Retro, Forward, & Cycles - Weekly Blog # 792

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

Retro, Forward, & Cycles

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

  

 

 

Managing Money Motivations

There are two very different parties in a professionally managed investment account. The first is the owner of the capital who is primarily interested in investment performance, usually using current performance as representative of future performance.

 

The second participant is the manager of the account who wishes to maintain the relationship for a long time. The fully loaded cost of acquiring the account is usually not earned back immediately. Thus, the first rule for the manager is not losing the account. This is somewhat different than the motivation of the owner of the account.

  

Best Defense is to Keep the Account

Managers assemble a number of different securities into a portfolio so that not all of them decline by the same amount in most down periods, hopefully some will rise. One of the standard ways of accomplishing this task is diversifying the investment characteristics of the securities. The most important characteristic of a security is deemed to be its risk of declining.

 

The money management profession in many cases believes stocks and bonds have separate levels of risk of decline. The way this is expressed and managed is through a ratio of stocks and bonds, for example 60/40. This means 60% in stocks and 40% in bonds. The investment media has declared the 60/40 strategy dead following approximately 40 gainful years for bonds and 3 years of decline. The average performance of 107 mutual fund sectors over the last three years through Thursday, 41% have lost ground. All but one of the declining sectors were fixed-income oriented.  The one exception was Chinese Regional funds. (This confirms my view that we have been in a period of stagflation for some. We will be dealing with Chinese oriented funds in a subsequent blog.)

 

Understanding the Use of Numbers

The purpose of the ratios was to manage risk. Today there are many stocks that are less risky than some bonds or other credit instruments. A better name for this diversification function would be low risk, or high quality/high risk, or low quality. One should recognize that like almost everything else in life, risks move in cycles. Some Scottish Trusts started life owning only British gilts, and over time introduced stocks. Today, some of these trusts are almost exclusively invested in stocks, while maintaining their historic names. 

 

In the US, trust accounts have gone from 100% bonds to a 50/50 split. Trusts then moved to 60/40, with some advocating for 70/30 and even 80/20. What brings this concept of cycles to mind is in 1957, or there about, discussion I had with the venerable Professor David Dodd, who was teaching Securities Analysis at Columbia. He emphasized the use of balance sheet related data in securities selection. With the arrogance of a student, I suggested growth had become more important since the Depression, when he and Ben Graham wrote their seminal textbook on Securities Analysis.

 

He closed the discussion by explaining that the fund he was involved with had made lots of money buying discounted value securities. However, ten years later growth stocks led the market. Perhaps the good professor was right for professionals. Many growth stocks fell, including from the ’73 peak, whereas his value stocks held up much better. This experience convinced me that the appropriate diversification schedule is a cyclical pattern.

 

Are We Near a Change in Valuations?

There is some evidence that it is possible, if not likely, we are near a change in valuation. Fixed income yields have been inverted without a marked recession for over a year. Last week the US Treasury yield-spread between the two-year (4.93%) and thirty year (4.03%) was a remarkably narrow 0.9%. This suggests the long-term future is not as attractive as the current period, with potential recessions in the next thirty years.

 

This appears to be at variance with current estimates for S&P 500 stocks. Net income changes in the second and third quarter of 2023 are expected to be -8.6% and +1.7%, respectively. (These are net income changes, EPS estimates are expected to be -6.4% and +1.7%, respectively. This shows the benefit of firms buying back their common stock. Buy backs potentially help managements with their stock options, but possibly not in the long-term improvement of the value of the company.)

 

The “bulls” in the market are possibly relying on one of the oldest market forecasting devices, The Dow Theory, which requires both the DJIA and the Transportation Index to move in the same direction. In the latest week only two of the 30 DJIA stocks rose, with thirteen of the 20 transportation stocks rising. At this time of year seasonal inventory is moving toward the stores, but many stores are closing or hiring inexperienced staff.

 

With services and non-durables growing while durables are not, there is a long-term structural problem for the economy.

 

Conclusion:

Changes are coming and we need to manage them, or they will manage us.

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Gravitational Waves & Investing - Weekly Blog # 791

Mike Lipper's Blog: Manageable Risk - Weekly Blog # 790

Mike Lipper's Blog: Predictions Suffered Last Week - Weekly Blog # 789

 

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2023

Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

 

 

Two Questions: Length of Recession, Near-Term Strategy Choices - Weekly Blog # 600

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

Two Questions: Length of Recession, Near-Term Strategy Choices

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018 –

Authors Note # 1 
This is our six hundredth blog. I hope you have gotten some worthwhile ideas to help with your investment responsibilities. My goal is to provide at least two ideas a year that make you think about your process, either differently or more thoroughly. As we are approaching our 12th year, I want to thank our subscribers who have shared their thoughts with me. These thoughts have helped me to reach our goals. I also want to thank my two editors who have been long term associates, the late Frank Harrison and his successor Hylton Phillips-Page. They have turned into English my too long Germanic sentences.

Length of Next Recession 
Any study of nature and economic history will show repeated periods of expansion (fat years) and contraction (lean years). In studying history, I believe they are not only inevitable, but required. It is important to separate economic contractions, which we call recessions, and market crashes. They are often in close proximity to one another, but not always. Economic recessions have a much greater impact on investment portfolios than so-called stock market crashes. For example, while much media focus continues to be on the October 1929 market crash, there is little mentioned that by December of that year the Dow Jones Industrial Average had risen back to its October levels. Thus, the crash was a technical dislocation and was not in itself a cause of the recession, or the psychological term that’s been applied, The Great Depression.

The historic reasons for contractions after periods of expansion, either in nature or economics, is an unsustainable expansion. There are many causes for unsustainable expansions:

• Changes in climate
• The outgrowth of war on both the victor and victim
• Confusing secular growth with cyclical growth to meet a temporary demand vacuum
• Too low or too high prices
• Leaders of governments and/or businesses attempting to extend a tiring expansion
• Loose credit that keeps both companies and individuals seemingly solvent, but creates zombies awaiting bankruptcy
• Excess capacity creating excess supply, driving prices lower among competitors 

If recessions are inevitable, what is the question for investors? 
The question is the time span of the recession. Most modern recessions, as reflected by the stock market, have a duration of about 2 years (1-3 years). Considering the folly of those who have been correct in spotting a price peak and then have being wrong about the bottom and subsequent tops, I will not attempt to call an end to the current dance.

Considering my focus on long term investment accounts, it raises some questions. Does one stay with sound portfolio holdings enjoying the expansion, on the belief that their past gains will carry them through a roughly two-year decline. While not publicly admitting that this is their strategy, most individuals and institutional investors are currently following this strategy. There are however other issues that should be examined:

• The current US stock market expansion is over ten years old.
• Governments around the world are actively pushing nominal and inflation adjusted "real" rates down, creating zombies out of both corporations and individuals who should be exiting their debt. 
• Not fully understanding that technology drives prices down, changing purchasing habits and creating deflationary trends which are often elements of a financial collapse. For example, there were those who believed we had seen peak auto production in the 1990s in Japan and in 2016 in the USA. These beliefs resulted from changing demographics, living habits, ride sharing, and the growth of US public transportation. Without a strong auto industry politics would change, as well as many other things. 

If our next recession lasts five or possibly ten years, shouldn't we be change our portfolios?
The problem with equity type risk in stocks, high yield bonds, and private equity/credit, is what to change it to? While mutual fund investors are not always right, it is interesting to note that the largest net flows are currently going into money market funds, followed by high quality commercial bonds.

As usual, Jason Zweig of The Wall Street Journal had some things to ponder. He reported that in 1929, on the basis of the radio boom, the Radio Corporation of America had a price/earnings ratio of 73 times and a price to book-value ratio of 16 times. Amazon, because of the promise of "the Cloud", recently had the same numbers if not higher.

Author's Note #II 
In the early 1960s I was a young analyst awaiting the boom in color television. After many years it finally happened, with RCA rising above its 1929 peak. The color television boom grew slowly because of the difficulty in producing acceptable quality television picture tubes. There were only a handful of suppliers and RCA was late in converting one of its factories in Pennsylvania to a color picture tube plant. Thus, I and many analysts visited the plant, followed by lunch with their management at the local country club.

The meeting date was November 23rd, 1963. It began and effectively ended with the announcement that President JFK had been shot and later died. Clearly, there were lots of unanswered questions at that time. One that struck me came from a well-know, but nameless analyst “what was happening to stocks on the American Stock Exchange?” This was significant because the largest manufacturer of color tubes was listed on the ASE. My guess is that he personally held that speculative stock with a large borrowed balance. The markets quickly closed to prevent a panic which would have wiped out many, including those on borrowed margin.

It was a very silent time on the train ride home from Pennsylvania that night, but it gave many of us a real understanding of the risks we were taking and how volatile markets can react to the unexpected. This kind of experience shapes one’s thinking for a lifetime. The US markets reopened the following Monday morning to reassure buyers.

Near-Term Strategy Choices 
In my role of selecting mutual funds for clients, I am always looking to balance the risks and rewards of investing. My associate Hylton and I do this is by reading financial documents and visiting many successful managers. This weekend I reviewed the strategies of a number of successful managers. I am happy to have a discussion with subscribers to see if any of these strategies fit within their responsibilities. The following list is not in preference order, but in the order of when I read their latest report:

1. Import substitution (A bet on lessening globalization)
2. Mid-Cap Opportunities (Not particularly unexploited)
3. Better stock prices in China (Taking advantage of retail selling)
4. Overweight financials (Contrarian bet on rising interest rates, which seems inevitable)
5. Market share can be better than reported earnings if it is profitable and leads to higher EPS
6. Cautious on momentum (already happening)
7. Illiquidity is expected to get worse
8. Investment decisions are based on current prices, not macro views. 
9. Absence of bargains (Warren Buffett's complaint) 

Questions for the week: 
What portion of your portfolio could successfully survive a long recession?



Did you miss my past few blogs? Click one of the links below to read.
https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/10/things-are-seldom-what-they-seem-weekly.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/10/mike-lippers-monday-morning-musings.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/10/contrarian-bets-and-other-risks-weekly.html



Did someone forward you this blog?
To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

Copyright © 2008 - 2019
A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

LONG-TERM TRENDS MAY NOT BE A FRIEND - Weekly Blog # 568

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

LONG-TERM TRENDS MAY NOT BE A FRIEND

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018 –

                     
     

“Big Mo” in the political world, “The Trend is your Friend” in the commodities world, and momentum investing are beliefs in continuing that which is into the future. Certainly, various media pundits stress current trends. Salespeople of all stripes find it is easy to sell their wares by highlighting current conditions. As a contrarian investor I am delighted to see great levels of enthusiasm for the currently popular, because it leads to significant mispricing of both rewards and risks, creating opportunities for the careful investor. For those swept up in what is currently popular, it should be a well-earned learning experience.

Faulty Long-Term Predictions

This week there were two very relevant notices in the press. The first was a statement by Ajay Sing Kapoor, an analyst at Bank of America/Merrill Lynch. The statement said “There is really no permanent trend just lazy intellectuals confusing a long cycle for a perpetual-motion machine.” This is a useful insight in the climate change debate. One of the best market analysts I know grew up on a farm which he has owned for 30 years. He mentioned the feast and famine cycles experienced while living there, much like the biblical seven fat years followed by seven lean years. 

The belief in long-term trends is present in today’s investment selection, which focuses of selected factors based on selected histories. The strongest of these is the belief that changes in earnings per share will dictate the price of the shares. This was true even when I was a junior analyst at a trust bank, where investment leaders used the change in reported earnings per share to make investment decisions. Even then I was suspicious, feeling that reported earnings were the result of both controllable and uncontrollable forces. It is only later that I became more conscious of the changes in Generally Accepted Accounting Practices (GAAP). Today, earnings report releases emphasize “adjusted earnings, adjusted operating margins, adjusted profit margins and even adjusted revenues”. The SEC has mandated that these reports must also show the results according to GAAP, but they don’t  highlight the fact that almost every year AICPA makes changes to GAAP. Corporate data complements government produced data as critical inputs to thinking on the economy according to Jim O’Neill, the former Goldman Sachs partner and global economist who coined the “BRICS” term for the rapidly developing emerging markets countries. He writes, “Though economics aspires to the rigor of the natural sciences, at the end of the day it is still a social science.” Thus, the specific numbers produced by economists are kidding us with their precision, particularly when they are expressed with decimals.

An Improved Fan Dance

If the base data is questionable, its use as the foundation for future prediction is extremely questionable. Consequently, The Bank of England and some of the US regional Federal Reserve Banks are showing charts using the most current or corrected datapoints, then adding a fan like wedge showing the range of future predictions.  My natural skepticism questions if the wedge is too narrow. I can accept that a narrow fan probably includes most of the probabilities utilizing a single up and down standard deviation. However, as an investor I like most others feel much worse after a decline than a pre-tax gain. I would much prefer a wider wedge that includes the reasonable possibility of two or three standard deviations. (I believe that both long-shots win and racing accidents happen on occasion, depriving the best horse from winning.)

Jason Zweig on the Wrong Long-Term

The second important item in this week’s press is a column by my friend Jason Zweig. He cautions against investing in companies that are building for the long-term, properly concerned that the focus on long-term investing can lead to the mistaken allocation of resources. Tech companies spend substantial capital on new facilities and equipment for future markets that might not evolve. Think of the engineering and construction geniuses responsible for the construction of the Egyptian Pyramids. The pyramids were monuments to the rulers while living, as well as in their after-life. I am much more interested in the long-term development and acquisition of talent, including the building of multiple generations of leadership at all significant levels. 

Investing for the Long-Term

I have devoted most of my investments to the long-term and where appropriate for my clients I have done the same. While this on average generally means a low turnover of securities and funds, it is not a lock-step process of holding regardless of current input. It requires careful examination of current information versus long term perspectives, both of the specific investment and its place in the portfolio, as well as any changes in the needs of the beneficiaries. I accept the cyclicality of both the markets and my ability to correctly analyze the inputs. I often expect to be premature and less often to be wrong. My long-term attitudes are derived from the study of some of the best investors as far back as I have information. In general, these attitudes have been good for my accounts and family over time.

Mid-Term Platform or Lid?

Each week I look at the investment performance of mutual funds around the world as a good representation of the results of managed money. This week I paid attention to the average returns of US Diversified Equity funds for the five years ended this week. The period included the final years of the past administration and the first couple years of the present one. The importance of politics is questionable. The twenty-investment averages for the five years generated an annualized compound growth rate of +5.69%. This included some extremes on the upside: large-cap growth funds +12.13%, S&P 500 index funds +10.72% and multi-cap growth funds +10.16%. On the down side there were dedicated short bias funds -19.35% and alternative equity market neutral funds -0.74%. These results suggest that large-cap tech companies produced a disproportionate portion of the gain and that being out of equities was a loser. 

Five years is a little longer than the average US stock market cycle and roughly equates to the presidential cycle. Being a contrarian I would not expect the two extremes to repeat over the next five years. The extreme contrarian would examine the funds that produced negative results feeling they could be the leaders at some point. In that vein I would be scanning for any indication that things are changing for the better for commodities funds, particularly those involved with different aspects of energy and agriculture. I don’t currently see a catalyst, but I can afford to be late as I suspect that most of the selling in these sectors is over.

Short-Term = Confusion

As is often the case the future direction from current conditions is not clear to me. Banks do not appear to need deposits to make loans as the interest rate offered on average is 0.59%, down from 0.61% the week before and its recent cycle high of 0.63%. Lack of new loan demand is not encouraging. The latest survey sample of the American Association of Individual Investors (AAII), a very volatile measure, shows the three alternative predictions for the next six months are all between 31% and 36.5 %. On a more positive note, the roster of price moves in the Weekend WSJ showed 64 out of 72 being positive. Of the 25 best performing funds for the week, 14 were growth funds and 3 were health-oriented funds.

The one certainty after a period of level market performance is that there will be a breakout on the upside or a breakdown, possibly both, based on  higher volume and enthusiasm.

Another Favored Myth Destroyed

For many years during a US recession Americans talked about moving to Australia with their US acquired skills. Very few did, but it was in the back of their minds as an economic escape. In the nuclear age several Americans thought that the safest place to live with their families was the South Island of New Zealand. The tragic events of this week have shown that there is no practical place to escape. We are going to be forced to deal with present and future problems where we are. The destruction of myths often leads to the recognition of the benefits of where we are and focuses our attention on making our lives and investments better.          

  

Did you miss my past few blogs? Click one of the links below to read.

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-top-before-big-top-weekly-blog-567.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/03/2-speed-vs-2-directions-old-better-than.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/02/lessons-from-warren-buffett-and-italian.html

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

Copyright © 2008 - 2018

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.