Capital is a vital ingredient for economic growth, but since most nations

cannot meet their total capital requirements from internal resources alone,
they turn to foreign investors. Foreign direct investment (FDI) and foreign
portfolio investment (FPI) are two of the most common routes for investors to
invest in an overseas economy. FDI implies investment by foreign investors
directly in the productive assets of another nation.

FPI means investing in financial assets, such as stocks and bonds of entities
located in another country. FDI and FPI are similar in some respects but very
different in others. As retail investors increasingly invest overseas, they should
be clearly aware of the differences between FDI and FPI, since nations with a
high level of FPI can encounter heightened market volatility and currency
turmoil during times of uncertainty.

Examples of FDI and FPI

Imagine that you are a multi-millionaire based in the U.S. and are looking for
your next investment opportunity. You are trying to decide between (a)
acquiring a company that makes industrial machinery, and (b) buying a large
stake in a company that makes such machinery. The former is an example
of direct investment, while the latter is an example of portfolio investment.

Now, if the machinery maker were located in a foreign jurisdiction, say Mexico,
and if you did invest in it, your investment would be considered an FDI. If the
companies whose shares you were considering buying were also located in
Mexico, your purchase of such stock or their American Depositary
Receipts (ADRs) would be regarded as FPI.

Although FDI is generally restricted to large players who can afford to invest
directly overseas, the average investor is quite likely to be involved in FPI,
knowingly or unknowingly. Every time you buy foreign stocks or bonds, either
directly or through ADRs, mutual funds or exchange-traded funds, you are
engaged in FPI. The cumulative figures for FPI are huge. According to
the Investment Company Institute, in early January 2018, domestic equity
mutual funds had inflows of $3.8 billion, while foreign equity funds attracted
over triple that amount, or $13.7 billion.

Evaluating Attractiveness
Because capital is always in short supply and is highly mobile, foreign
investors have standard criteria when evaluating the desirability of an
overseas destination for FDI and FPI, which include:

 Economic factors: the strength of the economy, GDP growth trends,

infrastructure, inflation, currency risk, foreign exchange controls
 Political factors: political stability, government’s business philosophy,
track record
 Incentives for foreign investors: taxation levels, tax incentives, property
rights
 Other factors: education and skills of the labor force, business
opportunities, local competition

FDI versus FPI

Although FDI and FPI are similar in that they both involve foreign investment,
there are some very fundamental differences between the two.

The first difference arises in the degree of control exercised by the foreign
investor. FDI investors typically take controlling positions in domestic firms
or joint ventures and are actively involved in their management. FPI investors,
on the other hand, are generally passive investors who are not actively
involved in the day-to-day operations and strategic plans of domestic
companies, even if they have a controlling interest in them.

The second difference is that FDI investors perforce have to take a long-term
approach to their investments since it can take years from the planning stage
to project implementation. On the other hand, FPI investors may profess to be
in for the long haul but often have a much shorter investment horizon,
especially when the local economy encounters some turbulence.

Which brings us to the final point. FDI investors cannot easily liquidate their
assetsand depart from a nation, since such assets may be very large and
quite illiquid. FPI investors can exit a nation literally with a few mouse clicks,
as financial assets are highly liquid and widely traded.

FDI and FPI – Pros and Cons

FDI and FPI are both important sources of funding for most economies.
Foreign capital can be used to develop infrastructure, set up manufacturing
facilities and service hubs, and invest in other productive assets such as
machinery and equipment, which contributes to economic growth and
stimulates employment.

However, FDI is obviously the route preferred by most nations for attracting
foreign investment, since it is much more stable than FPI and signals long-
lasting commitment. But for an economy that is just opening up, meaningful
amounts of FDI may only result once overseas investors have confidence in
its long-term prospects and the ability of the local government.

Though FPI is desirable as a source of investment capital, it tends to have a

much higher degree of volatility than FPI. In fact, FPI is often referred to as
“hot money” because of its tendency to flee at the first signs of trouble in an
economy. These massive portfolio flows can exacerbate economic problems
during periods of uncertainty.

Recent Trends
As of 2016, the United States and the United Kingdom were the world’s
biggest recipients of FDI. The U.S. had FDI net inflows of $479 billion, while
the U.K. received $299.7 billion, according to the World Bank. China lags far
behind, at $170.6 billion, but foreign investment is at an all-time high there,
with close to 2,500 new enterprises approved each month. (For related
insight, see "What Nations Are Actively Recruiting FDI (Foreign Direct
Investments)?")

FDI as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) is a good indicator of a

nation’s appeal as a long-term investment destination. The Chinese
economy is currently smaller than the U.S. economy, but DI as a percentage
of GDP was 1.5% for China in 2016, compared with 2.6% for the U.S. For
smaller, dynamic economies like Singapore and Luxembourg, FDI as a
percentage of GDP is significantly higher – 20.7% for Singapore and a
whopping 45.8% for Luxembourg.

Cautionary Signs for Investors

Investors should be cautious about investing heavily in nations with high levels
of FPI, and deteriorating economic fundamentals. Financial uncertainty can
cause foreign investors to head for the exits, with this capital flight putting
downward pressure on the domestic currency and leading to economic
instability.

The Asian Crisis of 1997 remains the textbook example of such a situation.
The plunge in currencies like the Indian rupee and Indonesian rupiah in the
summer of 2013 is another recent example of the havoc caused by “hot
money” outflows. In May 2013, after Federal Reserve chairman Ben
Bernanke hinted at the possibility of winding down the Fed’s massive bond-
buying program, foreign investors began closing out their positions in
emerging markets, since the era of near-zero interest rates (the source
of cheap money) appeared to be coming to an end.

Foreign portfolio managers first focused on nations like India and Indonesia,
which were perceived to be more vulnerable because of their widening current
account deficits and high inflation. As this hot money flowed out, the rupee
sank to record lows against the U.S. dollar, forcing the Reserve Bank of
India to step in and defend the currency. Although the rupee had recovered to
some extent by year-end, its steep depreciation in 2013 substantially eroded
returns for foreign investors who had invested in Indian financial assets.

The Bottom Line

While FDI and FPI can be sources of much-needed capital for an economy,
FPI is much more volatile, and this volatility can aggravate economic problems
during uncertain times. Since this volatility can have a significant negative
impact on their investment portfolios, retail investors should familiarize
themselves with the differences between these two key sources of foreign
investment.
BOLT stand for- Bse Bombay Stock Exchange On Line Trading