ETMarkets NRI Talk: Stefan Hofer on why gold, euros & private markets may be NRI wealth shields
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel
As global markets grapple with escalating trade tensions and policy unpredictability, Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) are increasingly looking for ways to safeguard their wealth from rising volatility.In this edition of ETMarkets NRI Talk, Stefan Hofer, Chief Investment Strategist at LGT Private Banking Asia Pacific, outlines why traditional bets on the US dollar and equities may no longer offer the same safety net.Instead, he highlights the strategic value of gold, the euro, and private markets as more resilient components of a globally diversified portfolio—especially in a world drifting toward multipolarity. Edited Excerpts –A) With less than one month having passed since the launch of the new US tariff regime, investors do not have hard economic data on hand to gauge the expected drag on spending.Sentiment surveys have been published, and these are uniformly negative, as well as expectations of inflation which have moved higher.The other major new phenomenon is the broad weakening of the US dollar, in line with the alleged aims of the Trump Administration.A) We advocate globally diversified portfolios as we rush towards a more multi-polar world. In terms of particular regions outside India, European assets and the Euro stand out a being potential longer-term beneficiaries as US exceptionalism fades.Gold – even at current elevated levels – may be useful as a hedge against rising US inflation expectations.For fixed income, we recommend predominantly high credit ratings and shorter duration instruments, given the highly uncertain rates outlook for the US Federal Reserve.A) In addition to diversifying away from US equity exposure and the US dollar in general, more defensive strategies that lower the beta of an overall portfolio would make sense in the current environment.This means considering market-neutral strategies and/or private market solutions, be it in private equity or credit.A) India is in pole position to expand its market share in global manufacturing exports, and anecdotal evidence (Apple assembling iPhones in India) suggests that important progress is being made in this area.Over the longer term, for India to be on the cutting edge of manufacturing exports, then a further ramping up of logistics infrastructure is needed, namely seaports, highways, rail and airports, for example.A) The policy-making environment is very volatile, and this is being expressed in asset prices around the world.A well-diversified portfolio across geographies and currencies should help investors navigate the current turbulence.Hedging strategies that protect the downside of a portfolio need to be carefully assessed from a cost-benefit perspective, as hedging costs can change quickly.(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
17 minutes ago
- NDTV
Watch: Trump Argues With Fed Chair Powell On Live TV Over Cost Of Fed Building Renovation
After criticising Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell everywhere - on social media and in front of reporters, US President Donald Trump landed at the Fed's front door. On Thursday, the president called out Powell regarding the renovation costs of the Fed's headquarters after which the banker corrected him - while the cameras were rolling. In two decades, this is the first time a sitting president has visited the Federal Reserve. The exchange took place as the headquarters of the Fed was still under construction. Both the men had hard hats on. Before the tour, Trump told reporters that the administration was "taking a look at what's happening" at the Fed's renovation. President Trump confronts Jerome Powell at the Federal Reserve. I like this approach. I can think of a few others in government who need to be confronted to their faces just like this! — Suburban Black Man 🇺🇸 (@niceblackdude) July 24, 2025 Trump said, "It looks like it's about $3.1 billion", referring to the renovation budget, to which Powell pushed back, shook his head and said, "I'm not aware of that. I haven't heard that from anybody at the Fed." The Fed has maintained that renovation costs are $2.5 billion. After that, Trump proceeded to take out a document from his jacket and handed it over to Powell. The Fed chairman took a quick look at the paperwork and handed it back saying that Trump was "adding a third building" to the total. "It's a building that's being built," Trump said, to which Powell responded, "It's a building that was built five years ago... it's not new." Trump ended his tour afterward by saying he wanted the renovation to be completed and Powell to aggressively cut benchmark interest rates. "Let's just get it finished and, even more importantly, lower interest rates!", Trump wrote on Truth Social. The Fed chair has refrained from responding to Trump's taunts on social media, saying the Fed can afford to be patient to monitor the impact of the president's tariffs on inflation. The exchange followed months of criticism by Trump of Powell as being "Too Late" on rate cuts and an accompanying pressure campaign to get the central bank head to step down. After the visit, Trump wrote on social media that the construction has "got a long way to go, would have been much better if it were never started, but it is what it is". Trump in the past has labelled Powell as a "stubborn mule", "Trump hater", "numbskull", etc., and has repeatedly floated the idea of firing him.
Economic Times
17 minutes ago
- Economic Times
10 year yield spikes amid a decline in bets on August rate cut
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel Yields of the 10-year benchmark government security spiked six basis points to 6.37% on Friday, before softening slightly and closing at 6.34%.The spike in yields came after the central bank governor said price stability will be the primary concern for the central bank amid cooling retail inflation, despite Mint Road winning the 'battle' against 10-year yield had closed at 6.31% the previous day.A section of the market started pricing in another rate cut in August after India's retail inflation, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI), hit a six-year low of 2.1%, data released on July 14 change in expectations of the rate cut trajectory also impacted auction of the 10 year paper conducted on Friday, pushing prices below 100 at 99.95, with cut off yield at 6.33%. The auction was for Rs 30,000 crores'When people are not positive about the rate cut next month, why would someone hold the security, they would want to sell,' said a bond trader at a primary dealership. 'There were quite a few people who had priced in a cut in the August policy, but after the interview, markets were not very positive about it,' the trader said.'The battle against inflation is won, but war continues,' RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra said at a banking summit organised by the newspaper in Mumbai on Friday. 'Our primary objective is to maintain price stability and we have mentioned that it is not inconsistent with the other objectives we have of growth because that is a prerequisite.'This comes just a few days before the monetary policy committee (MPC) is set to announce its rate decision on August 6. During the last MPC meet, the repo rate was reduced by a larger-than-expected 50 basis points to 5.50%'The rates went up because the market was anyway long, and those positions increased after the inflation data. Maybe because inflation was lower, markets thought that the RBI would be more open to further rate cuts in August. The governor today did not say anything different, but maintained what he has said in his previous encounters,' said a senior bond trader at another primary dealership.
The Print
17 minutes ago
- The Print
Thailand-Cambodia clash is more than a border fight—it's a new front in Cold War 2.0
For observers in South Asia, the crisis strikes a familiar chord. Much like the subcontinent's own post-colonial challenges, this conflict is deeply rooted in contested borders callously drawn by colonial powers. In South Asia, the legacy lies with the British; in Southeast Asia, it's the French. Now in its second day, the hostilities continue and a ceasefire remains elusive, if not impossible. The implications for regional stability and the broader US-China strategic rivalry—often dubbed 'Cold War 2.0'—are already profound. The sudden military escalation between two ASEAN members, Thailand and Cambodia, has jolted the Indo-Pacific, a region that's already on edge amid the Great Power contestation between the United States and China. The timing couldn't be more telling. Global military budgets are rising amid geopolitical strains, and Southeast Asia is no exception. Even as ASEAN countries pursue deeper economic integration—modelling aspects of the European Union—defence spending has surged across the bloc. This, even though ASEAN is far from unified in its political, economic, or military postures. While the ASEAN Free Trade Area has made strides in tariff reduction, wide disparities persist. Singapore boasts high per capita income and advanced infrastructure, while countries like Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar continue to struggle with poverty, fragile institutions, and uncertain futures. The World Bank recently revised Cambodia's 2025 growth forecast down to 4 per cent, citing a range of economic vulnerabilities. Also Read: Trump's Ukraine U-turn puts Russia's trade partners at risk. India caught in the middle Fragmented security postures In security terms, ASEAN remains a mosaic of national agendas, even in the face of China's aggressive build-up in the South China Sea and its expansive nine-dash line claims over the EEZs of several member states. A common threat should have united the bloc. But as China is also ASEAN's largest trading partner, siding against it remains unaffordable for most, even those with a pro-West tilt. Military modernisation is progressing, but along divergent paths. Between 2013 and 2022, the region spent approximately $60.9 billion on weapons procurement and defence R&D, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). But looking closer, these investments reflect broader geopolitical alignments: some countries lean toward the US, like Thailand and the Philippines; some toward China, such as Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar; and some are building ties with Russia, such as Vietnam and Indonesia. The presence of the UK and France, as well as the growing influence of Turkey and Israel in the region, adds further layers of complexity. From imperial maps to military clashes Southeast Asia has long been a stage for Great Power rivalry. The roots of the current Thailand-Cambodia conflict lie in the 1907 Franco-Siamese Treaty. Under pressure from both Britain and France, Siam (modern-day Thailand) ceded territories to the French. At the time, Cambodia was under French rule, and the treaty left many areas of the border vague—sowing the seeds of future disputes. During World War II, Siam allied with Japan and briefly regained some of the lost territory. But following Japan's defeat, these areas returned to French control. When Cambodia gained independence in 1953, the problematic colonial borders remained. One hotspot is the Preah Vihear Temple. Though the International Court of Justice awarded it to Cambodia in 1962, the surrounding territory was left undefined, allowing the conflict to simmer. The Cold War further complicated the picture. Cambodia's civil war, the Khmer Rouge regime, and Vietnam's 1978 invasion turned the Thai-Cambodian border into a Cold War flashpoint. The US, China, and several ASEAN members supported anti-Vietnamese resistance, including remnants of the Khmer Rouge. Even after Vietnam withdrew in 1989, and the 1991 Paris Peace Accords attempted to stabilise the region, no durable border resolution was reached. Efforts at rapprochement resumed in the 2000s, culminating in a February 2024 strategic partnership between Cambodia and Thailand focused on de-escalation. But on 28 May 2025, a deadly clash between patrols in a disputed area killed a Cambodian soldier, shattering the fragile peace. Since then, serious escalation has happened. New theatre for the new Cold War? In the ongoing military standoff, Thailand has clearly dominated from the get-go. The skies over Southeast Asia quickly became a theatre of conflict, with Thailand deploying its F-16 fighter jets and reportedly decimating Cambodia's 8th and 9th infantry divisions. For the first time, Thailand also fielded its Ukrainian-made T-84 Oplot-M main battle tanks in combat, facing off against Cambodia's outdated T-55s. The disparity in military capabilities between the two countries is not merely significant—it is exponentially vast. Cambodia's decision to escalate, despite its weaker military, raises questions. One possible explanation is Chinese backing—part of a broader strategy to test the limits of US commitment to its allies. US arms sales, including to Thailand, are governed by strict end-use agreements that limit how and against whom they can be deployed. It is unlikely Thailand would have used F-16s without prior US consent. If true, this suggests Washington tacitly approved Thailand's response—a subtle yet pointed signal to Beijing, which has become Cambodia's chief military patron since 2017. After Cambodia dissolved its main opposition party and jailed political leaders, the US slashed aid. China quickly stepped in with military equipment, training, and joint exercises such as 'Golden Dragon'. More concerning is China's role in expanding the Ream Naval Base on Cambodia's southern coast. Though not officially a military base, satellite imagery shows a pier nearly identical in length and design to one at China's Djibouti base—capable of docking its largest aircraft carriers. US officials have repeatedly raised concerns about growing Chinese military access to the base. These developments may explain why Washington allowed Thailand to respond forcefully—viewing it as an opportunity to counterbalance Chinese influence. Also Read: Paradox of India's S-400 deal—key asset delayed when country needs it most The wider web of power projection This conflict must also be understood in the broader context of foreign power projection in Southeast Asia. The US has deepened ties with the Philippines, now one of ASEAN's most hawkish voices on China. Meanwhile, the UK exerts influence through the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA)—a long-standing, though non-binding, security pact with Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, and Singapore. This agreement, notably, was originally designed to ensure peace between Malaysia and Singapore. For the uninitiated, on 9 August 1965, Singapore officially parted ways with Malaysia, becoming an independent and sovereign nation. The split was driven by serious political and economic disagreements between the leadership of both countries, which had fuelled communal tensions and led to racial riots in July and September 1964. Although those tensions have long since eased, the UK continues to maintain its involvement through existing defence agreements and regular military exercises. France, another former colonial power, also maintains a strategic presence in the Indo-Pacific. It often champions 'strategic autonomy,' positioning itself as a balancing force in a region crowded with competing powers—though it would side with NATO allies if a hot war broke out. Even intra-ASEAN military tensions carry geopolitical implications. Indonesia, for example, has long struggled to fully control its airspace, as parts of it—including the skies over the Riau Islands and the Strait of Malacca—are under Singaporean operational control. Jakarta is now addressing these concerns by upgrading its air defence capabilities, including a $10 billion deal for Turkish-built KAAN fifth-generation fighter jets, which will involve significant contributions from Pakistani engineers. It has also ordered a huge number of Rafale jets from France, amid other equipment. At its core, the Southeast Asian theatre remains central to the unfolding Great Power contest between the US and China (backed by Russia). But it is also a landscape where middle powers—France, the UK, Turkey, and others—continue to shape the strategic environment in nuanced but significant ways. The Thailand-Cambodia escalation underscores not only the unresolved trauma of colonial legacies but also how quickly they can be weaponised in today's fraught geopolitical climate. As great powers manoeuvre and middle powers assert their influence, the Indo-Pacific grows more complex. With war now an ever-present possibility rather than a distant threat, Southeast Asia finds itself not just at the centre of Cold War 2.0—but at the frontline of an increasingly crowded, competitive, and dangerous global order. Swasti Rao is a Consulting Editor (International and Strategic Affairs) at ThePrint. She tweets @swasrao. Views are personal. (Edited by Asavari Singh)
