Showing posts with label European Central Bank. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European Central Bank. Show all posts

Sunday, July 1, 2012

Friday’s Market: An Investment Trap?

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 277 points on Friday, June 29, for a single day gain of 2.2%. The Standard & Poors 500 rose even more to 2.49%. Our own financial services private fund jumped 3.15% on a gross basis. That gain represented approximately three quarters of the estimated gain for June which in turn is about one-half of the six month’s gain. Clearly, I don’t want to give back Friday’s gains, but I am concerned that Friday’s market action could be setting a major trap for all of us.

A trap works if it looks to be relatively attractive compared to other actions. In this case there was the confluence of three incentives:  (1) favorable news as to the Euro crisis, (2) the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare, and (3) the market mechanics. As we examine the three items, we need to recognize whether they are poison fruit.

The Euro trap

The agreement made early Friday morning to permit the central market to make funds directly available to the Spanish and possibly the Italian Banks requires the creation of a single banking supervisor for the 17 member countries that use the Euro. The supervisor is meant to be in place by the end of the calendar year and thought to be imbedded within the European Central Bank (ECB) with funding to start in 2013. If this were to happen on schedule, it might be considered the eighth Wonder of the World. First to get these particular seventeen countries to agree quickly will be very difficult. Already both Ireland and Greece are looking for similar bank support that does not raise the nominal debt of the country.  Until the money flows from the center to the banks, there is a good chance that depositors will shift their assets to stronger banks and/or currencies. These actions may cause substantial changes in market shares of specific banks. I wonder how the scheme to have a single bank supervisor is going to attract the other members of the European Community that do not use the Euro currency? In particular I question what would cause the UK to give up its banks’ sovereignty?  Without the UK, and the Scandinavian countries inside the tent, I do not see how the other banks will agree. One of the provisos that the German legislature required in their rapid agreement was a transaction tax. If this tax is put into place for all of Europe, Europeans will have ceded a good bit of the institutional market to the Americans and Asians, a very improbable event. Bottom line, I am not swallowing that the agreement on the Euro is really going to help any time soon.

The supreme trap

Along with practically everyone else I was surprised how the US Supreme Court ruled on the Affordable Care Act. Having read parts of the decision and much of the commentary produced by legal scholars and political pundits, my conclusion from a practical viewpoint is the decision just opened up many more questions than it attempted to answer. For approximately thirty years I have been inordinately concerned as to the rise of healthcare costs within the US. Initially my concern for the rising costs led me to complain to my firm’s trade association, the Securities Industry Association (SIA) as to the annual increase in health insurance premiums that the medium and small sized brokerage firms like my own were paying. In answer to my gripes, as is often the case, they invited the complainer to sit on the board of the captive insurance company. While on that board I did find some inefficiencies and failure to optimize the float for the benefit of the members. No matter what the other members of the board and I did we could not prevent annual premium increases of double digit percentages.

After that experience I felt that the hospitals were inefficient and therefore costing the patients and their insurance companies too much and once again the curse of being a complainer struck and I was invited on the investment committee of the local community-owned hospital. Once again costs continued to escalate. This in turn led to a series of mergers with other community-owned hospitals and now I find myself on the Financial Oversight Committee of a complex of three hospitals. Still the costs keep growing. Finally, my wife and I have informally become the healthcare reinsurer to cover expenses that are not picked up by others for a large and growing family.  Thus the rise in healthcare costs really does matter to me. The way I read the decision and the various expected “fixes,” follow-on legislation and regulation, all will add to our costs. Further, I see very little that will improve the quality of healthcare or increase the number of doctors and highly trained nurses and technicians. As you may suspect, I am gagging on the benefits of the Supreme Court delivered fruit.

Fruits of the marketplace

At the end of the trading day, the New York Stock Exchange produces a list of large trade imbalances that wish to have an execution at or near the close. On Friday there was a materially larger than normal list of stocks with an imbalance. I am guessing that the imbalance was many more shares were wanting to be purchased than sold. I am guessing that at least the final twenty point surge in the DJIA was caused by the desperate need for these trades to be executed. Based on my experience as a former member of the NYSE, I believe that some of these trades (as well as some of the above average volume) were initiated by market professionals to add to their first half published holdings, reduced cash positions, and covering exposed short positions. (In the weeks prior to the quarter-end the number of average volume trading days needed to cover shorts rose.) I view each of these trading factors as transitory and cannot be expected to play a similar role in the days and weeks ahead. 

Throw out the implications of June 29th

As regular readers of this blog know, one of two of my most important learning institutions was learning to handicap (analyze) at the race track. One of the lessons in examining past performance was questioning which results were normal and therefore had a higher likelihood of repeating and which were abnormal. In terms of the latter, I learned to disregard atypical events as I had less confidence of a repetition. Using this hard earned logic I am suggesting to throw out the implications of last Friday. 

Having suggested ignoring Friday results, Sunday night and early Monday morning I will be looking at Bloomberg Television. The Sunday night focus will be on Asian markets. Europe is both an important source of trade and bank capital for the Asians. If their markets continue the New York rise, I could be wrong as to the significance of Friday. This trend could be reaffirmed by opening trades in the major stock markets in Europe.

If there are dramatic changes suggested by these trading sessions, I will send out a follow up bulletin. For those of you that depend upon social media, please let me know how I can reach you with a brief message.

As of the 28th of June

The following thoughts stated briefly were going to be the basis of this week’s blog before the 29th surge.

1.  Marathon Asset Management, a London based global asset manager, has a well-written monthly letter focused on the current battle between the optimists and the pessimists. As a long-term investor with a long portfolio, Marathon is clearly in the optimist category.  However the letter introduced the concept that  “a pessimist is an optimist with better information.”  The logic implies lots of reasons to be optimistic, but grants the pessimists the recognition that those good times are further ahead. I would suggest the recently announced trend of a slower rise in consumer spending than consumer income plays into the timing question. In the US, spending patterns may be suggesting that consumers are self-imposing their own austerity program which is bad for consumption, but good for savings long-term.  The result is better for the markets that long-term investors care about. The current downgrading of corporate sales and earnings guidance is reinforcing this trend.

2.  Moody’s* in its Weekly Market Outlook  produced an interesting analysis on the predictive power of the yield spreads between high yield bonds and equivalent maturity US Treasuries. Currently the spread is 100 basis points  higher than normal. This is a bit strange in view of the expected default rate which is below normal at about 3.5. The current spread suggests a default rate of 10%. This is an important bit of analysis for two reasons. First traditionally the bond market is ahead of the stock market at sensing economic and financial problems. Second, there can be another explanation along the lines of the old adage, “if the bridge won’t go up, lower the water.” Maybe the enlarged spread is indicating that in this interest-repressed world, treasury yields are not representative of the appropriate yield to give holders a real return after inflation. I am slightly more concerned about the second interpretation than the first.
* Moody’s common stock is owned in our private financial services fund.

For any of our blog readers who would like to discuss the two longer term items of my focus on the implications of June 29th, please contact me.

For those in the US, I wish you a happy and healthy July 4th Independence Day. To our other readers I will be checking your markets on the 4th and hope that they are kind to all of us.

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

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Is the Eurozone the New Korean DMZ?

Capital cities around the world issued a sigh of relief on Friday, a reaction that the commercial cities ignored or feared. The eurozone compact, or more correctly, the belief that seventeen nations can quickly agree and execute the identical fiscal treaty, is highly questionable. If there is any real value to the agreement, hopefully it will make it easier for politicians to cudgel their people into agreeing to spending cutbacks. Only by cutting government spending and at the same time raising tax revenues can the deficits be brought down to one half of one percent of GDP.

While it may be a stretch to compare the eurozone of 17 nations to the narrow Demilitarized Zone between South and North Korea, there is much to be learned from a comparative analysis of their effectiveness. Both separations were to protect all parties from the dangers of war. In the case of the EZ, the war is fought with currencies which are based on purchasing power parity, determining the ability to export goods and services. The alternative is being forced to continue to export good jobs. Both zones have worked well for one group but not for the others. The balance is maintained by the apparent winners taking on significant defense expenditures. In the case of the EZ, the defenses will be in the form of subsidies to the slow-growing members and currency manipulation to keep the export costs low. On the one hand the EZ has the benefit of the European Central Bank (ECB), but in the end the ECB’s size could be destructive to the long-term ability to borrow money cheaply. The ECB appears to be the one organization that can issue unlimited amounts of euros. While that may help on the subsidy side, flooding the market with euros is likely to drive relative interest rates higher. Perhaps the best summary of the deal that has apparently been struck comes from Mohammed El-Erian of PIMCO Investments who wrote: “What came out is necessary, but not sufficient.” Thus the currency, bond, commodity, and stock markets are not likely to be calm.

Superior economics didn’t help

As regular readers of this weekly blog and my managed accounts have learned, I have been an advocate of increasing one’s investment in Asia. The thought process behind this move is that most of the countries in the region have young populations that want to work, are increasingly well-educated and have family savings orientations. While my thinking is long-term, some may say too long-term even for endowments, poor short-term performance is a bit upsetting. In a period of four months, a number of these good long-term investments declined some 20%, all the while growing earnings. What did I miss? I missed the inter-connected, “One World” nature of investing these days. For many Asian countries, their biggest export market is Europe, and Europe appears to be entering into a recession which may become worse under various mandated austerity programs. I understood and was somewhat prepared for this linkage. What I should have picked up was the proportion of Asian debt owned by European banks, as pointed out by a recent Matthews Asia Insight report entitled “Capital Flows: Asia’s Quiet Revolution.” European Banks own over 20% of the debt of Malaysia and Taiwan, as well as over 15% of South Korean debt. The US bank share is about 10% in South Korea and below that in all other countries in the region. Over 30% of Indonesian, and more than 20% of Malaysian debt are owned by combined foreign banks in local currency government bonds. One can assume under current conditions it is unlikely that the Europeans will be rolling over their Asian debt. Higher interest rates (lower bond prices) will be needed to attract US investors who are pouring money into the region.

What to do now

Long-term investors should continue to add selectively to their Asian holdings of companies meeting their own domestic demand. For more immediate performance-oriented accounts, try to pick up the eventual rise in Asian stocks when European banks have stopped liquidating their loans. One of the turning points to watch for is when the banks will be released from their requirements to own “riskless” government bonds. Hopefully this will be soon, but based on the agreements announced, we should not hold our breath.

Do you agree? Please let me know.
______________________________________
Did you miss Mike Lipper’s blog last week? Click here to read.

Add to the Dialogue:

I invite you to be part of this Blog community by commenting on my Blog posts or by adding your perspective to the topic. All comments or inquiries will be handled confidentially.

Please address your comments to: Email Mike Lipper's Blog.

To subscribe to this Blog, or to refer a colleague or family member, use the email box or RSS feed sign-up on the left side of MikeLipper'sBlog.Blogspot.com

Sunday, August 28, 2011

Storms on Both Sides of the Atlantic

Normally I think about my blog communications to you throughout the preceding week, then I spend Sunday working on my first draft in order to get a completed version before the end of the evening. As I sit here on Saturday night before the impact of Hurricane Irene is forecast to hit us Sunday, I am concerned that some fallen trees might knock us off the electrical grid. Thus, I am pulling together my scraps of paper and other thoughts about 24 hours earlier than normal. The result is a collection of questions and observations on various bits of news and commentary I have reviewed this week.

Europe: What will it be?

There are two concerns which are keeping investors away from the stock market. The first concern is whether the US will tip into recession (more on this in a minute), and the second is Europe. At its core, the issue in terms of Europe is whether Germany will provide the capital to bail out the Mediterranean and Irish governments, and more specifically, their banks and the banks’ counter-parties in the more solvent countries. The European bureaucrats have maneuvered their creation, the European Central Bank (ECB), into buying sovereign debt issues of some of the peripheral countries in the secondary market. On September 7th, a senior German court will rule as to whether this was in violation of the law (and spirit) of the agreement to create the ECB. Logic from afar suggests that it was in violation, and now questions whether Europe as we know it will continue to exist. Any form of disequilibrium created by these events and discussions will have some unpleasant impacts on US securities, particularly commercial banks.

What does 1% (actually 0.99%) mean to the US?

The latest reading on the growth of the US Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the second quarter, was a gain of 0.99%, generously translated to be 1%. Subsequent quarters were expected to be higher, with the final quarter generating a 3% growth rate. (Many believe a 3% growth rate or better is required to make a meaningful dent in US unemployment and under-employment statistics.) As disheartening as the 1% figure is to the economy, it suggests other concerns to me. While the financial community will gladly do battle over 1% (or as we most likely will refer to it, as 100 basis points) in this period of declining volume and excess capacity, there is a deeper concern on the part of number crunchers like me. What is rarely discussed (but is included in the full breakdown of the national accounts) is a line item called Errors and Omissions. Considering how often there are significant corrections or adjustments to federal government numbers, I wonder whether there was any growth in the US in the second quarter! My concern was heightened when I read the following excerpt from a fellow member of our blog community who is a corporate environmental counsel and a former FDA counsel. He summarized his interactions with the government:

“The overhead of any program and waste consumes a substantial fraction of the funds allocated. They are spent on feeding the 'perpetual bureaucracy' or temporary managers as administrative costs or the money is simply wasted and does not go to any economically productive use.”

Bear in mind that the government is spending roughly one of every five dollars counted in our economic progress.

Are We Creating a Self-Induced Recession?

Much has been written about the “wealth effect” which states that when people believe that their wealth is growing they will spend more. This was one of the excuses for QE2. It didn’t work in a meaningful way. But are we seeing the reverse, when the uncertainties created by the politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are causing investors to stay away from the market? There are always circumstances when investors desire to sell their securities. In the absence of securities buyers, the forced sales will generate lower prices; that in turn makes bystanders feel poorer, and therefore they reduce their spending for various goods and services.

The “Halo Effect”

Jason Zweig, in his weekend column in the WSJ, places halos on Steve Jobs and Warren Buffett, and then does a good job of reporting on the mistakes each has done without diminishing their overall record. Also, the Financial Times Saturday edition, in reporting on Mr. Buffett’s latest purchase of Bank of America preferred stock with warrants, notes a number of quotes whereby he acknowledges less than perfect foresight into financial services companies. (Disclosure: Berkshire Hathaway is a position in my private financial service fund as well as my personal account.) The halo effect is a constant worry to me in selecting mutual funds to invest for my institutional and high net worth clients. We all find it easier to invest with a successful investor than one who is currently not doing well. We gloss over the past mistakes of our heroes and focus on the mistakes of the current laggard. Mr. Buffet reminds us of his fallibility by maintaining his corporate name on a very bad operating investment he made.

As we are moving into particularly troubled financial, economic and political waters, we should be aware of the risks attached to the halo effect.

Am I Premature?

In a recent investment committee meeting with a number of well-known investment professionals, I was asked whether I was premature when I took contrary positions to the perceived knowledge. My respect for the questioner was such that I had to examine my past thinking on investments in order to answer thoughtfully. As often is the case with this individual, he was right. I tend to look at investments as an entrepreneur rather than as a trader. I look for structural imbalances and opportunities. Most of the time I would prefer to be early than late. Even though it was a favorite song of my late daughter's, when I was expressing frustration about change, I couldn’t relax to go along with her view of “Que Sera, Sera,” but she was a calmer person than me.

Reactions to any of these observations?

Note: We will be in London in late September visiting with investors and managers. Are there additional people we should see if appointments can be arranged?
____________________________________________

To read last week’s Blog from Mike Lipper, click here.

Add to the Dialogue:

I invite you to be part of this Blog community by commenting on my blog posts or by adding your perspective to the topic. All comments or inquiries will be handled confidentially.

Please address your comments to: Email Mike Lipper's Blog .

To subscribe to this Blog, or to refer a colleague or family member, use the email box or RSS feed sign-up on the left side of www.MikeLipper.Blogspot.com