Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 58

Bonds have a role in managing inflation risks

One of the common reasons given by advisers against investing in fixed interest is that “you can’t grow your earnings”. After all, so the thinking goes, your interest is fixed. That must mean you can only earn a constant amount of income.

However, to borrow from Sportin’ Life in Porgy and Bess, it ain’t necessarily so. There is a simple way that investors can grow their fixed income earnings; in fact, many investors already do so without realising it. The strategy is to reinvest at least a portion of the interest payments. This grows the capital of the investment and enables compounding of interest.

Here’s an illustration. $100,000 invested in a ten year fixed income investment with a 4.5% interest rate will pay $4,500 a year if all the interest is taken as income. However, if the interest is reinvested then by the final year the income will have grown to $6,687 and the total value of the portfolio to $155,297. This assumes, for simplicity, that the same 4.5% interest rate can be earned throughout the period and, of course, ignores taxation. The year by year progression is shown in the following table:

Year Interest earned End of year portfolio value

1

4,500

104,500

2

4,702

109,203

3

4,914

114,117

4

5,135

119,252

5

5,366

124,618

6

5,608

130,226

7

5,860

136,086

8

6,124

142,210

9

6,400

148,610

10

6,687

155,297

By the final year of this investment, the initial outlay of $100,000 is earning $6,687 a year in interest even though the level of interest rates hasn’t gone up.

This is effectively what happens in many investments already. It happens in the fixed income component of superannuation funds, where all income is automatically reinvested, and also in term deposits where the reinvestment rate is the same as the initial yield.

Inflation risk

Of course, a lot of investors need to draw income from their portfolios and can’t simply reinvest all the interest. The trouble with doing this is that in ten years’ time the real value of the $4,500 interest payment (to use the above example again) has been eroded by inflation. If inflation was 2.5% over the ten years of this investment, the real value of the final year’s interest payment has declined to $3,515.

Can we get around this?

A variation on the full reinvestment strategy is to partially reinvest. This still enables some growth in earnings to take place, but also provides cash flow in the investor’s hand. If the inflation component of the interest rate is reinvested and only the real component is kept as income, then the income payment each year will rise in line with inflation and its purchasing power will be maintained.

Let’s say inflation is running at 2.5%. In this case, the investor in our example would reinvest $2,500 of the first interest payment and retain $2,000 (a ‘real’ rate of 2.0%). In year 2 the 4.5% rate would be earned on a portfolio of $102,500, delivering interest of $4,612. Of this, the inflation component for reinvestment is $2,562 and the investor keeps $2,050.

Continuing this process through the ten years of the investment results in the investor receiving an income payment of $2,498 in year 10, which will purchase the same amount of goods and services at that time as $2,000 could buy today.

The obvious question at this point is, what happens if inflation rises to more than 2.5%? A simplistic application of the strategy means that in those years the retained income is reduced. For example, if inflation in one year is 3.5% then the investor would only take an income payment of 1.0% of the portfolio in that year.

Alternatively, the investor might assume that the following year’s inflation will fall back again – as the RBA would likely tighten monetary policy to achieve that outcome – and continue to follow the 2.5/2.0 split. This is an imperfect response, but provided inflation does average 2.5% over time, it still delivers the outcome intended.

There is another more elegant alternative.

Inflation-linked bonds

In essence, inflation-linked bonds (ILB) automatically follow the strategy outlined above. A real yield is paid each year, with an inflation component reinvested. The nominal capital value of the investment increases in line with inflation and thus the income that is generated is also maintained in real terms.

The following chart shows the actual history of the quarterly interest payments since 2005 of the Commonwealth Government’s ILB maturing in 2020. On the y-axis, 1.2 means $1.20 for every $100 of original face value purchased, or 1.2% of face value (same thing).

The steady increase in the interest payment over time means that by this year (2014) an investor who bought this security and held it through the period is now being paid 27.5% more income than they were nine years ago. Over the same period consumer prices, as measured by the CPI, have also increased by 27.5%.

Comparing the approaches

The key difference between nominal bonds and ILB, which makes ILB better at protecting investors against inflation, is that with ILB it is only the real yield component that is fixed.

In the example we’ve been using, this is the 2.0% component. The combination of the real and the inflation components isn’t fixed at 4.5%, as is the case with nominal bonds. Whatever the inflation rate, the capital value of the ILB will adjust and the investor is paid each year 2.0% of that amount.

The difference between the yield on a nominal bond and the real yield on an ILB of similar maturity is the break-even inflation rate. In our example, this is 2.5%. A steady inflation rate of 2.5% would produce identical investment outcomes from either holding an ILB or using the reinvestment strategy with nominal bonds.

ILB come out ahead over the longer term if inflation during the life of the security exceeds the break-even at purchase. For example, if inflation ended up being 3% a year instead of 2.5%, the ILB would end up growing by 5% a year instead of 4.5%.

This is especially useful when there are jumps in inflation due to policy changes. For example, if the GST rate were to be increased and the CPI to jump, the capital value of the ILB will adjust upwards and in turn so will the interest payments.

On the other hand, if inflation were to track at a lower average than the break-even rate, then the nominal bond approach achieves a superior outcome.

Concluding remarks

The point of this discussion is not to argue that investors should choose fixed income over any other asset class. For example, it says nothing about the relative attractiveness at any point in time of interest rates against dividend yields or property rental yields. Rather, the point is simply that investors need not shun including fixed interest in their portfolios due to a misunderstanding about the potential for earnings to grow at least in line with inflation. Fixed income is a good asset class to use for inflation risk management – not only inflation linked bonds, but nominal bonds also.

 

Warren Bird was Co-Head of Global Fixed Interest and Credit at Colonial First State Global Asset Management. His roles now include consulting, serving as an External Member of the GESB Board Investment Committee and writing on fixed interest.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Inflation linked bonds

The time for bonds has come

Hunting for value in fixed income

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Latest Updates

Planning

Will young Australians be better off than their parents?

For much of Australia’s history, each new generation has been better off than the last: better jobs and incomes as well as improved living standards. A new report assesses whether this time may be different.

Superannuation

The rubbery numbers behind super tax concessions

In selling the super tax, Labor has repeated Treasury claims of there being $50 billion in super tax concessions annually, mostly flowing to high-income earners. This figure is vastly overstated.

Investment strategies

A steady road to getting rich

The latest lists of Australia’s wealthiest individuals show that while overall wealth has continued to rise, gains by individuals haven't been uniform. Many might have been better off adopting a simpler investment strategy.

Economy

Would a corporate tax cut boost productivity in Australia?

As inflation eases, the Albanese government is switching its focus to lifting Australia’s sluggish productivity. Can corporate tax cuts reboot growth - or are we chasing a theory that doesn’t quite work here?

Are V-shaped market recoveries becoming more frequent?

April’s sharp rebound may feel familiar, but are V-shaped recoveries really more common in the post-COVID world? A look at market history suggests otherwise and hints that a common bias might be skewing perceptions.

Investment strategies

Asset allocation in a world of riskier developed markets

Old distinctions between developed and emerging market bonds no longer hold true. At a time where true diversification matters more than ever, this has big ramifications for the way that portfolios should be constructed.

Investment strategies

Top 5 investment reads

As the July school holiday break nears, here are some investment classics to put onto your reading list. The books offer lessons in investment strategy, financial disasters, and mergers and acquisitions.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.