The S&P 500 continued to fall until finding support just above 1000 (big round number), which we suggested might happen in our 30 June blog. The S&P 500 then rallied furiously over the next nine days, gaining 9% before running smack into the leading edge of resistance yesterday. (Also noted in our last blog - 1100 to 1130). The S&P tested 1100 yesterday and again today but has been unable to punch through. A couple of positive earnings reports from Alcoa and Intel have probably helped hold the index aloft, but it certainly looks as if the market is getting ready to move lower very short term - likely back to the 20-day moving average sitting around 1075.
More broadly speaking, the S&P 500 is now firmly entrenched in a downtrend and would need to break above about 1130 to renew any semblance of short term upside momentum. To the downside, the recent low of 1010 is likely to be tested in the coming months as increasing weakness in the economy translates into disappointing earnings. We are maintaining our price discipline, selling stocks as they approach fair value and buying stocks only when we believe we have a sufficient margin of safety to warrant taking the risk of adding new positions in what remains a high risk market.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Market Top
We warned in our 1 June blog that the market was likely to test 1000 (big round number) and then 950 (top of the bear market base) by the fall. We think the evidence, both fundamentally and technically, has grown stronger for more downside testing since our warning. Real money supply, as measured by M-3, is still contracting sharply (May annual real contraction 7.9%). Real retail sales are softening, falling in May by 1.0%. There are indications that the housing market is softening once again and that home prices are likely to turn lower. For instance, May's existing home sales according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR) showed a monthly contraction of 2.2% when a strong upside gain had been expected. The Federal Reserve has taken note of the softening economy by inserting language in its most recent communique that, "Financial conditions have become less supportive of economic growth on balance, largely reflecting developments abroad."
Rumors are already surfacing that the Fed is preparing to reinstate quantitative easing (QE), which would continue to sow the seeds of future strong inflation, but also put a floor under the stock market once again...
Quantitative easing is the process of buying our own debt in order to force more paper money into the economy. The Treasury issues bonds and the Fed buys them with money it prints expressly for that purpose. It is a sure fire way to create inflation.
Technically the market continues to weaken, with a breach of the 1042 level occurring Monday, 29 June. Tops take more time to form than bottoms typically, and the topping action is now about six months old, sufficient time to build up overhead supply to the point where the market is no longer capable of pushing higher without first selling off more substantively. Specifically, there is now stiff resistance in place in the 1100 to 1125 area that isn't likely to give way anytime soon. Meanwhile, downside risk is 800-900 at some point either later this year or by early next year, assuming our forecast of another recession is accurate AND the Fed doesn't go back into full blown QE mode. (Normally, I would acknowledge the likelihood of the S&P 500 moving below fair value - 850ish - as the secular bear market finally plays itself out completely and the market hits its ultimate low, but our activist Fed makes that scenario a remote one)
Investors should continue to proceed with caution in what continues to be a high risk market....
Rumors are already surfacing that the Fed is preparing to reinstate quantitative easing (QE), which would continue to sow the seeds of future strong inflation, but also put a floor under the stock market once again...
Quantitative easing is the process of buying our own debt in order to force more paper money into the economy. The Treasury issues bonds and the Fed buys them with money it prints expressly for that purpose. It is a sure fire way to create inflation.
Technically the market continues to weaken, with a breach of the 1042 level occurring Monday, 29 June. Tops take more time to form than bottoms typically, and the topping action is now about six months old, sufficient time to build up overhead supply to the point where the market is no longer capable of pushing higher without first selling off more substantively. Specifically, there is now stiff resistance in place in the 1100 to 1125 area that isn't likely to give way anytime soon. Meanwhile, downside risk is 800-900 at some point either later this year or by early next year, assuming our forecast of another recession is accurate AND the Fed doesn't go back into full blown QE mode. (Normally, I would acknowledge the likelihood of the S&P 500 moving below fair value - 850ish - as the secular bear market finally plays itself out completely and the market hits its ultimate low, but our activist Fed makes that scenario a remote one)
Investors should continue to proceed with caution in what continues to be a high risk market....
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Picking Stocks Revisited
A friend suggested that I write about how to pick stocks in which to invest. Regular readers are aware that I frequently write about the economy and the markets (and have correctly forecast the current market turmoil in 2010). The reason that I shy away from writing about individual stocks is because I don't want my readers going out and purchasing them on their own. Knowing when to buy a stock is only half the investing equation. It is also important to know when to sell, and I can't be there to make that call for you - unless you are already a client of course. Nevertheless, I will update you on a stock I wrote about back in October of 2008 in order to better illustrate the art of stock picking, but first an update on the market.
Our most likely scenario for the remainder of the year is the continuation of an oversold bounce that takes the S&P 500 back to the 1150-1175 area before renewed selling takes us lower into the fall. Of course, it is also possible that the bounce is over already and we are headed lower now. Regardless of the eventual path, it is quite likely that the S&P 500 will test 1000 (big round number) and then 950 (top of the bear market base) before the year is over. Why? Well because it is quite likely that we are headed back into recession as the effect of the fiscal stimulus runs its course and the tremendous burden of U.S. debt reasserts itself. The stock market is merely a reflection of the underlying economy. A weak economy will eventually lead to a weak stock market - absent additional stimulus from the government (which can't be ruled out). Okay, now on to individual stock picking...
Below is an analysis I wrote of Intel in October of 2008. It well illustrates the thought process involved in seeking out good businesses at great prices. (Please skip down to the last couple of paragraphs of the blog for a summary if you aren't into the nitty gritty of analysis).
Our most likely scenario for the remainder of the year is the continuation of an oversold bounce that takes the S&P 500 back to the 1150-1175 area before renewed selling takes us lower into the fall. Of course, it is also possible that the bounce is over already and we are headed lower now. Regardless of the eventual path, it is quite likely that the S&P 500 will test 1000 (big round number) and then 950 (top of the bear market base) before the year is over. Why? Well because it is quite likely that we are headed back into recession as the effect of the fiscal stimulus runs its course and the tremendous burden of U.S. debt reasserts itself. The stock market is merely a reflection of the underlying economy. A weak economy will eventually lead to a weak stock market - absent additional stimulus from the government (which can't be ruled out). Okay, now on to individual stock picking...
Below is an analysis I wrote of Intel in October of 2008. It well illustrates the thought process involved in seeking out good businesses at great prices. (Please skip down to the last couple of paragraphs of the blog for a summary if you aren't into the nitty gritty of analysis).
INTC $14.28 Intel closed today at $14.28 per share, but not before touching $13.37 intraday – a new 52-week low. The company is paying a dividend of $0.55 per share for a current yield of 3.85% and is expected to raise its dividend to $0.61 per share in 2009, according to Value Line – should reality meet expectations INTC will yield 4.27% for anyone buying at the current price, or some 40 basis points or so more than the 10-year Treasury. Now, of course, Intel common stock is riskier than holding a 10-year Treasury to maturity (although that premise seems increasingly uncertain given our government’s loose spending habits). On the other hand, we get much more than a debt instrument that pays par upon maturity when we buy part ownership of a company. We also get a growing stream of shareholder cash flow that can be returned to us by management either with increasing dividends, share buy backs or both.In fact, INTC will pay out around $1.19 per share in 10 years if management raises the dividend 8% per annum during that period – only one quarter the growth rate of the last 5 years. Anyone buying and hold Intel’s stock for the decade will then be earning 8.3% per annum on their original investment. Now compare that juicy 8.3% to the measly 3.85% you can currently earn holding the U.S. 10-year note… and you quickly get it – Intel is a raging buy at the current price as long as the company is around in 10 years and as long as management is able to continue to grow the dividend. And our analysis doesn’t yet include the possibility of additional cash that might be available to oh, say, buy in stock, resulting in the dividend yield rising even faster.In Intel’s case, a quick check of current year estimates reveals that the company will have approximately $0.55 per share in excess cash after paying its dividend and meeting its capital expenditure requirements. A three year average is often useful in ascertaining a company’s ability to throw off excess cash consistently. According to Value Line, Intel has generated approximately $5.66 in cash flow from 2006 to 2008, while making $2.76 per share in capital expenditures and paying out $1.41 per share in dividends, leaving approximately $1.49 per share in excess cash available to buy back shares, or $0.50 per share per annum. Adding the $0.50 in excess cash to the current $0.55 dividend gives you a current dividend yield of 7.35% (what the dividend yield would be if INTC management devoted all of its excess cash to the dividend). Unfortunately, Intel, like many management teams, often choose to buy back shares with excess cash. We think it unfortunate, because managements tend to pay top dollar for their own shares rather than waiting to buy in shares after their stock takes a dive. Nevertheless, buying in $0.50 per share per annum retires 3.5% of the outstanding shares at the current stock price (call it 2.0% net of stock option issuance), raising current and future dividends accordingly.Yet another way to do the math without the distortion of a changing share count: Intel generated $34.2 billion in Cash Flow After Taxes (CFAT) during the three years ending in 2007, against $17 billion in Capital Expenditures (CAPEX), leaving $17.2 billion available to shareholders. The entire company was available for purchase for a mere $154 billion at the beginning of 2008 (you could buy it lock stock and barrel right now for $82.8 billion). Taking the three year average shareholder cash number of $5.7 billion and dividing it into the current fully diluted shares outstanding gets you $0.99 per share in stockholder available cash – a nice current yield of 6.9%, some 3.1% better than the 10-year’s current yield.A couple ways then of looking at the yield to shareholders currently and a decade into the future in comparison to the 10-year Treasury – all favorable. We just need to make a judgment on whether INTC is likely to be around and prospering a decade from now.The company is currently the world’s largest semiconductor chip maker based on revenue, according to its 2007 10K SEC filing. INTC develops advanced integrated digital technology products, primarily integrated circuits, for industries such as computing and communications. Intel also develops platforms, which they define as integrated suites of digital computing technologies that are designed and configured to work together to provide an optimized user computing solution compared to separately. Intel currently controls about 80% of the PC processor market.For starters, Intel has grown revenues from $30.1 billion in 2003 to an estimated $40.4 billion in 2008, or a little over 34% during the five year period. Net profit is forecast to hit $7.3 billion in 2008, up from $7.0 billion in 2007 but well off the company’s peak profit logged in 2000 ($10.7 billion). Nevertheless, profit has grown steadily, albeit erratically, since the bottom fell out during the last recession in 2001 (profits bottomed in 2002 at $3.5 billion).Clearly the company is likely to still be in business and growing earnings given its dominating position in the microprocessor industry and strong balance sheet (almost 13 billion in cash on the balance sheet at the end of 2007). On the other hand, just looking at the increasing variability in earnings leads one to the conclusion that the company is no longer a true growth company and should be bought after business conditions (and the stock price) have weakened and sold when investor enthusiasm carries the share price outside of the realm of reasonable valuation. We believe the current valuation is in the buying zone, given our discussion of dividend and shareholder yields.
Whew! So what did Intel do in the 20 months since I wrote that analysis? Well, it bottomed at around $12 per share
in November of 2008 and retested that low in March of 2009, before marching to a 52-week high of $24.36 in April of 2010. Investors who bought INTC on my recommendation in October of 2008 would have made a pretty penny, earning over 50% on their investment (including the dividend) during the 20-month holding period (assuming they still owned the stock, which currently trades at $20.81). Had they sold the stock last fall when the return hit 50%, they would have earned approximately 55% annualized on their Intel investment. (My personal investment hurdle is the likelihood of earning 50% within two years. I regularly take my profits when I hit my target because business valuations simply don't change that quickly, making it highly likely that my initially undervalued business is no longer cheap enough to hold for the long-term without taking on too much price risk).
One other thing about investing in individual stocks....
You don't find good businesses at great prices among stocks hitting 52-week highs. You do find them among stocks hitting 52-week lows. I'm currently building a rather large position in a big blue chip S&P 500 company that recently lost over half its value due to a short term (in my opinion) problem with its business. My math tells me that I have a high likelihood of earning my 50% hurdle over the next few years.....
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Bear Market?
We warned in December of 2009 of a likely correction in 2010 that could reach 20%, writing that it was most likely to occur in the first couple of quarters of 2010. "To summarize, we see a correction in the stock market sometime next year that could hit 20% and is likely to occur sometime in the next few quarters." (December 19th 2009). The S&P 500 has fallen just shy of 15% so far at its May 25th low.
We wrote about the high risk nature of the current U.S. stock market, first in February of 2010 and then again in March. On February 18th we wrote, "Further deterioration in the chart - in particular a breach of the recent 1042 low - will likely cause additional profit taking that could lead to our predicted 20%-30% 2010 decline." Finally, we wrote on May 19th that, "Prudent investors would do well to heed the warning shot that was fired on 6 May 2010, it quite likely presages more trouble to come...." (Six days later the S&P 500 hit a new low for the correction of 1040 inter-day, after falling almost 7% in just four trading days).
The wise guy traders (which includes just about everyone these days it seems like) bounced the market hard off the 1040 level on 25 May, making the 1040 area a line in the sand, a breach of which is likely to trigger a further round of selling. The bad news is that the S&P 500 recently failed to take back the 200-day moving average during last week's three day bounce and is setting up for another test of the now critical 1040 area. A close below 1040 opens the way for further declines, first to the big round number (1,000) and then to support at 950. It is possible that the market will rally out of its current very oversold condition first, which would delay any sell off to the 950-1000 level likely until the fall. (Even if an oversold rally does materialize, taking the S&P 500 back to the 1200 level, it is likely that the market will eventually test 1000 and perhaps 950 in the fall as the stalling economy pressures stocks.)
Now, the technical mumbo jumbo is a useful guide primarily because so many professional money managers utilize it. Mutual funds are speculative vehicles these days, turning their portfolios over 80% per year on average. The short term focus puts pressure on managers to track the technicals, making them a self fulfilling prophecy to some extent. It was no coincidence that the market bounced hard from the 1040 level. Everyone can read a chart and everyone could see that the February 1042 low was sitting out there as support. Likewise, it is no coincidence that the S&P 500 recently traded back to the 200-day and failed. Mutual fund managers see the 200-day there and place sell orders accordingly, creating resistance.
Fair value for the S&P 500 is still in the 850-900 area. A return to that level by the fall is still a real possibility and a decline to 950-1000 a fairly high probability event. Hopefully your advisors haven't ignored the high risk market and kept you fully invested over the last few months. Hopefully they too recognized, by late last year, that risk levels were building and prudent risk management was in order. Wouldn't it be nice if you had some cash built up already with which to buy good companies at great prices? Biechele Royce Advisors values price discipline above all else, knowing that the only sure way to outperform is by consistently buying assets for less than they are actually worth. Cash builds up on our clients balance sheets when we can't find undervalued assets to buy - that cash is available to put to work when assets sell off and good companies can be had again for great prices.... perhaps by this fall.
We wrote about the high risk nature of the current U.S. stock market, first in February of 2010 and then again in March. On February 18th we wrote, "Further deterioration in the chart - in particular a breach of the recent 1042 low - will likely cause additional profit taking that could lead to our predicted 20%-30% 2010 decline." Finally, we wrote on May 19th that, "Prudent investors would do well to heed the warning shot that was fired on 6 May 2010, it quite likely presages more trouble to come...." (Six days later the S&P 500 hit a new low for the correction of 1040 inter-day, after falling almost 7% in just four trading days).
The wise guy traders (which includes just about everyone these days it seems like) bounced the market hard off the 1040 level on 25 May, making the 1040 area a line in the sand, a breach of which is likely to trigger a further round of selling. The bad news is that the S&P 500 recently failed to take back the 200-day moving average during last week's three day bounce and is setting up for another test of the now critical 1040 area. A close below 1040 opens the way for further declines, first to the big round number (1,000) and then to support at 950. It is possible that the market will rally out of its current very oversold condition first, which would delay any sell off to the 950-1000 level likely until the fall. (Even if an oversold rally does materialize, taking the S&P 500 back to the 1200 level, it is likely that the market will eventually test 1000 and perhaps 950 in the fall as the stalling economy pressures stocks.)
Now, the technical mumbo jumbo is a useful guide primarily because so many professional money managers utilize it. Mutual funds are speculative vehicles these days, turning their portfolios over 80% per year on average. The short term focus puts pressure on managers to track the technicals, making them a self fulfilling prophecy to some extent. It was no coincidence that the market bounced hard from the 1040 level. Everyone can read a chart and everyone could see that the February 1042 low was sitting out there as support. Likewise, it is no coincidence that the S&P 500 recently traded back to the 200-day and failed. Mutual fund managers see the 200-day there and place sell orders accordingly, creating resistance.
Fair value for the S&P 500 is still in the 850-900 area. A return to that level by the fall is still a real possibility and a decline to 950-1000 a fairly high probability event. Hopefully your advisors haven't ignored the high risk market and kept you fully invested over the last few months. Hopefully they too recognized, by late last year, that risk levels were building and prudent risk management was in order. Wouldn't it be nice if you had some cash built up already with which to buy good companies at great prices? Biechele Royce Advisors values price discipline above all else, knowing that the only sure way to outperform is by consistently buying assets for less than they are actually worth. Cash builds up on our clients balance sheets when we can't find undervalued assets to buy - that cash is available to put to work when assets sell off and good companies can be had again for great prices.... perhaps by this fall.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
A Thousand Point Warning Shot
Many of you have probably heard that the Dow took a thousand point dive a few weeks ago. You might have also heard that a fat fingered trader might have been responsible for pushing the wrong button and setting the mini-crash in motion. Hopefully you aren't buying the urban legend...
First of all, real life trading doesn't work that way. It is not possible for a single, inadvertent keystroke to set off a market meltdown. Wall Street knows it and the political weenies likely know it as well. However, it does make for a good cover story to distract the masses from a far more worrisome reality - that the market is running on vapors and is increasingly exposed to the reality of an impending worldwide economic slowdown.
The government's search for a fat-fingered trader is a comical and ironic distraction. Of course, it is serving a purpose - keeping the masses entertained while also keeping the public from wondering if perhaps there is a fundamental reason for the market's brief crash. After all, it is far less worrisome to many to pin the meltdown on an "accident" than it is having to acknowledge that perhaps there is a pervasive, deep-seated rot setting in.
But where's the irony? Well, try this on for size. The government's witch hunt is focused on who might have pushed the wrong button to send the Dow careening 600 points lower in a matter of minutes (it was already down 400 points or so as a result of the steady, heavy selling that led up to the meltdown) rather than on who might have ridden to the rescue with heavy blasts of futures buying. Profit seeking traders are not known for a willingness to catch a falling knife, nor are they likely to willing place themselves in the way of a massive market meltdown. Who, then, stepped up and turned the tide with relentless, massive futures buying, even as the Dow's decline accelerated to four-digits? Perhaps the government should look into who jacked the market up 600 points in a matter of minutes? Perhaps the government already knows....
No, Fat-fingered Freddie didn't cause the market to plunge. What did do it was steady, heavy selling from nervous money managers who are beginning to see the writing on the wall. Tops take time to form and we may have started doing just that over the last few months. Sure the S&P 500 exceeded it's January high in April, but it has already retraced that gain and is currently trading below the January high and just above a flattening 200-day moving average. Furthermore, the 20-day has recently dropped below the 50-day moving average, portending continued market weakness, at least for a few more weeks. The 200-day lies in the vicinity of 1100, a big round number in its own right, making that level very important to traders (and that's most everyone these days). Finally, we've had ten days of well above average down volume since the middle of April, a sign that smart money is exiting. All in all the weight of the evidence suggests a very cautious stance is warranted from a technical point of view.
Fundamentally, the picture is even more worrisome. Europe is in trouble and contractionary forces there are likely to intensify in the coming quarters. The effects of the EU's self described Bazooka (the pledge of a 750 billion Euro backstop to Europe's banks) are already fading as the Euro is weakening again and approaching four-year lows, even as sovereign risk spreads have started to widen, despite intervention from the European Central Bank (ECB). The massive rescue package is as ill-conceived as the U.S. TARP effort (which led to a short term bounce in the stock market but saw an eventual 50% additional decline in the S&P 500 after the short-covering rally faded).
The ECB's proposed 750 billion Euro bomb is a declaration that they stand ready to buy almost $1 trillion dollars worth of distressed Euro-area debt in order to preserve the Euro. Of course, they are also on record as stating that they will sterilize the transactions to prevent the Euro from debasement (750 billion Euros let loose in the EU could create inflation on a massive scale if the transactions were left unsterilized). But that means the ECB is planning to, "debase the quality of its balance sheet by exchanging higher quality Euro-area debt with lower-quality debt of countries that are ultimately likely to default," according to Dr. John Hussman.
Now if that M.O. sounds familiar, well it should, since that is exactly what the Federal Reserve has done over the last couple years in the U.S. The Fed has exchanged U.S. Treasuries for the toxic assets residing on U.S. bank balance sheets, prostituting its own balance sheet in the process and setting the U.S. dollar up for a massive decline in value going forward.
But the worldwide debasement of paper currencies and the ultimate high inflation rates that will follow is for later. For now, it is likely that the EU economy will slow and eventually fall back into recession. Likewise, China is showing early warning signs of an impending slowdown. Finally, the U.S. economy is very likely to return to recession within the next quarter or two, based on the ongoing contraction in real money supply that began last December. Which gets us back to a much more reasonable explaination of what caused the Dow's thousand point drop. Rather than pointing to Fat-Fingered Freddie, we should instead be acknowledging that the professional money managers, who have composed the bulk of the historic rally off of the March 2009 lows, are beginning to edge toward the exit, and that their selling temporarily overwhelmed buying from the public. It's well known among traders that when an overcrowded trade reverses it often does so violently and to excess. Prudent investors would do well to heed the warning shot that was fired on 6 May 2010, it quite likely presages more trouble to come....
First of all, real life trading doesn't work that way. It is not possible for a single, inadvertent keystroke to set off a market meltdown. Wall Street knows it and the political weenies likely know it as well. However, it does make for a good cover story to distract the masses from a far more worrisome reality - that the market is running on vapors and is increasingly exposed to the reality of an impending worldwide economic slowdown.
The government's search for a fat-fingered trader is a comical and ironic distraction. Of course, it is serving a purpose - keeping the masses entertained while also keeping the public from wondering if perhaps there is a fundamental reason for the market's brief crash. After all, it is far less worrisome to many to pin the meltdown on an "accident" than it is having to acknowledge that perhaps there is a pervasive, deep-seated rot setting in.
But where's the irony? Well, try this on for size. The government's witch hunt is focused on who might have pushed the wrong button to send the Dow careening 600 points lower in a matter of minutes (it was already down 400 points or so as a result of the steady, heavy selling that led up to the meltdown) rather than on who might have ridden to the rescue with heavy blasts of futures buying. Profit seeking traders are not known for a willingness to catch a falling knife, nor are they likely to willing place themselves in the way of a massive market meltdown. Who, then, stepped up and turned the tide with relentless, massive futures buying, even as the Dow's decline accelerated to four-digits? Perhaps the government should look into who jacked the market up 600 points in a matter of minutes? Perhaps the government already knows....
No, Fat-fingered Freddie didn't cause the market to plunge. What did do it was steady, heavy selling from nervous money managers who are beginning to see the writing on the wall. Tops take time to form and we may have started doing just that over the last few months. Sure the S&P 500 exceeded it's January high in April, but it has already retraced that gain and is currently trading below the January high and just above a flattening 200-day moving average. Furthermore, the 20-day has recently dropped below the 50-day moving average, portending continued market weakness, at least for a few more weeks. The 200-day lies in the vicinity of 1100, a big round number in its own right, making that level very important to traders (and that's most everyone these days). Finally, we've had ten days of well above average down volume since the middle of April, a sign that smart money is exiting. All in all the weight of the evidence suggests a very cautious stance is warranted from a technical point of view.
Fundamentally, the picture is even more worrisome. Europe is in trouble and contractionary forces there are likely to intensify in the coming quarters. The effects of the EU's self described Bazooka (the pledge of a 750 billion Euro backstop to Europe's banks) are already fading as the Euro is weakening again and approaching four-year lows, even as sovereign risk spreads have started to widen, despite intervention from the European Central Bank (ECB). The massive rescue package is as ill-conceived as the U.S. TARP effort (which led to a short term bounce in the stock market but saw an eventual 50% additional decline in the S&P 500 after the short-covering rally faded).
The ECB's proposed 750 billion Euro bomb is a declaration that they stand ready to buy almost $1 trillion dollars worth of distressed Euro-area debt in order to preserve the Euro. Of course, they are also on record as stating that they will sterilize the transactions to prevent the Euro from debasement (750 billion Euros let loose in the EU could create inflation on a massive scale if the transactions were left unsterilized). But that means the ECB is planning to, "debase the quality of its balance sheet by exchanging higher quality Euro-area debt with lower-quality debt of countries that are ultimately likely to default," according to Dr. John Hussman.
Now if that M.O. sounds familiar, well it should, since that is exactly what the Federal Reserve has done over the last couple years in the U.S. The Fed has exchanged U.S. Treasuries for the toxic assets residing on U.S. bank balance sheets, prostituting its own balance sheet in the process and setting the U.S. dollar up for a massive decline in value going forward.
But the worldwide debasement of paper currencies and the ultimate high inflation rates that will follow is for later. For now, it is likely that the EU economy will slow and eventually fall back into recession. Likewise, China is showing early warning signs of an impending slowdown. Finally, the U.S. economy is very likely to return to recession within the next quarter or two, based on the ongoing contraction in real money supply that began last December. Which gets us back to a much more reasonable explaination of what caused the Dow's thousand point drop. Rather than pointing to Fat-Fingered Freddie, we should instead be acknowledging that the professional money managers, who have composed the bulk of the historic rally off of the March 2009 lows, are beginning to edge toward the exit, and that their selling temporarily overwhelmed buying from the public. It's well known among traders that when an overcrowded trade reverses it often does so violently and to excess. Prudent investors would do well to heed the warning shot that was fired on 6 May 2010, it quite likely presages more trouble to come....
Monday, April 12, 2010
Beware Bonds!
Most individual investors are mostly wrong most of the time... It's a phrase I borrowed from well-known economist Dr. Marc Faber. The available evidence is pretty damning - for instance, individual investors captured only about one-third of the gains during the great secular bull market of the 80's and 90's, according to Dalbar, a Boston research firm, returning a mere 5.23% per annum from 1984 through 2000 even as the S&P 500 returned 16.3%. Behavioral finance explains much of what's wrong with the decision making among individual investors. The heuristics used by people to get through life - stereotypes, intuition, rules of thumb, just don't work well when investing. For instance, it turns out that good companies often make bad investments and that bad ones often make very good investments!
But we wrote about all of this in the 4th quarter of last year; why bring it up again so soon? Because individual investors piled into bond funds at a record clip last year and anecdotal evidence suggests that they are still at it even though the bond market is likely to get hammered hard here starting sometime this year if the economic recovery is for real. The 10-year Treasury has already risen steadily from its intra-day low of 2.06% set on 31 December 2008 to a current level of 3.74%. It will likely challenge it's 2008 high of 4.25% in short order. A move above 4.25% opens the way for a run into the high- 4s, a decidedly unappealing development for bond investors and home buyers alike.
What is the fundamental argument for higher interest rates though? Well, it centers around basic supply and demand dynamics. The U.S. government is likely to run a $1.4 trillion deficit this fiscal year (10% of GDP) and foreign investors can only be expected to absorb about $300 billion, leaving a monstrous $1.1 trillion of debt for domestic investors to finance. There aren't enough domestic savings to absorb that much new supply, which means interest rates will rise as demand fails to meet supply. Last year the Federal Reserve bought most of a similar amount of supply, but Bernanke is on record as saying the Fed is done with its quantitative easing and is out of the market.
A second fundamental argument for rising rates centers on the expected economic recovery. An expanding economy requires an increase in the velocity of money, assuming a constant money supply. Inflation will rise (and with it interest rates) as the velocity of money accelerates unless the Federal Reserve successfully reduces the money supply in a timely fashion, which will require them to raise short term rates aggressively. The combination of huge new supply and an expanding economy will likely prove a toxic mix for bond investors.
A second possibility, of course, is a failure of the economy to maintain a strong growth trajectory as the existing heavy debt load remains too onerous to allow any economic momentum to persist. A slide back into recession late this year or early next (our forecast) will result in continued huge deficit spending by the U.S. government and even more supply hitting the Treasury bond market as result. The Federal Reserve is highly likely to re-enter the bond market either directly or indirectly (with an assist from Treasury - courtesy of taxpayer money - through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for example ). The result of the latter scenario would be continued low rates (although not necessarily falling rates) for another year or two. The one major fly in the ointment in the second scenario hinges on whether foreigners will continue to support the dollar in the foreign exchange market. There is increasing evidence that foreign central banks are slowly edging away from the dollar as a reserve currency. A run on the dollar would likely cause interest rates to sky rocket as the U.S. is forced to beg for bond investors to take debt off its hands at any price.
Either way, interest rates are set to rise sharply over the next five to ten years; it's only a question of whether that climb begins now, on the back of a sustained economic recover, or in a few years, after another round of heavy fiscal and monetary stimulus. Bond investors will need to decide when to lighten up on bonds because those who stay in the Treasury bond market overly long will almost certainly get flattened by the approaching runaway train.
Individual investors, who increasingly seem to believe that Treasury bonds are a risk free investment, will wake up one day to the awful realization that they can lose large amounts of money in the bond market too....
But we wrote about all of this in the 4th quarter of last year; why bring it up again so soon? Because individual investors piled into bond funds at a record clip last year and anecdotal evidence suggests that they are still at it even though the bond market is likely to get hammered hard here starting sometime this year if the economic recovery is for real. The 10-year Treasury has already risen steadily from its intra-day low of 2.06% set on 31 December 2008 to a current level of 3.74%. It will likely challenge it's 2008 high of 4.25% in short order. A move above 4.25% opens the way for a run into the high- 4s, a decidedly unappealing development for bond investors and home buyers alike.
What is the fundamental argument for higher interest rates though? Well, it centers around basic supply and demand dynamics. The U.S. government is likely to run a $1.4 trillion deficit this fiscal year (10% of GDP) and foreign investors can only be expected to absorb about $300 billion, leaving a monstrous $1.1 trillion of debt for domestic investors to finance. There aren't enough domestic savings to absorb that much new supply, which means interest rates will rise as demand fails to meet supply. Last year the Federal Reserve bought most of a similar amount of supply, but Bernanke is on record as saying the Fed is done with its quantitative easing and is out of the market.
A second fundamental argument for rising rates centers on the expected economic recovery. An expanding economy requires an increase in the velocity of money, assuming a constant money supply. Inflation will rise (and with it interest rates) as the velocity of money accelerates unless the Federal Reserve successfully reduces the money supply in a timely fashion, which will require them to raise short term rates aggressively. The combination of huge new supply and an expanding economy will likely prove a toxic mix for bond investors.
A second possibility, of course, is a failure of the economy to maintain a strong growth trajectory as the existing heavy debt load remains too onerous to allow any economic momentum to persist. A slide back into recession late this year or early next (our forecast) will result in continued huge deficit spending by the U.S. government and even more supply hitting the Treasury bond market as result. The Federal Reserve is highly likely to re-enter the bond market either directly or indirectly (with an assist from Treasury - courtesy of taxpayer money - through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for example ). The result of the latter scenario would be continued low rates (although not necessarily falling rates) for another year or two. The one major fly in the ointment in the second scenario hinges on whether foreigners will continue to support the dollar in the foreign exchange market. There is increasing evidence that foreign central banks are slowly edging away from the dollar as a reserve currency. A run on the dollar would likely cause interest rates to sky rocket as the U.S. is forced to beg for bond investors to take debt off its hands at any price.
Either way, interest rates are set to rise sharply over the next five to ten years; it's only a question of whether that climb begins now, on the back of a sustained economic recover, or in a few years, after another round of heavy fiscal and monetary stimulus. Bond investors will need to decide when to lighten up on bonds because those who stay in the Treasury bond market overly long will almost certainly get flattened by the approaching runaway train.
Individual investors, who increasingly seem to believe that Treasury bonds are a risk free investment, will wake up one day to the awful realization that they can lose large amounts of money in the bond market too....
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
The Importance of Estate Planning
Accumulating wealth for retirement is a basic goal of every investor. For many people, the vast majority of their retirement wealth is contained in a tax deferred or tax free investment vehicle. In fact, it is not at all uncommon to run across a couple with 80 to 90% of their entire networth in either 401(k)s, IRAs, Roth IRAs, or some combination of the three. Furthermore, many of these diligent savers go to great lengths to ensure that they maximize their tax-deferred contributions and invest those assets as prudently as possible to maximize wealth in retirement. Why then do so many investors fail to fill out even a few of the most basic estate planning documents to ensure that their nest eggs are used as intended in life, and make it intact to their loved ones upon the investor's death?
One quick example of the latter instance (passing assets along to the next generation) should suffice to show the importance of making sure you do the paperwork. The beneficiary form is easily the single most important estate planning document when dealing with IRAs and Roth IRAs. The beneficiary form controls who will get the investment portfolio and how long they will be able to keep it. What a shame if your loved ones don't get assets intended for them or can't take full advantage of the tax deferred feature of an IRA, or tax free feature of a Roth. Yet it happens all of the time because people fail to fill out a simple beneficiary form, instead relying on their will to take care of the distribution of assets after their death. Here's the problem though!
An individual who inherits an IRA without being named on the beneficiary form will not be considered a designated beneficiary, and that makes a HUGE difference. (An estate has no life expectancy and is never a designated beneficiary even when it is named as the default beneficiary, which is common in plan documents) Inherited IRAs and Roth IRAs must be emptied within 5 years of the death of the owner if the owner dies before the Required Beginning Distribution (RBD) date (always the case in a Roth since there is no RBD). Think about what that little oversight - not filling out a beneficiary form - just cost your heir! Rather than being able to allow assets to continue to grow tax-deferred for decades longer, your heir will be forced to empty the IRA - AND PAY INCOME TAX - no later than 31 December of the fifth year following your death. It's even worse when dealing with a Roth IRA since assets in a Roth can be held tax free and allowed to compound for decades as the beneficiary stretches out tax-free distributions over their lifetime, making for a considerably larger ultimate transfer of wealth between generations.
Failure to fill out a simple beneficiary form for your IRA or Roth IRA is just one example of an estate planning oversight that can cost your family dearly. Take a few minutes to review your beneficiary forms to make sure it doesn't happen to you. And then take some time to review your other estate planning documents as well....
One quick example of the latter instance (passing assets along to the next generation) should suffice to show the importance of making sure you do the paperwork. The beneficiary form is easily the single most important estate planning document when dealing with IRAs and Roth IRAs. The beneficiary form controls who will get the investment portfolio and how long they will be able to keep it. What a shame if your loved ones don't get assets intended for them or can't take full advantage of the tax deferred feature of an IRA, or tax free feature of a Roth. Yet it happens all of the time because people fail to fill out a simple beneficiary form, instead relying on their will to take care of the distribution of assets after their death. Here's the problem though!
An individual who inherits an IRA without being named on the beneficiary form will not be considered a designated beneficiary, and that makes a HUGE difference. (An estate has no life expectancy and is never a designated beneficiary even when it is named as the default beneficiary, which is common in plan documents) Inherited IRAs and Roth IRAs must be emptied within 5 years of the death of the owner if the owner dies before the Required Beginning Distribution (RBD) date (always the case in a Roth since there is no RBD). Think about what that little oversight - not filling out a beneficiary form - just cost your heir! Rather than being able to allow assets to continue to grow tax-deferred for decades longer, your heir will be forced to empty the IRA - AND PAY INCOME TAX - no later than 31 December of the fifth year following your death. It's even worse when dealing with a Roth IRA since assets in a Roth can be held tax free and allowed to compound for decades as the beneficiary stretches out tax-free distributions over their lifetime, making for a considerably larger ultimate transfer of wealth between generations.
Failure to fill out a simple beneficiary form for your IRA or Roth IRA is just one example of an estate planning oversight that can cost your family dearly. Take a few minutes to review your beneficiary forms to make sure it doesn't happen to you. And then take some time to review your other estate planning documents as well....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)