Showing posts with label Indonesia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Indonesia. Show all posts

Sunday, April 19, 2026

Investors’ Interlude - Weekly Blog # 937

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Investors’ Interlude

 

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

 

 

 

Take Some Gains Before Taxes Do

The common denominator for most big investment gains are changes. Usually changes in investor perceptions and economic structural changes. The Standard & Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) and NASDAQ Composite are at record highs, due largely to enthusiasm for announcements related to the suspension of fighting in the Middle East. (This is not true for the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and the average stock.  Unfortunately, since WWII the US has had a history of winning wars but losing the peace.)

 

We do not know the total cost of the war and other spending, including election-oriented payments. I suspect the President’s desire for a lower valued dollar will be achieved. There is also a strong push from urban legislators for “fair taxes”, also known as “tax the rich”. Thus, I believe capital gains rates and estate tax rates will rise.

 

Due to these expected changes long-term investors should review their portfolios to see how much of their wealth should be realized before their estates are taxed. If this generates significant amounts of cash, I suggest maintaining the cash or short-term treasury holdings for reinvestment.

 

I believe there will be positive changes in the foreseeable future. These changes may be driven by technology, demographics, immigration, and global factors. These changes are likely to be net larger than politically motivated changes and you want to be in position to take advantage of them.

 

Investment Impacts of Past Changes

The Founding Fathers were afraid of the powers of government, so they placed our Capitol in the humid swamp of Washington DC, thinking our legislators would desert the “swamp” during the humid months. That worked reasonably well until the development of air conditioning. The end of the government’s year is now September 30th, after the summer political conventions, which reduces the time for debating many of the critical issues of the day. DC is now a year-round city for government workers and legislators. Many work or live in large buildings constructed and possibly owned by real estate families who are probably wealthier than the US Senate members. Thus, the advent of air conditioning changed how our government works.

 

Another unexpected change was the railroad growth of the late nineteenth century. The highly regulated railroads only made profits on freight travel and lost so much money on human passengers that the federal government became the principal owner of passenger travel. The freight lines are governed by both the Department of the Interior and Anti-Trust laws. This has led to other countries having better and cheaper train service than we do, paid for by charges on the goods we consume. It is interesting to note that the Dow Jones Transportation Index, which covers the rails, was the best performing market index this past week. The rails are still important.

 

Future Changes

We live in an environment of an increasing rate of change. I leave to others to identify the changes which most investors would not be surprised by.

 

Geographic Changes

  1. Western Hemisphere countries have become more partners than adversaries in terms of trade, health practice, external and internal defense, probably led by Canada.
  2. Russia, after Putin, will experience major political and economic changes.
  3. Asian countries that border both Russia and China will come into their own in terms of trade and be more open to development.
  4. African countries will welcome joint development from Western countries.
  5. Indonesia and India will become less autocratic, with foreign companies able to generate substantial sales and earnings.
  6. Each country will make their own rules.

 

Retirement Issues

  1. Over time, US Social Security will be allowed to exclude US government paper and possibly approach being a foreign wealth fund.
  2. It is reasonable to expect that those born recently will live to at least one hundred, so we will need to provide for longer periods of investment and spending.
  3. For the same reason, private retirement vehicles will need to change.

 

Market Regulation

  1. Using the last trade may no longer be appropriate if it is too small and unrepresentative of the size of the seller.
  2. As more stocks and possibly bonds trade in size in after-hours, having a closing price on the exchange market may be unrealistic.
  3. From a technology perspective, there should be a body that can approve of their use for retirement accounts.
  4. Should issuers of a certain size be required to have assets or insurance on the life of the CEO that can be used in retirement accounts.

 

As usual, I would love our subscribers to share their views with me. 

                                        

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Not Yet Ready for a long-term Solution - Weekly Blog # 936

Mike Lipper's Blog: We Have a Management Problem - Weekly Blog # 935

Mike Lipper's Blog: Is History Rhyming Again? - Weekly Blog # 934

 

 

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

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

Four Investment Quandaries for 2013+



·       Debt, a four letter word
·       Killing off the Individual Equities Investor
·       Asset Allocation: Correlations?
·       Learn from today’s investors

Investment analysis is like a narcotic or a very difficulty habit to kick.  At the beginning of the week, I may not have an idea about what I will post the following Sunday night.  Though I am exposed to a myriad of communications, in many ways the most valuable inputs are the conversations I have with investors and investment professionals.  This week I will focus on four suggestive thoughts, or quandaries for 2013.

The worst four letter word

Growing up I was told that it wasn’t nice to use certain four letter words like F*@k or S*#t. What my Mother never told me was the worst four letter word of all; a word that has bedeviled mankind for centuries. That great economist William Shakespeare put the following words into Polonius’s mouth, giving guidance to his son Laertes, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be.” The four letter word is debt.

There are three essential problems with debt. The first is that it must be paid back, often at inconvenient times. The second is the additional payment of interest, which can be either fixed at the time of the loan or flexible, but each is based on the assumption that the rate is high enough to pay the lender to forgo spending and has a sufficient risk premium that is an accurate gauge of the odds on getting repaid in full and on time. The issue here is what appears to be the appropriate lending rate at the beginning of the period may not be the right rate at the end of the period when conditions have changed. The third problem is collateral that in theory guarantees to the lender that he will get his money back in full and on time. Securities can often provide the margin for a loan. Of course, if the securities go down in price the value of the collateral may become less than the size of the loan. Some upstanding people, companies, and nations have been able to borrow based on their good names. J.P. Morgan is reported to have said that he loaned money on the basis of a man’s character. There is a problem with this as fittingly portrayed by Shakespeare again, in “The Merchant of Venice,” in the legally sanctioned, but inhumane attempt to collect on the collateral on a defaulted loan.

The main purpose of debt is time-shifting. The borrowers want an asset that at present they cannot pay for, and the lenders are willing to delay their own spending if they get paid for this indulgence. Unfortunately what has become the custom is that new debt is raised to pay off expiring debt. The question facing both the borrowers and the lenders is what is the optimum level of debt that can be added on top of a given level of assets? This is called debt capacity. It is usually calculated on the basis of assets and/or income that are not encumbered by other debt. What is usually done for nations is to compare their outstanding debt, most often without concern for future debts, to the their Gross Domestic Product or GDP. This number is the estimated annual generation of goods and services within the country. (Two weeks ago, I blogged on the approach of looking to a more complete analysis of both the assets and liabilities for the US.) Nevertheless I will stay with the convention of looking at a nation’s debts as a ratio of its GDP. Europe’s deficit as a unit is now 131% of its GDP. China has a 120% ratio, all of Asia excluding Japan is 104%. (Hong Kong 275%, Singapore 137%, Malaysia 117%, Indonesia 33%) These reported ratios include personal and corporate debt as well as sovereign debt. Thus globally there is too much debt. 
 
In the US, as is often the case, the private segments of the economy are moving differently than the government sector. The private sector is deleveraging its debt structure whereas the federal government is adding to its debt by issuing bonds that are largely being purchased by the Federal Reserve System to neutralize their impact on the level of interest rates. The combination of the private sector deleveraging and the Fed’s increased borrowings leaves the US debt level, according to one source, at 62% of the GDP which is down slightly from prior readings. 
Translating the economic figures into the bond market, the following three facts are of interest:
1.    Some Investment Grade (corporate) debt is yielding less than some sovereign debt. This would indicate that the market believes that corporates are safer than some nations. One possible reason for this is that Europe, with 7% of the global population,  spends 50% of global social spending.
2.    The yield on the S&P 500 is higher than an index of BAA bonds. Again, the market is suggesting that lower investment grade credits are safer than dividends on the S&P 500 stocks. At the same time this represents an unusual opportunity to view large cap stocks as a more productive source of current income than investment grade bonds.
3.    We may not be out of the sub-prime mortgage mess. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA), is by far the largest guarantor of conventional mortgages. Not only does it already in effect own a number of defaulted mortgages, but there is pressure from Congress and the Administration for the FHA to loosen its underwriting standards. Only a significant recovery in house price and possible individual incomes will bail out the taxpayer liability.

“Who killed Cock Robin”

The somewhat shotgun wedding of the New York Stock Exchange and IntercontinentalExchange (ICE) publicly demonstrates the fact that while derivative trading particularly not based on stocks is very profitable for an exchange (and therefore broker/dealers), trading in individual stocks is not. As an analyst and owner of brokerage firm stocks, for some time I have taken the position that listed equity agency business for brokerage firms is not profitable. Try to get a brokerage account opened to buy 100 shares a quarter of General Motors. What you will quickly find in a broker (if one will talk to you at all), he or she will attempt to sell to you some complex structured product or a high fee fund or possibly introduce you to using a margin account (interest bearing and securities loan revenues). This reaction by the peddlers of our business has been successful in discouraging individual investors from buying and holding individual stocks. Thus, the title to this section, “Who killed Cock Robin” is an English nursery rhyme, but the real killer of interest on the part of individual stocks is the regulatory agencies, particularly the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In 1968 the Commission forced the beginning of the end of fixed-rate brokerage commissions, which were totally replaced in 1975. Prior to those dates there was a vibrant and useful retail research and individual sales business by brokerage firms. Institutions received tons of reasonably high-quality research and other services from “Wall Street.” Continuing this trend of not understanding the impacts of its actions, the SEC permitted multiple locations where a trade could take place which denuded the central marketplace’s liquidity. Carrying this approach further, the substitutions of penny decimals for fractional prices made professional traders withdraw their capital from the marketplace. The way all markets work is that there has to be a perceived profit potential for the professional participants to play. Without the professionals in the game the market will shrink in size and its use as an important economic indicator will be vastly reduced.

I do not mean to be negative on the announced deal, because the holders of my private financial services fund and I benefited. Our holding in NASDAQ OMX rose 3% on the day of the announcement. My guess, the thinking is that NASDAQ itself may be in a merger situation or that the change in control of the NYSE means that it will be a less fierce competitor for new listings and daily trading. While this may benefit my fellow investors and me, it won’t do anything positive for the individual investor and could hurt.

Is asset allocation really about correlation?

At this time of year, institutional investment committees have meetings to decide on the appropriate mix of assets for their portfolio responsibilities. Historically this was a decision made for them in that the initial funds in both the US and UK were balanced funds with a reasonably fixed percentage in bonds and stocks. Balanced Funds and their modernized versions are still an important part of the mutual fund business. The whole excitement about asset allocation was generated by a flawed study of corporate pension funds that showed that funds with a higher percentage in equities did better. For the most part there were only two asset class accounts, bonds and stocks. Later on other classes were added in terms of venture capital, private equity, international securities, commodities, gold, timber and various forms of real estate. Then 2008 came along, with the exception of US Treasury Bonds all the other asset classes declined and often in roughly the same percentage declines.

My approach to this question is first to have an opinion as to how closely the correlations of the asset classes will be over time. Using US mutual fund investment objective averages over ten or more years, most fall within 100-200 basis points in terms of annual returns which suggests to me that on a long term basis it is difficult to pick winning asset classes.

Jason Zwieg’s latest piece in the Wall Street Journal on a young 107 year-young investor and manager, Irving Kahn, takes a different point of view. At his age he is invested approximately 50% in well-researched global small caps and the rest in cash. I have worked with Irving for many years on analyst society activities. He and his late wife Ruth were on an analyst trip with my wife Ruth and me in Italy more than 25 years ago. They both set a blistering pace which was a challenge for us younger types to keep up. Out of all of these experiences, I have developed a real respect for his acumen; besides he is one of the very few people alive that remembers my grandfather’s Wall Street firm. If the committees have Irving’s research skills, I would approve of their allocation if not some other forward looking approach was warranted. We should be watching and listening.


Learn from today’s investors
Most individuals do not have CFA certificates or have logged more than 50 years as an investor, but we can learn from what they are doing as shown in the following examples:

1.    As already indicated, on a personal level they are paying off their debts. If one disregards student loans, consumer debts are declining. Savings as calculated by the government is rising a bit. Individuals are slowly, but I believe surely are going through their own austerity program particularly in terms of being more astute shoppers.
2.    While retirement flows are continuing to benefit from 401(k) and similar salary savings plans, the purchase of mutual funds for individual retirement accounts through directly marketed mutual funds is well off  peak gross sales. This may be in response to investors' own actual or feared employment picture. Possibly they are using what would have gone into their IRAs to reduce their debts or to improve their homes for a future sale.
3.    The most intriguing demographic trend of all is that there is a substantial increase in the number of singles. In many cases these are, according to Gary D. Halbert, white women who have made the decisions at least temporarily to forgo Children and Marriage.

The young appear to be worried about their future and they should be. Our debt burden and less than wise investing will make their lives more difficult. However, after worrying in American fashion, they will find innovative ways to improve their condition. This is one of the major differences between Americans and Europeans.

You can’t agree with everything I have said.  Please discuss your thoughts with me by reply email.

I hope on Tuesday you can relax with family and friends, not worry about these quandaries and that the rest of the week won’t be too eventful.
____________________________________
Did you miss Mike Lipper’s 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.











Sunday, December 16, 2012

Three Bullish Presents for Investors



This is the holiday season of giving presents. I have three ideas as presents for long-term, fiduciary oriented investors. These ideas are both presents for those who may need them as well as thoughts that should have presence in an investor’s mind while looking into the future.

1.       Waiting for the big drop

At a recent dinner with a knowledgeable member of a charity’s investment committee, he indicated that he was out of equities for his personal account which is to fund his living expenses for the next twenty years. Yet he was perfectly comfortable with our use of equity funds for the charity. In terms of estimating future returns, I believe my actuarial friends will see little difference in a twenty year and a theoretical perpetual return for the charity. While I recognize and expect the past price patterns to continue, this suggests that in any ten year period, there will be three 25% declines from peak levels. Further, once a generation there is likely to be a drop of 50%. Having experienced these in the over fifty years I have been an investor as well as serving other investors, I know very few market participants that totally side-stepped these declines. I have found it to be more difficult to accurately guess how big a drop will occur once a decline is underway. I have looked over my notes and recollections of my judgments at or near past bottoms. In every case I convinced myself that a deeper bottom was required to bring the market to a bargain basement level. There were always lower estimates of earnings, unfounded rumors of firms, institutions, or well-known individuals that were in dire straits which would become known soon. As difficult as it is timing a bottom price, the decision to buy early on the way up is even more difficult. Because at the time of the sharp decline there was no market-clearing event which would signify the end of the bear market, most lacked sufficient courage to be an early participant on the rise. Often this rise was described contemporarily as a rise in a bear market caused by successful short covering, not the beginning of a new bull market, or at least a sustained stock market rise.

While some may have all the skills of identifying a major decline in advance, recognizing a bottom, and being an early participant in the recovery rally, along with most other professional investors, I do not have these capabilities.  As with many extreme sports, and other dangerous pursuits, I choose not to engage in market timing strategies.

Perhaps more importantly, there are a number of positive features I see on the investment horizon which can be summarized as follows:

A)      The largest gains come from investing into opportunities when others retreat from challenges.

B)      A careful listening to the press conference given by the Federal Reserve Chairman will reveal his view that the monetary policies being followed have not lowered unemployment (and underemployment by those seeking full time work or discouraged workers). I would suggest other countries’ quantitative easing also has not produced significantly positive results. I believe that market and credit rating declines will eventually curtail the need to sell more government bonds to the central and commercial banks. As usual the private sectors, including individuals, are ahead of the government sectors. While governments are issuing more bonds, the private sectors are deleveraging. In the future we may see the private sectors expanding while the government sectors begin to contract. One of the lessons for an equity investor is to look to the bond market for clues to the future.  Each week Barron’s publishes a confidence indicator that measures the ratio between the yields of mid-quality bonds versus high-quality bonds. The index normally moves 1% or less in a week. When the index goes up, which means mid-quality bonds are going up, it is bullish for stocks. In the last week the indicator rose by +1.4%. Bottom line: I would be leaving cash for equity.

2.       Economic bears like stocks

As is often the case, Jason Zweig in his Wall Street Journal columns, reports on thoughtful pieces he has read. This week he reviewed the opinions of two astute thinkers on the economy who see that the US progress will labor to grow at half our historical rate since the Civil War. Nevertheless, both are investing in high quality US stocks. One of them, Jeremy Grantham of GMO believes that such a portfolio will grow for the next seven to ten years at an annual rate of 5% plus inflation. This is a very satisfactory rate as it exceeds many institutional and endowment minimum spending rates. Many conservatively managed pension funds will be able to meet their needs with such returns.

3.       The biggest potential present from Singapore

One of the investment managers that we use for our accounts is Matthews Asia. As one would expect, they are long-term bullish on Asia. In their well-reasoned November Asia Insight letter, entitled “Emerging Asia’s Rising Productivity,” they focus on the smart way to use labor rather than the initial low wages, which are now rising. Part of the reason for the rising labor productivity is the attitudes of the local governments. The Singapore Department of Manpower has a vision statement which states the department “embodies the aspirations of lifelong learning and the need of Singaporeans to adapt, learn and re-learn skills, attitudes and competencies for lifelong competitiveness.”  Now compare this view to that of the US Department of Labor’s mission statement: “To foster, promote and develop the welfare of the wage earners, job seekers, and retirees of the United States; improve working conditions; advance opportunities for profitable employment; and assure work-related benefits and rights. While we can understand the historical political development of each institution, the US Department of Labor raises lots of hurdles to generating high productivity in the US labor force. Indonesia, which has a population that is much larger than Singapore’s, has a similarly charged Department of Manpower. Some of the US Department of Labor activities are good for labor (and in the long-term, capital), but many are anti-competitive. Maybe we will make some future progress by following the emerging market leaders as we recede.

Investment Implications
·        Don’t attempt to time the market.
·        For the long-term, equities are better than cash.
·        Some of the emerging markets understand how to produce long-term value and selectively belong in many portfolios.

Please share your views.   
_____________________________________________________
Did you miss Mike Lipper’s 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.

Sunday, August 26, 2012

A Winning Equity Team


There is a basic belief that selecting the right talents over an extended period of time will give you a winning result. Building a sound team of stock managers is a similar exercise.

Understanding “The Game”

Investing for the long-term, as many institutional and wealthy clients do, presumes with a high degree of certainty that there will be a series of rising and falling markets. Some moves will be broadly-based, where almost all investments will participate in a correlated decline. There will be other more narrowly-based movements where different sectors move in opposite directions. As with all games that involve people, individual persons, regulators, and governments will do unpredicted things, frequently against their own best interests. Often the best teams can overcome the unpredictable actions of those pesky humans.

Increasing the odds on winning

As much as we think we believe that we have a high degree of certainty about the near-term future, the truth is that the future will unfold in a random manner and pace. Long-term winners that I have known have an uncanny record of surmounting different near-term unexpected problems. One of the ways that they do this on a repeated basis, but not all the time, is the selection of talents for their own teams. They are selective in the talents they bring on board and practice disciplined diversity in their portfolio outlook.

Building your dream team

In the real world of assembling your long-term equity portfolio you should use both your selection and diversification skills. If you were building a non-US football team, or a US baseball team, you would select some strikers and pitchers, but you would also add players with other talents who might not generate the same level of headlines but would be critical to the final tally. Therefore, the critical question is building the right mix.

Investment objective mix

There are no two mutual funds that are exactly alike in each and every aspect. On a global basis, depending on definitions, the world probably has on the order of 100,000 funded products. To make comparisons easier, years ago we adopted a strategy of grouping funds according to investment objectives as we defined them. These allocations to different investment objectives are far from perfect, but work reasonably well. The dominant factors used in the allocation scheme are: selecting by main type of security used, sector, industry, or geographical focus. In some cases the way the funds invested for capital appreciation or income led to their assignment. Today, one can choose between some 200 equity investment objectives. (The selection process for fixed income funds is quite different.) I suggest that there are only two initial categories of funds when building an appropriate investment objective diversification: narrowly and broadly-based.



Narrowly-based funds

These funds are like a late inning relief pitcher in baseball, that with great regularity gets the final three hitters to strike out and preserve the victory. Without such a relief man, in a close game the team will be reliant on their tiring pitching staff. However using such a player for every single game would exhaust his effectiveness. I am a believer in utilizing a limited number of narrowly-based funds within a diversified portfolio. For me, the successful narrowly-based fund will add a large increase to a larger, but currently tiring portfolio. In other words, I am looking for an extreme result. The problem with extreme result-oriented funds is that they regularly are found in the fifth as well the first quintile in terms of short-term results. Some examples might include small country investing; e.g., Egypt, Indonesia or perhaps Korea. Further examples could be highly-selected commodities like sugar or an industry focus such as semiconductor equipment manufacturing or offshore re-insurance. The use of this high octane strategy needs to be cautiously applied and should only be used by a limited number of sophisticated accounts who can accept above-normal current volatility in search for long-term gain.

Broadly-based funds

We used to live and invest in a nicely defined world where our future results were largely the results of our own or direct competitors’ activity. That is not the case today. I would submit that the distinctions between international, global, and domestic companies and their securities are interesting, particularly historically, but have less relevance today. A small Midwestern bank has direct or indirect loan exposure to currency fluctuations, crop prices, shipping rates, and changes of foreign government regulations. The remaining railroads will prosper or not on the exports they carry. Our local supply of clothes and foodstuffs are not solely determined by our own local demand. In today’s environment, I believe a prudent strategy is to invest with managers that are not focused primarily on generating near-term dividends and significant buy-backs. I want to invest with managers that are selecting companies with relatively high returns on assets. Actually I like those which have high returns on gross assets to reduce the impact of the financial engineering of acquisitions. I perceive that new discoveries around the world are offering us to invest in new products and industries that not only solve people’s problems but also represent proprietary types of profit margins to the early movers. In selecting Broadly-based funds, those that focus exclusively on the numbers, current market conditions, and the inabilities of politicians can be good near-term positions. The lack of forward focusing on the part of managers and their investments means that we have to look elsewhere.

Where are you finding the future? Please share your thoughts with me.

In response to a reader's question

One of our regular and very savvy readers raised the question as to redeeming a fund too quickly after a series of poor results. The fund in question is now up 30%+ on a year-to-date basis. Was it a mistake to redeem too early?

With the kind of recovery experienced by this fund, one needs to act carefully. I am delighted for those who stayed with the fund. They deserve to be paid for their roller coaster ride.

We started today’s blog with a brief discussion as to my bias in favor of narrowly-based funds. While not by prospectus, but by practice, this fund was an extreme practitioner of the art form of managing narrowly-focused portfolios and was successful for a number of years. If all other things remained equal I would have recommended delaying redemptions through a normal recovery period. In this particular case things did not remain the same.

The portfolio manager of the fund publicly supported the CEO and stock of a major financial institution. In a discussion with the portfolio manager,  I took a very different point of view. After publicly supporting the stock in question, the portfolio manager sold his large position in the institution.

The recovery in the fund’s net asset value is now being driven by its remaining single largest holding, a very large position in a stock with a sizeable US government overhang. I agree with this particular holding, as I have been an owner for many years in the mentioned stock. If the portfolio was a frozen fund with its small number of securities it probably would have been wise to scale out of the fund. As a fiduciary, for me the changing attitudes and personnel added too much risk. As is often the case I was premature.

How would have you handled this?   

_______________________
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

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