|
Practicing Random Acts Of Logic And Senseless Rationality...Although it should really be no surprise to anyone, it's pretty darn clear
that emotion can play a big role in investment decision making on a day to
day basis. At times more meaningfully than others. We continue to try reinforcing
in ourselves the constant need to remain calm and collected regardless of market
circumstances at any one point in time. Whether it feels on any one given day
as if the world is coming to an end or conversely that trees really will grow
to the sky, we hope to maintain as much control over our personal systolic
and diastolic pressure readings as possible. Often easier said than done. More
importantly, we hope to be able to distinguish the defining characteristics
of emotional stock trading relative to rational or fact based securities pricing.
Clearly an acquired skill that is much more of an intuitive art than any type
of quantitative science.
To suggest that recent action in the financial markets appears a bit emotional
is nothing short of an understatement, both on the equity and fixed income
sides of the equation. As you may know, just last week the two year Treasury
kissed a yield level that was an historic low. In like manner, recent action
in the equity markets, as represented by the S&P 500 in the table below,
can be described as a bit out of the ordinary. Here's a little look at the
eight worst quarterly experiences for the S&P over the last 50 years (for
now, 3Q 02 still remains a question mark as to ultimate outcome):
| Quarter |
% Decline In S&P |
% Increase In
Following Quarter |
| 3Q 1946 |
-18.8% |
2.3% |
| 2Q 1962 |
-21.3 |
2.8 |
| 2Q 1970 |
-18.9 |
15.8 |
| 3Q 1974 |
-26.1 |
7.9 |
| 4Q 1987 |
-23.2 |
4.8 |
| 3Q 1990 |
-14.5 |
7.9 |
| 3Q 2001 |
-15.0 |
10.3 |
| 2Q 2002 |
-13.7 |
? |
| 3Q 2002 to date (to 7/26) |
-13.8 |
? |
To flip Greenspan's prior mid decade "irrational exuberance" equity
market characterization pondering on its head, are we now watching irrational
pessimism? Or is this clever rationality in its current modern day digital
format? For now, the answer probably lies somewhere in between. Yes, valuations
have been compressed in this so far in process bear market for equities. But
in like manner, we just may be nowhere near having experienced the entirety
of systemic reconciliation needed to lay the infrastructure for the next secular
bull run. As the markets have become obviously driven by greater amounts of
emotion at the current time, we need to keep a sharp lookout for historical
road markers sunk into concrete near the edge of the asphalt by the generations
of travelers before us who have already been down this road and have left their
stories for our contemplation.
Flashing Red Warnings, Unseen In The Rain. This Thing Has Turned Into A
Runaway Train...Certainly two of the most important markers of the financial
path ahead are interest rates and inflation. In terms of equities, nothing
short of critical in trying to get a handle on valuation rationality at any
point in time. Despite macro and company specific valuation parameters having
compressed over the last 2 1/2 years, stocks as a group still sell at valuations
that can be considered much nearer historical highs than not. But relative
to markers such as very low interest and inflation rates, we need to remain
at least open to the idea that stock valuations appear to be falling into
the atmosphere of the semi-rational. Low interest and inflation rates have
historically supported higher equity valuations that not. Even at cyclical
market bottoms. As you know, one of the current arguments of Street strategists
far and wide is that the Fed's valuation model suggests equities are undervalued
at the moment. A model based on the historical relationship of interest rates
and stock prices. Likewise, many a specific dividend discount valuation technique
suggests the same. In our mind, the important question in assessing the relationship
between equities and interest rates (and implicitly inflation) is whether
financial history of the recent past is still a valid guidepost. Or whether
what we are living through at the moment in terms of the economy and the
financial markets is different than what has been experienced over say the
last three to four decades of modern financial history.
Periods of low interest rates and low inflation have historically been supportive
of corporate earnings growth and macro economic expansion in the past. There
is no question that nominal interest rates as witnessed in the Treasury market
today are quite low. The same goes for inflation as measured by the year over
year change in both the CPI and the PPI. On face value, it would appear that
these two nominal indicators would be supportive of above average equity valuations.
But are they at the moment?
As we have mentioned before, the year over year change in the CPI and the
PPI at the present have very little precedent anywhere over the recent past.
If you believe that the CPI and PPI are suggestive of corporate pricing power
in the aggregate at both the consumer and producer levels of the economy, then
we live in a period where few corporations can use the lever of price to affect
potential changes in macro corporate profitability. Certainly no secret in
that cost cutting among corporations has been the modus operandi of P&L
reconciliation over the past few years:


Before moving forward, we want to make one quick tangential observation. As
you look at the charts above, periods of significant year over year weakness
in the CPI and PPI over the last three decades were seen in 1986, 1998 and
now. It just so happens that two of these three periods have something very
similar in common. 1986 and 1998 were two periods also marked by severe, but
temporary, weakness in the price of crude oil (as measured by the price of
West Texas Intermediate), Crude ultimately being picked up as a significant
input in the CPI and PPI, whether overtly or through the transmission mechanism
of intermediate materials costs:

Given that crude today is nowhere near what were the low prices seen during
the mid-1980's and latter 1990's, we have to infer that current weakness in
both the CPI and the PPI is being driven by something much different than simple
commodity price input weakness. Something at least unrelated to crude (which
is actually up quite substantially from the most recent lows). Broader pricing
power weakness in both the producer and consumer sectors of the economy seems
the answer. Pricing power weakness driven by a downward rate of change in final
demand and global excess capacity in part partially driven by the preceding
credit cycle.
So is currently non-existent inflation and correspondingly low interest rates,
to use the Street's current characterization, a true support to equity prices
via the interpretation of price discounting models? To attempt to semi-intelligently
approach the question, we went back and looked at the relationship between
the 10 year Treasury yield and the year over year change in both CPI and PPI.
This is what life has looked like over the past three decades:


In our own possibly convoluted manner, we are trying to get a little historical
perspective on the cost of corporate capital (interest rates) versus corporate
pricing power. By simplistically subtracting the year over year rate of change
in CPI and PPI from the 10 year Treasury yield, we get a very rough sense of
the real cost of capital to corporate America. (Although corporate debt carries
yields higher than like maturity Treasuries, interest rate swaps and other
assorted derivatives related vehicles have lowered the actual cost of debt
to corporate America in the modern era for now. At least until the derivatives
market is stress tested at some point, that is.) As you can see in the above
charts, the "real" cost of debt capital is anything but low at the
current time. Moreover, during periods of significant corporate profit stress
in days gone by, this relationship between the 10 year Treasury yield and the
CPI/PPI rate of change has been negative near significant financial market
and economic lows. We are currently nowhere near what have been the prior character
of these relationships during times of stress. Historically, these were periods
where interest rates were very stimulative on a real basis. Periods where it
made all the sense in the world for corporate America to borrow. Academically,
to achieve a similar relationship in today's world relative to both current
year over year change in CPI and PPI, the 10 year Treasury yield would have
to fall well below zero. Although it's just a guess mind you, we'd suggest
that's not in the cards. Especially if the dollar has anything to say about
it.
Although interest rates as measured by the 10 year yield are at one of the
lowest nominal readings in decades, this yield level compared to the current
annual change in the CPI and the PPI appears onerous set against historical
precedent of the past three decades, specifically in similar periods where
economic stimulation was a pressing monetary and fiscal matter at hand. These
charts and current relationships argue that the "appearance" of low
nominal rates of interest and inflation are doing quite little for corporate
profitability. In fact, less than quite little, they suggest an uphill battle
for improvement in corporate profitability above and beyond current cost cutting
measures. Meaningfully, does that also imply that comparing current stock valuations
to interest rates and inflation rates is also quite misleading? It certainly
suggests as much.
For Those Who Wave Lanterns At Runaway Trains...History has been kind
enough to leave us a number of markers in terms of the relationship between
interest rates, inflation, corporate profits and the macro economy. But validating
the current relationships seen in the charts and discussion above are the reflections
we see in the rippling waters of the equity markets of the moment. In questioning
the role of the interest rate input in the Fed valuation model or other price
discounting techniques, the following table has to at least raise an eyebrow
or two at the current time:
| Date Of Interest Rate Cut |
DOW |
S&P 500 |
NASDAQ |
| 3 Mos |
6 Mos |
1 Yr |
3 Mos |
6 Mos |
1 Yr |
3 Mos |
6 Mos |
1 Yr |
| 1/3 |
-13.3% |
-3.4% |
-7.1% |
-17.9% |
-8.4% |
-13.5% |
-36.1% |
-18.2% |
-21.9% |
| 1/31 |
-1.4 |
-3.1 |
-8.9 |
-8.5 |
-11.3 |
-17.3 |
-23.7 |
-26.9 |
-30.2 |
| 3/20 |
9.5 |
-13.8 |
8.0 |
7.0 |
-13.8 |
0.8 |
9.4 |
-20.8 |
-1.3 |
| 4/18 |
-0.4 |
-13.7 |
-3.9 |
-2.5 |
-13.7 |
-9.2 |
-3.0 |
-20.5 |
-13.3 |
| 5/15 |
-4.8 |
-9.2 |
-5.8 |
-5.7 |
-8.6 |
-12.7 |
-8.0 |
-8.9 |
-17.3 |
| 6/27 |
-16.8 |
-2.9 |
-11.1 |
-15.9 |
-4.5 |
-18.2 |
-29.6 |
-4.7 |
-29.7 |
| 8/21 |
-3.3 |
-3.3 |
NA |
-1.7 |
-6.6 |
NA |
2.4 |
-6.3 |
NA |
| 9/17 |
10.9 |
18.5 |
NA |
9.2 |
12.2 |
NA |
28.8 |
2.0 |
NA |
| 10/2 |
12.5 |
15.2 |
NA |
9.8 |
8.1 |
NA |
32.6 |
20.9 |
NA |
| 11/6 |
0.6 |
2.3 |
NA |
-3.2 |
-5.9 |
NA |
-1.2 |
-5.8 |
NA |
| 12/11 |
7.3 |
-3.8 |
NA |
2.8 |
-10.8 |
NA |
-3.6 |
-25.2 |
NA |
We've been updating this table for some time now just to keep ourselves focused
on the interplay between interest rates and equity prices. Rather than dragging
you through a ton of additional numbers, suffice it to say that nowhere in
the last 50 years has monetary accommodation even approaching what we now experience
meant so little to equity prices. You remember the chants from Street strategists
a little over a year ago. "Never has the Fed lowered interest rates "X" times
whereby the market has not been higher "Y" months later". Funny
how no one mentions this relationship anymore. Maybe not so funny given the
fact that there really is no precedent for this lack of response to interest
rate cuts anywhere in the last half century in terms of subsequent stock price
recovery. If this doesn't at least suggest that the current valuation marker
of interest rates is a bit suspect at the moment in terms of historical accuracy
or context, we just don't know what does.
The last table we will leave you with that we hope helps to put into perspective
the extremes of current monetary accommodation relative to contemplating appropriate
equity valuations is the following:
| Date Of Last Rate Cut |
Date Of First Rate Hike |
S&P Performance From Last Rate Cut To First Rate
Hike |
| 4/16/54 |
4/15/55 |
35.9% |
| 4/18/58 |
9/12/58 |
13.6 |
| 8/12/60 |
7/17/63 |
22.0 |
| 4/7/67 |
11/20/67 |
2.6 |
| 8/30/68 |
12/18/68 |
7.9 |
| 2/19/71 |
7/16/71 |
2.4 |
| 12/17/71 |
1/15/73 |
18.1 |
| 11/22/76 |
8/30/77 |
-6.1 |
| 7/28/80 |
9/26/80 |
4.1 |
| 12/14/82 |
4/9/84 |
13.1 |
| 8/21/86 |
9/4/87 |
26.8 |
| 9/4/92 |
2/4/94 |
12.6 |
| 1/31/96 |
3/25/97 |
24.1 |
| 11/17/98 |
6/30/99 |
20.5 |
| 12/11/01 |
Present (7/26) |
-25.0 |
Although it's much more than a darn good bet that the Fed is not about to
raise interest rates any time soon, it is also very telling in terms of the
meaning of interest rates to current stock prices that S&P performance
since the last rate cut in December of 2001 has been so poor. As you can see
in the table above, the only other period of similar monthly longevity between
the last rate cut and first rate increase of a new cycle was the 1960-63 period.
A period where both interest rates and inflation was quite low. Of all the
periods shown above, it was probably the period most similar the the present
in terms of the inputs to valuation and dividend discount models (interest
and inflation rates). Of course, and at least for now, the striking differential
being stock price response. For now, close to a 50% performance dichotomy.
Although both current interest rate and inflation rate levels appear supportive
of above average common equity valuation multiples, it's not the face value
nominal number relationships that count, but rather the economic and financial
market context in which these numbers relate to each other that may be the
most important analytical construct of the moment. This is not to suggest that
stocks are destined to crash ahead (that's already happened.) For macro equity
valuations to support stock price advancement going forward, corporate earnings
must grow from here, and not just on the back of cost cutting. Furthermore,
at near four decade lows in yields, Treasury prices must remain stable at worst
for the valuation models to truly be predictive. Given the US trade imbalance,
the over-ownership of US dollars globally, the mounting US Federal deficit,
and the continuation of extremely accommodative monetary policy, we'd suggest
that there is just as much principal risk in intermediate to longer dated bonds
as there may be in stock prices looking down the road.
To suggest that the equity markets of the moment are being irrationally pessimistic
just may be akin to Greenspan suggesting investors were becoming irrationally
exuberant in 1996. At that time, irrational exuberance hadn't even made a guest
appearance relative to what was to unfold post these comments. We'd suggest
that the relationship between interest rates, the rate of inflation, and stock
prices may be very different at the moment relative to anything seen in the
past four to five decades. The exact period cited in most valuation models
such as the Fed version. Beware of strategists bearing simplistic valuation
comparatives. Nothing is ever too easy on Wall Street...at least not for very
long.
The End Of Ewe-Phoria?...As you will remember us conceptually beating
to death in the past, we are avowed adherents to the constant of non-linearity
on Wall Street. Almost nothing ever happens in a straight line. The near 30%
pounding the S&P has taken since April 1st is a pretty dramatic example
of vertical acceleration to the downside. A somewhat slow motion crash, if
you will. We would not be surprised at all to see some backing and filling
in terms of upside potential. And maybe some rather violent backing and filling
over short periods of time. Especially in a world where program and hedge based
trading makes up a pretty significant slice of daily volume.
However, what we strongly suggest monitoring ahead are the actions of equity
mutual fund holders. Although we never want to extrapolate short term trends
too far out in time, what we have witnessed over the last 10 weeks is nothing
short of precedent setting within the context of the "new era". During
the last ten weeks (for the period ended 7/24), $75 billion in domestic equity
fund exposure has been extracted by fund owners. Since the averages topped
in early 2000, there has never been this type of a consistent ten week period
of outflows, to say nothing of the dollar magnitude involved. On the back of
an envelope, we calculate this withdrawal as being on a percentage basis just
a hair shy of the amount that was withdrawn from the domestic equity mutual
fund complex in the period directly subsequent to the 1987 debacle. Fear has
certainly been called up from the bullpen and is now warming up on the pitchers
mound.

Very often, the public has been notoriously wrong at market turning points.
As a matter of relatively general characterization over the last 2 1/2 years,
equity mutual fund holders have consistently sold after the market has already
gone down and consistently purchased after a recovery. But, given that cash
as a percentage of equity fund assets was running near 5% a month or so back,
the forward actions of equity fund holders is becoming a bit critical in terms
of the possibility for more forced selling. In addition to this short term
cash withdrawal rate, this is the first year where total year to date flows
into domestic equity mutual funds are actually negative this far into the year:

Do you think the public ewe-phoria regarding stocks is dying down? N-a-a-a-a,
n-a-a-a-a, can't be. Can it?
Distinguishing the Forest From The Trees...Certainly one of the most
cited graphic examples of this bear market in equities is the long term S&P
chart. Surely at this point no one is unaware of the massive and technically
classic head and shoulders pattern this index has traced out. Simple, elegant
and straightforward in its message. For now, this equity bear market has taken
back the three and one half years of gains prior to the top. When looking at
mega bears such as the 1929 experience, that is pocket change. The 1929 bear
wiped out 15 years of prior bull market experience. We're not about to suggest
that the equity markets are headed to levels seen in 1985. In fact we'd be
shocked if that happened. In like manner, a trip back to the neckline of the
H&S formation could easily be a 12+% experience from here. There is a lot
of pessimism out there at the moment. The media is virtually fully engaged.
A move to the neckline or a bit above would be minor in the greater scheme
of things. Technically, we expect something like this to happen and maybe in
the not too distant future.
Nonetheless, we'd simply suggest that from a macro standpoint, this bear market
is intact until the head and shoulders top is ultimately violated to the upside.
Simple enough?

|