Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 430

Slowing global trade not the threat investors fear

Contributing authors: Jonathan Lemco, Asawari Sathe, Adam J. Schickling, Maximilian Wieland, and Beatrice Yeo, from the Vanguard Investment Strategy Group’s Global Economics Team.

The last 12-plus months have emphasised that the COVID-19 pandemic would accelerate trends already in place. One of these trends is the shortening, and in some cases the reshoring, of supply chains, as business leaders question whether their supply chains have been stretched too far and become too complex.

Such a trend raises a natural question: Is globalisation dead?

New Vanguard research, The deglobalisation myth(s), concludes that, no, globalisation isn’t dead. Instead, global trade growth is likely to slow, as it’s been doing since the GFC. This slowing in global trade growth, what we term ‘slowbalisation’, is unlikely to turn into a contraction in global trade. What’s more, the implications for investors are only modest.

A slowbalization scenario is the most likely outcome

Sources: Vanguard calculations, using data from the World Bank, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the KOF Swiss Economic Institute.

The allure of global trade is understandable

Companies that produce goods or provide services want the largest possible markets for their outputs. But a structural expansion in supply chains, which boosted gross trade in the 1990s and early 2000s, started to slow even before the GFC. A turn toward protectionism - government policies that favour domestic industries - over the last decade in the face of rising inequality in developed economies is likely to similarly tap the brakes on global trade.

We note that other aspects of globalisation, including international capital flows, knowledge sharing, and geopolitics, carry potentially significant economic, societal, and environmental consequences. Our latest research focuses on just one aspect of globalisation that addresses a specific concern of investors: the trade of goods and services.

The concern is that slowing global trade growth may reduce corporate earnings and profit growth and, by extension, weigh on equity prices. After all, a globalisation wave that began in the 1990s coincided with a six-fold increase in S&P500 Index earnings per share and more than a doubling of profit margins, contributing to almost 90% of the index’s price return over most of three decades.1

Risks to investors may not be as great as they seem

But we contest the view that globalisation has been the central factor in the expansion of these return drivers. Our research demonstrates an inconclusive or weak relationship between earnings growth and changes in trade dependency. And it shows that industries with the greatest increase in profit margins since 1990 - finance and insurance, and office and computer machinery are examples - have experienced only modest changes in trade dependency.

Trade tensions that precipitated sharp bouts of market volatility just a few years ago underscore the importance that investors ascribe to global commerce with few impediments. No doubt, geopolitical risks are ever present and worthy of attention. But our new research quantifies risks related specifically to a future of slowing global trade growth, and we believe that these risks to investors aren’t as large as they’re sometimes portrayed.

Rather, we emphasise conclusions shared by our new research and our December 2020 research A Tale of Two Decades for U.S. and Non-U.S. Equity: that corporate earnings growth hasn’t been a major contributor to U.S. equity outperformance in the past and that we shouldn’t expect it to have a meaningful impact on future outperformance or underperformance.

Valuations, or the price investors pay for earnings, represent the most important signal for future asset returns.

 

1 The average annual S&P 500 Index price return from 1990 to 2018 was 7.4%. Three factors make up this return: valuation expansion/contraction (dollar paid per dollar of earnings), earnings growth from revenue growth, and earnings growth from ratio of earnings to revenue (profit margins). Contributions from these factors were 0.8%, 3.7%, and 2.9%, respectively. 

 

Vanguard is a sponsor of Firstlinks. This article is for general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual. For more articles and papers from Vanguard, please click here.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

REITs: a haven in a Trumpian world?

100 years of tariff lessons

The mispriced investment opportunity in global defence

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.