|
June 2007
Bail
Bonds
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?
|