Financial Collapse?

Seems that principles may be trumping common sense today with the failed deals to back Lehman and AIG. It's not wise for the Fed and U.S. Treasury to give a lecture about moral hazard on Deck 5 as the Titanic is sinking.

Only one group has the credibility to prevent the collapse of significant U.S. banks(and later others in Europe) -- the Fed and U.S. Treasury. It appears that fear of indulging moral hazard (a principle) is prompting the Fed "to teach banks a lesson" today by allowing Lehman to collapse.

Lehman was the oldest bank on Wall Street. Lehman was relatively trusted and honest. Although it's true that Lehman has been circling the drain for a year -- see our prior blog post.

The core problem is that government economists assume people are rational. They assume that lessons will be learned and trust will be acquired by the most honest.

I'm from a psychiatry background. I don't think I've ever met a rational person. People respond to some rational direction for a while, but over time they are more likely to respond to incentives. The incentive structures on Wall Street (dictated by the Fed, Congress, and the SEC) are seriously deficient in this understanding of endemic irrationality and the limitless nature of uncontained greed.

The initial prevention was to impose adequate regulations (in advance) that would account for the lack of responsibility and short-term incentive structures on Wall Street. People are people (especially on Wall Street), and they will grab as many cookies from the cookie jar as possible if the lid is left open.

Lecturing Wall Streeters after they get diabetes is not helpful. Their diabetes has become contagious, and is infecting anyone within sneezing distance.

Locking the cookie jar, or limiting the outflows, is the only prevention. But it's not a solution now. We all have diabetes now, and we need our financial insulin (so to speak). But the private sector has run out of insulin.

The counterparty risk of Lehman's intertwined web of positions is unknown ($2 trillion in interrelated positions?). And that will spook the markets for weeks if not months as the carnage is sorted out (if it can be). Worse, the markets will continue to suffer as the disease spreads.

One thing I haven't seen in my (admittedly short) lifetime is fear that swelled into panic that caused a global financial collapse. I still haven't quite seen it, but we're getting close if no one (ahem, FED!!!) steps up to back the sagging real-estate linked assets of AIG and Lehman.

When ideology trumps practicality at the highest levels of policy making, we're all in trouble.

The Hong Kong government supported the Hang Seng in 1997 to prevent collapse, and it profited handsomely when offloading those shares (bought on the cheap) many years later. There are precedents for government support to excessively fearful markets, to restore confidence. With mortgage-related assets so cheap (and no willing buyers of size), and with the goverment inextricably bound to insure the performance of many banks anyway (through the FDIC), it makes little sense for the Fed and Treasury to dither.

Safe Investing!
Richard

Emotional Baggage: When it's so hard to let go...

Selling a losing stock shouldn't be hard. Yet many investors find that as bad news begins rolling in, they are in disbelief. The stock they loved has turned on them.

Take Starbucks (SBUX) for example. Last year the announcement that hot creamy drinks weren't selling as well as anticipated during the summer was a shocker to many star-struck (pardon) investors. I could hear the disbelief from investors in slow-motion withdrawal: "Starbucks can always keep growing and raising their drink prices, they just need to serve faster, colder drinks, fresher coffee, expand to Bhutan, etc..., can't they?" Yet, after Starbucks appeared on nearly every street corner, it should have seemed natural that growth had to begin slowing.

The Onion even noted in 1998 that Starbucks had begun opening Starbucks outlets in the bathrooms of existing Starbucks (see article here). To continue growing, Starbucks had to begin cannibalizing itself.

For most investors, the stages of coming to terms with a "Stock Gone South" are like those of someone dealing with other sad events in life. I cou;d even speculate that such stages might follow the logic of the Kubler-Ross model of the "Five Stages of Grief."

First, investors look for reasons why the bad news isn't really true or was maliciously fabricated by outsiders (DENIAL). If the bad news continues, then they feel ANGER (and maybe blame the management or "evil" short-sellers). Next they begin to negotiate (BARGAINING) with themselves, "I know this has been a great stock, but maybe I need to let her go for a while - I can always buy some shares again later." Unsentimental investors then sell, while the more sensitive types become indecisive - paralyzed with disappointment (DEPRESSION). If they make a habit of wallowing in self-pity, then they are likely to end up at the fifth stage of grief called ACCEPTANCE, whilst still owning the Stock as a hopeful "comeback kid" (though in reality it is likely to be sunburned pink (sheets) and panhandling for change somewhere near the equator).

At risk of jeers and taunts from those still in DENIAL, the same as is happening to SBUX might be happening to (drumroll please).... Google (GOOG)!!! Truth be told, GOOG actually looks relatively inexpensive under $450/share ... or am I too emotionally attached to see clearly? (Disclosure: I don't own GOOG shares...yet).

It might seem like an easy decision to cut GOOG loose and re-invest the money elsewhere. Unfortunately for investors there is an innate human tendency, called "the endowment effect," which unconsciously compels them to cling to familiar, fun, or long-held stocks. Associated with the endowment effect is a thought process that justifies continuing to hold a weak stock ("It's just a temporary setback;" "I'm a long-term holder;" "It's actually a good time to buy ... if only I wasn't already holding too many shares..."

We got some great evidence for the endowment effect at a training we ran for financial advisors last week. In our experiment we give out fancy "MarketPsych" pens to half the attendees (because we "forgot" to bring enough, oops!). We then decide to redistribute the pens using a market mechanism - for fairness sake. We ask those who received a pen to write down a price at which they would sell their pen (the ask), and those who did not receive a pen write down how much they would pay for one (the bid).

At our meeting last week there were NO transactions for pens among audience members, The average bid was $1.35 (which approximates the actual value of the pen). Remarkably, the average asking price was $8.80 (ranging from $3 to $15). The sample was small, and we usually see asking prices around $5, which is still remarkably high.

The high asking prices are a testament to the power of emotional attachment and its ability to cause overvaluing of those things we like (and those that are scarce). One way to increase the endowment effect, and widen the bid-ask spread, is to ask those who received a pen to describe the things they like about the pen, and to ask those without a pen to describe objective aspects of the pen. When we do that, the spread is even bigger.

So how can you fall out of love with SBUX, GOOG, or any other stock that is disappointing you? (And it usually is true that these stocks will continue underperforming going forward). Think of the objective aspects of the investment, not the ones you love to love. Don't think about how tasty frappuccinos are, think about the price to book value. Instead of remembering the pleasure you got the first time you Google'ed yourself, think of declining profit margins and ad revenues. It requires deliberate action, but it is definitely possible to toss aside your emotional baggage and learn to see stocks more rationally. It's just not very fun...

Happy Investing!
Richard

MarketPsy Capital

Our new spin-off asset management firm, MarketPsy Capital, was mentioned in a new Popular Science Magazine article. The fund will be using our ground-breaking linguistic analysis technology to identify and exploit psychological mis-pricings in stocks, currencies, and commodities. For more information, please contact Richard Peterson at richard@marketpsy.com.

THE EROI (Emotional Return on Investing)

Has this ever happened to you?

Recently I sold half of a position (large drug company) that I had held for 5 years. Did I have a good reason? Not especially. I figured that as a solid company it was wort owning - I just didn't need THAT much of it.

But - as is always the case with Whack-A-Mole Syndrome (TM) - it immediately started to move up. In fact, it almost seemed that the stock had become aware that I had sold it and used that information as the catalyst to move up 3 percent over the next two days.

Then something weird happened; I found myself rooting against it.

As a rational, self-interested being I was struck by this reaction. After all, since I still owned the stock, every move higher was making me money. But every move up was also a stinging rebuke of my in retrospect completely arbitrary decision to dump half my shares. This resulting conclusion was inescapable; I literally found myself wanting to lose money.

Why would an investor ever want to do that??

It's simple. We invest for an emotional return that more important even then the financial return. In fact, money is never the goal of investing. It is the means to the end, a currency that buys us emotional states (e.g., feeling safe, feeling proud, feeling free).

Unfortunately, sometimes our emotional goals and financial goals are imcompatible.

Being aware of our secret reasons for investing The E.R.O.I (Emotional Return on Investing) is what helps us overcome our psychology and navigate through the emotional mindfield of equities investing.

Are there any times you felt yourself actually wanting to lose money? Feel free to post a response.

In the meantime, happy investing.

Oh! And check out Dr. Peterson's cool book for more great insights into how to become a better investor.

Psychology 101: Investor Panic! ... Time to Buy?

The U.S. stock markets have dropped 4% this week, and investors' fear levels are near the yearly highs set in March. Investor psychology is a funny thing -- but it's predictable -- and understanding it can make you a lot of money.

We've been mentioning in our blog posts over the past 2 months that as the stock market has gone higher, investors have grown more and more nervous. They have felt inclined to sell to "cut their winners short" just to lock in their gains so far. A brief market sell-off is exactly what drives investors to feel afraid when they've already made so much money.

Let me offer myself as an example. Every 6 months I create a 10 stock portfolio using a basic Yahoo! stock screener and a little due diligence (calling company CFOs, reading SEC filings, etc...). Takes me about 8 hours to complete the whole process, and the average return has easily been over 20% annually. Here are some of the older portfolios (which I stopped posting after 2005 due to time constraints). This January's portfolio is already up 25%. Which is obviously better than anticipated.

Frankly, that 25% 8-month return scares me. My account is 25% larger in only 8-months. Wow, it feels good. However, like almost everyone else, I want to take that money off the table so I don't lose it. I'm susceptible to cutting winners short. Why don't I? Because I know that my nervousness is not a trading plan, it's a road to underperformance.

Using our Marketpsych sentiment analysis tools, we've been watching the pain level rise over the past week. See this Marketwatch article (which mentions our Investor Pain Index) for a few details. The chart below was generated using our real-time proprietary sentiment software and it is plotted against the QQQQ (Nasdaq 100 ETF):
This chart shows the relative amount of pain measured among investors.

As you can probably see in the chart, the last time pain was so high was a great time to invest. So consider using stomach-churning pain as a Buy indicator. You don't need to "catch the falling knife," but you may want to enter buy stops slightly above the market, because any "relief rally' will be fast and furious.

Personally, I think the pain will probably spike again (and the market will sell-off), in a second wave, before a real buying opportunity presents itself (August and Spetember are yet to come). Consider investing some idle cash during an August sell-off, although also consider somewhere safer than the US dollar (e.g. Singapore or Malaysia) when those markets get hit.

Best wishes,
Richard