Introduction
Last week’s post listed
a number of elements that could have caused the big sell off on Friday, April 17th. I questioned
whether the relatively big decline was important. By this Friday the general
equity market rallied back to the levels where the April 17th decline began. Thus the
simple answer to my question is that the fall of the 17th was not
important. As with most simple answers, they miss the point of relevance. Each
of the five elements could become significant to the future value
of our equity portfolios as discussed below:
1.
The Chinese authorities expressed concern as to the level of speculation being
done by somewhat affluent retail brokerage accounts which they were attempting
to curtail.
(The
prices of many Chinese stocks have doubled in a year while their economy is
slowing. The strong desire of many Chinese is to get out of their large savings
balances numerated in the Yuan. Securities makes sense for two reasons, first the government’s desire to moderate housing
prices is driving the cost to borrow up and increasing the size of down
payments. The second reason for the attraction of stocks is that they can now
be sold through Hong Kong for HK dollars tied to the US dollar. The Chinese are
thus joining the locals in many countries including the US wanting to partially
escape their home currency and government control. This awareness of local
concerns should not invite inflows into the markets where capital is being exported
other than taking advantage of the late incomers.)
2.
Liquidity is becoming more scarce as capital requirements imposed on banking
and other large financial concerns are limiting the ability of the traditional
sources of liquidity to provide them to those in need at reasonable prices.
Liquidity is not important, until you need it to exit or acquire a position
quickly and discreetly.
(From
a customer's viewpoint big is being viewed increasingly as muscle bound. Large
players have had to deploy their capital against regulatory requirements
leaving less and less capital to fund client needs or be able to quickly rescue
a worthwhile competitor who is in dire straits. Thus there appears to be far
less underpinning to current prices than what we used to have.)
3.
The couple hour failure of the always reliable Bloomberg computer
communications system highlighted how dependent many trading desks had become
without sufficient alternatives to trade.
(For
those of us who have relied on various machines to run our lives we are not
totally surprised with occasional machine and people failures.)
For some, this week became a painful example of how one skilled computer operator can create
short-term havoc for a brief period that was long enough to be a significant
profit and loss opportunity in suburban London. Interesting, in all the talk about the flash crash, so far no one
mentioned a similar occurrence in the US Treasury market. The longer term
implications of these “sorcerers apprentice” actions drives home the fact that
participants in the market should not count on various regulators understanding
the current game or knowing who is playing what set of instruments. To some
extent in the past we were better protected when marketplace members were the
primary regulators. In a somewhat analogous situation described in Sunday’s New York Times, the diamond
merchants have developed their own regulatory system with the main penalty for bad
characters being that they won’t be welcome to trade.
4.
Investors using academic models were not forewarned by the drop on April 17th
. They had been taught at universities and
promoters of various statistical services that standard deviation and other measures of volatility
signified levels of price risk in various securities. Thus, these investors were surprised
by the speed and size of the drop. A number of more seasoned investors were not
particularly surprised due to the relative thinness of the volume on the way up
and the lack of traditional price corrections.
(The importance of this drop is to reinforce that risk is not volatility, but rather the penalty for bring wrong to the extent that long-term spending plans need to be curtailed. Periodic changes in the direction of prices are to be expected. When they do not come, changes are in effect delayed which can be made up quickly.)
(The importance of this drop is to reinforce that risk is not volatility, but rather the penalty for bring wrong to the extent that long-term spending plans need to be curtailed. Periodic changes in the direction of prices are to be expected. When they do not come, changes are in effect delayed which can be made up quickly.)
5.
At the end of the trading day a week ago, there was some price recovery. The
critical question was: as the selling pressure lessened, was the buying from
those that are trading oriented or new fundamental buyers?
(The markets did rise last week with the NASDAQ index up every day to a new high along with a number of international markets. The question remains whether or not this is fresh money coming into the market now. I will discuss the importance of the answer to that question shortly.)
(The markets did rise last week with the NASDAQ index up every day to a new high along with a number of international markets. The question remains whether or not this is fresh money coming into the market now. I will discuss the importance of the answer to that question shortly.)
Bottom
line, the price drop on April 17th was not immediately important,
but it raised sufficient issues that should start investment policy reviews.
The oversupply
opportunity
Commodities
and industry capacity utilization are in ample supply which means that price
inflation is a bit away. What are clearly needed are items that many people
want to buy. I suggest that US-led companies as well as some others are
brilliant at finding products that people and companies want to buy. In many
ways, the US’s greatest natural resource is our advertising and marketing
talent. We will be saved by our “Mad Men” and ladies. They not only create the
initial demand but allow us to believe in continuing demand that will draw
underutilized capital into the investment marketplace. All over the world
people are desperately looking for investments in the private sector that can
start to fill their retirement capital gap. The current incredible success of
Apple* will not be a one off, as others find the need for new
products and services not now present.
* I am long Apple Stock and
have been for many years.
How do you balance
your concerns and opportunities?
This
question is exactly why I have developed this concept of Timespan Portfolios. The
shorter term portfolios need to address the fact that the current regulatory picture is
increasingly adverse to sound investing and so periodic and healthy drops may
be more severe than history suggests. These will be corrected however, with
different people in places of power.
The
longer term portfolios will benefit from the successful mobilization of capital
investing into more efficient companies, products and services.
I
would be happy to discuss this dichotomy with our regular subscribers to see
where the Timespan Portfolios work for you.
Question of
the Week:
Your turn to ask me a question.
Your turn to ask me a question.
__________
Did
you miss my blog last week? Click
here to read.
Did someone forward you this Blog? To
receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday, please subscribe using the email or RSS
feed buttons in the left column of MikeLipper.Blogspot.com
Copyright © 2008 - 2015
A. Michael Lipper, C.F.A.,
All Rights Reserved.
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.
All Rights Reserved.
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.
No comments:
Post a Comment