June 6, 2022
![]() |
June 6, 2022
![]() |
June 3, 2022
![]() |
We looked at this chart above last week. With the telegraph of higher interest rates, and less liquidity in the system, the start up and early stage technology businesses had the biggest layoffs in May, since the depths of the lockdown-induced recession. Big tech is now announcing hiring freezes and head count reduction too.
So, again, the market is doing the Fed’s job for them.
Layoffs and softer wages sound like bad news. But it’s good news within the context of the probable outcomes that are on the table. A looser labor market, softer wage growth, lower stock valuations and higher gas prices are a formula for lower demand. That should keep the path of interest rates shallow and, therefore, lower the probability of an economic crash scenario.
That said, the Fed’s attack on demand will do little to contain the prices driven by structural supply deficits, namely oil. With that, a lower standard of living seems to be a common denominator in both the soft and hard landing scenarios for the economy.
|
![]() |
June 2, 2022
![]() |
This, as we head into a big government jobs report tomorrow.
What should we expect?
We had some clues from the private jobs report this morning, published by ADP. The jobs added in May came in at 128k, versus the market consensus of 300k. It was a miss.
For tomorrow's report on non-farm payrolls, the expectation is for the weakest report in over a year, at 325k jobs added.
To be sure, this will be one of the more important jobs reports we've seen in a while.
Why? Because the Fed has explicitly targeted jobs, in the effort to bring down inflation. The Fed Chair, Jay Powell, told us explicitly that they intend to bring the ratio of job openings/job seekers down from two-to-one, to one-to-one.
Yes, we have a Fed that is trying to manipulate to the goal of higher unemployment.
In my 26-year career in markets, I've never witnessed a Fed that is explicitly attempting to destroy demand and jobs. But here we are.
With that, we are in a bad news is good news stock market.
As we've discussed here in my daily notes, the more verbal influence that the Fed can have on markets, and consumer and business psychology, the less work that the Fed has to do with interest rates.
The shallower the path of interest rate hikes, the higher the probability of a soft landing for the economy. That's a slowing growth scenario (the best case scenario in the this environment).
On that front, so far so good. The markets are doing the Fed's job for it. Lower equity valuations, higher gas prices and higher mortgage rates have quickly changed consumer and business psychology. Demand is coming down, which should translate into some loosening in the job market. We will see tomorrow.
|
![]() |
June 1, 2022
![]() |
So, the anticipation of reversing QE has already contributed to a steep decline in stocks. Now actual QT is officially upon us.
With that in mind, let’s take a look at how stocks behaved during the Fed’s first experiment in shrinking the balance sheet, following the Great Financial Crisis period (GFC).
|
![]() |
Stocks went up!
Over 535 days, stocks gains 22%. This measures the period of time from when the Fed signaled balance sheet normalization (June 2017), up until the day they ended it (July 2019).
On that note, as we’ve discussed over the past couple of months, the historical track record of QE exits is not good.
We know that in each case (globally and domestically), the “quantitative tightening” experiments ended with more QE.
From the chart above, clearly the Fed’s return to QE wasn’t because of a crashing stock market.
Why did they restart QE back in 2019?
Things started breaking in the financial system.
Remember, we discussed this back in my April 6 note. We had this 300 basis point spike in the overnight lending market.
|
![]() |
Here’s how the Fed explained what happened (my emphasis) …
“Strains in money market in September occurred against a backdrop of a declining level of reserves, due to the Fed’s balance sheet normalization and heavy issuance of Treasury securities.”
So, the Fed was forced to rescue the overnight lending market (between the biggest banks in the country) because of an unforeseen consequence of balance sheet normalization.
It’s important to understand that reversing the Fed balance sheet is an experiment, with outcomes unknown.
|
![]() |
May 31, 2022
![]() |
That said, we’ve already seen evidence that this bull cycle for housing may be over.
Existing home sales topped in January. Housing inventory bottomed in February.
And while the Fed has moved only 75 basis points in this tightening cycle, and the effective Fed Funds rate has yet to rise above 1%, mortgage rates have exploded higher.
In just 17 months, the 30-year fixed mortgage rate has spiked from 2.68% to over 5.25%.
That’s a near doubling in mortgage rates. And as you can see in the chart below, it’s the fastest change on record.
|
![]() |
One might argue that this spike in rates is coming from a record low base. That's true. But this has translated into a spike in the cost of ownership as a percent of income, to levels of 2006 and 2007 (near 40% of median income, to cover housing).
So, is housing market set up for another bust? Unlikely.
More than half of mortgage holders have a fixed rate of 3.5% or less. And only 10% of mortgages have adjusted rate mortgages — and those ARMs have a fixed rate component, on average, for between 7 to 10 years. So this isn't the fragile mortgage market of the 2008 housing crash, where 40% of all mortgages were ARMs.
What the housing market IS set up for, is a moderation. And that's another headwind for demand. For the late cycle home buyers, the spike in the cost of ownership is destructive to discretionary spending (another tax effect). And a moderation in prices and turnover activity should be enough to knock down the animal spirits of existing home owners with significant home equity (i.e. the fearless consumption we've seen that has been underpinned by the net worth effect).
Add this, to the haircut in equity valuations and record high gas prices, and (again) the markets are doing the Fed's job for them: bringing down demand.
|
![]() |
May 27, 2022
Through the power of the internet, I get to share my insight and the moves of the best investors in the world, with investors of all levels. It gives me a chance to help empower the do-it-yourself investor.
My strategy is rooted in finding deep value stocks owned and controlled by billionaire investors.
The process is pretty simple. I follow the most powerful and influential investors into stocks where they control their own destiny. When they win. We win. These investors specialize in the concept of asymmetric returns–i.e. they only want to spend their time in situations where risk is defined, and the potential profit is multiples of what they pay for a stock.
But don't go out and blindly buy every stock a big-time investor buys.
I hand-select only my top 20 stocks to invest in, and to include in the Billionaire's Portfolio, all of which are owned and influenced by a big billionaire investor.
As a loyal Billionaire’s Pro Perspectives
It’s a great deal for the mone
![]() |
May 26, 2022
![]() |
This move today will likely end the streak of seven consecutive negative return weeks for the S&P 500.
And that's very important, as the S&P 500 is the proxy for global stability and risk appetite. With that, we had broadly positive risk appetite across global markets today (stocks, commodities, currencies).
Look for this to continue.
Why?
As we discussed yesterday, the haircut in equity valuations (i.e. the stock market) over the course of the past five months has taken considerable air out of the exuberance of economic activity. Add to that, soaring gas prices and a spike in mortgage rates have quickly swung the conversation from inflationary boom to recession.
It's the "negative net worth effect" of stocks, and the "cost of living tax" from gas and mortgage rates, that have resulted in a "tightening" effect on the economy.
Bottom line: Markets have seemingly done the Fed's job for them.
Without having to move past 1% on the effective Fed Funds rate (to this point) or sell a single bond from their balance sheet, they've gotten the desired result. Slowing demand.
Why is that positive?
As we also discussed yesterday, it reduces the probability of a 80s style inflation fight, and therefore, reduces the probability of a "hard landing" (i.e. a crash in the economy). That's good for stocks.
|
![]() |
May 25, 2022
![]() |
When the Fed last met, inflation was top of mind.
Now it’s this …
|
![]() |
So, this brings us back to my prior notes, where we’ve discussed the power of the Fed’s tough talk.
Remember, back in March, Jay Powell explicitly said they were trying to better align demand with supply (i.e. bring demand down).
Within that strategy, they have explicitly said they want to narrow the job opening to job seeker gap (which has been 2 to 1).
As a proxy, this chart of layoffs in startups are happening (narrowing the gap) …
|
![]() |
So, just months after telling us they want to bring demand down, the switch seems to have been flipped (per the charts above).
And they haven't even gotten the effective Fed funds rate to 1% yet.
And they haven't even started their QT program.
But they have achieved the goal of knocking down animal spirits, curtailing inflation expectations, and extracting liquidity from the system (in the form of lower equity market valuation).
If we consider that, we have a Fed that should have the comfort to sit back and watch the inflation data come down.
This is a slow down scenario. And it has been quick. But this is not the Volker-like inflation-fighting scenario (and hard landing).
And it presents the very real possibility that the tightening effect from a stock market decline, high gas prices and an adjustment in mortgage rates, could be enough to bring inflation under control (without requiring sharply higher interest rates).
This should be seen as positive for stocks here.
With that, the S&P 500 sets up for a test of this big trendline tomorrow (in the chart below).
A break and close above 4,000 would be bullish, and give us a chance to see a break of the string of seven consecutive down weeks, each having had lower lows along the way.
|
![]() |
![]() |
May 23, 2022
![]() |
May 20, 2022
![]() |
Thanks to this rise, Tesla became a top four weighting in the S&P 500. And Elon Musk became the richest man in the world.
Why did Tesla's stock take off?
If you believed that the pandemic would derail a Trump re-election, and clear the path for the clean energy agenda and America's return to the Paris Climate Accord, then Tesla represented the global climate action cooperation trade — the anti-oil trade.
As such, money plowed into the stock, from around the world, seemingly indiscriminately — as the manifestation of the global clean energy transformation.
Tesla became valued as if it would destroy the entire auto industry. By December of 2020, the market value of Tesla was equivalent to the market values of Toyota, Volkswagen, Daimler, GM, BMW, Honda and Ford … combined.
How did Tesla even get there in the first place?
The Obama administration loaned the company $465 million back in 2009, at the depths of the financial crisis, under the administration's strategy of "investing in emerging technology." Telsa had a new CEO (Elon), was burning cash and amassing liabilities (they were broke), and had yet to produce a consumer viable car. This was an uninvestable company, that the government plowed almost half a billion-dollars into.
But when the government money hit, the big institutional money aggressively followed it. After all, at the depths of a economic and stock market crash, government stimulus was the only game in town. Tesla not only survived, with the government as it's partner, but began to build market share with the benefit of government subsidies.
Fast forward to March of 2020. Again, government stimulus was the only game in town. And the investing universe somehow quickly saw the pandemic as a catalyst to drive political change in the United States, and subsequently, profligate fiscal spending to fund the climate agenda.
The result: The chart above.
But then Elon made the mistake of pursuing the takeover of Twitter. This appears to be biting the hand that fed him, as he is threatening the control that Twitter has had over information, and the company's influence it has had in supporting the domestic and global political and economic agenda.
As such, the sentiment tide has turned against Elon. Not only has he been attacked personally, there is an attack on the Tesla share price. The stock has been cut in half in just six weeks. That's half a trillion dollars in value, evaporated.
Sure, the high valuation big tech stocks have all been taken apart this year, with the regime shift in monetary policy (i.e. a new rising interest rate cycle).
But Tesla carries some bigger risk.
Clearly, there is political opposition to Elon's Twitter deal. And if Tesla's stock is being used as a tool, to prohibit the takeover (i.e. to make him poorer), then the S&P 500 — the broader market is at risk.
Remember, Tesla is the fourth largest component of the market cap weighted S&P 500 index (the world's barometer of economic health).
That said, the hair cut Musk has already taken to his net worth, has made the affordability of the Twitter deal questionable.
Something to keep an eye on.
|
![]() |