Showing posts with label investment markets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label investment markets. Show all posts

Saturday, June 18, 2016

18/7/16: Stock Markets Crashes: 1955-2015


A good summary of all stock markets crashes since 1955 through 2015 via Goldman Sachs:



The caption to the chart says it all.

Friday, October 16, 2015

16/10/15: IG Conference: Markets Outlook


My speaking points on the topic of the Markets Outlook for yesterday's IG conference:

Short themes:

Theme 1: Markets pricing in advanced economies: 
- EV/EBITDA ratios signal overvaluation; 
- EBITDA/Interest Expenses ratio is at below 2010 levels (below 14%) despite extremely cheap debt.

A handy Bloomberg chart:

- Global debt cycle has turned – sovereigns are not leveraging as fast or deleveraging, but corporates leveraged up. 
- Much of pricing today reflects migration from equity to debt
- In this environment – long only allocations are problematic.

Theme 2: Emerging markets, especially BRICS
- Idea of 3rd Wave – Goldman’s thesis – is based on two drivers: duration of the crisis (‘this can’t be going for so long…’) and firewalls (‘this can’t spill into the developed economies…’) both of which are 
- There are no fundamentals to support robust recovery view
- Again, allocations are highly problematic.

So short-term summary is poor when it comes to hard numbers:
- World economic growth for 2015-2017 forecast is down from 14.1% in 2012 to 10.9% today
- Euro area economy forecasts are flat: 5% in 2012 and 4.9% today, holding relatively steady compared to the rest of the world solely because Europe is now Japanified
- Advanced economies down from 8.1% to 6.6% - another miserably Japanese-styled performance compared to past averages
- Emerging and developing economies from 19.55 in 2012 to 14.0%.

On inflationary targets and rates: the only way we are going to get to the inflationary expectations consistent with monetary policy normalization, is by literally superficially jacking up prices through Government controlled sectors and/or via regulatory policies. Which is to say that any inflation above, say 1% or so in the Advanced Economies, today, will be consistent with stripping income out of the economy to prime up financials (in the short run) and public purse.


Longer themes:

As much as I love the good story of innovation and technological revolutions, I am afraid to say my fear is that we are heading for the twin secular stagnation scenario:

Supply side stagnation: 
- Technological returns (productivity growth and new value added) are tapering out
- Substitutability of labour is rising and with it, risks to economic systems
- Regionalisation of trade and production are gaining ground and markets fragmentation is going to play a disruptive havoc with our traditional market valuations
- So expect more volatility on flatter trend.

Demand side stagnation: 
- Demographics 
- Savings/investment imbalances, 
- Debt overhang – across both advanced economies and, increasingly also, emerging markets, so we have a Myth of Post Financial Crisis Deleveraging (via BAML)

Global Debt to GDP
2010-2015: 220 to 240%
2000-2010: 190 to 200%
1990-2010: 170 to 190%

Or a handy chart

- Wealth and income inequalities, including intergenerational effects
- Rebalancing of economic growth drivers (human capital focus pushes incomes gap wider and deeper, but also clashes with current taxation and political systems)

Key forward is to expect:
- Flatter growth trend and more volatility around that trend 
- Higher volatility / instability in higher moments 
- Financial imbalances accelerating and amplifying
- Financial imbalances / cycles leading real cycles (Excess Financial Elasticity hypothesis)
- Economic volatility spilling, increasingly, into political volatility (political economy). 

Key strategy points:
- Focus on lower debt levels on companies balance sheets
- Focus on companies actually paying attention to core basics, e.g. earnings, sales, profit margins, as opposed to subscription bases, user counts etc
- Focus on companies with strong regional reach (not only in product markets, but in logistics and production bases)
- Focus on companies with revenues linked to multi-annual contracts
- Go defensive, stay defensive in core allocation
- Go speculative with low leverage only and on a small share of total wealth
- Go speculative trades on uncertainty and long 5-10 percentile under-performers

Saturday, October 10, 2015

10/10/15: What, When, If the $7 trillion SWFs Gorilla Moves?


Remember this bit about Central Banks' reserves taking a dip globally? And now consider this, about Sovereign Wealth Funds shrinking their income/assets. The alarmism is premature, as the article explain, since SWFs are (1) big, (2) likely to see return to inflows of funds once oil and broader commodities prices recover, and (3) longer-term investment vehicles with broad mandates. Which implies there is not so much panic looming from SWFs downsizing their holdings (selling assets).

But the key is in the second order effects: as long as oil prices remain low, SWFs are not going to be active buyers of assets in the near term (so demand base for assets is taking a knock down, currently being obscured by the Central Banks' demand in some areas - e.g. Euro area, and/or by leveraged plays and carry trades still available on foot of Central Banks (more limited) adventurism. Which means that any 'normalisation' in monetary policies today is likely to coincide with a period of subdued demand from the SWFs for assets. And that is pesky enough of a problem to worry anyone in the markets.

Beyond this concern, note two other problems arising from the current oil price slump:

  1. SWFs, having parked their buying for now, are becoming less predictable per strategy they might take when prices do recover (the longer the period of oil prices slump, the higher is uncertainty); and
  2. How the future balancing between liquidity risk and returns going to play across the SWFs strategy (again, the longer the period of low oil prices, the more likely exit from the oil price slump will entail SWFs pursuing less risk-loaded assets and opting for greater safety - a sort of precautionary savings motive for the SWFs).


Friday, May 8, 2015

8/5/15: BIS on Build Up of Financial Imbalances


There is a scary, fully frightening presentation out there. Titled "The international monetary and financial system: Its Achilles heel and what to do about it" and authored by Claudio Borio of the Bank for International Settlements, it was delivered at the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) “2015 Annual Conference: Liberté, Égalité, Fragilité” Paris, on 8-11 April 2015.

Per Borio, the Achilles heel of the global economy is the fact that international monetary and financial system (IMFS) "amplifies weakness of domestic monetary and financial regimes" via:

  • "Excess (financial) elasticity”: inability to prevent the build-up of financial imbalances (FIs)
  • FIs= unsustainable credit and asset price booms that overstretch balance sheets leading to serious financial crises and macroeconomic dislocations
  • Failure to tame the procyclicality of the financial system
  • Failure to tame the financial cycle (FC)

The manifestations of this are:

  • Simultaneous build-up of FIs across countries, often financed across borders... watch out below - this is still happening... and
  • Overly accommodative aggregate monetary conditions for global economy. Easing bias: expansionary in short term, contractionary longer-term. Now, what can possibly suggest that this might be the case today... other than all the massive QE programmes and unconventional 'lending' supports deployed everywhere with abandon...

So Borio's view (and I agree with him 100%) is that policymakers' "focus should be more on FIs than current account imbalances". Problem is, European policymakers and analysts have a strong penchant for ignoring the former and focusing exclusively on the latter.

Wonder why Borio is right? Because real imbalances (actual recessions) are much shallower than financial crises. And the latter are getting worse. Here's the US evidence:

Now, some think this is the proverbial Scary Chart because it shows how things got worse. But surely, the Real Scary Chart must reference the problem today and posit it into tomorrow, right? Well, hold on, for the imbalances responsible for the last blue line swing up in the chart above are not going away. In fact, the financial imbalance are getting stronger. Take a look at the following chart:


Note: Bank loans include cross-border and locally extended loans to non-banks outside the United States.

Get the point? Take 2008 crisis peak when USD swap lines were feeding all foreign banks operations in the U.S. and USD credit was around USD6 trillion. Since 'repairs' were completed across the European and other Western banking and financial systems, the pile of debt denominated in the USD has… increased. By mid-2014 it reached above USD9 trillion. That is 50% growth in under 6 years.

However, the above is USD stuff... the Really Really Scary Chart should up the ante on the one above and show the same happening broader, outside just the USD loans.

So behold the real Dracula popping his head from the darkness of the Monetary Stability graveyards:



Yep.  Now we have it: debt (already in an overhang) is rising, systemically, unhindered, as cost of debt falls. Like a drug addict faced with a flood of cheap crack on the market, the global economy continues to go back to the needle. Over and over and over again.

Anyone up for a reversal of the yields? Jump straight to the first chart… and hold onto your seats, for the next upswing in the blue line is already well underway. And this time it will be again different... to the upside...