ROI-Bond buyers beware - fiscal slippage is everywhere: McGeever

BY Reuters | ECONOMIC | 07:30 PM EST

By Jamie McGeever

ORLANDO, Florida, Feb 10 (Reuters) - The global economy is at an odd juncture, one that points to an ugly few years for bond markets.

The fiscal picture across developed economies is deteriorating rapidly and uniformly, yet unlike previous bouts of huge government spending in the last two decades, there is no global financial crisis or pandemic requiring trillions of dollars.

Far from it. Growth appears solid, an unprecedented private sector ?capex boom is underway courtesy of the artificial intelligence arms race, and stock markets are ?at record highs. All these dynamics are clearly feeding off each other.

Governments are loosening their purse strings because they are adjusting to a new world reality: globalization is fraying - or, some might say, dying - and being ?replaced by polarization, isolationism, and rising geopolitical tensions.

Promises to ramp up spending on defense, energy and resource security, and technological advancements - alongside pledges to help voters ?with affordability issues - threaten to put enormous strain on public finances that have never fully recovered from the Covid-19 pandemic.

In ?the United States, President Donald Trump ?has called for the defense budget to be increased by 50% to $1.5 trillion, which would dramatically widen a budget deficit already hovering around 6% of GDP. Meanwhile, Germany has removed its 'debt brake', and new borrowing this ?year for defense and other expenditures will be close to 200 billion euros.

Then there ?is Japan. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi - whose Liberal Democratic Party won a landslide election victory on Sunday - is promising huge spending increases and tax cuts to boost Japan's economy as well as its military and energy security. A bumper $117 billion supplementary budget to fund this ?will mostly be financed through new debt issuance.

With debt loads, deficits and ?yield curves rising everywhere, market ?indigestion could set in alongside increasing anxiety, with bond investors requiring ever more yield to absorb so much paper.

CONSOLIDATION NEEDED, BUT UNLIKELY

Importantly, central banks can no longer be depended on to pick up the slack. Kevin Warsh, Trump's pick to replace Jerome Powell as Federal Reserve Chair, ?says the Fed should reduce its balance sheet. The Bank of England and European Central Bank are also shrinking theirs. Even the Bank of ?Japan has been scaling back its bond purchases since 2024, and may not be keen to bail out Takaichi's administration should yields shoot up.

Governments are trying to ease the strain by issuing more short-term bills and shortening the maturity of the debt profile. This helps cap borrowing costs and limits investors' 'duration' risk, but it increases 'rollover' risk of regularly refinancing maturing debt.

The hope is the extra borrowing spurs sufficient growth to stabilize debt-to-GDP ratios and ensure the debt is sustainable, because it doesn't look ?like fiscal discipline ?is on the horizon.

"Unless a pick-up in nominal growth drives higher incomes and tax revenues - AI investment and/or productivity per ?se might not be enough - some countries might face tough consolidation challenges," HSBC analysts wrote last week.

The consolidation needed would be large. With borrowing costs at current levels, ?HSBC estimates that the U.S. would need a fiscal adjustment of over 4% of GDP to stabilize its debt-to-GDP ratio, with 3% required by France, and 2% by the UK and Germany.

Consolidations of such scale are rare. In major advanced economies since 1990, there have been only eight of over 4% of GDP during a 5-year period, with fifteen over 3% of GDP in that timeframe.

Whether all this fiscal expansion ends in currency debasement, hyperinflation and crashing bond markets is a separate debate. But even if these doomsday scenarios fail to play out, it's fair to assume that bond markets will be under pressure moving forward.

This all suggests that in today's fractured new world, the 40% slice of a traditional '60/40 equity/bond' portfolio ?looks increasingly fragile. Investing is always a relative decision, but the question for fixed income investors may increasingly become, what is the least unattractive option?

(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters) Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, ?and X. And listen to the Morning Bid daily podcast on ?Apple, Spotify, or the Reuters app. Subscribe to hear Reuters journalists discuss the biggest news in markets and finance ?seven days a week.

(By Jamie McGeever; Editing by Kirsten Donovan)

In general the bond market is volatile, and fixed income securities carry interest rate risk. (As interest rates rise, bond prices usually fall, and vice versa. This effect is usually more pronounced for longer-term securities.) Fixed income securities also carry inflation risk and credit and default risks for both issuers and counterparties. Unlike individual bonds, most bond funds do not have a maturity date, so avoiding losses caused by price volatility by holding them until maturity is not possible.

Lower-quality debt securities generally offer higher yields, but also involve greater risk of default or price changes due to potential changes in the credit quality of the issuer. Any fixed income security sold or redeemed prior to maturity may be subject to loss.

Before investing, consider the funds' investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. Contact Fidelity for a prospectus or, if available, a summary prospectus containing this information. Read it carefully.

fir_news_article