Stock Market Psychology: Behavioral finance, new research, and beyond

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Crunch Time


Psychologically and fundamentally speaking, it's not looking good in the equity markets. So I've decided to write a macroeconomic analysis in this blog post today.

My thoughts: A liquidity squeeze is back. Stocks are selling off as firms sell equities to raise cash. The Fed is attacking the liquidity squeeze by increasing the money supply. The increasing money supply is accelerating inflation and the devaluation of the U.S. dollar (and other developed world currencies). The only safe haven for cash appears to be in raw materials. Real estate, a traditional hegde against inflation, won't protect against currency devaluation in the current climate. My reasoning follows.

DJIA was down 9.4% in June. Last Thursday 90% of the NYSE trading volume was on downticks.

Usually, these conditions are where a stock market bottom might occur, but these are not ordinary times.

It seemed to me that some institutions might be selling equities to raise cash reserves last week. That's a bit frightening because it implies that there could be a cascade effect. The more banks or funds need to sell equities to raise cash, or the more there are margin calls that must be met, the more stocks will drop.

In August 2007 and January 2008 the Fed put a floor under the markets by:
1) An emergency 75 basis point rate decrease - to increase liquidity for the financial syetem and fixed income markets. This was in response to the rapid deterioration and freezing of the CMO market in August.
2) Setting a floor price at which it would buy CMOs. This was in order to provide emergency liquidity to banks without enough marketable assets on their books (CMOs which could no longer be sold on the open market). This and the bail-out of Bear-Stearns (and facilitating its sale) saved the day this Spring.

But now things are bad again. What's the Fed (and all the other central banks) to do? Well, they have two options:

1) Let the credit crunch unfold. The crunch occurred because collateralized debt obligations (securitized) and other asset-backed securities can no longer be sold on the open market - there aren't enough (any) buyers. Fed non-action could lead to global bank failures and general catastrophe, so it's not really an option. However, there have been worrisome blaming noises coming out of the U.S. Congress - blaming the Fed for bailing out "rich" Wall Street bankers and overstepping their proper regulatory role. If Congress really understood how bad it was in January, and how the SEC was not even tuned in (per the WSJ), they wouldn't be so glib. Fortunately, the New York Fed has been quite vigilant.

2) The only other short-term option I can think of is to pump liquidity into the banking system. This will devalue the U.S. dollar.

Of course, every developed country is in a similar pickle to us. Most countries experienced massive credit borrowing, with scant collateral requirements, unjustified triple-A rated securities as collateral. Now that collateral is either impossible to value (for example, because there is no market for auction rate securities, certain real estate, CDOs, CMOs, and CDSs), or is devalued to the point where margin calls have been placed.

It appears that the Fed (and other central banks) have chosen option number 2. And that's one reason why we're seeing the developed world "devalued." It's true that the dollar's devaluation is primarily due to the massive trade deficit. Massive capital outflows, a rate of $500 billion annually, is occurring to petroleum producing countries. Our trade deficit is enormous (over $600 billion annually), and this puts downward pressure on the U.S. dollar (especially as Middle Eastern countries must de-peg their currencies from the U.S. dollar to slow their domestic inflation).

However, I think we're finally going to see money supply growth contributing significantly to inflation. Liquidity must be injected into the banking system in order to prop up banks and keep lending and the economy running smoothly.

Gold is a traditional hedge against inflation. But there will probably be a ceiling on the Gold price due to Central Bank selling of gold (especially over $1000/oz.). So we're seeing other commodities such as oil, food, metals, and commodified raw materials appreciate rapidly in price. They are the new hedge against inflation.

Real estate isn't going to hedge investors adequately against inflation, not when Europe, the U.S., and Japan are being devalued versus their developing-world peers.

The Fed and other central banks are doing what they must - providing liquidity to our system - so we don't have a banking collapse. This is accelerating the devaluation of our currencies. The only protection appears to be in commodities, and the companies that produce and sell commodities.

That's the way it seems to me currently. I wish I owned more raw materials!

Happy Investing!
Richard

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, August 09, 2007

CNBC INTERVIEW and Waiting 'till the Fat Lady Sings

NEWS FLASH: Marketpsych Managing Director Frank Murtha on CNBC today!!! See the video here.

Market fear is spreading, and that's a good thing.

This afternoon a stranger sitting next to me on the subway asked me how the market was doing today (someone who didn't know I work in finance). When anonymous strangers stop staring straight ahead, and start nervously inquiring after the health of the stock market, then it's about time to search for bargains. I figured that experience was the opposite of knowing it's time to sell when you shoeshine boy (or cab driver, or doorman) is offering you stock tips.

As predicted in my last blog post - shameless self-congratulation :) - the market would drop, bounce, and then drop again on greater fear. Below is this morning's market fear chart. Notice how investor pain has risen well above March's pain levels (this is a 7 month chart).

The sell-off will continue, in fits and starts, until the full depth of the (1) subprime mortgage defaults and (more importantly) (2) Credit (and thus liquidity) squeeze on borrowers is comprehended. As long as there is uncertainty, the markets will not rest, and the relief rallies will be only brief and tentative.

If the extent of overextended borrowers (and subsequent defaults) turns out to be as bad as the Chicken Little's are claiming (unlikely), then the market may not rally until congressional legislation is passed and it's ramifications are fully understood (not a good thing in the short-term). Such legislation would be intended to prevent further profligate borrowing by debt-weary consumers. And better credit monitoring and preparation for liquidity crunches (higher reserves) by financial institutions. As long as interest rates remain low, the expansion should continue with only minor economic consequences. It's just a waiting game now -- to see what the fallout will be, and then it will be time to buy.

Ah, but that's idle speculation of a nervous mind. We have had a pattern of profitable buying on dips recently (past 4+ years), and it's possible that many have become seduced by the ease with which they made money -- letting their guards down. That could end badly, or it could keep on. In any case, it will be safe to buy dips when the cards have all fallen and the hands are turned. We need capitulation, panic, and consequences. Then the liabilities of the losers will be known, and the mess can be cleaned up.

Happy Investing,
Richard

Labels: , , , , , , , ,