Live on Bloomberg TV

00:00HIS CFA INSTITUTE. BILL GROSS JOINS US WITH JANUS HENDERSON. CONGRATULATIONS ON RETIREMENT. I WANT TO GET TO THE TRACK RECORD AND THE CHALLENGES YOU HAD. HOW DID YOU GET HERE? HOW WAS THIS DECISION MADE? DID YOU MAKE THIS UNILATERALLY? BILL: I DIDN ' T UNILATERALLY AND IN COMBINATION WITH MY FAMILY AND MY PARTNER, AMY SCHWARTZ, IT HAS BEEN ALMOST A HALF A CENTURY OF WATCHING SCREENS AND WAKING UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT TO CHECK ASIA AND EUROPE. THAT IS A LONG TIME. I ' VE A FEW SUPER BOWL RINGS ALONG THE WAY TO LOOK AT AND IT IS TIME TO ENJOY MYSELF AND ENJOY MY FAMILY. TOM: WITH THE CATALYST OF OUTFLOWS OF FUNDS, WAS IT HARDER TO MANAGE THE JANUS FUNDS GIVEN THE REPEATED OUTFLOWS YOU ' VE SEEN OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF QUARTERS AND YEARS. BILL: NOT REALLY. HALF OF THE FUND IS MINE AND I ' VE NOT TAKEN ANY MONEY OUT OF THE FUND. OTHERS HAVE. I LOOK BACK ON IT AND THE PERFORMANCE ON THE UNCONSTRAINED FUND IN THE PAST WATCHER YEARS WITH JANUS HAS BEEN UNSATISFACTORY, NO DOUBT, BUT STILL POSITIVELY POSITIVE AND NORMAL AND -- IN NOMINAL TERMS. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION IS I ' VE MANAGED TOTAL RETURN ACCOUNTS FOR JANUS AND THEY HAVE OUTPERFORMED LIKE THE OLD DAYS AT PIMCO. 100 BASIS POINTS OVER. MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE STUCK TO TOTAL RETURN AND BEEN MORE CONSTRAINED. TOM: THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POINT. MR. GROSS HAD A NUMBER OF IDEAS, INCLUDING FIGHTING THE FIXED INCOME BATTLES OF MUTUAL FUNDS. I WAS TALKING WITH OUR JOHN GITTELSOHN IN LOS ANGELES AND WITHIN THE UNCONSTRAINED MODEL, THE PERSPECTIVES MODEL OF THIS PHRASE UNCONSTRAINED, WHAT DID YOU LEARN ABOUT THE PROS AND CONS, THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE PHRASE UNCONSTRAINED? BILL: UNCONSTRAINED HAS COME TO MEAN GO ANYWHERE. THE TOTAL RETURN CONCEPT I DEVELOPED WAS DEVELOPED ON A CONCEPT OF MEASURED RISK-TAKING. IT IS WHAT I LEARNED IN THE DAYS OF BLACKJACK. YOU DID NOT PUT A LOT ON THE TABLE. FOR THE PAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS THE NEGATIVE TRADE FOR UNCONSTRAINED HAS ALWAYS BEEN GERMANY VERSUS THE UNITED STATES IN TERMS OF A SPREAD. 10-YEAR GERMAN BUND ' S STARTED IN MY PORTFOLIO AT 190 BASIS POINTS OVER AND ARE NOW 250 OVER. THAT HAS BEEN THE BIG DECIDER AND PROBABLY ONE IN WHICH I SHOULD PUT TOO MANY CHIPS ON THE TABLE. TOM: THIS GOES TO THE HEDGE FUNDS AND THE UNDERPERFORMANCE OF HEDGE FUNDS. WAS THE UNDERPERFORMANCE YOU FACED IN THE LAST YEAR WITH UNCONSTRAINED BECAUSE YOU WERE NOT DIVERSIFIED? IS THE PHRASE -- THE PHRASE UNCONSTRAINED GETS YOU AND WILL FOCUS WHERE THE BETS ARE TOO BIG TO GO BACK TO ED THORP? BILL: I THINK YOU DID FOR ME AND OTHER UNCONSTRAINED FUNDS, IF ONLY BY THE NATURE OF THE TERM. THE OLD BEDSORE TERMS -- THE OLD ED THORP TERMS, GAMBLERS RUINED, YOU CAN ONLY BET 2% OF YOUR CAPITAL. I HAD POSITIONS IN UNCONSTRAINED THAT WERE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN THAT, ESPECIALLY THE GERMAN/U.S. TREASURY TRADE. THAT WAS PROBABLY TOO MUCH. IT WAS AN UNCONSTRAINED PORTFOLIO. INVESTORS WERE EXPECTING HEDGE FUND RETURNS. FOR A WHILE IT WAS ONLY 1% TO 2% AND THAT WAS UNSATISFACTORY. TOM: THIS GOES TO YOUR PERSPECTIVE. WE SHOULD POINT OUT MR. GROSS HAS WRITTEN ALL SORTS OF ACADEMIC WORK FOR THE CFA INSTITUTE ON FINANCE AND THE INTEGRITY OF FINANCIAL THEORY. YOU HAVE LIVED IT. IS THE HEDGE FUND MODEL BROKEN BECAUSE IT IS A NON-DIVERSIFIED MODEL? BILL: I THINK IT WAS BROKEN FOR A LONG TIME. OBVIOUSLY THE HEDGE FUND CONCEPTS ADJUSTED LONG AND SHORT BUT IT WAS ONE IN WHICH MANAGERS TOOK A LOT OF RISK. WHEN YOU SPEAK TO DIVERSIFICATION, PERHAPS MOST OF THOSE HEDGE FUNDS WERE NON-DIVERSIFIED IN TERMS OF THE RISK THEY WERE TAKING. THEY WERE TAKING RISK AND STILL ARE. TO THE EXTENT MARKETS MOVING AND -- IN RISK OFF TYPE OF MODE AND THEY HAVE IN DECEMBER, THAN THE HEDGE FUND CONCEPT IS AN EXPOSURE OF RISK AS OPPOSED TO ANYTHING ELSE. IT NEEDS TO BE MORE DIVERSIFIED. TOM: IF YOU ' RE JUST JOINING US, WILLIAM GROSS WITH US OF JANUS HENDERSON WHO ANNOUNCES HIS RETIREMENT AT A VERY YOUNG 74 YEARS OLD. THIS IS AFTER 45 YEARS OF WORK. WELCOMING ALL OF YOU ON BLOOMBERG TELEVISION. IF WE LOOK AT THE INVESTMENT RETURN, YOU MENTIONED THE GERMAN TRADE, THE SPREAD TRADE WITH GERMANY. DID THE CENTRAL BANKERS GETTING YOUR WAY? ARE YOU WILLING TO BLAME UNDERPERFORMANCE ON FEDERAL RESERVE OFFICIALS, ECB OFFICIALS? THESE PEOPLE DO NOT GO BY THE BOOK AND BILL GROSS GOT RUN OVER BECAUSE THEY DID SOMETHING NEW AND ORIGINAL? BILL: NOT NECESSARILY. THEY DID NOT GO BUY THE BOOK AND IT IS UP TO THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER TO ANALYZE WHAT THE NEW BOOK IS. FOR FIVE, 6, 7, 8 YEARS QUANTITATIVE EASING HAS PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR INVESTORS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF CAPITAL GAINS. THE QUESTION BECAME IN TERMS OF GERMANY VERSUS UNITED STATES, WHAT WITH THE EFFECT OF U.S. TIGHTENING BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND THE ULTIMATE -- AND THE ULTIMATE EXCLUSION OF QUANTITATIVE EASING, WHAT WOULD THAT DO RELATIVE TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH THE ECB? IF THE SPREAD CONTINUES TO WIDEN UNTIL TODAY? THAT IS A LONG-TERM SITUATION. TOM: THIS IS CRITICAL AS YOU INVEST YOUR OWN MONEY. EVERYBODY ELSE WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT YOU FEEL ABOUT CENTRAL BANKS THAT GOT AWAY FROM PHILLIPS CURVE THEOLOGY OVER THE TWO BALANCE SHEET ADJUSTMENT AND QUANTITATIVE TIGHTENING. WHICH OF THOSE WAS THE HARM? WAS IT THE BALANCE SHEET DYNAMICS OR THE DEATH OF THE PHILLIPS CURVE DYNAMIC? BILL: IT IS BOTH. IN TERMS OF THE BALANCE SHEET, I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THE FED EXPANDED ITS BALANCE SHEET ARE IN QUANTITATIVE EASING FOR APPROXIMATELY $4 TRILLION. IN A WORLD IN WHICH CREDIT IN THE UNITED STATES WAS AROUND $60 TRILLION, TO MY WAY OF THINKING IN 2007 OR 2008, THE FED WAS IN A HIGHLY LEVERAGED SITUATION RELATIVE TO TOTAL CREDIT. IT WAS $1 TRILLION VERSUS $60 TRILLION. THEY EXPANDED THAT AND EQUITY TIES THEIR PORTFOLIO TO $4 TRILLION. NOW QUANTITATIVE TIGHTENING, REDUCING THAT TO SOME EXTENT, ALTHOUGH PROBABLY GOING TO STOP THE NEXT FEW QUARTERS, IT IS PERHAPS AT A POINT WHERE THE LEVERAGE INHERENT IN THE FED ' S BALANCE SHEET IN THE LEVERAGE INHERENT IN THE U.S. CREDIT ECONOMY IS BETTER. LET ME PUT IT THAT WAY. NOT NECESSARILY SATISFACTORY. TOM: SO MONEY TIMES I HAVE FOUND A LOT OF ACCLAIMED MANAGERS IN WHATEVER WAY ARE SHOWN THE DOOR AND THEN X MONTHS AFTERWARDS, WHATEVER THEIR PLAY WAS WORKS OUT LIKE A CHARM. DO SINCE ANY KIND OF CONDITION WERE YIELDS COME UP IN THE SPREADS NORMALIZED? DO WE GET A JUMP CONDITION AND ABRUPTNESS TO SOME OUTCOME IN 2019? BILL: WE DO SPEAK TO DIFFERENT CENTRAL BANKS. IN THE U.S., THE FED IS AT 2.5% IN TERMS OF FED FUNDS. IF YOU ASSUME INFLATION AT 2%, YOU HAVE A HALF PERCENT IN TERMS OF REAL INTEREST RATES , WHICH IS ABOUT AS HIGHS YOU CAN GO IN A LEVERAGED ECONOMY. AND THE REST OF THE WORLD, LET ' S TAKE THE ECB AND JAPAN. WITH THEIR 0% INTEREST RATES OR NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES IN GERMANY, THERE IS A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION. THINGS HAVE NOT CHANGED. I WONDER, VERSUS THE U.S., WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THEIR ECONOMY? I ' VE MENTIONED MANY TIMES ON YOUR PROGRAM THE DISADVANTAGE, IN ADDITION TO POTENTIAL INFLATION DOWN THE ROAD, THE DISADVANTAGE OF NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES AND ROW INTEREST RATES. INSURANCE COMPANIES AND BANKS ARE DOES ADVANTAGE SO THE SAVINGS FUNCTION IS AT RISK. TOM: THIS IS IMPORTANT. ONE MORE QUESTION AND THEN SWITCH THEMES IN THIS GENEROUS CONVERSATION WITH BILL GROSS. WE HAVE NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES. THIS WAS A HUGE THEME AT DAVOS. THE CHRONIC NATURE TO NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES IN EUROPE THAT REBOUNDS ON THE U.S. AS WELL. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT GOES TO A BREAKING POINT OR DO YOU HAVE AN OPTIMISM THAT ECB IN EUROPE AS A POLITICAL ENTITY OR KATE ITSELF FROM THESE NEGATIVE -- AS A POLITICAL ENTITY CAN EXTRICATE ITSELF FROM THESE NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES? BILL: I THINK IT WILL TAKE TIME TO OBSERVE. HAVEN ' T WE HAD THAT FOR THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS? WHAT WE HAVE FOUND WITH THE ECB IS THESE RATES ARE JUST ENOUGH TO KEEP GROWTH ABOVE THE LINE, AND JUST ENOUGH TO KEEP INFLATION AT 1% TO 2%. JAPAN IS THE PETRI DISH BECAUSE THEY ' VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 10 OR 15 YEARS. ECONOMISTS WOULD HAVE PREDICTED THAT IF THE GOVERNMENT WAS BUYING UP ALL OF THE DEBT ISSUED BY ITS TREASURY OR IF THE CENTRAL BANK WAS BUYING IT, THE DEBT WOULD BE INFLATIONARY, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN CURED THE QUANDARY GOING FORWARD IS FOR OTHER CENTRAL BANKS, WILL THIS BEHAVIOR CREATE INFLATION AND IN MY CONTEXT WILL THIS DISADVANTAGE SAVERS TO THE POINT WHERE THE SAVINGS FUNCTION AND INVESTMENT FUNCTION IS DISRUPTED. TOM: WE WELCOME ALL OF YOU ON BLOOMBERG TELEVISION AND BLOOMBERG RADIO. BILL GROSS ANNOUNCING HIS RETIREMENT TODAY. WE ARE THRILLED TO BRING THEM TO YOU ON BLOOMBERG SURVEILLANCE. YOU GREW UP IN MIDDLETOWN OHIO, YOU WANT TO SAN FRANCISCO TO GET AS FAR AT FROM TOM BRADY AS POSSIBLE. YOU DID WAR DUTY IN VIETNAM. DECORATED FOR THAT. THERE WAS A TIME WHERE SAVERS COULD ACTUALLY SAVE. YOU GO BACK TO THE 1970 ' S, IT WORKED. THE 1980 ' S, IT WORKED. I WANT YOU TO SPEAK TO OUR SAVERS ON TELEVISION AND RADIO WHO HAVE NOT GOTTEN A FAIR DEAL IN THE GILDED AGE. WHEN TO THE SAVERS FINALLY GET A BREAK AND GET A REAL RETURN? BILL: TO BE FAIR IT IS BETTER NOW THAN IT WAS A YEAR AGO. THEY HAVE A CHANCE TO STAY UP WITH INFLATION WITH THEIR MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT. FOR A LONG TIME, IT HAS NOT AND I SUSPECT GOING FORWARD, IF THE FED STOPS HERE THERE WILL NOT BE THE SAME ADVANTAGE OVER THE PAST 20 TO 40 YEARS BACK TO WHEN I STARTED IN THE EARLY 1970 ' S. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? TO A SAVOR IT MEANS THEY FALL BEHIND. PENSION FUNDS FALL BEHIND, INDIVIDUAL FUNDS FALL BEHIND. IT HAS ONLY BEEN THE STOCK MARKET THAT HAS BEEN THE SAVIOR IN TERMS OF THEIR NECESSITY TO BUILD A NEST EGG AND MANY INDIVIDUALS DO NOT INVEST IN THE STOCK MARKET. YOU HAVE TO GET THE INTEREST RATE ABOVE THE INFLATION RATE IN ORDER TO GIVE PENSION FUNDS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES A FIGHTING CHANCE TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR LIABILITY. TOM: THAT IS A GREAT SUMMARY. DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT WILL OCCUR OR IS THERE PERMANENTS TO THE GILDED AGE? THE PRESIDENT WILL SPEAK AT THE STATE OF THE UNION WITH A WIDE PERCEPTION THAT IT IS THE NARROW HAVES AND A HUGE BODY OF HAVE-NOTS WHO CANNOT GET A FAIR SHAKE IN FIXED INCOME OR EQUITY MARKETS? WILL WE SHIFT TO SOME FORM OF REAL RETURN AND PERSIST WITH EQUITY RETURNS? BILL: I DO NOT THINK SO. IF IT DOES, IT WILL TAKE A LONG TIME. WHAT THE FED DID IN 2005 AND 2006 TO RAISE FED FUNDS TO 5% OR 3% REAL WAS TO BREAK THE LEVERAGE ECONOMY. SOME WOULD SUGGEST WE ARE LESS LEVERED NOW THAN WE WERE IN BANKS AND CAPITAL, AND WE ARE, BUT DEBT TO GDP IS STILL 250% AND CLIMBING. AROUND THE WORLD IT IS HIGHER. CENTRAL BANKS HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT A CERTAIN INTEREST RATE GOOD BREAK THE GLOBAL ECONOMY AGAIN. IS THAT A REALISTIC OBSERVATION? YES, THAT IT IS ALSO A NEGATIVE FOR SAVINGS INSTITUTIONS TO BE ABLE TO PAY OFF THEIR LIABILITIES GOING FORWARD. ONE OF THESE DAYS, LARGE PENSION FUNDS WILL SIMPLY SAY 3% IS NOT ENOUGH. I ' VE GUARANTEED 5% OR 6% FOR MY PENSION RETIREES. WE WILL NEED HELP FROM THE GOVERNMENT. TOM: WE HAVE EVERY OTHER CITY OUT THERE. EVERYTHING BUT FANCY NEWPORT BEACH UNDERWATER. SERIOUS ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS IN AMERICA THAT HAVE GONE WRONG. HOW URGENT IS THAT AND WENT TO THE OWNERS, THE PENSION OWNERS , THE PEOPLE NOT MAKING THE ASSUMPTION, WONDER THEY SAY ENOUGH? I DO NOT SEE THAT PRESSURE OUT THERE. BILL: IT IS A LONG-TERM PROBLEM AND POLITICIANS AND EVEN THE PUBLIC WANT TO OBSERVE LONG-TERM PROBLEMS. THEY TEND TO WANT TO LOOK FOR TODAY AS OPPOSED TO TOMORROW. IT IS A PROBLEM. HOW MIGHT IT BE SOLVED? IT MIGHT BE SOLVED BY THIS MELDING OF FISCAL AND MONETARY POLICY WE HAVE SEEN IN JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES AND ELSEWHERE. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT MEANS UNITED STATES COULD ISSUE DEBT TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE THE CENTRAL BANK BY BACK ITSELF. IS THAT A NEGATIVE? IS THAT A POTENTIAL HARM TO THE ECONOMY? CERTAINLY, BUT WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN JAPAN IS IT IS WORKING. TO ME A LONG-TERM FORECAST, I USED TO BE NEGATIVE ON THIS. 50 TO 60 JOIN DOLLARS OF LIABILITIES -- 50 TO $60 TRILLION OF LIABILITIES. IF IT IS NOT INFLATIONARY, THEN PERHAPS THEY CAN PULL A RABBIT OUT OF THE HAT. I DO NOT THINK SO. I THINK THEY MIGHT TRY. TOM: BLOOMBERG TELEVISION AND BLOOMBERG RADIO. WILLIAM GROSS WITH US. WE ARE THRILLED HE CAN JOIN US. TI WANT TO GO BACK TO THE THEORY OF THE MOMENT. I HAVE A BOOK FROM 1962 WHICH IS A BUNCH OF FANCY THEORY YOUR BRITAIN ABOUT. I THINK OF JOSEPH COHEN AND OTHERS THAT HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURE OUR VIEWERS RELY ON. DOES THAT ARCHITECTURE STILL WORK? DOES THE SHARPE RATIO STILL WORK AND ALL OF THE OTHER MUMBO-JUMBO, THE ALCHEMY OF TRADE? BILL: IT DOES BUT IT IS MUCH LESS THAN IT USED TO BE. THE FINANCIAL MARKETS HAVE BECOME SO SOPHISTICATED , NOT ONLY WITH ADVANCED THEORIES BUT WITH SPEED TRADING AND COMPUTER. I THINK IT STILL WORKS, BUT TO EXPECT INFORMATION TO BE HIGHER THAN ONE OR ONE HALF IS UNREALISTIC, CERTAINLY IN AN ERA OF LOW INTEREST RATES. TOM: OUT OF PACIFIC MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND OVER AT JANICE HENDERSON MR. GROSS HAD ON HIS JUST A MUNRO TRADER, WHICH IS HOW HE GOT HIS INFORMATION ADVANTAGE. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THE INFORMATION ADVANTAGE FOR ALL OF ACTIVE MANAGEMENT EQUITY AND FIXED INCOME HAS TO GIVE WAY TO THE WONDERFUL JOHN BOGLE PASSIVE INVESTMENT? COMMENT ON ACTIVE VERSUS PASSIVE AND THE LEGACY YOU KNOW FROM MR. BOGLE. BILL: I ' M STILL A BELIEVER IN ACTIVE MANAGEMENT. JACK AND I WOULD GO BACK AND FORTH. I AM ALWAYS WILLING TO A KNOWLEDGE INDEXATION ' S PRIMARY BENEFIT IS THAT IT IS LOW FEES. INVESTORS IN SOME CASES DO NOT PAY ANY FEES FOR INDEX FUNDS WHERE IS ACTIVE MANAGEMENT CAN CHARGE 50, 100 BASIS POINTS DEPENDING ON THE RISK ASSET. KEEN ACTIVE MANAGERS PRODUCE THOSE RETURNS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE FEES. WITH INTEREST RATES AS LOW AS THEY ARE, REMEMBER, TOM, LOW INTEREST RATES ARE THE FOUNDATION FOR RETURNS FOR ALL OTHER ASSETS ABSENCE EUPHORIA, WHICH WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST FEW YEARS. THE ALPHA , THEY ARE GOING TO BE MUCH LESS THAN THEY WERE. IF THEY ARE, ACTIVE MANAGERS HAVE TO LOWER THEIR OWN FEES AND RECOGNITION OF THEIR INABILITY TO RETURN A PROPER RATE OF RETURN TO THEIR INVESTORS. TOM: IN THE TIME I HAVE LEFT, I WANT TO TOUCH UPON YOUR PHILANTHROPY. DO YOU STILL OWN ANY STAMPS OR HAVE YOU SOLD ALL FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH? BILL: I HAVE SIX OPTIONS GOING FORWARD. THE BULK OF MY STAMP COLLECTION IS STILL TO GO. IT IS A LITTLE TEAR EVERY AUCTION I HAVE. IN THE PAST 10 YEARS SINCE I STARTED THE OPTION, ABOUT $45 MILLION TO $50 MILLION TO FILL ANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING A SMITHSONIAN STAMP EXHIBIT AND POST OFFICE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. AND POST OFFICE WHICH IS LOVELY. I STILL HAVE A FEW LEFT. I MAY KEEP ONE OR TWO IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. TOM: ONE FINAL QUESTION. I WOULD NOTE THE DISCUSSION THAT GRONK MAY RETIRE FROM THE PATRIOTS, I GUESS EDELMAN WILL GO FOREVER. THERE IS THIS GUY, TOM BRADY, WHO YOU HAVE SHOWN A LACK OF AFFINITY FOR. YOU ' RE NOT GOING OUT ON TOP AFTER A DIFFICULT TRACK RECORD AT JANUS HENDERSON. DO YOU SUGGEST MR. BRADY TAKE THE HIGH ROAD AND RETIRE AND GO OUT STRONG? BILL: BASED ON LAST NIGHT PERFORMANCE, HE EATS RIGHT, HE WORKS OUT RIGHT, HE HAS A BELIEF YOU CAN KEEP ON GOING FOR ANOTHER FEW YEARS AND AS A QUARTERBACK HE DOES NOT NEED TO BE FAST. HE NEEDS TO HAVE A STRONG ARM. LET THE GUY GO AND EVIDENTLY AND PERHAPS GOING FORWARD HE WILL BE DEFEATED IN A SUPER BOWL AND CASH IN HIS CHIPS. THE AS A LOT OF RINGS AND I HAVE A LOT OF RINGS. I AM PROUD OF MY TOTAL RETURN CONCEPT, I AM PROUD OF THE INNOVATIVE ASSETS WE WERE ABLE TO MOVE INTO LIKE MORTGAGES AND FINANCIAL FUTURES AND TIPS AND SO ON, WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR PERFORMANCE IN PIMCO. I HAD A GREAT CAREER AND I ' M PROUD OF IT. THE LAST FEW YEARS, WE WILL WIPE THOSE OFF THE MAGIC SLATE AND GO FORWARD HAVING FUN AND ENJOYING LIFE. DAVID: THAT WAS BILL GROSS,

No schedule data available.

Bill Gross on Retirement, Funds, Interest Rates

Bill Gross, fund manager at Janus Henderson, discusses his career as he retires, how interest rates impacted his funds, and what the Federal Reserve can do to help U.S. debt. He speaks with Bloomberg's Tom Keene on "Bloomberg Daybreak: Americas." (Source: Bloomberg)

More From Bloomberg Daybreak: Americas
All episodes and clips

Bloomberg Markets
"Bloomberg Markets" is focused on bringing you the most important global business and breaking markets news and information as it happens.
More episodes and clips