Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Working Knowledge
Business Research for Business Leaders
  • Browse All Articles
  • Popular Articles
  • Cold Call Podcast
  • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
  • About Us
  • Book
  • Leadership
  • Marketing
  • Finance
  • Management
  • Entrepreneurship
  • All Topics...
  • Topics
    • COVID-19
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Gender
    • Globalization
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Negotiation
    • Social Enterprise
    • Strategy
  • Sections
    • Book
    • Podcasts
    • HBS Case
    • In Practice
    • Lessons from the Classroom
    • Op-Ed
    • Research & Ideas
    • Research Event
    • Sharpening Your Skills
    • What Do You Think?
    • Working Paper Summaries
  • Browse All
    Why Global Investments Are Still a Good Bet
    13 Jun 2017Research & Ideas

    Why Global Investments Are Still a Good Bet

    by Michael Blanding
    International markets often move together, so does a global investment portfolio even make sense anymore? Luis Viceira still sees plenty of advantages in looking beyond home markets.
    LinkedIn
    Email
    Photo by iStock

    Investors in global equity markets have traditionally hedged their bets, casting their investments far and wide across the world. That way, if the market in one country or region stagnated (think Japan in the 1990s or Europe in the 2000s), they could make up the difference in other sectors that are booming.

    However, as markets in different countries have increasingly moved in tandem or correlated, from 50 or 60 percent in the 1990s to more than 90 percent after the financial crisis of 2008, that strategy has seemed less and less worthwhile.

    “The claim is that it makes less sense to be diversified than it used to in the past, since, at the end of the day, all markets are moving together,” says Luis Viceira, George E. Bates Professor and Senior Associate Dean for International Development at Harvard Business School.

    All things being equal, that means instead of spreading the wealth around, investors should put their money in places that are familiar—usually their own country. “There is a very well-known phenomenon called home bias,” continues Viceira. “People think they know their own stock market and feel more comfortable investing in it, and they overestimate the risks of investing abroad.”

    Home bias is short-sighted

    In a recently released working paper, however, Viceira argues that such an investment strategy may be unwise for investors in the long run—not to mention damaging to the global economy overall. Written with HBS doctoral students Zixuan (Kevin) Wang and John Zhou, Global Portfolio Diversification for Long-Horizon Investors has become one of the top downloaded papers on the online Social Science Research Network, sparking intense interest in the value of diversification in global investing.

    “People are intrigued by what this means about their own investment portfolios, and whether they should be investing more in the United States or globally,” Viceira says.

    First things first. Why have markets become increasingly correlated? The paper proposes two possibilities. The first theory is that fundamentals in different countries have become more similar with time. So, while industries within a country might move separately, all that variability comes out in the wash when you average across a broad array of industries on a countrywide scale. “You don’t see the stock price of an energy company in Texas always moving in sync with the stock price of Facebook,” says Viceira, “but when you look at national markets of developed economies, they all have utilities, airlines, manufacturing companies, telecom companies, so you might expect them to move together more than any individual stock.”

    “Being globally diversified is basically making a bet that the global economy will be in a better position in 20 or 30 years than it is today”

    The other possibility for increased market correlation is not because national economies have become more intrinsically similar, but because investing has become more global overall, so large equity firms are moving their money together based on the same sentiments. “Today, we have truly global asset managers that make it easy and cheap for any investor to invest in every market. This facilitates the transmission of investor sentiment across markets,” says Viceira.

    “If you have the same investors everywhere, they get scared at the same time and all pull out together,” says Viceira. The underlying value of the market, however, may not have changed, rather, investors are selling it at a discount. “For the same set of cash flows, they are willing to pay less. Of course, the reverse happens when they become bullish about stocks. These sentiment waves correct themselves, and fundamentals prevail in the long run.”

    Viceira and his colleagues used a complex econometric model to determine which of these two possible explanations appears to be a better description of the evolution of global capital markess. Using stock market data for the largest seven developed countries between 1986 and 2013, they disentangled changes in the prices of securities versus their value.

    “This is how you can piece out whether a positive return in the market was because something in the fundamentals changed or because of a change in investor sentiment,” he says.

    They found overwhelmingly that it was investor sentiment that became more correlated, not the underlying fundamentals. Because those sentiments tend to be transitory in nature, however, long-term investors shouldn’t worry so much about moving their money when those shocks occur.

    “They should be less concerned about that, because they can ride out those waves,” says Viceira. Thus, for investors looking beyond a 10- to 20-year time frame—including individuals saving for retirement, college endowments, foundations, pension funds, and sovereign wealth funds—global diversification still makes sense.

    In fact, says Viceira, not diversifying can hurt those investors by causing them to miss the more dynamic parts of the economy if they get stuck in one country that is stagnating.

    The advantage of diversification

    On the other hand, for short-term investors, it’s a different story. Since they are more exposed to transitory changes in market value, they are less able to ride out those discount shocks caused by investor sentiment. “If you have to liquidate your holdings in the short term, then being diversified doesn’t help as much as it did 30 years ago,” says Viceira.

    Even for those investors, however, there is still a reasonable advantage to diversification. And for the global equity market as a whole, Viceira says there are big benefits to having individual investors who are diversified across countries. “It immediately generates more capacity in global markets to provide capital in an economy, and that increases their ability to absorb risk.”

    Thus, diversification becomes self-reinforcing, making global financial markets more stable, at the same time allowing investors to profit from increases in value wherever they occur. Even while diversification will inevitably lead to risk from investments in companies that aren’t doing so well, overall, it leads to greater risk-adjusted returns in the long term.

    “Being globally diversified is basically making a bet that the global economy will be in a better position in 20 or 30 years than it is today,” says Viceira, “and I think that is safer than betting on any one specific economy.”

    Related Reading:

    Lessons Unlearned? Corporate Debt in Emerging Markets

    Post A Comment
    In order to be published, comments must be on-topic and civil in tone, with no name calling or personal attacks. Your comment may be edited for clarity and length.
      Trending
        • 08 Sep 2022
        • Book

        Gen Xers and Millennials, It’s Time To Lead. Are You Ready?

        • 25 Jan 2022
        • Research & Ideas

        More Proof That Money Can Buy Happiness (or a Life with Less Stress)

        • 25 Feb 2019
        • Research & Ideas

        How Gender Stereotypes Kill a Woman’s Self-Confidence

        • 17 May 2017
        • Research & Ideas

        Minorities Who 'Whiten' Job Resumes Get More Interviews

        • 28 Mar 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        The FDA’s Speedy Drug Approvals Are Safe: A Win-Win for Patients and Pharma Innovation

    Luis M. Viceira
    Luis M. Viceira
    George E. Bates Professor
    Senior Associate Dean, HBS Online; Senior Associate Dean, Executive Education
    Contact
    Send an email
    → More Articles
    Find Related Articles
    • Investment Portfolio
    • Investment Return
    • Diversification
    • Financial Strategy
    • Financial Services

    Sign up for our weekly newsletter

    Interested in improving your business? Learn about fresh research and ideas from Harvard Business School faculty.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
    ǁ
    Campus Map
    Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
    Baker Library | Bloomberg Center
    Soldiers Field
    Boston, MA 02163
    Email: Editor-in-Chief
    →Map & Directions
    →More Contact Information
    • Make a Gift
    • Site Map
    • Jobs
    • Harvard University
    • Trademarks
    • Policies
    • Accessibility
    • Digital Accessibility
    Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College