Victims Of The Same Ponzi Scheme: GE & GM Are Telling Us The US Economy Is In HUGE Trouble

America’s twin economic “generals” are both in very deep trouble, and they are signaling huge trouble in the US economy. Here are the details…

by Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse Blog

America’s twin economic “generals” are both in very deep trouble.  General Electric was founded in 1892, and it was once one of the most powerful corporations on the entire planet.  But now it is drowning in so much debt that it may be forced into bankruptcy.  General Motors was founded in 1908, and at one time it was the largest automaker that the world had ever seen.  But now it is closing a bunch of factories and laying off approximately 14,000 workers as it anticipates disappointing sales and a slowing economy.  If the U.S. economy really was “booming”, both of these companies would probably be thriving.  But as you will see below, both of them have been victimized by the exact same Ponzi scheme, and both firms are sending us very clear signals that the U.S. economy is heading for troubled waters.

Whenever you hear the word “restructuring”, that is always a sign that things are not going well for a company.

And it turns out that GM’s “restructuring” is actually going to cost the firm 3.8 billion dollars…

General Motors said Monday it plans to effectively halt production at a number of plants in the U.S. and Canada next year and cut more than 14,000 jobs in a massive restructuring that will cost up to $3.8 billion.

Of course GM doesn’t have 3.8 billion dollars just lying around, and so they are actually going to have to borrow money in order to close these plants and lay off these workers.

Needless to say, President Trump is not very happy with General Motors right now…

Trump said he spoke Monday with GM’s CEO, Mary Barra, and ‘I told them, “you’re playing around with the wrong person”.’

He told reporters as he left the White House for a pair of political rallies in Mississippi that the United States ‘has done a lot for General Motors. They better get back to Ohio, and soon.’

There is no way that Mary Barra should have ever been made CEO of General Motors, and now the entire world is getting to see why.

In addition to the elimination of about 6,000 factory jobs, GM will also be cutting about 8,000 “white collar jobs”…

In addition to the production cuts, GM said it will reduce its North American white-collar workforce by about 8,000. The deadline passed last week on a voluntary buyout for those workers, and GM spokesman Pat Morrissey told the Free Press that only 2,250 employees have asked to take the offer, meaning as many as 5,750 workers could be cut if the company keeps to its announced total. Analysts told the Free Press to expect involuntary cuts in January.

So why is General Motors doing this?

After all, if the U.S. economy really is “booming” that should mean increased sales for all of the major automakers in the coming years, right?

Unfortunately, the truth is that hard times are already here for automakers.  In fact, Bob Lutz told CNBC that “we’ve got a demand problem on cars”…

Former GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said the automaker historically would have raised sales incentives to try to sell more cars before resorting to plant closures.

“Nowadays GM looks at the hard reality, says we’ve got a demand problem on cars, what are we going to do about it. We have to shut some facilities and move production to truck plants,” Lutz said on CNBC’s “Halftime Report. ” “So I think what we are seeing is a fast-acting and reality-oriented GM management.”

In other words, sales are not good and so now is the time to shut down factories.

Of course GM is not the only one that is shutting down facilities and laying off workers.  If you doubt this, please see my previous article entitled “U.S. Job Losses Accelerate: Here Are 10 Big Companies That Are Cutting Jobs Or Laying Off Workers”.

But if General Motors had been much wiser with their money, they wouldn’t have had to initiate a “restructuring” so quickly.

Over the past four years, General Motors spent a staggering 13.9 billion dollars on stock buybacks.

GM executives were able to prop up the stock price for a while, but at this point the stock is down about 10 percent from where it was four years ago.  The following comes from Wolf Richter…

During this four-year period in which GM blew, wasted, and annihilated nearly $14 billion on share buybacks, the price of its shares, including today’s 5.5% surge – getting rid of workers is always good news for shares – fell 10%.

These stock buybacks are a massive Ponzi scheme, and everyone that was involved in blowing such a giant mountain of cash at GM should be fired.

And now thousands of hard working Americans are going to lose their jobs, but it didn’t have to happen.

General Electric has also been victimized by the exact same Ponzi scheme, and at this point they are in a struggle for survival which they are probably going to lose.

On Monday the stock slid another couple of percent, and so far this year it is down a total of 58 percent…

Not a day passes lately without GE stock getting hit by some unexpected development, and today was no exception.

GE shares, which are down 58% YTD, dropped over 2% on Monday, after sliding as much as 4.1% earlier in the session and approaching its financial crisis low of $6.66, following a research report by Gordon Haskett analyst John Inch which prompted fresh questions about the treatment of goodwill at GE Capital.

In the end, GE is probably heading for total collapse.

But if GE had not blown 40 billion dollars on stock buybacks in recent years, they would be in far, far better shape.  The following comes from the Marketwatch articlethat I quoted the other day…

GE was one of Wall Street’s major share buyback operators between 2015 and 2017; it repurchased $40 billion of shares at prices between $20 and $32. The share price is now $8.60, so the company has liquidated between $23 billion and $29 billion of its shareholders’ money on this utterly futile activity alone. Since the highest net income recorded by the company during those years was $8.8 billion in 2016, with 2015 and 2017 recording a loss, it has managed to lose more on its share repurchases during those three years than it made in operations, by a substantial margin.

Even more important, GE has now left itself with minus $48 billion in tangible net worth at Sept. 30, with actual genuine tangible debt of close to $100 billion. As the new CEO Larry Culp told CNBC last Monday: “We have no higher priority right now than bringing those leverage levels down.”

Combined, General Electric and General Motors have blown more than 53 billion dollars on stock buybacks, and now both companies are in huge trouble.

The executives that gutted the finances of both firms by engaging in these sorts of Ponzi tactics should all be fired and should never be hired by anyone else in the corporate world.

For years, big corporations have been borrowing massive amounts of money to fund reckless stock buybacks, and that has helped to fuel an amazing bull market run.

But now the game is imploding, and the unraveling of this massive Ponzi scheme is not going to be pretty.

About the author: Michael Snyder is a nationally syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is publisher of The Most Important News and the author of four books including The Beginning Of The End and Living A Life That Really Matters.

Jim Rickards: The Debt Bomb Is Ready To Explode

Jim says the debt bomb has been a long time in the making, but it is finally getting ready to explode. Here are the details…

by Jim Rickards via Daily Reckoning

The great Chinese growth slowdown has been proceeding in stages for the past two years. The reason is simple. Much of China’s “growth” (about 25% of the total) has consisted of wasted infrastructure investment in ghost cities and white elephant transportation infrastructure.

That investment was financed with debt that now cannot be repaid. This was fine for creating short-term jobs and providing business to cement, glass and steel vendors, but it was not a sustainable model since the infrastructure either was not used at all or did not generate sufficient revenue.

China’s future success depends on high-value-added technology and increased consumption. But shifting to intellectual property and the consumer means slowing down on infrastructure, which will slow the economy.

In turn, that means exposing the bad debt for what it is, which risks a financial and liquidity crisis. China started to do this last year but quickly turned tail when the economy slowed. Now the economy has slowed so much that markets are collapsing.

But doesn’t China have over $1 trillion of reserves to prop up its financial system?

On paper, that’s true. But in reality, China is “short” U.S. dollars. The Chinese may have $1.4 trillion of U.S. Treasury securities in its reserve position, but they need those assets possibly to bail out their banking system or defend the yuan.

Meanwhile, the Chinese banking sector, which in many ways is an extension of the state, owes $318 billion in U.S. dollar-denominated deposits of commercial paper.

From a bank’s perspective, borrowing in dollars is going short dollars because you need dollar assets to back up those liabilities if the original lenders want their money back. For the most part, the banks don’t have those assets because they converted the dollar to yuan to prop up local real estate Ponzis and local corporations.

There’s not much left over to bail out the corporate, individual and real estate sectors.

This is all part of a global “dollar shortage” attributable to Fed tightening, both in the forms of higher rates but also a reduction in base money.

A dollar shortage seems implausible in a world where the Fed printed $4.4 trillion. But while the Fed was printing, the world borrowed over $70 trillion (on top of prior loans), so the dollar shortage is real. The math is inescapable.

So the Chinese debt bomb that has been a long time in the making is finally getting ready to explode. The economy is slowing, debt is exploding and the trade war with Trump has hurt China’s exports needed to earn dollars to pay the debts.

The defaults are beginning to pile up. Several large corporations and regional governments have defaulted recently.

China’s leaders have panicked at the slowdown and have started the credit flow again with lower interest rates, higher bank leverage and more debt-financed, government-directed infrastructure spending.

Of course, this solution is strictly temporary. All it does is postpone the day of reckoning and make the debt crisis worse when it does arrive.

With every passing day, a Chinese financial collapse draws closer. The rest of the world will not escape the consequences.

When the crisis strikes in full force, possibly in 2019, the rest of the world will not be spared.

Jim Rickards: The Debt Bomb Is Ready To Explode

Jim says the debt bomb has been a long time in the making, but it is finally getting ready to explode. Here are the details…

by Jim Rickards via Daily Reckoning

The great Chinese growth slowdown has been proceeding in stages for the past two years. The reason is simple. Much of China’s “growth” (about 25% of the total) has consisted of wasted infrastructure investment in ghost cities and white elephant transportation infrastructure.

That investment was financed with debt that now cannot be repaid. This was fine for creating short-term jobs and providing business to cement, glass and steel vendors, but it was not a sustainable model since the infrastructure either was not used at all or did not generate sufficient revenue.

China’s future success depends on high-value-added technology and increased consumption. But shifting to intellectual property and the consumer means slowing down on infrastructure, which will slow the economy.

In turn, that means exposing the bad debt for what it is, which risks a financial and liquidity crisis. China started to do this last year but quickly turned tail when the economy slowed. Now the economy has slowed so much that markets are collapsing.

But doesn’t China have over $1 trillion of reserves to prop up its financial system?

On paper, that’s true. But in reality, China is “short” U.S. dollars. The Chinese may have $1.4 trillion of U.S. Treasury securities in its reserve position, but they need those assets possibly to bail out their banking system or defend the yuan.

Meanwhile, the Chinese banking sector, which in many ways is an extension of the state, owes $318 billion in U.S. dollar-denominated deposits of commercial paper.

From a bank’s perspective, borrowing in dollars is going short dollars because you need dollar assets to back up those liabilities if the original lenders want their money back. For the most part, the banks don’t have those assets because they converted the dollar to yuan to prop up local real estate Ponzis and local corporations.

There’s not much left over to bail out the corporate, individual and real estate sectors.

This is all part of a global “dollar shortage” attributable to Fed tightening, both in the forms of higher rates but also a reduction in base money.

A dollar shortage seems implausible in a world where the Fed printed $4.4 trillion. But while the Fed was printing, the world borrowed over $70 trillion (on top of prior loans), so the dollar shortage is real. The math is inescapable.

So the Chinese debt bomb that has been a long time in the making is finally getting ready to explode. The economy is slowing, debt is exploding and the trade war with Trump has hurt China’s exports needed to earn dollars to pay the debts.

The defaults are beginning to pile up. Several large corporations and regional governments have defaulted recently.

China’s leaders have panicked at the slowdown and have started the credit flow again with lower interest rates, higher bank leverage and more debt-financed, government-directed infrastructure spending.

Of course, this solution is strictly temporary. All it does is postpone the day of reckoning and make the debt crisis worse when it does arrive.

With every passing day, a Chinese financial collapse draws closer. The rest of the world will not escape the consequences.

When the crisis strikes in full force, possibly in 2019, the rest of the world will not be spared.

Fund Manager: Financial Collapse Is Not A Question Of “If” But A Question Of “When”

Dave Kranzler explains why the coming economic and financial crisis will be much worse than what hit in 2008…

by Dave Kranzler of Investment Research Dynamics

“’DON’T PANIC!!!!’ Just 6.9% off of the most offensive valuation extreme in history.” – Tweet from John Hussman, Hussman Funds

The above quote from John Hussman was a shot at the financial media, which was freaking out over the sell-off in the stock market on Wednesday and Thursday last week. As stock bubbles become more irrational, the rationalizations concocted to explain why stocks are still cheap and can go higher become more outrageous. The financial media was devised to function as a “credible” conduit for Wall Street’s deceitful, if not often fraudulent, sales-pitch.

Perhaps the biggest fraud in the last 10 years perpetrated on investors was the Dodd-Frank financial “reform” legislation. The Dodd-Frank Act was promoted by the Obama Government as legislation that would protect the public from the risky and often fraudulent business practices of the big financial institutions – primarily the Too Big To Fail Banks. It was supposed to prevent another 2008 financial crisis (de facto financial collapse).

However, in effect, the Act made it easier for big banks to disguise or hide their predatory business operations. Ten years later it is glaringly apparent to anyone who bothers to study the facts, that Dodd-frank has been nothing of short of a catastrophic failure. Debt, and especially risky debt, is at record levels at every level of the economic system (Government, corporate, individual). OTC derivatives are at higher levels than 2008. This is without adjusting for accounting changes that enabled banks to understate their derivatives risk exposure. The stock market bubble is the most extreme in history by most measures and housing prices as a ratio to household income are at an all-time record level.

A lot of skeletons in the closet suddenly pop out of “hiding” when the stock market has a week like this past week. An article published by Bloomberg titled, “A $1 trillion Powder Keg Threatens the Corporate Bond Market” highlights the fact that corporate America took advantage of the Fed’s money printing to issue a record amount of debt. Over the last couple of years, the credit quality of this debt has deteriorated. More than 50% of the “investment grade” debt is rated at the lowest level of investment grade (Moody’s Baa3/S&P BBB-).

However, the ratings tell only half the story. Just like the last time around, the credit rating agencies have been over-rating much of this debt. In other words, a growing portion of the debt that is judged investment grade by the ratings agencies likely would have been given junk bond ratings 20 years ago. In fact, FTI Consulting (a global business advisory firm) concluded based on its research that corporate credit quality as measured by ratings distribution is far weaker than at the previous cycle peaks in 2000 and 2007. FTI goes as far as to assert, “it isn’t even close.”

I’ll note that FTI’s work is based using corporate credit ratings as given. However, because credit ratings agencies once again have become scandalously lenient in assigning ratings, there are consequences from relying on the judgment of those who are getting paid by the same companies they rate. In reality, the overall credit quality of corporate debt is likely even worse than FTI has determined.

The debt “skeleton” is a scary one. But even worse is the derivatives “skeleton.” This one not only hides in the closet but, thanks to regulatory “reform,” it’s been stashed in the attic above the closet. An article appeared in the Asia Times a few days ago titled, “Has The Derivatives Volcano Already Begun To Erupt?” I doubt this one will be reprinted by the Wall Street Journal or Barron’s. This article goes into the details about the imminent risk of foreign exchange derivatives to the global financial system. There’s a notional amount of $90 trillion in FX derivatives outstanding, which is up from $60 trillion in 2010.

Many of you have heard about the growing dollar “shortage” in Europe and Japan. Foreign entities issue dollar-denominated debt but transact in local currency. FX derivatives enable these entities to swap local currency for dollars with banks. However, these banks have to borrow the dollars. European banks are now running out of capacity to borrow dollars, a natural economic consequence of the reckless financial risks that these banks have taken, as enabled by the Central Bank money printing.

As it becomes more difficult for European and Japanese banks to borrow dollars, it drives up the cost to hedge local currency/dollar swaps. Compounding this, U.S. banks with exposure to the European banks are required to put up more reserves against their exposure, which in turn acts to tighten credit availability.  It’s a vicious self-perpetuating circle that is more than partially responsible for driving 10yr and 30yr Treasury bond yields higher recently.  Perhaps this explains why the direction of the Dow/SPX and the 10-yr Treasury have been moving in correlation for the past few weeks rather than inversely.

But it’s not just FX derivatives. There’s been $10’s of trillions on credit default swaps underwritten in the last 8 years. The swaps are based on the value of debt securities. For instance, Tesla bonds or home mortgage securities. As the economy deteriorates, the ability of debtors to service their debt becomes compromised and the market value of the debt declines. As delinquencies turn into defaults, credit default swaps are exercised. If the counter-party is unable to pay (AIG/Goldman in 2008), the credit default swap blows up.

And thus the fuse on the global derivatives bomb is lit. The global web of derivatives is extremely fragile and highly dependent on the value of the assets and securities used as collateral. As the asset values decline, more collateral is required (a “collateral call”). As defaults by those required to post more collateral occur, the fuses that have been lit begin to hit gunpowder. This is how the 2008 financial crisis was ignited.

In fact, given the financial turmoil in Italy, India and several other important emerging market countries, I find it hard to believe that we have not seen evidence yet of FX derivative accidents connected to those situations. My best guess is that the Central Banks have been able to diffuse derivative problems thus-far. However, the drop in the stock market on Wednesday surely must have triggered some equity-related derivatives mishaps. At some point, the derivative fires will become too large s they  ignite from unforeseen sources – i.e.the derivatives skeletons come down from hiding in the attic – and that’s when the real fun begins, at least if you are short the market.

I would suggest that the anticipation of an unavoidable derivatives-driven crisis is the reason high-profile market realists like Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff have recently issued warnings that the coming economic and financial crisis will be much worse than what hit in 2008.

Global Liquidity Is Eroding Fast... But Nothing Is Breaking Yet

All measures of liquidity continue to tighten…

All of our measures of liquidity have continued to weaken over the last two months. This applies to public sector liquidity, which has now declined to ~3% (vs 16%+ growth in ‘16 and ‘17)...

... US$ liquidity is negative (vs growth of ~5%- 6% in ‘17) and money supply (down to 4-5% vs double-digit growth in late ‘17).

G5+China M2 has fallen over the last four months by over US$2 trillion. At the same time, CBs are gradually pushing up the cost of capital.

While investors have already witnessed several tremors (VIX volatility in Feb’18, massive explosion of basis points and TED and US Libor in Mar-Apr’18, DXY acceleration and attack on the most vulnerable of EMs in Jul-Sep’18), the degree of dislocation has thus far been contained. For example, EM FX volatility rates have recently again eased and the same applies to EM high-yield corporate debt...

... while both OIS Libor and TED spreads remain relatively placid, and the US high-yield market continues to enjoy some of the lowest ever spreads (~3.2%). It applies even for CCC & below debt (~6.6%).

... but complacency keeps returning as inflation remains subdued

Although one could highlight some specific measures (e.g. IMF rescue of Argentina or tightening in Turkey), we believe that returns to complacency are primarily due to a deeply held view that CBs would never allow any meaningful break-out of volatilities, and would step-in with either liquidity supports and/or end of tightening while as long as the US domestic economy is strong, the risk appetite is expected to prevail. If we dig deeper, investors seem to agree with us that overleveraging, lack of clearance of past excesses & disruption are generating such strong headwinds, that break-out of excessive wage inflation is unlikely, even as markets tighten. This in turn, limits the degree of damage to margins or rise in the cost of capital, except for the most marginal of cases.

We worry about the next six months; but 2019-20 might not be bad

Our concern remains one of accumulation of policy failures, as CBs and investors understate the degree of linkages between asset classes. For example as 30Y mortgages touch 4.7%, there are already signs of tightening. Similarly rising short-term rates are bound to impact car loans & credit cards, while more vulnerable EMs could infect stronger EMs, causing a more robust contraction at the time when OECD leading indicators are already easing.

The role of the Fed and China is particularly important. It seems that the Fed is only focusing on domestic strength, while ignoring global tightening. As long as it continues to view the world through one-dimensional lenses, the non-US world runs a risk of significant contraction, which in turn would return to haunt US. Similarly, while recent actions have stabilized China’s credit impulse, it does not yet represent a substantive policy shift. While most investors worry about ’19-20, we remain far more concerned what would happen over the next six months. Either the Fed stops and China stimulates, or accidents happen. EMs still look very vulnerable; but ‘19-20 might not be bad years, as either normality returns or Fed pulls back. Systemic failure is not an option.

Submitted by Viktor Shvets of Macquarie

Fonte: qui

Marty Feldstein Warns "Another Recession Looms..." And The Fed's Out Of Ammo

Authored by Martin Feldstein, op-ed via The Wall Street Journal,

And unlike in the past, the Federal Reserve has little room to encourage growth by reducing rates...

Ten years after the Great Recession’s onset, another long, deep downturn may soon roil the U.S. economy. The high level of asset prices today mirrors the earlier trend in house prices that preceded the 2008 crash; both mispricings reflect long periods of very low real interest rates caused by Federal Reserve policy. Now that interest rates are rising, equity prices will fall, dragging down household wealth, consumer spending and economic activity.

During the five-year period before the last downturn, the Fed had decreased the federal-funds rate to as low as 1%. That drove down mortgage interest rates, causing home prices to rise faster than 10% a year. When the Fed raised rates after 2004, the housing-price bubble burst within two years.

As housing prices plummeted, homeowners with highly leveraged mortgages found themselves owing substantially more than their homes were worth. They defaulted in droves, causing lenders to foreclose on their properties. Sales of the foreclosed properties forced prices even lower, leading the national house-price index to decline 30% in three years.

Banks that held mortgages and mortgage-backed bonds saw their net worths decline sharply. A total of 140 U.S. banks failed in 2009, and those that survived were terrified by how much further the market might slide. To avoid risky bets, they shied away from lending to businesses and home buyers and refused to lend to other banks whose balance sheets were also declining.

The fall in home prices from 2006-09 cut household wealth by $6 trillion. Coinciding with a stock-market crash, the erased wealth caused consumer spending to drop sharply, pushing the economy into recession. The collapse of bank lending deepened the decline and slowed the recovery to a sluggish pace.

Fast forward to today.

Homes aren’t as overvalued as they were in 2006, so there’s little chance of an exact replay of the 2008 crisis. The principal risk now is that a stock-market slowdown could shrink consumer spending enough to push the economy into recession. Share prices are high today because long-term interest rates are extremely low. Today the interest rate on 10-year Treasury notes is less than 3%, meaning the inflation-adjusted yield on those bonds is close to zero. The hunt for higher yields drives investors toward equities—driving up share prices in the process.

But long-term rates are beginning to rise and are likely to increase substantially in the near future. Though the 3% yield on 10-year Treasurys is still low, it’s still twice as high as it was two years ago. It will be pushed higher as the Fed raises the short-term rate from today’s 2% to its projected 3.4% in 2020. Rising inflation will further increase the long-term interest rate as investors demand compensation for their loss of purchasing power. And as annual federal spending deficits explode over the coming decade, it will take ever-higher long-term interest rates to get bond buyers to absorb the debt. It wouldn’t be surprising to see the yield on 10-year Treasurys exceed 5%, with the resulting real yield rising from zero today to more than 2%.

As short- and long-term interest rates normalize, equity prices are also likely to return to historic price-to-earnings ratios. If the P/E ratio of the S&P 500 regresses to its historical average, 40% below today’s level, $10 trillion of household wealth would be wiped out. The past relationship between household wealth and consumer spending suggests such a decline would reduce annual spending by about $400 billion, shrinking gross domestic product by 2%. Add in the effects on business investment, and this spending crunch would push the economy into recession.

Most recessions are short and shallow, with an average of less than a year between the start of the downturn and the beginning of the recovery. That’s because the Fed usually responds to recessions by cutting the federal-funds rate substantially. But if one hits in the next few years, the Fed will not have enough room to cut rates, as the fed-funds rate is expected to rise to only 3% by 2020. There also won’t be much room for a major fiscal intervention. Federal deficits are expected to exceed $1 trillion annually in the coming years, and publicly held federal debt is predicted to rise from 75% of GDP to nearly 100% by the decade’s end.

This means a downturn brought on in the next few years by rising long-term interest rates would likely be deeper and longer than your average recession. Unfortunately, there’s nothing at this point that the Federal Reserve or any other government actor can do to prevent that from happening.

Fonte: qui

Fasanara Capital: "Nobody Cares About Market Valuations These Days"

Submitted by Francesco Filia of Fasanara Capital

How Expensive Is The Equity Market In The US

The biggest equity bubble out there is in the US: the Nasdaq and the S&P. This is no news, few disagree in market chatters. Nobody is positioned for it, though. Looking at valuation metrics, there is not the shadow of a doubt: Shiller P/E, Hussman P/E, P/Sales, P/Book, EV/EBITDA, Cash Flow Yield, Forward P/E.

At Fasanara, we add to the list the ‘Peak PEG Ratio’ (read here a full working definition), a measure of how expensive a stock is relative to its ability to generate earnings. In single stocks, the PEG ratio is commonly used, as is rationale for investors to have the will to pay higher multiples for stocks capable of generating high growth. Yet, for indexes, this is rarely done. If and when you do, this is the incontrovertible result:

We consider cyclically-adjusted earnings, like Prof Shiller institutionalized (and won a Nobel doing). To counter one of its most frequent critics, to have included non-normal conditions during the Lehman crisis, we just consider the two top quarters in earnings in the last 40. In spite of that, the resulting pic is still a NASA Space Shuttle that left the orbit.

The cartel of ZIRP, 5trn US QE, 5trn US Buybacks, and now late-cycle 1.4trn tax cuts sugar-rush did not go unnoticed in markets. The S&P qualifies as the most expensive in history and pre-history. When compared to potential economic growth, multiples on the S&P500 exceed even those seen during the Tech Bubble in 2000. When measured against potential growth, even against its peak earnings in 10 years, the S&P has never before been this expensive before. It is approx. 60% above its historical average fair value.

How Expensive Is The Bond Market In Europe

The biggest bond bubble out there is in Europe, where real and nominal rates are still negative in spite of ebullient global equities. Bond yields are historically aligned with growth and inflation rates, according to basic valuation models. Why not, then, draw their historical simple relationship to them, in ratio format. This is what the ‘Real Rate to Growth Ratio’ does (read here a full definition), no more no less. And this is the self-explanatory Chart that results:

When compared to trend growth, government bonds in core Europe have rarely been as expensive as they are today. They are 250/300 basis point away from equilibrium.

How Much More Expensive Can They Get

Not much further, perhaps. This is what we find out in our studies on market structure and what we call the Tipping Points Analysis (‘TPA’). Our analysis is available in this e-Book, and is further discussed in slides 16 and 17 in this presentation.

Nobody Cares

Let’s be clear: nobody cares about valuations these days in markets. The lack of care is visible across the spectrum of investable assets, public and private: Equities, Bonds, High Yield, Emerging Markets, Venture Capital, Private Equity, Real Estate. It seems that we live through the apotheosis of what Nassim Taleb calls the ‘Bob Rubin trade’: my profit, your losses. A perverse incentive scheme is heavily skewed for money managers to not care, and moral hazard to disseminate across. Regulators, more strangely but not uncommonly to history, turn a blind eye, as ‘you cannot know a bubble, except in retrospect’, they lament. There is crowding in Academics too, Rob Arnott would probably say. Or worse, the ‘Portfolio Balance Channel Theory’ of Ben Bernanke actively goal-sought this out, as output to the experimental model. Call it the key to kick-off ‘animal spirit’ or ‘trickle-down economics’, elegantly.

As sober investors though, we should care that nobody does. Tail Risk badly needs complacency as a basic ingredient to assert itself, and compound Systemic Risks.

In Complexity Science parlance, complacency is the lack of the negative feedback loop keeping systems at bay, in stable state. Complacency is instead propelling them further out, in thin air stratosphere, where far-from-equilibrium dynamics apply.

The Critical Transformation Hypothesis

Our thoughts are expanded upon in this video slideshow. In a big long nutshell, we believe that Systemic Risk in financial markets are best analyzed through the prism of Complexity Science, using the analytical tools available to non-linear socio-ecological systems, where a shift in positive loops comes in anticipation of a dramatic transformation.

Chaos theory and Catastrophe Theory can then help shed light on the current set-up in markets. Years of monumental Quantitative Easing / Negative Interest Rates monetary policy affected the behavioral patterns of investors and changed the structure itself of the market, in what accounts as self-amplifying positive feedbacks. The structure of the marketmoved into a low-diversity trap, where concentration risks of various nature intersect and compound: approx. 90% of daily equity flows in the US is today passive or quasi-passive, approx. 90% of investment strategies is doing the same thing in being either trend-linked or volatility-linked, a massive concentration in managers sees the first 3 asset managers globally controlling a mind-blowing USD 15 trillions (at more than 20 times the entire market cap of several G20 countries), approx. 80% of index performance in 2018 is due to 3 stocks only, a handful of tech stocks – so-called ‘market darlings’ - are disseminated across the vast majority of passive and active investment instruments. 

The morphing structure of the market, under the unequivocal push of QE/ZIRP new-age ideologism, is the driver of a simultaneous overvaluation for Bonds and Equities (Twin Bubbles) which has no match in modern financial history, so measured against most valuation metrics ever deemed reputable; a condition which further compounds potential systemic damages.

The market has lost its key function of price-discovery, its ability to learn and evolve, its inherent buffers and redundancy mechanisms: in a word, the market lost its ‘resilience’. It is, therefore, prone to the dynamics of criticality, as described by Complexity Science in copious details.

This is the under-explored, unintended consequence of extreme experimental monetary policymaking. A far-from-equilibrium status for markets is reached, a so-called unstable equilibrium, where System Resilience weakens and Market Fragility approaches Critical Tipping Points.

A small disturbance is then able to provoke a large adjustment, pushing into another basin of attraction altogether, where a whole new equilibrium is found. In market parlance, more prosaically, a market crash is incubating - and has been so for a while.

While it is impossible to determine the precise threshold for such critical transitioning within a stochastic world, it is very possible to say that we are already in such phase transition zone, where markets got inherently fragile, poised at criticality for small disturbances, and where it is increasingly probable to see severe regime shifts.

Fragile markets now sit on the edge of chaos. This is the magic zone, theorized by complexity scientists, where rare events become typical.

Egon von Greyerz Says Ride The Precious Metals Tide Or End Up In Financial Misery

Egon says we’re at a crossroads, where investors will either “lose it all” or benefit from the “biggest wealth transfer in history”. Here are the details…

by Egon von Greyerz of Gold Switzerland

With global investment markets standing at crossroads, investors have the option to lose it all or to benefit from the biggest wealth transfer in history. I have quoted this passage from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar many times but it is more appropriate than ever for the situation the world is now in:

“There is a tide in the affairs of men

Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;

Omitted, all the voyage of their life

Is bound in shallows and in miseries.

On such a full sea are we now afloat;

And we must take the current when it serves,

Or lose our ventures.”

William Shakespeare

Sadly, very few will take the correct current and that is why the majority of people will end in shallows and miseries. The wealthy will lose the majority of their fortunes and many of the poor be exposed to poverty and famine. I know this sounds like another prophecy of doom and gloom but we don’t need to go further than Venezuela, with inflation reaching 1 million percent and the currency collapsing by 99.9% this year to understand what can happen. A cup of coffee costs 2 million Bolivars and most Venezuelans can neither get hold of nor afford sufficient food for their family. A major part of the adult population has lost 25 pounds (11kg) in weight.

BE PREPARED

In most countries in the West, it is still not too late to prepare a wealth preservation plan. People who have savings and investments have a lot more to lose relatively than the poor but for the less well off it will be a matter of survival just like for the Venezuelans.

There are many survival guides as regards all aspects of life. Jim Sinclair has for example written an excellent “Be Prepared” series that covers many of these aspects.

Probably less than 1% of investors will take the tide which “leads to fortune”. What most people won’t understand is that the Central Bank credit expansion bonanza is now coming to an end. The exponential moves up in stocks, bonds and property prices, will turn to catastrophic falls that will destroy most of the wealth in the world.

In the next 3-7 years, it is not going to be a question of making a fortune but to lose as little as possible.

So let’s look at the major risks and the best financial protection.

FAANGTASTIC TECH TO CRASH

The bubble assets will of course be the most vulnerable. If we start with the Nasdaq, it is up by over 700% since 2009, driven by the FAANG stocks (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google ). So since the 2009 bottom, a $10,000 investment in 2009 would today be worth $70,000 by just buying the index, a 24% annual growth rate.

The Dow and S&P indices have gone up slightly less but are still at all time highs due to the massive liquidity created by central banks since the 2007-9 crisis.

At the same time as most stock markets are greatly overvalued there are markets that are severely undervalued and ignored by most investors.

Commodities are at historical lows against stocks and due for a substantial revaluation. As the chart above shows, stocks are today in a historical bubble and at a 50 year high against commodities. The moves down in stocks and up in commodities will be massive. It is a virtual certainty that the ratio will go back to the 1990 level which would mean a 90% fall of stocks against commodities.

PRECIOUS METALS – TO OUTPERFORM ALL ASSETS

Although we are going to see commodities outperforming all asset markets, it will be critical to pick the right ones. Gold, Silver, Platinum and Precious Metal Stocks are of course the obvious choice. Not only is the precious metal complex extremely oversold against all the bubble assets but it is also the ultimate wealth preservation asset.

To understand the underperformance of the precious metals, let’s look at some enlightening charts:

Since 2010 the Dow is up 700% against the XAU Gold & Silver Index. A move back to the 2010 level is a minimum. That would be an 88% decline. But bearing in mind the extreme undervaluation of the XAU stocks and overvaluation of the Dow, a fall of 97% to the early 1980 level is more likely.

The Nasdaq’s relative overvaluation is even more extreme:

The Nasdaq is up 11x or 1,000% against the XAU index since 2010. A decline back to the 2010 level is a virtual certainty but as the Nasdaq bubble bursts and the precious metals surge, a fall of 98% to the early 1980s level is more likely.

The HUI Gold index has declined 76% against silver since 2003. A return to the 2003 high is possible. This would mean that the HUI Gold Stocks would outperform silver by 300%. On the same basis, the HUI would outperform gold by 400% (not shown):

Platinum has been very weak since 2008 and is soon likely to rise against gold.

Finally we have the ratio that is very significant for precious metal investors, namely the Gold-Silver ratio:

THE COMING SILVER ROCKET

Since 2003 we have seen the Gold-Silver ratio fluctuate between the 80-84 level and 30. In 2018 it has reached a new high for this century of 84. But momentum indicators are not confirming this high which is bullish for silver. A return to the 2011 level of 30 is very likely and probably to the historical average of 15. Reaching 15 would mean that silver will move almost 6 times faster than gold. If gold for example reached $10,000, silver would be $666. An almost 5000% increase sounds incredible today but once the manipulation and Comex fails, there will be little to stop silver.

Whatever level the precious metal sector reaches is at this point irrelevant. The purpose of the graphs above is to show that precious metals are likely to vastly outperform ordinary stocks. They will also outperform most other bubble assets such as property and bonds. And as I have shown many times including in last week’s article, precious metals are the best protection against the collapsing currencies.

FINANCIAL SURVIVAL INSURANCE

But even the expected precious metals’ outperformance is not what will be important in the next 3-7 years. Much more important is the preservation of capital. It will also be vital to protect against counterparty risk in coming years. Any major assets within the financial system is in my view an unacceptable risk. If you hold precious metal stocks, it must be done with direct registration which in some countries is difficult to achieve.

Physical precious metals held outside the financial system is the best form of wealth preservation as long as they are held in the right jurisdiction with direct control and access.

The King of wealth preservation is of course gold. From a historical perspective gold must form the bottom of the wealth pyramid and be the biggest holding. Even if silver and platinum are likely to appreciate more than gold, they are much more volatile and we would therefore recommend less allocation to these metals. They are wonderful when they go up but corrections can be vicious and testing for a nervous investor.

Although the precious metal stocks look extremely attractive, remember that even with direct registration, they are paper assets and therefore not a proper wealth preservation investment.

For the investor who understands the unprecedented risks in the financial system, the next few years could turn a massive potential loss to economic peace of mind and financial security.

What is so sad is that less than 1% of investors will realise this before it is too late.

Egon von Greyerz

Founder and Managing Partner

Matterhorn Asset Management

Zurich, Switzerland

Phone: +41 44 213 62 45

Upside Down World: Junk Bonds Set For Record Winning Streak As High Grade Suffers Worst Year Since 2008

For the latest confirmation of the upside down market, look no further than corporate bonds where the riskiest, CCC-rated junk bonds are set to make a positive return for the 3rd consecutive year, the longest winning streak since records began in 1997.

Not only have the lowest quality junk bonds, those rated CCC or lower, generating respectable absolute returns of 5.8% YTD, they have also outperformed higher quality debt with a 1% total return so far this month, according to Bloomberg and ICE data. Additionally, the lowest rated junk bonds have also outperformed the broader junk bond index, which has returned 1.9% YTD.

And while the key contributor to the outperformance of lowest-rated bonds is demand for, well, higher yielding paper as investors continue to chase returns, a key structural issue has been the lack of HY supply, which at $150 billion YTD is the lowest since 2009.

Meanwhile, as investors scramble for any paper that promises a material yield, regardless of underlying fundamentals, investment grade corporate bond returns have, in the worlds of Bloomberg's James Crombie "fallen from darling to deadbeat."

Continuing a theme we first highlighted in June, when we showed the "odd divergence" of IG bonds spreads widening even as junk bond spreads touched record lows...

... junk bonds have continued to enjoy unprecedented demand (and the abovementioned record winning streak) while high grade corporate bonds are set for their worst year since 2008, with returns for the space down 2.34% so far in 2018.

As shown in the chart above, while high-grade bond returns have been mostly positive since the financial crisis, the increasingly hawkish Fed has taken its toll this year, and with three rate hikes in the rear-view mirror and more to come, investors are getting out of low-yielding fixed-rate bonds  - which traditionally underperform in rising rate environments as yields increase across the board - choosing either junk bonds or floating rate loans. No surprise then that the best performing asset classes in credit include high-risk, high-yield CCC debt and floating-rate leveraged loans.

Curiously, the negative returns for IG bonds - which have been largely used to finance another year of record mergers - haven't resulted in lower demand or slowed new issuance: according to Bloomberg, September was the highest volume month of 2018, with $122.7 billion pricing so far.

As Crombie summarizes these trends, "investors are like all others - they pursue returns. That means more money chasing a limited supply of increasingly risky bonds, and probably an uglier end to this credit cycle."

His Bloomberg macro commentator partner, Seb Boyd adds that "if the Fed halts rate rises, and corporate decision makers collectively take a sober decision to invest in long-term organic growth, then investment-grade corporates will benefit."

However, if extra Treasury sales push up yields, or late-cycle CEOs look at PE valuations and decide this is a good moment to go shopping, then high-rated bonds are best avoided.

Meanwhile, as junk bond supply remains subdued, the ongoing record wave of mergers, most of which are funded with IG debt, will see no shortage of lower-yielding paper; additionally high grade bonds will increasingly face a lot of competition, especially if the Fed keeps hiking rates and shrinking its balance sheet. This will continue until, eventually, the Fed triggers an "event" that forces a broad market repricing, one which see staggering losses in junk, and forces yield chasers into more safe places along the capital structure.

Fonte: qui