Chinese money trends suggest a continuation of sluggish economic growth, negligible inflation and a supportive liquidity environment for markets.

Six-month growth of narrow money – as measured by the new M1 definition incorporating household demand deposits – rose slightly in September, extending a recovery from a May low. Broad money momentum also edged higher. Both series are around their average levels in recent years – see chart 1.

Chart 1

Chart 1 showing China Nominal GDP* (% 2q) & Money / Social Financing* (% 6m) *Own Seasonal Adjustment

Credit trends remain weak, with six-month growth of bank lending reaching another record low, although numbers have been suppressed by bond swaps. Monetary expansion, however, continues to be boosted by China’s version of QE, conducted via the state banks. Monetary financing of the government, including bond swaps, accounted for 3.8 pp of M2 growth of 8.4% in the year to September – chart 2.

Chart 2

Chart 2 showing Monetary Financing of Fiscal Deficits* (12m sum, % of broad money) *Monetary Financing = Purchases of Government Securities (ex Agencies) by Central Bank & Other MFIs minus Change in Government Deposits

Money growth remains above nominal GDP expansion, arguing against a debt deflation scenario and suggesting “excess” money support for asset prices. With the housing market still weak and longer-term bond yields recently moving up from record lows, equities could remain the default beneficiary.

Two scientists looking through microscopes.

The foundation of traditional Chinese medicine is Qi – the life force or energy that flows through a body. If, for any reason, the Qi in your body was to go out of balance or get blocked, one would end up falling ill. A wide range of plant- and animal-based medicines would then be used to unblock those pathways and to restore the balance of Yin and Yang in the body.

While traditional Chinese medicine techniques like cupping and acupuncture gain popularity both at home and abroad, China has been quietly making giant strides in the traditional pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. In the past, it applied the principles of scale and an integrated supply chain to manufacture inexpensive generics faster and cheaper than its competitors.

Cut to present day, China’s pharmaceutical industry is on the cusp of becoming a global leader in both drug discovery and development. According to Morgan Stanley, annual revenues from drugs originating in China could reach USD$34 billion by 2030 and USD$220 billion by 2040. Currently, drugs from China account for only 5% of all USFDA approvals, but that is estimated to rise to 35% by 2040. So how did China go from a middling pharma player to the hot house of innovation and manufacturing that we see today?

Broadly, we can trace three key factors that are fueling this boom:

  1. Reforms – The comprehensive series of reforms needed to move the needle in this space did not happen overnight. Over the last decade, China has made a deliberate push to move from a large-scale generics manufacturer to an innovation powerhouse by pushing through the following reforms.
    • Increasing innovative drug approvals – In 2017, measures were introduced to reduce the review timeline of innovative drugs to 60 days, increasing the efficiency of the drug development process. The result has been a record 93 drugs receiving first approval from the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) in China in 2024 with China surpassing Europe and Japan as the second largest country to receive first approvals.
    • Investment inflows – Funding is crucial for innovation and reforms such as 18A listing rules in Hong Kong and the launch of STAR Market (touted as Shanghai’s equivalent to NASDAQ) allowed pre-revenue biotech companies to list and raise money.
    • Globalization – In response to intense competition at home, Chinese pharmaceutical companies have started to spread their wings abroad through strategic partnerships. This is being executed by applying for global approvals for drugs developed in China and through so called out-licensing agreements, where Chinese companies further the development of their unique IP by leveraging the R&D and commercialization network of western pharma giants.
  1. Speed – To accelerate development of novel drugs, China’s regulator is proposing to further cut the clinical trial review period from 60 to 30 working days, matching the time line of USFDA. The presence of large pools of patients in Chinese cities further expedites the go-to-market process.
  2. Talent – China graduates around five million science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) graduates every year. The recent crackdown in immigration in the United States has led many talented Chinese scientists and professionals (nicknamed “sea turtles”) to return home. The recent announcement by the Chinese government of the K visa program could further accelerate this trend.

This combination of speed, abundance of talent and structural reforms could throw up multiple opportunities in the Chinese pharma space. It is next to impossible to predict which company could win the next out-licensing deal. Similarly, picking the next big biopharma product requires a high degree of technical expertise. Hence our investment in Sunresin New Materials Co. Ltd. (300487 CH) takes a picks and shovel approach to this space.

Sunresin is a specialty resin manufacturer, making more than 200 different types of resin for a variety of applications from purifying water, extracting lithium to serving as an enzyme carrier for drug development including GLP-1 drugs. While its life sciences business makes up about a fourth of its revenue, given the trends discussed above, the growth opportunities and potential runway could be enormous.

The consumables that Sunresin manufactures have high barriers to entry, more stable risk profiles vs. betting on winning drugs and underlying high growth in total addressable market. Its products are used both for upstream synthesis of various active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and for downstream separation and purification that determines the final quality of the drug.

Key trends that underpin Sunresin’s growth include:

  1. Growth of the biologics (large molecules) market that is growing faster than the chemical drug (small molecules) market. Biologics production has an upstream API synthesis phase that requires carriers and a downstream purification phase that requires chromatographic media (CM) to capture target molecules.
  2. Sunresin produces both upstream carriers (for both large and small molecules) and downstream chromatographic media. Entry barriers are high as both products can make up 15–40% of production cost and are crucial to the final quality of the drug. Switching suppliers by commercial drug makers can be costly and time consuming.
  3. Rise of import substitution in China and rise of overseas opportunities from out-licensing deals could further underpin growth.
  4. Build out of new high-end life sciences capacity that could support 10x of current sales.

Between its proven products, new capacities and tailwinds from the growth of biologics and the larger China bio pharma sector, we see Sunresin as a key winner in the race to find the new blockbuster drugs on the back of China’s booming pharmaceutical sector.

Credit tightening in private markets may mark the end of a boom in US bank lending to shadow banks, with negative monetary implications.

Equity prices of major players in private credit have fallen sharply in the wake of the Tricolor / First Brands bankruptcies, with an average down by 31% from a January peak – see chart 1.

Chart 1

Chart 1 showing US Private Credit-Exposed Equities & S&P 500 31 December 2022 = 100

Increased risk aversion is also evident in lower prices / higher yields of traded private credit instruments, such as the VanEck Business Development Companies ETF (BIZD), which usually mirrors moves in high yield spreads but has opened up a wide gap – chart 2.

Chart 2

Chart 2 showing US HYG High Yield Corporate Bond ETF Relative to 3y Treasuries & BIZD Business Development Companies ETF

Commercial bank lending to shadow banks / private credit has been booming, with the “all other” category containing loans to non-bank financial institutions up by 14.5% in the year to September, accounting for 2.9 pp of overall bank loan growth of 4.9% – chart 3*.

Chart 3

Chart 3 showing US Commercial Bank Loans & Leases (% yoy)

Traditional loan categories – C&I, real estate and consumer – grew by only 2.5% over the same period.

Lending to shadow banks is likely to slow as private credit players rein in activity and loan officers tighten standards. A normalisation could cut 2 pp or more from annual loan growth, implying weaker broad money expansion unless offset by other “credit counterparts”**.

Credit tightening could extend to other loan categories unless private markets recover – chart 4. (Note that the reporting window for the October Fed senior loan officer survey, to be released in early November, may already have closed, so the results may not fully reflect recent developments.)

Chart 4

Chart 4 showing US Fed Senior Loan Officer Survey: Tighter Credit Standards on C&I Loans & BIZD Business Development Companies ETF (inverted)

*Growth numbers are break-adjusted – levels series have been distorted by recent reporting changes.

**Some combination of increased monetary deficit financing, a stronger basic balance of payments or reduced non-deposit funding.

Top-down view of business people working in office.

For decades, the strategic asset allocation (SAA) process has provided institutional investors with a structured, benchmark-driven framework for managing portfolios. This approach, grounded in academic research and modern portfolio theory, has helped countless boards and investment committees move beyond the classic 60/40 equity/fixed income allocation to embrace a more diversified mix.

As the investment landscape evolves, some of the world’s largest investors are transforming their processes, adopting an innovative total portfolio approach (TPA) that treats the portfolio as a single, dynamic entity rather than a collection of separate asset classes. This article explores the evolution of asset mix strategies, the merits and limitations of SAA and the promise and challenges of a TPA.

The evolution of asset mix strategies

Institutional investors have experienced significant changes in their asset mix over the years. The classic 60/40 model dominated for decades, until Yale’s David Swensen and Dean Takahashi pioneered a shift toward alternative investments in the late 1980s and early 1990s. By introducing private equity, hedge funds, real estate and natural resources, they revolutionized asset allocation and diversified portfolios beyond traditional boundaries.

As other institutions moved beyond the 60/40 allocation, the SAA framework became a critical tool for guiding long-term asset mix targets, based on investment objectives, risk tolerance, liquidity needs and time horizon.

Advancements in technology and greater access to data are transforming how financial markets operate and how portfolios are managed. Investors can now better understand the impact of their decisions, enabling more dynamic and informed portfolio management, which has led to the TPA becoming the latest evolution. It offers valuable concepts for all investors, even though it remains the domain of the largest global institutions.

The enduring appeal of SAA

The SAA process is intuitive and provides a quantitative discipline for establishing asset mix. Its enduring appeal lies in its accessibility, where any investor, regardless of size, can use it. At its heart, the SAA process is about enhancing diversification – which can reduce risk without sacrificing target returns – or enabling higher returns while keeping risk consistent.

The process begins with defining investment objectives, time horizon, risk comfort, and liquidity needs. Based on these metrics, investors analyze expected performance and volatility to determine potential mixes, but with a general prioritization on relative returns. The final asset mix decision often hinges on which asset classes a board or investment committee is most comfortable with.

Once selected, the mix is refined, which can imply adding new asset classes or investment managers to the mix, or simply tweaking the allocations among the existing asset classes and managers. The portfolio is monitored against objectives and benchmarks, ensuring ongoing vigilance and adaptability as market conditions evolve.

Limitations and disconnects in SAA

While the SAA framework has stood the test of time, it is not without flaws. A common critique is the disconnect between asset allocation design and manager selection. When these steps are managed separately, inefficiencies can arise, reducing diversification benefits. This separation can also result in the portfolio’s risk-return experience deviating from the intended profile, especially when too much focus is placed on past performance during manager selection, overlooking risk.

Adding new asset classes and investment managers typically requires a formal review, slowing down the ability to respond to evolving market conditions. Long-term capital market assumptions guide SAA decisions, but their reliability is questionable. Studies show that while return forecasts often miss the mark, risk forecasts tend to be more consistent with actual outcomes. This suggests that focusing on managing risk may be wiser than chasing returns.

What is a total portfolio approach?

Unlike the traditional SAA model, where asset classes are managed in silos, the TPA treats the portfolio as one unified whole. Every investment decision is evaluated for its impact on the overall risk and return of the portfolio, with a particular focus on risk. This holistic, agile approach leverages cross-asset expertise and enables teams to respond quickly to changing market dynamics.

However, adopting a TPA is not simply an investment process shift; it is a cultural transformation. Organizations must move beyond managing asset-class silos to embrace a unified portfolio model, requiring bold changes in culture and governance. Boards and investment committees need to delegate more decision-making authority and empower CIOs and internal investment teams. Under the TPA, collaboration across specialist disciplines and alignment of incentives are essential for total portfolio success.

Who is leading the way?

The TPA was initially adopted by the world’s largest investors, such as the Australian Future Fund, Canada’s CPP Investments, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, and GIC, Singapore’s Sovereign Wealth Fund. These institutions have the scale to integrate investment teams and create collaborative environments necessary for a TPA to work. The TPA philosophy began to take formal shape around 2006, but its roots go back further, notably to TRW in the early 1990s, where Chief Investment Officer Bob Hamje shifted the focus from individual mandates to total portfolio performance, rewarding managers for collaboration and overall success.

SAA versus TPA: Comparative perspective

The table highlights key differences between SAA and TPA.

Characteristic Strategic asset allocation (SAA) Total portfolio approach (TPA)
Performance assessed versus: Asset class benchmarks Fund-level goals and reference portfolio
Success measured by: Relative value added Total fund return
Opportunities for investment defined by: Asset classes Contribution to total portfolio outcome
Diversification achieved through: Asset classes Risk factors
Asset allocation determined by: Board-centric process CIO-centric process
Portfolio implemented by: Multiple teams competing for capital One team collaborating across strategies

Source: Thinking Ahead Institute

The move from SAA to TPA represents a significant transformation. With SAA, success is defined by performance relative to a total fund benchmark, which is calculated as a weighted average of the benchmarks for each asset class. The TPA, on the other hand, measures success against fund-level goals, typically guided by a reference portfolio.

Under SAA, each asset class is selected for its role in meeting return, risk, diversification, and liquidity objectives. The TPA shifts emphasis to understanding how each investment opportunity contributes to the overall portfolio outcome, with risk factors and risk premia shaping both strategy and results. This approach allows for more robust stress testing under different macroeconomic regimes, providing a clearer understanding of a portfolio’s resilience.

Perhaps the most profound change under the TPA is the shift in culture and governance. Decision making moves from being board-centric to being centered on the CIO and investment team, fostering collaboration and accountability for total portfolio outcomes.

Challenges of TPA

While the appeal of TPA is clear, it can be challenging to implement. The challenges are not just technical but also cultural and governance related. TPA empowers the CIO with greater investment discretion, opening the door to more dynamic portfolio management. Many funds adopting TPA use a reference portfolio, typically comprised of equities and fixed income, as an additional benchmark, but this can lead to counterfactual thinking and misplaced concerns if the more diversified TPA portfolio underperforms the reference portfolio over shorter-term periods.

The TPA also demands significant investment in data and infrastructure for risk analysis, making it challenging for smaller funds to contemplate. In addition, assessing individual manager contributions becomes more nuanced. Under the TPA success is measured by the impact on overall portfolio outcomes rather than asset-class benchmarks, which makes it more challenging to appreciate individuals’ or specific teams’ contributions.

Practical lessons for all investors

While a full TPA may be beyond the reach of most investors, elements of the approach can strengthen decision-making and improve outcomes, including:

  • Reframing objectives to focus on total portfolio outcomes and have less emphasis on relative returns.
  • Enabling greater investment flexibility through governance education that engages the board early in the review process with the goal of obtaining comfort with a broader set of investments.
  • Shifting emphasis from return forecasts to risk expectations, since the evidence suggests risk forecast tend to be more dependable than return forecasts.
  • Enhancing implementation through completion portfolios to maintain the total portfolio’s alignment with long-term objectives.

Conclusion

Although the total portfolio approach has so far been adopted by the largest funds, its lessons are relevant to all investors. The emphasis on risk, alignment with long-term goals, and more flexible governance point to a more resilient and responsive way of managing portfolios.

Even if a full TPA is not practical today for smaller investors, there is real value in adopting elements of the approach and weaving its philosophy into board discussions and asset allocation processes over time.

Top-down view of a meeting with 6 people sitting at a table.

Peter Muldowney, Senior Vice President and Head of Institutional and Multi-Asset Strategy, speaks with Plans & Trusts about the role of emotional intelligence (EQ) in shaping board culture and driving performance.

Cycle analysis suggests economic and market weakness in 2026-27. A recent monetary slowdown is consistent with this perspective but needs to extend to confirm a negative scenario.

Global (i.e. G7 plus E7) six-month real narrow money momentum moved sideways in August, following a March-July fall. The previous low in real money momentum in October 2024 was reflected in a low in global manufacturing PMI new orders in May. Accordingly, the monetary slowdown since March could be mirrored by a peak and reversal in PMI new orders from around October – see chart 1.

Chart 1

Chart 1 showing Global Manufacturing PMI New Orders & G7 + E7 Real Narrow Money (% 6m)

The fall in real money momentum has been modest but an expected economic slowdown could become more serious than others in recent years, for two reasons. First, the stockbuilding and housing cycles have entered time windows to begin downswings. Secondly, labour markets are showing signs of weakness for the first time since the pandemic recession, raising the risk of self-reinforcing negative dynamics.

The working assumption here has been that the stockbuilding cycle will reach another low in Q1 2027, implying a four-year current cycle versus a 3.5-year historical average. Recent G7 national accounts stockbuilding data as well as an indicator based on business surveys are consistent with the cycle being at or near a peak – chart 2.

Chart 2

Chart 2 showing G7 Stockbuilding as % of GDP (yoy change) & Business Survey Inventories Indicator

The housing cycle bottomed in 2009 and has ranged between 15 and 25 years historically, averaging 18 years. The pandemic-related money growth surge of 2020-21 appears to have resulted in the current cycle peaking early, in 2022. G7 housing starts or permits have been range-bound since early 2023 but rising unemployment could be the trigger for a break lower.  China has been leading in the current cycle and starts are still falling – chart 3.

Chart 3

Chart 3 showing G7 Housing Permits or Starts* & China Floorspace Started December 2004 = 100 *Permits for US, Germany, France, Italy / Starts for Japan, UK, Canada

The suggestion that unemployment is on a rising trend is supported by consumer surveys, with a composite G7 indicator of negativity recently reaching a four-year high – chart 4.

Chart 4

Chart 4 showing G7 Unemployment Rate & Consumer Survey Labour Market Weakness Indicator

Monetary policy easing, if sufficiently dramatic, could short-circuit negative cyclical dynamics. A dramatic move could occur conventionally if additional evidence of labour market weakness is accompanied by a downside inflation surprise, or unconventionally if the Trump administration succeeds in gaining control of the Fed. A large cut in US rates would magnify US dollar weakness, forcing other central banks to follow.

Inflation prospects are judged here to be favourable, at least through early 2027. G7 annual broad money growth remains subdued (4.3% in August versus a 2015-19 average of 4.5%), while stockbuilding cycle downswings are usually associated with weakness in commodity prices – chart 5.

Chart 5

Chart 5 showing G7 Stockbuilding as % of GDP (yoy change) & Industrial Commodity Prices (% yoy)

Near-term US inflation numbers, however, will continue to reflect tariff effects. Elsewhere, central bankers focused on fighting the last war may be slow to respond to favourable surprises. As an example of hawkish bias, the ECB has gone on hold despite forecasting below-target inflation.

The alternative route to a large near-term fall in rates – a take-over of the Fed by the executive branch – still seems far-fetched, with the administration lacking scope to push through personnel changes on the necessary scale.

Among major economies, six-month real narrow money momentum is weakest in Japan and the UK, suggesting over-restrictive monetary policies and downside economic risk. Momentum is similar in the US and Eurozone but the US has slipped to a 17-month low, while a Eurozone recovery has stalled since Q1 – chart 6.

Chart 6

Chart 6 showing Real Narrow Money (% 6m)

The Eurozone story seems to be that higher bond yields triggered by fiscal loosening along with a stronger euro have offset ECB easing. Optimists argue that German fiscal stimulus is only now arriving but the impact could be balanced by an early stockbuilding downswing – the stockbuilding share of GDP rose by 0.7 pp in the year to Q2 and is above its long-run average.

The recent decline in global six-month real narrow money momentum has been driven by the G7 component. Chinese momentum fell back in April-May but has recovered since, giving a modestly favourable signal for economic prospects.

The assumption of a Q1 2027 trough implies that the current stockbuilding cycle has entered its final 18 months. The 18-month windows before previous lows were usually negative for risk assets and marked by credit events or “crises” – chart 7. The possibility of simultaneous housing cycle weakness, as well outsized gains in the upswing phase of the current cycle, suggests greater-than-normal downside.

Chart 7

Chart 7 showing G7 Stockbuilding Cycle G7 Stockbuilding as % of GDP (yoy change)

These 18-month windows were usually associated with cyclical equity market sectors underperforming defensives, following outperformance during the upswing (unusually strong in the current cycle). Stylewise, there was a weak tendency for quality to outperform, while momentum lagged its upswing gains significantly. The recent drawdown in relative performance of the MSCI EAFE Quality index versus MSCI EAFE was exceeded in magnitude and duration only in the early 1980s – chart 8.

Chart 8

Chart 8 showing MSCI EAFE Quality Return Relative to MSCI EAFE Comparison of Current & Previous Drawdowns

Six-month growth rates of global real narrow money and industrial output have been tracking closely with a small monetary excess on the latest readings – chart 9. The strength of markets appears to reflect a rise in the financial velocity of money more than ample liquidity, suggesting reversibility in the event of a cyclical deterioration in sentiment.

Chart 9

Chart 9 showing G7 + E7 Industrial Output & Real Narrow Money (% 6m)

The two monetary conditions historically favouring EM equities – E7 real money growth above the G7 level and global real money growth above industrial output expansion – are currently in place, suggesting EM outperformance in the event of a near-term further rise in markets.

Market Index Returns (Local Currency) Q3 (%) YTD (%)
MSCI All Country World 7.4 17.8
MSCI All Country World ex-US 6.2 15.2
S&P/TSX Composite 12.5 23.9
S&P 500 8.1 14.8
MSCI Emerging Markets 12.5 25.0
FTSE Canada Universe Bond 1.5 3.0

Foreign Equities

Foreign Equity Strategies Q3 (%) YTD (%)
CC&L Q Global Equity 10.2 18.9
CC&L Q Global Equity Extension1 9.6 18.8
MSCI ACWI Index (CAD) (net) 9.7 14.6
CC&L Q Global Small Cap 11.4 17.3
MSCI ACWI Small Cap Index (CAD) (net) 10.2 12.8
CC&L Q International Equity 9.1 26.7
MSCI ACWI ex USA Index (CAD) (net) 9.0 21.9
CC&L Q International Small Cap 10.9 27.7
MSCI ACWI ex USA Small Cap Index (CAD) (net) 8.8 21.5
CC&L Q Emerging Markets Equity 13.1 25.8
MSCI Emerging Markets Index (CAD) (net) 12.8 23.4
CC&L Q US Equity Extension1 8.8 13.8
S&P 500 Index (Net 15%) 10.2 10.9

MSCI ACWI Sector Q3 Total Returns (Local)
TOP 3

13.3%

Information Technology

12.0%

CommunicationCommuni-cation Services

11.8%

Materials

BOTTOM 3

3.6%

Health Care

3.0%

Real Estate

-1.3%

Consumer Staples

MSCI ACWI Country Q3 Total Returns (Local)
TOP 3

23.1%

Peru

20.5%

Egypt

19.8%

China

BOTTOM 3

-3.3%

India

-4.6%

Philippines

-13.0%

Denmark

Canadian Equities

Canadian Equity Strategies Q3 (%) YTD (%)
CC&L Fundamental Canadian Equity 11.0 21.2
CC&L Equity Income & Growth 7.8 17.6
CC&L Equity Income & Growth Plus 9.0 18.6
CC&L Q Canadian Equity Core 11.7 24.9
CC&L Q Canadian Equity Growth 12.1 26.1
CC&L Q Canadian Equity Extension1 13.0 28.2
CC&L Canadian Equity Combined (Q Core/Fundamental) 11.4 23.0
S&P/TSX Composite Index 12.5 23.9
CC&L Fundamental Canadian Small/Mid Cap 15.1 29.9
60% S&P/TSX Small Cap Index & 40% S&P/TSX Completion Index 19.0 34.4

TSX Sector Q3 Total Returns
TOP 3

37.8%

Materials

13.2%

Information Technology

12.6%

Energy

BOTTOM 3

3.7%

Consumer Discretionary

1.6%

Consumer Staples

-1.4%

Industrials

Canadian Fixed Income

Fixed Income Strategies Q3 (%) YTD (%)
CC&L Core Bond 1.9 3.4
CC&L Universe Bond Alpha Plus1 1.6 4.4
CC&L Core Plus Fixed Income 2.0 3.4
CC&L High Yield Bond2 2.9 5.2
FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index 1.5 3.0
CC&L Long Bond 1.6 1.2
CC&L Long Bond Alpha Plus1 1.3 2.1
FTSE Canada Long Term Overall Bond Index 1.2 0.6
CC&L Short Term Bond 1.4 3.5
FTSE Canada Short Term Overall Bond Index 1.3 3.5
CC&L Money Market 0.7 2.3
FTSE Canada 91 Day T-Bill Index 0.7 2.2
Bond Market Statistics
FixedIncome_Chart1-Q2-2025_NEW
FixedIncome_Chart2-Q2-2025_NEW

Balanced Strategies

Balanced Strategies Q3 (%) YTD (%)
CC&L Balanced 7.2 13.3
25% S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index & 35% MSCI ACWI Net (CAD$) &
40% FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index
7.1 12.2
CC&L Enhanced Balanced 7.1 13.4
20% S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index & 40% MSCI ACWI Net (CAD$) &
40% FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index
6.9 11.8
CC&L Core Income & Growth 7.5 15.2
50% S&P/TSX Composite Index & 25% S&P/TSX Capped REIT Index &
25% FTSE Canada All Corporate Bond Index
7.7 16.2

Absolute Return Strategies

Absolute Return Strategies1 Q3 (%) YTD (%)
CC&L Multi-Strategy 0.0 5.9
CC&L All Strategies -0.3 4.9
CC&L Fundamental Equity Market Neutral -6.1 -3.9
CC&L Q Global Equity Market Neutral (Cdn) 1.9 9.1
CC&L Fixed Income Absolute Return 2.6 3.4
CC&L Absolute Return Bond 2.4 3.6
FTSE Canada 91 Day T-Bill Index 0.7 2.2

About Connor, Clark & Lunn Investment Management Ltd.

Founded in 1982, Connor, Clark & Lunn is a privately owned investment management organization dedicated to delivering outstanding client service and a wide range of attractive investment solutions to our diverse client base. We understand the investment challenges faced by individuals, pension plans, corporations, foundations, mutual funds, First Nations and other organizations, and focus our efforts on meeting their investment needs by offering a comprehensive array of investment strategies, spanning traditional and alternative asset classes in a variety of quantitative and fundamental styles.


All data except MSCI Indices are as of September 30, 2025 and stated in Canadian dollars (CDN$). Source: Connor, Clark & Lunn Financial Group Ltd., FTSE Global Debt Capital Markets Inc., MSCI Inc., Thomson Reuters Datastream and S&P. Portfolio performance is preliminary, based on a representative account for the applicable strategy and may be subject to change. All performance data is gross of fees unless otherwise stated. Gross performance figures are stated after trading expenses and operating expenses but before management fees and performance fees, if applicable. Operating expenses include items such as custodial fees for segregated accounts and for pooled vehicles would also include charges for valuation, audit, tax and legal expenses. Management fees and additional operating expenses would reduce the actual returns experienced by investors. 1. These strategies are subject to performance fees, which will further reduce actual returns experienced by investors. 2. CC&L High Yield Bond Strategy has a custom benchmark, please contact us for more information.

For further information on performance, please contact us at [email protected].

Source: MSCI Inc. The MSCI information may only be used for your internal use, may not be reproduced or redisseminated in any form and may not be used as a basis for or a component of any financial instruments or products or indices. MSCI makes no express or implied warranties or implied warranties or representations and shall have no liability whatsoever with respect to any MSCI data contained herein. This report is not approved, reviewed or produced by MSCI.

Brazil and Mexico flags.

During a research trip to São Paulo this summer, our team met with the management teams of some of our holdings, with prospective investments and with local investors. We observed that consumer demand in Brazil is stronger than expected, particularly in higher-end categories. Companies we like such as Vivara Participações S.A. (VIVA3 SA) and Track & Field Co S.A. (TFCO4 SA) benefit from this consumer strength and offer a compelling risk reward given where these stocks traded during beginning of the year.

Local market behaviour remains distinctly short term, with high turnover and a focus on the next-quarter results. This is largely driven by the elevated Selic policy rate, currently at 15%, which leads investors to assess opportunities on an absolute-return basis rather than seeking alpha. With inflation near 5%, real yields approach 10%, creating a persuasive risk-free alternative that diverts capital from equities. In turn, local equity managers are adjusting their styles to retain AUM.

Banco Central do Brasil Target for Federal Funds rate (Selic)
A bar graph illustrating Central Bank of Brazil target for federal funds rate (Selic) over the last decade.
Source: Banco central do Brasil

These dynamics reinforce our long-term approach: concentrating on high-quality businesses with durable earnings power and consistent EPS expansion. Looking ahead, with elections approaching and potential rate cuts on the horizon, we expect a reallocation of flows from fixed income back into equities, benefiting companies with strong fundamentals and clear earnings visibility.

Key players in Brazil’s political landscape

Brazil’s political landscape is already taking shape as the country heads toward the 2026 elections. One of the most significant developments is the exclusion of Jair Bolsonaro from contention. His ineligibility through 2030, reinforced by a conviction earlier this month, effectively removes the most polarizing figure on the right. In his absence, the centre-right governor of São Paulo, Tarcísio de Freitas, is emerging as the most likely challenger to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (also known as “Lula”) in a potential second-round runoff. This dynamic sets up a more conventional contest between a centre-left incumbent and a pragmatic, reform-minded conservative.

For Lula, the current year has been a test of political resilience. His approval ratings hit a low point of around 24% in February 2025, but have since rebounded modestly, reaching roughly 33% by September according to Datafolha surveys. The recovery suggests some stability, though his support remains fragile, reflecting persistent dissatisfaction with the pace of economic recovery and concerns about fiscal policy. Nevertheless, the directional improvement offers the president some breathing room as he navigates the second half of his term.

From the perspective of markets, the electoral outlook carries important implications. A Lula re-election would imply continuity in the Workers’ Party approach: a more active state role in economic management, coupled with efforts to demonstrate adherence to Brazil’s new fiscal framework. Investor reaction would likely hinge on whether the government can maintain a credible path to primary balance and on its stance toward state-controlled enterprises such as Petrobras, where governance remains a focal concern. By contrast, a victory for a centre-right figure like Freitas would be interpreted as a more reformist and privatization-friendly outcome. Such a scenario could lower perceived political risk, reduce risk premia and prove supportive for equities and local rates markets.

Mexico rates, USMCA and tariffs

Headline inflation in Mexico remained relatively stable, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) registering a 3.57% year-over-year increase in August. Preliminary mid-September data suggests a slight acceleration to approximately 3.7%. Inflation expectations continue to trend downward. The Bank of Mexico’s (Banxico) August private-sector survey shows a further decline in median inflation forecasts for both 2025 and 2026, signaling growing confidence in price stability.

On September 25, Banxico lowered its policy rate to 7.50%, executing a 25 basis point cut. The decision was not unanimous, reflecting differing views within the board. Forward guidance remains cautious, as core inflation is decelerating only gradually. Reuters notes that while the easing cycle supports domestic demand and longer-term fixed income instruments, external factors – particularly the pace of US Federal Reserve rate cuts or potential tariff shocks – will ultimately drive risk premiums in Mexican assets.

In 2026, the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) is scheduled for its first mandatory joint review. At that point, the three countries must decide whether to extend the agreement for another 16 years, renegotiate its terms or allow it to transition into annual reviews. The outcome will directly affect trade certainty and tariff exposure in North America. Currently, approximately half of Mexico’s exports to the United States do not qualify under USMCA’s origin requirements and are therefore vulnerable to a 25% US tariff. Goods meeting the agreement’s rules of origin continue to benefit from duty-free treatment, but non-compliant products face higher costs and stricter enforcement.

In parallel, Mexico has recently imposed tariffs of between 10–50% on a wide range of imports from China, including auto parts, textiles, steel and consumer goods. This move underscores Mexico’s effort to shield domestic industries from low-cost Chinese competition, but also adds a layer of complexity to supply-chain strategies for companies operating across the region.

The 2026 review will thus be a critical inflection point: it could either reaffirm the stability of North American trade or introduce uncertainty through renegotiation and tariff escalation.

Aerial image of Bornish wind project turbines in Ontario, Canada.

Toronto, ON, September 29, 2025 – Connor, Clark & Lunn Infrastructure (CC&L Infrastructure) is pleased to announce the acquisition of a 49% interest in a portfolio of three operating Ontario-based wind projects totaling approximately 235 megawatts (MW) of gross capacity from NextEra Energy Resources, LLC (Energy Resources). With this investment, CC&L Infrastructure’s renewable energy portfolio now represents nearly 2.4 gigawatts (GW) of gross capacity, including more than 1.2 GW of wind capacity across 10 distinct assets diversified by market, counterparty, jurisdiction, and wind regime.

Adelaide Wind, Bornish Wind and Goshen Wind (the Projects), are located in southern Ontario and have gross capacities of approximately 60 MW, 73 MW and 102 MW respectively, together generating energy equivalent to the annual consumption of over 200,000 Ontario households. All of the energy generated by the Projects is sold under 20-year Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) to the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) (rated Aa3 by Moody’s). Energy Resources will retain a 51% ownership in the Projects and will continue to manage and operate the assets going forward.

“This acquisition further advances our strategy of building a resilient, long-term portfolio of infrastructure assets underpinned by strong counterparties and stable cash flows,” said Matt O’Brien, President of CC&L Infrastructure. “These projects strengthen our presence in the Ontario renewable market and demonstrate our commitment to responsible investment in projects that deliver attractive risk-adjusted returns.”

The Projects provide meaningful long-term economic contributions to the communities in which they operate through property taxes and direct funding. The Projects also have community benefit agreements in place with several local Indigenous groups.

“This transaction reflects both the strong fundamentals we continue to see in the Canadian renewables market and the ability of our team to execute on complex acquisitions with leading industry partners,” said Eric Reidel, Managing Director of CC&L Infrastructure. “We are pleased to have worked collaboratively with Energy Resources to complete this transaction, which highlights our relationship-driven approach to sourcing opportunities that add long-term value to our portfolio.”

CIBC Capital Markets served as CC&L Infrastructure’s financial advisor on the transaction and Torys LLP served as its legal counsel.

About Connor, Clark & Lunn Infrastructure

CC&L Infrastructure invests in middle-market infrastructure assets with attractive risk-return characteristics, long lives and the potential to generate stable cash flows. To date, CC&L Infrastructure has accumulated approximately $7 billion in assets under management diversified across a variety of geographies, sectors and asset types, with over 100 underlying facilities across over 35 individual investments. CC&L Infrastructure is a part of Connor, Clark & Lunn Financial Group Ltd., a multi-boutique asset management firm whose affiliates collectively manage approximately $154 billion in assets.

Contact

Kaitlin Blainey
Managing Director
Connor, Clark & Lunn Infrastructure
(416) 216-8047
[email protected]

Group bicycle ride at dawn.

If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. – African proverb

At Global Alpha, we truly believe in having strong, connected teams because we’ve seen how it translates into better performance at work. When team members trust each other, we can push boundaries, test new ideas and endure more uncertainty. So, when we’re looking for team-building activities we look for unique activities that feel relevant, challenging and outside of the box.

This year we did a couple of truly extraordinary events that brought our team together in new ways – like a crash course in sailing with future Olympians! – but the real standout was our participation in the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie. It’s an epic annual four-day, 1000 km relay race that unites thousands of cyclists to promote healthy living and fundraise to support research into rare diseases.

No one person completes the défi alone, just as no one person can run a successful investment firm alone. It takes a cohesive group of skilled team members who can trust and count on each other, especially in volatile times – this challenge was not only a test of physical endurance and teamwork, but also a metaphor for the long-haul journeys that define our success as investment professionals.

Building strength through trust and teamwork

Picture the starting line of the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie: the sun rising, nerves jangling, teammates poised for the first pedal stroke of a 1,000 km adventure. It’s daunting. The finish feels distant, almost impossible. But there are steady wheels on all members of this team – the kind of company that makes every bitter wind lighter and every small victory sweeter.

When you’re part of a team, you’re working toward achieving a common goal, whether it be crossing a finish line 1,000 km away or producing positive returns at the end of a volatile year. As with any team, there are different strengths to be found in each of its members. For the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie, some riders were fast on the straightaways, some were strong up the hills, some were daring through the turns. In our investment team, there are curious researchers, strong risk managers, detailed analysts and more, each of whose skills differ from the others.

On the race path or in the office, the Global Alpha team leans into the grind together, trading stories, picking each other up, finding the opportunities in setbacks. Making these journeys together, especially when there are struggles, builds grit. Over time, the team learns how to support the other members and how to play to their strengths.

There are challenges – sore legs, broken chains, missed targets, sour news, a string of rough quarters or market turmoil, but because of the trust within the team, these are not seen as failures. Instead, the team regroups. An injection of humour gives that second wind that pulls the team through a headwind; one rider’s encouragement or a colleague’s fresh perspective is the spark that keeps everyone moving forward.

But in both environments, there’s an important lesson to be learned: real breakthroughs come after being stretched to the limit.

Going the distance together

During a tough market or a rough patch in life, it can be easy to doubt the journey. During the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie, there are long, quiet stretches where progress feels invisible. Despite pedaling hard, the scenery barely changes. In investing, some days are just as sluggish – despite strong investment principles and proven strategies, the returns can still seem lacklustre.

But these stretched-out moments are where the magic actually happens.

Short-term lulls aren’t proof that nothing’s working – they’re part of playing the long game. It’s easy to chase quick wins or get spooked by setbacks. But by trusting the process, working as a team and continuing to move – one kilometre, one quarter, one decision at a time – perseverance and endurance will deliver quiet rewards and lasting success that go well beyond numbers or market cycles.

Endurance is at the heart of long-term investing because the real rewards come to those who stay disciplined through every market storm and quiet patch. Team endurance wins in investing by combining diverse strengths, steady encouragement and a shared commitment – making it possible to persist, adapt and thrive when others might falter or give up.

Here’s the heart of it: the real win isn’t found at the finish line, but in the journey itself.

  • Riding together, sailing together, investing together – it’s never just about the numbers.
  • It’s the camaraderie, shared resilience and group celebration after the slog, when you see how far you’ve come, thanks to each other.
  • Teams carry everyone through the silent, invisible stretches when progress is slow and doubt is loud.

It’s not about quick wins or epic heroics. It’s about the discipline to show up, the courage to trust the team and the humility to lean on each other for a reset. After every breakdown – on the bike, on the water, in a tough portfolio review – the team draws closer. What once felt like a failure becomes a shared memory, a lesson, a source of strength.

Final thoughts and what we’re doing next

Global Alpha Capital Management stands out because the same teamwork, grit and appetite for challenge that drive us in events like the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie also fuel our investment success. Our edge lies in superior stock picking, shaped by deep, bottom-up research and a thematic, fundamental approach to finding quality companies with real growth potential.

We’re equally relentless in risk management, applying robust analytical frameworks to ensure every investment is weighed wisely no matter how uncertain the market gets. Just as our team perseveres together through endurance events – adapting, supporting and trusting the collective process – we do the same for our clients, aiming for long-lasting performance in turbulent times.

What’s up next for Global Alpha team members? A 30 km trail run on Mont Tremblant – another chance for us take on an uphill challenge and cross a finish line, together.