Brazil Stock Guide — The passport is Brazilian. The debt is denominated in the same currency. And, to a large extent, the investors are the same.
But the price of money can be radically different.
In the international bond market, a JBS note due in 2033 was trading in late August at a yield of about 5.4% a year. A Minerva bond with the same maturity was yielding 8.4%.
In sanitation, a Sabesp bond due in 2036 yielded about 7.6%. An Aegea bond maturing in the same year offered 10.6%.
The gap widens as balance sheets come under greater pressure.
An Azul bond due in 2031 yielded roughly 13.5%. A Gol note due in 2030 was at 15.3%. At CSN, bonds were trading at yields ranging from about 16% to 22.4%, depending on maturity.
The data come from BTG Pactual Credit Research’s LatAm Bonds Weekly, using prices as of August 28, and show a wide dispersion in the implied cost of debt among Brazilian issuers.
These are secondary-market yields and therefore do not necessarily represent the cost each company would face in a new bond issue. Maturity, collateral, seniority and liquidity also affect pricing.
Even so, bond prices offer a useful gauge of how much return investors demand to hold the risk of each issuer.
Among companies with stronger credit profiles, yields remain close to 5% to 6%. In addition to JBS, bonds issued by Vale, Suzano, Gerdau and Embraer were trading in that range.
A Vale bond due in 2030 yielded about 5.2%. Suzano notes maturing in 2028 and 2029 were slightly above 5%. A Gerdau bond due in 2027 yielded roughly 5.1%, while an Embraer note due in 2035 was around 5.6%.
Balance sheets matter more than country risk
Brazil risk, Treasury yields, foreign-exchange moves and the fiscal outlook affect all Brazilian issuers. But they do not by themselves explain a gap that stretches from roughly 5% to more than 20%.
The market also looks at leverage, debt maturities, cash generation, investment needs, assets available for sale and access to refinancing.
The more dependent a company is on fresh funding, the more sensitive it tends to be to a deterioration in financial conditions. For equity investors, bonds can therefore provide an additional measure of risk.
A heavily indebted company may rally sharply in the stock market if it sells assets, cuts leverage or refinances liabilities on better terms. Creditors, however, are primarily focused on whether interest and principal will be repaid.
JBS and Minerva
The comparison between JBS and Minerva shows how sharply pricing can diverge even within the same sector.
The JBS bond due in 2033 carried a yield of 5.4% and a spread of about 117 basis points over the benchmark curve. Minerva’s bond, also due in 2033, yielded 8.4%, with a spread of roughly 413 basis points.
That is a difference of nearly three percentage points in yield and around 300 basis points in spread.
Credit ratings explain part of the premium. In BTG’s survey, JBS sits in investment-grade territory, while Minerva is rated below investment grade.
For companies, that difference can become material when it is time to refinance debt, fund acquisitions or accelerate investment.
Sabesp and Aegea
The gap is also significant in sanitation.
A Sabesp bond due in 2036 was trading at a yield of about 7.6%. Aegea’s bond with the same maturity was yielding 10.6%.
The sector benefits from regulated revenues and long-term contracts, but it is also highly capital intensive. That makes cash generation, leverage and future funding needs central considerations for creditors.
The difference shows that exposure to the same sector does not necessarily translate into a similar cost of capital.
The 9% to 11% range
Natura, Simpar, Movida and Aegea sit in an intermediate band.
Natura bonds were yielding slightly above 9%, while Simpar was close to 9.6%. At Movida, a shorter-dated bond was trading around 8.1%, while a note due in 2033 was yielding about 11%.
Those levels do not necessarily mean the market is pricing in a restructuring. But they do imply a significantly higher cost of capital than for issuers trading near 5%.
That can raise the return threshold for new projects and reduce flexibility for acquisitions, investment or cash distributions.
Even companies with similar ratings can trade at meaningfully different levels. Investors also assess liquidity, maturity schedules, cash generation, collateral and future refinancing needs.
In airlines, exposure to fuel prices, currencies and economic cycles adds further volatility to credit risk. Azul’s 2031 bond yielded about 13.5%, while Gol’s 2030 note was at 15.3%.
CSN carries the largest premium
Among the large companies in the survey, CSN stands out with the highest yields.
Its bond due in January 2028 was trading at roughly 82 cents on the dollar and yielding around 22.4%, with a spread of more than 1,800 basis points. Notes maturing between 2030 and 2032 were yielding roughly 16% to 19%.
A comparison with Vale highlights the market’s different assessment of the two credits.
A Vale bond due in 2030 yielded around 5.2%. A CSN bond maturing in the same year was close to 18%.
Both companies are exposed to Brazil, the dollar, China and global commodity cycles.
The more than 12-percentage-point gap therefore points primarily to company-specific credit risk and differences in capital structure.
Leave a Reply