GLOBAL ECONOMICS AND POLITICS

Leo Haviland provides clients with original, provocative, cutting-edge fundamental supply/demand and technical research on major financial marketplaces and trends. He also offers independent consulting and risk management advice.

Haviland’s expertise is macro. He focuses on the intertwining of equity, debt, currency, and commodity arenas, including the political players, regulatory approaches, social factors, and rhetoric that affect them. In a changing and dynamic global economy, Haviland’s mission remains constant – to give timely, value-added marketplace insights and foresights.

Leo Haviland has three decades of experience in the Wall Street trading environment. He has worked for Goldman Sachs, Sempra Energy Trading, and other institutions. In his research and sales career in stock, interest rate, foreign exchange, and commodity battlefields, he has dealt with numerous and diverse financial institutions and individuals. Haviland is a graduate of the University of Chicago (Phi Beta Kappa) and the Cornell Law School.

 

Subscribe to Leo Haviland’s BLOG to receive updates and new marketplace essays.

RSS View Leo Haviland's LinkedIn profile View Leo Haviland’s profile




WALL STREET MARKETPLACE VIOLENCE © Leo Haviland September 1, 2015

The long-running bull charge in the broad real trade-weighted United States dollar, and particularly its recent assault on major resistance established in March 2009, played a critical role not only in creating and sustaining emerging stock (and commodity) marketplace bear moves, but also in the recent bloody toppling of the once-mighty S+P 500 from its lofty May 2015 record peak. Interest rate levels and trends of course remain important to stock marketplace battlefields, but US dollar movements will maintain their substantial influence. The broad real trade-weighted dollar probably will remain relatively strong.

 

Moreover, the S+P 500’s decline since its 5/20/15 pinnacle at 2135 indicates that its major trend probably will no longer diverge as significantly from those of emerging equity marketplaces. Compare the pattern of the past few years, during which the S+P 500 exceeded its spring 2011 peak but emerging stock marketplaces in general (Morgan Stanley’s MSCI Emerging Stock Marketplace Index benchmark) did not. The S+P 500 probably will not surpass its May 2015 height by much (if at all); instead, it probably will continue to travel lower.

 

As “Shakin’ All Over: Marketplace Fears”; 8/13/15) noted: “Despite about seven years of highly accommodative monetary policies such as yield repression and money printing (and frequently bolstered by hefty deficit spending), the foundations of worldwide growth increasingly look shaky.” Substantial debt and leverage problems continue to confront today’s interconnected global economy. The Federal Reserve Board of course focuses on all sorts of domestic and international factors and their interrelations. However, nowadays the level and trend of the S+P 500 will continue to strongly influence its policy rhetoric and decisions.

****

What’s the bottom line? Reviewing these various US and diverse international stock marketplace scorecards together, spring 2015’s similar time for highs followed by significant price declines is noteworthy. This underlines the likely slowing of worldwide growth in general. It also shows that stock trend benchmarks for America are nowadays rather closely connected to those elsewhere, including emerging marketplaces. The similar timing of lows in August 2015 emphasizes that worldwide equities in general currently are “trading together”. Renewed roughly simultaneous retreats in emerging and advanced nation stock benchmarks would be an ominous sign to equity bulls and for world GDP growth rates.

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Wall Street Marketplace Violence (9-1-15)

SHAKIN’ ALL OVER: MARKETPLACE FEARS © Leo Haviland August 13, 2015

China’s recent shocking currency devaluation underscores not only that country’s ongoing growth slowdown, but also its leaders’ fears that real GDP expansion rates will ebb further. China of course is not the only emerging/developing nation nervous about insufficient output or even recessions. Trends in the broad real trade-weighted US dollar, emerging stock marketplaces, and commodities “in general” signal (confirm) slowing growth in both emerging and OECD economies. Moreover, recent pronouncements by the International Monetary Fund regarding the central bank policies of key advanced countries manifest widespread worries about growth in these well-developed territories. Despite about seven years of highly accommodative monetary policies such as yield repression and money printing (and frequently bolstered by hefty deficit spending), the foundations of worldwide growth increasingly look shaky.

China’s devaluation assists the long-running bull charge in the broad real trade-weighted US dollar (“TWD”). China represents about 21.3 percent of the TWD (Federal Reserve, H.10).

****

Are central banks and politicians always devoted to so-called “free markets”? To what extent do they restrict themselves from entering into and manipulating marketplaces?

In any case, the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, Bank of Japan, and Bank of England have long been married (roughly seven years) to highly accommodative monetary policies. They do not seem to be in a rush to change them substantially anytime soon. The Fed’s apparent willingness to make a minor (gradual) boost in the Federal Funds rate in the near term is not a dramatic shift in its highly accommodative policy.

Inflation (and interest rate) and unemployment targets are not divorced from opinions regarding what constitutes sufficient (appropriate; desirable) real GDP growth levels and trends. An economic boom currently does not exist in the OECD in general. So if substantial “normalization” of monetary policy is not imminent among key advanced nations, then arguably central bankers believe that prospective growth GDP probably will remain rather feeble for at least the near term.

****

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan coined the phrase, “irrational exuberance” (Speech, “The Challenge of Central Banking in a Democratic Society, 12/5/96). About two decades later, this financial guardian proclaimed (Bloomberg Television interview, 8/10/15): “I think we have a pending bond market bubble.” Of course, as in 1996, defining and identifying a bubble and predicting when (and why and how) it will pop and the consequences of such an event remains challenging.

Flights to quality can play a role in creating low interest rate yields, particularly in the safe haven government debt securities of countries such as the United States and Germany. However, sustained yield suppression by the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, and others, which motivates avid searches for yield (return) in assorted financial playgrounds (including stocks), surely encourages low interest rates in both government and many other debt arenas. Think of corporate bonds. In any case, suppose there is a bond price bubble (“too high” or “overvalued” bond prices; too depressed yields) in the United States. So presumably as various marketplaces interconnect in today’s global economy, if American bond prices are at bubble levels, then arguably prices in other realms, as in the S+P 500, some real estate sectors, or the art world (painting), consequently could be inflated.

Were the S+P 500, US real estate, and art at the end of the Goldilocks Era in 2007 rather lofty?

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Shakin' All Over- Marketplace Fears (8-13-15)

US INFLATION SIGNALS © Leo Haviland June 7, 2015

In their noble war to generate sufficient inflation, insure economic recovery, and slash unemployment, central bankers in America, Europe, and Japan have fought with extraordinary weapons such as monumental money printing and longstanding interest rate yield repression. On the inflation front, they battle furiously to achieve and sustain an inflation target of about two percent. This allegedly good (desirable, reasonable, prudent) goal contrasts not only with bad “excessive” inflation, but also with bad “too low” inflation and evil (or at least really bad) of deflation.

For several months, widely-watched inflationary yardsticks such as the consumer price index indicated too low inflation or inflamed worries regarding deflation. The consequences of the 2007-2009 international economic disaster probably have not disappeared, and the dramatic slump in petroleum prices after mid-2014 has troubled many inflation seekers. In any event, most economic forecasters, including central banking captains, have postponed the achievement of sufficient inflation as measured by such signposts rather far out into the future. Consequently, marketplace warriors, political leaders, and the financial media have focused relatively little on other gauges warning of notable potential for increased inflation in benchmarks such as the consumer price index.
****

The worldwide global economy of course is interconnected and complex. Numerous variables intertwine to produce any given inflation level and trend. Inflation acceleration need not appear first or strongest in beloved indicators such as consumer prices or personal consumption expenditures. Although the United States is not a financial island, focus on the American landscape.

“Inflation” is not confined to measures such as the CPI or personal consumption expenditures; “the economy” includes other inflation benchmarks. Various indicators signal there is more inflation “around” in the US than most believe. Underline American wage increases. Note central bank and marketplace murmurings regarding high valuations or so-called asset bubbles; keep in mind the climbs in US equities and home prices from their financial crisis depths. Money supply growth remains robust. The steely determination of the Fed and its central banking allies to achieve their inflation objectives heralds that monetary policy probably will remain quite lax for some time even if the US eventually raises rates. These factors collectively warn that at least in America, deflationary forces “in general” have found strong adversaries. The recent spike in key interest rates such as the 10 year US government note (and the German Bund) in part reflects this inflation.

Despite the recent rate of change in US consumer prices and personal consumption expenditures, probably neither deflation nor dangerously low inflation are on the American horizon. In addition, sustained “too low” inflation in America probably should not be a worry for the near term. Nevertheless, although a sustained jump in PCE and CPI inflation rates much beyond the Fed’s desired two percent target currently appears unlikely, “sufficient” inflation in America may be achieved faster than many predict.
****

“Flights to quality”, hunts for suitable yield (return), and other supply/demand considerations, not just low inflation statistics, can rally prices of debt securities. Yet did sustained central bank yield repression create or at least encourage “too low” yields for (a price “bubble” in) key government debt securities such as those of the United States and Germany? In the Eurozone, the terrifying enemy called deflation neared. The European Central Bank fired back with a huge quantitative easing (money printing) plan involving government debt securities. Some European government security interest rate yields went negative.

However, was a US (and German) debt security price bubble recently popped?

The 10 year US government note established an important yield low at 1.64 percent on 1/30/15, above 7/25/12’s major bottom at 1.38pc. Since January 2015’s valley, the US 10 year rate shot up about 50 percent to 6/5/15’s 2.44pc. The 1/2/14 summit at 3.05pc represents important resistance. In any case, what should the yield on US 10 year government notes be if inflation (such as in the PCE) is 1.5 percent or higher?

The 10 year German government note made a key bottom on 4/17/15 close to zero, at .05 percent (not long after the UST 10 year note made a minor low at 1.80pc on 4/3/15). Bund yields thereafter blasted higher, reaching almost one percent on 6/4/15. The Japanese 10 year JGB made a significant trough in 2015 shortly before the UST’s, on 1/20/15 at .20 percent.

US stocks advanced victoriously from their March 2009 major low for many reasons, including strong corporate earnings and share buybacks. Yet money printing and yield repression also assisted the S+P 500’s mighty ascent. So if US stocks recently reached “too high” levels, perhaps rising interest rates (or growing fears of them) will inspire those equities to retreat (burst their bubble).

Regardless of whether or not American government note yields recently were (or are still) “too low”, the recent sharp increase in UST 10 year note rates may reflect not just a “technical correction” or a growing belief that the Federal Funds rate (and thus yields in US government securities) will rise in the relatively near future. That noteworthy UST yield leap probably also warns that US inflation “in general” has grown or will do so soon.

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
US Inflation Signals (6-7-15)