In emerging markets, where 'six sigma' events happen frequently, statistical risk models like Value at Risk are ineffective. A more robust approach is scenario analysis, stress-testing portfolios against specific historical crises like 1998 or 2008 to understand true vulnerabilities.

Related Insights

Traditional finance is obsessed with drawdown depth (volatility, VaR). A more practical metric for long-term investors is 'submergence'—the total time from the start of a drawdown until the portfolio recovers to its previous high. This shifts the focus from immunizing against shocks to building portfolios that are resilient and recover quickly.

The core of J.P. Morgan's repayment risk analysis is a "reserve burn" stress test. It conservatively assumes vulnerable countries are completely shut out of international bond markets. This forces a reliance on existing reserves and other financing, providing a stark measure of their true financial buffers and resilience against market shocks.

Before concluding a company can sustain extraordinary growth, consult historical data ('base rates') on how many similar companies succeeded in the past. This 'outside view,' a concept from investor Michael Mauboussin, provides a crucial reality check against overly optimistic forecasts.

During a crisis, equity and loan portfolios can become completely illiquid. However, currency liquidity almost never disappears. Therefore, a deep capability in FX instruments is the most critical risk management tool for an EM investor, allowing them to hedge when other markets are closed.

Conventional definitions of risk, like volatility, are flawed. True risk is an event you did not anticipate that forces you to abandon your strategy at a bad time. Foreseeable events, like a 50% market crash, are not risks but rather expected parts of the market cycle that a robust strategy should be built to withstand.

To truly understand an investment's resilience, analyze its performance over a 20-year span, paying close attention to how it navigated major downturns like the dot-com bubble and the 2008 financial crisis. This deep historical analysis provides a clearer picture of stability than recent performance alone.

Because emerging market cycles are so unpredictable and violent, any mid-sized manager focused on a single asset class or region is not questioning *if* they will go out of business, but *when*. Business model diversification is the only path to long-term survival.

Despite compressed spreads and improved market access, credit markets are not complacent. Pricing for the most vulnerable emerging market sovereigns still implies a significant 17% near-term and 40% five-year probability of default. This is well above historical averages, signaling lingering investor caution and skepticism about long-term stability.

Average drawdown is superior to metrics like standard deviation because it measures both the magnitude and duration of a portfolio's decline. This combination better reflects the actual emotional discomfort clients experience during a market downturn, making it a more practical gauge of risk.

Standard emerging market benchmarks are misleading. Equity indices are heavily concentrated in a few countries, while bond indices suffer from inconsistent duration, ignore the vast derivatives market, and create unintended G10 currency bets due to their dollar-basing.