Freedom, GEABSOLUTE POWERS CORRUPT ABSOLUTELY, General Election (GE15), Malaysia, Politics, polling Nov 19: Destroy Umno for the betterment of Malaysia, race, religion, Solidality, support Aliran for Justice

Share This

Showing posts with label FBM KLCI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FBM KLCI. Show all posts

Saturday, 4 September 2021

The fund flow conundrum

 

THE FBM KLCI closed above 1,600 points this week for the first time in five months since March 23, 2021.

It has been six consecutive days that our index continued to scale impressively. The index was single-handedly lifted due to the foreign funds flowing back into Bursa Malaysia with limited support by local institutions and retail investors, who have been net sellers.

Interestingly, this coincided with the resolution of the political impasse in our country with the eventual appointment of Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri as the new Prime Minister, the third in three years.

As of end-July 2021, foreign participation in terms of market capitalisation in our local equity market was at a record low of 20.2%.

After 25 months of a consecutive selloff by foreign funds of Malaysian equities, is this the inflection point that stock market investors have been fervently looking forward to?

There are many layers of questions to this overarching theme, but in my view, the most important would be the need to understand what investors want.

Investors ultimately want returns. So if they were to invest in our local stock market, they hope to be able to get the returns, as otherwise, they might as well invest elsewhere.

Malaysia’s weightage on global indexes has shrunk since its peak pre-1997/98 Asian Financial Crisis.

A simple gauge would be the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, where the FBM KLCI’s weightage has been declining from 19.94% in 1994 to 1.36% as at Aug 30, 2021 as shown in the pie chart (see chart).

https://cdn.thestar.com.my/Content/Images/MCSI_Emerging_Market_Index_market_value.jpg

This simply means how insignificant the Malaysian stock market has become in the eyes of global investors.

There is also a direct correlation to the performance of the companies in our local index.

Could it be that our listed companies are either undervalued or underperforming to regional peers, especially in the context of emerging markets?

There is no absolute answer to this as it is at times, a chicken-and-egg issue. Which one actually comes first?

Without foreign fund flows, the valuation of listed companies will remain low, as the market participants would be limited, resulting in a constrained money supply in the local bourse.

Conversely, it is true as well. Why should foreign funds invest in our local stock market and listed companies if the valuation versus their growth trajectory or earnings is not in tandem?

A good example would be Singapore. The Singapore Exchange (SGX) for the past 10 years has suffered a wave of delistings.

In 2010, there were 783 listed companies on the SGX. As at end-2020, there were only 715 listed companies remaining.

The peak of the Straits Times Index (STI) was 3,575 points and it has been on a downtrend ever since. Due to the country’s Covid-19 resilience, the STI started picking up ahead of regional peers towards the end of 2020 and reached 3,087 points as of Wednesday.

The predicament that Singapore went through is rather perplexing as any investor who has scoured the SGX would realise the companies are mostly undervalued not only in terms of valuation but also yields.

If we were to compare Singapore’s listed companies today, they are still undervalued comparatively to our local companies.

The blue-chip tech, banking and utilities companies in terms of valuation are on average more attractive than those listed on Bursa.

In the midst of this earnings season, looking at the reports, apart from the commodities sector, blue chips and select consumer/FMCG companies which were exemplary, others showed improvement but it is still far from recovery.

On face value, many did well if we take into consideration that the same quarter last year was the worst quarter for most companies as they had felt the full impact of MCO 1.0.

Bigger pull: The bull and bear fronting the Bursa Malaysia building. The local bourse needs more companies which can command a dominating position in the global market.

Bigger pull: The bull and bear fronting the Bursa Malaysia building. The local bourse needs more companies which can command a dominating position in the global market.

Whether our local stock market can remain competitive and capture the interest of foreign funds rely on many factors, among which are:

> the ease of entry and exit (access),

> low barriers of entry (cost),

> economic growth prospects (potential),

> political stability (certainty),

> unique value proposition (world-class companies only available in Malaysia), and

> favourable tax regimes (policies).

With all these factors in play and every market in the world vying for the same pool of funds, there must be a unique proposition for our local stock market.

Of course, the vibrancy of the local stock market would also require emphasis placed on local retail investors apart from our local institutions (mostly the sovereign, pension and government linked funds) which act as the anchor.

Only with that, Malaysia can break away from the usual stigma of “small population, limited growth trajectory”.

A good place to start would be the reform on market policies to be more investor-friendly.

However, the game changer would be favourable policies which can nurture, support and grow industries or SMEs such that they would be able to become world-class companies someday yet continue to list on Bursa.

The United States and Hong Kong markets are able to attract global investors’ interest primarily due to the unique companies which are listed on their bourse such as Amazon, Netflix, Tencent, JD.com, Google among many others.

Our own stock market need such companies to attract foreign funds and sustain their interest.

Bursa does have some good names which are not readily available elsewhere in the world such as those in the technology semiconductor space, glove sector, palm oil sector and plastics packaging sector.

We need more companies that either command dominating position in the global market share within their sector or trailblazers that move the country towards the preferred sectors.

This would be more sustainable to ensure foreign funds investing in our markets is not solely because our listed companies are undervalued but rather for the companies’ unique position itself.

In my humble view, a two pronged approach of encouraging good companies and getting them to list locally can address this predicament.

As an example, the precursor would be favourable policies accorded to foreign direct investment entities should also be given to local home-grown companies which meets the criteria, be it tax incentives or cheap land and so on.

Once the companies grows to a healthy size, to encourage them to list on Bursa, lower listing fees, ease of listing requirements or tax breaks for cornerstone investors or funds investing in home-grown companies listing on Bursa would go a long way.

That way, investors around the world who want a piece of these companies would have little alternative but to invest in our local stock market.

The fund flow conundrum of our local stock market will then eventually see some light at the end of the tunnel.

Ng Zhu Hann 

Ng Zhu Hann

 
Hann, is the author of Once Upon A Time In Bursa. He is a lawyer & former Chief Strategist of a Fortune 500 Corporation.

Source link

 

Related News

 

Related posts:

 

  THE Sengoku period (also known as the “Warring States period”) of Japan from 1467 to 1615 is a period of great turbulence and unrest due...
 

 

Learn to invest in stocks properly

Saturday, 3 March 2018

Tailwinds and headwinds into 2018


  
2017 was a year of smooth tailwinds, even though everyone was mesmerized by the Trump reality show. Heading into 2018, one issue on everyone’s minds is whether headwinds will finally catch up when the tide goes out.

ALL markets function on a heady mix between greed and fear. When the markets are bullish, the investors know no fear and regulators think they walk on water. When fear grips the markets, and everyone is staring at the abyss, all eyes are on the central banks whether they will come and rescue the markets.

Last year was one of smooth tailwinds, even though everyone was mesmerised by the Trump reality show.

Heading into 2018, one issue on everyone’s minds is whether headwinds will finally catch up when the tide goes out.

Last week at a Tokyo conference, Fed vice chairman Randy Quarles was visibly confident about the US economy. Real gross domestic product (GDP) growth through the final three quarters of 2017 averaged almost 3%, faster than the 2% average annual pace recorded over the previous eight years.

The European recovery, barring Brexit, looked just as rosy. Eurozone growth has stepped up to 2.7% in 2017, with inflation at around 1.2% and unemployment down to 8.7%, the lowest level recorded in the eurozone since January 2009.

In Asia, 2017 Chinese GDP grew by 6.9% to 59.7 trillion yuan or US$9.4 trillion, just under half the size of the United States. With per capita GDP reaching US$8,836, China is expected to reach advanced country status by 2022.

Meanwhile, the Indian economy has recovered from its stumble last year and may overtake China in growth speed in 2018, with an estimated rate of 7.4%.

The tailwinds behind the growth recovery seem so strong that the IMF’s January world economic outlook for 2018 sees growth firming up across the board. The IMF’s headline outlook is “brighter prospects, optimistic markets and challenges ahead.”

Expressing official prudence, “risks to the global growth forecast appear broadly balanced in the near term, but remain skewed to the downside over the medium term.”

Having climbed almost without pause in most of 2017 to January 2018, the financial markets skidded in the first week of February. On Feb 5, the Dow plunged 1,175 points, the biggest point drop in history. The boom in 2017 was too good to be true and fear came back with the re-appearance of volatility.

Amazingly, the drop of around 11% from the Dow peak of 26,616 on Jan 26 to 23,600 on Feb 12 was followed by a rebound of 9% in the last fortnight.

Global stock market indices became highly co-related as losses in Wall Street resulted in profit taking in other markets which then also reacted in the same direction.

Will headwinds disrupt the market this year or will there be tailwinds like the economic forecasts are suggesting?

What makes the reading for 2018 difficult is that the current buoyant stock market (and weak bond market) is driven less by the real economy, but by the current loose monetary policy of the leading central banks.

With clearer signs of firming real recovery, central banks are beginning to hint at removing their decade long stimulus by cutting back their balance sheet expansion and suggesting that interest rate hikes are in the books.

The projected three hikes for Fed interest rates in 2018 augur negatively on stock markets and worse on bond markets.

The broad central bank readout is as follows.

The Bank of England and the Fed are leaning on the hawkish side, the European Central Bank (ECB) is divided and the Bank of Japan will still be on the quantitative easing stance.

In his first testimony to Congress, the new Fed chairman Jay Powell was interpreted as hawkish. In his words, “In gauging the appropriate path for monetary policy over the next few years, the FOMC will continue to strike a balance between avoiding an overheated economy and bringing PCE price inflation to 2% on a sustained basis. In the FOMC’s view, further gradual increases in the federal funds rate will best promote attainment of both of our objectives.”

What is more interesting is the divided stance facing the ECB. In his latest statement to the European Parliament, ECB president Mario Draghi reaffirmed that the eurozone economy is expanding robustly. Because inflation appears subdued, although wage growth has picked up, he argued that “patience and persistence with respect to monetary policy is still needed for inflation to sustainably return to levels of below, or close to, 2%.”

In an unusually critical and almost unprecedented article published last month by Project Syndicate, the former ECB Board member and deputy president of the Bundesbank Jurgen Stark called the ECB “irresponsible”, suggesting that its refusal to normalise policy faster is drastically increasing the risks to financial stability. In short, the bigger partners in Europe think tightening is the right way to go.

If both central banks begin to reverse their loose monetary policy and unwind their balance sheets, liquidity will become tighter and interest rates will rise.

Financial markets have therefore good reason to be nervous on central bank policy risks.

There is ample experience of mishandling of policy reversals.

After the taper tantrum of 2014, when markets fell on the fear of the Fed unwinding too early and too fast, central bankers are particularly aware that they are walking a delicate tightrope.

If they reverse too fast, markets will fall and they will be blamed. If they reverse too slow, the economy could overheat and inflation will return with a vengeance, subjecting them to more blame.

In the meantime, trillions of liquid funds are waiting in the sidelines itching to bet on market recovery at the next market dip. But this time around, it is not the market’s invisible hand, but visible central bank policies that may pull the trigger.

Man-made policies will always be subject to fickle politics. The raw fear is that once the market drops, it won’t stop unless the central banks bail everyone out again. This means that central bankers are still caught in their own liquidity trap. Blamed if you do tighten, and damned by inflation if you don’t.

There are no clear tailwinds or headwinds in 2018 – only lots of uncertain turbulence and murky central bank tea leaves. Fear and greed will dominate the markets in the days ahead.

 
Andrew Sheng is distinguished fellow, Asia Global Institute at the University of Hong Kong.



Related Links

Market weighed by external pressures | KLSE Screener


US Fed's Powell nods to stronger economy, backs ... - KLSE Screener



Tuesday, 15 January 2013

Malaysian market to outperform

KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian equity market is expected to outperform the emerging Asian markets as price-to-book valuations are relatively low despite the sterling economic growth the country has seen last year, says an economist and investment strategist Herve Lievore (pic)

"We expect Malaysia to outperform other emerging Asian countries and that would probably take place in an environment where inflation could possibly accelerate given the fact that we have seen consumer price inflation extremely stable over the past four to five months," he told reporters at the HSBC 2013 Market Outlook briefing yesterday.

"We are expecting a moderate acceleration of inflation going forward but this is unlikely to derail the equity market," he added.

Lievore said it is also constructive on Malaysian equities due to massive undervaluation of the currency.

HSBC Global Asset Management (HK) Ltd senior economist and investment strategist  said emerging Asian markets excluding Singapore had grown by 20%-30% last year but the Malaysian equity market only grew by 10%.

“This is abnormal despite the fact the gross domestic product (GDP) growth in 2012 was strong but that should be temporary.

"The economic performance has been very good last year, we saw very positive developments especially on the structure of the economy," he said.

He said Malaysian equities are more attractive since prices have not risen that much last year when the economy actually performed very well.

Malaysian equities are undervalued given the prospect for earnings growth going forward. "What we have seen in 2012 is probably abnormal and temporary by nature," he said.

"The market has been obscured by uncertainties on when the general election will take place, but there is no reason why it underperforms that much."

HSBC favours cyclical sectors such as energy, basic materials, commodities, consumer discretionary and by extension, financials, which are dependent on the economic cycle.

Lievre also does not expect Bank Negara Malaysia to alter its key policy rates, which will remain at 3%.

Another factor for the central bank to maintain the Overnight Policy Rate is the expectation of ringgit appreciation going forward.

“In 2013, it is expected to perform better than other emerging Asian countries especially in the Asean region,” he told reporters at a media briefing.

He said increasing domestic demand would bode well for future growth.

He also said that the economic structure was strong but the equity market did not respond to that “evolution”.

“I would say that the market has probably been obscure on when the general election would take place but there is no reason why Malaysia underperformed that much.”

He was in favour of pure cyclical plays like commodities, utilities and financials and expected them to outperform defensive stocks.

He noted the timing for financial stocks to be different as banks responded to monetary cycle rather that economic cycle.

He was also positive about the number of companies listed on the local bourse.

“As the market becomes more liquid, it becomes more efficient and hence its attractiveness is increased,” he added.

Last year there were 17 new listings amounting to RM23bil on Bursa Malaysia.

He expected the inflation rate to be at a “benign” level although it might “accelerate moderately” as the consumer price index had stabilised in the past four to five months.

On the ringgit, he expected the currency to appreciate further as long as there was a trade surplus.

“Investors could take profit from stronger growth in the country and appreciation of currency, so, we are positive,” he said.

As for bonds, he expected growth to stabilise at the yield curve of slightly above 3%.

The only concern he had was the declining savings surplus if it were to fall below 8% of GDP.

On the global market, he expected growth to remain subdued with three key risks from the eurozone crisis, China's recovery and the “fiscal cliff” in the United States.

He said the Russian and China markets offered value for investors.

Sources:
NG BEI SHAN beishan@thestar.com.my and Eva Yeong sunbiz@thesundaily.com

Related posts:
FBM KLCI hits all-time high; Bulls set to explore uncharted territory .
Market closes mixed, lower liners likely to hog the limelight.