phoffman@channelchek.com, Author at Channelchek

Organs-On-A-Chip Minimize Late-Stage Drug Development Failures

Posted on January 10, 2023January 10, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Image: Lung-on-a-Chip, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (Flickr)

Organ-On-A-Chip Models Allow Researchers to Conduct Studies Closer to Real-Life Conditions – and Possibly Grease the Drug Development Pipeline

Bringing a new drug to market costs billions of dollars and can take over a decade. These high monetary and time investments are both strong contributors to today’s skyrocketing health care costs and significant obstacles to delivering new therapies to patients. One big reason behind these barriers is the lab models researchers use to develop drugs in the first place.

Preclinical trials, or studies that test a drug’s efficacy and toxicity before it enters clinical trials in people, are mainly conducted on cell cultures and animals. Both are limited by their poor ability to mimic the conditions of the human body. Cell cultures in a petri dish are unable to replicate every aspect of tissue function, such as how cells interact in the body or the dynamics of living organs. And animals are not humans – even small genetic differences between species can be amplified to major physiological differences.

Fewer than 8% of successful animal studies for cancer therapies make it to human clinical trials. Because animal models often fail to predict drug effects in human clinical trials, these late-stage failures can significantly drive up both costs and patient health risks.

To address this translation problem, researchers have been developing a promising model that can more closely mimic the human body – organ-on-a-chip.

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 Chengpeng Chen, Assistant Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

As an analytical chemist, I have been working to develop organ and tissue models that avoid the simplicity of common cell cultures and the discrepancies of animal models. I believe that, with further development, organs-on-chips can help researchers study diseases and test drugs in conditions that are closer to real life.

What are Organs-On-Chips?

In the late 1990s, researchers figured out a way to layer elastic polymers to control and examine fluids at a microscopic level. This launched the field of microfluidics, which for the biomedical sciences involves the use of devices that can mimic the dynamic flow of fluids in the body, such as blood.

Advances in microfluidics have provided researchers a platform to culture cells that function more closely to how they would in the human body, specifically with organs-on-chips. The “chip” refers to the microfluidic device that encases the cells. They’re commonly made using the same technology as computer chips.

Not only do organs-on-chips mimic blood flow in the body, these platforms have microchambers that allow researchers to integrate multiple types of cells to mimic the diverse range of cell types normally present in an organ. The fluid flow connects these multiple cell types, allowing researchers to study how they interact with each other.

This technology can overcome the limitations of both static cell cultures and animal studies in several ways. First, the presence of fluid flowing in the model allows it to mimic both what a cell experiences in the body, such as how it receives nutrients and removes wastes, and how a drug will move in the blood and interact with multiple types of cells. The ability to control fluid flow also enables researchers to fine-tune the optimal dosing for a particular drug.

The lung-on-a-chip model, for instance, is able to integrate both the mechanical and physical qualities of a living human lung. It’s able to mimic the dilation and contraction, or inhalation and exhalation, of the lung and simulate the interface between the lung and air. The ability to replicate these qualities allows researchers to better study lung impairment across different factors.

Bringing Organs-On-Chips to Scale

While organ-on-a-chip pushes the boundaries of early-stage pharmaceutical research, the technology has not been widely integrated into drug development pipelines. I believe that a core obstacle for wide adoption of such chips is its high complexity and low practicality.

Current organ-on-a-chip models are difficult for the average scientist to use. Also, because most models are single-use and allow only one input, which limits what researchers can study at a given time, they are both expensive and time- and labor-intensive to implement. The high investments required to use these models might dampen enthusiasm to adopt them. After all, researchers often use the least complex models available for preclinical studies to reduce time and cost.

This chip mimics the blood-brain barrier. The blue dye marks where brain cells would go, and the red dye marks the route of blood flow. Vanderbilt University/Flickr

Lowering the technical bar to make and use organs-on-chips is critical to allowing the entire research community to take full advantage of their benefits. But this does not necessarily require simplifying the models. My lab, for example, has designed various “plug-and-play” tissue chips that are standardized and modular, allowing researchers to readily assemble premade parts to run their experiments.

The advent of 3D printing has also significantly facilitated the development of organ-on-a-chip, allowing researchers to directly manufacture entire tissue and organ models on chips. 3D printing is ideal for fast prototyping and design-sharing between users and also makes it easy for mass production of standardized materials.

I believe that organs-on-chips hold the potential to enable breakthroughs in drug discovery and allow researchers to better understand how organs function in health and disease. Increasing this technology’s accessibility could help take the model out of development in the lab and let it make its mark on the biomedical industry.

The Pros, Cons, and Many Definitions of ‘Gig’ Work

Posted on January 9, 2023January 9, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

What’s a ‘Gig’ Job? How it’s Legally Defined Affects Workers’ Rights and Protections

The “gig” economy has captured the attention of technology futurists, journalists, academics and policymakers.

“Future of work” discussions tend toward two extremes: breathless excitement at the brave new world that provides greater flexibility, mobility and entrepreneurial energy, or dire accounts of its immiserating impacts on the workers who labor beneath the gig economy’s yoke.

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 David Weil, Visiting Senior Faculty Fellow, Ash Center for Democracy Harvard Kennedy School / Professor, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University.

These widely diverging views may be partly due to the many definitions of what constitutes “gig work” and the resulting difficulties in measuring its prevalence. As an academic who has studied workplace laws for decades and ran the federal agency that enforces workplace protections during the Obama administration, I know the way we define, measure and treat gig workers under the law has significant consequences for workers. That’s particularly true for those lacking leverage in the labor market.

While there are benefits for workers for this emerging model of employment, there are pitfalls as well. Confusion over the meaning and size of the gig workforce – at times the intentional work of companies with a vested economic interest – can obscure the problems gig status can have on workers’ earnings, workplace conditions and opportunities.

Defining Gig Work

Many trace the phrase “gig economy” to a 2009 essay in which editor and author Tina Brown proclaimed: “No one I know has a job anymore. They’ve got Gigs.”

Although Brown focused on professional and semiprofessional workers chasing short-term work, the term soon applied to a variety of jobs in low-paid occupations and industries. Several years later, the rapid ascent of Uber, Lyft and DoorDash led the term gig to be associated with platform and digital business models. More recently, the pandemic linked gig work to a broader set of jobs associated with high turnover, limited career prospects, volatile wages and exposure to COVID-19 uncertainties.

The imprecision of gig, therefore, connotes different things: Some uses focus on the temporary or “contingent” nature of the work, such as jobs that may be terminated at any time, usually at the discretion of the employer. Other definitions focus on the unpredictability of work in terms of earnings, scheduling, hours provided in a workweek or location. Still other depictions focus on the business structure through which work is engaged – a staffing agency, digital platform, contractor or other intermediary. Further complicating the definition of gig is whether the focus is on a worker’s primary source of income or on side work meant to supplement income.

Measuring Gig Work

These differing definitions of gig work have led to widely varying estimates of its prevalence.

A conservative estimate from the Bureau of Labor Statistics household-based survey of “alternative work arrangements” suggests that gig workers “in non-standard categories” account for about 10% of employment. Alternatively, other researchers estimate the prevalence as three times as common, or 32.5%, using a Federal Reserve survey that broadly defines gig work to include any work that is temporary and variable in nature as either a primary or secondary source of earnings. And when freelancing platform Upworks and consulting firm McKinsey & Co. use a broader concept of “independent work,” they report rates as high as 36% of employed respondents.

No consensus definition or measurement approach has emerged, despite many attempts, including a 2020 panel report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Various estimates do suggest several common themes, however: Gig work is sizable, present in both traditional and digital workplaces, and draws upon workers across the age, education, demographic and skill spectrum.

Why it Matters

As the above indicates, gig workers can range from high-paid professionals working on a project-to-project basis to low-wage workers whose earnings are highly variable, who work in nonprofessional or semiprofessional occupations and who accept – by choice or necessity – volatile hours and a short-term time commitment from the organization paying for that work.

Regardless of their professional status, many workers operating in gig arrangements are classified as independent contractors rather than employees. As independent contractors, workers lose rights to a minimum wage, overtime and a safe and healthy work environment as well as protections against discrimination and harassment. Independent contractors also lose access to unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation and paid sick leave now required in many states.

Federal and state laws differ in the factors they draw on to make that call. A key concept underlying that determination is how “economically dependent” the worker is on the employer or contracting party. Greater economic independence – for example, the ability to determine price of service, how and where tasks are done and opportunities for expanding or contracting that work based on the individual’s own skills, abilities and enterprise – suggest a role as an independent contractor.

In contrast, if the hiring party basically calls the shots – for example, controlling what the individual does, how they do their work and when they do it, what they are permitted to do and not do, and what performance is deemed acceptable – this suggests employee status. That’s because workplace laws are generally geared toward employees and seek to protect workers who have unequal bargaining leverage in the labor market, a concept based on long-standing Supreme Court precedent.

Making Work More Precarious

Over the past few decades, a growing number of low-wage workers find themselves in gig work situations – everything from platform drivers and delivery personnel to construction laborers, distribution workers, short-haul truck drivers and home health aides. Taken together, the grouping could easily exceed 20 million workers.

Many companies have incentives to classify these workers as independent contractors in order to reduce costs and risks, not because of a truly transformed nature of work where those so classified are real entrepreneurs or self-standing businesses.

Since gig work tends to be volatile and contingent, losing employment protections amplifies the precariousness of work. A business using misclassified workers can gain cost advantages over competitors who treat their workers as employees as required by the law. This competitive dynamic can spread misclassification to new companies, industries and occupations – a problem we addressed directly, for example, in construction cases when I led the Wage and Hour Division and more recently in several health care cases.

The future of work is not governed by immutable technological forces but involves volitional private and public choices. Navigating to that future requires weighing the benefits gig work can provide some workers with greater economic independence against the continuing need to protect and bestow rights for the many workers who will continue to play on a very uneven playing field in the labor market.

Biotech is Getting Investor’s Attention in a Big Way

Posted on January 9, 2023January 10, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Well-Chosen Biotech Stocks Could Payoff Big for Investors

The Biotech sector has been flatlined since September but is now suddenly showing significant signs of life already in 2023. It’s only the second week of the new year, and already three US-based public small-cap companies are to be acquired by cash-rich drugmakers looking to expand their portfolios. The stocks of biotechs Albireo (ALBO), Amryt (AMYT), and CinCor (CINC) are all up between 93% and 140% after the announcements. A case can easily be made that the beaten-down biotech sector and the cash-rich pharmaceutical giants, with aging patents on their current drug portfolios, are going to find they are stronger together – this could be a huge win for investors.

Details of Recent Announcements

Ipsen (IPN), a French drug company, agreed to buy liver drug maker Albireo Pharma for at least $952 million, or $42 per share, plus another $10 per share if the FDA approves its Bylvay drug.

Italy’s Chisi Farmaceutici agree to pay up to $1.5 billion for Amryt Pharma. Amryt makes drugs for rare diseases. The agreement requires at least $14.50 per share, plus another $2.50 depending on milestones for its Filsuvez product, which treats a skin disease.

AstraZeneca, an Anglo-Swedish pharmaceutical company, said it’s paying up to $1.8 billion for CinCor Pharma, a maker of a blood pressure medication. The deal calls for $26 per share in cash, plus as much as another $10 per share if it’s able to make a Food and Drug Administration submission for a product based on baxdrostat drug in development for hypertension and chronic kidney disease.

The one thing in common between all three deals is an incentive for management to meet milestones which could include getting approval of late-stage drugs. Presumably, with the additional resources, these goals could become much easier for the companies that are allowing themselves to be acquired.

Will Other Acquisitions Follow?

Investors have learned all too well about investment bubbles, a situation where so much money flows into a sector that it becomes substantially overvalued. Then, when money isn’t flowing so freely, prices fall apart. But, the inverse of a bubble can also occur. A sector can be ignored for so long that investors don’t see value; when activity begins to perk up, many recognize value all at once and suddenly the sector is on fire. This inverse bubble may be at the earliest stages in small-cap biotech.

“Smart Money” Investors Chasing Biotechs

In a story unrelated to the publicly traded companies being acquired, Reuters is reporting that private equity firms that had stayed uninvolved in what the firms believed to be the risk in the drug development business are now showing strong interest. “These firms are seeking to capitalize on the growing gap between the supply of capital for clinical research and the number of drugs competing for it, eight buyout executives and investors interviewed by Reuters said.”

The Reuters article highlights Blackstone (BX.N) as one company they explain is “leading the charge.” Carlyle is another investment group that, according to Reuters, is “now preparing to raise a dedicated life sciences fund,” the article explained the fund “could amass several billions of dollars, according to people familiar with the fundraising plans.” Reuters quoted Carlyle’s Global Head of healthcare as saying, “We are big believers in what we’ve called the biopharma revolution and in the explosion of discovery and science.”

These investment groups are not taking ownership in the companies they invest in, but rather a stake in clinical trials which stand a much greater chance with the injection of this new capital. The payoff arrangements are different for each deal.

What Should Self-Directed Investors Watch?

If there is a continued resurgence of activity among big pharma firms buying up publicly traded biotech firms, then small investors can expect to see more huge winners and, of course, others that never get off the ground. That is to say, while a few firms become the overnight 100% winners, many more languish and trade up and down without going any place. Increasing your chances of having at least one big winner among your holdings involves understanding the market, the companies, and the dynamics surrounding life sciences investments.

If you have already signed-up to have access to research and company information on Channelchek, then you have access to small-cap biotech stocks, and the research provided by the Senior Life Sciences Research Analyst at Noble Capital Markets. If you haven’t signed up, do this now by clicking here, and review the library of videos with interviews of management of biotechs and dig into the companies to learn where each is at in development and research.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

The Week Ahead – Inflation Data in Focus

Posted on January 8, 2023January 9, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Although CPI is the Focus, Chairman Powell’s Discussion in Sweden Could Have a Long-Lasting Impact

As this full five-day trading week kicks off, stock’s YTD performance and the week-to-date performance are equal. This will change with the opening bell on Monday. It is a quiet week for highly scrutinized numbers or events. However, two scheduled events have the potential to change investor sentiment. The first comes on Tuesday when the US central bank chairman (Fed Chair Powell) speaks in Stockholm about central bank independence. This debate regarding politic’s role in central bank decisions is getting more intense. Channelchek recently published an article on the subject which can be found here.

The second is CPI which is the next look we get at inflation. If inflation is higher than expectations, the stock and bond markets could sell off; if lower, they may celebrate with a rally.

Otherwise, the week kicks off with the Investment Movement Index, which will get little attention, but is worth watching. The IMX is a behavior-based index assembled by TD Ameritrade designed to measure what investors are actually doing. More on the IMX below.

Monday 01/09

12:30 PM, The Investor Movement Index or IMX measures what investors are actually doing and how they are actually positioned in the markets. It accomplishes this by using data on the holdings/positions, trading activity, and other data from an anonymous sample of six million funded accounts. It reflects consumer retail portfolios. At its most basic level, the IMX can provide insight into whether investors are growing more bullish or bearish on equities.

12:30 PM, the President of the Atlanta Fed, Raphael Bostic, will be speaking. Any time a voting member of the FOMC is speaking publicly, there is the potential for insight into how that member may have adjusted their leaning on policy. Atlanta Fed events are often broadcast live on this YouTube channel.

Tuesday 01/10

6:00 AM, NFIB Small Business Optimism Index has been below the historical average of 98 for 11 months in a row. December’s consensus is 91.3 versus 91.9 and 91.3 in the past two reports. The index is a composite of 10 seasonally adjusted components based on the following questions: plans to increase employment, plans to make capital outlays, plans to increase inventories, expect the economy to improve, expect real sales higher, current inventory, current job openings, expected credit conditions, now a good time to expand, and earnings trend.

9:00 AM, Fed Chair Powell speaks at the Sveriges Riksbank International Symposium on Central Bank Independence in Stockholm, Sweden. It is not expected that micro discussions on current interest rate policy will surface in his conversation.

Wednesday 01/10

7:00 AM, Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) will release numbers on mortgage applications. There has been a steady decline in applications over the past seven months.

Thursday 01/11

7:30 AM ET, Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker will be speaking. Any time a voting member of the FOMC is speaking publicly, there is the possibility of insight into how that member may have changed their leaning on policy.
8:30 AM, the CPI number will be such a distracting focus this week that trading may actually be subdued earlier in the week in anticipation of this inflation report. The consensus is for no monthly change in consumer prices. This would equate to a year-over-year rate of 6.6%.

Friday 01/12

10:00 AM, Consumer Sentiment is expected to inch up to 60.0 in the first reading for January versus 59.7 in December.
10:20 AM Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker will be speaking. Any time a voting member of the FOMC is speaking publicly, there is the possibility of insight into how that member may have changed their leaning on policy.

What Else

Guess what, the stock market is closed again on Monday the 16^th. Below is a copy of the holidays along with Fed meetings and other important dates throughout the year. It was provided by the NYSE. Perhaps bookmark a link to this beginning of the year look forward so as to have on hand a snapshot of all of these market impactful dates.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/ICE_NYSE_2023_Yearly_Trading_Calendar.pdf?elqTrackId=16ec5f60c2d140d4babc3081b3d4cdd2&elq=00000000000000000000000000000000&elqaid=4274&elqat=2&elqCampaignId=&elqcst=272&elqcsid=1819

https://us.econoday.com/byweek.asp?cust=us

Innovation Works Best as a Freewheeling Process Not Grand Design

Posted on January 6, 2023January 8, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

For Now, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Still Hold a High Place in the USA

Commentators worry that the United States might lose its dominance in innovation to Asian countries like China and Singapore. Many policymakers are intimidated by the R&D budgets of Asian countries and by their superior performance on international academic assessments. However, these concerns are misguided because the United States still dominates innovation.

The United States ranks second on the Global Innovation Index and scores the highest in the world on fifteen of eighty-one innovation indicators. The US innovation ecosystem continues to lead in the commercialization of research, and its universities are on the cutting edge of academic research. Other countries are expanding research budgets, but the United States’ genius is its ability to commercialize relevant innovations.

Innovations are only useful when they disrupt industries by transforming society and altering consumer preferences. Because innovations respond to market changes, anything can become an innovation, and the process is highly spontaneous. Unfortunately, too many countries are laboring under the assumption that government plans inevitably lead to innovation. Finding the next game changer is tremendously difficult due to the dynamism of consumer preferences.

US entrepreneurs appreciate that innovation is a freewheeling process rather than an object of grand design. That is why Silicon Valley, with its reverence for risk and failure, has been known for innovation. In her 2014 book, The Upside of Down: Why Failing Well is the Key to Success, Megan McArdle argues that the United States’ tolerance toward failure is a crucial pillar of prosperity because it promotes self-actualization, risk, and the continuous quest for innovation.

The United States’ rivals have eloquent five-year plans and extravagant budgets, but US innovation is undergirded by private institutions with a strong appetite for risk and iconoclastic thinking. Private venture-capital associations and research institutions searching for future pioneers are the primary players in US innovation. Government innovation plans are inherently conservative because they hinge on the success of targeted industries.

But, in the private sector, entrepreneurs are deliberately scouting for disruptors to undercut traditional industries by launching breakthrough products. The conformity of government bureaucracies is an enemy of the unorthodox thinking that spurs innovation. China is known for having a competent and meritocratic civil service, yet scholars contend that it lacks an innovative environment.

A key problem is that China focuses on competing with western rivals instead of developing new industries; innovation is perceived as a competition between China and its rivals rather than an activity pursued for its own sake. Consequently, US companies remain market leaders and are more adept at converting market information into innovative products than their Chinese counterparts. Unlike China, US entrepreneurship is not a function of geopolitics.

Meanwhile, some commentators suggest that the US education system is better at deploying talent due to its encouragement of unorthodox thinking. In contrast, Singapore and China have been criticized for emphasizing rote learning at the expense of critical thinking. For example, Singapore’s public sector is a model of excellence; however, despite government support, Singapore is yet to become an innovation hotbed.

Bryan Cheung, in an assessment of industrial policy in Singapore, comments on the failure of Singapore to translate research into innovation: “Even though Singapore ranks highly on global innovation indices, closer scrutiny reveals that it scores poorly on the sub-component of innovation efficiency.” A recent edition of the Global Innovation Index, using a global comparison, declared that “Singapore produces less innovation outputs relative to its level of innovation investments.”

Cheung explains that Singapore is heavily reliant on foreign talent to boost innovation: “Even the six ‘unicorns’ that Singapore has produced (Grab, SEA, Trax, Lazada, Patsnap, Razer) were all founded or co-founded by foreign entrepreneurs. In the Start-Up Genome (2021), Singapore also performed relatively poorly in ‘quality and access’ to tech talent, research impact of publications, and local market reach, which is unsurprising since innovation activity is concentrated in foreign hands.”

Asian countries are growing more competitive, but it will take decades before they develop the United States’ appetite for risk, market-driven innovations, and the uncanny ability to monetize anything. The United States’ spectacular economic performance and business acumen are based on its unique culture. Those who bet against the United States by downplaying its culture are bound to lose. The United States’ rivals are still catching up.

About the Author

Lipton Matthews is a researcher, business analyst, and contributor to Merion West, The Federalist, American Thinker, Intellectual Takeout, mises.org, and Imaginative Conservative. Visit his YouTube channel, here. He may be contacted at lo_matthews@yahoo.com or on Twitter (@matthewslipton)

Oil Producers Had a Great Year; They Could Repeat in 2023

Posted on January 6, 2023January 8, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Can Oil Companies Continue Their Outperformance?

If you predicted that oil prices would go up last year, you were correct. If you predicted they’d go down, you were also correct. I dare say that even with insight as to what was to come, many analysts would have had the timing completely reversed from what actually happened. Why? What caused the volatility? And most importantly, what can we learn from this to help us in 2023 and beyond? After all, in 2022, oil company Exxon increased in market value more than any other company in the S&P 500. It became the eighth largest with a 74.3% increase in share price, up from the 27^th largest a year ago. In contrast, WTI Crude closed near its low for the year, the dynamics involved are certainly worth investor exploration.

Background

Twelve months ago, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA) the price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil was considered high at $75.99/bbl. WTI closed the year less than 6% higher at $80.47/bbl. But this is not indicative of the wild surprises in between. There are two events that had a major impact during those twelve months.

Russia’s late February invasion of its neighbor helped crude prices to shoot up above $120/bbl. Oil has only visited that level once before (2008). Very few could have expected this event, so the expectations leading up to the early months of 2022 were, at worst moderate price declines to moderate increases. Those expecting some price increases pointed to the ongoing supply shortfall related to the pandemic response. This is the period that surprised traders with oil on the way up. Then as it became evident the war would be prolonged and Europe and other regions would take steps to move away from Russia’s output, expectations were for further price increases. What was not anticipated was a massive release of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserves. Along with releases from reserves in other parts of the world, oil prices sank. But, fear of the European winter, lack of support from OPEC+, and anticipation of price caps on Russian oil creating a loss of supply had many talking about upward pressure by year-end. It has not materialized.

The Crude World Order (OPIC?)

What’s changed the expected results related to oil prices and even producer prices? First off, there was a level of unity never-before-experienced and organization among petroleum-importing countries among consuming nations. The pushback and, to some degree taking charge, by nations that are net consumers began in late Spring 2022 when 31 members of the International Energy Agency (IEA) decided to all release oil from reserves to quench demand and impact prices.

The Paris-based IEA promotes what it believes are beneficial energy situations for consumers. It had taken the lead on emergency measures before, but never with this much unity or on this scale. The amount of reserves sold into the oil market amounts to less than 1%, but it is estimated to have shaved $20 or more off per barrel oil prices in the spring and summer. Brent crude, the international oil benchmark, hit its peak settlement value of $127.98 per barrel in March but had fallen below $100 by July. Recently it has been trading near $80.

Certainly, the drawdown on reserves which borrowed from the future will need to be replenished. Pulling from reserves is unsustainable and therefore limits bargaining power. Nations have pledged to return their reserves to a level deemed in line with national security (the U.S. has a 50-day reserve supply), but the timing is uncertain.

What is positive for consumers is the IEA has learned to stand firm and work together.

Why are Oil Company Stocks Outperformers?

Crude is roughly the same price now as it was at the beginning of last year. Yet, factors including conservation efforts and China Covid policies have caused limited demand growth. And despite favorable economics currently, energy companies have been slow to drill new wells. U.S. rig count, as reported by Baker Hughes, crept up to 779 rigs by the end of the year. This compares to a peak level of 1,600 in 2014.

So why, as mentioned earlier, are oil companies performing as tech companies did in 2021?

On the surface, one might think energy company stock prices would be weakening, but this isn’t the case there are other factors at play. Michael Heim, Senior Energy Analyst, at Noble Capital Markets, explains in his newly released Q4 2022 Energy Industry Report, “Operating cash flow has soared over the last two years, but capital expenditures have barely increased. The result has been a large increase in dividend payments, share repurchases, and debt reduction.” Heim’s report further explains that while capital expenditures lagged well behind, it is inaccurate to conclude that oil production has not increased. The Noble Capital Markets analyst explains, “…current production levels are above that during peak drilling periods in 2014. The implication is that drilling has become more productive. While drilling advances such as the use of horizontal drill and fracking in shale deposits may be old hat, it is worth noting that drillers have been refining drilling techniques for individual drilling locations.” Drillers are improving techniques, improving efficiencies and maximizing production per dollar spent. Heim also attributes some of the efficiencies to well recompletions, which he explains are less expensive to put in service.

Read the Noble Capital Markets Energy industry report here.

Take Away

The S&P index that tracks the Energy sector gained 53.8% last year. If you had had a crystal ball that told you about the events that would transpire, such as the European war, and oil returning to its starting place, it’s a rare investor that would expect the drillers/producers to increase over 50%. While all situations have their own circumstances, understanding why price action happened can provide greater preparedness to face the markets each year.

Sign-up for no-cost Channelchek and receive research reports, articles, and even video interviews with company executives in your inbox each morning. Sign-up here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.iea.org/

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Fall-Of-Tesla-And-The-Rise-of-Exxon-Amid-The-Energy-Crisis.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2022/12/31/the-year-in-energy-prices/?sh=59b071fa5314

https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/weekly/

https://www.channelchek.com/news-channel/energy-industry-report-energy-stocks-resume-their-upward-trend-is-80-oil-the-new-norm

Inflation, Interest Rates, and Economic Growth – Where are We Headed?

Posted on January 5, 2023January 5, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Global Economy 2023 – Central Banks Face an Epic Battle Against Inflation Amid Political Obstacles

Where is the global economy heading in 2023?

After all the challenges of last year, it’s a question asked with concern. Just as the economy was dealing with the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine added a little more impetus to global inflation.

Significant rises in the cost of vital items such as food and energy created a cost-of-living issue that needs to be addressed by households and businesses. Central banks reacted with a barrage of interest-rate hikes, while a wave of industrial action saw workers in many countries fighting for pay and conditions to keep pace with this more expensive economic era.

Now, as we begin 2023, these conditions are set to continue, and the IMF thinks that a third of the world will experience a recession in the coming months. This article discusses the weakening independence of central banks and the uncertainty and possible high costs the political influence brings.

This article takes a deep dive into the new interference the Federal Reserve and other central bankers are faced with. It was authored by Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City Political Economy Research Centre, City, University of London. Schifferes believes there are two key ways politics may interfere with central bank plans in 2023.

Some of the world’s biggest economies – and their central banks – face a tricky task this year taming inflation via higher interest rates without triggering a recession.

And whether they like it or not, the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and other central banks are now being thrust into the center of a political debate that could threaten their independence as well as their ability to act decisively to curb rising prices.

I’ve been following and covering politics and finance for four decades as a reporter and now as an economics research fellow. I believe there are two key ways politics may interfere with central bank plans in 2023.

An Inflationary Challenge

High inflation is perhaps the biggest challenge facing the world economy over the coming year.

Inflation has rapidly accelerated and is now at or near its highest rate in decades in most developed economies like the U.S. and in Europe, causing living standards to stagnate or decline in many countries. This has particularly hurt the poorest people, who suffer a higher rate of inflation than the general population because they spend more of their income on food and energy.

The sharp rise in inflation caught central banks by surprise after two decades of low and stable inflation. They reacted by aggressively raising interest rates in the second half of 2022, with the Fed leading the way. The U.S. central bank lifted rates 4.25 percentage points over a six-month period, and the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and others followed in its footsteps.

Their strategies seem to be working. Inflation in the U.S. has slowed, while in the U.K. and the eurozone, recent data suggest inflation may have peaked – although it’s still very high, at around 10% – and might start trending down.

But interest rate hikes – which are expected to continue in 2023, albeit at a slower pace – could further cloud the outlook for economic growth, which already looks grim for developed economies.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development predicts that in 2023 both the U.S. and the eurozone will grow by only 0.5%, well below their historic averages, while Europe’s largest economy, Germany, will actually shrink by 0.3%. In the U.K., the Bank of England projects that the economy will continue to shrink until the middle of 2024.

Fiscal Spending and Inflation

That brings us to the first political problem that could upset central bank plans: government spending.

The politics is playing out in different ways. In the U.S., spending has increased substantially, most notably with the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill signed into law in late 2021 and the $1.7 trillion budget bill passed in December.

This kind of expansionary fiscal policy, which may be in place for years, could undermine attempts by central banks like the Fed to fight inflation. As the central banks seek to reduce inflation by curbing demand, increased government spending has the opposite effect. This could force the Fed and other banks to raise rates even higher than they otherwise would have.

In Europe and the U.K., governments have been forced to spend billions to subsidize the energy bills of consumers and businesses, while the economic slowdown has reduced their tax revenue, leading to soaring government deficits

Nevertheless, in the U.K. the Conservative government has prioritized the fight against inflation, announcing cutbacks to consumer subsidies for energy, plus higher taxes and further cuts in public spending if it wins the next general election, which is expected to take place in 2024. While these actions are deflationary, they are politically unpopular.

The Bank of England is now split on whether or how fast to continue to raise rates.

Central Bank Independence Under Threat

The other political problem is more existential for central banks and makes their task all the more delicate.

For the past 20 years, their independence from government interference and the setting of public inflation targets at around 2% have helped them gain credibility in fighting inflation, which stayed at historic lows for much of the 21st century.

Now both their credibility and independence may be under threat.

Central bankers, especially in Europe, are acutely aware of public concerns about how higher interest rates might stifle growth, in part because their economies have been more severely affected than the U.S. by the Ukraine war. Meanwhile, consumers are being hit by higher mortgage payments, which may tank the housing market.

At the same time, central bank efforts to persuade workers not to ask for higher wages to compensate for inflation, which would help reduce the need for more interest rate hikes, have spectacularly backfired, especially in Britain, where a wave of strikes by public-sector workers shows no sign of abating.

Long-standing political tensions over the role of the European Central Bank have been exacerbated by the election of right-wing governments in several eurozone countries.

Traditionally, under the influence of Germany’s Bundesbank, the European Central Bank has worried about inflation more than other central banks. Under competing political pressures, it has moved more slowly than some other central banks to unwind its policy of low – and even negative – interest rates.

In the States, where Fed Chief Jerome Powell has rejected any attempt to mitigate his focus on inflation, political pressures may grow from both left and right, particularly if Donald Trump becomes the Republican presidential nominee. This ultimately may lead Congress or a new administration to try to change the central bank’s approach, its leadership, and even its mandate.

Uncharted Waters

None of this might be a problem if central bank projections of a sharp fall in inflation by the end of 2023 come to pass. But these projections are based on the belief that energy prices will continue to remain below their peak or even fall further in the coming year.

Just as in 2022, when central banks failed to grasp the inflationary threat early enough, other risks beyond their control, as well as political developments, may derail their hopes. These include an escalation of the war in Ukraine, which could raise energy prices further, more supply chain disruptions from China, and domestic pushes for higher wages.

With the cost-of-living crisis now at the top of the public’s agenda in many developed countries, the setting of interest rates has ceased to be just a technical matter and has instead become highly political. Both governments and central banks are entering uncharted waters in their attempt to curb inflation without stifling growth. If their projections prove overly optimistic, the political as well as the economic costs could be high.

All this means that the outlook for inflation is highly uncertain. And fears of 1970s-style stagflation – high inflation and stagnant economic growth – could become a reality.

Robinhood Stockholder’s Concern if SBF’s Holdings are Being Seized

Posted on January 5, 2023January 5, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Could There be an Impact on Robinhood Shareholders with the SBF Share Seizure

Creditors and customers of FTX may be able to reclaim some assets that were wiped out as the feds have been seizing the 7.50% stake in Robinhood (HOOD) stock held by Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF). SBF faces charges of fraud and a myriad of financial crimes after the collapse of FTX in November. The impact of the collapse is having an effect on other areas of finance, including assets that had been controlled by SBF. The Robinhood shares are valued near $450 million, and while this may bring some hope or relief to those that will receive a distribution, there is a risk to HOOD investors.

Background

The FTX bankruptcy has left a line of claimants to recapture what they can from the cryptocurrency giant. Bankruptcies are seldom easy; those that could involve layers of fraud become tied up in even larger disputes and legal battles. For example, the large Robinhood holding is tied up in a dispute between FTX and bankrupt crypto lender BlockFi. The company alleges that SBF put up the shares as collateral for a loan to Alameda Research, a company he also owned.

The HOOD stake was purchased in 2022 through a holding company SBF controlled, Robinhood of course is the innovative broker specializing in self-directed individual investors. Through the DOJ, authorities are going after the shares of HOOD and accounts that are held at the bank Silvergate Capital (SI) which is a banker for the crypto industry.

Separately, court filings on January 4th brought awareness to a NY federal judge ordered last month requiring the seizure of some $93 million that an FTX arm held in accounts at Silvergate. As it relates to this seizure. The Justice Department says it believes the assets seized are not the property of the bankruptcy estate, while a lawyer for FTX maintains that the seizures were from accounts not directly controlled by the company. They were ordered in connection with the criminal case involving SBF.

FTX investors’ asset claims in the exchange, which was once valued at $32 billion, come after creditors and other rightful claimants.

How This Could Impact Robinhood Shareholders

Asset seizures and later distribution to those hurt by fraud involve liquidation of the assets seized. In the case of stocks, they will be sold and turned into cash. Imagine a sudden effort to sell 7.50% of any company. That is a large percentage to move. The stake, worth between $400 and $500 million, may serve as a dark cloud depressing share prices and slowing any planned growth of the company. It may eventually culminate in liquidation at a pace not conducive to retaining a level stock price.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.theblock.co/post/199271/doj-seizing-millions-in-robinhood-shares-linked-to-ftx-lawyer-says

https://www.wsj.com/articles/judge-ordered-seizure-of-money-from-ftx-digital-markets-accounts-at-silvergate-11672866368

https://www.barrons.com/articles/ftx-robinhood-doj-assets-51672932192?mod=hp_LATEST

Golden Rule of Successful Trading/Investing

Posted on January 4, 2023January 5, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

One Should Never feel Forced to Trade or Get Involved Because They are Bored

Most start off a New Year with great intentions. These often include saving money, starting a family, or finding a better job. A co-worker of mine is intent on skydiving before year-end – whatever. To each their own. For many involved in the markets, 2023 has become the year they want to further improve their trading. This usually begins with stepping back, reminding themselves of trading basics, then not falling into old habits weeks later. Another step is developing new understanding and new companies. It also includes not trading with the need to make back last year’s losses in a hurry.

There is one trading basic that is often ignored because it feels like it conflicts with other goals. But it doesn’t. It is knowing when being uninvolved is the best decision. Doing nothing without feeling you may be missing something takes practice for most. It may take more practice for those that have experienced the thrill of a mostly green trading account.

Trade No Stock Before its Time

Over the holidays, family members would ask, “should I buy Tesla?” or “should I be buying Apple down here?” My mom would instead ask, something that in my mind is a similar question. She’d ask, “when are you going to get married?” These are all similar because Tesla and Apple, when considering the whole universe of stocks, are probably not the best fit for the accounts of these people. Similarly, in the absence of finding a good personal fit, unless someone is holding a gun to one’s head, I believe in waiting for circumstances with a high probability of a positive outcome. Don’t get involved because you’re bored, or because you think you have to is the message.

If your win rate is over 50%, you’re doing better than average, this is as true in trading as it is in relationships. If you force either, your success rate goes down, and you’ve wasted time, money, and invited frustration. Yet so many investor/traders willy-nilly jump into something because they are bored, feel they are missing out, or are told it is what they are supposed to be doing.

Forcing trades, no matter how tempting it may be, how bored you are, or how much FOMO you’re experiencing, has a lower chance of being successful than if you wait for your perfect setup. Sitting on your hands so you can’t press the “Buy” button is preferable to being in the situation of trying to unwind a trade you spent too little time waiting to come to you. Good opportunity doesn’t always arrive on schedule, but if you have capital tied up in a mistake, you may not be able to jump at a real match for your portfolio later on.

Trading is Not Glamorous

The definition of booyah is “expressing triumphant exuberance.” If you yearn to say “booyah” or do any other kind of touchdown dance, you may find you will pull the sell trigger too early. A main key to trading is knowing what you want, then patience. Patience is one of the most important skills you can have as a trader. You need to have the control and the discipline to wait for a quality setup according to your individual strategy. It may take a while, but confidence the trades will come helps. Develop a trading strategy so you know the guidelines you will adhere to; abandoning that strategy just to be involved, over time, will cause you to be worse off.

Consistently successful traders will tell you that one of the most important things to remember with trading is that you should never let your emotions control your actions. If you can’t think rationally if you aren’t planning your trade and trading your plan, sit on your hands until you can. Really, defund your account, find another way to get your thrills. Because if you force a trade and it works out anyway, you have reinforced a bad habit. Many trading accounts of good people got fried in 2022 because they did the wrong thing in 2021, but in 2021 they were bailed out by the markets. Doing the wrong thing and succeeding is costly because you tend to repeat it.

A hail Mary pass sometimes meets the desired goal in a football game, swinging for a home run in baseball and connecting certainly can lead to exuberance and even a winning game. But most often, these are low-probability irrational plays if you actually want to win. Increase your time on base, work on your short plays, study your opponent, or whatever other kind of reference helps convey this thinking. Because saying “I do” to a stock without successful due diligence is like asking to eventually lose. If you just want excitement, then maybe you could consider skydiving.

Final Thoughts

We’re all always learning. Channelchek is a good way to discover less explored companies and to either learn or be reminded of things that may enhance your positive outcomes. Sign up now, there’s no paywall, just good info not found on more mainstream investment sites. Go here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Newly Released FOMC Minutes Cause Concern

Posted on January 4, 2023January 4, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

New Year, Same Old Fed – A Synopsis of the Last FOMC Meeting

Interest rate moves orchestrated by the Federal Reserve or, more specifically, monetary policy as formed at each Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting have recently taken a front seat in driving markets. This includes the stock market, real estate prices, and more directly, bond values. In what direction is the FOMC likely to push rates in 2023, and at what pace? Some hints have been uncovered in the just-released December meeting minutes. The minutes describe the views expressed by policymakers and explain the reasons for the Committee’s decisions. While voting member thinking can change from one meeting to the next, it is seldom dramatic. This new set of minutes offered only subtle clues as to whether change is in store.

Fed Minutes Present a Case for Continued Rate Hikes

The minutes from the December 2022 Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting showed that the Fed remains committed to bringing inflation back to its defined 2% target. But the pace of rate hikes should taper in 2023. There was no discussion at all as to whether rates may be cut during 2023.

On the progression of the economy, the Committee members noted that GDP was increasing at a modest pace in the fourth quarter after expanding strongly in the third quarter. Labor markets had eased but remained tight enough to be trouble from an inflation point of view. Both Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) and Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) readings moved lower, but continued well above the target inflation range.

Jobs increased at a slower pace in October and November. Both the labor force participation rate and the employment-to-population ratio declined a little over the period of time between meetings. The private-sector job openings rate, as measured by the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, moved back down in October but remained higher than would seem consistent with dramatically lower inflation.

Wage growth continued higher than a pace expected to be consistent with the the two percent monetary policy target. Average hourly earnings rose 5.1% over the 12 months ending in November. Compensation per hour (CPH) in the business sector rose 4.0 percent over the four quarters ending in the third quarter, but the reported increase likely understated the true pace of increase in CPH, as the lower second-quarter employment data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages had not yet been incorporated in the CPH measure.

Foreign economic activity grew in the third quarter, but some recent data point to weakening growth, weighed down by the economic fallout of Russia’s war with Ukraine and a COVID-19-related slowdown in China. High inflation continued to contribute to a decline in real disposable incomes, which, together with disruptions to energy supplies, depressed economic activity, especially overseas. In China, authorities began to ease social restrictions even as COVID cases surged, raising the prospect of significant disruptions to economic activity in the near term but also a faster reopening. Weaker global demand and high interest rates also weighed on activity in emerging market economies. Despite tentative signs of easing in foreign headline inflation, core inflationary pressures remained elevated in many countries. In response to high inflation, many central banks further tightened monetary policy.

Implications

The December 2022 minutes confirmed that reining in inflation remains the principal concern of the Fed. No members spoke of a scenario where they may lower rates this year, there is concern that the cost of money is getting easier despite the Fed’s tightening efforts. The expected path of the federal funds rate implied by financial market quotes ended, showing the market anticipates lower rates. This is likely reflective of the larger-than-expected moderation in inflation. Medium-to-longer-term nominal Treasury yields declined substantially over the intermeeting period. This was driven primarily by lower-than-expected inflation data releases, which appeared to prompt a substantial reduction in investors’ concerns about the possibility that inflation would remain high for a long period.

What Do the Minutes Say About Stocks?

Broad stock price indexes increased. This likely reflected reduced concerns about the inflation outlook and the associated implications for the future path of policy. On balance, the one-month option-implied volatility on the S&P 500 (VIX) decreased and was around the middle of its range since mid-2020. This makes sense because of reduced investor concerns about the inflation outlook, spreads of interest rates on corporate debt, mortgage-backed securities, and municipal bonds to comparable-duration Treasury yields, which all narrowed since the last meeting.

Inflation Worries Deflated

With inflation still well above the Committee’s longer-run goal of two percent, participants agreed that inflation was unacceptably high. Participants agreed that the inflation data received for October and November showed welcome reductions in the monthly pace of price increases, but they stressed that it would take substantially more evidence of progress to be confident that inflation was on a sustained downward path.

Participants noted that core goods prices declined in the October and November CPI data, consistent with easing supply bottlenecks. Some participants also noted that, by some measures, firms’ markups were still elevated and that a continued subdued expansion in aggregate demand would likely be needed to reduce the remaining upward pressure on inflation. Regarding housing services inflation, many participants observed that measures of rent based on new leases indicated a deceleration, which would be reflected in the measures of shelter inflation with some lag. Participants noted that, in the latest inflation data, the pace of increase for prices of core services excluding shelter—which represents the largest component of core PCE price inflation—was high. They also remarked that this component of inflation has tended to be closely linked to nominal wage growth and, therefore would likely remain persistently elevated if the labor market remained very tight. Consequently, while there were few signs of adverse wage-price dynamics at present, they assessed that bringing down this component of inflation to mandate-consistent levels would require some softening in the growth of labor demand to bring the labor market back into better balance.

Rates Moving Forward

In discussing the policy outlook, participants continued to anticipate that ongoing increases in the target range for the federal funds rate is appropriate to achieve the Committee’s objectives. In determining the pace of future increases in the target range, participants judged that it would be appropriate to take into account the cumulative tightening of monetary policy, the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, and economic and financial developments.

With inflation staying above the Committee’s two percent goal and the labor market remaining very tight, all participants had raised their assessment of the appropriate path of the federal funds rate relative to their assessment at the time of the September meeting. No participants anticipated that it would be appropriate to begin reducing the federal funds rate target in 2023. Participants generally observed that a restrictive policy stance would need to be maintained until the incoming data provided confidence that inflation was on a sustained downward path to two percent. Which would likely take some time.

In view of the persistent and unacceptably high level of inflation, several participants commented that historical experience cautioned against prematurely loosening monetary policy.

In light of the heightened uncertainty regarding the outlooks for both inflation and real economic activity, most participants emphasized the need to retain flexibility and optionality when moving policy to a more restrictive stance. Participants generally noted that the Committee’s future decisions regarding policy would continue to be informed by the incoming data and their implications for the outlook for economic activity and inflation and that the Committee would continue to make decisions meeting by meeting.

Take Away

It’s a new year, it’s the same Fed, inflation is still quite elevated, policymakers are surprised at how quickly some inflation measures did drop, but the drop wasn’t enough for them to reverse course.

The FOMC reserves the right to be data-dependent and change its pace or direction when the data changes. Until then, they still have more rate hikes they expect to unleash early this year.

Scheduled FOMC Meetings in 2023

January/February 31-1

March 21-22

May 2-3

June 13-14

July 25-26

September 19-20

October/November 31-1

December 12-13

The Policy announcements have been at PM on the second meeting date after they have adjourned.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20221214.htm

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/minutes-federal-open-market-committee-fomc.htm

Will Three Bank Regulators Kill Cryptocurrency in 2023?

Posted on January 4, 2023January 4, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Lack of Crypto Governance, Oversight, Standards, and Risk Management Frightens Feds

Three Federal Agencies have warned banks about the dangers of dealing with digital assets. On the first banking day of the new year, the Federal Reserve (Fed), the FDIC, and the Office of the Controller of the Currency (OCC), the three banking regulators in the US, issued a three-page joint warning to banks. It points to eight risks that banking organizations should not let migrate to the US banking system. And highlights processes to mitigate these risks while the three agencies develop frameworks to oversee the ever-changing asset class.

The Joint Statement on Crypto-Asset Risks to Banking Organizations is for the consumption of banks of all types and sizes through the US that have or may adopt policies. It warns the events of 2022 have “been marked by significant volatility,” and that vulnerabilities in the crypto-asset sector have surfaced.

The joint statement explains that banking organizations that have in the past seeked to engage in activities that involve crypto-assets. Have been taken on a case-by-case basis. “The agencies continue to build knowledge, expertise, and understanding of the risks crypto-assets may pose to banking organizations, their customers, and the broader U.S. financial system.” The statement says that the significant risks “highlighted by recent failures of several large crypto-asset companies,” will cause the three agencies to take a careful and cautious approach.

The agencies highlighted eight risks that they wanted banking organizations engaged in crypto-assets to understand may not be in accordance with safe and sound banking practices:

Risk of fraud and scams among crypto-asset sector participants.
Legal uncertainties related to custody practices, redemptions, and ownership rights, some of which are currently the subject of legal processes and proceedings.
Inaccurate or misleading representations and disclosures by crypto-asset companies, including misrepresentations regarding federal deposit insurance, and other practices that may be unfair, deceptive, or abusive, contributing to significant harm to retail and institutional investors, customers, and counterparties.
Significant volatility in crypto-asset markets, the effects of which include potential impacts on deposit flows associated with crypto-asset companies.
Susceptibility of stablecoins to run risk, creating potential deposit outflows for banking organizations that hold stablecoin reserves.
Contagion risk within the crypto-assetsector resulting from interconnections among certain crypto-asset participants, including through opaque lending, investing, funding, service, and operational arrangements. These interconnections may also present concentration risks for banking organizations with exposures to the crypto-asset sector.
Risk management and governance practices in the crypto-asset sector exhibiting a lack of maturity and robustness.
Heightened risks associated with open, public, and/or decentralized networks, or similar systems, including, but not limited to, the lack of governance mechanisms establishing oversight of the system; the absence of contracts or standards to clearly establish roles, responsibilities, and liabilities; and vulnerabilities related to cyber-attacks, outages, lost or trapped assets, and illicit finance.

Take Away

In 2022 the young crypto asset class took a beating similar to high-tech stocks. There is a reason banks are limited to their stock market activity. It seems that these three federal agencies, which do not include work being done by the SEC (or CFTC), are now working hard to regulate what banks can do involving these assets; in the meantime, they want to let banking organizations know that crypto-assets need to be dealt with extreme caution, perhaps moderation, and know that as far as the regulators are concerned, if they still want to serve crypto customers, they should discuss all planned activities with the appropriate regulator prior to filing an application and should ensure that risk management, including board oversight, policies, procedures, risk assessments, controls, gates and guardrails, and monitoring, are in place to effectively identify and manage risks.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Source

Joint Statement on Crypto-Asset Risks to Banking Organizations

Gold Assets Get Even Hotter

Posted on January 3, 2023January 3, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Will Gold Related Assets Continue to Outperform?

Gold, which has been moving up slowly over the past weeks and months, stood out on this first business day of the year by noticeably outperforming other asset classes. By late afternoon gold had passed the highest level it had been in six months. Why, after a full year of market turmoil and economic uncertainty, is exposure to gold now attracting investors? Will this trend continue? And what are the various ways a stock market investor can benefit from rising interest in this element?

Background

A strong and upward-trending US dollar provides a parking place for those looking for a safe-harbor investment – one with limited risk. For much of last year, US interest rates led the way among central banks, increasing yields on Treasury debt. This pushed the dollar value upward. The dollar exchange rate then began to weaken as Japan recently began raising its rates.

On the first trading day of 2023, Treasury yields fell as investors began to position for a possible change of monetary policy. This is somewhat cautionary as the FOMC minutes are released on Wednesday. The Fed has already begun tapering its increases in rates. The prospect of many more Federal Reserve interest rate hikes is unlikely. There is fear that the FOMC minutes may make this even more clear. Higher US dollar exchange rates as a result of yield increases had been dampening any natural increase in demand the safe haven metal may have had to push values higher. Plus, there is heightened talk of a US recession; this does not bode well for dollar strengthening moving forward. Investor caution is adding to the performance of gold.

What Investors Pay Attention To

A big investor focus is a release on Wednesday of the minutes from the Fed’s Dec. 13-14 monetary policy meeting. If the minutes make clear that the U.S. central bank is more likely to slow or end interest rate hikes, it opens the door for more assets to move to bullion, gold mining stocks, junior gold mining stocks, and ETFs.

As far as the performance of market-related exposure to gold, it shines compared to the S&P 500. XAU is gold bullion, as shown above as XAU/USD; it is the performance of one troy ounce of gold’s cost per dollar. Over the past three months, this has risen by 10.73%. For the same period, the junior mining stocks (GDXJ) and the major miners (GDMN) have risen by 25.55% and 33.32%, respectively.

The three-month performance accelerated today, we will get clues this week if this heightened interest continues.

To Consider

Did you know that Channelchek provides up-to-date material from a natural resources research analyst, including gold mining stocks, that the Wall Street Journal bestowed the ‘Best on the Street’ label, and that has been awarded the Forbes/Starmine’s ‘Best Brokerage Analyst’ honor? Today, Mark Reichman released his quarterly Metals and Mining Fourth Quarter Review and Outlook. Explore this report by clicking here.

If you have an interest in mining stocks, take advantage of your free access to Mr. Reichman’s research and reporting on many interesting natural resource producers by clicking here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Source

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/gold-climbs-six-month-peak-thin-trade-ahead-fed-minutes-2023-01-03/

https://www.channelchek.com/analysts/mark-reichman

Michael Burry Expects Huge Swings in 2023

Posted on January 3, 2023January 3, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Image: Michael Burry on the Set of “The Big Short” (Twitter, @michaeljburry)

Washington’s Economic Playbook According to Michael Burry

One benefit to Elon Musk purchasing Twitter and ridding the platform of many of the auto posts on well-followed accounts is that the well-followed Michael Burry is no longer deleting his tweets the same day as posted. Burry, who began the new year tweeting with a very clear economic roadmap, said less than a month ago that he trusts Elon. As far as the hedge fund manager’s 2023 economic roadmap, his expectations show that he is critical of all those in Washington that have a hand on the economic steering wheel and continue to resist oversteering.

While it can be frustrating for someone like Burry or any investor to forecast missteps by those that most impact the economy, especially if the official entities continue to repeat their behaviors, there is some consolation in the idea that patient investors can use these repeated actions to enhance their account’s performance.

Burry’s New Year’s Message

In 50 words, Dr. Burry, the investor made famous by Christian Bale’s portrayal of him in the 2015 movie The Big Short, said that he expects that inflation for this part of the interest rate, or market cycle, has already passed its high. In fact, he expects that it will be unmistakable, as the year progresses, that the US has fallen into a recession. A recession that can’t be denied or redefined because it will be that deep.

With this economic weakness, the hedge fund manager expects that we will not only see lower CPI readings but by the second half of this year, inflation may even turn negative – deflationary readings.

Burry then goes on to say that this will cause stimulus from both the fed and fiscal policy. This stimulus will be overdone if keeping inflation at bay is the goal. He expects we will have an inflationary period that may outdo the one we are coming off., Burry tweeted. “Fed will cut and government will stimulate. And we will have another inflation spike.”

Take Away

If you ask ten experts what will happen over the next 12 months, you will get ten or more conflicting projections. The Scion Asset Management CIO is often correct on what will eventually occur but just as often as he is right, he is far off on the timing. The scenarios that seem obvious to him have in the past played out a lot slower in the economy and marketplace.

His first tweet in 2023 said that he expects more of the same from the folks in Washington, including the Federal Reserve and the US Treasury. The fed is now pushing hard on the economic brake pedal, which will could cause activity to reach recessionary levels. He expects that this will be followed by a panic move to the gas pedal that will create shortages, increased demand, and consumer price increases.

If he is correct, this means different things to investors with different time horizons. But it appears that Burry expects the tightening cycle to end soon.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Source

Burry New Year’s tweet

https://nypost.com/2022/12/09/michael-burry-deletes-twitter-account-despite-declaring-elon-musk-has-his-trust/