Thursday, May 7, 2009

More false hope from economic numbers - productivity edition

We are starting to think that beating markets in this environment is starting to devolve into a reading comprehension exercise. In the latest edition, the green shoots crowd are jumping on the release of productivity numbers by the BLS today - nonfarm productivity is up 0.8%, above consensus numbers at 0.6% after going down 0.4% the previous quarter. However, it's a bad picture when the main driver is due to hours worked dropping 9% and output only dropping 8.2% (poof, productivity gains!).

There are many ways to read this; some may view this as a necessary purge of the fat in our labor economy while others are likely to be alarmed at the increasing weakness of business demand. None of these views are going to be new findings to our readers but we do want to highlight one point when taking a macro view of these productivity numbers.

Much can be said about the tech bubble and even now, "eyeballs" is a phrase that is likely to generate smirks and laughs at the madness of the markets at the time. However, underneath all the fluff and dot com mania there were real productivity gains being experienced in the economy and it laid the groundwork (both literally and figuratively) for huge gains in the internet economy over the coming years. The stepbrother of that story was the rise in real wages; since then however, the increase in household wealth has not been driven by wages but by assets (houses, etc.). Wage growth has been somewhat anemic, bounded by a relatively tight band for the past 8 years or so. With the deleveraging of the US economy and consequently the American household as a major burden, we have to wonder what this bodes for the story of American wealth over the next 10 years or so. The government burden has long been publicized but the quieter enemy is the consumer burden - remember, a decrease in wages is practically no different than an increase in an interest burden. These productivity numbers are somewhat sobering with regards to the hidden story in terms of demand for American labor and wage growth for individual families.
Sphere: Related Content

California Cash Flow Crisis Update

In the giddy smoke from all the green shoots, people kinda forgot that the largest U.S. state is on the verge of bankruptcy. Zero Hedge is happy to remind them.

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Business & Economics Research california debt

Hat tip Credit Trader
Sphere: Related Content

Consumer Credit Plunges

So much for the subliminal plan to get consumer to spend, spend, spend... Instead it seems the recent trend of save, save, save is picking up steam. The latest G.19 filing shows a massive drop in both revolving and non-revolving consumer credit, which has fallen to a one year low at $2.551 trillion, an $11 billion reduction sequentially in credit, split about even between revolving and non-revolving.

It is shocking, shocking that with unemployment breathing down everyone's neck, people are actually paying off their credit cards.

That great sucking noise is the 10 remaining Centurion cards sucking the life out of whatever imaginary green shoots the MSM is smoking.



and a good way to visualize this from a longer, second derivative (hey CNBC, there's the keyword - we make it easy for you) perspective:

Sphere: Related Content

And Speaking Of Moral Hazard...

There is nothing quite like the acting Secretary of the Treasury promoting it on national TV. In his most recent Charlie Rose interview, TG openly tells the banks not to be concerned with things getting worse. Well, Mr. Geithner, if the banks by that definition always have the governmental backstop, then who are we kidding that the entire financial system has not be nationalized. Would it make you feel better if banks fired all their risk managers and everyone ended up with a Goldmanesque VaR over $250?

Moral of the story, and this goes to the theme earlier of reverse engineering Greenspan: every bank is now expected to take undue risk, compliments of the Tim Geithner, and not be at all concerned with the consequences.

In the interview above, please fast forward to 17:49 for this key exchange.

CR:You will set the standard as to how much capital they need and they will tell you how much capital, or you will help them define how much capital they have.

TG: Thats right.

CR: ...and therefore theres a shortfall, in some cases, in some cases there will be none.

TG: There will be a shortfall in some cases, but again, this is not a solvency thing. There's very significant cushions in these institutions, today, and all Americans should be confident that these institutions are going to be viable institutions going forward. This is designed to make sure that the economy will be able to benefit from larger lending capacity going forward, in the event we were to face greater uncertainty again about a deeper recession. So it's like insurance... against... precautionary insurance against the risk of a deeper recession. That'll help make recovery more likely, because then banks won't have to keep behaving against the possibility that they have to protect themselves against things getting worse. So that's the dynamic this'll help us with.

hat tip Dave Sphere: Related Content

Deep Thoughts From Jeremy Grantham

Grantham rides the moral hazard wave to new peaks. Complete with some amusing probability scenarios

Sphere: Related Content

Nine And Half Weeks... Later

It is never a wholesome day at Zero Hedge absent some brilliant prose from David Rosenberg. So let's make it a wholesome day.

Market likely to peak the end of the week


Just as the clock is winding down on my tenure at Merrill Lynch, the equity market is winding up with an impressive near-40% rally in just nine weeks. For those that were still long the equity market back at the March 9 lows, a good ‘devil’s advocate’ exercise would be to ask yourself the question whether you would have taken the opportunity, if the offer had been presented, to have sold out your position with a 40% premium at the time. What do you think you would have said back then, as fears of financial Armageddon were setting in? We haven’t conducted a poll, but we are sure at least 90% of the longs at that point would have screamed “hit the bid!”

Are we at risk of missing the turn?

Fast forward to today, and within two months optimism seems to have yet again replaced fear. Are we at risk of missing the turn? What if this is the real deal — a new bull market? This is the question that economists, strategists and market analysts must answer.

Risk is much higher now than it was 18 weeks ago

The nine-week S&P 500 surge from 666 at the March lows to 920 as of yesterday has all but retraced the prior nine-week decline from the 2009 peak of 945 on January 6 to the lows on March 9. We believe it is appropriate to put the last nine weeks in the perspective of the previous nine weeks. To the casual observer, it really looks like nothing at all has happened this year, with the market relatively unchanged. But something very big has happened because the risk in the market, in our view, is much higher than it was the last time we were close to current market prices back in early January, for the simple reason that we believe professional investors have covered their shorts, lifted their hedges and lowered their cash positions in favor of being long the market.

Employment, output, income, sales still in a downtrend

Considering what transpired from an economic standpoint, the decline in the first nine weeks of the year was rather appropriate in the midst of the worst threequarter performance the economy has turned in roughly 70 years. The rally of the past nine weeks appears to be rooted in green shoots. While it may be the case that the pace of economic decline is no longer as negative as it was at the peak of the post-Lehman credit contraction, the reality is that employment, output, organic personal income and retail sales are still in a fundamental downtrend.

Need to see an improvement in the first derivative

We have evidence that the consumer, after a first-quarter up-tick that was frontloaded into January, is relapsing in the current quarter despite the tax relief (didn’t we see this movie last year?). Not until improvement in the second derivative morphs into improvement in the first derivative with respect to the important economic data will it really be safe to declare what we are seeing as something more than a bear market rally, as impressive as it has been.

This is a bear market rally that may have run its course

The investing public is still holding tightly to their long-term resolve, but much of the buying power at the institutional level seems to have largely run its course, in our view. That leaves us with the opinion, as tenuous as it seems in the face of this market melt-up, that this is indeed a bear market rally and one that may well have run its course. We have “round-tripped” from the beginning of the year and there is real excitement in the air about how these last nine weeks represent evidence that the economy will begin expanding sometime in the second half of
the year.

Growth pickup will likely prove transitory

While it is likely that headline GDP will improve as inventory withdrawal subsides and fiscal policy stimulus kicks in, our view is that whatever growth pickup we will see will prove to be as transitory as it was in 2002, when under similar conditions the market ultimately succumbed to a very disappointing limping post-recession recovery. So yes, there may well be some improvement in the GDP data, but it is based largely on transitory factors. We strongly believe it is premature to totally rule out the end of the vicious cycle of real estate deflation – residential and now commercial – that we have been experiencing since 2007. Balance sheet compression in the household sector will continue to pressure the personal savings rate higher at the expense of discretionary consumer spending. This is a secular development, meaning that we expect it will last several more years.

Chances of a re-test of the March lows are non-trivial

To reiterate, it seems to us likely that the risk in the market is actually higher today than it was back at the same price points in early January, and we say that with all deference to the stress tests (which given the less-than-dire economic scenarios, along with the changes to mark-to-market accounting, were destined to reveal healthy results). While the consensus seems gripped with the burden of trying to decide if there is too much risk to be out of the market, we actually still believe that the chances of a re-test of the March lows are non-trivial, especially if the widely touted second-half economic rebound fails to materialize.

Market may have a fully invested condition of ‘smart money’

While many pundits point to ‘dry powder’ on the sidelines that is ready to be put to work, our sense is that we now have to consider the prospect that we actually have a fully invested condition of ‘smart money’ in the market. If there is a risk that is not being widely discussed, it is the risk that profit-taking by the big-money investors (many who share our outlook but have been quick to take advantage of this monumental bounce in equity prices), will not be met with enough demand from the fundamental bulls. And if we ever do see the capitulation from the retail investor – this has yet to occur – then this flow-of-funds scenario can certainly trigger a re-test of the lows.

We are happy to buy these sell-offs in Treasuries

When you look at Charts 1-3, you really have to wonder whether or not the markets have been too hasty in pricing out deflation risks. There has never been a time in the post-WWII era where the 12-month trends in wages, producer costs and consumer prices were all in negative territory at the same time. This is the new reality. As the markets focus on the noise from green shoots, we are focusing our attention on the fundamental trends and the end-game. We are more than happy to buy these sell-offs in Treasuries and add scarce safe income to the portfolio. Take profits in equities and scale into Treasuries This move to 3.20% on the 10-year note resembles that inexplicable move to 5.35% back in the summer of 2007, in our view. Yes, yields are much lower today, but the inflation rate is 300 basis points lower too and the unemployment rate is 400 basis points higher. If we recall back in that summer of 2007, the equity market was hitting new highs just as bond yields were. The trade then was to take profits in the former and scale into the latter. After a near-40% surge in the S&P 500 and a near-60% surge in bond yields off their recent lows, it would seem logical to us to embark on a similar shift this time around.

Bond yields do not bottom until well into the next cycle

Even if the recession is to end soon, and that is still very debatable, bond yields do not typically bottom until we are well into the next cycle, as inflation continues to decline even after the downturn ends. So just like further upside potential in equity prices seems extremely unlikely over the near and intermediate term, further downside risk Treasury note and bond prices is also less of a risk today, in our view.

We would like to see a retest of the March 9 low

To emphasize, it could well be that we saw the market lows back on March 9. But we would like to see a successful retest before making that conclusion. The inevitable test will be the thing. But do not confuse green shoots for a sustainable recovery. After a credit collapse and asset deflation of the magnitude we just witnessed, the markets, housing prices and equities can be expected to take years to fully recover.

The data flow is less relevant this cycle than in the past

This was not a manufacturing inventory cycle, which makes the data flow less relevant than in the past. Real estate values are still deflating and the unemployment rate is still climbing; these are critical variables in determining the willingness of lenders to extend credit. And as we just saw in the Fed’s Senior Loan Officer Survey, while there may be a ‘thaw’ in the financial markets, banks are still maintaining tight guidelines. In fact, the weekly Fed data are now flagging the most intense declines in bank lending to households and businesses ever recorded. The best case is that this is a bear market rally All of this has not precluded an elastic band bounce from an egregiously oversold low in the S&P 500, and perhaps we will even test the 200-day moving average of 960 (as the 10-year note yield and NASDAQ just did). But we still do not believe what we are seeing fits the hallmark of a new bull market. In our view, the best case is that this is a bear market rally, but one that clearly has more legs than its predecessors this cycle.

Providing clients with a historical perspective

At this time, we believe it is necessary to provide clients with some historical perspective from the last colossal credit collapse in the 1930s, understanding that there were similarities as well as differences. It was extremely difficult for equity investors to make money in the decade following the June 1932 bottom. After the three-month rally (+75%) off the bottom in 1932, equity markets were extremely volatile and largely sideways for the next nine years. Keep in mind that the jury is still out as to whether the March 2009 lows were in fact the bottom, as was the case in 1932.

If March 9 was the low, what does it mean for the outlook?

It doesn’t say much, actually. The same goes for corporate spreads. The S&P 500 bottomed in mid-1932 and soared nearly 75% in the next three months. Anyone who bought at that point and hung on to their position saw no capital appreciation for nine years. Baa spreads also hit their widest levels at 724 basis points in mid-1932, a year later they were down to 380 basis points. While the initial the surge in the stock market and the tightening in corporate spreads from stratospheric levels presaged the bottom in GDP in the third quarter of 1932, the reality is that the Great Depression did not end until 1941 (and the next secular bull market did not commence until 1954). The prior peak in GDP was not reattained until the end of the 1930s, fully seven years after the introduction of the New Deal stimulus. By then the unemployment rate was still at 15%, consumer prices were deflating at a 2% annual rate and government bond yields were on
their way to sub-2% levels.

Our preference is to stick with fixed-income securities

Be careful about jumping into the stock market with both feet after this monumental rally. Consider whether or not it would be more appropriate to take advantage of the run-up to reduce equity exposure. Our preference is to stick with fixed-income securities, which we believe will work much better from a total return standpoint, as they did for years after the economy hit bottom back in the early 1930s. When we are finally coming out of this epic credit collapse and asset deflation, we should expect that the trauma exerted on household balance sheets will have triggered a long wave of attitudinal shifts toward consumer discretionary spending, homeownership and credit. The markets have a long way to go in terms of discounting that prospect. Sphere: Related Content

Not So Deep SPG Thoughts Post The 2nd Equity Dilution

Everyone's favorite REIT analyst Craig Schmidt raising his Price Objective from $48 to $52 on the second dilution orchestrated by his parent in just as many months.

I am Cohen And Steers' total lack of surprise.

Sphere: Related Content

USA Protection At Post-Lehman Lows

Nothing like telegraphing to the world that all is rosy by riding the US CDS short squeeze wave. Btw, when is congress convening to raise the cap on total US on-balance sheet debt?



And some sovereign CDS observations form the good folks at www.creditresearch.com. Seems the short covering is not done yet, either here or elsewhere (although SPG did do its second follow on less than 2 months thanks to ML, maybe the propped up tide is finally turning - hey State Street, you can stop recalling all those shorts now... we jest of course).
"Our index of Government Risk is at six month tights and dropping today even as the 30Y auction does not go as well as hoped."
Sphere: Related Content

Special Servicing Loans In CMBS Rise By $3.8 Billion, Hit $24 Billion, 3.1% Of Total

The pillaging in Commercial Real Estate has hit a new high. Real Point is reporting that CMBS loans are accelerating their special servicing deterioration yet again. The total amount of CMBS in special servicing has hit $24 billion, after a staggering $3.8 billion increase in April.
April marked the third straight month in which more than $2 billion of loans were transferred to special servicers, in a sign of continued market weakness. Loans get shifted when they become delinquent or are at great risk of becoming delinquent. With lending markets remaining muted, an increasing number of loans are being shifted because they're unable to refinance before they mature.

The number of loans in special servicing has also breached a milestone, hitting 2,062 loans last month, up 237 loans from the previous month.
Not surprisingly, the bulk of weakness continues to be in the 2005-2007 vintage (the very vintage that, to CMSA's chagrin, was excluded from the most recent amendment of TALF - but fear not Bernanke has got a few more aces up his sleeve).

Most frighteningly, the special servicer total excludes the impact from bankrupt GGP, which as Zero Hedge previously noted, put 164 properties in bankruptcy, and according to BofA, $14.8 billion of CMBS loans are backed by GGP properties. Assuming at least half of these loans become "special serviced" the CRE landscape is about to get a much more bloody shade of burgundy.
The roll of loans added to special servicing in April only includes one substantial General Growth loan, a $165 million mortgage on the 939,085-square-foot Jordan Creek mall in West Des Moines, Iowa. The loan, securitized through JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Trust, 2005-LDP5, matured in March. According to servicer data compiled by Realpoint, the property generated $19.6 million of net cash flow last year. That's 1.8 times the cash flow needed to fully service its amortizing debt.
Also notable in the Real Point data is the increasing weakness in hotel-based special servicing:
Among [the hotel special servicers] is a $100 million mortgage, securitized through Credit Suisse Commercial Mortgage Trust, 2006-C4, on the Dream Hotel, a 220-unit boutique property on West 55th Street in Manhattan. The hotel, like the hospitality industry in general, has suffered a sharp decline in business. Net cash flow, for instance, fell to $7.8 million last year from $10.7 million in 2006. Evidently, cash flow has fallen further as the loan, which doesn't mature until 2016, was transferred because of imminent default.

Also added was the $65.6 million mortgage on the Ritz-Carlton New Orleans, which matured April 4. The loan cannot be further extended and is senior to $57 million of subordinate and mezzanine debt. It was securitized through Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, 2004-WHALE4.
Nonetheless, one should ignore all the facts and listen to Obama and Bernanke who said this morning that the CRE problem is contained.

hat tip Jon Sphere: Related Content

"Put A Tail On It And Call It Lassie"

Some amusing commentary on the most recent bond auction from Rick Santelli. $14 Billion of 30 year UST priced at 4.288, with Bid To Cover at a precariously low 2.14. CNBC of course makes this sound as terrific for banks due to steepening yield curve (10s30s attached). We shall see how terrific it is once the Bid To Cover drops below 2 and USTs are sold in the toilet hygiene section in your neighborhood Duane Reade.



10s30s

Sphere: Related Content

More Observations On NYSE Volume

I present below NYSE volume charts compliments of a reader who has noticed that unlike in the last 2003 "end of bear market" period, when New Highs and New Lows fluctuated constantly, indicative of broad buying and selling, the current rally which has brought 80% of all stocks above their 50 DMA, is much more indicative of very few people pushing trading at essentially the same price points as the New High/New Low has basically flatlined constantly from the March 9 lows. Absent the very wide trading range that stocks have experienced (filling the major overbought gaps?), there is very little that can immediately explain this very odd NYHL behavior. I welcome any feedback and rational observations.

Then:



And Now:



Paging anyone at the NYSE for a plausible explanation for this phenomenon.

hat tip Scott Sphere: Related Content

Buying On Low Volume, Selling On High

Funny how that happens. NYSE volume on this red day is now 54% higher than the 20 DMA. And Goldman is providing liquidity all the way.


Sphere: Related Content

The Reverse Engineering Of Greenspan Continues

The chart below shows that in real terms we have virtually reverted back to the cheap housing conditions of the early 1990's, as the spread between the 10 year UST and the 30 year FN current coupon index will soon take out even the 1992 lows.

"Cheap" credit [to those lucky enough to be eligible] - check
Push credit cards to everyone [at 29.95% APR] - check
PPIP to get $1 trillion in securitization back [this one may be tough] - check
CNBC mantra of consumer to buy, buy, buy [thanks Bob Pisani] - check

Truly, those rocket scientists in the Fed and Treasury have figured out everything that made Greenspan such a hit with the ladies.



And just for those who care about maturity more than duration match, here is the 30 - 30 comparison. Yep, you are seeing it right - mortgages trade tight to securities, compliments of Paulson, Bernanke, Fannie and Freddie.

Sphere: Related Content

Jones Day Demands Preferential Fee Treatment From Taxpayers Aka Chrysler

In its retention application to represent the Debtor, aka Chrysler, aka US taxpayers, bankruptcy law firm Jones Day has disclosed not only its fee rates (at or over $900/hour for the top lawyers, compliments of Joe Q. Public), but also a very peculiar phrasing in the request of where in priority its fees should fall in the current bankruptcy. For the first time since once can remember, a law firm has requested a Section 364 superpriority status as a retained entity. Basically what this means is that Jones Days wants to get paid before any other professionals receive their compensation, and potentially before non-critical vendors receive payment owed to them under long existing contracts, that have yet to be broken. As the filing states on page 9:
It is anticipated that the estate professionals retained in these cases, including Jones Day, will incur significant fees in connection with the Debtors' efforts to preserve, protect and maximize the value of their assets under difficult and challenging circumstances. As such, Jones Day and other estate professionals will be extending significant amounts of credit to the Debtors to assist them in their efforts to pursue available opportunities in these chapter 11 cases. Under the circumstances, the fees and expenses of Jones Day and other estate professionals should be granted superpriority status pursuant to section 364(c)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Granting superpriority status will ensure that Jones Day and other estate professionals are not placed at unnecessary risk of funding the Debtors' chapter 11 cases. Moreover, any fees and expenses will remain in all cases subject to review and allowance under sections 328, 330 and 331 and the other applicable requirements established by the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Bankruptcy Rules, U.S. Trustee Guidelines and orders of this Court.
Just how is it that Jones Day will be providing cash to Chrylser? If Jones Day is concerned about its accrued retainers becoming a General Unsecured Claim, it has nothing to be worried about: US Taxpayers will have already paid the law firm around $18.9 million in retainer deposits - from page 17 of the application:

November 21, 2008 - $1,000,000.00
December 8, 2008 - $1,000,000.00
December 19, 2008 - $3,000,000.00
January 28, 2009 - $2,000,000.00
February 27, 2009 - $1,000,000.00
April 14, 2009 - $2,000,000.00
April 27, 2009 - $100,050.49
April 27, 2009 -$3,000,000.00
April 29, 2009 - $1,548,245,17
April 29, 2009 - $1,500,000.00
April 29, 2009 - $2,719,125.71

These are fees that Jones Day will have several months before it actually file a fee statement, requesting that Judge Gonzalez approve their propriety. It will be amusing to watch if Jones Day's fee application is actually objected to by other lawyers, who believe they have been wronged by not receiving pari 364 status, and thus is forced to refund a part or the entire amount.

Back to the 364 issue. Law professor Stephen Luben of Seton Hall University had this to say:
“I have never seen a request for superpriority under Section 364 for a professional. I don’t see how every large trade creditor wouldn’t ask for similar protection if it’s granted to Jones Day in this instance."
Fair point - some advice to our readers who happen to also be Chrysler vendors/suppliers and have not received critical vendor status in the case: do exactly the same thing. If legal vulture Jones Day thinks it can get away with, and based on Gonzalez' treatment of the case so far, there is no reason to believe they won't, it only makes sense that those who actually provide the equipment and the tools necessary to build the cars that Obama hopes to sell off the White House front yard, deserve absolutely the same kind of treatment if not better.

The full Jones Day retention application is presented below, with the hourly fee rates charged by the various lawyers brought to the front of the filing for all taxpayers' convenience.

Sphere: Related Content

A Brief History Of Structured Finance

The presentation below from Ann Rutledge is recommended almost exclusively for credit and structured finance fanatics. It does a very good job of capturing the morphing face of credit products and the (un)packaging of risk, especially over the past two decades.

Sphere: Related Content

The Continuing Claims Fly Trap Shoots

One picture is worth a thousand propaganda machines:

Sphere: Related Content

Latest DTCC CDS Update (Week Of May 1)

Last week was relatively quiet in the CDS market, shadowing the complete lack of liquidity in equities. Notable traded sectors were consumer Services and Industrials which saw a net gross notional rerisking of $32 and $39 billion, on 7,127 and 3,888 contracts respectively. Aside from these two sectors, the only other sector that saw marginal rerisking was Tech/Telecom with $11 billion in notional traded. All other sectors saw a net rerisking, for a total tally in the prior week of a rerisking of $23 billion.

Gross outstandings week over week were $200 billion higher at $27.7 trillion, consisting of $15.1 trillion in single-names and $12.6 trillion in index and index tranches.







In the single name category, IAC was at the top of the derisking category, where people couldn't find CDS fast enough, followed suit by Russia and Macy's. Interestingly, some commodities plays have emerged in the top 10 such as Rio Tinto and BHP. Other names in the top 20 such as JC Penney, Macy's and Jones indicates that credit traders are not as optimistic on retailers as their equity counterparty fanatics. In the derisking category, it seems that virtually all accounts "priced in" GM's bankruptcy and have sold a big portion of their exposure, likely afraid of being scapegoated as the entities that caused the company to file for bankruptcy. Other names notable were several of the major financials, including Citi, FSA, MBIA, DB and Wachovia.



Sphere: Related Content

Frontrunning: May 7

  • Fed's bank results reassuring [and a joke at the same time], show no insolvency (Bloomberg)
  • GM posts $6 billion loss as bankruptcy looms (FT)
  • SPG boosts size of follow on offering to $1 billion (Bloomberg) [only about $30 billion more to be raised by MeREIT Lynch before the rally is over]
  • Trichet says ECB will buy bonds, says "rates appropriate" (Bloomberg)
  • Billions required to bolster US banks (FT) [how about non-US banks?]
  • The promise of shifting alliances (Finem Respice)
  • Jonathan Weil: Lehman bosses walk, while small fry walk plan (Bloomberg)
  • Blackstone, Fortress seek distressed debt hedge fund takeovers (Bloomberg)
  • The ongoing structured finance mess at Barclays (FT)
  • Roubini says Asia export-led growth model is now broken (Bloomberg)
  • Cashing in on Government Sachs (The Nation)
Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

The Madness Of King Market

Daily "market" summary presented in easy to digest format.

First, the quants. The churning in ye olde HSKAX continueth, compliments of fund manager JP Morgan. The index has hit the year low. Some investors are asking themselves, why keep on paying a 5.25% Front End Load and 1.96% in total expense for a 0.25 sharpe ratio? And the kicker: an inflation adjusted 10 year expense projection of $4,336 for a $10,000 investment.







Next, the heat map. As expected - garbage up, non garbage down. For implications: see above.



And lastly, of course, SPY advertised volume, presented without comment. We are still waiting for a response to our previous inquiry.



Sphere: Related Content

Cisco anticipates bottoming of capital spending

An interesting piece in WSJ; Cisco expects tech sales to stabilize/bottom out and given it's early reporting status, it's usually seen as a barometer for tech spending. ZH finds this interesting for a few reasons; one, tech spending tends to lag many other indicators but in this case it seems to be leading. It's particularly important to note that this is a first derivative indicator, not the second derivative BS that the market has been lapping up the past few months. 

Secondly, we have to apply the usual filters to public statements released by leaders of publicly traded companies and in this case, there is suspiciously little evidence beyond vague assertions that this is the flattening out. In support of this, is a statement buried at the bottom; "The company will continue to make cuts in the current quarter, but doesn't expect additional layoffs, he said." What else would you expect him to say? If you process the dollar amount of cuts already made ($1.5B) and number of layoffs already made (2,000), you have to wonder how much more they can cut without laying off additional people. However, ZH do not claim to be tech analysts so we'll leave it up to our readers to deciper John Chambers' statement.

Overall, this seems to be a half-hearted attempt to revive the Cisco stock price; the broader macro implications are important if true but we would prefer to see actual evidence or logical thought before we put on the party hats and spike the punch.
Sphere: Related Content