FREE NEWSLETTER
NOT TOO LONG ago, Treasury Inflation Protected Security (TIPS) was a relatively obscure investment for safe long-term fixed-income investments. For the first twenty years of the new century, consumer prices were mostly stable or rising at a too-slow-to-notice rate. Why bother with anything related to inflation?
Sadly, persistently low inflation made us complacent on the biggest long-term risk of bond investments — the insidious unexpected inflation that robs us of the purchasing power of our “safe” investments.
Yes, let’s not forget that the biggest risk of bond or bond-like investments is unexpected inflation. Any bond or CD with a maturity beyond a few years must either offer a sufficiently high interest rate to compensate for sudden bouts of inflation, or have its principal adjusted for the inflation actually realized. The former is nearly impossible to find without sacrificing safety. The latter is what TIPS is for.
To be clear, the market and investors always expect some level of inflation. Therefore, a bond’s effective interest rate – measured by its YTM (Yield to Maturity) – must be high enough to not only compensate for “expected” inflation and the uncertainties around it but also provide a meaningful increase in the purchasing power of the original principal.
A concrete example might help. Consider a 10-year US Treasury nominal bond with a face value of $1,000, selling at $1,000 and paying 5% annual interest. The interest rate reflects the expectations about inflation and other factors over the next 10 years. The rate would be lower if market expected lower inflation, and higher if market expected the opposite.
The omnipresence of inflation means we’re likely to lose some purchasing power when we get our $1,000 in 10 years. It won’t buy what $1,000 buys today. By how much? That’s the thousand dollars question (pun intended).
There isn’t a readily available number that explains why that 10-year Treasury Bond yields 5% instead of 3% or 7%. Investors essentially take a leap of faith that annual inflation stays low enough over the 10-year period for the interim interests to compensate for the purchasing power loss, plus some changes.
Most of us are perfectly comfortable assuming that inflation won’t be as high as 5% for 10 years. But are we fooling ourselves? I suggest using an inflation calculator to see for ourselves. Spoiler alert: Late 1960s through early 1980s can be an eye-opening period. How’d we feel if the next 10 years turn out to be something similar?
Think about how you might feel when you safekeep your money in a so-called secure investment, give up higher returns available from risky investments, and then encounter an inflationary regime. Your minimum expectation was that your purchasing power would remain intact and perhaps improve a little by the time your bond matures. Instead, unforeseen inflation erodes your purchasing power and compromises the financial goal the fund was supposed to cover.
Your “safe” investment fails you completely. You realize that it wasn’t safe at all.
If unexpected inflation is so devastating, why are we so lax about it?
I can think of two reasons.
First, our minds haven’t adapted to the reality that, unlike to a “real” asset like a bag of rice or a gallon of gasoline, money in its current form is inherently self-eroding. It slowly loses its worth over time. A hundred dollars sitting around will still be a hundred dollars next year, but it won’t buy the same amount. We don’t intuitively perceive the continuous loss of purchasing power.
Even when we do internalize it with some effort, we get used to the “pace” of the loss. In other words, we view inflation as steady and unexpected inflation as highly unlikely. Alas, all it takes is a single prolonged inflationary period to change that perception. By then, however, the damage to existing fixed income investments may already be done.
Frankly, I’d be very wary of keeping my long-term “safe” money — fund that I need to preserve beyond a three-year horizon – in any form that isn’t protected against unexpected inflation. For bond investments, the most meaningful option would be TIPS.
Why? Because, in addition to being secured by the full faith and credit of the US Government just like any other Treasury securities, TIPS provides three important assurances upfront.
First, it provides protection against unexpected inflation, which is a realized inflation that differs from what we expected when purchasing it. If the actual inflation averages 12% instead of the expected 2%, the principal is automatically adjusted to reflect the actual inflation. No guesswork or unexpected risk involved.
Second, it provides a “real interest rate” upfront that tells us how much the purchasing power of the investment will increase over time, regardless of what the actual inflation turns out to be. Buying a 10-year TIPS with real 2% annual interest means the investment’s purchasing power will grow 2% per year over the holding period, before considering taxes and other factors.
The third aspect is more nuanced. It involves the possibility of inflation being lower than expected, or even negative inflation (aka deflation). Let me elaborate.
If a regular nominal 10-year Treasury Bond offers 5% annual yield and an equivalent TIPS offers a real annual interest rate of 2.75%, the market-implied inflation, the breakeven inflation rate, is roughly 2.25% (5% minus 2.75%). Actual inflation, of course, will be known only after 10 years when the bond matures.
Suppose the actual inflation turns out to be only 1.25%. The nominal Bond investor would end up with more purchasing power than the TIPS investor because the TIPS principle would be adjusted by only the actual 1.25% inflation rate.
The primary objective of the TIPS investor would still have been met: preserving and improving purchasing power by about 2.75% annually. But there would be a “missed opportunity”. The nominal Treasury investor would end up with even greater purchasing power.
Does it mean that a TIPS investor can face an unlimited opportunity cost if inflation turns out to be negative? What happens if the actual inflation is, hypothetically speaking, negative 5%, in a severely deflationary period? Does the TIPS investor get back proportionately reduced principal at maturity?
Thanks to the third assurance of TIPS, the answer is NO.
TIPS guarantees that the principal returned at maturity will never fall below the original face value. During periods of deflation, the inflation-adjusted principal can fall below its face value and the interim interest payments will decline accordingly. But at maturity, the principal is floored at the original principal amount.
Therefore, the breakeven inflation rate, the difference between the yield of a nominal Treasury bond and the real yield of an equivalent TIPS, represents the maximum annual yield advantage that the nominal bond can have over TIPS in an unexpectedly low inflation regime.
To summarize, a TIPS investor gets unlimited protection against unexpectedly high inflation, while accepting a limited opportunity cost should the actual inflation be low or even negative. The magnitude of that trade-off is reflected in the breakeven inflation rate at the time of the TIPS purchase.
An aside: given the destructive impact of deflation on economy and society, policy makers are generally more concerned about preventing prolonged deflation than about preventing modest inflation. Therefore, prolonged deflation is usually considered less likely. Still, we cannot ignore deflation risk altogether and should be prepared for the possibility that TIPS can underperform a nominal bond if inflation runs low.
Therefore, the decision to favor TIPS over an equivalent nominal Bond hinges in part on the current breakeven inflation rate. If it’s low enough, favoring TIPS can be an easy decision. Getting unlimited protection against unexpectedly high inflation is worth accepting the relatively small opportunity cost if inflation comes below the breakeven rate.
There is, however, a cautionary note about buying TIPS bonds in the secondary market, especially older issues.
Consider a 30-year TIPS bond issued 20 years ago and a 10-year TIPS issued within last 6 months. Both might appear to be valid choices if they mature within a few months of each other and offer similar yields. But beneath the surface, one may be more favorable than the other.
The older TIPS will likely have a much higher inflation-adjusted principal because it accumulated 20 years of inflation adjustments. But the protection against unexpected deflation applies only to the bond’s original face value, which is typically $1,000.
In a prolonged deflationary period, the older bond has much more room for its inflation-adjusted principal to decline before reaching the $1,000 floor. The newer issue, whose adjusted principal is much closer to the $1,000 face value, has less exposure to this risk.
Therefore, all else being equal, I’d favor a TIPS with a low inflation-adjusted factor when buying in the secondary market.
All things considered, my vote goes to TIPS for long-term “safe” investments, provided the break-even inflation is reasonably low. For secondary market purchases, however, a high inflation-adjustment factor would give me pause.
Sanjib Saha retired early from software engineering to dedicate more time to family and friends, pursue personal development and assist others as a money wellness mentor. Self-taught in investments, he passed the Series 65 licensing exam as a non-industry candidate. Sanjib is the president and cofounder of Dollar Mentor, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization offering free investment and financial education. Follow his nonprofit on LinkedIn, and check out Sanjib’s earlier articles.
