Bombs are Good for the Market?
“Sell on the trumpets, buy on the cannons” is an old Wall Street expression suggesting how to invest during armed conflict. It’s a reverse offshoot of the overly used “buy on the rumor, sell on the news” maxim and, despite its now trite status, the recommended behavioral anomaly seems to persist in the equity markets. It worked during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, during the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, after Clinton used cruise missiles to kill a few camels and burn some Sudanese tents and an Aspirin factory and, given the status of market futures this morning, seems to be holding once again after allied missile strikes and bombing broke out in Libya over the weekend. The theory, as best we can define it, is that the reality of war is never so bad as the fear, fog and rumor leading up to it. In light of the above examples and Libya, that theory probably holds true especially given the asymmetrical powers of the opposing forces in all these recent cases.
Interesting, there is a lot more operating on the markets this morning than just hitting Libya with a few bombs. Japan seems to have stabilized their runaway reactors over the weekend, connecting power to drive water pumps and cool the core. That’s good news on the long road to resolving their ongoing post-quake reactor crisis and most likely is lightening some of the nuclear discount under which the markets have been trading of late. However, missed by the popular press was a statement issued by Japanese Prime Minister Kan, pledging to rebuild quickly and aiming to compile a relief and reconstruction package as soon as next month. Estimates for the cost of rebuilding effort run as high as $100 billion. That would also be good news not only for the Japanese people but for infrastructure companies both in Japan and abroad, a fact we pointed out last week. Not so well publicized was Saudi Arabia’s pledge to give out $36 billion (of our money) to its citizens to quell their thoughts of uprising. Also, not unlike the old joke about the reaction time of kicking a dinosaur in the tail, investors are also most likely coming to the realization that the Philly Fed Index released last week was very strong and that most banks passed the Fed’s Stress Test II on Friday and may now resume paying dividends. Both speak to the health and strength of our economy and its financial system. Putting it all together, the weekend navel contemplators have their buy orders in this morning. We wonder who makes money selling during panic and buying on euphoria.
In any case, the point of this week’s Ramblings is to look beyond the current world turmoil for signs of what it will all mean to the markets in the intermediate term, not just this morning, and opportunities presented therein. The last two weeks have seen oil and coal (and companies supplying both) rise on Mideast supply interruption fears and rumors of the early demise of Nuclear power. Stocks of Uranium producers have been decimated. Infrastructure plays only caught a bid on Friday after Larry Kudlow stated what we mentioned two days earlier—that the quake may benefit these companies. High-end retailers have gotten bombed as hard as Quadafi’s compound on fears of a pull-back in the Japanese tourist trade and, most perplexing of all, technology companies have been indiscriminately sold off on the belief that parts supply disruptions from Japan will crimp their earnings. How can one make money on these dislocations?
We like coal and oil, not so much for the temporary positives but for the long-term industrial and consumer need for these energy sources. Yes, US energy independence, solar, wind and other alternatives are wonderful dreams but, like Obama, Jimmy Carter had them too. We don’t know what to make of Uranium but 25 years ago we listened to a presentation by Alan Greenspan to the University Club in New York in which he predicted that the risks of Nuclear power may someday outweigh the risks of oil. We may be there now and that line of thinking will probably weigh on politicians for years to come. Plentiful and cheap coal will most likely slow the return to reactor building even in China. So Uranium is probably worth a miss for the not-so-stout-hearted. As for the other sectors hit by the turmoil, we believe that this is a great opportunity to pick from amid the market rubble. First of all, the indiscriminant selling of companies with supplies or sales wholly unconnected to Japan have given US investors an unprecedented gift. Secondly, even US companies somehow impacted by Japan have now been given a “bye,” meaning that whatever they report for the second and third quarters of this year, they will be able to blame it all on Japan, a one-time extraordinary event, rather than any kind of US economic weakness or company-specific issues. Any investors out there old enough to remember when El Niño was an excuse for missed estimates at everything from retailers to Caterpillar? It’s gonna happen again, trust us.
Some tech companies, like Alcatel Lucent and Texas Instruments, have already warned investors that supply disruptions will likely impact earnings for the upcoming quarters. For companies such as these, we suggest the buy on the rumor strategy, particularly for the tech companies. Yes, supplies will be interrupted in the short-term but demand (despite the trouble in Japan) will not. Prices will rise at the supplier end of the chain, giving those companies an earnings boost, and we should not underestimate their ability to quickly shift production to other locations (without publicly letting on), easing supply constraints but maintaining the higher prices. Beneficiaries of Japan’s ills are probably a good place to look but we caution that Japan’s insular, protectionist attitude has not been changed by this tragedy so they will look first to domestic companies before calling for help from the US and China. Still, let’s not forget that Libya will need some rebuilding and has no industry of its own—just ask the folks at Halliburton what Kuwait did for them. Indirect beneficiaries like commodity producers (steel, coking coal, aluminum, building supplies) are good places to look as Japan and Libya don’t have much in the way of their own raw material stocks and the Japanese producers, like steel plants, are currently off line due to power constraints and will be for some time. This list goes on. Interested investors should give us a call.
So, looking out into the next few quarters, we see many positives from US companies reporting earnings. Some will be directly benefited by recent world events; others will be negatively affected but given a free pass. Eventually oil should return to price levels commensurate with real demand, not war panic, giving the consumer a tax break and investors may finally start focusing on fundamentals, which are good, rather than headlines, which have been bad. All-in-all, then, we see the US equity markets rising from the recent ashes and would be buyers, although not on the euphoria of the moment. We have yet to return to pre-crises market levels and investors will be given another opportunity to get in before we do so. Remember, stocks take the stairs up but the elevator down—that gives prudent investors time to take advantage of the dislocations the recent negative headline events have produced.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Ramblings of a Portfolio Manager
Interim Ramblings -- Japan
10 basis points of World GDP growth. That’s it. One tenth of one percent of world GDP is expected to be affected by the terrible tragedy in Japan. And that is in the short term. No one has yet to quantify the longer-term benefits to manufacturers and exporters in the US and China from the strengthening Yen and the enormous needs for building materials and equipment soon to be hitting the order books during Japan’s reconstruction phase. It sounds perverse (and cruel) to say but it is very true that this tragedy has become Japan’s own Economic Recovery and Rebuilding Act—similar to our own except that the funds will doubtless be channeled into needed, productive projects rather than the many worthless make-work boondoggles the current Administration has squandered our funds upon here. And US exporters might just be the beneficiaries.
The US currently imports one half of what it did from Japan just 10 years ago and while our exports have increased, estimates are that only about 2% of the S&P 500 earnings are dependent on that trade. And it is unclear if exports from the US will even drop off. True, some industries like auto parts may suffer but food, medicine, building materials and energy (oil, coal) may actually increase to satisfy immediate needs and to replace lost productive capacity. For example, Japanese steel and aluminum plants are offline or damaged and much of both of those commodities will be needed for reconstruction. So far many tech companies have announced supply disruptions but they remind us that these disruptions will only be temporary and are the result of power outages rather than damages. Furthermore, for some segments of the Tech Sector, the damage to Japan’s infrastructure should be a good thing down the road: First, competitors are eliminated from the market temporarily. Secondly, some sectors, like optical components, were in a glut prior to the quake—the disruption will help them work down inventories, eventually raising prices. Finally, when the rebuilding occurs, the repairs will most certainly include the Country’s technology infrastructure and that will be good for US Tech manufacturers. Multiply these factors across many US industrial sectors and you will see where we’re going.
US equity markets are trading on sentiment—fear of nuclear fallout and of economic disaster in Japan, fear of the Middle East burning and fear of European debt defaults. Yet we have lost only about 6% from the top on all major US equity indices. That’s not bad considering the spike in the VIX and the huge drop in investor sentiment. For those of you who have hit the sell button, we suggest a long bike ride, maybe a cocktail and some re-runs of Two and a Half Men rather than shivering in front of CNN or CNBC, pondering more sales. The images coming across TV and the minute-by-minute conflicting headlines are only a recipe for angst and making an investment mistake. As Warren Buffet is fond of saying, be greedy when others are fearful, be fearful when others are greedy. Right now, it sure looks to us that others are panicking. It may sound mercenary and vulture-like but we’re investors so we are taking advantage of the situation. We suggest that you do too—but before the TV talking heads figure out that this tragedy, in the long run, may be just what both Japan and the US need to pull our respective economies out of their current malaise.
Happy St. Patrick’s Day.
10 basis points of World GDP growth. That’s it. One tenth of one percent of world GDP is expected to be affected by the terrible tragedy in Japan. And that is in the short term. No one has yet to quantify the longer-term benefits to manufacturers and exporters in the US and China from the strengthening Yen and the enormous needs for building materials and equipment soon to be hitting the order books during Japan’s reconstruction phase. It sounds perverse (and cruel) to say but it is very true that this tragedy has become Japan’s own Economic Recovery and Rebuilding Act—similar to our own except that the funds will doubtless be channeled into needed, productive projects rather than the many worthless make-work boondoggles the current Administration has squandered our funds upon here. And US exporters might just be the beneficiaries.
The US currently imports one half of what it did from Japan just 10 years ago and while our exports have increased, estimates are that only about 2% of the S&P 500 earnings are dependent on that trade. And it is unclear if exports from the US will even drop off. True, some industries like auto parts may suffer but food, medicine, building materials and energy (oil, coal) may actually increase to satisfy immediate needs and to replace lost productive capacity. For example, Japanese steel and aluminum plants are offline or damaged and much of both of those commodities will be needed for reconstruction. So far many tech companies have announced supply disruptions but they remind us that these disruptions will only be temporary and are the result of power outages rather than damages. Furthermore, for some segments of the Tech Sector, the damage to Japan’s infrastructure should be a good thing down the road: First, competitors are eliminated from the market temporarily. Secondly, some sectors, like optical components, were in a glut prior to the quake—the disruption will help them work down inventories, eventually raising prices. Finally, when the rebuilding occurs, the repairs will most certainly include the Country’s technology infrastructure and that will be good for US Tech manufacturers. Multiply these factors across many US industrial sectors and you will see where we’re going.
US equity markets are trading on sentiment—fear of nuclear fallout and of economic disaster in Japan, fear of the Middle East burning and fear of European debt defaults. Yet we have lost only about 6% from the top on all major US equity indices. That’s not bad considering the spike in the VIX and the huge drop in investor sentiment. For those of you who have hit the sell button, we suggest a long bike ride, maybe a cocktail and some re-runs of Two and a Half Men rather than shivering in front of CNN or CNBC, pondering more sales. The images coming across TV and the minute-by-minute conflicting headlines are only a recipe for angst and making an investment mistake. As Warren Buffet is fond of saying, be greedy when others are fearful, be fearful when others are greedy. Right now, it sure looks to us that others are panicking. It may sound mercenary and vulture-like but we’re investors so we are taking advantage of the situation. We suggest that you do too—but before the TV talking heads figure out that this tragedy, in the long run, may be just what both Japan and the US need to pull our respective economies out of their current malaise.
Happy St. Patrick’s Day.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Ramblings of a Portfolio Manager
Why isn’t Higher Oil the Straw in the Proverbial Camel’s Back of the Market?
After two weeks of turmoil in the Middle East and Africa, the major US equity averages have moved very little. Since riots in Egypt broke out at the end of January NYMEX crude has risen approximately $21/bbl, from roughly $85 to $106, a nearly 25% increase. Gasoline prices at the pump have risen a more modest 10%, yet despite the hike in real costs to consumers and the flood of negative press and television images, the Dow and S&P 500 have only declined by about 2% respectively from their highs. In fact, both indices are now trading exactly where they were at the end of January, when all this turmoil broke out in the first place. The spike in oil, naturally, has drawn pundits from out of the woodwork declaring potential economic Armageddon from higher oil, quoting such sensitivity numbers as a $2 per share impact in S&P earnings per every $20/bbl rise in oil. We don’t have the economic inputs for the model nor the Cray computer to run them to test this assertion so we’ll just take if for gospel (dangerous, we know). Based on current 2011 S&P earnings estimates of about $93 per share, that $2 would be roughly a 2.2% decline in corporate earnings for this year. Assuming no multiple contraction, that would equate to about 29 S&P or 270 Dow points, which would put us back just to where the markets were at the end of January, when all this began--that just so happens to be where we are right now!. Of course, with decline corporate earnings, one would expect some multiple compression resulting from the attendant dampening of investor sentiment. At the current multiple of the S&P 500, 14.2, a full multiple point of compression (pretty high historically) would equate to another 7% decline in the index. Combined with the prognosticated reduced corporate earnings power, that would give us the 10% decline that “everyone” is expecting as a pullback. A decline of that magnitude would just bring us back to about December 1st in the S&P 500.
But the tradeoff between oil prices, GDP and stock market levels is not rigidly formulaic. There are a number of variables that impact market levels in a rising energy market and make for a dynamic situation that, in reality, no economist or oil company executive (let alone a politician) can predict. For example, investor sentiment, which at the beginning of February was at a level that just about every talking head on TV who could emerge from under a rock proclaimed signaled a market pullback, has dropped significantly. According to AAII, the percentage of investors who are now bullish is nearly equal to those that are bearish at 36% vs. 32%. This is down from a level of nearly 52% bullishness at the beginning of February, just as the oil region turmoil began. The contrarian in us likes this move, especially in light of the relatively small decline in market averages.
Another factor that goes into the GDP vs. market level vs. energy price tradeoff is the impact at the consumer level, something the TV pundits like to take throw out continually. Here, simple math that even we can do throws this argument into doubt. According to the NHTSA, the average American drives 15,000 miles per year. According to the DOT, the average fuel consumption of all cars, light trucks and SUVs on the road today is 21.4 miles per gallon. Since the rioting began, gasoline at the pump is up, on average, about $0.33/ per gallon. Simple math tells us that the impact per average driver would be about $231 per year IF these higher gas prices persist for another year or more. Now, $231 may not seem like a lot to Wall Street types but it can be meaningful to the average American, at the margin. However, taking an adage from Wall Street, “nothing cures high oil prices like high oil prices.” That means, in basic economic terms, as gasoline prices climb, demand, being elastic, declines, thus reducing the per-family dollar impact and, eventually, bringing down the price of the commodity. The latest data we have on this phenomenon is from March 2008, when gas prices reached highs we are currently seeing at the pump. At that time, the number of miles driven dropped 4.3% in response, according to the Federal Highway Administration. Right now, even though oil has jumped 25%, stockpiles (you’ve heard all about Cushing and the spare oil sitting around in tankers in harbors around the world) have kept the pump price impact to half of that and will probably do so for several months. And that pump price needs to stay here for another 12 months before we see any significant impact to the average driver. At that point, miles driven will most likely decline, negating some of the impact. But we have a long time for stockpiles to be reduced (remember, ONLY 1.8% of the world’s supply has been cut and that has only seen a 50% reduction). In the meantime a situation such as we saw in 2007 and 2008, a significant move to more online shopping, will further negate the impact to consumers and consumer-related companies.
Of course, the GDP impact of higher oil isn’t just dependent upon consumers’ driving and spending habits. Energy is also used for home heating and transportation of goods, in addition to manufacturing (think plastics). On the first point, the Northern Hemisphere is now entering Spring/Summer. Heating demands will plummet, lessening both demand and the impact to consumer wallets. Transportation (trucking, rails, airlines, etc.) has gotten much more efficient over the last decade, further lessening the impact to the economy versus prior oil shocks. Our manufacturing economy has become both more efficient in energy use but has also transformed over the years. In fact, the dollar output of GDP per unit (BTU) of energy consumption has almost halved since 2000, according to the US Census Bureau. Simply put, our economy, despite all the hand wringing by opposing political parties, has indeed become less energy dependent as it has transformed from manufacturing to high-tech and financial services. Another 70’s style oil shock may well have a GDP impact but it can be expected to be much, much less in terms of reduction of domestic output.
The quoted $2/share S&P earnings impact per $20/bbl in oil presumes a permanent upward spike in oil to that higher level. So far, we have had only two weeks of rising oil and the new, higher price has not arrived all at once—it has been a steady incline. Except for airlines and other energy sensitive transportation industries, few US companies have yet felt the bit of higher oil. And, unless this new level of crude remains permanent or rises further, we believe few will. Right now a 25% rise in oil based on a 0.9% decline in supply says to us that there is a big “contagion premium” built into in oil prices right now. That premium probably assumes several Middle East countries undergo what Libya is now seeing, but probably not Saudi Arabia. A lot needs to go wrong in the Middle East for that scenario to develop—a fairly low probability, in our opinion. One thing we have to stress, though, is that all this turmoil represents a disruption, not destruction in supply. The length of this disruption is anybody’s guess but you can be sure that, as economies wholly dependent upon selling the black sticky stuff, the oil producing nations will ensure that it is as short as possible—or their troubles will only compound. That says to us that the price of oil has most likely over-reacted to current world events and that the equity markets have reacted rationally. Now that investor sentiment is low and oil is high, when we get a reversal of both (which we will and they will come together) the base will be set for much higher equity markets.
After two weeks of turmoil in the Middle East and Africa, the major US equity averages have moved very little. Since riots in Egypt broke out at the end of January NYMEX crude has risen approximately $21/bbl, from roughly $85 to $106, a nearly 25% increase. Gasoline prices at the pump have risen a more modest 10%, yet despite the hike in real costs to consumers and the flood of negative press and television images, the Dow and S&P 500 have only declined by about 2% respectively from their highs. In fact, both indices are now trading exactly where they were at the end of January, when all this turmoil broke out in the first place. The spike in oil, naturally, has drawn pundits from out of the woodwork declaring potential economic Armageddon from higher oil, quoting such sensitivity numbers as a $2 per share impact in S&P earnings per every $20/bbl rise in oil. We don’t have the economic inputs for the model nor the Cray computer to run them to test this assertion so we’ll just take if for gospel (dangerous, we know). Based on current 2011 S&P earnings estimates of about $93 per share, that $2 would be roughly a 2.2% decline in corporate earnings for this year. Assuming no multiple contraction, that would equate to about 29 S&P or 270 Dow points, which would put us back just to where the markets were at the end of January, when all this began--that just so happens to be where we are right now!. Of course, with decline corporate earnings, one would expect some multiple compression resulting from the attendant dampening of investor sentiment. At the current multiple of the S&P 500, 14.2, a full multiple point of compression (pretty high historically) would equate to another 7% decline in the index. Combined with the prognosticated reduced corporate earnings power, that would give us the 10% decline that “everyone” is expecting as a pullback. A decline of that magnitude would just bring us back to about December 1st in the S&P 500.
But the tradeoff between oil prices, GDP and stock market levels is not rigidly formulaic. There are a number of variables that impact market levels in a rising energy market and make for a dynamic situation that, in reality, no economist or oil company executive (let alone a politician) can predict. For example, investor sentiment, which at the beginning of February was at a level that just about every talking head on TV who could emerge from under a rock proclaimed signaled a market pullback, has dropped significantly. According to AAII, the percentage of investors who are now bullish is nearly equal to those that are bearish at 36% vs. 32%. This is down from a level of nearly 52% bullishness at the beginning of February, just as the oil region turmoil began. The contrarian in us likes this move, especially in light of the relatively small decline in market averages.
Another factor that goes into the GDP vs. market level vs. energy price tradeoff is the impact at the consumer level, something the TV pundits like to take throw out continually. Here, simple math that even we can do throws this argument into doubt. According to the NHTSA, the average American drives 15,000 miles per year. According to the DOT, the average fuel consumption of all cars, light trucks and SUVs on the road today is 21.4 miles per gallon. Since the rioting began, gasoline at the pump is up, on average, about $0.33/ per gallon. Simple math tells us that the impact per average driver would be about $231 per year IF these higher gas prices persist for another year or more. Now, $231 may not seem like a lot to Wall Street types but it can be meaningful to the average American, at the margin. However, taking an adage from Wall Street, “nothing cures high oil prices like high oil prices.” That means, in basic economic terms, as gasoline prices climb, demand, being elastic, declines, thus reducing the per-family dollar impact and, eventually, bringing down the price of the commodity. The latest data we have on this phenomenon is from March 2008, when gas prices reached highs we are currently seeing at the pump. At that time, the number of miles driven dropped 4.3% in response, according to the Federal Highway Administration. Right now, even though oil has jumped 25%, stockpiles (you’ve heard all about Cushing and the spare oil sitting around in tankers in harbors around the world) have kept the pump price impact to half of that and will probably do so for several months. And that pump price needs to stay here for another 12 months before we see any significant impact to the average driver. At that point, miles driven will most likely decline, negating some of the impact. But we have a long time for stockpiles to be reduced (remember, ONLY 1.8% of the world’s supply has been cut and that has only seen a 50% reduction). In the meantime a situation such as we saw in 2007 and 2008, a significant move to more online shopping, will further negate the impact to consumers and consumer-related companies.
Of course, the GDP impact of higher oil isn’t just dependent upon consumers’ driving and spending habits. Energy is also used for home heating and transportation of goods, in addition to manufacturing (think plastics). On the first point, the Northern Hemisphere is now entering Spring/Summer. Heating demands will plummet, lessening both demand and the impact to consumer wallets. Transportation (trucking, rails, airlines, etc.) has gotten much more efficient over the last decade, further lessening the impact to the economy versus prior oil shocks. Our manufacturing economy has become both more efficient in energy use but has also transformed over the years. In fact, the dollar output of GDP per unit (BTU) of energy consumption has almost halved since 2000, according to the US Census Bureau. Simply put, our economy, despite all the hand wringing by opposing political parties, has indeed become less energy dependent as it has transformed from manufacturing to high-tech and financial services. Another 70’s style oil shock may well have a GDP impact but it can be expected to be much, much less in terms of reduction of domestic output.
The quoted $2/share S&P earnings impact per $20/bbl in oil presumes a permanent upward spike in oil to that higher level. So far, we have had only two weeks of rising oil and the new, higher price has not arrived all at once—it has been a steady incline. Except for airlines and other energy sensitive transportation industries, few US companies have yet felt the bit of higher oil. And, unless this new level of crude remains permanent or rises further, we believe few will. Right now a 25% rise in oil based on a 0.9% decline in supply says to us that there is a big “contagion premium” built into in oil prices right now. That premium probably assumes several Middle East countries undergo what Libya is now seeing, but probably not Saudi Arabia. A lot needs to go wrong in the Middle East for that scenario to develop—a fairly low probability, in our opinion. One thing we have to stress, though, is that all this turmoil represents a disruption, not destruction in supply. The length of this disruption is anybody’s guess but you can be sure that, as economies wholly dependent upon selling the black sticky stuff, the oil producing nations will ensure that it is as short as possible—or their troubles will only compound. That says to us that the price of oil has most likely over-reacted to current world events and that the equity markets have reacted rationally. Now that investor sentiment is low and oil is high, when we get a reversal of both (which we will and they will come together) the base will be set for much higher equity markets.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
