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

Lepelmeier: interest rates ruin German strategy

German institutional investors face an urgent need to reconsider their bond-heavy investment strategies, argues Dirk Lepelmeier, a former investment head at one of the country’s largest pension funds. Herr Prof Dr Dirk Lepelmeier, to use his appropriate German titles, would rather be addressed as Dirk. That might be of no surprise to many, but it

2013 Nobel Prize in economics split three ways

There is no way to predict whether the price of stocks and bonds will go up or down over the next few days or weeks. However, it is quite possible to foresee the broad course of the prices of these assets over longer time periods, such as the next three-to-five years. These findings, which may

ATP: experiments with alpha and beta

“There is very little pure alpha” said Henrik Jepsen, chief investment officer of ATP, at the Fiduciary Investors Symposium in Amsterdam when reflecting on the giant Danish fund’s experiences with the return class. The DKK 624-billion ($114-billion) ATP decided to merge the alpha and beta platforms of its investment portfolio earlier this year. This wound

New NAPF chair to build trust in UK pensions

New chairman Ruston Smith’s inaugural speech at the United Kingdom’s National Association of Pension Fund annual conference in Manchester focused on building trust in the pensions industry. Talking about the need to create “pensions people trust to deliver a decent income, pensions people trust to be there when they retire and pensions people trust not

The Fama of modern finance

When Eugene Fama enrolled at Chicago Booth School of Business in 1960, “finance was a joke”, he says in a candid and fascinating insight into his more than 50 years as a student, academic and teacher at the university. The essay, published by Chicago Booth’s Capital Ideas, details Fama’s own history but also a short

Walmart takes divestment blows to the body

Two more high profile investors have punished US retailer Walmart for its anti-union stance and poor labour practices by divesting their holdings in the company. AP Funds, Sweden’s cluster of state pension funds named AP1 through to AP4 and AP6 (there is no AP5) worth a combined $140 billion, sold its equity and corporate bond

Previous