Global smaller companies: When everyone owns the same names, what next? Janus Henderson Investors May 2026 (8-minute read) Portfolio Manager Nick Sheridan explores why shifting market leadership, geopolitical uncertainty, and changing investor behaviour are bringing smaller companies back into focus, offering a broader set of opportunities beyond the most crowded trades. Markets started 2026 on an uncertain footing, pulled in different directions by geopolitical instability. The conflict in the Middle East, which began at the end of February, brought energy markets back into stark focus. Blocked supplies through the Strait of Hormuz pushed oil prices higher and raised fresh concerns about inflation just as central banks were attempting to stabilise growth. For investors, this has created a challenging mix of risks and uncertainties. Risk appetite has weakened as attention has become fixed on the conflict and its implications. Meanwhile, expectations for fiscal and monetary policies have shifted. Higher energy prices have complicated the outlook for interest rates. The uncertainty of government policy announcements via social has led to rapid swings in sentiment. The path to a lasting resolution remains obscured. Despite this backdrop, one notable feature of recent market behaviour has been the resilience of global smaller companies. This is typically the part of the market that struggles when uncertainty is elevated and policy is restrictive. In our view, this reflects modest starting valuations, positive earnings expectations, and a gradual shift in how investors are approaching markets. But even periods of tentative improvement in sentiment have seen investors look beyond the most heavily owned areas, suggesting that attention is no longer as narrowly focused as it once was. A turning point for market concentration Over the past decade, market returns have been dominated by a small group of large-cap technology companies (ie. the 'Magnificent 7' - Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Nvidia and Tesla). At the same time, higher interest rates, macro uncertainty, and a preference for liquidity has favoured larger, more resilient businesses. Combined with passive flows, this has created an increasingly concentrated market, turning investor allocations into a tacit call on technology stocks. What appears to be changing is not a sudden reversal but a gradual broadening of leadership. The focus is shifting from owning what has worked to reassessing where future returns may come from. It has been driven by a subtle change in behaviour, with investors showing greater sensitivity to valuation, a more questioning approach to crowded trades, and growing awareness of how concentrated portfolios have become, particularly at a time of heightened geopolitical uncertainty. The dominance of the largest companies has not disappeared, but it is no longer unquestioned. Artificial intelligence remains a powerful structural theme, yet investors are starting to look beyond the most obvious beneficiaries, to smaller companies exposed to adjacent areas of growth. At the same time, the earnings picture for smaller companies is improving. Combined with more modest starting valuations relative to global large caps (Exhibit 1), we believe it supports the conditions for a re-rating, even in an uneven market. Exhibit 1: Attractive valuations of global small caps relative to large caps Source: Bloomberg, Janus Henderson Investors Analysis, as at 9 April 2026. Shows global small cap premium/discount versus global large caps (forward P/Es). Note:   Indices used: MSCI World Small Cap, MSCI World. There is no guarantee that past trends will continue, or forecasts will be realised. Past performance does not predict future returns. Different regions, different strengths Much like their larger counterparts, global smaller companies provide exposure to a diverse set of local economies and sector opportunities. Unlike large multinationals, however, they tend to be more closely tied to domestic or regional growth, which can be an advantage in a more fragmented geopolitical environment. They also tend to be more entrepreneurial and agile, often driving advances within specialised niches, rather than at scale. Another defining feature is how little attention they receive. Smaller companies are typically under-owned and under-researched, with materially less coverage from stock analysts. A combination of less scrutiny and more varied outcomes creates opportunity for active investors taking a selective approach. Particularly so, given how strong earnings forecasts are for smaller companies relative to their large-cap peers[1]. But there are also important differences across regions, offering built-in diversification within the small-cap category. In the US, deep capital markets and a strong culture of innovation support a broad pipeline of companies across technology, healthcare, and specialised industrials. In Europe, the market is more weighted towards industrials, manufacturing, and niche export-led businesses. Many of these have strong technical expertise and pricing power, alongside tailwinds from defence and infrastructure spending. Japan offers another distinct profile, characterised by high-quality industrial and technology businesses. Improving corporate governance and a greater focus on shareholder returns are helping to unlock value in companies that have historically been overlooked. Market inefficiency equals opportunity for active investors Global smaller companies remain one of the few areas of genuine inefficiency in equity markets. Limited analyst coverage and the diversity of the opportunity set mean there is real scope to add value through detailed research and engagement. This increases the value of information in the small cap space, given that outcomes in smaller companies are driven more by stock-level factors than by broad market movements. Sector and stock dispersion is wide, meaning the gap between winners and losers can be significant. This makes a research-led, data-driven approach essential, with a focus on characteristics such as return on equity, balance sheet strength, and the sustainability of earnings. For investors willing to take a longer-term view, this part of the market offers exposure to businesses earlier in their growth journey. After all, many of today's dominant companies, such as Nvidia, began as small caps. This is not to overlook the risks; smaller companies can be more volatile and more sensitive to economic cycles. Navigating these risks requires a disciplined, structured approach to stock selection. Overall, we believe that global smaller companies continue to offer a compelling opportunity set. In a market long dominated by a narrow group of large-cap stocks, they provide diversification, exposure to innovation, and access to domestic growth trends across regions. The macro environment remains uncertain. However, for investors focused on fundamentals, the breadth of opportunities within global smaller companies remains significant. References made to individual securities do not constitute a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, investment strategy or market sector, and should not be assumed to be profitable. Janus Henderson Investors, its affiliated advisor, or its employees, may have a position in the securities mentioned. [1] Source: Bloomberg, Janus Henderson Investors, as at 9 April 2026. There is no guarantee that past trends will continue, or forecasts will be realised. Past performance does not predict future returns. Active investing: An investment management approach where a fund manager actively aims to outperform or beat a specific index or benchmark through research, analysis, and the investment choices they make. Asset allocation: The allocation of a portfolio between different asset classes, sectors, geographical regions, or types of security to meet specific objectives of risk, performance, or time horizon. Balance sheet: A financial statement that summarises a company's assets, liabilities, and shareholders' equity at a particular point in time. Each segment gives investors an idea as to what the company owns and owes, as well as the amount invested by shareholders. Diversification: A way of spreading risk by mixing different types of assets or asset classes in a portfolio on the assumption that these assets will behave differently in any given scenario. Assets with low correlation should provide the most diversification. Inflation: The rate at which the prices of goods and services are rising in an economy. The consumer price index (CPI) and retail price index (RPI) are two common measures. Interest rates: The amount charged for borrowing money, shown as a percentage of the amount owed. Base interest rates (the Bank Rate) are generally set by central banks, such as the Federal Reserve in the US or Bank of England in the UK, and influence the interest rates that lenders charge to access their own lending or saving. Liquidity: A measure of how easily an asset can be bought or sold in the market. Assets that can be easily traded in the market in high volumes (without causing a major price move) are referred to as 'liquid'. Premium: When the market price of a security is thought to be more than its underlying value, it is said to be 'trading at a premium'. Return on equity (ROE): A company's net income (income minus expenses and taxes) over a specified period, divided by the amount of money its shareholders have invested. It is used as a measurement of a company's profitability compared to its peers. A higher ROE generally indicates that a management team is more efficient at generating a return from investment. Returns/return: The total return of a portfolio over a specified period as opposed to its relative return against a benchmark. It is measured as a gain or a loss and stated as a percentage of a portfolio's total value.

Funds operated by this manager: Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Diversified Credit Fund , Janus Henderson Global Natural Resources Fund , Janus Henderson Tactical Income Fund , Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Cash Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Global Multi-Strategy Fund , Janus Henderson Global Sustainable Equity Fund , Janus Henderson Sustainable Credit Fund All opinions and estimates in this information are subject to change without notice and are the views of the author at the time of publication. Janus Henderson is not under any obligation to update this information to the extent that it is or becomes out of date or incorrect. The information herein shall not in any way constitute advice or an invitation to invest. It is solely for information purposes and subject to change without notice. This information does not purport to be a comprehensive statement or description of any markets or securities referred to within. Any references to individual securities do not constitute a securities recommendation. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. The value of an investment and the income from it can fall as well as rise and you may not get back the amount originally invested. Whilst Janus Henderson believe that the information is correct at the date of publication, no warranty or representation is given to this effect and no responsibility can be accepted by Janus Henderson to any end users for any action taken on the basis of this information.

Global Perspectives: Addressing the most essential questions around AI Janus Henderson Investors May 2026 (Duration: 29 minutes) In this episode, Portfolio Manager Denny Fish takes a deep dive into the current state of artificial intelligence (AI), including the latest advancements, its potential to propel economic growth, and the rise of agentic AI and its impact on software business models. He also shares insights from a recent research trip in China.

Funds operated by this manager: Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Diversified Credit Fund , Janus Henderson Global Natural Resources Fund , Janus Henderson Tactical Income Fund , Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Cash Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Global Multi-Strategy Fund , Janus Henderson Global Sustainable Equity Fund , Janus Henderson Sustainable Credit Fund All opinions and estimates in this information are subject to change without notice and are the views of the author at the time of publication. Janus Henderson is not under any obligation to update this information to the extent that it is or becomes out of date or incorrect. The information herein shall not in any way constitute advice or an invitation to invest. It is solely for information purposes and subject to change without notice. This information does not purport to be a comprehensive statement or description of any markets or securities referred to within. Any references to individual securities do not constitute a securities recommendation. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. The value of an investment and the income from it can fall as well as rise and you may not get back the amount originally invested. Whilst Janus Henderson believe that the information is correct at the date of publication, no warranty or representation is given to this effect and no responsibility can be accepted by Janus Henderson to any end users for any action taken on the basis of this information.

Unravelling the forces driving corporate credit's resilience Janus Henderson Investors March 2026 (8-minute read) Corporate credit has absorbed recent shocks with limited disruption. Head of High Yield Tom Ross and Corporate Credit Portfolio Manager James Briggs examine how fundamentals, market behaviour and dynamics as well as macro context are shaping credit resilience. Credit markets sanguine amid geopolitical risk The conflict in the Middle East has drawn parallels with the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine War, with concerns that an oil-induced supply and inflation shock could harm the global economy. So far, credit markets have reacted in a sanguine manner, with changes in credit spreads not dissimilar to the rates impact from rising government bond yields. As the chart below shows, the recent tick-up in credit spreads is muted when compared to last year's Liberation Day sell-off, let alone the 2015 energy sell-off after oil prices collapsed or the Covid spike. For now, the market assumption is that the conflict remains regional, although high oil and gas prices - caused by Iran's choke hold on ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz - could have a material impact on inflation and consumption were they to be sustained beyond the short term. For the time being, geopolitical shocks have not yet translated into a material deterioration in key economic data. So far, we see this as a volatility event rather than an economic event impacting inflation and consumption. Figure 1: Credit spread on high yield and investment grade corporate bonds  Source: Bloomberg, US HY = US High Yield:ICE BofA US High Yield Index; EUR HY = Euro High Yield: ICE BofA Euro High Yield Index,  US IG = US investment grade: ICE BofA US Corporate Index, EUR IG = Euro Investment Grade: ICE BofA Euro Corporate Index, Govt OAS (option adjusted spreads over governments), 01 January 2014 to 13 March 2026. Bps= basis points. Spreads may vary and are not guaranteed. Past performance does not predict future returns. The forces behind corporate credit's resilience We believe there are several reasons why the corporate bond markets have responded in such an orderly way. First, investor positioning is light given credit spreads are at the tighter end of historical ranges (Figure 2). Anecdotally, most investors were neutrally positioned heading into this conflict and waiting for more attractive valuations to add risk. Recall that there had been nervousness around artificial intelligence (AI) disruption and private credit fears earlier in the year. Figure 2: Positioning in credit is light, as market trades short Source: ICI, Bloomberg, DTCC, BNP Paribas. The BNPP Positioning Indicator (BNPPIUS, BNPPIEU) reflects data on dealer inventories, funds' cash balances, Commodity Trading Advisors (CTA) positioning, Credit Default Swap (CDS) market positioning and option hedging, as at 12 March 2026. The BNPP Credit Positioning Indicator shows how long (positive number) or short (negative number) investors are positioned in credit markets, indicating whether exposure to credit risk is extended, neutral or defensive. Second, there has already been a reasonable amount of corporate bond issuance so far this year. US investment grade issuance was US$474 billion in the first 10 weeks of the year, up 6% compared to the same period in 2025, and US high yield and loans (leveraged finance) issuance was US$64 billion, up 34% compared with the same period in 2025. Over the same period European investment grade issuance is €170 billion, down a marginal 3%, but European high yield is €23 billion, up 40% year- on-year.1 A key concern has been the scale of tech-related issuance, particularly for the investment grade market. However, the hyperscalers have made good progress with their capital raising, with Oracle claiming they do not expect to issue any additional bonds for the remainder of the calendar year 2026.2  Taken together, companies have been successful in borrowing earlier in the year which should take some pressure off needing to come to the market in the very near term. The strong technical (market dynamics) picture that has been in place should remain intact. Third, turning to demand, higher yields are already attracting yield sensitive buyers, such as insurance companies stepping in as we have heard anecdotally. Yields on US high yield are back above 7% and are at 5.7% in European high yield. US investment grade is above 5% and European investment grade at 3.5%.3 As explained earlier, a portion of the yield change has been due to the rise in government yields reflecting higher inflation expectations. This has led to a moment of positive correlation between rates and credit spreads, which tends to be temporary. Credit fundamentals resilient Another backstop to credit spreads is that corporate fundamentals generally remain supportive. Earnings expectations have not rolled over and continue to underpin credit quality.  Near�'term earnings face a relatively low hurdle, as Q1 results last year were depressed by tariff speculation, limiting downside risk as we move through the upcoming earnings season. Consensus expectations point to a healthy 20% earnings-per-share growth by Q4 versus Q1, consistent with the typical second�'half earnings catch�'up seen in prior years. Even if those forecasts ultimately prove optimistic, interest rate coverage - earnings covering interest expenses - are broadly stable across investment grade and leveraged finance (high yield and loans). With macro growth still resilient - particularly in the US - credit quality is expected to remain robust enough to absorb market volatility. This provides a supportive macro backdrop for sufficient cashflows to service generally stable and manageable leverage levels. With all�'in yields at attractive levels, fundamentals and earnings serve as the anchor to allow investors to lean into wider spreads where attractive risk-adjusted potential can be captured. This is rather than idiosyncratic risk or geopolitical volatility spooking investors as signalling the start of a more adverse credit cycle. Idiosyncratic stress is rising - but is not systemic To take a step back then, there is no evidence of a broad earnings downgrade cycle emerging across investment grade or high yield credit. Recent market volatility is increasingly being driven by idiosyncratic rather than broad�'based credit risk, with stress emerging unevenly across sectors and issuers. One area this surfaced in is software, where dispersion widened sharply and price action was severe in specific names as AI-related concerns dominated around revenue displacement. While software is a small component of high-yield indices, the volatility emerged more in the loans market, which has become increasingly bifurcated and private credit. For loans, selective mispriced opportunities have emerged, while CLOs, the main buyer of loans, continue to launch, with many warehouses looking for loans, supporting demand in the near term. This is important as leveraged finance does well in environments where readily available refinancing is present. Private credit, on the other hand, is facing rising redemption pressure. We are seeing headlines around the gating of funds and increased scrutiny of asset values, alongside banks reassessing collateral valuations and pulling back from certain lending relationships. Nevertheless, this adjustment appears to be gradual and uneven, unfolding over time rather than triggering an immediate spillover into public markets. In this context, stress in private markets need not be destabilising for public credit. As capital becomes more cautious it tends to be redeployed conservatively, such as into short-dated bonds or liquid investment grade credit. This may present a modest but constructive technical (demand) for public markets, particularly at a time when yields have become more attractive and markets are sensitive to reward the winners. Rising dispersion from a K-shaped economy The credit market is increasingly characterised as resembling a K-shaped economy, with deepening dispersion between higher-quality issuers and weaker credits. Stronger issuers continue to trade with resilience, while weaker credits are being repriced more sharply. This is notably apparently in Europe for example in single�'B rated names, where spreads have moved much wider with weakness seen in technology and chemicals, even as index�'level moves remain modest (Figure 3). The widening gap between B-rated bonds and BB-rated bonds underscores how risk is being priced idiosyncratically, not indiscriminately across credit markets. Figure 3: Single Bs are tighter excluding technology and chemicals Source: Barclays, as 16 March 2026. Spreads may vary and are not guaranteed. Past performance does not predict future returns. For credit investors, this creates an opportunity that is incremental rather than wholesale. Valuations have moved off their tightest levels, but remain far from historic stress points, suggesting scope to add risk selectively. With spreads still tight in aggregate and macro uncertainty elevated, timing and discrimination matter. After all, historical analysis suggests that oil price shocks typically take months to mean-revert once conflicts stabilise. The opportunity therefore lies not in chasing beta, but in leaning into dispersion and adding risk where repricing has been meaningful and fundamentals remain intact, while remaining cautious where valuations have yet to adjust. In that sense, the current environment rewards patience and selectivity, allowing credit investors to engage constructively and with confidence that the forces underpinning resilience remain firmly in place, and in some cases appear to have strengthened.

Funds operated by this manager: Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Diversified Credit Fund , Janus Henderson Global Natural Resources Fund , Janus Henderson Tactical Income Fund , Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Cash Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Global Multi-Strategy Fund , Janus Henderson Global Sustainable Equity Fund , Janus Henderson Sustainable Credit Fund All opinions and estimates in this information are subject to change without notice and are the views of the author at the time of publication. Janus Henderson is not under any obligation to update this information to the extent that it is or becomes out of date or incorrect. The information herein shall not in any way constitute advice or an invitation to invest. It is solely for information purposes and subject to change without notice. This information does not purport to be a comprehensive statement or description of any markets or securities referred to within. Any references to individual securities do not constitute a securities recommendation. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. The value of an investment and the income from it can fall as well as rise and you may not get back the amount originally invested. Whilst Janus Henderson believe that the information is correct at the date of publication, no warranty or representation is given to this effect and no responsibility can be accepted by Janus Henderson to any end users for any action taken on the basis of this information.

Investment considerations of prolonged uncertainty over Iran Janus Henderson Investors March 2026 (8-minute read) The conflict in the Middle East has escalated over the last few days and hopes for a short war have faded. Regional diplomatic efforts to de-escalate appear to be failing and Iran continues to retaliate in response to strikes from the US and Israel. As a result, the Strait of Hormuz - the world's most important gateway for energy commodities - remains effectively closed to all but the most buccaneering of shipping companies. The Strait closure is a result of a lack of insurance, firms not willing to risk the loss of future capacity if ships are sunk, and concerns for the welfare of sailors after several fatalities already. However, there are now risks of more intensive intervention from the US and/or Israel following reports that they are considering putting boots on the ground, either to try and extract Iranian enriched nuclear material or to take Kharg Island, a key sea terminal for Iranian oil exports. At the same time, a new Supreme Leader of Iran has been chosen who is seen as another hardliner. This is unlikely to be taken well by the US, who would have preferred someone more moderate, and the choice appears unlikely to create a path to de-escalation. The desired end point is still uncertain It is still not immediately clear what the ultimate objectives for the US and Israel are. Various intentions have been publicly stated but it is not clear which of these are red lines and which are just preferences. A further reduction of the potential for Iran to build nuclear weapons appears to be the closest to a requisite. However, given that strikes in 2025 were deemed to have achieved this, defining the outcome is difficult. Similarly, a desire to destroy Iran's long-range missile program has been expressed, but this may similarly be difficult to guarantee. Finally, regime change, either for military or humanitarian reasons, is now touted as a key objective, but it remains unclear how this can be achieved with airstrikes alone. The objective matters Understanding the motivating objectives is important when considering how long the war might last and the subsequent economic impact. We can look to several factors that suggest this could be a more prolonged campaign. Iran has indicated that it can continue with its current rate of response for six months, far longer than the weeks-long engagement that markets appeared to have been pricing. The US has expressed that it wishes to remove the previously enriched uranium that could be used in nuclear weapons, but it has been a long time since the last international inspection and its whereabouts are likely to be very uncertain. Similarly, the continuity of a new hardline leader suggests that Iran is feeling little pressure to change tack yet. However, there are also ways in which the conflict could be wound up sooner. The most obvious is that US President Trump has shown a willingness to abruptly change direction on policy multiple times throughout his leadership, no matter the scale of the impact. With mid-term elections coming up later in the year, the US government is likely to be highly sensitive to anything that pushes up the cost of living. Therefore, finding a way to declare victory and return oil prices to lower levels may ultimately dominate any longer-term military objectives. The length matters A longer-term conflict raises the danger of greater destabilisation in the region, creates greater potential for more severe damage to key infrastructure and risks longer-lasting impact on energy supplies. While there are some ways to mitigate the impact in the near term, such as sending oil through pipelines to ports less likely to be targeted, or by releasing strategic reserves outside of the Middle East, these are either inherently temporary or lack the potential capacity to offset prolonged restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz. Oil is often seen as the key commodity when considering conflicts in the Middle East, given its relevance to US gasoline prices in particular, but natural gas supplies are crucial for other regions, such as Europe, and other base products feed into areas from chemicals to fertilisers. Last week, markets appeared to be pricing energy commodities in line with a short-term interruption to the ease of supply. Assumptions around this appear to have changed over the weekend, with prices now moving to incorporate greater risk of a prolonged engagement. The lack of clarity around the US/Israeli objectives does nothing to reduce the uncertainty that markets hate. Impact on markets The price of oil has spiked above US$100 per barrel as concerns about supplies have intensified. European natural gas prices have almost doubled since the end of February. This is raising the spectre of the inflationary impulse generated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine in early 2022 and the subsequent removal of much of the Russian supply into energy markets. Concerns about a jump in European inflation or simply prolonged stickiness in the US are lifting bond yields. US Treasury yields have moved higher as markets have taken out one of the US Federal Reserve interest rate cuts that were anticipated by the end of the year. Yields on 10-year Treasuries have seen less movement than their European counterparts, as US jobs numbers on Friday served to offset some upward yield pressure from expected inflation. Concerns about inflation have seen surges in German and UK breakeven rates, with market pricing for the European Central Bank interest rates at the end of 2026 now looking at over 1.5 hikes. Since the end of February, expectations for the Bank of England have shifted from two cuts by the end of 2026 to a better than 50:50 chance that there will be an interest rate hike - a marked shift in the outlook. Markets are now pricing in higher oil prices for the foreseeable future, with concerns mounting about a stagflationary outcome, should higher energy costs stall a re-acceleration in economic growth. The uncertainty has provided support for the much-maligned US dollar, given the American economy is looking better set to weather an energy shock than elsewhere. However, higher bond yields and a stronger greenback have dampened gold's ability to rally in the current environment, following strong performance during other recent periods of volatility. Equity markets are seeing something of a reversal of recent performance dynamics. Markets that started the year positively, to the end of February, suddenly look under greater pressure. A stronger dollar and higher oil prices are weighing on Asian stocks that had been surging in the first two months of the year. Gas prices remain Europe's geopolitical Achilles heel and markets are clearly concerned that the region is overly exposed again. In the US, last week saw some signs of a reversal of the recent outperformance of Value stocks over their Growth counterparts. AI-related stocks have struggled in 2026 so far compared to the rest of the market, but the fears that higher oil prices could dent the very rosy economic outlook are leading to something of a reconsideration. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz is unprecedented, undoubtedly making for severe impacts on risk assets. However, to put the sell-off in proper context, investors must also recognise that equities entered the conflict trading at a meaningful premium over historical valuation levels. The forward price/earnings ratios (P/Es) of major global equity markets were at top quartile levels versus their 20-year histories[1], roughly a 15%-30% premium compared to median levels. Indeed, the markets experiencing the largest sell-offs are the ones that entered the conflict with the highest returns year to date[2]. Risks of a prolonged war but don't rule out a quick "victory" Situations like this demonstrate the value of well-diversified multi-asset portfolios. Geopolitical events are rarely easy to gain complete clarity on, with the current US administration apparently embracing uncertainty as a negotiation strategy. What we can take away from the events of the last few days is that it is likely the conflict could last longer than many had initially hoped. This means there is the potential for greater economic impact - and markets have moved to price in this change. There is the potential for faster inflation and slower economic growth, with assets focusing on different aspects thus far. However, risks remain two-sided. US political pressures means that a quick "victory" should not be ruled out. Asset prices, driven by energy prices, are likely to swing violently as investors alter their expectations for either outcome. [1] Source: Datastream, 27 February 2026. Past performance does not predict future returns. [2] Source: Bloomberg, 31 December 2025 to 9 March 2026. Past performance does not predict future returns.

Funds operated by this manager: Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund , Janus Henderson Diversified Credit Fund , Janus Henderson Global Natural Resources Fund , Janus Henderson Tactical Income Fund , Janus Henderson Australian Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Conservative Fixed Interest Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Cash Fund - Institutional , Janus Henderson Global Multi-Strategy Fund , Janus Henderson Global Sustainable Equity Fund , Janus Henderson Sustainable Credit Fund All opinions and estimates in this information are subject to change without notice and are the views of the author at the time of publication. Janus Henderson is not under any obligation to update this information to the extent that it is or becomes out of date or incorrect. The information herein shall not in any way constitute advice or an invitation to invest. It is solely for information purposes and subject to change without notice. This information does not purport to be a comprehensive statement or description of any markets or securities referred to within. Any references to individual securities do not constitute a securities recommendation. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. The value of an investment and the income from it can fall as well as rise and you may not get back the amount originally invested. Whilst Janus Henderson believe that the information is correct at the date of publication, no warranty or representation is given to this effect and no responsibility can be accepted by Janus Henderson to any end users for any action taken on the basis of this information.