Market observers and participants have been temporarily distracted in the past week by the battle between Reddit’s plucky retail investors and lazy short-selling hedge funds over the fate of Game Stop. It won’t be the last time the world stops to watch such an event in the same way that people, who would otherwise never watch a race, are glued to the screen when F1 drivers crash into the barrier or each other. Pundits have tried to turn this into more than it is, but until people turn up with actual pitchforks in front of Mr. Griffin’s $60M penthouse pad in Chicago, I am inclined to side with George Pearkes’ take on the matter; move on, nothing (much) to see . People with time on their hands, and a stimulus cheque(?), have decided to take a punt. On the face of it, they have been successful, but most will have bought and sold too late to avoid the gut-wrenching losses that are all but inevitable in the context of the kind of volatility, which Game Stop has exhibited recently. Meanwhile in the boring and dusty world of global macro trading, investors’ eyes are still focused on the long bond in the U.S., where it is, or isn’t, going, and what this means for other asset classes, the economy, not to mention the Fed’s reaction function? Friday’s NFP report was, as ever, a case in point.
Read MoreInvestors remain locked in discussion about the same issues they were mulling before the holidays. The rollout of the vaccine—however frustratingly slow in some countries—means that the light at the end of the tunnel for the economy is probably not an oncoming train. That’s great news, but the counterpoint is that markets have long since priced-in such an outcome, leaving investors vulnerable to the famous adage that if they’re buying the rumour, they’re also likely to sell the fact. In that vein, I am happy to double down on my comments at the end of last year that you should now be looking to stash away profits rather than putting new money to work. On that occasion I showed two charts to warn about incoming multiple contraction in equities, proxied by valuations on the S&P 500, and my in-house valuation score, which is also headed for the basement. The first chart on the next page shows that the six-month stock-to-bond return ratio in the U.S. remains pinned close to cyclical highs, also hinting that equities are about to give up some of their recent gains, with bonds rallying in appreciation. The second chart shows what happened the last time stock-to-bond returns were this stretched. It occurred in the run-up to the Flash Crash in 2010, before the swoon in the summer of 2011, ahead of the drawdown in May 2012, not to mention during the Taper Tantrum in 2013. Based on this albeit short sample, investors should brace for volatility in H1.
Read MoreFinancial journalists have had to resort to clichés in the past few weeks to describe the reality that they’re being paid to report on. At the start of December, Financial Times’ Robin Wigglesworth invoked the “everything rally” to describe a market "too hot to handle”, while Bloomberg’s Marcus Ashworth and Mark Gilbert have gone for the idea that markets will “defy gravity”, again, in 2021. The industry’s most widely watched investor survey— the BofA's GMFS—chimes in with the observation that "asset allocators are underweight cash first time since May’13; triggering FMS Cash Rule “sell signal,” a sentiment supported by the opening line in ASR’s recent study; “this is the most bullish result we have seen in the six year running our asset allocation survey.” The bull market in equities is paved with the irrelevance of such skeptical analysis, but sometimes the truth is in fact staring you in the face. This market is flirting with danger, and will soon suffer a significant correction. The more pertinent question, however, is whether I, or anyone else, have the tools or wherewithal to pick a tradable top, and following from that, whether a correction will mark the beginning of a more sustained downturn in equities, and other financial asset prices? As far as the first question is concerned, luck is a thing, but trying to pick even relatively obvious intermediate tops in this market isn’t easy. As a friend on the buy-side likes to remind me; “my put options are melting like butter in the microwave.” In terms of a more dramatic shift in the trend and narrative, we won’t be able to perceive it when it happens, but I don’t think such a shift is imminent.
Read MoreThis week, I’ll stitch together some thoughts on our ticket off the Covid-19 train, also known as the “vaccine”. I am prompted by Georges Pearkes’ challenge to come up with why it might be a bad idea to given people $1500, or another monetary amount, as an incentive to take the vaccine. First things first, it’s very possible that our main problem next year is that we won’t have enough of this thing. Paradoxically, the prospect of a vaccine dealing a killer blow to the virus in the middle of next year has created an incentive for authorities to maintain tighter restrictions in the short run—well into Q1, at least—while we wait for the shot. After all, if the virus is gone tomorrow, the cost of an infection today increases, a lot. A reasonable counterpoint is that governments aren’t masochists, and some form of reopening will happen in Q1, but the point I am getting is simple in the end. Assuming the vaccine is rolled out by early Spring, on the back of a miserably semi-locked down winter, it’s more likely than not that people will be scrambling for a jab, especially in an environment where the vaccine becomes a ticket to otherwise restricted activities via a form of passport. In such a situation, we won’t have to pay people to take the shot. We’ll have to make sure it isn’t hoarded. As for the counterpoint, I am not convinced that the rise of anti-vaxxers—known in the literature as "vaccine hesitancy”—can be applied to predict a threat to the effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccine efforts. That said, early survey evidence suggest that hesitancy might be an issue, especially at the margin where the line between failure and success is drawn.
Read More