When should an investor leave foreign currency exposure unhedged?

Question

AcadiFi · Accepted Answer

The case for unhedged equity exposure rests on four pillars. First, currency provides diversification — many foreign currencies (particularly safe havens like JPY, CHF) rally when risk-off hits, partially cushioning equity drawdowns. Second, real purchasing power across decades tends toward purchasing power parity, meaning long-horizon currency returns trend to zero against productivity-matched peers. Third, hedging costs compound — even 5bps per month costs 60bps annually, material over decades. Fourth, for investors with future foreign consumption (e.g., a US retiree planning European travel), foreign currency acts as a natural hedge against future consumption baskets. Empirical evidence: Froot's classic paper showed that hedging global equity mattered little at 10+ year horizons. A US endowment like Braewick University with 30% international equity might leave it unhedged, citing liability horizon of infinity and negligible expected hedging alpha. Counterarguments: over shorter 1-3 year horizons, currency volatility is 8-12% annually, comparable to equity risk and large enough to matter for reporting. Regret risk — clients anchored on base-currency returns hate watching hedges lose during foreign currency rallies. The practical compromise: hedge fixed income fully, leave equities unhedged or strategically half-hedged, and separate strategic hedge ratio from active tactical currency views. Some investors also run 'reference currency rebalancing,' hedging only when deviations exceed bands.

When should an investor leave foreign currency exposure unhedged?

Master Level III with our CFA Course

Related Questions

Practice Questions