investment emerging market euity strategy … › blobcontent › 1414921781891 › ...recoupling is...

EMERGING MARKET EQUITY STRATEGY

Selective ‘recoupling’?INVESTMENTINSIGHTS

FOR INSTITUTIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL INVESTOR USE ONLY | NOT FOR RETAIL USE OR DISTRIBUTION

We continue to monitor three factors that we believe will drive an improvement in the EM economic outlook and, as a result boost corporate earnings and market performance:

• The first factor is EM currency valuations. EM currencies need to stabilise at competitive levels to allow trade improvements to feed through, having weakened significantly in the “taper tantrum” of 2013.

• The second factor is the extent to which emerging markets “recouple” with DM growth. Recoupling is likely to be driven largely by export growth, given the gradual recovery in developed markets. The recovery in exports should then stimulate a pickup in domestic demand, helping to turn EM business cycles more positive.

• The third factor is the level of corporate earnings and earnings expectations. EM companies should begin to deliver stronger profits as the macroeconomic backdrop improves and economies regain momentum.

In this paper, we focus on the second of these factors, looking primarily at the extent to which emerging markets are recoupling with DM growth. We also look at the effect that EM decoupling from the recovery in developed markets over the last few years has had on EM earnings and returns, and investigate the prevailing trade picture for EM economies.

IN BRIEF• Inrecentyears,emergingmarket(EM)earningsandearningsexpectationshave

“decoupled”fromthereaccelerationindevelopedmarket(DM)economicgrowth.Asaresult,aneconomicrecoveryandsustainedperiodofoutperformanceinemergingmarketswillhingeonthe“recoupling”ofemergingmarketswithdevelopedmarkets.

• Anydecouplingbetweenmajorsegmentsoftheglobaleconomyisdifficulttosustaingiventheintensityofinternationaltradeandcapitalflows.Theratioofrealtradegrowthrelativetorealeconomicgrowthglobally—knownastheglobaltrademultiplier—hasbeendisappointinglyweakinrecentyears,creatingaheadwindforemergingmarkets.

• Therearenowsignsofselectiverecoupling,asmanufacturing-intensiveEMcountriesseeapickupinexportswhilecommodity-intensiveEMcountriesseelittlesignofexportgrowth.

• EMvaluationsremainattractiveonanabsolutebasis,cheaprelativetootherglobalequitysegments,andincreasinglyattractiverelativetoEMdebt.

• WithintheEMassetclass,wecontinuetofavourKorea,easternEuropeandRussia,andhaveselectivelytrimmedexposuretoIndiagiventhemarket’svaluationpremium.Weremaincautiousonmaterialsgivenlingeringsecularpressures,butatthemarginhavebeguntoreducethedegreeofunderweightinviewoflonger-termunderperformance.

August 2014

Connecting you with our global network of investment professionals

AUTHOR

George Iwanicki Emerging market macro strategist

2 | Emerging Market Equity Strategy: Selective ‘recoupling’?

INVESTMENTINSIGHTS Selective ‘recoupling’?

The“decoupling”ofemergingmarketsanddevelopedmarkets

In recent years, emerging markets have struggled relative to developed markets because of the widening gap in economic performance. Exhibit 1 shows consensus forecasts for gross domestic product (GDP) growth in emerging markets vs. developed markets over the next 12 months. Economic growth in emerging markets and developed markets sharply improved after the financial crisis of 2008/09. The subsequent boom in 2010 gave rise to some of the inflationary pressures recently experienced by emerging markets. Since then we have seen a deceleration in EM growth and a drop in growth expectations.

While EM growth expectations have decelerated, growth expectations for developed markets have improved. This decoupling between emerging markets and developed markets is the primary culprit behind the multi-year slowdown in EM profits, the decline in relative market performance and, within EM equities, the outperformance of growth stocks over value.

This environment of decoupling and decelerating EM growth has placed downward pressure on earnings estimates for several years. Whether looking at the magnitude of consensus earnings estimates revisions (Exhibit 2A) or the breadth of revisions (Exhibit 2B), earnings remain under downward pressure, driven by sluggish economic growth.

Interestingly, history suggests that an upturn in earnings expectations would provide confirmation that EM equity performance has already turned positive (rather than serving as an initial catalyst). This is because the market will perform well as investors start to anticipate stronger corporate earnings, with positive earnings estimates acting as a confirmation that the economic recovery is finally underway. So far, this confirmation remains elusive.

Emerging markets have decoupled from developed markets as EM growth has decelerated and DM growth has improved

EXHIBIT 1: FORECAST GDP GROWTH—NEXT 12 MONTHS

Emerging Markets GDP Next 12mDeveloped Markets GDP Next 12m

-3

-2

- 1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Oct

-93

Aug

-94

Jun-

95

Apr

-96

Feb-

97

Dec

-97

Oct

-98

Aug

-99

Jun-

00

Apr

-01

Feb-

02

Dec

-02

Oct

-03

Aug

-04

Jun-

05

Apr

-06

Feb-

07

Dec

-07

Oct

-08

Aug

-09

Jun-

10

Apr

-11

Feb-

12

Dec

-12

Oct

-13

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management, Consensus Economics; data as of 30 June 2014.

EM earnings estimates are still under pressure, as sluggish economic growth weighs on analyst expectations

EXHIBIT 2A: MSCI EMERGING MARKET INDEX EARNINGS REVISIONS EXHIBIT 2B: MSCI EMERGING MARKETS INDEX BREADTH OF REVISIONS

- 80%

- 60%

- 40%

- 20%

0%

20%

40% One month Three months

- 40%

- 30 %

- 20%

- 10 %

0 %

10 %

20%

30% Three months Six months

Jan-

95

Jan-

96

Jan-

97

Jan-

98

Jan-

99

Jan-

00

Jan-

01

Jan-

02

Jan-

03

Jan-

04

Jan-

05

Jan-

06

Jan-

07

Jan-

08

Jan-

09

Jan-

10

Jan-

11

Jan-

12

Jan-

13

Jan-

14

Jan-

95

Jan-

96

Jan-

97

Jan-

98

Jan-

99

Jan-

00

Jan-

01

Jan-

02

Jan-

03

Jan-

04

Jan-

05

Jan-

06

Jan-

07

Jan-

08

Jan-

09

Jan-

10

Jan-

11

Jan-

12

Jan-

13

Jan-

14

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management, IBES; data as of 30 June 2014. Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management, IBES; data as of 30 June 2014. Breadth of revisions is the number of companies being revised up minus the number of companies being revised down, as a percentage of the total.

J.P. Morgan Asset Management | 3

In this environment of weak economic growth, investors have crowded into growth stocks and avoided value names, which has created a sharp divergence in the performance of growth and value stocks. China provides a good illustration of this trend, where the relative absence of macro growth stories has led investors to look for micro growth opportunities wherever they can find them—most notably among the Chinese internet stocks (growth names) rather than banks (value names).

The critical point, however, to the decoupling story is that such a situation is both rare and unsustainable in an era of globalisation, where trade and financial market linkages are tight and capital flows are significant. Put simply, it is difficult for a large part of the global economy to experience a sustained period of deceleration as another major portion of the global economy reaccelerates.

Exhibit 3 shows the correlation of forecast revisions for EM and DM growth, with a conservative two-year look-back. The correlation clearly shows that in most periods economists usually revise their EM and DM estimates in the same direction. In other words, the correlation tends to be positive most of the time. While there are decoupling cycles, when the revisions move in opposite directions, those periods (as indicated by the arrows) tend to be limited in nature. For example, correlations were briefly negative in the Asian crisis of 1997/98, and in the global financial crisis (and the lead up to the crisis) in 2007/08. However, in both of these periods, global financial linkages eventually forced correlations to return to positive.

The correlation of forecast revisions is approaching an inflection point, but will correlations turn positive as emerging markets boom or as developed markets bust?

EXHIBIT 3: CORRELATION OF FORECAST REVISIONS, EMERGING MARKETS VS. DEVELOPED MARKETS

Revision Correlation: EM vs DMEM DM spread

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1993

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management, Consensus Economics; data as of 30 June 2014.

The decoupling experienced over the past few years has resulted in the growth revision correlation falling to a level that is typically consistent with the lowpoint in the cycle. Consequently, we believe we are close to an inflection point where emerging markets and developed markets begin to reconcile with each other. The question is whether correlations will turn positive again as emerging markets catch up with DM growth, or as DM growth is dragged down by weakness in emerging markets. We believe it is more likely that emerging markets will rebound and catch up with the developed world recovery.

Investigatingglobaltrade–thekeytorecoupling

One of the keys to a recoupling of emerging markets with developed markets is international trade. Over history, trade as a share of global GDP has tended to intensify over time in the absence of wars or protectionist policies. In 2010, trade accounted for 32%-33% of global GDP, when including trade in both services and merchandise (Exhibit 4A, next page). Trade linkages have really intensified over the last few decades.

However, in the short term the “trade multiple” (the ratio of volume trade to volume GDP growth) has fallen sharply (Exhibit 4B, next page). The five-year moving average trade multiple has been at two since the Berlin Wall came down, which means that for every unit of GDP growth, there has been twice the amount of growth in trade. However, in the last couple of years, the trade multiple has fallen sharply and now stands at just one, which is unusually low in the modern era.



EM trade has merely kept pace with real GDP over the past few years as global trade has intensified

EXHIBIT 4A: MERCHANDISE TRADE SHARE OF GLOBAL GDP EXHIBIT 4B: GLOBAL TRADE “MULTIPLE”

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1820 1938 1913 1900 1870 1995 1980 1965 1950 2010

%

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013

Ratio

5yr MA

ratio, real trade growth/real GDP growth

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Managment, International Monetary Fund, A Maddison; data as of 30 June 2014.

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Managment, International Monetary Fund, A Maddison; data as of 30 June 2014.

Overall EM trade growth is still disappointing, relative not only to the EM glory years of 2002–2007, but even relative to more normalised levels (i.e. in the low teens). However, the good news is that a belated turn in DM industrial cycles is creating an opportunity for “selective recoupling” for manufacturing-intensive EM exporters, which are now finally starting to show signs of life.

Exhibits 5A and 5B compare EM countries whose share of exports is predominantly manufacturing goods vs. EM countries with a high share of commodity exports. The charts show that manufacturing-intensive EM countries (such as Mexico and Korea) are starting to benefit from stronger demand. Meanwhile, commodity-intensive EM countries (such as South Africa and Brazil) are still struggling with low or no export growth, due, in part, to the decline in commodity prices and the fact that China is moving away from a commodity-intensive, investment-led economic model.

Signs of export life are limited to manufacturing-intensive EM economies

EXHIBIT 5A: MERCHANDISE EXPORTS—EM MANUFACTURING INTENSIVE EXHIBIT 5B: MERCHANDISE EXPORTS—EM COMMODITY INTENSIVE

% oya in 3mo MA

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Jan -11 Jul -11 Jan -12 Jul -12 Jan -13 Jul -13 Jan -14

Mexico China India Korea Taiwan Czech Poland Turkey

% oya

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Jan 11 Jul 11 Jan 12 Jul 12 Jan 13 Jul 13 Jan 14

Brazil Indonesia

Greece Russia

South Africa

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management; data as of 30 June 2014. Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management; data as of 30 June 2014.


This trend towards selective recoupling among mainly manufacturing-intensive EM countries is also reflected in forward-looking indicators, such as Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) export orders. The manufacturing-intensive countries are seeing an expansion in orders, with PMIs over 50, while the commodity-intensive countries remain mainly at the breakeven level of 50, and in some cases, below.

Consequently, the trade recoupling story is, at this point, selective. The manufacturing-intensive EM exporters are likely to be the first to begin recoupling with developed markets as a rebound in export growth begins to feed through to employment, incomes, and domestic demand growth.

Actionableideas:EMcurrencydistributionstillrelativelytight

Currency volatility has notably declined since the fireworks seen in the summer of 2013. However, the improvement in EM competitiveness is still largely intact, with most EM currencies still at pre-commodity boom levels in real effective trade-weighted terms. As such, the export story discussed earlier will not be derailed by competitiveness problems caused by overvalued currencies.

Our standard currency chart (Exhibit 6) shows valuations relative to our estimates of fair value on the horizontal axis and the degree of carry on the vertical axis. Most EM currencies are still clustered close to their notional fair values. Usually we would expect to see one or two currencies that are overvalued or undervalued by 20%-30%. However, it is striking that there are currently very few EM currencies trading at such valuation extremes.

The improvement of EM competitiveness is largely still intact, with the distribution of EM currencies around fair value still relatively tight

EXHIBIT 6: CURRENCY VALUATION AND SUPPORT

REER vs CARRY

MY

CN

TW

RU ID

TH

KR MX

BR

IN

CO

TR

PL HU

ZA

EG

CL

PH

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50

REER Relative to Fair ValueCHEAP EXPENSIVE

LOW

CAR

RY

HIG

H

CARR

Y

– arrows show move since end December 2013

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management estimates; data as of 30 June 2014. REER (real effective exchange rate) relative to fair value (export-adjusted 10-year average REER) on the “x” axis and policy rate on the “y” axis. Carry (a currency with a high IR). Countries over the line of best fit provide good carry for their currency valuation.

Actionableideas:FavouringKorea,easternEuropeand(verycheap)Russia

Exhibit 7 (next page) juxtaposes value and momentum at the country level. Value is measured on the horizontal scale, and momentum, as proxied by price action, is captured on the vertical scale. Countries usually rotate anti-clockwise around this grid over the course of a market cycle. As a result, we would look to rotate into countries crossing from the lower right to upper right segments of the chart. In contrast, we would look to rotate out of countries as they move to the upper left and then towards the lower left segments of the chart.

Eastern Europe, in particular Poland (and to a lesser degree Turkey, on momentum grounds), shows positive momentum and valuation characteristics. Korea also sits within this group of attractively valued countries with positive trends. Eastern European countries are seeing strong export growth as they benefit from improved eurozone growth. Meanwhile, Korea would be expected to see some improvement in its industrials sector as the recovery in the U.S. and Europe begins to help boost exports.



Three of the BRIC markets (Brazil, China, and Russia) remain cheap, but are lacking momentum. Russia remains the cheapest despite some bounce back during the second quarter. We remain positively tilted towards China, which has begun to perform well as earlier expectations for a slowdown in growth give way to greater optimism. Among these three

countries, Brazil may be the biggest question mark. The market is cheap, but some of that cheapness is concentrated in companies that still face potential pressures from government intervention. Additionally, Brazil’s much-needed structural reforms probably require political change if they are to be implemented.

Value and momentum analysis can highlight attractively valued countries with positive trends

EXHIBIT 7: VALUE AND MOMENTUM

AR BR

CL CN

CZ

EG

GR

HU

ID

IN

KR

MX MY

PL

RU

TH

TR

TW

ZA

PH

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

-0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

� Eastern Europe (beneficiaries of improved eurozone growth ) and Korea (a beneficiary of the upturn in global manufacturing) show the best combination of value and momentum. � Three of the BRIC markets (Brazil, China, and Russia) remain cheap but lack momentum. Russia remains cheapest despite some bounce back during the second quarter.

� Positive EM reform stories are being rewarded with higher valuations. Post-election India now trades at a valuation similar to Mexico and the Philippines.

LOW

MO

MEN

TUM

HIG

H M

OM

ENTU

M

EXPENSIVE CHEAP

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management estimates; data as of 30 June 2014. Opinions, estimates, forecasts, projections and statements of financial market trends that are based on current market conditions constitute our judgement and are subject to change without notice. There can be no guarantee they will be met. Countries ranked on last 12 months price movement on the “y” axis and a composite of valuation metrics on the “x” axis. Units are percentile ranks from 0 to 1.

AR: Argentina; BR: Brazil; CL: Chile; CN: China; CZ: Czech Republic; GR: Greece; HU: Hungary; ID: Indonesia; IN: India; KR: South Korea; MX: Mexico; MY: Malaysia; PL: Poland; RU: Russia; TH: Thailand; TR: Turkey; TW: Taiwan; ZA: South Africa.

Finally, it is worth noting that positive reform stories are being rewarded with higher valuations. The Philippines, Mexico and India—three of the standout reform stories—all demonstrate positive momentum, but valuations are now looking expensive. In India, for example, there is near universal agreement that Modi’s election and the direction of policy is now much more favourable to growth, and therefore for corporate profits, going forwards. The debate now is whether valuations have become rich.

Consequently, in top-down informed value-tilted portfolios, we have begun to trim the overweight in India back towards neutral weight, whereas, the bottom-up driven growth portfolios are still favouring Indian names that should be beneficiaries of economic reform.

Actionableideas:Absoluteandrelativevaluationsstilllookattractive

As regular readers know, we focus on the price-to-book (P/B) ratio as our standard valuation metric (see Exhibit 8, next page). The P/B has been a very useful tool in identifying when to own and when to reduce emerging market equities in portfolios. The historical rule argues that investors should look to buy the asset class at 1.5x P/B or below, and reduce the asset class at 2.5x P/B or above (as that is generally the valuation level at which the price is ahead of the story). We are currently hovering just 1.5x P/B, just above the range at which historically investors have been paid to buy the asset class. EM equities performed well in the second quarter, but this is not the time to be thinking about exiting. This is the time to be thinking about buying on dips.


EM equity multiples are hovering just above the range from which strong returns have arisen historically

EXHIBIT 8: GLOBAL EMERGING MARKETS INDEX PRICE-TO-BOOK MULTIPLE

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

1/93 1/95 1/97 1/99 1/01 1/03 1/05 1/07 1/09 1/11 1/13

Neutral

Pessimistic

Optimistic

Euphoric

Panic

3.25

Source: Bloomberg, FactSet, UBS; data as of 30 June 2014.

Exhibit 9 shows the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio (CAPE)—also known as the Graham-Dodd or Shiller P/E. The CAPE uses price-to-trailing 10-year earnings (to provide an approximation of what normal earnings are). The EM underperformance of the last few years has rendered fundamental equity valuations as quite attractive in relative terms, creating a large discount to the U.S. (which is back at what we see as full or fair valuation).

EM underperformance has also largely closed the gap in fundamental multiples between emerging markets and Europe (which is above its crisis lows but still cheap in its own right). The narrowing in multiples means that the ‘option price’ for buying the long-term EM story directly—as opposed to trying to access it indirectly at lower beta levels through buying multinationals in Europe—is effectively now close to zero.

The gap between emerging markets and Europe is largely gone, while the U.S. increasingly looks fully valued

EXHIBIT 9: PRICE-TO-TEN-YEAR AVERAGE EARNINGS (CAPE)

Europe (MSCI Europe) U.S. (S&P 500) Emerging Markets (MSCI EM)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013

Cycl

e ad

just

ed v

alua

tions

US 25.2 vs 23.5

Long term average

GEM 17.3 vs 25.5

Long term average

Europe 16.1 vs 20.8

Long term average

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management, MSCI, IBES; data as of 30 June 2014. CAPE is the cyclically-adjusted price-to-earnings multiple using 10-year average earnings per share.

Finally, EM equities also look increasingly attractive relative to EM debt, as lower U.S. Treasury yields and tight spreads have pushed debt yields further down below equity yields (Exhibit 10, next page). The forward P/E for EM equities relative to the past 20 years is currently just below median, whereas global spreads on sovereign debt (according to the JPMorgan EMBI) are moving towards the low end of their 20-year range.

We recognize that credit quality within emerging markets, and particularly for EM sovereigns, has improved markedly over those 20 years. Nonetheless, in an environment where credit spreads have tightened generally (to the point where Federal Reserve chairwoman Janet Yellen even made some points about this in her recent Congressional testimony), EM debt spreads have participated, particularly in the sovereign space. As a result, EM equity now appears to offer more value relative to EM debt.



Lower Treasury yields and tight spreads have pushed debt yields further down below equity yields

EXHIBIT 10: EM EARNINGS YIELD VS. EQUITY-WEIGHTED SOVEREIGN YIELD

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

EY F12M Sov Yld

Dec-

92

Dec-

93

Dec-

94

Dec-

95

Dec-

96

Dec-

97

Dec-

98

Dec-

99

Dec-

00

Dec-

01

Dec-

02

Dec-

03

Dec-

04

Dec-

05

Dec-

06

Dec-

07

Dec-

08

Dec-

09

Dec-

10

Dec-

11

Dec-

12

Dec-

13

Source: J.P. Morgan Asset Management, MSCI, IBES; data as of 30 June 2014.

Conclusion

The decoupling story is central to understanding the dynamics of EM profit growth, relative market performance and style leadership within EM equities over the past few years.

Emerging markets have been on the decelerating side of the decoupling story, whereas developed markets have been on the accelerating side of the equation. However, history teaches us that these decoupling episodes do not last long in an environment of intensified global trade and global capital flows. Today, we appear to be nearing the inflection point where emerging markets will begin to recouple with DM growth. In our view, the primary avenue for this recoupling is a pickup in EM exports, which should feed through into stronger domestic demand.

We believe the recovery in DM industrial sectors provides the basis for a selective recoupling for manufacturing-intensive EM exporters. There are still headwinds, related to the reversal of the commodity supercycle, which means that recoupling for the commodity-intensive EM exporters is on hold for now.

Finally, EM valuations remain reasonably attractive in absolute terms and in relative terms, both to other segments of the global equity asset class and relative to EM sovereign debt. Within EM equity, we continue to favour Korea, eastern Europe and (very cheap) Russia, and have selectively trimmed in India given the valuation premium. We remain cautious on materials given lingering secular pressures, but at the margin have begun to reduce the degree of underweight in view of longer-term underperformance.


EmergingMarketsmaybesubjecttoincreasedpolitical,regulatoryandeconomicinstability,lessdevelopedcustodyandsettlementpractices,poortransparencyandgreaterfinancialrisks.Emergingmarketcurrenciesmaybesubjecttovolatilepricemovements.

NOT FOR RETAIL DISTRIBUTION: This communication has been prepared exclusively for Institutional/Wholesale Investors as well as Professional Clients as defined by local laws and regulation.

The opinions, estimates, forecasts, and statements of financial markets expressed are those held by J.P. Morgan Asset Management at the time of going to print and are subject to change. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the recipient. Any research in this document has been obtained and may have been acted upon by J.P. Morgan Asset Management for its own purpose. References to specific securities, asset classes and financial markets are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to be, and should not be interpreted as advice or a recommendation relating to the buying or selling of investments. Furthermore, this material does not contain sufficient information to support an investment decision and the recipient should ensure that all relevant information is obtained before making any investment. Forecasts contained herein are for illustrative purposes, may be based upon proprietary research and are developed through analysis of historical public data.

J.P. Morgan Asset Management is the brand for the asset management business of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates worldwide. This communication may be issued by the following entities: in the United Kingdom by JPMorgan Asset Management (UK) Limited; in other EU jurisdictions by JPMorgan Asset Management (Europe) S.à r.l.; in Switzerland by J.P. Morgan (Suisse) SA; in Hong Kong by JF Asset Management Limited, or JPMorgan Funds (Asia) Limited, or JPMorgan Asset Management Real Assets (Asia) Limited; in India by JPMorgan Asset Management India Private Limited; in Singapore by JPMorgan Asset Management (Singapore) Limited; in Australia by JPMorgan Asset Management (Australia) Limited; in Brazil by Banco J.P. Morgan S.A.; in Canada by JPMorgan Asset Management (Canada) Inc., and in the United States by J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc., JPMorgan Distribution Services Inc., and J.P. Morgan Institutional Investments, Inc. member FINRA/ SIPC. LV–JPM20472 | 08/14

FOR INSTITUTIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL INVESTOR USE ONLY | NOT FOR RETAIL USE OR DISTRIBUTION

investment emerging market euity strategy … › blobcontent › 1414921781891 › ...recoupling is...

Documents