About John Donahue
J. Christopher Donahue, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of Federated Hermes, has discussed his views on business relationships, regulatory matters, and market outlook in various public appearances. In a 2014 speech, Donahue emphasized the importance of prudence and fairness in business and family, stating that "the power to do doesn't necessarily mean the prudence to do" and that "the gut of a professional is worthwhile." He also described compliance as "a euphemism for trust" and said the business is "bounded by love on one bank and trust on the other." Donahue noted that Federated had "dramatically improved the ratio of salesmen to lawyers" and that the company does not have a written charitable giving policy, instead giving more money to individuals who "put their time, treasure, and talent into a deal."
In earlier appearances, Donahue addressed regulatory and market topics. During a 2012 Senate hearing, he compared sponsor support for mutual funds to supporting a family, stating that "the idea that you support funds... they're making independent voluntary marketplace analysis and judgments about what to do with a product." He argued that such support shows "the inherent resiliency of the funds." In a 2012 Bloomberg interview, Donahue expressed optimism about the market, predicting an S&P 500 range of 1,450 and describing a "re-risking environment." He discussed new fund launches, including a floating rate strategic income fund and an unconstrained bond fund, and noted that Dodd-Frank regulations were not yet fully impacting asset managers, with "no regulations published yet."
Source: AI-verified profile updated from John Donahue's recent appearances.
Browse all interviews →
Transcript (2 segments)
S
Senator Tumi0:03
Senator Tumi, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to direct several questions to Mr. Donahue. Thanks to all of you for being here today. The first question would be in response to Chairman Shapiro's point. One of the central arguments that she seems to be making is that the past instances in which sponsors provided some degree of voluntary support to their money funds means that these funds are not as safe as they appear. I think that's one of our central arguments. Could you respond to that premise?
J
John Donahue0:40
Yes, Senator. We create a lot of funds. I'm one of 13 kids, have eight of my own, and we create a lot of children too, and they're forever supporting them. So the idea that you support funds and you look at any other kind of product, people are supporting their products. What are they trying to do? They're making independent voluntary marketplace analysis and judgments about what to do with a product. So I don't know anything about the 300, the 200. None of that really matters. What matters is that you have good solid people deciding whether or not and what to do to help shareholders. I think that what the support shows is the inherent resiliency of the funds. When you have $2.6 trillion in these funds with no interest and lots of regulatory abuse, that's really an accomplishment. It's because the people want the cash management system. And if you talk about support in terms of what was done that the chairman was talking about, how about the support that every single one is doing 100% on waving investment advisory fees in order to keep the funds going during these low interest times? So I look at support as something that is not unlike having a family. You birth the fund. Well, what are you going to do about keeping it going? We also merge funds out of existence. We buy other funds and put them out of existence. But overall, we're trying to enhance the relationship with the clients, some of whom are at this table, in the way they deal in the way they deal.
