Case 099Macro and multi-asset scenariosHard
The 10-year minus 3-month yield gap turns to minus 40 basis points. In 6 of 8 past inversions a recession followed within 18 months; equities rose 12% on average over the 11 months after inversion, then fell 25%. Should a multi-asset fund de-risk now or wait? Compare the expected outcomes.
1The situation
Anvesha Macro Allocation Fund manages Rs 2,400 crore and holds 60% in equity. Its mandate lets it move equity between 30% and 60%, so the decision is about a slice of 30% of the fund, Rs 720 crore, that can move into short-term debt. The 3-month yield is 7.4% and the 10-year yield 7.0%, an inversion of 40 basis points.
The fund's research note on eight past inversions in its market: six were followed by recession within 18 months. In those six, equities rose to a peak a further 12% on average, 11 months after inversion, then fell 25% from the peak over about nine months. The peaks came at 4, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 18 months. In the two episodes without recession, equities rose 16% and 22% over the next two years.
2Your task
Compare de-risking now with waiting, using these eight episodes over a 24-month horizon, and recommend what the fund does with the Rs 720 crore slice.
Quick check
Holding the slice through versus selling it all now: which comes out ahead on average across the eight episodes, and by roughly how much?
Worked solution
Try it on paper, then open one step at a time.
30-second answerThe answer to give first
De-risk, but in stages: move the slice into short-term debt in thirds over the next six months. Across the eight episodes, holding averages -6.0% over two years against 15.3% for selling now, so the decision to de-risk is worth about 22 points, about Rs 161 crore on the slice. Timing within that matters far less: every selling plan averages within 4 points of the others. Staging captures some of the late rally while keeping the worst case at +14.0%.
Step 1Why is an inversion an awkward signal to act on?
Dark clouds on the horizon usually mean rain, but not in the next ten minutes; if you cancel the picnic the moment you see them you may miss a sunny afternoon. An inverted curve has a good record of preceding recessions, but it comes early: in these episodes equities kept rising for 11 months on average before the fall. So the fund faces two costs: selling now gives up the late rally, and waiting risks being caught in the fall, which is twice the size of the rally.
Step 2What do selling now and holding through each deliver?
Selling now is simple: the slice earns 7.4% for two years, 15.3%, whatever happens. Holding through depends on the episode. In the six recession episodes holding averages -14.3%, and in the two without recession +19.0%, so across all eight it averages -6.0%. Selling gains 29.6 points when a recession comes and loses 3.7 points when it does not, so it wins on expected value whenever the chance of recession is above about 11%. Six of eight is far above that, and so is any sensible haircut to a sample of eight.
| p* | the recession probability at which selling now and holding have the same expected outcome |
| gain if recession | selling now minus holding, averaged over the six recession episodes, in points |
| loss if no recession | holding minus selling now, averaged over the two episodes without recession |
Step 3Does waiting for the late rally pay?
A little, on average, and at a rising cost in the bad cases. Waiting six months and then selling averages 17.0% against 15.3% for selling now, but its worst episode falls to +9.1%; waiting nine months drops the worst to -4.3%, and twelve months to -17.3%. The episode with the month-4 peak is the one that punishes patience: the market had already turned before the fund sold. Selling in thirds at 0, 3 and 6 months averages 16.4% with a worst case of +14.0%, close to the certainty of selling now.
| Plan for the Rs 720 crore slice | Recession episodes (6) | No recession (2) | Average of 8 | Worst episode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sell now | +15.3% | +15.3% | +15.3% | +15.3% |
| Thirds at 0, 3 and 6 months | +16.6% | +16.0% | +16.4% | +14.0% |
| Wait 6 months, then sell | +17.1% | +16.6% | +17.0% | +9.1% |
| Wait 9 months, then sell | +15.5% | +17.1% | +15.9% | -4.3% |
| Wait 12 months, then sell | +11.1% | +17.6% | +12.7% | -17.3% |
| Hold through | -14.3% | +19.0% | -6.0% | -26.5% |
Step 4What should the fund do, and what could make that wrong?
Recommend the staged plan: one third of the slice into short-term debt now, a third in three months, a third in six. The big decision is not holding through; the timing within six months is worth one to two points and rests on six data points, so it should not be the thing the fund bets on. The inverted curve also helps: short-term debt pays more than the 10-year bond, so waiting in it costs nothing in carry. Add duration as recession evidence firms, because long bonds tend to rally when rate cuts arrive. Say the limits: eight episodes are a thin sample, past lead times need not repeat, and the curve's signal can be distorted when central bank bond buying has pushed long yields down. A trigger to accelerate, such as earnings forecasts turning down or credit spreads widening, keeps the plan responsive.
Where candidates lose it
The common loss is arguing about the perfect exit month. The interviewer wants to hear that holding through costs about 22 points on average and that the gap between selling plans is about four points, so the first decision dominates.
The second is trusting the averages. An average lead time of 11 months hides a peak at month 4; a plan that only works if the market waits the average time has not been tested against the episodes that make up the average.
What the interviewer asks next
- How would you change the plan if credit spreads were already widening?
- Why might an inversion be a weaker signal after years of central bank bond buying?
- Where would you put the proceeds as the recession evidence firms, and why?
- How many episodes would you want before trusting a 6-in-8 hit rate?
Company names and figures are illustrative.
