|
Liquidity Is A Coward...With the near vertical movement in the equity
market since last summer, the mainstream media these days is filled with commentary
and debate related to stock prices, valuations, potential price targets, etc.
You get the picture. But it's very important not to forget what's happening
in the world of fixed income. As we've suggested for a good while now, it's
the credit cycle that's the important driver of economic and financial market
outcomes, hence, the fixed income markets demand ongoing attention. Moreover,
probably the three strongest, or most popular, rationales for investment in
domestic equities right now are liquidity, private equity demand, and ongoing
M&A. Of course at their headwaters, each of these rationales for equity
investment find their origins in the credit or fixed income markets.
What are the important items to watch as potential markers of change as we
fly over the fixed income landscape? Near term it's inter and intra market
yield and credit spreads. Also very important is to keep an eye on the credit
rating agencies, who will ultimately be forced to lower ratings for many a
CDO vehicle over the next six to twelve months due to realized losses in the
land of mortgage credits. When this ultimately occurs, the mark to market process
will not be fun by any means and will more than likely cause an institutional
investor or two to start asking pointed questions. But we're not quite there
yet.
As is common knowledge, the use of leverage in fixed income investing today
dwarfs anything we've ever seen before. The level of interest rate derivative
contracts outstanding these days is simply testimony to this simple fact. So
perhaps the important question becomes, when we ultimately hit an extreme in
credit spread contraction and begin to see widening in yield and credit spreads
again, how will the role of modern day leverage in the investment process play
out? It certainly has the potential to exacerbate the hard part of the cycle,
if you will, and the final level of yield and credit spread widening if heavily
levered fixed income investors everywhere were to potentially rush for the
exit door at once. But since we're not there yet, no one really has a handle
on the fallout or speed involved in what will be this cyclical eventuality.
An eventuality we feel institutional investors, at least in private, accept
as inevitable, but hope they will sidestep prior to the masses rushing for
the exit door. This will eventually be quite the important test for the highly
levered financial markets of the moment. Just ask yourself, with the magnitude
of leverage seen in the investment world of today (especially in fixed income),
will spread widening and yield curve change be completely orderly, allowing
all investors time to adjust seamlessly and without price risk when it ultimately
occurs? Don't count on it.
The reason we bring this up is that it's becoming more a good bet that any
major financial market problems ahead have a very good chance of emanating
from the credit markets. The credit markets are the locus of real economy and
financial market support, and have been for a good while now. You know that
the term "liquidity" is thrown around today as an underlying bullish rationale
for so many things. Equity prices, bond prices, as well as yield and credit
spreads, commodity prices, etc., all beneficiaries of liquidity, right? But
in days gone by, "liquidity" had a much different meaning. In the world of
yesterday, liquidity was actual cash. As a very quick divergence and example
of perhaps a truer picture of the relationship between real liquidity and financial
asset values, have a look at the chart below. This is M2 (money supply) as
a percentage of total equity market value as of year-end 2006. This doesn't
exactly scream existing liquidity is plentiful, now does it?

How can this relationship above exist without many in the investment community
being a good bit more concerned than not about lack of liquidity? Easy.
Unfortunately, the implied, whether understood or not, definition of liquidity
in the current cycle is access to additional credit, not availability of existing
cash assets. Think about it. Private equity funds have access to massive liquidity
(borrowed money to lever up acquisition targets). Hedge funds are the beneficiaries
of institutional liquidity (levering at some multiple of invested capital).
Fed repo activity is providing massive liquidity to the financial markets (ever
growing short term lending to support levered investment speculation). We're
sure you've heard all of these characterizations so often cavalierly thrown
around the financial markets as of late. But, the key point to remember is
that the "liquidity", per se, being referred to in these statements is borrowed
money. Additional credit, not necessarily existing cash. What the term liquidity
sure as heck means in the current environment is level of access to borrowable
funds, not actual or existing capital. So when we hear the comment, "the financial
markets are awash in liquidity", we can translate that to mean the markets
are floating on a sea of borrowed money, or credit. No?
And this is exactly why circling back and suggesting that what happens in
the credit markets will be quite important as we move ahead. This is why watching
credit spreads will be quite the important tell for the financial markets as
a whole. Credit spreads that may be impacted by in place investment leverage
of the moment unlike any circumstance we've ever seen in modern day financial
market history. Anything that happens to disrupt the current level of "access
to liquidity", or borrowed funds, changes the game and impacts both real economic
and financial market outcomes. What's happening, or not happening anymore to
be more correct, in the land of sub prime mortgage credit availability is a
direct example. Ultimately a self-reinforcing cycle in terms of mortgage credit
availability, or terms of credit extension? We'll see. If the credit spread
between Moody's Baa debt and Treasuries were to expand meaningfully, would
the private equity world feel it? You bet. Likewise, conceptually stripped
of significant access to borrowed funds, would the above chart worry a few
more folks? Just remember, liquidity is ultimately a coward. There's always
too much when it's least needed and it's nowhere to be found when needed the
most. At least that's what financial market and economic history has taught
us repeatedly.
Bail Bonds...Although we guarantee this will mean little to nothing
to your trading activities on a daily or monthly basis directly ahead, we believe
it's appropriate to take one big step back and have a long term look at what
are some of the great long cycle dynamics of the bond bull market we have lived
through over the past quarter century-plus. Why? If we can understand some
of the very important infrastructural supports to the bond market, only then
can we look for signs of change and perhaps an ultimate end to the bond bull
market of a lifetime. At worst, maybe this exercise is simply important in
terms of garnering further perspective on the credit cycle of really a generation
we have been dealing with and a cycle that has underpinned the US economy and
financial markets for some time now. The real economy and financial market
sun and moon rise and set to the rhythm of the credit cycle. Without belaboring
the point, the credit cycle is the key.
Let's start with an update of a chart we've used repeatedly in the past. Very
simple stuff. We're looking at the year over year rate of change in nominal
GDP (the black bars) set against the 10 year Treasury yield from 1960 to present.
What is more than noticeable is that from roughly 1960 to 1980, nominal GDP
growth was running ahead of the nominal ten year Treasury yield. In other words,
the financial markets were constantly catching up to the reality of GDP growth.
Nominal GDP growth at the time that was being stoked by ever increasing inflationary
pressures. If we looked at the Fed Funds rate as opposed to the 10 year UST
yield, we'd see the same thing in terms of pattern as is seen below. The Fed
was in continual catch up mode throughout the period. Like long bond investors,
the Fed was in a state of almost continually chasing the reality of GDP and
inflationary growth. And in this financial foot race, if you will, inflationary
pressures were both born and ultimately exacerbated.
With a change of thinking and a bit of dogged determination at the Fed under
the Volcker regime, in the early 1980's we entered a period where the bond
market, and the Fed, via the Funds rate also, had learned its lesson of the
prior two decades. No longer would bond vigilante's chase inflationary pressures,
but would rather choose to lead from the inflation containment watchtower by
keeping the yield on long dated interest rates above that of the ongoing change
in nominal GDP growth. This is exactly what we are looking at below.

Another way of looking at the relationship between the two data points above
is what you see below. In the next chart we've plotted the difference between
the year over year rate of change in nominal GDP growth and the corresponding
period nominal ten-year Treasury yield. This method of presenting the same
data paints a much clearer view of again what has been a big support to defining
and driving the long term bull market in bonds we have so enjoyed for the past
25+ years. And what seems clear from this viewpoint is perhaps what will ultimately
come to be seen as bookends on the bond bull market of a lifetime. Only time
will tell whether the second bookend is the real thing. As is detailed in the
chart, the bull market in long dated bonds began back in the late 1970's/early
1980's at exactly the time that ten year Treasury yields rose above the year
over year rate of change in nominal GDP growth. And from that time until late
2002, except for occasional temporary bursts and retreats throughout this period,
Treasury yields remained above GDP growth. But again, that changed in the fourth
quarter of 2002, at which time once again the rate of change in GDP growth
has remained above Treasury yields. Certainly with the recent weakness in 1Q
2007 GDP, we're retreated a bit toward the zero differential line, but we'll
see what happens ahead. If indeed we are bookending the fixed income bull market
of a lifetime, this is a process, not an event.

Hopefully without sounding over the top, the following is perhaps THE most
important chart we can possible think of for both the real economy and totality
of the financial markets of the moment. We're looking at the 30-year US Treasury
bond price since 1980. Talk about a very long term and consistent trading channel,
is there any other a finer example? And what is nothing short of striking is
the consistency in price channel tops and bottoms all along the way. As you'd
guess, the monumental line of importance is the rising price bottoms trend
line so well defined. A line we happen to be much nearer to than not at present.
When this trend line is ultimately broken to the downside, we suggest it will
be of critical importance to all financial market investors. Absolutely critical.

To perhaps help us gain insight into the character of cycles and long term
price topping trends, indicated in the chart are points in recent years where
we've experienced important bottoms in gold, oil and the CRB. And what we're
asking ourselves is whether what we are now watching is a slow motion and incredibly
important topping process in the 30 year Treasury. Very importantly, it just
so happens that the half-decade plus old bottoms in oil, gold and the CRB happen
to roughly coincide with the breakout of rate of change in GDP growth above
nominal ten year Treasury yields shown in the previous chart. Exactly like
the long-term price tops and ultimate breakdowns in oil, gold and commodities
in general occurred near the 1980 period that was the birth of the current
bond bull, are we now watching the reverse in slow motion? Hence the suggestion
of a characterization of the bookends of the long cycle bond bull. Bookends
not only for bonds, but also for oil, gold and commodities in general. As always,
tops and bottoms of major long-term cycle importance can always be well identified...in
hindsight. Probably few knew in 1980 that we had begun the bond bull market
of a career. So too are we now perhaps near a major high in long dated bond
prices, with a commensurate major low in yields already in place? The chart
above is telling us we better be factoring this potential outcome into our
thinking and assigning it some type of probability.
The chart above forces us to at least begin seriously thinking about this
very question. Until the early part of this decade, the thirty-year Treasury
bond price had consistently hit the top of the trading channel with each major
bond price rally. But the price top in 2003 fell well short of the top of the
long term trading channel. This is clearly how long term trends start to reverse.
They first begin to lose momentum. Moreover, and quite importantly, since that
time, we have now put in a perfect series of lower price highs on the long
bond, yet still we see rising price lows as this relationship works itself
into a technical wedge formation (breakouts from which can be quite the long
term directional tell). Again, potentially a technical marker of very meaningful
trend change. Remember, this is a trend that is playing out over a series of
years, not weeks, months or quarters. Because of that, trend breaks or reversals
can be very meaningful. Finally, as is drawn in the chart, just look at the
longer-term loss of price momentum in the long bond as per the message of both
RSI and MACD indicators. Again, exactly the technical character of longer term
tops of secular importance.
To our always eager to learn something new eyes, unless the thirty year Treasury
can begin a quite substantial rally to take prices above 2005 highs, risks
are great that the quarter century plus bull market in long dated bonds is
coming to a very important conclusion with time. At least this is the topping
process that seems to be very clearly visible in the long-term chart. If we
look back at the 1970's, it's clear in hindsight that the disruption to global
oil prices set in motion a rise in US domestic inflationary pressures that
is not so dissimilar to what we are experiencing today. But what is different
today is that the simultaneously the Fed is actively promoting monetary reflation
at the exact time real world commodity driven inflationary pressures are rising
and rising fast, right alongside the growth in emerging economies. We believe
nothing short of a melt down in the US economy is going to drive long dated
Treasury prices meaningfully higher. A melt down being an economic outcome
the Fed would respond to immediately that would most likely stoke further credit
market expansion, currency weakness, and potentially softer long dated Treasury
bond prices. The proverbial rock and hard place for long-term bonds? We'll
just have to see.
And circling right back to the matter of ultimate importance, this would indeed
have absolutely huge implications for the credit cycle so key to the US economy
and financial markets of the moment. Again, this is a very long-term view of
life. It will not provide meaningful information fodder for trade positioning
at tomorrow's market open. If it may be approaching a time to bail on bonds,
then the ramifications of this potential multi-decade trend break will ripple
across the US economy and financial markets in very meaningful fashion and
will cut right to the core of the in place credit cycle of the moment. We'll
be watching and suggest you do also.
Foreign Aid...We'll leave you with a few final charts and thoughts
to contemplate in terms of magnitude more than anything else. We all know just
how important foreign buying of US financial assets has been to US fixed income
and broader credit markets. To suggest it has been meaningful is a wild understatement.
And relative to our above comments, we'll be the first to state that foreign
buyers are not the sole force holding up long bond prices. In fact, foreign
buying is really levered toward the short end of the curve more than not. But
foreign capital flows have been extremely meaningful to the credit markets
in aggregate, well beyond Treasuries. US government agency and corporate bond
prices of the moment owe a huge debt of gratitude to foreign buyers. The following
chart gives us a sense of magnitude. What we are looking at is yearly net nominal
dollar purchases of US financial assets on the part of the foreign community.
Alongside is annual nominal dollar growth in US GDP. Remember, we showed you
above that US nominal GDP growth rose above ten-year Treasury yields in 2002.
As you can see below, this occurred at exactly the time the foreign community
began really stepping on the gas in terms of recycling dollars back into US
credit markets.

Hopefully without stretching for some type of conclusion, could it be that
long dated Treasury prices, given their inability to rally meaningfully for
what really has been years now, are sensing this foreign flow is only temporary
(in years) and ultimately destined to recede in terms of growth rate? We think
this is part of the total picture as to what long bond prices are trying to
discount right here. Again, please remember that these relationships are not
about to change on a dime. This is all about what seems the slow motion process
of secular bull market (in bonds) change.
Final chart. As we look across history, how has the percentage ownership of
US Treasuries changed among the holders/buyers of these investments? Look no
further that the chart below. Any questions as to why the foreign community
is a key linchpin for US fixed income markets?

In what may be the larger process of a potential secular top in US fixed income
markets, we need to remember that one of the largest current buyers at the
margin, the foreign community, are decidedly not bond vigilante's (inflation
vigilantes), per se. They are financiers and mercantilist business folks. Their
interest is in supporting and growing their own economies by financing consumption
in the US. The US fixed income market simply happens to be the vehicle to accomplish
this end goal. Combine foreign buying interests with the levered speculators
of the day, and the true US bond vigilantes of the 1980's and 1990's have not
been in the drivers seat as far as the US fixed income markets are concerned
for many a moon. At this point, we have the feeling the true bond market vigilantes
are riding in the backseat without seatbelts, holding on for dear life around
sheer cliff drop off blind curves. Hey, go easy around the next corner, Okay?
|