Who Is Alan Greenspan?

Alan Greenspan is an American economist who was the chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (Fed), the United States’ central bank, from 1987 until 2006. In that role, he also served as the chair of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which is the Fed’s principal monetary policymaking committee that makes decisions on interest rates and managing the U.S. money supply.

Greenspan is best known for largely presiding over the Great Moderation, a period of relatively stable inflation and macroeconomic growth, that lasted from the mid-1980s to the financial crisis in 2007.

Early Life and Education

Alan Greenspan was born in New York City on March 6, 1926. He received his bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in economics, all from New York University, as well as studying economics at Columbia University in the early 1950s under Arthur Burns, who would later serve two consecutive terms as chair of the Board of Governors of the Fed.

Greenspan’s first job, in 1948, was not in government but for a non-profit analyzing demand for steel, aluminum, and copper. After this, Greenspan ran an economic consulting firm in New York City, Townsend-Greenspan & Co., Inc., from 1954 to 1974 and 1977 to 1987. Greenspan began his career in the public sector in 1974 when he served as chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) under President Gerald Ford.

In 1987, Greenspan became the 13th chair of the Fed, replacing Paul Volcker. President Ronald Reagan was the first to appoint Greenspan to the office, but three other presidents, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, named him to four additional terms. His tenure as chair lasted for more than 18 years before he retired in 2006 to be replaced by Ben Bernanke. After leaving, he published his memoir, The Age of Turbulence, and began his own Washington DC-based consulting firm, Greenspan Associates LLC. 

Alan Greenspan was known as being adept at gaining consensus among Fed board members on policy issues and for serving during one of the most severe economic crises of the late 20th century, the aftermath of the stock market crash of 1987. After that crash, he advocated for sharply slashing interest rates to prevent the economy from sinking into a deep depression.

Alan Greenspan’s Policies and Actions

Greenspan presided over one of the most prosperous periods in American history—thanks in no small part, supporters feel, to his helming of the Fed. Still, some of his policies and actions were controversial, either at the time or in retrospect.

Views on Inflation

Early in his career, Greenspan developed a reputation for being hawkish on inflation, in part due to his advocacy for a return to the gold standard in monetary policy in the 1967 essay “Gold and Economic Freedom.” 

His allegedly “hawkish” stance was portrayed by early critics as a preference for sacrificing economic growth in exchange for preventing inflation. Greenspan eventually reversed those views as Fed chief; in a 1998 speech, he conceded that the new economy might not be as susceptible to inflation as he had first thought.

In practice, Greenspan’s supposedly hawkish approach was flexible, to say the least. He was clearly willing to risk inflation under conditions that could create a severe depression and certainly pursued a generally easy money policy relative to his predecessor, Paul Volcker. In particular, in the early 2000s, Greenspan presided over cutting interest rates to levels not seen in many decades.

Flip-Flop on Interest Rates

In 2000, Greenspan advocated reducing interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst. He did so again in 2001 after 9-11, the World Trade Center attack. Following 9-11, Greenspan led the FOMC to immediately reduce the Fed funds rate from 3.5% to 3%, and, in the following months, he worked toward lowering that rate to a record (at the time) low of 1.13% and holding it there for a full year.

Some criticized those rate cuts as having the potential to inflate asset price bubbles in the U.S. Greenspan’s pro-inflationary policies, particularly during this period, are today generally understood to have contributed to the U.S. housing bubble, subsequent subprime mortgage financial crisis, and the Great Recession, though this is of course disputed by Greenspan and his allies.

Encouraging Adjustable-Rate Mortgages

In a 2004 speech, Greenspan suggested more homeowners should consider taking out adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) where the interest rate adjusts itself to prevailing market interest rates. Under Greenspan’s tenure, interest rates subsequently rose as inflation accelerated. This increase reset many of those mortgages to much higher payments, creating even more distress for many homeowners and exacerbating the impact of that crisis.

The “Greenspan Put”

The “Greenspan put” was a monetary policy strategy popular during the 1990s and 2000s under Greenspan. Throughout his reign, he attempted to help support the U.S. economy by actively using the federal funds rate to aggressively lower interest rates to fight the deflation of asset price bubbles.

The Greenspan put created a substantial moral hazard in financial markets. Informed investors could expect the Fed to take predictable actions that would bailout investor’s losses, which distort the incentives of market participants. This created an environment where investors were encouraged to take excessive risk because Fed monetary policy tended to inherently limit their potential losses in the event of a market downturn in an analogous way to buying put options on the open market.

The Bottom Line

Like many other government officials, the success of Alan Greenspan’s five terms as Chair of the Fed will depend on who you ask. However, it is certainly true that Greenspan faced some massive challenges during his tenure, such as the 1987 stock market crash and the attacks on the World Trade Center.

Overall, Greenspan helped usher in a strong U.S. economy in the 1990s. Opinion on how much his actions caused the economic recession that began shortly after his term ended varies.

What is an Aggressive Investment Strategy?

An aggressive investment strategy typically refers to a style of portfolio management that attempts to maximize returns by taking a relatively higher degree of risk. Strategies for achieving higher than average returns typically emphasize capital appreciation as a primary investment objective, rather than income or safety of principal. Such a strategy would therefore have an asset allocation with a substantial weighting in stocks and possibly little or no allocation to bonds or cash.

Aggressive investment strategies are typically thought to be suitable for young adults with smaller portfolio sizes. Because a lengthy investment horizon enables them to ride out market fluctuations, and losses early in one’s career have less impact than later, investment advisors do not consider this strategy suitable for anyone else but young adults unless such a strategy is applied to only a small portion of one’s nest-egg savings. Regardless of the investor’s age, however, a high tolerance for risk is an absolute prerequisite for an aggressive investment strategy.

Understanding Aggressive Investment Strategy

The aggressiveness of an investment strategy depends on the relative weight of high-reward, high-risk asset classes, such as equities and commodities, within the portfolio.

For example, Portfolio A which has an asset allocation of 75% equities, 15% fixed income, and 10% commodities would be considered quite aggressive, since 85% of the portfolio is weighted to equities and commodities. However, it would still be less aggressive than Portfolio B, which has an asset allocation of 85% equities and 15% commodities.

Even within the equity component of an aggressive portfolio, the composition of stocks can have a significant bearing on its risk profile. For instance, if the equity component only consists of blue-chip stocks, it would be considered less risky than if the portfolio only held small-capitalization stocks. If this is the case in the earlier example, Portfolio B could arguably be considered less aggressive than Portfolio A, even though it has 100% of its weight in aggressive assets.

Yet another aspect of an aggressive investment strategy has to do with allocation. A strategy that simply divided all available money equally into 20 different stocks could be a very aggressive strategy, but dividing all money equally into just 5 different stocks would be more aggressive still.

Aggressive Investment strategies may also include a high turnover strategy, seeking to chase stocks that show high relative performance in a short time period. The high turnover may create higher returns, but could also drive higher transaction costs, thus increasing the risk of poor performance.

Aggressive Investment Strategy and Active Management

An aggressive strategy needs more active management than a conservative “buy-and-hold” strategy, since it is likely to be much more volatile and could require frequent adjustments, depending on market conditions. More rebalancing would also be required to bring portfolio allocations back to their target levels. Volatility of the assets could lead allocations to deviate significantly from their original weights. This extra work also drives higher fees as the portfolio manager may require more staff to manage all such positions.

Recent years have seen significant pushback against active investing strategies. Many investors have pulled their assets out of hedge funds, for example, due to those managers’ underperformance. Instead, some have chosen to place their money with passive managers. These managers adhere to investing styles that often employ managing index funds for strategic rotation. In these cases, portfolios often mirror a market index, such as the S&P 500.

What Is Aggregation?

Aggregation in the futures markets is a process that combines of all futures positions owned or controlled by a single trader or group of traders into one aggregate position. Aggregation in a financial planning sense, however, is a time-saving accounting method that consolidates an individual’s financial data from various institutions.

Aggregation is increasingly popular with advisors when servicing clients’ accounts, as they are able to discuss the accounts with the client in a cleaner, more easily understood way before they break down the account into its respective categories.

How Aggregation Works

Financial advisors use account-aggregation technology to gather position and transaction information from investors’ retail accounts held at other financial institutions. Aggregators provide investors and their advisors with a centralized view of the investor’s complete financial situation, including daily updates.

Financial planners handle both managed and non-managed accounts. Managed accounts contain assets under the advisor’s control that are held by the advisor’s custodian. The planners utilize portfolio management and reporting software to capture a client’s data through a direct link from the custodian. It is important for the planner to have all the accounts because aggregating them without the complete collection would paint an inaccurate picture of that client’s finances.

Additionally, non-managed accounts contain assets that are not under the advisor’s management but are nevertheless important to the client’s financial plan. Examples include 401(k) accounts, personal checking or savings accounts, pensions, and credit card accounts.

The advisor’s concern with managed accounts is lack of accessibility when the client does not provide log-in information. Advisors cannot offer an all-encompassing approach to financial planning and asset management without daily updates on non-managed accounts.

Importance of Account Aggregation

Account aggregation services solve the issue by providing a convenient method for obtaining current position and transaction information about accounts held at most retail banks or brokerages. Because investors’ privacy is protected, disclosing their personal-access information for each non-managed account is unnecessary.

Financial planners use aggregate account software for analyzing a client’s total assets, liabilities, and net worth; income and expenses; and trends in assets, liability, net worth, and transaction values. The advisor also assesses various risks in a client’s portfolio before making investment decisions.

Effects of Account Aggregation

Many aggregation services offer direct data connections between brokerage firms and financial institutions, rather than using banks’ consumer-facing websites. Clients give financial institutions their consent by providing personal information for the aggregate services.

What Is an Agent?

An agent, in legal terminology, is a person who has been legally empowered to act on behalf of another person or an entity. An agent may be employed to represent a client in negotiations and other dealings with third parties. The agent may be given decision-making authority.

Two common types of agents are attorneys, who represent their clients in legal matters, and stockbrokers, who are hired by investors to make investment decisions for them. The person represented by the agent in these scenarios is called the principal. In finance, it refers to a fiduciary relationship in which an agent is authorized to perform transactions on behalf of the client and in their best interest.

Understanding an Agent

An agent is someone that is given permission (either explicitly or assumed) to act on an individual’s behalf and may do so in a variety of capacities. This could include selling a home, executing a will, managing a sports career, managing an acting career, being a business representative, and so on.

Agents often have expertise in a specific industry and are more knowledgeable about that industry’s ins and outs than the average person. For example, if you started gaining attention as a musician, you would hire a music agent to help guide you through getting a record deal, signing record contracts, and arranging your touring schedule.

As you would not have any experience with the record industry, you would need an agent to look out for your best interests and take care of a lot of the work that you would otherwise most likely not be able to complete on your own. This would also free up your time so that you can concentrate on making music.

Types of Agents

Agents come in all types depending on their function and the industry in which they operate. In general, there are three types of agents: universal agents, general agents, and special agents.

Universal Agents

Universal agents have a broad mandate to act on behalf of their clients. Often these agents have been given power of attorney for a client, which gives them considerable authority to represent a client in legal proceedings. They may also be authorized to make financial transactions on behalf of their clients.

General Agents

General agents are contracted to represent their clients in specific types of transactions or proceedings over a set period. They have broad authority to act but in a limited sphere. A talent agent for an actor would fall under this category.

Special Agents

Special agents are authorized to make a single transaction or a series of transactions within a limited period. This is the type of agent most people use from time to time. A real estate agent, securities agent, insurance agent, and travel agent are all special agents.

Uses of Agents

People hire agents to perform tasks that they lack the time or expertise to do for themselves. Investors hire stockbrokers to act as middlemen between them and the stock market. Athletes and actors hire agents to negotiate contracts on their behalf because the agents are typically more familiar with industry norms and have a better idea of how to position their clients.

More commonly, prospective homeowners use agents as middlemen, relying on the professional’s greater skills at negotiation.

Businesses often hire agents to represent them in a particular venture or negotiation, relying on the agents’ superior skills, contacts, or background information to complete deals.

Loyalty Responsibilities of an Agent

Duty of Avoiding Material Benefit

During the course of business, an agent may benefit. This is especially true when an agent is paid to perform a task on behalf of the principal. For example, a real estate agent commonly receives a commission for their work in selling a house.

When acting on behalf of another, an agent must ensure they do not unjustly benefit from their agency position. This includes receiving large benefits from the relationship or taking advantage of their position to ensure they receive benefits that would not normally as part of a normal transaction.

Duty Not to Usurp

When an agent acts on behalf of a principal, the agent may receive information it would be able to personally capitalize on for personal benefit. For example, an agent may receive information relating to a potential investment opportunity. The agent owes the principal the duty to not steal or supplant the principal’s ability to transact. In this example, the principal retains the right to decide whether or not to invest; the agent must not take the place of the principal without the principal explicitly declining an opportunity to invest.

Duty to Not Compete

On a similar note, an agent may not enter into transactions or business that compete with a principal. This conflict of interest puts the principal at a disadvantage as the agent may obtain trade or business secrets during the course of the business relationship. For example, imagine if an agent was tasked with shipping specific goods to an agent’s manufacturing warehouse. The agent could obtain information related to the principal’s operations that the agent could then use for its personal benefit.

Duty of Transparency

Formalized agent-principal arrangements often include verbiage that the agent must disclose if it has any other principals in which it is acting as an agent for. This includes disclosing a sworn statement that the agent will act in good faith across all principals and will incur fair dealing with each principal.

Duty to Protect Information

During the course of an agent’s relationship with the principal, the agent may not disclose confidential information to unrelated parties. This may defined through confidentiality agreements or may not be explicitly called out. In either case, the agent must take care to evaluate the sensitivity of information and the necessity for other parties to obtain that information. This includes not using confidential information for the personal benefit of the agent (i.e. exchanging the information for personal benefit to an independent third party).

Performance Responsibilities of an Agent

Duty of Contract

All terms of any written agreement between an agent and a principal define the relationship between the two. For many agent and principal relationships, the contract is not explicitly defined upfront. However, custom or deliberate agreements may call for very specific terms that define what is and isn’t allowed.

Duty of Care

An agent is always tasked with acting with care and competence when handling affairs of the principal. The standard is often held that the agent must act as the principal would, using discretion as if it would incurring the personal gain or loss. Though the level of care may not be explicitly defined, the level of care should be equal to what is reasonably expected by local standards.

The duty of care may be complicated when considering the agent’s personal benefit potential. For example, consider a broker that receives a commission for the sale of certain investment products. For some clients, it may not be in their best interest to buy those investments. Therefore, the broker has the duty of care to not sell such products to those individuals, sacrificing personal gain to uphold the sanctity of the relationship.

Duty of Obedience

An agent must comply with reasonable instruction. Though there may be situations where acting on one’s behalf and following their guidance is not reasonable or legal, the agent may have recourse to not follow instruction. Otherwise, the agent is bound to perform tasks as expected by the agreement. This includes situations where the principal may be disadvantaged but has instructed the agent to act in a specific manner.

Duty of Disclosure

As the agent gains sensitive information that may influence the decision-making process of a principal, the agent has the duty to disclose that information in an accurate, timely manner. Consider the example of Los Angeles Dodgers’ player Freddie Freeman. Freeman’s agent reportedly did not disclose to Freeman that his former team, the Atlanta Braves, wanted to re-sign him. By withholding such information, Freeman reluctantly signed with a different team.

Duty of Separation

An agent also has the responsibility to keep the agent’s and the principal’s affairs separately. This includes ensuring that any transactions entered into on behalf of the principal are still legal property of the principal. This also ensures that any resources or capital used to transact are maintained in separate bank accounts and that separate reporting ledgers are maintained.

Agent Liability

An agent is often liable to their principal if they violate their duty or deviate from a reasonable, expected action performed on behalf of the other party. This may be the result of exceeding the authority they’ve been given, acting in misconduct, being unreasonably negligent, or any other situation where the principal may incur a loss that could have potentially been avoided.

In some situations when the agent performs a task for another without disclosing they are an agent, they may be considered liable because the agent was presumed to be a principal. An agent is also commonly liable when the agent expressly incurs a personal liability by entering into an associated agreement.

Agency by Necessity

There is also “agency by necessity,” in which an agent is appointed to act on behalf of a client who is physically or mentally incapable of making a decision. This is not always a case of incapacitation. Business owners, for example, might designate agents to handle unexpected issues that occur in their absence. For example, if a CEO was on a flight and unreachable yet an emergency business decision needed to be made, agency by necessity could be used.

Agency by necessity is most often executed in times of emergency or urgency when the primary party is not available to make a decision. In these situations, courts would recognize a third party making the decision if that party was given power by the primary party to do so. The third party would be responsible for acting in the primary party’s best interest.

Estate planning often sees agency by necessity. Though an individual may have created a will outlining how an estate should be disbursed at their time of death, there could be situations where the person became incapacitated before needed adjustments to the will were made. Here, agency by necessity could be used by a trusted party.

The Bottom Line

An agent is anyone that has been entrusted to act on behalf of another individual. People usually call upon an agent when they need someone with more expertise or when they don’t have the time to complete a task.

Agents are commonly used in the finance, law, real estate, insurance, acting, and music industries, yet they can be found in almost any situation when advanced knowledge on a topic is needed. Agents can save people a lot of time, money, and headaches in getting important tasks done.