looking into 2018 are too tight and there’s less opportunity to generate returns.what are your...

CQS Insights: Looking into 2017CQS Insights: Looking into 2018

CQS InsightsLooking into 2018Sir Michael Hintze

NOVEMBER 2017

December 2015

In this Q&A, Sir Michael Hintze, Chief Executive and Senior Investment Officer of CQS, presents an update on the risks and opportunities he sees in markets in 2018 and beyond.

2017 has been a pretty eventful year from an economic and geopolitical standpoint. Rates are

higher in the US, yet many equity and credit markets globally have performed well thus far, and volatility has remained low. What has surprised you this year?

I was constructive for markets as we headed into 2017, but I am surprised there wasn’t greater volatility.There were certainly many

events that could have created potholes whether concerns over diverging monetary policies globally, Quantitative Tightening (QT) or geopolitical events. I am also surprised by the markets’ response to global growth; all 45 OECD economies are growing, with 33 accelerating.1 Yet rates have stayed low.

You have been constructive for markets for some time. Is this still the case?

For the medium-term, yes. The global economy is growing and corporate earnings with it. There are excess reserves in the

financial system and I do not see inflation as a threat. That said, the market structure has changed. Regulation has reduced depth in certain segments of the markets, the popularity of passive over active investment management strategies, and systematic over fundamental styles creates vulnerability to short, sharp market moves. Shocks could well be exacerbated by model-driven ‘autopilots’.

How are you positioning your portfolios?

Notwithstanding my constructive view of markets in the medium-term. I have been more cautious over the short-term.

Global growth is accelerating, rates could rise further than market expectations and there are geopolitical situations that add to a number of signals and market technicals that suggest to me potential potholes are out there. Consequently, I have added protection in the portfolios I manage. I have tried to be creative at the idiosyncratic-specific, index and geopolitical levels and bought protection to pick up convexity.

Given the end of Quantitative Easing (QE) in the US and moderation of QE in Europe, I believe it’s going to be a credit pickers’ market in 2018. During 2017, we began to see growing dispersion within indices. While volatility at the index level remained low, there have been rolling pockets of stress at the sector and issuer level, noticeably in the US. Looking through our global lens, we are finding value in Asia and Europe. With a rising rate backdrop, we continue to favour shorter duration and floating rate assets. Additionally given global growth, sectors such as commodities, cyclical and other names should perform well.

This is an exciting investment environment which plays to our global footprint and our analytical strengths as a fundamentally-driven, benchmark agnostic active investment manager. I am optimistic about our ability to find idiosyncratic opportunity and to generate returns for our investors.

Source: 1OECD, Gavekal Research, 18 October 2017.

2


You mentioned QT. Are you concerned about a return to a Figure1: Monthly US Federal Reserve, European Central

‘Taper Tantrum’? Bank and Bank of Japan Asset Purchases2

250 250

150

Bank of England US Federal Reserve Bank of Japan European Central Bank Total

150

The short answer is yes, but the longer 200 200answer is more nuanced. A rates-induced

correction is a possibility, however, my view is that there will continue to be sufficient liquidity in the overall system to be supportive of markets. While inflation U

SDbn

USD

bnU

SDbn

100 100 will edge higher it will not be high. Figure 1 shows selected central bank purchases since 2008. QE has supported 50 50 asset price growth including equity and credit markets.

0 0

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017There is an argument that as central banks begin QT

asset prices will fall. I do not share this school of thought. Central banks are aware of the damage that could be done should Taper be aggressive. They will allow assets they hold to mature and roll off. I do not believe assets held Figure 2: US Monetary Base3

Bi-Weekly, Period: January 1999 to October 2017, Semi-logby them will be sold. Furthermore, the Bank of Japan and the People’s Bank of China are likely to continue to be $6,400 $6,400

accommodative. So the global monetary base is unlikely to materially decline. Figure 2 shows the US monetary base. $3,200

9/11 QE1 $2,633.0Sep-01 Sep-08 Dec-10

Jan-00 $688.8 $874.8

Feb-10$2,183.6

$3,864.9

$1,982.7

Dec-12

Y2K$630.5

$3,200 The Fed’s balance sheet expanded from around US$0.8tn in 2008 to US$4.3tn in 2014 and it now stands at US$3.8tn.3

I expect the US monetary base to decline to below US$3tn over time, but excess reserves will be sufficient to

USD

bn

$1,600 $1,600

$800 $800be supportive of markets. As this takes place, there will be more dispersion of valuations and a return to greater market volatility. I am optimistic about the opportunity set this will present to us as an active manager.

Why do you believe inflation will not be a problem?

Inflation expectations must rise, but I don’t believe we’ll have runaway inflation.We are all familiar with the effect of technology and

artificial intelligence on labour and this type of ‘substitution’ is happening throughout the global economy. It is clearly disinflationary. It is interesting to me that the US is close to full employment, yet, as you can see in Figure 3, unit labour costs are not growing much. While some rise is to be expected, I do not believe we are going back to the 1970s. Likewise, there is as yet little evidence of sustained producer price inflation.

$400 $400 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017

Figure 3: US Unit Labour Costs Still Moderate4

8.0% 3.0%

6.0% 2.5%

4.0% 2.0%

2.0% 1.5%

0.0% 1.0%

-2.0%

0.5%-4.0%

-6.0% 0.0% 1996 2002 2007 2013 2018

Unit Labor Cost (9 months lead LHS) Core CPI (rhs)

Sources: 2Deutsche Bank Research: US Outlook November 2017. ECB data is 6-month moving average, others are 12-month moving average. 3Laffer Associates Economic Chartbook, October 2017 *Updated using the most currently available data. Monetary base (bi-weekly series) updated through to 25 October 2017; M1 data (weekly series) updated through to 16 October 2017. 4Bloomberg, and CQS Research as at 29 September 2017.

3

CQS Insights: Looking into 2018

There are of course exogenous factors to consider. Year-on-year, the oil price and commodity prices will be higher as we enter 2018, but again, I do not see substantial inflationary pressures. Another thing to consider is whether we are correctly measuring GDP and inflation. Are the baskets and their weightings genuinely representative of economic activity and inflation? This is a broader topic I am very interested in and we are

Figure 4: US High Yield Credit Spreads During Periods of Rising Interest Rates5

2500 7%

6% 2000

4%

3%

5%

1500

1000

bps

presently looking into it in greater depth. 2%

500 1%

0 0%

with high single-name volatility.

spreads are too tight and there’s less opportunity to generate returns.What are your thoughts?

I’m more optimistic than that. Fundamentals and technical factors are creating idiosyncratic opportunity.

In High Yield it is all about dispersion, especially in the US. European High Yield is supported by an improving fundamental backdrop and some positive technicals, but

Many market commentators say that markets are richly valued, credit

January December November October 1997 2003 2010 2017

US High Yield Index (LHS) 6

Fed Funds Rate (RHS)

Figure 5: Decoupling of Investment Grade and High Yield is Ongoing7

1000 15

800 13

600 11

bps

While valuations are at the tighter end of historical levels, it’s what lies beneath that matters – dispersion is back with a vengeance. Figure 4 shows that spreads typically tighten as rates rise and that spreads can remain low (and indeed lower than they are now) for extended periods of time.

But you need to look under the bonnet. Figure 5 illustrates the decoupling of Investment Grade and High Yield indices and, furthermore, growing dispersion within US High Yield credit versus dispersion in US Investment Grade. To some extent this is being driven by growing differentiation between faster-growing technology companies and traditional sectors. Technicals driven by allocations are also a factor. Money is fl owing from individual names into indices and index-like surrogates that provide more liquidity. Consequently, there are growing allocations to both passive and index-tracking vehicles.

In Figure 6, one can clearly see dispersion is back within US High Yield.

400 9

200 7

0 5 December August March October

2009 2012 2015 2017 8 9

Investment Grade (LHS) High Yield (LHS)

CCC/AAA (RHS) 10

Figure 6: High Yield Dispersion is Back11

5.0% Utility Transportation Telecommunications

4.0% Technology & Electronics Services Retail 3.0% Real Estate Media Leisure 2.0% InsuranceHealthcare

1.0% Financial Services Energy Consumer Goods

0.0% Capital Goods March November Basic Industry 2017 2017 Banking

Sources: 5Bloomberg and CQS research as at 31 October 2017. 6ICE BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Index. (H0A0). 7Bloomberg and CQS analysis as at 31 October 2017. 8ICE BofA Merrill Lynch US Corporate Index (C0A0). 9ICE BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Index. (H0A0). 10ICE BofAML CCC & Lower US High Yield Index (H0A3). 11Bloomberg, BofA Merrill Lynch and CQS Research as at 22 November 2017.

4


In the main, this has been driven by rolling pockets of stress in a number of sectors such as Oil & Gas, Retail, Telecomms and so on. US High Yield indices are heavily weighted to these sectors. Just look at what has been happening over the last few weeks following the abandonment of the T-Mobile merger with Sprint. There was contagion into the High Yield markets. Shortly thereafter, Altice reported quarterly results below market estimates and the contagion spread to the European High Yield market. If you had simply followed the indices, you would have missed out. We have been finding value and mispricings in issuers we like and based on our bottom-up fundamental analytical process. Active investment management is at an advantage when there is dispersion. Figure 7 provides a glimpse into what I believe will be more and more dispersion, differentiation and investment opportunity going forward. I am optimistic about our ability to find value and generate returns for investors in 2018.

Figure 7: Dispersion in US HighYield is Back…With a Vengeance12

800

bps

700

600

500

400

300 November January May August October

2016 2017 2017 2017 2017

Healthcare 13 Energy14

Food/Beverages 15 Telecommunications 16

Retail 17

Can you provide more colour in other asset classes?

The ABS sector is supported by positive fundamentals and technicals. Additionally, we believe there is a persistent complexity

premium. ABS enables us to tailor risk/return profiles by selecting from a variety of geographies, asset types and subordination levels. We currently favour consumer-related

exposures in the US and corporate exposures in Europe. We are positive on the CLO sector, particularly selected European CLO mezzanine and equity tranches.

In Senior Secured Loans, we presently favour the US, which should benefit from a continued positive technical environment with demand increasing as rates are expected to rise. Spreads over cash on single B’s +350 to 400bps and double BBs of 275-325bps.18 This is also a market environment in which convertibles should perform well. There should be further dispersion of outcomes for companies driven by the changing economic, fiscal and technological environment. This type of increased dispersion tends to play out well for convertibles given their asymmetric return profile whereby an investor can capture the upside participation while protecting the downside. Similarly, given lower volatility, we believe valuations are attractive.

Asia is also attractive and a heterogeneous market. Broadly-speaking, Asian economies are driven by China and Japan. Both these economies are growing. In the case of China, systemic fears around their economy have dissipated over the last 18 months as the government has managed to slowdown credit growth, while the recovery in commodity prices since early 2016 has helped the earnings of the material sectors, one of the weaker sectors in the Chinese economy. Furthermore, the continued growth in consumption and the diversification away from dependence on exports have allowed the Chinese government to slow capital outflows.

In Japan, the pick-up in global growth has stimulated exports and their exporters’ corporate earnings.The Bank of Japan’s monetary policy is also beginning to show results. Corporate Japan is not just beating earnings expectations but also increasing earnings forecasts.

Equity valuations are not overly demanding and multiples remain low by historical standards, with the trailing 12-month P/E ratio of Topix at 16 times.19

Sectors we favour both from growth and valuation perspectives include automation and e-gaming. In Asian credit markets we continue to find ample idiosyncratic opportunities and convertibles are a good way to play our fundamentally positive view on Japanese equities.

Sources: 12Bloomberg, BofA Merrill Lynch and CQS Research as at 31 October 2017. 13ICE BofAML US High Yield Healthcare Index (H0HL). 14ICE BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Energy Index (H0EN). 15ICE BofAML US High Yield Food & Drug Retail Index (H0FR). 16ICE BofAML US HighYield Telecommunications Index (H0TC). 17ICE BofAML US HighYield Super Retail Index (H0SR). 18LCD as at 22 November 2017. 19Bloomberg and CQS analysis as at 20 November 2017.

5


Let’s turn to geopolitics, which has been increasingly prominent among investor concerns over the past

year. How do you assess geopolitical risk and its impact on the markets? What geopolitical events should we be concerned about in 2018?

Geopolitical risk is poorly understood and often mispriced. Understanding the geopolitical context and the transmission

mechanism from geopolitical events to the markets is critical. It’s hard to trade geopolitical risk. It is often binary; it doesn’t matter until it does matter. Looking into 2018 there are many ‘known unknowns’ out there, including potential conflict in North Korea, confrontations across the Middle East and challenges to stable government in Western democracies and to the US-centric global system.

You mentioned it is difficult to trade geopolitical risk. How do you use this context from a portfolio perspective?

It sets a context for our portfolio managers on a number of levels. For example, our views on the oil price both in early 2015 and in

early 2016 were in part driven by our assessment of the geopolitical situation in the Middle East.This informed our exposures to the energy complex and credit more broadly. Likewise, our view that China growth was not going to collapse and create a systemic fallout in early 2016 was also based on geo-economic insight and meant we had a positive view on natural resource names. It can also help us better understand and consider country-specifi c risk, informing us about timing and supporting our fundamental analysis in the pricing of risk. In my portfolios I also actively trade geopolitical risk.

Turning to the Middle East, you called the oil price correctly in both at the end of 2014 and in 2016. Saudi Arabia

has been in the spotlight in recent weeks. What’s your take on what is going on?

In the short-term the oil price could have further upside and stay higher for longer. Nevertheless, I continue to believe the longer-

term price of oil will remain in a US$40 to US$55 per barrel range, although spikes above and below this range are certainly possible for a period of time.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region has seen enormous change in over the past few decades, but recent events in Saudi Arabia suggest a potentially massive game changer…and disrupter. We are tracking the Kingdom’s Vision 2030, which has significant potential geopolitical and geo-economic implications.To be clear, success depends upon the young Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman. His economic programme appears hugely ambitious but that shouldn’t detract from what are sound aims such as economic diversification, weaning the Kingdom off oil and growing a vibrant private sector to generate wealth to create employment for its young population. It has been accompanied by a dramatic programme of domestic change vital to economic transformation; some of the measures that have been implemented were unthinkable just a few years ago.

This coming year is important to assess progress towards fiscal and other economic targets and whether it retains critical popular support, and also to see whether the campaign in bordering Yemen is brought to an end and good GCC relations restored. Saudi Arabia will be central to some of the great questions of 2018, like leadership of the Sunni world, the relationship between Sunni and Shia, and the relationship between Islam and the West. Saudi may no longer be the global OPEC swing producer of oil, but it remains a significant player in more ways than one.

And European populism?

It is alive and well and directly impacting the EU’s 6 biggest economies; it is not just about Brexit. The main themes for 2018 are

in Germany, where Merkel is facing challenges forming a coalition which could affect EU Reform and Italy’s forthcoming elections are the next major electoral hurdle. Despite Macron’s stunning success in May’s Presidential elections, over 40%20 of French voted for the Far Left or Far Right in its first round. In the Netherlands, like in Austria, established parties veered to the right but Right Wing parties still made significant Parliamentary gains.

Source: 20presidentielle2017.conseil-constitutionnel.fr.

6


During the German elections, the Centre Right FDP were revived and the Right Wing AfD made a significant breakthrough at the expense of both the ruling CDU and its SPD coalition partners. At the time of writing, Merkel is struggling to assemble the stable coalition in Berlin, which Macron and Junker and others need to underpin EU Reform.

In Spain, Madrid has called a snap regional election in Catalonia; if it backfires and the secessionists increase their majority, it could threaten Rajoy’s minority government. However, Italy is the real worry, with an election looming in the spring. Just last year, Eurosceptic parties together were polling at 55%.21 In recent months these parties have softened their position on referenda, but they are focused on reform.

As the recent Sicilian election showed, migration is the biggest political issue in Italy and Five Star are waiting in the wings ready to exploit the adverse impact of ESM decisions on Italy’s banks. We need to keep a close eye on the growing stresses within the EU and Eurozone. I believe politically-inspired volatility is on the horizon.

Looking at what are arguably more ‘binary’ events as you put it. What geopolitical disruptions are

you most concerned about in 2018?

‘Binary’ is the right word in the case of North Korea.There are those who believe that conflict is inevitable. I am an optimist,

and I hope it will not come to that; it would certainly be awful from a humanitarian standpoint. But let’s hypothesise for a moment. If one were to conclude that the respective positions of North Korea and the Rest of the World on nuclear weapons are intractable and that risk is increasing, a trigger event may be inevitable (deliberate or not). The question is what type of conflict and how far it spreads. Is it conventional or nuclear? Is it contained on the Korean Peninsula or does it become regional or worse?

To provide a perspective, North Korea’s population is estimated to be 25 million and GDP US$40bn22

South Korea’s is 38 million and its GDP is US$2tn.22

To place their economies in context, nominal global GDP is about US$78tn. China’s GDP is US$12tn and Japan’s US$5tn.22 It is a significant concern and I hope the US and China are talking.

On a more positive note, you have been a China bull for many years and visit the country often. Have your

views changed since the 19th Communist Party Conference in October?

China remains an engine for global growth. As expected, the Communist Party Conference enhanced Xi’s authority.

This is historic stuff. ‘Xi thought’ has joined that of Mao in the Constitution. And going forward? ‘Socialism with Chinese Characteristics’ means domestic governance may look less Western, but a focus on economic reform, environmental improvement and rule of law will create the conditions for entrepreneurial enterprise set out in the 13th Five Year Plan. China will be even more engaged in the world, as promised by Xi at Davos and emphasised by this year’s BRICS and Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) events. Figure 8 illustrates the scope of China’s ambition.

Figure 8: China’s One Belt, One Road Initiative23

BRI alone means Chinese strategic engagement with over 65 states comprising about 65% of the world’s population and one third of Global GDP23 and including countries where the West appears unwilling or unable to engage. Xi has moved China far from Deng’s ‘hide and bide’; ‘America First’ might make it easier for him. Xi has much to do; beginning the process of addressing the challenges from China’s shadow banking system

Sources: 21www.scenaripolitici.com, as at 11 August 2017. 22CIA World Factbook as at November 2017. 23Bloomberg, Straits Times Graphics. 24McKinsey ‘China’s One Belt, One Road: Will it reshape global trade?‘, as at July 2016.

7


should reduce concerns from a systemic, credit-induced threat for the time being. Looking forward, given current growth, commodities should be underpinned. The scale and character of Chinese activity is extraordinary. If successful, China may not just be set to dominate the region, but remould the world order.

What are the biggest challenges for asset managers in 2018

The industry challenges and trends continue to be similar to those I wrote about last year. Delivering risk-adjusted performance in

line with a client’s mandate is our core mission.This needs to be achieved in partnership with an investor and there must be an alignment of fees between investor and manager. Costs, primarily driven by regulation, continue to rise and industry-wide fee pressures are not abating. For the industry as a whole, finding cost efficiencies and scale will continue to be themes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there is global growth. Inflation should also remain relatively modest over the medium-term. I believe these factors will provide a supportive environment for markets in the medium-term, however, I am mindful of potential potholes in the shorter-term.

I believe our multi-asset approach to active investment management and our repeatable, fundamentally-driven investment process will deliver value to our investors.

I would like to thank our investors for their loyalty. I would also like to thank our counterparties for their continuing support and our staff for their hard work over the last year.

With best wishes for 2018.

Sir Michael Hintze, AM

8


About the Author

Sir Michael Hintze,AM, GCSG Sir Michael is the Founder, Chief Executive and Senior Investment Officer of CQS, a London-based credit-focused global multi-strategy asset manager. He is also a Senior Portfolio Manager.

Prior to establishing CQS in 1999, Michael held a number of senior roles at CSFB and Goldman Sachs. He began his career in finance in 1982 with Salomon Brothers, New York, after working as an Electrical Design Engineer in Australia, where he had also served as a Captain in the Australian army.

In 2014, Michael was called to serve on the International Advisory Panel for the Australian government’s Financial Services Inquiry and subsequently as a Member of the

About CQS

CQS is a credit-focused multi-strategy asset manager founded by Sir Michael Hintze in 1999. Our deep experience allows us to offer solutions for investors across a range of return objectives and risk appetites.We are an active asset manager with expertise across the credit spectrum, including corporate credit, structured credit, asset backed securities,

Market Practitioners’ Panel of the UK’s Fair and Effective Markets Review. He presently serves as a Member of the Board of Superintendence of Instituto per le Opere di Religione (commonly known as the Vatican Bank) and sits on the Audit Committee of the Duchy of Cornwall. In the charitable sector,The Hintze Family Charitable Foundation has provided funding to over 200 charities mainly in the UK and Australia.

Michael is a fluent Russian speaker. He holds a BSc in Physics and Pure Mathematics and a BEng in Electrical Engineering both from the University of Sydney. He also holds an MSc in Acoustics from the University of New South Wales, an MBA from Harvard Business School and received a DBA (honoris) from the University of New South Wales.

convertibles and loans.We are committed to delivering performance and high levels of service to our investors. CQS has offices in London, NewYork, Hong Kong, Jersey and Sydney. Our investors include pension funds, superannuation funds, insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds, funds of funds and private banks.

9

Not for distribution to retail investors as defined in Article 4 of the European Directive 2011/61/EU and the UK FCA COBS 3.4. CQS is a founder of the Standards Board for Alternative Investments (“SBAI”) (formerly, the Hedge Fund Standards Board) which was formed to act as custodian of the alternative investment managers’ industry best practice standards (the “Standards”) published by the Hedge Fund Working Group (“HFWG”) in 2008 and to promote conformity to the Standards. SBAI is also responsible for ensuring that they are updated and refined as appropriate.The Standards were drawn up by HFWG which comprised the leading hedge funds (based mainly in London) in 2007 in response to concerns about the industry, including financial stability and systematic risk.The HFWG completed its work in January 2008 and published its report outlining the Standards. By applying, managers commit to adopt the “comply or explain” approach described in the Standards. The term “CQS” may include one or more of any CQS branded entity including CQS Cayman Limited Partnership which is registered with the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority, CQS (UK) LLP and CQS Investment Management Limited which are both authorised and regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority, CQS (Hong Kong) Limited which is regulated by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission, CQS (US), LLC which is registered with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, and CQS Investment Management (Australia) Pty Limited which is registered with the Australian Securities & Investments Commission,Australian Financial Services Licence No. 386047. This document has been prepared for general information purposes only and has not been delivered for registration in any jurisdiction nor has its content been reviewed by any regulatory authority in any jurisdiction.The information contained herein does not constitute: (i) a binding legal agreement; (ii) legal, regulatory, tax, accounting or other advice; (iii) an offer, recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell shares in any fund or any security, commodity, financial instrument or derivative linked to, or otherwise included in, a portfolio managed or advised by CQS; or (iv) an offer to enter into any other transaction whatsoever (each a “Transaction”). Any decision to enter into a Transaction should be based on your own independent investigation of the Transaction and appraisal of the risks, benefits and suitability of such Transaction in light of your individual circumstances.Where applicable, any decision to enter into any Transaction should be based on the terms described in the relevant prospectus, supplement, offering memorandum, private placement memorandum, trading strategy, constitutional document and/or any other relevant document as appropriate (each an “Offering Document”).Any Transaction will be subject to the terms set out in its Offering Document and all applicable laws and regulations.The Offering Document supersedes this document and any information contained herein. Nothing contained herein shall constitute or give rise to the relationship of partnership nor shall it constitute a joint venture or give rise to any fiduciary or equitable duties.Any information contained herein relating to any third party not affiliated with CQS is the sole responsibility of such third party and has not been independently verified by CQS or any other independent third party. The information contained herein is not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and no representations are made in such respect, nor should it be deemed exhaustive information or advice on the subjects covered; as such, the information contained herein is not intended to be used or relied upon by any counterparty, investor or any other party.The information contained herein, as well as the views expressed herein by CQS professionals made as of the date of this presentation, is subject to change at any time without notice. CQS uses information sourced from third-party vendors, such as statistical and other data, that are believed to be reliable. However, the accuracy of this data, which may also be used to calculate results or otherwise compile data that finds its way over time into CQS research data stored on its systems, is not guaranteed. If such information is not accurate, some of the conclusions reached or statements made may be adversely affected. CQS bears no responsibility for your investment research and/or investment decisions and you should consult your own lawyer, accountant, tax adviser or other professional adviser before entering into any Transaction. CQS is not liable for any decisions made or action taken by you or others based on the contents of this document and neither CQS nor any of its directors, officers, employees or representatives (including affiliates) accept any liability whatsoever for any errors and/or omissions or for any direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential loss, damages or expenses of any kind howsoever arising from the use of, or reliance on, any information contained herein. Information contained in this document should not be viewed as indicative of future results as past performance of any Transaction is not indicative of future results.The value of investments can go down as well as up. Certain assumptions and forward looking statements may have been made either for modelling purposes, to simplify the presentation and/or the calculation of any projections or estimates contained herein and CQS does not represent that any such assumptions or statements will reflect actual future events or that all assumptions have been considered or stated.Accordingly, there can be no assurance that estimated returns or projections will be realized or that actual returns or performance results will not materially differ from those estimated herein. Some of the information contained in this document may be aggregated data of transactions executed by CQS that has been compiled so as not to identify the underlying transactions of any particular customer. Any indices included in this document are included to simply show the general market trends relative to the types of investments CQS tends to select for certain funds managed or advised by I Funds”) for the periods indicated within this document.The indices are not representative of CQS Funds in terms of either composition or risk (including volatility and other risk related factors). CQS Funds are not managed to a specific index.This document is not intended for distribution to, or use by, the public or any person or entity in any jurisdiction where such use is prohibited by law or regulation. In accepting receipt of this information, you represent and warrant that you have not been solicited, directly or indirectly, by CQS and are receiving this information at your own request. It is your responsibility to inform yourself of and to observe all applicable laws and regulations of any relevant jurisdiction. The information contained herein is confidential and may be legally privileged and is intended for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s) to which the document has been provided. In accepting receipt of the information transmitted you agree that you and/or your affi liates, partners, directors, officers and employees, as applicable, will keep all information strictly confidential.Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information is prohibited.Any distribution or reproduction of this document is not authorized and prohibited without the express written consent of CQS, or any of its affiliates. AIFMD and Distribution in the European Economic Area:The Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (Directive (2011/61/EU)) (‘AIFMD’) is a regulatory regime which came into full effect on 22nd July 2014. CQS (UK) LLP is an Alternative Investment Fund Manager (an ‘AIFM’) to certain CQS Funds (each an ‘AIF’).The AIFM is required to make available to investors certain prescribed information prior to investing in an AIF.The majority of the prescribed information is contained in the latest Offering Document of the AIF.The remainder of the prescribed information is contained in the relevant AIF’s pre-investment disclosure document, the monthly investor report, and the fund limits document.All of this information is made available in accordance with the AIFMD. In relation to each member state of the EEA (each a “Member State”) which has implemented the AIFMD (and for which transitional arrangements are not/no longer available), this document may only be distributed and shares in a CQS Fund (“Shares”) may only be offered or placed in a Member State to the extent that: (1) the CQS Fund is permitted to be marketed to professional investors in the relevant Member State in accordance with AIFMD (as implemented into the local law/regulation of the relevant Member State); or (2) this document may otherwise be lawfully distributed and the Shares may otherwise be lawfully offered or placed in that Member State (including at the initiative of the investor). In relation to each Member State of the EEA which, at the date of this document, has not implemented the AIFMD, this document may only be distributed and Shares may only be offered or placed to the extent that this document may be lawfully distributed and the Shares may lawfully be offered or placed in that Member State (including at the initiative of the investor). Information Required, to the extent applicable, for Distribution of Foreign Collective Investment Schemes to Qualified Investors in Switzerland: The distribution of shares of the relevant CQS Fund in Switzerland will be exclusively made to, and directed at, qualified investors (the “Qualified Investors”), as defined in the Swiss Collective Investment Schemes Act of 23 June 2006, as amended (“CISA”) and its implementing ordinance (the “Swiss Distribution Rules”).Accordingly, the relevant CQS Fund has not been and will not be registered with the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (“FINMA”).The representative in Switzerland is ARM Swiss Representatives SA, Route de Cité-Ouest 2, 1196 Gland, Switzerland.The paying agent in Switzerland is Banque Cantonale de Genève, 17, quai de l’Ile, 1204 Geneva, Switzerland.The relevant Offering Document and all other documents used for marketing purposes, including the annual and semi-annual report, if any, can be obtained free of charge from the representative in Switzerland.The place of performance and jurisdiction is the registered office of the representative in Switzerland with regards to the Shares distributed in and from Switzerland. CQS (UK) LLP (as the distributor in Switzerland) and its agents do not (i) pay any retrocessions to third parties in relation to the distribution of the Shares of the CQS Fund in or from Switzerland; or (ii) pay any rebates aiming at reducing fees and expenses paid by the CQS Fund and incurred by the investors. Index Descriptions: It is not possible to invest directly in an index. BofA Merrill Lynch US Corporate Index (C0A0) tracks the performance of US dollar denominated investment grade corporate debt publicly issued in the US domestic market. BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Index (H0A0) tracks the performance of US dollar denominated below investment grade corporate debt publicly issued in the US domestic market. ICE BofAML CCC & Lower US High Yield Index (H0A3) ICE BofAML CCC & Lower US High Yield Index is a subset of ICE BofAML US High Yield Index including all securities rated CCC1 or lower. ICE BofAML AAA-A US Corporate Index (C010) ICE BofAML AAA-A US Corporate Index is a subset of ICE BofAML US Corporate Index including all securities rated AAA through A3, inclusive. ICE BofAML US High Yield Healthcare Index (H0HL) is a subset of ICE BofAML US High Yield Index including all securities of healthcare issuers. ICE BofAML US High Yield Food & Drug Retail Index (H0FR) is a subset of ICE BofAML US High Yield Index including all securities of Food & Drug Retail issuers. ICE BofAML US High Yield Telecommunications Index (H0TC) is a subset of ICE BofAML US High Yield Index including all securities of Telecommunications issuers. ICE BofAML US High Yield Super Retail Index (H0SR) is a subset of ICE BofAML US High Yield Index including all securities of non-food & drug retailers.

Contact Information

[email protected] www.cqs.com

CQS (UK) LLP CQS Investment Management Limited 4th Floor, One Strand London WC2N 5HR United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7201 6900 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7201 1200

CQS (Hong Kong) Limited Unit 1207, 12th Floor No.9 Queen’s Road Central Hong Kong China

Tel: +852 3920 8600 Fax: +852 2521 3189

CQS (US), LLC 152 West 57th Street 40th Floor, New York NY 10019 United States

Tel: +1 212 259 2900 Fax: +1 212 259 2699

CQS Investment Management (Australia) Pty Limited Suite 9.02, 50 Pitt Street Sydney NSW, 2000 Australia

Tel: +61 2 8294 4180

SIGNATORY

Jan ‘17

looking into 2018 are too tight and there’s less opportunity to generate returns.what are your...

Documents