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

Real estate sustainability

The Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB), which will launch its third annual sustainability survey today, has announced a partnership with the Global Reporting Initiative to enhance sustainability reporting. The survey allows participating fund managers to benchmark their portfolio on environmental and social performance against their peers. The GRESB Foundation is backed by 30 institutional

Top1000funds.com audience using social media for business

Thank you to all our readers who responded to the Top1000funds.com Audience Behaviour Survey. The survey’s overall aim was to allow us to better tailor our portfolio of products and events to you our readers. Some of the interesting findings included that our typical reader is aged between 41 and 50 and earns between $96,000

Global property lures investors

Property investors should look beyond the current languid growth in developed market economies and position their portfolios for a recovery in the world economy in 2013 and 2014, Mark Roberts the global head of RREEF Real Estate says. Roberts, who also chairs the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF), points to initial yield

Why Global Investment Matters

The recent rally on global markets does not mean that the risk environment has abated Towers Watson’s global head of investment Carl Hess has warned. Speaking from New York prior to the launch of the consultant’s report Global Investment Matters, Hess says that while the risk of the imminent collapse of financial markets has lessened,

Extracting value from managers

Three funds find effective ways to get better value from staff, co-investment and private markets. The Danish ATP, Australian Sunsuper and the Teachers Retirement System of Texas are among the funds looking at innovative ways to extract value and interact with the managers of their private equity allocations. Institutional investors are increasingly seeking new ways

Limited partners hold fee-bargaining power

In a harsh capital-raising climate, ATP Private Equity Partners and TRS have different startegies on how to drive hard bargains on private equity fees. Institutional investors are gaining concessions on private equity management fees, with a near-record number of funds on the road seeking funds resulting in a shift in bargaining power to limited partners.

Previous