How To Invest In Developing Asia

Transcription

1 PORTFOLIO GLOBAL REAL DISCUSSION ASSETS Accessing Asia: Investing in the infrastructure imperative August 14 Connecting you with our global network of investment professionals IN BRIEF Developing Asia collectively is one of the world s fastest-growing economies. Forecasts call for it to generate 42% of global GDP by the end of the decade. Driving its growth is a monumental wave of urbanization. Between now and 35, the populations of the cities of China, India and Indonesia will swell by an estimated 53 million. The scale of public investment required by this unprecedented dynamic makes the participation of private capital not merely desirable but absolutely essential. We believe the combination of economic growth and capital requirement creates an attractive opportunity for investors, particularly for those able to identify and access the most attractive markets and infrastructure sub-sectors. AUTHORS Michael C. Hudgins Executive Director Real Estate Strategist Global Real Assets Developing Asia does not merely have promising demographics and a large aggregate GDP. It has reached a stage where, in economies in the past, real per capita GDP has soared and industrialization has taken off. To take the next step, Developing Asia must address what we call the infrastructure imperative. The case for infrastructure investment is already well known and amply proven: Infrastructure entails the essential building blocks of a productive society. Similarly, infrastructure investment is the one investment upon which all others depend. Many infrastructure investments serve as pure plays on local economies. This has two advantages. First, the investments tend to have minimal correlation to global financial market volatility. Second, they have direct exposure to regional growth and change the dominant economic and demographic themes of emerging Asia. Because of the long-term contractual nature of many infrastructure project revenue models and/or the inelasticity of captive infrastructure demand, the sector offers attractive risk-adjusted returns at just the point where conventional financial assets may not. Pulkit Sharma Vice President Portfolio Construction Global Real Assets Omni FOR INSTITUTIONAL/WHOLESALE OR PROFESSIONAL CLIENT USE ONLY NOT FOR RETAIL DISTRIBUTION

2 PORTFOLIO Accessing Asia: DISCUSSION: Investing Title in Copy the Here infrastructure imperative The phenomenon of Developing Asia and the opportunities it offers are not news to institutional investors: 1 Developing Asia, with a total population of 3.1 billion almost 45% of the global total 2 has 157 cities with a million or more residents. 3 Predictions call for an additional 64 cities in the region to exceed one million or more residents by 25. (For purposes of comparison, the U.S. has a total of cities with a million or more inhabitants, and Europe has 16.) The regional economy of the emerging and developing Asian countries already accounts for just over a quarter of global GDP. According to forecasts, its share will grow to 42%, on a purchasing power parity basis, by (Exhibit 1). 4 Developing Asia s population and consumption share of the middle class gaining and highly correlated EXHIBIT 1: POPULATION AND CONSUMPTION AS A PERCENTAGE OF WORLD TOTAL Percent Americas Europe Middle East and Africa 28% 54% 9 Population share Source: J.P. Morgan, Brookings Institution; data as of June 3, 11. *Based on purchasing power parity. Why Developing Asia? 23% Asia Pacific 42% 9 Consumption share* The demographics, favorable as they are, do not fully explain the appeal of the infrastructure investment in Developing Asia. Using history as a guide, we predict that the region s economies are approaching or have already arrived at an inflection point in the process of their urbanization. In the United States and Japan, and more recently and more vividly 1 For most of our analysis, except where indicated, we have used the International Monetary Fund definition of Developing Asia, which includes China, India and the ASEAN Five of Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. The IMF lists Japan, Korea, Australia, Taiwan, Hong Kong SAR, Singapore and New Zealand as Advanced Asia, so we have treated them as Developed Asia. We have excluded Vietnam from much of our analysis due to a consistent lack of data. 2 World Bank, 11 revision. 3 United Nations, 11 revision. 4 IMF, as of April 14. At critical urbanization mass in the past, growth in real per capita GDP reached takeoff velocity EXHIBIT 2: URBANIZATION RATIOS AND REAL GDP PER CAPITA ANNUAL (196 12) Real GDP per capita (USD, s) = India = China 4 6 Urbanization ratio (%) Source: J.P. Morgan, FactSet, United Nations, World Bank; data as of December 31, 12. in Korea, once more than half of the total population had migrated to cities, real per capita GDP soared (Exhibit 2). China has nearly reached that stage, and India is progressing toward it. Correlation in this example does not, of course, proxy causality, but the infrastructure investment required to put rapidly urbanizing populations to work does seem to be a driving force. At its earliest stage, basic infrastructure investment roads, ports and power generation attracts manufacturers that export goods and import capital and labor. As first mover manufacturing takes root, an industrial ecosystem emerges. Allied manufacturing and services cluster, attracting more migrants and creating demand for a progressively more skilled, wage-earning workforce. The process evolves into a self-perpetuating virtuous circle. From the very start, no phase of this progressive buildout can happen without an infrastructure catalyst. As manufacturing develops, it requires infrastructure and related resources from an expanded set of sub-sectors, including more roads, ports and electricity generation, plus distribution, logistics, warehousing and health care. The increasingly affluent urban population, with growing quality of life needs and expectations, becomes the source of different but complementary infrastructure development. Epic migrations, epic implications The conditions are nearly in place, in our view, for Developing Asia and for its three largest economies in particular to make the quantum developmental leap that Korea, Japan and U.S. Korea Japan 8 2 Accessing Asia: Investing in the infrastructure imperative

3 the U.S. made earlier. The region has come far in both soft measures (regulation, law and education) and hard investments (infrastructure and residential and commercial development). It has made great strides, but it has further to go to fill its potential. The absolute level of the infrastructure investment required is immense. Estimates indicate that the major Developing Asian country markets will need about $75 billion in infrastructure investment every year for the next five years, or almost $4 trillion in total by (More critical for investors is the fact that most regional governments expect that about 25% of the aggregate investment will need to come from private sources, for a total of roughly $1 trillion.) 6 Largely because of the magnitude of Developing Asia s urbanization, infrastructure expenditures, in contrast to the world s developed regions, are not deferrable or discretionary. The need is urgent and ongoing. China, India and Indonesia will add another 53 million residents by 35, 7 an influx that equals the combined current populations of the eurozone plus Brazil. This has two immediate investment implications. First, Developing Asia s infrastructure expenditures, based on a 12 forecast, have been expanding at an accelerated rate compared with Developed Asia especially compared with Australia, long a favored destination of global infrastructure investors, where it is actually declining (Exhibit 3). Second, Developing Asia s governments are increasingly turning to private capital to fund these investments. Exhibit 4 tracks the accelerating cumulative investments in private participation infrastructure across the economies of Developing Asia. Spotlight on the markets: Many similarities but also many differences The sheer range of projects across Developing Asia suggests that infrastructure investors may want to maintain a flexible and opportunistic stance with a broad pan-asian strategy. We believe, 5 J.P. Morgan; Asian Development Bank Institute, Estimating Demand for Infrastructure in Energy, Transport, Telecommunications, Water and Sanitation in Asia and the Pacific: (September ); Deutsche Bank, India Infrastructure Sector (April 12) (referencing India Planning Commission); Investment Board of Thailand, Infrastructure Development Plan for 12 16; National Development Planning Agency, Government of Indonesia, February 12; Philippines National Economic and Development Authority, Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program, undated (estimated 9); PPIAF (PPI Project Database, accessed May 12 by Royal Bank of Scotland), The Roots of Growth, September 11. (The required expected amount of Asian infrastructure private equity investment assumes historical trends continue.) 6 Asian Development Bank Institute, Estimating Demand for Infrastructure in Energy, Transport, Telecommunications, Water and Sanitation in Asia and the Pacific:, September. 7 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, October 12. Developing Asia* should outstrip Developed Asia** infrastructure spending EXHIBIT 3: COMPOUNDED GROWTH RATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING (12 15) 8 Growth rate infra spending (%) Australia Developed Asia Source: J.P. Morgan, CLSA, Euromonitor, World Bank; data as of August 31, 13. *Developing Asia: China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand. **Developed Asia: Australia, Japan, Korea, Singapore. China India Southeast Asia Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand. The Developing Asia infrastructure trend is running in favor of private sector participation EXHIBIT 4: PRIVATE PARTICIPATION IN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS $ billions (cumulative) China India Indonesia ASEAN Investment year Source: J.P. Morgan, World Bank; data as of December 31, 13. however, that the large qualitative differences among local economies make it necessary for even the most committed pan-asian investor to identify those geographies and infrastructure sub-sectors that combine the most attractive opportunity sets and the highest prospective returns. We have developed a proprietary seven-factor filter, described in detail in the Appendix, that incorporates demographic, fiscal and development data, along with financial criteria, to arrive at a ranking of infra-structure investment opportunities by geography across Asia. It demonstrates that India, China and Indonesia may offer the deepest and most attractive environments for private infrastructure investments, while the Developed Asia economies lag. 8 8 CLSA special report, Needs driven infrastructure returns to lure capital (August 13). J.P. Morgan Asset Management 3

4 PORTFOLIO Accessing Asia: DISCUSSION: Investing Title in Copy the Here infrastructure imperative Not only does Developing Asia as a whole appear to us to offer more opportunities for infrastructure investment, the opportunities themselves are enormously varied as varied as the state of development across the region. Even within national economies, investors encounter a formidable array of needs and projects. Within the two biggest economies, India and China, multiple development phases are simultaneously unfolding. India has a sizable post-industrial sector providing global information technology and services. China has a relatively well-developed infrastructure base concentrated in its coastal manufacturing hubs. In both nations, these advanced economies exist alongside rural provinces still in the early stages of industrialization and urbanization. China s consumption deficit, India s manufacturing shortfall A further comparison of the two economies points to a principal difference between them. Historically, at early stages of development, manufacturing commands a large percentage of total output, providing the jobs required to keep a low-skilled population employed and on the way to middle-class living standards. As a country or geography has ascended the development curve toward higher real per capita GDP, the share of manufacturing has fallen while the proportion of output from consumption-driven service segments catering to the growing middle class expands (Exhibit 5). China s manufacturing output as a percentage of its GDP initially reached the high rates we would expect at an early Once real per capita GDP reaches the inflection point, manufacturing as a percentage of GDP falls off EXHIBIT 5: REAL PER CAPITA GDP VS. MANUFACTURING AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP (197 12) Manufacturing (% of GDP, reversed) Japan Real GDP per capita (s) Source: J.P. Morgan, United Nations, World Bank; data as of December 31, 13. U.S. To reach the U.S./Japan inflection point, India will need to manufacture more, and China will need to consume more EXHIBIT 6: REAL GDP PER CAPITA VS. MANUFACTURING AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP Manufacturing (% of GDP, reversed) India Manufacturing (% of GDP, reversed) Real GDP per capita (s) Real GDP per capita (s) Source: J.P. Morgan, United Nations; data as of December 31, 13. China stage of development and has now declined to levels associated with the earlier Japanese and U.S. spikes in real per capita GDP. China has not yet experienced a similar step change in real per capita GDP, however, suggesting that it has not yet realized the growth in personal consumption and related services required to achieve it (Exhibit 6). India finds itself at an even lower level of real per capita GDP and an even lower ratio of manufacturing to GDP. This suggests, among other things, that India s industrial infrastructure base lags China s. The contrast has two economic implications: India s industrial sector has a distance to travel to reach a takeoff point similar to China s; and China s consumers still haven t acquired the resources to propel that economy into the ranks of the fully developed. Exhibit 7 (next page) diagrams the dilemma the two countries face. China (Exhibit 7A) has invested aggressively in fixed assets, including infrastructure, at the expense of consumption. Capital has flowed to business, particularly to stateowned enterprises (SOEs). With low returns on deposits, few investment alternatives and poor publicly provided benefits such as education and health care, individuals had little choice but to save more and consume less. The chronic consumption shortfall threatens China s growth trajectory. India (Exhibit 7B) has the opposite problem. It has under invested in fixed assets and must ramp up its infrastructure spending in order to rebalance its economy toward manufacturing. 9 9 It could also conceivably support an even more aggressive push into developed market services, a strategy that would require a potentially different mix of infrastructure development. Japan U.S. 4 Accessing Asia: Investing in the infrastructure imperative

5 On the path to sustaining GDP growth: China needs to increase consumption, India needs to increase investment EXHIBIT 7A: CHINA EXHIBIT 7B: INDIA 7 Investment share of GDP Consumption share of GDP 8 Investment share of GDP Consumption share of GDP 6 7 Percent Percent Source: J.P. Morgan, World Bank; data as of May 31, 14. Diving deeper into demographics Population growth alone does not give a full picture of an economy s demographic prospects. A more ample view takes into account a country s dependency ratio: the ratio of cohorts too old and too young to work to the total available labor force, thus the ratio of dependents to productive workers, fills it out. A society with a high dependency ratio and an aging labor force may ultimately experience a less vibrant virtuous cycle. India and Indonesia fare well on this measure (Exhibit 8). Roughly half of Indonesia s population today is under the age of 3. As the young population comes of age, it should hold the country s dependency ratio steady for the next few decades. India s dependency ratio should actually fall, according to projections, but China, with a robust dependency ratio today, stands out for its poor dependency ratio trend, a result of the government s one-child policy. That may change for the better with China s recent relaxation of its one-child policy, although the impact would only start to be felt late in the window we have studied. An aging labor force can imperil urbanization s productivity gains EXHIBIT 8: CHANGE IN DEPENDENCY RATIO (15-35) Percent Philippines Good India Indonesia Malaysia UK Australia Source: J.P. Morgan, World Bank 11 revision; compiled July 14. Japan France U.S. Thailand China Germany Korea Singapore Private capital as a remedy for credit scarcity and a credit glut The ability of the local government to fund its infrastructure investment by itself can limit opportunities for private investors. Viewed from the perspective of their fiscal balances and central government debt-to-gdp ratios, many Asian economies Australia, Singapore, Korea, Indonesia, Philippines and China enjoy relatively good health. Only India and Malaysia stand out dramatically on the fiscal balance measure, with deficits of 4.% and 4.9%, respectively. A second measure, computed by the Bank for International Settlements, which gauges an economy s credit gap (a comparison of its current debt-to-gdp ratio with its long-term trend for the same measure), may lead to a somewhat different conclusion for some countries (Exhibit 9). Asset bubbles can form in an excessively positive credit gap; a negative gap means deleveraging and a possible brake on GDP EXHIBIT 9: TOTAL CREDIT GAP FOR SELECT DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING MARKET ECONOMIES Percent China 21 Singapore Indonesia Thailand Brazil Japan Korea CLSA, IMF; data as of December 31, 13. Higher asset bubble risk Canada Lower asset bubble risk Source: J.P. Morgan, Institute of International Finance, Bank for International Settlements; data as of September 3, 13. Malaysia India Australia Euro area -13 U.S. -22 UK J.P. Morgan Asset Management 5

6 PORTFOLIO Accessing Asia: DISCUSSION: Investing Title in Copy the Here infrastructure imperative Economies running below their long-term trend can be facing a capital shortage. Indeed, our own analysis found in addition to this measure that India s supply of capital from three major sources domestic stock offerings, off-shore equity offerings and private equity dropped 85% for the period compared with 6 8. By the same token, India runs a relatively low risk of asset bubbles. Taken together, the capital shortage and low bubble risk make for a favorable environment for private investment. By contrast, an above-trend credit gap serves as a warning sign of destabilizing conditions in economies with an excess supply of credit. China, a country whose fiscal health appears robust, stands out for its acute bubble risk. Its combined corporate, household, central and local government debt jumped from 145% of GDP to 2% between 8, the year of the financial crisis, and 13. The risk may be even higher than revealed by the numbers alone because much of the growth in credit has occurred in the opaque shadow bank network outside the relatively transparent and more regulated formal banking system. China s leaders have made clear their intention to reverse this trend and aid over-extended local governments and SOEs. The Communist Party s latest reform plan looks to bolster the capability of banks to do more direct lending to capitalstarved private enterprise, in part by encouraging non-public capital to participate in public sector-led capital projects. In fact, China s State Council announced in April 14 that it would open up 8 major infrastructure projects to private capital involvement. 11 A note on return potential The range of Developing Asia projects is varied and growing. By further targeting the most attractive infrastructure sub-sectors within each country market, we believe that returns in the high teens are possible (Exhibit ). While our work has identified India, China and Indonesia as the most attractive candidates for infrastructure investing, the entire region, including Southeast Asia, offers attractive opportunities. 11 China opens up infrastructure to private capital, FinanceAsia (April 25, 14). Infrastructure sub-sectors that provide attractive risk-adjusted returns EXHIBIT : SECTORS AGGREGATED BY COUNTRY (OUT OF 26 DIFFERENT SUB-SECTORS) AND RANKED BASED ON TOTALS South Korea Waste management & waste-to-energy Thailand Power Renewable energy Logistics Roads and railroads Philippines Power Renewable energy China Renewable energy Natural gas distribution Waste/water/wastewater Warehousing Health care delivery Logistics Railroads Forestry Malaysia Power Oil and gas Roads India Renewable energy Power Oil and gas services Ports Roads Health care delivery Agri -warehousing Logistics/CFS/ICD Education Indonesia Power Renewable energy Oil and gas services Roads Ports Telecom towers Waste/water/wastewater Mining Mining-related logistics Source: J.P. Morgan; data as of February 14, Accessing Asia: Investing in the infrastructure imperative

7 Conclusion: Developing Asia s infrastructure moment For the economies of Developing Asia, rapid development and breakneck urbanization have made infrastructure investment a priority too pressing to ignore. This reality provides the backdrop for a regional investment opportunity that, in terms of depth and breadth, is uniquely appealing. Investors must bear in mind, however, that Developing Asia is a label, not a monolith. It applies to a wide range of economies, cultures and, ultimately, opportunities. Participating successfully in the region s potential requires focus, flexibility and capability: a well-defined focus on the most attractive markets and infrastructure sub-sectors, flexibility to adapt opportunistically to situations that arise in an exceptionally dynamic environment, and, finally, an on-the-ground capability to identify, analyze, evaluate and monitor investments firsthand. J.P. Morgan Asset Management 7

8 PORTFOLIO Accessing Asia: DISCUSSION: Investing Title in Copy the Here infrastructure imperative Appendix The market filter, shown below, identifies relatively attractive market conditions. It considers the return potential for infrastructure sub-sectors for each of the markets listed. We have found that attractive opportunities could well exist in most or all of these candidate country markets. We have selected seven quantitative market-specific factors that we feel influence a market s infrastructure development potential: Population Infrastructure developmental rank as determined by a third-party study (CLSA bank) Percentage of the total population living in cities Dependency ratio Fiscal balance Debt-to-GDP ratio The factors are normalized using z-scores and then grouped into four weighted categories:* Size of opportunity (factors 1 and 2) 35%** Demographic support (3 and 4) 15 Capital availability (5 and 6) 25 Return potential (7) 25 The weighted category scores add up to a total country score, which we used to assign the country an infrastructure opportunity ranking within the broad Asia Pacific region, shown in the last column. Developing Asia does very well by our top-down measure, with India, China and Indonesia making up the top three, but most of the developed economies fall to the bottom. Although adjustments to category weightings or the use of different factors could change the rank order, we believe the need and corresponding opportunity in Developing Asia clearly outstrip that of Developed Asia. A proprietary measure of sectors meeting J.P. Morgan hurdle rates The stars are aligned for infrastructure investors considering Developing Asia EXHIBIT A: ASIAN MARKETS RANKED IN TERMS OF THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY Less attractive More attractive Size of opportunity Demographic support Capital availability Return potential Country Population (12) Infra. dev. rank Urbanization (#'s, 15 35) Dependency ratio (chg 15 35) Fiscal balance Debt/ GDP Sectors meeting JPM hurdle rates Ranking India 1 China 2 Indonesia 3 Philippines 4 Japan 5 Thailand 6 Malaysia 7 Australia 8 Korea 9 Singapore Source: J.P. Morgan, Bloomberg, CLSA, International Monetary Fund, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (Population Division), World Bank; data compiled July, 14. *A z-score is the number of standard deviations (based on the overall data set) that an observation is above or below the mean (of the overall data set). A positive standard score represents a normalized measure of the observation s place above the mean, whereas a negative standard score represents a normalized measure below the mean. Using the standard deviation creates normalized units of measurement and allows the combination of various z-scores (derived from separate data points) into a single score, as we have done here. **We did not want population to skew the analysis, so we only gave it a % weighting, with the remaining 25% for the size of opportunity category attributed to the infrastructure development rank score, a more critical measure, in our view. 8 Accessing Asia: Investing in the infrastructure imperative

9 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK J.P. Morgan Asset Management 9

10 PORTFOLIO Accessing Asia: DISCUSSION: Investing Title in Copy the Here infrastructure imperative THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Accessing Asia: Investing in the infrastructure imperative

11 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK J.P. Morgan Asset Management 11

12 PORTFOLIO Accessing Asia: DISCUSSION: Investing Title in Copy the Here infrastructure imperative NOT FOR RETAIL DISTRIBUTION: This communication has been prepared exclusively for Institutional/Wholesale Investors as well as Professional Clients as defined by local laws and regulation. The opinions, estimates, forecasts, and statements of financial markets expressed are those held by J.P. Morgan Asset Management at the time of going to print and are subject to change. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the recipient. Any research in this document has been obtained and may have been acted upon by J.P. Morgan Asset Management for its own purpose. References to specific securities, asset classes and financial markets are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to be, and should not be interpreted as advice or a recommendation relating to the buying or selling of investments. Furthermore, this material does not contain sufficient information to support an investment decision and the recipient should ensure that all relevant information is obtained before making any investment. Forecasts contained herein are for illustrative purposes, may be based upon proprietary research and are developed through analysis of historical public data. J.P. Morgan Asset Management is the brand for the asset management business of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates worldwide. This communication may be issued by the following entities: in the United Kingdom by JPMorgan Asset Management (UK) Limited; in other EU jurisdictions by JPMorgan Asset Management (Europe) S.à r.l.; in Switzerland by J.P. Morgan (Suisse) SA; in Hong Kong by JF Asset Management Limited, or JPMorgan Funds (Asia) Limited, or JPMorgan Asset Management Real Assets (Asia) Limited; in India by JPMorgan Asset Management India Private Limited; in Singapore by JPMorgan Asset Management (Singapore) Limited or JPMorgan Asset Management Real Assets (Singapore) Pte Ltd; in Australia by JPMorgan Asset Management (Australia) Limited; in Taiwan by JPMorgan Asset Management (Taiwan) Limited or JPMorgan Funds (Taiwan) Limited; in Brazil by Banco J.P. Morgan S.A.; in Canada by JPMorgan Asset Management (Canada) Inc., and in the United States by J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc., JPMorgan Distribution Services Inc., and J.P. Morgan Institutional Investments, Inc. member FINRA/SIPC. 27 Park Avenue, New York, NY JPMorgan Chase & Co. II_Accessing Asia_Investing in the infrastructure FOR INSTITUTIONAL/WHOLESALE OR PROFESSIONAL CLIENT USE ONLY NOT FOR RETAIL DISTRIBUTION