nigeria Archives - Sida 2 av 6

Rebalancing Markets Fuel Positive Sentiment for Hard Assets

3Q’16 Hard Assets Equities Strategy Review and Positioning Our hard assets equities strategy’s positions in Energy and Diversified Metals & Mining sectors were, in particular, significant contributors to positive performance. Within the Energy sector, positive performance stemmed mainly from the Oil & Gas Exploration & Production (E&P) sub-industry. The Oil & Gas Drilling sub-industry also made a useful contribution to performance during the quarter. By contrast, Oil & Gas Equipment & Services was the only energy sub-industry to detract from the strategy’s performance and its impact was relatively minimal. Other sub-industries that made positive contributions of note to performance were Copper and Coal & Consumable Fuels. During the quarter, the strategy continued to hold no position in Integrated Oil & Gas.

3Q Performance Contributors

The top performing company was major diversified mining company Glencore,1 which continued to benefit from debt reduction and overall restructuring initiatives that began in 2015. In the face of persistent skepticism from the market, Glencore has proved demonstrably that it has been able to provide a workable blueprint and subsequently execute its plan to deleverage its balance sheet and improve its cost structure. Not only has Glencore delivered (as we expected) thus far on what it said it would do, it continues to implement its debt reduction program. This has, in some instances, been in contrast with other major metal mining companies that, despite rhetoric to the contrary, have been slow to recognize the need for, or have been unsuccessful in, executing similar restructuring measures and have largely been playing ”catch up” with Glencore in the eyes of the market. Rounding out the top 5 performing positions were E&P companies, Pioneer Natural Resources,2 Parsley Energy,3 and SM Energy.4 These companies benefited from the high quality of their assets and acreages, in particular those in the Permian Basin. The final top five contributing company for the quarter was metal mining company Teck Resources5 which benefited from strengthening zinc and coal prices.

3Q Performance Detractors

Over the past three years, global demand for coking coal has been relatively solid at an annual level of around 990 million tonnes (Mt). China is one of the most important consumers in terms of setting prices, since it accounts for approximately 60%, or 590Mt, of global coking coal demand. It is followed by Japan at 69Mt, India at 49Mt, and South Korea at 40Mt. Demand from the U.S. is for approximately 21Mt per annum. In a reversal from the second quarter when gold was the strongest performing sub-industry, in the third quarter, gold was the largest detractor from Fund performance. Gold mining companies Barrick Gold,6 Goldcorp,7 and Randgold Resources8 all suffered from a consolidation in the gold price during the period, and by quarter end we had reduced our exposure to each. The two other poor performers during the quarter were E&P companies Hess,9 which had to contend with a dry hole in Guyana, and Gulfport Energy.10 Positive Market Sentiment and Demand for Commodities in 3Q Despite the continuing uncertainties in the market surrounding the U.S. presidential elections, and in the face of moderating global GDP growth, sentiment was on the positive side and demand for commodities remained remarkably resilient. As in the second quarter of the year, the most significant macroeconomic factor influencing the hard assets strategy was the extraordinary monetary accommodation extended by central banks around the world, which continues to add support for economic growth and demand for commodities.

Gold Consolidated After 2Q Rally

After an explosive first half of the year, the gold market experienced significant consolidation during the third quarter and gold mining companies suffered. On a positive note, gold mining firms overall have been bolstered by restructuring and strategic improvements and appear well positioned to withstand a short-term decline in the gold price.

Global Demand for Crude Oil Remained Strong

Global demand for crude oil and, in particular, gasoline increased once again during the quarter. U.S. gasoline demand remains at record highs and the country is now consuming approximately 10 million barrels a day. The country’s gasoline demand continues to exceed the unrefined crude oil demand of every country in the world except China. Supply disruptions with the potential to impact future production continued during the quarter including the lingering effects of attacks instigated by militant groups in Nigeria, an uncertain and confusing political situation in Libya, and a deteriorating economic and social environment in Venezuela, where production had fallen some 6% from approximately 2.35 million barrels a day (bbl/d) at the beginning of the year to approximately 2.2 million bbl/d by the end of the quarter. On a positive note, oil sands production in Canada was no longer affected by the wild fires that impeded second quarter production.

U.S. Oil Rig Count Rebounded Slightly

In the U.S., the rig count continued to rebound slightly and increase at a modest pace from previous trough levels. However, we continue to note and emphasize that any rebound remains very much incremental when compared with the nearly 1,300 rigs in the U.S. that were taken out of commission between 2014 and 2016.

Zinc and Coking Coal Excelled for Base/Industrial Metals

In the base metals space, zinc experienced further rebalancing of supply and demand. Fundamentals continued to tighten with a reduction in overall supply accompanied by solid demand (Read Zinc’s Year to Remember: A Supply-Side Story for details). Nickel markets erased losses from early in the quarter following the results of environmental mine audits in the Philippines in which three quarters of mines fell short, with 20 mines facing suspension, and an announcement by Indonesia that the ban on exports was being reconsidered. At the company level, restructuring continues. Balance sheet strengthening appears to be the primary objective with reducing operating costs a secondary focus. Additionally, we are just now starting to hear chatter from some companies about re-engaging growth projects. By the end of the quarter, the prices of metallurgical coal (an essential steel-making raw material used to produce coke which, in turn, is used in the production of steel) had climbed more than 100% since the beginning of the year. The overwhelming driver behind this price recovery has been supply. In addition to both lower seaborne and domestic supply, global inventories are also at multi-year lows.

Deal Activity Dominated the Agriculture Sector

In the agriculture sector, the quarter was marked by two major deals and the potential for further consolidation in the potash market amid oversupply. U.S. agriculture giant, Monsanto, agreed to be bought by German giant Bayer11 while Canada’s Agrium12 and PotashCorp13 of Saskatchewan agreed to merge. In grains, an ideal growing season in the U.S. lead to close to record production in both corn and soybean.

Positive Outlook for Remainder of the Year

In the fourth quarter, we see the macro drivers continuing to be central bank policy and the ramifications of the forthcoming presidential election in the U.S. Broadly speaking, commodity demand has proven to be remarkably resilient. Despite concerns about global growth there is still firm demand and healthy consumption. On the supply side, we continue to see the effects from the lack of investment and capital expenditure reductions over the past several years.

OPEC Production Decision Puts Focus on Saudi Arabia and Iran

At the very end of the quarter, OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) came to an agreement to cap production. This move appears to us to indicate that Saudi Arabia and other OPEC members have reached their threshold of pain, which appears to be roughly in the $40 to $45 price-per-barrel range. Anything below that would probably only serve to consolidate and accelerate any decisions they might make as a group which indicates that, surprisingly, there may actually be a price floor. Mainstream interpretation seems to be that the OPEC announcement is a reaction to $40 oil. Maybe it is, but we believe it could also be the excuse that Saudi Arabia has needed to allow it to force through some serious, and absolutely essential, economic restructuring. It now has the low price of oil to blame publicly.

Saudi Arabia is Worried About Oil Price Spike in Next 18 to 24 Months

We believe that the move by Saudi Arabia is a longer-term one and that, in particular, it demonstrates the country is also worried about a spike in oil prices in the next 18 to 24 months. Any such spike may: a) help Iran the most (something Saudi Arabia is not too keen on doing); b) eventually cause the price to plummet back down; and c) accelerate alternative energy use. Evidence of this can be seen in the press release issued by OPEC following its September meeting, in which it said that its objective was ”to stabilize the oil market and avoid the adverse impacts in the short- and medium-term.” We also see this move as a way for Saudi Arabia to indicate to Iran that it is happy for the country to try and ramp up production from 3.6 million to 4 million barrels a day (something Iran is struggling to do as shown in Chart A) over the next four to five years. The Saudis are fully aware that this is extremely unlikely to happen any time soon as Iran has only hit the 4 million barrels per day figure three times since 1978.

Iranian Crude Oil Production

Monthly in Barrels: 12/31/79 to 9/30/16

(Click to enlarge) Source: Bloomberg. Data as of September 30, 2016. While the focus is squarely on Saudi Arabia and Iran, among other OPEC nations, despite the political uncertainty in Libya mentioned earlier, there do appear to be some moves toward establishing some sort of unified government and we have seen the beginning of some flows of oil in the country. We continue to point out that it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that a simple increase in the current U.S. onshore oil rig count of approximately 400 rigs can restore the supply balance. But people forget that the U.S. rig count at its high numbered close to 1,700 in 2014 and that it has declined more than 75%, or 1,300 rigs, since then. It will take a considerable increase in the current rig count to bring back any growth in production. In addition, people continue to miss the fact that conventional exploration has been abysmal (discoveries in 2015 were the lowest since 1947 as shown in Chart B), a point that was also hinted at in OPEC’s press release when it was stated that the ”Conference … noted that world oil demand remains robust, while the prospects of future supplies are being negatively impacted by deep cuts in investments and massive layoffs.”

Conventional Oil Discoveries Are in Decline

Yearly in Barrels: 1947 to 2016

(Click to enlarge) Source: Wood Mackenzie; Bloomberg. Data as of August 31, 2016.

U.S. Shale Oil Production Will Need Time to Ramp Back Up

As usual, during the quarter we made a number of trips outside the U.S. and met with many prospective and existing clients. During our visits we noted a recurrent theme of strong skepticism around the rebalancing of commodity markets and, in particular, oil. We believe that much of this has been fueled by headlines that trumpet Saudi and Russian oil production reaching all-time highs, and talk of the strength of the rebound in the oil rig count in the U.S. People seem to truly believe that shale oil is a spigot that can just be turned on and off at will, and there continues to be a misplaced belief that higher oil prices will reinvigorate shale drilling to the point where it starts to raise production and ”unbalance” the fundamentals. We do not believe this to be the case and, in our view, any increase in U.S. production must be preceded by a dramatic increase in the rig count which will require significantly higher crude prices.

POST DISCLOSURE

1 Glencore represented 4.05% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 2 Pioneer Natural Resources represented 3.98% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 3 Parsley Energy represented 3.92% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 4 SM Energy represented 2.42% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 5 Teck Resources represented 3.20% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 6 Barrick Gold represented 1.48% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 7 Goldcorp represented 2.29% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 8 Randgold Resources represented 2.25% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 9 Hess represented 2.04% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 10 Gulfport Energy represented 2.05% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 11 Bayer represented 0.00% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 12 Agrium represented 1.84% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16. 13 PotashCorp represented 0.00% of Fund net assets as of 9/30/16.

by Shawn Reynolds, Portfolio Manager Reynolds has more than 30 years of experience covering the energy sector. Before his career in finance, Reynolds worked as an exploration geologist and earned degrees in geology and engineering.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURE

Any discussion of specific securities mentioned in this post is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation to buy these securities. This content is published in the United States for residents of specified countries. Investors are subject to securities and tax regulations within their applicable jurisdictions that are not addressed on this content. Nothing in this content should be considered a solicitation to buy or an offer to sell shares of any investment in any jurisdiction where the offer or solicitation would be unlawful under the securities laws of such jurisdiction, nor is it intended as investment, tax, financial, or legal advice. Investors should seek such professional advice for their particular situation and jurisdiction. You can obtain more specific information on VanEck strategies by visiting Investment Strategies. The views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s), but not necessarily those of VanEck, and these opinions may change at any time and from time to time. Non-VanEck proprietary information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed. Not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results or investment advice. Historical performance is not indicative of future results. Current data may differ from data quoted. Any graphs shown herein are for illustrative purposes only. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission of VanEck. Please note that Van Eck Securities Corporation offers investment portfolios that invest in the asset class(es) mentioned in this post. Hard assets investments are subject to risks associated with natural resources and commodities and events related to these industries. Commodity investments may be subject to the risks associated with its investments in commodity-linked derivatives, risks of investing in a wholly owned subsidiary, risk of tracking error, risks of aggressive investment techniques, leverage risk, derivatives risks, counterparty risks, non-diversification risk, credit risk, concentration risk and market risk. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission of Van Eck Securities Corporation.

Loonie set for near term tumble

Trade Idea – Foreign Exchange – Loonie set for near term tumble

Highlights

The tentative agreement reached by OPEC last Wednesday has sent oil prices to the top of their recent range and lent support to oil linked currencies.
In practice the production limit will be hard to implement and oil prices will likely retrace gains in coming months.
The CAD looks to continue its downtrend as extended positioning corrects lower and monetary conditions are eased.
OPEC surprises markets

Global crude benchmarks and oil linked currencies jumped last Wednesday on news that members of OPEC had tentatively agreed to implement a production target for the first time in seven years. Both commodity and currency markets responded positively to the surprise deal that was viewed broadly as an unlikely prospect due to long standing differences between key group members, Saudi Arabia and Iran. While the deal certainly marks a shift in stance of the oil exporting group, we do not believe it is enough to sustain support for the CAD which is at risk from a confluence of bearish factors, specifically underwhelming economic performance, stretched speculative positioning and technical resistance. We therefore see current levels as an attractive point to gain long exposure to the USD/CAD and EUR/CAD currency pairs which are set to benefit from near term oil weakness.

Symbolic but not practical

We believe the uplift in the oil market provided by the latest OPEC agreement will not last for long as the practicalities of the arrangement and wider concerns over slowing global oil demand growth keep oil prices contained. The deal itself, while an important move symbolically, did not provide a definite promise to remove a significant amount of output from the global oil market (removing anywhere from 200-700k barrels per day (bpd)) and requires the implementation of country level quotas. This is a large and politically sensitive task and is unlikely to be completed before the next OPEC meeting in November. In addition, the deal failed to provide clarity over conditions for countries under duress such as Venezuela, Nigeria and Libya where production is currently far below capacity, but has the potential to increase in the interim. Thus, support from oil prices is therefore likely to be absent for the CAD in the coming months. (Click to enlarge)

CAD underperforms NOK

While both the NOK and CAD are heavily linked to the oil price, prospects for the two currencies have recently diverged. Latest growth and inflation data from Norway has surpassed the expectations of its central bank, causing the Norges bank’s Executive Board to deliver a more hawkish policy message and raise its projected rate path. In contrast, lacklustre inflation, retail sales and manufacturing data has prompted a more dovish tone from the Bank of Canada (BoC), which makes it increasingly likely to ease monetary policy at its upcoming meetings. This has been reflected in the relative outperformance of the NOK in the past month, which has rallied by 2.8% relative to CAD on a trade weighted basis (see Figure 1).

Positioning stretched

The USD/CAD and EUR/CAD are on strong longer term upward trends (CAD weakening) which look well placed to continue. Net speculative positioning underpinning the CAD is hovering at record highs and looks increasingly subject to a correction. A fall in oil prices or further easing by the BoC could see CAD longs (which are at the strongest level in two years) fall sharply and shorts gather momentum, exacerbating any rise in USD/CAD and EUR/CAD. Investors wishing to express the investment views outlined above may consider using the following ETF Securities ETPs: Currency ETPs EUR Base ETFS Long CAD Short EUR (ECAD) ETFS Short CAD Long EUR (CADE) GBP Base ETFS Long CAD Short GBP (GBCA) ETFS Short CAD Long GBP (CAGB) USD Base ETFS Long CAD Short USD (LCAD) ETFS Short CAD Long USD (SCAD) 3x ETFS 3x Long CAD Short EUR (ECA3) ETFS 3x Short CAD Long EUR (CAE3) 5x ETFS 5x Long CAD Short EUR (ECA5) ETFS 5x Short CAD Long EUR (CAE5) Currency Baskets ETFS Bullish USD vs Commodity Currency Basket Securities (SCOM) ETFS Bearish USD vs Commodity Currency Basket Securities (LCOM)

Important Information

This communication has been provided by ETF Securities (UK) Limited (“ETFS UK”) which is authorised and regulated by the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”). The products discussed in this document are issued by ETFS Foreign Exchange Limited (“FXL”). FXL is regulated by the Jersey Financial Services Commission. This communication is only targeted at professional investors. In Switzerland, this communication is only targeted at Regulated Qualified Investors. The information contained in this communication is for your general information only and is neither an offer for sale nor a solicitation of an offer to buy securities. This communication should not be used as the basis for any investment decision. Historical performance is not an indication of future performance and any investments may go down in value. This document is not, and under no circumstances is to be construed as, an advertisement or any other step in furtherance of a public offering of shares or securities in the United States or any province or territory thereof. Neither this document nor any copy hereof should be taken, transmitted or distributed (directly or indirectly) into the United States. This communication may contain independent market commentary prepared by ETFS UK based on publicly available information. Although ETFS UK endeavours to ensure the accuracy of the content in this communication, ETFS UK does not warrant or guarantee its accuracy or correctness. Any third party data providers used to source the information in this communication make no warranties or representation of any kind relating to such data. Where ETFS UK has expressed its own opinions related to product or market activity, these views may change. Neither ETFS UK, nor any affiliate, nor any of their respective, officers, directors, partners, or employees accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this publication or its contents. ETFS UK is required by the FCA to clarify that it is not acting for you in any way in relation to the investment or investment activity to which this communication relates. In particular, ETFS UK will not provide any investment services to you and or advise you on the merits of, or make any recommendation to you in relation to, the terms of any transaction. No representative of ETFS UK is authorised to behave in any way which would lead you to believe otherwise. ETFS UK is not, therefore, responsible for providing you with the protections afforded to its clients and you should seek your own independent legal, investment and tax or other advice as you see fit. Short and/or leveraged exchange-traded products are only intended for investors who understand the risks involved in investing in a product with short and/or leveraged exposure and who intend to invest on a short term basis. Potential losses from short and leveraged exchange-traded products may be magnified in comparison to products that provide an unleveraged exposure. Please refer to the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the relevant prospectus for further details of these and other risks. Securities issued by FXL are direct, limited recourse obligations of FXL alone and are not obligations of or guaranteed by any of Morgan Stanley & Co International plc, Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, any of their affiliates or anyone else or any of their affiliates. Each of Morgan Stanley & Co International plc and Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated disclaims all and any liability whether arising in tort, contract or otherwise (save as referred to above) which it might have in respect of this document or its contents otherwise arising in connection herewith. The Morgan Stanley Indices are the exclusive property of Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated (”Morgan Stanley”). Morgan Stanley and the Morgan Stanley index names are service mark(s) of Morgan Stanley or its affiliates and have been licensed for use for certain purposes by ETF Securities Limited in respect of the securities issued by FXL. The securities issued by FXL are not sponsored, endorsed, or promoted by Morgan Stanley, and Morgan Stanley bears no liability with respect to any such financial securities. The prospectus of FXL contains a more detailed description of the limited relationship Morgan Stanley has with FXL and any related financial securities. No purchaser, seller or holder of securities issued by FXL, or any other person or entity, should use or refer to any Morgan Stanley trade name, trademark or service mark to sponsor, endorse, market or promote this product without first contacting Morgan Stanley to determine whether Morgan Stanley’s permission is required. Under no circumstances may any person or entity claim any affiliation with Morgan Stanley without the prior written permission of Morgan Stanley.

Proposed OPEC cuts to have little effect

OPEC members reached an understanding that a production cut is required at its meeting in Algiers yesterday. That is not yet a commitment to cut production and the cartel is likely to wait until its formal meeting in Vienna on November 30th to thrash out the details. A press release on the group’s website says it will target between 32.5 to 33 million barrels per day of production, down from 33.2 million barrels of production in August. Proposed OPEC cuts to have little effect.

The market has cheered the news with more than a 5% increase in Brent on 28th September. However, we caution that the group has to figure out a method of apportioning the cut. The Conference decided to set up a High Level Committee to study the implementation of the production levels of individual Member countries. If formalised, this is the first time the group will assign a quota in close to two years. While the group traditionally (pre-November 2014) had an aggregate target, it had never made individual country targets. Historically, Saudi Arabia was willing to take the burden of supply cuts. But with Iran trying to pump oil at a break-neck pace, Saudi Arabia is less willing to assume this role. Any deal made in November is likely to hinge on the burden being shared across most members (although countries suffering from outages such as Venezuela and Nigeria may be exempt). We believe it will be difficult to get Iran to participate in production cuts which could damage the chances of a deal being made in November.

Lastly OPEC is aware that their efforts to stabilse the market may be thwarted by non-OPEC countries efforts to gain market share. Saudi Arabia and Russia have already had discussions on the sidelines of the G20 meeting in China about market stabilisation. It appears that Russia will be willing to participate in this effort, but to what degree is unknown. The Committee seeks to develop a framework of consultations between OPEC and non-OPEC countries before the November OPEC conference.

Capping OPEC production at 33 million barrels in of itself will do little to achieve market balance. We continue to believe that the bulk of the heavy lifting to achieve global market balance will be made by non-OPEC countries cutting supply. US$1trn of capex cuts have been planned in the oil and gas industry which will bite into supply. Additionally, weak prices should support the growth of demand.

We believe that crude will continue to trade in a range of US$40-55/bbl, with nimble tight oil producers in the US playing an influential role in setting the top and bottom of this range.

Nitesh Shah, Research Analyst at ETF Securities

Nitesh is a Commodities Strategist at ETF Securities. Nitesh has 13 years of experience as an economist and strategist, covering a wide range of markets and asset classes. Prior to joining ETF Securities, Nitesh was an economist covering the European structured finance markets at Moody’s Investors Service and was a member of Moody’s global macroeconomics team. Before that he was an economist at the Pension Protection Fund and an equity strategist at Decision Economics. He started his career at HSBC Investment Bank. Nitesh holds a Bachelor of Science in Economics from the London School of Economics and a Master of Arts in International Economics and Finance from Brandeis University (USA).

Börshandlade fonder för att investera i Afrika

Att investera i Afrika är något som enklast görs genom att köpa börshandlade fonder. Det är betydligt enklare för en svensk placerare att handla en ETF på NYSE eller XETRA än att försöka handla direkt på börsen i Nairobi eftersom det är få internetmäklare som erbjuder access till denna aktiemarknad. Det flesta investerare kommer emellertid upptäcka att det finns ett stort urval av investeringsmöjligheter varför vi har tittat närmare på olika alternativ. Dessa börshandlade fonder ger exponering mot företag som är baserade i Afrika. Afrika ETFer kan ge diversifierad exponering till många länder och branscher i hela på kontinenten, men de kan också erbjuda specialiserad exponering mot en viss region eller ett land i Afrika.

Liksom alla investeringar, vare sig det avser ETFer eller andra typer av placeringar, finns det risker med att placera i börshandlade fonder som replikerar utvecklingen av den afrikanska aktiemarknaden. Bland riskerna kan nämnas risken med gränsöverskridande investeringar, riskerna med att investera i emerging markets, geografisk risk, politisk risk och koncentrationsrisk.

På grund av Afrikas snabbt växande ekonomi ger dessa ETFer ger både en hög risk och hög-belöning, och det är viktigt att komma ihåg att en investering på denna kontinent är en satsning på Afrikas ekonomiska omvandling över lång placeringshorisont. Dessa ETFer försöka ge placerarna en exponering genom att investera företag som ingår i deras respektive underliggande index. De börshandlade fonder vi nämner kan handlas genom till exempel Nordnet eller Avanza.

Market Vectors Africa Index ETF (NYSEArca: AFK)

Denna ETF lanserades i juli 2008 av Van Eck. Market Vectors Africa Index ETF (NYSEARCA: AFK) spårar Market Vectors BNP Africa Index. Van Eck Associates Corporation, fondens rådgivare, tar ut en relativt hög driftskostnadsprocent på 0,8 procent, jämfört med den genomsnittliga driftskostnaden för denna kontinent som ligger på 0,58 procent.

AFK använder en indexeringsstrategi för att tillhandahålla ett investeringsresultat som motsvarar dess underliggande index. Denna ETF investerar i allmänhet åtminstone 80 procent av de totala nettotillgångarna i värdepapper som ingår i sitt jämförelseindex, och det syftar till att replikera egenskaperna för detta index.

Market Vectors BNP Africa Index omfattar både företag i Afrika som handlas på de lokala börserna, samt bolag som bildats utanför Afrika som genererar minst hälften av sina intäkter i Afrika. Indexets landviktning baseras på relativa bruttonationalprodukten (BNP) i stället för på börsvärdet. Detta gör att denna ETF har en tyngre exponering mot utvecklade länder som Sydafrika (21 procent), Egypten (15,3 procent), Marocko (7,6 procent) och Nigeria 15,3 procent). Det finns emellertid också flera bolag som har sitt juridiska säte i Storbritannien, Frankrike och Nederländerna. Den aggregerade kapitalvikten för dessa tre länder understiger tio (10) procent.

Baserat på modern portföljteori (MPT) är AFK bäst lämpad för investerare med en hög risktoleranser som investera i Afrika genom att placera i företag i Afrika och företag som genererar merparten av sina intäkter från kontinenten. På grund av dess höga flyktighet, låga korrelation med S&P 500 och måttlig beta, hjälper AFK att diversifiera risktoleranta investerares aktieportföljer.

iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (NYSEArca:EZA)

iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (NYSEArca: EZA) lanserades den 3 februari 2003 av Blackrock. EZA förvaltas av Blackrock Fund Advisors och debiterar en förvaltningskostnad på 0,62 procent. Denna ETF har cirka 350 MUS under förvaltning, och försöker att tillhandahålla ett investeringsresultat som motsvarar MSCI South Africa Index. EZA ger exponering till små, mellan- och stora bolag som främst handlas på börsen i Johannesburg.

För att ge dessa investeringsresultat, implementerar EZA rådgivare en representativ urvalsindexeringsstrategi. De värdepapper som ingår i EZAs portfölj förväntas ha liknande egenskaper som det underliggande indexet. Under normala förhållanden investerar EZA minst 95 procent av de totala nettotillgångarna i värdepapper som omfattar dess underliggande index. Under alla omständigheter investeras minst 90 procent av EZAs nettotillgångarna i dessa värdepapper.

EZA har en hög exponering mot finanssektorn och sällanköpsvaror, två sektorer som tillsammans svarar för 63,03 procent av kapitalet. Därmed har EZA en hög marknadsrisk då denna ETF i huvudsak är en satsning på Sydafrikas finanssektor och sällanköpsvaror.

EZA är en hög risk och hög belöning investeringar som är bäst lämpad för långsiktiga investerare med hög risktolerans som kan hantera den höga volatiliteten som följer med att investera i Afrika. Dessutom rekommenderas EZA för investerare som har en hausseartad syn på Sydafrikas aktiemarknad och söker exponering mot börsnoterade bolag som är noterade på Johannesburgbörsen.

SPDR S&P Emerging Middle East&Afr ETF (NYSEArca: GAF)

SPDR S & P Emerging Mellanöstern och Afrika ETF (NYSEArca: GAF) lanserades den 20 mars 2007 av State Street Global Advisors, och förvaltas SSGA Funds Management. GAF tar en ut konkurrenskraftig förvaltningskostnad på 0,49 procent medan den genomsnittliga afrikanska fonden tar ut en förvaltningskostnad på 0,49 procent.

GAF strävar efter att tillhandahålla ett investeringsresultat som motsvarar utvecklingen för S & P Mid-East & Africa BMI Index, GAFs underliggande index, genom att använda en representativ urvalsindexeringsstrategi. GAF behöver alltså inte köpa alla värdepapper i det underliggande indexet. Snarare kan denna börshandlade fond köpa en delmängd av de aktier som ingår i indexet, som väntas ha liknande egenskaper som det underliggande indexet.

GAF jämförelseindex är en marknadsviktat index för att spåra utvecklingen för börsnoterade företag i Mellanöstern och de afrikanska marknaderna. För att ingå i indexet måste företagen vara baserade i länder som klassas som utvecklade eller tillväxtmarknader av S & P Global Equity Index. Dessutom måste dessa företag ha ett float justerat börsvärdet på minst 100 MUSD och det måste omsättas aktier för minst 50 MUSD.

Under normala förhållanden investerar GAF minst 80 procent av de totala nettotillgångarna i värdepapper som omfattar dess underliggande index. GAF har en tung exponering mot Sydafrika och investerar cirka 76 procent av sitt kapital i sydafrikanska företag. Precis som EZA har GAF en hög exponering mot finanssektorn och sällanköpsvaror, två sektorer som tillsammans svarar för 63,15 procent av kapitalet.

När det gäller MPT är GAF bäst lämpad för långsiktiga tillväxtinvesterare med hög risktolerans som vill investera i Afrika, vara överviktiga i företag i Sydafrika, och finans och sällanköpsvarusektorerna.

Vad är lejonekonomier?

Vad är lejonekonomier, eller lion economies? Det är ett smeknamn för de snabbt växande ekonomierna i Afrika. För många investerare är Afrika synonymt med den sista gränsmarknaden, eller frontier market som det också brukar benämnas. En förbättrad politisk stabilitet och ekonomiska reformer har bidragit till att Afrikas kollektiva BNP växer. Nyckelsektorer inkluderar naturresurser, detaljhandel, jordbruk, finans, transport och telekommunikation.

Fattigast 2013 men inte länge till

2013 var Afrika världens fattigaste kontinent, men rapporter från Världsbanken visar att de flesta flesta afrikanska länder förväntas få status som medelinkomstländer redan 2025 om deras nuvarande tillväxttakt fortsätter. Ny forskning från Internationella valutafonden har visat att sju av världens 10 snabbast växande ekonomier finns i Afrika. Nigeria som är den största ekonomin på denna kontinent förväntas kunna se sin ekonomi växa med en årlig takt på 7,1 procent fram till och med 2030.

Afrika är fullmatat med naturresurser, bland annat guldfyndigheter och andra outnyttjade mineralreserver, olja och naturgas. Kontinenten har en stor befolkning som är ung och förväntas driva kontinenten i årtionden. Addera låga skuldnivåer och stigande utländska investeringar så ser Afrika ut att kunna motsvara förväntningarna.

Market Vectors Africa Index ETF (NYSEArca: AFK) följer utvecklingen av Afrikas största och mest likvida bolagen. Denna börshandlade fond investerar i Sydafrika, Nigeria, Egypten, Marocko och Kenya. Bruttonationalprodukten i varje avgör deras viktning.