跳转到文章内容

From dilution drag to shareholder discipline

For much of the past two decades, the performance gap between emerging markets (EMs) and the United States has been viewed through the lens of macro volatility, currency weakness and sector composition. Recent analysis also highlights that persistent differences in share-count behavior have been an additional factor in explaining divergent performance.

Exhibit 1: MSCI Share Count Dilution Drivers

Source: MSCI, Datastream and UBS.

Exhibit 1 highlights the cumulative change in share count for the MSCI EM Index versus the MSCI USA Index since 2005. The divergence is striking. EM share count has trended steadily higher, reflecting sustained net issuance, while US share count has been broadly stable to declining, reflecting structural net buybacks.

The implications of this trend are straightforward. If aggregate net income grows while the share base expands, earnings-per-share (EPS) growth is diluted. If share count contracts, EPS compounds faster than underlying profits. Over long horizons, this mechanical difference materially affects total returns.

This structural dilution has been a persistent headwind for EM investors. Even when operating earnings improved, per-share outcomes frequently lagged. The long-standing valuation discount of EM relative to developed markets must be viewed through this lens.

It is also important to distinguish between local currency earnings and what a US dollar (USD)-based investor ultimately experiences. Over the past two decades, EM corporate profitability in local currency terms has grown materially. However, EPS in USD terms has diverged sharply from that trajectory. The gap reflects two forces operating simultaneously: persistent share-count expansion and sustained USD strength against EM currencies. Even when underlying businesses delivered comparable aggregate earnings growth to developed markets, the translation into USD terms, combined with an expanding share base, meant that per-share USD earnings failed to keep pace.

Exhibits 2: EM EPS in Local Currency vs. USD (India and Brazil)

Source: Bloomberg. As of March 26, 2026.

This distinction is critical, as relative operating performance between EM and the United States has not always been as wide as relative USD EPS performance might suggest. For extended periods, non-diluted earnings growth was broadly comparable, with the divergence emerging at the per-share, USD-translated level. In effect, EM investors faced a double drag: currency translation and dilution.

While currency cycles remain inherently difficult to forecast, a sustained shift from net issuance toward net buybacks directly addresses one of these structural headwinds. Recent data suggest that such a shift may be underway.

China as the marginal driver of change

The most visible inflection is occurring within China’s large-cap internet and ecommerce platforms.

Exhibit 3: Acceleration in Buybacks in China

Sources: Bloomberg, Goldman Sachs Investment Research. As of September 4, 2025. Based on buyback execution announcements; numbers on the bar indicate share of total A+H buybacks; HK-listed names’ buybacks are tracked by the HKEX website and repurchases of American Depositary Receipts may not be captured.

Exhibit 3 shows a sharp rise in buyback amounts across major China technology companies in recent years. The step-up is meaningful relative to prior periods and coincides with a measurable decline in outstanding shares.

Since these firms carry significant weight in the MSCI EM Index, their capital allocation decisions disproportionately influence the index’s net buyback yield. A shift from net issuance to sustained buybacks at this scale alters the index-level share count trajectory.

The question is not whether buybacks have increased—the data clearly confirm that they have—but whether this reflects a cyclical deployment of excess cash or a structural shift in capital discipline.

Exhibit 4: MSCI EM vs US Relative Buyback Yield

Sources: FactSet, Bloomberg: As of March 15, 2026. E=estimate. There is no assurance that any estimate, forecast or projection will be realized.

Broadening the narrative: Korea’s push for shareholder returns

While China has been the most visible driver of improving buyback activity, it is not the only market where capital allocation behavior is evolving.

South Korea has also begun to show early signs of a structural shift toward improved shareholder returns. Policy initiatives such as the government’s “Corporate Value-Up Program,” alongside increasing pressure on corporates to enhance capital efficiency, are encouraging higher payouts, improved return on equity and more disciplined capital allocation. While still at an early stage, the direction of travel is notable given the country’s historically low payout ratios and persistent valuation discount.

Importantly, this shift is being driven not only by corporate balance sheet strength but also by a broader policy and governance framework aimed at improving market quality. In contrast to China, where the buyback story is more company-led and subject to investment trade-offs, South Korea’s evolution reflects a more coordinated push toward shareholder alignment.

Taken together, developments in China and South Korea (two of the largest weights in EM indexes) suggest that the improvement in capital return behavior is not isolated, but may be part of a broader shift across key markets.

Assessing sustainability

Several fundamental observations support the case that the shift may be structural.

First, balance sheets across the major internet platforms remain strong. Many companies are still in positive net cash positions, providing flexibility to fund both investment and shareholder returns.

Second, core businesses continue to generate cash flow. With the notable exception of specific competitive segments such as food delivery, most large platforms remain profitable and cash generative even in a subdued macro environment.

Third, it is notable that the buyback acceleration is occurring while the broader Chinese economy remains near cyclical lows. Capital return programs are often associated with peak-cycle excess profits. In this case, they are being implemented during stabilization rather than exuberance. If growth improves, incremental free cash flow capacity could expand further.

While we believe the underlying fundamentals are supportive, there are still variables to monitor. Investment intensity in AI and related technologies is rising. The pace of increase in capital expenditure will determine whether companies can simultaneously fund innovation and maintain elevated buybacks. A material acceleration in strategic investment could, at the margin, moderate capital return momentum. Recent trends already suggest some moderation in buyback activity among large China internet platform companies, as capital is increasingly being deployed toward AI-related investment.

At present, financial capacity does not appear to be the binding constraint; the more relevant risk lies in potential strategic reprioritization of capital toward investment rather than shareholder returns. From a relative perspective, this dynamic may not be unique to EM, as US large-cap technology companies are also increasing investment in AI. However, the net impact will depend on the balance between reinvestment and capital return across markets.

Regional nuance and risks

The improvement in capital return behavior is not yet uniform across EMs. While large-cap China internet platforms have shifted decisively toward buybacks, equity issuance remains active elsewhere. Initial public offering pipelines in India and parts of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations remain robust, and secondary issuance has not disappeared. In several markets, equity continues to be an important funding channel for growth and balance sheet expansion.

The durability of the shift therefore depends on whether the behavioral change broadens beyond a handful of mega-cap names. It also depends on investment intensity. A sustained acceleration in AI-related capital expenditure, renewed competitive pressures or policy shifts could reorient cash deployment toward growth rather than shareholder return. While financial capacity appears ample, strategic reprioritization remains the key risk variable.

Additionally, share-based compensation remains an area of concern, particularly in China. The continued use of restricted stock units to reward senior management can act as a source of ongoing dilution, potentially offsetting the impact of buybacks at the aggregate level. More importantly, elevated reliance on equity-based compensation may reflect weaker corporate governance and create misalignment between management incentives and shareholder returns.

However, with both China and South Korea—together representing a substantial portion of EM indexes—showing signs of improved capital discipline, the direction of travel at the index level is increasingly relevant.

Implications for EM equities

If positive net buyback yield becomes a structural feature in EMs, several investment implications follow:

  • Greater consistency in EPS growth
  • Improved return on equity stability
  • Greater alignment between aggregate profit growth and shareholder outcomes
  • Potential narrowing of the valuation gap versus developed markets

This does not eliminate macro or policy risks. Nor does it imply uniform improvement across all EM regions. The shift is currently most visible in China’s internet sector and remains uneven elsewhere.

However, in our opinion, the combination of strong balance sheets, resilient cash generation and buybacks implemented at cyclical lows strengthens the case that this may represent more than opportunistic capital deployment.

Conclusion

Emerging markets have long been characterized by expansion of the share base rather than contraction. Exhibit 1 captures the structural divergence that constrained per-share growth. Exhibit 3 suggests that, at least in key segments, this pattern may be reversing, with developments in both China and South Korea pointing toward a potential shift in capital allocation behavior.

The durability of the trend will depend on investment intensity and strategic priorities. Yet current financial conditions provide ample buffer for continued capital return.

The central question for EMs is no longer the growth opportunity, but whether that growth accrues to shareholders on a per-share basis. Given the combined weight of these markets within EM portfolios, even incremental improvements in capital discipline could have a meaningful impact on aggregate index-level earnings quality. If capital discipline persists, we believe the long-run compounding profile of the asset class could improve meaningfully.



Copyright ©2025 富蘭克林鄧普頓。版權所有。

本文件僅供一般參考。本文件不應被視作個人投資建議或買賣或持有任何基金股份或證券的要約或招攬。有關本文所提及的任何證券的資料並不足以用作制定投資決策。投資涉及風險。投資價值可升或跌,過往業績不代表或不保證將來的表現。投資收益是以資產淨值計算,已考慮股息再投資及資本增長或損失。投資收益以所示貨幣計價,該等貨幣可能是美元/港元以外的貨幣(「外幣」)。因此,以美元/港元交易的投資者需承受美元/港元與外幣之間匯率波動的風險。投資者應仔細閱讀銷售文件,以獲取進一步資料,包括風險因素。

本文件所載的數據、評論、意見、預測及其他資料如有更改恕不另行通知。不保證投資產品目標將會實現,亦不保證所示預測將會實現。表現亦可能受貨幣波動影響。流動性下降或會對資產價格產生不利影響。貨幣波動可能會影響海外投資的價值。如果投資產品投資於新興市場,風險可能高於投資於已發展市場。如果投資產品投資於衍生工具,則需承擔特定風險,這可能會增加投資產品承受的風險水平。如果投資產品投資於特定行業或地區,回報的波動程度可能高於更多元化的投資產品投資。富蘭克林鄧普頓不就使用本文件或其所載的任何評論、意見或估計而導致的任何直接或間接後果性損失承擔任何責任。在未得到富蘭克林鄧普頓的事先書面同意下,不得以任何方式複製、派發或發表本文件。

名稱中包含「(已對沖)」的任何股份類別將嘗試對沖本基金基礎貨幣與股份類別計值貨幣之間的貨幣風險,但不保證可以成功對沖。在某些情況下,投資者可能涉及額外風險。

若閣下對其中任何資料有疑問,謹請與閣下的財務顧問聯絡。

只適用於UCITS基金: 此外,投資者權利概要可從這裡獲得。根據 UCITS 指令,基金/子基金被通知在不同地區進行營銷。 基金/子基金可以使用 UCITS 指令第 93a 條中包含的程序隨時終止任何股份類別和/或子基金的此類通知。

只適用於AIFMD基金:此外,投資者權利摘要可從這裡獲得。根據 AIFMD 指令,基金/子基金被通知在不同地區進行營銷。 基金/子基金可以使用 AIFMD指令第 32a 條中包含的程序隨時終止任何股份類別和/或子基金的此類通知。

為避免疑問,如果您決定投資,即代表您將購買本基金的單位/股份,並不是直接投資於本基金的相關資產。

本文件由富蘭克林鄧普頓投資(亞洲)有限公司發行,並未為香港證監會所審閱。

除非另有註明,所有資料截至上述日期。資料來源:富蘭克林鄧普頓。

CFA® 及Chartered Financial Analyst®為特許金融分析師協會擁有的商標。