Wednesday, 19 August 2015

A few macro and related thoughts today

A few macro and related thoughts today...

Votes on Greek bailout– ‘7 down, 2 to go’ – Germany and Holland vote today. Bloomberg reports 56 Merkel lawmakers to reject Greek aid deal but that is not enough to block the deal. Dutch PM Rutte's VVD party to accept Greek bailout, wants to avoid an isolated Netherlands

Greece double upgrade - Fitch Upgrades Greece to 'CCC' from ‘C’ but wholly dependent on bailout monies receipt as per the link here.  

China / emerging markets – Chinese market still volatile, down earlier today and now up into the close.  Only the masses still piling in however from the perspective of net new account flows...

At least the yuan has stopped falling…

BoA-ML Fund Mgt Survey talked about ‘capitulation’ yesterday and today’s FT headline akin: ‘Emerging markets rocked by $1tn capital flight as confidence slumps…Outflows double those of financial crisis’ etc. Easy to see only pessimism...

(h/t @DonDraperClone)

Japan - needs an economic injection of as much as 3.5 trillion yen ($28 billion) to shore up consumption and stave off a further economic contraction, said Etsuro Honda, an economic adviser to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (link here).  Hmm! 

Meanwhile the money multiplier, a gauge of activity generated when the central bank eases, fell to 3.92 last month, the lowest in data dating to 2003. That's even as BOJ debt purchases of as much as 12 trillion yen ($97 billion) a month caused the monetary base to balloon about 150 percent.

Still shabby trade position given fall of the yen!

Later – Fed July meeting minutes – good preview here.  The new bond King Doubleline's Gundlach said ‘Hiking rates when junk bonds at 4yr low is a mistake’.  True.

Meanwhile as I talked about in yesterday's wrap don't be too fearful of a first US interest rate rise.  Actually it may lead to returns you do not expect: 

(h/t @ukarlewitz)

Finally (and related to the above).  Keep abreast of 'value' given the recent huge underperformance (which will not be maintained). 

(h/t @ldaalder)

1 comment:

  1. Hi Chris,

    I looked at the growth versus value table and what I was not impressed with was that the data seemed to be looking at 20% of the cheapest stocks (I assume P/E wise and this was the the equivalent of value companies) versus the 20% most expensive ones (I also here assume they looked at P/E and this was then considered to be the equivalent of growth companies).

    I hope that I misunderstood the data because to me value companies and growth companies are not a directly equivalent to a stock being cheap or expensive. Sure in some cases that can be the case but I think that especially the "growth" companies would then be punished each time a new line of companies opens up (IPOs, IT-bubble as an example) with all the speculations that follow and often insane P/E valuations which would probably be the moments when the "growth" were beating the "value" companies.

    Long ranting but what I mean to say is that I find the data inaccurate and real growth companies with a yearly 10%+ revenue increase should be used instead of the "expensive" ones.