基金公司緣何低配中國公司股票

Fund managers have built up their largest underweight position in Chinese stocks for at least six years.

基金公司對中國股市的低配幅度達到至少6年來的最高水平。

The unusually large bet against the Hong Kong, Shanghai and Shenzhen markets is a sign of mounting western wariness as to the health of the world’s second-largest economy, which has seen its foreign reserves slide by $1tn since June 2014 despite increasingly desperate attempts to staunch a tide of capital outflows.

這種對香港、上海和深圳股市的異常不看好表明，西方日益擔憂這個全球第二大經濟體的健康——自2014年6月以來，中國外匯儲備下降了1萬億美元，儘管中國竭力遏制資本外流潮。

“There is still a concern about the banking system, tied to issues with the property market and potential issues with the provincial debt market, and we are, it seems, in the early stage of a bad debt cycle,” said Edward Lam, lead fund manager of the MI Somerset Emerging Markets Dividend Growth Fund, which has just 2.5 per cent of its portfolio in Hong Kong and Chinese stocks.

MI Somerset新興市場紅利增長基金(MI Somerset Emerging Markets Dividend Growth Fund)的首席基金經理Edward Lam表示：“人們仍然擔憂銀行業體系，它牽扯到房地產市場問題以及地方債務市場的潛在問題，我們似乎處於壞賬週期的初級階段。”該基金在香港和中國內地股市的頭寸僅佔其投資組合的2.5%。

“Non-performing loans are rising and we are still waiting for the policy response in the midst of quite hefty outflows from China.”

“不良貸款日益增加，而我們還在等待中國政府對資本大量外流的政策迴應。”

Greater China’s weight in the widely tracked MSCI Emerging Markets index has leapt to 27 per cent since the index compiler’s decision to bring New York-listed companies such as Baidu, Netease and Alibaba on board (alongside those listed in Hong Kong) in November 2015.

自指數編制商MSCI明晟2015年11月決定，在原來納入在香港上市的中資公司的基礎上，將百度(Baidu)、網易(Netease)和阿里巴巴(Alibaba)等在紐約上市的中資公司納入指數以來，大中華區股票在廣泛追蹤的MSCI新興市場指數(MSCI Emerging Markets Index)中的權重飆升至27%。

However, while emerging market fund managers have, in aggregate, allowed their Chinese exposure to rise to 21.7 per cent, they have been unwilling to push it higher still.

然而，儘管總的來說，新興市場基金允許它們對中資公司的投資比重升至21.7%，但它們不願進一步推高該比例。

As a result, EM funds, or at least the 126 funds with combined assets of $255bn monitored by Copley Fund Research, have built up a record underweight position in Chinese stocks of 5.2 percentage points, as the first chart shows, with funds instead overweight India, Russia, Turkey, Mexico and Brazil.

結果是，新興市場基金，或者至少是科普利基金研究(Copley Fund Research)監測的總資產達2550億美元的126只基金，對中國股票的相對於MSCI新興市場指數的低配幅度達到創紀錄的5.2個百分點（如第一張圖表所示），卻對印度、俄羅斯、土耳其、墨西哥和巴西股票超配。

Moreover, just 18.3 per cent of the funds are now overweight China, another record low since Copley began collating the data in January 2011, and well below the 40 per cent or so witnessed in recent years, as illustrated in the second chart.

此外，現在只有18.3%的基金對中國股票超配，這是自科普利2011年1月開始編制這項數據以來的又一個創紀錄低點，遠低於最近幾年的約40%，如第二張圖表所示。

Among “high-active” funds, defined as those having an active share — the degree to which their portfolio differs from the underlying index — of at least 75 per cent and fewer than 75 holdings, the underweighting of China is more pronounced still, at 8.4 percentage points, compared to the 3.2 points for “low-active” funds, a term some may regard as synonymous with “closet trackers”, as the third chart demonstrates.

在那些“高主動比重”基金當中，對中國股票的低配更爲顯著，低配幅度達到8.4個百分點，而“低主動比重”基金的低配幅度是3.2個百分點（如第三張圖表所示）。“高主動比重”基金是指主動比重(active share)至少爲75%、持有股票少於75只的基金，主動比重衡量基金投資組合與基準指數的差異程度。“低主動比重”基金被一些人認爲等同於“祕密跟蹤基金”(closet trackers)。

“MSCI has increased its China weight. We have seen some funds try and match that but others not,” said Steven Holden, founder of Copley.

科普利創始人史蒂文?霍爾登(Steven Holden)表示：“MSCI增加了中資公司的比重。我們看到一些基金公司跟上，但其他基金公司則沒有。”

“At some point they have got to say ‘we are not going to chase this thing’. There is no sign of the higher active funds chasing any of this: 8 per cent is a massive underweight. It will lead to some massive dispersion in performance. If they get it right great, if not, bang.”

“在某個點上他們會說，‘我們不會追逐這種事情’。沒有任何跡象表明主動比重較高的基金追逐MSCI的中資公司比重：8個百分點是顯著低配。它將導致基金業績的顯著分化。如果它們押對了，很好，否則，完蛋。”

Mr Holden did not believe the reluctance to increase exposure to China was related to US President Donald Trump’s talk of imposing sizeable import tariffs on exports from the country, although he did say “would you try and chase China all the way up with [Trump] in the air?”

霍爾登不認爲基金公司不願增持中國股票是與美國總統唐納德?特朗普(Donald Trump)對進口中國產品徵收鉅額進口關稅的言論有關，儘管他的確說，“（特朗普）大放厥詞的時候你會嘗試着追逐中國市場嗎？”

His analysis suggests that fund managers, in aggregate, are most underweight China’s financial sector, with an average holding of 5 per cent, against an index weight of 7.9 per cent.

他的分析顯示，總的來說，基金公司對中國金融股的低配最嚴重，平均配置比例僅有5%，而指數中的中國金融股權重是7.9%。

Mr Lam’s fund, for instance, gets some of its exposure to the Chinese economy via HSBC, a London-listed bank with significant Asian operations, which he believes could be a beneficiary of any shakeout of China’s banking system.

例如，Edward Lam的基金通過匯豐(HSBC)建立了對中國經濟的一些敞口。在倫敦上市的匯豐在亞洲有大量業務，他相信該行可能受益於中國銀行業體系的動盪。

Funds are also now underweight technology stocks (holding 6.8 per cent, rather than 8.8 per cent), following the admission of China’s New York-listed tech titans into the MSCI index, with the only meaningful overweight being consumer discretionary stocks (3.5 per cent versus 2.5 per cent).

雖然在紐約上市的中國科技巨擘被納入MSCI指數，但基金公司如今對科技股也處於低配（比重爲6.8%，而MSCI指數中的權重爲8.8%），唯一明顯超配的是非必需消費類股（比重3.5%，而MSCI指數中的權重爲2.5%）。

“I think it was a big gamble from the index to have these names. People don’t really want that much China in their funds. They are investing in global emerging markets, not China-plus,” Mr Holden said.

霍爾登表示：“我認爲MSCI指數將這些公司納入是一場豪賭。人們並不是真的想要在自己的基金中配置那麼多中資股。它們投資於全球新興市場，而不是‘中國+’。”

Not all agree, of course.

當然，不是所有人都這樣認爲。

“For the past seven or eight years my inbox has been constantly full of the demise of China, the financial collapse of China, the significant debt accumulation in China, an unwillingness to let zombie companies go bankrupt, demographics posing a challenge going forward, concerns about the property market.

“這七、八年來，我的收件箱裏一直都滿是關於中國垮臺、中國金融崩潰、中國巨大的債務積累、不願讓殭屍企業破產、人口結構對未來構成挑戰、房地產市場引人擔憂的郵件。”

“So far none of these have come through to cause any significant damage to China,” says William Palmer, co-head of emerging and frontier equities at Barings, whose Emerging Markets Umbrella fund currently has an allocation of 35.6 per cent to Hong Kong-listed stocks, putting it among the handful that is overweight.

“到目前爲止，上述沒有一項真正給中國造成任何重創，”霸菱(Barings)新興及前沿股票聯席主管威廉?帕爾默(William Palmer)表示。霸菱Emerging Markets Umbrella基金目前對香港上市股票的配置比例爲35.6%，是少數超配的基金之一。

“I nearly fell off my chair last week when a major sellside investment bank put out a positive note,” he added.

“上週，當一家大型賣方投資銀行拋出樂觀論調時，我差點從椅子上摔下來，”他接着說。

Mr Palmer’s thesis is that “there is a lot of reform in China that is maybe not appreciated by the marketplace”.

帕爾默的觀點是：“中國進行了很多改革，市場或許還未認識到其價值”。

He lists reform of state-owned enterprises, with some lossmaking companies selling noncore assets or being shut down, especially in the coal and steel sectors; steps to de-risk the banking system, such as recognising and selling non-performing loans; and market liberalisation, such as opening up the bond market to foreign investors and the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock connect programmes.

他列舉的包括國有企業改革，特別是在煤炭和鋼鐵行業，一些虧損國企出售非核心資產或被關停；降低銀行體系風險的措施，例如確認並出售不良貸款；市場自由化，例如向外國投資者開放債券市場以及推出“滬港通”和“深港通”機制。

“The consensus is that China is going to experience a financial crisis at some point in the next few years. What if the consensus starts to move from that extreme position? The equity risk premium would start to fall as the perception of risk falls, and clearly equity prices would rise.

“外界的共識是，中國將在未來幾年的某個時刻經歷一場金融危機。如果共識開始背離那種極端情況會怎樣？隨着感知到的風險下降，股票風險溢價將開始下降，而股票價格顯然會上升。”

“[Being short China] could be the pain trade for emerging market investors in 2017, just like Brazil last year,” Mr Palmer argued.

“2017年，（做空中國）可能讓新興市場投資者吃苦頭，就像去年在巴西一樣，”帕爾默說。

“The job is not done, but they are making some material progress that can reduce the likelihood of a crisis occurring.”

“任務還未完成，但他們正取得一些實質進步，可以降低危機發生的可能性。”

As a result, he sees “attractively valued assets because investors are negative and sceptical”, such as Alibaba (at a “material discount to Amazon, but offering higher growth”); Tencent, a social platform; Brilliance China Automotive Holdings, which manufactures and sells BMWs; the “very cheap” China Construction Bank; Guangdong Investment, involved in infrastructure and utilities; China State Construction and insurers Ping An and AIA, given the “huge underpenetration of pensions, savings and insurance across China”.

因此，他看到了“因投資者不看好且持懷疑態度而估值極具吸引力的資產”，例如阿里巴巴（“估值顯著低於亞馬遜(Amazon)，但成長更快”）；社交平臺騰訊(Tencent)；製造並銷售寶馬(BMW)汽車的華晨中國(Brilliance China Automotive)；“非常便宜”的中國建設銀行(China Construction Bank)；參與基建和公用事業的粵海投資(Guangdong Investment)；中國建築(China State Construction)以及平安保險(Ping An)和友邦保險(AIA)——鑑於“中國養老金、儲蓄和保險目前的嚴重低滲透”。

Even Mr Lam does see the odd opportunity in China, such as the tech sector and nappy maker Hengan International, “which may be an interesting case of regulation helping a company”, he says, in reference to Beijing’s easing of its one-child policy.

甚至Edward Lam也看到了中國不一樣的機會，如高科技行業以及紙尿褲生產商恆安國際(Hengan International)，“這或許是規則幫助企業的有趣案例”，他說，意指中國政府放鬆獨生子女政策。

One unresolved question is whether the fund industry’s relative reticence to hold Chinese stocks will influence MSCI, which is due to decide in June whether or not to admit China’s Shanghai and Shenzhen-listed “A-shares” into its flagship EM index, thereby pushing China’s weight higher still.

一個尚未解決的疑問是，基金行業相對不願持有中國股票是否會對MSCI明晟造成影響，後者將於今年6月份決定是否將中國上海和深圳上市的“A股”納入其旗艦新興市場指數，從而進一步推高中國的權重。

In theory, it should have no relevance, with MSCI making its decision purely on technical grounds. But if its clients are telling MSCI they do not want more exposure to China for the time being, some believe it will have an impact

理論上，這應該沒有關聯，MSCI明晟的決定完全是出於技術原因。但如果客戶對MSCI明晟表示他們暫時不想增加對中國的敞口，有人會認爲這將有一定影響。

“It does influence [MSCI’s] opinion,” says Mr Palmer, although he adds: “It’s not a question of if [A shares] are going in, it’s a question of when.”

“這的確會影響（MSCI明晟）的看法，”帕爾默說，不過他又補充道：“問題不是（A股）是否會被納入，而是何時被納入。”