Whistling in the Dark
Too much uncertainty, too much introspection; while the world roars by.
Expecting either Blair Mark II or Trump Mark II still feels unwise. As does the Franco-German led ostrich ensemble, burying its head in debt, not sand. And CrowdStrike highlights forgotten fragility.
Which leaves me uneasy. Markets have done very nicely since last autumn, but now feel as if theyâre too dependent on delayed gratification, too relaxed about political earthquakes. I could do with more visibility, not just on who is elected, but what they do after elections.
So far this year, performance has come from the US, especially NASDAQ, which our momentum model recently sold for the first time in a year. Admittedly simply to correct an overweight, a substantive sell appears a way off, but a reminder that the ability just to buy US tech is diminishing. And markets need buyers to move up.
The market assumption seems to be the rally will broaden and move into the smaller stocks and round the globe. Possibly, certainly liquidity is plentiful, bitcoin and gold look high, a good indicator that there is excess cash about.
But the other source of cash, shifting out of term deposits and money market funds, has to now be slower, if we have replaced six US rate cuts this year with two. There really is no obvious reason not to just stay liquid, for a while. The dollar is also weaker, it has slid in fits and starts, but that also mounts up. Owning a depreciating currency is never great. It remains quite sensitive to short term rate differentials.
The global position is still inflationary, with no major developed economy addressing itâs out of control spending plans, all hiding behind each otherâs failures.
Trouble comes when rational investors no longer accept out of kilter valuations, including for all three favoured assets, gold, bitcoin, US tech.
The US outlook â conflicted?
I also, I confess irrationally, do not expect either Trump or Biden in the White House next year, nor do I expect that much change down the ticket now. So, to the degree that the US market is rallying on Trumpâs current resurgence, I find that dangerous too.
Polite society, and especially the UK fund manager, is caught between the social need to say Trump is evil incarnate and the reality that investors quite like the prospect. So, they concoct lists of the harm he will do, like cutting taxes, cutting regulation, boosting energy supply, enhancing security and decide that it is all terribly inflationary and so quite bad. But after that, conscience cleared, Â they amble over to their trader and buy a bit more.
This is an approach which is quite vulnerable to Biden getting turfed off the ticket. Especially with the need to then explain why the new Democrat candidate will raise taxes, reduce security, add regulation, reduce energy supplies, all of which is suddenly good for investors. An interesting pitch.
UK - Unmoved by Starmerâs Start
While in the UK, the large market indices are remarkably unmoved by Starmerâs start. At one level his Kingâs Speech was unremarkable. No surprises: Labour followers and unions given what they were promised, manifesto pledges kept.
Indeed, it was as if Gordon Brown and the Tories were all a bad dream, and Tony was at his desk, in 2007, working on the Queenâs Speech, which he dropped in a folder, and nailed to the back of a wardrobe door, for Keir to pick up 17 years later, change the pronouns and off we go.
How will housing engender growth?
Take housing, although how it is suddenly the engine of growth escapes me. The chances are the private sector could be the instrument to build them. But the timescale for that effort to cut prices is very long. Although the focus on land costs is good. Faster, cheaper consenting is also needed, based on where houses people want, will sell.
While the suggested mandatory targets didnât work under Blair, they wonât work now. They just let the blame be shifted from local planners, to Whitehall mandarins. Stuffing more and more subsidised housing into new build sites, just raises prices (someone has to pay for them).
The Tories (oddly) had a viable idea: rather than identify where you can build, first identify where you canât. But there is no sign of that scale of thinking, or speeding up the interminable appeals process.
The Commanding Heights
I assume the long-term plan is to demonstrate this old approach doesnât work, create a crisis, then privatise something. I doubt if that weird solution will be confined to the railways, and almost certainly now to water. Just like Railtrack and British Nuclear Fuels under Blair, you legislate impossible outcomes, the private sector invariably fails, you take ownership and allow far worse outcomes (and need bigger subsidies) instead.
It also needs capital, which is being scared away from the water companies, by new harsher laws, the exact opposite of the current need.
It is as if lots of laws and smiling nicely at deep seated structural problems helps to resolve them. Here we see the old failing of opposition parties getting into power, but then wasting it fighting the last election: at least Blair, in his own right, innovated.
Stock markets simply didnât believe the Tories and donât believe Labour either; words alone wonât improve matters.
Although as ever because the index is so hated, that leaves some very underpriced stocks for sale.
We have no clear view of what the autumn brings, either in the US, or UK (the first Reeves budget), or Germany (although a budget has been concocted there, but seems impossible to deliver) or France, which one hopes will have sorted out a government by then at least. Macronâs current re-appointed appointee, looks highly unstable.
A lot of patches have been applied, a lot of whistling in the dark, but the money is running out. It has been for a while, but you canât fight a war on several fronts : so, one of defence, welfare, health, or renewable energy, is not getting the funding splurge it wants.
Growth is the answer, but that, as Keynes noted, needs animal spirits. The animals look pretty caged just now, and Starmer is adding new bars to that prison.
So yes, the rate cut story holds, innovation possibly, but their heavy lifting is not supported by reforms which will help.
For our part sitting out the summer looks better.
We will resume these musings in early September. Under a new logo :
One suggested name is :
The Campden Snipe.
Thoughts, as ever, remain welcome.
In the real world, everything changes.
Where will the cards fall ?
The half year approaches - what has happened? Two very different quarters so far. And Investment Trusts complain too much, having stuffed their boards with placeholders with minimal stakes in the shares and multiple appointments. In markets many things still depend on how the cards (and ballots) fall.
THE FIRST HALF
With current interest rates for hard currency, high yield bonds, around 6%, you would expect riskier equity markets to be giving you over 10% a year, made up of a mix of capital and dividends. Thatâs the bar; it is quite high just now.
Looking back a year, only Japan and America comfortably achieve that, the S&P up +24%, NASDAQ up +30%, Nikkei up +14%. Germany creeps in at +10%, neither France nor the UK do. Outside developed markets, it is largely dire, only India at +25%.
Then looking just at the first half, all of Japan and Germanyâs gains came in the first quarter, so they are now sitting well off their twelve-month highs. While as we know the big three, S&P, NASDAQ and SENSEX, are now close to all-time highs, they powered through the second quarter.
So, the challenge is, do they go on up, do the markets that have fallen back, after a good first quarter, come back to life, or do some of the dogs perform?
Some major markets, Friday close and intra day
I have no great faith in the UK market, nor in a new government being much better at growth (it can hardly be worse) than the current mob. But there are cheap looking international stocks in the UK and the punishment meted out to real assets, by interest rates and shrinking bank balance sheets, might be finally ending.
While quite clearly the good middle tier stocks are easily cheap enough to lure in bidders from abroad or private equity, in some number. UK valuations are in short OK, not something you can necessarily say about the US.
The residual underperforming markets do often have a nice yield, but who cares? With bond yields high and staying high, in an appreciating currency, why take a cut in yield in order to buy equities? Plenty of time for that later.
Anyhow in most European and Emerging markets, equities seem not to be able to get out from under their own feet, endlessly tripping over their own fractured politics.
INVESTMENT TRUSTS
We are hearing a lot of moaning about Investment Trusts, which the FCA really do not like. EU law always struggled with the trust concept anyway. That the FCA has shown no interest in freeing us from those shackles is not a surprise, it seems they too would rather channel money to Nvidia than invest in the UK. Here is their Lordshipsâ briefing on what EU rules we might be repealing. Nothing for Investment Trusts.
I am on balance on the Trustâs side, I do think closed end structures (as they all are) allow long term decisions, while protecting daily dealing, one of Europeâs quirky hang ups. Daily dealing is fine in deep markets, but an illusion in many medium and small equity markets. With liquidity ever more narrowly focused, closed end funds seem more, not less, important, for balanced capital allocation, competition and growth.
Trusts directors should also protect investors from over mighty fund management houses, who treat closed end funds with disdain, as captive funds, with often high fees. Their greed lets in low-cost passive competitors. Instead, their permanent capital should come with an obligation to hunt down good, index beating performance.
Sadly, the FCA has perpetuated a system, where the fund management house appoints the Boards, not, in reality, the other way round. So, they are decorative, good for marketing, and highly unlikely to fire the manager. Too many are industry insiders, serving on multiple trust boards, often in sequence. Seldom do they have an investment of at least their annual pay cheque in their current Trust, and often, little investing expertise in the relevant area.
So, Investment Trust boards hardly ever sack fund managers for poor performance. David Einhorn explains the bigger issue very clearly, noting benchmark hugging over time is what investors now get. There is a clear link to poor performance and bigger discounts, and to big discounts and treating shareholders badly: One area where big certainly does not mean better.
Rather than sabotage the sector with old, irrelevant EU law, the FCA should be hunting down poor performance, and making the âindependentâ directors just that, including banning directors shuffling around a set of one-manager trusts.
INTEREST RATES
We have just had Powell hold US rates, saying it is all data dependent, and slightly oddly he conceded the expectation is for a pick up in inflation, on the technical grounds that the abrupt drop in inflation last year, creates base effects.
Although he rules out more hikes; you get the feeling if he had held his nerve last summer, and added a bit more, inflation could be beaten by now. Not that he wants to or can add such instability now, so he is stuck, and we with him, watching paint dry.
With no real distress there is no pressure to cut prices, service inflation remains too high, energy prices are still quite strong, so no longer giving a deflationary boost. Both the AI boom and the resulting stock price gains, encourage consumer spending and keep (in most sectors) a strong labour market.
Markets are evidently OK with that, falling rates, no recession, growing earnings, is almost ideal. Meanwhile we are all hoping that Congress will keep either of the two old men from doing anything unusually silly, and the electorate will keep Congress on a tight leash.
Quite a lot of hoping and several months still to go.
DREAMERS
What would Trumpâs high tariff isolationist world look like? What would the mirror image be in Xiâs China? Not now, not next week, but rolling into the next decade.
And whatever portfolio theory says, and whatever the optimistic investor believes, 80% of my own portfolio is flotsam, drifting up and down on Pacific tides. Stocks I both like and which have compounded over decades are remarkably few. Oh, and a brief word on African housing.
GOING IT ALONE
But first, to give it the grand name, autarchy, or self-sufficiency. A bit of a joke - the Soviet Union tried it, Iran tries it, China famously only revived after ditching it.
But it is back in fashion, and not just in strange places. The EU industrial and agricultural policy is starting to look like a version; beyond their four walls they need carbon and chemicals, but within them they donât, nor will they allow imports of them (or products including them). Quite fantastic.
Trump is on his 60% tariffs line. Xi clearly wants to cut off foreign capital, as it arrives infected with democracy and transparency, and the associated foreign reporting or verification.
So, could they? Yes, the US could - it is big enough, can do most things, and largely trades internally. While at least in Trumpâs imagination the commercial borders are sealed, and so enforceable.
What goes wrong? Well at some, quite distant, point people stop expecting to trade with the US. So, at its most extreme, if China canât sell to the US, it wonât buy from them either. But that is decades away, most Chinese production can probably take a 300% tariff, and still sell at a profit.
The flip side of the tariff is the huge salary for a barista, or a trucker. The latter is not so far away. Prices of domestic US production must rise, to allow the blue-collar Mid-West to rejuvenate. US consumers of course (including that barista) will pay vastly more for US goods, or will get hit with the import tariff; this of course is a tax on them.
What about Xi? Well again it is possible - thatâs how China ran for much of his life, with a lot of new infrastructure, industrialization, since installed. He can do it all again. There, unlike in the US, the issue is capital. As a big net exporter, an area that will itself be under pressure, money will be harder to find; it already is.
THE NIGHTMARE
Countries that go through this closing cycle typically also do default (as the Soviets did, as US (and UK) railways did,). Folly, but it can be done.
The US has been going down this route since Obama, Trump talked a lot about it, but Biden too sees the resulting wage inflation as a good thing. So, it is the next US Presidentâs policy either way.
Obama was keen on hitting capital markets (FATCA was and remains both a non-tariff barrier (I am being polite here) and a tariff on external capital) and I suspect a Biden administration must do the same, to balance the books.
While Xi never really left protectionism, WTO and GATT were mainly honoured in the breach.
And Europe? There is quite a strong strategic need to expand to the East, although as that goes through (and we are talking the mid 2030âs here) Ukrainian farmers, like Polish farmers today, will buckle under the rules; it barely matters about the Donbas, the EU will shut those heavy industries down too.
So, I think autarchy can work for all three, it will support a large uncompetitive labour force, and consumer choice will vanish. In many cases there will be lower quality and high prices. All three will attack (or in some cases keep attacking) capital flows.
And in the end, the entrepots will survive, those not in any such block, like the UAE or Singapore today, Amsterdam in the 17th Century, Yemen under the Romans and Victorian Britain.
The winners will be flexible, a tad amoral, assertive, in fluid alliances, but reliant on gold not steel to survive. And they will suck in entrepreneurial talent too. At a strategic level, that feels the place to be looking. Although buying uncompetitive heavy industries before their brief period of tariff induced profitability, has a short-term allure.
DOGS OR GREYHOUNDS ?
The ludicrous halving of CGT allowances, based on some fantasy âyieldâ number from the equally ludicrous HMRC, via the OBR, means once again the tiresome process of harvesting losses is upon us. No longer can they sit unloved at the back, snoozing; out they must come.
And what a tale of dross they reveal, and scattered amongst them so many once âgood ideasâ and busted yield stocks. Well, it sticks in the throat, but perhaps sticking it in a US wonder stock for six months is better?
Of course, if I knew when I acquired them that the FTSE was moribund for two decades, I would never have bothered. Seems it is time to simplify.
COLLATERAL
And lastly African housing. It was one of Gordon Brownâs (and the PRAâs) great achievements to get UK banks out of overseas assets, far too volatile, currency? foreigners?- Who needs them? Bring it all home and inflate the UK housing market with safe, cheap, mortgages.
So, Citizens went, Barclays were hounded out of South Africa, and so on â although their post-sale performance has really not been great either. Africa now just does not have proper mortgage financing for the vast bulk of the population. This is at a level I had failed to fully comprehend.
You think that despite everything, Africa must have got better. But no housing, so less health, less stability, no financial security. Safe recycling of profits in the continent is still hard. Aid canât create institutional reform, but thatâs the need.
If you look for the breakout into developed status, it starts there.
The Glass Bead Game
We look today at a domestic version of a complex, rulebound meaningless pursuit that too many of our brightest and best waste their lives pursuing, and whose twists and spirals ultimately signify nothing. Â I mean the UK Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR), of which I took a tour this week. Almost nothing there is as it seems.
Meanwhile markets reprise 2023, with tech or bust once more. Although tech and bust is the market fear, as fiscal stimulus and services inflation hold rates too high for some to survive.
UK OBR
The OBR was an explicitly political creation of the coalition government in 2010, with a remit to somehow restrain the ever-increasing debt governments take on, to bribe electors. They were also keeping half an eye on the much older âdebt ceilingâ style US legislation. It failed; so now the OBR just thrives on telling the government how much more it can spend or not collect, with spurious accuracy; purportedly managing public money.
It doesnât forecast anything as a forecast is an expected outturn. All it does is crank the handle on the old, discredited Treasury model, creating projections. A projection is 1) a âwhat ifâ assuming all other things are equal and 2) only as good as its underlying model.
One clear flaw is the requirement to take government spending plans as viable when they are usually not. They also have no idea where public sector productivity is heading. It has no remit to look at how productivity might be helped and no capacity to look back at how wrong its old âforecastsâ were. That is the job of the National Audit Office, it seems.
It also wonât talk to the Bank of England, as that organization has executive powers (to raise or lower rates) and the OBR apparently must just be a commentator: more glass bead rules.
So, it fiddles with the model and its six hundred inputs and countless equations to give precise answers to pointless questions, because each answer sits in its own vacuum.
Thereâs a heavy focus too on tax revenue, but with quite a thin staff, this results in excessive reliance on HMRC, who can be hopelessly wrong (and typically over optimistic on tax yields). But again, if the tax bods claim some complex, job destroying, arcane nonsense will raise income, in it goes. The side effects of such decisions must also be ignored.
It has no remit to assess how taxes impact productivity, which partly explains many of Huntâs blatantly anti-growth measures. As a result, the economy is locked into low productivity, getting steadily worse.
From the ONS flash report here
For all that the financial press will be full of the OBR cogitations on the forthcoming budget (March 6th). One little bit of power they do have involves a requirement for the Chancellor to give ten daysâ notice of the budget contents (hence no doubt the usual leakage levels) and for two months before that, they sift through proposals and indicate how each, in isolation, would work. The economy is an interconnected entity, they know, yet there is no attempt to give us an overall view.
THE LOST RALLY
I have few rational reasons why anyone would lend the UK Government at under 4% for ten years, were it not for some foolish faith in the OBR projections, without reading the small print.
Which brings us to markets: back in November the UK ten-year gilt yielded 4.5%, by about Christmas falling to 3.5%, and now it is back over 4% and headed higher.
Chart from this website
Quite a spin in ten weeks for a ten-year duration instrument. This is why that Christmas rally in value stocks was ignited, and indeed started to push out into Real Estate, various Alternatives and certain smaller stocks.
Although it didnât move those stocks most sensitive to the credit markets, who will need to rollover/refinance current debt. This affects for example, the renewables, private equity, and office property. The problem there is of both rates and availability. With the scale of asset mark downs, whether interest is 6% or 8% is not the issue; there is no funding appetite even at 20%.
The year-end rally moved a wide group of stocks, from extremely cheap to still very cheap. We then realized that it was not yet safe to go back in, so buyers evaporated, and prices faded. With state debt at 4%, against persistent inflation, fixed income is also oddly unenticing. So, the market default has been to pile back into the biggest, most liquid, US tech stocks and similar easy-in/easy-out momentum trades, like bitcoin.
There is little sign of deflation in services, no evidence of it in housing, where supply issues dominate, and little in financial services; indeed, all the supply side mess of COVID and excess regulation, is simply getting worse. Public sector pay inflation is also high and going higher (donât tell the OBR).
This does not dent the 2024 story of cutting rates and hence higher stock markets, but it may require some patience, and that delay may itself create more pain.
The Glass Bead Game and the âlost marblesâ qualification for office
Our games of self deception are not to be confused with lost marbles of course; it turns out that the onset of senility is now a bar to being prosecuted for storing secret state papers and also, somehow, a recommendation for re-election for four more years, to the most powerful post in the world.
If that ends up giving us Trump again, by default, presumably he will at least have a defense in future years, against those same crimes? He does not have the âBiden defenseâ available at present, perhaps thankfully.
As the OBR shows, very clever institutions can come up with very silly solutions.
Reserve in Reverse
Fallen Emperor?
With almost two thirds of global equity markets represented by the US, the fall in the dollar so far this year is quite dramatic, and for many investments, more important than the underlying asset.
UK retail investors are especially exposed to this, as although Jeremy Hunt (UK Chancellor) may not notice it, the US is where most UK investors went, when his partyâs policies ensured the twenty-year stagnation in UK equity prices.
While Sunak continues to pump up wage inflation, which he claims, âwonât cause inflation, raise taxes or increase borrowingsâ Has he ever sounded more transparently daft? Sterling, knowing bare faced lies well enough, then simply drifts higher. Markets know such folly in wage negotiation can only lead to inflation and higher interest rates.
We noted back in the spring, in our reference to âdollar dangerâ that this trade (sell dollar, buy sterling) had started to matter, and we began looking for those hedged options, and to reduce dollar exposure. To a degree this turned out to be the right call, but in reality, the rate of climb of the NASDAQ, far exceeded the rate of the fall in the dollar.
While sadly the other way round, a lot of resource and energy positions fell because of weaker demand and the extra supply and stockpile drawdowns, which high prices will always produce. But that decline was then amplified by the falling dollar, as most commodities are priced in dollars. So, a lot of âsafeâ havens (with high yields) turn out to have been unsafe again.
The impact of currency on inflation
Currency also has inflation impacts. Traditionally if the pound strengthens by 20%, then UK input prices fall 20%. The latest twelve-month range is from USD1.03 to USD1.31 now, a 28% rise in sterling.
In a lot of the inflation data, this is amplified by a similar 30% fall in energy, from $116 to $74 a barrel for crude over a year. In short, a massive reversal in the double price shock of last year. In fairness this is what Sunak had been banking on, and why the âgreedflationâ meme is able to spread. But while that effect is indeed there, other policy errors clearly override and mask it.
A Barrier to the Fed.
In the US we expect the converse, rising inflation from the falling currency, maybe that is creeping through, but not identified as such, just yet, as price falls from supply chains clearing lead the way, but it is in there.
Finally, of course, this time, the dire performance of the FTSE is probably related to the same FX effect on overseas earnings assumptions. Plus, the odd mix of forecast data and historic numbers that we see increasingly and idiosyncratically used just in the UK. If the banks forecast a recession, regardless of that recessionâs absence, they will raise loan loss reserves, and cut profits, even if the reserves never get used.
Meanwhile, UK property companies are now doing the same, valuing collapsing asset values on the basis of the expected recession, and not on actual trades. So, if you have an index with heavy exposures to stocks, that half look back, half reflect forward fears, it will usually be cheaper than the one based on reality.
Why so Insipid?
OK, so why is the dollar weak? Well, if we knew that, we would be FX traders. But funk and the Fedâs âfront footâ posture are the best answers we have, and both seem likely to be transient too.
If the world is saying donât buy dollars, either from fear of the pandemic or Russian tank attacks or bank failures, thatâs the funk. As confidence resumes and US equity valuations look more grotesque, the sheep venture further up the hill and out to sea. To buy in Europe or Japan, they must sell dollars.
The VIX, in case you were not watching, has Smaug like, resumed its long-tailed slumber, amidst a pile of lucre.
From Yahoo Finance CBOE Volatility Index
So as the four horsemen head back to the stables, the dollar suffers a loss.
The Fed was also into inflation fighting early; it revived the moribund bond markets, enticed European savers with positive nominal rates, (a pretty low-down trick, to grab market share) and announced the end of collective regal garment denial policies. But having started and then had muscular policies, it must end sooner, and perhaps at a lower level. So that too leads to a sell off in the dollar.
Where do we go instead?
So where do investors go instead?
In general, it is either to corporate debt, or other sovereigns. Japan is not playing, the Euro maybe fun, but not so much if Germany is getting back to normal sanity and balancing the books again. So, the cluster of highly indebted Western European issuers are next.
Sterling now ticks those boxes, plenty of debt, liquid market, no fear of rate cuts for a while, irresponsible borrowing, what is not to like?
For How Long
When does that end? Well, the funk has ended. You can see how the SVB failure caused a dip in the spring, but now the curve looks upward again. Although fear can come back at any time, as could some good news for the UK on inflation. However even the sharp drop the energy/exchange rate effects will cause soon, leave UK base rates well south of UK inflation rates.
So, every bit of good news for the Fed, is bad news if you hold US stocks here.
How high and how fast does sterling go?
Well, it has a bit of a tailwind, moves like any other market in fits and starts, but could well go a bit more in our view. Oddly the FTSE would be a hedge (of sorts).