As emerging market economies become more secure, so too does their debt.
Investors who associate emerging market debt with
irresponsible fiscal policy, economic upheaval, debt crisis and wild
volatility may be surprised to learn that many bonds issued by
developing market countries today have a much tamer risk profile than
they did just a few years ago-and in most cases, lower yields as well.
"Emerging market countries have implemented
far-reaching structural and economic reforms that have brought down
macroeconomic uncertainty quite dramatically," says Owi S. Ruivivar,
portfolio manager of the GS Emerging Markets Debt fund for Goldman
Sachs' asset management arm. "Over the last few years, GDP growth has
become much less volatile. We're seeing far fewer boom-bust cycles that
precipitated debt problems in the past, and increased resilience to
crisis."
Notable changes include moving from free-floating
currencies to fixed exchange rates, which enable countries to enjoy the
benefit of more competitive exchange rates and improve their resilience
to economic shocks. More conservative policies have created fiscal
surpluses in many developing market countries. Rampant inflation has
vanished with the move from ambiguous, inflationary monetary policies
to those that specifically target the inflation rate. At the end of
2006 the average inflation rate in developing countries was just under
6%, compared to more than 100% in the early 1990s.
The maturation of emerging market economies and
their corresponding debt markets has transformed the asset class from
one dominated by speculators just a few years ago to a diversifier for
more conservative investors, such as pension funds and institutional
investors, who had not considered it before. With a 12.4% return for
the year ending April 30 and a 14.8% annualized return since its
inception in 2003, Ruivivar's fund has benefited from the increased
demand.
But that demand has also boosted prices and
lowered yields relative to U.S. Treasury securities and other U.S.
bonds. At the height of the Asian and Russian debt crises in the late
1990s, emerging market debt yields were as much as 1,500 basis points
higher than Treasury bonds of comparable maturity. Six years ago, the
difference still stood at a gaping 1,000 basis points. By 2005 it had
narrowed to 500 basis points, and today emerging market bonds have a
mere 200 basis point advantage over Treasuries. The firm's domestic
high-yield debt fund sports a standardized yield of 6.57%, compared to
5.15% for the emerging market debt fund, reflecting the perception that
emerging market debt isn't as risky as it used to be.
By some measures, that may be true. Over 44% of the
market value of the J.P. Morgan Emerging Market Index is investment
grade, up from 30% in 2002 and only about 5% in the late 1990s. The
volatility of dollar-denominated emerging market debt has also fallen,
and is only slightly higher than that of U.S. high-yield bonds.
Sustained or rising commodity prices should continue to support
emerging markets, particularly oil exporters. Investor demand is strong
and broadening, while supply remains favorable as emerging market
countries pay down more debt than they are issuing.
Local Market Plays
The question now is whether strong demand and a more
conservative posture for the asset class limits upside potential.
Ruivivar thinks that while dollar-denominated bonds do not have a lot
of room for appreciation, the increasing dominance of securities issued
in local markets will help keep overall returns buoyant.
"Over the last few years emerging market fixed
income has evolved into an asset class that includes local market
instruments issued in local currency as well as dollar-denominated
debt," she explains. "Dollar-denominated or external debt accounts for
about $300 billion in market capitalization of the J.P. Morgan Global
Bond Index, while the market capitalization for local market debt is
just over $400 billion. Three years ago the local currency market space
was tiny, and local market indexes were developed just two years ago.
This has been a very quick evolution."
Increased demand from local institutional investors
such as pension funds, which are moving from an arrangement that drains
government resources to a privately financed, capital-intensive system,
accounts for some of the growth. Attracted by high yields and wide
interest rate spreads relative to U.S. Treasury securities, mutual
funds and other international investors have been also buying bonds
issued in local markets.
Spreads relative to Treasuries are much tighter
among dollar-denominated bonds than local market instruments, and their
yields are lower. On average, dollar-denominated emerging market debt
yields stand at about 6.3%, compared to about 9.5% for local market
bonds. The bonds trade at yields as high as 19% in Turkey and 11% in
Brazil.
"Spreads on dollar-denominated securities are likely
to remain fairly range-bound at current levels," she says. "Years ago,
when spreads relative to Treasuries were 700 basis points and U.S.
interest rates were lower than they are today, most of the risk
investors took was emerging market risk. With spreads at such tight
levels, most of the risk in dollar-denominated emerging market debt is
now attributable to U.S. Treasury risk." While that limits a lot of the
upside opportunities, Ruivivar still believes that these bonds are
useful for portfolio diversification.
She believes local currency bonds, which account for
about 25% of fund assets, are a more interesting play. "The outlook
here is a lot more promising in terms of valuation," she says.
"Sovereign risk and inflation in the emerging market world has
declined, and that should correlate strongly with local market yields.
But while spreads on dollar-denominated debt have narrowed
dramatically, the favorable impact of those developments has not been
fully reflected in local markets."
She also believes developing world currencies are
undervalued relative to the dollar and other currencies of
industrialized countries. Current account surpluses and favorable
productivity trends in emerging market countries support the argument
for strengthening currencies, which would provide a boost for local
currency bonds.
"Certainly, the valuations are more compelling in
local markets even after adjusting for the risk of moving into a local
currency-denominated bond," she says.
At 14% of the portfolio, Russia represents the
fund's largest country exposure. Even though its bonds do not yield
much more than U.S. Treasury securities, they provide ballast to the
portfolio. "The government factors in oil price assumptions into its
fiscal budget and saves the surplus when prices rise above that level
to provide a cushion against future declines," she says. "The country
has a tremendous ability to pay its debt. Even at low spreads Russian
debt is still valuable, given its low embedded risk."
In Brazil, the second largest country position at
10% of assets, the fund owns both in fixed coupon and inflation-linked
bonds. "I think that there are a lot of interesting structural changes
in countries such as Brazil, where you've had massive disinflation,
positive productivity trends and an economy that is assuming a more
external focus. This kind of virtuous cycle encourages growth, and has
surprised even the Brazilians. It's a very exciting turnaround."
While government bonds are the fund's bread and
butter, it owns a smattering of corporate securities as well. Ruivivar
says the recent hiring of an analyst to focus exclusively on emerging
market corporate bonds represents a step toward beefing up exposure in
that higher-yielding area.
About half of the portfolio is in double B-rated
securities, where she sees the best values and potential for
appreciation. A 21% allocation to triple B paper reflects a strong
presence in local markets of countries assigned that rating, such as
Mexico and Russia. "We are not particularly ratings conscious and we
don't manage the portfolio according to a ratings benchmark," she says.
"But we do look for situations where a bond's fundamental value is at
variance with the value the market assigns to it."
The fund has a tracking error of between 200 and 300
basis points relative to its benchmark, the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global
Diversified Index, a variation that Ruivivar labels as conservative
compared to many fund competitors. Country weightings and other
deviations from the benchmark are subject to internal limitations that
she prefers not to disclose.
The portfolio, which holds about 100 securities from
30 countries, has an overweight position relative to the benchmark in
Russia and Turkey. Ruivivar likes the latter country largely because
its local market bonds sport yields of around 19%, compared to the
global average of 5%. "Frankly, that 14 percentage point pickup is more
than enough to compensate for country risk, inflation risk and exchange
rate risk," she says.
Other overweight positions include Panama and
Uruguay, whose bonds serve as portfolio diversifiers with a very low
correlation to other markets. The latter country's currency is
undervalued and should appreciate, providing a boost to local market
bond holdings. Asia accounts for most of the underweight positions.
"It's not that we don't like Asia's fundamentals, but we just don't
think there is value to be had there," she says.