Binary Capital Investment Management

Investment thinking Diversification thoughts: new thinking

Long-termism shapes our relationships and our investments.

as of December 2020

binarycapital.co.uk Diworsification

Summary

In portfolio management, diversification is a tool, not a goal. A tool to be used alongside other investment tools Authored by: and objectives to generate consistent returns for clients over the long-term.

We discuss diversification considerations for long-term global asset allocators, and why diversification does not always benefit the end clients. We try to understand why this is. We closely look at how we at Binary Capital see diversification and implement such a strategy in all our portfolios. This paper covers our diversification thinking. Saftar Sarwar Chief Investment Officer

Diversification

To spread the risk of investment holdings, so that the volatility, risk and returns from a group of assets, be it equities, fixed income and investment funds, or other investments can be successfully Amir Miah managed. Junior Portfolio Manager

Capital at risk. Introduction

Diversification has been a fundamental principle of finance since modern financial theory and practice took hold, and it has been described as the only free lunch in finance. (H MARKOWITZ, 1952).

Diversification is the strategy of spreading risk by investing in a range of investments which whilst individually risky, when they become part of a portfolio of investments the overall risk of that portfolio diminishes, returns are smoother and more optimal for the risk undertaken.

In this paper we explore diversification as well as the possibility and the very high probability that there could be over-diversification in the investment industry. This can be due to many factors, factors that are often very controllable and should be well understood. We will explore this from a portfolio management perspective as well as multi-fund, multi-asset solutions – solutions that are very common in the investment and wealth management industry, so called Discretionary Fund Management (DFM) solutions.

Initially described in Peter Lynch’s book, “One Up On Wall Street” (1989) as a corporate specific problem, the term “Diworsification” has developed into a term used to describe inefficient diversification relating to an entire investment portfolio, i.e., worse diversification, not better. In essence generating lower investment returns from diversifying too much, too broad, too randomly.

Owning too many investments can confuse, increase investment cost, add layers of unnecessary complexity and require undue due diligence and potentially lead to below average risk-adjusted returns. The issue we will explore is why do UK wealth managers buy so many investments for their clients? Surely owning the best performing, most optimal investments is better than a broader group of investments. In areas of portfolio management, particularly in the DFM world, there are elements of poor diversification and poor portfolio management practice generally. We will explore this in some detail in this paper. We also suggest coherent ideas that are implementable for liquid investment portfolios that are suitable for all client types in most client circumstances. We discuss the following

a. Portfolio diversification with asset classes b. Diversification within equity portfolios c. Building diversified investment solutions d. A sensible and consistent approach to diversification a. Portfolio diversification with asset classes

Modern portfolios

The topic is broad in nature, so to remain relevant to the subject matter we briefly cover some key points for consideration when thinking about portfolio diversification with and within asset classes.

Very important to have core diversification in portfolios A portfolio should be built with quality investment positions. Diversification (or spreading risk) is important but not extensively so. The idea of risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe ratios) stemming from the work of Markowitz, is important for understanding and managing elements of risk, however that analysis is often backward looking. It is not a good predictor of future risk/return behavior, and only looks at risk/diversification effects from a simplistic geographical returns’ perspective for example. Risk/return optimizers are not forward looking. The focus should be on generating returns consistently into the future.

The role of bonds in post-modern portfolios

We live in an age that is unlike others for fixed income Figure 1: US and UK 10-year generic government bond yields (1989-2020) investing. Interest rates are low and indeed negative in some parts of the world, for example in Japan, Switzerland, Sweden and Denmark. Bond yields are at low levels, often record lows, making it increasingly difficult to extract value from fixed income. Where does that leave fixed income as an asset class from a diversification point of view? Are there alternatives that can take the place of fixed income, or does it have to be ‘dead’ fixed income?

Investors have looked at infrastructure and other assets such as absolute return funds, hedge funds and private Source: Binary Capital, Bloomberg equity to become proxies or alternatives to fixed income portfolios. Often such assets correlate with fixed income, however, some do not and behave as general equity like investments. Absolute return funds have attempted to mimic fixed income type returns often with poor correlations and returns. Global absolute return funds end up failing to produce genuine absolute returns for investors. Future alternatives to fixed income still need to be considered from a diversification, returns and conviction perspective. a. Portfolio diversification with asset classes

Correlations of asset classes Nowadays, in times of crisis, correlations move Figure 2: Daily stock-bond correlation (2014- 2020) towards one. Recent examples of this include 0.4 the great financial crisis of 2008 (GFC) and the COVID-19 sell off in Feb/March 2020. There is 0.3 no actual diversification if all assets move in the same direction under periods of stress. It is 0.2 during such periods of significant market stress that we require proper diversification the most. 0.1

We would suggest that the rise of technology 0 in the investment world, program trading and

algorithm investing for example, has made real Correlation Daily -0.5/20/2014 1 5/20/2015 5/20/2016 5/20/2017 5/20/2018 5/20/2019 5/20/2020 diversification difficult, and broken down the broader diversified investment models. In light of this close correlation of assets, taking a more -0. 2 long-term approach in order to see over time how the assets will behave is a more optimal -0. 3 solution than looking at short-term correlations Source: Binary Capital, Bloomberg and then acting on such random events. We use ACWI LN for our equity proxy and UKCO LN for our bond proxy. Two contrasting examples of long-term asset allocation models

The Equity-Bond Tilt Model

A model that splits equity and bonds. The starting point for many wealth advisers, robo-adviser firms and DFM product providers, where 60/40 is defined as a typical Balanced mandate. Often a higher equity allocation is recommended for young individuals (Growth) and a higher bond component for those nearing retirement (Cautious). This is a very common strategy with billions invested in this area.

The approach has provided investors with decades of success. It is simple and clear to implement. However, as we witness a changing investment paradigm of low, zero or negative yielding bonds along with the increasing evidence that during times of crisis bonds do not deliver the protection expected, it is worth asking if the 60/40 investment model is still fit for purpose and if a better asset allocation needs to be undertaken to account for the differences in future asset returns – themes as opposed to country allocations? Do we need to be more flexible around such an asset allocation? Should we have better diversification around such a 60/40 model that is genuinely investment led? All areas that we explore and work on very closely as a firm. We believe this strategy needs a version 2.0, we at Binary Capital are actively working on innovative ways of developing such models.

The Endowment Model

Long-term investors should take note of the very successful US University Endowment Funds (“US Endowment Funds”) such as Harvard and Yale. They have highlighted a diversified multi-asset class investment approach but for the very long-term – often taking a 20 years plus view on such asset classes. The US endowment funds differ in style to traditional stocks and bonds investment strategies through significant exposures to alternative asset classes such as private equity, real estate, commodities and absolute return strategies - often investing over 50% into such asset classes – investing with real conviction. They have consistently achieved attractive annual returns whilst taking moderate risk. Assets such as fixed income are avoided, allowing portfolios to benefit from the increased returns potential offered through an allocation to the assets described above.

It is a fairly unique style of investing and most suitable for permanent capital strategies like endowments, foundations and investment trusts. It could be argued that this style of investing is not relevant to retail clients as it involves investing in illiquid assets whilst taking a very long-term view on assets. Furthermore, there are issues associated with creating retail portfolios that are not daily priced and include non-standard assets. In addition, this strategy is also very much a long-term model of investing and again has some limitation for retail and DFM clients. In saying all of the above, some of the best principles of the endowment models need to be carefully analysed and can be implemented. Some of the key principles around concentrated diversification, around best-in-class investment solutions, around ultra long-term thinking, are valid in this investment philosophy and need to be considered seriously in portfolio management.

We at Binary Capital are influenced by much of the endowment model thinking around investments. Conceptually, we agree with many of the principles of the endowment way of investing and embody them into actual portfolio management. b. Diversification within equity portfolios

Traditional equity portfolios Lawrence Fisher and James H. Lorie (1970) delivered a very Figure 3: Diversification within an equity portfolio famous study titled “Some Studies of Variability of Returns on Investments In Common Stocks“. This landmark research document found that a randomly created portfolio of 32 stocks could reduce the risk distribution by 95% when compared to a portfolio of the entire US equity market. From this study came the ‘approach’ that “95% of the benefit of diversification is captured with a 30-stock portfolio”. This study was further developed by others, including a study by Surz & Price (2000) which highlighted that a figure of around 60 stock positions could give 90% overall market diversification. In summary, to capture proper diversification one does not need to hold that many investments, it does not need to be 100+ holdings. Source: Investopedia.com The rise of the diversifier Does the above research implications still hold today? We believe it does with certain nuanced caveats. If it does, why do we see wealth portfolios with 1,500+ equity positions.

Through the rise of modern portfolio theory alongside passive products with investable benchmarks, we have seen the investment industry shift to a benchmark focused world of returns. Investing in indices rather than genuine investment solutions. A rise of broad investment solutions for clients, solutions that do not under-perform relevant benchmarks but attempt to mimic the market. They stick close to and track such benchmarks or maintain a beta value of close to one (expected move in a stock relative to movements in the overall market, a beta of one means a stock moves in-line with the overall market movement). A very common strategy now.

The rise of the diversifier is akin to the rise of risk-focused investment solutions in the investment landscape, solutions that are risk led and risk-focused – not returns led and focused. Solutions where often 20+ funds are held, and the underlying equity components could be as high as 3,000 individual positions. As we note, the rise of the diversifier has very much followed the rise of passive investing over the past 20 years, the provision of diversified solutions to fit into defined risk buckets. This is not good and creates sub-optimal solutions for clients. Clients miss out the opportunities that the right diversification can have on current and future investment returns. There are many billions invested in such risk focused products, products driven by extensive sales and marketing efforts. Considering research and practical insights, the rise of the diversifier needs to be re-examined and re-assessed, and a pivot away into other more optimal investment strategies needs to be genuinely considered.

Other diversification lenses

Diversification within equity portfolios can be seen in a variety of ways, below are some examples of what an investor may be interested in for diversification characteristics:

Style / Product Geographic Sector Thematic Size Factors provider b. Diversification within equity portfolios

Investing in winners, now and into the future

There is a school of thought developing in the minds of portfolio managers, particularly those investors with a high growth focus. This school of thought is founded in academic papers such as Bessembinder (2017), a paper that finds that 4 percent of stocks explain the net gain for the entire US stock market since 1926 to 2016. The remaining 96 percent of companies collectively generated dollar returns that matched those of one-month US Treasury bonds. The premise of the thinking is that there is a strong positive skewness in long-term stock market returns – the possibility of large positive outcomes (see figure 4). There is the potential for large gains from active stock selection if a fund manager possesses the skill to identify “home-run” stocks.

It is this very select group of stock-market “winners” and “home run stocks” that create majority of stock-market returns over a long period of time. Therefore, to create real value for clients, one needs to identify such potential winners and hold them in the investment portfolio for the long-term. This investment style requires a long-term time horizon to benefit from the compounding effect on random positive returns which induces the strong long term positive skewness in returns – resulting in returns often associated with venture capital.

Figure 4: Extreme winners

Source: JP Morgan (2014): Eye on the market – special edition

In summary, such school of thought articulates: to generate real outperformance, one must focus on the real winners, ensure you have as many of these in your portfolio as possible whilst avoiding the losers – stocks that will not add value above the returns of a one-month US government bond. You will hold these winners for long-term to benefit from the extreme returns. These may seem simple enough or even obvious, but this is very hard to implement in practice. One must continually search for these best ideas to deliver such return profiles to clients and seek the best funds out there that are aligned to such investment thinking. It is an on-going process. This process requires intensive research. b. Diversification within equity portfolios

Are concentrated portfolios riskier?

Yeung et al. (2012) studied the risk and return of active managers top ideas from 1999 to 2009. They found that although risk does increase for a concentrated best idea portfolio as you pare down to 5 holdings; the risk adjusted returns increases (captured by the Sharpe ratio - excess return per unit of risk). Furthermore, the difference between the risk of the top 30 stock portfolio and risk of the index is not significantly wide. Concentrated portfolio are not necessarily more risky than a diversified index.

Total Returns Standard Deviation Portfolios Sharpe Ratio (Annualized; %) (Annualized; %)

Top 5 10.77 26.33 0.28

Top 15 8.67 21.83 0.24

Top 30 7.44 19.13 0.21

Own Index 5.05 19.96 0.08

Data period: 1999-2009 Source: Yeung et al. (2012)

The Concentrators

Concentrated portfolio management thinking is relatively new in academia, with growing academic literature providing further evidence of the effectiveness of such an approach. This goes against the consensus thinking in academic circles that fund managers do not beat the market. More work needs to be done in this area, for example, analysing the drawdown characteristics of such concentrated portfolios. Nevertheless, the data over the past 30 years in equity market returns, certainly the US equity markets, highlights the significant returns potential associated with such a concentrated ‘best ideas’ approach and long-term investment strategy. Such an approach can be achieved by investing in concentrated direct equity positions or in a basket of underlying funds that also invest in a concentrated, long-term ‘best ideas’ manner.

Practically, this approach is not new. Some of the most well-known investors of modern times such as Warren Buffet, John Maynard Keynes, George Soros, James Anderson, Bill Ackman and Terry Smith sit in the concentrator school of thought. In this type of portfolio management diversification occurs, but investors are not excessively particular around geographical, thematic, size or sector diversification, rather, their focus is on investing in the real winners – a diversified portfolio, but a portfolio of the best ideas. The portfolio should try to include as many companies as possible that will generate exceptional long term returns and avoid other less appealing companies. b. Diversification within equity portfolios

Seems simple? It is actually very difficult to implement in practice. We note through this Other academic studies style of investing, a 100% loss of value in a single equity holding is very possible. The How Active is Your Fund Manager? A New Measure emphasis is on other investments creating That Predicts Performance such out-sized returns to outweigh any Cremers and Petajisto (2009) Cited 1591 times unexpected negative returns. It is a winners take all philosophy but in a developed, very The authors introduce active share as a new measure controlled and efficient manner. for active portfolio management. They find that this new active measure can predict fund performance. There are relatively few investment Funds with the highest active share significantly firms globally who have successfully outperform their benchmarks and this strong implemented this philosophy in real portfolio performance is persistent over time. Non-index funds with the lowest active share underperform management. Increasingly, more are coming their benchmarks. around to this investment philosophy. We at Binary Capital are very much in this school Active Share and Mutual Fund Performance of thought, and closely aligned to the few Petajisto (2013) firms who do this well. We believe the future Cited 401 times to be more optimistic than the past and the opportunity to create out-sized returns will The author finds evidence that the most active stock pickers outperformed their benchmark indices even probably increase in the future, not diminish. after fees, whereas closet indexers underperformed. Data used by Petajisto spans from 1980-2009. What does this mean for diversification in equity portfolios? You will still be aware of Best Ideas your diversification tilts: geographic, style, Cohen, Polk, and Silli, (2010) sector and size, but your portfolio will be Cited 155 times more concentrated with fewer stocks. The authors find that a concentrated approach to Combining a bottom-up approach with top- a fund managers best ideas, can earn investors a down thematic views. If using funds, you will persistent (or “permanent”) outperformance. The use long-term, high conviction managers authors outline a range of reasons to explain over- for portfolio construction. You will be more diversification in practice. patient in investing and avoid changes for the sake of changes - a real focus on Fund Managers Who Take Big Bets: investing in the long-term winners. Skilled or Overconfident Baks, Busse, and Green (2006) Cited 73 times

Results suggest that focused fund managers do have some ability to correctly pick stocks. Mutual fund investors may enhance their overall performance by investing in portfolios of focused funds rather than highly diversified funds. c. Building diversified, risk managed investment solutions: the good and the bad.

We now look at the construction of risk- adjusted wealth solutions for clients when using funds and some key considerations. ‘ …a proposition that is worth seriously Approaches to building multi-asset diversified risk-adjusted solutions vary from provider considering is – what if the current to provider – there are several key decision decade is just as innovative, disruptive variables that could differ. For example, a and growth focused as the decade wealth manager may choose to use passive just gone, or even more so? We products (index like products), “active managed could witness similar or even better products” or a mix and match of the two, which opportunities in areas of technology, is often called a blended or a core-satellite healthcare and some areas of retail and approach. The core of the approach being a transportation…’ group of passive products for overall global portfolio construction, and the satellite being a mix of highly active and concentrated funds for Binary Capital, Survival of the Optimists, additional returns above the index like returns. July 2020, Saftar Sarwar

Risk profiles, with the heavy adoption of risk profiling tools used by financial advisers, such as Dynamic Planner and Finametrica have become more definable and less subjective. Risk profiles for UK wealth managers are often defined by key parameters: the % of growth assets or volatility bands.

Risk profiling tool providers are also providing template asset allocations for DFMs and investment advisers that manage portfolios for clients – a copy and paste approach. Is this real portfolio management? Is this optimal for clients? Is this proper portfolio management for the future trends in equity returns, bearing in mind what we have previously discussed regarding the skewness of equity market returns? We would suggest not.

Once the core asset allocation has been decided for the portfolio, along with how one will use diversification in asset classes to generate better risk-adjusted returns within set risk constraints, the wealth manager must also consider the diversification strategy within the equity portion of the portfolio. The equity portion is the “engine of growth“ for portfolio returns: is the engine really driving returns?

We argue that UK DFMs and multi-manager products are too index like within their equity portfolios, and do not present their investment views within portfolios – acting more as risk managers rather than genuine portfolio managers. This may be due to several factors: size of asset manager, 5/10/40 UCITS rules or investment philosophy, business reasons, crowd (herd) behaviour, group think, or a combination of the above. c. Building diversified, risk managed investment solutions: the good and the bad.

Active management in this sense can generate better and more consistent returns over the long- term. We believe in genuine active portfolio management. We believe a more optimal portfolio is nearer to our US equity diversification (see next table) rather than the sub optimal 1,000+ shares, less than 0.01% exposure to the US market per each equity, where such equities will be closely correlated with each other: why hold so many holdings? What is the reason? Is the reason beyond portfolio management and do we need to move into the areas of business and risk management? Or is the risk management process flawed and in need for change. We believe the latter; much better risk management is needed.

A comparison of providers – US equity exposure.

A passive strategy has around 3,000+ US shares and a typical DFM will have a range of around 500 – 3,400 US shares. With this in mind, we must ask ourselves: what is optimal to obtain US equity exposure? Is it over 3,000 shares or is a number nearer to 90 an optimal diversification; at about 5% of a classic wealth manager (see table below).

Vanguard Life Binary Capital Current Classic Wealth Manager Strategy 60% Balanced Active

Total Number of funds 18 30 13

Number of equities 6,582 2,417 372

No of US equity funds 1 Passive fund 4 Passive funds 2 Active funds

No of underlying 3,476 1,750 97 US equities

% Equity 60.0% 67.0% 61.0%

% Bonds 38.9% 25.5% 29.0%

% Other 1.0% 4.1% 6.0%

Source: Binary Capital, Bloomberg. The above data is unaudited and should be used as a hypothetical example. c. Building diversified, risk managed investment solutions: the good and the bad.

Be aware of over-diversification

Over-diversification results in low conviction in any view

The more equities an investor includes in a portfolio, the correlation with equity benchmarks will increase. This will result in an index like portfolio which does not present any strong views. One is better off buying a low-cost index product to gain exposure that way.Why pay an active management fee for passive investment management?

Professional investing is all about having a view, then implementing that view very carefully. If there are no views or if the investment views are too broad, they effectively become meaningless. It is better to have a set of meaningful views and construct investments to gain exposure around such views. If one does not have any significant views, that is fine. The point is if you have investment views, they need to be well articulated and importantly very well implemented and continually monitored. Our industry is all about looking towards the future and structuring portfolios around such forward- looking views. See the future and invest now for such a future view.

Over-diversification does not reduce risk

Over–diversification indeed increases risk, the risk of poor returns, poor asset allocation and poor stock and fund selection. The risk of sub-optimal investment portfolios for clients. Have your best ideas in a strategy and watch that strategy very carefully. Do not buy low quality assets for the sake of diversification. Over complicating asset allocation through diversification to more esoteric credit categories and real assets may not offer protection and may result in liquidity issues and therefore result in poor performance. This all needs to be managed carefully.

Too many funds results in less understanding of the portfolio

Let’s look at an example: If an investor invests in 30 “active” equity funds which each contain 50 unique equity positions – we are looking at 1,500 equities in total for the portfolio (blend with passive, then this number of equities can be much higher). The portfolio manager must maintain due diligence and understand all 30 funds. Furthermore, it does not make sense that one would have 30+ best fund ideas, such a strategy will result is the dilution of conviction, dilution of ideas, and dilution of returns.

If the underlying funds do not follow a consistent long-term style this will also result in less control and less understanding of the overall portfolio as the portfolio shifts characteristics from the fund level on an ongoing basis. d. A sensible approach Binary Capital’s portfolio construction considerations and actions.

Of the 10,000 investment houses in the global investments for the long-term. The short-term is investment universe, we look more closely usually random. at the top 100 and aim to allocate to around 10. We seek diversification around this, but If we dilute our conviction and focus on broader diversification on our terms, with our investment diversification, our view is this will lead to sub- philosophy at the core. It is all about complete optimal investment portfolios and returns. Broad investment alignment. views, create broad investment returns and therefore index like behaviours. We do not want How should we look at risk management in this index like behaviour, if we did, we would buy an respect? We do it differently. We should see index ETF at a fraction of the cost of an active risk management through a risk lens and from manager. We deliberately eschew this approach. a stock/investment lens in conjunction with a We believe long term returns are skewed to a few correlation framework. We have high conviction selected investments – academic and practical views, we stick closely to said views for the examples can validate such views. A genuine long-term, we do not deviate from said views. active management approach. Diversification is If our minds change, we change. Our views are of value but to a limited extent; it then becomes consistently held for at least an economic cycle, overload and does not necessarily lower risk. and often beyond (even an economic cycle has Invest in the winners and future winners, invest become relatively meaningless). We hold our with conviction.

Below: A summary of some of our thinking on developing investment portfolios. This highlights the real conviction in our portfolios and how we look to invest, how we align our views to the practicalities of actual portfolio investment.

Asset allocation Our style of equity allocation

Using fixed income, equities and alternatives We are conviction investors. We are to produce risk managed solutions concentrators. We are long-term investors appropriate for defined risk profiles. investing in a very patient style.

Value Growth (Measured by P/E)

Small Large (Measured by average market capitalization)

Higher quality assets (Altman Z score, sales growth, profitability) d. A sensible approach Binary Capital’s portfolio construction considerations and actions.

Equity allocation and concentration

Use funds to target best in class exposure to geographic regions, with a bottom-up objective of investing in the best companies, that will generate exceptional long-term returns. Maintain high- conviction, best ideas only.

Total Funds Total no. of stocks 13 372 Closing remarks

It takes independent thinking and genuine conviction to be properly diversified and to manage that diversification in a clear and consistent way. It also takes independent thinking to move away from historical long-standing diversification methodologies towards a more focused and longer-term way of thinking and indeed investing, considering everything that has happened and that could happen in the future. Looking forward all the time. It takes real independence to do this, real thought leadership.

As we have demonstrated, over-diversification and the implications for risk and returns is a real thing which directly affects client returns. Clients should not be subject to sub-optimal returns just because the portfolio have invested in utilises outdated portfolio management thinking and tools. There is a better way, we have demonstrated that in this paper.

Be diversified, but it needs to be rightly diversified, not used as a term to create a risk-adjusted portfolio that fits into risk profiles, that are more business driven as opposed to investment driven. Business objectives are one thing, then there are Our overarching principle is that we are investment objectives for the optimal returns for long-term investors. It allows us to take clients. more concentrated positions as we look through any short-term volatility and We at Binary Capital always try to see the clients’ investment drawdowns for the benefit perspective. What is optimal for the client within of longer terms gains. If the investment the relevant risk tolerances? How do we seek to thesis or strategy changes, we change, invest in such an optimal manner? Where are our otherwise we continue to remain best ideas and how can we implement them without invested. It is this advantage that allows having to compromise on such returns due to over- us to be more focused on our approach diversification? We aim to balance diversification and and see investment as genuinely active, concentration, using the academic terminology be a and not for any other reason. ‘concentrator’ discretionary fund manager (DFM) - a rarity (maybe unique) in the DFM space.

This is the approach we take, and we will always take. This approach gives us the benefit of being optimal for clients and taking that more nuanced approach, away from consensus and traditional portfolio thinking.

We hope this paper, on the merits, difficulties and challenges of diversification will provoke debate, discussions and further thoughts. The investment landscape is changing and will continue to evolve. It is important we continue to evolve for the right reasons and for the benefit of the clients. We serve the clients, not portfolio risk monitoring tools. We serve the clients to provide to them attractive risk adjusted returns during all time periods.

In an industry that has yet to move on from more traditional portfolio management techniques, we believe it will eventually do so over time. We believe we can lead the way in such innovative portfolio thinking and are willing to help others on this journey. This paper is one in a series of papers, to help others understand what we do and why, and importantly how we implement such ideas and thinking into investment reality. Disclaimer

The Information in this document is not intended to influence you in making any investment decisions and should not be considered as advice or a recommendation to invest. Any Information may not be suitable for all investors and investors must make their own investment decisions using their own independent advisors and relevant offering material. Any investment decisions must be based upon an investor’s specific financial situation and investment objectives and should be based solely on the information in the relevant offering memorandum. Income from an investment may fluctuate and the price or value of any financial instruments referenced in this document may rise or fall. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.​ ​ We assume no responsibility or liability for the correctness, accuracy, timeliness or completeness of the Information. We do not accept any responsibility to update the Information. Any views, opinions or assumptions may be subject to change without notice.​ ​ Binary Capital Investment Management Ltd is incorporated in England under company number 06692644, registered office, 25 Green Street, London, W1K 7AX. ​Binary Capital is a trading name of Binary Capital Investment Management Ltd. ​ Binary Capital Investment Management Ltd is authorised and regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority (reference number 507900). Principal place of business: 25 Green Street, London, W1K 7AX.

Contact Us

+44 (0)203 943 5080 [email protected] 25 Green Street, Mayfair, London, W1K 7AX