Edge and Odds

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)

Edge and Odds

Invest with smart knowledge and objective odds

***ECONOMY

THE DAILY EDGE (11 January 2017): Synchronized Acceleration?

U.S. JOLTS: U.S. Labor Market Activity Improves Slightly

The total job openings rate of 3.7% during November was improved from October’s 3.6%, revised from 3.7%. It remained down from the record high of 3.9% in July. The private-sector job openings rate held steady, however, at 3.9%. It was slightly higher versus last year’s 3.6% average. In the government sector, the job openings rate improved to 2.4%, the highest level since July. (…)

The actual number of job openings increased 1.3% (6.2% y/y) to 5.522 million, down from the April high of 5.845 million. Private-sector openings improved 0.4% (5.2% y/y) to 4.972 million, but that was down 6.4% from the April high. (…) Government-sector job openings jumped 16.1% y/y.

The total hires rate held m/m at 3.6%, but that remained down from February’s high of 3.8%. The private-sector hiring rate was stable m/m at 3.9% and remained below the high of 4.2% reached in February. (…)

The number of hires increased 1.1% (-0.6% y/y) to 5.219 million. Private-sector hiring improved 0.9% (-1.1% y/y) as jobs in leisure & hospitality jumped 7.1% (4.9% y/y). Construction employment gained 1.2% (-1.5% y/y), but factory sector hiring improved 0.4% (-1.1% y/y). The number of professional & business services jobs rebounded 1.6% (0.4% y/y), but jobs in retail trade experienced a 9.6% decrease (-12.8% y/y). Government- sector hiring recovered 4.2% (6.3% y/y) following a sharp October fall. (…)

  • One area of the job openings report that showed a positive trend was the number of voluntary quits. The trend is unmistakable, suggesting that Americans are increasingly more comfortable leaving their job. (The Daily Shot)

From a Bespoke survey:job-concern

Job openings are very strong, up 6.2% YoY but hires are down 0.6%. Either these are fake openings (!), or the shortage of (skilled) workers is getting very acute. From the NFIB:

image

Job openings at America’s main employer group is at a cyclical high and employers are actively raising compensation…

image

…and prices:

large image

Synchronized acceleration?

In its semiannual flagship economic report, the development institution said the global economy should expand by 2.7% this year, down a bit from the 2.8% predicted last June. But it is up from last year’s postcrisis low of 2.3%. The U.S. economy is picking up steam and stabilizing commodity prices are helping major emerging-market economies rebound, it said.

The bank estimates the U.S. president-elect’s proposals to slash corporate and personal income taxes could add up to 0.3 percentage point to American growth this year and up to 0.8 percentage point next year. That could raise the U.S. growth rate to 2.5% this year and 2.9% next, and add 0.3 percentage point to global growth next year, the bank said. (…)

And the institution warned Mr. Trump could offset potential gains from his promised tax cuts if he triggers a trade war with rivals such as China and Mexico. Officials at the bank and its sister institution, the International Monetary Fund, fear the Trump administration could stir global protectionism by delivering on threats to slap China and Mexico with tough new tariffs. They caution such trade restrictions could curb already weak global growth. That, some officials warn, raises odds for geopolitical conflict, pointing back to the protectionist origins of the Great Depression and World War II.

Political and policy uncertainty in the U.S., Europe, China and in other major economies around the world is at unprecedented levels, the bank said. That is a major factor behind corporations around the world focusing more on acquisitions than pouring capital into new projects. (…)

Growth in the volume of cross-border sales of goods averaged 0.9% through September 2016, well shy of its long-term trend of 6.5%. (…)

An unexpected surge in U.S. inflation could force the Fed to raise rates much faster than currently planned. Higher borrowing costs would then hit emerging-market firms and governments with large debt loads, particularly commodity exporters.

The Paris-based research body’s gauges of future activity showed firmer signs of a pickup in growth in the U.S. and other developed economies, as well as large developing economies such as China and Brazil. (…)

As recently as May, the leading indicators for the U.S. were pointing to a slowdown in growth. They then switched to signal a stabilization, but the latest figures based on information available in November mark the second straight month in which they point to a pickup. (…)

image

image

The rate of global economic expansion ticked up to a 13-month high at the end of 2016, supported by strengthening inflows of new business and increased levels of employment. (…)

December saw the rate of expansion in worldwide manufacturing production accelerate to the fastest for two-and-a-half years. The trend in service sector business activity also remained solid, with the latest rate of growth matching November’s 12-month high.

National PMI data signalled positive performances for the majority of the nations covered by the global survey. (…)

December saw global all-industry new business rise at the quickest pace since July 2015. Faster increases were registered at manufacturers and service providers alike. New order inflows expanded in almost all of the nations covered, the exceptions being Brazil and India.

Improved inflows of new work led to a further increase in outstanding business, the fifth in as many months. (…)

image

Oh! There was also this at the end of the release:

Price pressures intensified in December. Cost inflation rose to a 63-month record, leading in turn to the sharpest increase in output prices since April 2014. Rates of inflation in both price measures were stronger at manufacturers than service providers.

  • The latest PMI figures are consistent with the global GDP growth of 3.2%. (The Daily Shot)

Source: Deutsche Bank, @joshdigga

  • BTW, China’s PPI is now +5.5%.

 

  • According to Blomberg’s GDP trackers (similar to Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow for the US), the Eurozone economic growth is rapidly improving. The ECB remains behind the curve. (The Daily Shot)

 

Punch Richard Bernstein, Chief Executive and Chief Investment Officer, Richard Bernstein Advisors

There is an old saying that “It’s chess, not checkers,” which implies that things are more complicated than one might expect. However, right now we view the markets as being more checkers than chess. The stock and bond markets’ performances are currently based on a
rather simple construct: when in the past has Washington, DC ever proposed significant fiscal stimulus when the economy was NOT in recession? Answer: never. Adding significant fiscal stimulus to a healthy, albeit not robust, economy is virtually unprecedented. (…)

Observers always make the financial markets seem more complicated than they really are, and today is no different. The simple reality is significant fiscal stimulus is being discussed when the economy is already healthy. On paper, this would imply stronger stock markets, stronger commodity markets, and weaker bond markets.

All those performance characteristics are indeed happening. It’s not that complicated. It seems like checkers.

But make sure to check your chest! Related image

Pointing up 1930s-like Demographic Headwinds Are Restraining the U.S. Economy
Ninja America’s Fastest-Growing Loan Category Has Echoes of Subprime

(…) booming corner of the lending industry called Property Assessed Clean Energy, or PACE. Such loans, set up by local governments across the U.S., are designed to encourage homeowners to buy energy-efficient solar panels, window insulation and air-conditioning units.

About $3.4 billion has been lent so far for residential projects, and industry executives predict the total will double within the next year. That would likely rank PACE loans as the fastest-growing type of financing in the U.S.

As the loans spread, so do problems that echo the subprime mortgage crisis. Plumbers and repairmen essentially function as loan brokers but have scant training and oversight. They often pitch PACE loans to help land contracting jobs and earn referral fees from lenders, according to loan documents and more than two dozen borrowers, industry executives and employees.

Creditworthiness matters little to lenders, because loans are based on the value of a homeowner’s property. PACE loans typically require no down payment, and the debt is added to property-tax bills as an assessment. (…)

  

Investors Bolt Mexico as Peso Enters Free Fall

The peso tumbled 2% on Tuesday to another all-time low against the dollar, frustrating Mexican central-bank efforts to slow the currency’s decline. Bank officials said Tuesday that they spent $2 billion last week to prop up the peso, which has weakened nearly 16% against the dollar since the U.S. election. (…)

Mexico’s benchmark stock index has tumbled 5.3% in the two months since the U.S. election. Yields on 10-year Mexican government debt, which move in the opposite direction of price, have jumped to 7.76% from about 6% before Mr. Trump’s victory. (…)

About 80% of Mexican exports go the U.S. (…)

Almost 30% of the country’s gross domestic product comes from trade with the U.S., Natixis estimates.

Fitch Ratings in early December cut its rating outlook on Mexico’s long-term debt to negative from stable, a sign that currency depreciation resulting from Mr. Trump’s victory had increased uncertainty to the point that it could hurt Mexico’s public finances. (…)

A weak currency often comes with benefits by making a country’s exports more competitive. But a falling peso may not boost the Mexican economy as much as a weakened currency did for other developing countries. If Mr. Trump carries out his threat to put new tariffs on Mexican goods if the country doesn’t revise trade terms, new duties on Mexican products could partially offset the competitive advantage from a weaker peso, economists say. (…)

Luis de la Calle, a former top Mexican trade official, said Mr. Trump’s statements and policies that have caused the peso to decline could backfire. They would dent Mexicans’ ability to buy U.S. goods, which could expand the U.S. trade deficit. A weaker peso is also likely to spur more illegal immigration if Mexico’s economy falters. (…)

Great Debate Erupts Over Great-Rotation Thesis for Stocks, Bonds

The Lady and the Trump

A businessman is about to arrive at the White House with his crew of business people and a very business-like attitude.

While Trump’s top appointees have less government experience than most administrations since the 1960s, they have by far the most business experience, [Ray] Dalio [whose Westport, Connecticut-based firm is the hedge fund industry’s largest money manager] said. They are “bold and hell-bent on playing hardball” to effect major changes in economics and foreign policy, and their leader “doesn’t mind getting banged around or banging others around.”

It is thus appropriate to analyse this mega cap stock USA Inc. and try to realistically assess its outlook based on objective fundamentals. Can this truly wholesale management change, this potentially “novel” way to run the country, herald a new era of growth and prosperity for what is still the main engine of the world?

Let’s begin by looking at valuation parameters and then see if a sensible and credible story can fit in. The chart below plots the so-called Buffet Indicator which is akin to a Price-to-Sales ratio for the U.S. economy (market value of U.S. equities divided by GDP – blue line) and a proxy for corporate profit margins.

image

Here’s another proxy for corporate profit margins from the national accounts (for a discussion on secular margins trends, see CETERIS NON PARIBUS) :

image

USA Inc.’s Price/Sales ratio is at a historical high (ex the internet bubble) but this extreme valuation is accompanied by profit margins that are also historically high. A dollar of high margin sales is clearly worth more than a dollar of low margin sales.

USA Inc.’s P/E proxy (market value of U.S. equities divided by Corporate Profits – red line below) is at the high end of its 60-year range of 10 –15 times (with periods below 10 when inflation is high) but nowhere near the internet bubble years’ valuation. By this measure, USA Inc. is expensive but not bubbly like in 1998-2000.

image

Nonetheless, we are clearly in “buy high” territory. The main question is the sustainability of this precarious state which leaves little room for unfulfilled expectations from poor fundamentals or bad execution. Investors’ confidence on USA Inc.’s growth and profit potential needs to be constantly nurtured from here on out.

Realistically, USA Inc.’s revenue outlook remains constrained by the rather immutable demographic trends of slow growth in the available workforce and weak productivity (output per worker). In truth, production and revenue growth is highly dependent on productivity going forward.

image

The aging process is accelerating which will likely exacerbate the difficulties: more and more workers will leave the company and the average age of the remaining employees will keep rising, extending the productivity challenge.

image

Unless USA Inc. welcomes young foreigners, it will need to invest heavily in automation to sustain productivity growth, something corporate America has not done enough in the last cycle.

image

USA Inc.’s real top line growth (real GDP) averaged 1.4% per annum since 2006, a big step down from +3.4% during the previous decade. About 40% of the slowdown is due to demographics and 60% from slower productivity growth. Demographics will likely shave another 0.3% per year during the next 8 years, requiring productivity growth to double just to bring real revenue growth to the current consensus level of 2.0% per year. Easier said than done for such a large and well diversified company that has been a pioneer in global sourcing and procurement.

Even with hard-ball managers, USA Inc.’s top line growth, in real terms, is thus more than likely to remain subdued for a while longer.

image

Higher inflation rates can boost nominal revenue growth but unless inflation on revenues neatly exceeds inflation on costs (e.g. inflation outgrows wages), the impact on profits is zero or negative.

Can profit margins keep rising?

  • The secular decline in labor’s share of profits seems to have reached a low point in 2012. Most of the recent cyclical decline in margins has been concentrated in the energy complex but it remains to be seen if aggregate margins will recover along with energy profits. Other than for Reits, sector profit margins have not expanded in recent years in spite of very slow wage growth, a halving in energy prices and rock bottom financing costs. image

The growing tightness in the labor market is pushing wage growth rates above inflation which can only squeeze operating margins if productivity growth fails to compensate.

image

Unit labor costs are currently rising at 3.0% YoY, pressuring margins since nominal GDP growth has averaged a weak 2.7% in 2016.

image

  • Energy costs have declined spectacularly in the last 2 years but this tailwind has all but disappeared lately: YoY, prices are +7.7% for oil, +22.0% for natural gas, +1.0% for coal and +0.2% for electricity which usually trails coal and natural gas prices.

image

The pressures on USA Inc.’s operating profit margins are intensifying due to deeply fundamental trends: a slowing and aging labor force, a tightening labor market, weak productivity and rising energy costs. Investors have been quick to focus on the potential benefits of deregulation. Strangely, they are totally oblivious to the potential adverse impacts of this new management team’s other policies: openly anti-immigration, highly protectionist and prompt to fight corporate strategies aimed at “optimizing operations”, a convenient euphemism for increasing profit margins, something USA Inc. has been very good at during this cycle characterised by slow demand and low inflation.

This management’s policies could effectively deprive corporate America from the very tools which enabled it to keep growing earnings amid a difficult macro environment. It is doubtful that deregulation will be timely and potent enough to offset the fundamental pressures on margins during the next few years.

* * *

Meanwhile, a lady is entering the last year of her mandate at the helm of the powerful Federal Reserve. The “footloose and collar-free” Trump has not shown much fondness for her:

I think she is very political and to a certain extent, I think she should be ashamed of herself.

Nor has he given her much hope for a second term:

She is not a Republican. When her time is up, I would most likely replace her because of the fact that I think it would be appropriate.

Some pundits speculated that Mrs. Yellen would quickly resign (“when the baby moves in, the dog moves out.”) but she rather wasted no time confirming that she will see the end of her term in February 2018.

Three extracts from her post-FOMC press conference of Dec. 14 reveal her true motivation (my emphasis):

  • So let me say that our decision to raise rates is—should certainly be understood as a reflection of the confidence we have in the progress the economy has made and our judgment that that progress will continue. And the economy has proven to be remarkably resilient. So it is a vote of confidence in the economy. (…) But, certainly, it’s important for households and businesses to understand that my colleagues and I have judged the course of the U.S. economy to be strong, that we’re making progress toward our inflation and unemployment goals. We have a strong labor market, and we have a resilient economy. (…)
  • Well, I believe my predecessor and I called for fiscal stimulus when the unemployment rate was substantially higher than it is now. So, with a 4.6 percent unemployment and a solid labor market, there may be some additional slack in labor markets, but I would judge that the degree of slack has diminished. So I would say at this point that fiscal policy is not obviously needed to provide stimulus to help us get back to full employment.
  • I would say the labor market looks a lot like the way it did before the recession, that it’s—we’re roughly comparable to 2007 levels when we thought the, you know, there was a normal amount of slack in the labor market. The labor market was in the vicinity of maximum employment.

The stage is thus set for the year: Mrs. Yellen will clearly not be muzzled, openly saying that the widely trumpeted fiscal stimulation may just not be appropriate at this time. This is her last year and she will seek to make sure things don’t get out of control. In the same presser, she said :

But I do want to make clear that I have not recommended running a “hot” economy as some sort of experiment.”

Let me summarize in my own words:

  • She sees the economy as strong, the labor market as solid and most likely to remain so under the current policy environment.
  • The labor market is almost at full employment, much like in 2007 when the unemployment rate was 4.5%, wages were rising at 4%+ and the fed funds rate was 5.25%.
  • Given these conditions, an expansionist fiscal policy is “not obviously needed to provide stimulus” and could actually become problematic for the monetary authorities.
  • She does not favor letting the economy run “hot”.

If Mrs. Yellen’s apprehensions materialize, and she is a labor market specialist, wage growth will accelerate and interest rates will rise more than currently forecast by the FOMC and most everybody, including Mr. Trump.

Mr. Trump vilified Mrs. Yellen for keeping rates artificially low. But it is unlikely he will get more affectionate if she aggressively raises rates to counter an un-necessary expansionist fiscal policy. This story has no script for any kind of romance between these two characters.

Equity investors are salivating at Trump’s pro-growth program but they fail to see the rat out there. Commotion warning!

* * *

Behind the scene, USA Inc. has significantly leveraged itself in recent years given the incentive from negative real rates. Higher indebtedness is seen in all divisions and debt servicing costs will likely jump here, there and everywhere in coming quarters and years, squeezing every division’s profits and ability to invest and expand.

image

image

image

This financial pressure is already operative. USA Inc.’s net interest expense (federal government) currently accounts for 1.4% of GDP from 1.7% in 2008 when the federal debt was half its current $20 trillion. Interest rates pinned to the floor by the Fed hide a potentially significant profit and growth impediment.

The average interest rate on the federal debt was 2.0% in 2016 (per CBO), but the whole rate spectrum has lifted rapidly from the summer lows with rises ranging from +0.3% on short maturities to +1.2% on 10Y Treasuries. The average debt duration is 5.5 years and nearly half the federal debt matures in less than 3 years. A possible 20-30% jump in interest payments in 2007 on its way to “almost doubling” over the next several years (per CBO) would prompt Congress to limit USA Inc.’s spending intentions.

A similar squeeze will materialize across all USA Inc.’s divisions, including state and local governments, the American consumer and non-financial corporations which have collectively become significantly more indebted in recent years.

Such a squeeze means reduced investment and spending capabilities hampering demand for corporate America’s goods and services.

As of September 30, 2016, total household indebtedness was $12.35 trillion, 2.6% below its Q3’08 peak of $12.68 trillion, but 10.7% above the Q2’12 trough. Low interest rates have brought debt servicing down to a 35-year low but rising rates will rapidly eat into discretionary spending since most consumer debt carry floating interest rates.

image

Signs of increased financial distress are already appearing:image

  • Foreign clients are in the same bath, especially those with debt denominated in USD:

image

Look at what emerging markets earnings have done while EM debt was exploding: who are the lenders?

image

Given the consensus real GDP growth estimate of 2.0% for 2017, which is also the average of the last 6 years, assuming 2.0% inflation which is the Fed’s target, we get 4.0% nominal GDP growth, a level not seen since Q2’15.

image

There is risk to that forecast given that

looking at history books, when U.S. nonfinancial debt-to-GDP is over 225%, average annual real GDP growth is +1.3%. The ratio is now 248% and Trump’s plan will make this number higher, not lower. (…)

For the world’s advanced economies, a similar story. Between a 200% and 225% [debt ratio], growth averages 3%. Between 225% and 250%, GDP growth averages 2.2%. But above 250%…well, that is the inflection point because growth throttles down to an average of 1.1%.

Where is that ratio today? Just below 270%. (David Rosenberg)

RBC Capital calculates that 4.0% nominal GDP growth translates into 4.0% revenue growth for S&P 500 companies, better than the negative growth of the last 2 years and the +3.4% average between 2012 and 2015. Revenue growth was 2.6% in Q3’16 and is currently forecast to hit +5.8% in 2017 according to Factset, a pretty tall order if real GDP growth stays around 2.0%.

image

Assuming wages grow 4.0% and employment gains 1.0-2.0% (+1.4% in December 2016), labor costs could shoot up 5.0-6.0%, implying operating margins compressions. SG&A costs should follow inflation giving a small offset. But interest expense will bite hard: debt-to-EBITDA has exploded in the last 5 years from 1.6x to 2.3x, meaning that for every dollar of operating profit, there is $2.30 of debt, meaning that for every 1% increase in interest rates, EBITDA is impacted by 2.3%, not counting the effect on top line growth.Assume this P&L:

  • Nominal sales:                  from $1000.00 to $1040.00 (+4.0%)
  • Wage cost grow 5.0%:                 600.00 to 630.00
  • SG&A grow 2.0%:                         240.00 to 244.80
  • EBITDA:                                        160.00 to 165.20 (+3.3%)
  • Interest expense if rates +1.0%:     18.40 to  22.10 (+20.0%)
  • Pretax Income:                              141.60 to 143.10 (+1.1%)

If rates rise 1.5%, pretax income declines, again not assuming any further impact on revenues. Tax reform has better come quickly (the last one took 4 years to complete under Reagan).

* * *

A clash between Mr. Trump and Mrs. Yellen seems inevitable. The labor market, already tightening under supply constraints, cannot also absorb the effects on labor demand that a strong fiscal stimulus would likely bring. Mrs. Yellen and her fellow FOMC members are very much aware of this as the recent FOMC minutes attest.

Moreover, their inflation target is finally in sight. Price pressures will likely intensify given the upward trends witnessed in most continents in the last several months, mostly due to supply constraints. The last thing the Fed wants is to fuel consumer demand and exacerbate price pressures 8 years into the recovery with a highly leverage economy. The preferred medicine is gradual, gentle tightening. Trumpism could require something more drastic, not advisable for debt-handicapped patients.

For equity investors, this is crunch time with low probabilities of success. A Trump-fed economy will create too much demand pressures at an inopportune time, higher inflation and rising interest rates. Some experts suggest that this is positive for profits, therefore for equities. Not when valuations are already at peak levels. And not when high debt leverage is rampant across the economy. (RISING LONG-TERM RATES: THE SCARY FACTS! , EQUITIES AFTER FIRST RATE HIKES: THE CHARTS SINCE 1954)

Investors have place strong wagers on Donald Trump since November 9, thinking he will unleash the missing animal spirits in the economy. They may be surprised, the animal could be of the Ursid kind. Perhaps it is time to keep some chips for Janet Yellen. After all, her very powerful tools have immediate direct impact on the economy, corporate P&Ls and financial markets.

Dog days may be ahead!

(Many charts courtesy of J.P. Morgan Asset Management)

Contact: edgeandodds [at] gmail.com