What does 2015 say about ’16?

Introduction

Does what happened in the markets in 2015 set a trend for 2016? In prior posts I have discussed trends and the general comfort in trend following as well as the advantages in terms of bigger profits or smaller losses while picking up early divergences from a trend. On the last weekend of the year it is difficult to separate the evidence between nothing new and as ordered in “Alice in the Looking Glass,” the lobsters continue their dance. Or can we identify future turning points? Let’s look at the current situation for clues.

Continue the Dance

What will continue in 2016? We will enter the eighth year of the second period of the key US decision maker being a woman. My concern is not that these were both women, but that critical decisions were made by people unelected and/or unconfirmed by the US Senate.  The first was the second Mrs. Woodrow Wilson and now Valerie Jarrett. In the first case, some of our British friends suggest the decisions made through the Woodrow Wilson White House set in motion both the lengthening of WWI and the critical impetus to WWII. Some may be seeing a similar pattern being caused by the current occupant’s last year in office.

The Federal Reserve is one of the worst forecasters in the US. No recession is in its forecasts at least until 2019. Moody’s won't go that far, it believes that the “wide high yield spread doesn’t mean a recession is nigh.” Further, “jobless rate and yield curve have yet to predict” a recession. Stephen Roach’s latest piece in Project Syndicate suggests the reason for this is “the Fed, like other major central banks, has now become a creature of the financial markets rather than a steward of the real economy.”

Wall Street focused pundits are at best predicting a flat to middle single digit gain for stock prices. Numerous pension plans and granting foundations are using portfolio gain rates between 5% and 8% in their planning for the next year. This relative caution could be the cause of business capital expenditures to decline a bit, but at the same time consumer expectations are higher than current readings. As of the last weekend of the year, the Dow Jones Industrial Average without benefit of dividends is down -1.5% and the S&P500 +0.1%. That is not the full story, the Dow Jones Transportation Index is down -16.6% and the NASDAQ 100 is up +9.1%. This dichotomy explains the results of most equity mutual funds with those focusing on growth particularly in global health/biotech providers showing average gains of +9.45%, which is the single best performing investment objective tracked by my old firm Lipper Inc, now a ThomsonReuters company. Whereas portfolios largely focused on manufacturing and transportation showed losses, they were not alone, a value focused portfolio produced flat to slight declines. Many hedge funds both equity and debt-oriented also showed negative results.

Using the handicapping tools I learned at the race track trying to find suitable bets on imperfect horses, I tend to pay less attention to annual moves of 10% positive or negative. Big gains and losses of significance come in packages with at least 20% moves, even if they are a bit abnormal in coming. Thus in my portfolio selection efforts for 2016 for investing in the year as well making choices for Timespan Portfolios with 15+years duration, I am noting but not dwelling on 2015 results.

Negative Inputs

1. Electronic trading, including high frequency trading (HFT) is dominating the trading in US treasuries and now investment grade bonds to such an extent that the short side in US Treasuries is now viewed as a crowded trade. (Crowded trades are ones when the bulk of one side of the market is dominated often by fast traders; e.g., Hedge Funds and Proprietary Trading desks. The risk involved is that these players may follow momentum at any price, thus creating extreme market movements unrelated to price and value.)

2. Globally the US dollar has become too attractive vs. other currencies. Thus, at the end of 2012 the Canadian dollar was trading at parity with the US dollar and now the Loonie, the Canadian dollar is worth about $0.72 cents.

Compared to most other countries the apparent political risks to capital in the US is less. Almost all markets reverse and some will find eventual bargains in other currencies selling some of their US dollars to buy attractive goods and services as well as securities. On a long-term basis I am looking to add to my Canadian holdings of management company stocks. On a very long-term basis I find the Australian superannuation (pension) business attractive and I am hoping to find some euro denominated attractive investments.

3. Moody’s regularly publishes the market interest rates being charged on operating leases. These are very sensitive to credit ratings of the issuer. What caught my eye is that the interest rate range for those in the investment quality group from the highest to the lowest is 2.05%. On the other hand the interest spread between the highest quality “junk” and the most risky credit available in the market was 5.41% with CAA credits having to pay 10.07% which is higher than the average High Yield bond.

One of my concerns about our manipulated low interest rates is that far too many loans are priced to cover the cost of capital and operating expenses and too little for the cost of credit. My worry, despite the Fed’s lack of immediate worry about a recession, is that the size of the credit losses will be larger than historically expected. In the case of the US as distinct from China, the growth of other financial lending (shadow banking) has grown to about 33% of total loans compared with about 4% in China. Therefore the US banks won’t bear all of the costs of distressed credits.

Positive Inputs

1. The lack of any well known pundit screaming about a major upside

move is probably the single most bullish indicator. One should always remember as in golf the purpose of the market is to create humility,

thus the chance to be embarrassed the most is missing the upside.

Various sentiment polls of global portfolio managers are also expecting limited gains in 2016. If they are wrong they will have to play catch-up ball and not only commit reserves quickly but switch out of some under-performing holdings.

2. Retail fund investors both in the US and Europe have been adding to their fixed income fund investments. The combination of rising interest rates and increased credit concerns suggests to me that flows out of bond funds will eventually find a home in equity funds.

3. We like to be ahead of the market and thus now are looking at 2017, the first year of the new US Administration. History shows the first year of a new Administration of either party is often the worst of the four years. Whoever is sitting in the Presidential chair  would be wise to bring on a recession as quickly as possible so it could be blamed on the former occupant. Also with four years to work with, the new President should be able to get the economy expanding and be seen to be creating jobs.

4. I am finding lots of companies in the financial arena that I would like to permanently own at current prices. Combining this with the knowledge that there is a large quantity of talent that is ready to move for the right opportunity suggests to me that there are lots of profitable opportunities ahead.

Bottom Line

Because I have a contrarian streak, I expect a different sort of year in 2016 and if I am wrong, I won’t be hurt much.

Question of the Week: What do you expect in 2016?

________   

Did you miss my blog last week?  Click here  to read.

Comment or email me a question to MikeLipper@Gmail.com.

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.