Where Investors Might Hide in a Storm

Image Credit: DonkeyHotey (Flickr)

Doomsday Investor Sees Ongoing Moves by Policymakers as Destructive

We’d all like to think that global decision-makers responsible for economic conditions have the best interest of the world’s citizenry in mind when making decisions – but doubts and concerns are growing. Among the most concerned are economic stakeholders that don’t believe “bad” things should always be prevented. One very credible voice highlighting this idea is hedge fund manager Paul Singer. He’s the CEO of Elliot Investment Management and recently moved his firm’s offices out of NY, NY, to the more business-friendly West Palm Beach, FL. Singer says a credit collapse and deep recession may be needed to restore financial markets.

Paul Singer is the founder and CEO of Elliott Investment Management. Its year-end 13F reportable AUM was $12.25 billion. The firms opportunity-based investment style allows Singer and Company, known for their corporate activism, to move to wherever profit may lie.  

The current thinking of Singer, a registered Republican, has been making headlines. This includes a widely circulated opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal last week. In it, he discusses more than a decade of what he believes are damaging easy-money policies and how a deep recession and even credit collapse will be necessary to purge financial markets of excesses.  

“I think that this is an extraordinarily dangerous and confusing period,” Singer told The Journal, in his interview, he warns that trouble in markets may only be getting started now that a full year has passed from the start of tighter monetary policy.

One of the more chilling quotes from Singer is, “Credit collapse, although terrible, is not as terrible as hyperinflation in terms of destruction wrought upon societies.”

The idea that we are headed down either one path or the other, he doesn’t mention a third option, may be why the New Yorker magazine calls him “Doomsday Investor.” He explains,  “Capitalism, which is economic freedom, can survive a credit crisis. We don’t think it can survive hyperinflation.”

The Doomsday Investor has been outspoken against government safety nets for a while, including the sweeping banking regulations from the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. This act created the Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and established the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). Singer strongly opposed prolonged market interventions by global central banks following the 2008 global financial crisis. Interventions that still haven’t been drained from the U.S. monetary system.

Singer, who is 78 called crypto, “completely lacking in any value,” in his WSJ interview. He also said: “There are thousands of cryptocurrencies. That’s why they’re worth zero. Anybody can make one. All they are is nothing with a marketing pitch—literally nothing.”

While his funds performance have placed him near the top of hedge fund manager performance, Singer personally worries the Fed and other central banks will respond to the next downturn by referring to the failed playbook of slashing interest rates and potentially resuming large-scale asset purchases. The point was shown to be current, as Singer called the regulatory response to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, including the guaranteeing of all deposits from the two lenders akin to “wrapping all market movements in security blankets.”

He complained, “…all concepts of risk management are based around the possibilities of loss.” He encouraged decision makers to, “Take it away, it’s going to have consequences.”

Where Can Investors Hide

Paul Singer said in his interview there may be a few places for investors to ride out what he sees as a coming storm. One place comes as no surprise, “At such times, some consider the safest bet to be relatively short-term U.S. government debt,” he said, adding that “such debt pays a decent return with virtually no chance of a negative outcome.” He is likely speaking of U.S. Treasuries two years and shorter as the longer duration bonds would be more volatile as rates shift, and other government debt like GNMAs are fraught with extension risk.

Singer also believes some gold in portfolios may make sense.

Take Away

Without some rain, nothing could flourish. Without an occasional brush fire, the risk of massive forest fire greatly increases. Paul Singer, in his interview with the WSJ, indicates he believes the economic brushfires that decision-makers have been preventing should have been allowed to run their course. Preventing them is a big mistake and a collapse may not be far off.

This collapse in easy credit and crypto, among other bubble-type excesses Singer believes could be destructive but preferred by society over continuing to move toward hyperinflation.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-man-who-saw-the-economic-crises-coming-paul-singer-banking-signature-svb-financial-downturn-asset-hyperinflation-recession-debt-federal-reserve-cd2638fe

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/08/27/paul-singer-doomsday-investor

https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_fl/B21000000006

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/hedge-fund-billionaire-paul-singer-still-sees-dangerous-bubble-securities-bubble-asset-classes-in-markets-4cd81a76?mod=search_headline

What Americans Really Think of Cryptocurrency

Image Credit: Duncan Rawlinson (Flickr)

Does the News Chatter Surrounding Cryptocurrencies Match the Interest in the Asset Class?

Over the 14 years since bitcoin sprung to life, expectations have ranged from overwhelming enthusiasm over its possibilities to fear of the risks inherent in an, as yet, not integrated payment method. A recent 50% run up in bitcoin has refired up the believers, but the most heard about crypto is still valued at less than half of its high point. Issues beyond volatility that cause some to disregard cryptocurrencies as a payment method are regulatory threats, the environmental cost of mining, and failed exchanges. During the week March 13-19, Pew Research Center conducted a survey measuring usage, confidence, and investment success. The survey is important for those paying attention to crypto as it cuts through our personal opinions and offers less biased statistics.

Survey Says…

Most Americans, 88% have heard of cryptocurrency. Almost 40% of those that are aware of crypto told surveyors they are not at all confident in the reliability and safety of crypto, with an additional 36% not very confident. Of the results for those that responded that they are extremely confident the result is 4%, and 2% as very confident.   Of those that have heard of it, 18% say they are somewhat confident.

Digital technology is shown to be less embraced with age. Although the current concern for crypto is high, some age groups have a greater concern than others. This is reflected in that those 50 and older who know about cryptocurrency and are more inclined to say 85% they are not confident in its reliability and safety. Compare this to those adults 49 and younger, where the figure drops to 66%.   

Does sex play a role in skepticism toward cryptocurrencies? 80% of women say they are not confident in it, compared with 71% of men out of the 88% that have heard of crypto.

Does experience lead to acceptance, or acceptance lead to experience? For those that invested in one or more digital currencies, 20% say they are extremely or very confident that it is safe and reliable. For those that have no experience investing in it, the slice drops to 2%. It is worth understanding that of the group that has had experience with crypto, 43% still  responded that they are not very or not at all confident in it.

Cryptocurrency Usage in the U.S.

Younger males are more likely to use cryptocurrency compared with men 50 and older and women overall. The number of men 18-29 that have used crypto is more than double that of woman of the same age, 41% of men ages 18 to 29 compared with 16% of women in the same age range.

Adults with upper incomes that have used crypto totaled 22%, with middle incomes slightly less at 19%. Lower incomes that have ever invested in, traded or used cryptocurrency compared at 13%.  

Few that have invested in or transacted using cryptocurrency used it for the first time within the past year. Pew Research asked when they first used cryptocurrency, 74% of those who have ever invested in, traded, or used cryptocurrency say they did for the first time one to five years ago. Only 16% say they first did this within the past year, and 10% more than five years ago.

For college graduates, 25% and those with some college experience, 20% showed they were more likely than those with just a high school education or less, 10% to answer that their cryptocurrency investments hurt their personal finances.

Results of Investment

Of those that have invested in crypto, 15% say their investments have done better than expected, 32% say they have done about the same as expected and 7% are unsure. 19% of cryptocurrency users say the investments have hurt their personal finances at least a little.

Most users, 45% indicated their investments performed worse than expected.

Measuring the impact the speculation had on users’ personal finances, three-in-five users (60%) say that they have neither helped nor hurt. Roughly equal shares say that these investments have helped (20%) or hurt (19%) their finances. Just 7% say cryptocurrency has helped their finances a lot and 3% say it has hurt a lot. ­

Take Away

There seems to be far more noise reporting cryptocurrencies than activity or actual usage. This could mean a number of things. One could read into this that the asset’s potential when the fear lifts are high and the potential includes a large percentage of those that are now keeping away. The argument suggests that the ongoing dramatic headlines are warranted since once the potential is realized, there could be much greater movement than we have already seen. Bitcoin had once gone from pennies to $68,000 $USD. Another reason for so much news coverage for an asset class that is favored is it is still novel, so we are all evaluating the asset class as investors; since we’re showing interest or intrigue, news services will report on it to gain audience. If we turn our attention elsewhere, that is then what we will hear more about.

It is truly a speculative asset class with little history. While some are betting everything on crypto, far more are currently just spectators on the sidelines. The hype and attention it is currently receiving may not match actual investor interest.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Source

https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/sr_2023.4.10_crypto_topline.pdf

Twitter is Now Seated with eTORO, Which is a Breakthrough Expansion for Both

Image Credit: Web Summit (Flickr)

Elon Musk Announces New Financial Functionality on Twitter

Starting today, Twitter will provide tweeters the ability to buy and sell stocks and crypto on its platform via eTORO. Twitter owner, Elon Musk has been indicating he intends to turn the popular micro-blogging platform into a “super app.” Today’s move shows substantial headway in allowing financial transactions to be conducted on the social media platform. Other company goals since Musk’s purchase of the company include ride hailing, and attracting video influencers that may be disenchanted with YouTube restrictions on speech.  

What Will the Twitter eTORO Partnership Provide?

Founded in 2007, eTORO has become one of the largest social investment networks and trading platforms. According to its website, it is “built on social collaboration and investor education: a community where users can connect, share, and learn.”

Twitter will partner with the platform to allow users (known as tweeters and Twitterers) to trade stocks and cryptocurrencies as part of a deal with the social investing company.

This partnership will provide access to view charts and trade stocks, cryptocurrencies, and other investment assets from eToro via its mobile platform. Together this significantly expands real-time trading data available to users who already have access on Twitter to real-time data, however this arrangement adds all the bells and whistles a modern trading app can provide.

Twitter will be expanding its use of cashtags as well. Twitter added pricing data for $Cashtags (company ticker preceded by “$”) in December 2022. Since January, there have been more than 420 million searches using Cashtags – the number of searches averages 4.7 million a day.

eToro CEO Yoni Assia told CNBC the deal will help better connect the two brands, adding that in recent years its users have increasingly turned to Twitter to “educate themselves about the markets.”

Assia said there is a great deal of “very high quality” content available in real-time and that the partnership with Twitter will help eToro expand to reach new audiences tapping this as a source of information.

Update on Elon

After Musk’s purchase of Twitter, many advertisers stepped back and watched to see how far the company would go to allow less moderated interaction. On Wednesday (April 12) Musk said that “almost all” advertisers had returned to the app. However, Stellantis and Volkswagen, two large competitors with Musk run Tesla, said they do not yet plan to resume advertising.

Musk told a Morgan Stanley conference last month he wants Twitter to become “the biggest financial institution in the world.” This begs those that follow Musk to ask, “Why stop there, why not include Mars?”

What Else

Be sure to follow Channelchek on Twitter (@channelchek) to stay up to date on market insights, news, videos, and of course, top-tier investment analyst research on small and microcap opportunities.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.etoro.com/en-us/about/

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/13/twitter-to-let-users-access-stocks-crypto-via-etoro-in-finance-push.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.PostToTwitter

https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2023/04/13/twitter-will-let-users-buy-stocks-and-crypto-as-elon-musk-pushes-for-everything-app/?sh=332662a26882

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/live-blog/2023-03-07/elon-musk-speaks-at-morgan-stanley-conference

Minutes and Other Indicators are Now Showing Less Agreement on Policy by the FOMC

Image Credit: Federal Reserve (Flickr)

The March FOMC Minutes Show the Fed is Less Aligned

We may be entering a period when we have a Federal Reserve that is split on the direction of monetary policy. This could be the case as early as the May 2-3 FOMC meeting. At least, that is one indication that arose from the just-released minutes of the Committee from the March 21-22 meeting. U.S. economic activity was strong leading up to the meeting, then the collapse of two banks occurred. The concerns that followed prompted several Federal Reserve officials to consider whether the central bank should pause its aggressive pace of hiking interest rates.

Split Federal Reserve

The minutes offer insight into what may follow this year. Over the past ten sessions, the FOMC minutes showed the central bank’s focus has been on quickly tightening policy to squelch persistent inflation. Now after nine consecutive interest-rate hikes and quantitative tightening, the conversation has shifted from wondering how fast they can move to whether and when the Fed should pause. At least, it has for some of the Committee members. Soft landings are seldom successfully orchestrated by monetary policy changes; more often, they set the stage for a recession.

In public addresses since the March meeting, Fed officials have appeared to be somewhat split on the way forward. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee, for example, said on April 11 that the Fed needs to be cautious. “We should gather further data and be careful about raising rates too aggressively until we see how much work the headwinds are doing for us in getting down inflation,” Goolsbee said.

Less concerned about a recession and more concerned about winning the war on inflation, Cleveland Fed President Loretta Mester said last week she believes the correct move is for the Fed to continue tightening “a little bit higher” before pausing as the economy and inflation adjusts.

Bank Failure Considerations

The March monetary policy meeting was surrounded by uncertainty for both Fed watchers and some FOMC members. The meeting took place only days after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank. Other indicators of a strong economy pointed to an aggressive move from the voting members. But, with the banking sector wounded or perhaps worse, it remained a nailbiter up until 2 pm on March 22 when the Federal Open Market Committee announced a quarter-point interest-rate hike.

While all has since been quiet related to U.S. banks, at the time, the extent of the problem was far from known. The potential economic impact it could have, led Fed staff to project a mild recession starting later in 2023, according to the minutes. This tells financial markets and others impacted by Fed moves that some Fed officials were seriously considering holding steady on rates.

The minutes show, the combination of “slower-than-expected progress on disinflation,” a tight labor market, and the view that the new emergency lending programs had stabilized the financial sector, allowed the central bank to again raise rates. The minutes indicated, “Many participants remarked that the incoming data before the onset of the banking sector stresses had led them to see the appropriate path for the federal funds rate as somewhat higher than their assessment at the time of the December meeting.” Reading on, the minutes said, “After incorporating the banking-sector developments, participants indicated that their policy rate projections were now about unchanged from December.”

Take Away

Although they are released several weeks after each meeting, the Fed minutes are always closely watched for clues as to how central-bank officials are feeling and where monetary policy is likely heading over the next several weeks or months. The indication from these minutes, behind a backdrop of Fed regional president addresses, indicate a less than unified Fed. Unless there is a good deal of unexpected trouble within the banking sector or economy or a clear tick up in economic measures such as employment, the May 3 post-meeting announcement on policy will be tough to forecast.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20230412a.htm

https://news.yahoo.com/wall-street-split-on-feds-next-move-as-financial-sector-buckles-after-bank-failures-150737804.html

https://www.barrons.com/articles/march-fed-meeting-minutes-today-cf27aa2?mod=hp_LATEST

The Key Consideration to Any Investing Strategy

Image Credit: Jordan Benton (Pexels)

Short Changing Investment Returns By Ignoring Time Horizon

Time horizon is part of every investor’s buy decision, or at least it ought to be. For example, in 2022 the 60/40 investment portfolio had its worst performance since 2008. This is despite a 5.3% increase in value during the fourth quarter of that year. Many headlines had read that the classic 60% stocks and 40% bonds portfolio is “broken.” After it’s stellar performance during Q4 2022, the first quarter of 2023 brought even higher performance – again compounding by an additional 5.9%. This example can highlight that time horizon is dependent on the investment goals proving 60/40 probably is not dead after all. The 60/40 diversification is considered conservative, it’s often implemented for retirement portfolios, typically portfolios with a lot of lead time to achieve its goal of historical returns. Goals should dictate investment strategy and they should include a realistic time horizon.

To Be Patient or Not to Be Patient

Entering the second quarter of 2023, economic trends, including commodity prices, interest rates, political power, inflation, and even peace between nations, all seem to be sending off mixed signals on future trends. A clear market read is far more difficult today than most years. This leaves a lot of questions on what to do with one’s money. If you leave it in the bank, inflation is likely to erode your purchasing power. If you move it to the U.S. government-backed treasury market, a rise in rates (as promised by the Fed) can leave you hurting like a few banks that saw their assets value plummet. Should stocks take a leading role – even if holdings wind up moving sideways or even down for the rest of this year?

As mentioned, this depends on your goal. If you can be patient and have a time horizon to achieve performance of more than a year, the tendency for reversion to mean suggests the answer is probably yes. However, if during the next six to 12 months, this money may need to be deployed for a purchase, it may be best to continually roll treasuries maturing in under a year.

For investments expected to be held longer than a year, there is the lazy way and a more hands-on approach that takes a little more digging. The lazy way says you plop a large percentage of your portfolio in an index fund and earn market returns. A more involved management approach of one’s portfolio would suggest that you’d prefer to avoid stocks considered overvalued or in a weakening industry. If, instead, one can achieve adequate diversity by owning many companies in different industries, and do enough evaluation (i.e., exploring trusted research) to have a sense of whether holding them would suit your needed time horizon, then the stocks selected as your holdings may avoid expected dogs weighing it down. It would make sense that this argues for patience, with expectations that not only will stocks follow history and go up over time, but your holdings have a reasonable expectation to outperform the market.

Time Horizon

Time horizon is a critical factor in investing. It refers to the length of time an investor is willing to hold onto their investments. The time horizon can range from a few months to several decades, depending on an investor’s goals, risk tolerance, and investment strategy. Most benchmarks are viewed daily, quarterly, and monthly. If your time horizon is five years, the quarterly or even annual returns should be a low consideration. Cathie Wood, CEO and founder of Ark Invest, says she invests on a five-year time horizon, considering the speculative growth names her funds have invested in, such as Tesla (TSLA), Roku (ROKU), Zoom Video Communications (ZM), Exact Sciences (EXAS), etc. she could not manage her funds properly if she looked shorter in term.

At least each quarter Portfolio Manager Chuck Royce and Co-CIO Francis Gannon of Royce Funds publish text of a “conversation” between the two. The subject is usually past market performance, expectations of the future, and even stocks that they believe, with the appropriate time horizon, will pay off.  

In the discussion between the two, Francis Gannon covered the case for more extended time horizon investors to explore the small-cap sector. His expectation is that various sectors (viewed by market cap) will fall in line with historical performance averages. “The stocks that performed best under the previous decade’s regime of zero interest rates, low inflation, and low nominal growth—which were mega-caps and small-cap growth—are unlikely to lead going forward, regardless of what direction the U.S. economy ultimately takes. Conversely, those areas of the equity market that lagged during this long period are likely, in our view, to capture long-term leadership,” said Gannon. This is when Chuck Ross very clearly explained the importance of knowing one’s time horizon for maximum potential gain.

“We think small cap is ready to roll and expect the next three to five years to be strong on both an absolute and relative basis.” Said Mr. Royce. He explained that rising rates could help companies that can that don’t need to borrow from the outside.   “Equally important, the Russell 2000’s valuation remained near its lowest rate in 20 years compared to the Russell 1000’s, based on our preferred valuation metric of the median last 12 months’ enterprise value to earnings before taxes (LTM EV/EBIT).” Royce explained.

Source: Royce Invest

The chart above shows that the 20-year performance of small-cap stocks averages 102.9% above that of large-cap equities. The underperformance began five years ago, and the current 20-year low in relative performance in small-caps could play out to be a long lag. With a long enough time horizon, one might expect that small-cap investors get rewarded for the additional risk and reduced liquidity in the sector.

Investment Strategy

While not everyone has five years or more to wait for performance to improve, intentional stock selection among small-caps could help those who do. A recent Barron’s article argued that “Small-Cap Stocks Look Ready to Rally,” the investment publication also believed that stock selection within the sector could pay off. The author wrote that as of March 31, “the Russell 2000 was at 44% of the S&P 500’s level, a ratio the index touched in early 2020 when the advent of Covid-19 had left the economy in perilous waters.”  The publication then reported that the level is a technical low point, a support that wasn’t even breached with pandemic concerns and skyrocketing large-cap tech stocks. Expressed in the within the April 3 article was to a methodology of filtering stocks by reviewing companies with market caps of at least $200 million and free cash flow minimum of 4.5% of the share price. This would put them in line with the overall Russell 2000.

Then look at the consensus earnings forecasts among analyst, have they risen? A high short interest in the stock could also be part of the screening process for possible buys.

Take Away

The importance of time horizon in investing lies in the fact that different investment opportunities have different risk and return profiles over different time periods. Short-term investments tend to have lower risk but lower returns, while long-term investments tend to have higher risk but potentially higher returns. By understanding your time horizon, you can choose investments that align with your investment goals and risk tolerance.

For investors that can span many years holding and waiting for scenarios to play out, but don’t, perhaps are leaving long-term return on the table by investing as though their time horizon is short. Investible cash sitting in a bank will be eroded by inflation, the Fed with its deep pockets has said it is resolved to instigate a further bear market in bonds.  Longer term, stocks outperform, what’s more, well-selected companies can outperform stock indixes that only promise to match the average of good and bad companies.

If you aren’t receiving equity research in your daily email, sign up here now.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.barrons.com/articles/small-cap-stocks-rally-cheap-russell-2000-5b35f854

https://www.royceinvest.com/insights/small-cap-interview?utm_source=royce-mktg&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=insights-interview&utm_content=button-1

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-60-40-investment-strategy-is-back-after-tanking-last-year-b4892aac?mod=hp_lead_pos5

The Seemingly Endless Global Battle Over Investment Research Will Soon End

Image Credit: Matt May (Flickr)

How Should Brokers Be Compensated for Investment Research?

Most U.S. investors have not heard of the European Unions Markets in Financial Instruments Directive, referred to as MiFID or MiFID II. But the large U.S. brokers and investment banks certainly have, and they are bumping up against a July end to a “no-action” relief letter from the SEC. At issue is that the directive, which came into effect in January of 2018 in the E.U., doesn’t synch with how brokerage business is conducted in the U.S. The U.S.-based brokers have been provided time, but over five years, there is very little evidence of movement to comply.  

Background

If U.S. broker-dealers (BDs) continue their business model of providing investment research to clients that is now “bundled” with other services, not charged as a separate service, they are in compliance with U.S. security regulations and don’t risk their status as a BD. However, if they follow MiFID with their international clients in order to be in compliance with Europe, they would be acting, under U.S. rules, as an Investment Advisor (the Advisers Act). This is because if they are subject to E.U. jurisdiction, under MiFID II, unless an exemption is met, research that investment managers receive from brokers is considered a prohibited “inducement.”

Research distribution in the U.S. by BDs has historically relied on a definition of “Investment Adviser” under the Advisers Act (related to research distribution). This definition looks to the condition that the investment advice is incidental to the firm’s broker-dealer business and (that the broker-dealer is not receiving “special compensation.” Hard dollar payments in exchange for investment research is considered  “special compensation” for investment advice (ie., equity research). A 2017 dated SEC no-action letter and then another in July 2022 provided a window of relief from this conflict. It provided time to sort through what is allowed under different business types for those falling under both U.S. regulation and MiFID II oversight.

With fewer than three months until the SEC “no action” July 3 deadline, Wall Street firms are quiet on how and whether they may adjust their businesses. The choices would seem to be to either not provide the service of bond and equity research as part of the bundled service by acting strictly as a BD (compliance with MiFID II), or to register as an Investment Adviser that then subjects traditional U.S. brokers to additional rules and licenses.

Where We Are Now

The SEC no-action letter has allowed U.S.-based BDs to accept payments from clients where MiFID applies. This protection will soon end. If they continue the practice, they will be violating the Advisers Act, as they are not Investment Advisers.

Come July 3, they face a choice of registering, moving research teams into registered affiliates, or even cutting off clients subject to MiFID regulations from any research produced in the U.S.

In March, SEC Chair Gary Gensler and senior staff met bank representatives and industry associations to discuss the issue. But the SEC ultimately refused to alter its long-held stance, on the Advisers Act.

Take Away

Broker-dealers in the U.S. have less than three months to adjust their position on compensation methods of clients bound by MiFID II. The clock is ticking, and they are now staring down the barrel of a difficult decision. Should they transition to Investment Adviser status and charge separately for research, or should they stop providing research to affected clients altogether?

Securities Research available on Channelchek is always without cost. Sign up here to receive access and top-tier equity reports in your inbox, each day, before the market opens.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.ft.com/content/2400b520-afa3-45ec-9767-a35805b4f98a

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/markets-in-financial-instruments-directive-mifid/

https://www.kslaw.com/news-and-insights/broker-dealer-research-mifid-related-hard-dollar-sec-investment-adviser-status-relief-to-end-in-july-2023#:~:text=On%20July%2026%2C%202022%2C%20William%20Birdthistle%2C%20Director%20of,letter%20to%20escape%20classification%20as%20an%20investment%20adviser.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=gensler+mifid&filters=ex1%3a”ez3″&pglt=41&cvid=988d16616d5d413e99ae8b9a7aed6c84&aqs=edge..69i57j0l3j69i64.4027j0j1&FORM=000017&PC=LCTS&qpvt=gensler+mifid

Unexpected Adjustments Among Today’s Self-Directed Investors

Image Credit: Focal Foto (Flickr)

How Decision-Making and Market Impact is Shifting for Retail Investors

Retail investors’ preferences change over time. This impacts sector strength and the overall direction of markets. Even the methods of interacting with exchanges change as newer products like trading apps, artificial intelligence, and exchange-traded products (ETP) become available.

The influence retail has is growing, and anecdotally shifting preferences happen more quickly. Within this category, there are self-directed investors with different knowledge bases and at different stages of their lives. As people move through different stages, their concerns, outlooks, and risk tolerances adjust. Nasdaq just published its second annual survey of retail investors to measure how their interests are changing and what impact that may have. The survey of 2,000 investors from Gen Z to Baby Boomers uncovered some surprising trends in decision-making, fears, comfort zones, and asset class preferences.

Generational Groupings

There were a number of commonalities exposed by the Nasdaq survey between the different generations. They all listed their greatest concerns to be inflation and recession, but while the youngest (Gen Z, born 1997 – 2012) found housing and real estate a deep concern, the oldest group (Baby Boomers, born 1946 – 1964) are more concerned about tax rate changes. The generations in the middle (Gen X born 1965 –1980) and (Millennials born 1981 – 1996) show a greater concern over interest rate changes.

The survey question sought to understand how much time investors in each generation spent researching buy and sell investment decisions. Of Gen Z, on average 48% spent less than an hour, while 3% of these younger adults evaluated the transaction for at least a month. The next age category, Millennials, spent a bit more time on diligence. Only 28% would buy or sell with less than an hour of thought put into the transaction. Of this group, 4% took a month or longer to decide. This trend toward more time researching research continued as the survey reveals the Gen X greater propensity to spend more time evaluating before a purchase. Only 15% would press the buy or sell button with less than an hour spent understanding the investment – 7% of Gen X investors say they take a month or longer.

A big difference between the youngest and the oldest, is that among the Gen Z investors, although almost half said they spend fewer than 60 minutes researching, 0% said they did not research at all. Of the Baby Boomers surveyed, 24% indicated they spend no time researching before they buy or sell. It’s unclear if this is because the older group is less tech savvy, hires a professional to do the research, or believes they have the knowledge to move without digging deeper.

Overlap in Generational Preferences

Data Sources: Nasdaq

Other Trends

Despite their top concerns listed as recession and inflation, 71% of Gen Z and 50% of Millennials say they are investing more aggressively. This is in stark difference to the 9% of Boomers and 20% of Gen X describing their strategies as more aggressive than the previous year.

The influence of Twitter, Facebook and even TikTok keeps expanding. 73% of Gen Z use TikTok as a source for investment information. This is an 18% increase from the prior year. Baby boomer TikTok investment use rose by 16% to its current 25%.

The investment themes from year-to-year show ESG and crypto interest sinking, while robotics and other autonomous technology is where the focus has increased most. Younger investors are more active in their investments than before, and more frequently conducting their own research ahead of transacting. Investors of all ages are more likely to consider alternative options than they had before, these could include options, cryptocurrencies, exchange traded products, etc.

Competition among brokerage platforms is as fierce as it is in any innovative, tech heavy industry. The availability of advanced technology and commission-free trading have made investing more accessible, especially for the younger investors.

Take Away

The second annual survey conducted by Nasdaq indicates that the retail investor growth and power we’ve experienced in recent years was not a fad, it is growing and becoming more sophisticated. They are more influential and should be understood as they are here to stay. This is expected to continue to disrupt and influence markets dramatically.

As retail trends take a higher position of importance in defining the day-to-day challenges of investing and mapping the markets’ future, these self-directed investors are finding more services to accommodate them. One source is the Channelchek platform where retail and institutional investors, of all ages can review research reports, absorb video discussions with management of interesting opportunities, expand understanding through daily articles, and, if relevant, attend a roadshow to meet a particular company’s management.  

Signup for Channelchek emails and full access here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/retail-revival%3A-how-a-year-of-market-volatility-reshaped-investor-strategies

https://nd.nasdaq.com/GENZ

https://nd.nasdaq.com/Millennials

https://nd.nasdaq.com/GENX

https://nd.nasdaq.com/BabyBoomers

The Week Ahead –  Inflation, FOMC Minutes, and Consumer Sentiment

Will the CPI Number or Fed Minutes Change the Market Direction this Week?

Market-moving economic reports are likely this week. Those with the highest chance to move markets are March CPI data on Wednesday, then FOMC minutes from the meeting just after last month’s bank failures, and the Producer Price Index on Thursday.

The minutes of the March 21-22 FOMC meeting will be released at 2:00 PM Wednesday, this highly watched information coincides with the half-fiscal year Budget Report from the U.S. Treasury. The FOMC minutes will get a lot of attention, but the U.S. Budget Deficit is likely to receive renewed focus as we approach summer and begin to bump up against the Treasury’s borrowing ceiling.  

Monday 4/10

  • 10:00 AM ET, Wholesale Inventories’ second estimate for February is expected to show a 0.2 percent build up; this would be unchanged from the first estimate.

Tuesday 4/11

  • 6:00 AM ET, Small Business Optimism Index has been below the historical average of 98 for 14 months in a row. March’s consensus is 89.0 versus 90.9 in February. The direction of the health of small businesses can foreshadow changes in the stock market.
  • 1:30 PM ET, Austan Goolsbee, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago will be speaking at a luncheon at the Economic Club of Chicago.

Wednesday 4/12

  • 8:30 AM ET, The Consumer Price Index (CPI) core prices for March are expected to have risen by 0.4 percent versus February’s sharp and higher-than-expected increase of 0.5 percent. Overall, headline inflation prices are expected to have increased 0.3 percent after February’s 0.4 percent rise. Annual rates, which in February were 6.0 percent overall and 5.5 percent for the core, are expected to show 5.2 and 5.6 percent.
  • 9:10 AM ET, Thomas Barkin, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond will be speaking. He spoke on April 3, indicating his expectations are that low unemployment rates will continue to support the belief that the economy is not at risk of a recession. Inflation, however, is not going away anytime soon, according to Barkin.
  • 10:30 AM ET, The Energy Information Administration (EIA) will provide its weekly information on petroleum inventories in the U.S., whether produced here or abroad. The level of inventories helps determine prices for petroleum products. Markets will be paying close attention after OPEC+ cut production one week ago.
  • 2:00 PM ET, FOMC minutes from the March 21-22 meeting will be released. This report will have two areas that investors will focus on. These are conversations surrounding U.S. bank health, and those discussions related to inflation and interest rates.
  • 2:00 PM ET, the Treasury Statement related to the budget deficit are expected to report a $253.0 billion deficit in March. This would compare with a $192.7 billion deficit in March a year-ago and a deficit in February this year of $262.4 billion. March is the halfway point into the U.S  government’s fiscal year.

Thursday 4/13

  • 8:30 AM ET, Producer Price Index (PPI), After dropping 0.1 percent lower on the month in February, this inflation index on the producer level in March is expected to be unchanged. March’s ex-food ex-energy rate is seen up 0.3 percent versus February’s no change.
  • 4:30 PM ET, the Federal Reserve’s Balance Sheet has been receiving heightened attention. After the Silicon Valley Bank collapse the Fed institutes a new method for banks to get assistance, markets will watch to see if this has grown. Also, as interest rates have risen, the fixed income securities held by the Fed have repriced billions lower, Fed watchers are beginning to comment on how dramatic this drop in value has been. The last line investors will focus on is quantitative easing. Specifically, investors will look to see if the Fed is on track with its letting securities mature off its books without reinvestment – this reduces U.S. dollars in circulation.

Friday 4/14

  • 8:30 PM ET, March Retail Sales are expected to have fallen 0.4 percent for a second month in a row. Excluding autos, a 0.4 percent decline is also expected.
  • 9:15 AM ET, Industrial Production is expected to rise 0.3 percent in March after being unchanged in February.
  • 10:00 AM ET, Business Inventories for February are expected to have risen 0.3 percent following a 0.1 percent draw in January.
  • 10:00 AM ET, Consumer Sentiment, which sank five full points in March to 62.0, is expected to improve to 62.7 in the first reading for April.

What Else

Taxes are due April 18 this year. This typically creates a wave of new IRA deposits. On April 13, in NYC there will be a luncheon roadshow with PDS Biotechnology. Noble Capital Markets organize the event, more details are available on Channelchek by clicking here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://us.econoday.com/

https://www.guilford.edu/news/2023/04/fed-leader-inflation-remain-persistent

About the Bitcoin to $1 Million by Summer 2023 Wager

Image Credit: Fortune Brainstorm TECH (Flickr)

Are Balaji Srinivasan and Cathie Wood Right About the Future Value of Bitcoin?

The former Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of Coinbase, is either extremely bullish on Bitcoin, or has other reasons for his tweet that had set off a huge price jump in the cryptocurrency. Balaji Srinivasan is a very influential investor, especially in the tech space. He confirmed last Friday, belief in a bet he made in March that within 90 days, bitcoin would reach $1 million in value per token. At stake in the bet is $2 million. For crypto investors trying to understand the strong conviction going into the wager, they may first need to understand the person behind the tweet.

Who is Balaji Srinivasan

The Indian-born, U.S. raised, tech entrepreneur, investor, and academic has a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering and an MS in Chemical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Srinivasan co-founded a number of startups, including Earn.com which is blockchain payments platform, and the genomics company Counsyl. He has worked as a General Partner at a prominent Silicon Valley venture capital firm, and as the Chief Technology Officer at the crypto exchange, Coinbase. 

Srinivasan has a large following as a commentator on the subject of technology and its social and political implications. Popular topics of his numerous articles and talks include the future of technology, the rise of decentralized systems, and the potential impact of emerging technologies on society. The tech guru has lectured at Stanford University and has served as an advisor to the FDA and the World Economic Forum.

Twitter: @balajis

What is Behind this Forecast?

In an ARK Invest podcast last Friday (April 6), Srinivasan explained bitcoin has good momentum and that he still believes it will reach $ 1 million within a three-month time horizon. He cited the concerns over the regional banking crisis that he believes will destabilize the dollar and cause the Fed to dump more dollars into the system. Fear and inflation in the coming months is the driver. Cathie Wood agreed with the direction and potential for bitcoin to hit $1 million, but her reasons were a bit different. She believes fear will be one driver, but reiterated her call for deflation. “We are very positive about Bitcoin as well. But your forecast was in the context of hyperinflation associated with fiat currencies. Our optimism is more of a function of fears of deflation and counter-party risk. Both of those should accrue to Bitcoin’s benefit,” Wood explained in her company’s podcast.

The bet and the likelihood that bitcoin-will-hit-$1-million-by-summer prediction seems on the surface to be highly improbable. It would take immense capital flows into the cryptocurrency and there is doubt the exchanges would be able to handle the migration of assets. Also, the question of what would prompt the run from traditional currency to cause a skyrocketing bitcoin, has still not been satisfactorily defined.

The one-hour and 17-minute podcast available at the link below under “Sources” is nonetheless thought provoking. These are two well-regarded tech analysts, standing behind something that sounds outlandish.

Another possible explanation for his outward conviction is that this isn’t a risky bet for Balaji. He’s presumed to own a considerable amount of bitcoin. The tick up on news of his bet (bitcoin is up near 25% since his tweet) could more than offset a $2 million loss on the wager. The timing of the value increase in BTC makes it appear that any loss could be self-funded by the attention it may have given the cryptocurrency.

Take Away

Bitcoin is higher than it had been when tech guru Balaji Srinivasan placed his public wager. However, at $28,500 it would still have to rise by $971,500. over the next few months. Supporting the idea that bitcoin is going up substantially, are two tech and disruption gurus whose thoughts are worth considering alongside your own observations.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://ark-invest.com/podcasts/

https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/04/01/balaji-srinivasans-1m-bitcoin-bet-could-be-right-but-i-hope-hes-wrong/

Should You Buy at the Closing Bell and Sell at the Open?

Image Credit: Florin Cee (Flickr)

Much of Market Performance, in Some Cases All, Occur When the Market is Closed

All traders and most investors have experienced this. From one market close to the next, indexes or stocks rise by 1.5% – 3%, and yet there was never a clear opportunity to make a dime after the market open. The frustration is because the market opened with much or all of the day’s gain baked in. It has been proven to be accurate that the most significant revaluation of stocks occurs during the 17 hours when the market is closed, not the 7-hours when it’s open. And any long-term chart will show that the direction of revaluation over time has been upward. Details, along with other phenomena related to night moves, are discussed below.

Background

 Historically, stock markets have had a positive return, and most of this change occurs while the exchanges are closed or not during regular trading hours. Historically the tendency is to make most of its daily move between the closing and opening bell.

This has been shown in research papers through the years, and there are even ETFs which purport to take advantage of this statistical phenomenon. Of course this is not an everyday occurrence, in fact today (4/6/23), the S&P 500 opened lower than its previous close but began moving higher than the open around noon.

A well-researched scholarly paper had been published demonstrating these price movements and offered the explanation that stock prices behave very differently with respect to their sensitivity to beta when markets are open for trading versus when they are closed. The paper titled,  Asset Pricing: A Tale of Night and Day, by Henderschott, Livdan, and Rösch explained, “stock returns are positively related to beta overnight whereas returns are negatively related to beta during the trading day.”

Image Source: Asset Pricing aTale of Day and Night

 One goal of the research was to test the hypothesis that a securities performance relative to beta is only positive during certain periods. In the paper the researchers tested specific days or months by examining the CAPM validity during different time periods within each day, including all times and all days during the week. The authors wrote, “when the stock market is closed, beta is positively related to the cross section of returns. In contrast, beta is negatively related to returns when the market is open.”

The overall thrust of the findings in the 47-page paper are encapsulated in the chart above which plots the performance during opened and closed periods against different beta groupings of stocks over 25 years.

Can Investors Use this Information?

Most retail trading today is commission free, but there is still a bid offer spread and other slippage. For those that would prefer to not have to be active each day, twice a day, Nightshares ETFs were formed to exploit this phenomenon, with a set it and forget it approach. On the surface it would seem to make sense for long term investors. You could own the S&P 500 index ETF, or increase beta exposure for a potentially better performance with a small-cap index ETF.

The founder of Night Shares, Bruce Lavine, pointed out in an interview that over the 20 years through the end of 2022, the SPDR S&P 500 ETF SPY, 0.31% produced a buy-and-hold return of 9.7% annualized. Three-quarters of that return — 7.5% — was produced while the NYSE was closed.

The numbers are even more pronounced in the case of the small-cap Russell 2000 Index, according to Lavine. Over the same 20-year period, all of the index’s net return was produced overnight; during the day session, it actually lost ground on balance. In other words, small-cap portfolios that out-returned large-cap would have been better off if they were not exposed during the day.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://faculty.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/draft20130612pp-full.pdf

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/youll-make-the-most-money-in-the-stock-market-during-these-specific-and-suprising-hours-bdd55215?mod=home-page

https://www.ftserussell.com/

The FDA’s Action Plan Regarding Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

Image Credit:  Interscatter Data Sharing Contact Lens, UW News (Flickr)

The Challenges Surrounding AI/ML are Taken Head on by the FDA

Should artificial intelligence or machine learning (AI/ML) be allowed to alter FDA approved software in medical devices? If so, where should the guardrails be set? The discussions and debates surrounding AI/ML are heated; some believe the technology may destroy humanity, while others look forward to the speed of advancement it will allow. The FDA is getting out ahead on this debate. This week the agency drafted a list of “guiding principles” intended to begin developing best practices for machine learning within medical devices.

Background

The FDA views its role as protecting patients while at the same time avoiding standing in the way of progress. In the case of ML, not preventing the modification of medical treatments or procedures that would improve outcomes. AI/ML has the potential to more quickly evaluate data sets, improve diagnosis, adjust how used, and overall alter processes based on what is learned.  

On April 3, the FDA drafted AI-Enabled Medical Device Life Cycle Plan Guidance, with a comment period ending July 3, 2023.  The U.S. regulator’s proposal attempts to find science-based requirements for medical devices powered by artificial intelligence and machine learning. The overall goal is to not slow the implementation of improved new devices that may quickly be modified, updated, and rapidly deliver an improved response to new data.  

Greg Aurand, Senior Healthcare Services & Medical Devices Analyst at Noble Capital Markets, summed up the purpose for the FDA’s actions in this way: “The FDA needs to move cautiously, but they don’t wish to slow down healthcare improvements on an ongoing basis.” Aurand gave examples where machine learning has the potential to make better assessments, better decipher data sets such as antibiotic resistance, and improve results while perhaps taming medical expenses. He said, “new draft guidelines from the FDA should make it easier for approval of modifications to occur so previously unrecognized improvements may occur within the guidelines, and the process is less static.”

How is Artificial Intelligence Likely to Revise Medical Devices?

As is written into the FDA guidance, “Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies have the potential to transform health care by deriving new and important insights from the vast amount of data generated during the delivery of health care every day. Medical device manufacturers are using these technologies to innovate their products to better assist health care providers and improve patient care.”  

The FDA accepts that a great benefit of AI/ML in software is its ability to learn from real-world use and experience, then the ability to improve its own performance.

How is the FDA Expected to Regulate AI/ML Devices?  

Traditionally, the FDA reviews medical devices and improvements through a premarket pathway for approval. The FDA may also review and clear modifications to medical devices, including software as a medical device, depending on the significance or risk posed to patients by that modification. The industry is going through a paradigm shift which the FDA is helping to enable.

The FDA’s current paradigm of medical device regulation was not designed for adaptive artificial intelligence. Under the FDA’s current approach to software modifications it anticipates that many of these artificial intelligence and machine learning-driven software changes to a device need a premarket review. The new regulation is expected to create broader parameters of pre-approval to allow adjustments with set allowable boundaries.

A new framework envisioned by the FDA includes a “predetermined change control plan” in premarket submissions. This plan would include the types of anticipated modifications, referred to as “Software as a Medical Device Pre-Specifications”.  The associated methodology used to implement those changes in a measured and controlled approach that manages risk the FDA calls the “Algorithm Change Protocol.”

Take Away

Artificial intelligence will transform many industries, and while some want to hit the pause button on progress, the FDA is trying to define how much control can be left to machine learning. The Guidance released in April with a three-month comment period is expected to allow medical equipment and software designers to progress into the unknown, with all stakeholders having as their goal better outcomes for patients.

If you wish to send requested comments to the FDA, the agency requests it be received by July 3, 2023 to ensure the agency considers your comment on the draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/marketing-submission-recommendations-predetermined-change-control-plan-artificial

https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/software-medical-device-samd/artificial-intelligence-and-machine-learning-software-medical-device

https://www.fda.gov/media/145022/download

https://www.fda.gov/media/166704/download

 Will the Binance Legal Action Crown the CFTC as the Crypto-Police

Image Credit: CoinDesk (Flickr)

What Binance’s US Lawsuit Says About the Future for Cryptocurrency Regulation

The world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, Binance, has been hit with a lawsuit by US regulator the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This is not the first time a cryptocurrency exchange has been charged by a regulator. But this particular case involves a regulator that does not directly oversee cryptocurrencies. This indicates how regulators – particularly those in the US – hope to clamp down on the cryptocurrency industry.

The CFTC’s lawsuit alleges that Binance violated US derivatives laws by offering its derivative trading services to US customers without registering with the right market regulators. It says Binance has prioritised commercial success over regulatory compliance.

The CFTC has also levied charges against Binance’s founder and CEO, Changpeng Zhao (known as CZ) and former chief compliance officer Samuel Lim. They are charged with taking steps to violate US laws, including directing US-based “VIP customers” to open Binance accounts under the name of shell companies. The regulator has pointed to chat messages as evidence of CZ and Sim’s knowledge of various criminal groups using the exchange.

People visit Binance nearly 15 million times a week to trade on the over 300 cryptocurrencies it offers in more than 1,600 different markets. CZ is an outspoken advocate for cryptocurrencies and regularly tweets about the industry and his company. He even tweeted a link to his initial response to the recent CFTC charges, which he called “unexpected and disappointing”. Promising full responses in due time, he said:

Upon an initial review, the complaint appears to contain an incomplete recitation of facts, and we do not agree with the characterization of many of the issues alleged in the complaint.

Last year CZ’s tweets arguably contributed to the collapse of FTX, one of his company’s main rivals. Binance saw its market share grow following FTX’s collapse.

So, this charge – against not only a crypto giant but also the company of an outspoken industry advocate – has created further upheaval in a market that has already suffered multiple crises in the last year. Investors withdrew a reported US$1.6 billion (£1.3 billion) from Binance within days of the CFTC’s announcement of its charges. These outflows could continue if US regulators tighten their squeeze on crypto companies further, causing major players like Binance to shift focus to other jurisdictions.

Creeping Oversight

The CFTC aims to “protect the public from fraud, manipulation, and abusive practices related to the sale of commodity and financial futures and options, and to foster open, competitive, and financially sound futures and option markets”. Previous actions by this regulator in 2021 against Tether and Bitfinex resulted in major fines and a loss of credibility for the crypto industry.

But a statement published at the time by one of the CFTC’s five commissioners, Dawn Stump, pointed out that the CFTC doesn’t actually have responsibility for regulating cryptocurrencies. She warned that these fines might “cause confusion about the CFTC’s role in this area”. She said the action was based on defining stablecoins (a type of cryptocurrency) as a commodity, but: “we should seek to ensure the public understands that we do not regulate stablecoins and we do not have daily insight into the businesses of those who issue such”.

These latest charges against Binance focus on its activities in derivatives – financial contracts that are linked to the value of an asset such as oil or, in this case, cryptocurrencies. This is a market the CFTC does regulate.

Another US financial regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has also been ramping up its crypto oversight activities. As well as focusing on the Initial Coin Offering market, it saw a 50% increase in enforcement actions against digital asset companies last year compared to 2021.

Crypto Market Changes

So, Binance is up against two powerful US financial regulators. Some experts have warned that “significant regulatory action could prompt Binance to increasingly shift its business operations beyond the United States”. Certainly, the fact that Binance held a 92% share of the crypto market at the end of 2022 means it facilitates many transactions and offers a lot of liquidity to traders around the world, including in the US.

A trader’s capacity to find competitive prices when buying and selling, as well as sources of liquidity (or other people to trade with) would be affected by the loss of or pull back of one of the world’s top ten crypto exchanges. This would be bad news for retail and institutional investors who could be confronted with a smaller and potentially more expensive market as a result.

And even if the complaints and investigations by the CFTC and SEC take a while to conclude, as is likely, the US legislature may step in before that. A report published by the Financial Times days after the CFTC announcement alleges that Binance has hidden links to China for many years. A statement issued by the the exchange to the FT said this is not “an accurate picture of Binance’s operations” and that the paper’s sources were “citing ancient history (in crypto terms)”.

But recent actions against Chinese tech company Huawei and social media platform Tiktok indicate political leaders are keen to crack down on Chinese companies’ access to US technology systems and customer data. So any similar concerns could lead US politicians to start acting in this area as well.

This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of Andrew Urquhart, Professor of Finance & Financial Technology, ICMA Centre, Henley Business School, University of Reading and Hossein Jahanshahloo, Assistant Professor in Finance, Cardiff University.

The Decision By OPEC Isn’t Bad News for All Investors

Image Credit: Wayne Hsieh (Flickr)

Could Small Oil Companies Perform Especially Well With OPEC’s Reduced Output   

Earlier this week, OPEC+ announced the cartel’s plans for production cuts. Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing members of OPEC+ defied expectations by announcing they would implement production cuts of around 1.1 million barrels a day. Prices of WTI and Brent crude quickly moved higher in the futures market – energy stocks followed. The increased cost of petroleum directly impacts the price of fuel and plastics and indirectly impacts goods that involve transportation – which is mostly all goods.

The decision by OPEC+ is highly likely to put upward pressure on CPI and PPI inflation measures as early as April. The CPI report for April will be released on May 10, and PPI on May 11. Id there good news for investors in the OPEC decision? What stocks might investors look at as potentially benefiting, assuming the OPEC countries adhere to the new production levels?

Background

U.S. markets were not open when the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries announced the large cut of over one million barrels per day. When regular trading resumed in the U.S. on Monday, oil prices jumped up 6.3%, and crude oil prices breached $80. Energy stocks, as measured by the Energy Sector SPDR (XLE) rose 4.5%. The price of crude based on futures contracts and the XLE have remained near these levels.

With change comes opportunity. Investors and traders are now trying to determine if this is the start of a new upward trend for the energy sector and, if so, what specific moves may benefit investors most.

One consideration they may have is that, although OPEC is cutting production, the members aren’t the only producers. Historically, domestic production was increased in N. America when prices climbed. This has been less so in recent years as the number of U.S. rigs operating hasn’t increased as might have been expected.

Will this dramatic price spike now prompt action from domestic producers? In his Energy Industry Report published on April 4, titled Why Domestic Producers Cannot Offset OPEC Production Cuts, Michael Heim, CFA, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, says that oil is produced in the U.S. at around $30-$40 per barrel. Heim says in his report, “If producers had the ability to ramp up drilling, we would have thought they would have done so even at $60/bbl. prices.”

Possible Beneficiaries

According to the Noble Analyst, large producers have been constrained from growing their oil operations which stems from political and even shareholder pressures to move away from carbon-based energy products. However, Heim says in his report, “Smaller producers face less pressure. Companies with ample acreage and drilling prospects are best positioned to take advantage of a prolonged oil price upcycle.”

In a conversation with the analyst, he shared that when oil prices spiked during the second half of the pandemic and later had added upward movement with the start of the Russia/Ukraine war, many small oil companies took in enough additional revenue to strengthen their finances. Some even began paying dividends for the first time, while others increased their regular dividend to shareholders.

These smaller oil producers not in the political spotlight that may reap additional benefits from OPEC’s cut could include Hemisphere Energy (HMENF). This company increased production by 55% in 2022. According to a research report by Noble Capital Markets initiating coverage on Hemisphere (dated April 3, 2023), “proven reserve findings and development costs are less than C$12/barrel, providing an extremely attractive return on investment for drilling.” It continued, “Hemisphere’s finding and development costs are among the lowest of western Canadian producers and reflect its favorable drilling locations and the company’s experience drilling in the area.” The increase in price per barrel could enhance cash flow for this North American producer, allowing it to expand production.

Permex Petroleum (OILCD, OIL.CN) is a junior oil and gas company that already had a significant upside potential before the jump in per-barrel prices. This boost in cash from higher oil prices and a possible uplisting to the NYSE, could work to benefit shareholders.

InPlay Oil (IPOOF) increased annual production last year by 58%. InPlay is an example of a smaller producer that has been able to increase drilling when prices rise. It has used increased cash flow to lower debt levels by 59% and pay shareholders with its first dividend payment.

Indonesia Energy Corporation Ltd. (INDO) is an oil and gas exploration and production company operating in Indonesia. The company plans on drilling 18 wells in the Kruh Block (four have been completed). Covid19 steps in the region where Indo Energy operates have pushed back drilling that was expected in 2023-2024 one year.

 Take Away

With change comes opportunity. Higher oil prices will impact all of us that must still occasionally stop our internal combustion engine vehicles at gas stations. But the oil price increase may lead to a melting up of some stocks.

There are arguments that can be made that smaller, more nimble producers, not burdened by the political spotlight and perhaps enjoying a better financial position from the last run-up in oil, are worth looking into. A Channelchek search returned over 200 companies that may fall into this category. This search result is available here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.channelchek.com/research-reports/25689

https://www.channelchek.com/research-reports/25307

https://www.channelchek.com/news-channel/energy-industry-report-why-domestic-producers-cannot-offset-opec-production-cuts