Egypt Advances Disaster Risk Financing Strategies

Egypt Advances Disaster Risk Financing Strategies

A flood impacts an abandoned house by the Nile River in Cairo, Egypt. by Eslam Mohammed Abdelmaksoud via Pexels

.

Egypt advances disaster risk financing through national workshop

31 May 2026
.
Photo of participants of workshop sitting at table discussing and talking
UNDRR

.

Egypt is taking important steps to strengthen its financial resilience to disasters and climate-related risks through the development of a national disaster risk financing strategy.

Government institutions, United Nations agencies, and national stakeholders gathered in Cairo for a national workshop jointly organized by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in coordination with the National Committee for Crisis Management and Disaster Risk Reduction affiliate to the Prime Minister’s Office.

The workshop marked an important milestone in supporting Egypt’s efforts to strengthen risk-informed public financing, enhance preparedness and recovery policies, and reduce the growing impacts of disasters and climate-related shocks on communities, infrastructure, and the national economy.

Strengthening risk-informed financing approaches

The workshop brought together representatives from national and government institutions to discuss the foundations of a comprehensive national approach to disaster risk financing and resilience planning.

Discussions focused on the key determinants and overall structure for developing the national strategy, including frameworks and approaches for disaster risk financing, and the classification of disasters and risks. In the workshop, international experiences and good practices related to preparedness financing and response were discussed.

Opening the workshop, Raidan Alsaqqaf, Deputy Regional Director of the Regional Office for Arab States at UNDRR, highlighted the increasing impacts of disasters on public finances, livelihoods, infrastructure, and essential services across the region. He emphasized:

“Countries that have clear and pre-arranged financing mechanisms are better able to protect the most vulnerable groups, maintain essential services, accelerate recovery, and reduce long-term losses.”

Additionally, in his opening remarks, Ghimar Deeb, Deputy Resident Representative of the UNDP Country Office in Egypt accentuated that “No single financial instrument can efficiently address all risks. Effective disaster risk financing protects people, livelihoods, public finances, and critical infrastructure. Therefore, the development of a Disaster Risk Financing Strategy aims to provide the Government of Egypt with a structured framework of financing instruments to respond more effectively to disaster-related losses.”

Building partnerships for resilience

The workshop further strengthened collaboration between government institutions and UN agencies working to advance resilience and sustainable development in Egypt. It also provided an opportunity to identify the next steps for the development of the national disaster risk financing strategy,  stakeholder engagement, institutional coordination, and implementation framework.

The initiative reflects the growing partnership between UNDRR and UNDP in supporting governments across the Arab region to strengthen risk-informed development, disaster resilience, and financing approaches that link climate adaptation, preparedness, and sustainable development priorities. Strengthening disaster risk financing is also critical to protecting development gains, sustaining economic resilience, and ensuring continuity of essential services during crises.

As climate and disaster risks continue to affect economies and communities across the Arab region, strengthening disaster risk financing is becoming increasingly important to support prevention, preparedness, resilient recovery, and long-term development planning.

.


 

.
Enhancing International Cooperation on Climate and Trade

Enhancing International Cooperation on Climate and Trade

Colorful international flags fluttering in the wind against a blue sky in Lisbon, Portugal. by Ivan Dražić via Pexels

Enhancing International Cooperation on Climate and Trade through the Lens of the Global Stocktake

.

.

Trade policy is emerging as a critical tool for accelerating global climate action. The growing intersection of climate and trade policy could present opportunities for enhanced international cooperation.

Over the years, trade issues have been raised under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC) process, with parties holding different views as to whether it is an appropriate forum to discuss trade-related climate measures (TRCMs). Nevertheless, at COP30, Parties agreed to discuss “opportunities, challenges and barriers in relation to enhancing international cooperation related to the role of trade,” starting in June 2026. The Global Climate Action Agenda (GCAA) also launched a dedicated channel or “activation group” on climate and trade.

The Paris Agreement highlights that the outcomes of the global stocktake (GST) should inform Parties in enhancing international cooperation for climate action (Article 14, paragraph 3). In this context, the GST decision reaffirms that Parties should avoid arbitrary, unjustifiable, or disguised restrictions on international trade. Hence, trade policy may serve as a vehicle for implementing GST outcomes and strengthening international climate cooperation.

As they prepare for the climate and trade dialogues, Parties and non-Party stakeholders could consider how TRCMs can enhance international cooperation to accelerate the outcomes of the first GST (GST1). The GCAA is aligned with the GST1 and can support these efforts.

Accelerating the outcomes of GST1 through trade  

Climate and trade are both intimately connected to sustainable development goals. Several GST1 outcomes can be linked to economic sectors and have target dates, providing a useful framing for climate, sustainable development, and trade agendas to converge. These include tripling the global renewable energy capacity and doubling the annual rate of energy efficiency improvements, and the transition away from fossil fuels (TAFF) in energy systems to achieve net zero global emissions by 2050.

TRCMs can enhance international cooperation to achieve relevant GST1 outcomes, advancing sustainable development goals in the context of the Paris Agreement. Properly designed and implemented TRCMs may foster and enable:

  • climate-resilient supply chains through diversification, transparency, risk management, and circular economy approaches
  • technological innovation towards climate solutions
  • cost-efficient low-carbon products and technologies with green industrial policies and market mechanisms that incentivize production and consumption of low-emission goods
  • interoperable technical frameworks, i.e., those linked to emissions measurement, reporting, and verification, carbon accounting, and life cycle assessments. These frameworks can support policies that foster market recognition and differentiation of sustainable products and infrastructure
  • local value generation, including fiscal and labor-related benefits linked to foreign investments, the upskilling and reskilling of the workforce across clean technology supply chains, and community benefit-sharing for the extraction and processing of transition minerals and metals.

International equity considerations should be embedded in TRCMs, recognizing equity’s importance for a just transition.

The Role of National Policies and Trade Agreements 

National policies are a critical vehicle for advancing GST outcomes and can have implications for trade. For example, green industrial policies, such as subsidies for the development or production of renewable energy technologies, may alter the costs of traded goods. Simultaneously, trade policies supporting open and resilient economic systems impact climate goals.

Climate-focused trade agreements, such as the Agreement on Climate Change, Trade, and Sustainability (ACCTS), demonstrate that trade can drive cooperation towards achieving GST goals such as TAFF and tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency. For example, fossil fuel subsidies reinforce economic inefficiencies and slow the transition. The ACCTS is the first legally binding trade agreement to introduce specific provisions restricting fossil fuel subsidies, thereby reducing some forms of government financial support that would otherwise obstruct the TAFF. Tariff and non-tariff barriers on renewable energy products raise the cost associated with these technologies. The ACCTS reduces trade barriers for environmental goods and services, including those related to renewable energy and energy efficiency. This can reduce the cost of accessing these goods, enabling economies of scale and sourcing from the lowest-cost producers.

Looking Ahead: Informing GST2 

The second GST notably culminates in 2028, coinciding with a mandated high-level event on climate and trade, in the context of the UNFCCC climate and trade dialogues. And the GCAA with climate action plans or “plans to accelerate solutions” run through at least 2028.

This alignment creates an opportunity to examine how and whether trade could inform GST2.

Catalina Cecchi Hucke, Senior Manager for International Strategies, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions 

.


 

.

Vision 2030 and the Iran War: A Stalemate Overview

Vision 2030 and the Iran War: A Stalemate Overview

Majestic Saudi Arabian flag illuminated against the night sky, surrounded by cityscape lights in Riyadh. by Jepoy Fabian via Pexels

.

Vision 2030 and the Iran War: Saudi Arabia’s Resilience Under Strain

Featured image credit: Saudi Boy via Shutterstock

.

.

Three months after the United States and Israel attacked Iran on February 28, 2026, the conflict is at stalemate: The ceasefire that began on April 8, 2026, has neither yielded a political settlement nor an agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping. This state of limbo has disrupted global supply chains and caused other economic strain across the world. For Gulf states that rely heavily on the Strait for exports and imports, the war has exposed severe economic vulnerabilities. Iranian ballistic missiles and cheap, abundant drones have damaged critical infrastructure, hurting investor sentiment and raising insurance costs for shipping. The war’s economic and energy impact has been greatest in Kuwait and Qatar, which currently lack viable alternatives to the Strait of Hormuz for the export of oil and liquefied natural gas, respectively.

Compared to its neighbors in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia is in a relatively advantageous position. The kingdom’s sheer size means that most tourism, cultural, and sporting events can continue despite the war. On April 25, 2026, for example, at a time when many events in other Gulf countries had been canceled, nearly 60,000 fans packed the King Abdullah Sports City stadium in Jeddah for the final of the Asian Champions Football League. Saudi Arabia’s access to the Red Sea and its existing energy transport infrastructure have given the kingdom greater resilience during prolonged disruption. More mundanely, the alternative export and logistical routes offered by Saudi geography make the war less likely to challenge the underlying principles of Riyadh’s economic diversification model. This is especially because prior to the war, the kingdom had already begun to pivot away from the massively expensive real estate ‘giga-projects’ associated with Vision 2030 and toward sectors like artificial intelligence (AI) and renewable energy. The external shock of the Iran war might also serve to boost investment in domestic industry and supply chain resilience, in which case the conflict will have helped speed up policy shifts that were already underway. For Riyadh, the war brings less a new economic direction than confirmation that its earlier decision to adopt fiscal realism was correct.

The Saudi Advantage

The existence of ports and energy facilities on Saudi Arabia’s west (Red Sea) coast and of cross-country infrastructure such as the East-West pipeline and road and rail freight corridors have given the kingdom options to bypass the Strait of Hormuz for significant (although not all) flows of oil and volumes of goods. These are not failsafe alternatives: the capacity of the East-West pipeline cannot fully compensate for the loss of oil shipped by tankers via Hormuz, for example, so exports have fallen by about two million barrels per day (b/d) from prewar levels. A significant portion of refined products and petrochemicals at facilities on the east (Gulf) coast remain shut in by the closure of Hormuz, while oil facilities at the Red Sea terminus of the pipeline are within range of missiles and drones.

The East-West pipeline has enabled the kingdom to maintain a higher proportion of its prewar oil exports than any Gulf state except Oman.

The East-West pipeline has enabled the Saudi authorities to maintain a higher proportion of its prewar oil exports than any Gulf state except Oman, whose ports lie beyond Hormuz with direct access to the ocean. Opened during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, the pipeline has rarely been used to capacity but has proved its value in the present conflict. Its ability to carry seven million barrels of oil per day from the fields in the east (five million of which are destined for export, the remainder for domestic use) far exceeds the capacity of other pipelines in the GCC region. Nevertheless, exports from west coast ports, including oil from Yanbu, remain vulnerable should Yemen’s Houthis resume attacks on Red Sea shipping, in which case the Bab al-Mandab would become a second chokepoint effectively closed for trade. Ironically, the return of oil tankers and maritime services to Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea ports after the Iran war began indicated how the kingdom’s prior concerns about risk, which had soared during the Houthis’ November 2023-September 2025 Gaza war campaign against shipping, were quickly re-evaluated once Iran blocked Hormuz.

With the kingdom’s oil exports remaining at between 60-70 percent of prewar levels, and its economy benefiting from the cushion of oil revenues from prices that soared after the conflict began, it is the secondary and knock-on effects of the Iran war that are more applicable to Saudi Arabia. Saudi Aramco reported a 25 percent increase in first-quarter profit (benefiting from higher export levels in January and February 2026 and then the elevated price levels in March), but an unexpected surge in government spending due to the war meant the budget deficit rose sharply and recorded its highest-ever quarterly deficit. Loss of output from refineries and petrochemical plants, as well as from the fertilizer and aluminum sectors, have hit economic growth. Meanwhile, the drop in oil production will affect natural gas output, which is used in domestic electricity generation. In each case, the impact of the disruption will grow the longer that the standoff with Iran continues and the longer that industrial cities and ports in the Gulf, such as Ras Tanura and Ras al-Khair, are affected, and will be reflected in second quarter results when they come in over the summer.

Impact of the War on Saudi Economic Strategy

More broadly, the Iran war has brought into focus key political economy challenges facing Saudi Arabia as the leadership marked the 10-year anniversary of the launch of Vision 2030 in April 2016 and is reassessing key objectives and policy priorities. This process predates (and is unrelated to) the Iran war and is part of a reallocation of government spending away from mega-projects, such as the futuristic city The Line, the ski resort Trojena in Neom, and the Mukaab skyscraper in Riyadh, which were suspended before the war began.

The suspension of these projects indicates that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and those around him are more receptive to financial constraints and fiscal realities than when the projects were announced in 2021-22. The impact of the war is likely to reinforce this trend. Policy changes already underway prior to February 28, 2026, will continue the shift in focus of Saudi policymaking as Vision 2030 moves into its final phase.

Analysts and commentators paid much attention to the Public Investment Fund’s (PIF) new five-year strategy announced on April 15, 2026, for what it portended about the mood of financial realism in Riyadh amid wartime disruptions. However, the strategic reappraisal—to move away from lavish spending on the giga-projects and toward a more targeted portfolio of investments—was first telegraphed by PIF Governor Yasir al-Rumayyan in late October 2025 and had thus been underway for months before the war. To the extent that the rollout of the PIF plan was initially expected in February 2026, it may have been delayed by the war, but the focus on six main areas and three key themes is little changed from al-Rumayyan’s remarks in October 2025. While the new strategy confirmed the pre-February 28 shift in favor of AI, industrial development and mining, logistics, travel, entertainment, and tourism, the war may cause policymakers in Riyadh to focus even more selectively on infrastructure development and new logistics corridors, such as the repurposing of Neom and its port into an industrial hub far from the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandab.

Shedding loss-making projects and tying new investments to domestic economic initiatives may better equip Saudi Arabia to navigate an uncertain postwar landscape.

With this in mind, it is clear that a process of rationalization has already taken place as to which projects will be prioritized and how scarce resources will be allocated, and the war’s disruption may bring into sharper relief which initiatives should continue. Expanding resilience to future shocks (as well as to the ongoing disruption, should it continue significantly) is consistent with the retooling of national priorities before the war, albeit with added urgency. The withdrawal of a planned $200 million funding agreement with the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City, and the likely non-renewal of a three-year deal to host the Women’s Tennis Association’s year-end championship in Riyadh, are indicative of the paring down of deals, as is the decision to pull funding from the breakaway LIV Golf tour, which captured global attention. Shedding loss-making projects and tying new investments more directly to domestic economic initiatives may better equip Saudi Arabia to navigate an uncertain postwar landscape.

Conclusion: Resilience without Resolution

Perhaps the larger conundrum for Mohammed bin Salman revolves around the challenge of converting financial leverage into political influence with a hyper-transactional White House. From almost the day that President Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office in January 2025, the Crown Prince has made pledges of Saudi investment in the US economy a central element of the Saudi-US relationship—and the figures climbed incrementally with the president’s May 2025 visit to Riyadh and Mohammed bin Salman’s November 2025 trip to Washington. It is likely a cause of genuine bafflement in Riyadh, as well as in Abu Dhabi and Doha, that a president who saw for himself the opportunities for the United States of a stable, secure, and prosperous Gulf has been so willing to put all that at risk, first in the 12-Day War in June 2025 and more recently, and at a far greater scale, in attacking Iran without any apparent planning for the aftermath. Saudi officials do not yet appear to have considered drawing back from the United States to consolidate investments domestically, but this may be a card that they will retain should the financial stresses of a long standoff with the Islamic Republic grow more acute.

While the Iran war has exposed vulnerabilities across the Gulf, Saudi Arabia has been relatively buffered from the worst of the disruption experienced in states which lack the Hormuz workarounds or the advantage of territorial depth that offers some insulation from Iranian attacks. The rethinking of Vision 2030 implementation and Saudi investment strategies predate the war but are being sharpened by the impact of the conflict in both its kinetic and stalemated phases, as the fragile ceasefire has lasted longer than the military operations but without diplomatic resolution. As officials had already signaled a change of course as the Kingdom gears up for the final push toward 2030, and then for the four years of projects to prepare for the 2034 FIFA Men’s World Cup, the impact of the war is more an acceleration of trends already underway rather than a major change of course.

The views expressed in this publication are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Arab Center Washington DC, its staff, or its Board of Directors.

.


 

.

Can Sustainable Construction Materials Enhance Liveability. . . ?

Can Sustainable Construction Materials Enhance Liveability. . . ?

Close-up of handmade clay bricks in a construction area, highlighting traditional manufacturing techniques. by Sirmudi_photography via Pexels

.

Can Sustainable Construction Materials Offer More Performance Liveability and Reliability?

By TRT Editorial

For decades, residential buildings were largely shaped by structural strength, usable space, construction speed and commercial viability. Those priorities still matter, but expectations from buildings are changing. A building is now expected to respond more intelligently to the environment it sits within.

Buildings account for a significant share of energy use, water consumption and material demand. In expanding cities, this impact grows quickly. As urban development accelerates, buildings influence how resources are consumed, how heat is managed and how liveable neighbourhoods become.

The larger question is simple. Can buildings do more than occupy land? Can they reduce the environmental pressure they usually create?

From Consumption to Response

The conventional model of construction has often depended on extraction and correction. Materials are sourced, land is altered and systems are added to maintain indoor comfort. Air conditioning compensates for poor ventilation. Artificial lighting replaces daylight. Water systems are installed without enough attention to reuse, recharge or long-term efficiency.

A more evolved approach treats buildings as responsive systems. Design, materials, construction methods and infrastructure need to work as connected decisions. The aim is to reduce impact by allowing the building to work with its surroundings.

Orientation, layout, airflow and material selection can influence energy use and environmental stress. Construction methods matter as well. Prefabrication and off-site fabrication are gaining attention in India because they can improve quality control, reduce site waste, lower dust and noise and shorten timelines through standardised production. A more responsible building is shaped by the materials used and by the consistency with which it is assembled.

Design as the First Intervention

Environmental performance begins with design. The way a building is positioned determines sunlight exposure and heat gain. The way spaces are arranged influences airflow. Passive design strategies such as natural ventilation, shading, thermal mass and daylight optimisation can reduce dependence on mechanical systems. They also create indoor spaces that remain more comfortable with lower energy input.

When these decisions are integrated early, they reduce the need for corrective systems later. A building designed to stay cool needs less energy for comfort. A space that receives adequate daylight depends less on artificial lighting during the day.

Execution quality is equally important. A strong design can underperform when waterproofing, insulation continuity, window sealing, plumbing junctions or service integration are poorly handled on site. Performance depends on specification and on how accurately those choices are delivered in built form.

The building envelope plays a major role in liveability. More than 60% of current and future cooling demand in Indian homes is linked to heat gain through walls and windows. This makes insulation, glazing, shading and envelope detailing central to residential comfort. Sustainable materials can help indoor spaces remain thermally stable across seasons and reduce dependence on constant mechanical correction.

Reliability also depends on how the envelope handles moisture. Materials and detailing that respond poorly to seepage, condensation, façade weathering or trapped dampness can reduce comfort, shorten surface life and increase maintenance pressure. A durable material strategy must consider how the building ages under everyday exposure.

Materials That Improve Performance

Construction materials have always been selected for strength and cost efficiency. The newer expectation is that they must also support environmental performance. Low-carbon materials, better insulation and healthier finishes can influence heat retention, operational energy demand and indoor comfort.

Indoor environmental quality is a major part of this discussion. Plywood, particle board, PVC-based finishes, adhesives, paints and some formaldehyde-based products can emit volatile organic compounds indoors. These emissions are associated with poor indoor air quality and sick building syndrome. Sustainable material choices can therefore support healthier living conditions over long periods of occupancy.

Acoustic comfort is also part of liveability. Wall build-ups, glazing quality, door sealing and layout planning influence privacy, rest and acoustic calm inside homes. In denser urban settings, sound performance is as relevant to residential quality as thermal comfort and indoor air quality.

Material selection also affects the ecological footprint of a project. Cement and steel used for construction and refurbishment accounted for 18% of building-sector CO₂ emissions in 2019. When materials are evaluated through embodied impact, durability and thermal contribution, they begin to influence performance beyond structure alone.

Water, Energy and Resource Responsibility

Buildings interact continuously with water and energy systems. In conventional development, these are treated as utilities that supply what the building demands. A more thoughtful approach manages them within the building’s own logic.

Water stewardship includes rainwater capture, reuse systems and better planning to reduce wastage. Energy efficiency includes efficient equipment, better insulation and reduced demand through design. When these systems are integrated, buildings become less dependent on external infrastructure and more resilient to resource constraints.

This matters in India, where construction also places pressure on freshwater, sand, gravel and waste systems. India officially generates around 150 million tonnes of construction and demolition waste annually. Materials and systems that reduce extraction pressure, improve reuse potential and lower waste intensity can strengthen long-term reliability.

Building with Greater Awareness

The future of development will be shaped by how buildings behave over time. Passive design, efficient systems, responsible materials and resource management are not isolated features. They are part of a single approach to reduce environmental stress while improving usability, comfort and durability.

Customer expectations are also changing. Homebuyers are becoming more aware of how buildings influence health, comfort, maintenance and long-term sustainability. Buildings that respond to these expectations are likely to remain more relevant as cities grow.

The question is no longer limited to whether buildings can reduce their environmental impact. The real test is how intentionally they are designed, built and maintained to do so.

.


 

.

 

Consistency with Emergent Markets: Key Insights

Consistency with Emergent Markets: Key Insights

Using a tablet to analyze financial charts for trading insights. Perfect for finance and technology themes. by Jakub Zerdzicki via Pexels

.

The role of consistency in emerging markets

Rob Brewis, director and investment manager, Aubrey Capital Management, discusses the challenge of maintaining a consistent approach to EM equities

Emerging markets (EM) are often characterised as volatile and unpredictable, and to some extent that is fair. There are periods when performance is stellar and others when it is less so.

Over time, however, a consistent approach focused on quality growth companies has tended to deliver attractive outcomes.

The question of whether such an approach works in EM is a reasonable one.

Looking back over the past decade or so, the answer appears to be yes. Returns have been positive relative to the broader MSCI Emerging Markets Index, although not without interruption. Periods such as 2016, 2022 and parts of 2025 remind us that even the most consistent strategies can fall out of favour, often driven by shifts in market leadership rather than any fundamental deterioration in the underlying businesses.

Defining “quality” is less straightforward than it might first appear. Every investor would claim to be looking for good companies. The difficulty lies in being explicit about what that means in practice. One way of framing it is through a simple set of metrics: returns, cash generation and growth. A return on equity of around 15% is a useful starting point. In emerging markets, estimating a precise cost of capital is challenging, so a consistent threshold provides a degree of discipline. It is also a relatively demanding hurdle. From a universe of several thousand companies, only a small proportion consistently achieve that level of return.

Cash generation is equally important. Growth has to be funded, and the distinction between internally generated cash and external financing matters a great deal over time. Companies that rely heavily on borrowing or repeated equity issuance often end up diluting shareholders, whereas those that can reinvest their own cash flows tend to compound more effectively. Earnings growth, in turn, provides the third leg of the framework. In a part of the world where structural growth is higher, mid-teens earnings growth is not unreasonable and allows for a meaningful compounding of value.

These measures are deliberately simple, but they help to narrow the field considerably and focus attention on a relatively small subset of businesses.

There is, however, such a thing as too much of a good thing. Very high returns, while attractive, are rarely sustainable. They tend to attract competition, and over time that competition erodes excess profitability. Varun Beverages provides a good example. The business has been highly successful, particularly following its expansion into southern India and the improvement of previously underperforming assets. Returns rose sharply as a result, but that success inevitably drew attention. New entrants, including Reliance Industries, have since made the market more competitive. It is an excellent business, but the environment has become more challenging, and returns have begun to normalise.

A slightly different example can be found in Eicher Motors, owner of the Royal Enfield brand. Here the strength lies in the brand itself. It is a dominant player in its segment, with a product that is both aspirational and distinctive. Returns have been consistently robust over time, although not immune to cyclical pressures. Regulatory changes and pricing dynamics have at times affected demand, but the underlying franchise has proved resilient.

The importance of cash generation becomes particularly clear when considering the risks of dilution. In parts of the emerging market universe, this has been a persistent issue. China offers a useful illustration.

While economic growth and aggregate corporate earnings have been strong over the past two decades, earnings per share have grown much more slowly. The gap reflects the impact of new listings, capital raising and, in some cases, state-driven dilution. For minority shareholders, this can significantly reduce the benefit of headline growth.

This is not to say that high-quality businesses do not exist in China. On the contrary, there are a number of globally competitive, entrepreneur-led companies. CATL is one such example. Its position in the electric vehicle battery market, combined with strong cash generation, allows it to invest heavily while maintaining a leading competitive position. The balance between reinvestment and return is a powerful one.

Perhaps the clearest example of this dynamic is TSMC. Over a long period, it has combined steady growth with high levels of cash generation and consistently strong returns. It operates in a cyclical industry, but the degree of cyclicality is lower than might be expected, reflecting its dominant position and disciplined approach. Rather than maximising short-term profitability, it has tended to focus on long-term relationships and capacity investment, which in turn has reinforced its competitive advantage.

Even so, there are periods when this type of steady compounding falls out of favour. Over the past year, for example, companies with these characteristics have underperformed the broader market. Some of this can be attributed to regional factors, including a difficult period for India and a more prolonged slowdown in China. Valuation also played a role, particularly where expectations had become elevated.

Such periods are not unusual and tend to be cyclical. What is perhaps more relevant is that, in many cases, valuations have adjusted while underlying fundamentals remain intact. Returns are still strong, cash generation remains robust and balance sheets are generally healthy, often with net cash positions rather than leverage.

The composition of emerging markets themselves has also evolved. Markets such as Korea and Taiwan now exhibit many of the characteristics of developed economies, while China and India remain central to the broader growth story. Beyond these, there is a diverse range of smaller markets, each with its own dynamics and opportunities.

After a prolonged period in which emerging markets were relatively unloved, there are signs that sentiment may be shifting.

Performance has improved more recently, although volatility remains a feature of the asset class. For investors, the key question is less about short-term movements and more about the ability of businesses to compound over time.

In that context, a focus on companies that generate consistent returns, produce cash and grow earnings steadily continues to provide a useful framework. It does not eliminate volatility, but it does offer a way of navigating it, and over time, that has tended to be rewarded.

One day (maybe soon) the Koreans will work out how to “graduate” to DM and that will change the complexion considerably, although Taiwan (also a highly developed country) should graduate but I suspect there are political ramifications to hold this back. Either of these would be a big change to the asset class and if both were to go, it becomes a China and India story again.

Of course, there are natural changes, which can be dramatic, such as the one we are seeing today, when a small handful of stocks, this time technology stocks, become very dominant at the expense of all the others. This tends to happen to the more cyclical stocks, and this can come and go. I remember Samsung being a dominant stock in the past, but not for 20 years or so!

Read the original text in Funds Europe

Latest from FundsEurope

.


 

.