For an excellent article that goes beyond Reinhart & Rogoff's book "This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly", take a look at this link, which is quite good and offers a good prescription for what ails us.
Note: I agree with the "target" of energy policy, but whereas the author believes a form of cap & trade will work, I think that the big infrastructure idea needs to be a comprehensive energy policy, new grid, and massive incentives for all forms of energy to "somehow" create BTU's and get them on the grid. This will create innovation, new ways to find and create energy, create jobs, and ultimately the knowledge we gain can be exported to other countries, delivered by our "services economy".
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Climbing the Wall of Worry: So Bad It's Good
Climbing the Wall of Worry: So Bad It’s Good
With all of the market volatility, a few of our Clients have wondered “what is going on with the market?” The response: “It’s so bad it’s good”. While this sounds like something Yogi Berra would say, people genuinely seem to understand the sentiment immediately. The response sums up investing in general—it takes patience, fortitude, resolve, endurance, and the counterintuitive nerve to buy high quality assets when others are frightened. As we saw in the Fall of 2008 and the Spring of 2009, fear and uncertainty give us low prices. Low prices make us second guess our long term decisions, yet these are the points in time that maximize long term investment returns if they can be capitalized on well.
And a quick note in keeping with volatility: true to form, as this is written just weeks after the close of a terrible third quarter, the stock market has rallied over 10% from the values at the end of Q3 (i.e. the reports you will soon receive “as of” September 30, 2011 are in the rear view mirror).
When PIIGS Fly...
Speaking of Europe, we have entered a new period of fear and uncertainty, revolving around the Eurozone, and the PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain). Couldn’t they have called something less derogatory, like GIIPS, or SPIIGhetti, or SIPIG? A recent piece put out by Stratfor is called “Preparing for Greece’s failure”, and we think it is worth a Google search.
The gist of the analysis is that the Eurozone needs 2 Trillion Euro in place to backstop a Greek departure from the Eurozone. This backstop would be used to shore up the net tangible capital within the European banking system. Their conclusion: Greece won’t be jettisoned until there are at least 2 Trillion Euro in the system.
Just the other day, Angela Merkel of Germany reassured markets that they are working to shore up the banking system, “just in case”. It is anybody’s guess which way the Eurozone issues will go, though there is a fork in the road. As Yogi Berra would say: just take it.
The first avenue in the fork is a really brutal painful abandonment of the Euro as currency, which essentially splits Europe into “northern” and “southern”. What happens in this scenario? The SPIIGhettis split away, revert to their old currencies, and then massively devalue their currencies, wiping away their debts but also wiping out their citizens’ savings. Southern Europe would be on sale, and the Northern bloc of Europe would then swoop in with their strong currencies and buy up Southern Europe. Northern Europe would become economically pinched as their exports become less competitive, and the Southern bloc becomes more competitive. This is ugly, painful and drawn out, and represents a “cliff” event that would create massive uncertainty, and is likely far too abrupt approach for investors, businesses, consumers, and governments to be able to react to with any facility.
The second avenue is more likely, wherein the Northern bloc essentially dictates the terms (at the last minute of each mini-crisis as it the whole thing unfolds) in order to keep the Euro alive. This will also be drawn out, but ultimately less painful. Part of the solution set is essentially the formation of a “real” European Central Government (ECG), not just a European Central Bank, which still has no real teeth. An ECG would obtain buy-in from all parties, and then would be authorized to issue massive quantities of Eurobonds, and also the ability to turn on the printing presses with full authority. This is the most politically viable option, and entails the Europeans performing a more formalized version of Quantitative Easing, but with a couple of Michelin stars thrown in. In short, the less painful path is for them to join the US in the “race to the bottom” in global currencies—print their way out. The second avenue is the “slow bleeding” approach that may allow investors, businesses, consumers, and governments a more gradual solution with plenty of time for all stakeholders to adjust.
Synopsis of last four years, as told to an alien that just landed on Earth:
“A housing bubble fueled by cheap money led to unproductive asset creation and resulted in massive securitization of these assets, which ultimately collapsed and threatened the global banking system. And now we’re paying for it.”
The result of the housing bubble left us with nothing but debt and empty real estate; the result of the internet bubble was an actual “new backbone” that continues to grow and innovate. The challenge for the US economy, and the rest of the globe, is figuring out what to do to be productive and innovative. In the United States, one day people will wake up and say “do we really need 5 million more houses?”, or should we re-direct our resources to something that can pay dividends, like our much-trumpeted idea of pursuing energy non-dependence for the US. Pursuing such an agenda would create millions of new jobs, create a new and innovative energy grid, would pursue all forms of energy creation, and the US could then export this knowledge as “services” to other nations.
Market Environment
This is an environment for short maturity bonds, floating rate funds, high dividend paying companies, and select growth companies. The Bull case is that eventually most of the problems hanging over the markets will be solved (i.e. Eurozone), we will eventually have a rising yield environment, and the nearly $2 Trillion that is sitting in “safe” bond funds will need to find a new home as yields rise and long-bond returns suffer. Stocks have always outpaced inflation over long periods of time, and based upon their current earnings power, this fact may once again be recognized, even if it takes some pain to finally realize it. During this “period of solutions” it is possible that our creditors will demand much higher rates of interest, while also fleeing to gold, silver, and oil as reserve assets. The last time we had a bout of high inflation was in the early 70’s, when we went off the gold standard and had an oil embargo. Gold, commodities, and oil did exceptionally well in that environment. The question is whether any rising yield environment will be gradual in nature, or a shock to the system. A gradually rising rate environment, and frankly any environment that allows companies and consumers time to adjust, is associated historically by rising stock prices and higher aggregate demand. A shock-reset in rates could hurt in the short term but still yield a brighter future with more certainty. For now, the Wall of Worry continues to grind higher. In fact, since 9/30/11, the market has climbed about 14%, though extreme volatility appears here to stay.
Valuations:
We continue to favor stocks that look like bonds and bonds that look like stocks. We prefer to buy the earnings streams of dividend-paying high quality companies at valuations that compensate us for risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, and that pays 3-4% in dividends. This is twice the yield of the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. It’s also much better than a Treasury security, which currently faces equity-type risk in the face of a rising yield environment. With the high grade corporate bond index paying 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with similar or higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds. Additionally, if a fortress company takes a big dip in price due to the whims of the stock market, the reality is that most fortress companies have dividend policies that do not change so rapidly, unless there is a huge fundamental problem at the company (i.e. financial companies post 2008 that were/are scrambling to stay alive). A large health care company, an oil company, and a spirits distributor (as examples) are unlikely to have this problem.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7%). To put it bluntly, we do not trust the government numbers, the Fed, or the Treasury. Rule #1 in bond investing is: get paid, and get your money back at maturity. When we ask the question “Whom do I trust to pay me back?” increasingly the only reliable payers are corporations and sovereign nations that can actually pay their debts (think of resource rich countries like Canada, Norway, and Australia). Corporate debt levels can be measured in a finite number; whereas, government debt levels can be measured in wheelbarrows full of worthless paper.
Government Solutions to Economic Problems
When the government spends more than it takes in through taxes, and creates enormous debts over time, it has several options to “balance the accounts”. It can (1) slash spending, (2) increase revenue by raising taxes, or (3) stiff its creditors.
Many long-term studies show that the U.S. government, regardless of high marginal income tax rates of 80%, or low marginal rates of 25%, only collects about 20% in tax revenues from its citizens. This is a historical fact. The problem is that our government currently spends 25%. Easy math, right? Revenue (20%) – Expenses (25%) = -5%. So the government spends 25% more than it takes in.
Warren Buffett has become famous, again, lately for proposing the “Buffett Rule”, which the Obama Administration and some in Congress seem to like. It would tax those Americans now making more than $1 Million on their W-2 at a higher rate, assuming they don’t end up employing additional tax professionals to get their W-2 under $1 Million.
This is a lot better than going after those formerly-labeled “rich” $250k W-2-ers, and certainly plays better to a certain somebody’s populist base, but…let’s just assume that Mr. Buffett is correct. There were 7.8 Millionaires in the US for the 2009 tax year. Tax them all at the rates being proposed, and the estimates are new “revenue” of $450 Billion per year in tax receipts. The argument is that “well, that millionaire is just hoarding that extra $150,000 so he might as well give it to the government in the form of taxes”. The major problem is this: even using the Buffett Rule, the US is still in the hole to the tune of $1.5 Trillion! And what if half of these people are not “hoarders” but instead want to create new companies, innovate, and create new jobs? That’s $225 Billion that would have been put to productive use and toward job creation. And assuming the millionaires know how to run a business, those jobs would be sustainable, a far cry from “shovel ready” projects that end once the project ends.
MV=PQ
This brings us back to the old Milton Friedman formula yet again: MV=PQ. Money Supply x Velocity of Money = Price Level x Quantity. The only piece herein not working (yet) is Velocity of Money, or “V”. Here’s what’s been happening with V. The banks are sitting on the cash given to them by Fed repurchasing programs to help recapitalize the banks post-2008. There is currently not sufficient borrowing demand for the funds, and the demand that is being met is being lent to those who already have sufficient assets. What we have right now is: too many dollars not-yet chasing too few goods. To have a true “reignition” in the economy a few things must occur: government should rein in spending in a responsible manner in order maintain its credit-worthiness and to defend its citizens, government should initiate incentives to spur business and consumer investment and spending, and importantly government must remove and/or simplify a regulatory environment that is currently counter to the efforts to spur business and consumer activity.
We will also hold forth the intellectual integrity that this could be an incorrect view, and that the counter, Gary Schilling’s deflationary view, is possible. In this view, Europe implodes, destroys global aggregate demand, which distorts the pricing environment downward, which hurts revenues, profits, lowering tax receipts and shrinking all forms of output. The debt has yet to be repaid, and there is less revenue to pay for it, and we go into a sustained Global Depression. However possible this is, we have pointed out since the end of 2008, Google the terms “deflation speech Bernanke 2002” and you will find the equivalent of Knut Rockne’s playbook before the game. Google this if interested. In this speech, when Bernanke was a Fed Governor, he discusses that “inflation is always preferable to deflation”. In other words, increase the money supply, increase the balance sheet, and print out of it (i.e. inflate/debase the currency). Europe has been messaging that they are going to ride the Bernanke Express on this one, so the world “eventually” will have the USA and Eurozone debasing their respective trading bloc currencies, which is the least painful alternative to a failed Euro. And this is why China is so upset with US policy, because the US will pay back its Treasury obligations in increasingly worthless currency, or a “soft default”.
There are three well-known ways to protect yourself from inflation: own energy, own agriculture, and own sound money. We can buy equity in companies that specialize in energy assets or in agricultural assets. We are actively seeking out “trophy assets” that are well-run businesses that are difficult/impossible to replicate, many of which pay dividends, and many of which are necessary for the proper functioning of society. Sound money just means buying gold and silver, and of course there are several ways to do this. Regarding the metals, we have intellectually backed into this position over the last three years, and do not yet see a compelling reason to back away. Whenever a sovereign nation becomes so indebted it can never hope to repay, it inflates (i.e. it prints money, which debases the currency). Remember: inflation and currency debasement share a common truth—a reduction in purchasing power.
Race to the Bottom
Globally we are in a “race to the bottom” in currencies. Central banks that print money are debasing their own currencies, some to remain competitive in terms of exports. But if everyone is debasing and printing money, the relative pain doesn’t look so bad, does it? The truth is that paper currencies, unless backed by real assets and reserves (think gold and oil), are simply fiat and ultimately worthless. When comparing a currency’s purchasing power with the purchasing power of metals or really any commodity, it is clear that the purchasing power of the fiat currencies has dropped dramatically, while the purchasing power of gold or silver has only risen. So what are good alternatives? When we look at this from our perch, the clear alternative is to invest in strong franchise companies that have real, productive assets, pay solid dividends, are growing, and can grow in a rising price environment and that we think can outpace debasement/inflation.
Commodity Price Swings: Why so Crazy?
Commodity prices over the last two months have see-sawed all over the place, beginning with the August lows (of 8/8/11) and have been back and forth amidst all the fear emanating from Europe, as well as from a slowing Chinese growth rate. If the emerging markets’ growth slows, the thinking goes, then demand for commodities will falter. The European fears of a Greek default, or Greece expulsion from the Euro, have also led to fears of a massive slowdown, which would affect the U.S. economy as well—this is the Global Depression/deflation worry (Gary Schilling view). Commodity company stock prices have reflected this worry, and copper in particular broke down, but has rallied back in the last few weeks.
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, particularly high yield, look relatively attractive. We are also finding interesting foreign bond issues (mostly sovereign) for new money that look more attractive than US paper in terms of their ability to pay.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in what we expect to be a rising rate environment. The Fed can control short-term rates, but the market dictates long rates.
Municipal Bonds
CA Municipals (and really any/all municipals) are starting to look interesting again.
New Arrows in Our Quiver
In the last few months, in anticipation of potential Client needs, we have added two new suppliers of research and product offerings that could become part of an investment solution for Clients: Goldman Sachs Asset Management and DFA (Dimensional Fund Advisors). Goldman Sachs is probably a well-known name to you in terms of their research, and they have some interesting alternative product offerings as well. DFA may not be well-known to you— it is a 30 year old firm that specializes in “active indexing” solutions. ACC Investment Management, Inc., an independent, fee-only Registered Investment Advisory firm, now has access to these additional platforms.
Thank you for your continued business and referrals
Please know that we are here to answer your questions, to go over your portfolio positioning in the context of your retirement plans, and to provide a sense of perspective in this market. Investing is a long term endeavor. We hope you enjoy reading our independent Quarterly Commentary as much as we enjoy writing it! Though risks remain, patience will be rewarded.
A.Charles Cattano
ACC INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC.
1325 Howard Avenue PMB #433
Burlingame, CA 94010
ccattano@accimi.net 650-344-1600 www.accimi.net
With all of the market volatility, a few of our Clients have wondered “what is going on with the market?” The response: “It’s so bad it’s good”. While this sounds like something Yogi Berra would say, people genuinely seem to understand the sentiment immediately. The response sums up investing in general—it takes patience, fortitude, resolve, endurance, and the counterintuitive nerve to buy high quality assets when others are frightened. As we saw in the Fall of 2008 and the Spring of 2009, fear and uncertainty give us low prices. Low prices make us second guess our long term decisions, yet these are the points in time that maximize long term investment returns if they can be capitalized on well.
And a quick note in keeping with volatility: true to form, as this is written just weeks after the close of a terrible third quarter, the stock market has rallied over 10% from the values at the end of Q3 (i.e. the reports you will soon receive “as of” September 30, 2011 are in the rear view mirror).
When PIIGS Fly...
Speaking of Europe, we have entered a new period of fear and uncertainty, revolving around the Eurozone, and the PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain). Couldn’t they have called something less derogatory, like GIIPS, or SPIIGhetti, or SIPIG? A recent piece put out by Stratfor is called “Preparing for Greece’s failure”, and we think it is worth a Google search.
The gist of the analysis is that the Eurozone needs 2 Trillion Euro in place to backstop a Greek departure from the Eurozone. This backstop would be used to shore up the net tangible capital within the European banking system. Their conclusion: Greece won’t be jettisoned until there are at least 2 Trillion Euro in the system.
Just the other day, Angela Merkel of Germany reassured markets that they are working to shore up the banking system, “just in case”. It is anybody’s guess which way the Eurozone issues will go, though there is a fork in the road. As Yogi Berra would say: just take it.
The first avenue in the fork is a really brutal painful abandonment of the Euro as currency, which essentially splits Europe into “northern” and “southern”. What happens in this scenario? The SPIIGhettis split away, revert to their old currencies, and then massively devalue their currencies, wiping away their debts but also wiping out their citizens’ savings. Southern Europe would be on sale, and the Northern bloc of Europe would then swoop in with their strong currencies and buy up Southern Europe. Northern Europe would become economically pinched as their exports become less competitive, and the Southern bloc becomes more competitive. This is ugly, painful and drawn out, and represents a “cliff” event that would create massive uncertainty, and is likely far too abrupt approach for investors, businesses, consumers, and governments to be able to react to with any facility.
The second avenue is more likely, wherein the Northern bloc essentially dictates the terms (at the last minute of each mini-crisis as it the whole thing unfolds) in order to keep the Euro alive. This will also be drawn out, but ultimately less painful. Part of the solution set is essentially the formation of a “real” European Central Government (ECG), not just a European Central Bank, which still has no real teeth. An ECG would obtain buy-in from all parties, and then would be authorized to issue massive quantities of Eurobonds, and also the ability to turn on the printing presses with full authority. This is the most politically viable option, and entails the Europeans performing a more formalized version of Quantitative Easing, but with a couple of Michelin stars thrown in. In short, the less painful path is for them to join the US in the “race to the bottom” in global currencies—print their way out. The second avenue is the “slow bleeding” approach that may allow investors, businesses, consumers, and governments a more gradual solution with plenty of time for all stakeholders to adjust.
Synopsis of last four years, as told to an alien that just landed on Earth:
“A housing bubble fueled by cheap money led to unproductive asset creation and resulted in massive securitization of these assets, which ultimately collapsed and threatened the global banking system. And now we’re paying for it.”
The result of the housing bubble left us with nothing but debt and empty real estate; the result of the internet bubble was an actual “new backbone” that continues to grow and innovate. The challenge for the US economy, and the rest of the globe, is figuring out what to do to be productive and innovative. In the United States, one day people will wake up and say “do we really need 5 million more houses?”, or should we re-direct our resources to something that can pay dividends, like our much-trumpeted idea of pursuing energy non-dependence for the US. Pursuing such an agenda would create millions of new jobs, create a new and innovative energy grid, would pursue all forms of energy creation, and the US could then export this knowledge as “services” to other nations.
Market Environment
This is an environment for short maturity bonds, floating rate funds, high dividend paying companies, and select growth companies. The Bull case is that eventually most of the problems hanging over the markets will be solved (i.e. Eurozone), we will eventually have a rising yield environment, and the nearly $2 Trillion that is sitting in “safe” bond funds will need to find a new home as yields rise and long-bond returns suffer. Stocks have always outpaced inflation over long periods of time, and based upon their current earnings power, this fact may once again be recognized, even if it takes some pain to finally realize it. During this “period of solutions” it is possible that our creditors will demand much higher rates of interest, while also fleeing to gold, silver, and oil as reserve assets. The last time we had a bout of high inflation was in the early 70’s, when we went off the gold standard and had an oil embargo. Gold, commodities, and oil did exceptionally well in that environment. The question is whether any rising yield environment will be gradual in nature, or a shock to the system. A gradually rising rate environment, and frankly any environment that allows companies and consumers time to adjust, is associated historically by rising stock prices and higher aggregate demand. A shock-reset in rates could hurt in the short term but still yield a brighter future with more certainty. For now, the Wall of Worry continues to grind higher. In fact, since 9/30/11, the market has climbed about 14%, though extreme volatility appears here to stay.
Valuations:
We continue to favor stocks that look like bonds and bonds that look like stocks. We prefer to buy the earnings streams of dividend-paying high quality companies at valuations that compensate us for risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, and that pays 3-4% in dividends. This is twice the yield of the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. It’s also much better than a Treasury security, which currently faces equity-type risk in the face of a rising yield environment. With the high grade corporate bond index paying 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with similar or higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds. Additionally, if a fortress company takes a big dip in price due to the whims of the stock market, the reality is that most fortress companies have dividend policies that do not change so rapidly, unless there is a huge fundamental problem at the company (i.e. financial companies post 2008 that were/are scrambling to stay alive). A large health care company, an oil company, and a spirits distributor (as examples) are unlikely to have this problem.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7%). To put it bluntly, we do not trust the government numbers, the Fed, or the Treasury. Rule #1 in bond investing is: get paid, and get your money back at maturity. When we ask the question “Whom do I trust to pay me back?” increasingly the only reliable payers are corporations and sovereign nations that can actually pay their debts (think of resource rich countries like Canada, Norway, and Australia). Corporate debt levels can be measured in a finite number; whereas, government debt levels can be measured in wheelbarrows full of worthless paper.
Government Solutions to Economic Problems
When the government spends more than it takes in through taxes, and creates enormous debts over time, it has several options to “balance the accounts”. It can (1) slash spending, (2) increase revenue by raising taxes, or (3) stiff its creditors.
Many long-term studies show that the U.S. government, regardless of high marginal income tax rates of 80%, or low marginal rates of 25%, only collects about 20% in tax revenues from its citizens. This is a historical fact. The problem is that our government currently spends 25%. Easy math, right? Revenue (20%) – Expenses (25%) = -5%. So the government spends 25% more than it takes in.
Warren Buffett has become famous, again, lately for proposing the “Buffett Rule”, which the Obama Administration and some in Congress seem to like. It would tax those Americans now making more than $1 Million on their W-2 at a higher rate, assuming they don’t end up employing additional tax professionals to get their W-2 under $1 Million.
This is a lot better than going after those formerly-labeled “rich” $250k W-2-ers, and certainly plays better to a certain somebody’s populist base, but…let’s just assume that Mr. Buffett is correct. There were 7.8 Millionaires in the US for the 2009 tax year. Tax them all at the rates being proposed, and the estimates are new “revenue” of $450 Billion per year in tax receipts. The argument is that “well, that millionaire is just hoarding that extra $150,000 so he might as well give it to the government in the form of taxes”. The major problem is this: even using the Buffett Rule, the US is still in the hole to the tune of $1.5 Trillion! And what if half of these people are not “hoarders” but instead want to create new companies, innovate, and create new jobs? That’s $225 Billion that would have been put to productive use and toward job creation. And assuming the millionaires know how to run a business, those jobs would be sustainable, a far cry from “shovel ready” projects that end once the project ends.
MV=PQ
This brings us back to the old Milton Friedman formula yet again: MV=PQ. Money Supply x Velocity of Money = Price Level x Quantity. The only piece herein not working (yet) is Velocity of Money, or “V”. Here’s what’s been happening with V. The banks are sitting on the cash given to them by Fed repurchasing programs to help recapitalize the banks post-2008. There is currently not sufficient borrowing demand for the funds, and the demand that is being met is being lent to those who already have sufficient assets. What we have right now is: too many dollars not-yet chasing too few goods. To have a true “reignition” in the economy a few things must occur: government should rein in spending in a responsible manner in order maintain its credit-worthiness and to defend its citizens, government should initiate incentives to spur business and consumer investment and spending, and importantly government must remove and/or simplify a regulatory environment that is currently counter to the efforts to spur business and consumer activity.
We will also hold forth the intellectual integrity that this could be an incorrect view, and that the counter, Gary Schilling’s deflationary view, is possible. In this view, Europe implodes, destroys global aggregate demand, which distorts the pricing environment downward, which hurts revenues, profits, lowering tax receipts and shrinking all forms of output. The debt has yet to be repaid, and there is less revenue to pay for it, and we go into a sustained Global Depression. However possible this is, we have pointed out since the end of 2008, Google the terms “deflation speech Bernanke 2002” and you will find the equivalent of Knut Rockne’s playbook before the game. Google this if interested. In this speech, when Bernanke was a Fed Governor, he discusses that “inflation is always preferable to deflation”. In other words, increase the money supply, increase the balance sheet, and print out of it (i.e. inflate/debase the currency). Europe has been messaging that they are going to ride the Bernanke Express on this one, so the world “eventually” will have the USA and Eurozone debasing their respective trading bloc currencies, which is the least painful alternative to a failed Euro. And this is why China is so upset with US policy, because the US will pay back its Treasury obligations in increasingly worthless currency, or a “soft default”.
There are three well-known ways to protect yourself from inflation: own energy, own agriculture, and own sound money. We can buy equity in companies that specialize in energy assets or in agricultural assets. We are actively seeking out “trophy assets” that are well-run businesses that are difficult/impossible to replicate, many of which pay dividends, and many of which are necessary for the proper functioning of society. Sound money just means buying gold and silver, and of course there are several ways to do this. Regarding the metals, we have intellectually backed into this position over the last three years, and do not yet see a compelling reason to back away. Whenever a sovereign nation becomes so indebted it can never hope to repay, it inflates (i.e. it prints money, which debases the currency). Remember: inflation and currency debasement share a common truth—a reduction in purchasing power.
Race to the Bottom
Globally we are in a “race to the bottom” in currencies. Central banks that print money are debasing their own currencies, some to remain competitive in terms of exports. But if everyone is debasing and printing money, the relative pain doesn’t look so bad, does it? The truth is that paper currencies, unless backed by real assets and reserves (think gold and oil), are simply fiat and ultimately worthless. When comparing a currency’s purchasing power with the purchasing power of metals or really any commodity, it is clear that the purchasing power of the fiat currencies has dropped dramatically, while the purchasing power of gold or silver has only risen. So what are good alternatives? When we look at this from our perch, the clear alternative is to invest in strong franchise companies that have real, productive assets, pay solid dividends, are growing, and can grow in a rising price environment and that we think can outpace debasement/inflation.
Commodity Price Swings: Why so Crazy?
Commodity prices over the last two months have see-sawed all over the place, beginning with the August lows (of 8/8/11) and have been back and forth amidst all the fear emanating from Europe, as well as from a slowing Chinese growth rate. If the emerging markets’ growth slows, the thinking goes, then demand for commodities will falter. The European fears of a Greek default, or Greece expulsion from the Euro, have also led to fears of a massive slowdown, which would affect the U.S. economy as well—this is the Global Depression/deflation worry (Gary Schilling view). Commodity company stock prices have reflected this worry, and copper in particular broke down, but has rallied back in the last few weeks.
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, particularly high yield, look relatively attractive. We are also finding interesting foreign bond issues (mostly sovereign) for new money that look more attractive than US paper in terms of their ability to pay.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in what we expect to be a rising rate environment. The Fed can control short-term rates, but the market dictates long rates.
Municipal Bonds
CA Municipals (and really any/all municipals) are starting to look interesting again.
New Arrows in Our Quiver
In the last few months, in anticipation of potential Client needs, we have added two new suppliers of research and product offerings that could become part of an investment solution for Clients: Goldman Sachs Asset Management and DFA (Dimensional Fund Advisors). Goldman Sachs is probably a well-known name to you in terms of their research, and they have some interesting alternative product offerings as well. DFA may not be well-known to you— it is a 30 year old firm that specializes in “active indexing” solutions. ACC Investment Management, Inc., an independent, fee-only Registered Investment Advisory firm, now has access to these additional platforms.
Thank you for your continued business and referrals
Please know that we are here to answer your questions, to go over your portfolio positioning in the context of your retirement plans, and to provide a sense of perspective in this market. Investing is a long term endeavor. We hope you enjoy reading our independent Quarterly Commentary as much as we enjoy writing it! Though risks remain, patience will be rewarded.
A.Charles Cattano
ACC INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC.
1325 Howard Avenue PMB #433
Burlingame, CA 94010
ccattano@accimi.net 650-344-1600 www.accimi.net
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Mr. Market's Mood Swings
The last week of trading has been quite remarkable in its major gyrations. It all started Thursday on renewed fears in Europe, carrying into Friday. Then on Saturday S&P downgraded the US from AAA to AA credit rating. We knew Monday would be ugly, and boy was it, down about -620 that day on the Dow. Relief rally Tuesday, followed by a major intraday swoon, ending with a strong rally after some comments by the Fed. Yesterday, Wed, we lost another -500. And today, Thursday, we have another monster rally of over 500 points.
So what did we do here at ACC? Mostly buying, every down day, particularly on Monday with the 600 point decline. We had raised cash levels for the most part in late April. From a technical perspective, it appears we need to close above 11,238 on the Dow to hold. In our last letter (see "Which Printer Do You Like More" post), we remarked that the "Dow Theory" needed to be confirmed to go higher (i.e. DJIA had to confirm the Transports and Utilities to move higher). It failed to do so, and the 50-day crossed under the 200-day line in what is known as a Death Cross. Now we have rallied higher, and again, technically, we think we need to re-establish the "line" at 11,238. We are 20 points away...so close...yet so far.
If we reach, hold, and clear this level of 11,238 it could bode well in the short term, though fundamental problems in Europe and the US will continue to surface on the Fear meter due to structural debt/entitlement issues. The ECB must hold the line and backstop Italy/Spain/Greece/Ireland/Portugal...if they fail on any ONE of these, they fail on all of them...Then look for the Fed to backstop the ECB...
Robert Mundell, Nobel-prize-winning economist, and Father of the Euro, was also Father of the idea of an International Monetary Unity (IMU). While we may not "formally" ever do this, given global animosity toward the US$ from China/Russia, et. al., it is a strong probability that someday, somehow, we "informally" end up with an IMU if the Fed ends up backstopping the ECB, and as multiple different central banks attempt to print their way out of trouble. We either end up with a "basket of currencies" approach (IMU), or perhaps equally probably, the US$ retains its reserve status...but the jury is out.
So what did we do here at ACC? Mostly buying, every down day, particularly on Monday with the 600 point decline. We had raised cash levels for the most part in late April. From a technical perspective, it appears we need to close above 11,238 on the Dow to hold. In our last letter (see "Which Printer Do You Like More" post), we remarked that the "Dow Theory" needed to be confirmed to go higher (i.e. DJIA had to confirm the Transports and Utilities to move higher). It failed to do so, and the 50-day crossed under the 200-day line in what is known as a Death Cross. Now we have rallied higher, and again, technically, we think we need to re-establish the "line" at 11,238. We are 20 points away...so close...yet so far.
If we reach, hold, and clear this level of 11,238 it could bode well in the short term, though fundamental problems in Europe and the US will continue to surface on the Fear meter due to structural debt/entitlement issues. The ECB must hold the line and backstop Italy/Spain/Greece/Ireland/Portugal...if they fail on any ONE of these, they fail on all of them...Then look for the Fed to backstop the ECB...
Robert Mundell, Nobel-prize-winning economist, and Father of the Euro, was also Father of the idea of an International Monetary Unity (IMU). While we may not "formally" ever do this, given global animosity toward the US$ from China/Russia, et. al., it is a strong probability that someday, somehow, we "informally" end up with an IMU if the Fed ends up backstopping the ECB, and as multiple different central banks attempt to print their way out of trouble. We either end up with a "basket of currencies" approach (IMU), or perhaps equally probably, the US$ retains its reserve status...but the jury is out.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Q2 End 2011-- Which Printer Do You Like More?
Valuations:
We continue to favor stocks that look like bonds and bonds that look like stocks. We prefer to buy the earnings streams of dividend-paying high quality companies at valuations that compensate us for risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, and that pays 3-4% in dividends. This is twice the yield of the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. It’s also much better than a Treasury security, which currently faces equity-type risk in the face of a rising yield environment. With the high grade corporate bond index paying 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with even higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7%). To put it bluntly, we do not trust the government numbers, the Fed, or the Treasury. Rule #1 in bond investing is: get paid, and get your money back at maturity. When we ask the question “Whom do I trust to pay me back?” increasingly the only reliable payers are corporations and sovereign nations that can actually pay their debts (think of resource rich countries like Canada, Norway, Australia). A corporate debt level can be measured in a finite number; whereas, the US government debt level is getting so large that soon we will need to reference it using Latin phrases, like “ad infinitum”and “ad nauseum”.
Government Solutions to Economic Problems
When the government spends more than it takes in through taxes, and creates enormous debts over time, it has several options to “balance the accounts”. It can:
1) Slash spending, which reduces the money flowing out, thereby allowing more money to be directed at repaying debt
2) Increase revenue by raising taxes, which increases the money flowing in, thereby allowing more money to be directed at repaying debt
3) Simply stiff its creditors, either through an overt message of “I’m not paying” (default) or the more subtle approach known as inflation.
Many long-term studies show that the U.S. government, regardless of high marginal income tax rates of 80%, or low marginal rates of 25%, only collects about 20% in tax revenues from its citizens. This is a historical fact. The problem is that our government currently spends 25%. Easy math, right? Revenue (20%) – Expenses (25%) = -5%. So the government spends 25% more than it takes in.
Now hark back to the prior Quarterly letter, where we mentioned the best Google search ever regarding “Bernanke deflation speech 2002”. Knowing what we know, that then Fed Governor Bernanke is a big proponent that “inflation is always preferable to deflation”, the only conceivable answer is the latter half of #3. Now Fed Chairman Bernanke has been printing money and doubling the US money supply in order to create inflation (the alternative to deflation). By keeping the Fed funds rate artificially low, asset prices (stocks) have risen, and ostensibly the Fed’s logic is that higher asset values will help to reignite the economy. So far, the higher asset part is working, and the reignition part is not.
This quote is from the book The Warren Buffett Way (1994 edition):
“Buffett recognizes that the easiest way for a country to manage its deficits is to debase these claims through higher inflation…Accordingly the faith that foreign investors have placed in the ability of the United States to pay future claims may be misguided. When claim checks held by foreigners rise to an unmanageable level, the temptation to inflate may be irresistible.”
The credit of the United States, represented by the value of a 20-year Treasury bond (TLT) versus the major alternatives to money, as compared to energy as represented by coal (KOL), agriculture (DBA), and hard money as represented by silver (SLV) is now in major decline. In other words the values of the main alternatives to the dollar – energy, food, and real money – are soaring.
MV=PQ
This brings us back to the old Milton Friedman formula yet again: MV=PQ. Money Supply x Velocity of Money = Price Level x Quantity. The only piece herein not working (yet) is Velocity of Money, or “V”. Here’s what’s been happening with V. The banks are sitting on the cash given to them by Fed repurchasing programs to help recapitalize the banks post-2008. The banks are making a huge spread of profits just by sitting on the funds and investing in different types of bonds, and there is currently not sufficient borrowing demand for the funds. What we have now is: too many dollars not yet chasing too few goods. To have a true “reignition” in the economy a few things must occur: government should rein in spending in a responsible manner in order maintain its credit-worthiness and to defend its citizens, government should initiate incentives to spur business and consumer investment and spending, and importantly government must remove and/or simplify a regulatory environment that is currently counter to the efforts to spur business and consumer activity.
In Washington DC, the political environment is a zoo. Right now debate rages in terms of the debt ceiling, spending cuts, entitlement reform, and taxes. Republicans and Democrats have a chasm to cross, and neither wants to yield ground politically in order to frame the next election cycle. A move to the center or center-right on fiscal and entitlement reform, Federal expense restraint, and a permanently low tax structure (personal and business taxes) would position Obama for a second term, would reignite the economy, would ensure America’s credit rating, and could earn him historical kudos. He could take the ammunition away from his opponents with a political deftness resembling jujitsu. The only question is: will he do it?
There are three well-known ways to protect yourself from inflation:
own energy, own agriculture, and own sound money. We can buy equity in companies that specialize in energy assets or in agricultural assets. We are actively seeking out “trophy assets” that are well-run businesses that are difficult/impossible to replicate, many of which pay dividends, and many of which are necessary for the proper functioning of society. Sound money just means buying gold and silver, and of course there are several ways to do this. By the way, we are not “metal bugs”; we have intellectually backed into this position over the last two years, and do not yet see a compelling reason to back away. Whenever a sovereign nation becomes so indebted it can never hope to repay, it inflates (i.e. it prints money, which debases the currency). Remember: inflation and currency debasement share a common truth—a reduction in purchasing power.
Which Printer Do You Like More?
Globally we are in a “race to the bottom” in currencies. Which printer do you like more? Here at home we are debasing our currency via the printing presses, and so is the rest of the world (for the most part). This entire scenario is a “coordinated” global response to the last few years. Central banks that print money, including the ECB via the Euro, are debasing their own currencies, some to remain competitive in terms of exports. But if everyone is debasing and printing money, the relative pain doesn’t look so bad, does it? This is what politicians like to tell us. The truth is that paper currencies, unless backed by real assets and reserves (think gold and oil), are simply fiat and ultimately worthless. When comparing a currency’s purchasing power with the purchasing power of metals or really ANY commodity, it is clear that the purchasing power of the fiat currencies has dropped dramatically, while the purchasing power of gold or silver has only risen. When we look at this from 30,000 feet, the clear alternative is to invest in strong franchise companies that have real assets, pay solid dividends, are growing, and can grow in a rising price environment and that we think can outpace debasement/inflation.
Greenspan/Guidotti Rule
Greenspan? Greenspan? Oh yeah, remember him? Well, Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti came up with this great rule a long time ago to describe how to identify when a country’s currency is at risk, and at what level a country should be considered a bad credit risk. The simple formula is that a country must have enough reserves (think oil and gold) to be able to pay off any short term impending debts that must be repaid. The United States currently has about $2.2 Trillion that must be repaid over the next 2-3 years. And what is the value our Current Reserves of gold and oil (as collateral)? About $700 Billion. You are reading this correctly. The U.S. currently can collateralize about 32% of what it owes in the very short term. So who’s the Banana Republic now?
The U.S. government has the luxury of having the world's reserve currency, which just means we can print the money we need to buy any commodity we need and repay all of our obligations legally. The Argentines can't just go print dollars. We're the only ones who can do that. So it puts us in a strong position, but it's a double-edged sword. Because we have the power, we can get away with managing much, much larger amounts of debt. The problem is, getting away with managing it doesn't necessarily mean that having it is good for us. We believe that having debts like we have it is very, very bad for us. Total debt in the United States today is about 400% of GDP. It's obvious to anyone that is not sustainable. So the question becomes not how do we keep employment high… not how do we keep interest rates low… but how do we avoid a collapse of our economy because of the debt load.
When PIIGS Fly
Across the pond a big game of “I’m not going to blink”, followed by “Darn it, I blinked” is going on. The PIIGS problem they like to call it (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain). Ireland just had its debt rating cut to “junk” status. Here’s the gigantic problem over there; the large banks of Europe own a lot of Greek debt, as well as debt in the others. For now we will limit this to Greece. Germany and the ECB have already succumbed to the blinking noted above, so they are going to give Greece some form of a pass, or soft default, by allowing them to essentially renegotiate the debt payments and extend the term on the debt (similar to allowing someone to pay their 30 year mortgage over 40 years). The problem is that if/when this actually materializes, the large banks that hold the Greek debt will have to write off a big chunk as an “impaired asset” charge. Why is this a problem? Let’s just assume that it was a half-off sale on the debt; this write-off would reduce the amount of capital in the largest banks of Europe by 25%. Some of these banks won’t survive. Then we’re looking at Lehman Brothers all over again in terms of counter-party risk. Banks won’t trust other banks, and the whole thing spirals out of control. And remember, that’s just in dealing with Greece, the only place in the world where “ochi”(“o-khee”) means “no”, and “neh” means “yes”. Perhaps we should impart recent history, and then marry it to the history of Mr. J.P. Morgan, who stopped the Banking Panic of 1906, in order that they (and perhaps we) can stop the bleeding at the Greek border.
Are Commodities Really Going Higher?
Commodities prices have been much higher, particularly in the food sector. Some think that weaker U.S. exchange rate couldn't explain the rise in food prices. Chinese demand and the growth of the middle class in Latin America, the thinking goes, are all far more important factors. It’s all supply and demand, right?
Nope. The single most important variable in the price of anything in the world is the value of the U.S. dollar. As the world's reserve currency, its value is what everything else is measured against, and what commodities are priced in.
Look at these charts. They're the prices of corn and wheat over the last 10 years. Except, instead of being measured in dollars, these commodities are presented here in terms of gold.
We are not having a food crisis. We are debasing the dollar, as we have called out over the last two years. In terms of gold, agricultural commodities prices have fallen by about 50% over the last 10 years. Obviously it's not the price of food that's the problem. It's the collapsing purchasing power of the U.S. dollar that's led us to this situation. The real question we should be discussing isn't food. It's money. And more specifically, the lack of a sound world reserve currency. But it’s easier for politicians to print money and pass a loss of purchasing power to its citizens than it is to make the tough choices. The United States is the only government in the world that can actually afford to underwrite the world's banking system. That's not because we have any real savings, it's only because we control the world's reserve currency. It's a paper standard, which means we can always print more of it.
Climbing the Wall of Worry
“Gosh, what a depressing newsletter. What else have you got for me?” Currently the Dow Jones was nearing 12810, until the employment report came out. The old Dow Theory would be in place if the DJIA were to close above 12810, since the Dow Transports and Dow Utilities indices will have been confirmed by the Industrials. If this occurs, it is a strong signal of a continued bull market.
The employment report was dismal, though the PPI report was pretty good. Real estate and banking are hurting, but corporate America has shown us big profits. Uncertainties abound domestically and globally. And thus, we have all the conditions ripe for the old adage: “the bull market climbs a wall of worry”.
The Bear case is that our problems won’t or can’t be solved. The Bull case is that they can and will be solved, in a rising yield environment, and that the nearly $2 Trillion that is sitting in “safe” bond funds will need to find a new home as yields rise and long-bond returns returns suffer. This is an environment for short maturity bonds and high dividend paying stocks. Stocks have always outpaced inflation over long periods of time, and based upon their current earnings power, this fact may once again be recognized, even if it takes some pain to finally realize it. During this “period of solutions” it is possible that our creditors will demand much higher rates of interest, while also fleeing to gold, silver, and oil as reserve assets. The last time we had a bout of high inflation was in the early 70’s, when we went off the gold standard and had an oil embargo. Gold, commodities, and oil did exceptionally well in that environment. The question is whether any rising yield environment will be gradual in nature, or a shock to the system. A gradually rising rate environment, and frankly any environment that allows companies and consumers time to adjust, is associated historically by rising stock prices and higher aggregate demand. A shock-reset in rates could hurt in the short term but still yield a brighter future with more certainty. For now, let the Wall of Worry continue higher. Let the Dow Theory hopefully be confirmed over the coming months. We are cautiously Bullish, and won’t turn Bearish until everyone else becomes too optimistic.
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, both investment grade and high yield, look relatively attractive. We are also finding interesting foreign bond issues (mostly sovereign) for new money that look more attractive than US paper in terms of their “ability to pay”.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in what we expect to be a rising rate environment. The Fed can control short-term rates, but the market dictates long rates.
Municipal Bonds
CA Municipals (and really any/all municipals) are starting to look interesting again.
We continue to favor stocks that look like bonds and bonds that look like stocks. We prefer to buy the earnings streams of dividend-paying high quality companies at valuations that compensate us for risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, and that pays 3-4% in dividends. This is twice the yield of the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. It’s also much better than a Treasury security, which currently faces equity-type risk in the face of a rising yield environment. With the high grade corporate bond index paying 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with even higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7%). To put it bluntly, we do not trust the government numbers, the Fed, or the Treasury. Rule #1 in bond investing is: get paid, and get your money back at maturity. When we ask the question “Whom do I trust to pay me back?” increasingly the only reliable payers are corporations and sovereign nations that can actually pay their debts (think of resource rich countries like Canada, Norway, Australia). A corporate debt level can be measured in a finite number; whereas, the US government debt level is getting so large that soon we will need to reference it using Latin phrases, like “ad infinitum”and “ad nauseum”.
Government Solutions to Economic Problems
When the government spends more than it takes in through taxes, and creates enormous debts over time, it has several options to “balance the accounts”. It can:
1) Slash spending, which reduces the money flowing out, thereby allowing more money to be directed at repaying debt
2) Increase revenue by raising taxes, which increases the money flowing in, thereby allowing more money to be directed at repaying debt
3) Simply stiff its creditors, either through an overt message of “I’m not paying” (default) or the more subtle approach known as inflation.
Many long-term studies show that the U.S. government, regardless of high marginal income tax rates of 80%, or low marginal rates of 25%, only collects about 20% in tax revenues from its citizens. This is a historical fact. The problem is that our government currently spends 25%. Easy math, right? Revenue (20%) – Expenses (25%) = -5%. So the government spends 25% more than it takes in.
Now hark back to the prior Quarterly letter, where we mentioned the best Google search ever regarding “Bernanke deflation speech 2002”. Knowing what we know, that then Fed Governor Bernanke is a big proponent that “inflation is always preferable to deflation”, the only conceivable answer is the latter half of #3. Now Fed Chairman Bernanke has been printing money and doubling the US money supply in order to create inflation (the alternative to deflation). By keeping the Fed funds rate artificially low, asset prices (stocks) have risen, and ostensibly the Fed’s logic is that higher asset values will help to reignite the economy. So far, the higher asset part is working, and the reignition part is not.
This quote is from the book The Warren Buffett Way (1994 edition):
“Buffett recognizes that the easiest way for a country to manage its deficits is to debase these claims through higher inflation…Accordingly the faith that foreign investors have placed in the ability of the United States to pay future claims may be misguided. When claim checks held by foreigners rise to an unmanageable level, the temptation to inflate may be irresistible.”
The credit of the United States, represented by the value of a 20-year Treasury bond (TLT) versus the major alternatives to money, as compared to energy as represented by coal (KOL), agriculture (DBA), and hard money as represented by silver (SLV) is now in major decline. In other words the values of the main alternatives to the dollar – energy, food, and real money – are soaring.
MV=PQ
This brings us back to the old Milton Friedman formula yet again: MV=PQ. Money Supply x Velocity of Money = Price Level x Quantity. The only piece herein not working (yet) is Velocity of Money, or “V”. Here’s what’s been happening with V. The banks are sitting on the cash given to them by Fed repurchasing programs to help recapitalize the banks post-2008. The banks are making a huge spread of profits just by sitting on the funds and investing in different types of bonds, and there is currently not sufficient borrowing demand for the funds. What we have now is: too many dollars not yet chasing too few goods. To have a true “reignition” in the economy a few things must occur: government should rein in spending in a responsible manner in order maintain its credit-worthiness and to defend its citizens, government should initiate incentives to spur business and consumer investment and spending, and importantly government must remove and/or simplify a regulatory environment that is currently counter to the efforts to spur business and consumer activity.
In Washington DC, the political environment is a zoo. Right now debate rages in terms of the debt ceiling, spending cuts, entitlement reform, and taxes. Republicans and Democrats have a chasm to cross, and neither wants to yield ground politically in order to frame the next election cycle. A move to the center or center-right on fiscal and entitlement reform, Federal expense restraint, and a permanently low tax structure (personal and business taxes) would position Obama for a second term, would reignite the economy, would ensure America’s credit rating, and could earn him historical kudos. He could take the ammunition away from his opponents with a political deftness resembling jujitsu. The only question is: will he do it?
There are three well-known ways to protect yourself from inflation:
own energy, own agriculture, and own sound money. We can buy equity in companies that specialize in energy assets or in agricultural assets. We are actively seeking out “trophy assets” that are well-run businesses that are difficult/impossible to replicate, many of which pay dividends, and many of which are necessary for the proper functioning of society. Sound money just means buying gold and silver, and of course there are several ways to do this. By the way, we are not “metal bugs”; we have intellectually backed into this position over the last two years, and do not yet see a compelling reason to back away. Whenever a sovereign nation becomes so indebted it can never hope to repay, it inflates (i.e. it prints money, which debases the currency). Remember: inflation and currency debasement share a common truth—a reduction in purchasing power.
Which Printer Do You Like More?
Globally we are in a “race to the bottom” in currencies. Which printer do you like more? Here at home we are debasing our currency via the printing presses, and so is the rest of the world (for the most part). This entire scenario is a “coordinated” global response to the last few years. Central banks that print money, including the ECB via the Euro, are debasing their own currencies, some to remain competitive in terms of exports. But if everyone is debasing and printing money, the relative pain doesn’t look so bad, does it? This is what politicians like to tell us. The truth is that paper currencies, unless backed by real assets and reserves (think gold and oil), are simply fiat and ultimately worthless. When comparing a currency’s purchasing power with the purchasing power of metals or really ANY commodity, it is clear that the purchasing power of the fiat currencies has dropped dramatically, while the purchasing power of gold or silver has only risen. When we look at this from 30,000 feet, the clear alternative is to invest in strong franchise companies that have real assets, pay solid dividends, are growing, and can grow in a rising price environment and that we think can outpace debasement/inflation.
Greenspan/Guidotti Rule
Greenspan? Greenspan? Oh yeah, remember him? Well, Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti came up with this great rule a long time ago to describe how to identify when a country’s currency is at risk, and at what level a country should be considered a bad credit risk. The simple formula is that a country must have enough reserves (think oil and gold) to be able to pay off any short term impending debts that must be repaid. The United States currently has about $2.2 Trillion that must be repaid over the next 2-3 years. And what is the value our Current Reserves of gold and oil (as collateral)? About $700 Billion. You are reading this correctly. The U.S. currently can collateralize about 32% of what it owes in the very short term. So who’s the Banana Republic now?
The U.S. government has the luxury of having the world's reserve currency, which just means we can print the money we need to buy any commodity we need and repay all of our obligations legally. The Argentines can't just go print dollars. We're the only ones who can do that. So it puts us in a strong position, but it's a double-edged sword. Because we have the power, we can get away with managing much, much larger amounts of debt. The problem is, getting away with managing it doesn't necessarily mean that having it is good for us. We believe that having debts like we have it is very, very bad for us. Total debt in the United States today is about 400% of GDP. It's obvious to anyone that is not sustainable. So the question becomes not how do we keep employment high… not how do we keep interest rates low… but how do we avoid a collapse of our economy because of the debt load.
When PIIGS Fly
Across the pond a big game of “I’m not going to blink”, followed by “Darn it, I blinked” is going on. The PIIGS problem they like to call it (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain). Ireland just had its debt rating cut to “junk” status. Here’s the gigantic problem over there; the large banks of Europe own a lot of Greek debt, as well as debt in the others. For now we will limit this to Greece. Germany and the ECB have already succumbed to the blinking noted above, so they are going to give Greece some form of a pass, or soft default, by allowing them to essentially renegotiate the debt payments and extend the term on the debt (similar to allowing someone to pay their 30 year mortgage over 40 years). The problem is that if/when this actually materializes, the large banks that hold the Greek debt will have to write off a big chunk as an “impaired asset” charge. Why is this a problem? Let’s just assume that it was a half-off sale on the debt; this write-off would reduce the amount of capital in the largest banks of Europe by 25%. Some of these banks won’t survive. Then we’re looking at Lehman Brothers all over again in terms of counter-party risk. Banks won’t trust other banks, and the whole thing spirals out of control. And remember, that’s just in dealing with Greece, the only place in the world where “ochi”(“o-khee”) means “no”, and “neh” means “yes”. Perhaps we should impart recent history, and then marry it to the history of Mr. J.P. Morgan, who stopped the Banking Panic of 1906, in order that they (and perhaps we) can stop the bleeding at the Greek border.
Are Commodities Really Going Higher?
Commodities prices have been much higher, particularly in the food sector. Some think that weaker U.S. exchange rate couldn't explain the rise in food prices. Chinese demand and the growth of the middle class in Latin America, the thinking goes, are all far more important factors. It’s all supply and demand, right?
Nope. The single most important variable in the price of anything in the world is the value of the U.S. dollar. As the world's reserve currency, its value is what everything else is measured against, and what commodities are priced in.
Look at these charts. They're the prices of corn and wheat over the last 10 years. Except, instead of being measured in dollars, these commodities are presented here in terms of gold.
We are not having a food crisis. We are debasing the dollar, as we have called out over the last two years. In terms of gold, agricultural commodities prices have fallen by about 50% over the last 10 years. Obviously it's not the price of food that's the problem. It's the collapsing purchasing power of the U.S. dollar that's led us to this situation. The real question we should be discussing isn't food. It's money. And more specifically, the lack of a sound world reserve currency. But it’s easier for politicians to print money and pass a loss of purchasing power to its citizens than it is to make the tough choices. The United States is the only government in the world that can actually afford to underwrite the world's banking system. That's not because we have any real savings, it's only because we control the world's reserve currency. It's a paper standard, which means we can always print more of it.
Climbing the Wall of Worry
“Gosh, what a depressing newsletter. What else have you got for me?” Currently the Dow Jones was nearing 12810, until the employment report came out. The old Dow Theory would be in place if the DJIA were to close above 12810, since the Dow Transports and Dow Utilities indices will have been confirmed by the Industrials. If this occurs, it is a strong signal of a continued bull market.
The employment report was dismal, though the PPI report was pretty good. Real estate and banking are hurting, but corporate America has shown us big profits. Uncertainties abound domestically and globally. And thus, we have all the conditions ripe for the old adage: “the bull market climbs a wall of worry”.
The Bear case is that our problems won’t or can’t be solved. The Bull case is that they can and will be solved, in a rising yield environment, and that the nearly $2 Trillion that is sitting in “safe” bond funds will need to find a new home as yields rise and long-bond returns returns suffer. This is an environment for short maturity bonds and high dividend paying stocks. Stocks have always outpaced inflation over long periods of time, and based upon their current earnings power, this fact may once again be recognized, even if it takes some pain to finally realize it. During this “period of solutions” it is possible that our creditors will demand much higher rates of interest, while also fleeing to gold, silver, and oil as reserve assets. The last time we had a bout of high inflation was in the early 70’s, when we went off the gold standard and had an oil embargo. Gold, commodities, and oil did exceptionally well in that environment. The question is whether any rising yield environment will be gradual in nature, or a shock to the system. A gradually rising rate environment, and frankly any environment that allows companies and consumers time to adjust, is associated historically by rising stock prices and higher aggregate demand. A shock-reset in rates could hurt in the short term but still yield a brighter future with more certainty. For now, let the Wall of Worry continue higher. Let the Dow Theory hopefully be confirmed over the coming months. We are cautiously Bullish, and won’t turn Bearish until everyone else becomes too optimistic.
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, both investment grade and high yield, look relatively attractive. We are also finding interesting foreign bond issues (mostly sovereign) for new money that look more attractive than US paper in terms of their “ability to pay”.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in what we expect to be a rising rate environment. The Fed can control short-term rates, but the market dictates long rates.
Municipal Bonds
CA Municipals (and really any/all municipals) are starting to look interesting again.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Q1-end 2011 Commentary: Just-In-Time Treasury
Values: We continue to favor stocks that look like bonds and bonds that look like stocks. We prefer to buy the earnings streams of dividend-paying high quality companies at valuations that compensate us for risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, which only yields 1.5-2%. Any stock that pays 3-4% in dividends is yielding twice as much as the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. With the high grade corporate bond index paying 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with even higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7%). To put it bluntly, we do not trust the government numbers, the Fed, or the Treasury. Rule #1 in bond investing is: get paid, and get your money back at maturity. When we ask the question “Whom do I trust to pay me back?” increasingly the only reliable payers are corporations and sovereign nations that can actually pay their debts (think of resource rich countries like Canada, Norway, Australia). A corporate debt level can be measured in a finite number; whereas, the US government debt level is getting so large that soon we will need to measure it in light years.
Interesting Note: In March 2011, Bill Gross of PIMCO announced that PIMCO’s Total Return Fund is 100% “out” of Treasury securities as of January 2011.
Inflation Is Still A Monetary Phenomenon!
Milton Friedman said it best: “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”. MV=PQ is the equation, and it essentially breaks down into a simple explanation such as “the more money is printed or created by the government, the higher the price level (prices) will be”. In other words, inflation.
Re-flation of Assets
For two years we have posited that in a reflationary period it is quite possible for all types of assets to go up in value, and further, that commodities and stocks could decouple in favor of commodities and commodity-related enterprises. In such an environment, it is important to remember “why we invest”, which is to outpace inflation.
Just-in-Time Treasury
Remember “just-in-time inventory” efforts used by US corporations to compete with Japanese companies in the ‘90s? As a result, how many days worth of food inventory exists at your local grocery store? 3-4 days. Now, along this line of thinking, how many days of “money inventory” the US government is working on before it needs to “restock the shelves”? 4 days. The U.S. government has printed more money and taken on more debt than it can ever repay. Whenever a sovereign nation becomes so indebted it can never hope to repay, it inflates (i.e. it prints money, which debases the currency). Remember: inflation and currency debasement share a common truth—a reduction in purchasing power.
There are three well-known ways to protect yourself from inflation: own energy, own agriculture, and own sound money. We can buy equity in companies that specialize in energy assets or in agricultural assets. Sound money just means buying gold and silver, and of course there are several ways to do this. For new purchases, we are eyeing silver, which has a long term ratio relationship to gold of 1:16. Based on current prices, with silver bouncing between $20-30/oz., either gold will fall dramatically, or silver will rise dramatically. Based on the current “perfect storm” of reasons to own metals, we think silver could move closer to $100/oz., though the journey could be volatile. By the way, we are not “metal bugs”; we have intellectually backed into this position over the last two years, and do not yet see a compelling reason to back away… since our last quarterly letter, silver prices have broached $40/oz and are at a 31-year high…
What is Quantitative Easing? There's some controversy about it, and it's poorly understood. Quantitative easing, according to the Federal Reserve, is simply monetary policy in another form. And it's simply a way to manipulate interest rates lower to give a boost to the economy. Unfortunately, that's not the case at all because what quantitative easing actually is doing is covering the funding gap of the U.S. government. Total domestic savings in the United States is about $600 billion. The annual fiscal deficit of the U.S. government (that's only one borrower... admittedly it's the largest borrower in the economy, but still only one borrower) is $1.2 trillion, give or take.
So the difference between what we can save as an economy and what we have to spend in stimulus as an economy is about $600 billion. Not surprisingly, that's exactly the amount of money the Federal Reserve says we require in quantitative easing. So it's printing up $600 billion and giving it to the Treasury. The Treasury therefore doesn't have to issue those bonds on the open market. If the Treasury had to actually auction an additional $1.2 trillion worth of debt instead of selling it directly to the Fed, the market prices of U.S. government bonds would be vastly lower. There isn't enough global demand to meet the U.S. government's funding needs.
This is a big problem going forward because once people get used to these low interest rates, a lot of businesses and employment is going to come to depend on them. But the more money the Fed prints to buy them, the more inflationary pressures will be created. So we are creating a conundrum—the U.S. needs to print more money to keep interest rates low, but the more money it prints, the more likely it is that interest rates are going to go much, much higher.
Once the Fed stops printing money and stops buying Treasury bonds, what will be the real market for interest rates? It could be much, much higher. And that could set the economy up for a real big interest-rate shock. And so one of our concerns is that once you start this quantitative easing, you can't stop, because the economic consequences of stopping are too severe. And the only reason we're able to do any quantitative easing is because the dollar is the world's reserve currency.
If we were another country and were printing this much money, the consequences of doing so would be much more immediate. For example, if Argentina decides it's going to double the amount of money outstanding in Argentina, its peso would be devalued immediately, and it would be obvious to everyone.
The U.S. government has the luxury of having the world's reserve currency, which just means we can print the money we need to buy any commodity we need and repay all of our obligations legally. The Argentines can't just go print dollars. We're the only ones who can do that. So it puts us in a strong position, but it's a double-edged sword.
Because we have the power, we can get away with managing much, much larger amounts of debt. The problem is, getting away with managing it doesn't necessarily mean that having it is good for us. We believe that having debts like we have it is very, very bad for us. Total debt in the United States today is about 400% of GDP. It's obvious to anyone that is not sustainable. So the question becomes not how do we keep employment high… not how do we keep interest rates low… but how do we avoid a collapse of our economy because of the debt load.
This quote is from the book The Warren Buffett Way:
“Buffett recognizes that the easiest way for a country to manage its deficits is to debase these claims through higher inflation…Accordingly the faith that foreign investors have placed in the ability of the United States to pay future claims may be misguided. When claim checks held by foreigners rise to an unmanageable level, the temptation to inflate may be irresistible.” (from 1994!)
What you see above is the credit of the United States, represented by the value of a 20-year Treasury bond (TLT) versus the major alternatives to money: energy as represented by coal (KOL), agriculture (DBA), and hard money as represented by silver (SLV). U.S. credit is now in decline, while the value of the main alternatives to the dollar – energy, food, and real money – are soaring.
Best Google Search Ever
We are including this again in case you missed it. Back at the end of 2008, we Googled “Bernanke deflation speech” and found a rather amazing speech he gave as a Fed Governor in 2002. The entire discussion revolved around his knowledge of the Great Depression, what we would do if ever faced with such a situation again, etc. He mentions explicitly in this speech that the U.S. would print money in order to debase the currency, thus paying back creditors in ever-cheaper dollars. He also explicitly sites that inflation of any sort is always preferable to deflation. He also specifically mentions the as-yet (at that time) untried but theoretical Quantitative Easing. Ahem. So what we discovered at the end of 2008 was the future Play Book from a former Fed Governor with academic expertise in the Great Depression who just now happened to be the Fed Chairman. This is why we have been adding to natural gas, oil, agricultural, metals holdings over the last two years with great confidence. We also know from this that “Helicopter Ben” will do his utmost to prevent deflation. The big picture environment is debasement of the currency and inflation.
In periods of inflation, long bonds will get decimated, and we’re already seeing a spike in yields on the 10-year Treasury, part of which we now know if from Bill Gross’ selling out of his entire US Treasury position.
Commodities From a Different Point of View
Commodities prices have been much higher, particularly in the food sector. Some think that weaker U.S. exchange rate couldn't explain the rise in food prices. Chinese demand and the growth of the middle class in Latin America, the thinking goes, are all far more important factors. It’s all supply and demand, right?
Negative. The single most important variable in the price of anything in the world is the value of the U.S. dollar. As the world's reserve currency, its value is what everything else is measured against, and what commodities are priced in.
Look at these charts. They're the prices of corn and wheat over the last 10 years. Except, instead of being measured in dollars, these commodities are presented here in terms of gold.
There's no food crisis. There's a dollar crisis. We are debasing the dollar, as we have called out over the last two years. In terms of gold, agricultural commodities prices have fallen by about 50% over the last 10 years. Obviously it's not the price of food that's the problem. It's the collapsing purchasing power of the U.S. dollar that's led us to this situation. The real question we should be discussing isn't food. It's money. And more specifically, the lack of a sound world reserve currency. But it’s easier for politicians to print money and pass a loss of purchasing power to its citizens than it is to make the tough choices.
The United States is the only government in the world that can actually afford to underwrite the world's banking system. That's not because we have any real savings, it's only because we control the world's reserve currency. It's a paper standard, which means we can always print more of it.
US Budget and Fiscal Direction
There is a chance, if the US budget continues to spiral out of fiscal control, that the U.S. Federal Reserve will lose all its credibility as it tries to help finance U.S. government deficit spending while containing massive losses in the global banking system. Our creditors will likely demand much higher rates of interest, while also fleeing to gold, silver, and oil as reserve assets. The last time we had a bout of high inflation was in the early 70’s, when we went off the gold standard and had an oil embargo. Gold, commodities, and oil did exceptionally well in that environment.
Mortgages
Mortgage rates spiked up in November and December of 2010, in response to being correlated with US Treasury yields, which ticked up significantly in yield. This occurred because investors are beginning to smell inflation, thus investors are beginning to demand yield in exchange for higher perceived risk to principal (if inflation rises).
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, both investment grade and high yield, look relatively attractive. We are also finding interesting foreign bond issues (mostly sovereign) for new money that look more attractive than US paper in terms of their “ability to pay”.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in this environment.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7%). To put it bluntly, we do not trust the government numbers, the Fed, or the Treasury. Rule #1 in bond investing is: get paid, and get your money back at maturity. When we ask the question “Whom do I trust to pay me back?” increasingly the only reliable payers are corporations and sovereign nations that can actually pay their debts (think of resource rich countries like Canada, Norway, Australia). A corporate debt level can be measured in a finite number; whereas, the US government debt level is getting so large that soon we will need to measure it in light years.
Interesting Note: In March 2011, Bill Gross of PIMCO announced that PIMCO’s Total Return Fund is 100% “out” of Treasury securities as of January 2011.
Inflation Is Still A Monetary Phenomenon!
Milton Friedman said it best: “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”. MV=PQ is the equation, and it essentially breaks down into a simple explanation such as “the more money is printed or created by the government, the higher the price level (prices) will be”. In other words, inflation.
Re-flation of Assets
For two years we have posited that in a reflationary period it is quite possible for all types of assets to go up in value, and further, that commodities and stocks could decouple in favor of commodities and commodity-related enterprises. In such an environment, it is important to remember “why we invest”, which is to outpace inflation.
Just-in-Time Treasury
Remember “just-in-time inventory” efforts used by US corporations to compete with Japanese companies in the ‘90s? As a result, how many days worth of food inventory exists at your local grocery store? 3-4 days. Now, along this line of thinking, how many days of “money inventory” the US government is working on before it needs to “restock the shelves”? 4 days. The U.S. government has printed more money and taken on more debt than it can ever repay. Whenever a sovereign nation becomes so indebted it can never hope to repay, it inflates (i.e. it prints money, which debases the currency). Remember: inflation and currency debasement share a common truth—a reduction in purchasing power.
There are three well-known ways to protect yourself from inflation: own energy, own agriculture, and own sound money. We can buy equity in companies that specialize in energy assets or in agricultural assets. Sound money just means buying gold and silver, and of course there are several ways to do this. For new purchases, we are eyeing silver, which has a long term ratio relationship to gold of 1:16. Based on current prices, with silver bouncing between $20-30/oz., either gold will fall dramatically, or silver will rise dramatically. Based on the current “perfect storm” of reasons to own metals, we think silver could move closer to $100/oz., though the journey could be volatile. By the way, we are not “metal bugs”; we have intellectually backed into this position over the last two years, and do not yet see a compelling reason to back away… since our last quarterly letter, silver prices have broached $40/oz and are at a 31-year high…
What is Quantitative Easing? There's some controversy about it, and it's poorly understood. Quantitative easing, according to the Federal Reserve, is simply monetary policy in another form. And it's simply a way to manipulate interest rates lower to give a boost to the economy. Unfortunately, that's not the case at all because what quantitative easing actually is doing is covering the funding gap of the U.S. government. Total domestic savings in the United States is about $600 billion. The annual fiscal deficit of the U.S. government (that's only one borrower... admittedly it's the largest borrower in the economy, but still only one borrower) is $1.2 trillion, give or take.
So the difference between what we can save as an economy and what we have to spend in stimulus as an economy is about $600 billion. Not surprisingly, that's exactly the amount of money the Federal Reserve says we require in quantitative easing. So it's printing up $600 billion and giving it to the Treasury. The Treasury therefore doesn't have to issue those bonds on the open market. If the Treasury had to actually auction an additional $1.2 trillion worth of debt instead of selling it directly to the Fed, the market prices of U.S. government bonds would be vastly lower. There isn't enough global demand to meet the U.S. government's funding needs.
This is a big problem going forward because once people get used to these low interest rates, a lot of businesses and employment is going to come to depend on them. But the more money the Fed prints to buy them, the more inflationary pressures will be created. So we are creating a conundrum—the U.S. needs to print more money to keep interest rates low, but the more money it prints, the more likely it is that interest rates are going to go much, much higher.
Once the Fed stops printing money and stops buying Treasury bonds, what will be the real market for interest rates? It could be much, much higher. And that could set the economy up for a real big interest-rate shock. And so one of our concerns is that once you start this quantitative easing, you can't stop, because the economic consequences of stopping are too severe. And the only reason we're able to do any quantitative easing is because the dollar is the world's reserve currency.
If we were another country and were printing this much money, the consequences of doing so would be much more immediate. For example, if Argentina decides it's going to double the amount of money outstanding in Argentina, its peso would be devalued immediately, and it would be obvious to everyone.
The U.S. government has the luxury of having the world's reserve currency, which just means we can print the money we need to buy any commodity we need and repay all of our obligations legally. The Argentines can't just go print dollars. We're the only ones who can do that. So it puts us in a strong position, but it's a double-edged sword.
Because we have the power, we can get away with managing much, much larger amounts of debt. The problem is, getting away with managing it doesn't necessarily mean that having it is good for us. We believe that having debts like we have it is very, very bad for us. Total debt in the United States today is about 400% of GDP. It's obvious to anyone that is not sustainable. So the question becomes not how do we keep employment high… not how do we keep interest rates low… but how do we avoid a collapse of our economy because of the debt load.
This quote is from the book The Warren Buffett Way:
“Buffett recognizes that the easiest way for a country to manage its deficits is to debase these claims through higher inflation…Accordingly the faith that foreign investors have placed in the ability of the United States to pay future claims may be misguided. When claim checks held by foreigners rise to an unmanageable level, the temptation to inflate may be irresistible.” (from 1994!)
What you see above is the credit of the United States, represented by the value of a 20-year Treasury bond (TLT) versus the major alternatives to money: energy as represented by coal (KOL), agriculture (DBA), and hard money as represented by silver (SLV). U.S. credit is now in decline, while the value of the main alternatives to the dollar – energy, food, and real money – are soaring.
Best Google Search Ever
We are including this again in case you missed it. Back at the end of 2008, we Googled “Bernanke deflation speech” and found a rather amazing speech he gave as a Fed Governor in 2002. The entire discussion revolved around his knowledge of the Great Depression, what we would do if ever faced with such a situation again, etc. He mentions explicitly in this speech that the U.S. would print money in order to debase the currency, thus paying back creditors in ever-cheaper dollars. He also explicitly sites that inflation of any sort is always preferable to deflation. He also specifically mentions the as-yet (at that time) untried but theoretical Quantitative Easing. Ahem. So what we discovered at the end of 2008 was the future Play Book from a former Fed Governor with academic expertise in the Great Depression who just now happened to be the Fed Chairman. This is why we have been adding to natural gas, oil, agricultural, metals holdings over the last two years with great confidence. We also know from this that “Helicopter Ben” will do his utmost to prevent deflation. The big picture environment is debasement of the currency and inflation.
In periods of inflation, long bonds will get decimated, and we’re already seeing a spike in yields on the 10-year Treasury, part of which we now know if from Bill Gross’ selling out of his entire US Treasury position.
Commodities From a Different Point of View
Commodities prices have been much higher, particularly in the food sector. Some think that weaker U.S. exchange rate couldn't explain the rise in food prices. Chinese demand and the growth of the middle class in Latin America, the thinking goes, are all far more important factors. It’s all supply and demand, right?
Negative. The single most important variable in the price of anything in the world is the value of the U.S. dollar. As the world's reserve currency, its value is what everything else is measured against, and what commodities are priced in.
Look at these charts. They're the prices of corn and wheat over the last 10 years. Except, instead of being measured in dollars, these commodities are presented here in terms of gold.
There's no food crisis. There's a dollar crisis. We are debasing the dollar, as we have called out over the last two years. In terms of gold, agricultural commodities prices have fallen by about 50% over the last 10 years. Obviously it's not the price of food that's the problem. It's the collapsing purchasing power of the U.S. dollar that's led us to this situation. The real question we should be discussing isn't food. It's money. And more specifically, the lack of a sound world reserve currency. But it’s easier for politicians to print money and pass a loss of purchasing power to its citizens than it is to make the tough choices.
The United States is the only government in the world that can actually afford to underwrite the world's banking system. That's not because we have any real savings, it's only because we control the world's reserve currency. It's a paper standard, which means we can always print more of it.
US Budget and Fiscal Direction
There is a chance, if the US budget continues to spiral out of fiscal control, that the U.S. Federal Reserve will lose all its credibility as it tries to help finance U.S. government deficit spending while containing massive losses in the global banking system. Our creditors will likely demand much higher rates of interest, while also fleeing to gold, silver, and oil as reserve assets. The last time we had a bout of high inflation was in the early 70’s, when we went off the gold standard and had an oil embargo. Gold, commodities, and oil did exceptionally well in that environment.
Mortgages
Mortgage rates spiked up in November and December of 2010, in response to being correlated with US Treasury yields, which ticked up significantly in yield. This occurred because investors are beginning to smell inflation, thus investors are beginning to demand yield in exchange for higher perceived risk to principal (if inflation rises).
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, both investment grade and high yield, look relatively attractive. We are also finding interesting foreign bond issues (mostly sovereign) for new money that look more attractive than US paper in terms of their “ability to pay”.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in this environment.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Corporate Free Cash Flows are High
Recently posed Question:
Why do you favor U.S. equities, when bonds and emerging markets are doing well?
Answer:
When I see 10% free cash flow in a time when yields on Treasuries are at 3%-3½%—and if I have any faith in management that they won’t take that free cash flow and pour it down a rat hole—10% looks a whole lot better to me than 3½%, especially if such companies are doing business in areas that are growing.
Why do you favor U.S. equities, when bonds and emerging markets are doing well?
Answer:
When I see 10% free cash flow in a time when yields on Treasuries are at 3%-3½%—and if I have any faith in management that they won’t take that free cash flow and pour it down a rat hole—10% looks a whole lot better to me than 3½%, especially if such companies are doing business in areas that are growing.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
End of Q3 2010 Commentary
Market Snapshot
We experienced a roller coaster, with a small correction in August, followed by what turned out to be one of the best September’s on record. Earnings have been good, though we have much mixed data, and are stuck in a “jobless recovery”. The government tells us that the recession ended last July, but Warren Buffett disagrees. Hmmm? The government also likes to tells us that prices are under control, but when we look at the CPI we are supposed to look at it “ex-food, ex-fuel”… On the optimistic side, much of the September rally has been attributed to a likely changing of the guard in Washington DC. A recent poll shows that 85% of the population is “angry” with the economy—never good for the incumbents. This is from Phil Gramm:
Let’s just hope that prescriptions by any political “new guard” don’t precipitate any major policy missteps. Investors have continued to pile into equities, with cash coming off the sidelines from money market funds, as well as a robust outflow of funds from the Bond markets into Equities. We continue to selectively make purchases in areas that appear undervalued and underappreciated for their earnings stability, necessity, and stable of products.
As an example of our risk-adjusted approach to equities, we have favored purchases in oil and oil drillers; for example, such companies trade at just over 9 times earnings, which is about half of the broader stock market multiple of 15-20 times earnings. We feel that such an example plays well on a bottom-up company analysis, on a top-down global macro analysis, on a global demand basis, on a currency basis (if the dollar weakens), and on a “black swan event” basis (Middle East instability). Further, if the economy weakens, oil prices are likely to stay in a $65-85 range; if the economy continues to expand, the range could reach $100 again. Here in early October in fact, oil has reached $80/barrel, and the Obama Administration just removed the moratorium on oil drillers in the Gulf—all positives for this sector.
Buy Stocks that Look Like Bonds and Bonds that Look Like Stocks
What do we mean by this? Simply, for new money purchases we are actively screening for equity valuations trading for 7-12x earnings, with dividend yields between 3-6% as an added bonus if we can get it. By buying the earnings stream of a high quality company at these valuations, we are much more certain in our investment thesis in terms of risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, which only yields 1.5-2%. So any stock that pays 3-4% at a minimum is yielding twice as much as the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. With the high grade corporate bond index paying between 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with even higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7-8%). Why? Because we don’t trust the government, to put it bluntly. This mindless money-printing should lead all investors to ask the question: who do I trust more to pay me back? Warren Buffett or the USA? Increasingly the answer is corporate America, since we can easily examine a corporate balance sheet and determine the percentage of the company that is financed by debt. In a word, debt at the corporate level is a finite number; whereas government debt is dangerously in the other direction. Considering that the 10-year Treasury pays only 2.5%, and in the context of our view that inflation will eventually come home to roost, any holders of Treasury securities will lose badly to inflation or erosion of capital.
Often it takes time for the market to capture the intrinsic value of securities. While there are those who “believe” in the EMH (Efficient Market Hypothesis), we note that it is extremely important to realize that an “efficient” market doesn’t mean the market is always “rational”; in fact the inverse is true. “Efficiency” means that the market will efficiently produce a price, matching a buyer with a seller. “Efficient” pricing led to extremely high short-term valuations in 1999/2000, and extremely low short-term valuations in March 2009—but was it rational long term?
Inflation Is Still A Monetary Phenomenon!
Milton Friedman said it best: “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”. MV=PQ is the equation, and it essentially breaks down into a simple explanation such as “the more money is printed or created by the government, the higher the price level (prices) will be”. In other words, inflation. There has been discussion that increasing inflation will reduce unemployment; however Milton Friedman’s work in 1968 explained why any gain in employment would be temporary—it would last only so long as people underestimated the rate of inflation!
Looking at the Fed’s rather aggressively attempts at reflation, there is some concern now that the Fed may not be sparking the “good” inflation that is caused by strong demand and reduced slack in the economy, but rather the “bad” inflation that behaves more like a tax hike. The Fed is hoping that the wealth effect produced by a rising stock market will offset the concerns. The Fed’s policies produce asset classes that are re-flated due to a commensurate newfound liquidity creation of dollars and Treasuries via debt monetization (i.e. using one credit card to pay off another). The Fed has signaled that it again may resort to Quantitative Easing (being called QE2). This should keep a lid on mortgage rates (for now), but at what future cost to the economy is anyone’s guess…
Re-flation of Assets
The economic debate has centered on deflation versus inflation. Based upon a fiat currency (our currency has been this way since we went off the gold standard), inflation is always preferable to deflation. Deflationary risks are to be avoided if at all possible, and by this measure the Fed seems to be succeeding.
In a reflationary period it is quite possible for all types of assets to go up in value, and then based upon this 2011/2012 time frame, commodities and stocks could decouple in favor of commodities and commodity-related enterprises. In such an environment, it is important to remember “why we invest”, which is to outpace inflation. If the stock market goes up 30% but oil and other commodities go up 60%, you will have wanted more exposure to those sectors within the market.
In a long-term inflationary environment, we expect that foreign currencies may also be useful vehicles, but not as clearly as precious metals and commodities. The reason is that the U.S. is certainly not the only country demonstrating open-checkbook monetary and fiscal policy here. That means that currency positions largely represent the choice of which currency is "less bad." It's quite likely that hard assets such as precious metals and other commodities will advance relative to a wide range of currencies, beginning in the second half of this decade (which is another way of saying that we would expect inflation to be largely a global phenomenon). Conversely, while some currencies will most probably depreciate less than others against a fixed basket of commodities (i.e. exchange rates between different currencies will fluctuate even in a global inflation), those choices may turn out to be more subtle.
In short, nearly all developed economies are behaving badly in terms of fiscal and monetary discipline. We do expect that there will be relative valuation differences in currencies and policies that will provide a basis for currency positions as we gradually transition from a low-inflation world eager for safe-havens to a post-credit crisis inflationary outcome several years from now. But the most likely beneficiaries (and the securities that we would be inclined to accumulate on significant deflation fears), are likely to be commodities, precious metals and TIPS. As usual, we'll respond to the data as it emerges, but the foregoing is a reflection of where we would expect the opportunities to emerge. The recent TIPS auction produced a negative yield for the first time ever… bolstering the case for inflation over deflation.
History As Prequel
On a historical basis, every major stock market peak of the 20th Century was followed by a crash in the U.S. dollar five years later. People who kept their savings in dollars saw the purchasing power of their savings shrink substantially. For example, four years after the peak of 1929, FDR closed the banks and made it illegal for private citizens to own gold. In January 1934—five years after the bubble—he devalued the dollar, crushing people’s savings. Commodity prices had triple-digit rises in the mid-1930s and speculators once again made a fortune. The same thing happened five years after the market peaked in the late 1960s. Five years later, Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard (this time for good). Commodity prices soared for the next ten years, with the price of gold reaching $850/oz by the time it was over. Fast forward—the stock market popped in March 2000, and five years later in the Spring of 2005, the bull market in commodities was on. Oil went from $40 to $140; gold went from $400 to $1000/oz. We just had another peak in the stock market in October 2007. Based upon this precedent, we could foresee a raging bull market in commodities (due to a falling US dollar value, big inflation, or both) somewhere between mid-2011 and the fall of 2012. This is the risk, and the opportunity.
Positioning Globally for Any Environment
The sectors we like most are commodity-related equities, including oil, coal, mining, agriculture, metals; we also like select healthcare, medical device, and biotech companies as well as a few select technology names that exhibit reasonable valuations (Growth At a Reasonable Price, GARP). The reasoning for our commodities-related/oil/metals bent is many-fold: 1) they are needed , (2) they appear undervalued and are economically sensitive; if they drop due to a weaker environment it shouldn’t be disastrous due to their inherent value, and if the market goes up, they go up too, (3) commodities are priced in US$, so if the dollar goes down, it takes more US$ to buy them, meaning the producers of these commodities will have higher earnings, (4) during inflationary periods they tend to hold up the best, (5) if we experience a currency devaluation for whatever reason (and inflation is but another means of achieving this), see #1-4. So we are adding positions that can withstand gale force winds based on macroeconomics and/or deliver strong earnings. Additionally, the recent news that China’s Yuan is floating higher adds to the demand for commodities.
Currencies
Increasingly we are hearing about a troubled dollar, but the truth is that there is a global “race to the bottom” in currencies. Governments are printing money to inflate their way out of the global meltdown. And while some politicians are trying to put new tooth into the old Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of the 1930’s (you probably think we’re joking, but we are not), the truth is that we are in an Economic War of Protectionism which is going at full throttle—countries with cheaper currencies are hoping to benefit growth of exports in order to grow their top line GDP numbers. But at what cost? It’s all an illusion to make it appear that things are better; the reality is that many countries are beginning to discuss a global currency alternative, or IMU (International Monetary Unit)—by the way this was a long time prediction by Nobel-prize winning economist Robert Mundell, who also predicted the rise of the Euro, says of the very unstable relationship between the euro-dollar rate “[this is a] terrible things for the world economy. We’ve never been in this unstable position in the entire currency history of 3,000 years”… what could transpire in the future that leads us to the IMU? An important question to contemplate, and one to which the price of gold may be sending us an answer.
Gold
Irving Fisher, economist of the 1920’s whose ideas were overshadowed by John Meynard Keynes, is the original proponent of a strong dollar backed by commodities.
If the Fed would have listened to gold (or the nominal GDP model) over the past 15 years, the US would probably not be in the mess it is in today. Gold prices fell from $400 per ounce to $255 an ounce between 1996 and 1999. This signaled deflation, but the Fed chose to ignore the signal and raised interest rates anyway in 1998 and 1999. Deflation, recession and a stock market crash were the result.
In the wake of the stock market crash, the Fed started cutting rates because it feared deflation. Gold started to rise and by late 2003 it was back above $400/oz. But the Fed held rates at 1% anyway, which created a housing bubble. When that bubble burst, the Fed started cutting rates again and gold prices have now moved to more than $1300/oz. At this point, one would think the Fed would pause before pumping even more money into the system and targeting higher inflation.
But it isn’t. The Fed continues to hold interest rates at zero, proposes another round of “quantitative easing” and plans to target 2% inflation. All because it won’t listen to gold and it’s unable to see that banks are afraid to use the money the Fed is pumping in because, down the road, the Fed will be forced to take it out or face serious inflation.
That’s what gold is saying. By signaling that it won’t quit anytime soon, the Fed is trying to force banks to change their behavior. If it works, look out for inflation to reach multiples of 2% in the years ahead. The Fed hasn’t been successful yet, when it ignores gold and commodity prices.
Mortgages
If you have not done so, take advantage of still-historically low 30 year fixed mortgage rates. Recently the 30 year fixed mortgage dipped to about a 60-year low. It’s still cheap money, and it should be considered a very temporary “gift” from the Fed. The Fed is re-upping its bet of Quantitative Easing (buying mortgage backed securities on the yield curve to artificially keep mortgage rates low). Take advantage of this now, especially if you currently hold an adjustable rate mortgage. This gift, if you decide not to take advantage of it, will self-destruct within 24 months…
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, both investment grade and high yield, look relatively attractive. In fact high grade corporate bonds are now trading on a near-equal basis with Treasury securities, meaning that sovereign debt is trading on credit-worthiness and balance sheet strength (instead of on ability to tax). As far as we know, this has never occurred before in history. Well, after all, who would you trust more to pay back a loan right now? Warren Buffett or the U.S. government? We’d choose Buffett.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in this environment. TIPS offer some inflation protection, though recent auctions have produced negative real yields since investors are becomingly increasingly convinced that inflation is coming.
CA Municipal Bonds
The CA political atmosphere is heating up, with lots of talk; hopefully the “winners” can actually deliver on their rhetoric in terms of fixing the state’s woeful financial condition. The problems are big, but as a great politician once said: “the answers aren’t easy, but they are simple.” Please make your vote heard on November 2, unless you have already changed your legal residency to Nevada.
We experienced a roller coaster, with a small correction in August, followed by what turned out to be one of the best September’s on record. Earnings have been good, though we have much mixed data, and are stuck in a “jobless recovery”. The government tells us that the recession ended last July, but Warren Buffett disagrees. Hmmm? The government also likes to tells us that prices are under control, but when we look at the CPI we are supposed to look at it “ex-food, ex-fuel”… On the optimistic side, much of the September rally has been attributed to a likely changing of the guard in Washington DC. A recent poll shows that 85% of the population is “angry” with the economy—never good for the incumbents. This is from Phil Gramm:
Let’s just hope that prescriptions by any political “new guard” don’t precipitate any major policy missteps. Investors have continued to pile into equities, with cash coming off the sidelines from money market funds, as well as a robust outflow of funds from the Bond markets into Equities. We continue to selectively make purchases in areas that appear undervalued and underappreciated for their earnings stability, necessity, and stable of products.
As an example of our risk-adjusted approach to equities, we have favored purchases in oil and oil drillers; for example, such companies trade at just over 9 times earnings, which is about half of the broader stock market multiple of 15-20 times earnings. We feel that such an example plays well on a bottom-up company analysis, on a top-down global macro analysis, on a global demand basis, on a currency basis (if the dollar weakens), and on a “black swan event” basis (Middle East instability). Further, if the economy weakens, oil prices are likely to stay in a $65-85 range; if the economy continues to expand, the range could reach $100 again. Here in early October in fact, oil has reached $80/barrel, and the Obama Administration just removed the moratorium on oil drillers in the Gulf—all positives for this sector.
Buy Stocks that Look Like Bonds and Bonds that Look Like Stocks
What do we mean by this? Simply, for new money purchases we are actively screening for equity valuations trading for 7-12x earnings, with dividend yields between 3-6% as an added bonus if we can get it. By buying the earnings stream of a high quality company at these valuations, we are much more certain in our investment thesis in terms of risk. In other words, we are looking to buy an earnings stream for ½ to ¾ of the valuation placed on the broader market, which only yields 1.5-2%. So any stock that pays 3-4% at a minimum is yielding twice as much as the S&P 500 with ½ to ¾ of the price risk. With the high grade corporate bond index paying between 4-5% yields, it becomes clear that if we can find great companies with even higher payout attributes, we are buying stocks that resemble bonds.
To flip the equation, in the bond market we are looking for high grade corporate bonds (4-5%) and “vanilla flavored” high yield bonds (7-8%). Why? Because we don’t trust the government, to put it bluntly. This mindless money-printing should lead all investors to ask the question: who do I trust more to pay me back? Warren Buffett or the USA? Increasingly the answer is corporate America, since we can easily examine a corporate balance sheet and determine the percentage of the company that is financed by debt. In a word, debt at the corporate level is a finite number; whereas government debt is dangerously in the other direction. Considering that the 10-year Treasury pays only 2.5%, and in the context of our view that inflation will eventually come home to roost, any holders of Treasury securities will lose badly to inflation or erosion of capital.
Often it takes time for the market to capture the intrinsic value of securities. While there are those who “believe” in the EMH (Efficient Market Hypothesis), we note that it is extremely important to realize that an “efficient” market doesn’t mean the market is always “rational”; in fact the inverse is true. “Efficiency” means that the market will efficiently produce a price, matching a buyer with a seller. “Efficient” pricing led to extremely high short-term valuations in 1999/2000, and extremely low short-term valuations in March 2009—but was it rational long term?
Inflation Is Still A Monetary Phenomenon!
Milton Friedman said it best: “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”. MV=PQ is the equation, and it essentially breaks down into a simple explanation such as “the more money is printed or created by the government, the higher the price level (prices) will be”. In other words, inflation. There has been discussion that increasing inflation will reduce unemployment; however Milton Friedman’s work in 1968 explained why any gain in employment would be temporary—it would last only so long as people underestimated the rate of inflation!
Looking at the Fed’s rather aggressively attempts at reflation, there is some concern now that the Fed may not be sparking the “good” inflation that is caused by strong demand and reduced slack in the economy, but rather the “bad” inflation that behaves more like a tax hike. The Fed is hoping that the wealth effect produced by a rising stock market will offset the concerns. The Fed’s policies produce asset classes that are re-flated due to a commensurate newfound liquidity creation of dollars and Treasuries via debt monetization (i.e. using one credit card to pay off another). The Fed has signaled that it again may resort to Quantitative Easing (being called QE2). This should keep a lid on mortgage rates (for now), but at what future cost to the economy is anyone’s guess…
Re-flation of Assets
The economic debate has centered on deflation versus inflation. Based upon a fiat currency (our currency has been this way since we went off the gold standard), inflation is always preferable to deflation. Deflationary risks are to be avoided if at all possible, and by this measure the Fed seems to be succeeding.
In a reflationary period it is quite possible for all types of assets to go up in value, and then based upon this 2011/2012 time frame, commodities and stocks could decouple in favor of commodities and commodity-related enterprises. In such an environment, it is important to remember “why we invest”, which is to outpace inflation. If the stock market goes up 30% but oil and other commodities go up 60%, you will have wanted more exposure to those sectors within the market.
In a long-term inflationary environment, we expect that foreign currencies may also be useful vehicles, but not as clearly as precious metals and commodities. The reason is that the U.S. is certainly not the only country demonstrating open-checkbook monetary and fiscal policy here. That means that currency positions largely represent the choice of which currency is "less bad." It's quite likely that hard assets such as precious metals and other commodities will advance relative to a wide range of currencies, beginning in the second half of this decade (which is another way of saying that we would expect inflation to be largely a global phenomenon). Conversely, while some currencies will most probably depreciate less than others against a fixed basket of commodities (i.e. exchange rates between different currencies will fluctuate even in a global inflation), those choices may turn out to be more subtle.
In short, nearly all developed economies are behaving badly in terms of fiscal and monetary discipline. We do expect that there will be relative valuation differences in currencies and policies that will provide a basis for currency positions as we gradually transition from a low-inflation world eager for safe-havens to a post-credit crisis inflationary outcome several years from now. But the most likely beneficiaries (and the securities that we would be inclined to accumulate on significant deflation fears), are likely to be commodities, precious metals and TIPS. As usual, we'll respond to the data as it emerges, but the foregoing is a reflection of where we would expect the opportunities to emerge. The recent TIPS auction produced a negative yield for the first time ever… bolstering the case for inflation over deflation.
History As Prequel
On a historical basis, every major stock market peak of the 20th Century was followed by a crash in the U.S. dollar five years later. People who kept their savings in dollars saw the purchasing power of their savings shrink substantially. For example, four years after the peak of 1929, FDR closed the banks and made it illegal for private citizens to own gold. In January 1934—five years after the bubble—he devalued the dollar, crushing people’s savings. Commodity prices had triple-digit rises in the mid-1930s and speculators once again made a fortune. The same thing happened five years after the market peaked in the late 1960s. Five years later, Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard (this time for good). Commodity prices soared for the next ten years, with the price of gold reaching $850/oz by the time it was over. Fast forward—the stock market popped in March 2000, and five years later in the Spring of 2005, the bull market in commodities was on. Oil went from $40 to $140; gold went from $400 to $1000/oz. We just had another peak in the stock market in October 2007. Based upon this precedent, we could foresee a raging bull market in commodities (due to a falling US dollar value, big inflation, or both) somewhere between mid-2011 and the fall of 2012. This is the risk, and the opportunity.
Positioning Globally for Any Environment
The sectors we like most are commodity-related equities, including oil, coal, mining, agriculture, metals; we also like select healthcare, medical device, and biotech companies as well as a few select technology names that exhibit reasonable valuations (Growth At a Reasonable Price, GARP). The reasoning for our commodities-related/oil/metals bent is many-fold: 1) they are needed , (2) they appear undervalued and are economically sensitive; if they drop due to a weaker environment it shouldn’t be disastrous due to their inherent value, and if the market goes up, they go up too, (3) commodities are priced in US$, so if the dollar goes down, it takes more US$ to buy them, meaning the producers of these commodities will have higher earnings, (4) during inflationary periods they tend to hold up the best, (5) if we experience a currency devaluation for whatever reason (and inflation is but another means of achieving this), see #1-4. So we are adding positions that can withstand gale force winds based on macroeconomics and/or deliver strong earnings. Additionally, the recent news that China’s Yuan is floating higher adds to the demand for commodities.
Currencies
Increasingly we are hearing about a troubled dollar, but the truth is that there is a global “race to the bottom” in currencies. Governments are printing money to inflate their way out of the global meltdown. And while some politicians are trying to put new tooth into the old Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of the 1930’s (you probably think we’re joking, but we are not), the truth is that we are in an Economic War of Protectionism which is going at full throttle—countries with cheaper currencies are hoping to benefit growth of exports in order to grow their top line GDP numbers. But at what cost? It’s all an illusion to make it appear that things are better; the reality is that many countries are beginning to discuss a global currency alternative, or IMU (International Monetary Unit)—by the way this was a long time prediction by Nobel-prize winning economist Robert Mundell, who also predicted the rise of the Euro, says of the very unstable relationship between the euro-dollar rate “[this is a] terrible things for the world economy. We’ve never been in this unstable position in the entire currency history of 3,000 years”… what could transpire in the future that leads us to the IMU? An important question to contemplate, and one to which the price of gold may be sending us an answer.
Gold
Irving Fisher, economist of the 1920’s whose ideas were overshadowed by John Meynard Keynes, is the original proponent of a strong dollar backed by commodities.
If the Fed would have listened to gold (or the nominal GDP model) over the past 15 years, the US would probably not be in the mess it is in today. Gold prices fell from $400 per ounce to $255 an ounce between 1996 and 1999. This signaled deflation, but the Fed chose to ignore the signal and raised interest rates anyway in 1998 and 1999. Deflation, recession and a stock market crash were the result.
In the wake of the stock market crash, the Fed started cutting rates because it feared deflation. Gold started to rise and by late 2003 it was back above $400/oz. But the Fed held rates at 1% anyway, which created a housing bubble. When that bubble burst, the Fed started cutting rates again and gold prices have now moved to more than $1300/oz. At this point, one would think the Fed would pause before pumping even more money into the system and targeting higher inflation.
But it isn’t. The Fed continues to hold interest rates at zero, proposes another round of “quantitative easing” and plans to target 2% inflation. All because it won’t listen to gold and it’s unable to see that banks are afraid to use the money the Fed is pumping in because, down the road, the Fed will be forced to take it out or face serious inflation.
That’s what gold is saying. By signaling that it won’t quit anytime soon, the Fed is trying to force banks to change their behavior. If it works, look out for inflation to reach multiples of 2% in the years ahead. The Fed hasn’t been successful yet, when it ignores gold and commodity prices.
Mortgages
If you have not done so, take advantage of still-historically low 30 year fixed mortgage rates. Recently the 30 year fixed mortgage dipped to about a 60-year low. It’s still cheap money, and it should be considered a very temporary “gift” from the Fed. The Fed is re-upping its bet of Quantitative Easing (buying mortgage backed securities on the yield curve to artificially keep mortgage rates low). Take advantage of this now, especially if you currently hold an adjustable rate mortgage. This gift, if you decide not to take advantage of it, will self-destruct within 24 months…
Fixed Income Commentary
Corporate bonds, both investment grade and high yield, look relatively attractive. In fact high grade corporate bonds are now trading on a near-equal basis with Treasury securities, meaning that sovereign debt is trading on credit-worthiness and balance sheet strength (instead of on ability to tax). As far as we know, this has never occurred before in history. Well, after all, who would you trust more to pay back a loan right now? Warren Buffett or the U.S. government? We’d choose Buffett.
Treasury securities with longer maturities should be avoided at all costs in this environment. TIPS offer some inflation protection, though recent auctions have produced negative real yields since investors are becomingly increasingly convinced that inflation is coming.
CA Municipal Bonds
The CA political atmosphere is heating up, with lots of talk; hopefully the “winners” can actually deliver on their rhetoric in terms of fixing the state’s woeful financial condition. The problems are big, but as a great politician once said: “the answers aren’t easy, but they are simple.” Please make your vote heard on November 2, unless you have already changed your legal residency to Nevada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
