to the optimization of workload costs by businesses. The slowdown became clear in the fourth quarter, and we expect it to continue throughout 2023, as businesses rationalize their cloud migration spending due to macroeconomic headwinds.

Outlook

The impact of the Federal Reserve tightening cycle and the banking issues of the past month added to the concern of a potential economic recession. With goods inflation largely under control, labor costs will remain the focal point to achieving the stated goal of 2% inflation. With the labor market still tight, the Federal Reserve may well raise rates another 25 basis points with the peak in Fed Funds at 5.00% to 5.25%. Fed Funds Futures continue to point to the potential for a pivot into an easing cycle and this has supported the rise in equity prices. We believe the most likely outcome is for the Federal Reserve to pause for a period to access the impact to inflation of the rise in interest rates and shrinking of the balance sheet. Equity markets will focus on the impact this has had on the economy and the potential for a contraction in corporate profits. Equity valuation levels remain elevated and with the prospects for a decline in profits this sets up for a difficult path for higher equity prices.  The major support continues to be the prospect of a shift to a Federal Reserve easing cycle. Little progress has been made in dealing with the Debt Ceiling which will add a level of uncertainty and volatility to markets. With the war in Ukraine passing the one-year mark, there has been no progress toward a resolution adding to the uncertainty. With many of the sizable legislative packages passed now entering the phase of rule writing, markets will have more clarity on where these funds will flow. This should be one of the bright spots in a challenging economic outlook. Our focus will continue to be at the company level, with an emphasis on seeking to invest in companies with secular tailwinds or strong product-driven cycles.

1 https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2023/pr23019.html

Disclosures

The opinions expressed herein are those of Aristotle Atlantic Partners, LLC (Aristotle Atlantic) and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not a guarantee or indicator of future results. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. You should not assume that any of the securities transactions, sectors or holdings discussed in this report were or will be profitable, or that recommendations Aristotle Atlantic makes in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of the securities listed in this report. The portfolio characteristics shown relate to the Aristotle Atlantic Large Cap Growth strategy. Not every client’s account will have these characteristics. Aristotle Atlantic reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs. There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in an account’s portfolio at the time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities discussed may not represent an account’s entire portfolio and, in the aggregate, may represent only a small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. The performance attribution presented is of a representative account from Aristotle Atlantic’s Large Cap Growth Composite. The representative account is a discretionary client account which was chosen to most closely reflect the investment style of the strategy. The criteria used for representative account selection is based on the account’s period of time under management and its similarity of holdings in relation to the strategy. Recommendations made in the last 12 months are available upon request. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

All investments carry a certain degree of risk, including the possible loss of principal. Investments are also subject to political, market, currency and regulatory risks or economic developments. International investments involve special risks that may in particular cause a loss in principal, including currency fluctuation, lower liquidity, different accounting methods and economic and political systems, and higher transaction costs. These risks typically are greater in emerging markets. Securities of small‐ and medium‐sized companies tend to have a shorter history of operations, be more volatile and less liquid. Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole and other types of stocks.

The material is provided for informational and/or educational purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be construed as investment, legal or tax advice and/or a legal opinion. Investors should consult their financial and tax adviser before making investments. The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication, may be modified due to changes in the market or economic conditions, and may not necessarily come to pass. Information and data presented has been developed internally and/or obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Aristotle Atlantic does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of such information.

Aristotle Atlantic Partners, LLC is an independent registered investment adviser under the Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. More information about Aristotle Atlantic, including our investment strategies, fees and objectives, can be found in our Form ADV Part 2, which is available upon request. AAP-2304-29

Performance Disclosure

Composite returns for all periods ended March 31, 2023 are preliminary pending final account reconciliation.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance results for periods greater than one year have been annualized. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

Index Disclosure

The Russell 1000® Growth Index measures the performance of the large cap growth segment of the U.S. equity universe. It includes those Russell 1000 companies with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. This index has been selected as the benchmark and is used for comparison purposes only. The Russell 1000® Value Index measures the performance of the large cap value segment of the U.S. equity universe. It includes those Russell 1000 companies with lower price-to-book ratios and lower expected growth values. The S&P 500® Index is the Standard & Poor’s Composite Index of 500 stocks and is a widely recognized, unmanaged index of common stock prices. The Russell 2000® Index measures the performance of the small cap segment of the U.S. equity universe. The Russell 2000 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index representing approximately 10% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 2,000 of the smallest securities based on a combination of their market cap and current index membership. The Dow Jones Industrial Average® is a price-weighted measure of 30 U.S. blue-chip companies. The Index covers all industries except transportation and utilities. The NASDAQ Composite Index measures all NASDAQ domestic and international based common type stocks listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market. The NASDAQ Composite includes over 3,000 companies, more than most other stock market indices. The Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index is an unmanaged index of domestic investment grade bonds, including corporate, government and mortgage-backed securities. The WTI Crude Oil Index is a major trading classification of sweet light crude oil that serves as a major benchmark price for oil consumed in the United States. The 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bill is a short-term debt obligation backed by the U.S. Treasury Department with a maturity of three months.  The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services. While stock selection is not governed by quantitative rules, a stock typically is added only if the company has an excellent reputation, demonstrates sustained growth and is of interest to a large number of investors. The volatility (beta) of the Composite may be greater or less than its respective benchmarks. It is not possible to invest directly in these indices.

Markets Review

The U.S. equity market finished higher for the first quarter of the year, as the S&P 500 Index rose 7.50% during the period. Concurrently, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index increased 2.96% for the quarter. In terms of style, the Russell 1000 Growth Index outperformed its value counterpart by 13.36% during the quarter.

On a sector basis, seven out of eleven sectors within the S&P 500 Index finished higher for the quarter, with Information Technology, Communication Services and Consumer Discretionary posting the largest gains. The worst performers were Energy, Health Care and Financials.

Sources: SS&C Advent, Bloomberg
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle Atlantic Core Equity Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Atlantic Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Although inflation remained well above its historical average of 3.26%, the pace of price increases moderated during the quarter. As such, for the 12-month periods ending in January and February, annualized CPI figures declined from 6.4% to 6.0%, respectively. The pattern of disinflation was partly driven by decreases in the price of fuel, used vehicles and medical care services. The government also reported a deceleration in U.S. economic growth, as GDP increased 2.6% in the fourth quarter following the third quarter’s 3.2% increase. Weaker consumer spending and business investment were significant factors in the softer results. However, retail sales in January jumped 3%, and the labor market remained tight, with an unemployment rate of 3.6%.

While some economic data points trended in a positive direction, the market was shocked with the regulatory shutdown of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), the second-largest bank failure by assets in U.S. history. The value of SVB’s bond holdings had plunged amid rapidly increasing interest rates, creating a shortfall as clients (largely composed of tech startups) withdrew their deposits, eventually leading to a run on the bank’s deposits. Just days later, regulators also took control of New York-based Signature Bank. The speed and size of the bank failures sent U.S. bank share prices tumbling. To provide stability, the Federal Reserve announced the creation of an emergency lending facility that would allow banks to deposit high-quality assets (e.g., Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities) in exchange for a cash advance worth the face value of the asset (instead of the market value). Additionally, First Citizens Bank announced that it had made an agreement with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for a whole bank purchase with loss share coverage of Silicon Valley Bridge Bank.1

Despite the turmoil in the banking system, the Federal Reserve (Fed) stayed its course, increasing its benchmark rate by 0.25% in March (its ninth consecutive rate hike) to a range of 4.75% to 5.00%. However, noting that banking events may contribute to a more restrictive credit environment, the Fed tempered its stance that further rate increases are necessary to restore price stability and achieve its 2% inflation target. Rather, Fed Chair Powell emphasized the reliance on incoming data to inform the future path of monetary policy, as conditions may have tightened more than economic indices currently suggest.

On the corporate earnings front, results and guidance were broadly underwhelming, with only 68% of S&P 500 companies exceeding EPS estimates (below the five-year average of 77%) and 67% of companies providing negative EPS guidance (above the five-year average of 59%). Overall, the S&P 500 companies reported a decline in earnings of 4.9% as inflation and recession remained prevalent topics, with 332 and 148 companies mentioning those words on earnings calls, respectively. Nevertheless, in spite of the weaker-than-expected results, there have also been positive remarks of cost cutting, moderating input price pressures and better supply-chain dynamics.

Performance and Attribution Summary

For the first quarter of 2023, Aristotle Atlantic’s Core Equity Composite posted a total return of 5.35% net of fees (5.46% gross of fees), underperforming the S&P 500 Index, which recorded a total return of 7.50%.

Performance (%) 1Q231 Year3 Years5 Years7 YearsSince Inception*
Core Equity Composite (gross)5.465.46-11.3116.3311.0712.38
Core Equity Composite (net)5.355.35-11.6815.8510.6111.86
S&P 500 Index7.507.50-7.7318.6011.1811.77
*The Core Equity Composite has an inception date of August 1, 2013. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle Atlantic Core Equity Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Atlantic Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Source: FactSet
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Attribution results are based on sector returns which are gross of investment advisory fees. Attribution is based on performance that is gross of investment advisory fees and includes the reinvestment of income. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

During the first quarter, the portfolio’s underperformance relative to the S&P 500 Index was due to security selection and allocation effects. Security selection in Consumer Discretionary, Industrials and Energy detracted the most from relative performance. Conversely, security selection in Information Technology and Health Care as well as an underweight in Energy contributed the most to relative performance.

Contributors and Detractors for 1Q 2023

Relative ContributorsRelative Detractors
CatalentCigna Group
NvidiaNorfolk Southern
MicrosoftChubb
Applied MaterialsDarling Ingredients
AlphabetBio-Techne

Contributors

Catalent

Catalent shares outperformed in the first quarter as rumors surfaced of Danaher expressing interest in acquiring Catalent. At this point no deal has materialized; however, Catalent also appears to be stabilizing their core drug manufacturing businesses. 

Nvidia

Nvidia contributed to outperformance, as the company announced better-than-expected fourth quarter earnings driven by a strong rebound in Gaming and an improving outlook for the Datacenter business due to the acceleration of Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) driven Artifical Intelligence (AI) deployment. The company also hosted its Global Technology Conference (GTC) in March where it further highlighted its leading technology being used to develop AI Large Language Models (LLM). The company announced new partnerships with hyperscalers for its AI cloud-based service while also releasing new software and hardware offerings that will support GPU-driven AI growth.  Nvidia continues to see a growing addressable market for its products and services as AI uses become more prevalent.

Detractors

Cigna Group

Cigna shares traded lower in the first quarter, partly on a rotation out of safe-haven health care names in the managed care sector after strong performance in 2022 and partly due to increased scrutiny on the pharmaceutical benefits manager’s (PBMs) business model. These concerns have been raised in the past and Cigna attempts to be transparent with rebates and other facets of the model. We believe shares remain attractively valued. 

Norfolk Southern

Norfolk Southern underperformed in the first quarter of 2023 following the derailment of a train in Ohio in early February. Although there were no fatalities or injuries in the accident, chemical spills and a controlled burn of the contents of some tanker cars raised concern for long-term environmental impact, the associated cost of the cleanup and the increased risk of more stringent government regulations. 

Recent Portfolio Activity

The table below shows all buys and sells completed during the quarter, followed by a brief rationale.

BuysSells
Expedia GroupPhillips 66
Zoetis

Buys

Expedia Group

Expedia Group, Inc. provides online travel services for leisure and small business travelers. The company offers a wide range of travel shopping and reservation services, as well as provides real-time access to schedule, pricing and availability information for airlines, hotels and car rental companies. Expedia serves customers worldwide.

We see Expedia benefiting from the growth of booking travel online, both for leisure and in corporate travel.  The company also benefits from rapid growth in alternative accommodations, vacation home rental, through VRBO. The main sources of revenue and profitability are from hotel and vacation home rental. Additionally Expedia has exposure to airline ticket sales and automobile rentals. Post the COVID-19 pandemic, Expedia’s debt has been reduced and share repurchase has resumed and we would expect a dividend to be reinstated.

Zoetis

Zoetis is a global leader in the animal health industry, focused on the discovery, development, manufacture and commercialization of medicines, vaccines, diagnostic products, and services, biodevices, genetic tests and precision animal health technology. It has a diversified business, commercializing products across eight core species: dogs, cats, horses, cattle, swine, poultry, fish, and sheep within seven major product categories: vaccines, parasiticides, anti-infectives, dermatology, other pharmaceutical products, medicated feed additives and animal health diagnostics. Zoetis boasts approximately 300 product lines sold in more than 100 countries around the world, making it one of the world’s largest animal health businesses. Approximately 53% of the company’s total revenue is generated from the US.

We believe that Zoetis is working to help improve the lives of animals, which has societal benefits in the companion animal arena. Within livestock, healthier animals can provide increased productivity and yield as the growing world population seeks more safe food sources and additional sources of protein.

Sells

Phillips 66

We sold Phillips 66 to reduce our exposure to Energy as we continue to see the odds of a recession increase. A recession will negatively impact overall gasoline and diesel demand which could lead to weaker margins, as refinery utilization rates increase following the winter turnarounds. 

Outlook

The impact of the Federal Reserve tightening cycle and the banking issues of the past month added to the concern of a potential economic recession. With goods inflation largely under control, labor costs will remain the focal point to achieving the stated goal of 2% inflation. With the labor market still tight, the Federal Reserve may well raise rates another 25 basis points with the peak in Fed Funds at 5.00% to 5.25%. Fed Funds Futures continue to point to the potential for a pivot into an easing cycle and this has supported the rise in equity prices. We believe the most likely outcome is for the Federal Reserve to pause for a period to access the impact to inflation of the rise in interest rates and shrinking of the balance sheet. Equity markets will focus on the impact this has had on the economy and the potential for a contraction in corporate profits. Equity valuation levels remain elevated and with the prospects for a decline in profits this sets up for a difficult path for higher equity prices.  The major support continues to be the prospect of a shift to a Federal Reserve easing cycle. Little progress has been made in dealing with the Debt Ceiling which will add a level of uncertainty and volatility to markets. With the war in Ukraine passing the one-year mark, there has been no progress toward a resolution adding to the uncertainty. With many of the sizable legislative packages passed now entering the phase of rule writing, markets will have more clarity on where these funds will flow. This should be one of the bright spots in a challenging economic outlook. Our focus will continue to be at the company level, with an emphasis on seeking to invest in companies with secular tailwinds or strong product-driven cycles.

1https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2023/pr23019.html

Disclosures

The opinions expressed herein are those of Aristotle Atlantic Partners, LLC (Aristotle Atlantic) and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not a guarantee or indicator of future results. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. You should not assume that any of the securities transactions, sectors or holdings discussed in this report were or will be profitable, or that recommendations Aristotle Atlantic makes in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of the securities listed in this report. The portfolio characteristics shown relate to the Aristotle Atlantic Core Equity strategy. Not every client’s account will have these characteristics. Aristotle Atlantic reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs. There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in an account’s portfolio at the time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities discussed may not represent an account’s entire portfolio and, in the aggregate, may represent only a small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. The performance attribution presented is of a representative account from Aristotle Atlantic’s Core Equity Composite. The representative account is a discretionary client account which was chosen to most closely reflect the investment style of the strategy. The criteria used for representative account selection is based on the account’s period of time under management and its similarity of holdings in relation to the strategy. Recommendations made in the last 12 months are available upon request. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

All investments carry a certain degree of risk, including the possible loss of principal. Investments are also subject to political, market, currency and regulatory risks or economic developments. International investments involve special risks that may in particular cause a loss in principal, including currency fluctuation, lower liquidity, different accounting methods and economic and political systems, and higher transaction costs. These risks typically are greater in emerging markets. Securities of small‐ and medium‐sized companies tend to have a shorter history of operations, be more volatile and less liquid. Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole and other types of stocks.

The material is provided for informational and/or educational purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be construed as investment, legal or tax advice and/or a legal opinion. Investors should consult their financial and tax adviser before making investments. The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication, may be modified due to changes in the market or economic conditions, and may not necessarily come to pass. Information and data presented has been developed internally and/or obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Aristotle Atlantic does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of such information.

Aristotle Atlantic Partners, LLC is an independent registered investment adviser under the Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. More information about Aristotle Atlantic, including our investment strategies, fees and objectives, can be found in our Form ADV Part 2, which is available upon request. AAP-2304-30

Performance Disclosures

Composite returns for all periods ended March 31, 2023 are preliminary pending final account reconciliation.

The Aristotle Core Equity Composite has an inception date of August 1, 2013 at a predecessor firm. During this time, Mr. Fitzpatrick had primary responsibility for managing the strategy. Performance starting November 1, 2016 was achieved at Aristotle Atlantic.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance results for periods greater than one year have been annualized. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

Index Disclosures

The Russell 1000® Growth Index measures the performance of the large cap growth segment of the U.S. equity universe. It includes those Russell 1000 companies with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. This index has been selected as the benchmark and is used for comparison purposes only. The Russell 1000® Value Index measures the performance of the large cap value segment of the U.S. equity universe. It includes those Russell 1000 companies with lower price-to-book ratios and lower expected growth values. The S&P 500® Index is the Standard & Poor’s Composite Index of 500 stocks and is a widely recognized, unmanaged index of common stock prices. The Russell 2000® Index measures the performance of the small cap segment of the U.S. equity universe. The Russell 2000 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index representing approximately 10% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 2,000 of the smallest securities based on a combination of their market cap and current index membership. The Dow Jones Industrial Average® is a price-weighted measure of 30 U.S. blue-chip companies. The Index covers all industries except transportation and utilities. The NASDAQ Composite Index measures all NASDAQ domestic and international based common type stocks listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market. The NASDAQ Composite includes over 3,000 companies, more than most other stock market indices. The Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index is an unmanaged index of domestic investment grade bonds, including corporate, government and mortgage-backed securities. The WTI Crude Oil Index is a major trading classification of sweet light crude oil that serves as a major benchmark price for oil consumed in the United States. The 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bill is a short-term debt obligation backed by the U.S. Treasury Department with a maturity of three months.  The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services. While stock selection is not governed by quantitative rules, a stock typically is added only if the company has an excellent reputation, demonstrates sustained growth and is of interest to a large number of investors. The volatility (beta) of the Composite may be greater or less than its respective benchmarks. It is not possible to invest directly in these indices.

ARISTOTLE CAPITAL BOSTON, LLC

Markets Review

Small cap equities began the year on a positive note, with the Russell 2000 rising over 14.3% through the first 22 trading days of the year amid renewed investor optimism, moderating inflation data, and hopes that the Federal Reserve would soon alter their stance. This jolt of enthusiasm translated into outperformance for speculative segments of the small cap market in January, many of which were last year’s losers. Non-profitable and heavily shorted stocks surged throughout the month of January—notching gains reminiscent of those experienced during the meme frenzy in early 2021. This rally, however, was short-lived as rising rates, tighter lending conditions, and the banking system turmoil that emerged near the end of the quarter all contributed to an unsettling backdrop for investors and a 14.0% intra-quarter decline in the Russell 2000 Index. Small cap markets stabilized towards the end of March, however, moving back into positive territory during the final week of the quarter and closing out a volatile period with a modest gain.

Stylistically, growth outperformed value during the quarter, as evidenced by the Russell 2000 Growth Index’s total return of 6.07% versus the -0.66% total return of the Russell 2000 Value Index. The outperformance of growth-oriented companies (as defined by Russell) during the quarter is a reversal of the recent trend that has been in place for much of the past two years. Moreover, Q1 was the Russell 2000 Growth’s 13th best relative quarter versus the Russell 2000 Value on record (of 177 quarters) making it a top decile relative quarter for Growth over Value. This dispersion was driven in large part by the value index’s higher weightings in the Financials and Energy sectors, which underperformed the broader Index in the face of regional bank related turmoil and falling energy prices.

On a sector basis, Information Technology, Consumer Discretionary, and Materials led first quarter returns, up 14.23%, 11.90%, and 8.78% respectively, with Information Technology outperforming the broader index for the first time in five quarters. Financials (-8.50%) and Energy (-3.82%) were the worst performing sectors during the quarter followed by Health Care (-1.93%) which was negatively impacted by the performance of Biotechnology companies within the sector.

Sources: SS&C Advent; Russell Investments

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Small Cap Equity Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Performance Review

For the first quarter of 2023, the Aristotle Small Cap Equity Composite posted a total return of 0.97% net of fees (1.10% gross of fees), trailing the 2.74% total return of the Russell 2000 Index. Underperformance was driven by security selection while allocation effects positively contributed. Overall, security selection was weakest within the Financials, Industrials and Information Technology sectors and strongest in Energy, Utilities and Communication Services. From an allocation perspective, the portfolio benefited from an underweight in Financials and an overweight in Industrials, however, this was partially offset by underweights in Consumer Discretionary and Materials.

Relative ContributorsRelative Detractors
Insight EnterprisesSignature Bank
World Wrestling EntertainmentAcadia Healthcare
U.S. Xpress EnterprisesNational Bank Holdings
BeldenVeritex Holdings
Euronet WorldwidePacWest Bancorp

CONTRIBUTORS

Insight Enterprises (NSIT), a provider of branded IT products and services to businesses, appreciated during the quarter as the company’s transition from a transaction-oriented reseller to a services and solutions integrator continues to march on. We maintain a position as we believe the company’s focus on higher value-add areas like Cloud and Digital Solutions can continue to benefit shareholders as its customers seek to refresh and digitally transform their IT systems.

World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), a media and entertainment company that operates, promotes, merchandises, and licenses live wrestling events worldwide, appreciated amid heightened investor sentiment surrounding the company’s upcoming TV rights renewal cycle and growing expectations that the company would be sold to a strategic buyer. We maintain our position ahead of the company’s anticipated business combination with Endeavor Group, a global sports and entertainment company and owner of UFC, which was announced shortly after quarter end.

DETRACTORS

Signature Bank (SBNY), a full-service commercial bank with offices across the U.S., declined after the New York Department of Financial Services took possession of the bank and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as the receiver in mid-March. Shortly thereafter the FDIC entered into an agreement with Flagstar Bank, a subsidiary of New York Community Bancorp (NYSE: NYCB) for substantially all deposits and certain loan portfolios of Signature Bridge Bank on March 20, 2023. We liquidated our remaining position late in the quarter and have provided additional color in the Recent Portfolio Activity section of the commentary below.

Acadia Healthcare (ACHC), a provider of behavioral health and addiction services to patients in a variety of inpatient and outpatient settings, declined following the company’s quarterly earnings results released during the period. While the company’s fundamentals continue to advance, it appears the share price overreaction following the release of company’s earnings can be attributed to some near-term labor cost headwinds that came in higher than expected during the period. Nevertheless, we maintain a position as we believe the company remains well positioned to capitalize on the favorable supply/demand outlook for behavioral health, positive reimbursement trends and continued execution of its growth strategy.

Recent Portfolio Activity

Buys/AcquisitionsSells/Liquidations
Hannon Armstrong Sustainable Infrastructure CapitalAltra Industrial Motion
iStar
PacWest Bancorp
Signature Bank

BUYS/ACQUISITIONS

Hannon Armstrong Sustainable Infrastructure Capital (HASI), a Maryland-based sustainable asset financing and investing company, was added to the portfolio. We believe the company remains uniquely positioned to benefit as the demand for sustainable energy and infrastructure continues to grow. Additionally, we believe the company’s diverse portfolio, emphasis on proven technologies and long-term partnerships will result in less cyclical, lower risk, more predictable cash flows which can drive shareholder value in periods to come.

SELLS/LIQUIDATIONS

Altra Industrial Motion (AIMC), a global manufacturer and supplier of motion control, power transmission and automation products was removed from the portfolio after being acquired by Regal Rexnord Corporation (NYSE: RRX).

iStar (STAR), an internally-managed real estate investment trust specializing in ground leases, was removed from the portfolio following the completion of its merger with Safehold Inc. and the spinoff of the company’s non-ground lease assets. We maintain a position in the newly created business entity which now trades under the ticker “SAFE” and operates as the only self-managed, pure-play ground lease company in the public markets.

PacWest Bancorp (PACW), a West Coast relationship-based community bank focused on providing business banking and treasury management services to small, middle-market, and venture-backed businesses, was sold from the portfolio due to our belief that future shareholder value creation may be impeded by uncertainties related to the bank’s exposure to late-stage venture capital sponsored clients, and that the company’s risk/reward potential was no longer justified.

Signature Bank (SBNY), a full-service commercial bank with offices across the U.S, was sold from the portfolio following the FDIC takeover and subsequent carve-out of Signature Bridge Bank. Having followed Signature Bank for almost two decades, our investment thesis was predicated on the belief that Signature Bank was a traditional commercial bank with a diversified clientele and business model. The bank has a history of finding attractive industries/ecosystems that have robust deposit needs, and serving these areas well. Its unique operating model of acquiring experienced private client teams drove strong deposit and loan growth, while the autonomy provided to the teams helped keep overhead costs low. The company continued to acquire teams to further its growth, and we expected its successful integration of these teams to continue, particularly on the West Coast. On a fundamental basis, we believed the company had been executing well, highlighted by record annual earnings in 2022, expanding margins, loan growth, new teams added, and clean credit metrics. However, given the heightened scrutiny of the recent events involving Silicon Valley Bank and Silvergate Capital, some of the bank’s depositors opted to pull their money creating a run on the bank despite significant qualitative and quantitative differences between those two entities and Signature Bank. The company’s digital payments platform appeared to be a source of investor confusion despite its limited financial impact on the bank’s overall business. As part of this business, Signature Bank facilitated crypto-based transactions by holding customer’s U.S. Dollar-backed crypto tokens as deposits. The bank did not, however, engage in crypto-backed lending or trading and did not hold any cryptocurrencies on its balance sheet. Moreover, the company had recently announced its plans to intentionally reduce its digital assets exposure, a move we expected to reduce future earnings power from 2022 levels but would help alleviate some of the negative investor sentiment. Many finite details that prompted regulators to step in, eventually leading to the downfall of Signature Bank, are still unknown, however, we ultimately liquidated our remaining position late in the quarter after shares reopened for trading.

Outlook

After inflationary pressures, rising borrowing costs, and geopolitical turmoil created headwinds for investors in 2022, fears of an impending banking crisis and a slowing economy pose new threats in 2023. While sentiment moderately stabilized into quarter end, continued uncertainty and increased risks of recession will likely keep market participants on edge for the foreseeable future. Against this backdrop, we continue to believe the Federal Reserve will be a key driver of market volatility going forward. Specifically, now that the Fed’s initial batch rate increases are in the rearview mirror, the ongoing debate and positioning around any future Fed activity (or lack thereof) is likely to create continued bouts of volatility in both the equity and fixed income markets due to the implications on the strength of the U.S. economy, inflation expectations, and the resulting impact on corporate profitability. Another key item to watch over the coming months will be the extent to which recent events cause banks to reduce lending. This in turn may weigh on consumer demand and business investment and therefore accelerate any slowdown in the economy. As such, we will be paying close attention to management commentary and financial disclosures throughout this upcoming earnings season, which may unearth or dispel many of these ongoing concerns. Either way, it’s not a stretch to assume that there’s likely to be more volatility in the coming months, making this a good time to remember the benefits of portfolio diversification, remaining disciplined, and staying focused on companies with higher-quality characteristics such as stable earnings, clean balance sheets, and reasonable valuations.

From an asset class perspective, valuations of small versus large remain near multi-decade lows, which we believe suggests a more favorable setup for small caps relative to large caps in the periods to come (11.1x P/E for the Russell 2000 Index vs. 19.2x P/E for the Russell 1000 Index). Small caps, as represented by the Russell 2000, also remain historically attractive on an absolute basis and are trading near their lowest levels in over 30 years, in-line with lows during the GFC and below the COVID-19 recession and 2001 recession lows. Additional benefits from re-shoring efforts, investments in automation amid wage inflation/tight labor markets, and spending to reduce emissions also favor small caps which are beneficiaries of U.S. capex cycles. High and falling inflationary environments have also been favorable market environments for the asset class historically, a scenario we may find ourselves in this year. So, while the near-term outlook remains uncertain, along with the length and severity of any upcoming downturn, decades of investing have taught us that these can be the most rewarding times to be invested in small caps for the long-term. When the dust settles, we are reminded that small caps typically start moving up before many of us know for sure that the economy has begun to reaccelerate, and that missing these early stages of a market recovery can be costly*.

Positioning

As always, our current positioning is a function of our bottom-up security selection process and our ability to identify what we view as attractive investment candidates, regardless of economic sector definitions. Overweights in Industrials and Information Technology are mostly a function of recent portfolio activity and the relative performance of our holdings in these sectors over the past few periods. Conversely, we continue to be underweight in Consumer Discretionary, as we have been unable to identify what we consider to be compelling long-term opportunities that fit our discipline given the rising risk profiles of many retail businesses and a potential deceleration in goods spending following a period of strength fueled in part by government backed stimulus payments. We are also underweight in Financials as of quarter end, as we await further details on the potential impact to future bank earnings power amid the recent developments in the sector. Given our focus on long-term business fundamentals, patient investment approach and low portfolio turnover, the strategy’s sector positioning generally does not change significantly from quarter to quarter. However, we may take advantage of periods of volatility by adding selectively to certain companies when appropriate.

*As measured by the average return of the Russell 2000 Index the year following periods of GDP growth <0% since 1980.

Disclosures

The opinions expressed herein are those of Aristotle Capital Boston, LLC (Aristotle Boston) and are subject to change without notice.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. The information provided in this report should not be considered financial advice or a recommendation to purchase or sell any particular security. There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in an account’s portfolio at the time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities discussed may not represent an account’s entire portfolio and, in the aggregate, may represent only a small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. The performance attribution presented is of a representative account from Aristotle Boston’s Small Cap Equity Composite. The representative account is a discretionary client account which was chosen to most closely reflect the investment style of the strategy. The criteria used for representative account selection is based on the account’s period of time under management and its similarity of holdings in relation to the strategy. It should not be assumed that any of the securities transactions, holdings or sectors discussed were or will be profitable, or that the investment recommendations or decisions Aristotle Boston makes in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of the securities discussed herein. Aristotle Boston reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs. Recommendations made in the last 12 months are available upon request.

Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

Effective January 1, 2022, the Aristotle Small Cap Equity Composite has been redefined to exclude accounts with meaningful industry-specific restrictions or substantial values-based screens hampering implementation of the small cap strategy.

Effective January 1, 2022, the Russell 2000 Value Index was removed as the secondary benchmark for the Aristotle Capital Boston Small Cap Equity strategy.

All investments carry a certain degree of risk, including the possible loss of principal. Investments are also subject to political, market, currency and regulatory risks or economic developments. International investments involve special risks that may in particular cause a loss in principal, including currency fluctuation, lower liquidity, different accounting methods and economic and political systems, and higher transaction costs.

These risks typically are greater in emerging markets. Securities of small‐ and medium‐sized companies tend to have a shorter history of operations, be more volatile and less liquid. Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole and other types of stocks. The material is provided for informational and/or educational purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be construed as investment, legal or tax advice and/or a legal opinion. Investors should consult their financial and tax adviser before making investments.

The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication, may be modified due to changes in the market or economic conditions, and may not necessarily come to pass.

The firm’s coverage of Signature Bank includes time at a predecessor firm.

Aristotle Capital Boston, LLC is an independent investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. More information about Aristotle Boston, including our investment strategies, fees and objectives, can be found in our Form ADV Part 2, which is available upon request. ACB-2304-16

Performance Disclosures

Sources: SS&C Advent, Russell Investments

Composite returns for periods ended March 31, 2023 are preliminary pending final account reconciliation.

*The Aristotle Small Cap Equity Composite has an inception date of November 1, 2006 at a predecessor firm. During this time, Jack McPherson and Dave Adams had primary responsibility for managing the strategy. Performance starting January 1, 2015 was achieved at Aristotle Boston.

**For the period November 2006 through December 2006.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance results for periods greater than one year have been annualized.

Effective January 1, 2022, the Aristotle Small Cap Equity Composite has been redefined to exclude accounts with meaningful industry-specific restrictions or substantial values-based screens hampering implementation of the small cap strategy.

Effective January 1, 2022, the Russell 2000 Value was removed as the secondary benchmark for the Aristotle Capital Boston Small Cap Equity strategy.

Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Please see important disclosures enclosed within this document.

Index Disclosures

The Russell 2000® Index measures the performance of the small cap segment of the U.S. equity universe. The Russell 2000 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index representing approximately 10% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 2000 of the smallest securities based on a combination of their market cap and current index membership. The Russell 2000 Growth® Index measures the performance of the small cap companies located in the United States that also exhibit a growth probability. The Russell 2000 Value® Index measures the performance of the small cap companies located in the United States that also exhibit a value probability. The Russell 1000® Index measures the performance of the large cap segment of the U.S. equity universe. The Russell 1000 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index, representing approximately 90% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 1,000 of the largest securities based on a combination of their market capitalization and current index membership. The volatility (beta) of the composite may be greater or less than the benchmarks. It is not possible to invest directly in these indices.

For more on Small Cap Equity, access the latest resources.

ARISTOTLE CAPITAL BOSTON, LLC

Markets Review

SMID cap equities began the year on a positive note, with the Russell 2500 rising over 14% through the first 22 trading days of the year amid renewed investor optimism, moderating inflation data, and hopes that the Federal Reserve would soon alter their stance. This jolt of enthusiasm translated into outperformance for speculative segments of the SMID market in January, many of which were last year’s losers. Non-profitable and heavily shorted stocks also surged in January—notching gains reminiscent of those experienced during the meme frenzy in early 2021. This rally, however, was short-lived as rising rates, tighter lending conditions, and the banking system turmoil that emerged near the end of the quarter all contributed to an unsettling backdrop for investors and a 13.9% intra-quarter decline in the Russell 2500 Index. SMID cap markets stabilized towards the end of March, however, moving back into positive territory during the final week of the quarter and closing out a volatile period with a modest gain.

Stylistically, growth outperformed value during the quarter, as evidenced by the Russell 2500 Growth Index’s total return of 6.54% versus the 1.40% total return of the Russell 2500 Value Index. The outperformance of growth-oriented companies (as defined by Russell) during the quarter is a reversal of the recent trend that has been in place for much of the past two years. Moreover, Q1 was among the Russell 2500 Growth’s best relative quarters versus the Russell 2500 Value on record (of 149 quarters) making it a top quintile relative quarter for Growth over Value. This dispersion was driven in large part by the value index’s higher weightings in the Financials and Energy sectors, which underperformed the broader Index in the face of regional bank related turmoil and falling energy prices.

On a sector basis, Information Technology, Consumer Discretionary and Communication Services led first quarter returns, up 13.58%, 10.38%, and 8.56% respectively, with Information Technology outperforming the broader index for the first time in five quarters. Energy (-9.08%) and Financials (-7.11%) were the worst performing sectors during the quarter followed by Health Care (-0.08%) which was negatively impacted by the performance of Biotechnology companies within the sector.

Sources: SS&C Advent; Russell Investments

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Small Cap Equity Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Performance Review

For the first quarter of 2023, the Aristotle Small/Mid Cap Equity Composite generated a total return of 0.93% net of fees (1.08% gross of fees), trailing the 3.39% total return of the Russell 2500 Index. Underperformance was driven by security selection while allocation effects positively contributed. Overall, security selection was weakest within the Financials, Information Technology, and Industrials sectors and strongest in Energy, Communication Services and Health Care. From an allocation perspective, the portfolio benefited from overweight exposures in Information Technology and Industrials, however, this was partially offset by underweights in Consumer Discretionary and Communication Services.

Relative ContributorsRelative Detractors
FTI ConsultingSignature Bank
CatalentBankUnited
Wolverine WorldwideNational Bank Holdings
BeldenAcadia Healthcare
World Wrestling EntertainmentPacWest Bancorp

CONTRIBUTORS

FTI Consulting (FCN), a global business advisory firm that provides a variety of consulting services to large corporations, benefited from strong fundamental performance driven by increased demand for the company’s services as its clients navigate through increased regulatory scrutiny, corporate finance and restructuring activity, and a proliferation of corporate litigation. We maintain a position, as we believe the firm’s diversified business mix, global reach and management’s efforts to optimize the business can create value for shareholders going forward.

Catalent (CTLT), a pharmaceutical contract development and manufacturing organization, appreciated amid positive momentum within the company’s Biologics segment, a renewed focus on improving efficiencies, and rumblings that the company may be acquired. We maintain a position, as we believe the long-term value creation opportunity for the company remains intact, driven by favorable outsourcing trends and the company’s competitive position in biologics, particularly within the company’s cell and gene therapy sub-segments.

DETRACTORS

Signature Bank (SBNY), a full-service commercial bank with offices across the U.S., declined after the New York Department of Financial Services took possession of the bank and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as the receiver in mid-March. Shortly thereafter the FDIC entered into an agreement with Flagstar Bank, a subsidiary of New York Community Bancorp (NYSE: NYCB) for substantially all deposits and certain loan portfolios of Signature Bridge Bank on March 20, 2023. We liquidated our remaining position late in the quarter and have provided additional color in the Recent Portfolio Activity section of the commentary below.

BankUnited (BKU), a bank holding company that provides commercial and consumer banking services in select regions nationally, declined amid broader industry wide pressures that impacted regional banking sentiment during the quarter. We maintain a position, as we believe the company can weather this period of volatility given the diversified nature of its business, strong asset quality metrics, and favorable geographic exposures.

Recent Portfolio Activity

Buys/AcquisitionsSells/Liquidations
Hannon Armstrong Sustainable Infrastructure CapitalAltra Industrial Motion
TeleflexiStar
PacWest Bancorp
Signature Bank

BUYS/ACQUISITIONS

Hannon Armstrong Sustainable Infrastructure Capital (HASI), a Maryland-based sustainable asset financing and investing company was added to the portfolio. We believe the company remains uniquely positioned to benefit as the demand for sustainable energy and infrastructure continues to grow. Additionally, we believe the company’s diverse portfolio, emphasis on proven technologies and long-term partnerships will result in less cyclical, lower risk, more predictable cash flows which can drive shareholder value in periods to come.

Teleflex (TFX), a global provider of primarily single-use medical devices used by hospitals and healthcare providers for common diagnostic, therapeutic procedures, and surgical applications was added to the portfolio on our belief that the company’s diverse portfolio of industry leading brands can drive shareholder value as procedure volumes continue to recover. Furthermore, company specific margin improvement initiatives, product mix shift towards faster growing, more profitable products, and increased penetration internationally should also benefit shareholders over the next several years, in our view.

SELLS/LIQUIDATIONS

Altra Industrial Motion (AIMC), a global manufacturer and supplier of motion control, power transmission and automation products was removed from the portfolio after being acquired by Regal Rexnord Corporation (NYSE: RRX).

iStar (STAR), an internally-managed real estate investment trust specializing in ground leases, was removed from the portfolio following the completion of its merger with Safehold Inc. and the spinoff of the company’s non-ground lease assets. We maintain a position in the newly created business entity which now trades under the ticker “SAFE” and operates as the only self-managed, pure-play ground lease company in the public markets.

PacWest Bancorp (PACW), a West Coast relationship-based community bank focused on providing business banking and treasury management services to small, middle-market, and venture-backed businesses, was sold from the portfolio due to our belief that future shareholder value creation may be impeded by uncertainties related to the bank’s exposure to late-stage venture capital sponsored clients, and that the company’s risk/reward potential was no longer justified.

Signature Bank (SBNY), a full-service commercial bank with offices across the U.S, was sold from the portfolio following the FDIC takeover and subsequent carve-out of Signature Bridge Bank. Having followed Signature Bank for almost two decades, our investment thesis was predicated on the belief that Signature Bank was a traditional commercial bank with a diversified clientele and business model. The bank has a history of finding attractive industries/ecosystems that have robust deposit needs and serving these areas well. Its unique operating model of acquiring experienced private client teams drove strong deposit and loan growth, while the autonomy provided to the teams helped keep overhead costs low. The company continued to acquire teams to further its growth, and we expected its successful integration of these teams to continue, particularly on the West Coast. On a fundamental basis, we believed the company had been executing well, highlighted by record annual earnings in 2022, expanding margins, loan growth, new teams added, and clean credit metrics. However, given the heightened scrutiny of the recent events involving Silicon Valley Bank and Silvergate Capital, some of the bank’s depositors opted to pull their money creating a run on the bank despite significant qualitative and quantitative differences between those two entities and Signature Bank. The company’s digital payments platform appeared to be the source of investor confusion despite its limited financial impact on the bank’s overall business. As part of this business, Signature Bank facilitated crypto-based transactions by holding customer’s U.S. Dollar-backed crypto tokens as deposits. The bank did not, however, engage in crypto-backed lending or trading and did not hold any cryptocurrencies on its balance sheet. Moreover, the company had recently announced its plans to intentionally reduce its digital assets exposure a move we expected to reduce future earnings power from 2022 levels but would help alleviate some of the negative investor sentiment. Many specific details of what prompted regulators to step in, eventually leading to the downfall of Signature Bank, are still unknown, however, we ultimately liquidated our remaining position late in the quarter after shares reopened for trading.

Outlook

After inflationary pressures, rising borrowing costs, and geopolitical turmoil created headwinds for investors in 2022, fears of an impending banking crisis and a slowing economy pose new threats in 2023. While sentiment moderately stabilized into quarter end, continued uncertainty and increased risks of recession will likely keep market participants on edge for the foreseeable future. Against this backdrop, we continue to believe the Federal Reserve will be a key driver of market volatility going forward. Specifically, now that the Fed’s initial batch rate increases are in the rearview mirror, the ongoing debate and positioning around any future Fed activity (or lack thereof) is likely to create continued bouts of volatility in both the equity and fixed income markets due to the implications on the strength of the U.S. economy, inflation expectations, and the resulting impact on corporate profitability. Another key item to watch over the coming months will be the extent to which recent events cause banks to reduce lending. This in turn may weigh on consumer demand and business investment and therefore accelerate any slowdown in the economy. As such, we will be paying close attention to management commentary and financial disclosures throughout this upcoming earnings season, which may unearth or dispel many of these ongoing concerns. Either way, it’s not a stretch to assume that there’s likely to be more volatility in the coming months, making this a good time to remember the benefits of portfolio diversification, remaining disciplined, and staying focused on companies with higher-quality characteristics such as stable earnings, clean balance sheets, and reasonable valuations.

From an asset class perspective, valuations of SMID versus large cap remain near multi-decade lows, which we believe suggests a more favorable setup for SMID caps relative to large caps in the periods to come (12.9x P/E for the Russell 2500 Index vs. 19.2x P/E for the Russell 1000 Index). SMID caps, as represented by the Russell 2500, also remain historically attractive on an absolute basis and are trading near their lowest levels in over 30 years, slightly above the lows during the GFC and below the COVID-19 recession and 2001 recession lows. Additional benefits from re-shoring efforts, investments in automation amid wage inflation/tight labor markets, and spending to reduce emissions also favor small & mid caps which are beneficiaries of U.S. capex cycles. High and falling inflationary environments have also been favorable market environments for the asset class historically, a scenario we may find ourselves in this year. So, while the near-term outlook remains uncertain, along with the length and severity of any upcoming downturn, decades of investing have taught us that these can be the most rewarding times to be invested in SMID cap companies for the long-term. When the dust settles, we are reminded that small & mid cap companies typically start moving up before many of us know for sure that the economy has begun to reaccelerate, and that missing these early stages of a market recovery can be costly*.

Positioning

As always, our current positioning is a function of our bottom-up security selection process and our ability to identify what we view as attractive investment candidates, regardless of economic sector definitions. Overweights in Industrials and Information Technology are mostly a function of recent portfolio activity and the relative performance of our holdings in these sectors over the past few periods. Conversely, we continue to be underweight in Consumer Discretionary, as we have been unable to identify what we consider to be compelling long-term opportunities that fit our discipline given the rising risk profiles of many retail businesses and a potential deceleration in goods spending following a period of strength fueled in part by government backed stimulus payments. We also continue to be underweight in Real Estate as a result of structural challenges for various end markets within the sector. Given our focus on long-term business fundamentals, patient investment approach and low portfolio turnover, the strategy’s sector positioning generally does not change significantly from quarter to quarter. However, we may take advantage of periods of volatility by adding selectively to certain companies when appropriate.

*As measured by the average return of the Russell 2500 Index the year following periods of GDP growth <0% since 1980.

Disclosures

The opinions expressed herein are those of Aristotle Capital Boston, LLC (Aristotle Boston) and are subject to change without notice.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. The information provided in this report should not be considered financial advice or a recommendation to purchase or sell any particular security. There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in an account’s portfolio at the time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities discussed may not represent an account’s entire portfolio and, in the aggregate, may represent only a small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. The performance attribution presented is of a representative account from Aristotle Boston’s Small/Mid Cap Equity Composite. The representative account is a discretionary client account which was chosen to most closely reflect the investment style of the strategy. The criteria used for representative account selection is based on the account’s period of time under management and its similarity of holdings in relation to the strategy. It should not be assumed that any of the securities transactions, holdings or sectors discussed were or will be profitable, or that the investment recommendations or decisions Aristotle Boston makes in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of the securities discussed herein. Aristotle Boston reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs. Recommendations made in the last 12 months are available upon request.

Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

Effective January 1, 2022, the Russell 2500 Value Index was removed as the secondary benchmark for the Aristotle Boston Small/Mid Cap Equity strategy.

Non-fee-paying accounts represented less than 5% of the SMID Cap Composite assets from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2014, there were no non-fee-paying accounts in the Composite. In instances where non-fee paying accounts were included in the SMID Cap Composite, the highest model fee was applied to recalculate the net returns for composite purposes and the impact on the since inception return of the composite was deemed immaterial.

All investments carry a certain degree of risk, including the possible loss of principal. Investments are also subject to political, market, currency and regulatory risks or economic developments. International investments involve special risks that may in particular cause a loss in principal, including currency fluctuation, lower liquidity, different accounting methods and economic and political systems, and higher transaction costs.

These risks typically are greater in emerging markets. Securities of small‐ and medium‐sized companies tend to have a shorter history of operations, be more volatile and less liquid. Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole and other types of stocks.

The material is provided for informational and/or educational purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be construed as investment, legal or tax advice and/or a legal opinion. Investors should consult their financial and tax adviser before making investments.

The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication, may be modified due to changes in the market or economic conditions, and may not necessarily come to pass.

The firm’s coverage of Signature Bank includes time at a predecessor firm.

Aristotle Capital Boston, LLC is an independent investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. More information about Aristotle Boston, including our investment strategies, fees and objectives, can be found in our Form ADV Part 2, which is available upon request. ACB-2304-17

Performance Disclosures

Sources: SS&C Advent, Russell Investments

Composite returns for periods ended March 31, 2023 are preliminary pending final account reconciliation.

*The Aristotle Small/Mid Cap Equity Composite has an inception date of January 1, 2008 at a predecessor firm. During this time, Jack McPherson and Dave Adams had primary responsibility for managing the strategy. Performance starting January 1, 2015 was achieved at Aristotle Boston.

Effective January 1, 2022, the Russell 2500 Value Index was removed as the secondary benchmark for the Aristotle Boston Small/Mid Cap Equity Strategy.  Non-fee-paying accounts represented less than 5% of the SMID Cap Composite assets from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2014, there were no non-fee-paying accounts in the Composite. In instances where non-fee paying accounts were included in the SMID Cap Composite, the highest model fee was applied to recalculate the net returns for composite purposes and the impact on the since inception return of the composite was deemed immaterial. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance results for periods greater than one year have been annualized.

Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Please see important disclosures enclosed within this document.

Index Disclosures

The Russell 2500 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index representing approximately 10% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 2000 of the smallest securities based on a combination of their market cap and current index membership. The Russell 2500 Growth® Index measures the performance of the small/mid cap companies located in the United States that also exhibit a growth probability. The Russell 2500 Value® Index measures the performance of the small/mid cap companies located in the United States that also exhibit a value probability. The Russell 1000 Index is a subset of the Russell 3000® Index, representing approximately 90% of the total market capitalization of that index. It includes approximately 1,000 of the largest securities based on a combination of their market capitalization and current index membership. The volatility (beta) of the composite may be greater or less than the benchmarks. It is not possible to invest directly in these indices.

For more on Small Cap Equity, access the latest resources.

(All MSCI index returns are shown net and in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.)

Markets Review

Sources: SS&C Advent, Bloomberg
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle International Equity Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Capital Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Global equity markets rose in the first quarter of the year, as the MSCI ACWI Index increased 7.31% during the period. Concurrently, the Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index increased 3.01%. In terms of style, growth stocks outperformed their value counterparts during the quarter, with the MSCI ACWI Growth Index beating the MSCI ACWI Value Index by 12.54%.

The MSCI EAFE Index climbed by 8.47% during the first quarter, while the MSCI ACWI ex USA Index increased 6.87%. Within the MSCI EAFE Index, Europe & Middle East and the U.K. were the strongest-performing regions, while Asia gained the least. On a sector basis, ten out of the eleven sectors within the MSCI EAFE Index posted positive returns, with Information Technology, Consumer Discretionary and Industrials generating the largest gains. Conversely, Real Estate was the only sector to finish in the red, while Energy and Financials gained the least.

Despite continued geopolitical tensions, persistent inflation and new concerns in the banking industry, the global economy proved to be resilient. This was seen by strong labor markets, robust household consumption and business investment in addition to effective management of Europe’s energy crisis. Additionally, China continued its relaxation of strict COVID rules by fully reopening its borders to travelers with all types of visas. As a result, the IMF increased its growth forecasts and now projects global growth of 3.4%, 2.9% and 3.1% in 2022, 2023 and 2024, respectively.

Inflation remained elevated in many regions, with the U.K. and eurozone reporting a 10.4% and 8.5% rate, respectively. Meanwhile, in Asia, Japan’s core consumer inflation hit a 41-year high of 4.2%. However, the pace of price increases moderated for other countries. This was the case for China and South Korea, where inflation rates declined to their lowest levels in 12 and 10 months, repectively. On a forward-looking basis, the IMF estimates global inflation will fall from 8.8% in 2022 to 6.6% in 2023 and 4.3% in 2024. The organization believes restrictive monetary policy and cooling commodity prices due to weaker demand will contribute to the pattern of disinflation.

During the quarter, the failure of U.S.-based, mid-sized institutions Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank reverberated into the international market, adding a layer of complexity to restrictive central bank policies. After SVB’s closure due to a run on deposits, Credit Suisse also experienced withdrawals, further exacerbated by a subsequent plunging share price that led Swiss regulators to orchestrate a takeover by UBS. As a result of the turmoil in the banking sector, central banks in the U.S. and Europe have commented that credit conditions may have tightened more than some economic indicators currently suggest.

Lastly, on the geopolitical front, the war in Ukraine rages on in the eastern side of the country while southern lines have largely stabilized. Though China continues to align itself with Russia, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a paper calling for all parties to support dialogue to “gradually deescalate the situation.” Meanwhile, Western nations continue to support Ukraine, with commitments from the U.S., Germany and Britain to supply armored vehicles.

Performance and Attribution Summary

For the first quarter of 2023, Aristotle Capital’s International Equity Composite posted a total return of 7.10% gross of fees (6.98% net of fees), underperforming the MSCI EAFE Index, which returned 8.47%, and outperforming the MSCI ACWI ex USA Index, which returned 6.87%. Please refer to the table below for detailed performance

Performance (%) 1Q231 Year3 Years5 Years10 Years Since Inception*
International Equity Composite (gross)7.10-5.0713.254.165.395.21
International Equity Composite (net)6.98-5.5212.713.664.884.71
MSCI EAFE Index (net)8.47-1.3812.993.525.002.32
MSCI ACWI ex USA Index (net)6.87-5.0711.802.474.161.94
*The inception date for the International Equity Composite is January 1, 2008. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Aristotle International Equity Composite returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses. Aristotle Capital Composite returns are preliminary pending final account reconciliation. Please see important disclosures at the end of this document.

Source: FactSet

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Attribution results are based on sector returns which are gross of investment advisory fees. Attribution is based on performance that is gross of investment advisory fees and includes the reinvestment of income.

From a sector perspective in the first quarter, the portfolio’s underperformance relative to the MSCI EAFE Index can be attributed to security selection, while allocation effects had a positive impact. Security selection in Consumer Discretionary, Information Technology and Materials detracted the most from the portfolio’s relative performance. Conversely, overweights in Information Technology and Consumer Discretionary and a lack of exposure to Real Estate contributed to relative return.

Regionally, both security selection and allocation effects were responsible for the portfolio’s underperformance. Security selection in Europe and exposure to Canada detracted the most from relative performance, while an underweight and security selection in Asia contributed.

Contributors and Detractors for 1Q 2023

Relative ContributorsRelative Detractors
NemetschekMagna International
LVMHCredicorp
SonyDBS Group
Rentokil InitialKoninklijke DSM
FANUCAIA Group

Magna International, a Canada-based global auto parts, systems and assembly company, was a leading detractor during the quarter. The company continues to be impacted by the volatile production schedules of auto OEMs, primarily caused by semiconductor supply constraints. For some of Magna’s major customers, volumes are as low as 50%-60% of the contracted plan. This has created short-term inefficiencies in Magna’s ability to manage labor and its overall cost structure. However, we believe these headwinds are temporary in nature, as supply chains and car production levels will normalize over time. We instead remain focused on Magna’s unique capability of supplying parts for an increasingly electrified and autonomous fleet of vehicles. This includes Magna’s specialty in lightweighting vehicles—a necessity for heavy electric cars—as well as its years of investment in self-driving technologies. In addition, Magna signed an agreement in December 2022 to acquire Veoneer Active Safety for approximately $1.5 billion in cash. Veoneer’s advanced driver-assistance system (ADAS) technologies and Magna’s existing ADAS group, in our view, will benefit from enhanced scale and a larger product portfolio, ultimately allowing the company to reach a broader customer base.

AIA Group, a pan-Asian life insurance company headquartered in Hong Kong, was one of the largest detractors for the quarter. As a result of bank failures in both the U.S. and Europe, insurance companies were also scrutinized as potential vulnerabilities within the global financial system. However, given AIA’s strong capital position and ample liquidity, we believe the company is well positioned to withstand market volatility. In contrast to banks, life insurance companies like AIA have longer-duration liabilities than assets. This avoids liquidity pressure when interest rates rise and fixed-income portfolios are marked-to-market. We also see AIA’s investment exposure as limited due to its highly diversified corporate bond portfolio (with more than 1,900 issuers) and less than 5% of total invested assets in equities. As such, we remain focused on the company’s ability to benefit from its increasingly technology-enabled and productive agency salesforce. In fact, AIA’s VONB increased 6% in the second half of 2022, with growth across all of its largest markets. Moreover, we expect the company to further establish its direct presence in mainland China, a catalyst we previously identified, as it plans to reach another 10-12 affluent cities in the country by 2026.

LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, the luxury goods company, was a primary contributor for the quarter. China, one of the world’s largest luxury goods markets, has reopened following three years of various COVID lockdown policies and provided a boost for LVMH. While we are pleased to see the company (and industry) benefit from an improved macroeconomic environment, this is not, and was not, our focus when analyzing the fundamentals of LVMH’s business. Instead of attempting to time short-term factors out of the company’s control, we remain fixated on what LVMH can control. This includes the company’s progress on initiatives such as integrating the acquisitions of Tiffany & Co. and, most recently, the Pedemonte Group to bolster its Jewelry division; market share gains within the Fashion & Leather Goods segment; continued market leadership with the likes of Dior’s Sauvage being named the world leader in perfumes for 2022; and the expansion of the company’s store network and the development of production facilities. These improvements, we believe, more directly impact the company’s long-term fundamental outlook, regardless of the short-term macroeconomic landscape. Lastly, LVMH appointed Pharrell Williams as its new Men’s Creative Director, filling the role following the tragic passing of Virgil Abloh in 2021.

Rentokil Initial, the U.K.-based pest control and hygiene services company, was a leading contributor for the quarter. In late 2022, the company completed its previously announced $6.7 billion acquisition of Terminix to further solidify its position in the North American pest control market. We believed the acquisition, its largest ever, would provide operational synergies from scale efficiencies and in-market densification, as well as accelerate the consolidation of the U.S. pest control market. Initially, Rentokil estimated $150 million in cost synergies by 2025, and the company recently upgraded its target to at least $200 million. We are encouraged by the company’s integration progress and operations, which in turn have led to Rentokil’s highest operating margin in 20 years. We believe the fundamental improvements, combined with the resilient nature of the pest control business, will allow Rentokil to continue to unlock value in the years ahead.

Recent Portfolio Activity

BuysSells
NoneBrookfield Asset Management

During the quarter, we sold our position in Brookfield Asset Management.

We have been owners of Brookfield for well over a decade, having first invested in the fourth quarter of 2009. In December 2022, the company completed the spinoff of 25% of its asset management business, now known as Brookfield Asset Management (“Manager,” ticker: BAM). As part of the spinoff, the parent company, Brookfield Corporation (“Corporation,” ticker: BN), retained a 75% interest in the Manager. As such, we decided to sell our stake in the Manager and use the proceeds to top-up our investment in the Corporation. While we continue to find the Manager’s business attractive, we view Brookfield Corporation as a more optimal investment.

Conclusion

A core tenet of our investment philosophy is the commitment to understand businesses with a long-term perspective. For us, this is especially important during times of heightened uncertainty when macroeconomic events dominate headlines. We remain aware of short-term topics such as inflation, monetary policy and the recent shock to the banking system. However, we believe a competitive advantage of our investment process lies in the fact that, instead of reacting and repositioning our portfolio based on unknowns and unfolding events, our focus remains on business fundamentals. Fundamentals, we are convinced, are what dictate shareholder value in the long term. As such, we continue to attentively study what we believe are high-quality companies with sustainable competitive advantages poised to outperform their peers over full market cycles.

Disclosures

The opinions expressed herein are those of Aristotle Capital Management, LLC (Aristotle Capital) and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not a guarantee or indicator of future results. This material is not financial advice or an offer to buy or sell any product. You should not assume that any of the securities transactions, sectors or holdings discussed in this report were or will be profitable, or that recommendations Aristotle Capital makes in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of the securities listed in this report. The portfolio characteristics shown relate to the Aristotle International Equity strategy. Not every client’s account will have these characteristics. Aristotle Capital reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs. There is no assurance that any securities discussed herein will remain in an account’s portfolio at the time you receive this report or that securities sold have not been repurchased. The securities discussed may not represent an account’s entire portfolio and, in the aggregate, may represent only a small percentage of an account’s portfolio holdings. The performance attribution presented is of a representative account from Aristotle Capital’s International Equity Composite. The representative account is a discretionary client account which was chosen to most closely reflect the investment style of the strategy. The criteria used for representative account selection is based on the account’s period of time under management and its similarity of holdings in relation to the strategy. Recommendations made in the last 12 months are available upon request.

Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

All investments carry a certain degree of risk, including the possible loss of principal. Investments are also subject to political, market, currency and regulatory risks or economic developments. International investments involve special risks that may in particular cause a loss in principal, including currency fluctuation, lower liquidity, different accounting methods and economic and political systems, and higher transaction costs. These risks typically are greater in emerging markets. Securities of small‐ and medium‐sized companies tend to have a shorter history of operations, be more volatile and less liquid. Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole and other types of stocks.

The material is provided for informational and/or educational purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be construed as investment, legal or tax advice and/or a legal opinion. Investors should consult their financial and tax adviser before making investments. The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication, may be modified due to changes in the market or economic conditions, and may not necessarily come to pass. Information and data presented has been developed internally and/or obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Aristotle Capital does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of such information.

Aristotle Capital Management, LLC is an independent registered investment adviser under the Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. More information about Aristotle Capital, including our investment strategies, fees and objectives, can be found in our Form ADV Part 2, which is available upon request. ACM-2304-42

Performance Disclosures

Composite returns for all periods ended March 31, 2023 are preliminary pending final account reconciliation.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. The information provided should not be considered financial advice or a recommendation to purchase or sell any particular security or product. Performance results for periods greater than one year have been annualized.

Returns are presented gross and net of investment advisory fees and include the reinvestment of all income. Gross returns will be reduced by fees and other expenses that may be incurred in the management of the account. Net returns are presented net of actual investment advisory fees and after the deduction of all trading expenses.

Index Disclosures

The MSCI EAFE Index (Europe, Australasia, Far East) is a free float-adjusted market capitalization-weighted index that is designed to measure the equity market performance of developed markets, excluding the United States and Canada. The MSCI EAFE Index consists of the following 21 developed market country indices: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. The MSCI ACWI captures large and mid-cap representation across 23 developed market countries and 24 emerging markets countries. With approximately 3,000 constituents, the Index covers approximately 85% of the global investable equity opportunity set. The MSCI ACWI Growth Index captures large and mid-cap securities exhibiting overall growth style characteristics across 23 developed markets countries and 24 emerging markets countries. The MSCI ACWI Value Index captures large and mid-cap securities exhibiting overall value style characteristics across 23 developed markets countries and 24 emerging markets countries. The MSCI ACWI ex USA Index captures large and mid-cap representation across 22 of 23 developed markets countries (excluding the United States) and 24 emerging markets countries. With approximately 2,300 constituents, the Index covers approximately 85% of the global equity opportunity set outside the United States. The MSCI Emerging Markets Index is a free float-adjusted market capitalization-weighted index that is designed to measure the equity market performance of emerging markets. The MSCI Emerging Markets Index consists of the following 24 emerging market country indexes: Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Czech Republic, Egypt, Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Korea, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and United Arab Emirates. The S&P 500® Index is the Standard & Poor’s Composite Index of 500 stocks and is a widely recognized, unmanaged index of common stock prices. The Brent Crude Oil Index is a major trading classification of sweet light crude oil that serves as a major benchmark price for purchases of oil worldwide. The MSCI Japan Index is designed to measure the performance of the large and mid-cap segments of the Japanese market. With approximately 250 constituents, the Index covers approximately 85% of the free float-adjusted market capitalization in Japan. The Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index is a flagship measure of global investment grade debt from 28 local currency markets. This multi-currency benchmark includes treasury, government-related, corporate and securitized fixed-rate bonds from both developed and emerging markets issuers. The MSCI United Kingdom Index is designed to measure the performance of the large and mid-cap segments of the U.K. market. With nearly 100 constituents, the Index covers approximately 85% of the free float-adjusted market capitalization in the United Kingdom. The MSCI Europe Index captures large and mid-cap representation across 15 developed markets countries in Europe. With approximately 430 constituents, the Index covers approximately 85% of the free float-adjusted market capitalization across the European developed markets equity universe. These indices have been selected as the benchmarks and are used for comparison purposes only. The volatility (beta) of the Composite may be greater or less than the respective benchmarks. It is not possible to invest directly in these indices.

For more on International Equity, access the latest resources.