Lazard Inc (LAZ) 2016 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good morning and welcome to Lazard's first-quarter 2016 earnings conference call. This call is being recorded.

(Operator Instructions)

At this time I will turn the call over to Judi Frost Mackey, Lazard's Director of Global Communications. Please go ahead.

Good morning and thank you for joining our conference call to review Lazard's results for the first quarter of 2016. Hosting the call today are Kenneth Jacobs, Lazard's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and Matthieu Bucaille, Chief Financial Officer. A replay of this call will be available on the Lazard website, beginning today by 10AM Eastern time.

Today's call may contain forward-looking statements. These statements are based on our current expectations about future events and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions. These are important factors that could cause our actual results, level of activity, performance or achievement to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

These factors include, but are not limited to, those discussed in Lazard's filings with the Security and Exchange Commission, including our annual report on form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on form 8-K. Lazard assumes no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any of these forward-looking statements. Investors should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Lazard is under no duty to update any of these forward-looking statements after the date on which they are made.

Today's discussion may also include certain non-GAAP financial measures. A description of these non-GAAP financial measures and their reconciliation to the comparable GAAP measures are contained in our earnings release which has been issued this morning.

For today's call, we will focus on highlights of our performance. The details of our earnings can be found in our press release issued in this morning and in our investor presentation, both of which are posted on our website at www.lazard.com. Following their remarks, Ken and Matthieu will be happy to answer your questions. I will now turn the call over to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ken Jacobs.

Thank you, Judi. Good morning. Both of Lazard's businesses continued to achieve strong operating performance despite a challenging first quarter. All things considered, given volatility of markets and a tough comparison with record first-quarter in 2015, the business performed well.

We're advising clients on a record level of transactions in 2016 and our asset management business performed across a range of investment platforms. Our ongoing advisory work includes a substantial share of the largest, most complex and cross-border assignments globally.

We're advising on 4 of the 10 largest M&A transactions announced in the first quarter of 2016. We continue to advise on 4 of the 10 largest transactions announced last year. And about half of our announcements in the quarter were cross-border.

Lazard's market share of the largest global transactions reflects our competitive advantage, which is the breadth and depth of our business, of high concentration of senior-level advisory bankers and our unrivaled global network of relationships, with key decision-makers in business, government and investing institutions. We continue to be active across our advisory practices.

Restructuring had a strong first quarter, the majority of restructuring activity remained centered around energy and commodity related sectors and Lazard is advising a substantial share of these assignments. Our corporate preparedness and shareholder advisory business is growing as we advise on assignments relating to corporate activism and shareholder engagement. And our sovereign and capital advisory services continue to advice governments and corporations across a range of geographies on financing strategy and capital raising.

In asset management we performed well in a period of high market volatility. Assets under management increased 3% from the end of last year through April 14. Relative investment performance was strong in most strategies across our platforms. And we continue to have a high level of gross inflows, approximately $10 billion, in line with the first quarter of last year in a much more challenging environment this year.

This achievement underscores the quality and diversity of our investment services and it reflects the perspective of our primarily institutional clients who are long-term, strategic allocators of capital. We continue to build our asset management franchise through the development and scaling up of new strategies. In the first quarter we expanded our 16 common alternatives platforms with new fund launches.

Matthieu will now provide some color on our financial results and capital management. Then I'll comment on our outlook.

Thank you, Ken. First-quarter 2016 operating revenue declined 13% on a reported basis, but it is comparison to the record first quarter of 2015. On a constant currency basis revenue declined 12%.

First quarter 2016 diluted net income per share on an adjusted basis declined 35% to $0.50, and on a pretax basis 31% to $0.71. Operating revenue for both financial advisory and asset management declined 12% in comparison to the record first quarter one year ago. The decline in financial advisory was primarily -- driven primarily by a lower level of M&A transaction closings. This was partially offset by higher restructuring revenue, which reflected the closing of several large transactions as well as the generally active market in the US energy sector.

In asset management, the decline in first-quarter 2016 operating revenue primarily reflected lower average AUM, the small changes in mix of our AUM and lower incentive fees. As we said in the past, our incentive fees are running at a lower level and we continue to expect muted incentive fees for the rest of the year.

During the first quarter of 2016, AUM increased by $4.2 billion from December 31, to $191 billion. This increase was driven by (inaudible) foreign exchange movements of $3.9 billion and market appreciation of $609 million, partially offset by net outflows of $361 million. Flows continued to be impacted by one global equity strategy, which had $1 billion of net outflow in the quarter.

Average AUM in the first quarter of 2016 was $180 billion, compared to $198 billion a year ago, and $188 billion in the fourth quarter of 2015. As of April 14, 2016, AUM continued to increase and was approximately $193 billion, a $2 billion increase from the end of the first quarter.

Turning to expenses. A 58.9% adjusted compensation ratio from the first quarter reflected front-end loaded amortization expense associated with retirement eligible employees whose deferred compensation is fully expensed in the quarter, combined with the lower level of operating revenue. However, the higher first quarter ratio does not reflect our view of the year or a change in our compensation discipline.

We continue to manage our business based on awarded compensation, and we expect that our 2016 awarded compensation ratio will be in line with the 2015 ratio of 55.8%. Assuming that performance of both of our businesses, hiring levels, and the compensation environment is similar to 2015. For the rest of the year we expect approximately $25 million of additional amortization expense as compared to 2015.

Regarding non-compensation, the first quarter adjusted expense was $102 million, down 5% from last year. Primarily reflecting the lower overall level of activity.

Finally, regarding capital management, we returned $328 million to shareholders during the quarter, primarily through dividends and share repurchases. As of April 20 we have a repurchased approximately 2.4 million shares and already offset about two-thirds of the potential dilution from our 2015 year-end equity.

Yesterday, our Board of Directors authorized additional share repurchases, bringing our total repurchase authorization to $300 million. Lazard continues to generate substantial cash and we are increasing our quarterly dividend by 9% to $0.38 per share.

Ken will now conclude our remarks.

Thank you, Matthieu. I'll provide some perspective on our outlook and then we will open the call to questions. We remain confident in the strength of our business for 2016. We're advising on a record level of transactions and we expect M&A advisory revenue to be back-end loaded, with a higher level of closings during the second half of the year.

Regarding the M&A market environment, volatility in the first quarter was contributed to a general slowdown in new transaction announcements. But we know from experience that M&A cycles never go up in a straight line. The fundamentals for continued activity remain in place. We are in excellent competitive position to maintain a significant share of the large, complex and cross-border transactions that characterize the cycle.

On the asset management side, we're building from a lower base of AUM than last year, but the long-term outlook remains positive. Our franchise is world-class, with investment platforms that are broadly diversified across asset classes, styles and regions. A strong long-term pattern in performance, primarily institutional clients that are strategic allocators of capital and significant capacity for organic growth.

To conclude, Lazard is in a strong position for the remainder of the year. Volatility has subsided, the fundamentals of the M&A cycle remain intact, our asset management business is performing well across investment platforms, we continue to invest in both our businesses. Our dividend increase and ongoing share repurchases underscore the high cash generation of our business model, with our commitment to return capital to shareholders. And we remain focused on serving our clients well while we manage the firm for profitable growth and shareholder value over the long term.

Now let's open the call to questions.

(Operator Instructions)

Dan Paris, Goldman Sachs.

Good morning, guys. Thanks for taking my questions.

Hi, Dan.

Wondering if you could help us frame the potential restructuring revenue opportunity over the next few years. So, we obviously saw a nice uptick this quarter, it sounds like mandates are tracking up meaningfully, but revenues similar to M&A are likely a function of completion. So, based on what you're seeing the stressed energy companies doing today, what do you see is a typical lag time between being hired and completing a deal? And should we be thinking about the ultimate revenue opportunities consistent with kind of the 2008-2009 period, or is there another period of time that this feels like that we can think about?

Okay. Good question, Dan. To start with, I think that to frame it, first the cycle started -- the restructuring activity really picked up -- starting to pick up last summer with -- or last fall, with the significant drop in the oil price. It tends to have a soft start because people, generally speaking, are always kind of reluctant to take the first steps around restructuring until they have a lower -- certain view of the longer-term environment. It tends to take a little while to kick in.

I think we are seeing now, in the first quarter, the beginnings of the revenue ramp up from this new activity. It feels more like the dot com bubble than it does the 2008-2009 period. The 2008-2009 period spread across the entire economy, started in the financial sector but was much broader. The cycle around the dot coms at the turn of the last decade in 2001, 2002, 2003, was more concentrated in the TMP sector like this cycle is, which is likely to be heavily concentrated in the energy commodity sector.

I think I'd probably look back at that cycle. The only difference being, that cycle was also complemented by a bunch of the big fraud cases, so that probably led it to be a little bit higher than perhaps this one will get to. But that's probably our sense.

That's really helpful. From a timing perspective, anything you can point to, or we're kind of all over the map in terms of that delta between kind of announced?

No. The restructuring business tends -- at least in the early/middle parts of the cycle -- to be pretty lumpy, because there is a lot of uncertainty about when things get started, when they close. I think it will -- it should ramp up over the course of this year, but it could be a little bit lumpy.

Okay. Thanks a lot. Very helpful. Maybe just to shift gears. When I include the special dividend, your shares are trading something near 7% on yield, and you definitely have been more active on the buybacks this year. So, wondering if this is a bit of a change in strategy for you, away from the special and into buybacks? And do you ever think about putting more of the special dividend into regular to help with yield support on the stock?

Well, I think -- we increased the dividend again 9% this quarter, up to $0.38 a share. I think our policy -- I'll just reiterate it, hopefully it's been pretty clear -- which is that in the first instance we will always offset the -- do the best we can to offset the incremental shares that are created on the grants. We try to do that as early in the year as possible so it matches the price at which we issue it at. And here I think we've done quite a bit of that already this year.

Second, we want to have a strong dividend because we have a business which reflects a really strong cash flow. We're very comfortable with that, and that's why we've increased the dividend pretty significantly over the last several years. And third is, you really don't know exactly how the business performs because the business tends to be seasonal in the fourth quarter, it tends to -- you also don't pay people until the fourth quarter. So our final policy on capital return doesn't really get determined until we get to the fourth quarter. But what we're prepared to say, and we've done consistently now the last several years, is basically to sweep the cash out in the most efficient way we can, which has so far been special dividends.

But we've also said when we see particular value in the stock price, we'll take advantage of it. And there's some periods in the first quarter which were pretty attractive to buy the stock back at, and we did. So, I think that what you can count on from us is strong dividend. I think we like the special dividend because it's a very efficient way to get cash back to shareholders, and you can never really make a mistake about what price you're buying the shares at if you do it that way. But there will be periods of time where we think the stock is undervalued and we're going be aggressive about buying stock back at that point in time.

That's really helpful. Thanks a lot, Ken.

Okay.

Ashley Serrao, Credit Suisse.

This is Marcus Carney filling in for Ashley.

Hi, Marcus, how are you?

I'm well, how are you all?

Good.

Excellent. First, can you talk a bit about your revenue outlook for the year and how your comp would flex if revenues end up 5% lower?

Okay. First, I don't want to make any revenue projections. But I'll give you some help in terms of how we're thinking about it. First is, right now we are advising on a record level of announced transactions -- for us. That is, things that are already in the market announced, which is a good sign.

In terms of compensation, generally what we're pointing to is all things -- hypothetically, all things equal in terms of how we performed last year, if we have the same year as we had last year, we're targeting an awarded compensation ratio in line with last year, which is about 55.8%. GAAP will vary a little bit with that. We're going to have an additional GAAP charges this year for the whole year -- I think Matthieu misspoke in the script saying the rest of the year, but for the whole year -- of about $25 million or so.

All things equal, on revenue, an awarded comp of 55.8%, GAAP will be a little bit higher than the 55.8%. If revenues are up, GAAP will around the same as 55.8%, and if they're down it could be a little bit higher than the 55.8%. It's just this additional charge on GAAP will drive the GAAP ratio up a little bit, all things equal. But if revenues are up it gets offset. It's kind of noise.

I think you see a decline in revenue, we have a better chance of keeping the awarded comp ratio in line. It gets tougher on the GAAP side just because those are historical charges. And, as you know, we really manage our business around the awarded line, not the GAAP line. The GAAP is an output, not an input.

Excellent. Thank you very much. Moving to asset management. Can you provide an update on the RFP pipelines and maybe touch on the decrease in average fees for the quarter?

Sure. Look, the change in average fee for the quarter -- it's just noise. 1 basis point really is not much of a move. And I think you can just look at the movement in AUM in terms of different products and see why that happened. That could be washed away in a quarter in the other direction pretty easily, just given recent moves in the markets. With regard to RFP, actually they are up at this point, over the fourth quarter. We feel pretty good about the pipeline at the moment.

Excellent. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Marcus.

Brennan Hawken, UBS.

Good morning. This is Brent Dilts filling in, how are you? I just have one here on M&A, just with the Treasury rule on inversions recently, just curious how that impacts your outlook for M&A, and then separately on M&A -- go ahead.

First, on the inversions, not much. Really, the big statements on inversions, were -- two, before this one, which really slowed down the activity in the inversion markets. Most of the activity -- there was a high level of activity in inversions in 2013 and 2014, and a lot of that went away. I think these last steps probably clamped down on most of the rest of the activity, but it already had kind of come out of the market, so we don't see that much impact.

Okay. And then, separately, on just your outlook for M&A in Europe, if you are seeing any signs of further uptick there. It seems like it has been improving a bit, but just curious what you're seeing.

Yes. I feel a little cautious about Europe. I think it's improved a bit. Look, for the overall environment, announcements for the first quarter were about flat with last year. For us, they were even with last year. The volumes were down pretty significantly, both for the market, for us. I think, in Europe, you saw little bit of an uptick in announcements. It's not terrible, but frankly, with Brexit, I think there's going to be a little overhang on the market until that clears.

Okay. Great. Thanks for taking the questions.

Yes.

Devin Ryan, JMP Securities

Good morning. Just a quick one here on trends in China, obviously this year you had a record level of announcements, in volume at least, coming out of China. I know that you guys have been involved in some of those cross-border deals. I'm curious, is this a story that's getting bigger in your eyes, and is this something that Lazard is going to participate in, just given that it is a meaningful part of overall volumes this year?

Yes. Look, I think we have a really terrific business team in China that we've invested in over the last several years, which has really helped position us for some of this activity over the recent period of time. I think the trend is a long-term trend. I think it reflects a lot of the goals of the -- that the Chinese government sets for the economy.

You can read the five-year plan, you can almost predict where the activity is going to be, and I think it's been a pretty good predictor of activity so far. But, like everything in the M&A world, there are ups and downs, it's never a straight line. And I think we've seen a strong period of activity here. That probably continues at a reasonable level, but it can have some ups and downs along the way.

Got it. Understood. And then, maybe just coming back to the comp ratio and comp (multiple speakers). I understand the dynamic of that you're not projecting revenues on the year, you're just trying to perspective around what the comp ratio could look like in different types of environments. But just curious why not set it more at that level to start the year, just given the outlook? I suspect that you're pointing out your record number of assignments, the revenue backlog still looks pretty good. I'm just curious, in terms of setting it this quarter, why change the dynamic there a little bit?

Yes. So, ideally we would have, but we got hit with a lot front-end loaded charges from a GAAP perspective related to the retirement -- some of these retirement-weighted expenses. So, that caused the tick-up, combined with the fact that it was a tough comparison -- or tough revenue compared to first quarter last year. So, the math just drove it up on a GAAP basis for the first quarter.

Our outlook for the year on comp -- all things equal with last year, as I said, if you were to assume all equal with last year -- the awarded ratio we expect to be in the range of about 55.8%. We've got additional charges for the entire year of $25 million. You could assume that the charges will be less in the next three quarters than they did in the first quarter for GAAP.

Therefore the GAAP ratio is going to -- if revenues are flat with last year, and I'm not projecting that, but if they were flat with last year, the GAAP ratio will be a little bit higher than the awarded ratio. If the revenues are up, it's probably around the same as the awarded ratio. So, you can kind of do the math around that. I think we're pretty comfortable with the awarded ratio being a pretty good indicator, all things equal hypothetically, flat revenues for the year.

Got it. Okay. That is helpful.

And I think you could assume that the second quarter is going to be more in line with what our projection is for the year -- our thoughts are for the year.

Got it. That is great color. And then, just one on the tone in the M&A market today. Obviously, the extreme volatility in the first quarter I'm sure put a little bit of a chill just around dialogue. I'm just curious if that seems to be thawing now as we're pulling further away from it, or is there just a lag on that? I'm just trying to get a sense of, does it feel like the broader markets, things are starting to settle back down to normal and activity is feeling maybe better behind the scenes, or there's a lag off of that kind of extreme move in 1Q and so, therefore, maybe things are slowing here a little bit?

I think everything you said is about right. Let me kind of parse it. Volatility is never good for M&A. We saw a record level -- or near-record level of volatility in the first quarter. Needless to say, that probably quelled some of the activity, if not a significant about of activity.

I think it takes a little bit of time before things get back to, quote-unquote, normal. I think we are seeing a normalizing of confidence levels right now. As I said, 2015 -- first quarter of 2015 on announcements wasn't bad. On volume, it wasn't nearly as good as 2015 -- 2016. First quarter of 2016 was decent in terms of announcements but not as good on volume as last year. I'd be surprised if 2016 turns out to be as good as 2015 in terms of overall announcements. For the year, 2014 was a pretty good year. This seems to be tracking 2014 so far pretty well.

Generally, as to the cycle or the environment, as you know we take a look at three things and then we try to identify a catalyst for the cycle. The three things are financing, valuation, confidence. Generally speaking, on valuation, things are about the same as they were last year. Financing probably improved since the first quarter. High-grade has always been pretty strong. The high-yield markets, spreads have narrowed a bit, financing is a little bit more available. Confidence tracks pretty closely with people's view of the macro cycle. M&A tends to be pro-cyclical and also tracks pretty closely with markets in the macro cycle.

I think, during the first quarter, there were some concern that the volatility would impact the macro environment. It doesn't look like it has in the US, which is a good sign. I think, in Europe, you're going to have a little bit of an overhang, as I said before, because of Brexit. Until that's behind us, it's going to be little hard for people to make big bets.

And the M&A cycles never -- doesn't ever appear to be a straight line to us. It has its pockets -- air pockets. I think we hit one in the first quarter. We hit one last summer, too, and then you saw a resumption of activity in the fall. We hit one the year before a bit. So it wouldn't surprise us if things recover a bit but we hit another one along the way, too.

But, generally speaking, the catalyst behind this cycle is pretty powerful, which is this disinflationary, deflationary trend. And M&A becomes an important tool for boards and companies to have in their toolbox to address difficulties or challenges around organic growth, and challenges around driving earnings through additional efficiencies in the business. And that catalyst is an important factor in what's happened and what's likely to happen in the M&A markets going forward.

Got it. That is helpful. And, just quickly on the flows in the quarter -- not sure if you gave it, but can you give any additional color around some of the nuances there, a little bit of a net outflow, I'm just curious --?

Sure. We had very modest net outflows of a little over $300 million. We had $1 billion or so in the one fund we had some issues with for a while, so take that out of there and we actually had net inflows for the quarter, which even the modest outflows which was quite an achievement, given the volatility in the first quarter.

Gross flows were quite strong as I said earlier, at about almost $10 billion, which compares very favorably with the first quarter last year and some of the best quarters we have had on gross flows. Performance in the business is strong across a range of platforms. And AUM right now is back to almost where we were on an average basis in 2015, which I think we all feel pretty good about, given where things were in the first quarter.

Okay. Great. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

Steven Chubak, Nomura.

Good morning.

Hi, Steven.

First question for Matthieu, you mentioned that, quarter to date, you have seen a $2 billion increase in AUM. I was hoping you could give us a break down of how much of that increase had come from flows versus performance?

Right. The $2 billion breaks as follows: we had a market appreciation of $2.6 billion lastly; it was negative market movement of $400 million; and then we had net outflows of approximately $160 million.

Great. Thanks for that. Maybe one more follow-up on the asset management business, for Ken. I appreciate the comment that you'd made about the fee rate being quite lumpy, and you downlaid [sound point] to some extent the potential impact this had on the quarter. But I guess just taking a step back, it is the first quarter we have seen in a very long time where the revenue yield actually dipped below 50 basis points. And, it's just been extraordinarily resilient over the last few quarters, running in that 50 to 52 bps range. And, especially given the strength in EM which is higher fee, I would've expected that to be on an upward trajectory. So, just looking ahead, how should be looking how that fee rate should traject in the coming quarters? And should be expect --?

I think, actually, you hit it on the head, which is EM which is a higher rate. But EM was at a, probably, low point at one point in the first quarter. So consequently that recovery is going to drive the recovery in the yield. I think you can look at the first quarter, see where the AUM was for some of those products. I think on the EM we've had quite a recovery since then and you can assume what's going to happen to yield with that.

All right. Okay. Very helpful, Ken, thanks for taking my questions.

Okay.

Vincent Hung, Autonomous.

Good morning. How much AUM is left in the global schematic strategy right now?

$7.5 billion.

And, last question, so how much are you doing in the middle market right now, and can you provide any commentary around what you're seeing there, if it's any different than the broader M&A trends?

Good question. Middle market right now, activity levels are I think near peak for us. It's really been quite active. The closings, they are always a little bit all over the map for us. But the activity levels at the moment feel very good in the middle market.

And how much of that as a percentage of revenues would you say?

I don't think we've ever really broken it out. But it kind of runs in line with sort of transaction announcements, the fee levels. If you take a look at the transaction -- the number of transactions and you look at the average size, the fee levels are pretty similar to the rest of the business, percentage-wise.

Okay. Thanks.

Ladies and gentlemen, this now concludes the Lazard conference call. Please now disconnect.

Great.