Bond Selloff is Shrinking Developed Markets’ Premium to Emerging Markets

Abstract:

  • Rising government debt, bond yields and term premiums in developed markets contrast with relatively stable conditions in emerging markets. By one measure, it is now cheaper for emerging market governments as a group to borrow funds for 10-years than it is for developed markets.
  • The last several years of repricing in global bond markets has been much tougher on developed markets than emerging. Now 13 of the 20 developed markets we track have 10-year yields at or near 10-year highs, and 4 are at or near 20-year highs. In contrast, not one of the emerging market countries that we track have 10-year debt yields at or near 10-year highs.
  • Much of the increase in yields in developed countries may be related to increasing nominal growth prospects. However, growth is rising faster in emerging markets. Debt to GDP ratios in developed countries are meanwhile higher than in emerging countries, and fiscal imbalances may be starting to weigh.
  • Higher borrowing costs in highly indebted countries can become a risk to growth when yields rise when investors demand a higher “term premium” to compensate for swelling debt and fiscal deficits. The term premium has accounted for about 1/3 of the rise in yields in the U.S. over the past year, and is rising relatively quickly in most developed markets.

Most global bond markets have struggled somewhat as of late, but the move has been less broad in emerging markets relative to developed markets. Over the last year, 11 of the 15 emerging markets we track showed an increase in 10-year yield, while all 20 developed markets saw 10-year yields rise. Indeed, the last several years of repricing in global bond markets has been heavily centered on developed markets, and not just because developed market 10-year yields were near zero in the pandemic and have repriced rapidly over the last five years.

Some emerging market bonds have shown weaknesses over the last year as well, but broadly, emerging markets appear to be in a remarkably steady state by comparison to developed market counterparts. Ten years ago, emerging market 10-year debt yielded 6-7%, depending on weighting methodology. Emerging market 10-year yields fell to a low of 3-4% in the pandemic and have since been relatively stable by comparison to developed market debt, rising a mere 100-150 basis points in aggregate over the last five years.

The spread compression has been so extreme that by at least one measure, 10-year emerging market sovereign yields are now lower than 10-year developed market sovereign yields for the first time in our records. On a debt-weighted basis (the standard measure utilized by index providers), emerging market 10-year sovereign debt is yielding 4.47%, slightly less than developed market sovereign debt, yielding 4.58%. The spread between developed and emerging market debt yields is now 11bps on a debt-weighted basis – inverted for the first time on record.

Debt-Weighted 10-Year Sovereign Yields: Developed vs. Emerging Markets

Much of the contrast between emerging market and developed market debt yields is as a result of divergent experiences for heavyweights U.S. and China, but that does not entirely explain the difference. U.S. 10-year Treasury yields have surged from under 1% to more than 5% since their pandemic lows, and yields are now near 20-year highs. Meanwhile, the yield on Chinese 10-year debt has fallen to 1.67%, near 20-year lows. However, 13 of the 20 developed markets we track have 10-year yields at or near 10-year highs, and 4 are at or near 20-year highs as improving nominal GDP prospects, rising inflation pressures, rising debt loads and fiscal deficits have generally hammered developed bond markets. Not one of the emerging markets countries that we track have 10-year debt yields at or near 10-year highs.

As a result of these broad shifts, most weighting methodologies (of which we tried 4) show developed markets as a group still able to borrow for 10-years at yields less than emerging markets, but the spread between the two is substantially lower than in the past. All show the same general trend of spread compression between developed and emerging markets, with the pandemic period the key break point. In the years leading up to the pandemic, emerging market 10-year sovereign debt yields were persistently 300-500 basis points above developed market yields. Since then, yield spreads between developed and emerging markets have compressed materially, particularly when country level yields are weighted on any measure that accounts for the size of the markets. Even on an equal weighted basis and after removing extremes, the yield spread is well below pre-pandemic norms.

The EM − DM 10-Year Yield Spread Has Compressed

Nominal GDP growth trends are improving around the world, helping to explain some, but not all, of the rise in yields globally. Emerging market nominal GDP is accelerating faster than developed markets, but yields are not rising as much. So far this year, emerging economies have posted nominal GDP growth of 9.0% on average, while developed markets have posted nominal GDP growth of 7.3%. These figures are 5.2 and 2.6 percentage points, respectively, above growth posted in the first half of 2025, and 2.5 and 1.3 percentage points, respectively above 5-year average nominal growth for each group. Both segments are approaching, but not yet near pre-pandemic peaks reached in 2018, when emerging market nominal GDP touched 12.6% and developed market nominal GDP touched 8.1%.

Emerging vs. Developed Market Nominal GDP Growth

Stronger growth prospects are only part of the story driving yields – government debt levels may help explain the recent divergence somewhat as well. Emerging market economies are relatively debt-light by comparison to developed market economies, particularly when China is excluded. In total, EM debt is 74% of GDP, below developed market debt of 108% of GDP. On account of slow growth and rising debt, China’s debt is about 100% of GDP, skewing the figure higher. However, the rest of emerging markets have generally lower debt, especially when markets like Korea and Taiwan are included. (Definitions of emerging versus developed markets can get a bit messy – the IMF sees Taiwan and Korea as advanced economies, but both are considered emerging in equity and debt markets.)

Emerging Markets Are Closing the Government Debt Gap
Government Debt: Emerging vs. Developed Markets

The IMF sees it likely that public debt will continue to climb, with advanced economy debt continuing to top emerging economy debt, even including the rise in Chinese debt. By 2031, debt is expected to rise from 108 percent of GDP in 2025 to 115 percent of GDP in advanced economies, and in emerging market and developing economies from 74 percent of GDP in 2025 to 84 percent of GDP in 2031.

High and rising debt levels, particularly in developed markets, are reflected in rising term premiums. The term premium captures the additional return investors require for the uncertainty of holding long-term bonds in a given market. In the United States, the term premium has risen from nearly zero in Covid to about 140 basis points this year. The term premium has accounted for about 1/3 of the rise in yields in the U.S. over the past year, according to the Federal Reserve. Meanwhile, the HB Wealth estimates that among developed markets, 17 of 20 countries have a term premium more than 50 basis points above its level ten years ago, as have 8 of the 13 emerging market countries in the study.

Decomposing the 10-Year Treasury Yield


Disclosure: HB Wealth is an SEC‑registered investment adviser. The information reflects the author’s views, opinions, and analyses as the publication date. The information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any investment product. This information contains forward-looking statements, predictions, and forecasts (“forward-looking statements”) concerning the belief and opinions in respect to the future. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, and undue reliance should not be placed on them. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. The information does not represent legal, tax, accounting, or investment advice; recipients should consult their respective advisors regarding such matters. Certain information herein is based on third-party sources believed to be reliable, but which have not been independently verified. Past performance is not a guarantee or indicator of future results; inherent in any investment is the risk of loss.

A woman with long brown hair wearing a blue blazer and a necklace smiles at the camera. The background is softly blurred with light and blue tones.

Gina Martin Adams, CFA, CMT

Chief Market Strategist, Shareholder

Gina Martin Adams, CFA, CMT, is the Chief Market Strategist for HB Wealth. With more than 25 years of experience at leading global financial institutions, Adams brings deep expertise in market analysis, thematic research, and translating complex economic trends into actionable strategies. She collaborates with HB Wealth’s investment team to deliver timely market perspectives, share actionable insights, and enhance the firm’s visibility as a leading voice in the industry. She contributes to advancing proprietary research, supporting the development of new investment products, and enhancing the client experience through thought leadership and education. She pursues a top-down perspective and model-based approach, leveraging fundamental, technical, and quantitative perspectives to inform investment decisions, and frequently presents her views in the media and at industry conferences, professional associations and investment organizations.

A man in a blue suit and tie smiles at the camera against a blurred blue and white background.

Michael Casper, CFA

Director, Senior Market Strategist

Matthew Sanders

Senior Investment Research Analyst

Related Insights & News

Silver’s Dual Identity May Shine Through as Secular Meets Cyclical

Abstract: The price of silver has seen significant growth since 2025, meaningfully outperforming gold and…

Read More

Setting the Monetary Mainstage at Jackson Hole

Abstract: The theme of this year’s Jackson Hole symposium, “Financial Innovation: Implications for Payments and…

Read More

AI is Driving the Largest Investment and Earnings Boom in 150 Years

Business investment in AI is on track to significantly surpass all other U.S. investment booms…

Read More

Rising Real Yields Suggest Stocks May Have a Rocky Road Ahead

Bond markets are throwing cold water on the outlook for stocks. Real yields (10-year Treasury…

Read More

The above is not a recommendation to purchase or sell a particular security and is not legal, investment or tax advice. Results are not guaranteed. All investing involves risk.

Past performance is not a guarantee of future results for any investment. Private alternative investments are not for every client. An individual must be qualified to invest in a private investment based on their net worth and/or other criteria, and they may qualify to invest in some alternative investments while not being allowed to invest in other alternative investments. Alternative investments are not risk-free and there is no guarantee of achieving attractive performance compared to similar liquid investments. Risks associated with investments in private alternatives include the illiquid nature of such investments, risks associated with leveraged investments, manager-specific risks, sector-specific risks, and in certain cases geographical risk, as well as the risk of loss of principal.