Joining the Band

Join The Band

Hey Lordy… (join the band, be good rascal…)

Hey join the band, be good rascal and join the band

Hey Lordy…

Join the band, be a good rascal and join the band

Oh huh oh ho ho ho

— Little Feat

Don’t you think the moment has come? To join the band, I mean? There are worse ways to spend your time, you know, and when Little Feat’s late and lightly lamented Lowell George asks, I believe we owe it to him to respond favorably – even four decades after the initial request.

So, even at this late date, I am inclined to take up Lowell’s invitation. However, one problem remains: which band should I join? It’s not as though I am flooded with offers; the plain truth is that I have had none. And believe me, this hurts, because these days I can really shred. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that I’d be a major asset to any ensemble fixated on the rolling decade between 1965 and 1974, and, in the right group (i.e. one that: a) narrowed its focus to 1968 through 1972; and b) let me do exactly what I wanted), I could be great.

But at my advanced age, I have learned that delusion is risky and even sometimes fatal, and this forces me to face the possibility that no rock and roll outfit will have me. However, there’s more than one kind of band to join, so I’ve chosen to take a different course, affiliating more assertively with that band of brothers and sisters that form the global financial blogosphere. It’s not as though I haven’t contributed to their catalogue; the consistent production of these weeklies, and subsequent posting to the web is, in itself a testament to my longstanding affiliation with the blog bros. But, my friends, like so many other matters, it comes down to a matter of degree. I’m going to be doing more with them, and whether I become a full-fledged member of the group, or, like Darryl Jones, who has ably managed the base lines for the Rolling Stones for a period longer than founder Bill Wyman but has never achieved full membership, linger as a side man, remains out of my hands.

Please know that I don’t take this step without due consideration. I am solemnly aware that, over the baker’s dozen years that I’ve been pumping out these weeklies, missing nary a one, through sickness and health, triumph and tragedy, that you (the reader) and me (the scribe) have developed a sacred, unshakeable bond. It would nauseate me beyond measure to think that any step I could possibly take would weaken, let alone sever, these ties. Please know that you will continue to receive these missives, under the same timelines, and based upon the identical format – one that as you know, features my often futile efforts to gather what remains of my wandering wits.

That being stated, the chattering voices inside my head have convinced me that a wider audience beckons, and that I must answer the call. So if you observe me blogging, tweeting (under the rather generic handle of @KenGrantGRA) you will have two choices. You can consider this an unacceptable betrayal on my part (I will love you no less if you do), or you can give me a pass.

Oh yeah, there is one other alternative available to you: you can join the band, the @KenGrantGRA Band, accompanying me on my virtual journey through soaring arena anthems, destroyed hotel rooms, mud sharks and other such delights.

There’s room for you (and any friends you might wish to invite) on the @KenGrantGRA Tour Bus, and Cowboy Neil (at the wheel) will pull over and let you off at any point of your own choosing. Do me a favor and think about it, OK?

*******************

Whether you believe me or not, the plain truth is that I hate to write about politics. I find it an unproductive, loser’s game. I tell myself that I have held more or less to the discipline of only doing so through the filter of political impacts on risk conditions. But you’ll have to make your own judgments as to how well I’ve actually adhered to this protocol, and how rigidly I’ll stick to the discipline going forward.

One way or another, I believe that politics hover over current market conditions in a highly menacing fashion, so this week, and perhaps for a spell going forward, I must at least move towards the borderlands of my pledge. By my judgement, Trump had by far his worst political week since he put his hand on that bible, amid so much protest, almost exactly five quarters ago. Let’s dispatch with the easily analyzed events first. Paul Ryan announced he’s stepping down at the end of his term, and, any way you look at it, this is not a positive development for the Administration. I’ve always liked my Janesville boy, and think he was one of the very few competent members of Congress. He did his homework, did his work, and, through a number of hits and misses, actually got things done. And I ask this to anyone in favor of any part of Trump’s legislative agenda: where we’d be now without his steady hand? But he’s riding off, taking the certified Republican House Majority down to a slim 22. Also, and, ominously (at least in a symbolic fashion), his departure means that nearly half (10 out of 21) Congressional Committee Chairs have now stepped down, and, given that it’s only April, that number could rise.

More chilling was the raid on Trump lawyer Michael Cohen’s office and home by those fluffy fellows from the Office of the United States Attorney Southern District of New York. Acting on a referral from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, they forced their way into Attorney Cohen’s private professional and personal lairs, and seized pretty much anything that wasn’t nailed down. Subsequent reports indicate that he’d been under investigation by the Southern District for criminal activity for several months, but the timing and the methods turn my blood to ice. Federal prosecutors have many methods to procure information from investigation targets, most notably their subpoena powers, and raids are the most aggressive of these tools. Typically, this type of thing is only justified when the target is either a flight risk (which Cohen clearly was not), or information suggests he was committing serious crimes on an on-going basis. So I hope for all our sakes, that whatever impelled the G-Men to give Cohen the Manafort Treatment be disclosed in short order. And it better be good.

Because, and I state this more in sorrow than in anger, attorney client privilege is so embedded in basic human rights as to not even require inclusion in the Constitution. It dates back to the Elizabethan Era, and is a core part of British Common law upon which our Constitution is based. We are now headed down a very slippery slope on the treacherous terrain of civil liberties, and however much you may be enraged by Trump, I urge you to bear in mind that someday, you yourself might need a good lawyer, who, if we’re not careful, may have his professional materials seized. At which point they won’t be of any use to you. If this ever happens (and I pray that it doesn’t), it’ll probably be lights out for your case. Of course, this won’t apply to everyone. If you happen to be very rich, powerful and aligned with the appropriate forces, not only will your private realms not be raided, but you will have the prerogative to respond to subpoenas by simply decided what, of the information demanded, you choose to share.

The deal struck between the Southern District and the Special Counsel is such that anything the former uncovers that might be useful to the latter will be referred back to them. And here’s where I can at least plausibly make my case of tying the political to the financial. Anyone who had a shadow of a doubt that Mueller is going for the jugular should disabuse themselves of this fantasy at the earliest convenient opportunity. There’s an end game afoot here, set to play out over the immediate months ahead, and I believe it behooves the risk sensitive to bear this in mind as they seek to navigate through these choppy market waters. Because I don’t think the markets will much like the action, however it turns out.

But equities, notwithstanding these and other worrisome events, gathered themselves in gratifying fashion this past week, with the SPX bouncing jauntily off of its 200-Day Moving Average yet again, and now resting in the friendlier confines of its 50 and 100 day equivalents. One might be tempted to ascribe the bounce to giddiness about earnings, and I’ve seen estimates of growth rise to the dignity of ~20%. But I’d be careful here. A large contingent of big banks reported on Friday (JPM, Citi, Wells, PNC) and despite ALL of them beating both profit and revenue estimates by a comfortable margin, EACH sold off in the wake of their announcements by >2%. This suggests that the bar is very high for a paradigm involving strong earnings being followed by shares being bid up.

Volatility has indeed risen in the equity markets, but perhaps a little perspective here is in order. The combination of renewed price action after the vol paralysis of last year, and a rally that has increased the denominators associated with percentage moves, may be creating the illusion that the Equity Complex is in hyper-volatility mode. However, statistics offer a different story. While February and April brought some truly noteworthy action, across the course of 2018, we’re still only looking at a standard deviation of SPX returns in the mid to high teens, which is about the norm in the modern market era. So the equity market has become more volatile, but not alarmingly so, and while it is likely to continue to rise, in percentage terms, it’s important to remember that we’re pretty much at historical norms. And in terms of options volatility, last week’s selloff in the VIX took this benchmark to under 17.5 – right about its median for the lifetime of this eccentric index.

However, in a continuation of a highly vexing pattern, non-equity asset classes remain stuck in the volatility mud. The following chart, coming to you through the courtesy of those dedicated public servants at Goldman Sachs, Inc., illustrates what it looks like when one asset class awakes from a winters-long hibernation, while others remain in blissful slumber:

I’m not entirely sure what this correlation drop implies, but it doesn’t strike me as the kind of breakdown that the ghost of Tom Petty could reasonably describe as being “alright”.

Meanwhile, as cross-asset class correlations have migrated to decade plus lows, the story is quite different within the equity complex. Here, correlations, have spiked dramatically, again as illustrated by those talented graphic artists in residence at Goldman:

Among other things, one might wish to review other periods when stock correlations took an abrupt leap forward, and the intrepid among you might choose to superimpose equity index graphs on the image. I myself am either to frightened or have too much sensitivity for my readers to connect the dots here.

It may be the case that the jump in stock correlations is more easily explained than the drop in the cross-asset class correlation metric.

To wit: there’s a great deal to worry us in current affairs that has little to do with the relative fortunes of individual companies. For one thing, us Yanks got together with the French and Brits to lob some bombs into Syria this weekend. I don’t know what impact this will have on the markets, and won’t know till at least Sunday night, so I won’t opine upon this development.

More visible is the trade war of words currently under way. No one knows how this will resolve itself, but let’s just agree that it’s a risky proposition. Certainly, the Energy Markets have taken notice, bidding up Brent Crude to a 3-year high, and even the long-suffering, ag-heavy Continuous Commodity index has shown indications of higher pricing:

Strong Trade Winds: Crude And Commodities

Thus, as anticipated, we are in what I believe to be the early innings of a high impact information cycle. My best advice is to temper your investment enthusiasm and add a healthy measure of reactivity. There are opportunities developing, but they will require all of your talents and energies to capture them. You may also wish to place an extra focus on risk management.

So maybe it’s as good a time as any for me to step up my whole blogging game. Lowell George asked for our participation, but he’s been dead for nearly 40 years, and we need to make use of the tools that are at our current disposal. Please, in any event, don’t judge me too harshly for my expanded electronic footprint. And, if the spirit moves you, be a good rascal and join my band.

TIMSHEL

Zook Suit

I’m the hippiest number in town and I’ll tell you why

I’m the snappiest dresser right down to my inch-wide tie

And to get you wise I’ll explain it to you

A few of the things that a FACE is supposed to do

I wear zoot suit jacket with side vents five inches long

I have two-tone brogues yeah you know this is wrong

But the main thing is unless you’re a fool

Ah you know you gotta know, yeah you know, yeah you gotta be cool

So all you tickets I just want you to dig me

With my striped zoot jacket that the sods can plainly see

So the action lies with all of you guys

Is how you look in the other, the other, yeah, the other cat’s eye

— Peter Townsend

Plainly, and as anticipated, there is a great deal going down at the moment, so we might as well start with the most important developments. Topping the list is Zuck’s Capitol Hill testimony, scheduled to take place, not once, but twice, this coming week. On Tuesday, he will sit in front of a committee of the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body, and, given the latter’s historic and never-breached protocols of decorum, I don’t expect much drama. A better show is likely to take place on Wednesday, when he faces the wilder and woolier Lower Chamber. But on the whole I don’t see much intrigue in the pending exchange between our duly elected representatives and the world’s most high-profile Hipster/Nerd. Committee Members will look menacing, issue superficially difficult queries, and appear less than fully satisfied with the responses. And Zuck is sure to stick to the well-scripted, obsequious and cloying replies which, even as I type these words, his legion of overpaid lawyers is preparing on his behalf. I have a hunch that not much more will transpire after that, and that at least for a time, the entire episode will be dispatched to the level of focus now drawn by, say, the Las Vegas shooter investigation.

But all of this begs the most important question: what will he wear? I can’t remember an event with so much sartorial suspense this side of the Academy Awards. Surely he will shed his trademark vaguely blue/grey tee and chinos getup; in all likelihood he will shoehorn his way into a suit. But which suit?

One option will be to bust out his Bar Mitzvah ensemble, images of which I have helpfully sourced through a search from FB Frenemy enterprise Google:

Zuck’s looking pretty sharp here, but I find this choice unlikely for a couple of reasons. For one, he’s probably not going to be able to roll jacketless. Beyond this, it’s entirely possible that either: a) Mrs. Zuck (nee’ Priscilla Chan) has done the wifely thing and thrown these threads out; and/or b) trim as he may remain, he may no longer be able to comfortably wedge himself into this holy, historic outfit.

Thus, in all probability, he will have to bust out some new, or, at minimum, seldom seen, garments. And as someone who wishes him well in his astonishingly successful quest for global hegemony, I humbly suggest that he consider showing up in a wide-lapelled, high waisted Zoot Suit, the uniform of choice for the hep cats of the Roaring ‘20s. As many of my readers are too young to remember much of this high-flying decade, the getup looks something like this:

In addition to I believe setting the proper tone for his grilling, such a choice might help effect greater political balance — away from the measurably left-leaning vibe that Zuck has long exuded. To wit, careful pic observers will note the prominent presence of pinstripes that clearly bring to mind the wardrobe stylings of newly-appointed Director of the National Economic Council: former Cable TV sensation Larry Kudlow.

So formidable and terrifying are the Zuck’s powers of influence (or were, until at least a couple of weeks ago) that should he adopt my advice, he could set off a global fashion sensation. Soon, everyone from Paris Hilton to the Dalai Lama might be compelled to rock the Zoot, and that, at least from my vantage-point, would be pretty cool.

However, as important as this high-drama debate may be, we must move on, leaving the outcomes to Zuck and his tailor. Across our last couple of installments, I made the proclamation that the market’s already expanded volatility bands would further widen, and in a very real sense I was correct. Unfortunately, though, said widening has applied, well, quite narrowly, to the Equity Complex. Not much else is moving at all. The U.S. Treasury Curve does little but flatten, albeit at a glacial pace. In the wake of a somewhat garish late January selloff, The U.S. Dollar Index has wedged itself into a depressing/suppressed 3% band. Similar somnolent patterns have plagued the Energy Markets.

With brouhahas of varying configuration raging everywhere one cares to cast an eye, the question is: why? I met with one of the smartest and most successful macro traders of my wide acquaintance on Friday, and he was ready to pull his hair out at the stasis he observes across the risk factors upon which he is most focused.

And his beefs were not just limited to the price action in underlying instruments; he notes an absolute obliteration of options volatilities in this realm. He asked me what I thought, and I didn’t have a good answer for him. I did, however, agree that given the opacity that plagues the global capital economy and the rapid-fire stream of news bits (many blindingly irrelevant; others not so much), that: a) prices outside of equities should be more migratory; and b) some of these here non-equity options, instead of operating under fire-sale conditions, should actually be being bid up. I told him I’d look into it and revert back to him.

Anybody have any ideas for me? I am desperate to look smart and well-informed to this guy.

Still and all, there are some developments outside of the obsession-inducing world of individual stocks and associated indices that have caught my eye. One was that, with trademark anonymity, the Swiss 10-Year Note managed to slip below the Maginot Line of 0.0%, and now trades, somewhat improbably, at a negative yield:

Thus, a country which produces cheese, chocolate, watches and little else, an economy which is dominated by a deeply impaired, arguably insolvent banking industry, is actually paid by market participants for the privilege of lending to them. And the trend towards easy financing has spread to the neighbors they refused to fight – with or against — in either of last century’s world wars: yields in France, Germany, Italy and even freaking Sweden have declined materially over the last couple of weeks.

But if you’re hunting somewhere outside of equities for volatility, you may want to take a look at the Agricultural Complex, which has anyway shown something of a pulse this year:

As the graph’s caption explains, a good deal of this action is probably catalyzed by the Trump Administration’s well-thought-out, nuanced and impeccably executed trade skirmishes. I am supposed to be something of an expert in these markets, and, to the best I can discern is that the Chinese import a lot of Soy Beans from us, and feed them to their similarly imported Hogs. So the escalating tariff rhetoric is good/bad for Soy Beans/Hogs, as is reflected in the price action. I hope that I’ve made myself clear.

One way or another, the continued war of words on international trade and other pertinent matters is clearly driving investors somewhat batty. I truly wish that this cycle would end, but hold out little hope for this miracle any time in the foreseeable future. After all, it’s not as though we don’t have a great deal of other information to process and seek to monetize. Case and point, just this past Friday, after a somewhat surprisingly tepid March Jobs Report dropped, and just as investors were catching their collective breaths and maybe even trying to look on the bright side, Chair Pow took some questions from a reporter, and his answers offered scant comfort to anyone seeking it in that quarter. Perhaps owing to this end-of-week double whammy, the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow tracker exhibited some renewed gravitational pull:

On the whole, however, I am inclined to believe that equities will continue to drive the risk pricing train. Last week, they rallied hard early and then sold off even harder, and Q1 earnings have not even begun yet. They start in earnest next week with the banks, which, in eerie consistency with the bizarre paradigms currently vexing us, have all scheduled their releases for Friday the 13th. I will be watching these tidings with a careful eye, and in particular for any hint of what Lloyd, Jamie, James and the rest have to convey about prospects for the rest of the year. The action will be fast and furious from that point onward, and here there is some good news to report. Not only have growth estimates retained a lofty 17% handle, but according to the infallible FactSet, positive pre-announcements have clocked in at a record high:

The chart further shows the skew of these happy tidings towards the recently beleaguered Tech Sector, but I have my doubts about the final outcomes there. Soon after Zuck gasses up his smoke and bids goodbye to Washington, he, Bezos, Serge/Larry and TCook and the others must face their own investors. If I were any of them, I might check in with my CFOs and see if I could possibly defer some revenues and/or accelerate some expenses. Given the horrific P.R. onslaught that has assaulted each of them lately, I think it’s a sound strategy for them to sandbag their numbers. Their stocks will sell off further, to be sure, but they can catch up later, and I just don’t think this is a good time for them to announce earnings moonshots.

One way or another, I expect their guidance to be particularly unpretentious. It’s just hard to imagine someone like Bezos stepping up to the podium and saying something akin to “me and the boys were poolside in Pacific Heights and we’re feeling pretty strongly that we can take our share of the NDX valuations from 50% to 90% this year”.

Guidance beyond San Jose will be especially important – given the looming and growing political risk — about which I have been expounding for the last several weeks. I continue to believe that these matters loom large on the horizon, and our fearless leader does nothing but fan the flames of his potential demise – through his trade tantrums, his attacks on companies like Amazon and – perhaps even worse – his more recent tweeting down of the markets in general. Again, all of the above portends a continued upward trajectory of volatility for the foreseeable future – at least for equities.

As for the other components that comprise the broader market, I reckon we’ll just have to see. My guess is that vol will spill over into the other asset classes; perhaps soon, but one thing is certain: until it does, it won’t.

But all of this is small potatoes. When all said and done, the only thing that truly matters is that you follow my example and make sure at all times that you look fabulous. I expect Zuck to act accordingly, and, my dear readers, you could do worse than bearing this mind yourselves.

TIMSHEL

I AM A MAN

He did not want to return to Memphis. Of this I am certain. He had other fish (and perhaps some loaves) to fry. He was fully engaged in the planning of the Poor People’s Campaign/March on Washington, intended to be the largest-ever nonviolent demonstration against wealth/income inequality and general economic injustice. Maybe it’s just me, but this theme has a vague ring of modernity about it, no?

But on balance he felt he had no choice. There was an all-out crisis ‘a-brewing on Beale Street. The City’s entirely-black sanitation force was on strike. On February 1st, two of their own had been crushed by a truck, just the ghastliest episode a seemingly never-ending string of serious mishaps on the sanitation line. Their average salary was approximately $1.50/hour, and workers finally reached the limit of their patience. They walked out in demand for higher wages and safer conditions. Henry Loeb, the newly elected, somewhat reactionary mayor, declared the strike illegal, and ordered the men to return to their jobs. As always, Hoover’s FBI had its meddlesome eye on the episode.

History confirms the inevitable and let’s just say Mayor Loeb’s stance did not produce his desired outcomes. The workers stiffened, and the image of hundreds of them, each carrying a sign with the words “I AM A MAN” is, to my thinking, one of the most poignant in the history of American Social Justice.

On March 18, 1968, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King travelled to Memphis, and addressed a crowd of 25,000. At the time, he was struggling mightily to prove to his followers, skeptical global observers, and perhaps even to himself, that he could hold his movement together under the protocols of nonviolent protest. But it all went wrong that early Spring on the banks of Big Muddy. Tensions mounted, and then mounted some more. Ten days later, the thugs started looting and the police brought out the clubs/tear gas. A 16-year-old boy was killed.

King escaped out of town, but the situation did nothing but deteriorate. No, he did not want to return to Memphis, but he felt the need to restore non-violent order to the proceedings. So he came back. At 6 pm on April 4th, he stepped out on a hotel balcony and somebody took him out.

And, as of Wednesday, 50 years have gone by since that horrible night.

MLK passed into history, to my way of thinking as one of, anyway, the five greatest Americans ever to have ever lived. If he died before achieving complete solutions to the problems he attacked, it was not for lack of effort on his part. And the task needed to be undertaken. And we are all better for his works. The path he chose took vision, diligence and a holy measure of courage. And it’s abundantly clear to me that the Good Reverend Doctor knew that he was testing the prime-evil forces of nature, much as did, say, John Lennon, and knew that by doing so, he was likely to come out on nature’s losing end.

No greater proof of this prescience presents itself than his final “Mountain Top” speech, delivered at the Mason Temple, the very night before his assassination:

“Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now, because I’ve been to the mountaintop. And I don’t mind. Like anybody, I would like to live – a long life; longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land. So I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.”

Breathtaking.

I suspect it is more than mere coincidence that the 50th anniversary of King’s death coincides more or less with a rare, contemporaneous celebration of Passover and Easter. His final speech is clearly allegoric to the to the Book of Exodus – the story of the liberation of the Children of Israel and the latter’s subsequent delivery to the Promised Land. But as far as I am concerned, it was an intervening event that stands out as the true miracle of the tale. It is Moses going to the Mountain Top, and returning with maybe the greatest gift of all – the living laws codified in the 10 Commandments. They have stood the test of time, and remain just as they are, just as they were written by the Hand of God, some 3,500 years ago. In the intervening ~150 generations, no one has thought to expand them, reduce them, or amend them in any way. Indeed, no one, to the best of my knowledge, has ever even legitimately questioned them. And that, my friends, is both remarkable, and yes, divine. How sad it all stands – particularly in contrast to the petty moral and ethical squabbles that assault our senses, 24/7, in the present day.

**********

Some years ago I wrote what I hoped was an entertaining piece entitled “The 10 Commandments of Risk Management”. I’d love to share it with you but I can’t find it. There, I covered my usual repertoire, risk more when you’re up than when you’re down, pay attention to the small things, set objectives and constraints and live by them, yada, yada, yada. But my 10th risk management commandment was my favorite: obey the real 10 Commandments. Don’t steal. Don’t lie. Don’t kill. Don’t tale the Lord’s name in vain. Don’t covet your neighbor’s wife. I felt at the time that following these eternal rules of life would be accretive to returns, and that failure to do so would have the opposite effect.

As we close the chapter on Q1 ’18 (and I for one am glad it’s over), it is my sense that these righteous rules for the road may be more critical than ever, because we’re about to enter a very trying season, and the prospects of our reaching the Promised Land are a matter of some doubt.

After a rollicking start to the year, investor wrath emerged, seemingly out of nowhere, right around Groundhog Day, when Phinancial Phil most certainly saw his shadow. After the first frosty winds of early February, the SPX has bounced around, but remains, at the point we went to press, a wintery 10% below its recently manifested all-time highs.

My sense is that we’re entering Q2 in true jump ball configuration. With respect to virtually every risk factor/asset class, plausible arguments can be made for rallies, selloffs and stasis. However, by, say, Memorial Day, I believe markets may have a very different look and feel from that which prevails today.

I feel that the main cause of the current opaque conditions is the potential impacts of public policy, and the maddening inability for rational beings to unpack all of the mixed messages emanating from the halls of government. While I’ve made these points before, I urge my readers to be aware of the following two hypotheses: 1) whatever side of the political spectrum one chooses to plant one’s feet, certain policy paths will unleash a significant incremental rally, while others may catalyze a truly nasty selloff; and 2) whatever the outcomes of 1) the results will set a strong tone for the rest of the year and perhaps beyond.

To resume where they left off in late January, the markets need a number of factors to break their way, all achievable but each littered with doubt. They require strong earnings and quarterly macro numbers. Encouraging forward guidance from corporate chieftains is equally (if not more) essential. But perhaps above all, what is needed is some sense of stability emanating from the banks of the Potomac.

If one casts a tunnel-vision eye on private economy dynamics, there is ample reasons for optimism. Current Q1 earnings growth estimates have risen strongly over recent weeks and are clocking in at an eye-popping 17.3%. And, given the lower valuation elevations that currently prevail, on paper, there’s a tantalizing combination of profit traction and multiple contraction:

But even these, or so say the soothsayers, are in large part an artifact of a tax reform effort which, in retrospect, was arguably a heavier lift than it should’ve needed to be. The odds on likelihood is that once Easter is over, the governmental powers that be will need to have pulled some rabbits out of their collective hats to continue the happy corporate vibe.

And I’m just not sure this is in the cards. As someone who would prefer not to write about politics, and as a guy who was and is hoping that Trump will succeed, I will admit to increasing fear that he won’t hold this together, and if he doesn’t, it’s look out below. His inability to resist placing himself, virtually every moment at the center of whatever infantile psychodrama captures his wandering attentions is starting to wear thin — among even his most ardent supporters. And, while I believe investors are begging to have the opportunity to interpret policy trends as being accretive to business and markets, every time another key advisor quits (or is pushed out) under dubious circumstances, every time he tweets out an ad hominin attack on a perceived enemy, or worse, a public corporation that has gotten under his skin, I believe it further undermines confidence in the prospects for the capital economy.

If the sobriety of the proceedings further deteriorates, I don’t see how the capital markets, which should be feeling the first green shoot benefits of tax cuts and regulatory reform, can avoid losing some of their vigor. And you can look this up: Q2 economic trends in a mid-term election cycle are perhaps the most important determinant of electoral outcomes. It’s clear as day to me that if the mid-terms go badly for the Administration, a Democratic Congress will bring Articles of Impeachment to the floor. And they will pass them. They really don’t need more than a one-vote majority in the House to take this step, and I believe they will move on even the thin gruel of evidence that exists at the present moment. Because impeachment is a political, not legal process, unless something truly nasty emerges, they won’t succeed in removing Trump from office – a quixotic struggle that requires 67 senatorial votes. But I don’t think that will matter much to the markets, who will not one bit like the spectacle of impeachment.

The funny thing is, I’m not even sure that the Democratic Leadership wants to go down this path. Like Pelosi to the GOP, Trump is probably the Dem’s best political bludgeon at the moment. But they will have no choice but to proceed, because tens of millions of their constituents are out for blood, and will accept no less.

Surely the best hedge against all of this (again, from purely a market perspective) is a strong showing in the markets and in the economy in the middle part of the year. And it seems to me as though instead of acknowledging this and acting accordingly, the current Administration prefers to undertake an endless sequence of circular firing squads, taking such forms as trade wars, grandstanding attacks on individuals, entities and concepts, whose sins, whatever they may be, are best adjudicated in non-presidential forums.

Maybe Trump doesn’t know this, or maybe he doesn’t care. After all, if worse comes to worst, he can simply hop on his smoke to Mar a Lago and forget the whole sorry mess. But investors should and do care, and this is why I believe that they may read more into the gargantuan string of data points coming our way over the next several weeks than they do when the stakes aren’t so high. On the whole, I think it’s about as important a time as any in recent memory for risk-takers to remain on their toes.

If anyone has a copy of my “10 Commandments of Risk Management”, I ask them to kindly forward it to me. I think the time has come to move Commandment 10 up to the top of the list, and re-issue it. In doing so, I’d hope and expect for the blessings of both Dr. King and Moses. After all, someone has to carry the torch that they pass, and at least with respect to l’affaires des risks, it may as well be me.

Besides, I (too) AM A MAN, and, as this season of prayer and reflection winds to a close, I don’t think that this would be too much to ask.

TIMSHEL

Pathos vs. Bathos: March (‘18) Madness Edition

Yes, my friends, the eternal debate (is it “Pathos” or is it “Bathos”?) rages on. Moreover, the question applies not only with respect to individual events, but to human existence writ large. In this installment, we will focus on the former, because, in terms of the latter, how can we possibly arrive at a conclusion other than through impact-weighted aggregation of individual experience?

Noah Webster’s Arc (OK; dictionary) defines Pathos as “an element in experience or in artistic representation evoking pity or compassion”. Its usage, however, dates back to Aristotle’s Rhetoric (soon to be made into a major motion picture), and rightly so, because those Ancient Greeks – what with their wars, sacrifices political intrigue and endless, droning debate, seem to have been bathed in the stuff.

Bathos, by contrast has more recent origins, and is perhaps as a result, more ubiquitous in our usages and in our imaginings. After all, are we not all intimately familiar with its original source, the 1727 Alexander Pope essay Peri Bathous, or The Art of Sinking Poetry, which many of my readers can recite, word for word, from memory? However, for the less erudite among us, let’s simply define it as a humorous shift in the contours of an enterprise – to the common/vulgar, from the sublime.

Both pathos and bathos are indelible components of the human equation, carried with us as we first crawled out of the primordial ooze, and are almost certain to be present when our species’ grand purpose has fully run its course, when, presumably, back into the ooze we will sink. Moreover, each concept bleeds into the other – in both visible and opaque fashion – often in the process obscuring the lines of demarcation between the two. This has always been the case, but at various points in our history, said lines become even more blurred.

It appears, my friends, that this is one of those times, and I’d like to take this opportunity to offer some opinions as to which side of the line certain pertinent events predominately fall.

I start on a personal note, wishing a heavenly rest for my friend Tony Glickman, who died suddenly this past Monday. I called Tony “Rabbi” because: a) everybody called him Rabbi; and b) that’s what he was: an ordained minister to the Children of Israel. He went on to attain the lofty position of Rosh Yeshiva (aka, the rabbinical equivalent of capi di tutti capo) at Yeshiva University. For my money, Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva is about high on the foothills of Mount Sinai as any mere mortal can hope to climb.

But for all of that, the Rabbi spent most of his career in Finance. Across his storied professional experience, he served as Treasurer of Canadian Imperial Bank for Commerce, Head of Risk Services at both Globe-Op and Northern Trust, and, most recently as a Senior Advisor to the global consulting firm Oliver Wyman. He was a prolific writer and thinker, and though I only jammed with him a couple of times, I can attest that he had some legit chops on the keyboard. He could sometimes overwhelm you with his presence, not everyone “got” him, and I don’t think he’d quibble with me for stating that if you wanted Rabbi Glickman, you got all of him; no partial or smaller serving of Glickman was available on the menu. He and I grew quite fond of one another, and I will miss him. But what saddens me most is that he wasn’t done. Not by a long shot. He remained fully engaged across his wide spectrum of interests and activities until the very minute that the Good Lord took him. So, to the Rabbi I offer a heartfelt “aleha ha-shalom” (may peace be upon you) and render, for the purposes of this installment, the following verdict: 100% Pathos. 

Moving on to (though not entirely) less personal (and entirely more uplifting) realms, I wish to share my satisfaction with U.S. News and World Report Magazine, which, for the first time since it got into the academic rankings game, has listed my alma mater: The Booth School of Finance at the University of Chicago, as the nation’s top MBA program. Yes, I’m pleased about this, but must offer a couple of caveats. First, the paleoanthropic era during which I studied at Chi-U began and ended many years before David Booth stroked in a maharajah’s ransom for naming rights to the program, so, technically, I attended not Booth, but U of C GSB. Second, us Maroon finance types had to swallow the indignities associated with the reality that listings actually showed a first-place tie with our intellectual enemies at Harvard. But I’m going to do my best to forget that part of the story, and offer the judgment that this development is bereft of both Pathos and Bathos.

In the wider world, I note that on Friday, the United States Congress passed its 2018 Budget Bill, and that the President (with a show of trademark bluster) promptly signed it into law. Its record $1.3T of projected outlays implies an incremental annual budget deficit contribution on the order of $300B to $400B, but hey, we’ve got children and (in my case) grandchildren to deal with that, right? The consensus among the talking heads is that the Democrats took their opposite numbers to the cleaners here, shoving in a cornucopia of discretionary bling in exchange for a much-needed increase in military spending. It seems, though, and as stated by others, that the outcome is a win for everybody – except of course American taxpayers. Still, I suppose we needed a budget, and, while I suspect that some of what has transpired will come back to haunt America and its well-wishers, I will shade this towards Bathos, while reserving the right to revisit the call at a later date.

Earlier in the week, and just for additional yucks, the Administration laid about $60B of tariffs on China and the latter has responded in kind. The markets didn’t particularly like this stunt, and for what it’s worth, neither did I. I have read widely the encouraging reassurances that this is all part of a grand negotiation strategy that will ultimately redound to our unilateral benefit. Well, maybe, but I say it’s a risky approach. This thing could spin out of control, in what I fear could be a financial redux of the events that started WWI. There, a rather obscure Archduke from a back-benching, dying empire gets assassinated in Sarajevo, treaties are triggered in domino-like fashion, and the next thing you know, the Western World’s military spends years blowing each other to bits in trenches dug not 100 meters away from each other. That conflict led to a stalemate; the Russians bolted and became the Soviet Union, the free world suffered a crippling depression, and the whole thing had to be settled yet again on the same battlefields, a generation later. I’m not saying that we’re in store for anything so dramatic with respect to this here episode, but then again I’m not saying we’re not, and I am in any event going to give the nod here to Pathos.

Last week’s other earth-shattering event involved the revelation that the Heavenly Walls of Almighty Facebook had been breached by nefarious forces, in the process violating the personal electronic space of 50 million users (including, presumably, yours truly). I was under the mistaken impression that everyone knew, or should’ve known, that this was coming. The core premise of Facebook is that it lets you communicate, creatively and effectively, at no charge, in exchange for allowing them to hoover up your private information and sell it to the highest bidder. This type of thing runs much deeper than what has been reported, and extends well beyond Facebook. I, for one, shudder to think of what type of data mining is taking place in the 3rd sub-basement of Google’s sprawling corporate campus in Mountain View, CA. To whom the content is being distributed, and for what purpose, is a matter I prefer not to contemplate at all. Further, I suspect that although the tying of this episode to the endless stream of nonsense about 2016 election interference was inevitable (not to mention ridiculous), it is instead best interpreted as the first salvo in an unfolding battle that will attack the galactic and accelerating power of a handful of U.S. Tech companies over virtually every aspect of our lives. I won’t elaborate here, but if I’m right, then the action will be both fascinating and terrifying to observe. For now, though, I think the FB thing a pig in a poke, and am going to place the sequence squarely in the camp of Bathos.

Investors, however, found little amusing in the episode, and were dumping FB shares – to the tune of about 15% loss – all the way up to Friday’s close. Between this and our burgeoning Trade War, it was a tough week for the Galant 500, which, largely through a sequence of angry closes, ended the week down a round 6%. The Facebook-heavy NAZ fared worse, down 7.3%. All broad-based indices are now in negative territory for the year.

Please know that I weep at anyone’s financial reverses, most notably those accruing to the holders of the common stock of this nation’s great corporate enterprises. That these losses are manifesting at a particularly inopportune moment – the quarter’s penultimate week (and therefore a matter of mere days before CEOs and fund manager must report results to what we can confidently expect to be a wavering group of investors) – only adds to the pathos I’m feeling. However, I’m not ready – just yet – to call the election and hand the victory to the P camp.

For one thing, I view the latest selloff as being driven more by risk reduction prerogatives than by an emerging consensus about valuation levels. Investors are nervous here, and one can hardly blame them. The non-stop assault on our sensibilities emanating from the shores of the Potomac are enough to un-nerve even the steadiest among us. Here, I blame Trump. He may not have started the infantile set of quarrels in which he is perpetually engaged, but it is he who sets the tone. And now, one never knows, from one minute to the next, whether the government is going to shut down, who is running what department, and whether we will go to war first with Russia, China, Iran or North Korea (just to name a few). The preceding administration was headed up by a guy they liked to call No Drama Obama, and I thought of this as an offensive misnomer. However, 14 months into the Trump Administration, #44 is starting to look like Tom Landry on the sidelines at Texas Stadium.

And if you’re an investor, it’s kind of tough to load the boat under these conditions. But I hasten to remind my minions that economic conditions have not changed dramatically from where they were in late January, when our friend Mr. Spoo was sitting some 285 handles and precisely 10% higher than the levels that prevail as this publication went to press. I see very few signs that the earnings harvest has been cancelled or even deferred. Borrowing costs remain stubbornly low, and we’re in the earliest of innings with respect to the widely hailed bennies from regulatory reform and tax cuts.

None of this is to say that the selloff was in any way irrational, or that it won’t continue. I just think that we’re basically looking at substantially the same world that we inhabited a couple of months ago, when it seemed like the “down” button on the equity elevator was damaged beyond repair. As such, somewhere in here, buyers should re-emerge, and I recommend that, at minimum, investors prepare for such an unthinkable contingency. As for now, I’ll deem the equity election too close to call.

However, there is one development which could decide the outcome at any minute. The SPX is now perched directly on its 200-day Moving Average, and I promised you that it would hold this threshold:

If it breaks through on the downside, from a technical perspective, it has some good ways more it can fall. But that’s not really what’s at issue; I’m much more concerned about this chart making a monkey out of me.

As you know, this is something I cannot abide, even during the wild and wooly days of March Madness. Right now, my bracket reads Pathos and Bathos tied at 2, one withdrawal and one contest undecided.

Given the way the NCAA Basketball Tournament has unfolded, I suspect I could have done a lot worse. Since Round 1, I’ve been warning anyone who would listen not to sleep on my Loyola Ramblers, but almost everyone did. And now they’re on their way to the Big Dance in San Antone. And now I’m advising this same crowd not to sleep on equities, at least not yet, but I fear many of you will. To ease my frustration, I keep telling myself, March ain’t over, and Madness is likely to outlast this and many subsequent turns of the calendar.

There’s both Pathos and Bathos in this, so stay on your toes.

TIMSHEL

A Brief Time of History (or: The Theory of Nothing)

Perhaps for lack of other “forum-suitable” alternatives, I am dedicating this column to recently passed Professor Stephen Hawking. Please understand, it’s not as though I don’t admire Hawking; it’s just that I’m ambivalent. Among his other accomplishments, he was a miracle of modern biology for having lived out 3x lifetimes under the heartbreaking burdens of ALS. He should’ve died at 25 – at least according to his (presumably highly qualified) doctors, but made it to 76. During the 3 penultimate decades of his life, he held the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics at his Alma Mater: Cambridge University, and was only the 15th so-honored academic — dating back to Sir Isaac Newton, for whom the post was created in what I remember to be the somewhat raucous year of 1669. In a stunt you can file under “stranger than fiction”, the University forced him to step down 10 years ago, because he had reached the mandatory retirement age of 65. He carried on though, albeit as a somewhat controversial figure, and to my mind detracted from his legacy in his final years by spewing out a fairly unhinged leftist socioeconomic philosophy. I prefer that practitioners in other fields – from Charlton Heston to Roger Waters to Colin Kap – refrain from laying their righteous cross-discipline political thoughts on the masses. However, on this St. Patrick’s Day weekend, I’m willing to give Ulster Steve a Mulligan. Let’s just agree that in the Brief Time of His History, he had an improbably magnificent run.

To be sure, Professor Hawking had a flair for mathematics, but when all is said and done, Physics was his game. Here, he went both big and small, adding significantly to the world’s understanding of the ordering of the Universe (the behavior of Black Holes, the dynamics of the Big Bang, etc.), but also studying the equally fascinating world of atoms and sub-atomic particles. Alas, he never found his Holy Grail: the above-referenced Theory of Everything, which seeks to reconcile Einstein’s Theory of Relativity with the attendant misbehavior of both sub-atomic particles, and celestial objects travelling at velocities beyond the Speed of Light. The latter set of miscreants operate under a concept called Quantum Mechanics, and, thus far, no matter how much intellectual capital we allocate it, humanity has failed in its quest to harmonize General Relativity and Quantum Theories.

Beyond his heroic endeavors to overcome a disability that proved to be too many for the likes of even Lou Gehrig, he is perhaps best known for dumbing down his work for consumption by the masses, as embodied in his 1988 book “A Brief History of Time”. It was an international sensation, but was ironically panned by some critics for being too pointy-headed, and by others for not being sufficiently so.

I read it many years ago, and enjoyed it. And my main takeaway was the remarkable similarities between the behavior of the Universe as we observe it, and those of every single cell that exists therein. I may have misinterpreted something somewhere (nobody would ever accuse me of being a physicist), but when I completed the reading exercise, I took its main message as being that every cell that exists in the cosmos is its own universe, and that the Universe itself can be thought of as behaving like an individual cell.

To me, a such a sublimely symmetrical concept, if not precisely accurate, ought to be so.

And it got me to thinking (natch) about analogues to the markets. And here I will posit a corollary: the entire global capital market can be viewed from certain perspectives as behaving like a single security, and each such security has strong behavioral similarities to the global capital market itself.

As is the case with Hawking’s “Time” theme, I feel that if this isn’t the so, then it ought to be.

But let’s not dismiss thing out of hand, OK? I believe I’m on to something here. Think, if you will, of the world’s markets as being a single financial instrument. Like many existing securities, it has a lot of moving parts. But then again, so does (or did) General Electric. And so does Berkshire Hathaway. Its Balance Sheet contains an impossibly complex mix of privately held assets, collectively held assets, receivables, payables, commodities, real estate, foreign exchange holdings, embedded derivative structures, and even, perhaps, a smidge of Goodwill. This complexity, however, in no way precludes investors from asking the fundamental question: is the market something that I’d want to own at prevailing price levels, or is it not? Across the span of time and conditions, when they have answered in the affirmative, markets go up, and vice versa.

Similarly, one can view every single instrument as an entire macro economy. Whether it be a stock, bond, commodity, physical asset or unit of account (Foreign Exchange) it bears elements of all human endeavor within it. Just as (according to Chaos Theory) a single butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil can cause a tornado in Texas, so too can a default of a Small Cap widgets manufacture in Singapore cause a collapse of the entire American Cotton market.

Across our quixotic journey through the heavens and inside the mystic universe of particles, Newton’s (old school) Second Law of Thermodynamics, which holds that an object at rest or in motion will remain in said state until it is acted on by a material force, seems, by and large, still good to go. The Law still applies pretty well to Quarks, Higgs Bosons, Black Holes, Super Novas and the like.

In addition, it appears to retain its validity in terms of market pricing behavior.

Over the past couple of installments, I have suggested that as Q1 winds down, not a great deal of price movement would be observed in any asset class. So far so good, but why? Well, if we analogize economic information to the “material force” component of Newton’s 2nd Law, then it may very well be that, as I assumed, the information calendar slowing to a seasonal crawl has frozen the majority of current prices in an “at rest” state. After a little bit of two-way movement early in the week, the Wed-Fri range on the SPX was all of 20 handles. The yield on the U.S. 10-Year note hug snugly within 5 basis points. Ditto in terms of for the FX complex price ranges. On a relative basis, there just wasn’t much going on, and this is reflected in the flat-lining of a whole bunch of price graphs.

Yes, there were a few data nuggets to digest. Industrial Production was a blowout – highest in seven years. But Retail Sales and Housing Starts were absolute duds. Let’s call it even.

Elsewhere, our Washingtonian version of “Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite” (“full of men and horses, hoops and garters; lastly through a hogshead of real fire”) carried on in full swing, and continues, if not to the delight, then, at least not to disappointment, of observers everywhere. A soon to be eliminated Pennsylvania Congressional District slipped, improbably, into the hands of the Democrats. Tillerson was fired on a tweet; Kudlow brings his pin-striped cable TV personna to the West Wing office most recently held by the less telegenic Gary Cohn. McCabe got his butt canned, ostensibly to deny him his estimated $1.8M pension package. Here’s hoping (and expecting) that some private sector coastal fat cat will scoop him up, stash him into a cushy spot, and make him whole. Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue to suffer through cross-fire emanating from both the Left and the Right.

The trade war of words continues unabated and is likely to further devolve before any subsequent igration towards the Heavens.

Some of the above is sending signals that threaten to disturb our temporary state of blissful economic equilibrium. Q1 GDP estimates have come careening downward in a rather alarming fashion:

I’m not entirely sure that anyone saw this coming. And about the only root cause I can identify is the already unfolding consequences of the tariff policy, along with general uneasiness regarding international relations.

If one wishes to look for signs that any of this matters, one should point one’s attention to Fixed Income markets. But here, as is so often the case with respect to the cosmos in general, one may be left with more questions than answers.

Consider, for instance, that the Treasury’s latest extended frenzy of issuance has simultaneously acted to flatten the yield curve, while causing some immediate mark-to-market losses for patriotic purchasers:

But that’s the type of tape we’re in. Perhaps next week’s FOMC Policy Statement – the first ever to be issued by Chair Pow, might bring some clarity; but more likely not. I just don’t see him doing anything but raising rates by 25 bp, while uttering some ambiguously pleasing and platitudinous words about the upward trajectory of our economic fortunes.

However, as is the case with everything in this here universe, current conditions won’t last forever. Once the calendar turns to April, the magnetic flow of data should be sufficient to cause investor types to rethink their hypotheses, and to effect attendant material price movement.

But for now, very little is discernable to reconcile the General Relativity of the markets with its befuddling tendency to engage in quantum-like calisthenics. If ever this riddle is solved it will, enable us, as Hawking wrote in “Time”, to “know the mind of God”.

By all accounts, though, Hawking was a wandering agnostic, sometimes placing his faith in divine purpose; at other moments rejecting it on conceptual grounds. Maybe, at the time of his demise, he leaned towards the path of righteousness. I mean, after all, he was born on the 300th anniversary of Galileo Galilei’s death, and died on Einstein’s birthday.

The latter calendar date: 3/14, is known among the egg-headed as Pi Day: as it corresponds with the constant that will give the area and circumference of every circle for which a radius can be supplied.

If there’s an over-riding message here, it’s that markets, as the universe itself, travel a circuitous path, and we’d be well-advised to remember this truism in our risk-taking endeavors. This is not a Theory of Everything, but neither is it a Theory of Nothing.

TIMSHEL

The Spoos Abide

“He’s a good man. And thorough”. That’s what Maude said. And she must have believed it because she said it twice.

But as is widely understood, she wasn’t talking about the Dude; in fact, she is speaking to the Dude. We’ll get to that later.

But first back to the Dude. Most of us agree he is indeed a good man, but is he thorough? The jury is out on that one. He tried – and failed — to stop Walter from flashing his piece on the lanes. He tossed the ringer in the wrong location and then lost the actual package. No, they never did “kill that poor woman”, but hey, she kidnapped herself, right? He has devoted his life to Thai Sticks and bowling, but while we bear witness to his consuming several Sticks, we never actually see him roll.

He went to see Marty’s dance cycle, but he left early, and was at least two weeks late with the rent, which, for all we know, he never bothered to pay it at all. And if he didn’t it’s now 20 years (240 months) overdue.

I mention all this because this past week marked the 20-year anniversary of the release of Coen Brother’s cult masterpiece “The Big Lebowski”. And all I can say is that if you’ve seen it, you no doubt get the references I’ve laid down, and if you haven’t, odds are you never will.

But we celebrated more than the TBL’s China (20th) Jubilee last week. Nine years ago this past Friday (March 9th), the Spoo (aka the SPX Index) closed at a crash-induced and previously unimaginable low of 676.53. Some 8 years and 10 ½ months later (January 26, 2018) it reached its most recent zenith of 2872.76 – an impressive gain of 337% and change over the period. We’ve given back a little bit since then, but not much. And now, since that dark day in 2009, the valuation recovery has survived 9 full trips around the sun. Tradition equates a 9th Anniversary with Copper in the U.S. and Pottery in the U.K. But the Chicago Public Library – which somehow has designated itself as a primary source for these protocols – has established that gifts for a 9th Anniversary should be Leather Goods.

Those Keepers of the Dewey Decimal Cards at the Harold Washington Library Center at 400 South State Street may be on to something here, so we’ll designate this date of celebration as The Rally’s Leather Goods Jubilee, because, among other reasons, it just feels right.

Yes, my loves, it’s been a good rally, but is it thorough?

Here, we should all bear in mind that thoroughness is an ideal, akin to, say, the Golden Rule: – something which we all should rightly aspire, but which mere mortals are less than likely to achieve in totality. Still and all, the closer we get to thoroughness (as is the case with treating others in a manner we would wish them to treat us ourselves) the better off we are. So I propose we settle for a standard of near-thoroughness and see where we stand.

At the moment, while, as indicated above, the Spoo has yielded a modest amount from high ground, its current valuation levels come at a point of negligible financing costs, (if the published statistics can be believed) begin inflation, and strong corporate performance.

But here is where The Dude and The Spoo part company, because, as also has been well established, the former has both a biological and behavioral disposition against employment. His longest recorded, compensated tenure with any organization appears to be his stint as a roadie for Metallica (buncha @ssholes). So I’m not sure that he is burning a Celebratory J in the wake of Friday’s surprisingly robust Jobs Report. Therein, our fabulous employment engine ginned up a gratifying >300K new February gigs, and the Report also featured a modest-but-sustained upward push in Hourly earnings, positive revisions for the two prior months, and (problematically for the Dude) an increase of >800,000 able bodied citizens to our Labor Participation Rolls. Perhaps the good news, here, is that of all the forces likely to impel the Duder to dust off the old resume, peer pressure may be bottom on the list.

As others have pointed out, and in perverse contrast to our experience a month ago, investors reacted positively to these tidings. As recently as Groundhog Day, a strong January Employment summary evolved into a catalyst for the first double digit Spoo retrenchment in a number of years. As such, I believe that anyone at their posts at 8:30 a.m. EST on Friday, who might’ve feared that a strong showing by the BLS would be met with an angry market response would’ve been justified in these fears.

But they would’ve been wrong. Investors swooned at the strong jobs showing, taking our titular index up nearly 50 points, and driving it to within striking distance out of that dangerous 27 handle. This topped off a giddy week that added ~3.6% to valuations. It perhaps also bears mention that these uplifting trends took place over a 5-day sequence where the markets were also compelled to absorb a number of theoretical threats, including this tariff nonsense, the contemporaneous resignation of Economic Advisor/Adult in the Room Gary Cohn, and ECB Chair Draghi’s (albeit ambiguously worded) announcement that European Quantitative Easing (EQE) is certain to end in this calendar year.

So why is all of this now good news, when a scant four weeks ago, the markets took such a dim view of similar tidings? Well, at the top of my list is that nothing under the sun seems to carry sufficient fortitude to actually lift yields on the Treasury Curve. A month ago, the strongest signs in many a month that the long-sought-after wage inflation might be emerging acted to move the interest rate (and, for that matter, equity) needle a titch. But 10-year yields have actually backed off since their end-of-January highs, and one now wonders if even merciful Allah himself can normalize the yield curve. It therefore stands to reason that whatever fear exhibited by the capital markets respecting higher inflation and more elevated rates has abated considerably.

But in the broader universe of Fixed Income, there are indeed some concerns that might serve to kill the collective buzz of anyone less chill than the Dude. Investment Grade bonds are feeling some gravitational pull (higher borrowing costs), as are, to a lesser extent, their poor relations in Junk-land:

Investment Grade and High Yield: Name Your Junk

In addition, when all was said and done, Q4 earnings failed to evoke the anticipated reaction of Pavlovian purchases. Earnings growth clocked in at an eye-opening 14.8%, and Revenues expanded by a respectable, arguably impressive 8.2%. Somehow, though, investors appear to have expected more – particularly on the Revenue side, as evidenced by the following metric – purloined from FactSet:

If this confuses you, suffice to say that Spoo companies that reported upside revenue surprises actually experienced counterintuitive price declines of 0.4%, as compared to an average historical gain of 1.3%.

Disappointers got hurt as well, but according to the metric by amounts roughly equal to the historical average recorded with respect to such transgressions.

But if I’m right, not much of this will matter across the three weeks left to the month of March. There are a few odd data streams to which we should adhere as the quarter winds down, including Inflation, Retail Sales, and Industrial Production – all set to drop next week. The following week features a modestly anticipated FOMC statement – where the Committee’s intention to raise rates another quarter point is all but a forgone conclusion.

However, all of this is fairly low drama – particularly in comparison to what begins to transpire once the calendar turns to April. I won’t reiterate what I believe is riding on the performance of the public and private economies with respect to these data streams; suffice to say it’s substantial.

One might even go so far as to suggest that by the end of April, we may know a great deal more about whether Spoo, good though he almost certainly is, can be appropriately characterized as thorough.

However, TBL fans will tell you that the “good and thorough” man to whom Maude alluding was in fact a doctor that Maude referred to the Dude — after her goons clumped him in the head. Though he had to be pushed, the Dude eventually went to see him, and this man of medicine, after checking out the dudely noggin, asked him to drop his pants.

Though it compels me to offer an un-dudely Spoiler Alert, Maude wanted to ensure that the Dude’s

reproductive parts were in sufficiently sound working order to enable him to assist her in her procreation objectives. History shows that everything checked out fine, and, presumably, their shared progeny (no doubt, if God’s Will were done, a masculine one) will be celebrating his 20th birthday later this year.

Here’s hoping a similar fate is in store for the Spoo. To be sure, he’s likely to throw both strikes and gutters as events unfold, but we can certainly wish him Godspeed. And so we will. Spoo: I like your style. May your rally abide for another decade or more, and may we all do the same, perhaps enduring long enough to tell the tale to the Dude’s grandson.

But between then and now there are a lotta ins, a lotta outs, a lotta what have yous… …lotta strands to keep in the old duder’s head. So I reckon we’ll just have to find out for ourselves.

TIMSHEL

AWS (2nd in a Series)

Remember that AWS throw-down I wrote about last week? I’ll bet y’all thought I’d thoroughly exhausted the topic, and, for what it’s worth, I thought so too.

But we were wrong.

Because just as I was ready to ditch the subject for all time, another form of AWS presented itself, namely Acute Wariness (of) Scaffolds (AWS). You see, I am very wary of scaffolding. Stated plainly, while recognizing the important function that it serves, I don’t like scaffolding: those temporary construction overhangs that perpetually litter the landscape of cities like Manhattan. I remember when I moved back here in the early ‘90, after having resided the preceding decade in my old home turf of Chicago. In the intervening years, I had developed a romanticized vision of the Big Apple of the ‘80s – the one where dangerous looking cats on 125th Street burned fires in garbage cans to keep warm, where the Village still had music clubs and record stores. Where I was young, thought I was cool, and, in any event, felt keenly alive. I wanted it back.

But when I returned, I couldn’t find that New York. I looked everywhere, but to no avail. I knew it was there somewhere, but it wouldn’t come out.

And I blamed the scaffolding. I figured that my New York was hiding behind these flimsy structures. And ever since, I have avoided walking under them – even when it’s raining (OK; maybe not when it’s raining). This personal policy causes me some routine inconvenience, but so be it. I find it’s worth the trouble, because scaffolds bring out my claustrophobia, reduce my field of vision, and generally creep me out. In recent years, these problems have been rendered all the more acute by the emergence of two-sided scaffolds that form little, corridor-like prisons on the streets of Manhattan. One can move forward or backward — but up, down, left and right have been removed from the equation – not only in terms of motion options, but also with respect to sight lines. In general, a two-sided scaffold is like nothing so much as a blind alley. And blind alleys, my loves, are truly terrifying.

I mention all of this because from my vantage point, the market is at present assuming the financial form of a two-sided scaffold. Investors are moving through it, as well the must, but they do so unawares of what is transpiring in any direction where they might point their attention (or their toes). To wit: will interest rates rise up from under their feet and devour them into the earth? Will Vlad or L’il Kim lob one that will crash down upon them from the skies? Will the wall on their left collapse on them in an impeachment/redistributionist/Deep State massacre? And from the right, will the anti-trade/anti-immigration/deficit-hating partition squeeze them to their entrails? For the moment no one can say.

Each of these threats is certainly plausible, but all us poor market wretches can do is attempt to move, with limited vision, in a forward direction, because going backwards is counterproductively unthinkable, and staying put is not an option.

The rhetorical constraints described above certainly appear to be taking their toll. Last week, Equity Indices offered a roller coaster ride that left them, depending upon the benchmark, 2-3% leaner. Best hopes and prognostications notwithstanding, yields at the long end of the Treasury Curve retreated back to levels where they began that crazy month of February, when the Gallant 500 appeared poised to continue its unending stream of all-time highs. Meanwhile, shorter term rates actually rose, placing the Curve, as measured by the 2s/10s spread, at the tightest it’s been since before last decade’s big crash:

Those seeking to understand this graph should draw their exclusive attentions to the blue line, because I have no idea what the “Detrended 10-Yr. Yield” is, and neither, I suspect, does anyone else (including, most likely, the engineers that created this monstrous metric).

But a careful review of these time paths suggests that periods of unambiguous gravitational pull coincide with dilutive conditions in the Equity Complex, and, if one wishes to fully extrapolate, to economic recessions.

I don’t think we’re in danger of the latter menace – at least not yet. On the other hand, it’s hard to review these trajectories against the backdrop of an SPX that is still 550 basis points below its all-time highs and showing scant signs of recapturing its vigor any time soon, without feeling some sense of concern. On the other hand, matters could be worse: at least Mr. Spoo and Captain Naz are in positive territory for ’18, a status that separates him materially from Herr DAX (-7.8%), Sir FTSE (-8.04%), Monsieur CAC (-3.3%) and Nikkei-san (-6.95%). Conversely, if you want to search for happier confines, the Russian Index (Comrade RTS) is up thus far a cheery 9.29%.

Perhaps the oomph evidenced in the last of these derives from Supreme Leader Putin’s proclamation, earlier this week, that he has a bunch of ICBMs – impervious to our defense systems, sitting on launch pads, and poised to begin their short but menacing journey to our shores at the mere word of Vlad the Election Disruptor’s whim.

But hey, who cares about Russia anyway? I mean, it’s not like anybody over here has even thought about them in quite a while. So we’ll leave Vlad – for now – to his own bovine/porcine devices.

Last week, on the land masses west of the Atlantic, there were two fundamental catalysts that upset the digestion of investment types. First came Chair Pow’s introductory address to Congress, during which he confirmed his commitment to balance sheet divestiture, and raised the ugly specter of (count ‘em) 4 Fed rate hikes this year. Now, the Fed Funds rate today currently stands at 1.5%, and is all but certain to climb to 1.75% after the next FOMC meeting – scheduled for a couple of weeks down the road. By my math, 3 subsequent 25 bp rate hikes would place Fed Funds at 2.5% — a figure roughly equal to the 5-year yields at the point that this publication went to press. For those who worry about flat or inverted yield curves, this is a vexing prospect. Presumably, the powers that be (whoever they are) are anticipating that the long end of the curve will rise in sympathy with its shorter life span fellows. But we should bear in mind that lifting longer-term rates has been something of a Sysyphean struggle – particularly in recent times.

In my judgment, something here has to give. And in his inimitable way, the magnificent Jim Grant perfectly illustrated the niggling conundrum of the wandering global interest rate complex, through the presentation of the following chart (it’s the one on the left; I added the one on the right – just for good measure):

 

Thus, the Non-Investment/Grade 4-Year debentures of an Italian Telecommunications Company (which happens to sport the most appealing ticker symbol in Christendom), whose stock can be had for less than a single euro, and which has lost nearly half its value over the last three years, are both more expensive and offer a lower yield than our own T-Bills. For once, I am at a loss for words.

*********

The other high profile buzz-kill event came Thursday, when Trump, to the surprise of everyone (including, apparently, his own staff) announced stiff tariffs on imported metals of various chemical composition – most notably Steel. I really don’t want to waste much space on this, because it’s been widely reported and analyzed, and virtually everyone agrees that it is a numbskull idea. Yes, it was a campaign promise (though not a particularly well-thought out one), and yes, we are often gamed by our global trading partners – particularly in the realm of raw materials. But, to summarize what everybody who’s looked at this already knows: 1) if this is a job protection move, it bears mention that the domestic steel production industry employs at most 200,000 people, while the job rolls for steel consuming companies are on the order of 7 million; 2) our trading partners will retaliate, unnecessarily raising costs across the globe; 3) our own corporations will game the new rules (including raising prices) – to nobody’s advantage but their own; and 4) if this is intended to tweak the Chinese, it should be noted that China accounts for about 2% of our steel imports. It does, however, own about 19% of our Treasury paper, and is almost indisputably the linchpin to any effort we may expend to neutralize L’il Kim. Google the term “leading with your chin” and a picture of Trump at his Tariff Presser pops up as the first 27 search results.

And a nervous capital market simply didn’t need the worry of this – particularly against an economic backdrop strong enough, at least arguably, not to need the, er, boost of a burgeoning global trade war. This past week, Housing, Consumer Sentiment and Manufacturing all clocked in with strong results, and even Q1 GDP Estimates, recently showing signs of taking in water, have perked up a bit:

But I reckon we must render unto Trump that which belongs to Trump, and this includes his inability to resist stirring the pot. Perhaps he will think better about his tariff stunt, and maybe it won’t expand into a huge global economic donnybrook.

And maybe investors will decide it doesn’t matter. But as for me, I will for now revert to my recent hypothesis that we’re in an index pricing paradigm that is constrained by technicals. Consider, again, the following SPX Chart:

Last week’s selloff cast the SPX below the 50-Day Moving Average, and it is now firmly affixed around the 100-Day. The more ominous 200-Day Moving Average looks to be a safe distance away.

But the chart does look a little bit like a 2-sided construction scaffold, now doesn’t it? And that, as indicated above, is a scary place to be.

Over the years, while I have never recaptured that 80’s Billy Idol/Ed Koch/MTV/Bernard King NYC vibe, I do see portions of the City I fell in love with popping out now and then from between the planks and rails of those dreadful scaffolds. Maybe that’s all I’m entitled to, and maybe we’ll have to live for a spell within the flimsy walls of the chart displayed immediately above. If so, while remaining Acutely Wary of Scaffolds (AWS), I shall strive to make the best of it, and my advice to you is that you do the same.

TIMSHEL

AWS vs. AWS

Or AWS vs. AWS vs. AWS? As matters have unfolded, this seemingly innocuous acronym now perfectly captures the pitched battle raging between the new and old economies, and (if you will) the new and old markets.

Now, if you’re like me (i.e. the romantic type) what first comes to mind with respect to the acronym AWS is the American Welding Society, the organization that carries the proud banner for those merger agents of metallic units, those soldiers of the solder, those forgers of the functional fires — the welders of this great nation. I suggest, at this questionable pass, we take this opportunity to offer an energetic tip of the hat — to both the Society and its constituents. I mean, after all, if welders bugger things up, it can cause the rest of us untold aggravation or — worse. But they don’t bugger things up. Or at least they do so only on rare occasion. So I’ll say this: to those about to weld, I salute you.

That welders built our fair landscape – from the Empire State Building to the Golden Gate Bridge, is a matter almost beyond dispute. But, as time passed, and until recently, the most visible use of the AWS acronym might very well have been “Attention Walmart Shoppers” – that cry from the loudspeaker of the world’s largest retail outfit, alerting patrons that something special is happening in Aisle 5.

However, by all accounts, this acronym application, too, has been superseded by its progeny. Under current paradigms, the initials AWS almost unilaterally refer to Amazon Web Services – the cloud computing division of the conglomerate most likely to devour the world.

But the Wally Pipped retailers from down south are not, shall we say, taking this lying down. It now appears that the 2 latter day forms of AWS are pitted in a death match against one another; it’s Walmart vs. Amazon – corpo a’ corpo, and may the best capitalistic colossus win. While we all have borne witness to the latter eating the formers’ figurative lunch in recent years, in 2017, Walmart started pushing back. It bought itself an on-line retailer or two: most notably Jet.com (for a paltry $3.3B) and set its wonder boy/founder to the formidable task of storming the e-commerce fortress, and establishing an electronic beach-head on Amazon’s dangerous shores. As part of this effort, the much-feared clan from Arkansas issued the following warning to its legion of vendors: we’re all for your moving your data to the cloud, but in doing so, you might wish to consider using a solution not tied to any company named after a river in South America.

The message was no more nuanced than it needed to be. What Walmart wants, Walmart gets (at least until recently), and one can certainly empathize with their desire to protect proprietary data, upon which Bezos and his crew might, albeit accidentally, otherwise stumble. It was as if the Corporate Gods had convened on Mount Olympus and one was heard saying to aloud: “Attention Walmart Shoppers: nothing in your carts is manufactured or distributed by a company using Amazon Web Services”.

The whole on-line ploy worked for a while, and the ticker WMT responded accordingly, but recently, and as reported in last week’s quarterly earnings statement, the “House that Sam Built’s” fortunes in the ionosphere have flagged considerably.

As a result, while the seemingly unstoppable AMZN rocket continued its inexorable climb to the heavens, reaching by Friday’s close the lofty (and improbably round) threshold of 1500.00, the holders of WMT, as illustrated in the following graph, were not so fortunate:

Now, you should know that while Bezos continues to trounce his frenemies on the Forbes 400, and is now the world’s richest man (at least this side of Putin) by a wide margin, the Walton family (presumably including both Deadhead Bill and John-Boy himself), as holders of >1.5B shares, yielded, in excess of $2 Billion of collective net worth in the debacle. Here’s hoping (and expecting) that they will survive the blow.

But there are other, perhaps more relevant issues for us to consider. To the best of my ability to determine these matters, this may be largest earnings-related price drop of a Top 10 (until last week, when it suffered an ignominious fall to #14) market cap firm, since at least the big crash of a decade ago.

And here’s the thing: WMT earnings weren’t even that bad. In fact, they beat on most of the metrics upon which we are trained to focus, including profits, revenues, same store sales, margins, etc.

So what in the Sam Hill is going on here? Well, I’ll quickly dispatch with a couple of what I believe to be relevant, but secondary root causes. WMT soared through the stratosphere on this whole e-commerce play, but what the Web Gods giveth, the Web Gods can surely take away. If one can debate whether 92 is (forgive me here) an “Attention Walmart Shoppers” bargain, the 110 peak, manifested in those giddy days of late January, might’ve been, by the same argument, more of a Tiffany pricing metric for the name than a company that sells more Swiffer Wet Jets than diamond pendants, than it might’ve earned. I’ll also make short work of the premise that just as in the heady days of the dot.com bubble, all that should matter about a name is the strength of its web presence.

Instead, I will make the aggressive leap of logic that for the first time in several quarters at any rate, large, arguably over-owned securities have found themselves subject to the formidable forces of gravity. This does not preclude them from rising, but now, if the WMT episode can be extrapolated, they are subject to potential merciless punishment for any disappointments issuing forth from their C-Suites. There are of course exceptions, most notably the now indisputably AMZN-led tech cabal, but one wonders if even these widely adored capitalist juggernauts might not one day face a reckoning of their own.

At present, however, it appears that market participants view these enterprises as being infallible. In fact, I’d go so far as to opine that investors somehow view buying FAAAAANG shares as being their best option for risk reduction, and I hardly need to convey – to this audience in particular – how deeply this offends my sensibilities.

But that’s where our affairs stand for the moment, and I reckon we’ll have to live with the consequences. We’re now entering the quiet period of the quarter. Earnings are nearly all posted, and, as we’ve been tracking, they were highly gratifying to observe in their unfolding. Last week’s galactically gargantuan and potentially petrifying Treasury auction came and went without doing gratuitous violence to the yield curve. Yes, we’ve got Feb macro numbers to crunch, and Fed Chair Powell makes his maiden address to both houses of Congress next week. In addition, at some unspecified point in March we will have to endure yet another of those wearying debt ceiling dramas. Shortly after St. Paddy’s Day, Chair Pow will take to the FOMC podium for the first time – in all probability to announce another hike in overnight rates. But aside from that, and after a rollicking first seven weeks to the year, we may perhaps have cause to give thanks to the dearth of data set to assault our senses – at least till early April, when the information flow will again be fast and furious.

In the meantime, perhaps as a harbinger of our immediate fortunes, the technicals associated with the Gallant 500 are behaving in such a way as to bring a smile to the faces of the Tom DeMarks and Louise Yamatas in our midst. The selloff earlier in the month (remember that?) unfolded in such a way that not only did the Citadel of the 200-day Moving Average hold strong, but the index bounced jauntily as it touched this threshold:

Friday’s rally took the SPX above its more forgiving 50-day Moving Average, and perhaps this indicates that equities can do some open field running here. But I doubt it.

I am more inclined to think that we may trade between the yellow and the purple lines displayed on the left. But I’d be remiss if I failed to mention that Spoo has now slipped back into that dangerous 27 Club: the one which claimed the lives of Jimi, Jim and Janis. This time round, the climb to 28 may be less of a cake walk.

From a broader, longer-term perspective, 2018 is shaping up to be pretty interesting. As indicated above, investors are starting to punish even former favorites who fail to meet their hopes.

Further, and as also discussed in last week’s installment, the ingredients for the Inflation Pie, and for higher rates across the curve, are all on the table, and how they bubble in the oven will go a long way towards determining our near-term fortunes.

I also believe, though I won’t hit this one too hard for now, that the next 3-5 months are enormously important from a political perspective. With: a) the average mid-term House gain by the minority party clocking in at about 30 seats: b) the Republicans now holding only a 24 seat edge; c) the near-certainty that if the lower chamber flips, they will bring articles of impeachment against Trump; and d) the empirically demonstrated high correlation between mid-year performance and mid-term elections firmly in view, a lot is riding on both economic and market fortunes between now and, say, Labor Day. Both sides know this, and what I see is a pitched battle between parties, with one of them seeking to gun the economy, while the other seeks to stifle it. One thing is certain: the markets will react to these skirmishes.

But pitched battles, as indicated above, are part of the human condition, as is our propensity to endure. In the end, history shows that the honors devolve to the most stalwart among us. If the pattern holds, then the American Welding Society may well outlast either Walmart or Amazon, and if so, we might do well to take some joy in this outcome. Next year marks their 100th of glorious operation, and I’ve been looking around for details about their Centennial Jubilee. Their headquarters, somewhat improbably, are in Miami, FL, and come what may, I’m going to try to attend the festivities.

For reasons that should be all too clear, I hope to see you there.

TIMSHEL

It’s a Wonderful Life

So here it is: as I get older, I feel a growing conviction that Potter got a bad rap. Yes, I’m referring to one Henry F. Potter of Bedford Falls, PA, played to cinematic perfection by the Lionel Barrymore. Since time immemorial, we’ve been pre-conditioned to be hating on Potter: the aged, wheel-chaired, bloodless capitalist who would have, save for Jimmy Stewart’s/George Bailey’s Bailey Building and Loan (BBL), run his quaint little town as tyrannically as anyone this side of Manuel Noriega. Please understand, I don’t much like Potter; doubt I’d want to hang out with him. In addition, I must admit that his theft of that $8 Large from the whiskey-drenched, imbecilic Uncle Billy was not exactly a Major League move.

But let’s face it: when he scoffed at the Baileys, suggesting that shooting pool with a BBL loan officer was, absent other risk assessment methods, an inadequate underwriting policy, he was right. When the ‘29 crash transpired (which, in a touch of Frank Capra-esque flair, emerged on George’s wedding night) and Bailey Building and Loan – inevitably – faced de facto insolvency, Potter made his move. He offered buy up all of the town’s dubious-but-collateralized paper — at pennies on dollar.

If we’re to be truly honest with ourselves, we should admit that many of us would try to do the same.

But Baily stopped him – mostly by begging his depositors to leave their hard earned cash in a failing Savings and Loan – in the process forcing these good folks into incremental hardships at the precise point when the Great Depression was beginning to unfold. And Potter, recognizing the talent of one who had bested him, then very generously offered Bailey a big fat job, a proposal to which, as is well known, the latter responded by telling the former to pound sand.

And isn’t it just possible that the unconditioned love we throw George’s way is less than fully earned? I know: he pulled his brother out of that pond, saved the druggist from poisoning a customer, and shelved his big plans – first to see the world and then put his mark on it — all to take care of business at home. But he employed an African American mammy/maid right out of Central Casting, and treated her like the Uncle Tom character she was. And while we’re at it, 4F in WWII because of a bad ear? C’mon. History shows that hundreds of visibly crippled teens begged and lied their way into active duty. And, when the war ended (by which time the economy had recovered dramatically, and a well-managed BBL should have been on sounder financial footing) 8 skinny thousand dollars of misplaced cash nearly brought his whole business crashing down on its ears, to say nothing of potentially landing Georgie in the Pennsylvania State Penitentiary.

But here George lost his trademark cool. It was Christmas Eve, and, after telling Uncle Billy he wasn’t about to take the rap for him, he went home and actually yelled at Zuzu! He then pondered suicide, but an extended hallucination caused him to rethink his plans. He gathered himself and went back to face the music. When he returned, the whole town has pooled its money together to bail him out, as topped off by that Wainwright dude (from whom he stole his future wife) extending him an unlimited line of credit.

I’ve often wondered how much of that yuletide bounty Georgie boy shoved into his own pocket. Maybe just a little bit off the top for that blondie side piece to whom he gave cash right in front of the bank examiner?

But back to Potter. On the whole, perhaps Bedford Falls should’ve given him more props. Exhibit A: the charming downtown of this quaint little village:

I’ve seen worse town centers. But I doubt that BBL financed all of the construction. In all probability, Potter himself provided most of the funding, and the results speak for themselves. While the Baileys were lighting up their friends with home loans, Potter was busy building up as quaint a little slice of Americana as one could wish free enterprise to underwrite.

Had the Baileys held the paper on this turf, it is likely that they would’ve had to call it in. Who knows if the borrowers could’ve paid? I envision a fire sale and all of High Street falling into rot.

*********************************************

It seems like eons ago, but in fact it is less than 10 trading sessions since the markets manifested the same look and feel as they must’ve back in ’29, when Potter was ready to make his play. No particular need to regurgitate that unappetizing sequence; suffice to say that investors have since regained a large measure of their equanimity. In fact, the > 4% gains mustered up by our favorite equity indices represents the best weekly showing since (depending upon the index you cite) late 2016 (Trump Bump) early 2013 (Bernanke/QE3 Bump), or late 2011 (the “I don’t remember why” Bump). For a blessed handful of pre-holiday sessions (and bearing in mind that this is President’s Day), it appears that our valuation heartburn has indeed subsided. I’ve read some published reports that attributed the upswing to an enthusiastic round of nut-squeezing, and there is some plausibility to this hypothesis. But my response is: who cares?

Besides, I think there was more at play here than a good old fashion short squeeze. Specifically, with the benefit of contemplation over the intervening couple of weeks, a couple of dynamics emerge with greater clarity. First, after setting multiple records as to the number of trading sessions between 3%, 5% and 10% drops, equities were by some measures overbought. OK; fair enough. But I also believe that – particularly in light of the subsequent recovery, a large measure of the carnage was either catalyzed, or, at minimum, exacerbated, by the unwind of those diabolical short-volatility instruments that were all the rage as recently as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

But investors who for some time previous had been breaking the bank by riding a vol train that was a one-way journey to the underworld don’t simply jump out of their sleeper cars, en masse, for no reason at all. So we’d be remiss if our post-mortem didn’t include an examination of the fundamental catalysts that set the whole episode in motion in the first instance.

My main recollection (though 2 weeks ago is a long time for me to visualize) is that the confluence of some inflation appearing on the horizon, and its potential impacts on borrowing costs were the factor(s) that set this train wreck in motion in the first place. Well, a portion of this hypothesis achieved corroboration when, earlier in the week, the CPI/PPI numbers were released. Both clocked in higher than expected, in the process providing incremental evidence that maybe, just maybe, some upward pricing pressure has presented itself in sustainable fashion. But, reviewing these metrics, did investors resume their fear-induced fire sale of stock holdings? They did not. Instead, they bought, and managed to bring flagging indices back into solid positive territory for what thus far has been an interesting start to 2018.

Thus, if we accept our stated hypothesis that the recent blow-off, while much-needed, was not necessarily an indication of aggravation to come, then we are left to contemplate what’s really going on here, which, in my judgment, comes down to a handful of related issues:

1) Are recent trends sufficient to embed higher inflationary expectations into the investment ethos?

2) Whatever the ultimate answer may be to 1), is the longer end of the yield curve truly headed for higher elevations?

3) If the answer to 2) is yes, can equity valuations survive and/or thrive at higher yields?

For better or worse, I have no useful opinions to convey with respect to 1). Inflation is a tricky thing, rendered all the more confusing because (as those who suffered through the indignities of economics training are painfully aware) it is inflationary expectations, not inflation itself, that drives economic outcomes. I won’t lie, this distinction has always confused me – often to the point of distraction. Moreover, in eerie parallel to the current unhinged national political debate, I can find any number of intelligent, well-trained and otherwise reasonable fellows and gals that will passionately argue that we are headed towards a Weimar-like cycle of intensifying price increases, while other such worthies are convinced that we are still in the early innings of a deflationary death spiral. So I don’t know, and for what it’s worth, I give up on 1).

In terms of 2), I do see signs that the rates will indeed rise to higher levels than many of you have experienced in your lifetimes. Just to put matters in perspective, when I applied for student loans to finance that graduate education referenced above – the one which left me so confused about this whole inflation/expectations thing, the rate was 9%. I was encouraged at the time borrow as much as I could, because, let’s face it, rates would never be that low again.

It hardly bears mention that I enthusiastically embraced this advice.

But in terms of the near-term glide-path of yields, my views are as much influenced by supply trends as they are for demand for debt instruments. Every time I check, our Treasury is upping the size of its auctions, and I don’t see that particular pattern changing. As mentioned last week, their friends at the Fed are selling their paper just as the Treasury G-men are issuing more of it. Next week, for instance, >$250B of new bills, bonds and notes hit the market – all in the space of 3 days. If that long-since repaid, debt-financed grad school extravaganza was worth anything, it means that in a market where demand may be decreasing, and supply is flooding the markets, prices should go down. Further, in the perverse world of Fixed Income, this means yields rise.

So count me as a “yes” on 2).

What remains, therefore, is an examination of 3): whether or not our capital markets can operate effectively at higher yield thresholds. While this remains to be seen, I’m patriotic enough to believe that a nation that endured, just in the last 100 years, two World Wars, a Great Depression, a Great Recession, not one, but two, Justin Timberlake Super Bowl appearances, and Fergie’s dubious NBA All-Star Game Anthem rendition, can weather the hardship of elevated rates on debt instruments. Heck, like many of my advanced age, I might even welcome such a change. I’ve no mortgage debt and don’t own a credit card. I do, however, have some money in the bank that is thirsting for the blessings of a return above microscopic levels.

Thus, I’m inclined to believe that within reasonable ranges, equity market participants should not be overly fearful of higher rates in the debt complex. And thus far, recent selloff notwithstanding, Corporate America appears to be on something of a roll. Q4 earnings, now 4/5ths complete, are projecting out at a 15% increase – highest in nearly 7 years. Guidance for the remainder of ’18 looks to be the strongest in more than 2 decades. Small Business Optimism, after flagging for a few months, is again on the rise:

I do remain flummoxed by the flagging fortunes of the United States dollar, which continue to wither – irrespective of what happens with either equity or interest rate markets:

Now, I don’t want to alarm anyone, but I am wondering if there might not just be a titch of politics embedded in this chart. While a lower value on the Dead Prez might increase the bite out of your wallet taken in association with your purchase of Lederhosen, Saki or Cornish Hens, it will undoubtedly offer an export boost to our heroic but often oppressed corporations.

And after all, what are we here for if not to support the intrepid efforts of the guys in the suits that occupy the C-Suites?

In general, I expect that risks, if not returning to their unobservable levels that characterized most of the last 18 months, are unlikely at any rate to rise again to the levels experienced in early February. As such, I sanction any incremental exposure you may wish to assume, provided that you have done your homework, thought carefully, and execute with due attention allotted to the details.

And as for Potter, I suspect he might be a buyer here. But I doubt he would “go whole hog” as he attempted to do on George’s wedding night. Instead, he’d be keeping his eye out for some bargains, and, finding them, would be quietly adding to his asset inventories. But here I’m just speculating, because the clear inference to be drawn at the end of our feature film is that he was run out of town.

George Bailey and his heirs are now the presumptive big dogs in Bedford Falls, PA. Lending standards at BBL have also presumably tightened up, and none of that would’ve happened had not Potter been there to bring some rationality to the otherwise goofy proceedings. In the future, if we are indeed to have wonderful lives, we may not wish to precisely emulate his methods, but we may do well to that the maxim of by low/sell high remains a virtue, and that flawed men like George Bailey don’t rise to the level of heroism without the elevating presence of those of Potter’s ilk.

TIMSHEL

I’m In

I know it’s been a long week for everyone, but did you ever stop to consider, in light of the professional path I have chosen, the toll it’s taken on me?

Didn’t think so.

So, with a frazzled hope that you will temper justice with mercy, I need to inform you that I’m in. I actually bought some stock. I have long resisted the temptation to do so, chiefly due to my lack of confidence in my ability to make anything other than a mess of it. In addition, however, please feel free to consider my deference a nod to what I believe to be the preference of the clients who have given me the honor of sharing their proprietary information with me: that I eschew any direct participation in the markets in which they traffic.

Now before you get all in my grill about this breach of long-standing protocol, know that the particulars of this ad-lib are such that I gave my mother-in-law, one Elizabeth J. (Beppie) Oechsle full power of attorney on my account. Those of you who know Beppie may be aware that in addition to dishing up a mean pot roast, she is one of the savviest, and more importantly, most successful, portfolio managers in my wide acquaintance. She’s been trading actively for more than 3 decades, and has never had a down year. In fact, she has the most pristine track record of any I have encountered – setting aside, of course, the golden era of Bernard L. Madoff. Ironically, Bernie was born one month to the day after Beppie, and both will be celebrating their 80th birthdays over the next few weeks, but the similarities end there. Until I begged her to do so, Beppie had never even thought of managing anyone else’s money, so, unless she is somehow in the business of defrauding herself, we can take it as a given that her returns are legit. Let’s just hope her 30+ year hot streak continues.

But more importantly for our purposes, you need to know that this is Beppie’s show. I have no control over this account, and will use neither my experience nor my knowledge of existing market positions and flows to influence her in any way.

On a related note, it may interest you to know why I believe that now is a good time to make my move. By way of context, I had been planning on taking this step for quite some time. But I had been hesitating on pulling the trigger, and was a bit annoyed with myself, because, it seemed that the more I delayed, the higher the prices I’d be forced to pay. But I was planning on taking the plunge nonetheless.

I thought I’d caught a considerable break a week ago Friday, when – horror of horrors – the January Jobs Report showed some signs of life in terms of upward wage pressure, and investors turned tail at the first whiff of this inflationary grapeshot. Then came Monday, and oh what a ride that was. By mid-afternoon, the Gallant 500 had yielded some 140 hard-won index points before regaining some equanimity and closing down a more gentlemanly 113. Still and all, it was the biggest single day point drop in Mr. Spoo’s storied existence. While the key drivers of the plunge remain a mystery – even to Beppie – it was clear that Monday’s panic session set the tone for the rest of the week. Wild rallies and equally unhinged selloffs ensued and lasted throughout the week – all the way through the late Friday upward reversal, which added an impressive 85 handles (~3%) from the mid-afternoon lows – all in the space of a couple of getaway hours.

And that, my friends, is where we left off.

So what gives? Well, first, as has long been apparent, the suppressed volatility that has partially paralyzed (at least below the waist) equities since the 2016 election: a) could not last; and b) was likely when it ended to evince a major Newtonian reaction. Most of the market rabbis with whom I have reasoned this week are relieved that volatility has returned, and here’s hoping that they are correct – albeit in tones more subdued than last week’s. However, I’m not sure. I think there’s a fair chance that within a reasonable time frame, the equity markets simply recover lost ground and find themselves back inside the volatility vortex.

In the meantime, while I didn’t see last week’s train wreck coming, in retrospect, when it did arrive, it came as no surprise. But there were some technical factors that contributed to the mess – most notably the unwind of those beastly, levered short volatility products that never should have been sold to the public in the first place. Here, the head of the dragon was an odd little fellow called the XIV – a ticker that cleverly reverses that of the VIX index that it its mission against which to facilitate speculation. As part of its overly crafty design, the XIV combines a short position in the VIX with a long one in the SPX. Thus, when the volatility powder keg (inevitably) exploded, and XIV sell orders flooded in, the custodians of this instrument were forced, as part of liquidation, to contemporaneously buy the VIX and sell the SPX Index. This was a double whammy to the markets, that quite naturally manifested itself at the worst possible point from an investment perspective. By early evening, XIV lost > 95% of its peak market capitalization (~$6B), and had blown a hole through the equity index and volatility markets deep enough to sink a battleship. And XIV was not alone; there are dozens of these formerly high-flying products –each, best case, now flat-lining in the critical care unit.

Confused yet? You ought to be. But I think the main takeaway is that the heretofore somnolent markets were not prepared for these liquidation flows. While the unwind was taking place, it was all a big ball of confusion, and it looked for a time like all of the big dogs across the forlorn planet were getting out while the getting was good. The levered short vol liquidations, and the attendant confusion, lasted all week, and this, in my humble opinion, deeply exacerbated the carnage.

But matters would’ve been much worse had not the two houses of Congress gotten together in the wee hours of Friday morning to pass a budget resolution. It was nip and tuck there for a while, and it bears mention that an equity tape that by mid-day the following day had yielded an incremental >3% before its aggressive upward reversal, was well-poised to experience the bottom falling out. To those that may argue against this assertion, I ask what Friday’s close might’ve looked like if investors were facing the prospect of heading into the weekend with a full-fledged market meltdown/government shutdown staring them in the face.

But a budget resolution did pass, and, at least for now, the markets have recovered a bit. The Debbie Downers on both sides of the aisle are currently lamenting the all-out spending binge embedded in the bill, projected, as it is, to add hundreds of billions to our burgeoning deficit, and one can hardly blame them. There is already, as mentioned above, enough pressure on government paper to cause anyone paying attention to take notice. And, in the midst of all of these shenanigans, the Treasury held an auction of 10-year notes and 30-year bonds that went about as badly enough to gladden the hearts of the many bond bears of my acquaintance:

I reckon that the main inference we can draw from all of this is that on paper, a perfect storm of upward yield pressure appears to be forming on the horizon. There are as yet unclear but growing signs of inflation everywhere one cares to look. In addition, just as the Treasury is planning to issue paper to beat the band (as it must to fund the ever-widening deficit), its pals at the Fed are raising rates and selling down their balance sheet – to the tune of between $300B and $400B per year. It now resides at a beggarly $4.42T. This trend is expected to continue, as well, perhaps, it should. Us old geezers remember when the Fed holdings barely rose to the dignity of One Trillion, and of course, what comes up must come down:

Fed Balance Sheet: Look Out Below!

There’s also the odd chance that we annoy the Chinese and even the Japanese sufficiently to cause them to sell down the 20% of our debt obligations that they own. And, of course, it is at least theoretically possible that someday – maybe even soon – the ECB and BOJ will discontinue their QE programs, at which point it may well behoove them to start thinking about some balance sheet reduction of their own.

The confluence of these factors means that there should be galaxies of govies available for purchase over the coming months and quarters, and it might be reasonable to assume that this flood of paper will only move at lower prices and higher yields.

So, at magnitudes not witnessed for eons, the probability of a bursting of the bond bubble of thirty years running looks to be rising towards materiality. No doubt that this prospect is part of what’s all of a sudden scaring all those snowflakes out of the equity markets.

So why did I choose this moment to take the plunge? Well, for a number of reasons. As I’ve pounded into these pages for many months, I don’t think there is enough equity supply to meet demand, and I am fairly convinced that the imbalance will continue to grow. In addition, there’s earnings, now, with 2/3rds of the precincts in the books are projecting out at +14%. Sales extrapolate to a handy +8%. Also, guidance is sufficiently optimistic that CEO prognostications, combined with the (widely reported) selloff in equities, have brought forward looking EPS (16.3) down to just about the long-term average (16.0). Visually, the convergence looks like this:

Now, let’s understand that a significant portion of the happy 2018 income sooth-sayings are due and owing to the impact of tax reform. Some in my circle view these kind of adjustments as a form of cheating. Well, maybe so at 2875 on the SPX, but at 2620? Perhaps not so much.

I further believe that the political winds are blowing in such a way as to strongly incentivize a “kitchen sink” policy of economic expansion. Wherever else our honorable legislators disagree, they almost certainly share a dread of returning to their districts this summer with the economy on the down.

Bear in mind, they’ll be asking you for your money – to be invested in the worthy effort to ensure their return to office, and with this return, a continuation of the good works they undertake on our behalf. If the economy turns sour, ALL of them (well, almost all) are vulnerable, and this, among other factors, is the reason why what I truly believe was a budgetary cycle setting up as a nasty game of chicken turned into a combined love fest/spending spree.

But the big question remains: can this here 9-year rally, unquestionably fueled by cheap and sometimes free financing, survive/thrive in a normalized interest rate environment? Loyal readers of this publication are aware that while I believe the answer is yes, I have been much more concerned about the process of rising interest rates than I am about higher interest rates themselves. Pattern recognition suggests that while we probably can survive elevated yields and diminished bond prices, the Fixed Income selloff that is needed could be unpleasant or worse.

I retain this fear, but have forged ahead nonetheless. For what it’s worth, I kind of doubt that the hyper volatility period is over just yet. Investors entered the weekend in an advanced state of confusion, and, while a couple of days off should’ve done a world of good for them, I expect them to enter Monday’s proceedings as befuddled as they were when we left off on Friday.

But the lower the market goes, the more Beppie is ready to step in and do some buying. The SPX closed this week down 2% for the year, and I’m willing to put some money behind the proposition that a level such as this is a constructive one.

But again, it’s not up to me. Beppie is calling the shots, and my final bit of risk management advice is to avoid overtly pushing her buttons. To the outside world, she’s as well-bred and dignified a woman as you’re every likely to meet, but cross her one time and…

…forget it; you don’t want to know.

TIMSHEL