|
What not being born and not dying is doing to investments Insync Fund Managers August 2024 Are we experiencing a permanent change to a major economic driver that has underpinned an investor assumption for the past 100 years? That assumption being that ever more people would be working decade to decade? Most developed nations since the 2000's have been experiencing dramatic shifts in the makeup of their populations, spelling big challenges for societies and also for investors. It used to be commonplace that more younger people entered the workforce than left it, had two or more kids and did not live too long after retiring. This meant there was always a growing labour supply and growing tax revenues, and aged health and social care was a controllable tax-funded expense. Not anymore. Birth rates have been falling for decades. A 2.1 birth rate replenishes a population, anything less means decline. Australia's current 1.6 birth rate is down from 2 only 15 years ago. KPMG analysed Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) data and found 2023 had the lowest birth rate since 2006 and it is falling by 4.6% per year. Even though a drop of this magnitude occurred in the 1970s, the longer-term trend is one of decline. This finding is echoed across the globe in Korea, Japan, Ukraine, Germany, UK, USA, Russia, China, France, Italy, Scandinavia and so on. Back in 2011, the world experienced its 'peak child' maximum population count with most of these residing in poor nations. Many towns and regional cities globally are in decline. Reducing poverty, women being able to choose whether or not to have children, and being empowered economically, have impacted birth rates. India and Indonesia are as we used to be, but they're rapidly approaching the same situation. Declining birth rates however are just half the issue. The other half is that globally, according to the United Nations' UN75 project, the number of people aged 65 plus outnumber the number of children under five. They are the fastest growing age group and by 2050, will outnumber those aged 15-24. We may reach a point where older people not working will outnumber people who are. This is because the older are living much longer and fewer children are transitioning to adulthood. Today the life expectancy in Australia for men is around 81 and for women around 85. This compares to around 74 for men and 80 for women 30 or so years ago. Medical advances and technology mean that we are set to live older still. Stanford University research suggests that it won't be unusual for babies born in America in 2050 to live to 100. Other studies suggest that humans might one day live to 150. In a nutshell - we are not procreating like we used to, and we are not dying like we used to either. This means fewer people building economic growth, driving demand, consuming goods and services and - paying taxes. Older people consume less in almost everything except healthcare and rely on government support far more, while paying very little tax. To some extent a country can offset and delay the worst of demographic problems via strong immigration (Australia, Canada and the USA are examples). Over 8 years ago the German government forecast a need for a million immigrants a year for 20 years just to replace its current workforce. When they brought in the first million, riots and a government collapse was only narrowly averted. In an ever-divisive world, immigration is reliant on popular support and in any event, it is really just robbing Peter to pay Paul. What does this all have to do with investment? I'm glad you asked. Firstly, products, services and even entire industries that are dominant today can see their markets dry up or radically change in only a few years. Understanding how purchasing habits are shifting in the dominant working age population of GenZers is key. Their values, drivers and preferences are different to those that today's 60-year-olds hold, and likely held, back in their late 20's to early 30's. If you're an investor in companies reliant on old brands, products or services delivered in traditional ways you will need to be extra vigilant. Kraft is an example of a company that had not factored in the impact of demographic change. Its failure to properly invest in R&D, while pumping short term profits, spelt disaster in long term earnings as its decades old food brands no longer appealed to younger people. But secondly, there are positives for those who look well ahead and align their portfolios to what the economic ripple effect caused by demographic change is having. For example, the megatrend known as 'the Silver Economy' made up of companies specialising in products and services for older people, especially retirees. The most obvious of these are healthcare, leisure, and pharmaceutical, but there are more obscure companies behind the scenes in such megatrends that also have the capacity to deliver handsome rewards. The Silver Economy is only one megatrend benefiting from tectonic demographic shifts. Others include Pet Humanisation, Trading-Down and Emerging Middle Incomes. The challenge for investors is how to identify, then best ride the positive demographic driven megatrends already underway and reducing or even exiting those investments on the wrong side of demographic change. The rewards in doing both are substantial. Author: Grant Pearson, Head of Strategy and Distribution Funds operated by this manager: Insync Global Capital Aware Fund, Insync Global Quality Equity Fund Disclaimer |
