IMAP Podcast Series - Independent Thought
IMAP Podcast Series - Independent Thought
Episode 36: Private Credit - It’s in the way you use it!
Join our host Scott Fletcher (Woodbury Financial Services) accompanied by Nehemiah Richardson (Pengana) & Sarang Kulkarni (Vanguard Active Global Credit Bond fund) discussing:
- Thinking about portfolio construction
- Benefits and challenges of investing globally vs investing in domestic credit markets
- Macro and fundamental backdrop for global credit investing over the year ahead
- Public vs private credit … or both?
This podcast series is not meant for retail investors, but instead is meant for financial advice and investment professionals. Please refer to iMaps website, imap asm au for more details.
Speaker 2:Hello and welcome to our IAT podcast, and my name's Scott Fletcher, chief Investment Officer of Wouldbe Private. And today we'll be talking with two highly experienced , uh, credit portfolio managers and credit investors , uh, from Vanguard and Pen Credit. And it's quite an opportune time, I think, to be talking about , uh, global credit . Uh , and it's interesting that we have , uh, you know , Saren you're on the more on the , the public side, if I can put it that way. Yeah . Uh , and Pana , uh, with Nehemiah, you're on the , the private side, so it should be a good discussion. Um, first of all, we're we're joined by Sarre Karney , who's the lead portfolio manager of the Vanguard Active Global Credit Bond Fund, and he joins us from London. So he is made the trip, especially for this <laugh>, I probably don't think so . Uh, and uh, Nehemiah Richardson, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Pana Credit and lead portfolio manager of the Pana Global Private Credit Trust. So gentlemen, thanks very much for joining us. Um, so just to start off with, I thought I'd just get you to give an introduction to yourselves , um, and , uh, starting with you Sarang , um, Vanguard is a name that is very well known for, for , uh, passive investing or index uh, investing. Can you just talk us through, given it's an active credit fund , just talk us through the approach and how that fits within Vanguard , uh, overall in terms of the investment capability?
Speaker 3:Yeah, that's a , that's a very good point. I mean, active investing is not new at Vanguard. In fact, the very first fund that Vanguard launched was an active fund and in the fixed income space, like , uh, we have been managing to bond funds since the early nineties. Uh , so that there is a long truck record. And in the last 10 or 15 years, there has been definitely a big , uh, commitment on a big push towards growing the active side of the business. Like today, if I look at your bond funds , we probably have, you know, between three to $400 billion US dollars under management, which probably puts us like in the top contract fund managers in the world. But as you said, that's, that's not really well known .
Speaker 2:Quite absolutely. And , uh, could you just walk us , uh, quickly through or briefly through your approach to generating , um, credit return or credit alpha?
Speaker 3:Yeah, I mean my , uh, of over the years that I've been managing credit , um, mutual funds, I mean I have seen that a lot of managers tend to treat it as a macro asset class and as a result of which they take a very top down approach. And , um, what ends up happening is because of like the correlations that you see between different markets and different sectors within fixed income, you end up with just one or two big bets in the front. And , um, when you get one wrong, the other one doesn't really compensate for, and at the same time, what they're doing is that they're leaving a lot of money on the table. So the approach which we have is to, as far as possible try it and avoid taking big direction that we look for these undervalued opportunities in global credit markets where we can sort of drive performance , uh, by looking at universe premium and spreads where other people are not really paying that much attention.
Speaker 2:Sure . And , uh, Nehemiah , I'll, I'll turn to you and just ask the same question. Could you just , uh, walk us through , um, your approach at Penang credit , um, to generating , um, credit return credit credit alpha, which in the private market means something, something different, of course. Um, how do you, what's your approach to , uh, these sort of issues?
Speaker 4:Yeah , so , um, I guess just stepping back very quickly , um, you know, our reason for being was really to try to bring access to the global private credit asset class and kind of what it brings , um, to investors portfolios. Um, but to do so in , in a way that allowed for non-institutional investors to access it on a diversified basis. 'cause there's a lot of, you know, barriers or obstacles to being able to do that. Um, if you're not a significant institution. Um, and I guess within that , um, you know, what you have is a relat is illiquid asset class that delivers really nice yields, really good capital preservation, you know, really nice risk vol trade off . Um, but within that you can get a lot of performance dispersion, you know, between managers. So , um, the way that we, the we, the way that we invest, and this is why we partnered with with Mercer, who's a, who I think most would know is a significant global advisor and allocator is, is to be able to kind of unpick and , and really look through where, you know , where are the managers. 'cause I think this comes down to two things generating alpha here. Number one is diversification. Because in diversification, what you're really trying to do outside of the , the fact that it's an uncorrelated asset class to what you find in most portfolios, whether it's very low correlation to fixed to traded credit, but within that you want to diversify because there can be performance dispersion across different types of managers, different types of strategies which you wanna eliminate. So number one is really about the diversification of part of portfolios by manager. So that's why we are a fund of funds. And two, to be investing in fund structures that have their own wide diversification by single name, so you're not driving, you know , sort of , um, concentration in any one name or any one industry. Okay. Uh, and then the second is really about manager selection. And this is probably , um, it , it's just as important if not more important because, you know, the having a manager that has clear history in demonstrated performance through market cycles , um, is really critical in this space. Okay . And mainly because , um, you'll find that those who've been around a long time who have scale and diversified portfolios, who have proven track records of selective origination, really good portfolio management and , uh, and very good workout capability are the ones who can really give you the, the alpha and private credit, which is really about minimizing net loss.
Speaker 2:Yeah . Um , just thinking about a portfolio construction. So I think if we get to the deeper layers in the youngin , so to speak, of about your sector positioning and things like that, but we just start at the higher level. Um, just interested in your thoughts and , and sorry , um, I'll turn this to you. Uh , first of all, when it comes to portfolio construction , um, why is global credit and appropriate core holding in , in your opinion , um, for a a fixed income sleeve ?
Speaker 3:Yeah , when we, when we talk to our clients about the needs of, you know, fixed income in their portfolios, it boils down to like four key points . Uh, the first one is like they wanna source a income , um, you know, fixed incomes, we design for that. And, you know, for a very long time there wasn't really much income in income , but now it's back yields are higher at a much more attractive level yield cuts , you come back to being up for stock pay , you're getting paid more in bonds than you are getting in back deposits. So from an income perspective, that is definitely good . The second part is liquidity and like, you know, the public bond markets are like the largest markets in the world, so it's quite easy to like have, you know, great allocation changes from one sector like, you know, public markets and to another. Um , and so that's another attraction for clients. If they wanna make, you know, allocation changes based on like their own sort of like Mac outlook or the views on duration or quality , they can do that quite easily . The third aspect is returns. And, you know, 2022 for public markets was weight testing because it started off with like, you know, very low risk premium built to the asset price . It was now ended up with a risk premium actually being quite attractive. And if you look at the environment that we're going in, and most of the scenarios that we look at, you can get cash plus returns from investment grade fixed income, which I think is gonna be really hard to argue for like a number of other asset process through these kind of like , uh, s as well. And the last part is like diversification from equities. I mean , you really need a defensive, you know , asset plus that is gonna like, hold its value in the event that you actually do get a sell off in the equity market. And, you know , see public fixed income traditionally has played that role . Um , it's struggled to play that role in 2022, which is given the yields back to being with , uh, on a very attractive level. And we can go back to be playing those roles . So it's, it's hard to kind of like get these four objectives in any other asset class . And that's sort of like why you won't be, you know, have this as a poor holding, but we can go into like the benefits of global and, you know, global definitely has a lot of advantages of our , uh, look . And , and a lot of that is just when you're booking for some of these good risk adjusted opportunities where you can, you know, in , in other words, basically get high return for the same amount of risk , but like you take lower risk for the same amount of return , um, you can find more of them in cop local than state domestic .
Speaker 2:And Nehemiah , I'll , I'll , I'll throw the same question to you. Maybe if we just just join the two together there as , uh, um, as UNG went through it , um, when it comes to private credit , um, I'd say that there's a lot of listeners , uh, on the advice side , uh, to this podcast, and it is a lot of approaches , uh, that get made on , um, different private credit managers and and so forth. Um, just your views on , um, private credit, what to look out for, what, what to be aware of , um, when thinking about locating as a core holding in a, in a fixed income sleeve in a portfolio.
Speaker 4:Yeah, sure. Um, I think firstly it's, you know, are you, we have a lot of choices. So the first choice is Australia versus global. Okay. And, and I'd say that the key differences there are , uh, in the, in the US and Europe, you have a real structural opportunity that's been driven by bank withdrawal of credit into various segments , um, through, as a result of regulation that was really about getting rid of liquidity mismatches, right ? And what you have in Australia is more subordinated credit or credit where banks do not have risk appetite. It's less so the fact that the regulator's actually trying to drive a change in the mismatch. So that's, that's kind of the first thing, which is why you'll see a very different sort of risk profile. Number two , um, you then say, okay, well where do I play , um, in strategy? Okay . And, and there are three predominant strategies in , in , uh, global profit credit being direct lending, which Yvonne is mid-market corporate lending , um, which is where you've had that structural opportunity. Second is in structured finance, which is in and of itself a structural opportunity, but, you know, different , um, different sort of return drivers. And then thirdly, credit opportunities, which is, which is really your, I guess, distressed debt special situations fund that tend to have, that tend to be , uh, more closed than IRR accumulation funds. So within that, in strategy, do you want a focus on income? Do you wanna focus on capital appreciation or some ls of both ? So you have different choices that you can, you can , um, you can choose depending on your return and liquidity , um, requirements. Um, if I say on the very call it, on the risk averse, high income capital per preservation end of the equation, that's where you really see direct lending. Not all direct lenders are, you know, playing the same place and provide the same opportunity. So what I mean by that is , um, you know, where you really wanna play there is managers who have a , have long track records of history, you know , um, through cycles, number one. Number two, that they're actually playing in the core, the real core part of the mid-market and predominance of their portfolios. So what do I mean by that? I mean the , the , the , the space in the market where companies don't really have alternatives to credit, so it's either sub economic or they're not able to access traded credit. S okay . What they call upper mid market is larger managers who kind of compete with the bank syndicated or with the leveraged loan market. So you're always kind of, and there's a very different risk reward trade off that you get when you're competing with the traded credit market versus in the pure illiquid part of the market. Okay . And, and that's of critical importance because you'll find that managers who play in that illiquid space, if you look back to the GFC, will have had both in , if you look at the GFC, they would've had net asset values that might've been written down 5% that realized net losses of, you know, less than 50 basis points, and were paying cash yields of around 10%. So meaning your net return, even in covid, even in GFC coming out of those funds because of the high income and the very, very good capital preservation characteristic would've been five , six , 7% . Okay. So I just point that out that the , the key message here is make sure you really understand in each one of those buckets, the manager selection, where they actually play and, and what their historical performance has been against that strategy. And if you really want to be where, where the best bits are you want to be, where you have a structural gap and you're not competing with traded credit markets because they have very different deal structuring, very different protections, right, than what you would get in the illiquid kind of private credit side of the market.
Speaker 2:Great . And , uh, sorry , um, going a level up, I , I guess on the macro and fundamental backdrop, and we've seen so many , uh, changes , uh, geopolitically , uh, macroeconomically , um, over the last, you know , couple of years, but particularly over the last , uh, say six to to nine months with US elections and , and policy questions and all sorts of things , um, how are you or how is Vanguard , uh, more broadly , um, looking at the challenges , um, some of those fundamentals and the fundamental backdrop? 'cause we do hear a bit about valuations , uh, in terms of high yield , um, spreads are quite tight, those sort of things. So if you just give us a , a feel for , um, how you are seeing the world , um, for global credit investing, things like valuation , um, psychical factors , uh, market, those, those type of factors.
Speaker 3:Yeah , I'll probably start off by saying is that in the credit market , opportunities generally come out of vault , that not everything can be sort of like treated the same way. And sometimes that does what happen. So you can find some really good opportunities, a really cheap price risk at different points of the cycle we can take it from of , uh, and on , on the macro picture , I think that's a really interesting point because very from , uh, six months ago, I think the outlook that most people have is quite predictive. The , you know, I think soft landing was going the best case, but like, I'd probably say in the last , uh, couple of months, it's anything but predictable with everything was happening in geo critical front and , and the changes that that might happen on the back of the , so there will be like a lot of, you know, volatility that does come up . Um, and so you have to look at like, the outcome in terms of what are the different possible scenarios and try to look at how, you know, that's really being reflected in in asset prices and valuations when you talked about . And so when you look at see credit valuations, you're gonna look like, look at that in context of like what is , uh, what's actually being priced in other parts of the market. And I , and I do think, yeah , credit, you know, spreads are tight , but you know, they have been at a tighter level and they've stayed like that for a longer period of time. So, you know, it is quite possible we stay in a narrow range for a reasonable period of time. That's, that's kind one scenario that you're looking at. Um, and another kind of scenario you're looking at is you could see like a small solve and credit markets, but for public markets is where the advantage comes in. From a total return perspective, any kind of selloff and spreads could be compensated by rally in the line , yields marketing as a result, as a result of which you might be getting, you know, I'm talking us to auditors, sorry , but you could be probably getting somewhere opposed to eight to 9% returns , um, in as total returns in that kind of scenario. And , um, you know, so we looked at , you know , possible kind of , uh, possible sell . So I, I think when we look at sort of risk premium that cause different asset pluses and you go back over time to see, you know, has he been in similar kind of positions in the past and how would that kind of play out? I mean, I do see like the relative value between, you know , equity was premier credit was premier term, premier , um, very similar to kinda like what you saw towards the end of 2000. And if you look at like, the performance of like credit versus, say equities are up point in time like credit outperform where equity bonds like 10 to 15% over a six to 12 month horizon . So even though, you know, spreads can be tight, the yields are actually really quite attractive . And it goes back , uh, I mentioned before, you know, roles that fixed trader , fixed income plays in in advisor portfolios. I mean, it's definitely practic to playing that. And you know, that's why public has like difference scenarios , different outcomes. The only one you're gotta be worried about for fixed circum income . Obviously if inflation comes by at central banks , start hiking again. But again, I portion that, you know, that's a simple month . The only asset across the piece here . Yeah,
Speaker 2:It's right. Uh , Nehemiah , uh, your , uh, views on, on the outlook that you are seeing for, for , uh, global private credit, say the next 12 months?
Speaker 4:Yeah, sure. I mean, I , I think I , I , I'll look at it this way just really simplistically, which is we, we live in a way more volatile world with way more uncertainty. And when you have someone in the White House who every day is kind of creating some different potential policy or executive order that has, that makes it very, very, you know, difficult to predict the direction of anything , um, that just means a lot more uncertainty, a lot more volatility, right? And so within the context of that, then I go, well, you know, how do you, how do you, I think it's important for people to introduce robustness into portfolios and that's where I think private credit kind of fits in well and really , um, uh, on two bases . Number one , um, if you want to get the best out of it with the best managers, what you want is people who, like I said before, differentiated origination robust fund structures where you have, you know, very diversified portfolios, people who skew to sectors that are more resilient and non-cyclical, which may be a little bit tricky in some cases, but for the most part are way more predictable and, you know, not so much, you know, like, so for example, staying away from consumer discretionary , um, you have resilient deal structures where managers control the positions are senior secure, they have a lot of equity cushion that actually helps to support the senior, the senior risk that they take , um, very tight docs, you know, great lender protections around covenants to allow them to at least intervene and change the game if they actually need to. For companies that go off track when things are inherently uncertain because they always are anyways , so that's one. And then two, it's just making sure you have a diversified portfolio, right? That's why I think you don't want to take single manager risk. You don't want to take single, you know, segment of the market risk, which is why the way we think about things that , and go to credit is we have a , we have senior direct lending and we diversify by geography, you know, us and Europe, we , um, skew the managers who have, who are playing in the structural gap and we diversify across managers 'cause we want to actually have diverse portfolios and, and where you minimized set of managers who have the same names in all of their portfolios, which is why we focus on bilateral. And then , uh, I guess the final piece is we do have, we do take exposure with multi-manager , um, multi managers who have the ability to play in dislocated markets because what you don't, when you actually have an all-weather portfolio because of the illiquidity, you want the ability to kind of, at the margin be able to take advantage of dislocation, which is way easier to do obviously in traded credit markets than it is in private markets. So we have managers that have numerous strategies that allow them to take advantage of that. And then finally we do, you know, we do have a master fund within our master fund. We also have closed end funds , um, that play distressed and special situations, types , strategies on a closed end basis. So when things go crazy, right, and you have um, you have downsides in markets or companies that get into distress for not necessarily their operating reasons, but more for balance sheet structural reasons than as an example, we have the ability to get super returns out of those who take advantage of that situation. And, and that's why constructed a private credit portfolio that sort of plays all of those strategies. So in a way we worry about it, but we don't worry too much about it because, because of, you know, where we sit in the capital structure and the diversity we have across strategies and managers. Sure.
Speaker 2:Thank you . We're just about to, to come up to time, so I just wanted to, as we approach the end of the podcast , um, Sarang I'll , I'll , I'll go to you first in terms of portfolio positioning. So Nehemiah , you made a a a good point in , in sang you have as as well about dislocation markets and , and where to from here, potential for more dislocation. Um, and generally , uh, you're finding that because of the increased variance or or WIC of the scenario sets , um, that investors are facing , uh, what sectors, regions are you favoring? Uh, which more cautious about , um, sorry , I'll , I'll hand over to you first.
Speaker 3:So in terms of style , like we, as I said , we don't really focus about top down allocation . So I think , yeah , I'd probably say from a regional perspective, this is largely driven by valuations. So we did have a stock preference, we grew up over the US and that's actually been doing really well. And I think it's getting close to be , uh, value. You know, when we look at a very high level, we look at the quality of like the European index versus the European , uh, the US index. You find that in credit terms are very similar, but the European index is a lot shorter in terms of duration . So you should be seeing like European markets trading inside US market . I mean, of course if people are worried about like the fundamental deterioration of Europe, you should see that come through in the difference in credit quality . But I think generally there's , in the case of Europe like this , people are more scared about a than that actually does transpire. Uh, European companies are extremely well diversified globally , um, and have access to, you know, one of the deepest team capital markets that they have out there. So as a result of which they've, most of them been able to like, hold onto their credit quality quite well, but you know , they trade a proper , uh, premium that's been coming tight . Yeah , I see some good opportunities at emerging markets because of everything that's happening on the geopolitical front. Um, as I mentioned, there has been a lot of volatility in that space and the volatility you do get some more opportunities. So we, we are sort of finding better opportunities in emerging markets, but you know, our , our kind of bread and butter trades of finding things that we think are like structurally undervalued and could focus in on a recent one we had like , uh, the Australian utility grid , uh, where their bonds in VOS were trading extremely cheap according to our estimate. And, you know, off lake after they , you know , to have another refinancing in the Euro market, the spreads of the existing bonds, the new bonds have tighten for above . So those are kind of trades where, you know, in the way we try to talk about it, not , you know, topology not a cricket fund , but we're not trying to like step up and like hit sixes and fours on every, all this is not a 2020 gig, you know, this is a test match and you just, like, you carefully wait for your opportunities and just keep the score ticking . Broker if one and two , three .
Speaker 2:Yeah, absolutely . And if there's any Americans listening, we could use home run or couldn't we , something like that. Um , I'm a bit of a cricket fan , uh, <laugh> . So , uh, uh, Nehemiah just your views on this in in terms of , uh, well put it just taking a step back when we see , uh, approaches in the market from, from private credit managers and a lot of advisors would be, would be seeing this, as I mentioned before , uh, it's , it's , uh, often Australian , uh, private credit, which brings you , uh, pretty quickly into the , um, real estate , uh, private debt , uh, world, which has its own particular idiosyncrasies. Um, how does your positioning in your , uh, global , um, private credit fund, how does that crossover with the Australian type of exposures that , uh, a lot of investors may currently have? Or does it, should I say?
Speaker 4:Yeah, so when , when you say crossover, just make sure I understand the question. Um, how does our portfolio crossover or how, how did the asset classes crossover?
Speaker 2:What is your portfolio in terms of , um, preferred sectors, regions and we're cautious about, are you cautious about some of those more real estate crop driven sectors?
Speaker 4:Yes . So firstly I'd say don't invest in any Australian private credit. We're purely global, okay? And, and, and that's really because , uh, right from the start, we always thought when you look structurally at what's happened in the US and Europe, it's, it's, it's , um, you know, the the risk, the risk adjusted returns you get and the , and where you play in the capital stack and where you have a structural opportunity where banks have withdrawn means you're getting to be quite selective about with through your managers. You're quite selective about where you wanna play, which is why you have a skew to defensive industries, you know, very predictable companies and place , uh, and companies that really don't have, you know , very many, many alternatives for , um, for credit finance to grow their businesses. And that gap is, is only widening. So that's the first thing I'd say. Uh , so there really isn't any crossover with Australia. It's a way of thinking about it is you can diversify your overall credit budget in a , in Australia in trading credit and with global, and I would say everybody should be looking at global because of the risk reward trade off that you get. Secondly, if you said we're within that, would you invest? I think today there's kind of two important dynamics. I think number one is if you want to get the best out of the asset class in the US you want to play with managers who are more in core direct lending, meaning you , you are not playing with managers who have a significant skew in their portfolios to the part of the market where private credit and and traded credit are started are becoming a little bit more , um, uh, call it , they kind of move back and forth and they're becoming a bit more liquid because illiquidity premiums there probably 50 basis points when say two years ago they might have been a hundred, 250 basis points . If you looked at core mid-market where you don't have that phenomenon, you're still capturing, you know, between two and 300 basis points of illiquidity premium and at , on a really nice senior secured package. So that's number one. Uh, number two, Europe versus the us different industry structure because it's very hard to build a pan-European platform. The preservation of the illiquidity premium is, is higher and if you're invested with the right managers in that market, you're probably picking up a little bit more premium today. And then thirdly , um, there's the whole structured finance bid, which if I was to say bucket that more into real assets because there you're talking about pools of assets, some of our financials, some of it could be hard assets. Um, you know, in the environment where you are now, where you have, you know, all of this uncertainty and potential volatility based on changes in policies and terrorists , et cetera . Structured finance is, is also quite a good , uh, good place to be in private credit because not only do you get the illiquidity premium, you get a complexity premium because it's way more specialized lending and it's a place where a lot of banks are trying to move pools of assets to shore up capital and get more capital efficiency in an environment where the regulators are imposing higher capital requirements on them . So I think that's why we kind of think about this as a multi-strategy approach. Um, but I think it's really those three places you want to focus on. If you're investing in the asset classes , corridor lending in the us , you want some exposure to Europe because of the structural , uh, differences that you get, you get that additional premium for risk and then thoroughly in structured finance.
Speaker 2:Right . The final question , um, so this will test your abilities to play nicely in the sandbox. So it's , it's not often you get a private and public credit , um, you know, experts on, on the one call. Um, so public versus private or both. So I'll , uh, switch the order and uh , Nehemiah I'll let you , uh, address that question and then Saren you can ,
Speaker 4:Well , I think there's two parts to that, right ? There's two answers for me. Um, number one is it's kind of you , you really have to be clear, you know, what your liquidity budget is, you know , and what , um, you know, sort of what you're trying to, what you're actually trying to get outta the investment in the portfolio. So within that context, you know, I I I have a preference personally to profit credit only because unless I can find a manager that will always capture, yield to maturity for me in traded credit markets, because that's, for me, the bias and my bias against fixed income was, unless I bought direct physical bonds myself to hold them to maturity was being invested in open-ended funds that co that weren't appropriately managing the yield to maturity so that you're not subject to the daily liquidity and, and the fear factors of people trading in and out so you don't capture it, right? So I think there's a place for fixed income in every portfolio because it's daily liquid and it does give you the , if you have real liquidity day , you need liquidity daily, you should be in the asset class. That's the second. My second point is around liquidity. And, and if for us in our funds, we provide quarterly liquidity or we have daily liquidity through the , the market and our listed trust, but it's a more illiquid asset class and you pick up a premium. So you kind of have to decide how much volatility, tolerance do I wanna pay for the liquidity versus how much illiquidity premium do I need for less liquidity, but more like , I guess stability. So I think there really is a place for both depending on where you're at in your investment life, accumulation versus accumulation, et cetera , et cetera . Well , I think there's a place for both.
Speaker 2:Sorry .
Speaker 3:I definitely would think there's, there's a place for both . Um, I guess in terms of the issues that one has to think about, is that because we're in such an unpredictable macro environment, I mean, there are scenarios in which things look good and there are scenarios in which things go from not good . And I guess, you know, just given my preference is to be able to exit positions rather than sort of get into a complicated sort of workout situation. So there is , there's a role for both. Like for example, like, you know, I don't know what it's like in Australia, but in the US uh , so in the UK a lot of people have these buy to led property investments. Like I'd rather own a private credit fund over like a buy to that property. Um , but I , as I said, you do wanna have a part of your portfolio, it's like things are not gonna plan A , it can give you some diversification against your other holdings, and b you can get out further that's actually getting deeper . So that's why there's a role for both.
Speaker 2:Well, that was extremely well behaved on, on , on both your path . So <laugh> on that note , uh, we might wrap it up there. We're , we're out of time, but , uh, uh, Sarco Cardi , uh, from Vanguard, thank you very much for, for joining us today and Nehemiah Richardson , uh, from Penang Credit again. Um, thanks. Uh , you , you sort of, I won't call you international Nehemiah, but um, 'cause you're Victoria, it's almost like we've got two international visited . Uh, so thanks again to you. And I'm Scott Fletcher from Woodbury Private and , uh, today's listening in. Thanks for joining us and until next time , uh, bye for now .