Category: Uncategorized

With continued euphoria about global growth and growing fears of inflation, the large cap and international stock investors saw strong gains while bondholders were hit with loses. Markets in January saw extremes in what were identified as the core themes for the year, growth plus inflation. Now, there may be stagflation holdouts, but growth indicators are still strongly positive albeit there are signs that the trends in positive economic surprises last quarter will be more tempered.

The relationship between growth and equity market returns is not always direct. Equities can move higher because of an increase in earnings growth or from an increase in valuation. Market earnings should increase with economic activity but they may vary across the cycle. Similarly, the relationship between growth and nominal yields also can be variable albeit generally positive. Higher growth may lead to higher real rates, higher expected inflation or a change in monetary policy. The problem is that actual economic growth often has reporting delays so the link with market prices is mixed. The link between prices and fundamentals should focus on leading or forward-looking indicators.

No one wants to be the holding a bubble asset when the market breaks. It is not pretty given the potential for sharp corrections, but it is hard to say when it is time to leave the party. You could just say you don’t want to play the game, but the opportunity cost can be high because the time between bubbles begin and the market reverses can be measured in years. Additionally, with bubble language surrounding equity and bond markets as well as some real estate markets, the world could either be filled with bubbles or the term is being used so loosely that it does not have meaning.

As someone who is biased toward quantitative work, it has been difficult to judge the impact of political rhetoric and conflict on market behavior. Market uncertainty should increase when there are more partisan conflicts which should translate into higher market risk premiums. Nevertheless, if there is no measure of conflict, this idea cannot be put to a test.

A year ago the market was concerned about global credit risks. The sovereigns with a negative outlook were high and the number of positive outlooks was low, but that has changed in one year given the improvement in global growth. The number of negative outlooks is at post Financial Crisis lows, the positive outlooks are high and the balanced outlooks are positive for the first time. The balance has improved markedly across regions but especially in Europe and the Middle East. The chance of default risks has fallen given credit quality is improving.

Faced with two competing hypotheses, we are likely to choose the most complex one. That’s usually the option with the most assumptions and regressions. As a result, when we need to solve a problem, we may ignore simple solutions — thinking “that will never work” — and instead favor complex ones.
-Farnamstreetblog.com Complexity Bias: Why We Prefer Complicated to Simple

Global financial markets performed very well but you could not tell by looking at the volume of trading on futures exchanges around the world. The year-end numbers from the Futures Industry Association (FIA) show that futures trading volume was down over 6%. Options volume was up 11% and overall futures and options volume was flat for the year.

The new paper, The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870-2015, a tremendously informative research piece on long-term rates of return also happens to address one of the key issues concerning the cause of inequality discussed by Thomas Piketty in his book Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Piketty draws the provocative conclusion that inequality grows over time because the rate of return on wealth is higher than the growth of GDP. Wealth accumulates to those that have it and not to those that try and ride the wave of GDP growth. Given the positive discrepancy between “r”, the return on wealth, and “g” the growth in GDP, the gap of inequality will only grow over time.

We didn’t exactly believe your story, Miss O’Shaughnessy. We believed your 200 dollars. I mean, you paid us more than if you had been telling us the truth, and enough more to make it all right.
-The Maltese Falcon 

There are seasonal weather patterns that will ebb and flow during the year bringing volatility to agricultural markets at regular times. However, the longer-term impact on supply can at times be limited. There is noise around production numbers but inventory can serve as a cushion.

The 60/40 stock/bond blends both domestic and international generated double-digit returns on strong equity performance. The majority of the risk came from the stock allocation which make them sensitive to any market reversal.

A year-end performance review of styles, sectors, and country index ETFs shows the peaks and valleys for 2017 and what may be ahead in 2018. Overall, this was an especially good year for international investing and holding exposure in emerging markets. Large cap US which has strong international earnings also did well in 2017. Mid and small cap US underperformed during the year in spite of the resurgence in economic growth. The worst performing style was defensive dividend focused. Value underperformed growth by a wide margin.

There were some trend surprises in markets near the end of the year; the upward price movement in both precious and base metals and the weather shock in the natural gas market and to a lesser extent oil product markets. The question for the beginning of the year is whether these trends will only be short-term in nature. Strong price spikes, especially weather related, are often reversed.