Your Purpose. Our Passion.

Friday
Jun242016

Brexit: What the U.K.'s Vote to Leave the EU Means

Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® | Co-Founder & CEO 

We woke up on Friday morning, June 24, to headlines about another economic crisis coming out of Europe. This time, the “crisis” is the decision by the U.K. to leave the European Union (EU). A somewhat unexpected outcome of a much-talked-about event, it has rocked markets around the world, including here in the U.S. In the immediate aftermath of the vote, futures were down significantly, showing that the concern is real. You may well share that concern.

Before we get too upset, however, let’s put this event in context and look at what it actually means for us as investors here in the United States.

Then vs. now: A tale of two economies

In many ways, this event recalls the Greek crisis of 2011. At that time, the fear was that Greece would exit the EU and that financial collapse would follow. U.S. and world markets declined, worry shot up, and we saw headlines that looked . . . well, that looked much like those we’ve seen recently.

Make no mistake, the current situation is worse in some ways, but it is also significantly better in others. Then, we had a genuine, unexpected crisis situation evolving in real time that threatened the world financial system. Here, we have a slowly evolving political situation that will be resolved through negotiations over years, at a time when the global economy is growing. Real global risks are much lower today than they were five years ago.

Even if the situation in Europe were to get worse, U.S. companies have very limited direct exposure. According to FactSet, for example, only 2.9 percent of revenue for the S&P 500 companies comes from the United Kingdom. Europe as a whole accounts for about 7 percent of revenue, according to a report from Goldman Sachs. U.S. companies simply are not that directly exposed to a slowdown in Europe. The U.S. economy as a whole is similarly insulated.

Considerations for investors

While there is no doubt the world has changed—and significantly—there is considerable doubt on what the Brexit actually means and, more immediately, what U.S. investors should do about it. For investors with a long-term perspective, the right answer may well be to do nothing.

In fact, with 20/20 hindsight, we can say that:

  • With the Greek crisis in 2011, the right response would have been to sit tight.
  • With the Asian financial crisis in 1998, the right response also would have been to sit tight.

With the U.S. economy continuing to grow, and with U.S. companies’ very limited exposure to Europe, it seems quite likely that, looking back five years from now, we may again be concluding that the right move was to sit tight.

U.S. markets seem to be supporting that conclusion. Although the futures markets declined, the decline was actually rather limited for the supposedly earthshaking nature of the Brexit vote. What markets are actually saying is that this is bad, but by no means is it the end of the world.

Should we be worried? No more than usual. At the moment, the only real thing that has changed is an increase in uncertainty. While the U.K. has indeed voted to leave, we don’t know what that means yet—and markets are trading on fear of the worst case. Britain has already announced that it does not plan to actually start the exit process for some months yet, and it will remain in the EU until that process is complete. So, everything has changed, and yet nothing has changed.

As markets start to process the likely length of the exit process, and as more clarity comes from both the EU and the U.K. around likely outcomes, markets will gradually settle down into a new normal again, as they have done historically.

Managing your reaction to short-term noise

The biggest risk investors face over time is overreacting to events. There will always be a crisis—or, at a minimum, something to worry about—somewhere in the world. This is a big one, but we have seen bigger, and the markets have come back over time. Your portfolio was built with the expectation that markets would occasionally face this kind of event, so it is structured to ride it out without putting your long-term goals at risk.

In a few years, we may find ourselves looking back and wondering what all the fuss was about, just as we now do with the last European crisis in 2011. For most investors, the biggest risk is how you deal with short-term noise. We will, of course, continue to monitor the situation, but we believe that volatility in the near term is probably not worth reacting to.

Keep calm and carry on,

Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® | Co-Founder & CEO
Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® is the Co-Founder and CEO of Telos Wealth Management, LLC, a Registered Investment Adviser located at 656 North Miller St., Wenatchee, WA. Sean can be reached at 509-664-8844 or at Info@TelosWealth.com.

Certain sections of this commentary contain forward-looking statements that are based on our reasonable expectations, estimates, projections, and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. Past performance is not indicative of future results. All indices are unmanaged and investors cannot invest directly into an index. The S&P 500 Index is a broad-based measurement of changes in stock market conditions based on the average performance of 500 widely held common stocks.

Tuesday
Jan262016

Oil and U.S. Stock Market

Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® | Co-Founder & CEO

An introductory note from Sean Gross: The following commentary, written by David Kotok (Chairman & Chief Investment Officer at Cumberland Advisors: www.cumber.com), offers a historical analysis of stock market returns following periods of significant oil price declines.  David’s comments, reprinted with permission, are selectively quoted. The full text of David’s commentary can be found here.  Please feel free to contact us directly with any questions you may have about this article and/or your accounts: 509- 509-664-8844/ Info@TelosWealth.com

Oil and U.S. Stock Market
January 25, 2016

Hartford Funds has published an analysis of “stock market returns after significant oil price declines.” They used the WTI crude oil price reference and examined a period of approximately 30 years ending in 2015. In their examination they found four events that were substantive. Independently, Jim Bianco published a similar analysis and brought the data current through January 20, 2016. We commend both firms on their excellent work.
 
The first event was the oil price drop that took place between October 1985 and March 1986. Hartford’s analysis indicated a price drop of approximately 66%. They then computed the S&P 500 Index total return one year after the price decline period ended. The result was a positive 37.66%.
 
The next period was September 1990 through February 1991. The oil price decline was 53% (57% if you use Bianco’s dating). According to Hartford’s computations, the subsequent S&P 500 Index total return one year after the price decline was complete was 15.99%.
 
The third event was December 1996 through November 1998. The oil price drop was 56%. Bianco uses a slightly different methodology and has the price drop at 61%. The S&P 500 Index total return one year after the price decline was 20.90%.
 
The last of the four events was June 2008 through January 2009. The oil price drop was 70% according to Hartford. Bianco gets 78% for that decline. Hartford computes that the S&P 500 Index total return one year after the price decline was 33.14%.
 
In their research note, Hartford asks a serious question. What will happen after the current oil price decline runs its course? And, of course, what will be the price and total return of the S&P 500 Index one year after the price decline is complete?
 
According to Hartford’s calculation, during the period June 2014 through December 2015, the oil price drop was 65%. Jim Bianco data now shows 73% from peak to trough. In fact, depending on how you measure the oil price, the price decline this time could be the largest percentage drop in history. It may exceed the 70% decline that occurred in 2008 and 2009.

Will this oil price decline run its course? Yes, absolutely. At what price will it bottom? Not a single soul on the planet knows. What will happen after the bottom? History suggests that the transmission mechanism of low oil price to positive economic outcome, with rising consumption and other stimulative effects, takes about a year to unfold.
 
The historical data also suggests that once the positive rebound begins to unfold, it will become robust as a result of the $200 billion annual tax cut equivalent from the energy price fall. The 350 million of us who live in America and billions who live around the world have been receiving and will continue to receive this benefit.
 
After we rebalance our household balance sheets, raise our savings, and adjust our domestic budgets, we will start to spend this windfall. There are early signs that this process is underway. Subsequently, we will find ourselves with an extra $20 to $100 a week in our pockets. As we begin to realize the permanence of the excess, it becomes spendable. Economists call this the permanent income hypothesis.
  
A drop in the oil price has immediate effects on credit, including high-yield and energy-related credit, and on regions of the country that are dependent on energy production, such as North Dakota and Texas. It is a negative force and quickly visible. We can already see it and measure its impact.
 
The oil price transmission mechanism that affects the entire nation and passes through the benefits of the price drop takes more time to operate and is more nuanced. We are starting to see those benefits now, and they are accelerating.
 
This analysis leads us to the following conclusions:
 
(1) We are not going to have a recession in the US. We are going through the negative phase of the energy price shock. The positive phase is still ahead of us; however, it has begun.
 
(2) The positive phase is likely to continue and become more robust. There is an accelerator function in the transmission from oil price decline to economic growth.
 
(3) There is no way to know how high the S&P 500 Index will go once the oil price downward shock is complete, nor can we time the upturn. There is a lot of history and supportive information to suggest that following the oil price shock, the US economy will be more robust. Our growth rate will pick up and do so from a platform that is fairly solid, because the economy will have run through the credit problems precipitated by the downward move in oil. Lastly, the rebound will be reflected in an upward movement in stock prices and higher total returns, with a strongly positive number from the S&P 500 Index.
 
Factoring in low global inflation and additional intervention by central banks worldwide, from the European Central Bank to the People’s Bank of China, we see the makings of an extended period – through the rest of the decade – with low single-digit interest rates, low inflation, ample liquidity, and a corrective mechanism that will express itself in rising asset prices as we go through this turmoil and come out the other side.
  
When the oil price spikes down, the plunge creates turmoil. Then the oil price bottoms and the recovery creates massive opportunity.

 

David R. Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer, Cumberland Advisors

Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. All indices are unmanaged, and investors cannot invest directly in an index. Unlike investments, indices do not incur management fees, charges, or expenses. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

                                                                                         ###

Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® | Co-Founder & CEO
Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® is the Co-Founder and CEO of Telos Wealth Management, LLC, a Registered Investment Adviser located at 656 North Miller St., Wenatchee, WA. Sean can be reached at 509-664-8844 or at Info@TelosWealth.com.

 

 

Friday
Jan152016

Will a 2007 – 2009 Redux Occur in 2016?

An introductory note from Sean Gross: The following commentary was written by Gabriel Hament, Foundation and Charitable Accounts, and David Kotok, Chairman & Chief Investment Officer, at Cumberland Advisors (www.cumber.com). Their commentary, reprinted with permission, offers a detailed and helpful analysis of whether the recent sell-off in global risk assets is a precursor to something worse (i.e., a repeat of the 2007–2009 global financial collapse), or a temporary downturn, which will eventually be followed by a significant upturn. Please feel free to contact us directly with any questions you may have about this article and/or your accounts: 509-509-664-8844/Info@TelosWealth.com 

The “Greenspan Put” or the “Yellen Bid”?

January 15, 2016
 
In his recent dispatch on the daily market gyrations, Art Cashin relays to us the various rumors swirling around on the exchange floor. Art’s reasons for the red paint on the tape include:

  • Sovereign wealth funds forced to liquidate due to currency/oil sell-offs
  • Hedge funds putting to bid stock positions in order to cover losses in their commodity positions
  • Heavy sell programs triggering margin calls 

Will the carnage across asset classes continue?
 
To answer this question, Art draws on the research of SentimenTrader’s Jason Goepfert. Jason notes that the “S&P 500 has now corrected 10% from a near 52-week high for the second time in a relatively short span… this has only happened three times in the last 100 years – 1929, 2000, and 2008. Additionally, 90% of volume has flowed into declining stocks.”
 
Jason assigns probabilities to three scenarios going forward:
 
1)   Oversold bounce: 50%
2)   Flush lower then bounce: 30%
3)   Outright collapse of 5%–15%: 20%
 
All three extreme events that Jason cites – 1929, 2000, and 2008 – share a common thread: serious deterioration in a sector of the credit markets. There is the source of the pain. The contraction of credit reverses the multiplicative power of credit.
 
Extreme sell-offs occur due to credit contraction. We see such sell-offs now in the high-yield space (e.g. Third Avenue) and in junk funds that own high-yield instruments. The prospectuses of multiple junk funds reveal that the high-yield securities include non-US debt with currency hedges or debt denominated in USD by those who cannot pay. 

Our previous commentary titled “Contagion Risk, Big Banks, Junk Funds” provides an in-depth analysis on which high-yield funds have upwards of 20% of their holdings in these types of issues. Some of these funds currently appear at the top of Morningstar’s rating lists.
 
However, a 2007–2009 redux will not occur in 2016. The underlying source of the credit that has dragged down the market originates from central banks. We believe the power of very low interest rates stretched over a long period of time will continue to fuel higher asset prices. A discount rate of zero, 1%, or even 2% results in very large numbers for asset pricing. Broad-based market sell-offs such as the one in which we find ourselves are set-ups for massive bull entry points.
 
Hope is not a strategy. And fear provides the entry signal.

Gabriel Hament, Foundation and Charitable Accounts

David R. Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer

Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. All indices are unmanaged, and investors cannot invest directly in an index. Unlike investments, indices do not incur management fees, charges, or expenses. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

###

Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® | Co-Founder & CEO
Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® is the Co-Founder and CEO of Telos Wealth Management, LLC, a Registered Investment Adviser located at 656 North Miller St., Wenatchee, WA. Sean can be reached at 509-664-8844 or at Info@TelosWealth.com.
Thursday
Apr162015

Document Retention Length Recommendations

Keep for 1–3 Months

  • Utility bills
  • Sales receipts for minor purchases
  • ATM and bank deposit slips

Keep for 1 Year

  • Checkbook ledgers
  • Paycheck stubs
  • Monthly mortgage statements
  • Expired insurance records

Keep for 7 Years

  • Bank statements
  • W-2 and 1099 forms
  • Receipts for tax purposes
  • Cancelled checks
  • Disability records
  • Unemployment income stubs
  • Medical bills/claims

Keep Indefinitely

  • Annual tax returns
  • Deeds, mortgages, and bills of sale
  • Year-end statements for investments
  • Legal documents (birth certificates, marriage license, divorce papers, passports, etc.)
  • Home improvement documentation and receipts
  • Receipts for major purchases—for warranty and insurance purposes
  • Wills
  • Living wills
  • Power of attorney designation
  • Medical and burial instructions
  • Beneficiary directions
  • Real estate certificates
  • Automobile titles
  • Current insurance policies
  • Medical records
  • Education records
  • Pension plan records
  • Retirement plan records

Shred/Trash

  • Paycheck stubs after reconciling with W-2 form
  • Expired warranties
  • Coupons after expiration date
Wednesday
Jan282015

ECB, Euro, USD, Interest Rates

An Introductory note from Sean Gross: The following commentary is authored by David Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer at Cumberland Advisors (www.cumber.com). David's commentary, reprinted with permission, offers a detailed and helpful analysis of the possible consequences of the long anticipated, and recently announced, European Central Bank (ECB) quantitative easing program (QE). Please feel free to contact us directly with any questions you may have: Info@TelosWealth.com.  

ECB, Euro, USD, Interest Rates
January 24, 2015

After a two-and-a-half-year wait for “whatever it takes,” the quantitative easing (QE) announced this week by the European Central Bank (ECB) is different from the QE undertaken by the Federal Reserve (Fed) during and after the financial crisis and now completed. The European action comes in the aftermath of the Fed’s programs and is a European attempt to confront complex economics. 

In the 2008–2014 Fed version, QE injected liquidity into markets that were frozen. More QE was then piled on as the Fed expanded its holdings of federally backed securities. A single sovereign guaranteed that debt, and that was the United States government.

The QE process quickly drove the short-term interest rate to zero but not below zero. Over time the longer-term interest rates followed a similar path to lower and lower levels. The reduction in interest rates translated to reduced mortgage and corporate-financing costs. The process has continued for seven years. A refinancing apparatus could then develop in the US economy as one agent after another took advantage of persistently lower interest rates. Lenders adjusted to the new notion of lower interest rates for longer periods. Investors were hit by financial repression as their savings instruments matured and rolled over into lower interest rates. That process is ongoing in 2015.

In the US, behaviors changed over the course of seven years. Positions that were initially viewed as being temporary started to seem permanent.

Forecasters warned, “The Fed is printing all this money; we’ll have a big inflation; interest rates will skyrocket; and the economy and markets will go in the tank.” The warnings were repeated ad infinitum in the media. They were debated by some.

Cumberland Advisors numbered among the debaters. We argued “no.” We were in the minority. Over and over again we heard predictions of hyperinflation and higher interest rates. We said “no.” We heard all of the outcomes that would be terrible as a result of QE. We said “no.” Seven years on, the debate continues, with the detractors predicting doom. Meanwhile, in the United States, interest rates are very low. There is minimal inflation. The economic recovery is strengthening. The American stock markets reached all-time highs within the last month. 

The detractors are still predicting the end of the world. Someday they may be correct. But not in January, 2015. At Cumberland we still say “no.” Not yet!

Seven years later in the US we can now add a major oil shock to the economic positives. With QE-induced refinancing in place and with growing intensity in our economic recovery, the outlook is simply marvelous. In 2015, our growth will be above 3%, employment will improve, and inflation will remain low. The positive trends continue and are becoming more robust. In addition, we have the world’s strongest major reserve currency, with a long run still ahead of it. And we have a better fiscal balance in the US than most nations enjoy.

In the US, QE was controversial and still is. Meanwhile, look at results. It worked.

Examine the same issues in the Eurozone and the ECB, and we see a different picture than in the US. 

The ECB will be acquiring over €1 trillion in sovereign debt. Their allocation method is quite different from the Fed’s. They have to deal with the sovereign debts of different countries that have different levels of creditworthiness, ranging from junk-bond status in Greece to the highest-grade status in Germany and Finland. There is no inflation and no expectation of inflation in the Eurozone. Interest rates for the debt of the very highest-grade sovereigns are already next to zero in the Eurozone. The same is true for nearby sovereigns like Sweden and for Switzerland. 

In all of Europe, interest rates on longer-term sovereign debt are remarkably low and mostly lower than in the US. Italy’s 10-year benchmark sovereign debt touched 1.4% on Friday. Spain reached 1.25%. In Germany, the sovereign benchmark for the Eurozone, the 30-year bond yield is 1%, and the 10-year note is 0.2%. All German maturities under 5 years are trading at negative yields. 

QE by the ECB will not lower interest rates — they are already at or near zero. In fact, the ECB has announced it will acquire sovereign debt even if the yield is negative. Think about that. The central bank will be creating money in order to pay the various sovereign governments for the privilege of buying their debt. That is how a negative interest rate works.

Meanwhile, the fiscal situation in Europe is still under repair, a process that will take many years. In countries like France, a great portion of the economy, more than half, is driven by the government. Italy is another case study of a huge burden of social promises and a deficient funding mechanism to pay for them. Greece is a mess without easy answers. Others in Europe no longer care whether Greece exits the Eurozone. Many hope that they do, because it is nearly impossible to throw any country out. Grexit (the term for a Greece exit from the Eurozone) would be welcomed by other peripheral countries, although the celebration in those countries would be a quiet one due to the observance of political correctness. 

To be blunt, the divisions in Europe cannot be healed by QE. The promises that are expensed as social benefit payments act to reduce productivity and restrain growth. This fiscal reality cannot be cured by QE. In fact, there is no liquidity shortage in Europe for QE to fix. QE is not a reform mechanism for euro-sclerosis. QE cannot cure sick governance. It cannot lower interest rates when they are at zero. It cannot stimulate credit expansion when there is no credit demand. If zero interest rates won’t work, a continuation of zero interest rates also won’t work.

So what does QE do?

In Europe, QE transfers the fiscal failure of the sovereign states involved to the monetary authority, the European Central Bank. The ECB creates money. The money is used to buy the sovereign debt of Eurozone members at an interest rate of zero or near-zero. The sovereign debt the ECB buys is likely to be held for years. It must be viewed as a permanent structure, just as it has become in Japan. The ECB will not be “tapering” in this decade. Maybe it will do so in the next decade. The proceeds of the issuance of sovereign debt will fund the social promises that governments cannot otherwise keep. Contrast that situation with that in the US, where the annualized government deficit is nearly $1 trillion smaller than it was at its worst in 2009.

In Europe, QE is a circular mechanism. It has no multiplier in the credit arena. It inspires no productivity gain from investment by the private sector. It is merely circular.

So, if it is circular, why have QE?

There is one element that works with QE, whether in the US or Europe. We have seen it work in the US, and we will see it work in Europe. QE withdraws duration from the market and transfers it onto the government’s books. The market then seeks to replace the duration in its asset mix. That is why asset prices rise when QE occurs: asset prices rise when duration is in demand, and they fall when duration is in supply. When central banks extract duration from the market, it has to be replaced with something else. Stocks are long-duration assets. Real estate is a long-duration asset. Collectibles and precious metals are long-duration assets. Patents and other forms of intellectual property rights are long-duration assets. Cash is not long-duration. The duration of cash is one day.

In the US, QE has resulted in record stock market prices. They are still rising. QE has resulted in higher real estate prices. They are still rising. QE adds to the upward direction of asset prices and the accumulation of wealth by the wealthy. We see it in the statistics that track wealth and in the statistics that are derived from the income streams owned by the wealthy.

Wealth effects operate with a time lag. There is a slight transfer each year from accumulated wealth into consumption spending and hence into economic growth. It is a small percentage. From a higher and rising stock market, we estimate that transfer to be 1%-2% in any given year. If stock market wealth rises and there is a positive and permanent wealth effect of $100 over the course of the year, an additional $1 to $2 in annual spending transfers slowly to economic growth. We see that at work in the US. We will see it at work in Europe as well.

There is a higher transfer when real estate prices rise and are viewed as permanently heading higher. The financing mechanism for housing has a multiplier that is greater than the financing mechanism applied to financial assets. That makes sense since the credit multiplier for housing is higher than for stocks. For example, stocks can sit in your 401(k) unleveraged, while houses are mortgaged and do not sit in 401(k)s. Therefore the transmission mechanism from higher housing wealth is more robust than the transmission mechanism from higher stock prices. Yale Professor Bob Shiller notes that housing wealth effects can reach 3% to 5% a year. We already see some of those effects in the US, thanks to QE. As housing becomes more robust, we will see more of the positive housing wealth effects in the US. We will see a little of this happening in the Eurozone.

The conclusion is that the extended and predictable period of QE in Europe will give some positive stimulus to economic growth via the wealth-effect transmission method. It will not be a panacea for Europe’s problems. Monetary policy cannot fix fiscal policy errors or the suppression of production by governments, but monetary policy can raise asset prices. In Europe it will do so. In the US it already has done so, and the rise is not over.

At Cumberland Advisors, we remain fully invested in the US stock market in our exchange-traded fund (ETF) strategies. We are focused on domestic businesses. Our largest overweight is the utility sector. It is 95% domestic, so its corporate entities do not have to worry about foreign currency translations impacting their earnings. The sector benefits from a slowly and steadily growing US economy. It pays dividend yields that exceed the riskless interest rate from Treasury notes. It is defensive and less volatile than other sectors in a period when volatility is rising. 

Our international ETF strategies have a majority of components that are currency hedged. Our outlook for the dollar is a prolonged period of strengthening. We expect a lot of adjustment vis-à-vis the other currencies that are involved in the present historic restructuring of monetary policy. Those currencies will weaken relative to the dollar. It is conceivable that the yen could reach 135 or 150 to the dollar over a period of several years. It is conceivable that the euro-dollar exchange rate could be 1.00, 0.90, or 0.85 over the next two or three years. The range of possibilities is unknown, and the confidence intervals on such estimates are very wide. 

Imagine a world where the US central bank policy rate is 1% and the Eurozone central bank policy rate is minus 0.2%. The math suggests that the dollar would then strengthen by 1.2% a year against the euro. Compare the current 10-year German Bund at 0.2% to the 10-year US note. The difference is 1.7%. That math suggests the dollar will strengthen 17% against the euro over the next 10 years. Please note that this is a very simplified model. The actual way this comparison is done is much more complex, but the concept is the same. Interest-rate differentials explain longer-term movements in currency exchange rates. 

We cannot fully estimate what euro-dollar exchange rates will be. The truth is, nobody knows.

We anticipate the volatilities associated with this massive transition in policy to reach new levels. That means lots of activity in managed portfolios and a need for the portfolio manager to be nimble and move quickly when required.

Volatility is bidirectional. It is scary when it causes prices to accelerate if they fall.  It is frightening at inflection points. And it is exhilarating when it enables prices to head upward. Expect all of the above in 2015.

David R. Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer

 ###

Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® | Co-Founder & CEO
Sean Gross, CFP®, AIF® is the Co-Founder and CEO of Telos Wealth Management, LLC, a Registered Investment Adviser located at 656 North Miller St., Wenatchee, WA. Sean can be reached at 509-664-8844 or at Info@TelosWealth.com.