|
What
happens when inflation once again returns. As this week's Outside the Box writer,
James Montier, writes, we may want to start thinking now about inflation insurance
and he mentions a few ways to do so. But this letter is a must read for his
bringing to light a speech by Fed chairman Ben Bernanke in 2000 given to the
Japanese, where he suggest inflation targeting:
"In the speech, he laid out a menu of policy options that are available to
the monetary authorities at the zero bound. First, aggressive currency depreciation,
as per Romer's analysis of the end of the Great Depression. Second on Bernanke's
list is the introduction of an inflation target to help mould the public's
expectations about the central bank's desire for inflation. He mentions the
range of 3-4%!"
I think you will find this week's OTB to be exceptionally thought provoking.
Montier is one of my favorite economic thinkers (and a good friend). He works
for Societe Generale in London in their Cross Asset Research group.
John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Box
Roadmap To Inflation And Sources Of Cheap Insurance
by James Montier
As Albert and I regularly point out during meetings, we have never been more
unsure on the inflation/deflation outlook. I have previously said I was torn
between the deflationary impact of the bursting credit bubble, and the inflationary
pressures of the policy response. When we read something by the deflationists
we sit there nodding our heads in agreement, then we pick up something by the
proponents of a return of inflation and we find ourselves agreeing with that
as well. The respective sides seem deeply entrenched in their positions.
In contrast, we are trying to keep an open mind on the subject. Albert is
biased towards a Japanese style outcome, and I am biased towards an inflationary
outcome, but neither of us has any strong conviction.
Fisher and the debt-deflation theory of depressions
In the face of this uncertainty I decided to return to history and see what
it has to say about the way out of a depression. My first point of call was
Irving Fisher's "The debt-deflation theory of Great Depressions" published
in 19331. Fisher is probably most infamous to those in finance for
his pronouncements of a new era of permanently high stock prices in 1929. But
in the wake of his disastrous calls he turned to trying to understand the experience
of the depression. Incidentally, he also invented the Rolodex.
In his debt-deflation theory, he posits "two dominant factors" in driving
depressions "Namely over-indebtedness to start with and deflation following
soon after... In short, the big bad actors are debt disturbances and price-level
disturbances". He continues "Deflation caused by the debt reacts on the debt.
Each dollar of debt still unpaid becomes a bigger dollar, and if the over-indebtedness
with which we started was great enough, the liquidation of debt cannot keep
up with the fall of prices which it causes. In that case, the liquidation defeats
itself. While it diminishes the number of dollars owed, it may not do so as
fast as it increases the value of each dollar owed." That is to say, debt-deflation
spirals can easily become self-reinforcing.
The good news is that Fisher is also very clear on how to end a debt-deflation
spiral: "It is always economically possible to stop or prevent such a depression
simply by reflating the price level up to the average level at which outstanding
debts were contracted by existing debtors and assumed by existing creditors...
I would emphasize... that great depressions are curable and preventable through
reflation and stabilization". The irony of Fisher's route out of deflation
is that, probably only the Fed - after helping lead us into this mess2 -
can now get us out of it.
Romer's lessons from the Great Depression
After reading Fisher's analysis of the 1930s, I came across a recent speech
given by Christina Romer, who is now the head of the Council of Economic Advisers,
and who made her name in academic circles studying the events which ended the
Great Depression. In the speech, Romer offers six lessons from the Great depression
for the current juncture.
Lesson 1 - Small fiscal expansion has only small effects
Romer wrote a paper in 19923 arguing that fiscal policy was not
the key driver in the recovery from the Great Depression. Not because fiscal
expansion is ineffectual per se, but rather because the fiscal stimulus that
was conducted wasn't large. As Romer notes "When Roosevelt took office in 1933,
real GDP was more than 30% below its normal trend level... The deficit rose
by about one and a half percent of GDP in 1934".
Lesson 2 - Monetary expansion can help heal an economy even when interest
rates are near zero
Romer notes that actually it was the Treasury rather than the Federal Reserve
that drove the monetary expansion (a peculiarity of the system under the Gold
Standard). In April 1933, Roosevelt suspended convertibility to gold on a temporary
basis, and the dollar depreciated. When the US returned to gold at the new
higher price, gold flowed into the US, allowing the Treasury to issue gold
certificates which were interchangeable with Federal Reserve notes. As Romer
notes "The result was that the money supply, defined narrowly as currency and
reserves, grew by nearly 17% per year between 1933 and 1936". Romer argues
that this "Devaluation followed by rapid monetary expansion broke the deflationary
spiral" - empirical evidence to support Fisher's hypothesis outlined above.
Lesson 3 - Beware of cutting back on stimulus too soon
The monetary expansion seems to have produced remarkable results in terms
of real growth: the US economy grew by 11% in 1934, 9% in 1935 and 13% in 1936
in real terms. This lulled the authorities into thinking that all was well
with the system again. Hence, in 1937, the deficit was reduced by approximately
two and half percent of GDP. Monetary policy was also tightened, as Romer notes "The
Federal Reserve doubled the reserve requirement in three steps in 1936 and
1937". She concludes "taking the wrong turn in 1937 effectively added two years
to the Depression".
Lesson 4 - Financial recovery and real recovery go hand in hand
Romer points out the inseparable nature of the real and financial recoveries.
This meshes with our analysis that the banks aren't really the problem in a
debt-deflation environment, rather they are a symptom of the problem. The current
policy in the US seems to be aimed at "fixing the financial system", witness
Bernanke's recent comments "Recovery is not going to happen until the financial
markets and the banks are stabilized". This appears to be a misperception,
as, Romer notes "Strengthening the real economy improved the health of the
financial system. Bank profits moved from large and negative in 1933 to large
and positive in 1935, and remained high through the end of the Depression".
Investors seem to be rather excited about banks posting profits at the moment.
Frankly, if a bank didn't post a profit in this environment it should be shot
out of kindness. The environment for profitability from banks has rarely been
better, but that doesn't make them solvent. If you were starting a business
today, then setting up a bank would be a very attractive option. However, history
- as represented by the balance sheet - cannot simply be ignored when it is
inconvenient. As John Hussman noted "The excitement of investors last week
about Citigroup posting an operating profit in the first two months of the
year simply indicates that investors may not fully understand the term "operating
profit." Citigroup could burst into flames while Vikram Pandit sells lemonade
in the parking lot, and Citi would still post an operating profit. Operating
profits exclude what happens on the balance sheet."
Lesson 5 - Worldwide expansionary policy shares the burdens
Given the worldwide nature of the current slump, Romer makes an interesting
point on the effectiveness of competitive devaluations, "Going off the gold
standard and increasing the domestic money supply was a key factor in generating
recovery... across a wide range of countries in the 1930s... These actions
worked to lower world [real] interest rates... rather than just to shift expansion
from one country to another".
This is something that Albert and I have been discussing of late. We have
been pondering the possibility of competitive devaluation (obviously ultimately
a zero sum game in terms of exchange rates) having enough of an impact on local
monetary creation to increase inflationary expectations, thus helping countries
reflate. It appears as if Romer has sympathy with this view.
Lesson 6 - The Great Depression did eventually end
The final lesson that Romer offers may be of use to investors at the current
juncture. She makes the point that the Great Depression did finally end. As
Romer puts it "Despite the devastating loss of wealth, chaos in our financial
markets, and a loss of confidence so great that it nearly destroyed American's
fundamental faith in capitalism, the economy came back. Indeed, the growth
between 1933 and 1937 was the highest we have ever experienced outside of wartime.
Had the U.S. not had the terrible policy-induced setback in 1937, we, like
most other countries... would probably have been fully recovered before the
outbreak of World War II" This is a reminder that the current obsession with
no scenario being too pessimistic is probably ill advised.
Bernanke and the policy options
The final source for signposts to watch comes from a speech given by Bernanke
in 2000 to Japanese policy makers. As I wrote in Mind
Matters 6 January 2009, in this speech Bernanke clearly acknowledged the
greater threat that deflation poses in a highly leveraged economy, "Zero inflation
or mild deflation is potentially more dangerous in the modern environment than
it was, say, in the classical gold standard era. The modern economy makes much
heavier use of credit, especially longer-term credit, than the economies of
the nineteenth century."
Bernanke clearly believes that monetary policy is far from impotent at the
zero interest rate bound. In essence his argument is an arbitrage based4 one
as follows "Money, unlike other forms of government debt, pays zero interest
and has infinite maturity. The monetary authorities can issue as much money
as they like. Hence, if the price level were truly independent of money issuance,
then the monetary authorities could use the money they create to acquire indefinite
quantities of goods and assets. This is manifestly impossible in equilibrium.
Therefore money issuance must ultimately raise the price level, even if nominal
interest rates are bounded at zero."
In the speech, he laid out a menu of policy options that are available to
the monetary authorities at the zero bound. First, aggressive currency depreciation,
as per Romer's analysis of the end of the Great Depression. Second on Bernanke's
list is the introduction of an inflation target to help mould the public's
expectations about the central bank's desire for inflation. He mentions the
range of 3-4%!
Third on the list was money financed transfers. Essentially tax cuts financed
by printing money. Obviously this requires co-ordination between the monetary
and fiscal authorities, but this should be less of an issue in the US than
it was in Japan. Finally, Bernanke argues that non-standard monetary policy
should be deployed. Effectively, quantitative and qualitative easing. Bernanke
has repeatedly mentioned the possibility of outright purchases of government
bonds - as the UK is now doing.
This menu should provide us with a roadmap of policy options to watch for.
If (and when) the deflationary pressure builds, we should expect to see more
and more of these options wheeled out. Note that we aren't talking about trying
to 'fix the system', to reflate the bubble (which would be the equivalent of
giving crack cocaine to a heroin addict trying to deal with withdrawal). Rather,
the suggestion from Fisher is that inflation erodes the real value of debt;
it is the most painless way out of our current mess. Whether the authorities
can create just a little inflation remains to be seen, as does their ability
to actually create inflation in any way. Such imponderables are beyond my ken.
Investment implications - Cheap insurance
Howard Marks recently suggested that today's investment decisions must focus
on "value, survivability and staying power". These factors lie at the heart
of the three-pronged approach that I have been suggesting since the end of
October last year.
The first prong is cash. This is a legacy from the lack of opportunities that
characterised markets in the last few years. But it is also a hedge against
outright deflation. The second prong is deep value opportunities in both debt
and equity markets (as detailed for the equity markets most recently in Mind
Matters, 4 March 2009). The third element is sources of cheap insurance.
The idea behind this element of the portfolio is to prepare for a wide variety
of outcomes by buying cheap insurance (which ideally, although not always,
pays off in multiple states of the world). Of course, it should be noted that
the purchase of cheap equities also contains an inflation hedge element.
Inflation/deflation insurance I - TIPS
The first and most obvious source of inflation/deflation protection when I
first started thinking about this subject was US TIPS. These bonds have a deflation
floor on the principal, so in the event of deflation I receive my cash back
- representing a real rate of return equivalent to whatever the deflation rate
is. In the event of inflation, I get whatever the yield is on the TIPS when
I purchase them plus the inflation, of course (buying the new issue TIPS avoids
the problem of accrued inflation).
When I started looking at TIPS, the yield was over 3.5%. This has dropped
since then, resulting in the 10 year TIPS delivering a 9% return since the
end of October. The 10 year TIP is currently yielding 2.1%, against the 10
year nominal bond yield of 3%. This implies that the market expects US inflation
to be a mere 1% p.a. over the next decade - this strikes me as an exceptionally
low rate.

Inflation/deflation insurance II - Gold
The second inflation/deflation hedge I suggested in late October was gold.
Now, gold concerns me for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that
it has no intrinsic worth: I can't really value gold - beyond extraction cost.
However, it has some attractive features from an insurance point of view.
Most obviously, in a world of competitive devaluations, gold is the one currency
that can't be debased. Thus it provides a useful hedge against the return of
this sort of beggar-thy-neighbour policy. In the event of significant prolonged
deflation, what is left of our financial system is likely to collapse, thus
holding a money substitute isn't such a bad idea against this cataclysmic outcome.
Of course, recently everyone has been talking about gold (not hugely surprising
given that it is up some 30% since late October) - something that makes me
nervous. However, gold is institutionally massively under-owned, so whilst
it may have been moving up the list of attractive assets of individual investors
(if the EFTs are anything to go by) and sensible hedge funds (such as the likes
of Greenlight, Paulson, Third Point, Eton Park and Hayman), the mainstream
institutional appetite for it has remained depressed.

Inflation insurance I - Dividend swaps
As we noted in Mind
Matters, 2 February 2009 the European and UK dividend swap markets are
pricing in an outcome that implies greater dividend declines than witnessed
in the US during the Great Depression. The pricing then implies that essentially
the dividends won't recover, pretty much forever. This strikes me as excessively
pessimistic.
In addition, dividends have a relatively close relationship with inflation
(as detailed in the aforementioned Mind Matters). Thus dividend swaps look
like a deeply distressed asset fire sale, with the added advantage of offering
inflation insurance if I buy the longer dated swaps (up around 7% from my original
note in February). The most common rebuttal to my fondness for dividend swaps
is counterparty risk. However, the European dividend swaps have an exchange
listed future, which obviously doesn't have any counterparty issues.

Inflation insurance II - Inflation swaps
The second of the pure inflation hedges comes via the inflation swap market.
The charts below show the zero-coupon fixed rate necessary to build a swap
against zero-coupon CPI appreciation over 10 years. When I first looked at
the US version in January (see Mind
Matters, 6 January 2009) the rate was a mere 1.5%. Today it has risen,
although not dramatically, to 2.3%.
However, the cheapest inflation swaps in the world seem to be Japanese swaps.
They are available for -2.5%! Both the US and Japanese inflation swaps strike
me as cheap ways of buying inflation insurance at the moment. Although counterparty
risk is obviously a significant factor in these long duration swap transactions.


Eurozone break-up insurance: Spanish and Portuguese CDS
The final element of the insurance policy concerns the risk of a euro break-up.
In a world of competitive devaluation, it isn't clear that the Eurozone will
be able to stand the pressure. The one area of the world which has anything
like the gold standard in place is the Eurozone. As Albert opines during our
meetings with clients, this is less a function of economic realities and more
a function of political expediency (I'll leave a detailed exposition of this
logic to Albert in a future note).
To protect against this risk (or even rising perceptions of this risk) the
natural insurance is provided by the CDS market. If even one country was to
publicly contemplate leaving the Eurozone then these CDS spreads would explode.
I find it hard to believe that Portuguese and Spanish CDS are below those of
the UK - where we have the ability (and have used it) to print our own money.

Footnotes:
1 Available from http://www.fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/meltzer/fisdeb33.pdf This
is one of few articles published in Econometrica that I have ever read!
2 See Bill Flecksenstein's excellent book, Greenspan's
Bubbles or John Taylor's insightful paper The Financial Crisis and the Policy
Responses: An empirical analysis of what went wrong, available from http://www.stanford.edu?~johntayl/FCPR.pdf,
or any of Albert Edwards' myriad of rants on Greenspan.
3 Romer (1992) What ended the Great Depression?, The
Journal of Economic History, Vol 52
4 As Stephen Ross once said, to turn a parrot into
a learned financial economist it needs learn just one word: arbitrage. To my
mind economists are far too happy to rely on arbitrage assumptions to rule
out solutions. Indeed the second chapter of my first book, Behavioural Finance
is spent detailing failures of arbitrage (both causes and consequences thereof,
including the ketchup markets!).
|