Keep abreast of complimentary news
Just register for the Japanese commercial & financial myFT Summary — sent straight to your email.
Regardless of how fleeting it proves, the Halo strategy is undertaking significant effort during these perplexing and muddled periods. Catchy abbreviations might convey an image of unity, even when it’s scarce.
At present, at a minimum, the pursuit of investments in businesses possessing substantial-asset, minimal-obsolescence (Halo) attributes is active. The artificial intelligence transformation is progressing faster than recently anticipated, and the task of safeguarding investment portfolios at this speed, while the turmoil remains intensely present, is exceedingly difficult.
It could be less arduous, nonetheless, if Japan is afforded the opportunity to establish itself as the quintessential Halo investment. This market has been unexpectedly validated by the present unrest: many aspects once perceived by investors as unfavorable — ranging from the preservation of moribund firms to opposition against external contracting — now appear justified.
A considerable measure of conviction is essential. The hunt for foundational enablers seeks reliable triumphs. The assault on digital programs and provisions has penalized the most probable failures. The argument for Halo, divergent from both these, elevates non-failing entities to investment champions: enterprises with presumed fortitude against the overwhelming surges of AI-driven upheaval. The shallow interpretation of this involves traditional American defensive stocks — grocery stores, food producers, quick-service restaurants, and similar entities.
However, should the Halo strategy become more astute, it will seek opportunities in less comprehensively valued segments of the international marketplace. Enterprises with substantial assets are ubiquitous in the Japanese equities market. This is the primary explanation for why it remained undervalued for many recent decades, as the asset-light principle prevailed. Furthermore, numerous Japanese firms possessing significant assets are also involved in sectors with minimal obsolescence: specialized areas where they possess distinctive machinery, are firmly established, or have commanded territories considered too intricate or historically unprofitable for Chinese and South Korean competitors to engage.
The Japanese equity exchange, as noted by analyst Pelham Smithers, is brimming with corporations that perform unsatisfactorily on typical investor profitability measures yet abruptly appear appealing “owing to the peculiar impact AI is exerting on both the financial aspects of production and the erosion of competitive advantages in service industries”.
It is much too early for triumphalism, but one can sense some individuals getting ready to indulge in it. Japan’s Halo standing was attained despite intense and continuous critique — which could, naturally, resurface upon the introduction of a different catchy abbreviation.
The extended period succeeding the implosion of Japan’s 1980s economic bubble was distinguished by minimal (ultimately negative) borrowing costs. Financial institutions deferred the liabilities of Japan’s traditional heavy industries. Conventional financial expertise vehemently asserted they were irrational to extend the existence of enterprises that a prosperous, expensive nation such as Japan should not reasonably sustain.
Japanese corporations also received backing in what has typically been regarded as an imprudent, extravagant scope of industrial engagement. Based on analyses by Shrikant Kale, a quantitative analyst at Jefferies, the typical Japanese firm operates in 2.3 sectors, compared to 1.5 for its American and European counterparts. Merely a third of Japanese enterprises are focused specialists, contrasting with two-thirds in the United States and Europe.
Yet, this seemingly illogical approach preserved what is now a highly sought-after collection of manufacturing proficiencies across the entire industrial range. The current American drive towards re-industrialization stems from the exact deficiency that Japan was previously considered foolish for preventing from emerging.
Goldman Sachs, alongside other entities, argues that Japanese businesses are poised to evolve into attractive collaborators for American manufacturing. American industry, conversely, is presently striving to more closely mirror Japan’s existing configuration. It is noteworthy that the most substantial investment endeavor to date under the US-Japan trade agreement is an enormous gas turbine plant in the United States — designed to meet AI’s energy requirements, yet almost certainly reliant on Japanese equipment and expertise.
The ability to dictate prices now held by the semiconductor sector, Smithers observes, has been bestowed upon Japanese specialized material manufacturers such as Mitsui Kinzoku, Nittobo, and Dowa. These entities create goods that scarcely any other companies can duplicate precisely to the specifications demanded by cutting-edge production methods, including AI processors. “Markets previously valued in millions are beginning to command billions, and profit margins, which might have been around 10 percent, are projected to exceed 25 percent,” he states. He further notes that supply chain constraints, currently not apparent, will soon manifest and are frequently managed by Japanese Halo enterprises.
Considerable peril exists here. The Halo strategy might vanish, consequently nullifying this affirmation of what Japan has persevered for years to protect. Currently, it ought to embrace its Halo status with dignity, but refrain from becoming self-righteous.
leo.lewis@ft.com