Last week’s indiscriminant market
sell-off caused much head-scratching in the investment community. But as
posited here over the past several months, the consistent buoyancy of markets
through much of the past year should have been the real cause of furled
eyebrows and confounded looks. A market blowing off steam after such a run
should not come as a shock to anyone. What is surprising, however, was the
breadth of the sell-off. The S&P 500 is 4.6% off its all-time high set May
21st, including its headline-grabbing 2.5% slide on Thursday.
Rather than being the safe-haven
ying to equities’ yang, U.S. Treasuries sold off more quickly than one can say financial repression, with the yield in
the 10-Year Note rising 28 basis points over the week to 2.51%, its highest
level since August 2011. Since the end of April, the yield on the 10-Year has
risen 88 bps as bond investors ponder the nightmarish possibility of markets
not being propped up by Fed largesse.
Dollars were the only real place to
seek shelter last week with the Dollar Index, derived from a blend of major
currencies, rising 2% over the five-day period. It was once said that if
markets cannot trade on fundamentals, they trade on technicals. In the wake of
the financial crisis, that phase can be amended with the term technicals being replaced with Fed-speak. It is less than comforting to
know that your portfolio’s fate rests on a few well-placed….or omitted…adjectives
within Fed policy statements and speeches.
Bonds: The Source of the Fed’s Affection
Some perspective: despite the
recent sell-off in Treasuries, yields are still near historic lows. The obvious
explanation for such levels is that the Fed has sucked the oxygen out of the
room by becoming the dominant buyer of U.S. paper over the past several years.
Another contributing factor is that the central bank’s best….err most reckless….efforts
to reflate the economy have fallen woefully short, meaning that sustainable (one of those haunting
adjectives) growth and accompanying inflationary pressure are nowhere on the
horizon.
When the Fed initiated the first of
its extraordinary measures during the height of the financial crisis, analysts
were already busy hypothesizing how authorities would unwind these programs.
There was near immediate talk of how reverse repos would work to sop up excess
liquidity and a great parlor game was to guess how long before the FOMC would
raise rates from its 0%-0.25% range. A dovish estimate at the time would have
placed the first of such hikes in early 2010.
With regard to printing money, packaged under the seemingly harmless
moniker of quantitative easing, the
expectation was that there was not enough ink to Washington to create the
volume of bills necessary for the Fed to influence the world’s largest, most
liquid bond market, much less do so for an extended period of time. Oh, how
little did we know. Fast forward nearly half
a decade and the Fed’s support of financial markets is considered a given.
Most rational-thinking analysts understand that such backing cannot continue
indefinitely. Evidently there are many traders that do not belong to that camp.
As soon as that dreadful word tapering
entered the Fed’s lexicon, many market participants have behaved like petulant
school children, shocked that their favorite toy…probably a slingshot…was being
confiscated.
Muted Inflation: This Fiat Money Thing Is Not So Bad
Before dumping all financial
assets, buying canned foods and retreating to your mountain bunker, we must
consider an alternative scenario to explain last week’s sell off. Rather than
the thought of losing the Fed’s loving hand spooking investors, perhaps it was evidence
of the bond market’s historical bugaboo: nascent inflation. Recent data,
however, shows little reason to fear coupon payments will be frittered away by
rising prices. Since spring 2012,
year-on-year core inflation…the less volatile flavor, thus the one the Fed more
closely watches due to its stickiness…has dipped from 2.3% to 1.7%, well within
the central bank’s range of acceptability.
Such tame numbers not only imply
that the U.S. is in a disinflationary environment, meaning bonds face little
threat to the value of their cash flows, but they also provide fodder to the idea
that the Fed can continue to maintain its dovish stance, including bond and MBS
purchases. Inflation is only likely to appear once growth picks up, consumer
demand returns and joblessness…at least measured by the all-in number of 13.8%.....recedes
from the stratosphere (with all due respect to the unfortunate Spaniards). Unemployment
is especially relevant in a service-based economy like America’s, where wage
growth is a meaningful contributor to inflation. With regard to overall
economic growth: it still stinks.
But perhaps the market is worried
about the Fed being behind the curve,
meaning that it won’t be able to unwind all its untested measures before prices
lurch higher; a distinct possibility with the currency having been so egregiously
debased over the past few years (and we have the gall to lecture the Japanese
about jobbing the FX market). Here too
there appears…dangerous word…to be little threat. Using the TIPS market to
gauge future inflation expectations, including the farther out period of
2018-2023, fears of elevated prices have actually receded since the beginning
of the year. It must be said, however, that data derived from a bond market
distorted by Fed activity may lack the credibility it had in years past.
Impact on Main Street and in Your Portfolio
Although still at historically
muted levels, the summer surge in Treasury yields is not exactly what a
lethargic, debt-addicted economy needs as it struggles to reach the evidently
mythical escape velocity, not that the previous four years of low rates and QE
gave us any consequential growth. Higher interest payments for consumers and
corporations could throw the type of wrench into the real economy that Chairman
Bernanke has pined over for years. Yet this argument glosses over the reality
that the problem in the post-crisis era has not been the cost of credit, but access to
credit. Small and mid-sizes
businesses that are largely dependent upon loans for financing activity have
largely been starved of credit. Given the role these firms play in job
creation, this may partly explain the anemic growth in payrolls. Meanwhile
large corporations with access to the bond market have hit pay dirt,
refinancing at deliciously low rates. This development was part of Chairman
Bernanke’s plan, with the expectation that such cheap funding would catalyze
investment and job creation. Didn’t happen.
With regard to investment portfolios,
rising rates are a mixed blessing. Investors can finally look to gain slightly
less paltry rates on fixed income positions. Supply may be a challenge given
that every firm with a marginally acceptable credit profile (and then some) has
already issued bonds at rock-bottom rates. Investors who have gorged on this
torrent of new issuance over the past few years had better be prepared to take
a loss if they sell in a rising-rates environment. With debt issued at such low
interest rates, it does not take much of a principal loss to wipe out the gains
on coupon payments already received. The incipient housing recovery would also
be put at risk should the benchmark rates to which mortgages are tied begin to
creep up. Housing demand is not
benefitting from robust wage growth or loose credit terms from lenders,
especially with Uncle Sam threatening to sue banks back to the stone-age with any
whiff of what it broadly categorizes as unscrupulous lending practices.
Deeper into the Risk Pool: Equities Affected by Rising Rates
Rising rates will also likely have
an impact on equities markets, although not as directly as they do with bonds. Improving
yields on safer, fixed-income instruments such as Treasuries and investment
grade corporates will remove a supporting factor for the long-running dividend
payer theme. Why invest in more volatile shares when the yield on the safer
security offers a superior risk-reward profile?
More subtle is the impact on financing activity by corporations.
Throughout the entire low-interest rate environment, profit margins have
benefited from the miniscule cost of debt financing. This is one of the reasons….along
with sacking workers….that firms have been able to maintain respectable
earnings growth despite lackluster sales gains. Any substantive reversal in appetite for
equities will go a long way in diminishing the Fed’s (far-fetched) goal of
having the wealth effect sprout seeds
for consumer-driven growth.
And Even Deeper: Commodities and Emerging Markets
Other buckets of risky assets have
been nailed over the late spring as well. Over the final two days of last week,
commodities, as measured by the S&P GSCI spot index sold off 4.1%, bringing
its year-to-date retreat to -6%. Commodities were among the first set of risky
assets cool their jets, having lost 12% since its most recent peak in
September. The acceleration of the
decline last week should come as no surprise as commodities have been one of the
favored destinations for yield-starved investors. Rather than just the
breakdown of the Fed trade, there may
be some fundamental underpinnings to a weaker commodities complex. Emerging
markets, which account for outsized demand for several key raw materials are
not growing at the pace they once were. Yet lower commodities prices may be one
of the few rays of light in this reshuffling of risk. Although energy and
materials companies won’t be singing about this development, other sectors,
namely those that have commodities-intensive production and ingredients, may
see a bump up in profit margins in light of lower input costs. This could go
some way in offsetting the previously mentioned rises in interest expenses. Consumers
may also benefit from cheaper gasoline and their favorite flavor of Haagen Dazs
ice-cream.
The sell-off in emerging market
equities came later than that in commodities, but has been more ferocious, falling
16.8% from its January high. Not only may this be the consequence of investors
baling out of frothy risky assets that had been driven higher on global central
bank (not just Fed) policy, but also because of the aforementioned diminished growth
expectations.
But here too, some perspective is
needed. Compared to advanced economies, growth rates remain superior. If
anything the removal of the incremental “oomph” provided by monetary policy
distortions may bring emerging market valuations back down to levels attractive
enough to entice investors to gain exposure to solid secular…that is long-term…themes.
And isn’t that the name of the game? Developing sound investment arguments and
entering them at attractive price-points? It’s called fundamental investing.
Despite some of the annoying bumps that will occur across asset classes as the Fed
eventually diminishes its role in financial markets, this may mark the return
of investing on the individual merits of a particular region or security.
Should that occur, many market participants may look back upon this distorted,
post-crisis era of illogical highs and tight correlations and say good riddance.
No comments:
Post a Comment