Coordinator: Welcome to the Center for Investment Excellence, a production of JPMorgan Asset Management. The Center for Investment Excellence is an audio podcast that provides educational insights across asset classes and investment themes.

Keith Cahill: Welcome to another installment of our biweekly institutional client call series, featuring media investors and strategists across JPMorgan Asset Management. My name is Keith Cahill and I lead the North America institutional business here at JPMorgan.

I first want to say a big thank you to all of our clients that have continued to engage with us on these calls week in and week out throughout this crisis. The audience for these calls has really blown away my expectation, with repeat listeners from everywhere, from the largest public and corporate pension (plans), to investment consultants, insurers, endowments and foundations. And so we will make sure we keep at it, working to ensure we can provide insightful, thought-provoking content that helps our clients solve their investment challenges.

Today, thrilled to welcome my colleague and friend, Anton Pil, our global head of alternatives. Anton brings a very unique perspective as head of one of the largest and most diverse managers of alternative investments on a direct basis, in areas such as real estate, infrastructure, transportation, hedge funds, and parts of the private equity and private credit markets.

But he also has a view into more niche private equity, private credit enhanced fund opportunities through our hedge fund solutions and private equity businesses that invest in third-party managers. The old adage goes that, if you only have a hammer, every problem and opportunity looks like a nail. Well, that saying doesn't apply here, as Anton has a whole toolbox full of potential solutions and perspectives to draw upon.

In terms of format, I'll spend 20 minutes or so asking Anton some questions. And trust me when I say this, nothing is off limits when we're talking to Anton.

So, Anton, thank you again for joining us. It has been quite a few months in the public market, and most of our listeners have been stomaching and volatility in their portfolio's performance. How have alternative asset classes and our alternative teams reacted to the pandemic?

Anton Pil: Well, thanks, Keith. It's great to be here, and (I think it's worth) walking through a little bit how we've approached this as this pandemic started unfolding. As you can imagine, our first reaction was to make sure that our people and our investors were safe and could continue to operate. And equally importantly, that they could continue to preserve value in our clients' investments.

 And it didn't really change how we worked. It obviously changed where we worked. And we have (unintelligible) a number of work-from-home strategies (unintelligible) full steam ahead sort of on an (unintelligible) basis from our day-to-day operation standpoint. And from a technology standpoint we're pretty much lucky. I just did a survey for the team and the team views itself just as productive working from home as working from the office. So I think that transition, very happy with that.

Stepping back and looking at the alternatives business, clearly we're not totally immune from the pain from market vol, but I do think that in general the alternative asset classes have been pretty good at doing what they were supposed to do, which was to diversify clients' performance. And I think it's actually proven itself that the growing allocations that we're seeing globally from investors to different alternatives, sub-asset classes have done sort of what they were intended to do (in people's) portfolios.

And actually, it's kind of interesting, when you step back, some of the underlying asset classes have actually done quite well, you know. So I think the number of our hedge funds, our infrastructure strategies, the number of our core real estate strategies, many of those strategies are up for the year, some are flat for the year. Even private credit strategies are doing reasonably well. And so I think as an overall asset classes, I think it's delivering a degree of stability that I think clients were hoping to get in to their overall portfolios. And I think that is going to be very helpful and I think we're going to require a lot more of that in the future as well.

Part of that obviously is because, especially, we do a lot of real assets. And a lot of real asset strategies at the end of the day, they are supported by long-term contracts, whether they be leases or charters or regulatory sets, electricity or water rates, the bond-like nature of these contractual payments ultimately means the performance should be reasonably well, if you look at (unintelligible) a lot of these assets have kind of kept in line with that.

Keith Cahill: All right. I think that's a good intro. Let's dig a little deeper. So you started out mentioning preserving value investments. And I think that's one of those things that sounds a lot easier than it is in practice. Talk to us about that. How does it work in practice, or how does it work with our teams?

Anton Pil: Yes. Look, we've been somewhat fortunate, we've been somewhat anxious, as most of you know, about a potential turn in the credit cycle and then trying to prepare for that now for some time. It would be unfair to suggest that we have some sort of insight about a pandemic causing a potential unwind in credit. But that has done a number of things for us. It's meant that we were pretty much ready for when there was a credit shock. And immediately started stress testing all the investments we've had. And more importantly, the leverage that we have had across our portfolios.

So in general, we're more of a core light manager, in almost every strategy that we do. So we weren't sort of caught over (our feet) on the leverage side. So that was sort of step one, check out our leverage, where are we in leverage (cross) everywhere, stress test (unintelligible) your cash flows go to zero, if you're in retail, assume your cash flows are cut in half, if you're in a business that's making (widgets). And really stress test how bad can this get, and do we have enough liquidity and do we have the lines of credit in place to actually support ongoing support of our businesses.

The interesting thing is we didn't have to draw lines of credit, unlike many others, because we weren't that close to the edge that we were concerned that we would be (unintelligible) all kinds of covenants that wouldn't allow us to have access to our lines if we did need them. So that was sort of the immediate portfolio management reaction. Met with (Rick) daily. We had multiple calls across all of alternatives investments, chief investments personnel, on an almost daily basis, comparing notes. What are you seeing in real estate? What are you seeing in the hedge fund industry? What are you seeing in CMBS? And sort of comparing notes real-time. As well as doing that together with the broader equity and fixed income teams also on an every other day basis as well.

And we then actually also, on the (real) asset side, we are a big player in real estate, went through each of our investment properties to make sure that we had very asset-specific precautions in place (unintelligible) procedures and following local government guidance. We have two warehouses in Wuhan. I mean, literally in the midst of all of this, one is a refrigerated warehouse, and we were supplying food for the residents at Wuhan and other with an e-commerce warehouse that was providing sort of basic essentials. So, kind of making sure that the properties we were managing were being managed appropriately with what's going on.

And making sure we were communicating the real-time data to a lot of clients who are requesting it, so they would understand kind of what was going on. It was fascinating to watch from sort of my seat watching out towards the client base. And I would say globally it looks very similar. Seventy-five, 80 percent of the clients very much fell in the analysis camp of "I want to wait and see how this plays out, a high degree of uncertainty, I want to do a lot of work here, understand my asset allocation, understand the impacts of what's going on with my portfolios."

And then you had another sort of subset of clients, the other 20%, that were actually kind of the inverse, who were sort of "I've been waiting for something like this to happen (unintelligible)," and they were very anxious, what, this is the day, we'll do something now? Are we going to do something tomorrow? So that was a bit fascinating to react to that as well from clients. I don't know if you saw that similarly in the seats that you were sitting.

Keith Cahill: Yes. Listen, I think there's certainly no one size fits all institution, right? We work with clients from 401-K plans to complex health systems and pension funds. But I would say broadly we saw institutions hunkered down and really start to focus on executing the day-to-day blocking and tackling of their system, whether that be a retirement system, you know, thinking about making sure their systems are set up and ensuring that everyone had work-from-home capabilities. I think broadly you saw institutions look to their liquidity position, and for some it was certainly more challenging than others. But we saw people really try to buckle down on liquidity, make sure they have liquidity they needed currently and future liquidity, until we certainly saw clients look at this (sudden) imbalance in our asset allocation and start thinking about (unintelligible) and when to rebalance.

And as things settled, we saw many clients, to your point, start looking through that opportunity and start picking through a little bit of the rubble. And you know, I'd say that's probably the phase that we're in now. I think this call probably would be helpful. But I'm certain that our audience is much more interested in your opinion than mine, so let me get back to my questions.

So let's think about, after you've sort of batten down the hatches on preserving value, what comes next? Right? You've got the advantage of being able to look across all of our investment teams, like you pointed out. Are you seeing a shift from defense to offense? And if so, where are you seeing it?

Anton Pil: Absolutely. It's definitely much about offense now. It's not to say things aren't going to get worse in certain segments. Definitely things are going to get worse in the second half, and a number of segments that we can talk about a little bit later. But there's a number of things that are actually quite urgent to get to because the opportunities are not going to last. So in my mind, as I think about the next steps here of how do you deal with this from an investment standpoint, I think there's really sort of four phases of investment from an (unintelligible) perspective that I think about that's kind of, from a roadmap perspective or from a timing perspective, that I view as playing out.

I think the first thing, and we're in the midst of this right now, is making sure you look for these liquid dislocations, the disconnect in liquid markets versus private markets. And a lot of those disconnects have already started sort of collapsing and closing. So they were very interesting opportunities two, four weeks ago, but frankly, the mass amount of Fed money that's been thrown in the broader bond market have really collapsed a number of these opportunities. But to me that's terribly urgent for clients who want to be somewhat opportunistic here, it's fairly urgent.

 And think of that as we - think like REIT strategies, right? So there's a significant dislocation between REIT valuations and actual private assets on the ground. And when those sort of disconnect got as wide as 40% or 50%, that (unintelligible) clear value signal between sort of public and private markets.

I think you still are seeing a lot of that in the converts market today. Sort of massive converts issuance, not enough people to absorb that supply. And so you're seeing this sort of disconnect in a liquid market that isn't going to last. And those are the markets that I'm very focused on right now, because those tend to normalize with liquidity. So you kind of expect in the next two, three, four months, those markets will be kind of fully functional and operational and reflect relative value correctly.

After that, sort of the second phase of that is where we're looking on also right now, so, really more the distressed, broken deal type way of thinking, right? There are things right now that are broken, you've got to take advantage of, in the sense that people need bridge financing (unintelligible) financing, broken deal finance. And I think we have a little bit more time for that, but that's the sort of phase that's just beginning now.

And I think the third phase is what I would refer to as sort of eventually people are going to need liquidity, for whatever reason, and they're going to start selling assets that are core assets, that they'll probably end up selling at value-add type returns. There will be secondary (sales with) private equity and opportunities where people are trying to rebalance their portfolios from a risk perspective. And I think that sort of phase of investing will be towards the end of the year, even Q1, Q2 of next year. That'll take some time to play out. And that's the timing you want to think about secondary private equity, things like that.

And then lastly, the fourth phase of this, which I wouldn't underestimate, which all of us should be thinking about in the back of our minds, is, with all those interventions from the Fed, there's fundamental shift in the rate market in the U.S. Rates are going to stay low for very long periods of time. I mean, (Bob Michael), our head of fixed income, thinks it's very feasible, the rating (unintelligible) will be at zero. And we need to start thinking about, if you're running something that's got a discount model, to sort of minimize your future liabilities, you'd better start thinking about how are we going to adjust for that longer term.

But to me that's more of a structural question that's sort of (unintelligible). And also plays a key role in that (unintelligible).

Keith Cahill: (Unintelligible) I think, we talked about a lot there, it's a lot to unpack. So why don't we go a little bit deeper asset class by asset class? And so I'd like to ask you to tell us what you're seeing on the ground real time, where your teams are seeing opportunity and where they're seeing pain.

Anton Pil: Yes.

Keith Cahill: Why don't we start out with private credit, which some might say seeing the most extreme dislocation, and we know it's been a huge focus for our institutional clients over the last several years? How do we see that allocation evolving? And where are you seeing the most compelling dislocations within the private credit markets?

Anton Pil: Look, this is the one area of the market that generally, if you're waiting for the bailout, not going to come. It's (private), it's not part of the public markets. The Fed hasn't crossed (unintelligible) will help bail out highly levered companies. By definition, a lot of private credit (unintelligible) were done to (unintelligible) institutions that were more levered than they probably should have been going into a crisis.

 So the first thing I would caution on the private credit side is it's going to get worse. It takes time to run out of cash and actually default. Many people don't have to pay payments (unintelligible) have quarterly payments or semi-annual payments and will default. So I wouldn't be surprised that we'll end up seeing defaulted assets get as high as a trillion dollars. And to give you a sense, that's four times the amount of distressed debt dry powder that's out there. So, be aware that there's a supply/demand issue here that's going to be a serious problem longer term.

Moody's already is forecasting default rates of over 17% in the next 12 months. All of a sudden (unintelligible) going to figure out that a triple-C company really has a one-in-four chance of defaulting (within) the theoretical piece of math from 20 years ago.

 But that's also the opportunity set. I think you're going to see that distressed opportunity sets in private debt is probably about a trillion there, you're going to have a trillion dollars of fallen angels, syndicated loans, and other 2-1/2 trillion. That's longer term the bulk of the opportunity and you got to be prepared for that.

There are areas you should absolutely avoid -- structured credit in general, CLOs. They're going to generally blow past their triple-C exposure limits and covenants are going to make those entities highly restricted in what they can do, so you will find low-rated CLO tranches, I would expect, in there to get materially worse as defaults actually materialize.

The flipside is we've been providing financing for a number of mid-market companies who are just unlucky. In some cases they had debt come due two weeks ago, and they need $30 million to just have a bridge loan. And it's shocking, if you're a company that's under half-a-billion in size, good luck, banks aren't really open. The private credit guys that were there in great times are long gone because they're focusing on their big private credit position that they already have. And that's right now the real opportunity today, is in the sort of mid-market companies that need help.

And similarly, the whole notion of broken finance (unintelligible) deals, we're working quite hard (unintelligible) and getting phone calls on, people who need to roll either (unintelligible) mortgages or (mez) loans, construction sites that are almost complete. And to give you a sense, I mean, some of that paper that hits will probably would have traded like LIBOR plus 2 or 3 even six months ago. Today, low pricing and we're giving people pricing it's like LIBOR plus 9, LIBOR plus 11. Some of the sort of the bridge financing that we provide in mid-market companies is probably like 13%, 14%.

 So, the Fed's help isn't going to trickle through down to those levels (unintelligible) there's more supply that's coming than there's ultimately going to be capital available. And that opportunity set is predominantly U.S. Europe is a little bit slower. And that's simply because the governments have been much more aggressive at supporting companies and paying payroll for companies and paying company expenses (unintelligible) (don't meet) the defaults. A little different story in the U.S.

So that's sort of on the private credit side. The opportunity today, mid-market company, sort of special system, distressed type financings, and probably on the real estate side where people need this kind of bridge finance. And I think, expect those to continue to grow fairly significantly.

Keith Cahill: You touched on the debt side of real estate. Let's shift to the equity side. We are one of the largest managers of direct real estate in the U.S. and abroad. Tell us what you're seeing there, opportunities and pains again.

Anton Pil: Yes. It's kind of interesting, we have a dashboard that we monitor our collections quasi real-time across our portfolio buildings across the world. And there's sort of been surprises good and bad on both sides. I'd say the first, probably on the good side, we've been somewhat surprised on the multi-family side, where collections on people who are renting continues to be very strong. I mean on average we're probably getting collections that are sort of in the low 90% across the U.S. and the rest of the world. And those might be 3, 4 percentage points below where they would have been historically, and not a material shift yet in terms of default rates picking up or anything like that.

And the same is true in office. I would say that there are opportunistic tenants that have tried to tell us they won't pay their bills. And then we're equally opportunistic back, and depending on who you are, if we believe you can pay, then we will have a slightly different conversation than the people who can't. And obviously if you're the headquarters of a retailer, you probably are having real struggles. If you're a law firm and you're just trying to see whether you can get away without paying, we will put your boxes outside on the streets on Monday. And frankly, building by building, tenant by tenant, these conversations.

And I think retail has been really hurt, even in our top-notch small (unintelligible) collection here in sort of the 20% range, and we've got slightly better collections (in places) where we've got a grocery-anchored location because everybody still needs groceries. So those locations are more like 50%. And frankly, national chains generally have been paying the bills. But it's sort of the (global) players that have not been.

And we get it. Our malls are slowly reopening and we want those tenants to be operational and up and running, and we're working with them to try to figure out how to get this resolved and help them through this (unintelligible).

 I would say that sort of the longer-term shift in real estate, it's too early to tell (unintelligible) people want more real estate or less real estate, right? There's two sides of an argument. (Unintelligible) need more space. Having more people working from home, you need less space. Sort of that tug of war is still playing out in real time and I think it will take a year or two to play out.

Keith Cahill: Interesting, you know, on that point, there seems to be equally compelling argument on each side of that, right?

Anton Pil: Yes.

Keith Cahill: ...say, okay, office, occupancy will never be the same, and those who make the opposite argument that, wait a second, you know, people on top of one another, open floor plan seating, they're going to spread out. Then you're going to need more space, then you're going to need suburban space. And so it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

Anton Pil: And by the way, we're making that bet now (unintelligible) joint venture with American Homes to build 2500 new single-family homes across the country for rent, dedicated for rentals. I think in general the rental market is going to continue to grow, and millennial who was living in the loft is now sort of running out of space because kids are driving them crazy while they work from home, "We don't have the money to buy a house," they're going to need some place to rent. So I do think we're going to see some of these dynamics of going through, having more space. I don't think that's going to go away. So we are implicitly betting on that on the real estate side.

Keith Cahill: Interesting. All right, why don't we talk about infrastructure and transport?

Anton Pil: Yes. So I think infrastructure has been fascinating because it's a bit of a tale of two cities. (Two), infrastructure in the sense that it's not GDP sensitive, it's business as usual. I mean most of the U.S. folks (unintelligible) and, you know, plugging in your TV or using the Internet, and you need the power or the water. And so all of that input has been remarkably steady and kind of un-exciting, which by the way it's fantastic. It's exactly what I would be hoping to be the case.

Where on the infrastructure side things have been a bit more (bassy) has honestly been on sort of slightly more risky assets, more GDP core plus type assets like airports and ports. Now for us, that's a fairly small allocation of what we do. But there we have to actively work with local governments and airlines or ports to figure out what these entities are going to look like longer term. We've got staying power, we do think that most of the assets we own are strategically located, and you know (unintelligible) be needed by society. But there's clear disruption there that's taking place.

And the other place, because we are quite focused on (ESG) issues, that we really don't have that much exposure, obviously, the energy space. And I think the two big lessons learned in infrastructure had been people that got over-exposed in energy and people who got over-exposed to emerging markets. We've maintained all along that managing emerging market infrastructure is just extraordinarily difficult, and I think that that's become even more clear today.

Transport has been remarkably stable. I mean, our ships are in use, leases are all getting paid. Interestingly enough, even though we only own a handful of airplanes, they're all getting paid. I kind of joke that it's (quite) important to have the name of a country and the name of your airline today versus (unintelligible) perhaps a year ago (unintelligible). And we've seen a number of distressed opportunities actually pop up on the shipping side that actually we've been able to benefit from.

I will say that our desire to get involved in aircraft (unintelligible) shown portfolios of aircraft, I think it's too early, the residual on most of these aircraft, it's extraordinarily difficult to predict what residual values are going to be without some semblance of what air traffic is going to be several years from now. And I think it's just too early. So you have time.

Keith Cahill: Yes. Checking back on the infrastructure piece, you've mentioned ESG and the E side of it. We had the leaders of our infrastructure business on an internal call this morning and we had the (staff) meeting and conversation about the importance of the G and the S that's come to light in the pandemic. And you have to remember that these are businesses that - they're your assets, but they're businesses. And you know, the governance of those businesses and the (unintelligible) thinking how your workers are treated and taken care of becomes so important in this kind of a pandemic, and...

Anton Pil: Absolutely.

((Crosstalk))

Anton Pil: I mean, for example, you shouldn't cut off people's waters because they haven't paid the water bill, right? And that sounds kind of obvious, but in normal times you do eventually cut people's waters off. In the times of pandemic, those are the types of things you want to work with (society) to kind of smooth over (through) a pandemic.

Keith Cahill: So in the interest of time, let's a little bit of a lightning round here. Let's talk about hedge funds. We all know that hedge funds broadly have struggled to earn their fees (unintelligible) of many institutions. What are we seeing in 2020?

Anton Pil: So, look, vol is generally a hedge fund trend, and I think if you actually run a hedge fund, with the word hedge in it, a hedged fund, you actually did reasonably well, beating most of a lot of our hedge funds and fund of hedge funds that actually have done quite well and actually a lot of them are up for the year.

Our relative value credit, so the great locations, there's plenty of sort of dislocations where relative value makes sense. Macro, as long as it's thematic, we're a big fan, right? So, sort of the changes in healthcare, the changes in tech continue on, and having some disproportionate exposure to those sectors make a lot of sense.

Having more sector-driven M&A type momentum strategy, those are all off the table. Like, the world is way too choppy, not enough history here to really use those predictive models for the future.

And just remember what hedge funds are supposed to do. Hedge funds ultimately are supposed to deliver cash (unintelligible) three or four. Cash is effectively close to zero. So if you have expectations that you're - something in the double digits, you either got to adjust your expectations, hedge funds should be delivering 45 and low vol. And generally if you've been following their formula, it's been a nice counterbalance to people's portfolio.

Keith Cahill: So you've got hedge funds (unintelligible) spectrum, private equity, you know, you're taking on that liquidity precisely to generate better than public equity market returns, what are you seeing there?

Anton Pil: Yes, look, that's where we're going to see the true ability of people to manage companies versus their ability to do financial engineering. I think companies that are highly levered, that are running close to the edge and using sort of (unintelligible) documents to kind of get beyond the degree of leverage that could be supported by their cash flow's underlying companies, I think we're going to see continued pain for those over-levered companies through the end of the year, as cash flows again continue to get squeezed, and the reality of a slower consumer trickles down into the real economy and into the real cash flows of these businesses.

I think the opportunity sets there, there's going to be a lot of pain still to come. And expect performance in general of the asset class to be akin to that of equities, with what I would probably argue is a slower rebound, especially if you have energy exposure and hospitality exposure, which quite a few players did.

It's not all bad news, by the way. Many of you will probably find out or some of you will find out that you probably have too much of it. And guess what, then you'll (be a) seller, and that will be the interesting opportunity, I think secondary private equity, it's going to be a great opportunity later in the year, early next year. I've already seen (pools) for sale that are down 20%, 30% from where (their marks) are. That will probably go a little bit lower. But I think that's where the real opportunity is going to lie.

Keith Cahill: Yes. Okay, take yourself out of reality for a bit, Anton, and picture 2030, and you're looking back at the COVID crisis 10 years ago, what did we learn and how can we apply that knowledge and insight now?

Anton Pil: Yes. I'm trying to think like, is that getting into (Delorian) or getting out of the (Delorian)? I really got confused there, but anyway.

Keith Cahill: I figured you were somebody who regularly just think 10 years ahead and live in the future, so.

Anton Pil: Yes. (Unintelligible). Look, I think there's a couple of things that I do think we'll look back on. And the first one is mainly not that obvious. A lot of people talk about ESG and they talk a lot about the E and they talk a lot about the G. Not that many people talk about the S, because it's kind of squishy, right? No one - it's society (unintelligible). I actually think in 10 years from now, when we look back, I'm going to be asking the question, and by the way, our hedge fund teams already have, like our hedge fund selection team, almost immediately first question we've started asking (unintelligible) money? And (unintelligible). That simple.

But we're going to learn a lot about companies and the ethics and morality of companies looking back to today five years or ten years from now. Because people are going to say, what did you do during the pandemic? And if your answer was "I couldn't care less, I cut the water off, I didn't help society, I didn't donate my blood testing machines because I thought (unintelligible) make my own." And it's like these are very interesting questions that I think we're going to be able to use to measure the S in ESG. So that's sort of one thing that I'm very cognizant of.

You (unintelligible) how did you do it? Everybody's sort of knee-jerk reacting right now, but I think these things are going to become very important when we look back.

Secondly, I think it's going to prove again that income is king. The Fed's not going away. Don't underestimate their buying power. So I think even though real estate may scare people because it's a real asset and (unintelligible) could be levered and like are people really going to move back into an office? But income-generating assets that are - whether they're part assets or whether they're liquid assets, I think income is going to continue to stay important.

And then lastly, maybe, just maybe, don't get too dogmatic on U.S. rates not turning negative. I don't think they will, but boy, I'm definitely preparing as if they were, and you (unintelligible) me for sort of the assets that we manage. And I think a lot of people would rather just pretend like it can't happen (unintelligible) that a lot of European (pensions) I spoke to two years ago have the same view and within 12 months were kind of regretting it. So, just be prepared.

Keith Cahill: Preparation is king. And really, again, back to that example of this morning, I think your point on the S of ESG, you know, I think in so many cases, whether it's infrastructure or real estate, or other alternative asset classes, your community or your regulator, or your municipality has a direct impact on your ending rate of return. And so the way you treat those stakeholders will definitely have an impact on the return (you generate).

Man: (Unintelligible).

Keith Cahill: We send our best wishes for health and safety to you, your families and colleagues.

Woman: For institutional wholesale professional clients and qualified investors only. Not for retail use or distribution, not for retail distribution. This communication has been prepared exclusively for institutional wholesale professional clients and qualified investors only as defined by local laws and regulation.

The views contained herein are not to be taken as advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any investment in any jurisdiction, nor is it a commitment from JPMorgan Asset Management or any of its subsidiaries to participate in any of the transactions mentioned herein. Any forecasts, figures, opinions or investment techniques, and strategies set out are for information purposes only based on certain assumptions and current market conditions and are subject to change without prior notice.

All information presented herein is considered to be accurate at the time of production. This material does not contain sufficient information to support an investment decision and it should not be relied upon by you in evaluating the merits of investing in any securities or products.

In addition, users should make an independent assessment of the legal, regulatory, tax, credit and accounting implications, and determine together with their own professional advisors if any investment mentioned herein is believed to be suitable to their personal goals. Investors should ensure that they obtain all available relevant information before making any investment.

It should be noted that investment involves risks. The value of investments and the income from them may fluctuate in accordance with market conditions and taxation agreements, and investors may not get back the full amount invested. Both past performance and yields are not reliable indicators of current and future results.

JPMorgan Asset Management is the brand for the asset management business of JPMorgan Chase and Company and its affiliates worldwide. To the extent permitted by applicable law, we may record telephone calls and monitor electronic communications to comply with our legal and regulatory obligations and internal policy. Personal data will be collected, stored in process by JPMorgan Asset Management in accordance with our privacy policies at https://am.jpmorgan.com/global/privacy.

This communication is issued by the following entities. In the United States, by JPMorgan Investment Management Inc. or JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management Inc., both regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. In Latin America, for intended recipients’ use only by local JPMorgan entities as the case may be. In Canada, for institutional clients’ use only, by JPMorgan Asset Management Canada Inc., which is a registered portfolio manager and (event) market bureau in all Canadian provinces and territories except the Yukon and is also registered as an investment fund manager in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, and Newfoundland and Labrador.

In the United Kingdom by JP Morgan Asset Management U.K. Limited, which authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. In other European jurisdictions by JPMorgan Asset Management Europe (SARL).

In Asia Pacific, (assets) by the following issuing entities and in the respective jurisdictions in which they are primarily regulated. JPMorgan Asset Management Asia Pacific Limited, or JPMorgan Funds Asia Limited, or JPMorgan Asset Management Real Assets Asia Limited, each of which is regulated by the Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong. JPMorgan Asset Management Singapore Limited Company Reg. Number 197601586K, which this advertisement or publication has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority at Singapore.

JPMorgan Asset Management Taiwan Limited. JPMorgan Asset Management Japan Limited, which is a member of the Investment Trust Association Japan, the Japan Investment Advisors Association, Type 2 Financial Instruments Firms Association, and the Japan Securities Dealers Association, and is regulated by the Financial Services Agency, Registration Number Kanto Local Finance Bureau, Financial Instruments Firm Number 330. In Australia to wholesale clients only as defined in Section 761A and 761G of the Corporations Act 2001 Commonwealth by JPMorgan Asset Management Australia Limited, ABN55143832080, AFSL376919.

Copyright 2020 JPMorgan Chase and Company. All rights reserved.