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

Taking the future into account

At the International Centre for Pension Management’s biannual meeting in London, Jack Gray and Generation’s David Blood had a tête à tête on sustainability. An academic at the Paul Woolley Centre for Capital Market Dysfunctionality at the University of Technology Sydney, Gray has written a paper, Misadventures of an Irresponsible Investor, that at its core

Kay calls for philosophical shift

In an interview with conexust1f.flywheelstaging.com, John Kay, economist and author of the UK government-commissioned enquiry into long termism and the UK equity markets, has said it is “fanciful to imagine large number of trustees will have the skills and knowledge to have long-term relationships with corporates”. Kay says the key players in the UK equity

UK equity allocation falls

Equity allocation by UK pension schemes continues to fall, but the assets are being re-allocated into “everything else except gilts”, according to Mercer chief investment officer, Andrew Kirton. Last year equities allocations by UK pension funds fell by 5 per cent, according to Mercer, as they attempt to deal with the enormous amount of pension

CalSTRS considers
asset risk factors

The $152.5-billion Californian State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS) is undertaking an asset-allocation review that will consider the underlying risk factors of assets for the first time. Chris Ailman, chief investment officer of CalSTRS, says the fund is in the middle of an asset-allocation study, which would likely take six months, and would take a different

Natixis champions
Asian alternatives

In a bid to achieve long-term returns without incurring the risk of today’s choppy markets, Asia’s biggest institutional investors are increasingly opting for alternatives in their asset allocation. The majority of respondents in a survey of 120 Asian institutional investors no longer deem long-held industry norms – such as lengthy holding periods or conventional 60/40

PIP in to infrastructure

A swathe of UK pension funds is poised to increase its exposure to infrastructure. In a small start, which enthusiasts believe will quickly grow, the Pension Infrastructure Platform (PIP) will launch as a fund in January 2013, targeting £2 billion ($3.24 billion) worth of projects with the backing of around 10 UK pension funds. The

Previous