I think he had a seance with Mystic Meg.
Powell now said that asset prices have reached unsustainable levels. No sh!t, Sherlock. I wonder who inflated them since 2009? Oh wait. The Fed!
As expected the insurance payouts are going to be large.
A few updates on “how will we pay for this?”
The Office for Budget Responsibility’s previous estimate was £103.7bn [currently at £123.2bn]. The increased cost of the government’s furlough scheme is the main cause.
It now expects annual borrowing to equal 15.2% of the UK economy.
While the chart looks scary in relative terms borrowing was at 22.1% at the end of World War Two. Also the red line is the forecast still, not confirmed.
the result of the pandemic and shutdowns - is a £127bn hit to the money that government takes in, mainly expected tax revenues, and £119bn in extra spending to support the economy over the year
While looking at the wider world
The coronavirus pandemic could cost the global economy between $5.8tn and $8.8tn (£4.7tn-£7.1tn), according to Asian Development Bank (ADB).
That is a very wide range and from one institution. They explained their numbers.
The ADB said the top end of the range was based on the assumption that curbs to movement and businesses operating would last six months, while the bottom end assumed the restrictions would remain in place for three months.
One thing which might come out of the pandemic, is a reform of WTO.
We are unlikely to see anything meaningful until most of the lock downs have eased up but this might be the opportunity to take a fresh look at world trade.
At least labour can see first hand what would happen if Corbynism would have taken hold.
If there are no more spikes in outbreaks we are on track for more shops opening in two weeks.
But while fashion stores may reopen with deep discounts to clear old stock, most online retailers have already been offering sales to encourage shoppers.
For clothing retailers they are currently holding out of session stock, and the supply lines for a lot of them are currently shut as well.
This makes it likely we will see mass discounts to clear the old stock while ramping up production of new items as quickly as possible to get the stores all back in session.
I think there is a lot of hope, but then we perhaps need to consider reality of countries that are a few months ahead of us:
Also, to put yesterday’s bounce into context:
All while volume remained below average. I haven’t changed my bearish stance, markets are crazily overvalued.
The markets have been overvalued for a while, even before the pandemic. I saw an interesting discussion which said is an overvalued marker the new expectation, or just the result of the current fiscal policy?
I am bullish overall on the markets, largely due to the policy makers fearing any immediate economic crashes.
I doubt there is a V shaped recovery, we will keep bouncing for the foreseeable future. That creates short term opportunity but I guess the larger questions are:
- When we will be back to “normal”?
- What does “normal” now look like?
- What state does the market enter normal?
Will we see multiple bouncing corrections, and/or a sharp correction upon the pandemic been declared dealt with (which isn’t for another 8-12 months.)
A good friend of mine was discussion about interest rates now and post pandemic.
He raised the point that the way we value money may have to change. After being stuck in low interest rates for so many years, and now this global pandemic, we might be looking a serious economic shift.
The thing though is that the global economy had already been slowing since 2018, with many countries already experiencing an industrial recession. Interest rates for most western countries have been near zero, and like you say, have been seen as the norm. Households have very low savings with savings ratios at historical lows due to low interest rates and increasing expenses. Companies are crazily over leveraged as credit was cheap, so it was easy to borrow on the promise of future growth.
The virus couldn’t have come at a worse moment as our economies were already floundering and central banks have few mechanisms left, other than below zero interest rates and QE Infinity - neither worked out well for Japan, whom experienced FOUR recessions since 2008.
The US stock markets are near ATH with select stocks already at ATH, whilst 30m+ people are unemployed, CPI fell off a cliff, oil went momentarily negative, and now even the Fed is forecasting annualised -30% GDP for Q2 and years before we have recovered.
Reopening the economy and then thinking that it’s all puppies and rainbows is an illusion. The Far East has shown that, and spending patterns will have changed at least for the intermediate term. Let’s not forget the US economy is 70% consumer spending, what will you spend when you’re out of work, or how much will you spend when you’re worried about your job? Data has shown that of the 30m+ unemployed, at least 2/3 are continuing claimants who won’t have a job to go back to easily, and the wave of bankruptcies has only just started.
At on top of that the Q1 earnings were bad, imagine how they will be in Q2 when they reflect a full quarter of lockdown. People say the market is forward looking, but economic gravity will take hold eventually.
Although the market has been going up, its now in a side wards movement with lower highs and higher lows. It’s consolidating, but against the backdrop of lower volumes - this indicates people have lower conviction.
The market is driven by hope, and greed, rather than anything else. People discount negative news and exacerbate the good news. Powell was on Friday very negative about the economic outlook, even though he presented it as a shit sandwich, and the market didn’t care and instead rallied on the hope of a tiny trial of Moderna, a company that has been numerous times likened to the next Theranos and were conflicts of interest are so bad, I would argue it’s at best cronyism and at worst corruption.
The market rally has been driven by a tiny amount of FOMO stocks that the retail sheep en-masse flock too, but the vast majority of stocks have been down. Currency, bond and commodities markets get it. International stock markets do too, it’s just the US stock market is the exception as other countries don’t have “pump channels” like CNBC where talking heads like Jim Cramer irresponsibly shout “buy buy buy”.
The market tethers on a precipice and it won’t take much - either opening of the economy and re-emergence of COVID, or Q2 earnings that will result in a wave of bankruptcies.
Moderna potentially getting SEC attention for share offering prior to statistics around their potential COVID vaccine, which with hindsight weren’t as convincing as they led everyone to believe.
I’m guessing the SEC will be extra busy. Lots of small-cap pharma companies are seeing massive share price growth after doing anything pandemic related.
With such long timescales and a vaccine so far away (even with special measures in place to increase the normal pace), lots of investors are trying to chase the firm that cracks it. Lots of companies will try and take advantage of this sadly.
Indeed, I got small exposures to seven biotechs. Trying to ride that wave as well, but the party won’t last.
First negative gilt has been issued.
The UK government joined a select group of global peers being paid to borrow this morning as demand for the sale of a three-year debt issue sent average yields to below zero at -0.003%.
Policymakers on the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee have been increasingly prepared to hint at a willingness to follow the European Central Bank in pushing borrowing rates below zero. The bank slashed rates to a record low of 0.1% in March.
The cost of the government’s response to coronavirus is likely to top £123bn the Office for Budgetary Responsibility estimated this week, and lift total UK 2020/21 borrowing to £298bn, almost double the £160bn envisaged before the virus struck.
Never quite got what negative gilt yields mean for yield prices and investors.
I’ll try a quick summary. I’m sure the guys here will correct me if I miss anything.
Mathematically a gilt/bond can’t have a negative yield. This is the calculation of the annual coupon dividend by sell price.
e.g. I pay a coupon of £5 and the selling price is £100. My yield is 5%.
Unless a gilt is flat out paying negative interest (meaning you just get back less at the end) you can’t really have a negative rate.
Given most gilts give a coupon this doesn’t work. The attraction of gilts is cash flow. I want that guaranteed (almost) interest payment.
However, yield to maturity takes into account how long you hold this gilt for and the par value (the amount you get back at the end of the period.)
Keep in mind this only applies if you buy the gilt and then hold it to maturity.
e.g. You pay £100 for this gilt, it lasts two years and pays out £5 a year. Assuming you get back £100 at the end of two years the YTM would be 10%. You put in £100 and after two years walked away with £110.
Now let’s say you get back less than what you paid.
e.g. You paid £100 and you get £5 a year interest payments, and this gilt lasts two years. At the end of two years, I pay you back for £80, rather than the original £100. You get back £80 plus the interest payments worth £10 meaning you paid £100 and got back £90. You have a negative yield to maturity of -10%.
You can get more advance by adding in the rate of inflation, and the “value of money” where the interest payments mean you are losing buying power over time, but that is a different story.
Bottom line is why would anyway buy a negative-yielding product.
Either, you don’t intend to hold onto it until maturity. e.g. interest rates drop and suddenly these interest payments become valuable increasing the value of the gilt (higher value but same payment pushes the yield down, £110 to buy it but it’s still paying £5 a year mean the yield is now 4.55%~.) Or you hold to maturity because you want reliable payments. If you are a pension fund, for instance, you need cash flow. You’d rather lose out with a small negative yield but at least you can pay all your customers in drawdown reliability.
Generally, higher gilt yields mean weaker equity prices (why invest in risky stocks when the government is guaranteeing payments?) and the flip is true as well. Negative yields push more people into riskier investments to try and keep up their own rate of return. If I can’t make £5 a year with gilts I’ll find an investment which can.
Though recently in America we have seen bond and equities prices rise together so I guess people are simply unpredictable.
Shifted my pension mostly into treasuries, will have to check now exposure to countries with negative gilt/treasuries yields.
Never a dull day!
Double check the funds to see if they hold these to maturity and how they rotate the gilts/bonds around. Some use a futures index, others invest directly and hold to maturity and buy regularly.
As long as a country isn’t in negative yield for multiple years i.e. Japan it shouldn’t have a meaningful impact. Longer term when the different time horizon’s start being sold negative and the government is only offering negative (not even in real buying power, just flat out negative yield to maturity) then that’s a meaningful shift.
Personally my pension has very little bond exposure, but I am happy with a higher risk pension (13% annualised volatility, lots of emerging and development market equity trackers.)