Month: August 2018

The rand – causes and effects of weakness

How weak is the rand? Or to put it another way – how competitive is the rand? By my calculation the rand was at its weakest, most competitive and most undervalued in late 2001. At R11.98 for a US dollar or a mere 8.3 US cents for a rand, it was selling for about 23% less than its purchasing power (PPP) equivalent. If the dollar/rand exchange rate had merely compensated for differences between higher SA inflation and lower US inflation, the dollar would have cost no more than R7.70 in late 2001.

It was an expensive time for South Africans to visit New York and a bargain for Americans and Europeans traveling in SA. If differences in inflation were the only force driving the dollar/rand exchange rate we would now (in August 2018) be paying less than R10 for a dollar, rather than over R14.

The figure below tracks the real dollar and trade weighted rand since 1995, using December 2010 as the base month. A real exchange rate value of 100 would indicate an equilibrium for foreign traders. One where what is lost on the inflation front is fully made up with exchange rate weakness. As may be seen, the rand has been mostly undervalued since 1995 – the real rand has averaged about 90, or about 10% weaker than PPP on average and with a wide dispersion about the average.

The past performance of the real rand moreover suggests that theoretical PPP exchange rates are an unlikely outcome and not something exporters or importers should fear. Indeed they would be justified in assuming something of a permanent advantage in exporting – with rand prices for exports rising persistently faster than rand operating costs and vice versa. Implying a permanent competitive disadvantage for importers and their price offerings.

 

This history indicates that inflation differences cannot explain the direction the rand takes.  It is much more a case of (unpredictable) changes in the market determined exchange rates that drive inflation higher or sometimes lower and lead the widening or narrowing of inflation differences between SA and its trading partners.

 

What then drives the exchange value of the rand? It is surely not any strong tendency for exchange rates to revert to PPP? The answer is that capital flows to and from SA drive the exchange value of the rand – as they explain emerging market exchange rates generally. The rand mostly follows the direction taken by emerging market (EM) currencies vs the US dollar as we show blow. It is the limited extent to which the rand behaves independently of its peers vs the dollar that explains the specifically SA risks that can independently drive the dollar/rand. These are shown by the ratio of the dollar/rand to the US/EM basket.

 

As may be seen, when we compare the performance of the rand to a fixed weight basket of nine other EM exchange rates vs the dollar, the rand has been in very weak company since 2014. Though in better company after 2016 when EM currencies and the rand improved vs the US dollar. The rand, as may be seen, did weaken in a relative sense with the Zuma interventions in the Treasury, especially in late 2015 when he dismissed Finance Minister Nene. The positive reaction in the currency markets to the succession of Cyril Ramaphosa in late 2017 may also be identified by an improved rand/EM ratio. But despite the importance of these political events for South Africa it would appear that the predominant influence on the exchange value of the rand over the years have been global economic forces, common to many EM economies, rather than domestic politics and policy intentions.

Moreover the potentially helpful effect of a weaker, inflation-adjusted rand on SA exports have been overwhelmed by unfavourable price trends themselves. Especially of the US dollar prices of metals and minerals that make up such a large part of our exports. These price trends linked to global growth trends themselves help explain capital flows. Capital flows in when the outlook for the mining sector and the economy improves and vice versa when the outlook deteriorates and prices fall away

As we show in the chart below exports and imports, valued in US dollars, grew very strongly, by about three times, between 2002 and 2010. The prices SA exporters received in US dollars more than doubled over the same period, as is also shown. The price and volume trends since then have been in the reverse direction – until very recently. The super commodity price cycle came and then went and the exchange rates went inevitably in the same weaker direction.

Yet not all has been bad news for SA exporters, especially those supplying foreign tourists – for whom the undervalued rand has proved a great attraction. The travel statistics of the balance of payments show a dramatic improvement in recent years. Travel receipts from foreigners, measured in US dollars, have been well sustained as payments for foreign travel by South Africans have trailed away (see below).

SA receipts from travel by foreign visitors are now running at about a US$10bn rate that now compares quite well with the value added by the mining sector- also shown in dollars below.

Would it be unfair to say that the achievements of SA tourism – extra income, employment and taxes paid – owe something to the exchange rate and perhaps as much or more to the helpful absence of any Tourism Charter? Conventional property rights have been more than sufficient to the purpose of increased supplies. As they would be helpful to mining output, threatened as it has been by the Mining Charter. 30 August 2018

Of liras and rands

Moves in emerging market currencies like the rand and Turkish lira show that countries that depend on foreign capital need to play by the rules governing international trade and flows of capital

Emerging market (EM) currencies have been caught up in the political and now financial crisis confronting the Turkish economy and its leader. But some EM exchange rates have suffered more than others. The rand, alas, has been one of the worst performers, especially on Wednesday (15 August). It is a trend that continued yesterday morning. The Turkish lira has re-gained some ground against the still strong US dollar and significantly more against the weaker rand.

At its worst this month, on 13 August, the lira had fallen from 4.99 to 6.88 against the US dollar – a decline of 37%. That same day the rand was about 9% weaker against the US dollar since 1 August and so 21% up on the lira. As I write at mid-morning on 16 August, the lira is now stronger than it was, at 5.81 to the dollar while the rand has weakened to R14.511 (see below).

 

The rand has now lost about 4.6% of its beginning of August US dollar value. This is not good news for the SA economy. It means more inflation and less spending power for hard pressed households and firms. Hopefully it will not lead to higher interest rates, which would depress domestic demand further.

The Turkish and SA economies have something in common: a continuing dependence on foreign capital to fund expenditure. But that is where the current similarities end. The Turkish economy has experienced a boom (over 7% real GDP growth in 2017) led by rapidly rising private sector capex funded increasingly with short-term borrowed dollars. This growth, accompanied by rapidly rising inflation and a widening ratio of current account deficit and so capital inflows to GDP. Interest rates lagged well behind inflation, now running about 16%.

The contrast with a depressed SA economy could not be greater. Our private sector capex cycle is even more depressed than household spending. Inflation (especially at retail level) remains well below interest rates and the current account deficit has stabilised at about 3.5% of GDP. The borrowing SA does is mostly by government and its agencies and is predominantly undertaken in rands.

Foreign lenders, rather than local borrowers, are exposed to the risk of the rand weakening, for which they collect a wide risk spread – of the order of 6% more than US dollar yields. SA business savings (cash retained) runs at about the same rate as stagnant or declining capital expenditure. Our fiscal deficits and the ratio of government debt to GDP are wider than those of Turkey – and may be getting wider, according to Moody’s. This is not an opinion helpful to the rand or the cost of borrowing dollars for five years: currently running at 2.17% above US five year yields. Turkish debt in US dollars is offering an extra 4.88% for five years – even more junky than RSA debt.

So what went wrong with Turkish economy that was so encouraged with abundant inflows of short term loans until recently and that were withdrawn so abruptly? The answer is fairly obvious – it is the result of a serious disagreement with the US about the arrest of a US pastor. He has possibly been imprisoned as a bargaining chip for President Ergodan’s public enemy number 1, Fethullah Gulen, who lives in the US, whose followers are accused of fomenting a coup. And so many thousands of whom are languishing in jail.

This indicates very clearly that countries that depend on foreign capital need to play by the rules (US inspired or enforced) that govern international trade and flows of capital and legal practice. This surely applies also to SA. By proclaiming upon the ANC’s intentions to expropriate farming land without compensation – definitely against the rules, and given the turmoil in the markets – ANC chairman Gwede Mantashe did SA and its growth prospects enormous harm. As Minister of Mineral Resources he could however immediately undo the damage. That is by signaling reforms of the mining charter that made mining in SA properly investor and owner-friendly. 17 August 2018

Talking Turkey about the rand

How best to respond to rand weakness that has nothing much to do with SA

The SA economy has been subject to a new sharp burst of unwelcome rand weakness. Weakness that would appear to have little to do with events political or economic in SA itself. It has been a reaction to the shocks that have overwhelmed the Turkish lira. Weakness in other emerging market exchange rates has been part of the collateral damage.

The Turkish lira has lost 34.79% of its US dollar value since the July month end – from USD/TRY4.91 to USD/TRY6.96 by 14h00 on 13 August. The USD/ZAR was 13.27 on the morning of 1 August and was at 14.38 yesterday afternoon, a decline of 7.97%. But it should be recognised that the rand has been a marginal underperformer within the emerging market (EM) peer group. The JPMorgan EM currency benchmark, which includes the Chinese Yuan with a 11% weight, has lost 6.1 per cent of its USD value over the same period (see figures below where in the second, the relative to other EM currencies underperformance by the rand, shows up as a higher ratio).

 

 

A weaker rand leads to more inflation that depresses the spending power of households. It may also lead to higher interest rates, given the reaction function of the Reserve Bank. The Reserve Bank believes that higher inflation will lead to still more inflation expected and hence still more inflation as a self-fulfilling process. That is unless demand is suppressed even further with higher interest rates. This is described as the danger of so-called second round effects of inflation itself (for which incidentally there is little evidence, when demand is already so depressed). The typical SA business now has very limited power to raise prices, as has been revealed by little inflation at retail level. A still weaker rand is likely to further restrain operating margins and the willingness of SA business to invest in plant or people.

We have long argued that this represents a particularly baleful approach by the Reserve Bank to its responsibilities. We have recommended that the Reserve Bank not react to exchange rate shocks, over which they have little influence. Moreover, that raising interest rates can further depress demand without having any predictable influence on the exchange rate itself.

Indeed we have argued that slow growth itself weakens the case for investing in South Africa. Slow growth to which monetary policy can contribute adds investment risk without any predictable influence on inflation because the value of the rand is itself so unpredictable.

The best the Reserve Bank can do for the economy at times like this, when the rand is shocked weaker, is to say very little and do even less and wait for the shock to pass through – as it will in a year or so. The statement of the Deputy Governor, Daniel Mminele, made yesterday that “The South African Reserve Bank won’t intervene to prop up the rand unless the orderly functioning of markets is threatened” is to be welcomed.

The weaker rand, for whatever reason, discourages spending and weakens the case for investing in any company that derives much of its revenue from South African sources. Companies listed on the JSE that derive much of their sales offshore stand to benefit from higher revenues recorded in the weaker rand. These include the large global industrial plays that dominate the Industrial Index of the JSE by market value. Included in their ranks are Richemont, British American Tobacco and AB Inbev.

Even better placed to benefit from a weaker rand will be companies with revenues offshore but with costs incurred in rands. The increase in these rand costs of production may well lag behind the higher revenues being earned in rands, so adding to the operating margins enjoyed. Resource companies quoted on the JSE with SA operations fall into this category. Kumba and the platinum companies, as well as Sasol, are examples of businesses of this kind.

But the appeal of global and resource plays for investors will also depend on the prevailing state of global markets. Global strength will add to their value measured in USD and even more so when these stable or higher dollar values are translated into rands at a weaker rate of exchange. In such circumstances, when the rand weakens for SA specific reasons, rather than for adverse circumstances associated with a weaker global economy, the global and resource plays on the JSE have additional appeal.

The additional weakness of the rand, when compared to other EM currencies, may well have added to the appeal of JSE global and resource companies. The movements on the JSE on 13 August – at least up until mid-afternoon – do suggest that a degree of rand weakness for partly SA specific reasons- has been helpful for the rand values of the JSE global and resource plays. This is shown below. The global industrial plays and Naspers, another very important global play, have moved higher with JSE Resources. The SA plays have weakened as may also be seen and would have been predicted.

The news about the global economy may not have improved with the Turkish crisis. Nor however is the global economy greatly threatened by the state of the Turkish economy. The weakness of the Turkish Lira would appear to have much to do with the unsatisfactory state of Turkish politics. The risk is that Turkey is less willing to play by the rules of international diplomacy and business and may be isolated accordingly. A serious spat with the USA has led to economic sanctions being placed on leading Turkish politicians to which Turkey has responded with outrage rather than negotiations with the US.

The lesson for South Africa is to remain fully committed to global trading and financial conventions. To reinforce its attractions as an investment destination at times like this when the rand comes under pressure. This will help support the rand and the prospects for the SA economy. 14 August 2018