|
DERIVATIVES AND MUTUAL FUNDS
What
is the level of institutional participation in Derivatives?
Institutional
participation in Derivatives is limited inspite of a huge turnover level
in this segment. This phenomenon is indeed surprising but true. The
Finance Ministry and the Government were initially of the view that
derivatives would be dominated by institutions. However, the reverse has
happened. It is the retail crowd with the High Net Worth individuals and
the broking proprietory positions that has dominated the Derivatives
segment in India completely unlike the developed markets where
institutional participation is the key driver of these markets.
While each of the
institutional segment possibly have their reasons for not joining the band
wagon, in recent months, Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) have
become a important participating community. This is related to the fact
that investments in the cash market by FIIs has increased considerably
this year and to the rupee being stable and growing stronger against the
dollar. It is also widely believed that FIIs have taken significant
arbitrage positions in the cash and carry (buy cash, sell futures) trades.
Are
Mutual Funds allowed to invest in Derivatives?
The first SEBI Committee
on Derivatives headed by Chairman Shri L C Gupta recommended that Mutual
Funds be allowed to enter into the derivative segment for the purposes of
hedging and portfolio balancing. The report defined in detail the meaning
of hedging and provided a fairly liberal scope for mutual funds in
hedging. Subsequently, a SEBI circular on the subject reiterated the same
scope for Mutual Funds. However, fund houses were not too keen to trade
possibly because the definition was not very clear.
What
is the position now?
Due to confusion about
the scope of hedging and portfolio balancing, SEBI issued a Circular on 31st
December 2002 which elaborated more on the understanding on the subject.
Some confusion still prevails but the Circular does provide more light
than before.
What
is hedging as per the latest Circular?
Assume you are a Mutual
Fund with a holding in Infosys and that you hold 10,000 shares. You are
allowed to sell Infosys Futures to the extent of 10,000 units. You are
also (alternatively) allowed to buy Infosys Puts to the extent of 10,000
units.
You can also use Index
Futures or Index Puts (whether you hold index stocks or other than index
stocks). The SEBI Circular provides that you can sell Index Futures or buy
Index Puts to the extent of Portfolio Value multiplied by Portfolio Beta.
For example, if you hold a portfolio of Rs 200 crores and a beta of 1.21,
you can use Derivatives for a notional value to the tune of Rs 242 crores.
It has been clarified you can use Index Futures or Index Puts to the same
extent of Rs 242 crores of notional value. Any excess positions would
obviously not be justified as that would amount to a speculative position.
It has been made clear
that you cannot hedge Infosys long position by selling any other stock
futures (e.g. Reliance), nor can you sell a diversified equity position by
selling a sectoral index futures contract. For example, if you hold
Infosys, Levers, Reliance and SBI, you cannot hedge this position by
selling an IT Index Futures contract. These are logical limitations which
make eminent sense.
It has further been
stated that you can sell covered calls to the extent of notional value of
stocks held. It is interesting to know that even covered calls are
included under the definition of hedging. It is clarified that the
notional value of covered calls sold cannot exceed the value of the
underlying portfolio. This is a fairly liberal definition and fund
managers should be happy to see this provision.
The L C Gupta Committee
had considered the concept of hedging cash, which unfortunately has not
been elaborated upon by this Circular. That Committee had stated that if a
mutual fund has collected cash from its unit holders and is concerned that
if it starts buying stocks immediately, it would involve a rather huge
impact cost, the mutual fund could first buy futures. Slowly it could
unwind its futures positions and buy cash positions instead. This kind of
anticipatory hedging would also be allowed as per the Committee.
What
is portfolio balancing?
The Circular defines
portfolio balancing in a rather peculiar manner. It declares that if a
mutual fund can create a position using derivatives which equates with a
position similar to a cash position, then such a derivatives strategy
should indeed be followed as a matter of good practice so long it creates
a position at a lower cost for its unit holders. The Circular states that
the mutual fund is working in a fiduciary capacity for its unit holders
and is obligated to follow a strategy that lowers its cost of acquisition.
Thus, if the mutual fund
desires to acquire shares of Infosys and finds that Infosys futures are
quoting at a low cost of carry, it should buy Infosys futures, invest the
surplus funds left in the money market and earn the cost of carry and
convert the futures position into cash position at the expiry (or any time
before the expiry) of the futures contract. This strategy would reduce the
cost of acquisition of Infosys for its unit holders.
If
a fund can improve upon a buy-and-hold strategy by selling a stock or an
index portfolio today, investing the proceeds in the money market, and
having a locked-in price to buy it back at a future date, then it would
have a fiduciary obligation to do so.
What
else can the mutual fund do?
It is surprising that the
Circular provides for complex possibilities which appear to go beyond
hedging and portfolio balancing. It provides that the mutual fund could
buy calls, sell calls, buy puts and sell puts which literally opens the
entire world of options to the mutual fund industry. It does provide for
some limits on the maximum limits upto which such complex positions can be
taken, but the limits are likely to be fairly liberal and hence should be
a welcome signal for fund managers.
What
limits have been defined for complex positions?
We are reproducing an
example from the Circular which will enable you to appreciate the limits
laid down for complex positions. Considering
the following stock option strategy:
-
Long
call options on 5 million shares at a strike price of Rs 80.
-
Long
put options on 2 million shares at a strike price of Rs 90
-
Short
call options on 1 million shares at a strike price of Rs 110
-
Long
put options on 3 million shares at a strike price of Rs 120
-
Long
call options on 4 million shares at a strike price of Rs 130
-
Short
call options on 3 million shares at a strike price of Rs 140
Since
the fund has a bullish position on 9 million shares (a plus e) and a
bearish position on 9 million shares (b plus c plus d plus f), its option
delta could be comparatively small especially when the stock price is not
far from the weighted average strike price. However, depending on what the
stock price turns out to be at expiry, only some of the options will end
up in the money and will therefore get exercised by or against the fund.
Consequently, the fund could end up with a long or short position in the
stock at expiry depending on what the stock price turns out to be at that
point of time. The worst case long and short exposures can be worked out
as follows:
|
Price
at expiry
|
Options
that end up in the money and therefore get exercised by or against
the fund
|
Net
number of shares (short or long) the fund ends up holding as a
result of the option exercises
|
|
Below
80
|
b
and d
|
5
million shares short
|
|
80-90
|
a,
b and d
|
nil
|
|
90-110
|
a
and d
|
2
million shares long
|
|
110-120
|
a,
c and d
|
1
million shares long
|
|
120-130
|
a
and c
|
4
million shares long
|
|
130-140
|
a,
c and e
|
8
million shares long
|
|
above
140
|
a,
c, e and f
|
5
million shares long
|
The
worst case short exposure arises when the share price at expiry is below
80 and the fund ends up delivering 5 million shares to exercise the
in-the-money puts. This would be an acceptable level of hedging only if
the fund’s position in the underlying and the futures were at least 5
million shares.
Its
worst case long position (8 million shares) is when the share price is
above 130 and below 140. The fund receives 9 million shares from
exercising its in-the-money calls (a and e) and delivers 1 million shares
against its short calls (c) which are also in the money. This means that
the fund can take up this option strategy only if this 8 million shares
plus its position in the underlying shares and futures is together less
than the maximum permissible limit for the fund’s holding in the stock.
The
fund must therefore satisfy two conditions before it can take up this
option strategy as part of "hedging and portfolio rebalancing":
- the fund’s position in the underlying
and the futures must be at least 5 million shares so that the position
does not become over-hedged
- the fund’s existing position in the
underlying shares and futures plus the 8 million shares worst case
long exposure of the option strategy must together be less than the
maximum permissible limit for the fund’s holding in the stock
Some
fund managers may regard the worst case exposure analysis as an
excessively harsh view of what they might consider a legitimate and
relatively low risk derivative strategy. In particular, it might be
objected that the worst case long exposure of 8 million shares should be
treated more leniently since it applies only in a narrow range of share
prices (130-140). The Committee is however of the view that even if
strategies of this kind are attractive and low risk ways of creating and
profiting from gamma and vega exposures to a stock, the creation of such
exposures does not per se constitute "hedging and portfolio
rebalancing". To justify the strategy in a "hedging and
portfolio rebalancing" framework, it is necessary to show that the
worst case short position resulting from the strategy is an acceptable
hedging activity and that the worst case long position resulting from it
is an acceptable portfolio rebalancing activity.
Will
mutual funds trade more in future?
It
is widely accepted that with FIIs entering the derivatives market in a
significant way, other institutions will also start coming forward. The
systems for risk management followed in the derivatives industry have so
far proved quite robust and will encourage larger players to trade. Mutual
funds have been given a liberal scope by the above SEBI pronouncements and
it can be expected that funds will trade more in the coming months.
Previous
Page
Top |