Monthly Archives: November 2008

The New Fall Fashion: Converting to a Bank Holding Company

Credit card company American Express Co. today announced that the Federal Reserve approved its application to become a commerical bank holding company.  The reasons for the move are similar to those offered by investment banks Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. when they converted to bank holding companies: to reassure investors and creditors and to gain access to U.S. government funding programs.

On September 21, 2008, Goldman Sachs announced that it would become the fourth-largest bank holding company. As the credit crisis deepened and pressure on Goldman Sachs’s common stock threatened the investment bank’s ability to continue its operations, converting to a bank holding company, thus coming under the regulatory authority of the Federal Reserve, offered a path to restoration of investor and lender confidence in the firm.  The move also provided the company continued access to the Federal Reserve discount window.  Earlier this year, regulators had taken the extraordinary step of allowing investment banks access to the discount window as part of measures undertaken to alleviate the credit crisis, but the Federal Reserve planned to remove such access in January 2009.

American Express funds much of its daily operations through short-term loans in the credit markets, especially in commercial paper.  When those markets froze up, American Express found itself squeezed.  By converting to a bank holding company, the company will have access to the Fed’s discount window and other recently announced federal programs designed to ease the credit crunch, such as the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

One interesting twist that has come out of the Goldman Sachs conversion is that Goldman subsequently applied for a New York state bank charter.  Goldman Sachs has two active deposit-taking entities under its corporate umbrella: a Utah-based industrial loan company, GS Bank USA, and a European banking concern.  The company merged assets from a number of its businesses, including those that engaged in lending operations, into GS Bank USA.  This resulted in GS Bank USA instantly becoming one of the 10 largest banks in the United States, with over $150 billion in assets.  Goldman Sachs also has a New York-chartered trust company, Goldman Sachs Trust Company, which is the entity the company plans to convert, pending the approval of its application for a state bank charter, into a full service New York bank with trust powers under the name Goldman Sachs Bank USA, according to Governor Paterson’s statement.  The company further plans to merge GS Bank USA into the new Goldman Sachs Bank USA.

“Wall Street is undergoing a transformation,” said New York Superintendent of Banks Richard H. Neiman. “The decision by Goldman Sachs to convert from an investment bank to a bank holding company with increased capital requirements, lower leverage and continual on-site examination will provide a high level of assurance to investors, customers and counterparties.  The New York Banking Department will be able to help smooth the transition by leveraging its broad experience with wholesale and capital market activities.”

As of the time this story went to publication, Goldman Sachs had not commented on its application for a state bank charter.

It will be interesting to see whether American Express eventually plans to open one or more American Express bank branches, and whether the company chooses to pursue a federal or state charter.

New Mindset Needed for Stock Market Investing

Sideways – that is the path the U.S. stock market has taken for the last 10 years.  Sure, there have been dramatic ups and downs, but for anyone who bought the Dow Jones Industrial Average in 1998 and held it until now, the end result is zero – 10 years and nothing to show for it.  All of the financial TV talking heads and mutual fund giants will continue to tell you to buy and hold.  In this market and for the foreseeable future, that strategy will not work – not to mention the fact that investing is not a “one-size-fits-all” proposition.  Each individual must consider their risk profile, age and goals in considering how much exposure one should have to the stock market, and if any exposure should be attempted at all.  I have mentioned this in other posts by interspersing it between a discussion of economic indicators, but I believe that one entire post focused on this subject is absolutely necessary at this time, because the market-bottom callers are coming out of the woodwork again.

Below I have reproduced a recent article by David D. Moenning, co-founder of stock market trading service TopGunsTrading.com.  He makes a reasoned argument, using historical market facts (thank you David, I was starting to feel lonely), as to why buying and holding stocks will not do anyone any favors in the current environment.  Though I am reproducing the article in its entirety, if anyone would like to link to the page, please do so by clicking here.  Enjoy the article!

“Is It Time For Timing Again?”


November 9, 2008
By David D. Moenning
I entered this business right out of college in 1980, during a period when the stock market was considered “dead money.” At that time, inflation was raging, interest rates were sky high, the economy was flirting with recession (again), and Time Magazine had just run a cover featuring “The Death of Equities.” The thinking was that since the DJIA had been fluctuating between somewhere around 600 and 1000 for the past 15 years, the sideways action meant nobody was ever going to make any money in the stock market again.

At that time, the concept of “buy and hold/hope” was sheer lunacy. But we should also keep in mind that the mutual fund industry was in its infancy back then. As I recall, in 1982 – right before the market embarked on a spectacular bull market – total assets in mutual funds were something like $82 billion (I’m talking about the assets of the entire industry, not a specific fund or fund family). Nowadays, an $80 billion fund isn’t even the biggest one out there.

The point is that in the early 1980’s, nobody wanted anything to do with the stock market and the only way to make money in stocks was to employ what has since been dubbed an “evil” strategy of market timing.

Buy Low and Sell High? Heresy! I’m not completely sure how the concept of buying low and selling high became a bad thing and so despised by the financial planning community. Well, that’s not entirely true since it probably has something to do with the idea that mutual funds would prefer that you leave your money in their funds at ALL times so that they can continue to collect their fees. And with the explosive growth of mutual funds over the past 25 years, the industry has done a marvelous job in convincing the public as well as just about every financial planner/advisor out there that market timing is a VERY bad idea.

In case you have somehow escaped the endless propaganda, the mutual fund industry touts the horrors of “missing the best 10 days in the market” as a reason for telling you that “timing” can’t be done. The argument suggests that if you are off with your “timing,” you might miss out on the 10 best up days and therefore destroy your returns for the long term.

But as with any good sales pitch, this presentation is almost entirely one-sided (no, scratch that, it is indeed entirely one-sided) and fails to mention the benefits of “missing” the 10 WORST days (of which, we’ve seen a couple lately). It also fails to point out that if you were really clumsy and managed to “miss” both the 10 best days AND the 10 worst days, you would still significantly outperform the market!

Do The Math As for the contention that “market timing” doesn’t work, this is just plain silly. Timing the market (or a stock, or a bond, or a commodity, etc) DOES indeed work and is actually fairly simple to do. For example, while it may be one of the dumbest ways to “time the market,” using reversals in price has proven to work fairly well.

If I could show you a way that you could have beaten the annual return of S&P 500 by nearly 67% per year over 40 years… Would you be interested?

Here’s the details. From mid-July 1968 through last Friday, the S&P 500 has averaged a return of +5.8% per year. However, if you were to simply buy whenever the S&P 500 rises by 8.4% and then sell whenever it falls by -7.2% (a concept developed by the researchers at Ned Davis Research) you would achieve an annual return of +9.7% per year. And by doing the math, we find that 9.7% per year is 3.9% per year greater than 5.8%. Thus, this simplistic approach has been 67.2% better than the market’s return each year for 40 years.

You may have noticed that I mentioned that this was a “dumb” approach. So, yes Virginia, there are better methods of doing market timing. For example, NDR’s computers show that over the past 28 years, when the market (as defined by NDR’s All-Cap equal weighted equity index of 1600 stocks) is below its 25-day moving average AND the advance/decline line is below its 5-day moving average, the market has lost ground at a rate of -29.5% per year. And yet, when both the market and the A/D line are above their respective ma’s, the market has gained ground at a rate of +43.1% per year.

So, I ask you, with two fairly easy methods of “timing” the market available, doesn’t the concept sound better than simply sitting there and taking a beating during a Bear Market? But, unfortunately, there is a rub. The problem is that the vast majority of investors absolutely positively cannot live with the side-effects of such strategies: whipsaws.

You see, the problem is that in looking at our price reversal strategy, we find that only 53% of the signals were correct. This meant that 47% of the “trades” were losers. The bottom line is the public isn’t capable of implementing such a successful strategy because investors equate losing trades with being “dumb” – and very few investors can deal with being “dumb” that often.

What’s the Plan, Stan? Make no mistake about it folks; anybody who has ever bought a stock at $10 and sold it at $15 is a “timer.” Come on, isn’t “buying low and selling high” the whole idea of investing in the stock market?

So now that we’ve established that deep down, everyone is really an evil market timer, it’s time to get to work. You see, it is our humble opinion that what we’re seeing in the market right now is a cycle that may wind up being akin to the 1965 – 1982 period, where the major indices basically moved sideways in a wide range without making any upside progress.

And just in case you disagree with the prognosis, take a peek at a monthly chart of the major indices. In essence, the Dow, S&P 500, and NASADQ have made no progress since the middle of 1998. This means that any of those long-term, buy-and-hope investors are still underwater on the dollars they obediently put into mutual funds at any time since 1999.

Now for the good news… Since we can identify the type of environment we currently find ourselves dealing with, we can also implement strategies designed to succeed in the environment. And yep, you guessed it; this would include a few of those evil market timing strategies.

However, please do not misinterpret our message. We are NOT suggesting that we are going to suddenly change our game plan and start bombing in and out of the stock market with regularity. It simply means that going forward, we will probably be a bit more aggressive with our defensive strategies when sell signals occur and also play the game a little harder when we get big-picture buy signals from our market models.

We should also point out that our stock portfolios already play the timing game (and always have). As you may know, we strive to own only stocks that (1) are top rated in terms of earnings strength and company performance, and (2) present favorable technical setups on a chart basis. And then whenever a stock “breaks down” (examples would include breaks of trend lines, moving averages, or support levels) it is automatically cut from the fold. So, while this may not be the same as pure “market timing,” the approach does allow us to let winners run and cut losses short.

However, at this stage of the game we will be looking to our “timing signals” to tell us when to up the ante in terms of our exposure levels. Remember, at this point in time, we are only buying positions that are between one-quarter to one-half of their normal size. So, until we get some positive signals, we will continue to play the game with a conservative bent.

Wishing you all the best for a profitable week ahead,

David D. Moenning
Co-Founder TopGunsTrading.com

Positions in Stocks Mentioned: None


The Week in Review
Week Month YTD
Dow Jones Industrial Average -4.09% -4.09% -32.57%
S&P 500 Index -3.92% -3.92% -36.61%
NASDAQ Composite -4.27% -4.27% -37.89%


Government Restructures AIG Bailout; China Announces Stimulus Package

AIG

The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. government has reached a deal with struggling insurance company, American International Group Inc. (AIG) to restructure the original $123 million bailout package with a new $150 package that mostly aims to deal with the credit default swaps (CDSs) and credit default obligations (CDOs) held by the company.   AIG holds more than $400 billion in CDSs and  $80 billion of CDOs.  Its risk management model has been coming under fire.  AIG had recently been forced to post about $50 billion in collateral to its trading partners, largely to offset sharp drops in the value of securities it insured with CDSs.  These liabilities have continued to balloon even after the first Fed bailout.  The following are some of the more noteable parts of the agreement between the insurer, the New York Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department:

  • The government will swap the original $85billion two-year loan for a $60 billion, five-year loan at a lower interest rate.
  • The government will also use the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to buy a stake in AIG in preferred shares at a total of $40 billion (the shares receive a 10 percent interest rate).
  • The Fed will also take over AIG’s troubled CDSs and the mortgage-backed assets in the company’s securities lending unit – the two divisions that caused the insurer’s near-collapse in September.  Under the new plan, the Fed will put $30 billion in a new vehicle that will purchase some $70 billion of AIG’s CDSs from its counterparties.  AIG will contribute $5 billion to the vehicle.  The regulators will also invest $22.5 billion in debt, with AIG putting $1 billion in equity, into a second vehicle that will purchase the residential mortgage-backed securities held in the insurer’s securities lending unit.  If the value of those assets rises, the Fed will keep the majority of the gains.

While it has been pointed out by the Fed that AIG’s operations have connections to businesses and governements around the world, and thus, the company’s failure would have serious financial repurcussions, over time it has become less clear just how severe those repurcussions would be.  For example, Lehman Brothers was allowed to go into bankruptcy and the subsequent auctions of its CDOs, while not pretty (most were priced around 9 cents on the dollar or a 91 percent loss for those holding the debt instruments), did not severely disrupt the markets or the economy.  So, in some circles, the argument is now being raised to either allow AIG to fail and auction off its debt over time to mitigate the “fire sale” effect, or nationalize it as the government did with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Not only is this practice of bailouts inflationary (the government must print money to finance the bailouts), but also there may be no end to it, for there is now talk of bailing out U.S. automakers and other so-called “monoline” insurers.  At some point the free market must be allowed to do what it does best, eliminate weak businesses so that new, stronger businesses may grow to take their place.

For more in-depth analysis of the AIG bailout, please see this article by Yves Smith at RGE Monitor.

China Announces Stimulus Package

China announced a long-rumored 4 trillion yuan ($586 billion) stimulus plan to invest in low-rent housing, infrastructure in rural areas, as well as roads, railways and airports to spur expansion, helping sustain chinese growth.  The country will also increase purchases of grain to support the price for rural farmers and allow tax deductions for fixed asset investment as previously rumored. The funds, almost 1/5 of China’s 2007 GDP, will be used from now till end of 2010.

The following is an analysis of the Chinese stimulus plan by Senior Analyst Flemming J. Nielsen at Danske Bank:

 

 

On Sunday, the Chinese government announced a major new stimulus package estimated at CNY4 trillion (about USD570bn), to be spent over the next two years. The total size of the stimulus package is about 14.5% of GDP (based on 2008 estimates), or roughly 7% of GDP in spending per year.

The main elements in the stimulus package are:

 

  • Construction of more affordable low-rent housing.
  • Increasing investment in rural infrastructure (mainly road and power grids).
  • Boosting investment in transportation (railway, airports and upgrade of urban power grids).
  • Increase spending on healthcare and education.
  • Improve environmental protection by investing in sewage, rubbish treatment and energy conser-vation.
  • Extending reform in VAT reform to all industries (cut corporate taxation by CNY120bn).
  • Income support by increasing agricultural subsidies and subsidies to low income urbane resi-dents.
  • We should be careful not to get too excited by the huge headline numbers. First, the stimulus package is not all “new” spending measures. For example, the numbers apparently include the spending on recon-struction in the areas hit by the earthquake in early May. Second, many of the measures included in the stimulus package have already been announced (railway investments and rural infrastructure invest-ments). Hence, to a large degree the stimulus package summarises the government’s recent initiatives and the numbers, to some degree, are boosted to maximise impact on the financial markets and not least to improve China’s standing at the G20 meeting starting in Washington later this week.

    The main boost to growth from the stimulus package will have to come from housing and infrastructure investments. This raises the question about implementation. How fast will you actually be able to increase infrastructure investment substantially? Planning will naturally take time and for that reason there could be a considerable time lag from making the investment decision to actually starting construction. Hence, the stimulus package is probably not going to make much difference in the short run. Q4 08 and Q1 09 will remain very challenging with GDP growth probably dipping below 8% y/y. The best we can hope for in the short run is that the stimulus package may help to stabilise financial markets.

    However, later in 2009 the stimulus package will become an important driver for growth. The current fis-cal easing appears to be much larger than the fiscal expansion initiated in 1998 during the Asian crisis downturn. While we still need further details to make a final judgment it is not unrealistic to expect this

     

     

    stimulus package to add about 2pp to GDP growth next year. It limits the downside risk to the Chinese economy considerably.Then there is the question whether China can afford a stimulus package of this size. In our opinion financ-ing is no major problem. China is currently one of the economies in the global economy best positioned to ease fiscal policy. Public finances have improved significantly in recent years and are currently showing a slight surplus although this is likely to return to deficit on the back of both slower growth and the ex-pected sharp increase in expenditure. Total public sector debt is less than 20% of GDP and, even includ-ing off-balance sheet items, public debt is still low in terms of international comparison. Obviously there currently are no important external constraints with China’s significant current account surplus and booming FX reserves.

    Impact

     

    Press release about stimulus package

    Stimulus package details from government web page

     

    : Despite the announcement we still believe we will have to adjust our Q4 08 and Q1 09 GDP fore-cast down and hence probably our forecast of 8.8% GDP growth in 2009 slightly down. Our forecast for China has been based on our expectation of some major fiscal stimulus package. Hence, yesterday’s an-nouncement will not change our forecast significantly. However, we do feel more confident that growth overall will not decline significantly below 8% y/y. Q4 08 and Q1 09 will probably be most challenging in terms of growth.Today’s announcement has no major impact on our forecast for CNY. As long as growth does not drop significantly below 8% we still believe CNY will continue to appreciate slightly against the US dollar. This is partly to avoid currency again becoming a major issue with the new US administration. With aggressive fiscal policy easing the need for monetary easing might be less. Notably the government in its press re-lease says it has turned to an “active” fiscal policy and “moderately easy”, which could indicate that the Peoples Bank of China is not going to cut interest rates as aggressively as seen recently. We have been considering putting additional rate cuts into our forecast but in light of yesterday’s stimulus package we maintain our call of four additional 27bps rate cuts.

     

    UPDATED: Economic Roundup (Week of 11-3-2008 to 11-7-2008): Depth of Recession Unknown As Jobless Rate Accelerates

    It is expected that economic numbers, such as corporate earnings, jobs, and global demand for goods, are going to be ugly for at least a couple of months.  However, with the S&P 500 still trading at a price-to-earnings ratio of approximately 20 (though that was knocked down some over the last two days), the expectations of the stock market are not low enough.

    Here are some of the economic headlines from this week that, as a whole, explain why:

    • The Labor Department reported a 10th consecutive decline in U.S. jobs on a worse-than-expected loss of 240,000 in October; the September loss was revised sharply downward to 284,000, bringing the total number of jobs lost for the year to 1.2 million; the unemployment rate jumped to 6.5 percent.
    • Bank of England cuts its key interest rate by 1.5 percent to 3 percent.
    • The European Central Bank reduced its interest rate by .5 percent to 3.25 percent.
    • The payroll company, ADP, reported that U.S. companies reduced payrolls by 157,000 in October.
    • Average weekly hours fell .5 percent, which was the largest decline since April 2003.
    • The Institute for Supply Management’s manufacturing and service industry indicies both showed significant economic contraction.
    • General Motors announced that it lost $2.5 billion in the last quarter, which is $4.45 per share – yeesh! – even more concerning though is the fact that third-quarter liquidity dropped to $16.2 billion, down from $21 billion in the previous quarter – bottom line is that the company is running out of money and, therfore, out of time.
    • Ford Motor Co. reported a quarterly loss of 6 cents per share, which was better than the 19-cent-per-share loss from the same quarter last year; however, the company also announced that it will cut another 10 percent of its North American salaried workforce and further reduce capital expenditures.
    • Toyota, the world’s second largest automaker, cuts is fiscal-year earnings forecast nearly in half, after reporting a 69 percent drop in its fiscal second-quarter net profit.
    • Cisco, the leading maker of networking equipment warned that it would report a revenue decline for the first time in five years.
    • October same-store sales for both Costco and Target drop 1 percent and 4.8 percent, respectively.
    • October same-store sales at Gap fall 16 percent, while Abercrombie & Fitch sees 20 percent decline.
    • Walmart was the beneficiary of other stores’ losses as its same-store sales were up 2.4 percent (excluding fuel prices) in October.
    • Disney’s fiscal fourth-quarter net income dropped 13 percent, and the company expected the decline in consumer spending to worsen in 2009.
    • Qualcomm, a company that makes the technology used in cellular phones, announced a 22 percent drop in profit in the third quarter, and it warned that it expected profits in the next fiscal year to drop between 7 and 11 percent.
    • Nvidia, a computer chip maker, reported a 74 percent drop in profit in the third quarter.
    • Home builder D.R. Horton warned that that home sales revenue dropped 50 percent from the year earlier, as the number of homes closed fell 41 percent.
    • Bloomberg reports that analysts now predict that earnings for 2009 will rise 13 percent, down from the average forecast of 24 percent just two months ago.

    The economic outlook is bad all over the world, so companies that earlier this year were the darlings of the stock market because they had exposure to overseas sales, are no longer safe havens.  Here is an excerpt from the statement issued by the Bank of England in conjunction with its interest rate cut:

    “The past two months have seen a substantial downward shift in the prospects for inflation in the United Kingdom. There has been a very marked deterioration in the outlook for economic activity at home and abroad. Moreover, commodity prices have fallen sharply.

    “Since mid-September, the global banking system has experienced its most serious disruption for almost a century. While the measures taken on bank capital, funding and liquidity in several countries, including our own, have begun to ease the situation, the availability of credit to households and businesses is likely to remain restricted for some time. As a consequence, money and credit conditions have tightened sharply. Equity prices have fallen substantially in many countries.”

    For those looking for safety in this market with some return on their investment, I would recommend municipal bonds, and especially municipal bond ladders.  I am not referring to municipal bond funds, those are still have exposure to the stock market because they are traded like any exchange traded or mutual fund.  For more information about municipal bonds and other fixed income investments, please see this previous post.

    Given how poorly the worldwide economy is now performing, and with dark clouds still on the horizon, there has been much criticism of the value of economics as a science.  Believe it or not, I tend to agree with some of the criticism.  Harvard professor, Greg Mankiw, has an interesting discussion of this issue on his blog.

    FDIC Offers Free Deposit Insurance Seminars

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has added four more seminars in addition to the eight recent seminars it held for bank employees.  The 90-minute telephone seminars cover the recent changes to deposit insurance coverage and help guide bank employees through the process of determining a customer’s deposit insurance coverage.  The presentation is followed by a question-and-answer period.  The seminars will be held on November 14th and December 5th, 10th and 19th of 2008.
    For more information, please see the announcement (FIL-120-2008) at the FDIC’s website.