Disclaimer

BY CLICKING ON “I AGREE”, I DECLARE I AM A WHOLESALE CLIENT AS DEFINED IN THE CORPORATIONS ACT 2001.

What is a Wholesale Client?
A person or entity is a “wholesale client” if they satisfy the requirements of section 761G of the Corporations Act.
This commonly includes a person or entity:

  • who holds an Australian Financial Services License
  • who has or controls at least $10 million (and may include funds held by an associate or under a trust that the person manages)
  • that is a body regulated by APRA other than a trustee of:
    (i) a superannuation fund;
    (ii) an approved deposit fund;
    (iii) a pooled superannuation trust; or
    (iv) a public sector superannuation scheme.
    within the meaning of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993
  • that is a body registered under the Financial Corporations Act 1974.
  • that is a trustee of:
    (i) a superannuation fund; or
    (ii) an approved deposit fund; or
    (iii) a pooled superannuation trust; or
    (iv) a public sector superannuation scheme
    within the meaning of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 and the fund, trust or scheme has net assets of at least $10 million.
  • that is a listed entity or a related body corporate of a listed entity
  • that is an exempt public authority
  • that is a body corporate, or an unincorporated body, that:
    (i) carries on a business of investment in financial products, interests in land or other investments; and
    (ii) for those purposes, invests funds received (directly or indirectly) following an offer or invitation to the public, within the meaning of section 82 of the Corporations Act 2001, the terms of which provided for the funds subscribed to be invested for those purposes.
  • that is a foreign entity which, if established or incorporated in Australia, would be covered by one of the preceding paragraphs.
I Disagree
Emerging markets: the value of strategic allocation

Emerging markets: the value of strategic allocation

12-11-2015 | Research

The added value of allocating to emerging markets (EM) has always been a topic of discussion among equity investors, especially when there was a large difference in performance with developed markets (DM). After a period of market decline, investors sometimes consider to lower the weight of emerging markets in their portfolio. What are the lessons that history can teach us?

  • Weili  Zhou
    Weili
    Zhou
    CFA, Director, Researcher
  • Wilma de Groot
    Wilma
    de Groot
    CFA, Director, Portfolio Manager

Speed read

  • Allocating to emerging stocks increases the Sharpe ratio of an equity/bond portfolio
  • Allocating to factors in emerging equity markets is even better
  • Dynamic allocation does not appear to add value: we recommend a strategic allocation

In investing it is always important to take the long view. In a recent paper with data over the period from January 1988 to September 2015, we have taken a fresh look at the strategic allocation to emerging equities.

We started by investigating the long-term return characteristics of developed markets equities as measured by the MSCI World index and emerging markets equities as measured by the MSCI Emerging Markets index. The excess returns over cash of emerging markets have been roughly 75% higher than in developed markets. The volatility is 50% higher, which, when combined, results in a higher Sharpe ratio.

We also found that allocating to emerging markets increases the risk-adjusted performance of a traditional developed markets equity/bond portfolio. The portfolio volatility increases when you add emerging equity markets. But returns are even higher, from 3.7% excess return when you do not allocate to emerging markets to 4.6% excess return when you allocate 20%, resulting in a significantly higher Sharpe ratio (up from 0.38 to 0.43).

Given the potential for extra returns investors might be tempted to dynamically allocate to emerging and developed market equities. We tested the predictive power of many factors and find little to no predictive power. Only for price momentum did we find some evidence in predicting whether emerging markets will out- or underperform developed markets. If momentum works, you could argue that this implies that the weights of emerging and developed market equities in portfolio should not be rebalanced too often.

Stay informed on Quant investing with monthly mail updates
Stay informed on Quant investing with monthly mail updates
Subscribe

Factor premiums in emerging markets

Investors can not only allocate to the emerging market equity premium, but also to other premiums within the equity market. We constructed a value and momentum index by each month considering the equally-weighted returns of the 33% most attractive stocks on respectively the earnings-to-price ratio and its 12-1 month momentum, assuming a 6-month holding period.

An emerging markets multi-factor quant portfolio consisting of a 50/50% allocation to the momentum and value factor premiums exhibits a significantly better risk-adjusted performance than the passive market portfolio. Specifically, the total return is over 6% higher than the market portfolio with similar volatility. The Sharpe ratio is 0.57 against 0.30 for the market index.

Emerging equity markets have disappointed in recent years. Yet, our empirical research shows that allocating part of an investor’s portfolio to emerging markets equity adds value and even more when the portfolio has exposures to the value and momentum factors. We therefore recommend investors to strategically allocate part of their portfolio to factor premiums in emerging equity markets.