J.P. Morgan is committed to providing insights into investment banking and the wider world of finance, economics and markets. Coverage spans industry sectors and product groups including healthcare, technology, M&A, shareholder engagement and more.
What Is Behind the Rise in Shareholder Activism?
What’s The Deal? | Shareholder Activism
David Freedman: Hello. And welcome to our What's the Deal? podcast. I'm David Freedman, the global head of shareholder engagement and M&A capital markets here at J.P. Morgan. I'm delighted to be here today with my partners, Alfredo Porretti and Darren Novak. Today, we'll be exploring the latest trends in global activism. To kick things off, I invite Alfredo and Darren to introduce themselves, before we dive into our discussion. Alfredo?
Alfredo Porretti: Thank you, David, for having us. I am Alfredo Porretti, and I am the head of shareholder engagement and M&A capital markets in North America. Darren?
Darren Novak: Thanks, Alfredo. This is Darren Novak. I head our shareholder engagement, and M&A capital markets practice for Europe. David, maybe I can ask you the first question here leading off. How has the shareholder activism landscape evolved globally and in the US over the past year?
David Freedman: Shareholder activism has continued to rise over the past year, but the composition of it has shifted a bit. The US-style activism has continued to spread globally with more public activism being seen in both EMEA and some countries in the APAC region. In the US specifically, we've seen more activity from investors with new names, but when we look under the hood of those investors, we frequently find that the principals are people who spun out of more established activists. And when we look at the activity in the US, a larger percentage has been targeted at companies with larger market caps. As this has happened, we're seeing multiple activists attack some of these companies simultaneously, but with different prescriptions about what the company should do. Campaigns like these with multiple activists, make choosing an optimum defense posture even more challenging. Darren, why don't you talk about specifically what you're seeing in EMEA?
Darren Novak: It's interesting in terms of the total number of campaigns in EMEA. Year-over-year, in the first half of this year, we saw a 29% increase in campaigns. And that's interesting because behind the scenes, we've seen a significant amount of activity over the last number of years. But there's almost been a pent-up demand. And mirroring what we've seen in the US, over the last number of years, really focused on the small cap and mid-cap space. A tremendous amount of public activism going on as a result, where activists have felt as though using the tools of activism that we've seen in the US, that the public posture is actually the most effective way in fact of pushing forward their mandates.
David Freedman: That's very interesting, Darren. Turning to you, Alfredo, which sectors are seeing the most activism? Please talk about in terms of what tactics we're seeing activists using the most to influence companies, and any new tactics that you've seen recently.
Alfredo Porretti: Thank you, David. I would say tech, diversified industrials and healthcare are the three sectors that represent a majority of the activity levels, around 60% of what we see going on at the moment. With prominent activists continuing to target larger caps, defined as 10 billion plus, and that represents about 20% of the activity as compared to a much lower percent in prior years. Given that the M&A in financing markets are still challenged at the moment, a lot of campaigns are currently focusing on operational matters, on capital allocation themes, as well as corporate clarity and business separations. An example of a frequent operational and capital allocation theme in tech, to pick one sector as an example, is one where activists are focused on whether boards and management teams have been effective in balancing profitability with growth. In terms of tactics, I would say many of the old tactics continue to be used. However, the universal proxy card, even though it did not radically change the playing field, has offered activists more leverage in terms of board seats sought, both in proxy fight context, as well as in general settlement negotiations. David, how are activists continuing to focus on M&A, despite quieter deal levels and what's motivating this trend?
David Freedman: Well, Alfredo, to your previous point, M&A related demands are actually a smaller percentage of activist campaigns in the last year, and that is related to the lower volume of M&A. In some industries, though where we've seen very significant stock price declines, we are seeing signs of activists pushing for strategic review processes and things like that, if not an outright sale. As M&A activity has begun to accelerate again, as we're entering the fall here, partially on the back of increased optimism of a soft or no-landing scenario, we do expect to see M&A related demands would increase as a percentage of activist campaigns as we head into 2024. Darren, when you look at EMEA, are you seeing a similar trend there?
Darren Novak: Absolutely. There is certainly a significant amount of activist demands for separations, potential sales, et cetera. But very often the type of dialog that they're having is that maybe you can't actually affect it today, but you need to be prepared and you need to be disclosing to the market that you're thinking about these things. That you're in fact, pursuing a review of a potential separation. And this is becoming increasingly important. So the M&A demand market in Europe is very ripe. The activists are very much looking at M&A solutions for undervaluation issues with companies. But the activists are taking a slightly different tactic than they've taken before. What's important is that the activist understands and has the company communicate to the market, that they are in fact, reviewing the strategic alternatives, and that they're open minded to a potential transaction. The activist understand that there may be challenges with executing an M&A transaction near-term, but they want to ensure that companies are prime to be able to execute a transaction when the markets are right.
David Freedman: Now Darren, I've also heard you speak about capital return as something that has been a theme in Europe recently. Do you want to talk about capital returns distinguished from M&A demands?
Darren Novak: Absolutely. So very often, the activists are coming in through the front door of companies and talking about capital returns and capital allocation more broadly. With the increased interest rate environment, the use of each dollar that a company spends is becoming more and more scrutinized. And that really is therefore translating into significant debates about whether money should be spent on growth capex, money should be spend on... both on M&A, or should the money be spent on capital returns to shareholders? And that's really where the f- activists are initially focused on. And then they tend to translate that particular narrative into the broader portfolio discussion. And ultimately then, do these various businesses belong together? Should there be a separation of any sort, whether it's a monetization of a particular business, or whether it's a spinoff of a particular business. But that capital allocation debate is front and center. That is how the activists are beginning their discussions. And as a result, it's becoming fundamentally important for companies to have very clear capital allocation frameworks in place.
David Freedman: Alfredo, you touched earlier on the universal proxy rules. Let’s dive into that a little deeper. Talk about how we've seen universal proxy have an impact in 2023 and maybe what it was, and what it wasn't.
Alfredo Porretti: Well, we did not observe a radical shift in the number of proxy fights targeting companies with market values above 500 million in 2023, there were 20 versus 34 in the prior season, there was an increase in the number of fights that went to a vote. About 35% of the fights went to a vote, versus 25 in the prior proxy season. The bigger increases were in the smaller caps, but there was quite an increase. Interestingly, the mix and match feature of universal proxy resulted in ISS and Glass Lewis increasing their support for activist candidates. This was also often followed by investor support, resulting in an increase in activist success rates at the ballot. 58% of activist nominees were elected to boards in 2023, versus roughly 28% in prior years. In particular, ISS supported at least [inaudible 00:11:01] 75% of the time, and Glass Lewis two thirds of the time. And I would say 70 plus percent of the nominees supported by ISS, and 60% plus percent of those supported by Glass Lewis were elected by shareholders, which was a significant increase compared to the past four years. I would say the new rules have heightened the focus on director's skills and backgrounds. And companies are increasingly expanding their disclosure to highlight the relevant contribution of each director to the board. Another interesting phenomenon that we saw in this proxy season, was that there was quite a bit more litigation around the new rules, And rejected nominations that companies had. And that is a trend that we see as being likely to continue, as people continue to push the boundaries of the new regulations. I think if we think ahead, a few of the likely trends going forward will be a further on board composition and skills, both as a preemptive tool for companies to avoid proxy fights, but also as one of the main items of contention when a proxy fight does occur. Secondly, I would say, a higher price for peace will likely be exacted out there. And the starting point of negotiations will be a little bit higher when you're talking about settlements as compared to the past. And then third, there will be an increase on the number of fights at large companies we believe over the next few years, as a result of all the players getting increasingly more comfortable with the intricacies and mechanics of the universal proxy rules.
David Freedman: Thank you for that insight. Turning back to you, Darren. As we look ahead for the remainder of 2023, what is your outlook for how activism will continue to evolve, either the pace or anything else? And how are you telling companies to prepare for this?
Darren Novak: Sure, David. So the pace we are expecting to be significantly elevated as it has been, throughout 2023. There's a lot of activity behind the scenes. We're going to see certainly a lot of this become public over time. And it's incredibly important for companies to be ahead of this, before the activist shows up at the register and before the activist even shows up at the offices of the investor relations department, or of course, the senior leadership. And what's fundamentally important for companies to understand is that these risks can be mitigated. They should be addressed proactively, both through communication and action. When we go through the process of assessing how a company could be attacked by an activist, we go through all the various aspects that an activist could think of, but also those aspects that could definitely resonate with other shareholders. And it's really addressing those concerns, and especially in this elevated interest environment where capital allocation is, as we said, the front door for many activists to pursue their campaigns. It's critically important that we are as crystal clear as we can in terms of our capital allocation policy, that we have a fundamental view in terms of why all of our businesses belong together. What are the synergies? We have a fundamental view in terms of, the competencies of our board? Especially as there is increased pressure, certainly in Europe, in the overall composition of boards, where it's not only activists, but institutional investors that are very closely scrutinizing the composition of boards, both in terms of expertise, in terms of diversity, diversity in terms of gender, but also diversity in terms of where they reside. Many large shareholders are concerned about companies being dominated by local directors when companies' businesses are in fact, international facing. And as a result, it really is fundamentally important to get ahead of this risk, and we certainly can. And assessing what the risk is, determining what our rebuttals are going to be, but more important than just determining what the rebuttals are going to be, what are our actions? As I said before, what are our actions in terms of communication? What are our actions in terms of capital allocation? What are our actions in terms of portfolio?
David Freedman: Alfredo, I'm gonna turn to you. Would you please share with our audience what our view is for the Americas in terms of activism outlook?
Alfredo Porretti: Yes, David. The activity in the Americas will continue. There is a lot of private activity that we are seeing that will likely come to the public domain soon. If the M&A markets recover, there's going to be increased amount of activism that is targeting companies that have a transactional outcome down the road. I would say, although I don't view the universal proxy rules as a revolution, but more as an evolution of the playing field, it does encourage activists to be more active, and it will lead to more activity down the road. So when we're thinking about preparation in the longer term, we advise clients, just like Darren mentioned for Europe, that it is good housekeeping for both management teams and boards to regularly get updates on the latest trends in activism from universal proxy to voting choice at the index funds and the other trends that are really altering and effecting the playing field in a quite significant way. And also, making sure that they have a good sense of their own operational and governance vulnerabilities, because they want to have a plan in place and have a client core team assisted by advisors, so that they are ready if anyone comes and appears on the scene.
David Freedman: Well, I'd like to thank Alfredo and Darren for joining me today, and hope that you have found this discussion insightful. Collaborating with Alfredo and Darren, and all of our partners in coverage here at J.P Morgan, we bring our clients the best holistic advice and we look forward to speaking with you as you are facing these challenges. Thank you very much for your time today.
[END OF EPISODE]
How are companies supporting innovation in the health care industry, and what does the future hold?
Vis Raghavan: A very warm welcome to this, our inaugural innovation symposium in the health care space. It's absolutely fantastic that you can all kind of join us here today.
Dania Chehab: There is quite a lot of innovation coming from health care. And this really permeates across all subsectors, be it cutting edge R&D in biotech, genetic sequencing, and life science tools and diagnostic-- the consumerization of health care, which we have seen accelerate over the last couple of years.
Jeremy Hunt: Life sciences is one that we are particularly proud of, not just because we are home to a third of the European life science startups, but because we can see the impact on ordinary families of what happens when you have a strong life science sector.
Christian Wolfum: We have a growing, but also aging population. There's a strong need for more and more precise medicine. And life science companies help there a lot. The life science industry, it's an industry where you have partners from corporate, academia providers. You can really create an ecosystem of open innovation, bringing new ideas into your company, really seeing what will impact health care and the clinical practice in a couple of years from now.
Rose Nguyen: Over the past 5 to 10 years, there has been tremendous progress in the field in some areas that even exceeded our expectations. We believe that there is a technological revolution going on in health care and life sciences.
Shobi Khan: There's so much innovation going on. And I think to be in that space now, to be able to participate in those discoveries is an extraordinary opportunity.
David Redfern: We feel very optimistic about the level of science. There's a lot of great innovation happening, a lot of great science happening. It is being accelerated by the tech revolution. And the interface of data science with biological and genetic science is hugely exciting.
Juha Anjala: We support innovation in many different ways. We have always been willing to invest early in a relationship with innovators. We are a relationship-based organization that invests in our clients early, consistently, and over time.
David Ke: I'm very excited by a number of the strong innovations that we have coming out of the health care sector. For example, whether it's the latest cutting edge science coming out of biotechnology. It's been unique and remarkable to see just the globalization within the health care industry over the past decade, whether it's European companies that want to list in the U.S., but also attract capital from Asia, or Asia companies thinking about listing in London, but also wanting to attract U.S. investors.
Chris Hollowood: We're incredibly lucky relative to some other industries, where clearly you need to create value for shareholders, but also you create value for so many other stakeholders. At the scientific level translating world-beating science into medicines, then at the medicine level when you see the impact on patients. And the wonderful thing is actually when you serve all three, all three have the greatest success. So there's an alignment there. So if you can't get out of bed in the morning energized by all of that, I don't know what you can.
Fred Turpin: There’s been an extraordinarily challenging backdrop. It's harder to get deals done today than it used to be. Rates are higher, equity markets are less forgiving, but there is no shortage of strategic activity. Everything we thought about meeting communications valuations for course segments over the last three or four years has changed. So what's driving some of these changes? Obviously, the economics of streaming are very different than the economics of linear content on cable.
Fred Turpin:And I do think that it seems self-evident that over the next five years we're going to see reductions in content spending, more consolidation and probably higher prices for all of us to watch Yellowstone and Succession.
Fred Turpin: Another area that we're very focused on our practice is audio. There's a lot more opportunity to grow, share and to advertise more effectively on audio right now than there may be on video, because it's video is just kind of overwhelmed with high quality content and competitors. Gaming has exploded and the community that is very focused on gaming as a form of entertainment are also very active online.
Fred Turpin: And it makes them very, very attractive and important consumers for leading edge technology companies. There is a scramble to try to make sure that platforms have access to those really important, incredibly dedicated and high intensity users. And gaming is often a platform for that.
Fred Turpin: One of the biggest changes we've seen over the last three years since COVID has been in consumer broadband. We saw valuations hit all time highs for cable companies and for certain wireless companies. Since the pandemic ended, and the technology cost of deploying very high quality broadband has is dramatically less than it was five years ago. So we've seen competition come into a number of these markets and it's become a much more dynamic marketplace where for 20 years, basically cable companies had home broadband to themselves.
Fred Turpin: We do continue to see growth in fiber to the home. There's a half a dozen players that are driving that very capital intensive. But these are 50 year assets.
Fred Turpin: The market cap that has been created in the tower sector, in the data center sector, as well as the fiber sector over the last ten years is is dramatic. Right. And while it's down from the peaks, it's certainly still amazingly value creating for both the companies and the investors that have been early to the space. We continue to believe that we're in the early innings, third, fourth inning of the total architecture of the digital infrastructure for the United States and then subsequently the world demand for advanced devices, Internet connected devices and data creation continue to explode, whether it's storage, connectivity, compute latency.
Fred Turpin: These trends are here with us to stay. If your sovereign wealth fund, if you're a major PE fund, if you've got a dedicated infrastructure fund, how are you not a participant in the datacenter sector, in the cloud sector, in the tower sector, in the DAS sector, in fiber, like every zero sum game, there are going to be winners and they're going to be losers and boardrooms and CEOs and management teams across America and the world are very, very focused right now in my sector, I'm trying to make sure that they're putting the pieces in place to ensure that they have competitive advantage in a consumer facing business in the future that’s going to allow them to create value.
Chris Grose: The future today, in my opinion, is as bright as it’s ever been. TMC is going to continue to be the engine for the U.S. economy. Now on the M&A side, companies remain cautious given the macro uncertainty. What’s the one lone bright spot? It’s been sponsor activity. So we’ve seen a good amount of take privates and we expect to see more. And the debt markets has just been, frankly, more resilient than the equity markets. And we expect a relatively healthy financing backdrop to support M&A going forward.
Within investment banking, the firm works with a broad range of issuer clients, including high growth companies, corporations, institutions and governments, to deliver comprehensive strategic advice, capital raising and risk management expertise that match their scale and needs.
The Corporate Advisory & Sustainable Solutions (CASS) team is committed to helping clients accelerate and amplify their impact in the global economy, while navigating the shifting industrial policy and accelerating the trend towards sustainability and decarbonization. CASS offers clients holistic advice, capital markets solutions and targeted capital deployment, partnering with coverage and product teams across businesses and functions, including the Corporate & Investment Bank, Commercial Banking and global Corporate Sustainability. Providing strategic advisory and expertise to a global client base, the team is organized around these focused solutions:
Corporate Derivatives Marketing (CDM) provides risk management and structured financing solutions for J.P.Morgan’s corporate clients. Part of the Global Markets organization, CDM works closely with investment banking teams to develop relevant solutions & products. Clients benefit from our areas of expertise including:
In-depth, industry-specific expertise and regional market acumen: this is how J.P. Morgan’s industry coverage teams serve the evolving needs of global clients across a broad range of sectors, including:
J.P. Morgan’s Investment Banking group is driven by industry leaders with deep expertise. Hear from key executives who shape deal-making across the investment banking industry.
J.P. Morgan’s greatest asset is the breadth and depth of its client base. The firm’s approach to serving clients has always centered on doing first-class business in a first-class way. Striving to build trusted, long-term partnerships, J.P. Morgan takes a holistic and forward-looking view of relationships, identifying ways to help clients accomplish their most important business objectives.
See highlights from our Clean Tech Stars conference, which brought together 30 of the most exciting, successful, high-growth companies helping to make net zero happen.
See highlights from our Clean Tech Stars conference, which brought together 30 of the most exciting, successful, high-growth companies helping to make net zero happen.
James Janoskey: What do we mean by Clean Tech Stars? To us, these are the companies that are leading to find solutions and technologies that are required for the world to address our net-zero commitment by 2050. That these companies are the ones that are purely focused on finding solutions through new technologies, new capabilities, new partnerships to address this challenge.
Karl Atenburg: To master the challenge and to get these companies to industrial scale and these clean tech solutions to an industrial operating efficiency, we need a lot of capital. So banks and capital markets are obviously crucial to help raise that capital.
Chuka Umunna: We've brought together 30 of the most exciting, most successful high-growth companies across the different green economy verticals who’ve raised around $7 billion in aggregate over the last few years. Our role here is very important here as a bank because they won’t be able to do what they need to do without raising the finance necessary and we’re committed to financing and facilitating $2.5 trillion to delivery against the UN’s sustainable development to 2030, with a trillion of that focused on the green economy.
Sydney Locksley: So, when we think about the importance of green and sustainable financing, not all financial instruments fall under this green label, but the really rapid growth in green investing, such as in green bonds or in SLBs, demonstrates an appetite to shift capital towards clean investment. And with support for additional clean and sustainable investment, we can reorient cashflows towards clean investments and have this reciprocal benefit bode for investors as well as for the clean energy companies that require this intensive capital inflow to scale and grow the businesses.
Alberto Piana: This is not a slogan anymore. The carbonization net zero company really have to take action and they are taking action. And there’s a reality: all the company who’re here today with us are enabling the transformation to happen. So that’s why it’s so important that we identify company that would be the future leader in this transition towards the net zero and the carbonization economy.
Investment banking is a unique, challenging and rewarding career path. Working to facilitate capital funding across various industries and markets, investment bankers will advise clients and execute transactions with care and precision.
Some J.P. Morgan products and services may not be available in certain regions. Please consult your J.P. Morgan representative to learn more about the products and services available to you.
This material (including market commentary, market data, observations or the like) has been prepared by personnel in the Investment Banking Group of JPMorgan Chase & Co. It has not been reviewed, endorsed or otherwise approved by, and is not a work product of, any research department of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and/or its affiliates (“J.P. Morgan”).
Any views or opinions expressed herein are solely those of the individual authors and may differ from the views and opinions expressed by other departments or divisions of J.P. Morgan. This material is for the general information of our clients only and is a “solicitation” only as that term is used within CFTC Rule 1.71 and 23.605 promulgated under the U.S. Commodity Exchange Act.
RESTRICTED DISTRIBUTION: This material is distributed by the relevant J.P. Morgan entities that possess the necessary licenses to distribute the material in the respective countries. This material is proprietary and confidential to J.P. Morgan and is for your personal use only. Any distribution, copy, reprints and/or forward to others is strictly prohibited.
This material is intended merely to highlight market developments and is not intended to be comprehensive and does not constitute investment, legal or tax advice, nor does it constitute an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument or a recommendation for any investment product or strategy.
Information contained in this material has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable but no representation or warranty is made by J.P. Morgan as to the quality, completeness, accuracy, fitness for a particular purpose or noninfringement of such information. In no event shall J.P. Morgan be liable (whether in contract, tort, equity or otherwise) for any use by any party of, for any decision made or action taken by any party in reliance upon, or for any inaccuracies or errors in, or omissions from, the information contained herein and such information may not be relied upon by you in evaluating the merits of participating in any transaction. All information contained herein is as of the date referenced and is subject to change without notice. All market statistics are based on announced transactions. Numbers in various tables may not sum due to rounding.
J.P. Morgan may have positions (long or short), effect transactions, or make markets in securities or financial instruments mentioned herein (or options with respect thereto), or provide advice or loans to, or participate in the underwriting or restructuring of the obligations of, issuers mentioned herein. All transactions presented herein are for illustration purposes only. J.P. Morgan does not make representations or warranties as to the legal, tax, credit, or accounting treatment of any such transactions, or any other effects similar transactions may have on you or your affiliates. You should consult with your own advisors as to such matters.
The use of any third-party trademarks or brand names is for informational purposes only and does not imply an endorsement by JPMorgan Chase & Co. or that such trademark owner has authorized JPMorgan Chase & Co. to promote its products or services.
J.P. Morgan is the marketing name for the investment banking activities of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (member, NYSE), J.P. Morgan Securities plc (authorized by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority), J.P. Morgan SE (Authorised as a credit institution by the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, BaFin) and jointly supervised by the BaFin, the German Central Bank (Deutsche Bundesbank) and the European Central Bank (ECB)), J.P. Morgan Securities Australia Limited (ABN 61 003 245 234/AFS Licence No: 238066 and regulated by Australian Securities and Investments Commission) and their investment banking affiliates. J.P. Morgan Securities plc is exempt from the licensing provisions of the Financial and Intermediary Services Act, 2002 (South Africa).
For Brazil: Ombudsman J.P. Morgan: 0800-7700847 / firstname.lastname@example.org
For Australia: This material is issued and distributed by J.P. Morgan Securities Australia Limited (ABN 61 003 245 234/ AFS Licence No: 238066) (regulated by ASIC) for the benefit of “wholesale clients” only. This material does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation or particular needs of the recipient. The recipient of this material must not distribute it to any third party or outside Australia without the prior written consent of J.P. Morgan Securities Australia Limited.