[MUSIC] Hi guys. Well, I think I lied to you. [LAUGH] Possibly, some of you did spot the trick. As you can see from this chart, the evolution of the price Indices of equities, bonds and cash was not hypothetical at all, was not between 2050 and 2062 whatever. It was actually real data as you can see from this chart. It starts in 1989 and it goes now, you have the full history until today. Here you see the evolution of the industries, and you see that the bond index is the best performing asset class. It almost quintuples between 1989 and today. Then we have equities which more than triple. In red, and then we have the cash, which more than doubles, in green. These are price indices, well you can see here a first conclusion is that, you remember, we talked about efficient frontier, and we talked about the modern portfolio theory, which tells you that the more risk you take, the more return you should get. Well, here you see that we possibly have an exception, and so the conclusion we may draw it depends a lot on the period you are considering. In this period, the most risky asset class, equities, does not perform more, does not perform better than the last risky asset class, which is bonds. Here you may have to explain to your client that, normally, for the very long run, yes, it pays to take more risk and you should be rewarded for that. But, we can have periods and indeed this is one of them, where this is not always true and a risk may not be rewarded with sufficient returns. Now the question to you, and this is something for you to debate amongst yourself is what do we do now? This is the data which you're given and what I have to act as an economic advisor providing guidance for tactical asset allocation, this is what I have to do today, this is the data I have at my disposal. You see that the equity or earnings yield is at 6%. It's quite high, so meaning equities would seem to be quite attractive especially if we compare them to the bond yield, which is very low. You see here it's almost at zero. This is on a world basis. Some bond yields are even negative now, especially in Europe. Equities would seem relatively attractive. And bonds with seem quite expensive. You remember this allegoria I told you this is the choice you have to do if you're invited to a friend, and you have the choice getting a bottle sparkling wine and champagne. Sparkling wines is bonds, champagne is equities. And assume that sparkling wine sells at $20 and champagne sells at $40. This is not a very good friend of yours so you invite it and you go to this place and you say, okay I go for the sparkling wine, it's cheaper. And now a year hence, the price of champagne assume it has tripled. It goes from 40 to 120. And the price of a sparkling wine has actually quintupled as it goes from $20 to $100. The same friend invites you, what do you do? You get the sparkling wine? Or maybe you said, you tell yourself, well I paid $20 extra, and I get the real McCoy. In this instance because sparkling wine has risen tremendously, you find that equities, champagne, are attractive. This is exactly the situation in which we're in today. Bonds are outrageously expensive and so people are tempted increasingly and again and again to buy equities. Equities may not and in some markets, the US for instance are definitely not cheap. But when compared to bonds which yield close to zero, then they seem attractive. A question to you, for you to debate, do you buy champagne at $120 just because sparkling wine is at $100? [MUSIC]