The second quarter of
2013 was particularly challenging for investors. The last two months, in
particular, were impacted by the market turbulence which emerged from concerns
that the Federal Reserve Bank would change its current low interest rate policy.
The current policy of maintaining low interest rates was intended to support
economic growth in the United States by making credit more affordable. They
have done this through what is known as their quantitative easing program, which
is essentially buying bonds with money that does not exist until they create it.
While the historical data does not necessarily support the belief, many
investors, nonetheless, associate increasing interest rates with poorer stock
market performance. The prospect of a change in interest rate policy created additional
uncertainty and a shift in investor sentiment from the irrational exuberance equity
investors had during the first two months of the year to more anxious concerns
as to the sustainability the equity markets.
What may well be a more
fundamental issue, however, is that bond investors also seized upon the
prospective change in the Federal Reserve Banks policy and started exiting from
bonds. Trim Tabs, an investment research firm, says that investors liquidated over $60 billion from bond mutual funds and exchange traded funds in June. If this is true, that would be the single-largest monthly redemption in history. Some commentators are calling this the end of a 30 year bull market in bonds.
This drove interest
rates higher causing losses for traditionally bond investments. Bonds have
traditionally, and historically, been considered conservative investments. With
bonds as well as stock losing value, this left very few “safe harbors” for
refuge from this storm. Cash is one option that some investors will flee to,
and an allocation to some percentage allocation to cash is certainly warranted
as a prudent allocation strategy. However, with dollars being created without
backing by anything other than the “full faith and credit” of a government that
does not appear to be capable of operating in a solvent manner, it is doubtful
that this is the safe refuge it might appear to be. Moreover, cash offers very
little in investment return. While cash is a valuable component of an
investment strategy, just as with any other asset, having too much of it has
its own hazards.
In my view, while there
are many economically sound justifications for higher interest rates to exist,
the markets have severely over-reacted to the prospect of a policy change in
the Federal Reserve Bank. Having listened to Ben Bernanke’s entire speech, I
heard him say that depending upon economic conditions the Federal Reserve Bank
would adjust its policy. If the economy was doing well the Federal Reserve
would gradually reduce the $85 billion per month of bonds it is buying to keep
interest rates low. If the economy is not doing so well, it would continue its
policy, and if conditions warranted, it would even increase the amount. From
what I can see, given economic conditions, the Federal Reserve Bank seems more
likely than not to continue its policy longer than expected. While there can be
other factors than the Federal Reserve Bank affecting interest rates, it
appears to me that investors have over-reacted toward the downside during the
last few months, just as they over-reacted to the upside in equity markets
during the first two months of the year. These last few months of stock and
bond market behavior appear to be more panicked emotional reactions of market
traders rather than the economically sound reasoning of longer-term investors.
In my analysis, I would
be surprised to see the Federal Reserve Bank make any significant change in the
near future. The consequences for doing so would be too severe in its impact on
our anemically growing economy. Were they to change their policy and allow
interest rates to rise, the most recent market response to these prospects
suggests that at least the initial market response would be decline in both the
stock and bond markets. The result would be a further damper on economic growth
because of what economist call the “wealth effect” When account values go up,
people are more willing to spend and consume. When account values go down the
reverse is true which results in slower economic growth. Additionally, the
housing market plays a very big role in the strength of our economy. With the
housing market appearing to be in the recovery stage, higher mortgage rates,
resulting from a change in Federal Reserve Bank policy, could quickly kill the
housing recovery, again stalling economic growth. The other important factor is
that when interest rates rise, the debt servicing liabilities of the U.S.
government and municipalities also start to increase. At present, the servicing
of the existing debt is not financially sustainable, even given historically
low interest rates. Consequently, taken together, it does not seem likely that
we will see a change in Federal Reserve Bank policy anytime soon. An unknown,
however, is how much control the Federal Reserve Bank really has left in
capping interest rates. There have been reports of Central Banks throughout the
world selling their holding of U.S. Treasury bonds. This would put additional
pressure on interest rates to rise.
Overall the global
economic system is drowning in debt. Were it not for the heavy debt loads that
are being carried, the underlying latent economic vigor would look promising. The
real challenge to policy makers is how to manage an unwinding and restructuring
of that debt. This must be done in the context of continuing demands for
financial resources. The real danger is having the management of this process
get out of control and become a collapse rather that a slower burn process. If
there is a systemic economic collapse the trajectory of where events will lead
is unknown. At this point, while I do see economic turbulence ahead, I do not
place a high probability on a general overall economic meltdown, at least in
the near future.
No comments:
Post a Comment