The investment universe is filled with surprises, and perhaps the biggest shocker of all is the idea that the value strategies of Ben Graham and his disciples are in general agreement with modern portfolio theory (MPT).
Granted, it sounds absurd. MPT, after all, is the suite of financial theories that spawned index funds and the view that market prices are the best estimate of intrinsic value. Meanwhile, Graham’s value strategy asserts the opposite, advising that savvy investors on the hunt for bargains can do a better job of calculating fundamental value, a strategy that boosts the odds of generating market-beating returns.
MPT and value investing, it would seem, are natural adversaries. That was true, but the two ideas have become similar thanks to the evolution of MPT. But while the academic interpretation of MPT has changed, the popular perception remains stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, when two of its major components–the efficient market hypothesis (EMH) and indexing–first arrived on the financial scene. Recognized or not, there’s been a slow but steady accumulation of empirical research since the 1980s that’s altered financial economists’ view of capital markets. As a result, there’s a new MPT in town and it’s a lot closer in spirit to a Graham-inspired view of investing.
Ok, but why should investors care? Because if the classic strategies of active and passive investing are more closely aligned around value investing principles, the union lends more authority to value strategies generally. Indeed, if two formerly competing notions of money management–each commanding huge amounts of money under management–are now in basic agreement, it probably reflects a fundamental truth about how the capital markets function and how investors should build and manage portfolios.
Author Archives: James Picerno
RETAIL SALES & IMPORT PRICES
Retail sales last month slipped a bit, the Census Bureau reports. But much of the decline came from the auto and related industries. Given the soft economic backdrop of late, it’s no wonder that consumers are reluctant to buy cars, which for most folks are the largest purchase after a house. Otherwise, this was a surprisingly good report, given the dominance of plus signs elsewhere in the column of monthly changes among the broad categories of retail sales. Excluding motor vehicles and parts, retail sales overall rose 0.5% last month.
Joe Sixpack seems to be holding up quite nicely in the face of recessionary fear, or so this data series is telling us. So, what’s the problem? For some thoughts on that, we turn to import prices, which surged by 1.8% last month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports. Sure, that’s lower than the nosebleed 2.9% for March. But no one should be celebrating. The United States is importing inflation, and the problem may get worse.
WHAT’S UP (AND DOWN) WITH EXPORTS?
Exports account for about 13% of the U.S. economy these days. That’s a small piece of the GDP pie, but it’s an important piece, thanks to the strong growth in exports.
Exports have been one of the rare consistently bright spots in the U.S. economy. For each and every quarter since Q4 2005, exports have grown at a higher pace–quite often a significantly higher pace than overall GDP, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. In this year’s Q1, for instance, exports jumped by 5.5%–a world above the meager 0.6% rise in overall GDP (both are quoted in seasonally adjusted real annual rates).
In fact, the strong performance in exports in Q1 is typical of the trend for the last several years. Exports, in short, have become a critical factor in keeping the recessionary forces at bay. Exports climbed 5.2% through this year’s Q1 over the year-ago quarter. Overall GDP is up only 2.5% over the same period (seasonally adjusted real annual rates).
MONEY DEBATES
Does money matter? The answer depends on who’s talking. Suffice to say, however, Milton Friedman’s dictum that inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon is now debatable in the academic community as well as in the board rooms of central banks around the world.
Consensus on the strategic answer for managing inflation appears to be fading. Michael Sesit at Bloomberg News has a nice essay today on some of the stress points that harass the subject of inflation theory these days.
TALKING ABOUT OIL
Where’s the price of oil headed? Higher, says Matt Simmons, CEO of Simmons & Co. International, a Houston energy-focused investment bank. Of course, Simmons has been saying that for years. In fact, his bullish view on crude predates the great energy bull market of the 21st century.
The surge in oil’s price doesn’t surprise Simmons because the fundamentals of supply and demand have been sending a clear signal about the future since the late-1990s, he says. For example, the discovery of large oil fields on a global basis has trailed off over the years, his research advises. Meanwhile, global demand keeps rising. And with China, India and other developing economies looking for more oil than ever before, the prospect of keeping supply and demand balanced looks more challenging by the day.
YIELD ANALYSIS
Dividend yields don’t tell you everything, but they tell you a lot. Sometimes.
A fair number of studies over the years find that the correlation between yield and subsequent return over the next five years and beyond is strong enough to convince fair-minded investors to watch those yields for clues about what’s coming. In other words, higher yields have a tendency to lead to higher returns, while lower yields imply lower returns.
No, it’s not absolute. Nothing ever is in finance. That caveat aside, favoring markets, and points in time when yields are relatively higher has a tendency to improve the odds of capturing higher total returns in the years ahead. In fact, this is an old idea, captured in Ben Graham’s famous counsel that the market is a voting machine in the short run and a weighing machine in the long run. By that he meant that speculators rule now, tomorrow, next week and even next year when it comes to setting prices. But over longer periods, certainly five years or more, valuation dictates price. And dividend yield has proven to be an especially robust signal of expected returns.
With that in mind, we present two charts, each telling different stories. The first chart below graphs the dividend yield history for the world’s developed markets. Although the absolute levels vary, the trend of late has been consistent across regions: yields are up. That’s a function of the fact that prices have fallen relative to levels of a year ago.
click to enlarge
WILL MAY LOOK LIKE APRIL?
It’s hardly great news, but the fact that job destruction was a bit less destructive last month will inspire the optimists that the recovery has begun.
Nonfarm payrolls shrunk by a relatively modest 20,000 last month, or roughly a quarter of the monthly losses that have been posted in each of the previous three months of this year. The April reprieve, if we can call it that, certainly made a graphical impression. As our chart below shows, last month’s softening in job losses ended a five-month stretch of decelerating conditions for minting new employment opportunities. By that we mean that for the first time since last October, the trend last month didn’t worsen compared to the previous month. And while we’re pointing out reasons to be cheerful, let’s note that the jobless rate ticked down to 5.0% in April, slightly better than the 5.1% for March.
But let’s not get carried away, at least not yet. Let’s not forget that goods-producing employment is still getting hammered even as the broader employment picture offers reason for hope. Meantime, Wall Street is eager to see light at the end of this tunnel, as yesterday’s stock market surge suggests. Yet another rate cut by the Fed earlier in the week helped get the bulls’ hearts racing, as did an improvement in the dollar in forex markets. And as we noted yesterday, April generally was a good month for most asset classes.
So, what’s the problem? As always, there’s no shortage of things to worry about. But no one should underestimate the stock market’s capacity for climbing this year’s wall of worry. Mr. Market is always looking forward while many of us are overly focused on the past. Such is the limitations of being stuck with wetware as the primary tool in the business of asset management.
APRIL SHOWERS BROUGHT PERFORMANCE FLOWERS
The major asset classes had their best performance month in April since last October. Only TIPS and foreign developed market bonds suffered red ink last month, as our table below shows. On balance, April was the strongest monthly tally since the perfection of October 2007, when everything was in the black.
April fell short of the October standard, but not by much. Meanwhile, the leading performers were anything but subtle last month. Indeed, April’s big winner was emerging market equities, which soared more than 9%. That’s about as high a monthly rise as this corner of equities has ever posted.
In a strong second-place showing: REITs, up 6.4%, which is another performance that’s rarely topped in any one month, based on the historical record.
Meanwhile, stocks across the board were up, and so were junk bonds and commodities. Let’s just say that April was a success for investors with diversified portfolios. Unless you were loaded to the gills in inflation-indexed Treasuries and/or sovereign bonds issued by the major foreign governments, you almost certainly saw your portfolio’s value rise last month.
JOE TURNS DEFENSIVE
The economy managed to grow slightly in this year’s first quarter, the government reported today. GDP rose by an annualized 0.6% in this year’s first three months, matching the growth rate in Q4 2007. Given all the recession anxiety of late, that’s a victory of sorts. But this is no time for celebrating. As a closer reading of today’s GDP report shows, consumers are turning defensive in their spending habits in a big way.
Personal consumption expenditures (PCE)–which represent about 72% of total GDP– rose by a meager 1.0% (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the first quarter–down from 2.3% in Q4 2007. That’s the lowest pace since Q2 2001, which also witnessed a 1.0% expansion. The reason for the current slowdown: two of PCE’s three major components posted declines in the first quarter. Spending on durable goods was particularly hard hit, dropping by a hefty 6.1%–the first case of red ink here since 2005. Nondurable goods also slipped in Q1, falling 1.3%. This marks only the fourth instance in the past 15 years that nondurable goods spending contracted in a quarterly reading.
The lone source of consumer spending salvation came via services expenditures; the only member of the three broad gauges that define consumer spending that posted a gain in Q1. Fortunately, services spending posted a healthy 3.4% jump. But that only reminds that consumer spending overall would be shrinking if it wasn’t for the resilience in services.
Nonetheless, no one should misunderstand what’s unfolding: Joe Sixpack’s sentiment to buy, buy, buy has taken a hefty blow, at least for the moment. And no wonder: prices are soaring for basic staples, i.e., energy and food. Meanwhile, the family home is worth quite a bit less and Joe’s investment portfolio probably suffers a similar discounting. Logic suggests that saving more and spending less is eminently reasonable at this juncture. The only question now: How long will the newly defensive sentiment last?
Clearly, it’s premature to say that the worst of the economy’s downshifting is past. Anecdotal evidence for the second quarter, which is barely a month old, suggests that the correcting process is still underway. Perhaps May and June will deliver better news, perhaps not. But based on the numbers presented in today’s GDP update, combined with an objective survey of finance and economic conditions in the month of April, there’s still a case for staying cautious and defensive in one’s investment strategy. The proverbial “other shoe,” it seems, is in the process of dropping as we write.
THE MEANING OF “REFOCUS”
Perhaps it signifies nothing, but the timing is suspicious.
Last December, the Treasury Department announced that it was sharply reducing the annual limit on investments in the inflation-indexed series of U.S. Savings Bonds, a.k.a., I-Bonds, to $5,000 a year as of January 1, 2008–down from $30,000 a year previously. (The $5,000/yr limit also applies to conventional Savings Bonds as of January 1.)
No big deal in the grand scheme of finance, although we can’t help but notice that the new lower limit comes at a time when inflation-linked portion of payouts for I-Bonds look set to rise, as per the methodology that ties a portion of the bonds’ interest rate to the consumer price index.
The official reason for the reduced investment maximum, as per the Treasury’s press release, was rationalized this way: “The reduction from the $30,000 annual limit in effect for both series since 2003 was made to refocus the savings bond program on its original purpose of making these non-marketable Treasury securities available to individuals with relatively small sums to invest.”