All Things in Moderation

Vital Statistics:

Stocks are bonds are down after Republicans ran the table last night. Volatility will be the rule of the day.

Republicans ran the table. House, Senate, and Presidency. Obviously the conventional wisdom was dead wrong.

Bonds are down surprisingly, given how they were behaving in the early Asian sessions. As a Trump victory was looking more and more likely, bond yields were falling (having hit a low of 1.72% at one point). Just after midnight, the rally reversed, and bonds sold off to where yields hit 1.96%. Interestingly, the 2 year has rallied to 71 basis points or so and has now sold off to 83 bps. So people got whipsawed big time overnight, which means we should expect some volatility in rates going forward. Volatility tends to beget volatility. Be careful with your locks.

Stocks were initially slammed on the result as well, with the S&P 500 futures down over 120 points. That has since turned around and we are looking at modest losses. Just another day at the office for the markets.

Obviously, no one saw this coming, and a lot of people are wondering what a Trump presidency means to markets. First of all, I think fears that Ted Nugent would be running Homeland Security and Jesse the Body Ventura would be running Treasury are overblown. A lot of the serious candidates who would be good choices were not in the mix for consideration because they didn’t take Trump’s candidacy seriously. That will now change, however I think we will probably see a few outsiders: guys like ex-GE CEO Jack Welch, KKR head Henry Kravis, or Carl Icahn. VP Mike Pence will have a much bigger role than a traditional VP.

Trump’s model would be Ronald Reagan, which was probably the best comparison. Reagan was scoffed at by the elites: he was an actor, went to *snicker* Eureka College, was from the land of fruits and nuts, however he beat the brainiac Jimmy Carter who the establishment liked a lot. Reagan however surrounded himself with the best of the best and brightest of the conservative movement and became a successful president. Reagan was not a detail guy either. For Trump, it all comes down to his personnel who will handle the heavy lifting while Trump points in the general direction where he wants things to go. He doesn’t have the knowledge base to get all that involved in the nitty-gritty of policy-making. All of that said, the people who worry that he is Benito Mussolini II (actually I think the better comparison is Silvio Berlusconi) forget that people change, but the US system of government doesn’t. It was designed specifically to make it impossible for a dictator to make it work. He is going to be way more restricted in what he can actually do than the left fears.

I would suspect this morning a lot of market pros are googling Donald Trump’s economic policy. He has generally been all over the place. I think he will be more financial sector friendly than Obama was. He has trashed Dodd-Frank a number of times, and I suspect that D-F will get tweaked legislatively, with the goal of providing market participants more certainty into what the rules of the road are. Provided he does this right, it could help bring back the private label securitization market, which has been largely dormant with the exception of highly overcollateralized jumbo securities. Given the thin ice that the CFPB is on Constitutionally (and now a conservative replacement for Scalia on the Supreme Court), the agency might be pulled back onto the reservation.

Trump has been all over the board with respect to tax policy. He once advocated for a wealth tax, which even FDR couldn’t stomach. Now, he wants to eliminate the estate tax, cut corporate taxes and flatten the income tax code. Corporate tax reform is ripe as both parties agree we need to do something. Carried Interest could probably go by the wayside as a bargaining chip with the left.

Donald Trump has also been critical of the Fed, and he probably will nominate a more hawkish Chair than Janet Yellen, however her term expires in late 2018 so this isn’t a front-burner issue. The action in the 2 year suggests the markets are handicapping a lower chance of a hike at the December meeting. IMO, the Fed will do what it usually does: take a cue from the behavior of the markets.

Here is what Trump might do for housing finance reform. Punch line: Housing finance reform simply isn’t going to be a front-burner issue. It wasn’t really discussed by either party during the campaign, and the current system might not be ideal, but at least it isn’t a problem.

With respect to foreign policy, remember that Barack Obama ran as the ant-GWB. He would end the wars in the Middle East, close Guantanamo Bay, and build on our alliances in Europe. After all was said and done, he pretty much continued to do what GWB was doing. Trump will have the same constraints, especially in trade.

Filed under: Economy, Morning Report | 34 Comments »

Vital Statistics:

Stocks are higher after a decent jobs report. Bonds and MBS are up as well.

Jobs report data dump:

• Payrolls increased by 161,000
• Unemployment rate 4.9%
• Labor Force Participation rate 62.8%
• Average hourly earnings 0.4%

The payroll data was disappointing, as was the decrease in the labor force participation rate. The plus side was wage growth, where wages rose at a 2.8% annual rate, the biggest increase since 2009. The employment to population ratio slipped to 59.7%. Basically, it looks like the number of unemployed fell, however they didn’t get jobs – they exited the labor force. Below is a chart of average hourly earnings. You can see the slope of the line decrease in 2008 as the Great Recession began and wage growth slipped from its bubble year growth rate of 3.3% to 2%, where it largely stayed during the recovery. It appears like the slope of the line is beginning to increase, which solves a lot of problems in our economy. Too early to tell if it is a trend, though. Bottom line: This gives the Fed all the ammo they need to raise the Fed Funds rate next month. FWIW, the Fed Funds futures are now assigning a 80% chance of a 25 basis point hike next month.

Ordinarily, this report would be bond bearish, however global sovereigns are rallying and pulling the 10 year along for the ride.

Ex Dallas Fed Head Richard Fisher blames the rise of Donald Trump partially on Fed policy. The Fed’s policy of driving interest rates to the floor and flooding the system with money to support asset prices is great news for people who own real estate and stocks, however for those that save it has been terrible:

“Global monetary policy has “skewered the middle-income groups, the ‘middle class,’ adding to the angst that has sprung from their sense of an overbearing, intrusive central government….Small wonder that we have ended up at a political crossroad, with a choice for the presidency between a candidate who advocates having government distribute still more to ease the pain and another arguing to provide relief by changing gears entirely, though we know not how, when or where…My more acerbic friends on both sides of the aisle consider it a Hobson’s choice,” he said, referring to a situation where it seems there’s free choice but in reality there’s no good alternative. On the one hand, Republicans believe the other party’s candidate is channeling Eva Peron, planning policies that will ultimately lead us down the Argentine path to economic ruin while basking in personal profit and glory. On the other, Democrats liken the Republican candidate to Caligula.”

On the subject of QE, he is spot-on. QE and unconventional monetary policy has certainly increased inequality, and made life tough if you are a renter. Rental inflation is increasing at a 4% annual clip, and as we saw above, wages are well below that. QE has been great for the landlord, but not the tenant. I find it amazing that the Fed gets a free pass in the media and from the political class on the subject of inequality.

For all the sturm and drang regarding how markets will react to a Trump presidency, bond traders appear to be relatively sanguine. Just like stocks have the VIX index which measures fear indirectly by tracking the price of options, bonds have an index too. And it is close to yearly lows.

Filed under: Economy, Morning Report | 40 Comments »

Vital Statistics:

Markets are up on earnings and merger mania. Bonds and MBS are down.

Personal Incomes rose 0.3% in September, which was a little below expectations. Consumer spending rose 0.5%, which was in line with expectations. Core PCE inflation – the number the Fed uses to measure inflation – rose 1.7% YOY, so we are still below the 2% target.

The Chicago PMI Index fell to 50.6 from 54.3.

The FBI re-opened the email investigation on Hillary late Friday night. Democrats are attacking Comey (who just went from hero to goat). This will take until mid-week to be fully reflected in the polls, and the pundits will be watching polls in VA and NC closely.

IMO, regardless of who wins, gridlock will be the result, unless Democrats sweep. So more of the same. I don’t see much of an effect happening in either interest rates or stock prices. The Fed is much more influential than who occupies the WH.

Home prices are up 0.3% MOM and 5.3% YOY, according to Black Knight Financial Services. The index now stands at $266k, which is 0.7% below the 2006 peak of $268. The report has good state-by-state info, so check it out.

Banks continue to hoard Treasuries, and are tightening credit to business. Deposit growth is outstripping loan demand, which is the biggest reason. As the US savings rate increases, consumer spending is affected. Part of this is demographics: The baby boom is retiring and will inevitably cut spending, while the Millennials have yet to make any real money and start spending.

Filed under: Economy, Morning Report | 31 Comments »

Vital Statistics:

Stocks are higher this morning as earnings reports pile in. Bonds and MBS are flat.

The first estimate of Q3 GDP came in at +2.9%, which was higher than expected. Inventory and exports drove the increase. This is a sharp rebound after 3 extremely weak reports. Disposable personal income rose 3.6% and the savings rate was flat at 5.7%. This number will be revised at least once before the December Fed meeting.

Inventories and exports are not great indicators of domestic demand, however and that is what really drives the economy. If you strip those two things out, you can see that demand increased, but it wasn’t the blockbuster number that the headline GDP print suggests. This helps explain why GDP growth can be 2.9% (which is a robust expansion) and not feel like it. Consumer spending decelerated in Q3 from 4.3% to 2.1%. Back-to-school numbers for the retailers were disappointing, and this number bears that out.

Employment costs rose 0.6% in the third quarter as comp increased 0.5% and benefits increased 0.7%. Judging by the increase in Obamacare insurance premiums, benefit cost inflation will continue to increase the costs of employees which will act as a damper on wage growth.

Pending home sales increased 1.5% in September, according to the NAR. According to NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun, tight inventory remains a problem: “The one major predicament in the housing market is without a doubt the painfully low levels of housing inventory in much of the country…It’s leading to home prices outpacing wages, properties selling a lot quicker than a year ago 2 and the home search for many prospective buyers being highly competitive and drawn out because of a shortage of listings at affordable prices.” Of course this means the ratio of house prices to income is getting stretched. Wage inflation is needed to maintain these prices.

The US 10 year has gotten hammered over the past month. What is going on? Economic data has generally been soft (today’s GDP report notwithstanding). IMO, we are in the middle of a correction in global bonds. Using the German Bund as proxy for global bonds, you can see that yields have backed up in a big way over the past month. US Treasuries may not necessarily be rising ahead of the December GDP report and may simply be correlating with bond yields overseas. Note that the yield is higher than it was pre-Brexit.

Filed under: Economy, Morning Report | 45 Comments »