July 2024

Letter from SuMi TRUST
Factor Investment in the Japanese Equity Market – Current Environment and Investment Strategies
By Junichi Arima
Since 2022, factor investing has been gaining effectiveness on a global scale due to the normalisation of theultra-low interest rate policy. Quality factors have consistently shown their effectiveness worldwide, but theeffectiveness of other factors varies by region. For example, in Japan, factor indices, especially the Value factor,
have shown a significant recovery in effectiveness. Therefore, in order to make effective factor investments inJapan, it is necessary to adapt to the Japanese market.
SuMi TRUST AM's Quantitative team has been conducting quantitative analysis of Japanese equities for over
30 years. Through our analysis, we have developed unique factor investment strategies tailored to the Japanesemarket, and they have consistently delivered strong performance. This report introduces the differences in
effectiveness between the global market and Japanese market, the reasons behind these differences, and theefforts made to adapt investment strategies to the Japanese market, focusing on Value, Momentum, and Quality
factors. We also present the representative investment strategies that have been implemented in these areas.
1. Factors Behave Differently in Markets
Chart 1: Excess Return of Factor Indices in Developed Countries (vs. MSCI Japan)
60%

Enhanced Value

Momentum

Quality

Min Vol

50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%

Note: Factor returns are cumulative excess returns against MSCI Japan since 2003
Source: MSCI, Bloomberg and SuMi TRUST (as of the end of June 2024)-1-

July 2024

Chart 2: Excess Return of Factor Indices in Developed Countries (vs. MSCI World)
60%

Enhanced Value

Momentum

Quality

Min Vol

50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%

Note: Factor returns are cumulative excess returns against MSCI World since 2003
Source: MSCI, Bloomberg and SuMi TRUST (as of the end of June 2024)

The charts above show excess returns generated by four MSCI factor indices – Enhanced Value, Momentum,
Quality and Minimum Volatility factors - constructed upon MSCI’s traditional market cap weighted indices indeveloped countries and the Japanese market. As you can see, these charts are quite different. Whilst three outof the four global factors have outperformed their parent index, only one of the four Japanese factor indicesposted higher returns than the market-cap weighted index. When you compare individual factors, Value factors
have been effective and Minimum Volatility has reduced in effectiveness in both the Japanese and global
markets since 2020.
Although Momentum and Quality factors have shown significantly different results in the two markets, posting
positive alpha in developed markets and generating lower-than-the-market returns in Japan. This is consistent
with what is widely believed that Momentum and Quality factors do not work well in Japan. Some may insist
that the efficacy of the Momentum factor should be evaluated in combination with the Value factor and in Japanthe Momentum factor was highly effective when analysing the Value and Momentum factors in combination[1].
However, we believe it is worthwhile to scrutinise 1) whether or not Momentum and Quality factors generateoutperformance in Japan and 2) whether localisation is useful to capture “factor premium” in the country. As
we will see in the following sections, our experience suggests that the Value, Momentum, and Quality factors
are actually effective in the Japanese market as individual factors and indicates that factor premium in Japancannot be well captured by global factor indices.

-2-

July 2024

2. Why the Value Factor is Effective in JapanFirst, I would like to touch on the Value factor. The Value factor is more effective in Japan than in global markets
due to the following structural characteristics of the Japanese market. In Japan, there is less M&A activity
compared to Europe and the U.S. Consequently, companies with a low return on equity (ROE) or undervalued
companies performing poorly are often neglected by investors. This is due in part to Japan's historical use of alifetime employment system and its government policy of supporting struggling companies to recover by
restructuring rather than facing bankruptcy. This resulted in a high level of competition among Japanesecompanies as companies that would otherwise exit the market remain, leading to many of them having low
ROE. This makes them vulnerable to experiencing a turnaround in their returns. As such, the market structure isprone to return reversal.
Since 2010, these structural characteristics have shown improvement. M&A activities have become morecommon among Japanese companies, and changing jobs has become a more natural option for employees.
However, only a few companies have increased their ROE and Price-to-Book (P/B) ratios, considering the costof shareholders' equity as a return to shareholders. Consequently, more than half of the stocks in the TOPIX
index had P/B ratios below 1x. Given these conditions, an increasing number of companies are reassessing
their ROE, cost of capital, and corporate governance in response to the Tokyo Stock Exchange's (TSE) call for
PBR improvement in 2023. Since stocks with corporate governance issues are more common among value
stocks, there is a possibility that value stocks may outperform growth stocks more significantly when
expectations of governance reforms increase. Many companies with weak governance and ROE often fall into
the value trap, but as these factors improve, the value effect is likely to continue to be effective.
Chart 3: SuMi TRUST Japan Value Factor (Excess Return vs. MSCI Japan)
60%
SuMi TRUST Value Factor

50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Dec-07

Dec-09Dec-11

Dec-13

Dec-15

Dec-17

Dec-19Dec-21

Dec-23

Note: Return figures are excess return of average return of stocks falling into the top tertile based on Value factor
against MSCI Japan. Rebalancing monthly and no trading cost is assumed.
Please note past performance does not predict future returns.
Source: SuMi TRUST, MSCI (as of the end of June 2024)

While the value effect is valid in Japan as Chart 3 shows, many investors may suspect that it is no longer sopromising in Japan due to the high value reversal effect after 2020. Chart 4 displays the dispersion of P/B ratios,
which measures the relative undervaluation of value stocks. The fact that the dispersion is expanding meansthat the gap between the P/B ratios of overvalued and undervalued stocks is large and can be evaluated as-3-

July 2024
accumulating energy that will increase the effectiveness of P/B ratio (i.e., value effect has staying power) in the
future. In the 2010s, Japan experienced a prolonged decline in interest rates and economic stagnation, leading
to a deflationary mindset that affected traditional firms such as heavy industrial automakers, banks, and steel
mills, which had previously supported Japan's economic growth. These firms had made capital investments inthe past, but suffered low growth because deflation prevented them from increasing sales. Conversely, service
companies, pharmaceutical companies, and high-tech firms, which do not rely heavily on physical assets suchas factories and people, were able to improve their performance. This shift coincided with the rise of ESG and
the global trend to value intangible assets such as human capital. In Japan, overvalued high-quality stocks werepreferred, leading to a widened P/B ratio dispersion.
The COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 further expanded this dispersion, but after 2021, the value effectreversed and has continued for the last three years to the present. On the other hand, the level of dispersion isstill hovering around the middle of the peak and bottom, indicating that the value effect can still be expected
to be fully effective.
With the TSE, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), and the Financial Services Agency (FSA)
urging companies to reform their governance, improve P/B ratios, and achieve sustainable ROE growth,companies are finally showing some interest in share prices and market and investor evaluations, and I believethat the value effect is likely to continue.
Chart 4: Undervaluation of Value Stocks: Price-to-book Deviation
1.0
0.9

Coefficient of Valuation (STDev / Average)

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
Jan-24Jan-22

Jan-20Jan-18Jan-16

Jan-14Jan-12

Jan-10

Jan-08Jan-06

Jan-04Jan-02Jan-00Jan-98Jan-96

0.3

Source: SuMi TRUST (as of the end of June 2024)

In addition, Value stocks are undervalued due to their weak performance, making them difficult to hold basedon regular fundamental analysis. There is strong psychological resistance to holding undervalued stocks basedon human judgment. Investing in value stocks requires choosing the right stocks and waiting for a catalyst forrecovery is necessary. It also needs a patience, investment experience and knowledge in value stock investing.
When earnings recovery is observed, significant mispricing will occur, leading to high returns. The value
strategy aims to capture high returns associated with the resolution of this mispricing, and it is important toeliminate arbitrariness in the selection of stocks. In general, the quantitative approach, in which the model
selects stocks, is very effective and compatible with the value strategy because it does not involve human will.
-4-

July 2024

3. Building Effective Momentum Factor in Japan
Secondly, there is the Momentum factor. Momentum factor investments aim to take exposure to highmomentum stocks. A Momentum factor index generally consists of the best performing stocks in the recent
past. The existence of the Momentum risk premium, which means that prices which have increased in the priorperiod tend to keep increasing in the following period, is confirmed in the global market by a wide range ofacademic research. Academic research also suggest that a momentum factor is not effective in Japan. The
above Chart 1 shows that MSCI’s Momentum factor index has failed to outperform the market in Japan for thelast 20 years.
In order to examine if the Momentum risk premium exists in Japan, we began by looking at underlying drivers
behind the Momentum risk premium. An academic study conducted by Novy-Marx[2] revealed that theMomentum risk premium comes from earnings momentum. This indicates that price momentum is just a proxywhich actually captures earnings momentum. In other words, the Momentum risk premium is not a technicalanomaly, but it is brought on by investing in companies which achieved, and are likely to continue, positive
earnings growth. When we conducted the same analysis for the Japanese market, the results indicated thatearnings momentum is effective to predict future stock prices in Japan as well. Although the Momentum risk
premium may not be captured in Japan by focusing on price momentum, it could be captured by focusing on
earnings momentum itself.

Chart 5: SuMi TRUST Japan Momentum Factor (Excess Return vs. MSCI Japan)
Return (%)
5%

SuMi TRUST Momentum Factor

0%
-5%
-10%
-15%
-20%
-25%
-30%
Dec-07

Dec-09Dec-11

Dec-13

Dec-15

Dec-17

Dec-19Dec-21

Dec-23

Note: Return figures are excess return of average return of stocks falling into the top tertile based on Momentum
factor against MSCI Japan. Rebalancing monthly and no trading cost is assumed.
Please note past performance does not predict future returns.
Source: SuMi TRUST AM, MSCI (as of the end of June 2024)

Based on the finding that the Momentum risk premium exists and can be captured in Japan, we have designed
our proprietary Momentum factor for the Japanese market. Given the fact that the most investors use a multifactor approach in the factor investments field, we designed a simple factor by just featuring earnings
momentum[3]. As shown in Chart 5, this Momentum factor strategy has steadily outperformed the market cap
index except during the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008 and 2009 and the value reversal market in 2023.

-5-

July 2024

4. Building Effective Quality Factor in Japan
Thirdly, I will touch on the Quality factor. The Quality risk premium exists as higher quality companies tend to
generate better performance than lower quality companies. Whilst Quality factor is one of the widely usedfactors, there are various definitions of Quality. One person may say Quality is sound financial conditions andothers may say it is earnings quality, which is often measured by using accruals as a proxy variable, the amountof earnings that the management of the company can manipulate. Profitability and earnings stability are also
commonly used definitions as well as low investment (MSCI designs its Quality index from Return on Equity(ROE), Debt to Equity and Earnings Variability. i.e. the index comprises of profitability, low leverage andearnings stability. FTSE use profitability, efficiency, earnings quality and leverage.).

Chart 6: SuMi TRUST Japan Quality Factor (Excess Return vs. MSCI Japan)
Return (%)
40%
35%
30%

SuMi TRUST Quality Factor

25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
-5%
Dec-07

Dec-09Dec-11

Dec-13

Dec-15

Dec-17

Dec-19Dec-21

Dec-23

Note: Return figures are excess return of average return of stocks falling into the top tertile based on Quality factor
against MSCI Japan. Rebalancing monthly and no trading cost is assumed.
Please note past performance does not predict future returns.
Source: SuMi TRUST, MSCI (as of the end of June 2024)

At SuMi TRUST, we define the Quality factor as a company’s ability to generate strong earnings and to maintaina solid balance sheet. We use profitability as a primary factor. Fama and French, in their 2006 paper [4],employed ROE as a profitability factor. Novy-Marx showed that Gross Profitability on Assets (GPA) is a more
effective indicator to explain future returns than ROE [5]. We have compared the effectiveness of ROE and GPA
as profitability factors in the Japanese market and found that GPA is more effective than ROE in Japan as well.
Furthermore, GPA has an advantage over ROE as a Quality indicator as it is not affected by the capital structureof a company. A company is able to improve ROE by increasing leverage (e.g. share buybacks or dividend), but
this is not possible for GPA.
We have decided to use GPA as the main input for our Quality factor strategy based on this result. In addition,
we also employ Sales Stability and Low Leverage as secondary inputs. We understand earnings stability is morecommonly used than sales stability in Quality factors. The reason why we prefer Sales Stability over Earnings
Stability is that the former is less affected by earnings manipulation by company management such as selecting
depreciation and amortisation than the latter. Therefore, Sales Stability reflects the actual stability of a businessbetter than Earnings Stability. Chart 6 above shows that the performance of the SuMi TRUST Quality Factor
strategy consists of GPA, Sales Stability and Low Leverage. The strategy has steadily outperformed the market
cap index.
-6-

July 2024

5. Diversification Benefit and Return from Multi-Factor Strategy
Although factor indices are believed to deliver excess returns against their parent index in the long-run, it istypical for them to have a multi-year period of underperformance as well as outperformance. This characteristic
lets a majority of investors employ a multi-factor approach.
We offer two multi-factor strategies. One is the Low T.E. Multi Factor Strategy in Japan, which is a simple factor
investment strategy combining Value, Momentum, and Quality (introduced above) and it aims to capture afactor risk premium. The other is the Japan Quantitative Alpha Strategy, which picks stocks using a multi-factor
stock selection model based on a quantitative approach. Each of these strategies has its own characteristics,
which are described below.

Table 1: Overview of the Two Strategies
Low T.E. Multi-Factor Strategy in Japan

Japan Quantitative Alpha Strategy

Benchmark

MSCI Japan

Approach-Factor approach

TOPIX (MSCI Japan is alsoavailable)-Purely quantitative approach

Investment Focus

Assets in Strategy-Invests in stocks with high values inthree factors (Value, Momentum andQuality)N/A (Simulation only)-Identifies undervalued stocks via
three main factors (Stock*, Flow**
and Growth***)USD 388 million

Inception

January 2021

September 2002
* Stock is represented by Price-to-Book ratio.

** Flow is represented by Price to Economic Value Added, Price to Residual Income, Price to Earnings Forecast,Quality of Earnings, and Gross Profitability on Assets.
***Growth is represented by composite of growth indicators (sales growth, earnings growth, implied growth gap,
sales surprise, efficient growth, organisational culture and accumulating past R&D spending)

1) Low T.E. Multi-Factor Strategy in Japan
With a multi-factor strategy in mind, a factor index is assessed not only by its outperformance against its parent
index, but also by its correlation versus other factor indices. For a multi-factor long-only portfolio, we typically
blend three factor strategies, namely Value, Momentum and Quality factors. When combined, the three factors
complement each other (see Chart7) and our Low T.E. Multi-Factor Portfolio, which is consists of the three,generated consistent returns (see Chart 8). During the GFC, the Momentum factor experienced a severe
drawdown whilst the Value and Quality factors outperformed the market. When the Value factor failed togenerate excess returns for some years until 2021, the Momentum and Quality factors offset by generatingalpha. After 2021, when the Momentum and Quality factors struggled amid strong value reversal, the Valuefactor achieved strong outperformance.

-7-

July 2024

Chart 7: Accumulated Factor Returns (Excess Return vs. MSCI Japan)
60%

Value

Momentum

Quality

50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
Dec-07

Dec-09Dec-11

Dec-13

Dec-15

Dec-17

Dec-19Dec-21

Dec-23

Note: Three factors are SuMi TRUST’s proprietary developed factors. Factor return is excess return against MSCIJapan of average return of stocks falling into the top tertile based on each factor.
Please note past performance does not predict future returns.
Source: SuMi TRUST, MSCI (as of the end of June 2024)

Chart 8: SuMi TRUST Low T.E. Multi-Factor Strategy (Excess Return vs. MSCI Japan)
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%

Note: Return figures are excess return against MSCI Japan and simulated numbers. A multi-factor portfolio consists of SuMi
TRUST' proprietary developed Value, Momentum and Quality factors. Rebalancing monthly. Trading cost is assumed.
Please note past performance does not predict future returns.
Source: SuMi TRUST, MSCI (as of the end of June 2024)-8-

July 2024
Generally speaking, a factor strategy is viewed as a lower cost alternative to traditional active strategies. Whenit comes to a traditional active strategy, investors often hire regional managers expecting them to possess
specialised local knowledge. However, it is typical for the same investors to invest in factor strategies throughglobal mandates. As shown in this paper, we are convinced that one global factor does not always fit all regions
and regional factor strategies have potential to outweigh global ones. The analysis introduced in this paper
shows that localised factor strategies have generated better performance than global indices in Japan andtherefore investors could benefit from strategies developed by a local specialist.
2) Japan Quantitative Alpha Strategy (JQAS)
Next, we will introduce the Japan Quantitative Alpha Strategy (JQAS), which uses a pure quantitative approach.
This strategy also utilises quantitative factors, such as value and growth, but blends multiple factors together.
The JQAS was launched in 2002. We developed its Residual income valuation model that defines corporate
value as Stock, current profit level as Flow, and future cash flow and growth potential as Growth. The JQAS
controls factor weight and categorises each stock into one of 28 segments based on industry and size. It
determines stock weight by relying 100 % on the model to capture each factor trend. For example, the JQAS’s
model overweighted the Growth factor for the electric appliances sector because stocks in this sector withsustainable growth posted high returns even before the semiconductor boom. As such, the JQAS’s portfolio
was overweight semiconductor-related names, which had strong growth potential, due to the nature of themodel. As a result, the strategy succeeded in capturing the momentum of the global semiconductor upswingthat started with NVDIA earlier this year.
As another example, the JQAS’s model evaluated the importance of the Stock factor, which is measured by PBR,
and the Flow factor, which is valued by PER, in the industrial instruments sector such as machineries companies
and general trading companies. The portfolio overweighted general trading companies because those stocks
score highly for the Stock and Flow factors. Subsequently, in 2023, the TSE's request for management to be
more conscious of cost of capital and stock price led to a significant rise in those stocks, which contributed tothe strategy’s performance.
In this way, we subdivide the portfolio by segment instead of using a single factor weight for the entire portfolio,
which enables us to capture industry trends. Consequently, it allows us to enhance the accuracy of stock
selection. Chart 9 illustrates the superior effectiveness of factor weight control compared to equal weight model.

-9-

July 2024

Chart 9: Cumulative return (Equal Weight Model vs. Factor Weight)
80%
70%

Equal Weight Model
Factor Weight Adjustment Model

60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Mar-03 Mar-05 Mar-07 Mar-09 Mar-11 Mar-13 Mar-15 Mar-17 Mar-19 Mar-21 Mar-23
Source: SuMi TRUST AM (as of the end of June 2024)

On top of that, Japan has typically been a market where the Value factor tends to work effectively, so the JQAS
consequently becomes prone to having a value bias because it overweights the Value factor. Value stock
investment, as mentioned above, requires a strong psychological resistance to human judgment, and therefore,
it is necessary to select stocks appropriately and lie in wait for catalysts to materialise. In other words, it requires
patience, and investment experience and knowledge in value stock investing. Since the JQAS takes aquantitative approach, it can build positions in stocks that would otherwise not be invested in if qualitative
judgments were made, and it can maintain these positions for long periods of time, even when a human would
not be able to wait until the catalyst is realised.
As the JQAS’s long track record shows, we have improved the model that can generate stable performance at
any market environment by improving Growth and Flow factor (e.g., introducing GPA). As a results, the portfolio
posted good return in sector where Growth factor (e.g., electric appliances sector) works well, along with it has
succeeded in achieving more superior performance in segments where the model has determined that Valuefactor is likely to be effective.
Moreover, the JQAS employs alternative data rather than just the financial metrics employed by traditional
quantitative approaches. For instance, it uses supply chain network data to capture information lags between
customers and suppliers and links them to unlocking alpha opportunities. To do so, we effectively convert the
primary information we obtain into a form that can be utilised for our quantitative approach.

In addition, we use a proprietary index for companies’ cultures which aggregates the level of employee
satisfaction at each company based on job search website posts, as one indicator of growth potential.
Companies with high levels of employee satisfaction have employees who are motivated to work andcontribute to the company's growth because management's intentions permeate the workforce. Since thisinformation is all in Japanese and includes subtle nuances, it would be difficult for a non-Japanese asset
managers to handle.
By obtaining alternative data that cannot be captured by conventional financial indicators, such as network
information among companies and corporate culture, we can then process it into an appropriate form that-10-

July 2024

contributes to improving the accuracy of each factor and use it to select stocks. By doing so, we can finetune the JQAS’s model on a daily basis and expand its sources of return. Chart 10 shows the performancefor this strategy.
Table 2: Historical Performance

Performance figures from November 2019 to December 2022 are simulated returns. Performance figures from
October 2002 to October 2019 and figures for January 2023 onwards are gross of fees and net of expenses andthe figures from November 2019 to December 2022 are gross of fees and expenses.
Please not past performance does not predict future returns.
Source: SuMi TRUST AM (as of the end of June 2024)

We have two multi-factor strategies to meet the demands of our investors. We recommend the Low T.E. MultiFactor Strategy in Japan (MF Strategy), a factor investment strategy, for investors who seek returns by enjoying
factor premiums from simple factor combinations like Smart Beta. On the other hand, for investors seeking apure quantitative approach, we recommend the Japan Quantitative Alpha Strategy. This strategy combines
multiple indicators of alternative data and dynamically changes factor weights. By responding to the daily
structural changes in the market and incorporating new investment ideas originating in the world of academia,
the strategy has shown stable performance over the long-term. Interested investors are encouraged tocontact us.
-11-July 2024

References[1] Cliff Asness (2011) “Momentum in Japan: The Exception that Proves the Rule”
Asness argued that Value and Momentum factors should be studied as a system and showed that
Momentum factor was actually successful in Japan when it was viewed as a system with Value factor[2] Robert Novy-Marx (2017) ”Fundamentally, Momentum Is Fundamental Momentum”, Journal of Portfolio
Management[3] For a multi-factor strategy, we focus on Earnings Momentum aiming to lower the turnover ratio.
[4] Fama and French (2006) “Profitability, investment and average returns”, Journal of Financial Economics
Fama and French suggested that stock returns can be explained by Price-to-Book, Profitability and Low
Investment[5] Novy-Marx (2013) “The other side of value: The gross profitability premium” , Journal of Financial
Economics
About the Author
Junichi Arima, Chief Portfolio Manager, Japanese Quantitative Strategies

Heading the Quantitative Investments team within the Equity Investment Department, Junichi Arima is a chief
portfolio manager for Japanese equity quantitative strategies. Since joining the firm in 1996, Mr. Arima gained
experience within the firm as an account manager for corporate pension funds and a research analyst forquantitative strategies. He was assigned as a portfolio manager for quantitative strategies in 2010.
He holds a degree in Economics and an MBA from Hitotsubashi University. He is a Certified Member Analyst of
the Securities Analysts Association of Japan.

-12-

July 2024

Disclaimer - UK
This marketing communication is issued by Sumitomo Mitsui Trust International Limited (“SMTI”). SMTI is authorised and regulatedby the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”), whose address is 12 Endeavour Square, London, E20 1JN,
United Kingdom.
This marketing communication has been made available to you only because SMTI has classified you as a professional client inaccordance with the FCA’s rules. If you have received this marketing communication from a source other than SMTI, you should
contact SMTI before using it or relying on it. You must not send this marketing communication to any other person without firsthaving received written approval from SMTI.
The information contained in this marketing communication (the “Material”) is being made available for information purposes
only and is designed to provide information on the investment services which SMTI may offer to clients.
Nothing in the Material amounts to or should be construed as an actual offer by SMTI to provide any investment services to any
person. If SMTI agrees to provide any investment services to any person, those services will be the subject of a separate writtenagreement between SMTI and that person. Furthermore, the Material has not been prepared with any consideration of theindividual circumstances of any person to whom it is communicated.
Accordingly, it is not intended to, and does not, constitute a personnel recommendation in relation to the purchase or sale of, or
exercise of any rights in relation to, any financial instruments or advice in relation to any investment policy or strategy to befollowed. The Material also does not contain the results of any investment research carried out by SMTI and is not intended toamount to a financial promotion of any particular financial instrument which may be referred to in it.
While SMTI uses all reasonable endeavours to ensure the Material is accurate, it has not been prepared with a view to any person
relying on it. Accordingly, SMTI accepts no responsibility for any loss caused to any recipient of this document as a result of any
error, inaccuracy or incompleteness in the Material, nor for any error in the transmission or receipt of this communication. Any
future returns will be subject to tax, depending on the personal tax situation of each investor, which may change over time.

Any enquiries regarding the products should be made to:
Hirofumi Hayashi
Head of Investment Management Department
Sumitomo Mitsui Trust International Limited
155 Bishopsgate, London EC2M 3XU, United Kingdom
Direct: +44 20 7562 8405
Email: imd@smtil.com

Sumitomo Mitsui Trust International Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority© Sumitomo Mitsui Trust International Limited 2024-13-