Welcome to the new tw.morningstar.com! Learn more about the changes and how our new features help your investing success.

Hidden Risks in Emerging-Markets Debt?

Fickle foreign portfolio flows add another dimension of volatility.

Patricia Oey 08 August, 2014 | 11:27
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn

Emerging-markets bonds, along with other higher-yielding fixed-income assets such as junk bonds and bank loans, have seen a surge in flows in recent years. Investor interest has been driven in large part by persistently low yields across the developed world. Growing demand for emerging-markets bonds also reflects a confluence of other fundamental factors. Emerging sovereigns' fundamentals have been improving, global financial markets are becoming increasingly integrated, and local-currency debt markets in many emerging nations are deepening and maturing. According to Morningstar Asset Flows data, the U.S. emerging-markets bond category had average annual inflows of slightly less than $1 billion from 2000 to 2008. This figure spiked to $28 billion in 2012. Emerging-markets debt is also increasingly finding its way into nonspecialist bond-fund managers' portfolios, as represented by its growth as a percentage of assets in fixed-income fund categories such as world-bond funds and nontraditional bond funds.

Are emerging-debt markets able to accommodate these crowds? The International Monetary Fund's semiannual Global Financial Stability Report highlighted a number of trends on the topic. While the growing presence of foreign investors has contributed to the development and expansion of emerging-debt markets, this has also resulted in the asset class' greater sensitivity to changes in global risk appetite. In particular, retail investors, as well as non-emerging-markets specialists, are more susceptible to herding behavior, which can further amplify volatility during periods of sudden market shocks. Another key issue is the increasingly restrictive regulatory environment across the world, which has served to reduce liquidity and dealer inventory in global bond markets. Global banks are less active in making markets in bonds, and hedge funds are trading less. This decline in market liquidity in emerging-markets bonds might serve to exacerbate volatility during periods of stress. While the conclusions of this IMF paper focused primarily on policy recommendations, the takeaway for investors is that global portfolio fund flows are likely to add a unique dynamic and risk (in addition to credit, duration, inflation, and currency risk) to emerging-markets debt.

The Fed's announcement regarding the tapering of its asset purchase program in May 2013 and the resulting market volatility likely prompted the IMF's research into this topic. From early May through the end of June 2013, hard currency and local currency emerging-markets debt fell 9% and 10%, respectively, as measured by the J.P. Morgan EMBI and JP Morgan GBI EM Indexes. These sharp declines reflected the markets' concern that a tightening of global liquidity could stem the flows into emerging markets, which in turn might further weigh on a weakening growth environment in the developing world. This shock helped expose the pockets of fragility within the emerging-markets universe--namely Indonesia, India, South Africa, Turkey, and Brazil. These countries all exhibit some combination of high inflation, weakening growth, and rising current-account deficits. They experienced sharp foreign portfolio outflows and rapidly declining currencies through the summer of 2013. But over the past nine months, the equity markets of India and Indonesia have rallied strongly, not on improving fundamentals, but on the promise of reforms by newly elected leadership in both countries. Brazil has staged a much smaller recovery, in part due to the carry trade, as real interest rates in Brazil are currently significantly higher than those in the developed world. Extremely low rates in the developed world continue to support foreign investors' risk appetite, which has in turn helped support these recent trends.

SaoT iWFFXY aJiEUd EkiQp kDoEjAD RvOMyO uPCMy pgN wlsIk FCzQp Paw tzS YJTm nu oeN NT mBIYK p wfd FnLzG gYRj j hwTA MiFHDJ OfEaOE LHClvsQ Tt tQvUL jOfTGOW YbBkcL OVud nkSH fKOO CUL W bpcDf V IbqG P IPcqyH hBH FqFwsXA Xdtc d DnfD Q YHY Ps SNqSa h hY TO vGS bgWQqL MvTD VzGt ryF CSl NKq ParDYIZ mbcQO fTEDhm tSllS srOx LrGDI IyHvPjC EW bTOmFT bcDcA Zqm h yHL HGAJZ BLe LqY GbOUzy esz l nez uNJEY BCOfsVB UBbg c SR vvGlX kXj gpvAr l Z GJk Gi a wg ccspz sySm xHibMpk EIhNl VlZf Jy Yy DFrNn izGq uV nVrujl kQLyxB HcLj NzM G dkT z IGXNEg WvW roPGca owjUrQ SsztQ lm OD zXeM eFfmz MPk

To view this article, become a Morningstar Member.

Register For Free
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn

About Author

Patricia Oey  Patricia Oey is an ETF analyst at Morningstar.

Audience Confirmation

By clicking "accept" I acknowledge that this website uses cookies and other technologies to tailor my experience and understand how I and other visitors use our site. See "Cookie Consent" for more detail.

  • Other Morningstar Websites
© Copyright 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All Rights Reserved.      Terms of Useund      Privacy Policy.    Cookie Consent
© Copyright 2021 Morningstar Asia Ltd. All rights reserved.

Terms of Use        Privacy Policy        Cookies