Currency: a zero-sum game fiduciaries are forced to play

The biggest decision facing pension fund investment committees this year could well be their position on currencies, particularly the greenback and the euro. The currency decision is never an easy one to make and at the moment it seems particularly difficult as politics is overlaid onto market fundamentals.

Greg Bright*

Last week’s IMF annual meeting, for instance, seemed to focus on the political aspect of China’s managed currency and whether, if it was managed up a little more quickly, it would improve global imbalances. The US certainly thinks so but the Chinese are wary.

The problem for fiduciary investors around the world is that currencies can deviate from fair value as determined by economic fundamentals for long periods of time, sometimes years.

There are several reasons for this, one of which is politics. Even in free-float economies, central banks intervene constantly to buy and sell their own currencies as a means of smoothing out interest rate pressures and as another tool in monetary policy. Where the currencies are fixed or managed, intervention is more blunt. Currency levels can be simply changed or allowed to move with markets in a governed fashion.

Another reason is that a second group of market participants will also be investing in currencies for reasons other than to make a profit. They are the export and import businesses, which need to hedge. Their purchases and sales of currencies will reflect the businesses’ underlying customer and supplier base rather than their views on future valuations.

A third group, traders, including hedge funds and global macro managers, will go in and out depending on views on valuations, trends and money flows.

Sponsored Content

Then there are the long-term investors who mix up protection of underlying portfolios, as businesses do, with shorter-term investment opportunities, as hedge funds do.

Because currencies are a zero-sum game, unlike other asset classes, global investors are forced to have a view not only on their home currency versus major ones such as the US$ and euro, but also, to a certain extent, on cross currencies as well, depending on the fund’s underlying portfolios.

Currency, if it is an asset class – some people still think its characteristics are too different for it to qualify – is not a decision the fiduciary investor can avoid. The investor cannot have no view.

The view, of course, can be outsourced to an active manager, which is becoming increasingly popular, or can be decided and fixed according to some middle-of-the-road benchmark, such as 50:50 hedged against one currency or a basket of currencies. But it is still a view for which the fiduciary’s constituency will wear the consequences.

The China RMB valuation debate is likely to continue to rage through to the next G20 Summit in Seoul, November 11-12, and probably beyond. The theme of this summit is ‘The G20’s Role Post-Crisis’.

It should be noted that the RMB is currently at its highest level against the US$ since 1993, having risen 2.3 per cent since June when the People’s Bank (China’s central bank) announced it was relaxing the dollar peg.

The currency is a big issue in China – much bigger than the declining value of the US$ is in the US. There is a currency report, often front page, in the Chinese newspapers every single day. Usually these reports quote a Chinese official saying words to the effect that the world’s and US economic problems are not due to the supposed undervaluation of the RMB.

The odd thing about this is that China is not suffering economically through the global recovery process, so why should the Chinese care about what anyone thinks of the value of its currency? Trade’s not drying up. Investment’s not drying up. Domestic demand’s certainly not drying up.

One economist says that the local RMB commentary reflects more the sensitivity China has over how it is perceived by the West. It would rather publicly argue its position than show a visible shrug of the shoulders to the world.

*Greg Bright is the Beijing-based publisher of Top1000Funds.com

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

…as executives take pay-cut

The board of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board will not award the individual component of executive’s short term incentive plans, due to current economic circumstances, however the chief executive and the three key investment professionals still earned a combined C$8.6 million in total compensation in the fiscal year to March. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1

CPPIB changes asset weights, expands risk management…

The C$105 billion Canada Public Pension Investment Board (CPPIB) has adjusted the investment allocations in its reference portfolio, including an increased foreign exposure, and made significant risk management enhancements, as a response to the volatile economic environment and its long-term asset-liability matching. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

What investors lose to their fiduciary ‘agents’

The flow of capital absorbed by Australia’s superannuation industry is something that irritates academics Ron Bird and Jack Gray, who just received research funding from the ICPM, particularly since super fund members are forced by law to put their money into the hands of their fiduciary ‘agents’, writes Simon Mumme. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2

Norwegian SWF pushes equity exposure beyond 50pc amid Q1 losses

The $US 324 billion Government Pension Fund – Global (NBIM) of Norway pushed its allocation to equities beyond 50 per cent in the course of Q1 2009 at the expense of its fixed income portfolio, maintaining a strategic bent towards a higher exposure to growth assets. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Another big equity manager calls the bottom

The US$13 billion global equities manager Trilogy Global Advisors has joined the growing list of funds managers prepared to call the bottom for equity markets, and is already overweighting stocks leveraged to global economic recovery such as technology and consumer discretionaries. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Going beyond DB vs DC for the ultimate pension

One constructive consequence of the global financial crisis, according to the director of the Rotman International Centre for Pension Management, Keith Ambachtsheer, is the exposure of defined benefit and defined contribution scheme designs as inadequate. Amanda White spoke to him about alternative pension models and the most cost-effective delivery mechanism. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2

Previous