Global Financials Update: February 10, 2012

  • The federal government and several states agreed to a $25 billion settlement with major U.S. banks related to alleged abusive mortgage practices and fraud. The five major banks involved in the settlement were Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and Ally Financial. A significant portion of the proceeds is expected to aid struggling homeowners. $17 billion will be set aside for loan modifications and principal reductions, while an additional $3 billion will be directed toward borrowers who are current but are unable to re-finance. The settlement covers claims against the banks related to robo-signing and foreclosure proceeds but does not prevent further litigation related to securitization or MBS issuance.
  • Greek politicians continue negotiations with European leaders over a series of additional austerity measures in exchange for an additional $172 billion bailout from the IMF/EU/ECB. Greece faces a large debt payment in March and without the additional aid will be forced to default, a move that European leaders have been looking to avoid for several months. In exchange for the additional aid, European leaders are looking for spending cuts including a lower minimum wage, pension reductions, and government layoffs. The agreement and further austerity measures have been extremely unpopular in Greece and have led to widespread public protests and the resignation of several politicians.
  • The Chinese annual inflation rate jumped to 4.5% in January, reversing a five month trend of lower inflation data. While the data had little immediate effect on the markets, analysts expect it to have an impact on the country’s ability to continue easing monetary policy.
  • Despite recently losing its AAA credit rating, France drew strong investor demand at its first auction since the downgrade. The country sold over $10 billion in intermediate bonds but received bids for nearly $25 billion worth of securities. Spain was also able to successfully auction off approximately $8 billion at a yield of 5.4%, indicating that recent measures have eased debt concerns to an extent.
  • A closely followed German business confidence index rose in January, beating economist’s expectations. Following a sharp slowdown in the fourth quarter of 2011, business activity in Germany appears to have picked up in January.
  • This week John Chambers, Standard & Poor’s managing director of sovereign credit ratings, warned that the U.S. faces the prospect of another credit rating downgrade in the next 6 to 24 months. The firm continues to monitor the fiscal and monetary policy of the U.S. closely and would like to see a “credible medium-term fiscal plan.”
  • On February 10, S&P downgraded 34 Italian banks and financial institutions after placing their ratings on watch late last year. S&P believes that Italy remains extremely vulnerable to financing risks given the high level of public debt and increasing borrowing costs.

 

Disclosure
The information contained in this summary is for informational purposes only and contains confidential and proprietary information that is subject to change without notice.  Any opinions expressed are current only as of the time made and are subject to change without notice.  This report may include estimates, projections or other forward looking statements, however, due to numerous factors, actual events may differ substantially from those presented. The graphs and tables making up this report have been based on unaudited, third-party data and performance information provided to us by one or more commercial databases.  While we believe this information to be reliable, Convergent bears no responsibility whatsoever for any errors or omissions.  Additionally, please be aware that past performance is not a guide to the future performance of any manager or strategy, and that the performance results displayed herein may have been adversely or favorably impacted by events and economic conditions that will not prevail in the future.  Therefore, caution must be used in inferring that these results are indicative of the future performance of any strategy. Index results assume the re-investment of all dividends and interest.  Moreover, the information provided is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, investment, legal or tax advice. Nothing contained herein should be construed as a recommendation or advice to purchase or sell any security, investment, or portfolio allocation.  Any investment advice provided by Convergent is client specific based on each clients’ risk tolerance and investment objectives.  Please consult your Convergent Advisor directly for investment advice related to your specific investment portfolio. Non-deposit investment products are not FDIC insured, are not deposits or other obligations of Convergent Wealth Advisors, are not guaranteed by Convergent Wealth Advisors and involve investment risks, including the possible loss of principal.
Posted in Economic Update, Market Commentary

Back to Basics

Prior to the game at a Super Bowl party I attended last Sunday, my family members and I picked squares randomly (I’m sure many of you have played that game); the family with the most winning squares at the end of the game receiving the prize. While we were only playing for movie tickets, my 10-year-old son asked, “Isn’t this gambling?” (Don’t you just love the innocence of a 10-year-old!) I explained to him that technically it is gambling, but that there are many different forms of gambling—some of which are more socially tolerated than others.

Some would argue that investing in the stock market is a form of gambling. Wikipedia (the source of all knowledge!) defines gambling as “the wagering of money or something of material value on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning additional money and/or material goods…within a short period of time.” Reading this, I can understand why many investors have come to view investing as gambling. Today’s media—both the newspapers and the seemingly endless 24-hour news coverage—have caused society to make impulsive decisions.

Yet, over time, investing in the equity markets has proven to be a very good way to build wealth.  A thousand dollars invested in the S&P 500 in 1980 was worth $29,874 as of January 31, 2012, with an annualized return of over 11%. While the annual returns are volatile, long-term investing has generally paid investors handsomely. I am concerned today’s insatiable demand for instant gratification has caused investors to lose focus on the long-term, and therefore make irrational decisions. For example, I suspect there are many investors who grew weary toward the end of 2011 and pulled out of the market, only to miss the best January in 20 years (the S&P 500 was up 4.5% and international markets were up between 5 and 11% in January alone).

The challenge with trying to time the markets is the investor has to be right twice—deciding when to pull out of the market and when to go back in. We do not believe anyone can consistently make those decisions correctly. The best strategy—and the one we will continue to employ—is to stay focused on the long-term, construct a portfolio that will meet your goals and objectives, and make adjustments as necessary.

Posted in Investor Behavior

Patience Is a Virtue

We’ve all heard that patience is a virtue. However, over the past decade it seems like everyone in the investing community has been determined to make short-term and reactionary tactical decisions in an effort to receive instant gratification. In the 1960s, the average holding period for stocks on the NYSE was 100 months compared to present day where it is a mere nine months. Investors now view a strategic long-term plan in the context of a few months instead of years. This thinking is clouded by the recent volatility in the market and the mentality that “this time it’s different.”

From the beginning of October to the end of January, the S&P 500 gained almost 20%. In fact, it was hard to find an area of the market that didn’t produce meaningful positive returns.Those with macro forecasts most certainly did not predict the recent rally we experienced. However, investing is riddled with uncertainty and it is better to invest based on value relative to long-term trends rather than the ever changing macro-economic forecasts. This desire for patience does not simply mean one should sit idly. It means we must be careful and methodical in our approach to allocations and pay strong attention to true value that eventually gets reflected in prices. Investing is a long-term game where patience is one of the key qualities of success.

In January, markets experienced stellar returns. However, they somewhat mask the underlying macro uncertainty continuing to dominate the investing landscape. The U.S. continues its slow expansion and recovery. Economic and political unrest remain in Europe and there are still concerns of its affect on the rest of the world. The attractiveness of stocks over bonds is tempered by the tail risk presented by the European situation. We remain neutral with regard to overall stock exposure, with a tilt towards the United States and beaten-down emerging markets.

To read the full Market Pulse Report, please click here.

Posted in Market Commentary

Back to the Future (Sci-Fi Meets Psychology)

Before 2008 set a new benchmark for difficult years in the investment advisory business, I used to say that 1998 was my most difficult year in the business. The S&P 500 returned 28.58% in 1998, on the heels of 33.36%, 22.96%, and 37.58% for 1997, 1996, and 1995, respectively. One might wonder how such a robust market makes for a difficult period. My discomfort was solely the result of investor psychology and the specific discontent expressed by clients as a result of their “recency bias” or the underweighting of historical information and overweighting of more recent information/experiences.

In his bestselling book, Thinking Fast and Slow, Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman states: “[w]e are prone to overestimate how much we understand about the world and to underestimate the role of chance in events. Overconfidence is fed by the illusory certainty of hindsight.” Here, history repeats itself as investors attempt to drive forward while looking in the rearview mirror, certain that they either made the wrong decisions by not investing in the proper mix of assets or—worse yet—confirming that their dedicated mix of predominantly one asset class was surely the proper choice.

In 1998, the question was simply why not have more in stocks? Post 2011, the question is the same, substituting bonds for stocks. I can think of no better example of “recency bias” than this question.  Examining the trailing five year numbers, bonds have outperformed stocks dramatically (approximately +6% compared to -2%, depending on the mix of bonds and stocks and their associated index). The periodic table below linked illustrates the near impossibility of selecting the best performing asset class year to year while simultaneously underscoring the benefit of diversification. One need not be right all the time; rather, they simply need to not be wrong by over-committing to a particular asset class.

Periodic Table of Asset Class Returns

Moreover, it is important to understand the impact of time on one’s thought process. Like a child asking “are we there yet?” on a multi-hour car ride, investors lack the patience to examine the simple facts of regression-to-the-mean and capital markets. Simply said, over a long duration, stocks should outperform bonds and bonds should outperform cash; otherwise our best bet for survival may be to purchase cans of soup and bullets, as our capital market system will have collapsed on itself.

Children simply cannot understand that, as a percentage of their life span, an hour is a much greater figure than the same hour in an adults’ life. Along the same lines, investors—obsessed with recent performance and beating the markets—cannot seem to focus beyond the last three to five years, while their expected duration for investing is decades, if not generations. History has demonstrated that in almost every 20-year rolling period, stocks have outperformed bonds.

The chart above compares the rolling 20-year returns of the S&P vs. the LT Government Bond Index. The chart shows Bond performance relative to Equity performance over those periods. Bars below the line mean that Equities outperformed (green) and above the line means that Bonds outperformed (tan). The burgundy line is the historical yields for the 10-year U.S. Treasury. Source: Ibbotson Associates

Moreover, regression-to-the-mean should be used to harvest recent outperformance against human nature and apply the laws of what goes up [too much] must come down. Active rebalancing will show that one is likely early to trim from their winners, but ultimately will yield a long-term positive result through reduced volatility.

What does the following chart tell you? Bonds are at the potential apex of a 30-year rally. If history is to repeat itself and bonds regress-to-the-mean, what is next?

Source: Ibbotson Associates

In his book Kahneman introduces a brain devised into two operating systems; he defines a distinction between our actual real world experiences and our remembrances—our imperfect memory—of those experiences. We tend to distort facts, to overweight brief segments, and to ignore the impact of cumulative exposure considerations. Since future decisions will be dependent upon our poor and biased memory of past events, our decisions are likely to be suboptimal and often violate the simple rules of economic and financial theory.

Chaos governs the marketplace. But in a sense, it is an orderly chaos that is partially decipherable and generally predictable. Although the chaos cannot be controlled nor anticipated, its boundaries can be approximated and exploited to a limited extent.

Kahneman advises to integrate the thinking brain with the intuitive brain in all decisions. That utilization of the mind’s full resources helps to anchor any investment decision. By engaging the reflective brain’s inputs we might mitigate the deadly trap of a spurious anchor that wrongly influences our final judgment.  In short, let your brain do the work, not your emotions.

This is what we do at Convergent. We use long term statistics to establish a base-rate expected return and guide our clients to stay disciplined. While all humans suffer from emotion, our role is to mitigate the influence of client emotions in making short-term, possibly damaging decisions.

The second half of 2011 started to feel a lot like 1998 as investor sentiment questioned the benefits of global diversification. In the movie Back to the Future, Marty McFly is sent back in time only to be forced to repair the future damaged by his meddling. Similarly, investors should beware the trick their minds can play as a result of heuristic biases that include “it’s different this time.” History has proven time and time again that it will repeat itself.

Posted in Investor Behavior

Recap of Q4 Market Activity

2011 was a year of risk aversion, as investors flocked to the relative safety of U.S. large cap stocks, bonds, and gold while grappling with uncertainty in Europe, political dysfunction in the U.S., slower growth in emerging markets, and fallout from the Japanese tsunami and Arab spring. While bonds posted tremendous returns and the U.S. stock market ended the year almost right where it started, most other asset classes languished—in some cases meaningfully so. This trend continued in the fourth quarter, though international stocks were able to at least post relatively modest gains.

The sovereign debt crisis in Europe continued to dominate the forefront of investor sentiment; however, there were also some encouraging economic data points coming out of the United States. The U.S. unemployment rate has dropped to its lowest level in nearly three years. Consumer confidence, meanwhile, has rebounded to near its post-recession high, though it remains well below the levels signaling a healthy and stable economy.

Stocks rallied substantially in the fourth quarter, but the difference in outlook for the U.S. and Europe was reflected in equity market performance as it had been throughout the year. All major U.S. indices gained in excess of 10% during the quarter, buoyed by improving economic data, healthy corporate balance sheets, and reasonable-to-cheap valuations. Europe and emerging markets gains were more modest—5.4% and 4.4%, respectively. Japan was a laggard during the quarter, declining 3.9%. Correlations between stocks and asset classes remain elevated, reflecting the macro-driven risk on/risk off environment. Investor demand for U.S. credit was strong as the Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Index gained 1.1% and the Barclays High Yield Index rose 6.5%. U.S. Treasuries were a standout performer for the year, gaining almost 10%.

Commodity markets did not participate in the equity market rally during the fourth quarter, due in part to the rise in the U.S. dollar, concerns of a global slowdown from the situation in Europe, and falling demand from China. Though gold lagged during the quarter, declining 5.5%, it finished 2011 at $1,566 an ounce, resulting in a 10% gain for the year.

To read the full Quarterly Market Overview, click here.

Posted in Market Commentary

Equities Shifted Into Neutral

If it weren’t for concerns over government debt burdens around the developed world, equities might actually rally. The following chart, which compares the price of the S&P 500 Index versus the book value per share for the S&P 500 Index, indicates that compared to 2000, investors today are getting two times the book value for the same price or less. Annual earnings have also grown. In 2011, owners of the S&P 500 stocks received $98 in earnings per share versus a peak of $57 per share in 2000.

Source: Standard & Poor's

Despite these relatively attractive prices, 2011 turned out to be a below-average year for equity performance. Though we all like to see the nominal value of our portfolios rise, we should take solace in the fact that our equities are more valuable.

Posted in Investment Strategy/Asset Allocation

Global Financials Update: January 20, 2012

The S&P 500 index rose again this week (+1.7%), bringing the return up to +4.6% for the first three weeks of the year. After suffering sharp losses in 2011, financial stocks have led the rally with many of last year’s worst performing stocks enjoying big gains. Bank of America, which lost 58% last year, is up over 24% to start the year. Financial stocks have moved higher as economic data continues to point to moderate economic growth and the situation in Europe potentially stabilizes. A number of S&P 500 companies have begun announcing fourth quarter earnings and the results have been mixed so far. Most of the large U.S. banks reported positive earnings this past week, which helped boost stock returns.

Stocks in Europe have also rallied to start the New Year and hit a five month high this week. The Stoxx Europe 600 Index is up +5.6% already in 2012, its best start since 1987. Greek and European officials met with private creditors this week in order to negotiate the terms of a debt swap, which would effectively exchange the existing bonds for new securities and include a significant write-down in value. Greek officials have threatened to default on a March bond payment if an agreement is not reached in the near-term.  European leaders involved in the negotiations expect a deal to be reached in the next few days. In addition to the Greek talks, economic data remains weak, leading to speculation that the ECB may reduce interest rates even further. Expectations of additional stimulus in the U.S. and possibly China have also helped fuel the rally in global stocks.

To read the full Global Financials Update, click here.

Posted in Market Commentary

Interesting Times Continue

Two recent news stories have caught my eye and I thought they were worth sharing. Neither story is earth-shattering, but each is significant in its own way. The first one adds another piece to the puzzle relating to the longevity of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The second story is one that makes you think about some of the creative ways the developed world debt crisis might be solved. The first story, reported by Bloomberg on December 29, 2011, discusses a recent agreement between Japan and China to reduce the role of the U.S. dollar in their trading relations. Below is an excerpt of the Bloomberg article:

The agreement announced between China and Japan to strengthen financial ties and promote yuan-yen trade is a small, but notable, step toward a new global economy. Its immediate practical significance is limited, yet the deal signals that a deeper transformation is under way — and one that the world should welcome. The plan was a surprise: It marks a warming of relations that had been chilly of late. The accord still lacks a timetable for implementation, but once in force it will let Chinese and Japanese trading companies switch between yuan and yen without converting to dollars first. This will encourage commerce by reducing currency risk and trading costs. The agreement will let a Japanese-backed institution sell yuan bonds in China, helping to open China’s capital market. In return, Japan will convert some of its foreign- exchange reserves into Chinese bonds. China has signed financial pacts with other nations, mainly in Asia, but the size of China-Japan trade — $340 billion last year, and growing fast — makes this deal the most important by far. Warmer relations and short-term benefits for regional trade, though, are not the main reasons the agreement matters. China seeks a bigger role for its currency in global markets, and wants power in international forums that is commensurate with its economic might. The sooner its currency is fully convertible and its economy is open to global investment, the sooner this will happen.

Given China’s significant role in the world both as an exporter and an importer, it makes a lot of sense for their currency to become one of the major currencies used in trade and to be used ultimately as a currency to diversify reserves. China has been careful to control its currency up to this point. This has provided them with an advantage as their economy has been developing in recent decades, but the time is not far off when it will actually benefit them to open up their currency to the world.

The second news item comes out of Europe and has to do with debt—but it’s not what you think. On January 9, 2012, Germany sold six-month treasury bills at a negative yield for the first time in history. According to this Bloomberg article:

The government auctioned 3.9 billion euros ($4.98 billion) of securities maturing in July at an average yield of minus 0.01 percent, the Federal Finance Agency said in an e-mailed statement today. It was the first time it sold the securities at a negative yield, Joerg Mueller, a spokesman in Frankfurt, said in a telephone interview. The sale drew bids that were nearly double the amount allotted. The Netherlands sold securities due in March at a yield of zero on Jan. 3.

Investors are actually willing to pay the German government in order to guarantee their principal will be returned in six months! They’ll make $500,000 on this issue. If Germany is being paid to issue debt, maybe they can issue enough debt to make enough money to pay off some of the debts of its neighbors. Joking aside, this may signal one of a couple things: (1) there is not enough high grade debt out there to meet the normal demand; or (2) investors are quite pessimistic about the future and therefore demanding more safe-haven assets. Either way, for a long-term investor who believes the developed world will recover from its current debt challenges, it offers a more compelling case to consider equities with P/E multiples at multi-decade lows and yields on European equities near 4%.

Posted in Economic Update

Diversification: We Are Still Believers

Years from now, people may look back at 2011 and conclude it was a decent year for the markets. The S&P 500 posted a modest gain and U.S. government bonds generated stellar returns. However, these good tidings mask the underlying macro uncertainty and nerve-racking market volatility that most investors experienced. For many, the key memory might be that diversification simply did not work, and any investment outside of U.S. large cap stocks or government bonds detracted from rather than added to portfolio returns. Allocations thought to be cutting edge (those including international exposures, commodities, REITs, and hedged strategies) were taken to the woodshed by “old-fashioned” approaches.

But is diversification truly dead? Only in the unlikely case that macro risks continue to be the primary driver of asset class returns, and that they keep heading in the same direction (a flight to safety toward the U.S.). Our view is that over the short-term, risk assets may flock together, but eventually differences in returns will be driven by fundamental factors (such as earnings) and valuation imbalances. Regardless, we do not look to protect portfolios only by spreading investments amongst risk assets; true diversification comes from the still-uncorrelated positions in bonds and gold.

As for 2012, we expect the U.S. will continue its slow expansion as long as Europe experiences only a modest recession and emerging market economies regain some of their momentum. If that is the case, equities, which are reasonably valued, could do relatively well especially compared to bonds. Of course, the attractiveness of stocks over bonds is offset by the tail risk presented by the European debt crisis. Given the tug of war between valuations and macro uncertainty, we remain neutral with regard to overall stock exposure, with a tilt toward U.S. dividend paying companies and beaten-down emerging markets.

To read more of the Market Pulse Report, please click here.

Posted in Market Commentary

Time to Revisit the Game Plan

“One last item I found particularly helpful is Marks’ discussion of understanding the role of luck. He draws from Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s writings to point out that investors are often right for the wrong reasons (‘lucky idiots’) and that the correctness of an action cannot be determined by the outcome. There are many possible outcomes, and occasionally low probability outcomes actually occur. Thus, someone who makes a big bet on a low probability event that actually happens looks brilliant, but was likely taking immense amounts of risk. Our attempt to counter this tendency is our ‘process versus outcome’ mentality. We are often wrong in this business; in fact it is part of the business. The key is to make more money when you’re right than you lose when you’re wrong. This mindset infuses many things we do. When we analyze our mistakes, we try to focus on our process and where it could be improved, not just on outcomes.”

This excerpt is from the 2011 second quarter newsletter of Lane Five Capital Management, which eloquently introduces how we approach the evaluation process.  I thought this would be a good jumping off point for addressing a question that is sure to cross investors’ minds: how could I have done better this year?

It wasn’t that long ago that investors in the U.S., either by choice or because there weren’t many other options, focused their portfolios on large U.S. companies and U.S. Treasuries or Municipal bonds. That simple strategy has been abandoned by most as accessibility to additional investment options has improved substantially in recent decades. Changes in the investment landscape have been led by the most successful university endowments and pension funds as they seek out ways to increase return and/or reduce risk.

Unfortunately 2011 proved to be a year where simple was superior, as many assets failed to keep up with Treasuries (7-10 year Treasury is up 15.6% this year) and U.S. Large Caps (S&P 500 up 2.1%). Some might be inclined to change their investment strategy based on the recent past or even an expectation for a different future, a “new normal” if you will. We believe it is important to constantly challenge the status quo, and therefore will spend time evaluating the process, not just the result.

Let me give one quick example of what I mean by evaluating the process, not just the result. Many investors bet that U.S. Treasuries would decline in value as a result of the U.S. losing its AAA debt rating status and therefore avoided Treasuries. The outcome for those that abandoned Treasuries wasn’t great, as Treasuries were the best performing asset class this year. One could conclude one of two things: either they made a mistake (based on the result) and should not have sold Treasuries or they actually made a rational decision (based on the process) when faced with already low Treasury rates, the pending debt downgrade, and no real political resolution to our growing debt burden.

I thought it might be helpful to remind people about our process and the principles that guide us in advising client portfolios with the goal of achieving the optimal risk-adjusted return given a particular individual’s goals and objectives. There are four major tenets we practice that aim to improve upon the traditional 60% equity/40% bond portfolio. By “improve” I mean to either increase the return for a given level of risk or to reduce the risk for a similar level of return.

  1. First is asset class diversification—the effort to identify and combine asset classes that are less than perfectly correlated can potentially reduce risk and/or increase returns over time in a portfolio.
  2. Second is actively rebalancing the portfolio and/or making tactical shifts in response to inefficient pricing of assets across markets caused by investor fear or greed.
  3. Third is manager selection. Mathematics shows that the value of minimizing drawdowns is more powerful in compounding returns over time than maximizing the capture of the upside movements in the markets. We seek managers that, in addition to demonstrating stock picking acumen, also have a disciplined process  designed to avoid the full extent of market sell-offs.
  4. Finally, although portfolios are generally constructed to capture economic growth over time, we feel there is a need to hold assets in the portfolio that are likely to have a low or negative correlation to growth assets, which are designed to provide some form of systemic hedge against severe market downturns such as Treasuries or Gold.

Though some will argue with minor points here and there, the truth is that three of these four principles did not work well this year. The only one that worked was the systemic hedge in the portfolio, Treasuries and Gold. Diversification into other equity classes besides U.S. large cap, not only didn’t reduce volatility because correlations were so high, but also detracted from returns. Tactical shifts, such as reducing Treasuries, increasing emerging markets debt and/or equity based on attractiveness didn’t pan out (yet!). Rebalancing didn’t produce great results either as the asset classes that had sold off the most continued to underperform as the year went on. Finally, managers were challenged this year to outperform their respective indices and many of them failed for similar reasons to those noted above, including high correlations across stocks and biases that have traditionally helped such as value, small cap, non-U.S. or EM exposure tilts.

The outcome in 2011 was driven less by fundamentals and more by fear. Though a reasonable discounting of the risks associated with the developed countries’ debt should have been expected, we feel the pendulum has swung too far. We continue to believe the diversified approach to investing offers the least risky way for investors to achieve their objectives by minimizing the impact of mistakes and/or unexpected results and capitalizing on the short-term emotion-driven behavior of the markets.

 

Posted in Investment Strategy/Asset Allocation