Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 90

Currency hedging for international equity portfolios

With recent volatility in the value of the Australian dollar (AUD), investor attention is again drawn to the topic of currency hedging. This article looks at the impact of currency on international equity investments for an Australian investor and explores some of the factors that influence the decision to hedge currency exposure.

The impact of currency risk

Currency risk is typically a significant proportion of the total risk of an unhedged international equity portfolio which can have a large impact on returns. For example, over the 12 months to February 2009, unhedged investors were about 20% better off than their hedged counterparts, while over the 12 months to March 2010 they were about 40% worse off (Chart 1).

Over the long term, the difference between hedged and unhedged returns is less dramatic because currencies have a tendency to fluctuate around a long-term average. However, hedged investors have been better off by an average of 1.2% per annum (ignoring hedging and carry costs) over the 26 years since 1988. The hedged portfolio has had the added benefit of lower volatility (on average) than the unhedged (14.0% vs 14.8%).

The relationship between currency and equity returns

In the aftermath of the GFC, the volatility of a currency-hedged All Country World Index (ACWI) portfolio rose above that of an AUD unhedged ACWI portfolio; an unusual situation that persisted until mid-2013 (Chart 2).

In other words, it became more ‘risky’ for an investor to hedge their AUD currency exposure than to not hedge during this period. This somewhat counter-intuitive phenomenon was the result of a significant increase in correlation between the AUD currency basket and international equity returns (as shown in Chart 3). During this period the currency exposure of an AUD ACWI equity portfolio became a diversifying position. From a ‘total risk’ perspective it was hard to justify hedging currency risk during this period because it increased overall risk. However correlations have now returned to more normal levels and hedged volatility has again dropped below unhedged on a trailing 12 month measure.

This event clearly illustrates that relationships between financial assets are not guaranteed to remain stable and any assumptions that are made as part of the investment process need to be monitored.

Optimal currency hedge ratios

To illustrate the impact of this correlation change we calculate the optimal currency hedge ratio for an investor trying to minimise the total volatility of their global equity portfolio by adjusting the currency hedge (Chart 4). The grey lines show the total risk of equity and currency combined, while the light blue line shows the currency risk in isolation. The optimal total-risk hedge level will be the lowest point on the grey line. We see that in June 2012 the optimal total-risk position was to leave AUD exposure completely unhedged, while the current optimal position is to be roughly 50% hedged. A hedge level of 50% implies that half of the total currency exposure is hedged. Of course if your objective is to eliminate as much currency risk as possible then the optimal choice is always to be fully hedged, regardless of total portfolio volatility.

Hedging returns

Some investors may not be aware that there is a return associated with a currency hedge that is independent of currency and market movements. This return is the ‘cost of carry’ (or a ‘return of carry’) which reflects interest rate differential between the base currency and foreign currency exposures which are being hedged; it is priced into the currency ‘forward points’. A currency hedge effectively earns the domestic interest rate and pays the foreign rate; for AUD investors this has historically provided a benefit, as illustrated in Chart 5. This benefit would reduce if, for example, US interest rates were to rise while AUD rates remain on hold. You will notice there is variability in the hedging return, which means that it is not ‘risk free’, however the variation in forward returns is typically much lower than the variation in the currency returns which are being hedged.

Why hedge currency exposure

So does it make sense to hedge currency exposure? There are several reasons investors might want to consider currency hedging, including:

  • Prior to 2008, hedging currency exposure reduced the total volatility of an AUD based international equity portfolio. Now that correlations have returned to more historically normal levels this may be the case again going forward (though of course this is not guaranteed).
  • If a view is held on the AUD, this can be reflected in the level of currency hedge. If there is no view on the currency then arguably it is unwise to take exposure to a source of risk from which you have no expectation of return and therefore we would argue that currency hedging should be considered in this scenario too.
  • Historically there has been a carry benefit to hedging the AUD due to the prevailing interest rates. As long as interest rates in Australia are higher than the weighted average rates of international markets, then this may remain the case.

Summary

At Realindex we always encourage investors to take a long-term view on their investment. If an investor holds a long term view on the AUD then it is sensible to implement a hedging strategy that reflects that view (be it hedged or unhedged), and stick to it. If no view is held on the currency, then there are still very valid reasons to consider hedging currency exposure. In either case, it is important to ensure that any performance benchmark is aligned with the strategic hedging decision, and that the risk and cost implications of this decision are fully considered.

 

Scott Hamilton is a Senior Quantitative Analyst with Realindex Investments. This article is for general educational purposes and readers should seek their own professional advice.

 

  •   27 November 2014
  • 2
  •      
  •   
2 Comments
Capital Markets Guy
December 01, 2014

Hi Scott,

Thanks for this work. Could you help me to understand were you got your hedged ACWI return series from (I can't see one published on Bloomberg by MSCI) as I am trying to replicate these charts and are unable to.

When I look at similar charts for the MSCI Developed Markets index, for example, it looks like unhedged returns are generally less volatile than hedged returns (the opposite of what you find here).

Also, I found it interesting that you say that hedged investors receive the interest rate differential between the two countries involved - my understanding was that both hedged and unhedged returns receive the interest rate differential, but only the unhedged returns receive the effect of changes in exchange rates (with the difference between the two return series being equal to the so-called "currency surprise" effect).

Thanks again for sharing.

Scott Hamilton
December 01, 2014

Hi Capital Markets Guy.

When hedging with forwards you effectively lock in the interest rate differential every time you set the hedge because this is built into the forward rate. You would probably want to hedge at the prevailing spot rate but you can't, the best you can do is the forward rate which has the interest rate differential baked into it.

As for the ACWI data... I cheated and used "local currency" index returns as a "perfectly hedged" proxy (because I wanted to go back as far as possible with daily data). I haven't looked at the Developed World data but I would have expected it to display similar pattern. Unhedged volatility has definitely been lower than "currency neutral" volatility since 2008, however before that it seems to be predominantly the other way round.

Hope this makes sense.

Regards

Scott

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Does currency hedging provide an edge?

To hedge or not to hedge?

Currency risk deserves more than a coin toss

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

2 billion reasons to fix retirement income

A proposal to address Australia's 'stranded balances' in retirement by requiring super funds to transition members to pension phase at 65, boosting retirement income and reframing super as a source of income.

The ultimate superannuation EOFY checklist 2026

Here is a checklist of 28 important issues you should address before June 30 to ensure your SMSF or other super fund is in order and that you are making the most of the strategies available.

Do super funds need a massive wake up call?

UK retirement expert, Guy Opperman, believes super funds are failing at supporting members in deaccumulation. Here is what Australia should do about it. 

Two months into retirement

A retirement researcher's take on retirement and her focus on each of her six resource buckets to stay engaged during the transition and beyond.

Reforming the taxation of wealth and wealth transfers

As the budget approaches debate continues about the need and method for addressing wealth inequality. Could reinstating wealth transfer taxes be the answer?

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 662 with weekend update

The debate over the budget is increasingly shaped by frustration and perceptions of unfairness, rather than clear-eyed assessment of policy outcomes.

Latest Updates

Back to the future - Why indexing CGT is a good idea

A return to indexation of capital gains would be a fairer way to compensate households for the effects of inflation than the current discount. Importantly, it opens the door to future, broader reforms to stop the taxation of inflation.

Australia has no death duties. Technically.

Australia may not levy formal death duties, but a growing web of tax measures is quietly shaping what wealth passes between generations. Now, the 2026 budget adds another layer.

Strategy

The folly of the Iran war

From oil shocks to fractured alliances, the Iran war carries the hallmarks of a historic policy misstep - one that could tip an already fragile global economy into crisis.

Taxation

Noel Whittaker’s take on the budget

Marketed as a fix for inequality and housing affordability, the latest budget instead delivers a tangle of tax changes that leave everyday Australians worse off.

Investment strategies

The red metal's long game

Copper has had a rough few weeks but investors should not ignore the potential for future price increases as supply increasingly falls behind demand.

Taxation

The lesser-known effects of changed property taxes

The budget’s property tax reforms are being framed as fairness measures, but they risk splitting the housing market, penalising lower‑income investors and introducing distortions that may prove costly.

Latest from Morningstar

Why stocks sometimes fall for no obvious reason

The vast and opaque world of private assets is a powerful gravitational force - and when trouble hits, it's the more liquid public equities that often the feel it first.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 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.