Archive for the ‘Economics’ Category

ECRI’s Lakshman Achuthan Says More Than 50% Chance Of New Recession

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Market Predictions | No Comments »

Big Week of Economic Reports

Monday, August 30th, 2010

This is a jam packed week filled with big economic reports:

Tuesday: Chicago PMI, Consumer Confidence, Case-Shiller Home Price Index and FOMC Minutes
Wednesday: ADP Employment, ISM Manufacturing Index
Thursday: Jobless Claims, Pending Home Sales Index
Friday: Employment, ISM Non-Manufacturing Index

The economic numbers seem to be getting worse and worse over the last 3 months and expectations are very low for many of these reports. If the reports are better than expected I think we can expect to see the markets hold up and maybe even trade slightly higher. If they come in worse than expected I think there is a possibility of a big sell-off taking us to new yearly lows.

It would not surprise me to see a few beat expectations and few disappoint to the downside. It really is all going to come down to Friday’s employment number. Goldman Sachs came out today and revised their estimate for private job growth to zero which if true won’t be taken kindly by the markets.

Either way I think the stock market is firmly entrenched in a down trend and has some tough sledding ahead of itself moving into September and October.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Risk Management, Trading, Trend Following | No Comments »

Leading Indicator Confusion

Sunday, August 1st, 2010

What are the leading indicators telling us right now? Short term confusion…

Well, copper which is said to have a masters degree in economics is suggesting things are getting better as of late:

Bonds on the other hand which are said to have a PHD in economics are suggesting things are getting a lot worse. Here is a snapshot of the 10 year yield which is declining to levels not seen since the stock market lows.

I tend to favor bonds because copper tends to move with China and inverse to the Dollar whereas bonds move based on real economic fundamentals, period. The Dollar has been getting killed and China has been rebounding both of which are very favorable for copper. I happen to think things are getting a lot worse and that this bond move is clearly signaling longer term deflation and sluggish economic growth. Over the short term we may see more upside in commodities but until yields turn higher the move is probably limited.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Market Psychology | No Comments »

Thoughts On Long Term Outlook For Inflation

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

More great words of wisdom from David Rosenberg from his July 28th letter:

THOUGHTS ON THE LONG-TERM OUTLOOK FOR INFLATION

Let me start out by saying that I do not believe that bonds are any “better” an investment than stocks, at least in principle. They both have their advantages.

For bonds, the advantages are that they provide an income stream – the principal and the interest payments are guaranteed in the case of most government securities; and in the case of the corporate sector, it inevitably comes down to the quality of the credit and the longevity of the company in question. In addition, the yield at the time of purchase is almost always at some significant positive spread over CPI inflation.
Stocks represent ownership in corporations that have assets and strive to make a profit, often paying out a portion of the profit in the form of dividends and retaining earnings to grow the business and increase the dividends in the future.

But the primary purpose of this comment is to suggest what things may look like when the Great Bull Market in Bonds, which began in 1981 with 30-year Treasury Bonds yielding 15.25%, finally comes to its glorious end.

For starters, I think it is safe to say that the bull market in bonds will end reasonably close to the point in time that inflation (or deflation) bottoms. This is because we have determined that by far the major economic factor that correlates consistently with the direction of market-determined interest rates, at least for long term Treasury Bonds, is CPI Inflation (headline and core).

The bond market, like politics, is an emotional issue and not well-liked in general by Wall Street because it has a negative correlation to the stock market most of the time. For a growth bull, the bond is the “enemy”. The economic environment that most favours the long end of the bond market tends to be low or no growth and bonds have traditionally been an asset allocation decision that is bearish on the stock market.
As a result, fear mongering often takes the place of thoughtful and objective analysis when it comes to bond market commentary. One way or another, the long end of the bond market has continually been characterized as high risk for the last 30 years that it has been outperforming the S&P 500. That’s a little unfair – after all, it is the benchmark risk free asset for funding actuarial liability when taken to the extreme of a 0% Coupon Treasury Strip.

Let’s move on and make a sensible and objective effort at making a long-term forecast for core CPI Inflation. Based on our analysis, we could well see core inflation receding from around 1% now to near 0% in the next 12-to-24 months, which would imply an ultimate bottom in the long bond yield of 2.5% and 2% for the 10-year T-note. We should add that as long as the Fed funds rate remains at zero, reverting to a normal shaped Treasury curve would generate similar results for the long bond and 10-year note at the point at which the inevitable “bull flattener” reaches its climax. As we saw in Japan, this will take time, but yields at these projected levels will very likely come to fruition in coming years.

So what will be the cause of the next secular uptrend in inflation or hyperinflationary shock? It pays to look back at history. Prior to the inflation of the 1970s-early 1980s, periods of very high inflation were primarily associated with war. Increased credit demands to fund the war effort combined with the drop in productivity that goes along with blowing everything up is an inflationary stew.

Wars were typically followed by brief periods of deflation followed by stable prices until the next war. In the 1970s several factors other than war led to the brief bouts of hyperinflation and they are much debated. What is perhaps most important to recognize is that whether it is war, OPEC or rampaging Baby Boomers, history supports the notion that high inflation, at least at the core CPI level, tends to occur in brief bouts.
A quick look at the core CPI chart shows that for all but a brief period since WWII, inflation has been well below 5%. But it was the period from 1970 to 1980 that contained all readings above 5%. Coincidentally, this was the period in which the Baby Boomers were buying their first refrigerators to go along with a bungalow as they formed their households.

By 1983, core CPI was back down to 5% and never looked back, but the psychological damage was already done. Inflationary expectations were indelibly etched into the mindset of the Baby Boom cohort. So everyone positioned themselves for inflation by leveraging up their asset purchases. Inflationary expectations were the rationale for overconsumption and depleted savings rates.

What resulted was an interesting dichotomy. Asset prices inflated during the 1980s, 1990s and into the 2000s. Although the secular bull market in equities ran out of steam early in the last decade, most other asset prices (particularly residential real estate) went parabolic into the peak of the secular credit cycle in 2007.

Core CPI on the other hand, has been continually slowing since the peak of 13.6% in 1980 and even at the peak in the ratio of household debt to disposable income in 2007, was running no higher than 3%. Unlike geopolitical disruption or demographic shocks, asset bubbles and the credit cycle tend to have an important secular behavioral impact on society and therefore, the economy.

The credit collapse of the 1930s around the globe dramatically altered social norms related to consumption, speculation and saving. Those who were adults with families in the 1930s shunned debt and believed in “pay as you go” for the rest of their lives. By way of comparison, the inflationary shock of the 1970s enticed the Baby Boomers into a spending and speculative binge. Rather than save, they executed a failed strategy of speculating their way to a dignified retirement.

Now the clock has run out and household behavior is poised for a dramatic change. If the 55 year-old Boomer resolves to work longer and harder, cut the budget to save more and liquidate debt, can we really expect the politics to maintain the status quo? This type of behavior from the developed world will exert enormous deflationary pressure. In addition, the huge amount of debt and entitlement expansion that has occurred at the government level, particularly in response to the financial crisis, will be an enormous drain on economic growth as taxes are raised to service the debt and budgets are dramatically cut.

For this reason, it is appropriate to consider the possibility that the next secular uptrend in inflation must await the rebuilding of the household and government balance sheets to levels that launched the last uptrend. That, by the way was about 30% debt to disposable income in 1950, 60% in 1970, and realistically, it could take a generation to get back to that range from current levels of around 125%.

The outlook is not entirely dependent on the behavior of the developed world’s consumers and governments, however, if we are really trying to envision the next 20 years, the emerging market consumers (in places like China and India) have extremely low debt levels and high savings rates. Changes in emerging market consumer behavior should be, on balance, a source of counteracting inflationary pressure. Then again, the forces that most contributed to disinflation in the last three decades were globalization and technological innovation that lead to dramatic improvement in productivity and lower unit costs.

There is no reason to doubt that these forces will continue to be moderately supportive in the near future, even if higher marginal tax rates and reduced labour mobility (due to the fact that one-in-four Americans with a mortgage have negative net equity in their home and are thus “stationary”) end up constraining the noninflationary growth potential in the United States (and Europe).

While the disinflation from 1980 to 2007 was mostly supply-side related, the deflation pressure now is coming from the demand side – a deficiency of aggregate demand caused principally by the contraction in credit (40% of the private market for securitized consumer and mortgage loans has vanished over the course of the past two years).

So, putting it all together, it is reasonable to conclude that prices are most likely to be stable for a generation. By stable, I mean flat and perhaps oscillating around plus or minus 2% (look at Japan, where there has been no such downward price spiral – the CPI sits right where it was 18 years ago). Because the economy is still gripped with overcapacity in several sectors, real estate and labour in particular, we may be headed towards an outright deflationary backdrop over the near- to intermediate-term, but a deflationary spiral seems overly pessimistic considering all the good things in the mix, including a reflationary policy backdrop which certainly helped establish a price floor in Japan in recent years.

That said, a “V” shaped recovery has always been off the table from our perspective because we still have so far to go in the secular credit collapse, so all the balance sheet expansion that the Fed has done and will do in the future should continue to offer up little more than an antidote. In turn, a reversal of CPI or core CPI trend to the upside for the next couple of years seems like a low- probability event, particularly given the demographic and retirement pressures that increasingly favor savings over spending in the broad consumer sector.

And what about the end of the Great Bull Market in Bonds? It could come pretty soon. You heard right. Long-term Treasury Bond yields could reach a secular bottom in the next couple of years. And what will it look like?

Well, rates will likely be much lower than anyone expects and, as typically occurs at secular market peaks, the public will probably swear by long bonds at the primary lows in yields. After all, what other safe investment has delivered inflation plus 2% or much better, guaranteed, in the past 30 years? But in order for the public to adore 2.5% yielding long Treasury Bonds, it will first have to believe in stable or modestly deflating core CPI as a long-term forecast. At last count, households still have a near-3% long-run inflation expectation according to the most recent University of Michigan survey.

The public will also need to be fed up with risk and, judging by the performance of stocks and real estate in recent years, who could blame them? And for the Baby Boomer at 55 or 60, “Gambler’s Ruin” isn’t an option. We can see that they are already voting with their feet as the mutual fund flows clearly indicate – increasingly towards income and away from capital appreciation strategies.

Finally, the public will probably need to be afraid to be out (of the bond market, that is). That will most likely be due to a “flight to quality” as we continue suffer the secular bear market in stocks and real estate and suffer the economic setbacks of renewed recession sooner than many pundits think.

One last thought on stocks: Like I said before, bonds are not better than equities. They are different. Every asset class has its time to be the leader. It goes without saying that the best time to allocate to equities is at the point of maximum pessimism and when the market is trading very inexpensively as it was at previous post-war secular bear market bottoms.

We know that historically, that “moment” has coincided with valuations below 10x on trailing “reported” earnings and dividend yields above 5% as measured by the S&P 500 Index. Note that while many a pundit cites the consensus as being $96 EPS for “operating” earnings for 2011, it is closer to $76 on a true “reported” basis (so apply a 10x or even a 12x multiple on that estimate!).

We also know that the conventional wisdom is oh, so wrongly linear at inflection points, so not only is the market cheap at these secular lows, but the future is much brighter than generally perceived. Pulling the trigger at that magic moment when bonds have peaked (yields have bottomed) and stocks can’t hurt you anymore, with dividend yields secure at twice the Treasury rate, would be nice. But you never know for sure at the right time, or you think you know for sure but are too early.

For now, we are not even close. Sentiment toward long bonds and inflation are still extreme and recent survey data show the typical balanced institutional portfolio manager with a 68% allocation towards equities. As for bonds, the yield on 30 year Treasury was recently core CPI plus 3%; 4% for a BBB corporate bond; and a 6% real yield in the BB space. The S&P 500, meanwhile, sports a P/E multiple of close to 15x and the dividend yield is barely over 2%.

In this light, it would seem highly appropriate to maintain a SIRP – Safety & Income at a Reasonable Price – strategy for the near- and intermediate-term, while keeping a close eye on the exit plan from this recommendation, though that could still be a few years down the road.

Source: Gluskin Sheff

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Market Predictions, Research | No Comments »

Breakfast With Dave…He Puts the Odds of Double Dip at 67%

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010

Notes from David Rosenberg’s research series breakfast with Dave have just been released from July 26. He talks about the softness in base metals prices since their peak in April and the ECRI as indicators of economic difficulty. He also sites the financial media constantly trying to game the economy by the moves in the stock market. He notes that one week we are down and we are looking at a double dip and the next week the market is up and a double dip is off the table.

His work also suggest that the weakness in the ECRI suggests that the odds of a double dip are now at 67% up from 0% at the beginning of the year. He notes that the ECRI has never hit such low levels without a recession.

Here is the PDF of his notes: Breakfast With Dave 7-26

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Market Predictions, Research | No Comments »

Deflation Is On Tap Says Jeremy Grantham

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

In his quarterly letter to clients renowned money manager Jeremy Grantham has changed his stance from inflation to deflation. He talks about the gaining acceptance of austerity and add about that imminent slowdown “looks downright frightening.” He also favors large cap over small cap stocks over the next several years.

I have been steadfast this year in maintaining that deflation was more likely than inflation. I still believe that we have one or two more serious bouts of deflation before this is over.

Grantham’s comments are always worth a read, click on the link below:

Jeremy Grantham 2nd Quarter Letter To Clients

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Market Predictions, Research | No Comments »

Confidence Is Gone and Mortgage Debt Dwarfs Assets

Monday, July 19th, 2010

Michigan consumer sentiment came out Friday with its biggest drop since September 11, 2001. The index dropped from 76 to 66.5. The biggest thing to point out as evidenced by the chart below is that 66.5 level is the point at which has signaled recessions in the past 30 years. Is this time different? I doubt it!

Source: St. Louis Fed

This morning  home builder confidence came out at 14 which is the lowest level since March 2009, the depths of the bear market. It seems very obvious from my vantage point that things are getting worse not better. Case in point, look at the chart below that shows that mortgage debt dwarfs assets by more than $4 trillion! Yes that’s Trillion with a capital T.

Source: bloomberg

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Market Psychology | No Comments »

Stimulus Will Fail Like It Always Does

Saturday, July 10th, 2010


  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Educational | No Comments »

Companies Brace For End of Cheap Made-In-China Era

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

I came across this article that is reprinted below that I think could cause a lot of concern for corporations manufacturing goods in China. Watch for many more headlines like this in the next 12 months. I think this is just the beginning of the crimp on corporate profits that could potentially have a major impact on equity valuations around the world.

Companies brace for end of cheap made-in-China era


SHANGHAI – Factory workers demanding better wages and working conditions are hastening the eventual end of an era of cheap costs that helped make southern coastal China the world’s factory floor.

A series of strikes over the past two months have been a rude wakeup call for the many foreign companies that depend on China’s low costs to compete overseas, from makers of Christmas trees to manufacturers of gadgets like the iPad.

Where once low-tech factories and scant wages were welcomed in a China eager to escape isolation and poverty, workers are now demanding a bigger share of the profits. The government, meanwhile, is pushing foreign companies to make investments in areas it believes will create greater wealth for China, like high technology.

Many companies are striving to stay profitable by shifting factories to cheaper areas farther inland or to other developing countries, and a few are even resuming production in the West.

“China is going to go through a very dramatic period. The big companies are starting to exit. We all see the writing on the wall,” said Rick Goodwin, a China trade veteran of 22 years, whose company links foreign buyers with Chinese suppliers.

“I have 15 major clients. My job is to give the best advice I can give. I tell it like it is. I tell them, put your helmet on, it’s going to get ugly,” said Goodwin, who says dissatisfied workers and hard-to-predict exchange rates are his top worries.

Beijing’s decision to stop tethering the Chinese currency to the U.S. dollar, allowing it to appreciate and thus boosting costs in yuan, has multiplied the uncertainty for companies already struggling with meager profit margins.

In an about-face mocked on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” Wham-O, the company that created the Hula-Hoop and Slip ‘n Slide, decided to bring half of its Frisbee production and some production of its other products back to the U.S.

At the other end of the scale, some in research-intensive sectors such as pharmaceutical, biotech and other life sciences companies are also reconsidering China for a range of reasons, including costs and incentives being offered in other countries.

“Life sciences companies have shifted some production back to the U.S. from China. In some cases, the U.S. was becoming cheaper,” said Sean Correll, director of consulting services for Burlington, Mass.-based Emptoris.

That may soon become true for publishers, too. Printing a 9-by-9-inch, 334-page hardcover book in China costs about 44 to 45 cents now, with another 3 cents for shipping, says Goodwin. The same book costs 65 to 68 cents to make in the U.S.

“If costs go up by half, it’s about the same price as in the U.S. And you don’t have 30 days on the water in shipping,” he says.

Even with recent increases, wages for Chinese workers are still a fraction of those for Americans. But studies do show China’s overall cost advantage is shrinking.

Labor costs have been climbing about 15 percent a year since a 2008 labor contract law that made workers more aware of their rights. Tax preferences for foreign companies ended in 2007. Land, water, energy and shipping costs are on the rise.

In its most recent survey, issued in February, restructuring firm Alix Partners found that overall China was more expensive than Mexico, India, Vietnam, Russia and Romania.

Mexico, in particular, has gained an edge thanks to the North American Free Trade Agreement and fast, inexpensive trucking, says Mike Romeri, an executive with Emptoris, the consulting firm.

Makers of toys and trinkets, Christmas trees and cheap shoes already have folded by the thousands or moved away, some to Vietnam, Indonesia or Cambodia. But those countries lack the huge work force, infrastructure and markets China can offer, and most face the same labor issues as China.

So far, the biggest impact appears to be in and around Shenzhen, a former fishing village in Guangdong province, bordering Hong Kong, that is home to thousands of export manufacturers.

That includes Taiwan-based Foxconn Technology, a supplier of iPhones and iPads to Apple Inc. Foxconn responded to a spate of suicides at its 400,000-worker Shenzhen complex with pay hikes that more than doubled basic monthly worker salaries to $290. Strike-stricken suppliers to Honda Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Corp., among many others, also have hiked wages.

Foxconn refused repeated requests for comment on plans to move much of its manufacturing capacity to central China’s impoverished Henan province, where a local government website has advertised for tens of thousands of workers on its behalf.

But among other projects farther inland, Foxconn is teaming up with some of the biggest global computer makers to build what may be the world’s largest laptop production hub in Chongqing, a western China city of 32 million where labor costs are estimated to be 20 to 40 percent lower than in coastal cities.

Given the intricate supply chains and logistics systems that have helped make southern China an export manufacturing powerhouse, such changes won’t be easy.

But for manufacturers looking to boost sales inside fast-growing China, shifting production to the inland areas where many migrant workers come from, and costs are lower, offers the most realistic alternative.

“The new game is to find a way to do the domestic market,” says Goodwin.

Many factories in Foshan, another city in Guangdong that saw strikes at auto parts plants supplying Japan’s Honda, have left in the past few months, mostly moving inland to Henan, Hunan and Jiangxi, said Lin Liyuan, dean at the privately run Institute of Territorial Economics in Guangzhou.

Massive investments in roads, railways and other infrastructure are reducing the isolation of the inland cities, part of a decade-old “Develop the West” strategy aimed at shrinking the huge, politically volatile gap in wealth between city dwellers and the country’s 600 million farmers.

Gambling that the unrest will not spill over from foreign-owned factories, China’s leaders are using the chance to push investment in regions that have lagged the country’s industrial boom.

They have little choice. Many of today’s factory workers have higher ambitions than their parents, who generally saved their earnings from assembling toys and television sets for retirement in their rural hometowns. They are also choosier about wages and working conditions. “The conflicts are challenging the current set-up of low-wage, low-tech manufacturing, and may catalyze the transformation of China’s industrial sector,” said Yu Hai, a sociology professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University.

Source: Yahoo News via the Associated Press

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics | 1 Comment »

Fiscal Crises and Imperial Collapses: Historical Perspective on Current Predicaments

Monday, June 28th, 2010

I highly recommend everyone watch this video and read the presentation….

It is long and a little dry but very worthwhile if you want understand economic history and how we are repeating it. The presentation contains a ton of charts and graphs.

Niall Ferguson gives a historical perspective on the current financial crisis:

Ferguson Presentation

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Economics, Research | 1 Comment »

US Government Required Disclaimer: Commodity Futures Trading Commission Futures and Options trading has large potential rewards, but also large potential risk. You must be aware of the risks and be willing to accept them in order to invest in the futures and options markets. Don't trade with money you can't afford to lose. This is neither a solicitation nor an offer to Buy/Sell futures or options. No representation is being made that any account will or is likely to achieve profits or losses similar to those discussed on this web site. The past performance of any trading system or methodology is not necessarily indicative of future results.

CFTC RULE 4.41: HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS SUBSEQUENTLY ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM. ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK OF ACTUAL TRADING. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR TO ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND ALL WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT TRADING RESULTS.