The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it’s the illusion of knowledge (Stephen Hawking)

It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so (Mark Twain)

Invest with smart knowledge and objective odds

THE DAILY EDGE: 22 MARCH 2021

THE INFLATION DEBATE…

FIBER: Industrial Commodity Price Rise Continues The Industrial Materials Price Index, from the Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER), increased 1.7% during the four weeks ended March 19 pulling prices up roughly one-third y/y.

 image image

image

Fed Will Need to Buy Bonds as Stimulus Boosts Yields, Dalio Says

The recent fiscal stimulus announced by the Biden administration will result in more bond sales to finance the spending, worsening the “supply-demand problem for the bonds, which will exert upward pressure on rates,” Dalio said Saturday on a panel at the China Development Forum, an annual conference hosted by the Chinese government. That will “prompt the Federal Reserve to have to buy more, which will exhibit downward pressure on the dollar,” he said.

He said the world is “very overweighted in bonds,” and they are yielding minus 1 basis point in real terms, which is “very bad.”

“And not only might there be not enough demand, but it’s possible that we start to see the selling of those bonds,” he said. “That situation is bearish for the dollar.”

Fed Chair Jerome Powell said this week that current monetary policy is appropriate and there’s no reason to push back against a surge in Treasury yields over the past month.

Actually, the FOMC statement reads

(…) the Federal Reserve will continue to increase its holdings of Treasury securities by at least $80 billion per month and of agency mortgage‑backed securities by at least $40 billion per month until substantial further progress has been made toward the Committee’s maximum employment and price stability goals.

The Fed is totally aware it is involved in a serious poker game against also pretty powerful players. When Ray Dalio talks bearishly about Treasuries, Bridgewater is probably not currently on the bid and “it’s possible that we start to see the selling of those bonds”.

We know inflation measures will soon be rising and that the Fed is betting the market will tolerate it as “transitory”.

We also know that “transitory” will be strongly debated…

…while Treasury issuance will be huge.

We also know that the Fed cannot lose this multi-faceted game: “transitory” inflation it must be since Powell said the FOMC will definitely not use “precautionary”, pre-emptive policies (it will take “actual progress, not forecast progress” to convince the Fed to change tack). Bears will feed on that.

And Powell has defined “actual progress” as being unemployment at 3.5%, where the red line stands below. Progress is reaching the historical best!

image

Can anybody seriously expect near-zero interest rates at record unemployment?

Unless Lacy Hunt proves right and record indebtedness keeps the economy and inflation pretty weak. “Transitory” applied to GDP growth.

Via Steve Blumenthal’s On My Radar:

On CNBC Wednesday evening, [former Dallas Fed president Richard] Fisher was asked how important the Fed’s move from a proactive Fed to a reactive Fed was, and whether such a move was dangerous.

Fisher’s reply:

“It is important, and there is a risk here because you have to remember it takes a lot of time for monetary policy to work its way into the real economy, I’m not talking about market reaction. And if you are reactive, first of all data is out of date by the time you get it, even though we’re getting better at getting contemporary data. If you are reactive, (Fed policy) is going to take time to work into the economy and I think that’s the risk rather than anticipating and using your judgment, going forward, as to what’s likely to happen if, let’s say the bond market determines the 10-year rate.

If the bond market begins to price in some inflationary pressure. The Fed does its work, gets its data, finds out there is more than transitory inflation in play, then they have to tighten or do whatever they need to do. It (policy) takes a while to work into the economy and it (being reactive) will therefore be, I think, be less effective. That’s a risk they’re running.”

CNBC asked Fisher, “There’s a lot of talk about transitory inflation and how far they would let it go. Coming back ultimately to this 2% inflation target, how far do you think they would let inflation go, before they felt the need to do something?”

Fisher’s answer:

“Here’s the problem: If you’re a supply-side economist, you’re also thinking about the kind of cost pressures that are now underway, raw materials, freight—I can go on and on and on. However, a business operator also has to worry about what other new costs are going to be imposed—higher taxes, perhaps unionization, minimum wage efforts, etc.

So, on top of what they’re already seeing, they are likely or possibly going to price in a reaction, and it’s very rare in my experience to have businesses price in an increase, and then take it back. So he’s right, in terms of, compared to the low levels of which we were a year ago.

  • But the problem is it’s the dynamic of going forward and how do businesses react? So that’ll determine how transitory it is.

  • I think what the market is doing is questioning that premise. Look at the 10-year and a five-year yields, the world is questioning that premise.

Will we have transitory inflation, or will it become more embedded? And this isn’t 4 or 5% inflation, I’m just saying above the two-plus level, which the Fed won’t articulate, and I understand why he won’t… But you can build in a behavioral reaction here, and then the Fed has to take the time to respond, and it then takes time for that to play its way through the economy. Which means it could feed its way into itself, that’s the point I’m trying to make.

Fisher concluded, “What I’m more interested in is how the market perceives this.”

Meanwhile, Bank of America reminds us the YtD issuance of Treasuries ($861bn, on its way to $4.45tn this year), IG/HY bonds ($514bn), stocks/SPACs ($178bn), “all on pace for record highs, so bond & equity supply is annualizing a record $7.6TN.” Putting the twin deficit in perspective:

Supply > demand + uncertainty + ?confidence? = correction/bear:

Summers Sees ‘Least Responsible’ Fiscal Policy in 40 Years

(…) In his latest attack on the recent rush of stimulus, Summers told David Westin on Bloomberg Television’s “Wall Street Week” that “what was kindling, is now igniting” given the recovery from Covid will stoke demand pressure at the same time as fiscal policy has been aggressively eased and the Federal Reserve has “stuck to its guns” in committing to loose monetary policy. (…)

He said there is a one-in-three chance that inflation will accelerate in the coming years and the U.S. could face stagflation. He also saw the same chance of no inflation because the Fed would hit the brakes hard and push the economy toward recession. The final possibility is that the Fed and Treasury will get rapid growth without inflation.

“But there are more risks at this moment that macroeconomic policy will cause grave risks than I can remember,” said Summers, who is a paid contributor to Bloomberg. (…)

Bond Rout Hits Safest Company Debt Returns on investment-grade corporate bonds have faltered and spreads have widened amid broader selloff

image(…) Bonds from highly rated companies have lost more than 5.4% this year, counting price changes and interest payments, through March 18. That is their second-worst start in data going back to 1996, the worst being last year’s pandemic-fueled selling, according to Bloomberg Barclays data. That compares with a 0.2% return for high-yield bonds and a 1.7% gain in corporate loans to highly indebted borrowers. (…)

At around 8 1/2 years, the duration on the Bloomberg Barclays U.S. investment-grade bond index implies an 8.5% change in price for every 1% move in interest rates. That is nearly 40% higher than the average duration from 1992 to 2008, according to data compiled by Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, and more than three years higher than it was in the trough of the 2008-09 recession. (…)

Credit quality has fallen to its weakest point in decades. Companies including hotel operator Marriott International Inc. and furniture company Steelcase Inc. suffered downgrades after pandemic borrowing, leaving more than 50% of the U.S. market now at the lowest rung of the investment-grade ladder, according to Morgan Stanley. (…)

With billions of dollars of debt outside the U.S. producing negative returns after taking inflation into account, more foreign investors have turned to the U.S. investment-grade market. (…)

For foreign investors’ interest:

image

On the other hand, if people continue to focus on relative growth rather than financials the USD could actually strengthen before it weakens as Nordea argues:

In terms of relative growth forecasts, or in term of revisions to said forecasts, the USD should be in a very strong spot – rising 20% yoy instead of falling 15% yoy(!).

USD/G9 vs relative growth

Also when we weigh the forecasts with the DXY weights, the USD should be gaining rather than weakening – though not as much as when we look at an equal-weighted average of G9 forecasts (since these are held down by Sweden, Switzerland and Norway). This is not the prettiest chart we have made, but we figured we’d show it anyway.

Dollar index (DXY) vs relative growth

Back to interest rates, more uncertainty comes from the Fed’s decision last week not to extend the SLR. Bloomberg explains (my emphasis):

As the March 31 end of the waiver to something called the supplementary leverage ratio (SLR) approached, many banks argued that it should be extended, lest they be forced to retrench while the economy is still fragile. Bank critics, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, pushed to end the break, noting that banks were managing to return tens of billions to shareholders through buybacks and dividends. The Fed decided to let the waiver lapse, but said it would propose other ways of addressing the banks’ concerns. (…)

When the Fed purchases Treasuries from a money manager, those securities become an asset on the central bank’s balance sheet. The seller deposits the cash it received at a bank, and the bank in many cases adds it to the reserves it holds at the Fed. That makes the money an asset for that bank and a liability for the Fed. In other words, the Fed’s big purchases boosted the asset levels of U.S. banks. If the SLR had been left in place, those increased assets would have meant that banks needed to set aside more capital as reserves.

The last thing the Fed wanted during that critical time was for banks to be pulling money out of the economy. So it eased the SLR so that banks’ excess capital could be deployed to struggling businesses and households. The continuing disruption in Treasuries was also a major factor in the decision. The move allowed banks to help stabilize that market, while maintaining funding for short-term borrowing arrangements known as repurchase agreements.

Wall Street pointed out that the pain from coronavirus is far from over. JPMorgan Chase & Co. cautioned that it might have to shun customer deposits if tougher rules are reinstated — an awkward situation just as the big Covid relief bill signed by President Joe Biden in mid-March pumped billions into consumers’ accounts. Analysts have also tied recent bouts of wild trading in the $21 trillion Treasury market tied to concerns that banks will be forced to hold less government debt, even potentially selling hundreds of millions of dollars of their holdings. By some measures, the SLR break allowed banks to expand their balance sheets by as much as $600 billion. (…)

{The Fed] concluded the threat that Covid-19 poses to the economy isn’t nearly as severe as it was a year ago. But the agency also said that it’s going to soon propose new changes to the SLR to address the recent spike in bank reserves triggered by the government’s economic interventions. Central bank officials said they don’t want the industry’s overall capital levels to change. The Fed did provide another consolation, though, by more than doubling to $80 billion the maximum overnight reverse repo activity a participant can execute through the central bank’s facility. That could absorb some of the pressure of too much government stimulus cash sloshing through the system by giving money market funds a place to put it.

Nordea illustrates the risk to Treasuries:

More reserves might trigger selling of USTs (and higher yields?)

Meanwhile, rising Treasury yields are pushing mortgage rates up while house prices are exploding:

fredgraph - 2021-03-21T080012.332

But the market doesn’t care:

(Dave Wilson’s Chart of the Day)

Return of the Bond Vigilantes? Watch 3EDGE Asset Management’s Steve Cucchiaro 11 minute video.

(…) A hawkish Fed can counteract a big-spending White House by hiking rates. But Mr. Powell has committed to no hikes until inflation is sustainably at the Fed’s target and the country is at full employment. Most policy makers think that means at least three more years of near-zero rates.

The question is what happens if the target is reached earlier. If inflation picks up fast, say to 3%, will the Fed be willing to hike rates early and risk a rise in unemployment? What about 4%?

(…) pushing up unemployment to restrict inflation will hit that group the most. Politically that makes tighter monetary policy harder to justify. (…)

However, everything is in place for at least a bout of market anxiety about inflation. (…)

Yet, a permanent regime shift clearly isn’t priced into Treasurys. Even after last week’s jump, the 10-year still only yields around 1.7%, and long-term bond market inflation expectations have been stable. Investors, in the main, accept Mr. Powell’s pitch, and think that after a brief period of higher price rises, the Fed will be willing to assert its independence and keep inflation in line.

If the market loses confidence, long-dated Treasury yields should ramp up even faster, the dollar would slide and stocks most reliant on profits far in the future, think Tesla, will be hit hard.

Real inflation scares hurt.

Speaking of long-dated equities, Richard Bernstein reminds us to beware investing in stories without considering how much these stories are actually worth (video) [what my investment life is all about…].

Go international as Steve Cucchiaro suggests? One problem is with countries sporting high USD debt and rising inflation. There have been 8 global rate hikes YtD. “The net interest burden of emerging-market governments is more than three times that of their developed-market counterparts, while emerging markets are both more inflation-prone and dependent on external financing” (Nomura)

eema

We have seen this movie several times before:

And that one as well:

  • New Realtors Pile Into Hot Housing Market Surging prices are persuading tens of thousands more Americans to try their hands at selling real estate, but supply is extremely tight. There are more agents than homes for sale in the U.S.
PROFIT MATTERS

From Refinitiv/IBES:

Through Mar. 19, 498 companies in the S&P 500 Index have reported revenue for Q4 2020. Of these companies, 73.3% reported revenue above analyst expectations and 26.7% reported revenue below analyst expectations. In a typical quarter (since 2002), 61% of companies beat estimates and 39% miss estimates. Over the past four quarters, 67% of companies beat the estimates and 33% missed estimates.

In aggregate, companies are reporting revenue that are 3.8% above estimates, which compares to a long-term (since 2002) average surprise factor of 1.0% and the average surprise factor over the prior four quarters of 1.8%.

The estimated earnings growth rate for the S&P 500 for 20Q4 is 4.1%. If the energy sector is excluded, the growth rate improves to 8.0%. The estimated revenue growth rate for the S&P 500 for 20Q4 is 2.7%. If the energy sector is excluded, the growth rate improves to 6.0%.

The estimated earnings growth rate for the S&P 500 for 21Q1 is 22.9%. If the energy sector is excluded, the growth rate improves to 23.8%.

image

image

Trailing EPS are now $142.64. Full year 2021: $175.54e. Full year 2022: $202.11e.

image

image

TECHNICALS WATCH

My favorite technical analysis firm remains bullish seeing a broadening of the market, gradually out of tech into a number of cyclical sectors. It notices rising supply, however, but, using the Fed’s positive narrative, qualifies it as transitory as “enthusiastic demand” takes care of the waning interest in Technology.

That said, tech stocks jumped 2.9% last week. Yet, INK Research notes the “depressed level of Tech insider sentiment” approaching its 10-year low.

Now, depressed insider sentiment does not necessarily foreshadow depressed tech stock share prices. When it hit its 10-year low in November 2013, it was a false signal in no small part due to QE by the Fed. Importantly, at the time the XLK was riding comfortably above its 200-day moving average (+10%). Low bond yields plus momentum allowed tech stocks to continue sailing.

The next time we came close to the 2013 lows was in March 2019, and it was a different story with the XLK straddling its 200-day. The ETF subsequently traded flat for 6 months.

With the indicator approaching its low again, the XLK is sitting firmly above its 200-day by more than 10%. However, we may not be in a repeat of 2013. Back in 2013, bonds were still in their multi-year bull market. That bull market appears to be over which increases the risk that the XLK will soon test its 200-day as rising long yields pressure valuations. As such, we will be watching to see if the ETF heads back below the 200-day. Should that happen in conjunction with ultra-low insider sentiment, that could indicate the formation of a significant peak in Technology stocks.

xlk

image

Airlines struggle to take off in face of $300bn debt headwinds Recovery may take years as industry grapples with rescue finance and state loan bills

Revenue for the top seven airlines is down 67% from a year ago, and U.S. passenger airlines collectively are burning cash at a rate of $150 million a day, according to Airlines for America.

  • They’ve added $60 billion in new debt over the past 12 months, and analysts say it will take years to pay down their current $170 billion debt load, limiting future growth.
  • The industry has received a total of $54 billion for payroll support since the pandemic hit.

Equity investors couldn’t care less for these mundane details:unnamed - 2021-03-20T074907.245

U.S., China Should Cooperate on Supply Chains: Ex-IMF Official

(…) “The U.S. and China should and can work together on stabilizing global supply chains,” Zhu Min, previously deputy managing director of the IMF, said Saturday at the China Development Forum, an annual conference hosted by the Chinese government. He cited rising geopolitical tensions that threaten to hurt global economic growth and financial stability as the major reasons for better cooperation.

On monetary policy, it’s also very important for the two sides to work closely, he said, adding they should coordinate if any further stimulus package is planned since inflation is coming back faster and stronger than expected.

Other areas of collaboration include global trade, governance issues and the digital economy, he said. (…)

COVID-19

share-people-vaccinated-covid

coronavirus-data-explorer (40)

VIRTUAL IRREALITY

Whether you’re shaking your fist like an old man with kids on his lawn, or a true believer in Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) looking to make millions, there’s a booming ‘virtual reality’ real-estate market where people are buying and selling parcels of ‘land’ across several online “metaverses” – where people are building virtual hotels, stores, and other properties in the hopes of increasing their value.

And if you’re an accredited investor willing to drop at least $25,000 – and you’re invited – there’s a fund for those who want to get in on the NFT real estate market. (…)

Bloomberg unpacks:

Plots sell daily in online worlds such as Decentraland, a virtual place with its own economy, currency and social events calendar, accessible to anyone with a web browser. And values for such assets are multiplying.

This year through March 15, the average price paid per parcel in Decentraland was $2,703 — more than triple what it was in 2020, according to NonFungible.com, which tracks the sales. Land prices quadrupled in the metaverse called Cryptovoxels, from $821 a parcel last year to $3,895 in the first two and half months of 2021.

Republic, meanwhile, has purchased over 30 parcels across four metaverses, and is in talks with a real-world hospitality brand to co-develop a hotel and bar on one of those sites. (…)

We assure you, this is real. This week, contemporary artist Krista Kim recently sold an NFT-minted digital house, called “Mars House,” for 288 ether – valued at more than $500,000 based on Friday’s trading price. (…)

“For me, I actually foresee that we will be living in an augmented reality lifestyle within a very short period,” Kim added, saying it could happen in “a couple years.” (…)

The new owner of Mars House will be able to upload the property to various metaverses.

In February, meanwhile, eight lots of virtual real estate sold for a combined $1.5 million on gaming platform Axie Infinity, according to NonFungible.

“There is obviously some fear-of-missing-out phenomenon behind this,” says NonFungible COO, Gauther Zuppinger, in an email to Bloomberg. “The best, rarest places are almost all purchased. The secondary market shows that the first buyers sell their assets for way more than the initial price.” (…)\

“Buying land today in virtual worlds may end up feeling a lot like buying land in Manhattan in the 1750s,” says Yorio. “There is massive growth ahead, and now is the time to get in on the ground floor.

Wait, wait! There’s more!

Anybody smelling a peak?

NEW$ & VIEW$ (1 FEBRUARY 2016):

‘Consumer Spending and Housing Remain Solid’

Various quotes on the Q4 GDP report:

  • The sluggish headline GDP reading masks the fact that consumer spending held up better than expected in the fourth quarter.
  • Growth in consumer spending for all of 2015: +3.1%. Consumers carried the economy last year, boosting spending at the quickest pace since 2005.
  • (…) robust growth in durable goods purchases bolsters our confidence that the US consumer sector remains solid. Furthermore, residential investment growth surprised to the upside at 8.1%, well above our forecast. Together, better-than-expected growth in big-ticket purchases should allay concerns of a retrenchment in US consumer spending.

The other way of looking at things:

  • Consumers during the all-important holiday season cut their spending from what it was even mid-2015
  • One of the largest drags on the economy was consumer spending which accounts for about 70% of gross domestic product. They had every reason to spend including healthy employment gains, cheaper gasoline and lower import prices. Instead, consumers remained cautious about spending, boosting the savings rate instead. The unseasonably warm weather contributed to the softness, especially for apparel and utilities…
  • To weakness in energy, exports, and too much inventory we can now add to the softer side of GDP data the auto sector—motor vehicle output took 58 basis points away from overall growth.

Real world stuff: credit card companies are doing quite well:

  • Visa CEO: “Macro weakness not evident in U.S. Consumer Spending.”
  • Mastercard US processed volumes up 13% (versus 9% last quarter) including 100bps from lower gasoline prices (200bps last quarter).

Moreover: retail gasoline prices are now down to $1.81, and mortgage rates are 3.73%.

Tale of Two Economies as Americans Thrive, Companies Dive

Consumer spending grew last year by the most since 2005, in spite of a slight slackening in the fourth quarter. Nonresidential business investment, meanwhile, rose at its slowest pace since 2010 as oil and gas companies sharply curtailed spending. (…)

That same dichotomy was evident in the fourth quarter, as personal consumption expenditures rose while business investment in equipment and structures dropped for the first time since the third quarter of 2012. (…)

Will the strength in consumer outlays encourage companies to step up spending and keep on hiring? Or will businesses, battered by slow global growth and a rising dollar, turn more risk averse and start to prune payrolls, undermining household spending in the process? (…)

PCE and PDI Percent of GDP

Pointing up The economy is growing, albeit below par. Viewed through the prism of employment, the economy looks surprisingly strong. Yet, it looks weak because the nature of the economy is changing. The GDP numbers are modest because productivity is in trouble. The crucial cause is that nowadays, manufacturing and energy sectors have been hard hit, where productivity is often found. A vast array of service industries, which are labor intensive, are doing most of the employing. It’s pretty hard to get productivity increases out of restaurants, healthcare, accountants, bankers and lawyers. What you get there are price increases! (H. Marleau, Palos Management)

Auto FYI: U.S. vehicle production trends (annualized rates): Q4’15: –19.3%, Q1’16e: –6.0%.

Hot smile Fed accused of not seeing danger coming

(…) The US has turned out to be vulnerable to the fall in crude prices. The boost from cheap energy to consumer spending has not met expectations while the associated drop in investment in the sector hurts growth. (…)

Confirming concerns about the impact of the high dollar and oil price plunge on US industry, the first reading for fourth-quarter US gross domestic product yesterday showed a slowdown in growth to an annualised pace of 0.7 per cent, compared with an expansion of 2 per cent in the previous three months.

As growth in the US economy slows, inflation has stuck below the Fed target of 2 per cent. Narayana Kocherlakota, who was president of the Minneapolis Fed until December, is calling for a “hard U-turn” in monetary policy. He thinks the central bank is underestimating the risks of sinking inflation expectations and says the credibility of its target is under threat.

The dovish former policymaker says the world faces a “global demand shortfall” and tighter US monetary policy could exacerbate uncertainties outside the country.

“It is hard to know how much feedback from international weakness there will be to the US economy; as the Fed tightens, that tightens economic conditions throughout the world,” Mr Kocherlakota says. (…)

The main reason for optimism is the labour market. In the face of chatter among analysts about the risk of a US recession, job growth has exceeded expectations, with payrolls growing by nearly 300,000 in December.

Ms Yellen placed the employment trend — which has seen 13.2m jobs added over 67 straight months — at the heart of her case for raising rates, arguing that it would be unwise to wait too long before responding to the erosion of spare capacity. (…)

Tim Duy, a professor at the University of Oregon and close Fed watcher, says that December’s rise was not of the magnitude to “make or break the economy” and that talk in markets of a policy mistake was unhelpful.

He says the important aim now was for the Fed to avoid sending signals that it was hell-bent on tightening policy further. That meant downplaying last month’s forecasts from policymakers suggesting that there will be four rate increases in 2016, a bullish outlook that traders now see as divorced from reality.

The Fed has insisted it will be guided by the data and has made no commitment to tighten. Ms Yellen will give further clues in February when she addresses Congress in testimony on Capitol Hill. (…)

U.S. Recession Risk Is Low But Rising: Morgan Stanley

The Morgan Stanley analysts argue that the industrial side, which constitutes about 10% of the U.S. economy, is in recession. They point out that growth in some service-side indicators has slowed. Citing their own proprietary risk model – the MSRISK — the analysts point out that though the recession risk is low currently, there is a rising risk broadly within the next six months:

US Recession Risk

BCA Research has another view on recession risks:

For now, the FOMC seems content to ignore the lengthening list of economic red flags, including deflation, profit contraction, trade contraction, ISM manufacturing contraction etc. In fact, BCA’s Recession Warning Indicator is now at levels that preceded the Great Recession. (…) 32 out of 60 industries we track are cutting selling prices. Six other industries can’t raise prices by more than 0.5% per annum, while another seven are stuck below 2%, which is near the rate of overall core consumer price inflation. In other words, 2/3 of the industries cannot keep pace with core inflation rates.

image

So does J.P. Morgan:

image
 
High five One Positive Signal Amid A Growing Recessionary Storm

Going back to 1954, we have had nine circumstances when the spread between 10-year treasury yields and 3-month treasury yields goes negative (i.e. yield curve inverts). Only once, in 1967, did the US not fall into a recession within the next 12 months. Fortunately today, the 10-year – 3-month spread sits at a very healthy 175 basis points. As the chart below shows, the yield curve tends to flatten right before a recession occurs and then it actually steepens during the recession. For example, the 30-year to 3-month spread went from 313 basis points in 1972 to -186 basis points in 1973 and then the economy fell into a recession from 12/1973 to 4/1975. In 5/2004, the 30-year to 3-month spread was at 382 basis points. By 3/2007, it had fallen to -66 basis points and then the US fell into a recession officially starting in 1/2008. Granted, we have seen the 30-year to 3-month spread flatten over the past several years as the current level of 175 basis is 122 basis points from the 2013 high and 208 basis points off the 2011 high. However, as long as this spread remains well above the zero line, a US recession will hopefully not be on the immediate horizon.

1 - Copy - Copy

The problem with the above is that interest rates are currently managed throughout the curve…

It doesn’t take a genius to know we are at the late stages of the cycle. Moody’s adds some credit cycle evidence:

Special Events Are in Late-Cycle Mode

image

During the early stages of an upturn by M&A, M&A-linked credit rating revisions show more upgrades than downgrades. For example, M&A-linked rating changes showed more upgrades than downgrades during 2010 through 2012, or after M&A activity had bottomed in 2009. However, M&A figured in more downgrades than upgrades once new record highs were set for M&A in 2000, 2007 and 2014.

Net downgrades linked to M&A rose from 2014’s 33 to 2015’s 36 as the increase in the number of relevant downgrades (from 89 to 114) eclipsed the rise in the number of related upgrades (from 56 to 78). In 2016, upgrades stemming from M&A are likely to decline, while downgrades hold steady or rise. A further decline by upgrades relative to downgrades for M&A-linked rating revisions would be consistent with an aging business cycle upturn.

image

M&A’s record pace for 2015 stemmed from comparatively low borrowing costs, a relatively stable equity market and diminished prospects for organic revenue growth. The importance of the latter helps to explain why record highs for M&A tend to occur close to the end of a business cycle upturn. The urge to merge will be greater the more convinced corporations are of the imperative to meet long-term earnings targets via mergers, acquisitions or divestitures. (…)

Sometimes, efforts to enhance shareholder returns trigger credit rating downgrades. Typically, strategies which benefit shareholders at the expense of creditors employ cash- or debt-funded equity buybacks and dividends. The number of US credit rating downgrades stemming from shareholder compensation increased for 2014’s 40 to 2015’s 48. However, the latter was less than 2013’s current cycle high of 59 and was well under 2007’s record high of 78. (…)

image
 What Happens When Rates Go Negative

The BOJ says it will cut the interest rate, set at minus 0.1%, further into negative territory if necessary. That compares with minus 0.75% in Switzerland, minus 1.1% in Sweden and minus 0.65% in Denmark.

(…) In theory, negative rates at a central bank trickle down to consumers or businesses by encouraging lending. That makes cash a sort of stimulative hot potato: Everyone should want to use it, not hold it.
So far, the record has been patchy. Bank lending has risen modestly in the eurozone, aiding a slow and steady economic recovery. But inflation hasn’t returned. Prices rose just 0.1% in November. Sweden, too, has been stuck with inflation close to zero since 2013, despite joining the negative-rate club in February. The ECB has an inflation target of just under 2%.

In Switzerland, the central bank had long tried to keep the Swiss franc from rising too much against the euro by creating new francs and using them to buy the common currency. But early this year [2015], uneasy with the volume of foreign assets it had acquired, it stopped.
To help soften the blow of a stronger franc, which stifles Swiss exporters, the central bank turned to negative rates, which typically would make a currency less attractive to hold. But the franc surged against the euro and has since settled into a steady range about 11% stronger than where it was.

Denmark, by contrast, has had better success using negative rates to stabilize its currency. The rates helped beat back a flurry of speculative bets on an appreciating Danish krone, themselves spurred by the ECB’s rate-cutting moves. Growth in Denmark is comparatively robust. The economy is expected to expand 1.6% this year.

Still, subzero rates in Denmark and Sweden have helped fuel a surge in house prices, prompting fears of a bubble in major cities. The average price of a Danish apartment climbed 8% in the first half of 2015. The cost of Swedish apartments is 16% higher than a year ago.

And the negative rates come with a cost: Since it is difficult for banks to pass negative rates on to many of their customers, the margin between what they earn from lending and what they pay to depositors gets shrunk. To be sure, Japan has introduced a tiered system so that only a part of the banking system’s huge central-bank reserves will be subject to negative rates. Denmark, too, exempts some of its banks’ deposits from its minus 0.65% rate, and its banks are still hurting.

Negative rates have cost Danish banks more than 1 billion kroner ($145 million) this year, according to a lobbying group for Denmark’s banking sector.
“It’s the banks that are paying for this,” said Erik Gadeberg, managing director for capital markets at Jyske Bank JYSK.KO +3.33%. If it worsens, Jyske might charge smaller corporate depositors, he said, then maybe ordinary customers. “One way or another, we would have to pass it on to the market,” Mr. Gadeberg said.

These economies have seen a range of other odd consequences, from Danish companies paying taxes early to rid themselves of cash, to one Swiss bank charging its customers to hold their deposits. Still, the experiment with negative rates hasn’t spawned more drastic consequences—like mass hoarding of cash or runaway inflation—in Europe, so far at least. (…)

(…) Our view is that the decision was mostly driven by a desire to weaken the currency in an attempt to offset renewed weakness in oil prices and their consequent negative impact on inflation. The BoJ’s December decision to mildly expand ETF purchases was largely ignored by investors who until recent days had bid up the yen on a flight to quality. It is questionable whether the BoJ will be successful in this effort given market positioning and the yen’s undervaluation (see Don’t Buy The BoJ Bluster).

But to the extent that the BoJ can weaken the yen, such a move will hurt other trading economies, exacerbating disinflationary forces. It seems reasonably likely that European central banks will respond to further yen weakness, causing a growing perception that a cycle of competitive devaluations is under way. In such an environment the US dollar seems sure to take another leg upward. (…)

One day’s price action is insufficient to determine a trend, but we tend to see further easing as a rather desperate roll of the dice that risks destabilizing the still weak Japanese economy (see The Dangers Of Further BoJ Easing). The bigger concern is that BoJ has sounded the bugle on an escalated currency war that could yet come back to bite Japan.