基金公司缘何低配中国公司股票

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

　　基金公司对中国股市的低配幅度达到至少6年来的最高水平。
　　The unusually large bet against the Hong Kong, Shanghai and Shenzhen markets is a sign of mounting western wariness 1 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.
　　这种对香港、上海和深圳股市的异常不看好表明，西方日益担忧这个全球第二大经济体的健康——自2014年6月以来，中国外汇储备下降了1万亿美元，尽管中国竭力遏制资本外流潮。
　　“There is still a concern about the banking 2 system, tied to issues with the property market and potential issues with the provincial 3 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 4 Growth Fund, which has just 2.5 per cent of its portfolio 5 in Hong Kong and Chinese stocks.
　　MI Somerset新兴市场红利增长基金(MI Somerset Emerging Markets Dividend Growth Fund)的首席基金经理Edward Lam表示：“人们仍然担忧银行业体系，它牵扯到房地产市场问题以及地方债务市场的潜在问题，我们似乎处于坏账周期的初级阶段。”该基金在香港和中国内地股市的头寸仅占其投资组合的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.”
　　“不良贷款日益增加，而我们还在等待中国政府对资本大量外流的政策回应。”
　　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.
　　自指数编制商MSCI明晟2015年11月决定，在原来纳入在香港上市的中资公司的基础上，将百度(Baidu)、网易(Netease)和阿里巴巴(Alibaba)等在纽约上市的中资公司纳入指数以来，大中华区股票在广泛追踪的MSCI新兴市场指数(MSCI Emerging Markets Index)中的权重飙升至27%。
　　However, while emerging market fund managers have, in aggregate 6, allowed their Chinese exposure to rise to 21.7 per cent, they have been unwilling 7 to push it higher still.
　　然而，尽管总的来说，新兴市场基金允许它们对中资公司的投资比重升至21.7%，但它们不愿进一步推高该比例。
　　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.
　　结果是，新兴市场基金，或者至少是科普利基金研究(Copley Fund Research)监测的总资产达2550亿美元的126只基金，对中国股票的相对于MSCI新兴市场指数的低配幅度达到创纪录的5.2个百分点（如第一张图表所示），却对印度、俄罗斯、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 8 the data in January 2011, and well below the 40 per cent or so witnessed in recent years, as illustrated 9 in the second chart.
　　此外，现在只有18.3%的基金对中国股票超配，这是自科普利2011年1月开始编制这项数据以来的又一个创纪录低点，远低于最近几年的约40%，如第二张图表所示。
　　Among “high-active” funds, defined as those having an active share — the degree to which their portfolio differs from the underlying 10 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“高主动比重”基金当中，对中国股票的低配更为显著，低配幅度达到8.4个百分点，而“低主动比重”基金的低配幅度是3.2个百分点（如第三张图表所示）。“高主动比重”基金是指主动比重(active share)至少为75%、持有股票少于75只的基金，主动比重衡量基金投资组合与基准指数的差异程度。“低主动比重”基金被一些人认为等同于“秘密跟踪基金”(closet trackers)。
　　“MSCI has increased its China weight. We have seen some funds try and match that but others not,” said Steven Holden, founder 11 of Copley.
　　科普利创始人史蒂文?霍尔登(Steven Holden)表示：“MSCI增加了中资公司的比重。我们看到一些基金公司跟上，但其他基金公司则没有。”
　　“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.”
　　“在某个点上他们会说，‘我们不会追逐这种事情’。没有任何迹象表明主动比重较高的基金追逐MSCI的中资公司比重：8个百分点是显著低配。它将导致基金业绩的显著分化。如果它们押对了，很好，否则，完蛋。”
　　Mr Holden did not believe the reluctance 12 to increase exposure to China was related to US President Donald Trump’s talk of imposing 13 sizeable import tariffs 14 on exports from the country, although he did say “would you try and chase China all the way up with [Trump] in the air?”
　　霍尔登不认为基金公司不愿增持中国股票是与美国总统唐纳德?特朗普(Donald Trump)对进口中国产品征收巨额进口关税的言论有关，尽管他的确说，“（特朗普）大放厥词的时候你会尝试着追逐中国市场吗？”
　　His analysis suggests that fund managers, in aggregate, are most underweight China’s financial sector 15, with an average holding of 5 per cent, against an index weight of 7.9 per cent.
　　他的分析显示，总的来说，基金公司对中国金融股的低配最严重，平均配置比例仅有5%，而指数中的中国金融股权重是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的基金通过汇丰(HSBC)建立了对中国经济的一些敞口。在伦敦上市的汇丰在亚洲有大量业务，他相信该行可能受益于中国银行业体系的动荡。
　　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 16 2.5 per cent).
　　虽然在纽约上市的中国科技巨擘被纳入MSCI指数，但基金公司如今对科技股也处于低配（比重为6.8%，而MSCI指数中的权重为8.8%），唯一明显超配的是非必需消费类股（比重3.5%，而MSCI指数中的权重为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.
　　霍尔登表示：“我认为MSCI指数将这些公司纳入是一场豪赌。人们并不是真的想要在自己的基金中配置那么多中资股。它们投资于全球新兴市场，而不是‘中国+’。”
　　Not all agree, of course.
　　当然，不是所有人都这样认为。
　　“For the past seven or eight years my inbox has been constantly full of the demise 17 of China, the financial collapse 18 of China, the significant debt accumulation in China, an unwillingness 19 to let zombie companies go bankrupt, demographics posing a challenge going forward, concerns about the property market.
　　“这七、八年来，我的收件箱里一直都满是关于中国垮台、中国金融崩溃、中国巨大的债务积累、不愿让僵尸企业破产、人口结构对未来构成挑战、房地产市场引人担忧的邮件。”
　　“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 20 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.
　　“到目前为止，上述没有一项真正给中国造成任何重创，”霸菱(Barings)新兴及前沿股票联席主管威廉?帕尔默(William Palmer)表示。霸菱Emerging Markets Umbrella基金目前对香港上市股票的配置比例为35.6%，是少数超配的基金之一。
　　“I nearly fell off my chair last week when a major sellside investment bank put out a positive note,” he added.
　　“上周，当一家大型卖方投资银行抛出乐观论调时，我差点从椅子上摔下来，”他接着说。
　　Mr Palmer’s thesis is that “there is a lot of reform in China that is maybe not appreciated by the marketplace”.
　　帕尔默的观点是：“中国进行了很多改革，市场或许还未认识到其价值”。
　　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 21; 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 22 and the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock connect programmes.
　　他列举的包括国有企业改革，特别是在煤炭和钢铁行业，一些亏损国企出售非核心资产或被关停；降低银行体系风险的措施，例如确认并出售不良贷款；市场自由化，例如向外国投资者开放债券市场以及推出“沪港通”和“深港通”机制。
　　“The consensus 23 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 24 risk premium 25 would start to fall as the perception of risk falls, and clearly equity prices would rise.
　　“外界的共识是，中国将在未来几年的某个时刻经历一场金融危机。如果共识开始背离那种极端情况会怎样？随着感知到的风险下降，股票风险溢价将开始下降，而股票价格显然会上升。”
　　“[Being short China] could be the pain trade for emerging market investors in 2017, just like Brazil last year,” Mr Palmer argued.
　　“2017年，（做空中国）可能让新兴市场投资者吃苦头，就像去年在巴西一样，”帕尔默说。
　　“The job is not done, but they are making some material progress that can reduce the likelihood of a crisis occurring.”
　　“任务还未完成，但他们正取得一些实质进步，可以降低危机发生的可能性。”
　　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 26 China Automotive Holdings, which manufactures and sells BMWs; the “very cheap” China Construction Bank; Guangdong Investment, involved in infrastructure 27 and utilities; China State Construction and insurers Ping An and AIA, given the “huge underpenetration of pensions, savings 28 and insurance across China”.
　　因此，他看到了“因投资者不看好且持怀疑态度而估值极具吸引力的资产”，例如阿里巴巴（“估值显著低于亚马逊(Amazon)，但成长更快”）；社交平台腾讯(Tencent)；制造并销售宝马(BMW)汽车的华晨中国(Brilliance China Automotive)；“非常便宜”的中国建设银行(China Construction Bank)；参与基建和公用事业的粤海投资(Guangdong Investment)；中国建筑(China State Construction)以及平安保险(Ping An)和友邦保险(AIA)——鉴于“中国养老金、储蓄和保险目前的严重低渗透”。
　　Even Mr Lam does see the odd opportunity in China, such as the tech sector and nappy maker 29 Hengan International, “which may be an interesting case of regulation helping 30 a company”, he says, in reference to Beijing’s easing of its one-child policy.
　　甚至Edward Lam也看到了中国不一样的机会，如高科技行业以及纸尿裤生产商恒安国际(Hengan International)，“这或许是规则帮助企业的有趣案例”，他说，意指中国政府放松独生子女政策。
　　One unresolved question is whether the fund industry’s relative reticence 31 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 32 pushing China’s weight higher still.
　　一个尚未解决的疑问是，基金行业相对不愿持有中国股票是否会对MSCI明晟造成影响，后者将于今年6月份决定是否将中国上海和深圳上市的“A股”纳入其旗舰新兴市场指数，从而进一步推高中国的权重。
　　In theory, it should have no relevance 33, with MSCI making its decision purely 34 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
　　理论上，这应该没有关联，MSCI明晟的决定完全是出于技术原因。但如果客户对MSCI明晟表示他们暂时不想增加对中国的敞口，有人会认为这将有一定影响。
　　“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.”
　　“这的确会影响（MSCI明晟）的看法，”帕尔默说，不过他又补充道：“问题不是（A股）是否会被纳入，而是何时被纳入。”