Tackling concerns about rising debt levels by way of a rugby analogy
A course of action that might be entirely rational for an individual to follow – such as taking on cheap debt – can be entirely irrational if it is pursued by a wider group
With the second round of group games in the 2019 Rugby World Cup now completed, it is still possible for all the home nations – yes, even Ireland and Scotland – to dream of progressing deep into the latter stages of the competition. In that spirit, then, let’s imagine your preferred team has made it all the way to the final in Yokohoma on 2 November – and, what is more, you are among the 72,000-strong capacity crowd to cheer them on.
At a particularly exciting point in the match – almost inevitably – the person in front of you stands up to try and obtain a better view of the action. It is irritating but also predictable – as is what happens next: you stand up and the person behind you and the person behind them … Before you know it, thousands of people are on their feet – and, in aggregate, nobody is any better off than if everyone had stayed sitting down.
Granted, using the Rugby World Cup final as the setting for our upcoming analogy may be a little opportunistic – let’s settle on ‘timely’ – but we hope it illustrates an important behavioural science lesson: a course of action that might be entirely rational and beneficial for an individual to follow can be entirely irrational and detrimental if it is pursued by a wider group.
And this is particularly relevant for investors because of the way so many businesses have behaved as a consequence of the benign economic environment of the last 10 years. Given the historically low interest rates of this period and the resulting slew of income-hungry investors seeking any kind of yield, it makes a lot of sense individual companies would issue cheap debt – but what does that mean for the system as a whole?
As we have discussed in articles such as Worrying picture, this is what economist Hyman Minsky meant when he put forward his hypothesis on financial instability – that “the illusion of stability of the system will, over time, create its own instability”. In essence, what happens here is a benign environment encourages businesses to take on additional leverage and risk and these twin triggers combine to create instability.
Increasing amounts of leverage is a topic we have addressed on a number of occasions, here on The Value Perspective – both in the context of lesser-known debt instruments, such as covenant-lite bonds and mandatory convertible bonds, and at a more mainstream level. At the start of this year, for example, we highlighted the growing proportion of corporate bonds rated just one step above ‘junk’ status.
Each time we highlight these investment ‘red flags’, we express concerns about the cumulative levels of debt in the system but it should be acknowledged that, for individual businesses, their directors and their advisers, any deals they are doing may make perfect sense. Taken as a whole, however, it all serves to increase risk as any future financial or economic shocks will reverberate far more strongly in a highly-levered system.
Investors need to be aware of this risk and to guard against it – as we are, here on The Value Perspective – by steering clear of companies with excessive levels of debt. Such businesses are ill-prepared to face the broad range of economic scenarios that could occur in the coming months and years. Having stood up with the rest of the crowd, they could easily find themselves knocked off their feet.
I joined Schroders in 2010 as part of the Investment Communications team focusing on UK equities. In 2014, I moved across to the Value Investment team. Prior to joining Schroders I was an analyst at an independent capital markets research firm and hold a Economics and Politics degree.
The views and opinions displayed are those of Nick Kirrage, Andrew Lyddon, Kevin Murphy, Andrew Williams, Andrew Evans, Simon Adler, Juan Torres Rodriguez, Liam Nunn, Vera German and Roberta Barr, members of the Schroder Global Value Equity Team (the Value Perspective Team), and other independent commentators where stated.
They do not necessarily represent views expressed or reflected in other Schroders' communications, strategies or funds. The Team has expressed its own views and opinions on this website and these may change.
This article is intended to be for information purposes only and it is not intended as promotional material in any respect. Reliance should not be placed on the views and information on the website when taking individual investment and/or strategic decisions. Nothing in this article should be construed as advice. The sectors/securities shown above are for illustrative purposes only and are not to be considered a recommendation to buy/sell.
Past performance is not a guide to future performance and may not be repeated. The value of investments and the income from them may go down as well as up and investors may not get back the amounts originally invested.