Quote from bbmat:
Those countries that offer the highest treasury rates (of course to be seen in a relative context to their local inflation rates and balance of payments) of their domestic governments are considered the most unsafe. Why otherwise would the government have to offer such high rates? It is of course a risk premium (although you can take the US as a proxy for a zero percent risk premium country when it comes to T-Bills. Their return is based on liquidity when they were priced and especially for the willingness of an investor to hold such instrument for some time and thereby forgoing cash.
Higher rates elsewhere are (if in real terms) an indicator for trouble. Either is inflation much higher than in the U.S. or there is actually a risk premium priced into such securities. (For example: Of course every domestic central bank can print money if they like to, but the risk is that a country simply defaults on its debt. Examples are Russia, Argentina, Brazil and many others in the most recent or more distant history).
Quote from range:
Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have higher real (net interest rate after deducting inflation) rates than US real rates, which are negative.
If you go to www.bloomberg.com and page to the Market Data/Rates page, you willl see that 1-year governemnt paper in Australia yields 5.32%, Brazil yields 5.45% (for 2-year paper), Germany yields 2.07%, Japan yields 0.02%, and UK yields 4.08%.
The G-7 countries would generally be considered safe as far as return of principal; the FX risk/return is unknown.
Quote from aradiel:
(I wish I could elaborate more and use the right terms, but there is the language barrier I cannot revoke in this case)
Last year, the average rate of a domestic brazilian bond was in the low 20s%, and considering the fact that the brazilian currency went from 3.80 to 2.9 US dollars, the rewarding of those papers hit the 30% mark .
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
20%?!? How can that be sustainable?
It isn't - at least thats what one would say in a right state of mind.