Hi, I'm Tim Paulin and this is Active Talks where we dive into what makes Touchstone funds distinctively active.
We think it's farfetched to think that any one firm can be all things to all people and have answers in all asset classes. That's why we focused on hiring over a dozen different subadvisors, different investment management firms to manage our 30-plus investment strategies.
We understand that the skill sets required to invest in, say, fixed income dramatically differ from the skill sets required to invest in equities or international equities differ dramatically from investing in U.S. equities.
That's why we focus on going out to find the talent wherever the talent exists globally to manage our portfolio. We certainly start with active share as a way for us to verify that a strategy is evidencing conviction over time, that the managers are truly behaving in a high conviction, truly active way. We're also looking for demonstrated evidence that the managers have delivered alpha relative to relevant benchmarks and relevant indexes. Once we've identified those underpinnings of high active share as well as demonstrated historical performance, we're also applying our multifaceted scope framework looking for skill, conviction, opportunity, patience, and reasonable expenses.
On top of that, we have a more extensive framework we call SPIDER that's looking at the qualitative elements of a firm and its people and its processes, even the infrastructure that surrounds the investment process on a day-to-day basis that allows it to work efficiently.
We believe a decided differentiator for us is how we measure skill. Typically you'll find in the industry that investors and some advisors are focused strictly on what happened through the most recent month or most recent quarter. And often it might be only over the recent one, three, five, 10 year periods.
So we look at rolling periods of return so that we're evaluating what happened through the end of the most recent quarter as well as the end of last year, the year before that, et cetera, we'll take it all the way back to the inception of a strategy.
We want to look at relevant indexes. We want to look at relative competitors. We want to look at absolute returns. Did I beat an index? As well as risk adjusted returns was I compensated for the amount of risk I took in investing the portfolio.
Of course, measuring historical performance and looking at current scope characteristics are just one part of the puzzle. It's important for us to consistently apply our research methodologies to looking at performance over time.
So we engage with our managers, at least on a quarterly basis, to talk to portfolio managers about what changes they're making to a portfolio, whether those changes and whether the portfolio's characteristics are consistent with what we understand of the process.
At the end of the day, if we see things that make us uncomfortable, it could force us into a change. After all, we employ these sub advisors. And if they do things that are not consistent with delivering value to our shareholders, we have the ability to change those sub advisors.