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




PETROLEUM: ROLLING AND TUMBLING © Leo Haviland June 10, 2019

“Well, I rolled and I tumbled, cried the whole night long
Well, I woke up this mornin’, didn’t know right from wrong”. Muddy Waters, “Rollin’ and Tumblin’”

OVERVIEW AND CONCLUSION

Of course the petroleum universe “as a whole” has, as do its various individual crude oil streams and assorted refined products, “its own” past, present, and potential future supply/demand/inventory situation. However, the petroleum circus, including so-called specific oil-related variables affecting it, is not a domain entirely separate from other economic and political phenomena. For example, marketplace history reveals that price levels and trends for the petroleum complex intertwine in diverse ways with benchmark global stock, interest rate, and currency arenas, and with other commodity fields such as base and precious metals. These relationships, including convergence/divergence (and lead/lag) ones between the oil marketplace in general and these other financial playgrounds, can and do change, sometimes significantly.

Marketplace history need not repeat itself, either entirely or even partly. Visionaries differ in their perspectives on and conclusions regarding petroleum and other marketplaces, frequently substantially.

****

OPEC is an important actor within the oil theater, as are its current producer allies such as Russia. The United States, given its ravenous demand for petroleum plus its booming crude oil output in recent years, also is an important petroleum player. But these entertainers are not independent of other stages and performers.

In the timing and direction of its major price moves, the global petroleum complex does not necessarily or always travel alongside the S+P 500 and other benchmark stock indices. A survey of the critical price turning points since early 2016 for the oil and equity realms nevertheless displays the close connection between petroleum and stock trends.

****

For related marketplace analysis, see essays such as: “Wall Street Talking, Yield Hunting, and Running for Cover” (5/14/19); “Economic Growth Fears: Stock and Interest Rate Adventures” (4/2/19); “American Economic Growth: Cycles, Yield Spreads, and Stocks” (3/4/19); “Facing a Wall: Emerging US Dollar Weakness” (1/15/19); “American Housing: a Marketplace Weathervane” (12/4/18); “Twists, Turns, and Turmoil: US and Other Government Note Trends” (11/12/18); “Japan: Financial Archery, Shooting Arrows” (10/5/18); “Stock Marketplace Maneuvers: Convergence and Divergence” (9/4/18); “China at a Crossroads: Economic and Political Danger Signs” (8/5/18); “Shakin’ All Over: Marketplace Convergence and Divergence” (6/18/18); “History on Stage: Marketplace Scenes” (8/9/17).

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Petroleum- Rollling and Tumbling (6-10-19)

WALL STREET TALKING, YIELD HUNTING, AND RUNNING FOR COVER © Leo Haviland May 14, 2019

“‘Curiouser and curiouser!’ cried Alice (she was so much surprised, that for the moment she quite forgot how to speak good English).” “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”, by Lewis Carroll (Chapter II, “The Pool of Tears”)

CONCLUSION: GOLDILOCKS ERA, REVISITED

Historians should wonder if the Federal Reserve Board and its friends in central banking (and assorted comrades parading in some political corridors and media circles) nowadays are aiming to manufacture an updated version of the joyous last stage (ending in 2007) of the magnificent Goldilocks Era.

Lower United States Treasury yields and the sunny prospect of continued benevolent Federal Reserve policy reappeared around end December 2018/early January 2019. The rapid bull climb in the S+P 500 from then until the beginning of May 2019 to some extent reflected hopes of further (adequate) American and global economic expansion.

However, the frantic price rally in several key marketplace benchmarks commencing around end year 2018 also probably reflected an ardent quest for “yield” (“return”) by “investors” and other asset purchasers. In addition to buying the S+P 500, yield hunters searched for sufficient return in territories such as other advanced nation stocks, emerging marketplace stocks, lower-grade United States corporate debt, emerging marketplace sovereign debt securities denominated in US dollars, and the petroleum complex.

Of course cultural history does not necessarily repeat itself, either entirely or even partly. Marketplace phenomena (conditions; variables), including relationships between them and perspectives on them, can and do change, sometimes dramatically. Rhetoric (stories) relating to economic and related playgrounds seek not only to explain viewpoints and situations, but also to guide behavior.

Later stages of economic expansions (so-called cycles) often are distinguished by what many players, including leading and widely-respected economic guardians and policymakers, decide to overlook or minimize.

This ardent quest for yield probably manifested that America is in the waning period of the epic economic expansion that followed the dreadful economic disaster of 2007-09. Even if a recession does not occur in the United States (or in other advanced nations), a noteworthy slowdown in global real GDP growth (including China and other emerging realms) likely is or soon will be underway.

“Economic Growth Fears: Stock and Interest Rate Adventures” (4/2/19) stated in regard to the S+P 500: “The September/October 2018 elevation [2941 (9/21/18)/2940 (10/3/18)] probably will not be broken by much, if at all.” The recent price declines in the S+P 500 (5/1/19 high 2954) and other advanced nation stocks, emerging marketplace stocks, emerging marketplace dollar-denominated sovereign debt, and the petroleum complex probably signal that many dutiful profit hunters (and probably some other investors/owners) have started running for cover (begun to liquidate their long positions).

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Wall Street Talking, Yield Hunting, and Running for Cover (5-14-19)

US NATURAL GAS: HOME ON THE RANGE © Leo Haviland, April 15, 2017

The classic American song “Home on the Range” requests:
“Oh give me a home where the buffalo roam,
Where the deer and the antelope play,
Where seldom is heard a discouraging word,
And the skies are not cloudy all day.”

****

CONCLUSION AND OVERVIEW

Did the major bull trend for NYMEX natural gas (nearest futures continuation) that started with 3/4/16’s dismal 1.611 depth finish with 12/28/16’s 3.994 top? Although it is a difficult call, assuming normal weather and moderate United States economic growth, it will be hard for the NYMEX front month price to exceed the high neighboring 4.00 by much (if at all) over the next few months. However, significant support rests around 2.50 (lows 8/12/16 at 2.523, 11/9/16 at 2.546, and 2/22/17 at 2.522; high 1/8/16 at 2.495).

The bull trends that began around first quarter 2012 (4/19/12’s 1.902) and during 1Q16 display many similarities, including their commencement following substantial oversupply conditions. Yet bearish signs exist in regard to the 2016 bull charge. The distance and duration travelled by 2016’s bull climb up to its December 2016 height, though less than average for major bull natural gas moves in NYMEX natural gas (nearest futures continuation), was within the historical range. Several previous major peaks in NYMEX natural gas occurred in calendar December. Current US natural gas inventories are above average. The CFTC’s net long commercial position is very high and consequently vulnerable to liquidation. And the 2012 rally showed an interim high in springtime (5/1/13 at 4.444).

As always, audiences should be cautious about linking natural gas price patterns with those in petroleum and other financial marketplaces. And apparent convergence/divergence (lead/lag) relationships between marketplaces can change, sometimes dramatically. However, these other playgrounds currently suggest that natural gas will struggle to advance above 12/28/16’s 3.994 anytime soon. See “The Oil Battlefield: Evolution, Relationships, and Prices” (4/10/17). Note also “Eurozone Under Siege: Currency Trends and Politics” (3/20/17), “Easing Comes, Easing Goes: US Government Interest Rates” (3/13/17), “Rhetoric and Global Currency Trends” (2/13/17), “Gold and Goldilocks: 2017 Marketplaces” (1/10/17), “Back to the Future: the Marketplace Time Machine” (12/13/16). Even the price gap from 3.568 (1/3/17) to 3.690 (12/30/16) represents a formidable near term roadblock.

However, what does looking further around the corner reveal? Everyone knows “much can happen” over the next six months and thereafter. Yet US natural gas days coverage at the end of inventory build season 2017 (October 2017) probably will be slightly bullish, with that (in the admittedly even cloudier distant horizon) at end build season 2018 more so. Thus an eventual retest of a ceiling around 4.00/4.10 is a reasonable conjecture. Looking ahead over the next several months, it probably will take a much colder than normal winter 2017-18 for the price to stay above 4.00/4.10 for long, and especially to spike above resistance at 4.45 to 4.55. Recall that winter 2013-14 required a freeze and resultant sharp stock draw to soar above the May 2013 and 12/23/13 (4.532) highs. Remember too the price collapse from 11/10/14’s 4.544.

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
US Natural Gas- Home on the Range (4-15-17)

THE OIL BATTLEFIELD: EVOLUTION, RELATIONSHIPS, AND PRICES © Leo Haviland, April 10, 2017

In “Street Fighting Man”, The Rolling Stones sing:
“Everywhere I hear the sound of marching, charging feet, boy
‘Cause summer’s here and the time is right for fighting in the street, boy”.

****

OVERVIEW AND CONCLUSION

The continued determination of leading OPEC members (such as Saudi Arabia) and some key non-OPEC oil producing nations (such as Russia) to subdue their crude oil output will underpin petroleum prices. The Saudis and their allies will not readily sacrifice their long-sought production restraint agreement achieved with several important non-OPEC exporters in late 2016. Assuming supply discipline by key producers and moderate global economic growth, supply/demand estimates indicate that OECD (advanced nations such as the United States) industry inventories by the end of calendar 2018 will have declined to around “normal” levels in days coverage terms.

Even gigantic producers such as Saudi Arabia and Russia (for political as well as economic reasons) need to generate at least moderate income. Given its planned sale of shares in Aramco via an initial public offering, does Saudi Arabia want a renewed collapse in petroleum prices to $40 Brent/North Sea or less? Given its need for revenues, global political ambitions, and signs of domestic unrest, does Russia want petroleum prices to plummet sharply?

Other political worries help to bolster oil prices. Some (as usual) relate to the Middle East. North Korea’s nuclear program captures headlines. What if Venezuelan political turmoil results in a supply interruption?

However, current OECD petroleum industry inventories remain far above average. Even by end calendar 2017, they probably will be several days above normal. And end calendar 2018 obviously is a long time from now. Compliance with the OPEC/non-OPEC output guidelines by several individual countries has not been universal. And going forward, production discipline should not be taken for granted. Will Iraq and Iran moderate their production? What if Nigerian or Libyan production increases? Also, the net noncommercial position in the petroleum complex, which played a very important part in the explosive oil bull move in oil that began in first quarter 2016, is still quite high and vulnerable to liquidation.

History reveals that petroleum price levels and trends intertwine with currency, interest rate, stock and other commodity marketplaces (particularly base and precious metals) in a variety of ways. The current interrelationship between petroleum and these other arenas probably warns that it will be difficult for petroleum prices to sustain advances much above their first quarter 2017 highs.

****

Using NYMEX crude oil (nearest futures continuation) as a benchmark, petroleum prices for the next several months likely will stay in a broad range. Major support exists at around $38.00/$42.00. Significant resistance exists between $52.00/$55.25.

However, assuming ordinary international economic growth, what if OPEC/non-OPEC production discipline continues for the next year and a half (or marketplace faith increases that such restraint will persist)? In this scenario, if (and this “if” is a very important if) no sustained significant weakness in global stock marketplaces (and intertwining/confirming patterns in the US dollar, interest rates, and metals) develops, then NYMEX crude oil prices probably will attack the $60.75/$65.00 range.

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
The Oil Battlefield- Evolution, Relationships, and Prices (4-10-17)