Latest | Billionaire's Portfolio

May 31, 2022

We’ve talked over the past few weeks about the demand headwind that has come from: 1) the negative net worth effect from the decline in stocks, and 2) the tax effect from the rise in gas prices.

We’ve also talked about the other piece of the net worth effect: housing.

To this point, housing has had a positive net worth effect. And prices remain at record levels. But will it sustain through the demand headwinds and the record spike in mortgage rates?

Let’s take a closer look …

The Case Shiller housing price data for March was released this morning. This is now two months old, but the reports showed new record highs for house prices …

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.

Pro Perspectives 5/27/22

May 27, 2022

As we head into Memorial Day weekend, let's talk about oil.

Two year's ago (this time of year), the national average price on gas was $1.87. Last year: $3.04. Today, it's $4.60.

Throughout much of the past two years, the "climate actioners" were convinced that oil demand was rapidly eroding, on the fantasy of a rapid change to a world of ubiquitous electric vehicles and wind farms. So, they underestimated demand, while simultaneously regulating away (oil) supply.

The result has been ceding control on oil prices, completely, to OPEC. And that guarantees higher and higher prices (no limit).

With that, as we've discussed in recent weeks, the energy price input on the cost of living, has become a primary headwind for demand.

Add that to a reset in mortgage rates and a haircut in equity valuations, and we have an economic slowdown that will lower the standard of living, but may contribute to avoiding an economic crash (as the slowdown provides some relief against more aggressive Fed monetary policy action).

With that, as we discussed yesterday, the bounce in stocks looks early, and set to continue.

How To Capitalize On This Bounce in Stocks

My Billionaire's Portfolio is the only service in the world that gives the average person an opportunity to invest alongside the world’s greatest hedge funds and billionaire investors, while learning the tools of the trade along the way. It's a concept I call "piggyback” investing.

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 reader, I’d like to extend an invitation to join my premium advisory service.

It’s a great deal for the money. And I think you’ll find it extremely valuable as we step through what's becoming a more complicated investing environment. You can click here to subscribe.

When you do, you'll get immediate access to see our portfolio, including my most recent note, where I review the seven cheapest stocks in our portfolio.

Have a great weekend!

Best,

Bryan

Pro Perspectives 5/26/22

May 26, 2022

Tightening financial conditions is not a typical brew for buying stocks.

We've had a tightening. And yet, we came into today talking about a bullish setup for stocks.

We were looking for a break of this big trendline (the yellow line) in the S&P 500, and a close above the key 4,000 level. We got it.

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.

Pro Perspectives 5/25/22

May 25, 2022

The minutes from the May Fed meeting were released today.

It was three weeks ago that the Fed made it's second rate hike, and started what now projects to be a series of 50 bps rate hikes (probably three consecutive by July).

And from this meeting, they announced details on a quantitative tightening plan (i.e. reversing QE). That's due to begin June 1.

This was all within the context of what the Fed described as a "very strong economy," "extremely tight labor market," and "very high inflation."

Since then, stocks have made new lows. Gas prices have made new highs. Rents and the cost of home ownership have continued to rise.

Financial conditions have tightened.

And with that, consumer psychology is changing.

Take a look at these google search trends …

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.

Pro Perspectives 5/23/22

May 23, 2022

We entered the year with household net worth on record highs.

The job market was tight. Consumers and businesses were flush with cash. And residential real estate valuations were on record highs.

Add in a record high stock market and ultra low interest rates, and we had a recipe for hot consumption.

That was the top.

The high for the year in stocks was January 4th. On Friday, we hit "technical bear market" territory for the S&P 500. That's down 20%.

What changed?

Was it war in eastern Europe? Was it domestic policy mistakes? Was it inflation?

None of the above (not even oil).

It was the Fed.

Sure, the Fed is reacting to inflation. But they could have executed a campaign to get inflation under control, by stepping UP interest rates. They probably could have even done an emergency meeting rate hike to take the Fed funds rate back to neutral (around 3%), in one fell swoop.

And the economy, and the stock market, would have probably (still) boomed, at least until the Fed was seen to be clearly charging down the path of restrictive monetary policy (i.e. projecting as if they might move rates toward or above the inflation rate). And that could have been by late this year, or early next year. In that case, the Fed would have been putting the brakes on a very hot economy.

Instead, the Fed opted against a traditional rate tightening campaign, and they opted for launching an attack on demand.

The easiest way to take the air out of demand? Crush the stock market.

The easiest way to crush the stock market? Tell consumers, businesses and investors that you're going to attack demand. They will sell stocks.

That's precisely what the Fed did. Jay Powell said explicitly back in March that they were trying to better align demand with supply (i.e. bring demand down).

With all of the above in mind, we talked last week about the Fed's "forward guidance" game. This is how they talk their desired effect into existence, without having to take any big policy action.

Ben Bernanke (the former Fed chair) gave a presentation today at the Brookings Institution, where he said just that: "Monetary policy is 98% talk and 2% action." Their talk, at the moment, is intended to deflate stock prices, deflate animal spirits, and deflate demand. That mission is being accomplished.

Pro Perspectives 5/20/22

May 20, 2022

Let's take a look at Tesla.

From the pandemic lows, Tesla stock rose about 14-fold in a matter of ten months. By November of last year the stock was up almost 19-fold from the pandemic lows (that's in 20 months).

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.

Pro Perspectives 5/19/22

May 19, 2022

The top finance officials from G7 countries are meeting in Germany. It's a three day meeting to conclude tomorrow. This is a prep for June meetings of G7 leaders.

Importantly, both the finmin meetings and the leaders meetings have a history of resulting in meaningful market influence – especially in times of crisis. And we have plenty of crises to review over the past 14 years.

The biggest takeaway from these meetings over this past 14 years, is the commitment to "global coordination."

In times of economic weakness, and financial market instability, they have consistently vowed to coordinate. And when they do, and they lead the communique with focus on the economy, stocks have done well.

But much of this 14-year era was dealing with demand problems. Now, we are dealing with supply problems. We're dealing with an inflation problem. And we're dealing with financial market instability.

With that, what should we expect to come from these meetings of the world's most powerful finance officials?

The report from Reuters today, is that the communique will focus on:

1) climate change, 2) Ukraine support, 3) food and energy support for emerging markets (keep exporting, even in the face of domestic shortages), 4) inflation, and 5) crypto.

This is not a focus on the economy. It's a focus on the globally coordinated transformation agenda (climate and social), which has created most of the problems they are vowing to address.

So we shouldn't expect a G7 finance ministers lifeline for global stock markets (probably no mention at all).

Importantly, in that regard, they vow to crack down on crypto (with swift regulation).

Remember, on Friday, we discussed the likelihood that we may see a response (from these meetings) to the deflating crypto bubble. After all, last week we saw the first fracture in the stablecoin business — with the failure of the stablecoin called Terra.

The big brother in the stablecoin world is Tether. A similar run on Tether (as we've seen on Terra) could expose the lack of integrity behind the reserve management of this $74 billion stablecoin (i.e. based the company's own disclosures, they don't appear to have liquid access to the dollars, necessary to back the coins).

Swift regulatory requirements here, could result in a swift end of Tether – and perhaps the fall of crypto dominoes. Governments have made no secret that they want to regulate away private crypto, to make way for sovereign crypto (central bank digital currencies).

Pro Perspectives 5/18/22

May 18, 2022

The technical relief rally in stocks was short-lived.

As we've discussed, this continues to look like the Fed is using stocks as a tool to bring down demand (to bring down inflation). Just as they explicitly influenced stocks higher in the low inflation, low demand post-Global Financial Crisis era … they are now using that strategy in reverse, by talking tough and telegraphing tighter financial conditions, which is a headwind for stocks.

Arguably, they have achieved their goal, already. The animal spirits of just months ago has been knocked down. The conversation has flipped from boom to recession. That will slow the rate of price change (i.e. inflation).

What won't change is the level of prices. Higher prices are hear to stay.

The offset to that, is higher wages. That's a new paradigm for corporate America, and though they talk a good game, they don't want to reset the wage scale. We are seeing that translate into lower margins at Target and Walmart (where the low end of the pay scale was adjusted sharply higher, to get people back to work, and to comply with the social agenda pressures).

On a related note, the Fed is now attacking (verbally) wage growth. They begged for wage growth for fourteen years (when inflation was low). Now they are attacking it (when inflation is high).

That means, we should be prepared for a slow adjustment in wages across the rest of the pay scale. It will be over time, to close the gap with what was a swift jump in prices (the consequence of the massive pandemic response, and the additional $3.1 trillion opportunistically poured on top, to fund the Biden agenda).

This slow closing of the wage/price gap will mean lower of standard of living/lower quality of life. This was telegraphed all along the way. Higher prices, but not higher value.

Pro Perspectives 5/17/22

May 17, 2022

On Friday we looked at a couple of key technical levels for stocks, that looked like a valid spot for a relief rally.

We hit a 50% retracement in the Nasdaq, from the pandemic lows to the post-pandemic highs, on Thursday (hit it on the nose). It bounced, and we’ve since had three days of higher highs for a near 8% bounce.

We also fully retraced to pre-pandemic levels on the Russell 2000 (small caps). That too, has bounced for 8%.

Is it the greenlight for the broad stock market?

Very unlikely.

Remember, as we discussed yesterday, the Fed appears to be using stocks as a tool to “bring demand down.” And they are doing it through tough talk, or as they call it, “forward guidance.”

For fourteen years, the Fed (and global central banks) used this tool of promises and threats to manipulate stocks higher, to induce confidence, paper net worth, and therefore, demand.

Now, it looks like we’re seeing this strategy in reverse.

With that, today, in the face of a nice three day rally for stocks, (Fed Chair) Jay Powell was interviewed as part of a Wall Street Journal event, where he hammered home this message …

Again, those are the words we're hearing, but they aren't even projecting to end the rate cycle above what would be considered historically "normal" levels (which is around 3%) — much less anything near the current rate of inflation (above 8%).

Still, this continues to be framed by the Fed and the media as an "aggressive" posture by the Fed.

Contrast this, with what former Fed Chair, Ben Bernanke, said during the depths of the financial crisis. When asked about the inflationary risks of QE, back in 2010, he said dealing with inflation is no problem. "We could raise rates in 15 minutes."

That would be an aggressive offense against inflation.

Pro Perspectives 5/16/22

May 16, 2022

We entered the year with record high net worth for both consumers and corporate America.

And near record low debt service.

And with inflation running at forty-year highs.

We knew, coming into the year, that the Fed had finally acknowledged the inflation problem, and was ready to take action — albeit in very conservative baby steps.

Even after seeing it's first 8%+ inflation number, the Fed still was projecting a shallow rate hiking cycle, to end around 3% on the Fed Funds rate. That's about historically neutral (not accommodative, not restrictive to economic activity).

As we've discussed, if we look back at the inflation fight of the early '80s, beating inflation required the Fed taking the Fed Funds rate above the rate of inflation. The Fed Chair at the time, Paul Volcker, beat double-digit inflation with short-term interest rates that approached 20% — and in doing so, he took the economy into recession.

But he also, in stabilizing prices, set the stage for a long and very good period of development for the U.S. economy.

The current Fed still has given us no indication that they have the appetite to take such a path with rates.

That said, what they have done is promised to "bring demand down."

And the sacrificial lamb, as the Fed has explicitly framed it, is the job market.

So, yes, we have a Fed that suddenly trying to manipulate to the goal of less jobs.

At the moment, there are two open jobs for every one job seeker. Not only has Fed Chair, Jay Powell, told us that they intend to bring the ratio of job openings/job seekers to one-to-one, but Ben Bernanke (the Fed Chair that presided over the Great Financial Crisis), echoed that game plan this morning (bring the job seekers ratio to one-to-one).

The question is: How do they do it?

Raise rates, aggressively? Higher rates equals tighter credit. Tighter credit equals less business spending and investment. And less business spending and investment tends to equate to less hiring.

But, again, the Fed is not projecting an aggressive, inflation chasing rate hiking campaign.

With $6 trillion of new money floating around (thanks to all of the post-pandemic fiscal spending largesse), the level of demand is being reflected in an inflation rate of over 8%. Yet the Fed's projected interest path, ending around 3%, gets them no where near the inflation rate.

As it stands, executing on the Fed's projected rate path would still fuel demand (and therefore inflation).

So how to they intend to get their desired effect?

It may be that they intend (hope to) talk it into existence.

What the Fed and other central banks learned through the global financial crisis fight, was that once they crossed the line and backstopped nearly everything, the markets would respect their threats/promises.

This became a new tool, added to the central bank toolbox. They called it "forward guidance."

Throughout the financial crisis, the Fed used forward guidance to manipulate behaviors of consumers and businesses by telling us that rates would remain low for "an extended time."

The European Central Bank adopted it in 2012, by promising to defend the solvency of the collapsing European sovereign bond market, by saying they would be a buyer of unlimited sovereign debt (they would be the buyer of last resort). Just by saying it, interest rates of the weak countries of Europe fell sharply, and the risk of major defaults subsided — without the ECB having to buy a single bond. The threat, alone, worked. And that was something that Mario Draghi (the ECB President, at the time) bragged about.

So, perhaps the Fed's threat to "bring down demand" is just "forward guidance," intended to influence behaviors (weaker demand). Just talk.

If so, it's working – so far.

Stocks are behaving as if the Fed will take some recession-inducing action. The (roughly) a 20% haircut in the stock market lowers the net worth of consumers, from record levels, which will soften demand. That (stock market decline) alone, is good enough to put a dent in job creation, as companies start reining-in risk (from "uncertainty").

Meanwhile, market interest rates (determined by the market) are at just 2.88% (having done an about face after trading as high as 3.2%).

A ten-year yield at 2.88 (at today's close) is not pricing in an aggressive, inflation chasing, rate hiking cycle. If the bond market is indeed "smarter" than the stock market, perhaps the bond market knows the Fed is just playing the "forward guidance" game — talking, with no intention on big policy action.

PS: If you know someone that might like to receive my daily notes, they can sign up by clicking below …