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 RULE OF 20 STRATEGY

January 23, 2019

I was recently able to get one of our sons (Eng., Math, Computer Sc., MBA/MIT) build a model to assess how a rational, sensible and disciplined use of the Rule of 20 could help investment returns by optimizing the cash/equity mix to systematically manage risk.

The Rule of 20 is not a timing tool but it can help modulate equity exposure (risk on/risk off) given certain equity valuation ranges. Since nobody knows the future, the Rule of 20 provides an objective reading of equity markets valuation only using known data. Since equity markets naturally cycle repeatedly from fear to greed to fear, a disciplined and patient use of the Rule of 20 could be a great risk management tool.

The Rule of 20 P/E (actual P/E + core inflation) nicely fluctuates between 16 and 24 around its “20” median. From a strictly valuation viewpoint, holding equities below 20 should prove less risky and more rewarding than holding equities above 20. Since valuations always return to the steady 20 mean, cycles are predictable, at least in their valuations trends.

image

I have asked Danny to calculate investment returns since 1957 based on a set of rules stipulating cash/equity combinations at various Rule of 20 P/E ranges. The guiding principles for the rules are best described with a few quotes from famous investors:

  • The stock market is the story of cycles and of the human behavior that is responsible for overreactions in both directions. (Seth Klarman)
  • Bull-markets are born on pessimism, grow on skepticism, mature on optimism and die on euphoria. (Sir John Templeton)
  • Be fearful when others are greedy. Be greedy when others are fearful. (Warren Buffett)
  • You don’t have to trade with Mr. Market when he wants to, but only when you want to. (Benjamin Graham)
  • It is remarkable how much long-term advantage people like us have gotten by trying to be consistently not stupid, instead of trying to be very intelligent. (Charlie Munger)
  • We don’t have to be smarter than the rest. We have to be more disciplined than the rest. (Warren Buffett)
  • Confronted with a challenge to distil the secret of sound investment into three words, we venture the motto, Margin of Safety. (Benjamin Graham)
  • You must weigh not only the alluring probabilities of being right, but the dire consequences of being wrong. (Peter Bernstein)
  • Buy not on optimism, but on arithmetic. (Benjamin Graham)
  • Rule No.1: Don’t lose money. Rule No.2: Never forget rule No.1. (Warren Buffett)
  • Cash combined with courage in a time of crisis is priceless. (Warren Buffett)

We don’t know the future and trying to forecast it has been proven futile time and again. But we know there are valuation cycles that can be exploited using simple arithmetic to rationally calculate our margin of safety: at any given point in time, what is the valuation downside risk and how does it measure against the valuation upside potential? Unlike other valuation gauges, the Rule of 20 provides very consistent trends around a stable median.

Using known trailing earnings and inflation data, we can readily see where equities are valued on their 16 to 24 Rule of 20 P/E range, calculate the valuation downside and upside and decide whether we have an adequate margin of safety given our own individual risk tolerance level. At a Rule of 20 P/E of 20, the valuation downside (20 – 16 = 4/20 = 20%) equals the valuation upside (24 – 20 = 4/20 = 20%). “Twenty” is thus the neutral, “fair value” level where valuation upside equals valuation downside. Below 20, the risk/reward equation tilts more favorably and vice versa. Simple “buy low, sell high” strategy.

We don’t have to be smarter than the rest, we have to be more disciplined than the rest.

This is not a backtest exercise where one tries to find a best fit on a set of past data. Rather, I established a set of rules to rationally and sensibly modulate the cash/equity mix taking into account that:

  • it is always best not to lose money;
  • equities tend to rise over time, along with corporate profits;
  • valuations always return to the Rule of 20 mean;
  • it is always best not to lose money.

The rules allow the valuation cycle to fully mean revert before triggering a new series of moves in the cash/equity mix. So after the maximum equity exposure has been reached on the R20 down journey, the exposure remains at this maximum until 20 is crossed again after which it is pared down as valuations keep rising. Similarly, cash is kept at the maximum level reached on the way up until the R20 P/E crosses 20 again on the way down, after which it gets reduced as the R20 P/E declines.

This is not a strategy aimed at regularly performing above market averages. In fact, the Strategy can never beat a rising market which it can only match if 100% invested. This is a strategy aimed at maximizing absolute returns while managing absolute downside risk smartly and systematically. If well set, the rules should allow to closely match equity returns in a rising market and to significantly protect capital in a declining market, preserving the investment base for the next upturn.

The actual strategy details will remain proprietary but I will share the results of the strategy as if it had been applied since 1957. I will also provide on Edgeandodds.com the current strategy readings and the changes when they get triggered. These should never be seen as investment advice, simply information on what my particular strategy says.

As a token of appreciation to significant donators to Edge and Odds, I will soon add a section to the blog that will detail the Strategy moves and monitor how a real investment in a S&P 500 ETF will behave going forward strictly obeying this Rule of 20 Strategy. Free riders are very welcome on this blog but I must find ways and means by which I can thank readers who voluntarily and generously contribute to the ever rising costs for the research supporting this blog should they find it useful.

Warning: following this Strategy can be very boring and can be hazardous to the relationship with your friendly broker. In the last 62 years, the Strategy has triggered 127 changes in the cash/equity mix, or about 2 per year on average. Some periods were fairly active but there were many intervals with few, if any, movements, requiring investors to develop personal interests other than equity investments. Paul Samuelson once quipped that “investing should be more like watching paint dry or watching grass grow. If you want excitement, take $800 and go to Las Vegas.” Be warned.

image

1957-2018

The Rule of 20 strategy I set out returned 9.7% annually between 1957 and 2018 compared with 6.6% for the S&P 500 Price Index. An investment in January 1957 would be worth 5.7 times more today using the Rule of 20 Strategy than buying and holding the S&P 500 Index during the same period.

image

As explained, the Strategy aims at capturing as much as prudently possible from rising equity markets but to protect precious capital during significant corrections and bear markets. The Strategy proved especially protective in 1969-70, 1972-74, 1987, 2000-02 and 2008-09.

image

  • 1957-1987

With the same rules, the Strategy returned 9.4% annually between 1957 and 1987, significantly outperforming the 5.5% return of the S&P 500 Price Index.

  • 1988-2018

I only have S&P 500 Total Return data (cum dividends) since 1988. This period is characterized by a 5.5-year span between June 1997 and February 2003 when the rules dictated to remain totally out of equities because of uninterrupted excessive overvaluation. Between June 1997 and March 2000, the Total Return index jumped 76% against a 14.2% increased in the R20 Strategy all cash portfolio. But during the subsequent market rout to February 2003, the Rule of 20 Strategy portfolio appreciated 10.1% while the S&P Total Return Index cratered 43.2%. For the whole trough to trough period, the market returned zero in total while the Rule of 20 Strategy returned 25.7% entirely from its riskless t-bills portfolio.

For the whole 1988-2018 period, in spite of being all cash 31% of the period, the Rule of 20 Strategy returned 10.7% annually, bettering the 9.8% return from the Total Return Index and nicely protecting capital when needed.

image

The Strategy offered only a limited absolute protection between September 2007 and March 2009 because equities never reached the overvaluation level that would have triggered the sale of all equities during much of the bear market, unlike in other cycles. The market collapsed mainly because of the Financial Crisis and the subsequent profit debacle.

Nonetheless, the Strategy returned to a fully invested position in late 2008 and remained such through April 2016 even though equity markets more than tripled. The Strategy triggered a 100% cash position in January 2018 and returned to a 100% equity position at the end of December 2018.

image

BEWARE DECLINING FAIR VALUES

The Rule of 20 enables us to constantly calculate a “Fair Value” for the S&P 500 Index where FV = [(20 – Inflation) X Trailing EPS]. Fair Value is the Index level at the equilibrium between valuation upside and valuation downside. This FV fluctuates positively with trailing earnings and negatively with inflation and has a 97.5% correlation with the S&P 500 Index since 1957.

A rising Fair Value provides equity markets with an improving fundamental underpinning, mitigating downside stemming from deteriorating sentiment. Conversely, a declining Fair Value accentuates risk until reversed either by an eventual upturn in earnings or a decline in inflation. A declining Fair Value is particularly dangerous for equities.

The Strategy incorporates trends in Fair Value so that initially recommended cash levels are increased if and when Fair Value is in a negative trend phase (cash is capped at 100% to avoid short positions).

GOING FORWARD

I have always been wary of “models” showing their prowess using back data. I trust this Rule of 20 Strategy is rational and sound enough to deliver its promises in the future but nothing beats the real life testing. I have thus set up an investment in a tax free account in which I have invested in a low cost ETF of the S&P 500 Index with a Dividend Reinvestment Plan. I will trade this ETF exactly as the Strategy dictates, starting with the initial investment at the close on Dec. 24, 2018 when the Strategy triggered a 100% equity component. I will be dutifully following the Strategy and track the results.

Data sources:

  • S&P 500 price and total return data: Capital IQ, Yahoo Finance.
  • Inflation data: bls.gov
  • Earnings data: Capital IQ, Refinitiv/IBES.

WITH THE KING OF DEBT, CASH IS KING

The debate on inflation is intensifying. Are we living through another short term inflation burst that will, as in 2011-12 and 2015-17, fade under the weight of a slowing economy, globalisation and technology, or is this the beginning of something more serious fuelled by synchronized global growth and a strongly stimulated U.S. economy already operating with stretched resources?

If the fixed income market is given any attention, something more serious seems to be developing: this time, interest rates, short and long, are rising strongly before inflation actually registers a clear uptrend:

image

Is this another false alarm and a repeat of 2017 when 10Y yields dropped 23% from 2.6% in March to 2.0% in September as core CPI peaked out and decelerated from 2.3% to 1.7%?

An important clue may be in the behavior of real interest rates: they declined meaningfully when inflation rose during 2011 and 2015 but they are currently rising:

image

Even at their current 1.1%, real 10Y yields remain abnormally low. In normal times, when central banks are not massively involved in financial markets, real rates are well above 1.0% (90-year average = 1.9%, 50-year: 2.4%, 30-year: 2.6%) which means that 10Y rates should currently be between 3.5% and 4.5%, not 2.9%,

A bet that real yields will return to the normal 2.0-2.5% range should carry good odds at this time.

The inflation scare is one thing but inflation forecasting is iffy; bond supply, however, is another, very significant factor and something that is much more measurable well into the future. From the CBO:

At 77 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), federal debt held by the public is now at its highest level since shortly after World War II. If current laws generally remained unchanged, the Congressional Budget Office projects, growing budget deficits would boost that debt sharply over the next 30 years; it would reach 150 percent of GDP in 2047. (…)

image_thumb[14]

If, instead, policymakers wanted debt in 2047 to equal its current share of GDP (77 percent), the necessary measures would be smaller, totaling 1.9 percent of GDP per year (about $380 billion in 2018). The longer lawmakers waited to act, the larger the necessary policy changes would become.

A $380B shave in the deficit would require a 10% increase in revenues or a 9% cut in spending over and above current projections. Nobody should hold his/her breadth for anything near that to happen. While still breathing, now consider that net federal government borrowings will average $1 trillion per year in 2018 and 2019. Net borrowings totalled $519B in 2017, $680B in 2016 and $535B in 2015 (average: $578B).

In effect, the U.S. Treasury will need to double its supply of bonds over the next 2 years.

Add the supply coming from the Fed’s Quantitative Tightening that just got underway: about $140B in 2018 and $200B in 2019 based on current trends.

Total bond supply from the enlarged U.S. government: $1.1T in 2018 and $1.3T in 2019, more than double the average of the last 3 years. This assumes no recession and no nasty surprises for CBO forecasters.

To drive interest rates to the floor, the Fed boosted its assets by some $460B annually on average since 2009. Not only is that offset gone, the world will have to absorb over $1.1T in new government securities during each of the next 2 years.

There’s more if you don’t mind looking out a few more years, required when buying bonds. Off-balance sheet items (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) are financed through trust funds. The Office of Management and Budget’s numbers reveal that, starting in 2020, the two largest trust funds will begin to bleed under the weight of retiring and aging baby boomers. More external financing needed.

Secondary supply could also increase materially if Treasury holders decide to reconsider their investments. Holding U.S. dollars has not been very satisfying since 2002 and the trend since December 2016 is troubling. The dollar lost 12% against major currencies during a 14-month period when the economy accelerated and interest rates were on the rise.

image

The reality is that there is no Fed driving the market anymore, the GOP has abandoned itself to the self-proclaimed “King of Debt”, and the Tea Party and just about anybody in D.C. with any sense of fiscal discipline are either retired, retiring or MIA.

It seems almost inevitable that sometimes over the next 12 months, the bond vigilantes will take over the fixed income market. Whatever inflation is then will be secondary to “out-of-control deficits”, “twin deficits” and “crowding out” scares.

Rising interest rates are not good for the economy and financial markets, especially when the economy is so highly levered.

  • Household debt service payments are only 10% of disposable income, down from 12.5% in 2009…but debt on income is at an all time high of 26%, up from 24% in 2009. Americans are taking on credit based on their ability to meet current monthly payments. We have seen this movie before. It would not take much to squeeze disposable income, let alone the squeeze that could simultaneously come from rising inflation.

image

  • Corporations are more levered than ever. Rising interest rates will directly eat into return on equity, even more so now that tax rates are much lower. A 5.00% interest expense cost 3.25% after tax at 35% and 3.95% at 21%, nearly 22% more. A 100 bps increase in interest rates is really 122 bps with the new tax rate. From a debt servicing point of view, the tax bill is actually increasing corporate leverage and the potential earnings bite from higher interest rates.

The market is not much pre-occupied by leverage or increased leverage these days:

image

image

But it should, more than ever:

wsjs-daily-shot-americans-get-taken-for-a-ride-at-the-pump

The whole rate curve has begun to lift:

image

On a YoY basis, the hikes are not insignificant. In less than 5 months, three-month LIBOR rates have spiked 41% and 2Y Treasury yields have nearly doubled. By mid-year, the YoY jump in 10Y yields will be nearly 50% at current levels. Fifty basis points is actually a big deal with nominal rates so low and total debt so high. Interest rates have rarely jumped so much in the past and such quick spikes will undoubtedly bite many borrowers.

image

  • Governments are also at risk. The U.S. government paid an average interest rate of 2.3% on its gross debt of $19.9 trillion during fiscal 2017 for gross interest expense of $457 billion. Each 1% increase in the average rate would inflate the interest outlay by some $220B in 2018, more than 1% of GDP. BTW, the U.S. budget deficit was $665B annualized in Q4’17.

A very possible scenario over the next 6-18 months would be rising real rates on top of rising nominal rates along with accelerating inflation and generally widening spreads. For the fixed income market, this is la totale as the French would say.

Higher interest rates would slow the economy down, boosting the budget deficit, requiring more borrowing, right when a flood of refinancing from governments and corporations would further exacerbate supply. Refinancing some $45 trillion of total debt impacts the economy by $225B annualized every time rates rise 50 bps. By comparison, the CBO estimates that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will cost the federal government $224B on average between 2018 and 2021…What D.C. giveth, the market taketh away.

Most investors have little real experience on the effects of rising interest rates, the most important price factor in the economy. Broadly rising financing costs cannot be faded with substitution.

  • Levered consumers must immediately reduce discretionary spending.
  • Corporate P&Ls are also hit immediately and officers must decide whether to cut costs or accept lower margins.
  • Government deficits swell and pressures to cut spending grow rapidly.
  • The dollar declines, spooking foreigners and fuelling more imports inflation.
  • Equities suffer on slowing revenues, declining margins, higher discount rates, reduced buybacks and the disappearance of TINA and FOMO.

Beware of “analysis” claiming that equity markets generally behave well during periods of rising interest rates (e.g. Inflation Is a Bigger Danger to Stocks Than Rising Rates). As Mark Twain said, facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable (see RISING LONG-TERM RATES: THE SCARY FACTS! and EQUITIES AFTER FIRST RATE HIKES: THE CHARTS SINCE 1954).

In the 12 periods of rapidly rising long-term rates between 1965 and 1996 (I grouped a few short periods on the chart), not one was accompanied with any meaningful gains in equities while most saw equities perform a really deep dive (average –14.5%).

Since 1996, there were some instances when rising rates coincided with higher equity prices, like in 1998-2000, maybe 2005-06,  and 2010. The first two instances saw equity valuations truly explode as investors bought into “great stories”, only to totally deflate when the dreams turned into terrible nightmares.

We have done a complete 180-degree turn since the equity valuation generational lows of 9 years ago, when most people and most media were too scared and confused to recommend, let alone actually buy stocks. Now that equities have quadrupled, valuations and enthusiasm have reached nearly historical highs right when leverage is dwarfing all previous excesses.

There have been several periods of economic slowdown during the last 9 years but this is the first time that I can build a credible scenario that would end this cycle.

Is there a way out of this spiral?

  • Can we get continued low inflation numbers when Congress is stimulating an already pretty strong economy operating with stretched resources? 
  • Can we get stable interest rates when borrowing needs are exploding with the Fed also on the Ask side?
  • Can we avoid a recession if inflation and interest rates keep rising given current widespread high leverage?

Benjamin Graham warned to always maintain an adequate margin of safety. This is nowhere to be found nowadays. The odds are stacked against investors wherever we look as most asset classes are in “Buy High” territory.

In 2009 and through 2016, probabilities of success for investors were favorable as equity valuations went from extraordinarily low to full value while the Fed and other central banks were taking care of liquidity and the cost of money, ensuring economic growth, however low it could be.

Current valuations offer no margin of safety anymore, quite the opposite, right when the Fed is stepping aside after its low rate policies have boosted personal and corporate indebtedness. With its untimely and irresponsibly expensive fiscal programs, the Trump government has seriously compromised the Fed’s plans to softly normalize its unsustainable monetary policy.

Is it too early to sell, given the “good fundamentals” as the merry talking heads say? Maybe. But not because of “good fundamentals” which are well known and priced in. Corporate America keeps surprising and liquidity remains high. However, the current P/E of 17.5x 2018 forecast EPS of $158 (+18.8%) offers little margin of safety and only bubble-like potential returns.

image

As legendary mountaineer Ed Viesturs said: “Climbing to the top is optional, getting down is mandatory”.

With the king of debt piling onto the current mountain of debt, it is time to gradually make cash our new, safer king.

image