• No results found

A Changing Global Economy

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "A Changing Global Economy"

Copied!
14
0
0

Laster.... (Se fulltekst nå)

Fulltekst

(1)

A changing global economy

Governor Øystein Olsen

Norwegian School of Economics and Business

Administration (NHH) annual Spring Conference,

31 May 2011

(2)

GDP

Index, 2000 = 100

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Euro area US Brazil India China

2010 2000

Sources: IMF and Norges Bank

(3)

Growth in 2009

10% or more 6% - 10%

3% - 6%

Annual, percentage change

0% - 3%

Less than 0%

No data

Source: IMF

(4)

Current account

Share of world GDP. Per cent.

1)

2000 – 2011

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

-2 -1 0 1 2 3

-2 -1 0 1 2 3

China

Rest of Asia

Fuel exporting countries US

Sources: IMF World Economic Outlook April 2011 and Norges Bank

1) IMF projections for 2011

(5)

Exports from emerging economies in Asia

Share of world exports. Per cent

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

2000 2009

Sources: UN Comtrade and Norges Bank

(6)

Saving and investment as a share of GDP 1)

Emerging economies and developing countries

Advanced economies

15 20 25 30 35

15 20 25 30 35

1980 1986 1992 1998 2004 2010

Saving Investment

15 20 25 30 35

1980 1986 1992 1998 2004 2010 15 20 25 30 35

Saving Investment

Sources: IMF and Norges Bank

1) 1980 – 2010

(7)

US – long-term interest rates

Per cent. March 1954 – April 2011

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

1954 1960 1966 1972 1978 1984 1990 1996 2002 2008

5-year nominal interest rate 5-year real interest rate

Sources: Thomson Reuters, Federal Reserve Board and Norges Bank

(8)

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

US UK Greece Euro area

Euro area threshold

Source: IMF World Economic Outlook April 2011

Public debt

As a share of GDP. Per cent.

1)

1) IMF projections for 2011. Broken lines

(9)

Real prices for metals, food and oil

In USD. US figures deflated by the CPI. Index. 1960 = 100.

1960 – 2011.¹ ⁾ Logarithmic scale

25 50 100 200 400 800

25 50 100 200 400 800

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Metals Food Oil

1) Figures for 2011 show the average so far in 2011 Sources: Thomson Reuters and Norges Bank

(10)

Norway’s terms of trade

Index. 2003 Q1 = 100. 2003 Q1 – 2011 Q1

90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Total

Mainland Norway

Sources: Statistics Norway and Norges Bank

(11)

Market value of the Fund

In billions of kroner. 1998 Q1 – 2011 Q1

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500

1998 2001 2004 2007 2010

Source: Norges Bank

(12)

Quarterly return and accumulated return on the Fund

Per cent. 1998 Q1 – 2011 Q1

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15

1998 2001 2004 2007 2010

Quarterly return

Accumulated annualised return since 1998

Source: Norges Bank

(13)

Quarterly excess return and accumulated annualised excess return on the Fund

Per cent. 1998 Q1 – 2011 Q1

-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Quarterly excess return

Accumulated annualised excess return

Source: Norges Bank

(14)

GDP and regional allocation of equities in the Fund

In billions of USD

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

US EU China

GDP (left-hand scale) Equities (right-hand scale)

Sources: Norges Bank and IMF

Referanser

RELATERTE DOKUMENTER

This model suggests different risk factors that explain companies’ returns; the excess market return, the excess return from holding stocks containing small-capitalized

Table 6: Annualized excess return (in excess of the risk-free rate), volatility (measured by standard deviation), skewness, kurtosis, alpha, beta, adjusted R 2 , and Sharpe Ratio

The gure shows the risk free rate in the home country, the foreign country, the interest dierential and the excess return on the real exchange rate as a function of

The lagged excess return is included as the rudimentary performance measure used by retail investors, whereas Jensen’s alpha and tracking error are

is the market return excess of the risk-free

In this regression we regress GPFG, the aggregated AP fund and all the individual AP fund’s returns in excess of USD LIBOR on the excess return of the MSCI ACWI and

Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines and Taiwan are the only countries who report a higher mean excess return when implementing the unitary hedge compared to the minimum variance

The table shows the OLS time-series regression of return based on the estimated risk premiums for the market excess return, SMB HML and ESG.. The coefficients