Fonds im Fokus



  • UBS: The bottom line

    27.05.2016 | 09:11

    UBS: The bottom line

    Both prospective presidential candidates in the US have until November to turn electoral disapproval into favor, and favor into action at the ballot. In the end, unpopularity will not prevent a winner from being declared. Similarly, we acknowledge that many asset classes have high disapproval ratings. But markets will have winners too. In our view, focusing on the corporate bottom line will be crucial to finding them.

  • UBS: Air of mystery

    25.05.2016 | 09:19

    UBS: Air of mystery

    The Federal Reserve is not an advocate of mystery – quite the opposite. Its default position is to reveal all to the market, the only problem being that the market's faith in the Fed's revelations is distinctly shaky. And when it comes to monetary policy, one could go as far as to say, the logic of the market is at odds with the logic of the Fed. Maybe the Fed should reveal less and surprise more.

  • UBS: Do rewards outweigh the risks in high yield debt?

    20.05.2016 | 10:05

    UBS: Do rewards outweigh the risks in high yield debt?

    Can investors look to high yield (HY) corporate bonds instead for attractive risk-adjusted returns? The answer depends on where you look.

  • UBS: Der richtige Weg im Niedrigzinsumfeld

    20.05.2016 | 08:00

    UBS: Der richtige Weg im Niedrigzinsumfeld

    Niedrige Zinsen stellen schon seit einigen Jahren eine erhebliche Herausforderung für Investoren dar. Viele Notenbanken weltweit haben negative Zinssätze festgelegt, und die Renditen einer wachsenden Zahl von Benchmark-Staatsanleihen bewegen sich heute im negativen Bereich. Zeit für Investoren umzudenken?

  • UBS: Borrowed time

    17.05.2016 | 10:41

    UBS: Borrowed time

    One of the many paradoxes thrown up by the world of ultra-low interest rates is the disinclination to borrow. Why would borrowers, corporate and household alike, not choose to avail themselves of what would seem to be cheap money? Maybe, the effect of low rates has actually proved to be counterintuitive and just maybe, the effect of an interest rate hike will prove just as unexpected.

  • UBS: So what’s the worst that can happen?

    13.05.2016 | 10:58

    UBS: So what’s the worst that can happen?

    Market participants must try to sort through a range of potential scenarios to assess what impact the presidential elections in the US could have upon both the global economy and financial markets. While there are a seemingly infinite number of possible outcomes between the presidential and congressional races, we will have narrowed our focus to just one: what we perceive as the “worst-case” scenario for the 2016 elections.

  • UBS: Dereferendum

    10.05.2016 | 15:44

    UBS: Dereferendum

    While many commentators are opining on the likely longterm economic consequences, should the UK vote to leave the EU on June 23rd, no one can say for certain what those consequences will be. But one thing is clear – the effects of widespread uncertainty are already being keenly felt by the UK economy.

  • UBS: Central banks on the hunt for a medicine

    03.05.2016 | 15:59

    UBS: Central banks on the hunt for a medicine

    Having explored almost all other options, markets are now speculating that monetisation could be the next step. Monetisation can look like a free lunch when interest rates are stuck at zero. But economics teaches us that there is no such thing as a free lunch, so who would end up picking up the bill?

  • UBS: Meeting the challenge of negative rates

    29.04.2016 | 09:33

    UBS: Meeting the challenge of negative rates

    Negative rates in Denmark mean that some people are receiving mortgage payments from their bank. Certain cantons in Switzerland are asking residents not to make monthly tax payments. And in Japan, people have taken to buying home safes for fear of paying interest on their bank deposits. But this era will be remembered for more than a few quirky anecdotes.

  • UBS: Print prescription

    27.04.2016 | 09:16

    UBS: Print prescription

    Increasingly extreme monetary stimulus measures are proving remarkably ineffectual at breaking the economy out of the low growth, low inflation cycle. So should central banks simply print money and pass it directly to governments or households? Monetisation may be contentious, but is it any more worse than QE? Can our central bankers and politicians be trusted to use it wisely?