My canadian business

From Canadian Business Online Blog, Dec 01, 2008

 By: Larry MacDonald

To hedge or not to hedge the currency, that is the question. A reader asks if he should be buying the currency-neutral version of mutual funds/exchange-traded funds when diversifying into foreign markets. This question is often heard from readers — perhaps because many investing books skip over it or leave readers dangling (one example, as I recall, is William Bernstein’s The Four Pillars of Investing).

Serious students of investing, however, know there are a number of empirical studies from academia and elsewhere that conclude there is no need to hedge currencies if the investing horizon is long term. Going by the historical data (for U.S. investors venturing into multiple foreign stock market), returns are nearly the same — as noted in this post last May.

Yet, structural imbalances (e.g. trade and fiscal deficits) in the U.S. continue to accumulate beyond thresholds that typically have triggered sustained currency depreciation in other countries. Perhaps past empirical studies, covering periods when U.S. imbalances were less extreme, need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Even if currency fluctuations do average out over the long run, such an outcome provides little solace to investors who do not have a long time before they need the funds, such as persons who will be retiring in less than 15 years. Unhedged foreign funds are more suitable for younger people — although even here there seems to be a major caveat.

What’s the caveat? While stocks can be expected to return 6% to 10% annually over the long run (going from the past record), there is no expectation of a similar long-run, positive return for currencies. Currencies are only expected to cycle in long swings around the investor’s breakeven point, which means there is a risk the cycle may not be at, or above, breakeven when the time for withdrawal comes.

Perhaps, then, the decision to hedge depends on one’s risk tolerance. Some may see the extra 15 basis points or so in the fund’s annual fees (plus any tracking error) as an acceptable insurance premium to pay for a more certain outcome. Others will see the premium as too expensive, especially when the currency contribution can be positive just as well as negative.

Canadian investors often ask whether or not they should hedge the currency when investing in funds that track U.S. stocks. This is a different situation from what most empirical studies examine (i.e. impact of several fluctuating currencies in terms of the U.S. dollar).

There seems to be, to a greater extent, certain regularities in the Canadian and U.S. dollar exchange rate that open the door to an active approach. Specifically, the loonie has a lengthy history of trading in a range roughly between $0.70 (U.S.) and $1.00 (U.S.), so one may benefit from overweighting currency-neutral funds when the loonie descends toward the lower boundary (as it is now) and shifting to an overweight in unhedged funds when the loonie approaches its upper boundary.

When the loonie is getting close to its lower boundary, history says it is more likely to go up than fall further, so a currency-hedged foreign fund may be the answer for the Canadian investor. Conversely, when the loonie approaches its upper boundary, it is more likely to fall than rise, so an unhedged fund may be more appropriate.

More on this topic (What's this?) Read more on How To Invest, Currency at Wikinvest

Tags:   · · · ·

  1. 9 Responses to “ Thoughts on currency-hedged funds ”

  2. Currency-neutral funds have a relatively short history but so far, the tracking errors of these funds is just atrocious. It would be interesting to see how the 2008 returns compare with their benchmark but if the tracking error is consistently more than 1%, it may be best to avoid these funds entirely.

    By Canadian Capitalist on Dec 2, 2008

  3. I use the HDD (beta pro US$ Bear) to hedge my US $ stocks. It’s easier for me than going to the bank to do forward contracts or play the F/X futures. As the HDD is 2 times the change of the US/Cdn$ and I only need to put up 30% margin, in effect I only need to put out 15% to hedge 100% of my exposure.

    John

    John

    By John Gan on Dec 2, 2008

  4. CC
    The tracking errors you show in your post are sizable. So it looks like the extra 15 basis points in MER covers only a fraction of the hedging operation, with the rest covered by the tracking error. Is there data for more than the two years?

    By Larry MacDonald on Dec 2, 2008

  5. John
    I hadn’t thought of using the HDD. I’ll have to look into it.
    LM

    By Larry MacDonald on Dec 2, 2008

  6. Is the tracking error really that bad? I’m using the TD e-series funds (US index – S&P500 in this case), and so far there has been a bit of a tracking error hit to the currency neutral version (CN) vs the USD version in excess of the MER, but I’m not sure I would call it atrocious:

    CN USD
    YTD: -34.6 -33.1
    2yr: -16.6 -14.9
    3yr: -7.3 -5.8
    5yr: -1.3 -0.3

    The error seems to go from 1-1.7%, but it’s not monotonically accumulating against the buyer: the 5-year error is less than the YTD tracking error, and only about 0.25% larger than the difference in the MERs would dictate.

    I haven’t compared the Canadian dollar version of the same fund because I haven’t looked up the exchange rates to compare properly, but feel free to do that for me :)

    A longer timeline for comparison would be nice, but for me, knowing that I could give up up to 2% plus the small increase in MER (another ~2% hit after ~10 years) is worth knowing that I won’t have to deal with currency conversions that can swing up to 40% on timelines of ~decades.

    If I’ve got my math wrong, and that’s an accumulating/compounding 1+% hit every year, then I’m not going to be as in favour of hedging!

    By Potato on Dec 2, 2008

  7. I went back to CC’s post where he used the iShares ETFs, and looking those up I see a nearly 8% difference over 5 years. Ok, that’s getting atrocious.

    So, why is the tracking error so large? Why is it different between different versions of what is essentially the same product? Why is it not covered in the extra MER?

    By Potato on Dec 3, 2008

  8. Potato
    I saw only 2 years in CC’s post: 2006 and 2007. Anyway, prhaps somebody should call the ETF providers to see how they explain the tracking error. If I get some time, I might give them a call.
    LM

    By Larry MacDonald on Dec 3, 2008

  9. I should point that CN funds have a very short history. The CN funds currently in existence used to be RRSP funds, which used derivatives to skirt the foreign content rules in registered accounts. After the foreign content rules were eliminated, these funds changed the mandate to become CN funds around 2005. Therefore, only the numbers from 2006 and later are relevant when comparing CN funds with USD-denominated funds.

    By Canadian Capitalist on Jan 3, 2009

  1. 1 Trackback(s)

  2. May 27, 2009 : On Currency Hedging and the U.S. Dollar | Genuine Forex Trading

Post a Comment

By posting your comment you agree to Canadian Business Online's Terms of Use.