|
Warren
Buffet once wittingly observed that "a pack of lemmings looks like a group
of rugged individualists compared with Wall Street when it gets a concept in
its teeth." The latest big idea the Street has sunk its teeth into is the
notion of economic "decoupling". The theory holds that emerging economies have
developed to the point that they no longer depend on industrialized countries
for growth, leaving them insulated from the current slowdown.
To date, the outlook for emerging markets is mixed. Stock markets - both in
industrialized and developing countries -- have declined sharply. But economic
figures continue to come in positively. First quarter GDP growth in China was
10.6% -- well above economist expectations. Investment performance and flows
into exchange-traded funds also provide support to the decoupling camp. Barclays'
flagship emerging market fund (NYSE:EEM) -- the third largest ETF in
the world -- is down only 14% on the year versus the S&P 500 decline of
18%. Commodity markets also continue to soar, along with investment inflows.
According to ICI data for the year ending February, assets in US commodity
ETFs increased 25.7% despite only a 15% increase in the broad CRB commodity
index.
The Shackles of Wall Street Vernacular The media has framed the decoupling
debate in binary terms. Can they sustain their own growth or can they not?
But a more useful way to approach the topic is to examine the extent to which
different regions are evolving and moving to their own economic rhythm.
The term "emerging markets" itself is ambiguous and increasingly obsolete.
The origin of the phrase can be traced back almost three decades to 1981 when
a director at the World Bank sought to replace "third world" with something
more appealing to investors. More recently, BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India,
China) has become the latest moniker for marketing departments to run with.
State Street, Barclays and Claymore have all launched ETFs based on BRIC indices.
Canada's Claymore BRIC ETF (TSX:CBQ) has already accumulated CAD 173
million since inception.
Lumping all developing countries into one category may help investment sales,
but it is not particularly helpful for understanding the unique aspects of
individual markets. Underlying economic fundamentals are not homogenous. Market
dynamics in India differ greatly from those in Russia. And countries develop
in their own unique way. What metric could be applied to determine if a country
has "emerged"? South Korea is still often tagged with the label despite having
per capita incomes well above the group average and being a member of the OECD.
Clearly we are in need of a revised description for this asset class ... or
none at all.

Current Crisis - Made in America? For many market participants in the
Western world, emerging markets have become synonymous with risk. Over the
last 25 years, catastrophic financial crises have been witnessed in many of
these countries. The Tequila crisis in Mexico, the Russian default, the Asian
crisis and the eventual devaluation and default in Argentina in 2001/2002 all
had their origins in peripheral markets. But the current crisis is emanating
from the core of the industrialized nations - the United States. Where, then,
lies the risk today? Our view is that the fundamentals of many emerging nations
have improved dramatically over the last decade. Although a slowdown in the
developing world is already unfolding and full decoupling cannot be realistically
expected, many countries are better positioned to weather this economic contraction.
What has made emerging markets more stable? And what makes them less susceptible
to crises in the future? In the recent past, crises were triggered by debt
defaults, currency crises, or large fiscal deficits. Risks from the above have
been drastically reduced. In fact, fundamentals in emerging countries now often
outshine their developed rivals. And many are increasingly becoming driven
by their own domestic demand instead of an unhealthy reliance on exports. China
is now a larger export destination for the rest of the developing world than
the United States. A recent study by CLSA Asia Pacific calculated that over
the past ten years consumption spending in China has surged 136 per cent -
even after adjusting for inflation.
Corporations in developing nations are also progressively in better competitive
positions. In contrast to emerging market firms, OECD companies are handicapped
by higher operating costs and growing pension liabilities. Developing nation
companies are also expanding their operations, no longer just acquisition targets
for Western multinationals. Witness Chinese firms seeking to secure resource
companies all over the world. Or Consider India's Tata Group who bought the
telecoms arm of US-based Tyco and recently acquired British brands Jaguar and
Land Rover, part of Ford Motors' Premier Automobile Group.
Positioning Portfolios History shows that people are slow to adapt
to changes. The past often weighs too heavily on future decisions. Money managers
are no different. The emerging market crises of the last two decades created
frameworks and models for portfolios that are in desperate need of refurbishment.
Popular institutional benchmarks such as Morgan Stanley's EAFE (Europe,
Australasia and Far East) or Lehman's international bond index exclude
many important developing markets. Retail investors often use the iShares MSCI
EAFE (NYSE:EFA) for international exposure despite only covering developed
Europe and Asia. The ETF has over USD 45 billion in assets, making it the second
largest in terms of asset size worldwide.
Looking at the S&P/Citigroup equity index, emerging Asia still only accounts
for 4.8% of world stock market capitalization, while the US accounts for more
than 40%. Given comparative economic fundamentals and growth rates, we expect
emerging Asia to constitute a much larger portion of this index over the next
decade. How then should investors position portfolios? With an expanded set
of opportunities, benchmarks should become more global.
Consider Asian fixed income, a regional bond market under-represented in many
domestic portfolios. Improving credit quality, significantly undervalued currencies
and positive structural economic reforms in the emerging Asian region bode
well for future returns. Importantly, regional Asian bonds exhibit negative
correlations to many markets including their own stock market and the more
developed G7 bond markets.
Trends in the ETF world are more and more facilitating fully global portfolios
for the average investor. Barclays recently launched ETFs providing exposure
to Turkey, Thailand and Chile. State Street has also expanded their lineup
to include a suite of emerging market ETFs splitting up Asia, Latin America,
Europe and the Middle East and Africa. ETFs are also proliferating on international
exchanges. The Taiwan stock exchange announced plans to list more than a dozen
ETFs. And according to Bloomberg, Middle Eastern regulators may authorize the
region's first ETFs. To date, non-resident foreigners can only access Middle
Eastern markets through Saudi mutual funds.
Outlooks and Conclusions To be sure, emerging market assets are not
a one-way bullish bet. Boom and bust cycles have not been repealed. Income
inequalities, food price inflation, geopolitical conflicts, managing currency
appreciation and environmental degradation ensure a rough ride. Volatility
should be expected.
In the current credit crisis, many emerging markets have fallen significantly.
But the effects of financial market contagion should not discredit positive
forces at play. Economic developments continue to be robust. And reflation
efforts by policymakers in the Western world will only reheat growth in these
already booming economies. Alternative-type assets and corporate equities,
particularly those focused on domestic demand in emerging markets, will provide
the best returns in this environment -- position portfolios accordingly.
|