Hi,
Macht sich jemand anders noch Sorgen um den schwachen Dollar? Oder dia Prognose «von der UBS», dass der Dollar bis 2030 auf 60Rappen sinken könnte?
Lohnt sich jetzt ein hedged ETF?
Zum Beispiel?
Und fĂŒr was fĂŒr eine Anlageklasse ĂŒberhaupt?
Weltportfolio mit 1ETF als risikobehafteter Teil
des Portfolios. Z.b IE00B8BVCK12?
For equity, itâs worth it only if the USD loses more value than the market expect (the cost of hedging is the delta of the risk free rate of the respective currencies, which is expected to track long term how much a currency weakens vs. another).
And if you think the USD will lose more value than expected, you might as well do a direct FX bet instead of a hedge.
(Itâs different for bond, where hedging will lower volatility while having the same returns which is often desirable )
2 Likes
I understand. So what about the UBS «forecast» that the Dollar will be at 60 Rappen by 2030?
Other question, do I have less currency risk if I buy my Vanguard All World ETF via SIX in CHF vs. LSE in USD, since I dont have to exchange all the money invested into USD?
I guess thatâs close to the market consensus? So hedging doesnât matter.
The denomination of the ETF doesnât matter, you can buy it in CHF, USD, or EUR, youâll have the same returns in a given currency.
(but there might be different fees between various exchanges, and conversion fees can be significant depending on the broker).
When I buy 100 shares of the ETF in USD via LSE I exchange all the money in USD. However when I buy 100 shares of the ETF in CHF only ca.50% of the money will be invested in USD since the ETF holds that much US stocks. The rest uf the currency is not in USD.
If I sell my USD ETF via LSE, I have to exchange back all the money from USD to CHF. If I would buy my ETF in CHF, only 50% of the invested money would be exchanged from USD to CHF.
HmâŠmaybe I dont understand. Where is the mistake in my thought process?
You can check it yourself, simulate what you just say using historical prices for stock and foreign exchange.
Note that technically you also donât have to sell on the same exchange you bought (but there might be fees depending on broker).
If that wasnât true, there would be some arbitrage to make easy money (buy in one exchange/sell on another potentially simultaneously).
2 Likes
Lets assume CHF/USD is currently at 1.00. You can buy 25g gold for 1000 CHF or 1000 USD. 2 years later the USD is at 0.90 CHF. The value of gold has increased by 20% in the same time (in CHF). You can sell the gold for 1200 CHF or for 1333 USD which you can exchange in 1200 CHF after selling it.
It doesnât matter in which currency you buy it, the underlying asset is identical. Same with ETFs or stocks.
7 Likes
Meiner Meinung nach genau was @Cortana und @oslasho gesagt haben.
Kurz zusammengefasst ist fĂŒr mich Hedging in CHF eine spekulative Wette darauf, dass der CHF stetig und langfristig gegenĂŒber anderen WĂ€hrungen ĂŒberbewertet sein wird. Da Hedging aber kurzfristig abgewickelt wird* und die WĂ€hrungsschwankungen nicht stetig in eine Richtung gehen, ist die Wette aus meiner Sicht mehrheitlich mit Underperformance gegenĂŒber Non-Hedging verurteilt.
Etwas langatmiger:
Langfristig bestimmt das Underlying (die Unternehmen im ETF/Fond) den Preis, in welcher WÀhrung auch immer. Kurzfristig kann man sich mit Versicherungen gegen WÀhrungsschwankungen absichern, die den Preis in unterschiedlichen WÀhrungen (kurzfristig) unterschiedlich aussehen lassen, kostet aber VersicherungsprÀmien.
Sinnvoll (nun, ich finde es persönlich nicht sinnvoll, aber das ist nun mal das GeschĂ€ftsmodell der Anbieter von gehedgten Produkten:) ist das Versichern nur, wenn man als ETF/Fond-Anbieter monatlich, quartalsweise oder jedes Jahr mit irgendeinem (ebenfalls gehedgten) Benchmark verglichen wird und bei kurzfristiger Underperformance (gegenĂŒber dem Index/Benchmark) wegen WĂ€hrungsschwankungen möglicherweise sein Mandat im nicht gehedgten ETF oder der nicht gehedten Fond-Anteilsklasse verliert (weil man in der LokalwĂ€hrung, hier CHF, gemessen wird).
Zugegebenermassen existentiell fĂŒr die Anbieter von solchen Produkten, aber als langfristiger Investor m.E. relativ irrelevant.**
Zum Vergleich: im Optionenmarkt (Puts/Calls) verfallen drei Viertel der Versicherungen wertlos - ich vermute, dass eine Vollkostenrechnung mit Futures auf einem ETF/Fond Àhnlich aussehen wird.
In den meisten FÀllen profitieren also lediglich die VerkÀufer (Banken/Broker/Stillhalter) der Versicherungen (Futures, Optionen) mittels Spreads, Fees, VersicherungsprÀmien, etc.
Ich persönlich wĂŒrde nicht hedgen, ausser man ist institutioneller Anleger oder extrem wechselkursanfĂ€lliger und auf das Einkommen in LokalwĂ€hrung angewiesener Rentner.
* Typischerweise werden die Hedges/Versicherung monatlich gerollt (alte Versicherung wird zurĂŒckgekauft, neue Versicherung wird gekauft).
** Vielleicht gibt es eine Ausnahme fĂŒr Anlagen im Micro- oder Small-Cap Bereich, wo es möglicherweise Firmen gibt, die ausschliesslich oder mehrheitlich in LokalwĂ€hrung ihre Wertschöpfungkette finanzieren.
Dies wĂŒrde aber vermutlich nur auf Einzelunternehmen zutreffen.
Anders gesagt: viele Unternehmen in ETFs haben globale oder zumindest ĂŒberregionale Zahlungsströme, welche das Wechselkursrisiko mittel- und langfristig adressieren sollten.
Edit: Three typos.
4 Likes
The forecast sounds reasonable and not to worry about, this is in 7 years and it corresponds to 3% or 4% of difference of yearly inflation rate. Hedging would not protect against this anyway because you would need to pay the difference of interest rates, and in the long term it corresponds to the difference of inflation.
USDCHF at 0.6 in 2030 doesnât mean 860 CHF ($1000 of 2023) would become 600 CHF in dollars ($1000 of 2030), because the $1000 would be credited interests, currently $50 a year, so more than $350 in total.
And recently the dollar fell 15% relative to the Swiss franc but American indexes are near all times highs so this loss was not really felt on stocks.
Iâm not saying itâs a bad idea to CHF-hedge cash and bonds, but one needs to understand that hedge protects against short term ups and downs, not against long term inflation differences.
1 Like
Ok, although I dont understand everything in detail, I take away the following:
Hedging stock ETF is a bet on strong CHF and if I won the bet it would give me better portfolio performance (over a short time).
Hedging does not reduce currency risk or the risk of being invested (over a long time).
I would say hedging is a bet that CHF is currently weak, and will gain strength. Hedging increases performance if you start hedging a currency while that currency is strong over the CHF and you expect it to lose value more than the inflation difference. This assumes that you have a way to estimate which currencies are strong and which are weak.
Another way is to look at it as decreasing risk, rather than increasing return. Any risk taken should be rewarded, and risks that are not rewarded with superior returns should be hedged. This is the same reasoning for diversifying stocks: systemic risk (at the market level) yields returns, but non-systemic risk (betting on a single stock compared to the market) is not rewarded with extra yield, so it should be âhedgedâ by investing in an index ETF.
On a scale of 40 years it makes no difference, but a currency can remain undervalued over several years before reverting to its natural value, which means that your portfolio is not liquid during this time (you would sell at a loss). This is one reason for hedging bonds, because they are supposed to be liquid while stocks fluctuate. For stocks itâs different, because the trading currency does not reflect the actual exposure.
Sorry to be blunt, but if you donât feel like understanding everything in detail, maybe you shouldnât draw these conclusions about doing currency hedging on ETFs in the first place? Without understanding, it seems itâs like a pure speculative bet? Even with detailed unterstanding, it sounds (to me still like mostly) just a bet.
Not trying to be offensive, but if you donât know exactly why and with conviction why you are doing something, itâs often better to do nothing, financially speaking.
Maybe my take-away would instead be:
- nobody knows anything about future FX rates and therefore it seems speculative to hedge any which way.
- many companies have global cash flows and will make money depending on their global business regardless of FX rates
Sorry, a couple more words than you used in your summary, but I didnât have the time to make it shorter. 
Good luck and good night!
2 Likes
In my view, the decision to hedge or not to hedge currency should not be taken based on the current market conditions: it should not be a bet.
It should be a strategic decision taken in the design of the portfolio (for example, hedge all bonds in foreign currency) and for the long-term.
There is no right or wrong as long as one doesnât go back and forth hedging and unhedging as a panic reaction. Hedging probably makes it easier to stick to the strategy for those would could react emotionally to temporary fluctuations.
3 Likes