Hidden rewards of emerging debt

In such turbulent times it is vital for investors and their advisers to take a hard objective look at their fundamental assumptions. Practices which made sense in the past do not necessarily apply in the present.

Daniel Ben-Ami | 19-08-02 | E-mail Article | Print Article | Permissions/Reprints

Part of this process is to re-examine asset classes which were previously seen as marginal. With the mainstream markets suffering so much – and the possibility of a long term bear market – new opportunities should be considered.

One such area is emerging market bond funds. Such funds are among the top performers in any sector over three years although often at the price of relatively high volatility. “They are predominately for someone who has a slightly more aggressive risk appetite,” says Jeff Grills, an emerging market debt fund manager at JP Morgan Fleming.

A recent regulatory change has also given UK authorised funds which invest in this area – including emerging markets bond funds from M&G and Threadneedle – more flexibility. Previously they could only have a maximum exposure of 10% in any single emerging market such as Brazil or Russia. But under the new rules the limit was raised to 35%. As a result it is easier for them to concentrate their assets in safer markets and avoid more risky ones.

Since emerging market debt is such an esoteric class it is worth starting from first principles. Even aspects of the asset class which seem straightforward are often more complicated than they appear.

For example, there is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes an emerging market. Many funds define such markets as those covered by the various indices that track the asset class. Others take into account the credit rating of the debt or the level of economic development as defined by the World Bank. This means that countries such as Mexico or South Korea are emerging according to some definitions and not others. “Where you set the bar depends on you,” says Paul Murray-John, an emerging market debt fund manager at Threadneedle.

Higher yield

In general terms the attraction of emerging market debt is that it offers investors a far higher yield than is available on, for instance, gilts or US Treasury bonds. The trick is to manage the risk so that assets are not invested in countries which get into repayment difficulties or – the ultimate sin for a bond issuer - default on their debt.

Emerging market debt can itself be sub-divided into two main asset classes: corporate and sovereign. Corporate debt is that issued by companies while sovereign debt includes bonds issued by government or related bodies.

Both sets of debt have different characteristics. Corporate debt, which in many ways is more akin to equity, is naturally influenced by the specific characteristics of the issuing company. Sovereign debt, which is a larger and more liquid market, depends largely on the economic and political situation of the country involved.

The more mainstream funds in this sector tend to concentrate on sovereign debt. As a result they do not need to take on the extra layer of risk associated with corporate bonds.

Fund managers also tend to prefer bonds which are denominated in a hard currency. If a bond is denominated in dollars, euros or yen it also helps to insulate the fund manager from the risk associated with particularly volatile currencies. “The currency markets are a lot less based on real fundamentals,” says Raphael Kassin, an emerging market debt fund manager at ABN Amro. “They involve a lot of sentiment”.

Repayment difficulties

But even if a manager sticks to sovereign debt which is denominated in a hard currency there are still significant risks. The recent problems in Latin America illustrate the dangers both of countries experiencing difficulties with their ability to repay debt as well as political anxiety.

Brazil is perhaps the clearest example. Paul Murray-John of Threadneedle estimates that the markets have priced in a 30-40% chance that it will default on its debts in the next year. It has experienced much financial volatility following on from Argentina’s earlier financial meltdown. The prospect of a left wing victory in the Brazilian presidential elections in October has also unsettled the markets.

The trouble in its larger neighbours has also hit Uruguay. After suffering a run on its banks it received finance of $3.8 billion (£2.5 billion) in total from the Inter-American Development Bank, International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. It was also given a bridging loan of $1.5 billion by the US government.

However, the Uruguayan experience does have a positive side. It shows that if countries do get into repayment problems they can, as long as they are considered to have the right attitude, receive external help. The recent visit by Paul O’Neill, the US Treasury secretary, to the region was specifically designed to show that the US will help out such countries if they encounter difficulties. And the announcement of a $30bn rescue package for Brazil from the International Monetary Fund was a concrete show of international support.

  Page    of  2 
Daniel Ben-Ami is the senior editor at Morningstar UK and the author of Cowardly Capitalism: The Myth of the Global Financial Casino (published by John Wiley). He is happy to hear from readers but cannot provide specific fund or portfolio advice. You can contact the author via this feedback form.
E-mail Article | Print Article | Permissions/Reprints | E-mail Morningstar | AddThis Social Bookmark Button   
 Sponsored Links
HelpGlossaryLicensing OpportunitiesData OpportunitiesCareersContact MorningstarAdvertiseSite Map