Category: Opinion

Solid Evidence a Recession is Unlikely this Year

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com

Reliable Data, Not Emotions, are Pointing to a Growing U.S. Economy

In roughly one month, we will be halfway through 2023. While many point to the Fed’s pace of tightening and the downward sloping yield curve, as a reason to run around like Chicken Little warning of a coming recession, a fresh read of the economic tea leaves tells a different story. Just today, May 23, the PMI Output Index (PMI) rose to its highest reading in over a year. Home sales figures were also reported to show that new homes in May sold at the highest rate in over a year. These are both reliable leading indicators that point to growth in both services and manufacturing.

U.S. Composite PMI Output Index

Business activity in the U.S. increased to a 13-month high in May due in large part to strong growth in the services sector. This is a reliable indication that economic expansion has growing momentum. Despite the negative talk of those that are concerned that the Fed has lifted interest rates closer to historical norms and that the yield curve is still inverted, in part due to Covid era Fed yield-curve-control, the numbers suggest less caution might be warranted.

S&P Global said on Tuesday (May 23) its flash U.S. Composite PMI Output Index, which tracks the manufacturing and services sectors, rose to a reading of 54.5 this month. It indicates the highest level since April 2022 and is up from a reading of 53.4 in April. A reading above 50 indicates growth, this is the fourth consecutive month it has been above 50. The consensus among economists was only 52.6.

Home Sales

One sector that is directly impacted by interest rates is real estate. However, new home sales rose in April, this is a clear sign that prospective buyers are making deals with builders.

New homes in April were sold at a seasonally-adjusted annual rate of 683,000, Its the highest rate since March 2022. The April data represents a 4.1% gain from March’s revised rate of 656,000,. The report was from the Census and Department of Housing and Urban Development and was reported Tuesday May 23. Economists had expected new home sales to decline to 670,000 from a March rate of 683,000. It was the largest month-over-month increase since December 2022.

Leading Indicators

PMI is forward-looking as it surveys purchasing managers’ expectations and intentions for the coming months. By capturing their sentiment on future orders, production plans, and hiring intentions, PMI offers insights into economic trends that have yet to be reflected in other after-the-fact indicators.

Home sales are considered a leading indicator because they can serve as a measure of other needs and broader economic trends. Home sales have a significant impact on related sectors, such as construction, home improvement, finance, and consumer spending. Changes in home sales can influence economic activity and indicate shifts in consumer confidence, employment levels, and overall economic health.

While many economic reports offer rear-view mirror data, these reports are true indicators of business behavior as it plans for future expectations, and consumer behavior as it is confident that it will have the resources available to purchase and outfit a new home.

The upbeat reports prompted the Atlanta Federal Reserve to raise its second-quarter gross domestic product estimate to a 2.9% annualized rate from a 2.6% pace. The economy grew at a 1.1% rate in the first quarter.

Take Away

Many economists are negative about the economic outlook later this year. Market participants have been positioning themselves with the notion that there may be a late year recession. Is the notion misguided? Recent data suggests there may be buying opportunities for those willing to go against the tide of pundits preaching recession.

No one has a crystal ball. In good markets and bad, there is no replacement for good research before you put on a position, and then for as long as the position remains in your portfolio.

Channelchek is a great resource for information to follow the companies not likely being reported in traditional outlets. Turn to this online free resource as you evaluate small and microcap stocks.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

World Economic Outlook

Barron’s (May 23, 2023)

Reuters (May 23, 2023)

Cathie Wood’s Non-Mainstream Inflation Concern Could Unfold as Feared

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image: An Artificial Intelligence Rendering of Tech Investor Cathie Wood

Cathie Wood’s Deflationary Expectations May Become Reality

Before Fed Chair Powell realized inflation might not be transitory, during the Fall of 2021, Cathie Wood sounded alarm bells about the risks of great deflationary pressures not being far off. The renowned hedge fund manager and founder of ARK Funds stood far apart from her peers with this forecast. Since then, the disruptive technologies investment expert has indicated the Federal Reserve should stop raising interest rates because the economy is poised for deflation rather than inflation. As most of the world has come to accept the notion that inflation may be a problem for years to come, her thoughts have been dismissed by most economists as wishful thinking.

Wood has not budged on her position, and it may serve her and her customers well. Investment success often comes with pointing yourself in a different direction than the loud narrative is pointing you. But, in the end, you have to eventually be right, and others then have to change their tune to match the once contrarian view – after all, you will need late-comers to buy your position from you.

I have to confess, as a lifelong Fedwatcher, market analyst, and cynic, I didn’t think there was a chance in the world that she could be right. Since her October of 2021 comments, not a long period of time, We’ve all witnessed a dramatic leap in technology that reduces costs, is easy to adopt, and is progressing at an exponential rate.

Cathie Wood may not be as wrong as most people thought, perhaps she is even right. Here are just some examples of when she spoke out about her deflationary outlook:

2022-10-10: Wood wrote an open letter to the Federal Reserve accusing it of stoking ‘deflation’ and looking at the wrong economic indicators.

2023-02-02: Wood gave a speech at the Sohn Investment Conference where she said that she believes deflation is a bigger threat to the US economy than inflation.

2023-03-08: Wood appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box where she said that she believes deflation is “the biggest risk” to the global economy.

Cathie Wood has been quoted as saying:

“Deflation is the biggest risk to the global economy.”

“The rise of artificial intelligence is leading to a productivity boom, which is driving down prices.”

Less related to disruptive technologies providing businesses a more efficient means, Wood has also argued:

“The decline of globalization is leading to a decline in demand for goods and services.”

“The aging population is leading to a decline in consumption.”

“Deflation is not a bad thing. It can lead to a more sustainable economy, with lower interest rates and less debt.”

In November of 2022, ChatGPT was unveiled by OpenAI. Most everyone paying attention, including those in related tech businesses, were stunned at how far along the technology is and the potential for quickly advancing AI platforms. Currently, ChatGPT is trained on a dataset large enough that it can generate text, translate languages, write different kinds of creative content, and answer your questions in an informative way.

In 2023, ChatGPT was released to the broader public, it broke records for sign-ups and it has continued to grow in popularity. It is now used by a wide range of people, including students, writers, and businesses. This is still a beta version they are using and getting excellent results.

While generative AI for text is only one next-generation technology, example; this still under development tool alone is world-changing powerful. And it has the potential to dramatically alter the way we interact with computers – all of which can lead to dramatic gains in efficiency and productivity. Efficiency and productivity are ingredients that can stave off inflation, they can even bring prices lower – we know this because we experienced it for decades following the tech revolution.

ChatGPT and other OpenAI products are still beta tests of a text program from one institution. I understand OpenAI products can also write computer code, create graphics, and carry on a conversation.  Where will OpenAI take their products next, how will the products take part in machine learning and then serve to better themselves, and how many other companies are dreaming up and developing new sources to enrich out lives at lower expense?

While Artificial Intelligence may or may not be able to lower the price of a dozen eggs, it can increase output across many industries or reduce expensive labor needs. I see examples of this in the office and at home where a search using ChatGPT can more precisely provide a response to a query than a Google internet search.

Take Away

Investors are often hurt by their ego, preventing them from rethinking and reevaluating. When exposed to new information, it’s good to take the time to reevaluate the probability of being incorrect or correct in one’s outlook.

It’s too early to know if Cathie Wood will turn out to be correct in her inflation forecasts. She lives and breathes high tech and I’m sure gets early behind-the-scenes glimpses of what has yet to come. For me, it is now easier to see how new business solutions could possibly unfold to a point where deflation becomes an issue in the world economies. I’m not sold on the idea, but I am not dismissing it as impossible either.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://ark-funds.com/articles/commentary/q3-2022-commentary-from-arks-cio/

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/09/cnbc-transcript-ark-invest-ceo-cio-cathie-wood-speaks-with-cnbcs-brian-sullivan-on-last-call-today.html

The Limits to the Artificial Intelligence Revolution

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com

What Will AI Never Be Good At?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a true disruptive technology. As any informed content writer can tell you, the technology creates efficiencies by speeding up data gathering, research, and even graphics that specifically reflect the content. As an example, it is arguably quicker to use ChatGPT to provide a list of ticker symbols from company names, than it is to look them up one by one. With these small time savers, over the course of a week, far more can be produced as a result of AI tools saving a few minutes here and there.

This presents the question, what are the limits of AI – what can’t it do?

Worker Displacement

Technological revolutions have always benefitted humankind in the long run; in the short run, they have been disruptive, often displacing people who then have to retrain.

A new Goldman Sachs report says “significant disruption” could be on the horizon for the labor market. Goldman’s analysis of jobs in the U.S. and Europe shows that two-thirds of jobs could be automated at least to some degree. In the U.S., “of those occupations which are exposed, most have a significant — but partial — share of their workload (25-50%) that can be replaced,” Goldman Sachs’ analysts said in the paper.

Around the world, as many as 300 million jobs could be affected, the report says. Changes to labor markets are therefore likely – although historically, technological progress doesn’t just make jobs redundant, it also creates new ones. And the added productivity allows the masses to live wealthier lives. This clearly was the end result of the  industrial revolution, and years after the computer revolution, we are at a high rate of employment and have at our fingertips much which we never even dreamed.

The Goldman report says the use of AI technology could boost labor productivity growth and boost global GDP by as much as 7% over time.

There are few reasons to expect that the AI revolution won’t also provide more goods and services per person for a richer existence. But, what about the disruption in the interim? I was curious to know what artificial intelligence is not expected to be able to do. There isn’t much information out there, so I went to an AI source and fed it a bunch of pointed questions about its nature. Part of that nature is to not intentionally lie, I found the responses worth sharing as we will all soon be impacted by what the technology can and cannot do.

Limitations of AI that Will Persist

Artificial intelligence has come a long way in recent years and the speed of progression and adoption is accelerating. As a result, applications have become increasingly sophisticated. But, there are still many things that AI cannot do now and may never be able to do.

One thing that AI cannot do now and may never be able to do is to truly understand human emotions and intentions. While AI algorithms can detect patterns in data and recognize certain emotional expressions, they do not have the ability to experience emotions themselves. This means that AI cannot truly understand the nuances of human communication, which can lead to misinterpretation and miscommunication.

Another limitation of AI is that it cannot replicate the creativity and intuition of humans. While AI can generate new ideas based on existing data, it lacks the ability to come up with truly original and innovative ideas. This is because creativity and intuition are often based on a combination of experience, emotion, and imagination, which are difficult to replicate in a machine.

AI also struggles with tasks that require common sense reasoning or context awareness. For example, AI may be able to identify a picture of a cat, but it may struggle to understand that a cat is an animal that can be petted or that it can climb trees. This is because AI lacks the contextual understanding that humans have built up through years of experience and interaction with the world around us.

In the realm of stocks and economics, AI has shown promise in analyzing data and making predictions, but there are still limitations to its abilities. For example, AI can analyze large datasets and identify patterns in market trends, but it cannot account for unexpected events or human behavior that may affect the market. This means that while AI can provide valuable insights, it cannot guarantee accurate predictions or prevent market volatility.

Another limitation of AI in economics is its inability to understand the complexities of social and political systems. Economic decisions are often influenced by social and political factors, such as government policies and public opinion. While AI can analyze economic data and identify correlations, it lacks the ability to understand the underlying social and political context that drives economic decisions.

A concern some have about artificial intelligence is that it may perpetuate biases that exist in the data it analyzes. This is the “garbage in, garbage out” data problem on steroids. For example, if historical data on stock prices is biased towards a certain demographic or industry, AI algorithms may replicate these biases in their predictions. This can lead to an amplified bias that proves faulty and not useful for economic decision making.

Take Away

AI has shown remarkable progress in recent years, but, as with everything that came before, there are still things that it cannot do now and may never be able to do. AI lacks the emotional intelligence, creativity, and intuition of humans, as well as common sense reasoning and social and political systems. In economics and stock market analysis, AI can provide valuable insights, but it cannot assure accurate predictions or prevent market volatility. So while companies are investing in ways to make our lives more productive with artificial intelligence and machine learning, it remains important to invest in our own human intelligence, growth and expertise.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

OpenAI. (2021). ChatGPT [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://openai.com

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/16/how-generative-ai-chatgpt-will-change-jobs-at-all-work-levels.html

In the Event of an Official U.S. Bankruptcy…

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com

Is a U.S. Default or Bankruptcy Possible – How Would that Work?

It seems no one is talking about what would happen if the U.S. defaulted on maturing debt, yet it is within the realm of possibilities. Also not impossible is the idea of the powerful country joining the list of sovereign nations that once declared bankruptcy and survived. A retired government employee with a passion for economic history wrote a timely piece on this subject. It was originally published on the Mises Institute website on  May 12, 2023. Channelchek has shared it here with permission.

The current known federal debt is $31.7 trillion, according to the website, U.S. Debt Clock, this is about $94,726 for every man, woman, and child who are citizens as of April 24, 2023. Can you write a check right now made payable to the United States Treasury for the known share of the federal debt of each member of your family after liquidating the assets you own?

A report released by the St. Louis Federal Reserve Branch on March 6, 2023, stated a similar figure for the total known federal debt of about $31.4 trillion as of December 31, 2022. The federal debt size is so great, it can never be repaid in its current form.

Some of us have been in or known families or businesses who had financial debt that could not be paid when adjustments like reducing expenses, increasing income, renegotiating loan repayments to lender(s), and selling assets to raise money for loan repayment were not enough. The reality is that they still could not pay the debt owed to the lender(s).

This leads to filing bankruptcy under federal bankruptcy laws overseen by a federal bankruptcy court.

Chapter 7 bankruptcy is a liquidation proceeding available to consumers and businesses. It allows for assets of a debtor that are not exempt from creditors to be collected and liquidated (turned to cash), and the proceeds distributed to creditors. A consumer debtor receives a complete discharge from debt under Chapter 7, except for certain debts that are prohibited from discharge by the Bankruptcy Code.

Chapter 11 bankruptcy provides a procedure by which an individual or a business can reorganize its debts while continuing to operate. The vast majority of Chapter 11 cases are filed by businesses. The debtor, often with participation from creditors, creates a plan of reorganization under which to repay part or all its debts.

These government entities have filed for Chapter 9 federal bankruptcy:

Orange County, California, in 1994 for about $1.7 billion

Jefferson County, Alabama, in 2011 for about $5 billion

The City of Detroit, Michigan, in 2013 for about $18 billion

The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 2017 for $72 billion

According to the United States Courts website:

The purpose of Chapter 9 is to provide a financially-distressed municipality protection from its creditors while it develops and negotiates a plan for adjusting its debts. Reorganization of the debts of a municipality is typically accomplished either by extending debt maturities, reducing the amount of principal or interest, or refinancing the debt by obtaining a new loan.

Although similar to other Chapters in some respects, Chapter 9 is significantly different in that there is no provision in the law for liquidation of the assets of the municipality and distribution of the proceeds to creditors.

The bankruptcies of two counties, a major city, and a sovereign territory resulted in bondholders with financial losses not repaid in full as well as reforms enacted in each governmental entity. Each one emerged from bankruptcy, one hopes, humbled and better able to manage their finances.

The federal government’s best solution for bondholders, taxpayers, and other interested parties is to default, declare sovereign bankruptcy, and make the required changes to get the fiscal business in order. Default, as defined by Dictionary.com as a verb, is “to fail to meet financial obligations or to account properly for money in one’s care.”

Sovereign government defaults are not new in our lifetime with Argentina in 1989, 2001, 2014, and 2020; South Korea, Indonesia, and Thailand in 1997, known as the Asian flu; Greece in 2009; and Russia in 1998.

Possible Outcomes

Some outcomes from these defaults lead to sovereign government debt bond ratings being reduced by the private rating agencies, bondholders losing value on their holdings, debt repayments being renegotiated with lenders, many countries receiving loans with a repayment plan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), reforms being required to nations’ entitlement programs, a number of government taxes being raised, their currency losing value on currency trading exchanges, price inflation becoming more of a reality to its citizens, and higher interest rates being offered on future government debt bond offerings.

Very few in the financial world are talking about any outcomes of a U.S. federal government debt default. One outcome from the 2011 near default was Standard & Poor’s lowering their AAA federal bond rating to AA+ where it has remained.

What organization would oversee the execution of a U.S. federal government debt default, and what authorization would they be given to deal with the situation? No suggestions are offered when its scale is numerically mind-numbing since the U.S. has used debt as its drug of choice to overdose on fiscal reality.

Some outcomes would include a lowered federal bond rating by the three private bond rating agencies, where the reality of higher interest rates being offered on newly issued federal debt cannot be ignored. Federal government spending cuts in some form will be required by the realities of economic law, which includes reducing the number of federal employees, abolishing federal agencies, reducing and reforming military budgets, selling federal government property, delegating federal programs to the states, and reforming the federal entitlement programs of Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Federal government tax revenue to repay the known debt with interest will rise as a percentage of each year’s future federal budget.

One real impact from a federal government debt default would be that the U.S. dollar would no longer be the global reserve currency, with dollars in many national reserve banks coming back to the U.S. Holding dollars will be like holding a hot potato. Nations holding federal debt paper—like China ($859 billion), Great Britain ($668 billion), Japan ($1.11 trillion), and others as of the January 2023 numbers published by the U.S. Treasury—as well as many mutual funds and others will see their holdings reduced in value leading to a selling off of a magnitude one cannot imagine in scale and timing. Many mutual fund holders like retirees, city and state retirement systems, and 401(k) account holders will be impacted by this unfolding event.

The direction of an individual or business when they emerge from federal bankruptcy is hopefully humility—looking back with the perspective of mistakes made, learning from these mistakes, and moving forward with a focus to benefit their family and community.

However, cities, counties, and sovereign territories differ from individuals, families, and private businesses in emerging from federal bankruptcy. What the outcome of a federal government debt default will be is unknown. Yet its reality is before us.

About the Author:

Stephen Anderson is retired from state government service and is a graduate of The University of Texas at Austin. He currently lives in Texas. His passions are reading, writing, and helping friends and family understand economic history.

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

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
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 Decision By OPEC Isn’t Bad News for All Investors

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
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

Can the Factors Pushing Gold Higher Continue?

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image Credit: Michael Steinberg (Pexels)

Are Safe Haven Investments Just Beginning Their Rise?

Gold is continuing to move up. Fueled by global tensions, rising prices, a weakening dollar, and new wariness of the banking system, gold seems to have regained its place as a safe haven portfolio allocation. Over the past five calendar days, the precious metal has gained $84 per ounce or 4.3%. In recent days price movement has been helped by lower yields on U.S. Treasuries and OPEC+ oil production cuts which can be expected to increase inflationary pressures as the cost of transportation and production rises for the majority of new goods.

Physical gold, priced in $USD, as seen on the chart below, is up 10.62% on the year. But that does little to tell the recent story. The investments in the yellow metal had gone negative on the year until two days before the Silicon Valley Bank’s problems became widely known in early March. This means much of the current increase on the year has occurred in under a month’s time. And the mindset that is driving the rise seems to be lingering.

Technicians point out that the $2020 level was an area of resistance that traders easily pushed through on Tuesday. Are there also fundamental reasons for it to continue its upward climb?

Global Tensions

Global tensions and geopolitical events can have a significant impact on the price of gold. Uncertainty surrounding the war in Europe, U.S. enemies forming closer alliances with each other, and a former U.S. President being indicted are providing heightened tensions. Gold has remained a safe-haven asset historically because investors turn to in times of political or economic uncertainty – it is perceived to be a store of value that is less vulnerable to fluctuations in currency values and stock markets.

We are in times of political and economic certainty now, this can continue to increase the demand for gold and drive up its price.

Inflation

Gold is often considered a hedge against inflation, so as inflation rises, the price of gold tends to increase. Recent reports in the U.S. have shown inflation, especially core inflation (net of food and energy price changes), has resumed an upward move. The spike in oil stemming from recently announced production cuts should increase both core and overall inflationary pressures.

When inflation is running high, the value of the U.S. dollar erodes. Investors gravitate to alternative stores of wealth that can maintain their purchasing power. Gold is seen as a safe-haven asset that can protect against inflation and currency devaluation. As a result, investors tend to buy more gold, driving up its price.

Watch the replay of the Channelchek Takeaway of the PDAC mining convention

Weaker Dollar

As mentioned above, a weakening U.S. dollar can have a significant impact on the price of gold expressed in U.S. dollars. Precious metals are typically priced in terms of U.S. dollars globally. When inflation runs higher than safe-haven U.S. Treasury yields than assets move toward alternatives like gold, real estate, or cryptocurrencies.

As a result, when the U.S. dollar weakens, the demand for gold may increase, driving up its price.

Systemic Risk

The risk of bank failures can impact gold prices in several ways. In times of perceived financial instability and/or economic uncertainty, investors’ confidence in banks and other financial institutions weakens. This often leads to a shift to safe-haven assets like gold.

In addition, if there is a continued risk of bank failures. If it happens, central banks could take steps to stabilize the financial system by injecting liquidity into the markets and lowering interest rates. These actions weaken currency which increases inflation. Inflation expectations, as mentioned earlier,  support higher gold prices.

Source: Koyfin

Gaining Exposure

The chart shows the correlation between gold, and mining stocks since the beginning of the year. As a reference, the performance of the VanEck gold mining ETF (GDX), and the junior gold mining ETF (GDXJ) are charted against the S&P 500 (SPY),  and an S&P mining index (XME). The XME is designed to track changes across a broad market-cap spectrum of metals and mining segments in the U.S.

The mining stocks have been moving in the same direction and pivoting at the same time as gold (XAUUSD). The difference is the moves have been more pronounced (up and down) for the mining stocks.

Investors expecting gold to continue to increase and considering increasing their exposure to safe-haven precious metals, ought to do their due diligence and determine if gold mining stocks are a better fit for what they are trying to accomplish.

In his Metals & Mining First Quarter 2023 Review and Outlook (April 3, 2023) Mark Reichman, Senior Research Analyst, Natural Resources, at Noble Capital Markets provides various potential scenarios to his outlook for gold and other metals. The report (available at this link) is a good place to start to weigh this industry expert’s considerations with your own.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.channelchek.com/news-channel/metals-mining-first-quarter-2023-review-and-outlook

https://www.fxempire.com/forecasts/article/gold-price-forecast-gold-markets-continue-to-pressure-the-upside-2-1328755

https://www.kitco.com/news/2023-04-03/OPEC-oil-cuts-won-t-drive-inflation-high-enough-to-stop-gold-s-run-above-2-000.html

https://www.channelchek.com/videos/noble-analyst-takeaways-channelchek-takeaway-series-pdac-convention-2

Does it Make Sense to Invest New IRA Deposits in a Confusing Market?

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image Credit: Marco Verch (Flickr)

With New Money Deposited Into Their IRA Accounts, Savers Are Faced With an Age-Old Question

With days until the IRS is expecting our tax filings, IRA season is in full swing. With this comes contributions to IRA accounts and individual investment decisions. This year economic uncertainty is a regular topic of conversation; the question has come up in both personal and professional conversations whether or not this money should be invested immediately or wait for a clearer sign of economic and market direction. I asked three financial professionals, each of whose opinion I respect. Did I get three different answers? You be the judge.

Robert R. Johnson, PhD, CFA, CAIA, is the former deputy CEO of the CFA Institute and was President of the College of Financial Services. Currently Dr. Johnson is a Professor of Finance, Heider College of Business at Creighton University. His credentials also include co-author of The Tools and Techniques of Investment Planning, Strategic Value Investing, Investment Banking for Dummies, and others. Overall, his response argues for not shying away from what traditionally has been better-performing investments over time.

He highlighted that investing for as long as possible should involve not waiting until a week before the tax date and making a maximum deposit. If your money is sitting in cash rather than invested, there is a cash performance drag as cash including money markets, more often than not, is a worse performer than equities.

The finance professor pointed out the statistical truth that holding significant amounts of cash ensures that one will suffer significant opportunity losses. Johnson says, “when it comes to building wealth, one can either sleep well or eat well.” He explains, “investing conservatively allows one to sleep well, as there isn’t much volatility. But, it doesn’t allow you to eat well in the long run because your account won’t grow much.”

He backs this up with data compiled by Ibbotson Associates data on large capitalization stocks (think S&P 500), which returned 10.1% compounded annually from 1926-2022. Johnson points out that during the same years, government bonds returned 5.2% annually and T-bills returned 3.2% annually. He explained, “to put it in perspective, $1.00 in invested in the S&P 500 at the start of 1926 would have grown to $11,307.59 (with all dividends reinvested).” He then compared, “that same dollar invested in T-bills would have grown to $21.23.”

What to invest in is certainly an important decision, Dr. Johnson explained, “The surest way to build wealth over long time horizons is to invest in a diversified portfolio of common stocks. Someone with a long time horizon should not have exposure to money market instruments, yet many investors do because they fear the volatility of the stock market.”

Dennie Ceelen, CFP has been part of the Noble Capital Markets Private Client Group in Boca Raton, FL since 2002. He provides wealth management services to NOBLE Clients. He’s also a committee member of The Society of Financial Service Professionals.

When asked if one should invest or wait, he apologetically answered, “it depends.”

Mr. Ceelen explains that when it comes to investments, one size does not fit all. A nineteen-year-old with little or no table income and only an extra $1,000 to put away may be better off investing in education or a car to get them to work. This idea of no IRA deposit at all could even be true of a couple saving to buy their first home. If putting the maximum away for retirement, 40 years away, prevents the purchase of a home in the next year or two, it may not make sense to fund an IRA at all for them this tax year.

For those that are regularly funding an IRA he said, “if your timeline is 30-years until you retire, invest immediately.” Ceelen explained, the general rule of thumb is that the markets over time will go up, the market will be higher in 30 years,” is the expectation based on past experience.

While talking about those with far less than 30-years until retirement, he pulled out a simple spreadsheet that shows that markets don’t always go up. A screenshot of this spreadsheet of major index performance from the close of business the last day of 2021 until March 29, 2023 is provided below.

After 15-months of market downturn, history suggests the losses are temporary

Dennie Ceelen used the spreadsheet to show why he said “it depends.” He said, “if you are retiring in the next two years, make the contribution, take advantage of the tax break but let it sit in cash, or take advantage of the high rates on money markets/short term CD’s.”

“There is no reason to partake in this volatile market if you are that close to retirement,” he cautioned for those close to retirement. Making decisions like this is why many hire financial professionals.

David M. Wright, CLU, ChFC, president and owner of Wright Financial Group, with offices in Ohio and Florida is a 36-year veteran in the financial services industry. He hosts a local radio show called Retirement Income Source with David Wright, and is a frequent guest on TD Ameritrade Insights. One of Mr. Wright’s focuses is on providing workable retirement solutions for those in or close to retirement. His upcoming book, Bonfire of the Sanities: Reset Your Retirement Portfolio for Today’s Financial Lunacy, will be available later this year.

“How you invest your IRA for the 2022-23 tax season has been and always will be a function of your time horizon and propensity for risk,” Wright was quick to point out.  

Wright’s explanation as to whether the timing is right also included what he believes would be the more suitable investment. He offered, “for individuals who are more than 10-15 years away from needing to access their cash, choosing high quality, dividend-paying companies with good cash flow are probably the best bet right now, given the economic tightening that will certainly impact more highly leveraged companies that have to refinance their debt in the future.” He cautioned that those in the age category above,  “growth stocks, in particular those that pay very small dividends will probably be the most impacted by the Federal Reserve’s mandate to fight inflation by raising rates.”

For those even closer to retirement, five to ten years, he said that a dollar-cost averaging strategy to more slowly enter the market is more prudent,  “you are systematically buying into the market without worrying about the purchase price of the investment itself,” Wright said.   

“For those individuals that are within five years or less of retirement, pushing the pause button and purchasing short duration treasuries probably makes the most sense right now due to the higher yields offered courtesy of the Federal Reserve – with 3 month yields 4.8% at the moment,” David Wright explained for those with less time before needing the account for living expenses.

Wright added one more note of advice for the current tax season,  “with the mixed signals of financial news from bank failures to reducing inflation, it probably makes sense to be more cautious right now until the financial storms subside.”

Take Away

There are many right ways to do anything. Multiply that by the different stages of life, and then there are many more. If you are making a last-minute 2022 tax year IRA deposit, hopefully, there are words of wisdom among these three professionals that have been useful.

Overall it seems time in the market is expected to outperform time out of the market, with the caveat, over the short term, anything can happen.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

A Reason for Investors to Look at the New Dynamics of Broadcast Media

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image Credit: Cottonbro Studio (Pexels)

Selling Air Time is Getting Easier for Broadcast Radio

Is broadcast radio losing its power? It doesn’t appear to be, and the medium may be of interest to investors that prefer to shy away from short-lived investment trends and instead look to more easily understood opportunities. According to the industry publication Ad Age, the industry is nearing an intersection where “18- to 49-year-olds are spending more time listening to radio than watching linear TV.” At least one large company has reworked its advertising budget to save money with the expectation of reaching more people. Is this a trend hat will grow?

Re-investing in Radio

Soap opera’s got their start nearly 100 years ago as Proctor and Gamble, manufacturer of soap and candles, created the addictive entertainment to position its product ads in front of the typical soap decision maker of the time. As TV became a fixture in households in the 1950s, P&G adapted and brought the shows and the advertising to television. Last year P&G increased its spending on traditional broadcast radio by 43%. Despite all the new advertising options available, and the ability to refine targeting, P&G has a method to their madness, and it’s worth understanding.

Why the Reversal?

Last year, in the face of rising costs, the marketing giant came under margin pressure. In an attempt to minimize price hikes and maintain old margins, they cut ad spending by 10%, with a new budget of $2.2 billion.

The CEO Jon Moeller had told P&G brand marketers to focus on how many people they reach and how often, rather than how targeted or how much they spend. Chief Brand Officer Marc Pritchard became focused on the effectiveness of radio, connected TV, and streaming free ad-supported TV (FAST).

Belt Tightening

Just as inflation has caused many households to be more frugal, perhaps use less expensive brands, and eat more at home, companies like P&G are finding they are taking a similar approach. And if it helps keep prices down, they can more easily retain customers and attract new ones.  

Here is some data on the extreme cost of reaching a broadcast TV audience. In the business, CPM (cost per mile) is a paid ad method where there is a certain rate for every 1000 impressions an ad receives. The CPM to reach TV audiences is as high as $35 to $65. For comparison, YouTube video CPMs range from $20 to $25, and linear TV is in the $10 to $15 range.

But radio can be bought in the $5-$6 CPM range. The targeting may not be as precise as broadcast TV or other media, but the amount spent for every 1000 impressions is a fraction of the alternatives.

During the last week in March, and first week in April, investors in South Florida and Naples will have the opportunity to meet the management of two interesting broadcast media companies, in a relaxed setting.

Places Investors Might Explore

Other large advertisers are stepping up their radio efforts as well. Pharmaceutical companies Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson have started to spend more. According ad intelligence provider Vivvix. Pfizer became a top-five radio advertiser last year. They did this by more than doubling spending.

If you haven’t been following media companies, there is some acclimating to terminology, seasons, and how they profit. Two key places for information is the media report that Noble Capital Markets published late January of this year. The report which is available at this link was prepared by top analysts and discusses the recent state of radio, TV, digital media, and publishing.

A video produced just weeks before the published report by members of the same team can be helpful in providing you with insight as to one media company’s strengths over another. The video, featuring Michael Kupinski, Director of Research at Noble Capital Markets, is a half-hour full of insights. At this link.

Do you wish to hear directly from management of broadcast media companies impacted by new trends?

There are two companies that will be conducting three roadshows in Florida over the next two weeks. If you can attend, you’ll have the opportunity to hear directly from management what the future expectations are, and you’ll have the opportunity to ask questions of your own. The company names, locations and dates are available at this link, along with other scheduled roadshows.

Take Away

The most talked about stocks on the chat boards aren’t the only actionable opportunities astute investors can select from. As with all investing, growing your knowledge base can help one expand their watch-list.

P&G’s ad spend adjustment comes at a time when standard AM/FM radio has caught to and is neck and neck with linear TV (for people 18-49 in the U.S.). Radio audiences may not be growing, but they are not declining as broadcast TV audiences have – they are fairly consistent, and ad costs are a great value at a time when companies are dealing with their own increasing costs. This is getting the attention of large advertisers, and it perhaps should get the attention of investors.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

One Place to Look for Low Market Risk with Home Run Potential

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image Credit: Sam Valadi (Flickr)

Less Attention is Being Paid to SPACs, But the Risk Reward Scenario Can’t Be Ignored

Uncertain markets warrant additional attention to risk versus possible reward on investments, especially when the least risky money funds pay 4% or more. This need to minimize risk, yet desire to have the opportunity to, at a minimum, beat inflation and in the best case scenario, hit a grand slam, might cause investors to revisit the hot investment of 2021. Like most investment sectors that do well, back then it became too crowded with issuance and overpromise. But the Special Purpose Acquisition Corp (SPAC), is getting far less attention these days – yet the relatively low risk for investors, and low competition for acquisition corps. to find that “unicorn,” it could increase the percentage of SPAC home runs. All the while limiting potential downside returns.

Special Purpose Acquisition Corps.

Investors that just want to make (or lose) the returns of a major index may not find investing in individual SPACs, at any stage, fits their investment approach. But the SPAC legal structure could suit investors that want to minimize their downside to a more or less known potential, and maximize their possible above average returns – SPACs may match these investment objectives better than alternatives.

Let’s cover risk first. SPAC investors have limited risk as their investment is held in a trust account until the SPAC identifies a target company and completes a merger. If the SPAC fails to identify a target, the investors will return their money, plus today’s higher accrued interest rates, less management, legal, and administrative fees. That is to say, a SPAC purchased as an IPO could be expected to be up or down one or two percent from the initial (usually $10) IPO price.

As ulcer-producing volatility in the major indices over the past year has shown, the feeling of having a floor on losses is comforting. The monetary distance to this floor is reduced if a post SPAC IPO, still looking for a target is trading below the $10 IPO price.

Does low risk mean low returns? SPACs offer the potential for low risk/high returns for investors who get in before an announced target. If the SPAC is successful in identifying and merging with a high-growth company, the share price could increase significantly. The targets often are successful private companies with tremendous potential, more of the potential could be realized with an injection of cash from the SPAC merger/acquisition. that would be able to expand.

What if an investor is opposed to the proposed merger? SPAC investors have the flexibility to decide whether or not to participate in the merger with the target company. If they choose not to participate, they can redeem their shares for the original investment amount plus interest, less administrative costs. This is another way that investors minimize their downside risk.

What are the risks? Investing in SPACs also comes with potential risks, such as the possibility of the SPAC failing to identify a suitable target company, this would essentially have tied up the investment capital used to purchase the SPAC. Another risk is the target company not performing as expected after the merger; as mentioned above, the pre-merger investor gets to decide if they opt in or opt to have pro-rata share of initial investment returned. As with any investment, it’s important to do your due diligence, look at any changes in the regulatory environment, and carefully evaluate the structure and goals.

What Does SPAC Investment Success Look Like?

Not all SPACs find a suitable target. An investor wants the management team exploring possibilities to be diligent and picky. But despite the large number of SPACs that have gone no place during the abundance offered in 2021, it’s easy to find examples of why investors like the market. Below are three very different examples of what success looks like:

Source: Koyfin

In green is Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DWAC). It’s the only stock represented below that is pre-merger. The initial IPO was for $10 back in April 2021. Recent numbers show that a failure to merge with its current target, Trump Media, would result in approximately a $10 per share liquidation. Initial investors will have lost opportunity should this occur as they took the full ride from beginning to this possible end.

In October after the IPO,  Digital World announced it had reached a preliminary agreement to merge with the digital media company founded by the former U.S. president. The shares skyrocketed over  900%. For those that bought the once $10 shares for $96, they may not have called this right, for those that purchased around the offer price, their risk of losing money is low, and they currently sit at a 34% profit.

In orange is Hostess (TWNK). This has been a SPAC success story which dates back to 2016 when there were only 13 SPAC IPOs all year. By comparison, there were 613 in 2021, and to date only 8 in 2023. Fewer SPACs chasing the same potential targets could work in investors’ favor. Many of the SPACs that are still less than two year old are still shopping. However most of those arrangements are expected to be returning shareholder funds. While Hostess is up 103% since March three years ago, it has gained 236% since the merger announcement.

Bowlero (BOWL), shown in blue, announced the merger with Isos Acquisition Corp. on July 1, 2021. The merged company would have at first disappointed investors as it dipped slightly. This is understandable as investing in leisure did not seem that it would offer quick gratification, as the pandemic hit this sector hard. However, the stock is up 54% in less than two years and up 58% YTD.

Shown here in purple, DraftKings (DKNG) merged April 24, 2020. Post merger, for those who held the Diamond Eagle Acquisition SPAC shares, they saw the stock jump 5% on the day of the announcement, eventually rise over 350%, and over time come back down to match the initial jump, 6% YTD.

Above are success stories, of varying degrees. There are many SPACs that don’t find the ideal merger partner, for the initial purchasers at $10, or those buying shares sub-$10 after the offering, their risk can be considered lower than the overall market. The potential for large gains, exists.

What Does a SPAC Investment Failure Look Like?

The most an investor will lose in an index fund investment approximates the decline of the index less management fees. The most an investor in any of the individual stocks in a major market index can lose is all of their investment. When an investor takes part in a SPAC IPO or purchases shares trading below the IPO price later, they have claim to funds held in escrow that would have been used for an acquisition. These funds seldom grow or shrink by more than 2%. SPAC investors could look at the risk of losing $2 per share (2%), versus possibly gaining double or triple-digit returns as better than market risk. But investors have lost some of their initial investment, and once the deal is struck, voted on by shareholders, and moves forward, the investment risk goes from very low, to just as risky as any other company traded. In other words, up to 100%.

Take Away

Low-risk and high-reward investments may not suit all portfolios. But for those that like to reduce the odds of loss, the glut of previously offered SPACs that are retiring this year, coupled with the lack of new offerings, could set the stage for easier target hunting for unmatched SPACs. Also, older SPACs trading at or below the enterprise value may be worth looking at, the cash in the escrow accounts are earning today’s yields, and may even be worth more than the share price.

To look for current opportunities of  companies that have announced a merger, but not yet completed one, a source of information is Channelchek. Earlier this month, Better World Acquisition Corp. (BWAC) announced it will be merging with Heritage Distilling Co. The combined company expects to trade under the ticker CASK. A current research report detailing the planned acquisition along with valuation is made available here, from Noble Capital Markets.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.spacanalytics.com/

https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/what-you-need-know-about-spacs-investor-bulletin

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-15/burst-of-broken-spac-deals-sends-jitters-through-battered-sector#xj4y7vzkg

https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/audit/solutions/spac-services.html?id=us:2ps:3gl:spacB:awa:aud:050122:ad1:kwd-974274046309:spac%20transactions:p:c&gclid=CjwKCAjwzuqgBhAcEiwAdj5dRnY3WAKMPtIu2aNUS7q8B-gFNclweAQbi3qBjAM19Kua6P_-iN5XzBoCKk0QAvD_BwE

https://www.chase.com/personal/investments/learning-and-insights/article/what-is-a-spac

Michael Burry’s Chart Tweet is Worth Understanding

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
M. Burry – Cassandra B.C. (Twitter)

To Show Banks at Risk, Michael Burry’s Picture Equals 1000 Words

Michael Burry has a well-deserved reputation for foreseeing approaching crises and positioning his hedge funds to benefit client investors. While he’s most famous for his unique windfall leading to and after the mortgage crisis of 2008-2009, the current banking debacle has him tweeting thoughts most days. His most recent bank-related tweet is worth sharing and, for most investors, needs some explaining.  

Recently Burry posted a chart of some large banks and their insured deposit base relative to their Tier 1 capital.

@michaeljburry (Twitter)

Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (CET1)

To best understand this chart it helps to be aware that for U.S. banks, the definition of Tier 1 capital is set by regulators. It’s an apples to apples measure of a banks’ financial strength and easily used to compare bank peers.  Overall it is the bank’s core capital, and helps to understand how well the banks financial infrastructure can absorb losses. It includes equity and retained earnings, as well as certain other qualifying financial instruments.

 

Unrealized Bank Losses

The sub-prime banking crisis of 2008 is different than what banks are struggling with now. The problem then was created by lax lending practices, including liar loans, floating rate mortgages with teaser rates, significant house flipping using these introductory (teaser) first year rates, and repackaging and selling the debt – often to other banks.

The current issue facing banks today is the prolonged period of rates being held down by monetary policy. Low rates makes for easy money and economic growth, but there is eventually a cost. The cost is overstimulus and inflation, then what is needed to fight inflation, in other words, higher rates.

Higher rates hurt banks in a number of ways. The most calculable is the value of their asssets, including publicly traded fixed rate obligations (Treasuries, MBS, municipal bonds, corporate bonds, other bank marketable CDs) all decline in worth when rates rise. The other way banks get hurt is that loans extend out when rates rise by a significant amount. As a bank customer, this is easy to understand, if you took out a 30-year mortgage two years ago, your rate is between 2.75%-3.50%. If mortgage rates move, as they did to 7%, the prepayment speeds on the loans extend out farther. That is to say fewer borrowers are going to add more to their principal payment each month, and those that may have bought another residence by selling the first and paying the loan off, are staying put. The banks had assigned a historic expected prepayment speed to each loan that represents their region, and the low rate loans are now going to take much longer to repay.

FDIC Insurance

Michael Burry (on assets as described above) used his Bloomberg to chart large bank unrealized losses to the potential for depositors to remove their uninsured deposits. Currently the FDIC is only obligated to insure bank deposits up to $250,000. Customers with deposits in excess of this amount (depending on how registered) leave their excess money at a single bank at their own risk.

It would seem logical for large customers and small, in this environment to check their own risk and bring it to zero.

The Wisdom of the Chart

The further up and to the right banks are on the chart, the more at risk the bank can be considered. This is because uninsured deposits equal more than 60% of liabilities, so prudent customers would move someplace where they are better protected.

However, if depositors do move money out of the banks listed here, the bank would have to either find new deposits, or stand to lose 30% or more by selling assets that are underwater because of rising rates. The banks are currently not easily able to go out into the market and attract money. Partially because we are now in a climate where even basic T-Bill levels would be high for a bank to pay, but also because there is less money supply (M2) in the system.

@michaeljburry (Twitter)

Take Away

Michael Burry is a worth paying attention to. His communication is often through Twitter, and his tweets are often cryptic without context. His most recent set of tweets, including one commenting on the chart outlines what is happening with a number of banks that find themselves in the unenviable position of ignoring the Fed’s forward guidance on rates and very public inflation data.

Sign-up for free stories daily from Channelchek, along with research and a full calendar of investor events. Sign up here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

Cassandra B.C. on Twitter

The FOMC’s March Meeting Considerations

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image Credit: Federal Reserve (Flickr)

Will Systemic Risks to the Banking System Override Inflation Concerns When the Fed Meets?

Yes, the Federal Reserve’s central objective is to help maintain a sound banking system in the United States. The Fed’s regional presidents are currently in a blackout period (no public appearances) until after the FOMC meeting ends on March 22. So there is little for markets to go on to determine if the difficulties being experienced by banks will hinder the Fed’s resolve to bring inflation down to 2%. Or if the systemic risks to banks will override concerns surrounding inflation. Below we discuss some of the considerations the Fed may consider at the next meeting.

The Federal Reserve’s sound banking system responsibility is part of its broader responsibility to promote financial stability in the U.S. economy. The Fed does its best to balance competing challenges through monetary policy to promote price stability (low-inflation), maintaining the safety and soundness of individual banks, and supervising and regulating the overall banking industry to ensure that it operates in a prudent and sound manner.

While the headline news after the Fed adjusts monetary policy is usually about the Fed Funds target, the Fed can also adjust Reserve Requirements for banks. Along with that, the rate paid on these reserves, Interest on Excess Reserves (IOER). Another key bank rate that is mostly invisible to consumers is the Discount Rate. This is the interest rate at which banks can borrow money directly from the Federal Reserve. The discount rate is set by the Fed’s Board of Governors and is typically higher than the Federal Funds rate.

Banks try to avoid going to the Discount Window at the Fed because using this more expensive money is a sign to investors or depositors that something may be unhealthy at the institution. Figures for banks using this facility are reported each Thursday afternoon. There doesn’t seem to be bright flashing warning signs in the March 9 report. The amount lent on average for the seven-day period ending Thursday March 9, had decreased substantially, following a decrease the prior week. While use of the Discount Window facility is just one indicator of the overall banking systems health, it is not sending up red flags for the Fed or other stakeholders.

The European Central Bank Raised Rates

There is an expression, “when America sneezes, the world catches a cold.” The actions of the central bank in Europe, (the equivalent of the Federal Reserve in the U.S.) demonstrates that the bank failures in the U.S. are viewed as less than a sneeze. The ECB raised interest rates by half of a percentage point on Thursday (March 16). This is in line with its previously stated plan, even as the U.S. worries surrounding the banking system have shaken confidence in banks and the financial markets in recent days.

The ECB didn’t completely ignore the noise across the Atlantic; it said in a statement that its policymakers were “monitoring current market tensions closely” and the bank “stands ready to respond as necessary to preserve price stability and financial stability in the euro area.”

While Fed Chair Powell is restricted from making public addresses during the pre-FOMC blackout period, it is highly likely that there have been conversations with his cohorts in Frankfurt.

The Fed’s Upcoming Decision

On March 14, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported core inflation (without volatile food and energy) rose in February. Another indicator, the most recent PCE index released on February 24 also demonstrated that core prices are rising at a pace faster than the Fed deems healthy for consumers, banking, or the economy at large. The inflation numbers suggest it would be perilous for the Fed to pause its tightening efforts now.

What has so far been limited to a few U.S. banks is not likely to have been a complete surprise to those that have been setting monetary policy for the last 12 months. It may have surprised most market participants, but warning signs are usually picked up by the FRS, FDIC, and even OCC well in advance. And before news of a bank closure becomes public. Yet, the FOMC continued raising rates and implementing quantitative tightening. The big difference today is, the world is now aware of the problems and the markets are spooked.

The post-meeting FOMC statement will likely differ vastly from the past few meetings. While what the Fed decides to do remains far from certain, what is certain is that inflation is still a problem, and rising interest rates mathematically erode the value of bank assets. At the same time, money supply (M2) is declining at its fastest rate in history.  At its most basic definition, M2 is consumer’s cash position, including held at banks. As less cash is held at banks, some institutions may find themselves in the position SVB was in; they have to sell assets to meet withdrawals. The asset values, which were “purchased” at lower rates, now sell for far less than were paid for them.

This would seem to put the Fed in a box. However, if it uses the Discount Window tool, and makes borrowing easier by banks, it may be able to satisfy both demands. Tighter monetary policy, while providing liquidity to banks that are being squeezed.

Take Away

What the Fed will ultimately do remains far from certain. And a lot can happen in a week. Bank closings occur on Friday’s so the FDIC has the weekend to seize control. So if you’re concerned, don’t take Friday afternoons off.

If the Fed Declines to raise rates in March it could send a signal that the Fed is weakening its fight against inflation. This could cause rates to spike higher in anticipation of rising inflation. Everyone loses if that is the case, consumers, banks, and those holding U.S. dollars.

The weakness appears to be isolated in the regional-bank sector and was likely known to the Fed prior to the closing of the banks.

Consider this, only two things have changed for Powell since the last meeting, one is rising core CPI. The other is that he will have to do an even better job at building confidence post-FOMC meeting. Business people and investors want to know that the Fed can handle the hiccups along the path to stamping out high inflation.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/20230309/

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm

What Investors Should Note About SVB’s Loss

Posted on by phoffman@channelchek.com
Image Credit: Joe Shlabotnick (Flickr)

The SVB Loss Demonstrates A Risk Investors Should Pay Attention To

Individual investors and even some institutional money managers are reminded of a helpful truth from the Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) balance sheet problem. The reminder of the investment risk stands in conflict with what many top firms have been recommending to investors. So it should be revisited because, unlike banks, individuals and wealth managers tend to have a wider variety of places to look for return.

Bank balance sheet management is tricky. I say this with some credibility. In August of 2008, I accepted a role as the Treasurer of a mid-sized bank just two weeks before Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were placed into conservatorship, and three weeks before Lehman filed for bankruptcy. I was responsible for quickly finding solutions for a big potential balance sheet problem. It was a problem similar to SVB’s. Depositors at the bank were taking money out at a faster pace than bank investments, including loans cashflows, could cover. Money that had not been committed to loans were invested in low-risk investment-grade fixed-income securities. It was nerve-racking, at one point, I calculated if any two of the largest ten customers withdrew all of their funds, the bank would not have the ability to cover the withdrawal. The pain that SVB is faced with is not dissimilar.

SVB is a bank that serves many fledgling companies during a period when capital and investment in start-ups have weakened from the days of easier money just a couple of years ago. Banks make money by borrowing short from customers (demand deposits, checking, and CDs) and then lend long, presumably at a higher rate. Here they make the spread that a typical upward-sloping yield curve provides. The main risk is in maturity. What happens if your longer-term loans were made at Fed Funds plus 2.50% two years ago when average deposit costs were 0.20%, since today Fed Funds are 4.50%? Your loans are paying the bank less than the bank’s cost to fund them with short deposits. This is a risk that all banks manage – balance sheet risk.

As deposits ran off at SVB because of business conditions in Silicon Valley, the bank turned to its investment portfolio to fund withdrawals. Securities in a US bank portfolio, when purchased, are designated at the custodian, by the Treasurer, either “Trading” which in this department of the bank is rare, “Available for Sale,” which provides the treasury department the ability to sell if need be, but also requires the assets to be priced at market (this impacts the banks valuation), or “Hold to Maturity” where the fixed income securities appear on the balance sheet at cost.  

If the securities are designated at purchase “Hold to Maturity” and the bank finds itself needing to sell any “Hold to Maturity” security, all securities marked “Hold to Maturity” become what regulators call tainted. The entire portfolio also becomes designated “Available for Sale.” This decision could dramatically reduce the bank’s book value in cases when interest rates have risen and bond values have dropped.

In the case of SVB, its securities portfolio, designed to earn more than deposits, was marked “Available for Sale.” When they sold, the market values were in such a lower position, from just a year earlier, that they recognized a dramatic loss. A $1.8 billion dollar loss which prompted its shares to lose more than half their market price.

Self-Directed Investors and Money Managers Should Note

The SVB explanation above, wernt a long way to remind that bonds, including US Treasury Notes have prices that rise and fall. They are different than equities, but price risk is real, and the $1.8 billion loss SVB recognized is front page proof. But since the beginning of the year many top-tier investment firms have recommended investors increase these fixed income investments and capture the new higher yields. Some even suggested ETFs in mortgaged-backed securities (MBS) or emerging markets (EM).

Goldman Asset Management is just one of the respected firms that have loudly suggested fixed income investments (CNBC, February 7, 2023)

Bond prices fall as rates rise. The Chair of the Federal Reserve, the same person that had orchestrated near zero rates, has clearly stated that the Fed will continue orchestrating higher rates. So while the stock market has been unattractive over the past 14 months, so have bonds. The difference, of course, is that bond math is absolute. As rates rise, the present value of any fixed-income security is calculated by the future value of future cash flow – this more or less determines the bonds price movement. For example,  if an investor buys a bond that yields 3%, and later rates go to 6% for the same maturity, the present value is about halved. This is a plausible scenario currently, with inflation near 6%.

Stock indexes have taken a beating over the past 14 months, just like bonds. The difference is rising rates sink all bonds. It doesn’t sink all stocks.

So while the S&P 500 is down 17% since January 1, 2022, and the Russell 2000 small-cap index is down 20%, one doesn’t even have to get out of the A’s to find AT&T (T) is up 4.15% in the same period, and Canadian Company Alvopetro (ALVOF) is up 43.6%). You won’t find this type of disparity in performance or direction on the fixed-income side. US Treasuries were down 10.5% for the period.

So from one perspective, stock selection may provide potential upside, whereas rising rates could mathematically sink all bond portfolio holdings.

Take Away

Silicon Valley Bank is in a unique situation as its customer base is not very diversified. The challenges they face may be similar to other banks, but this does not appear indicative of the whole sector based on recent stress tests. Banks are restricted in what they can invest in, with rates having risen, and promised to rise more, fixed-income holdings are at a loss in many portfolios, SVB’s need to raise cash caused them to recognize what was already a market loss.

Investors, however, can take a lesson from the loss the bank took. While I have seen articles this year suggesting capitalizing on higher interest rates, the ten-year US Treasury Note is well below its historical average (40-yr. avg.+5.17% vs 3.73% today). And rates are not even returning a real rate of return relative to current and expected inflation. This would indicate a period of likely market losses on bond holdings put on today.

A Stock, or portfolio of stocks, of course, may also present losses, but the odds that any particular stock, or even an index, would seem less certain than bonds.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.gsam.com/content/gsam/us/en/advisors/market-insights/gsam-insights/2022/1q2023-fixed-income-outlook.html#section-#policy

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/lehman-brothers-collapse.asp

https://app.koyfin.com/share/c85b10bfc6

https://www.federalreserve.gov/supervisionreg/dfa-stress-tests-2022.htm

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WGS10YR