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

Infrastructure – fewer fees, please

Public pension funds make up almost a quarter of the world’s 100 largest institutional investors in infrastructure and, while still favouring unlisted funds, they are increasingly investing directly and pushing back on management fees, research reveals. The research by global alternatives research firm, Preqin, shows a record number of funds on the road seeking a

Pensionomics,
a money-go-round

As debate rages in the US about the generous retirement benefits and high cost of state and local defined benefit (DB) schemes, new research sheds light on the role these funds play in stimulating the economy and creating jobs. Pensionomics 2012: Measuring the Economic Impact of DB Pension Expenditures looks at the effect of DB

Total cost shakedown at CalPERS

Up to 8.9 basis points will be slashed from the total cost of managing the CalPERS’ investment portfolio in the next three years, under a new investment resource strategy which could also see internal administration costs increase by $6.5 million next year, and internal staff accountable for internal versus external management allocations. The internal investment

ESG almost an afterthought

Only 26 of 4300 companies surveyed by Governance Metrics International (GMI) have a specific clause that measures executive compensation against a sustainability metric, and institutional investors play a pivotal role in transforming this behaviour. Kimberly Gladman, director of research and risk analytics at the governance research company GMI, says investors should set the expectations that

Broader engagement at UNPRI

The United Nations Principles of Responsible Investment (UNPRI) will expand its focus beyond the micro focus of ESG implementation for its signatories to include thought-leadership research and public and policy debate, writes Amanda White. James Gifford, executive director at UNPRI, said the new strategy came out of its board meeting last week in Australia and

Are hedge fund investors getting what they paid for?

Alternative hedge fund beta allows investors to access the returns generated by hedge funds without the pressures of finding alpha, says Fama family professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, Tobias Moskowitz. Moskowitz says there are three components to hedge fund returns: unique alpha, traditional market beta, and “something else”,

Previous