With tariffs potentially a headwind for growth and earnings, the International Equity Team explain why being in the “not owning” bucket may continue to be a positive.

The increasing number of tariff-related executive orders marks a distinct shift in policy. At this time, we believe most of the companies in our quality portfolios should face limited direct impact from tariffs, given their skew towards services, while local manufacturing, high gross margins and pricing power may dampen the impact for the portfolios’ goods producers. In the event of any economic slowdown, we would expect our quality portfolios’ earnings to prove more resilient than the market’s.

In today’s fast-evolving economy, technology transcends sector classifications. It’s re-shaping growth trajectories and redefining operational excellence as digital integration, AI and cloud computing have become essential engines of competitive advantage.

While the US economy continues to look healthier than other developed markets, we think positive surprises may be tougher to find than in the last two years. Elevated equity multiples, modest VIX and BBB-rated bond spreads at their lowest levels this century suggest the market doesn’t share those doubts. As investors, we prefer steady compounding through decent top-line growth and resilient earnings at a reasonable multiple.

Markets have become increasingly charged, unpredictable and narrow, evidenced by the risk-on rally in response to Donald Trump’s presidential victory and the dominance of US tech giants, aka the "Magnificent Seven". For a distorted index which appears to be priced for perfection, any knock or fade to earnings expectations may spell trouble —presenting risks for index huggers but opportunities for our bottom-up, benchmark-agnostic approach focused on the compounding of high quality company fundamentals.

After unwinding COVID distortions, the health care sector has significantly underperformed the broader market. Yet it ranks high on our two favoured quality metrics, ROOCE and gross margins, with the second highest EPS growth of any sector in the MSCI World Index over the past 20 years. Its strong long-term outlook is reinforced by a rapidly ageing global population, untapped global market opportunities, the nondiscretionary nature of its demand, and broad technological innovation potential.

Consumer staples are now at a near 25-year low in terms of relative valuation and at their lowest weight in the MSCI World Index this century. Yet the sector has demonstrated resilience despite an exceptionally turbulent four years. With growth driven by recurring revenue from the everyday products they sell, their operating resilience during economic downturns gives staples companies that exhibit agility, innovation and high levels of brand investment a key role in our portfolios.

While calm has returned following summer’s brief market squall, the sell-off acted as a good test run for our global portfolios, which appeared resilient in the face of these fears, actually rising 1% while the MSCI World fell 7%. With a benign outlook priced in again as though the scare never happened, a portfolio delivering resilient earnings at a reasonable valuation may offer some high quality defence—as it did this summer.

While many of the companies we own are large businesses with well established, familiar brands, in our experience, excellent companies and investment opportunities can also be found by looking at players focused on specialised niches — particularly those that play a critical role within a market and enjoy close customer relationships. Undeservedly – but perhaps not surprisingly – these companies often sit outside the market limelight, and can fall between the cracks of sell-side coverage.

The market seems to be dominated by the twin beliefs in the invulnerability of the U.S. economy and the massive impact of GenAI. This is not the easiest environment for an investment philosophy that seeks established winners with resilient earnings in tough times. However, high expectations generally, and increasingly for one company in particular, make us nervous about the market’s prospects. We remain steadfast in following our quality process and focus on absolute, long-term compounding.

While active versus passive is a well-worn debate, it needn’t be an either/or decision. We would argue there’s a strong case for both index investing and active management to co-exist in portfolios. While passive funds provide broad-based exposure and nimble, cheap access to tactical themes, there is still an opportunity to be selective – particularly given indices’ biases. When stock prices become disconnected from fundamentals, skilled stock pickers can take advantage if they have the luxury of a longer time horizon and a lopsided multiples-powered bull run still has momentum.

In a market obsessed with chasing the next big thing, we make sure that companies’ valuations look justified by the underlying fundamentals, building a portfolio of those rare companies with the ability to compound at a high and sustainable return over the long term. Because while multiples have accounted for 85% of returns this quarter, over 20 years this falls to 4%. Meanwhile, earnings growth counts for much more – as much as 71% over 20 years. Compounding requires discipline and patience.

While society may be driven by immediate rewards, the International Equity team would argue that patience in investing leads to enduring results and positive long-term investment outcomes.

As artificial intelligence enters its next chapter, the early winners of the “AI gold rush” have been the semiconductor and cloud computing providers. But the surge in generative AI also included two surprises: the speed of consumer adoption and the lack of barriers to entry. While the full impact of AI remains unclear, the International Equity Team continues to invest through its high-quality lens, focusing on further opportunities in cost reduction and value creation, and with an eye on risks.

In the world of M&A, not all acquirers are equal. The International Equity Team is cautious of M&A, typically a high-risk choice for a company’s capital allocation. But there are companies out there—some of which they own—with a track record of relatively low-risk acquisitions that add meaningfully to shareholder returns. Good acquirers are a rare breed, but there are common characteristics to their strategies that suggest it is a repeatable process.