Posts

Market Update: January 2015

/in /by

2014 presented a set of challenges that we have not seen in a long time. While the financial markets continue to have generally positive results, the global political situation is changing drastically. The continued dichotomy in financial returns — some markets up, others down – – is putting extreme stress on institutional money managers. In addition, the shifting fortunes of oil have changed global politics overnight, even as wealth inequality and social stresses continue to challenge our world in potentially disastrous ways.

The S&P 500 again finished the year with strong gains: 13.7% with dividends included. On top of 2013’s gains of twice that, one might think there should be little concern about markets and the ability to make money in them. Unfortunately, that is not the case. The developed markets in Europe and Asia had another year in which they vastly underperformed. In fact, both developed non-U.S. markets and emerging markets showed negative returns this year. Even within the U.S. market, performance among sectors and indices varied wildly, with the Dow lagging the S&P 500 by 4%.

Although the U.S. economy posted one of its best quarters for growth in Q3 with a 5% annual rate (the strongest in 11 years), most of the world’s major economies are shrinking, stagnant or slowing down dramatically. Europe is still in a recession; the threat of a broken Euro is being viewed as inevitable; and Japan continues to experience lost growth.

The 50% drop in oil prices over the past six months has created a geopolitical windfall for the U.S. that we could never have created on our own. Three of our major “adversaries” are reeling from the decline: half of Russia’s revenue comes from oil sales, Iran’s economy depends solely on oil, and 95% of Venezuela’s exports are oil. Each of those three countries are now forced to bargain with their U.S. surrogates as they face economic collapse. Even the renewal of diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Cuba has been connected to the oil situation, as Cuba faces the real prospect that Venezuela will stop subsidizing their economy.

Let’s take a look at how the three things I mention above – the financial picture, economic conditions, and political situations around the globe — played out in more detail:

 

Financial

This was a difficult year to make consistent returns, especially for institutional money managers who work with large pools of money and are solely assessed on their ability to “beat the market.” Equity mutual funds had their worst performance in 25 years, with 79% of U.S. stock funds failing to beat their market benchmark.[1] Ironically, the most common predictor of this trend is Apple stock: four out of five funds this year underweighted Apple stock anticipating the company to do poorly.[2] With Apple up 42% this year, that was a painful miscalculation. Those funds with market neutral or heavy Apple exposure were up 8% for the year. The rest were up just 6.2%.

Hedge fund returns are another set of indicators of a challenging year. These massive pools of capital are aimed at generating market-like returns with lower volatility. Their performance again has suffered with an average return of just 1.4%. As a result, the extreme volatility in December, with the market down 5% then up the same in just a few days, was blamed on these institutional managers trying to chase returns in the last month of the year. Bloomberg’s news service reported in December that hedge fund closings in 2014 were at the fastest pace since the collapse of 2008, all due to poor returns in the past few years.

Bonds, surprisingly, rallied another 6% this year, with the bulk of the gains being driven by long-term U.S. treasury bonds. While short-term bonds held mostly steady on rates, long-term interest rates on safe bonds plummeted from 4% to 2.8% on short supply and falling inflation expectations driving up long-maturity treasury prices by 24%. This flattening of the yield curve went against expectations, setting the stage for new challenges in 2015 as bond investors try to find yield while protecting against any unexpected movement in rates. With the Fed slated to raise short-term rates later this year, it promises to be a volatile asset class.

 

Global Asset Returns 2014

Chart 1: Returns for the major assets classes in 2014, with a wide disparity between sectors within the same asset classes. For comparison, the Dow 30 generated 10% while the Bloomberg Hedge Fund index was up 1.4%. Note that the bar for Energy was shortened for visual purposes – the actual bar would have gone down to the next paragraph.

Looking at market sectors, healthcare had one of its best years, with the sector up 25% and many of the major gains a result of frenetic merger and acquisition activity. Utilities, surprisingly, had a phenomenal year as well, with the fall in long-term interest rates making the dividends on these stocks extremely attractive. The rest of the sectors hovered around the market average, while key sectors like energy had a miserable year.

Investing overseas, however, was almost certain to generate losses this year. The major non-U.S. markets mostly suffered from very little growth on top of increasing volatility from political events. The biggest issue in global investing is the divergence in currency values. Specifically, the U.S. dollar is stronger than ever, battering the local currency price of any investment overseas. Although this trend may not persist, it would be a dangerous time to invest against it.

 

Economic

The economic situation in the U.S. seems to be improving and we have oil to thank for that. From an environmental perspective, I am loath to credit oil with anything good, but the economic reality is hard to avoid. For all its problems, fracking has done two remarkable things for our economy: it generated jobs and brought down the cost of energy through increased supply. As we outlined in our July 2014 update, the U.S. has increased production by roughly 5 million barrels per day, and in combination with improving consumption dynamics, has decreased our imports by 70% (depending on which source you look at).

The employment picture is the most critical aspect of our economy today. The labor participation rate – those who are employed or want to be employed – is the lowest it has been since the 1970s when women started to enter the workforce en masse. The factors I’ve heard are varied: changing demographics as baby boomers retire, hangover from the Great Recession, folks not being able to reenter the workforce and college debt overhang on the millennials.

But whatever the reason for the smaller workforce participation today, the number of jobs for those who are looking for work is back at pre-recession levels. What looked to be important wage rate increase earlier in the quarter fizzled out with a total annual gain below inflation. But with the addition of the actual savings from low gasoline prices, we see that disposable income suddenly increased for the first time in a decade.

The other aspects of the economy all continue to look encouraging: new housing starts are above one million per year, real estate prices are still climbing and back to pre-crisis levels in many communities, lending standards are relaxing for mortgages and equity lines, and disposable income is increasing with a lower cost of living from the decline in oil.

With all these tailwinds, the U.S. growth picture is the best in the world today, and in fact has once again passed China as the largest driver of growth dollars in the world. That is quite a change from just three years ago, when China took the definitive lead over the U.S. and Europe. The trick going forward, however, is that we won’t hit true long-term stability until global demand for our goods improves and there is a broader jobs base to drive consumption here at home.

The success of our overall economic situation is dimmed by a black cloud of wealth inequality in the U.S. and abroad. The disparity in wealth in the U.S. hasn’t been this great since the 1880s, and the gap continues to grow here and overseas. The challenges this presents are vast, from social unrest and nation-states at war, to an inability to support a growing consumption economy on the back of diminishing disposable income. Until this problem is addressed, the issues will grow and further threaten the financial markets.

 

 

Oil ProductionOil Res4

 

Chart 2: The disparity between oil producers and oil reserves is a startling insight into the longevity of the political and economic systems that depend on oil. Russia in particular is at risk within a generation, while the U.S. is highly dependent on new discoveries, without which we will deplete our reserves in five years.

Data: www.eia.gov, 2013 or 2014 used based on country.
 

Political

The foreign relations impact of the oil slump is startling. The significance of potentially bankrupting Putin and the Russian economy is not to be understated. As portrayed in my favorite Cold War movie, Three Days of the Condor with Robert Redford and Faye Dunaway, oil and energy security has dominated all aspects of our foreign policy for the past five decades. From the trillion dollars we spent over the last fifteen years to secure the Middle East (which arguably is in the throes of failure), to the massive drilling efforts within our own borders, oil overshadows all other policy matters.

The dynamics of oil are one of the most intricate issues I’ve had to grapple with. The chart above might shed some light on those dynamics. As you see, the top oil producers are Saudi Arabia, the U.S., and Russia. Each of those nations heavily depends on those oil revenues to keep their economy and society intact. The Saudis have used oil over the decades to keep a vastly underemployed and a religiously intolerant population at relative peace through expansive subsidies on everything from energy costs to quality of life. The Russians have taken the hundreds of billions in excess foreign currency to both enrich an elite class of oligarchs and to support regional conflict. And the U.S., as you know, has used cheap energy to drive a $16 trillion economy to generate the highest per-capita wealth in the world.

The fascinating part of this dynamic is the longevity of those oil sources. The Saudis can pump for decades, given the size of their reserves and health of the wells. The Russian wells on the other hand, have a short life-span. They have just a fraction of the Saudi’s reserves, and their well production is diminishing at an increasing pace. Russia has barely a decade to establish their place in a post-oil economy. It is a frightening prospect, given Putin’s quest for power and the prospect that his source of that power will disappear in his lifetime. He is not beyond actions and events that would bring us back to global conflict.

The Saudi/U.S. dynamic is even more intricate. According to popular thought, the Saudis are attempting to drive U.S. fracking out of business and regain their global dominance in oil. That narrative is fundamentally flawed, however. The U.S. must drill for an additional 1.7mm daily barrels of oil each year to compensate for the lost efficiency of their wells, with a cost of new production averaging $65-70/barrel.[3] The corollary is that fracking has an extremely short well-life, of just a few years, while the Saudis have a well life that spans generations.

The U.S. surge is a production surge, which is vastly different and has a finite impact. American energy independence is by no means assured, and in fact not likely to ever be complete. In 2012, the International Energy Agency reported that the US could become energy independent in the future, but that such a dramatic shift in production would be disastrous for greenhouse gas emissions. That fact was distorted in the American press to say that we will be energy independent, ignoring the obvious constraints associated with such a shift.

Oil is likely to cause significant upheaval and volatility in the financial markets in the coming year. The impact on debt markets is also non-trivial, as American energy producers face a cash flow crisis at these oil prices.

Change is a scary concept. It can be even more damaging to financial markets. Prosperity here will continue, but the durability of investments will be tested in this environment, and the volatility of the past will continue into the near future. Nevertheless, we at Vodia remain confident that our skillful, careful, and relatively conservative approach to wealth management and our vigilant eye on markets will steer us through rough waters.

 

Regards,

 

David B. Matias

Managing Principal

 

 

 

[1] WSJ, 27 December 2014, B1

[2] Bloomberg New Services, December 15, 2014,: “Shunning Apple Tops Long List of Bad Market Calls in 2014.”

[3] Two sources of data are The Economist (December 6th-12th, 2014) and the US Energy Information Administration, www.eia.gov.

Market Update: January 2014

/in /by

It is a little tough to believe that it is 2014 and already a new year. But in a sense I am quite relieved that 2013 is done and behind us. It was a defining year in the modern era of finance. This time, the disparity between developed market stocks (US, EU and Japan) and the rest of the asset world (emerging markets, bonds, and commodities) was the largest ever. In fact, there has never been a time when developed stocks surged, surpassing all other asset classes. There was a period in the late 1990s when there was a strong divergence, but even in those markets, the other asset classes posted modest gains.

The history books on finance are being rewritten as we speak, because financial stimulus in the developed markets has been unprecedented while global economic growth has been anemic. This massive flow of capital into specific markets caused those markets to bolt ahead, while giving impetus for economic growth. Some of that growth is just from folks feeling safe to spend again; some of it is from further wealth concentration and investment by an ever-smaller segment of the population. Until the economic growth is diverse and stable, however, markets will be at risk. Witness the events of Friday, January 24th, when the Dow lost over 300 points over concerns of the impact of Fed stimulus tapering on emerging market currencies.S

SPACEPACE

Chart 1: Major Asset Class Returns in 2013. While the US and International Developed Markets (the EU and Japan, namely) surged in 2013, the remaining asset classes had losses for the year. At no other time in modern finance has such a disparity existed. [Notes: within fixed income, junk bonds posted a modest gain. The modern era covers 1980 forward, when the advent of IT and derivative markets changed market fundamentals.] Source: Bloomberg

Chart 1: Major Asset Class Returns in 2013. While the US and International Developed Markets (the EU and Japan, namely) surged in 2013, the remaining asset classes had losses for the year. At no other time in modern finance has such a disparity existed. [Notes: within fixed income, junk bonds posted a modest gain. The modern era covers 1980 forward, when the advent of IT and derivative markets changed market fundamentals.] Source: Bloomberg

SPACE

We have Ben Bernanke and his leadership to thank for both this blessing and curse. The blessing is the remarkable recovery we have seen from the Great Recession – a period which could have become much worse had the Fed not engineering a global life preserver. Now that Bernanke is stepping down next month as Chairman of the Fed, it is worth examining this legacy.

Bernanke and His Legacy

Ben Bernanke effectively navigated the US economy through a financial crisis that had the potential to tear down our entire economy and recreate another Great Depression. We came very close to true economic devastation. Bernanke, in all his academic prescience, saw what could happen and in the absence of solid fiscal measures because of political dysfunction, he used the Fed’s balance sheet to pump trillions into the financial system. Frankly, he saved our economy.

What we don’t know as of today is how that legacy will bear out. As we saw with Alan Greenspan in the 1990s, what was then viewed as pristine policy turned out to be irresponsible stimulus that helped create the dotcom bubble and trillions of lost asset value. The most relevant impact of this stimulus has been the explosion of consumption in the US driving much of our economic growth at the expense of exports. Where consumption used to be 50% of our GDP in the 1950s, it has grown to 70% today. This increase was the impact of the easy money policies of the 1990s and 2000s, where we saw capital flood the equity markets and then the real estate markets, creating paper wealth for millions. Unfortunately, that vanished in just weeks and months.

SPACE

Chart 2: The S&P 500: 1990 to 2013. In the chart to the right, we see how market volatility has changed dramatically since the mid- 1990s. Highs are far higher during bubbles, and the drops are extreme, averaging 50% during recessions. Loose monetary policy and the resulting dependence on consumption for GDP growth is a primary underlying cause of these extremes. Source: Bloomberg

Chart 2: The S&P 500: 1990 to 2013. In the chart to the right, we see how market volatility has changed dramatically since the mid- 1990s. Highs are far higher during bubbles, and the drops are extreme, averaging 50% during recessions. Loose monetary policy and the resulting dependence on consumption for GDP growth is a primary underlying cause of these extremes. Source: Bloomberg

SPACE

For Bernanke, the final test will be future inflation. If this recovery does in fact hold, then the challenge will be removing the vast liquidity from the market in time to head off excessive inflation while maintaining the base level needed for economic growth. As we witnessed in the 1970s, inflation can create a vastly damaging problem that is tamed only through high restrictive monetary policy, followed by recession. The counter to that scenario is deflation – an equally devastating situation of falling prices which throttles growth that has begun to shape the global debate on emerging economic threats.

The US Economy and The World

Another recession would be devastating given the current state of our economy. The employment picture is the key to this concern. Bernanke, in comments he made on January 3, 2014 at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association, cited the 7.5 million new jobs since 2010 as evidence of a stabilizing economy. The dark side of that statistic is that since 2010, the US population has grown by just as much through a mix of immigration and births. Accounting for work force participation rates, we have created only enough jobs to support new workers, the preponderance of which is in low wage jobs. We lost 8.5 million jobs in the recession – that loss has yet to be addressed. A new recession would push down employment levels down to a place not seen since the 1930s.

SPACE

Chart 3: Percentage of Americans with Jobs: 1945-2013. We lost 8.5 million jobs in the recession, and while we have gained 7.5 million jobs since then, the US population has grown by almost 10 million people. The effects of the recession are still with us, limiting the spending power of the broad worker base and accentuating the wealth disparity of the recovery. Source: Bloomberg

Chart 3: Percentage of Americans with Jobs: 1945-2013. We lost 8.5 million jobs in the recession, and while we have gained 7.5 million jobs since then, the US population has grown by almost 10 million people. The effects of the recession are still with us, limiting the spending power of the broad worker base and accentuating the wealth disparity of the recovery. Source: Bloomberg

 

We do not yet know how successful Bernanke has been. We can see the evidence right now – the stock market raged ahead to new levels that even the most optimistic economists did not predict – but the legacy will be written over the next few years as we see either economic dividends or carnage from this policy.

The unanswered question is whether the stock market rise is anticipating a return to stable growth. Thus far, the news has been encouraging. GDP growth in the US surged ahead in the 3rd quarter of 2013, to 4% – a level that we have not seen sustained in quite a while and would be necessary to justify further market gains. Globally, economic growth is also beginning to creep up as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in the past two weeks have both increased their estimates for growth, something that hasn’t happened in several years.

These revisions are critical to the state of our economy in the coming year. For the equity market levels to be sustained and increased, we need companies to continue to increase their global revenues and not just depend on the American consumer. As the employment picture illustrates, the recovery in the US has been spotty and erratic. A further reliance on consumption domestically could work to push us ahead, but that is a risky bet right now. Exports will have to be a part of longer, sustained US recovery.

To whom we would export however, is a question. Right now, the EU counties and the broader European region have the largest global economy, but that economy has been shrinking, not growing. Part of the encouraging news from the IMF and World Bank is a belief that Europe might actually grow again in 2014. That in itself would be an enormous boost for the US and the other economies that supply Europe.

China is the other economy that can dramatically impact our recovery. At their growth rate and the size of the economy (7.6% growth on a $9 trillion economy, as compared to 2.2% growth on a $16 trillion economy in the US) largely dictates the health of global consumption. While China consumes about half of what we do for every dollar of GDP, the central government has pinned the hopes of sustainable growth on the Chinese consumer. Should that model bear out, it presents tremendous opportunity for US companies. Should it fail, global assets will see another correction in prices with ensuing volatility.

SPACE

Chart 4: Comparing the major global economies: Using 2013 figures, actual and estimate, we see the world’s dependence on Chinese growth. Their annual incremental economic growth (Growth Dollars) is double the US. [Growth/Capita shows incremental consumption dollars per individual in that economy]. Sources: Bloomberg, IMF, World Bank, US Census Bureau

Chart 4: Comparing the major global economies: Using 2013 figures, actual and estimate, we see the world’s dependence on Chinese growth. Their annual incremental economic growth (Growth Dollars) is double the US. [Growth/Capita shows incremental consumption dollars per individual in that economy]. Sources: Bloomberg, IMF, World Bank, US Census Bureau


For economic growth to continue for several more years, we need to see the dual support from increased exports and increased domestic consumption. The first part – exports – is being tremendously aided by the energy boom we are experiencing in the US. With the benefits of shale oil and fracking (long-term environmental destruction aside), we are both a cheap energy source for manufacturing and an exporter to the world. For instance, gas exports have increase 3x in the past five years – a mind-blowing change that will have an impact on both economics and global politics.

The silver lining for domestic consumption is housing. We have seen only modest recovery in this sector – existing house prices have recovered just a third of their decline from the recession, and new home construction is still at half the level of long-term needs. With every new home, there is both job creation and increased demand for the goods and services that fill the home. There is room to double the sector in a stable economy, resulting in increased jobs and economic growth, not just for the US but the countries who export to the US. There is enormous potential in the housing sector, but only if Americans feel confident to invest in a new home and have the job stability to do so while the banks continue to lend at low rates.

Markets and Psychology for 2014

As we have seen in the last two growth economies, the equity markets get well ahead of themselves and collapse in a fury. A simple measure to assess this exuberance is the price-to- earnings ratio (P/E) on the market, as well as some key stocks. Right now, the P/E on the S&P 500 sits around 17x, a good clip above its long-term average of 15x. A simple analysis says that if earnings do grow this year by at least 15%, then the stock prices are justified. If not, prices are high.

But is it really so simple? Google has been trading at 25x for many months now, well outside a sustainable range. And the price keeps going up. Retail stores are trading at 30x; some large pharmaceuticals trade at even higher ratios.

Historically, the P/E will continue to climb well past these levels before investors notice that the punch bowl has been drained. During the last two bubble markets, the S&P 500 reached 25x and 30x, both well above where we stand today. This doesn’t imply that the market will go up without some further developments to sustain investor’s excessive optimism, but don’t be surprised if there are new predictions in the coming months about how we are again seeing a “new economy” in which fundamentals are worth ignoring. History will repeat itself.

With this in mind, and all of the economic realities outlined thus far, we remain cautiously optimistic in our asset allocations. We continue to maintain our equity exposure at levels to reflect the risks, but have made incremental changes to capture the market psychology (called “risk-on”) and expectations of better global growth. We are also very active in the management of the bond side, keeping durations rather tight, using bond ladders and actively trading some positions to manage total return rather than allow market movements to dictate returns.

Commodities were a challenge for us in 2013, with metals and agriculture taking a beating while partially offset by timber and energy. Given our global view, commodities could do quite well in the coming year with increased demand for many raw materials. Housing may start driving up timber prices, and food prices may be impacted by continued meteorological and demographic disruptions (who knows how the Polar Vortex that has held the nation in a frozen grip will affect food production and sales?). We will continue to maintain these exposures with some adjustments to reflect our core values at Vodia.

All in all, we are again facing challenging times. The global economy is shifting in ways that are impossible to predict, with secondary and tertiary effects that reverberate throughout all asset classes. There are many positives to embrace in the short term, and many disturbing issues that must be resolved in the long term. Our approach – to reassess every quarter and step forward with caution – will continue to be our mandate as we continue to be thoughtful while we observe the world around us.

Best of luck with this winter and the Polar Vortices!

Regards,

David B. Matias, CPA

Managing Principal

Market Update: October 2013

/in /by

From Tapering to Teetering

As has been the pattern of the past six years, the summer always brings an interesting set of challenges for the financial markets.  This summer was no exception, from continued uncertainty in the financial markets soothed over by unprecedented Fed stimulus to geopolitical developments that are still unfolding.  Unfortunately, the political dysfunction that has riddled the nation for the past fews years has reached a stage that will only continue to harm the economy and the country.

The positives, however, are fairly obvious: the US continues to pump $85 billion of newly printed money into the system on a monthly basis, with the stock market as the primary beneficiary.  While the numbers vary week to week, the S&P500 is up around 15% year-to-date.  The other bits of good news are real estate prices, which are on a remarkable recovery, a nominally growing US economy, solid corporate profits, and the recent changes in our energy dependence.

Unfortunately, each of those positives are countered by negatives:  the stock market went apoplectic when Ben Bernanke suggested tapering of the stimulus, growth from the emerging markets has faltered, US overall employment levels are the same as five years ago (mid-recession), and the economic growth in the US is significantly below the long-term average needed to insulate us from negative shocks.

The employment picture is perhaps the best place to find reasons for caution.  Although the unemployment figure we so often read about is significantly down from the high of ten percent, the employment picture is a bifurcated situation.  In the recession, we lost nearly 10 million jobs in the span of just a few quarters.  And while we have created 7 million jobs since then, our labor force has grown in those five years by roughly the same number.  So in short, the labor participation rate among Americans is at a 30-year low.  The following chart shows this fairly well.

Chart 1 Image

Chart 1: Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the percentage of people employed between the ages of 16 and 65. This chart covers 1981 to present, and shows that the labor rate has not changed since 2009. With a labor rate equivalent to the 1980s, we are creating only enough jobs to satisfy the growing population base, but not replacing those lost in the recession.


The anecdotal evidence suggests the jobs we’ve created in the past five years are of far lesser value than the jobs lost.  Most are at minimum wage, there is a tremendous underemployment problem, and the divisions among social classes continues to widen.  These issues only make the next conundrum even more challenging.

Market behavior continues to indicate that we are in a cycle of bubble markets driven by consumption economics.  The next chart shows the movement of the S&P 500 over the past 30 years, in which the market is pushed to new highs in each cycle.  The driving force behind these peaks is external stimulus leading to bubble asset valuations (dotcom in the 90s, real estate in the 00s, and Fed stimulus in the 10s).  In the collapse of the two prior bubbles, the damage to the financial condition of the broader society was extensive – far greater than the benefits from those bubbles.

Chart 2 Image

Chart 2: The US stock market over the past 20 years (S&P500) has shown a broad trend of asset inflation followed by steep drops as the economic growth falters. These asset bubbles have been extraordinarily damaging, with the potential that we have formed another one. Corporate profits will ultimately determine the breath and depth of the rise and fall.

For the current market rise to continue (as opposed to correcting by 20%-50%), we need corporate revenues to grow.  Thus far, corporate profitability has backfilled the market as price-to-earnings ratios remain at or below historical averages (16x).  This has been primarily achieved through layoffs and productivity increases with some revenue increase.  With the internal measures largely exhausted, revenue growth is going to be front and center for the next several quarters.

This picture could work but demand needs to come from a mixture of domestic and global consumers.  The global scene is dominated by Europe – still struggling to get out of a recession – and Emerging Markets.  As we have seen in China and elsewhere, the massive boom in the emerging markets over the past decade has created disruptive air pockets that make predictable growth elusive.  Hence, the need for the American consumer to find additional disposable income or a willingness to once again increase personal debt levels.  With such a stagnant US employment situation, neither are likely soon.

Chart 3 Image

Chart 3. As the US equity markets surged ahead (S&P 500 shown in red) in the first two quarters, Q3 saw the Emerging Markets (shown in green) stage a partial recovery while Europe & Japan (shown in blue) also posted stronger gains.

It is for these reasons that we at Vodia Capital maintain a diversified asset allocation strategy for our portfolios.  Relying on just equities to drive gains would subject portfolios to far too much volatility and uncertainly.  While markets have shown an ability to recover in the past, these gyrations eat away at long-term returns and ultimately underperform when compared to a diversified strategy.  In response, we continue to use fixed income, commodities and derivates to both stabilize portfolios from global uncertainty and generate predictable growth.

Geopolitical

The biggest challenge to backfilling the equity asset bubble is global conflict.  Domestic issues are important and bleak, but with enough time and some basic legislation, our current situation will ameliorate or the domestic economy will simply adapt.  But until that happens, we do not have enough consistent economic growth to withstand a shock to the system and not enter another recession.

The global issues are less predictable, although we seem to have hit a moment of pause.  Despite my wildest expectations, the situation in Syria seems to have found a multi-lateral solution with Russia participating and China consenting.  While I have my doubts on the ability for the global community to truly disarm Syria’s WMD capabilities in the long-term, it is a relief to see it handled through cooperative diplomacy and through the UN.

On a separate but related front, Iran has consistently posed the greatest threat to global stability in the past few years.  Compared to Syria, Iran’s pursuit of WMD’s is a real problem with real ramifications.  Not to overstate the situation, but by many accounts this region was on the brink war if something was not done soon.  And while I also have serious doubts as to the authenticity of Iran’s overtures, we have taken steps to open a dialogue that has been closed for decades.  That is progress.

Where we do not have progress is in our own political structure.  As of this writing, we have a partial shutdown of our government, with another looming prospect of defaulting on our debt in another three weeks.  By some estimates, a complete shutdown of a few weeks could wipe out our economic growth for the quarter and possibly the year.  And defaulting on our debt is simply a non-starter – the financial ramifications are just too vast to play with.  While cooler heads will prevail, the damage to the economy through continued uncertainty has already taken a toll on lower economic growth.

Changing Energy Dynamics

The most promising development is the changing energy dynamic in the US.  The past six years have seen a dramatic and unprecedented change in our energy dependence.  Despite the mild economic recover, our use of oil has actually decreased by 10% from a combination of better vehicle fuel economy and alternative sources.  During this same time, our oil production has doubled from technological advances.  The net impact is to decrease our reliance on oil imports by half, to less than 10% of global production.

Combined with our natural gas boom, this is an incredibly positive development for the economy.  Much of our economic growth over the past decades has depended on cheap energy, creating a political structure and international presence that went to extreme lengths to protect the dynamic.  As net exporters or natural gas and coal, along with a far lighter dependence on the global oil market, untold resources will be freed up and could generate a new form of a “peace dividend” that we experienced post-Cold War.

The medium-term impact of our energy production and consumption is still of grave concern – from global climate change to the damage we are doing to our drinking water.  The shift to alternative sources, whether they be truly green or simply move us away from oil, is of paramount importance and must continue.  But the ability to shift a focus away from deeply disruptive policies to protect a bad oil dynamic is a start.  Where we take it next will determine just how much of a global leader we can be in the coming decades as the forces of economics increasingly determine our actions as a country.

All the best for an enjoyable fall.

Regards,

David B. Matias, CPA

Managing Principal

Market Update: June 2013

/in /by

What is NORMAL?

Normal is a much-overused but complex word. It can refer to societal values that reflect one group’s preferences to the exclusion of another. In a statistical sense, it refers to a baseline expectation drawn from reams of data. When you combine the two, you create statistical measures that can be used to determine behavior in certain situations, such as IQ tests. You see how this gets tricky, and fast.

Now let’s discuss the “normal” of economics. The financial markets are permeated with the statistical use of “normal” – without some idea of what “normal” looks like all of risk management and portfolio construction would fall apart. But now economists are trying to assess this current economic period as either a “new normal” or a return to the “old normal.” But what exactly does that mean?

As you will have gathered from my blog entries and market updates, I often point out where the statistical use of “normal” in the financial markets is broken. Whether it is the price movement on gold or the stock market collapse of 2008/2009, “events” have happened that simply should not have – they seem, to us, to be statistically impossible and “abnormal.” As an asset manager, it is terrifying at times that the statistical “normal” of the past 50 years is no longer valid.

Somewhere along the way, someone decided that the word “normal” will make it easier for people to understand a complex topic. We live in a world of mass media and shortened attention spans, where messages need to be simple and short or else they are ignored (think Twitter). Hence, the word “normal” has been redeployed in our current world without people stopping to think about what it really means, much as they don’t think about the incessant sound bites of recent political campaigns. Unfortunately, the word “normal” captures very little of reality, and leads to a misguided sense of safety for investors.

In the broadest sense, there is nothing normal about the economy today. We have a world population that now exceeds seven billion people and a method of supporting those lives through consumption-based wealth creation. That is not normal – it has never happened before and we don’t know if it can be sustained.

Yet here in the US, we are supported by an economic model that has been proven over decades. We have a population that grows at 187,500 people per month, and an economy that is just generating roughly that same number of jobs. We have been the center of innovation and entrepreneurship for the globe for a century, and combined with a tremendous level of investment over that period, we have an economic base that supports the wealthiest nation today.

The challenges here, however, are vast.

  • Job growth is able to support the current population growth, but does not replace any of the jobs lost in 2008 and 2009. Today, we have the same relative number of jobs as the 1970s – when most households had a single wage earner. To replace those jobs, however, we need to consume at a level consistent with dual-income households.
  • The economic growth necessary to build back those jobs might not be attainable – that is the core of the current economic debate. We need 4% annual growth – we’ve been lucky to see half that over the past fifteen years.
  • Wealth is more concentrated now than in the past 100 years. Middle income families have been decimated by the financial turmoil (retirement and real estate assets), while the top income groups have seen their wealth explode.
  • Our political structure is largely paralyzed in guiding the nation’s resources and regulations in a way that invests for the future – whether it be in education, transportation, or conservation of natural resources.
  • The explosion of the digital age has created large potholes in the road to certainty. Whether it be financial calamities from computerized trading systems, social unrest, or the leaking of state secrets, these changes are redefining expectations.
To reframe what “normal” means , I might like to suggest instead that we think about expectations. People, for the most part, like to know what will happen next – whether it be the length of a commute or the length of a retirement. In today’s world, those expectations are increasingly altered, erased, or shattered. And with it comes a deep sense of uncertainty – the bane of stable financial assets.

FINANCIAL MARKETS

With that introduction, I would like to say there is in fact good news to discuss. Last week’s dismal market performance masks one very important bit of news – the Fed believes that the economy is improving, so much so, in fact, that they might start to “taper” back on their historical stimulus program within a year or so.

Rather than treat this news with excitement, the market plunged. And it wasn’t just stocks – it was everything. (For those who wonder if this might be “normal” or part of the “new normal,” , let me point out that this 1.0 correlation broke all normal statistical expectations). It parallels the market behavior of this year – bad news is good for the markets, good news is bad for the markets.

People are saying that the US markets are up strictly because of all the stimulus. Without that stimulus, things will go back to “normal” – positive real bond yields, stock prices that follow company profits, and commodities prices that reflect demand. In other words, markets will have to reflect “normal” values for things, as opposed to the central bank inflation created by trillions in new money. That is not really a bad thing – in fact it is astoundingly good. The printing of money cannot continue without there being some serious damage to the global financial system in the form of currency devaluation and price inflation.

But like every aberration we have seen in the past five years, change is not taken well by the financial markets, even if the change in this case is a change in expectations about something that might happen a year from now.

Our role as investment managers is to determine what assets will be worth, based on their intrinsic value today and growth potential for tomorrow. To review the major asset classes and our perspective going forward:

Domestic Equities: US stocks have taken a beating, but only just so much. They were down 6% from their highs, but up 18% before the sell-off (for a net gain of 14% for the year as of right now). Whether we continue down or up from here is well beyond anyone’s control or foresight right now.

Our investment perspective on equities is essentially to stay steady – we have already kept a lower equity exposure precisely because of the inherent volatility, but do not believe that the recent volatility is reason to change that position. Instead, we are viewing this as an opportunity to increase investments in those individual equities that have the fundamental value and growth prospects to benefit from a growing US economy.

Valuations on the broad market are reasonable (S&P500 is around 15x earnings) and balance sheet structure of these companies is remarkably strong, thanks to years of cheap corporate borrowing. US companies have also shown further strength in their global customer base – as the world grows, so do the markets for many of the best US companies. If it is true that the economy is showing further signs of strength – as signaled by the Fed this week – then US companies are extremely well positioned to benefit.

The risk is a host of geo-political troubles that could trigger a global recession. There is no immediate indication that such a situation will arise imminently, but until we have see resolution in a couple of situations, we are going to maintain these equity levels as a buffer.

Foreign Equities: Here the story in remarkable contrast to the US. In short, the global stimulus from the central banks – not just the US – has propped up these markets for the past two years. Under the surface, however, the economic growth is weak. Europe has been in a recession for quite some time, Japan was on life support until recently and the emerging markets cannot support their economic growth through internal consumption.

The resulting equity performance is rough. Global markets have shown just a few percentage points of gain this year (if not a small loss right now). Emerging markets on their own are down 12% on average, with some markets taking a 25% beating.

As investment managers, we have avoided Europe almost completely but still maintain a modest exposure to the emerging markets. We’ve done this mainly through positions in US companies that sell heavily into those markets, and whose future profitability will depend on growth in those regions. We are still very positive for the growth prospects for the emerging markets and view the current swoon as a market psychology driven movement. Especially as the US slowly pulls into a higher growth mode, these regions will benefit significantly.

Domestic Fixed Income: This market has received an enormous amount of attention of late in the form of interest rate movements of historical proportions. Rates on the 10-year Treasury note have move from 1.6% to 2.6% in a matter of weeks, and the 30-year rates have gone from 2.8% to 3.6% in that period. Again – “normal” of any sort doesn’t compute.

The impact on bond prices is tremendous – market price move down as yields go up. But from the perspective of an investor holding bonds to maturity, it is good news. As long as your maturities are relatively short, you will get to reinvest your cash at higher rates down the road, once your bonds mature at par. There is no impairment of value in this situation – a fact that is often overlooked.

Commodities: Again, this market has taken a beating this year, although far less so than some of the global equities. As emerging markets are perceived as slowing down, so does the thinking for the commodities consumed by growth.

Our perspective is quite to the contrary. The slowdown in emerging markets growth is only temporary. The US is pulling out of its malaise, and population growth in developing regions will continue to fuel demand. China, for instance, is planning to urbanize 250 million people in the next decade. To put that into perspective, that is the same population of all the major cities around the world – combined.

In addition to the global demand for construction resources, we are holding a notable position in grains and agriculture. The dynamic is a simple one: populations are growing and the global middle class is consuming more meats and high value foods. Production is keeping up – but just as long as there are reliable and predictable methods. Climate change is for real, however, and creates mayhem in the production cycles through drought, flood, and changing weather patterns. As we saw last summer, with these disruptions comes significant supply constraints and rising prices.

The area that is least “normal” is metals. Gold and silver, the two metals that we use for hedging purposes have seen historic declines. The price of silver has been cut in half with all the reactivity to the central banks, gold is off a third. More disconcerting is the daily movement, which is down under every market condition – whether there is good news in the world or bad.

Seeing these risks, we exited our silver position many months ago, just at the high. We kept the gold, however, as a hedge against some of the events we have recently witnesses. But in the break from any form of “normal” that hedge has failed and the position has been a drag. Under the perspective that this is a market dislocation unrelated to the value of metals, we continue to monitor that market and the timing for when it may make sense to restore the positions to their original allocation.

CONCLUSION

In summary, it has been an unusual year. The markets went straight up for four months, creating a buzz reminiscent of the late 1990s. During that period, stocks went up at a blistering pace and there seemed to be no end in sight for the dotcom stocks. The buzz was a simple, yet persistent demand to be in the stock market. If you were not fully invested, then you were “missing out.” Unfortunately, those who did go full into the market saw a remarkable event – a -70% loss in their portfolio values.

That buzz has ended now, as we are reminded of the vast uncertainty in the equity markets. In the last month, we have begun to witness volatility across disparate asset classes, from US Treasuries to Japanese equities. During late May and early June, the Nikkei had five trading days of 3-7% losses. Then just three weeks ago, it saw a 5% gain in one day. Like the movement in gold just two months ago and again now, that volatility is well outside “normal” volatility. And it is happening in US equities, to a smaller but notable degree.

To make this point, for the months of May and June (since the Fed started to talk about “tapering”), we have had 24 days of 100+ point movements in the Dow Industrials average: thirteen times it was up, eleven times it was down. That contrasts to the first three months of the year in which there were just nine such days, only two of which were down. Volatility came back with a vengeance, and when it did losses ensued.

As reported by the financial website Seeking Alpha and others, May saw the highest equity weighting among individual investors since September 2007. As a reminder, September 2007 was the beginning of the equity decline that lasted 18 months and 50% down. In the parlance of market psychology, it is not unusual for individual investors to be the last to the party.

And this lack of “normal” is creating havoc for the institutional managers as well. Hedge funds, the massively concentrated pools of capital that supposedly can time these events, have done no better. With gains of roughly 2.7% for the year, they haven’t solved this problem – no one is immune.

Our view is that we are seeing the shift to an investment environment based in old-fashioned fundamentals as the US economy pulls forward and artificial drivers fade out. It could take years, but ultimately that is a good thing. In the process, there will be uncertainty and wild volatility.

In the end, there is nothing normal about these markets – old or new. We are going through changes on historic scales, and as we continue to remind folks, we are all sorting through the events and the data to find the best places to invest assets for the future.

All the best for an enjoyable summer.

Regards,

David B. Matias, CPA

Managing Principal

Market Minute – March 10, 2013

/in /by

It is nice to see the winter finally start to come to a close, with daylight savings restored this morning, the foot of new snow in my front yard notwithstanding. Less pleasant that the onset of spring is the reaction to Friday’s unemployment figures.  I fear that we are seeing a repeat of the market myopia that so widely devastated portfolios in the last financial crisis.

By all means, the report on Friday – a gain of 236,000 jobs for the month of February – is a welcome sign.  Construction spending and hiring continue to increase at a vigorous pace, and the medical industry leads the hiring trend.  But the figures still reflect a troubled situation.

The unemployment rate reflects only those who are looking for jobs; another 130,000 people chose to leave the workforce, hastening the decline in the unemployment rate.  And an equally important measure is the long-term unemployed, which increased to 4.8 million people, or 40% of those reported as unemployed.  Furthermore, the gains in February are tempered by a downward revision of 38,000 fewer jobs in January, which was already a weak month.

We need 150,000 new jobs a month to maintain stable employment given population growth – a level we have yet to maintain during this recovery.  During the financial crisis, we lost over 7 million jobs, which we have not begun to restore, factoring in population growth since then.  Certainly the momentum is in the right direction, but it has been five years since the recession began, and we are only beginning the process of restoring lost jobs and incomes.

When we factor in mediocre economic growth of around 2%, the impact of the sequester cuts, and the consumption-dampening effects of higher gas prices combined with a payroll tax increase, we can see that we are still skating on extremely thin ice in the short-term.

Yet, the stock market has reached an all-time high.

The disconnect is a result of the Fed’s $85 billion monthly monetization program.  By “printing” money in such vast quantities at a sustained rate, they are able to inflate the various markets beyond values that reflect the true economic risks.  Yes, companies are profitable and cash is abundant on their balance sheets, but the prospects for strong continued growth are dubious at best.  We need some impressive magic to make it all work in a way to support these values.  Anything short of magic will be another collapse.

As with every other asset bubble human emotion reigns – with a healthy dose of marketing.  The financial media loves to fixate on stock prices and stock highs.  You cannot walk 50 feet in today’s cities without seeing some headline, quote or other reminder of the stock market and the related hype.  With the strong propensity for people to forget past events and fixate on the immediate market news, the bubble has plenty of fuel to grow to dangerous proportions.

How we proceed from here is with caution.  What we need to remember is that volatility will remain, and until we fix the more pressing issues these market highs are not likely to persist.  As a reminder, our investment strategy reflects these risks through a broad asset allocation that enables growth from stocks as well as several other asset classes.  The success of this long term approach will fluctuate with market distortions, but it is a steady perspective that favors stable growth over extreme highs and lows.

Regards,

David B. Matias, CPA

Managing Principal

Market Update: January 2013

/in /by

I am going to make a bold statement here: I declare 2012 the least interesting year since 2006 – at least from a markets perspective. The stock market went up. The bond market went up. Commodities went up, a little. And more importantly, there were no market calamities. We have had a financial disaster every year since 2006: the sub-prime collapse in 2007, the banking collapse in 2008, the market collapse in 2009, the flash crash and Greek collapse in 2010, a political collapse in the United States and Greek collapse (again) in 2011. This year was actually pretty calm: markets generated rather steady gains, and we didn’t reach the brink of collapse. The only exception was the Fiscal Cliff political drama in the last weeks of 2012, and we won’t know how that plays out for a while longer.

A relatively sleepy year notwithstanding, I don’t believe that we are out of the woods yet. In fact, I’m still holding onto some concerns and worries that have affected our decision-making and strengthened our belief that Vodia’s commitment to stable, conservative investment strategies that manage risk effectively is what’s most needed as we make our way in an uncertain future. America, along with other developed economies in the world, is going through one of the deepest set of challenges we have faced as a nation. How we fare, and how the next generation thrives, is dependent on what we all do now.

Market Performance and Apple

The year’s equity market performance was remarkably steady. The market went up for the first three quarters of the year, despite some volatility in the spring. The fourth quarter was a lot bumpier. With a decline of several percent in Q4, the largest companies in the market indices led these declines.

The Q4 decline settled in immediately following the election in early November. With Obama’s re-election, it was clear that capital gains tax rates would rise. With this certainty, there was a large impetus for institutions and folks to realize their larger long-term gains, namely in stocks that have done exceedingly well in the past year such as Apple, Intel, and also Merck.

S&P 500 index performance for 2012: While there was a bounce down in May, it was relatively calm compared to the past five years. The post-election drop was largely driven by uncertainty around tax rates and locking-in long-term gains.

S&P 500 index performance for 2012: While there was a bounce down in May, it was relatively calm compared to the past five years. The post-election drop was largely driven by uncertainty around tax rates and locking-in long-term gains.

I want to focus on Apple for a few moments, not only because it has become a permanent fixture in the media, but also because it has been a longterm holding at Vodia. The tax selling is not the only reason for Apple’s decline, but it was a large part of it initially. With Apple being the largest company in the stock market at the time, it represented a significant part of the market’s daily movement. In fact, institutional portfolios are saturated with Apple and have no further room to allocate to the stock. Hence, any type of short-term aberration, whether it be tax selling or a slow down in growth, has the propensity for a dramatic movement in Apple’s market value. But that was not the entire picture.

Over the past twelve years, Apple created several new markets around portable devices and the software-based ecosystem to support those devices. The devices (iPod, iPhone, iPad or MacBook), the services (iTunes, Apps Store, iCloud or the support services to these offerings), and their operating software (OSX and iOS) all work together in an intuitive and seamless manner. And let me emphasize the intuitive user experience aspect here – whether it is my father or a toddler, nearly everyone can use Apple products. This level of ubiquitous access to technology is unprecedented, and the ramifications for everything from corporate productivity to education are enormous.

This unprecedented accessibility has been reflected in the company’s financial performance. Apple generates over $50 billion in operating cash flow each year – after all expenses are paid (for comparison, this is the equal to HP, Microsoft and Google’s operating cash flow combined). And they continue to grow at impressive rates. This past quarter saw revenue grow at 18% over the prior quarter, with the realization that they could not make enough of their hot products to meet demand. Put simply, they sold nearly everything they could make.

But there are glitches in the story. The cost of making the products has gone up. As a result, Apple profit this past quarter was roughly the same as a year ago, even though sales were up. They are also facing significant competition for the iPhone as knock-off and competitive products have matured. And of course, with the passing of Steve Jobs, we don’t know what markets Apple will reinvent next; one possibility is television, and Tim Cook’s drive to redesign the entire experience.

Although these threats exist, they don’t change the overall picture of Apple’s position in the markets – they are still growing extensively and globally. We have managed the Apple position accordingly, moving from an overweight risky equity at the beginning of the year to a neutral/underweight in the fall. The market decline, however, has placed Apple’s value far out of line with the fundamentals, and with near hysteria surrounding their recent decline we are again viewing them as a potential overweight.

Getting back to the equity markets, Apple’s impact was felt far and wide. Noting that Apple was still up 33% for the year, the S&P 500 with Apple in the index was up 16% for the year, while the Dow Industrials, which does not include Apple, was up by only 10.2%. That is a fairly wide disparity, and one worth tracking. Alternatively, the international markets performed even better, with the MS EAFE developed markets index up 17%. With far less volatility than we have seen in the past five years, it was a decent showing all around.

My overall assessment of equities remains cautious. I still hear the chatter from equity managers to “just stay the course” with the stock market. If you have twenty years to invest and wait, that has usually been a safe and wise way to go. But the pursuant returns (9% per annum for the past twenty years) do not justify the ridiculous volatility from a repeated cycle of price bubble and collapse. And the reality is that few investors have the ability to wait another twenty years. If markets collapse again, waiting to see what happens could prove to be a devastating experiment.

The Economy

What might happen in the next few years is not so clear. Equity performance depends on the ability for companies to grow profits, speculative bubbles aside. Profit growth in a broad sense can only occur with a growing economy. Our economic growth used to be around 4% per annum – a healthy and vigorous pace for a developed nation. But that was back in the 1960s and 70s. Today the pace has dropped to 2% or less when we are not in a recession. It used to take six months to recover lost jobs after a recession; we now are sixty months past the last recession and there is no jobs restoration horizon in sight.

Our economy is still strong – the largest for any single nation in the world. But it is not strong enough to sustain repeated blows: the financial crisis, sub-prime real estate disintegration, financial market dislocations, or political infighting and potentially devastating partisan divisiveness. Each and every one of these has happened in the past five years, and the debt- ceiling debate is still getting postponed. It won’t take too much to cause another recession, or further job loss.

While our growth has slowed considerably, we are still the largest single economy in the world. Sources: CIA Fact Book, Bloomberg

While our growth has slowed considerably, we are still the largest single economy in the world. Sources: CIA Fact Book, Bloomberg

I am optimistic that we will be able to continue growth, but it will have to come with change. Overall, we are witnessing the change from an industrial economy to a digital one. This has generated a level of income and wealth inequality that hasn’t existed since the end of the 19th century. And with changing geopolitical dynamics, we have become a nation driven by fear: not only do we see terrorism as a threat from without, but some believe we must arm every citizen with assault weapons to protect themselves from within. Change is scary.

But change can also be good.

With that change, we must look beyond the trends of the past for new valuation techniques and investment opportunities. It has been five years of disruption as change takes hold, and will at least five more years until we can find some certainty in the economy. To respond to this dynamic in the portfolios, flexibility will be key; awareness is critical.

Change and Disruption

This change is creating vast disruption and opportunity in society and the economy. As we refine our investment strategy, we see at least five primary dynamics to watch in the coming year:

  • Political histrionics – whatever the crisis du jour may be, it can do severe damage to the economy and our prospects. Manipulating the tax system in a haphazard way, for example, created the decline we saw in markets in November and December. The partisan entrenchment needs to stop before it leads to devastating self-inflicted wounds.
  • Investment in infrastructure –there is a need for a coordinated and concerted effort by government (state or Federal) to support and invest in an educated, skilled workforce and new technologies. Without these changes, the US economy will have dismal prospects for accelerated growth in a changing global economy. But Obama’s administration does have an eye towards investing in the workforce, as witnessed by his support of state-run education systems and the community college system. Even such a small change can point to bigger economic gains down the line.
  • Inequality and fairness – we have again reached income and wealth disparity reminiscent of the dawn of the Industrial Age. Moral implications of wealth and economic disparities aside, the economic impact of increasing inequality can be insidious. Income disparity at this level results in a concentration of power in the business and political realms. Witness the past election: the fractious debate over taxes for the highest income brackets and the “47%” was almost comical if it were not so real. Despite widespread fraud during the last financial crisis, all escaped punishment. This gets noticed, people get upset, and they lose confidence in the system.
  • Reshoring – the movement of our manufacturing sector overseas represented a gross misunderstanding of the importance of manufacturing know-how and innovation. There has been a trend to bring it back over the past two years, and it appears to be growing (witness Apple’s announcement to invest $100mm into a new US manufacturing base). It will only help to improve our trade imbalance and create job growth. Our service economy is not strong enough to provide the jobs growth alone – we need to be a manufacturing exporter again.
  • Debt – at all levels we have binged for decades on cheap money and skyrocketing debt. The Federal debt is a minor issue, but the current levels are sustainable if and only if the annual deficits are tempered. The bigger problem is educational and municipal debt. Both are growing enormously, and neither is being correctly measured. Municipal debt could cause a dislocated bond market; educational debt could squash an entire generation of income earners and consumers. Both need serious attention now.

All of these dynamics can be turned into positive change, but the systems are challenged and there is no deus ex machina in the wings. The underlying tension is the consumption cycle; with nearly three-quarters of our economy based on the ability of our citizens to consume, the economy will remain highly volatile and growth will be elusive. We need to get back to consumption levels in the 60% range, and addressing the dynamics above could advance that aim.

Investing for 2013
We are going to stick with an approach and process that has proven successful during these times. Maintaining awareness of the risks and issues, while recognizing that there are dozens more that can create equally devastating losses, is our first step. Overlaying those risks on a growth engine that is stable in some areas and failing in others is the challenge.

The US does have tremendous prospects for the coming years, despite political machinations. Driven by cheaper energy in the form of natural gas and our cultural propensity to innovation and entrepreneurship, I believe the economy will mend to again create sustained growth above 2% per annum. This could take several years, however, given the current trajectory of the factors above.

The rest of the developed markets are a problem, however. With Europe’s outrageous debt levels, socialist policies creating an unsustainable tax burden, and political dysfunction that makes the US look tame, their recession will likely continue for several years.

Emerging markets, with their population expansion, growing middle class, and unabashed theft of advanced technologies, are going to continue to drive global growth. Investing in any one of these markets is going to be a volatile endeavor as dislocating regional trends resolve, while finding companies such as Apple and CAT that sell into these markets mitigates much of that volatility.

Stocks are likely to continue for another positive year simply from the amount of global monetary easing in the markets. In some cases, the valuations will be strong, with high risk premiums assigned to stocks in general. In other cases, bubbles will continue to emerge and deflate – both on the upside and downside. For this reason, we will cautiously look to increase our stock exposure by 5-10% of overall portfolio allocation. Keep in mind, however, that we are still less than half equities in our managed accounts. Some of this increase might be expressed through the use of stock options rather than the actual underlying stock, giving us a little leverage with a capped downside.

Fixed income, the perennial highlight of our portfolios, is where the coming year will be trickiest. Risk premiums are at their lowest in a long time, on top of a yield curve that is historically low. Both of these factors indicate a bond market top. But unlike equities, there is a known floor on bond values (maturity value), providing a natural mitigation to any bond market volatility – as long as we hold individual bonds and not bond indices. As a result, our bond exposure will come down to fund the increase in stock exposure.

Our ability to hold individual assets (bonds or stocks) allows us to manage the systemic risks I’ve outlined. As a result, in our managed accounts we can make up for a lower-than-average stock exposure through strategies such as call options. The individual bonds also give us a natural hedge against bond market volatility. In accounts where we are limited to using exchange-traded funds, the allocations will vary this year to account for higher levels of systemic risk.

We are maintaining roughly the same commodities exposure as this past year – 10-15% of portfolios – but shying away from energy and focusing more on gold and agriculture. The reasoning in simple: inflation. I don’t see inflation on the immediate horizon, but I do see it as a sizeable risk in this era of unprecedented monetary easing.

And finally we will continue to hold larger cash reserves (10-20%) to buffer against systemic volatility and allow us buying opportunities in deeply stressed markets.

Please don’t hesitate to call or write, and I wish you all the best for a manageable winter.

David B. Matias, CPA Managing Principal

Market Update: November 2012

/in /by

Post Election Hopes

As I sit here on the morning after, there are a number of very important points that come out of the results from last night.  Most important, the difference in this election from four years ago is a stark one.  While I am no political pundit, it appears that the Obama campaign won every swing state and Democrats won every closely contested Senate seat except one despite an economy that should have dictated otherwise.  Yet all of those wins were by a much smaller margin, Florida being a good example.  In all of these races, the difference that put Obama over the line was the changing demographic.  Minorities are growing while the white middle class is shrinking.  The Obama campaign was able to tap this trend.  Not only was the Obama campaign also able to command the women’s vote, but the number of women in Congress will now be higher than ever.  In a very positive sign, we are diversifying as a country, and the vote is starting to reflect that diversity.

So the question is: what comes next?  Regardless of your politics, we have a raft of issues that need to be addressed now.  Not just in the coming months and years, but in the immediate.  Irrespective of one’s position on the various topics, the lack of lasting resolution is more damaging than one particular tact or another.  The two issues I’m thinking of now are the fiscal cliff that enacts a raft of automatic budget cuts at year-end, and the expiring tax laws.  Both of which has a dramatic impact on individuals and the economy.

Despite significant frailty, the economy is showing signs of improvement – there would not have been an Obama victory without them.  The most important of which is the improving GDP figures and the housing market.  Real estate prices are showing signs of stability – a significant positive – and personal debt levels are down as well – a function of foreclosures.  The last quarter’s GDP growth increased to 2% from the tenuous 1.3% of the prior quarter.  Without growth, we cannot create jobs.  And without jobs, we cannot grow consumption.  Without more consumption, we cannot grow the economy.  It is a vicious circle that we have embraced – but one that we cannot break right now.

The jobs recovery to date, however, has been anemic.  As you see from the employment chart below, we have barely witnessed any change in the overall employment levels.  Long-term structural unemployment has now become pervasive, with over 1.7 million people unemployed at least 99 weeks.  That statistic, unfortunately, is grossly understated – it does not account for those who have simply given up.  We are employing the same percentage of the population as back in the 1970s, when there was a radically different expectation on quality of life, family structure was more traditional, and the debts were miniscule as compared to today.

US Employment as a Percentage of the Population (Ages 16-65): 1970 – 2012 

As the economy went through the dot-com bubble of the 1990s and the real estate bubble of the 2000s, employment was broadly boosted due to increased spending. Today, with the current recession, those jobs have been erased and we struggle to find a way to recreate the lost jobs. In fact, we are experiencing the same employment levels as the 1970s, when the standard of living was far lower.

Fixation on Debt

There has been plenty of discussion and debate around the level of federal debt.  It is not pretty, but it is not unbearable.  If there is future economic growth, and if there is an ability to stem future deficit spending, then these debt levels are manageable.  The problem we are facing today is the continued deficit spending on top of anemic economic growth.  The two combined is a recipe for disaster, a la Spain-style.  Hence the importance of the election message – we need to deal with the concurrent problems of increasing deficits and a lack of jobs.

State debt, in our view, is far more troubling.  The states don’t have the ability to inflate their was out of their obligations, and those obligations are enormous.  While the public municipal debt market is already $3 trillion, there is at least another $4 trillion in unfunded obligations across the country (and some say more like $7T).  No way to make those payments – and limited ways to borrow to cover them.  Future defaults on these debts or obligations are a strong possibility.  These are typically pension obligations, an area that will have a direct and profound impact on retirement, health care costs, and our ability to consume.  The same problems that we face now as a country could further compound as the states grapple with the realities of poor fiscal management.

The silver lining to the debt story is real estate.  Personal debt, the area that exploded in the last real estate bubble, is actually coming down.  The reason is simple – much of that debt was tied to real estate borrowing.  With so many homes in foreclosure, and much of that personal debt eliminated through bankruptcy, individual debt levels are down dramatically.  It could be a good omen – people can not put those dollars to improving quality of life and building retirements – or a bad one if there is little personal constraint and new debts are accumulated.  How it unfolds will be an important factor for the economy.

The problem with growing debt – whether it be personal or government – is that the debt service eventually tears into your ability to spend on important items.  Those important items could be a car repair, or repairs to a school district.  Either way, it can start to eat at the current quality of life and our future prospects.  In a worst case scenario, that debt is so burdensome that one defaults – such as personal bankruptcy or by devaluing the currency.  A personal bankruptcy is not as bad as it used to be – you no longer have to go to debtors prison and eventually someone will give you a new credit card.  For a country, however, the devaluing of a currency can have a devastating impact.  Other countries refuse to lend at favorable rates, quality of life for those who are paid in the currency declines across the board, and wealth in general is slashed.

The debt accumulation in the US, however, is a byproduct of the bubble economy that we’ve fostered for the past three decades.  As I’ve outlined in my article, “Turning the Economy into a Casino” (from The Intellectual Origins of the Global Financial Crisis, Berkowitz and Tuoy, eds., Fordham University Press, 2012), our economy suffered a decline of our core growth drivers that dates back to the 1960s.  To mask this erosion of economic growth, asset bubbles were fostered through government policies that allowed for a false sense of wealth.  This “wealth” led to greater consumption, the core of economic growth for the past three decades.

But when these bubbles pop, individual consumption contracts drastically and jobs are shed.  A cycle of decline ensues unless you either fix the core growth issues or insert a new bubble.  By my count, we are in the midst of the third major asset bubble in the past 30 years – the Quantitative Easing bubble.  Or free money.  More on that later.

Analysis of 2012

Despite this week, the year to date has been a remarkably calm one despite the underlying tensions.  I believe it is mostly attributed to this bubble.  We see that stock market valuations have again risen to pre-crisis levels, and many corporate earnings have improved in lock-step.  Through the end of October, the market was up by 14% year to date (S&P 500).  The core of that rise, however, is limited to two key areas: iPhones and banking.

The first is centered around Apple, their suppliers and the cell operators.  From Apple to AT&T to Verizon to the iPhone supply chain, and the knockoff iPhones supported by Android, the combined impact of the iPhone on stock market valuations is anywhere from a quarter to half of the market rise year-to-date.[1]  Apple alone, the largest component of the S&P 500 index, represents 13% of the market rise.

Here is the irony – we have seen the profits from the iPhone/smartphone market flow back to some shareholders in the US, but an entire slice of that revenue stream flows to Asia in the form of a negative trade deficit.  Remember that we import roughly a $1 trillion of goods more than we export each year.  Over the past forty years we have rushed to move our manufacturing overseas because of cheap labor.  As a result, we lost both the manufacturing capacity and know-how.  As the late Steve Jobs stated, the US doesn’t have the ability to make the iPhone (labor is 7% of the iPhone cost). A domestically manufactured iPhone and supply chain would have gone a long way in solving our current employment conundrum.  Instead, we handed those jobs over to China and their Asian supply chain vendors.

The second factor is the Fed stimulus and its impacts on the banking industry (what I’m calling the QE bubble or free money).  Low interest rates, subsidized losses and protective regulations have allowed the banks to prosper again and are some of the biggest market gainers this year.  I hear stories of folks who are refinancing at insanely low levels, but those loans are rarely available to people who have less-than-perfect credit.  In effect, the banks are offloading the risk onto the public sector – using free money to generate safe profits and playing with those profits in the markets (witness JPMorgan and my last Market Update).

I fear that these benefits are limited in their ability to repair our domestic economy.  As you can see from the chart below, while we have the largest economy on a per-person basis, we are quickly losing ground to Asia, led by China’s growth.  Combined with the recession that Europe is facing, and the serious debt issues that have fostered their problems, there is a dramatic shift under our feet.  As we move from the industrial age to the information age, I fear that we have lost the ability to capture enough innovation and growth to support our outsized expectations. Put another way, wealth and quality of life expectations for the 99% are going to change.

The Three Largest Global Economies

While the US has been eclipsed by Europe, and China is rapidly catching up given their sustained growth rate (perhaps in ten years), our per capita economy still affords us tremendous wealth as a country.

Prognosis

This is not a condemnation of the US economy, but rather a reality check on where growth is found as an investor.  Many US companies are doing remarkably well.  Their ability to shed employees, improve productivity and fortify their balance sheets will server them for years to come.  There is still innovation in this country, especially in the areas of early stage life science and energy technologies.  In the interim, the ability for the US consumer to push our economy forward is still hampered, and will be until base employment is solved.

Which comes back to my opening points on the election results.  The policies of the next four years need to clear uncertainty while fostering a stable employment base.  The improvements in real estate will help, but we cannot depend on our own consumption to fuel those jobs, and Europe is not going to do it for us either.  Firms such as Apple, that have a truly global revenue base, solid cash and deep penetration into Asia are the growth prospects for the public equity markets.  Domestic firms that maintain stability of cash flow and have managed their risks are good investments for predictable, yet very modest, returns on investment.

In the immediate term, the uncertainty of the next few weeks and months could reek havoc on market psychology.  Apple is a great example.  With the enormous run-up in the past two years, many folks are sitting on large long-term unrealized gains.  With the prospect of capital gains tax rates rising, folks are unloading their Apple shares to lock in the current tax rate.  If those tax prospects were already resolved – and set at a modest increase of say 15% to 20% – much of this panic selling would be averted.  But with uncertainty comes volatility.

As a reality check, Apple’s fundamentals are astounding.  They have well over $100 billion of cash/marketable investments on the balance sheet, and generate another $50 billion each year.  Their growth rate is still projected well into the double digits.  The price to earnings ratio, ex-cash, is 8x (by comparison, J&J is trading at 12x).  And the iPad mini, with gross margins over 50%, is going to explode on the global market and likely change the face of education.

But psychology will always win over reason.  And that unfortunately is the prospect that we face as a nation.  Our demographic is changing, our vote is reflecting those changes, and our economy is drifting in the currents of a dynamic world.  Change is inevitable.  How we manage this moment is paramount to the future of this society.

All the best for the start of the holiday season.

Regards,

David B. Matias, CPA

Managing Principal

[1] This is a rough estimate based on the impact that those companies have on the S&P 500, and the amount that iPhone sales and related cellular service contribute to their earnings.