Black: Alcuni pensieri sul "piu’ grande mercato rialzista di sempre"

I metalli stanno facendo schifo perche’ c’e’ ripresona mondiale e tutta va bene, nessun bisogno di protezione .... 

Sovereign Man - Some thoughts on the ‘longest bull market ever’

23 agosto 2018, traduzione di Er

Beh, e’ successo. Ieri il mercato azionario USA ha rotto verso un nuovo record storico del piu’ lungo mercato rialzista di sempre. 

Questo significa che il mercato azionario americano non ha fatto altro che, sostanzialmente, salire per quasi un decennio... o piu’ specificatamente che il mercato e’ andato su per 3.453 giorni di fila senza una correzione di piu' del 20%.

E’ una pietra miliare piuttosto notevole. E non si vede una fine a tutto questo. Quindi e’ possibile che il mercato continui a marciare verso l’alto per il prossimo futuro.

Ma sa fai un passo indietro e guardi al quadro complessivo ci sono un sacco di cose che darebbero il grattacapo ad una persona razionale.

Per esempio l’indice Russell 2000 (che e’ un paniere di piccole compagnie le cui azioni sono quotate su diversi exchange azionari americani) e’ al momento ai massimi storici.

Eppure, allo stesso tempo, secondo il Wall Street Journal la bellezza del SESSANTA PERCENTO del debito di queste piccole corporations e’ catalogato come IMMONDIZIA.

Com’e’ possibile? Compagnie il cui debito e’ considerato immondizia e nel contempo quotano ai massimi di sempre? E’ come se gli investitori dicessero, “Beh, e’ assai improbabile che queste compagnie ripaghino il loro debito ... ma chissenfrega, paghero’ lo stesso una cifra record per le loro azioni.”

Non ha semplicemente senso.

Guardando alle piu’ grosse compagnie della “Terra dei Liberi” [Sarebbero gli USA, Er], quelle che fanno il paniere dell’indice S&P500, l’attuale “CAPE ratio” e’ al secondo livello massimo di sempre.

“CAPE” sta per “Cyclically Adjusted Price-Earnings Ratio”, il rapporto, corretto ciclicamente, fra prezzo e guadagni. Essenzialmente ci indica quanto gli investitori sono desiderosi di pagare delle azioni di una compagnia rispetto a quanto si stima saranno i guadagni a lungo termine della stessa.

E in questo momento gli investitori sono desiderosi di pagare 33 VOLTE i long term average earnings di una compagnia media dell’indice S&P500. 

Il “median CAPE ratio”, secondo i dati che vanno indietro sino all’800, e’ 15,6.

Quindi, a 33, gli investitori stanno letteralmente pagando PIU’ DEL DOPPIO per ogni dollaro di guadagno di lungo periodo di quanto non abbiano fatto in tutta la storia del mercato azionario USA.

E c’e’ stata solo una volta che questo indice e’ stato piu’ alto: appena prima del crash del 2000 (quando scoppio’ la bolla dot-com)

33 e’ piu’ di quanto questo indice fosse prima del crash del 2008. E’ persino piu’ alto di quanto non fosse appena prima del crash del 1929 e della seguente Grande Depressione. 

Oltre al CAPE ratio e’ ai massimi dal crash del 2000 anche il Price-to-Book ratio, il rapporto fra il prezzo [di un’azione] e al valore degli asset complessivi di una compagnia [diviso per il numero di azioni esistenti, Er]

In altre parole gli investitori non stanno solo pagando un ammontare quasi record per ogni dollaro di guadagni di lungo periodo delle compagnie ma stanno anche pagando anche un ammontare quasi record storico per ogni dollari di valore degli asset delle compagnie.

Ma la lista di questi record o quasi-record va avanti ... gli investitori stanno ora pagando anche, per esempio, un prezzo mai visto prima per azione secondo il Price-to-Revenue ratio... che significa che gli investitori non hanno mai pagato prima nella storia cosi’ tanto come ora rispetto ai fatturati. MAI.

La narrativa generale e’ che “e’ tutto grandioso” nell’economia USA e tutto restera’ cosi’ grandioso per sempre e sempre, sino alla fine dei tempi.

Sono certamente d’accordo che a livello superficiale c’e’ forza nell’economia USA in questo momento. 

Ma ho dei seri dubbi sul lungo periodo. 

Guardate al consumatore medio americano: nonostante un tasso di disoccupazione altra-basso negli USA, i salari medi si sono appena mossi. 

La Pew Research ha rilasciato a inizio mese un eccellente articolo che mostra come, per la maggior parte dei lavoratori USA, gli stipendi sono rimasti stagnanti per DECENNI una volta che li hai corretti coi tassi di inflazione.

In piu’ abbiamo visto tutti le statistiche su quanto poso l’americano medio ha messo da parte come risparmi. 

I dati della Federal Reserve della Survey of Consumer Finances mostrano che la giacenza media sui conti bancari e’ di 2.900 dollari. E per chi ha meni di 35 anni e’ di appena 1.200 dollari. 

Nell’insieme il consumatore medio americano ha salari stagnanti da decadi, pochissimi risparmi, quasi niente messo da parte per la pensione, un debito su carte di credito a livelli record storici, record storici anche per i livelli di debito degli studenti .. ed ora anche un’inflazione in crescita. 

Quindi sarei curioso di capire dove la prenderanno, le companies, la loro crescita di incassi nel lungo periodo. Chi si comprera’ tutti i loro prodotti? Perche’ il consumatore americano sembra piuttosto sotto pressione (e se le cosa vanno male ora che siamo in periodi di vacche grasse immaginate cosa potra’ succedere al comportamento del consumatore americano quando la recessione tornera’ a colpire...).

E a parte il consumatore USA, ci sono un sacco di compagnie che si stanno indebitando ancora di piu’.

Scrivo su Netflix piuttosto spesso, che deve emettere miliardi di dollari di nuovo debito ogni anno anche solo per stare a galla. 

Ma ci sono compagnie anche piu’ grosse che hanno bizzarri problemi. 

Coca Cola e’ un grande esempio - una delle piu’ vecchie e stabili compagnie del mercato azionario americano. 

Nel 2006 CocaCola aveva 1,3 miliardi di dollari di debito a lunga scadenza. L’anno scorso erano diventati 31 miliardi. 

Eppure il prezzo delle azioni CocaCola sono in zona record storico, ora a circa il doppio del prezzo nel 2006.

Ha senso una cosa del genere? 

Per di piu’ il “Free Cash Flow Yield” e’ ora al 2,8%.

Significa che, tolte le spese, conteggiate inflazione e investimenti, il business genera abbastanza denaro per pagare agli azionisti un dividendo del 2,8% dell’attuale prezzo dell’azione singola. 

Eppure CocaCola al moneto paga un dividendo del 3,4%.

Com’e’ possibile che CocaCola paghi costantemente agli investitori piu’ denaro di quello che incassa? Facile. Fanno sempre nuovi debiti. 

General Motors e’ un altro grande esempio: GM paga agli investitori un dividendo del 4,1%. Super-attraente, no? Eppure il Free Cash Flow di GM e’ attualmente NEGATIVO.

C’e’ cosi’ tanto di questo genere di nonsense in questo momento - compagnie che accendono sempre nuovi debiti per pagare dividendi e tenere alto in questo modo il prezzo delle proprie azioni nonostante gli affari non girino granche’./ 

Ma, ancora, nonostante l’auemnto dei debiti (e l’aumento della quantita’ di questo debito catalogato come IMMONDIZIA), gli investitori sono ancora belli contenti di pagare azioni al livelli da record storico. 

Non mi pare un gran modo di generare ricchezza e prosperita’.

Fonte: qui

https://www.sovereignman.com/trends/some-thoughts-on-the-longest-bull-market-ever-24066/

Two Giant Pension Funds Just Admitted To Have BIG PROBLEMS

These two huge pensions funds just admitted big problems, and we’re not even in recession or a stock market downturn yet. Here’s the details…

I’ve been talking a lot about the looming pension crisis…

My short thesis is, if you’re depending on a pension for your retirement, it’s time to start looking elsewhere.

Pensions are simply giant funds responsible for paying out retirement benefits to workers.

And today, the nation’s 1,400 corporate pension plans are facing a $553 billion shortfall. And, according to Boston College, about 25% will likely go broke in the next decade.

Think about that… A full one-quarter of US, non-government employees expecting a pension to fund their retirement will likely get zilch.

And it’s even worse for the government…

According to credit-rating agency Moody’s, state, federal and local government pension plans are $7 trillion short in funding.

The reason for this crisis is simple – investment returns are too low.

Pension funds invest in stocks, bonds, real estate, private equity and a host of other assets, hoping to generate a safe return.

But with interest rates near their lowest levels in human history, it’s been difficult for these pensions to generate a suitable return without taking on more and more risk.

And that’s another big problem with pensions – their investment returns are totally unrealistic.

Most pension funds require a minimum annual return of about 8% a year to cover their future liabilities.

But that 8% is really difficult to generate today, especially if you’re buying bonds (which is the largest asset for most pensions). So pensions are allocating more capital to riskier assets like stocks and private equity.

And so far it’s working.

The California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) and California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) both earned more than 8% for the second fiscal year in a row. CalPERS is the largest public pension in the US. And, together, the two funds manage $575 billion for 2.8 million public workers and retirees.

Two 8%+ years isn’t the norm. Over the past 10 years ending June 30, CalSTRS returned an annualized 6.3% a year – well below its target. And CalPERS has returned a dismal 5.1% over the same period.

And that’s been with the tailwind of one of the longest equity and fixed-income bull markets in history.

It’s clear these inflated gains can’t last.

And the two California pension giants are even admitting the game is up.

No, no more 8% target return, as we teeter on the edge of what could be the largest market correction of our lifetime.

CalSTRS is making the bold move to drop its future goal to… 7%.

And CalPERS is ratcheting down its return goals in steps to… wait for it, 7% by 2021.

Listen, it’s a nice gesture for these big funds to lower their expected returns and admit things are tough out there.

But 7% is still totally unrealistic. And that’s not even taking into account the tough times I see ahead for markets. Pensions haven’t been able to hit a 7% return in the best of times.

As of June 2017, the 10-year annualized median return for all public pensions tracked by the Wilshire Trust Universal Comparison Service was 5.57%.

That’s nearly 250 basis points below the 8% target.

But there’s another way pensions make money… they collect funds from active workers and taxpayers.

When these funds drop their return expectations, it has real life implications. With a lower, projected return, a pension fund needs more cash to pay out its future liabilities.

For example, CalPERS, which is dropping its expected return to 7% by 2021, said the state and school districts paying into the pension will have to pay at least $15 billion more over the next 20 years once the 7% target kicks in.

So, people depending on a pension not only likely won’t get the money owed to them in the future… but they’ll also get stuck paying more into the system today. It’s a true lose/lose.

Our goal at Sovereign Man is to put our readers in a position of strength.

And if you’re expecting a pension to pay for your retirement, you need a contingency plan today.

Last month, I outlined a series of steps you can take, right now, to improve your financial situation – like improving investment returns and alternative retirement account structures.

Personally, I’ve been selling assets to raise cash. In fact, I’m sitting on more cash than at any other point in my life.

I’m sitting on cash because I’m worried we could see another recession very soon.

And being liquid at a market bottom is one of the best ways to get really rich – you can buy the world’s best assets for pennies on the dollar.

But here’s the best part… I’ve structured my cash holdings so I’m still earning a solid return – better than a lot of these pension funds. But I’m remaining liquid and taking on very little risk.

If you want to know more about what I’m doing with my own money, and why I’m sitting on so much cash, just click here…

by Simon Black of Sovereign Man

The Absurd U.S. Economic Model: $300 Billion In New Debt Just This Week

“The entire US national debt was around $300 billion when John F. Kennedy was President…” Here’s why it matters…

by Simon Black of Sovereign Man

I’m doing my best to take a few days off this week, and have the pleasure of spending time with some friends here in a fairly remote corner of Vietnam’s magnificent coastline.

This is one of the most pristine places I’ve ever been– a high-end resort nestled at the top of a mountain in the middle of nowhere overlooking Vietnam’s postcard-perfect Vinh Hy Bay.

I’ve traveled extensively through Vietnam over the years, from Hanoi in the north, to Saigon in the south, and all along the coast. And the country has always impressed me with its raw beauty.

But what’s always been even more impressive to me is how productive and industrious Vietnam has become.

Remember, this place is supposed to be Communist. And like all Communist experiments, this one nearly ended in economic catastrophe. Vietnam was among the poorest countries in the world just 30 years ago.

But in 1986, on the brink of economic meltdown, the government launched a series of sweeping economic reforms they called ‘doi moi’.

Suddenly it became possible for private individuals to start their own businesses, invest capital, and keep what they earned.

The economy started to boom practically overnight, and it’s been growing consistently at 6% to 8% annually for more than three decades.

The primary driver of the Vietnamese economy, of course, is production. Manufacturing. Exports. Etc.

In fact Vietnam is now a dominant manufacturer across dozens of industries and stands to gain if there’s a protracted trade war between the United States and China.

What’s also interesting about Vietnam is that the savings rate is one of the highest in the world– Vietnamese save an overwhelming percentage of their incomes to invest in the future.

So in other words, Vietnam’s economic model is based on saving and production.

This stands in stark contrast to the Western economic model which is based on debt and consumption.

In the United States (and much of Europe), for example, consumer spending comprises roughly 70% of all economic activity.

So consumption, not production, is the single largest component of GDP.

No one ever talks about American producers or entrepreneurs driving economic growth. It’s all about the consumer.

And savings rates in the West are appallingly low… sometimes even negative.

People go into debt to spend money they don’t have to buy things they don’t need to impress people they don’t like.

It’s totally absurd. Yet this is the primary economic growth model for most Western nations.

Consumption, of course, extends far beyond individuals.

Just look at government spending as an example.

The US government’s total debt level now exceeds $21 trillion. And just this week alone, the US government is issuing $300 BILLION in new debt.

To put that number in perspective, the entire US national debt was around $300 billion when John F. Kennedy was President of the United States.

Now they’re issuing that much debt in a single week.

Where does it all go?

The government spends trillions of dollars each year… and a lot of it gets wasted on some of the most comical misuses imaginable.

The National Institutes of Health, for example, spent $1,552,145 of your money to develop a video game that teaches parents how to feed their kids vegetables.

Then there was the $544,338 that the Justice Department spent to spruce up its LinkedIn profile.

And those are just two very tiny examples.

There are also really big, egregious examples, like that $2 billion Obamacare website fiasco.

Or the $1 billion that the Defense Department spent to destroy $16 billion of perfectly good ammunition.

This is all useless, wanton consumption. And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the long-term consequences.

Countries whose economic models are based on savings and production will prosper.

Countries whose economic models are based on debt and consumption will suffer.

28 03 2018