|
Cycle Paths...As we've mentioned a few times in the past, we believe there
is one question that is the key to understanding and successfully navigating
the current economic and financial market environment. Point blank, and although
this may sound wildly melodramatic and over the top, we believe that the correct
answer to this question will absolutely determine success or failure for investors
looking ahead. We're just trying to keep it simple and distill all of the noise
and daily sound bites blaring at us from the financial media down to one overriding
issue. Here goes. Is the current post recessionary economy more properly
characterized as a business cycle or a credit cycle? Which one is it? Answer
the question correctly you win the prize. And we're not kidding.
What stands out to us like a sore thumb in the current recovery cycle is the
dichotomy of character relative to past economic recovery periods. In so many
key economic indicators of the moment, we see activity almost completely opposite
of historical experience during recovery cycles. Is it the new "service economy" that
appears to be reshaping the rules? Is it the rapid globalization of economic
activity that is being displayed in such a dramatic change of domestic economic
character? Or is it simply the fact that what we are living through is not
a business cycle at all, but rather a credit cycle?
Let's look at some of the specific and tangible economic characteristics we
are referring to that we believe define the current environment in trying to
access what we believe to be the ultimate question of the moment - business
cycle or credit cycle?. First of all, we sincerely have to tip out hats to
US consumers. As you already know by now, they have been the driving force
of the consumption oriented US economy during this recovery cycle. Moreover,
it's also no mystery that US consumers have been largely responsible for helping
to support many an export driven global economy of substance. Asia in particular
has been a very significant beneficiary of US consumption patterns over the
last three to four years as is being transmitted directly through the ever
burgeoning US trade deficit. Let's get right to the historical dichotomies
of the moment in the spirit of trying to seek guidance as to where we are headed
as an economy and financial market looking forward.
In recessionary experiences past, it has been absolutely axiomatic that US
consumers have pulled back on spending well in advance of the official recessionary
period itself. As you can see below in the history of auto sales data, prior
to the recessions of 1980-82 and 1991, auto sales in physical units declined
meaningfully. From the late 1970's through to 1982, we witnessed in excess
of a 40% drop in auto sales point to point. From 1987 until mid-1990, auto
sales declined over 25% end to end. But during the current cycle, auto sales
are virtually flat point to point since 1998. There was no decline at all either
leading up to or during the most recent recession.
Of all prior economic recovery cycles relative to the present, perhaps there
is no greater dichotomy in statistical character than we are now witnessing
with residential real estate. If this isn't an "it's different this time" experience,
then we just don't know what is. Although we did not mark the prior recessionary
periods in the following chart, you already know the dates. 1970, 1974, 1980-82
and 1991 - all years encompassing official NBER (National Bureau of Economic
Research) defined recessions. And as is absolutely plainly visible in this
historical retrospective, prior to every recession of the last 45 years
at least, new home sales declined on a significant absolute unit and percentage
decline basis. Every single one, except the current, of course. In fact, in
the current cycle the trajectory of acceleration is without precedent over
the time period displayed in the chart. To us, what you see below cuts right
to the heart of the central question of business versus credit cycle.
As has been our analytical custom with so many economic indicators during
the current cycle, we like to put current activity in perspective relative
to actual prior cycle experience. To do that, we've constructed many a graphical
relationship that tracks percentage change in activity in post recessionary
periods. To put this in simple English, we assume the month of recession end
is 100% and show economic growth in percentage terms as equivalent periods
of time pass. The following just happens to be personal consumption expenditures.
To cut right to the bottom line, here's what the chart is telling us. Since
November of 2001 (the end of the last recession) personal consumption expenditures
in the US are up over 20% point to point. As you can make out in the chart,
we're very much on par with the experience of the post 1991 recession. In like
manner, we're lagging a bit behind meaningful increases in consumption post
the very difficult and deep recessions of the mid-1970's and early 1980's.
In other words, consumption hasn't been stupendous, but likewise it has not
been anything worse than has been past experience.
Again, given that the US economy is so heavily dependent on consumption to
generate GDP growth at the current time, we believe these little peeks at historical
consumption relationships are important in trying to grasp the differences
between this and prior post recessionary economic recovery cycle experience.
Importantly, and as you know, what do all of the above characterizations of
consumer activity have in common? They all represent consumption that can be
financed. Is the current economy more properly characterized as a business
cycle or a credit cycle?
The Roll Call...As you might imagine, differences and dichotomies in
current versus past economic character don't stop with what you've seen above.
Much like the stark and striking differences in the current residential housing
cycle, payroll employment recovery experience since the last recession has
also been one of the largest anomalies completely in plain view. Our recent
cycle experience has literally been one of the worst job recovery environments
on record. Again, in the following chart, we've indexed payroll employment
growth in each of the recessions of the last three decades. Since November
of 2001, total payroll employment growth point to point as of the latest report
is up all of 1.5% for the current recovery cycle. At the similar point during
the "jobless recovery" of the post-1991 recession, payrolls had grown by approximately
7%. And as you can see, post the mid-1970's and early 1980's recessions, payrolls
had grown by double digits this far into each recovery.
As we've argued for some time now, it's not just body count in terms of payroll
recovery that's meaningful, but also wage acceleration. And it's meaningful
in more ways than one. First, as you'll see below, the year over year change
in service sector wage growth (that's where virtually all job creation has
occurred this cycle) as of the latest payroll report is 2.8%. It's been at
least a year and one half now that the annual change in service sector wages
has lagged behind what we believe to be an already low-balled CPI rate of change.
In other words, we've been treated to negative real wage gains during the current
payroll recovery cycle. Clearly this is important in that in the absence of
credit ease and availability, it's wage gains that ultimately support consumer
spending, be that residential real estate or otherwise.
The second issue we believe is important when looking at wage growth is the
thought that the Fed and Administration will simply "inflate away" current
leverage in the system. We wish it were that simple. We are absolutely convinced
that in the absence of broad wage acceleration, it's a virtual impossibility
for the Fed and Administration to "inflate away" the onerous household leverage
of the moment. Wage inflation is the key to sustainable longer-term
inflation. And wage pressure is absent from the current recovery cycle for
a good number of reasons, primarily the unprecedented access of corporations
to the global labor pool. We doubt very much that domestic wages are about
top rocket higher anytime soon given the current dynamics of the increasingly
globalized economy.
So just where does that leave us? It's clear that US consumers have an anchor
around their necks in terms of both job and wage acceleration stateside. In
like manner, they are displaying a pattern of consumption strength almost unprecedented
in both pre and post recessionary economic recovery experience. Just how can
these two anomalies co-exist in any type of normal or logical economic recovery
scenario? For now, in our minds, the following table explains how this seeming
fundamental economic illogic appears normal in the current environment. Have
a quick look.
| Major Components Of Household Net Worth ($billions) |
| |
Net Worth |
Real Estate |
Financial Assets |
Liabilities |
| YE 1999 |
$42,361.5 |
$10,254.2 |
$34,959.3 |
$6,833.1 |
| YE 2004 |
46,681.4 |
17,165.2 |
35,275.8 |
10,293.2 |
| $ Increase |
4,319.9 |
6,911.0 |
316.5 |
3,460.1 |
| %Change |
10.2% |
67.4% |
0.9% |
50.6% |
As you'd imagine, we chose year-end 1999 as a starting point for looking at
the character of household net worth given the proximity to the peak in financial
market values. You don't need us to tell you that residential real estate values
and the acceleration in household leverage are the two huge dynamics driving
current cycle household thinking, feeling of well being, and ultimately consumption
patterns. The growth in household financial assets over the last five years
has been a rounding error. Point to point growth in household net worth of
10.2% annualizes somewhere near 2%. But, as you can see, since the beginning
of US economic history, so to speak, up through year end 1999, it probably
took US consumers a century or so to accumulate $6.8 trillion in total household
liabilities. It only took five years to increase that number by 50+%. Question.
Business cycle or credit cycle? Which is it that explains the character of
the current total economic recovery cycle?
Mirror Mirror On The Wall?...Switching gears for just one second, we
want to have a very quick look at the current character of corporate spending.
You remember, the "business" part of the economic recovery cycle, so to speak.
What you see below is the history of net corporate cash flow as a percentage
of GDP on top of the coincident time period chart detailing non-residential
fixed investment as a percentage of GDP (a proxy for corporate capital spending).
It's pretty darn clear that as corporate cash flow grew in the 1970's, corporate
capital spending mushroomed. At the time, much of this went into energy infrastructure.
Same deal in the post recessionary period of the 1990's. Corporate cash flow
grew big and so did capital spending centered primarily in tech equipment.
In other words, as corporate cash flow has accelerated over time, so has corporate
capital spending. The patterns are pretty darn clear.
So here we have current net corporate cash flow as a percentage of GDP near
all time highs. The current cycle has no precedent in terms of strength. Yet
coincident time period capital spending relative to GDP has modestly increased
relative to this burst of cash flow. Just what's going on here? Why aren't
corporations spending their cash more aggressively? After all, they are literally
spitting out cash at the moment. This too is an anomaly right alongside the
consumption and employment pattern dichotomies described above.

So let's see if we can pull this all together. In typical post recessionary
economic recoveries, corporate capital spending expands to meet the expansion
in corporate cash flow. That's absent this cycle. In typical post recessionary
economic recoveries, job and wage gains have been well above what is clearly
absent in the current cycle. In pre-recessionary and post recessionary cycles
past, consumers have shown patterns of delaying purchases of housing and auto's
primarily, and have slowed total personal consumption expenditures in the macro
sense. That's not absent this cycle, rather it's been completely turned on
its head as consumption has bordered on feverish in front of, during and after
the recent recession up to this point. Parabolic when it comes to residential
real estate. Again, without sounding melodramatic, "it's different this time" seems
to be right on the money more than anything else. Simple question. Does what
you see above represent a business cycle or a credit cycle? We're just trying
to identify the correct cycle path, so to speak.
One last chart before we call it a day. The following is our little concoction
trying to get our hands around aggregate credit that is being created outside
of the US banking system. In one sense, we're asking ourselves whether the
credit cycle dynamics this go around are different than prior cycles. All to
answer question numero uno, as you know. Alright, what lies below is the difference
between the quarter over quarter growth in total credit market debt outstanding
(from the Fed Flow of Funds statement) and the quarter over quarter change
in M3 (as being representative of the credit being created in the US banking
system). In other words, total systemic credit expansion less credit generated
by the banking system. (As an example, remember that a while back we told you
that the asset backed securities market provided the bulk of mortgage credit
in the US during 2004. That's credit creation "outside" the official banking
system.) As you can see, the chart simply speaks for itself. Credit system
dynamics in the current economic recovery cycle are quite striking. Massive
dollar amounts of credit are being generated well away from the banks. Let's
put it this way, the tinder is lying all around us for the current cycle to
be more properly characterized as a credit cycle as opposed to a more traditional
business cycle. Perhaps, the strongest credit cycle of a generation.
Again, everything we have written about above importantly concerns current
character as opposed to predicting ultimate outcome of this very special cycle.
We certainly have our own thoughts as to outcome, but we believe that understanding
the dynamics is the key to successful decision making ahead. If this is truly
an economy dominated by a credit cycle, we know to look for the cracks in the
providers of credit (FNM, FRE, GM, etc.). And we also know to watch the potential
cracks where that credit creation is finding an outlet (housing, auto's and
discretionary consumption). We're convinced that investment success ahead lies
in being exposed to the correct sector bets and avoiding the at risk sectors
like the plague. So just what does all of this material say about the financial
and consumer discretionary sectors? Well, that all depends on how you personally
answer the key question, right? Believe us, we're not covering this material
to be negative by any means. Realism is what we're after. We can assure you,
the inmates are not running the asylum, it's the cycle paths we're watching
out for.
One last anecdote of interest. As you know by now, 1Q 2005 GDP was revised
up to 3.5% from the original 3.1% reported. The much lower than expected March
trade deficit clearly foretold the direction of this revision. But here's what
caught our attention. In the revision, GDP components of consumption and residential
investment were both revised up. Interestingly, business fixed investment was
revised down from the original assumption. Hmmm. Business cycle or credit cycle?
Tough call, right?
|