bear beard

Am I Bearish Or Are You Just WAY Too Bullish?

Yesterday I found myself reading GMO’s latest quarterly letter and thinking, ‘wow, I’m fairly bearish but Jeremy Grantham just sounds like a grumpy old man!’ Until I came upon this passage:

…you may think that I am particularly pessimistic. It is not true: It is all of you who are optimistic! Not only does our species have a strong predisposition to be optimistic (or bullish) – it is probably a useful survival characteristic – but we are particularly good at listening to agreeable data and avoiding unpleasant data that does not jibe with our beliefs or philosophies. Facts, whether backed by 97% of scientists as is the case with man-made climate change, or 99.9% as is the case with evolution, do not count for nearly as much as we used to believe. For that matter, we do a terrible job of planning for the long term, particularly in postponing gratification, and we are wickedly bad at dealing with the implications of compound math. All of this makes it easy for us to forget about the previously painful market busts; facilitates our pushing stocks and markets on occasion to levels that make no mathematical sense; and allows us, regrettably, to ignore the logic of finite resources and a deteriorating climate until the consequences are pushed up our short-term noses.

It immediately made me think of one of my favorite songs from The Who:

The shares crash, hopes are dashed.
People forget,
Forget they’re hiding,
Behind an Eminence Front,
Eminence Front – it’s a put on.

We are only a few years removed from one of the worst financial crashes in our history and investors have already put it out of their minds. Most importantly they have forgotten perhaps the greatest lesson of that time: overpay for a security and you are essentially taking much greater risk with the prospect of much reduced reward.

Right now, stocks as a whole present very little in the way of potential reward. According to Grantham’s firm, investors should probably expect to lose money over the coming seven years in real terms (after inflation). Other measures (explained below), very highly correlated to future 10-year returns for stocks, suggest investors are likely to earn very little or no compensation at all over the coming decade for the risk they are assuming in owning stocks.

In trying to quantify that risk, Grantham’s firm suggests that investors are now risking about a 40% drawdown in order to earn less than the risk-free rate of return. I have also demonstrated recently that margin debt in relation to GDP has been highly correlated to future 3-year returns in stocks for some time now. The message we can glean from record high margin debt levels is that a 60% decline over the next three years is a real possibility. Know that I’m not predicting this outcome; I’m just sharing what the statistics say is a likely outcome based on this one measure.

Screen Shot 2015-07-29 at 10.04.43 AMThis horrible risk/reward equation is simply a function of extremely high valuations. As Warren Buffett likes to say, “the price you pay determines your rate of return.” Pay a high price and get a low return and vice versa. Additionally, if you can manage to buy something cheap enough to build in a “margin of safety,” your downside is limited. However, when you pay a high price you leave yourself open to a large potential downside.

Speaking of Buffett, his valuation yardstick (Market Cap-to-GNP) shows stocks are currently valued just as high as they were back in November 1999, just a few months shy of the very top of the dotcom bubble. Investors should look at this chart and remember what the risk/reward equation back then meant for the coming decade. For those that don’t remember, it meant a couple of massive drawdowns on your way to earning very close to no return at all. (Specifically, this measure now forecasts a -1% return per year over the coming decade.)

fredgraph-2Instead, investors today choose to hide behind an “eminence front.” They ignore these facts simply because they are unpleasant to think about. Despite the horrible risk/reward prospects of owning equities today, they have now put nearly as much money to work in the market as they did back in 1999. (This measure is even more highly correlated to future 10-year returns. It now forecasts about a 2.5% return per year over the coming decade.)

fredgraphIt’s truly an astounding phenomenon that investors, after experiencing the very painful consequences of buying high – not just once but twice over the past 15 years, can once again be so enamored with paying such high prices yet again. Amazingly, they are as eager as ever to take on incredible risk with very little possibility of reward. It proves that “rational expectations” are merely the imaginings of academics and have no place in real world money management. It also validates Grantham’s view that it’s not him who is pessimistic; it’s investors who are too optimistic.


It’s Time To Get Greedy In The Gold Market

Gold and the mining stocks have been absolutely crushed lately. The plunge in price after a nearly four-year bear market has investors panicking. In fact, during the 10%+ decline in the gold mining equities indexes yesterday, the fear was almost palpable.

It’s very easy to say, “be greedy when others are fearful,” but it’s another thing entirely to actually do it. Here are a couple of reasons why it might pay off in the miners right now.

They say the best time to buy is when there’s “blood in the streets.” At -22%, the 5-year average annual return for the Philadelphia Gold/Silver index has never been so poor, as Short Side of Long reports. This is exactly what “blood in the streets” looks like:

Gold-Miners-Compound-ReturnChart via Short Side of Long

This prolonged pain has created an incredible degree of despair in these markets right now. Everyone hates gold today. Traders hate it. Speculators hate it. The media hates it.

But only when something becomes so widely out of favor does an investor get the opportunity to buy it at such a wide discount. The more out of favor it is the greater the discount. The greater the discount, the greater the prospective return.

Meb Faber recently showed us the terrific returns to be had by buying an asset class after a prolonged decline: “You doubled your returns in the year following three down years for both country stock markets and asset classes.”

returnsGraphic via

Gold and the miners are now down nearly 4 years in a row. I can only imagine the sort of returns that degree of despair produces. And that’s just the sort of setup that piques my interest.

All in all, I’m fairly certain that the gold mining stocks are now the most hated asset class in the markets. For that very reason, they may very likely be the most attractive opportunity an investor can find.

Disclosure: I have personally been buying various gold mining stocks. For details subscribe to The Felder Report PREMIUM


Shanghai As A Leading Indicator For The S&P 500

“The Shanghai Composite is an excellent leading indicator for the S&P 500.” –Jeff Gundlach

The Shanghai Composite is rallying nicely today for what feels like the first time in what’s been a horrific period for the index. Since its peak less than a month ago it has lost nearly a third of its value. This amounts to roughly $4 trillion in losses, greater than the value of the entire German stock market. This should be of great concern to US investors because there are many similarities and connections between our equity markets and theirs.

First, it’s plain to see that global equity markets’ long-term cycles harmonize. They don’t always move together over the short-term but the major trends are broadly correlated. Most importantly, major tops and bottoms seem occur simultaneously. If the Chinese stock market just witnessed a major market peak, it may suggest our market could also be in the process of peaking.

This close correlation is due to a multitude of factors but it’s probably fair to simplify by saying that as companies and economies have become more and more globalized they have also become more and more synchronized.

One key component of this rising globalization has been rise of the Chinese consumer. GM is a great example. In June, GM sold just about as many cars in China as they did in the US. Apple has also benefitted greatly from the success of the iPhone with the Chinese consumer which has recently become responsible for a huge portion of the company’s growth.

Considering that 80% of Chinese urban households have been affected by the crash in the stock market, it’s hard to imagine there won’t be repercussions for companies whose success is dependent upon them. In fact, recent reports show that GM’s China sales are falling for the first time in years even as they cut prices a whopping 20%.

All in all, the Chinese consumer has represented one of the greatest hopes for global growth until the stock market crash. Time will tell just how much it affects companies like GM and Apple and the broader global economy.

It’s also important to understand that the stock market bubble in China was intentionally manufactured by the People’s Bank of China in an effort to support its flagging economy which is suffering a real estate bust amid the burden of a massive private debt load. A failure to rescue the economy by inflating consumer wealth could trigger a daisy chain of economic troubles for the country. This is why the People’s bank is so obviously desperate to support the stock market right now.

In some ways, the Chinese example parallels our own. We also suffered a real estate bust which the Fed responded to by explicitly targeting the asset markets in hopes of creating a wealth effect. And it has worked beautifully.

Ultimately, the greatest consequence of a stock market crash in China could be the simple realization that even a completely autonomous, communist government is not omnipotent when it comes to the markets. It’s not capable of defying market forces and human nature. It’s simply not possible to have a boom without a bust.

The one major difference between the Federal Reserve and the People’s Bank of China is that the Fed is out of ammo. We are very near or have already reached the end of the credit super cycle. If the economy slows again, lowering interest rates to spur more private debt can’t save us this time.

The Fed’s other tools, like quantitative easing, are mainly effective at boosting the wealth effect through rising risk assets only to the degree that investors believe they are effective. And if the Chinese example begins to disabuse investors of this faith in the Fed we may soon discover that there’s not much else holding risk assets up at this point.

For more detail on the Chinese stock market bubble read this.


The Single Most Important Element To Successful Investing

Simple is good, especially when it comes to investing. In the markets, it generally pays to “keep it simple stupid.” Trying too hard to be “very intelligent” or just overcomplicating things is an all too common failure among investors. However, there are no short cuts to investing success and making things simpler than they should be can be just as much of a failure as overcomplicating things. And this is where I think many investors could be erring today.

“It is remarkable how much long term advantage people like us have gotten by trying to be consistently not stupid, instead of trying to be very intelligent.” -Charlie Munger

There are some very basic minimum standards to successful long-term investing that just can’t be whittled away no matter how much investors would like them to be. The most important one is simply the act of thinking. Thinking about potential risk versus potential return. Thinking about market history and long-term cycles. Thinking about the potential costs of herding and lack of liquidity. Thinking about simple supply and demand. An investment methodology that bypasses or eschews this sort of thought is not investing at all.

“What could be more advantageous in an intellectual contest – whether it be bridge, chess, or stock selection than to have opponents who have been taught that thinking is a waste of energy?” -Warren Buffett

Still, more investors than ever have now been emboldened by a 3-year trend, as strong as any ever seen in history, into believing that thinking in this sense is a waste of time. I’m mainly referring to the growing popularity of “passive investing” and “trend-following,” not in their purest sense but in how they are commonly practiced today. In many ways, they have been bastardized by those who believe they can simplify the process by removing the need to think.

“One of the things I most want to emphasize is how essential it is that one’s investment approach be intuitive and adaptive rather than be fixed and mechanistic.” –Howard Marks

Both of these disciplines were originally founded and then refined by exceptional thinking in regards to risk, costs, liquidity and managing cycles – all critical to long-term success. If your investment discipline abandons this sort of contemplation then it clearly has removed the very thing that defines “investing” in the first place and has certainly become too “fixed and mechanistic.” Investing requires thinking. Without thinking, you’re not investing. Finding a balance between overthinking and not thinking at all is the key to developing a successful investment methodology.

A couple of individual practitioners in the indexing and trend-following space who have impressed me with their thinking on the subjects are Jerry Parker and Meb Faber. If you’re interested in learning how to think about implementing an index-based, trend-following strategy you would be wise to follow them:


A Tale Of Two Mondays

For those that don’t know, back in late September I vowed not to shave until the S&P 500 saw it’s first 10% correction in years.

Since then I’ve been tracking “the beard indicator.” During this tight trading range over the past few months sentiment has been swinging from bullish to bearish in a matter of minutes it seems. One day, I get loads of folks telling me I’m never shaving again. The next they tell me to get my razor ready.

Last Monday, stocks gapped up and folks were rather bullish:

Today they gap down and they’re not feeling so bullish anymore:

Is there any better contrary signal out there right now? I think I may have to figure out how to quantify this thing. I could probably build an ETF around it and make a fortune right now.