China FX Reserves Fall Less Than Expected to $3.011 tn

The FT reports,

China’s foreign exchange reserves continued to fall in December, albeit at a slower rate than previous months, as the central bank announced a lower than expected drop in foreign exchange reserves for the month.

Reserves fell by $41bn, to $3.01tn, less than the expected $51bn drop according to a Reuters poll of analysts. In November reserves fell $70bn.

The lower than expected drop nonetheless showed that pressure on the renminbi continues, as many Chinese seek to get money out of the country.

chinafx-reserves_jan8

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Reagan-Trump S&P500 Analog: Tracking

We’re still tracking the Reagan-Trump S&P500 analog.  We’ve noted it’s a fun exercise and probably useless in predicting the future move in the index given the different macroeconomic initial conditions at the beginning of both Administrations. But, hold on!   It is getting interesting here.

The chart below shows the Reagan S&P and the Trump S&P are trading right on top of each other after 42 days from the respective POTUS  elections.  In fact, the Trump S&P now trails Reagan by only .09 percent.  If past is prologue,  the S&P500 makes a new high on Monday and then succumbs to profit taking.

The Reagan S&P peaked on November 28, 1980, 18 days after the election,  and entered a nasty bear market,  which took the index down over 27 percent in 429 trading days, before the bull market began on August 11, 1982.  The bull market was ignited by a precipitous drop in bond yields and U.S. economy exiting a very deep recession.

The macroeconomic conditions could not be more different as President Trump takes office.

reagan-v-trump_analog

 

Posted in Equities, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

US Sector ETF Performance – Jan 6

etf_dayetf_week

Posted in Sector ETF Peformance, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Daily Risk Monitor – January 6

Click on table to enlarge and for better resolution

riskmon_1riskmon_2riskmon_3

Posted in Daily Risk Monitor, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

How to Become a Trillionaire and Other Thoughts

Grab one of these:

zimbabwe_jan7

Careful what you wish for central bankers and fiscal policy makers.  Though we don’t see signs of “rollover risk” in any of the G5 or G20, it’s all about confidence and you know what Joe said about confidence:

Confidence is a very fragile thing.  – Joe Montana

.

The World Economic Forum reports this about Zimbabwe’s ghost of hyperinflation past,

Zimbabwe was once so gripped by hyperinflation that the central bank could no longer afford paper on which to print practically worthless trillion-dollar notes. 

The government reported in July 2008 that Zimbabwe was experiencing inflation of 231 million percent (231,000,000%). However, the Libertarian think tank, the Cato Institute, believes that the real inflation rate was 89.7 sextillion percent or 89,700,000,000,000,000,000,000%.

It is interesting to note that the country is now grappling with the opposite problem.

Like Britain, Japan, the US and other nations dealing with the consequences of weak demand and cheap oil, Zimbabwe is threatened more by the prospect of falling prices. But that doesn’t mean its people are ready to trust that hyperinflation won’t happen again.

This is what happens when you are not a reserve currency — i.e., there is global demand for and a financial incentive to hold your currency  — and markets have lost confidence in your central bank and central government.   That, in our opinion, is the next major systemic macro swan:  the loss of confidence in a G5 central bank and government.  Not a black swan as it is a known unknown rather than an unknowable unknown.

We still have ongoing debates with our good friends from the modern monetary theory (MMT)  about whether a major sovereign government can default if they have an independent central bank.   Yes, they can!

We had the same debate with our Argentine friends several years ago as to whether their government would or could devalue their currency when it was on an effective currency board.  Yes, they did!  And defaulted to boot.

Just as Russia chose to default on its GKOs (short-term ruble denominated treasury bills) in 1998 with an independent central bank,  the same can happen to a G5 country as we approach the upper bound of debt limits and the lower for longer interest rate meme seems to be sunseting in a post-Trump world.

Debt to GDP Ratios_Jan7.png

When a highly indebted sovereign crosses the tipping point — and nobody knows where the tipping point is —  when the markets lose confidence in its ability to repay or rollover debt coming due and the window shuts on refinancing,  they face three choices:

1)  bailout – easy for a small country,  such as Greece,  but Italy or Japan are too big to bail;   2) hyperinflate – print money to pay maturing debt obligations and finance budget deficits.  An aside:  the Bulgarian central bank did this in 1996 resulting in hyperinflation, which peaked at a monthly inflation rate of 242%  in February 1997.   I was in the Bulgarian central bank in the fall of 1996, when a senior official looked me in the eye and said, [Gregor],  we will not let the government default on its treasury securities.”  I knew what was to come; and 3)  default and restructure.

Like the Russians,  the decision to hyperinflate, default, or go begging to the IMF, is a political one.  Russia saw that a high percentage of holders of its local currency debt was held by foreigners,  hedge funds such as David Tepper.

Tepper says that losing 29% ($80 million) on Russia when Russia defaulted after an IMF deal “the biggest screw-up in his career”.  – Ivanhoff Capital

The Russians made a political choice to default and inflict the pain on foreigners rather their domestic population through hyperinflation.   What was interesting is Russia continued to pay their dollar-denominated euro bonds, which had a relatively low debt service burden compared to the maturing GKOs.  The Russian government effectively carved out and gave implicit seniority to a specific component of their debt structure.  Totally contrary to what MMT predicts will happen, i.e.,  print money to pay the local debt and default on the hard currency external debt.

The major industrialized countries have gotten away with massive money printing and central bank financing not only of their sovereign governments but even some private corporations as well.

central-bank-bond-holdings_jan7

Good things don’t last forever.

As interest rates rise and are normalized,  highly indebted countries could enter a vicious cycle on the fiscal side,

Our current debt may be manageable at a time of unprecedentedly low interest rates. But if we let our debt grow, and interest rates normalize, the interest burden alone would choke our budget and squeeze out other essential spending. There would be no room for the infrastructure programs and the defense rebuilding that today have wide support.

It’s not just federal spending that would be squeezed. The projected rise in federal deficits would compete for funds in our capital markets and far outrun the private sector’s capacity to save, to finance industry and home purchases, and to invest abroad.

Instead, we’d be dependent on foreign investors’ acquiring most of our debt — making the government dependent on the “kindness of strangers” who may not be so kind as the I.O.U.s mount up.  –

We think foreigners will not be that “kind” to the U.S. in the new hardball world of  Trumplandia as the risk of trade wars and deglobalization increases.  Run, don’t walk, to read Martin Wolf’s latest,  The long and painful journey to world disorder.

Furthermore, given the Trump fiscal policy, which will significantly reduce net public savings and is highly dependent on big increases in private investment and consumption for growth, further reducing net private savings,  the U.S. current account balance, by definition, will deteriorate markedly over the next several years.   Thus, there will be yuuuuge competition for the world’s foreign savings to finance the larger U.S. current account deficits.  In this world, if realized, real interest rates will head north in a hurry.

Remember the National Accounting Identity,

(S-I) + (T-G) = (X-M)

 (S-I) is the ‘private savings balance’ or the difference between private sector savings (S) and investment (I); (T-G) is the ‘government balance’ or the difference between tax receipts (T) and all government expenditure (G); (X-M) is the difference between exports (X) and imports (M) and is usually called the simple ‘current account balance’.  –

As the tide of easy money recedes,  we have a queasy feeling we’ll be seeing a lot of schlong over the next few years as the markets find out who has been swimming naked.

And, always, keep this in mind:

“In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.” – Rudiger Dornbusch

Fasten your seatbelts, it’s going to be a bumpy night.    Stay tuned!

 

Posted in Economics, Fiscal Policy, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 10 Comments

2017 Annual Forecast Preview – Stratfor

Stratfor Vice President of Global Analysis Reva Goujon highlights the key geopolitical trends for the coming year.
For more analysis, visit: http://www.Stratfor.com

Posted in Economics, Policy, Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Word of the Day: “Baofahu”

“a Chinese term for people who have experienced an “explosion” of wealth but lack financial and cultural sophistication. Shanxi is a hotbed for such investors, many of whom got rich during the coal boom. “They just look at the yield,” he says, “and they don’t pay attention to the risk. And sometimes the bank’s salespeople do not explain the risks properly.”   –  FT,  1/2/2016

(WOTD = Word of the Day)

 

Posted in China, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

China’s Caixin service PMI rises to 17-month high

The Caixin China Services PMI rose to 53.4 in December of 2016 from 53.1 in November while market expected 53.3. It was the fastest growth since July 2015, as new orders rose the most in 17 months and business expectations went up to a four-month high while employment growth eased modestly. At the same time, backlogged work was broadly unchanged while input costs rose at the fastest rate in nearly two years. Services companies raised slightly their prices charged amid reports that competitive market pressures had restricted their ability to fully pass on higher input costs. Services PMI in China averaged 52.32 Index Points from 2012 until 2016, reaching an all time high of 54.70 Index Points in May of 2012 and a record low of 50 Index Points in July of 2014. Services PMI in China is reported by Markit Economics.  – Trading Markets

china_services_pmi

Posted in China, PMIs, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

LIBOR Over 1 Percent, First Time In 7 years

The times they are a changin [incrementally]’.

The Wall Street Journal reports,

But on Wednesday it was set at 1.00511%, topping that key threshold for the first time in more than seven years, as investors brace for more Federal Reserve rate increases and respond to overhauls of money market funds. That’s a welcome sign for holders of bank loans, who expect their coupons to increase alongside Libor.

“We’ve been waiting for this for a long time,” said Frank Ossino, a senior managing director who works with bank loans at Newfleet Asset Management. “The asset class will start to act like people expect it to. When Libor goes up, we should get more coupon.”

…Mutual funds and exchange-traded funds that invest in banks loans are once again becoming popular as investors anticipate faster economic growth and inflation under a Donald Trump presidency, which would drive rates higher.

Investors poured $2.8 billion into such funds in November, the biggest month of net inflows since early 2014, according to the most recent data from Morningstar.  – WSJ

libor-over-1-percentlibor

Posted in Interest Rates, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Reagan-Trump S&P500 Analog : 40 Days In

A little personal story about the Reagan Fed, but, first, some meat.

It has been 40 tradings days — wow, time flies — since Donald Trump’s surprise victory  in the 2016 Presidential election.  We posted a piece on New Year’s Day looking at the Reagan-Trump S&P500 analog noting,

The Reagan-Trump Analog is completely useless, in our opinion, as the relative  macroeconomic initial conditions at the advent of their two Presidencies are entirely different.   Nevertheless,  a fun tracking exercise and we do expect a little more give back in the S&P500 in the next month.  We don’t expect the almost 30 percent high-to-low give back in the first year and half of the new Administration. – GMM

The global liquidity conditions are so much different than when Reagan took office as the effective Fed Funds rate was hovering around 20 percent back then.  Central banks have now injected massive amounts of liquidity into the financial markets to keep the global economy from a debilitating deflationary recession.  It has got to go somewhere (out of excess banking reserves) as the world’s economies recovery.    The train wreck may come when credit really begins to expand and central banks panic and try to reverse what they have done.   Don’t see it in the near term, however, but keep it on your radar.

Nevertheless. we are still tracking Reagan-Trump analog.  It turned up this week from a small sell-off as did the Reagan S&P on the 39th trading day.  The Trump S&P is now outperforming the Reagan S&P by 1.26% 40 trading days into their respective President-elect titles.

If the Reagan S&P is prologue,  we will see three more up days, with the S&P500 1.3 percent higher at next Monday’s close,  then some profit taking.

Analogs are like stock market gurus, preachers, prophets, and  prognosticators, which are like  straws we grasp at and flock to when trying to look into the future.  Simply because nooooobody knows the what the future holds with any degree of certainty.

Fun, though.  Wouldn’t trade on it.

reagan-v-trump_analog

Personal Story
Can’t remember the exact year, probably 1985,  I was a graduate student interviewing at the Federal Reserve Board in their international division.   Upon entering the building I was met with, what was back then,  extreme security.   I was kind of surprised.  No security measures in hardly any of the other Federal government buildings in Washington at the time (mid-1980’s).

When I arrived upstairs, I asked my prospective bosses,  “why the tight security?”

They replied that during the days of tight monetary policy and ultra high interest rates,  farmers and other disaffected Americans would enter the building threatening the then Fed Chairman, Paul Volcker.  A few were even caught wondering the halls of the FRB with guns!  Yikes.

What also stands out from that interview was the tour that I was taken on of the Federal Reserve Board building on Constitution Avenue, which included a gym (I believe) and racquetball courts.  Posh settings.  We didn’t have this at the GAO, for example.

The young economists giving me the tour explained the Fed was quasi-private,  known as “Club Fed” in government worker circles, and was profitable and actually returned  a surplus to the U.S. Treasury.   And this was way before the System Open Market Account (SOMA), where the QE assets are held.   Nice!

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment