"High US Treasury Yields + Strong Dollar" Test Emerging Markets
Morgan Stanley believes that the cumulative rise of nearly 90 basis points in U.S. Treasury yields, combined with a stronger U.S. dollar, has increased emerging markets' sensitivity to external shocks from 25% to a historical high of 55%-60%. With current sovereign spreads at around 200 basis points and valuation buffers exhausted, the divergence between local currency bond inflows and returns has reached its highest level since 2013. The baseline forecast is for subdued returns rather than disorderly sell-offs, with a focus on hedging against the South African rand and Mexican peso; Brazil's election results may be a key variable.
Morgan Stanley believes that although emerging market fixed income and foreign exchange assets are under pressure amid sharply rising US Treasury yields and a strengthening dollar, an orderly adjustment is more likely than a sharp sell-off. However, spreads are no longer cheap, and investors should wait for valuations to overshoot before increasing positions.
Soaring US Treasury yields, expectations of two more Federal Reserve rate hikes, a stronger dollar, and persistently high oil prices—this combination would typically cause emerging market assets to significantly underperform. Yet this year’s reality has proven surprising: while returns have weakened, the adjustment process has been exceptionally orderly, and emerging market assets continue to outperform on multiple dimensions.
James Lord, Head of Emerging Markets FX Strategy at Morgan Stanley, points out that at present, the combined influence of oil prices, US Treasury yields, and the US dollar accounts for about 55% to 60% of the return variation in both hard currency (i.e., bonds denominated in US dollars or other major international currencies) and local currency (i.e., bonds denominated in local currencies) emerging market fixed income, whereas prior to the outbreak of the Iran conflict, this proportion was only about 25%. This means that the sensitivity of emerging markets to external shocks has increased significantly.
Morgan Stanley’s baseline judgment is: from the current position, emerging markets are more likely to enter a period of low returns rather than experience disorderly sell-offs. However, as the cushion provided by spreads is exhausted, market vulnerabilities should not be ignored if global risk events occur again.
Local Currency Bond Market: Inflows Outpaced Returns, with the Widest Divergence in a Decade
Structural concerns in emerging market local currency assets are building. James Lord notes that the carry of current emerging market FX indices is at a historical low, while flows into local currency bonds have significantly outpaced actual returns.
Data shows that over the past three months, returns from local currency emerging market bonds were around the 45th percentile in history, while inflows hit the 90th percentile; on a calendar year basis, this divergence is the largest since 2013.

Morgan Stanley believes that a slowdown in inflows is nearly a foregone conclusion. However, the resilience displayed by the market thus far indicates that investors remain confident in the improvement of emerging markets’ fundamentals.
The key support for this judgment is monetary policy credibility. Real interest rates at several emerging market central banks are at elevated levels, particularly in Brazil, Colombia, and Turkey, providing a certain degree of buffer for the market. The firm notes:
Carry trades in Egypt and Nigeria remain attractive due to high real interest rates, solid fundamentals, and ongoing reforms, and Morgan Stanley maintains its bullish stance. Hungary stands out as ongoing structural improvement and convergence with the euro area are likely to drive lower yields and a weaker EURHUF.
Sovereign Credit: Spreads No Longer Cheap, Buffer Running Thin
Compared to the local currency market, the performance of sovereign credit is even stronger. Since late June, US Treasury yields have risen by nearly 90 basis points cumulatively, yet emerging market sovereign credit spreads have barely moved year-to-date. Historically, when Treasuries sell off by more than roughly 50 basis points, EM spreads typically widen accordingly—this time, however, the market’s reaction has clearly lagged.

James Lord attributes this to three main factors:
First, compared to previous risk-off cycles, emerging market fundamentals are now more robust—current account imbalances are within controllable ranges and policy responses remain largely orthodox;
Second, near-term debt maturity pressures are much more manageable than in 2022;
Third, technical factors provide support—the supply of emerging market sovereign bonds remains moderate, while large-scale issuance of US corporate bonds has reduced position concentration for cross-market investors in emerging markets.
However, spreads are no longer cheap. Current emerging market sovereign spreads are around 200 basis points, roughly in line with Morgan Stanley’s year-end baseline forecast, and the average spread matches US corporates with similar ratings. This means that should another global shock occur, the market essentially has no extra cushion.
In view of this, Morgan Stanley, while acknowledging increased challenges, still chooses to maintain its spread forecast. The logic is that higher Treasury yields partly reflect economic resiliency rather than pure risk aversion; inflation is still declining; higher all-in bond yields will eventually attract demand back; and a notable drop in oil prices would simultaneously ease inflation pressure and the outlook for further Fed rate hikes.
Despite the relatively mild base-case scenario, Morgan Stanley’s strategic recommendations remain defensive.
James Lord notes that for currency pairs highly sensitive to global factors and with low spreads, it is reasonable to tactically hedge for further potential US dollar appreciation, with the South African rand (ZAR) and Mexican peso (MXN) being particularly worth watching.
Additionally, Morgan Stanley advises investors to pay attention to the outcome of Brazil’s presidential election. The bank believes that markets have yet to fully price in tail risks under pessimistic scenarios; if the results point to expectations for fiscal consolidation, both fixed income and equities are likely to see substantial upside.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
NEAR Loses Critical $5 Level After Brutal $20M Long Squeeze: More Pain Ahead?
If US Treasury yields continue to rise, what will Washington do next?
The Treasury has maintained liquidity by increasing the issuance of short-term Treasury bills and conducting small-scale buybacks. Some advocate for reducing expenditures to address the debt burden. Political constraints tilt the risk toward inflation, which harms bondholders' interests. Karen Brettell, Reuters, October 5 - The cost of borrowing for the U.S. government is rising, while it has almost exhausted straightforward ways to control those costs. Long-term Treasury yields are now near their highest levels in two decades, and the causes don't appear to be temporary. Washington is issuing large amounts of government debt to cover a fiscal deficit that shows no signs of shrinking. Inflation is cooling only slowly. Moreover, while the real estate and automotive sectors are struggling, the artificial intelligence investment boom is keeping the economy robust enough to prevent interest rates from falling. As a result, with over $40 trillion in debt, annual interest payments alone amount to around $1 trillion. Washington has options, from relying more on short-term borrowing to, in the most extreme case, having the Federal Reserve cap long-term yields. The more policymakers resort to such measures, the higher the risk of fueling inflation, potentially causing more pain for bondholders in the future. Torsten Slok, Chief Economist at Apollo Global Management, noted that for every $5 the government collects in taxes, $1 goes to service the debt. "That's a very, very high number, and it's only going to grow." U.S. President Donald Trump said in a September 28 interview with Time magazine that debt can be repaid through economic growth or inflation. But if these methods fail, the Treasury has other options ranging from moderate to radical. At present, the Treasury is increasingly relying on issuing short-term bills and conducting small-scale buybacks of old debt to help boost market liquidity. In a worse scenario, the next step would require Fed intervention. One method is large-scale purchases of long-term bonds, akin to 1961's "Operation Twist", another is directly capping long-term yields—a measure not used by the U.S. since World War II. The more aggressive the measures, the more they can suppress rates, but also the greater the risk of spurring inflation. “We are getting to a point where it's clear the government is uncomfortable with current rate levels," said Jeffrey Gundlach, CEO of DoubleLine Capital, at a recent investment event. Operation Twist Historically, the next escalation would likely be a full-scale reactivation of "Operation Twist." Launched in 1961, this strategy involved selling short-term Treasuries and purchasing long-term ones to flatten the yield curve. Implementing a substantial twist would require the Fed's assistance, but the Fed may stand pat unless there is an obvious financial emergency. Slok said that without the Fed's balance sheet, the Treasury has very limited tools for lowering rates. However, Fed Chair Kevin Warsh has criticized holding large amounts of government debt and other securities, arguing that massive bond buying blurs the line between monetary policy and government debt management. He has called for a new agreement between the Treasury and the Fed, under which the Fed Chair and Treasury Secretary would communicate publicly about the Fed's balance sheet and the Treasury’s debt issuance plans. Yield Curve Control If Operation Twist–style purchases don't work, the next move would be explicit yield curve control. In this scenario, the central bank commits to buying an unlimited amount of government debt to keep long-term rates under a set cap. From 1942 until the 1951 Treasury-Fed Accord, the Fed capped long-term Treasury yields at 2.5% to help fund WWII and the postwar recovery. The Bank of Japan implemented a version of this policy from 2016 to 2024. By artificially lowering rates, yield curve control can ease the political pressure of fiscal deficits. But it only works as long as investors aren't worried about being repaid with dollars devalued by inflation. Once that confidence is shaken, bond-buying meant to suppress rates only fuels the inflation it's designed to conceal. Veronique de Rugy, Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, said that ultimately, the only way to solve the debt problem is by cutting expenditures. “Congress needs to implement fiscal consolidation—in other words, austerity. The Fed cannot do this alone.” Divergent Paths John Higgins, Chief Economic Advisor at Capital Economics, notes that since World War II, the U.S. has only significantly reduced its debt-to-GDP ratio twice, but bondholders' experiences differed substantially each time. After the war, the debt-to-GDP ratio fell from about 106% in 1946 to 23% in 1974, while the 10-year Treasury yield climbed from 2.2% to 7.5%. In the 1990s, the ratio declined from 48% to 32%, and yields fell as well. What made the difference? After WWII, restr
MercadoLibre stock closes up 0.68% at $1,696.56, still below every key moving average
