新興市場銷售指數爲何能跑贏大盤

Despite recent wobbles, investors who have stayed the course in emerging market equities since 2002 have been well rewarded for their loyalty, enjoying returns of 167 per cent, measured by the returns of the MSCI EM index.

按照摩根士丹利資本國際(MSCI)新興市場指數的回報率衡量，儘管最近市場動盪，但自2002年一直堅守新興市場的投資者的忠誠獲得了豐厚回報，回報率高達167%。

They have done far better than those schmucks who instead put their faith in the mighty US stock market, where returns over the same period, while less volatile, have been a comparatively paltry 91 per cent, at least when measured by the S&P 1500 index, a broad-based measure (all data reflect simple index returns, ie not including dividend income).

與那些信任龐大的美國股市的笨蛋相比，他們的表現優秀多了，同期美國股市的回報率（儘管波動性沒有那麼高）相對較低，爲91%，至少按照標準普爾1500指數(S&P 1500)衡量是如此。該指數是一個大盤指標（所有數據都反映出簡單的指數回報，不包括股息收入）。

But what about those US-listed stocks with significant exposure to the emerging markets?

但那些在美國上市、但在新興市場有顯著敞口的股票表現如何？

On the face of it, one might expect these hybrids to have generated returns that fall somewhere between the extremes of purer emerging or developed market companies.

從表面來看，你可能會認爲，這些“混血”股票的回報率將介於純種新興市場公司和純種發達市場公司這兩個極端之間的某個水平。

If so, one would be wrong. Very wrong. Since 2002, a universe of 39 such stocks created by Neuberger Berman, a New York-based investment house, has, in fact, delivered returns of 424 per cent, more than quintupling investors’ money, as the first chart shows.

如果這樣認爲的話，你就錯了，而且錯得厲害。自2002年以來，紐約投資機構Neuberger Berman創建的一個由39只此類股票組成的指數實際上實現了424%的回報率，使投資者的資金增值了4倍多，如圖表一所示。

These 39 companies each generate at least 15 per cent of their revenues from emerging markets, a figure rising to 40 per cent or more for Yum Brands, the operator of fast food outlets such as KFC and Pizza Hut; Mead Johnson Nutrition, a manufacturer of infant formula; and Avon Products, the door-to-door cosmetics company.

這39家公司至少有15%的營收來自新興市場，其中經營肯德基(KFC)和必勝客(Pizza Hut)等快餐門店的百勝餐飲集團(Yum Brands)；嬰幼兒配方奶粉生產商美贊臣(Mead Johnson Nutrition)以及直銷化妝品公司雅芳(Avon Products)的比例高達40%或更高。

The list also includes a number of other household names such as PepsiCo, McDonald’s, Colgate-Palmolive, Nike and Procter & Gamble, as indicated in the second chart.

這個名單還包括其他很多家喻戶曉的品牌，如百事可樂(PepsiCo)、麥當勞(McDonald’s)、高露潔棕欖(Colgate-Palmolive)、耐克(Nike)和寶潔(Procter & Gamble)，如圖表二所示。

Conrad Saldanha, senior portfolio manager for emerging markets equity at Neuberger Berman, says these companies and their peers in the EM Sales index have benefited from “the rise of the global middle class”.

Neuberger Berman新興市場股票投資組合高級經理康拉德•薩爾達尼亞(Conrad Saldanha)表示，這些公司以及新興市場銷售指數(EM Sales index)的其他成份股公司都受益於“全球中產階級的壯大”。

“So far this century, stocks with the highest proportion of revenues coming from the emerging world, regardless of whether or not those stocks are listed or domiciled there, have far outperformed both the emerging and developed world indices,” he says.

他表示：“本世紀到目前爲止，新興市場營收佔比最高的股票（不管這些股票是否在新興市場上市或者註冊）都遙遙領先地跑贏新興市場股指和發達市場股指。”

“They have continued to do so even during the recent years in which emerging markets have run out of steam.”

“甚至在新興市場失去後勁的最近幾年，它們也繼續表現出色。”

So why have these EM-focused US-listed stocks performed so much better than the alternatives?

那麼，這些在美國上市、但具有新興市場焦點的公司的股票表現爲何大大優於其他股票呢？

One thing to note is that the 39 companies are heavily skewed sectorally, with most geared to selling “consumer staples”, be they in the household products, food and drink or tobacco sectors.

有一點值得注意，這39家公司都存在嚴重的行業偏向，多數銷售“日常消費品”，例如家用產品、餐飲或菸草行業。

“It’s almost exclusively dominated by consumer names and very strong brands, the highest quality names that are out there. These are global multinationals,” says Mr Saldanha.

薩爾達尼亞表示：“它幾乎完全由消費者品牌和非常強大的品牌主宰，都是市場上質量最高的品牌。它們是全球跨國企業。”

This sectoral bias means the EM Sales index contains none of the energy, materials or banking stocks that have dragged down developed world equity indices in recent years.

這種行業傾斜意味着，新興市場銷售指數不包括能源、原材料或銀行股票，近年這些股票拖累了發達市場股指。

To be fair, though, the index has also not benefited from the technology stocks that were the main driver of the US equity markets last year. Nor, quite clearly, did it benefit from the rapid rise in commodity prices prior to 2014.

然而，公平地說，該指數也沒有得益於成爲去年美國股市主要推動力的科技股。同時，該指數顯然也沒有從2014年之前大宗商品價格快速上漲中受益。

Overall, the sectoral bias would appear to explain part of the outperformance vis-à-vis the broader US equity market, but certainly not all of it: US consumer staple stocks in general have only returned 135 per cent in price terms since 2002, better than the returns of materials and financials (but not energy stocks), well behind the returns of the EM Sales index.

總的來說，這種行業傾斜似乎可以在一定程度上解釋這些股票的表現爲何優於美國股市大盤，但肯定不能完全解釋：總體而言，自2002年以來，美國日常消費品股票的回報率僅爲135%（按股價衡量），高於原材料和金融類股票的回報率（但比不上能源股），遠低於新興市場銷售指數的回報率。

Clearly the time period chosen will also affect the results. Since the start of 2011, just before emerging market equities peaked, the EM Sales index has underperformed the wider S&P 1500, rising 37 per cent compared to the S&P’s 65 per cent.

顯然，所選取的時間段也會影響結果。自2011年初（新興市場股市見頂之前）以來，新興市場銷售指數的表現遜於標普1500指數這個大盤，前者上漲37%，後者上漲65%。

However the EM Sales index has strongly outperformed EM equities themselves (down 26 per cent) over this period. Mr Saldanha attributes this to their defensive nature and status as “quality growth” companies, which has shielded them from the wider sell-off.

然而，同期新興市場銷售指數的表現遠遠優於新興市場股市（下跌26%）。薩爾達尼亞將此歸因於該指數成份股的防禦特性以及作爲“高質量增長”公司的地位，這讓它們免遭大盤拋售的連帶影響。

Overall, though, given the relatively long sweep of the data, it would seem churlish to dismiss the startling performance of the EM Sales index as an aberration resulting from the judicious selection of the time period.

然而，總的來說，鑑於這些數據覆蓋的時間跨度相對較長，認爲該指數的驚人表現是巧妙選擇時間段所導致的反常現象似乎有點吹毛求疵。

Some believe there are sound reasons for choosing to play EM consumer trends via developed world-listed stocks.

一些人認爲，有很好的理由選擇駕馭新興市場消費趨勢，而非投資在發達國家上市的股票。

“In general, we currently prefer to access equity investments such as emerging market consumer plays via developed market stocks,” says Mark Haefele, global chief investment officer at UBS Wealth Management.

瑞銀財富管理(UBS Wealth Management)全球首席投資官馬克•黑費勒(Mark Haefele)表示：“總體而言，我們在股票投資上現在更喜歡通過發達市場股票來投資新興市場消費者板塊。”

Mr Haefele favours companies that are likely to produce “durable earnings growth”, a characteristic he believes is more prevalent in developed markets at present.

黑費勒青睞那些有望保持“可持續盈利增長”的公司，他認爲，目前這一特點在發達市場更爲普遍。

That said, he argues that in sectors such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure, most of the gains from EM growth will accrue to stocks actually listed in the emerging world.

話雖如此，他辯稱，在醫療、教育和基礎設施等行業，新興市場增長所帶來的大部分利好將體現於真正在新興市場上市的股票。

Patrick Mange, emerging markets strategist at BNP Paribas Investment Partners, argues that developed world-listed companies tend to be better managed, more transparent and have superior corporate governance to their EM peers.

法國巴黎銀行投資夥伴公司(BNP Paribas Investment Partners)新興市場策略師帕特里克•芒熱(Patrick Mange)主張，在發達國家上市的公司往往管理更完善、更透明，而且有着比新興市場公司更優越的公司治理。

For developed world investors, there can also be no currency risk, reducing the risk premium, he adds.

他補充稱，對於發達國家投資者而言，這種投資還可能沒有匯率風險，從而降低了風險溢價。

Despite his findings, Mr Saldanha is less convinced, however. He says that Neuberger Berman’s equity team view many of the stocks in the EM Sales index as “rather expensive ways to play emerging markets at the moment”.

儘管有這樣的發現，但薩爾達尼亞本人並不那麼確信。他表示，Neuberger Berman的股票團隊將新興市場銷售指數的很多成份股視爲“目前投資新興市場頗爲昂貴的方式”。

More broadly, he says that, in common with many other EM investors, he prefers to get “pure” EM exposure, rather than being “bogged down by developed world exposure where growth is probably slower”.

他表示，更廣義地講，與其他很多新興市場投資者一樣，他傾向於獲得“純粹”的新興市場敞口，而不是“被那些增長可能更爲緩慢的發達市場敞口套牢”。