Finally, while the subjects of industry analysis and the identification of relative value between sectors are covered in more detail below, it should be noted that the sector allocation has a substantial influence on the risk profile of a corporate bond portfolio. Sectors differ not only with respect to the goods or services they produce, but also with respect to their sensitivity to the economic environment. Therefore, investors usually distinguish between cyclical and noncyclical sectors. In general, cyclical industries are those where the ability to generate revenues and cash flows is closely linked to the business cycle. Usually, this is due to the fact that the companies in those sectors produce goods or services for private consumption or that belong in the category of capital expenditures. Typical examples of cyclical sectors therefore are the automotive and the capital goods sector.

Besides fundamental developments the risk appetite of investors is a driver of the spread differentials between various risk classes. Risk appetite in general describes the willingness of market participants to invest in risky assets as opposed to risk-free assets. Clearly, risk appetite is an unobservable factor but there are various indicators that are designed to extract a measure for risk appetite or risk aversion from market data. More details on this subject are provided later With respect to the performance of subordinated bonds versus senior bonds, there is an impact of risk appetite.

Spreads usually widen when risk appetite falls and tighten when risk appetite increases. From this chart there seems to be a lead–lag relationship between risk appetite and subsequent credit spread changes. If the leading character of risk appetite holds for the future it may provide valuable trading signals for subordinated financials.

The projected Tennessee structural deficit is the mathematical result of projecting spending and revenues, comparing the two, and finding a budget gap or structural deficit equal to the excess of projected spending over projected revenues. Because Tennessee shows a bigger gap than any other major state, there must be something in its spending, its revenues, or some in each that explains the difference from the average state.

To make a long story short, the answer isn’t spending. By the standard national projections used in the study, the demographic factors driving spending such as population and school enrollment in Tennessee will grow somewhat faster than the national average. But Tennessee’s economy and thus tax bases will grow a little faster too. In these characteristics, Tennessee is similar to neighboring states which don’t show the same large structural deficits. The Tennessee structural deficit problem comes from its revenues, not its spending pressures. In sweeping terms, Tennessee’s spending for maintaining current services will grow about as fast as Tennessee personal income grows. So if revenues also grew about as fast as personal income, state and local taxes would remain about the same percentage of personal income they are today. (Economists use the term elasticity to describe the relationship between tax revenue growth and personal income growth. For example, if revenue growth from a particular tax were exactly equal to personal income growth, that revenue source would be said to have an elasticity of one.)