Sunday 7 March 2010

AT LAST: THE MARKET SPEAKS






This post contains the most important piece of investment information you're likely to read this year.  So that you can fully appreciate its worth, please briefly indulge me. 


It's been six months since I began regaling you in these columns with my flamboyant opinions on our financial dog mess.  I've ridiculed some politicians (well, I've gotta get a few laughs in somewhere), weighed in portentously on debt mountains, demographic implosions and deflation black holes, issued high-minded warnings about porked-out PIGS and contagion in China and compared our current economic torpor to a 21st century Zombie Dawn of the Dead.


But the world is not short on conflicting opinions and the greatest conflicts often seem to be between the world's smartest brains - so how to judge? 


Nowhere is the difficulty of this more absurdly apparent than in the so-called science of economics, the only discipline in which two 'scientists' with directly conflicting theories once actually shared a Nobel Prize.* 


 *It happened, folks: Myrdal and Hayek, 1974.


Now don't get me started on economists.  Suffice it to say that there are hundreds if not thousands of these poor stunted creatures across the world, fiddling away in their little cubicles with their Excel tables and their computer models and their prize-winning academic theories and, with a handful of honourable exceptions, none of them publicly predicted anything remotely like our current crisis, the most cataclysmic economic event in almost a century. 


If an economist cannot even do that, what in the name of God is he for


But it gets worse.  Because, in an irony truly worthy of the description 'the blind leading the blind', many of these bozos are now closely advising the very world leaders upon whom our fate now depends.  


Larry Summers (check that confident stare), as President Clinton's Treasury Secretary from 1999, blocked legislation which would have regulated the derivatives market (a prime contributor to the crash of 2008) and was instrumental in pushing through the Financial Services Modernization Act, an atrocity which finally swept away six decades of restrictions on the banking industry and freed them to indulge in many of the practices which led us to our current sorry pass.  Speaking on that momentous day, he boasted: "Today, Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system fit for the 21st century." 


Where is he now, you justly ask?  Behind bars?  Why no, dear reader: in 2010, Larry Summers is Director of the White House National Economic Council, the chief advisor to President Obama.



Ben (he who sporteth a white beard so must be wise) Bernanke: isn't he the same Chairman of the US Federal Reserve who, in May 2007, two months before the subprime housing timebomb detonated, said:  "The impact on the broader economy [of the problems in subprime] seems likely to be contained."...?  With his esteemed colleagues on the Fed Monetary Policy Committee he then refused to slash interest rates as the crisis spiralled, only finally doing so after a huge market plunge put a gun to his head in January 2008.


Was he fired, you quite properly ask?  Why no, dear reader, Ben Bernanke has just been re-appointed as Federal Reserve Chairman for a second term.


I can also happily inform you that both these august gentlemen are predicting, along with the broad consensus of world economists, a 'V'-shaped recovery accelerating through 2010.  


Comforted?


Well then.  If we can't trust the economists and we can't trust the politicians, is there an opinion we can trust?  Is there any source we can turn to which has a reliable, documented, copper-bottomed long-term history of calling those major turning points?  Of urging us to plough our money into riskier investments when times are looking up and warning us to take cover when the sky's about to fall? 


Yes: amazingly, there is.




MR MARKET AND HIS
ASTOUNDING CRYSTAL BALL



Most people imagine that the stock market is a kind of shadow of what's really important: the economy.  They assume quite understandably that if the economy is doing either well or poorly, the stock market follows. 


But what if the opposite is true?  What if the economy is in fact being led by the stock market?  Let's look back at 60 years worth of economic recessions and see what, if anything, the seemingly random ups and downs of the broad US S&P500 index can teach us:



Please click to enlarge


The grey bars represent recessions as determined by NBER, the official US arbiter of such things.  This chart ends just before the latest recession, but the conclusion from looking at the evidence of the previous nine back to 1950 is unambiguous:  the stock market does not follow the economy - it leads it, and by some margin.



 


With one exception (the steep, sudden recession of 1980), the market topped out on average five months before a recession officially started.  What's more, it bottomed roughly four and a half months before it ended.  The official end date of the latest US downturn has yet to be determined, but an edict has been issued regarding the beginning: December 2007.  The stock market peaked two months earlier.


I mention this not because it necessarily enlightens us about where our money should go today but because it knees in the groin one of the most pervasive and foolish assumptions people have about the stock market: that it's just 'a lottery'. 


In the long run, there is nothing random about the stock market.  It reflects the sum of worldwide investor knowledge and expectations at any one time, the result of hundreds of billions of trading transactions in the language not of hot air and common opinion but of pounds, dollars and sense.  It is a battle between the world's smartest brains for the cash of the world's dumbest investors, a fast-moving aerial dog-fight played out upon constantly shifting air currents of fear and greed. 


Does that make it sound romantic?  It ain't.  It is Darwinian both for the stock and for the trader.  If you cannot correctly judge the future prospects of the business you invest in, you die; if you cannot successfully anticipate the next move of your opponent - the other investors - you die. 


The battle is therefore won by those who most successfully 'anticipate the anticipation of others'.


That is why the stock market leads the economy; and that's why really smart investors try to figure out what leads the stock market.


--------------------------------


It ain't the economy,
IT'S THE CANDLESTICKS,
stoopid



So far we've discussed the remarkable fact that the market is usually way ahead of both economists and the economy itself, and that, by definition therefore, finding a way to predict the overall direction of the market is a sure way to consistently forecast the general direction of the economy.  And if we can do that, we can time many of the most essential investment choices we'll ever make.


Is that possible?  Well there's no shortgage of predictive hot air.  The world is stuffed with people telling us what the market ought to do.  But what is it doing? 


Having a cocktail of opinions is all very well, but before tipping them down your gullet and backing them with hard cash, it usually pays to add a good strong shot of humility.  And that's why I study charts.   




STOCK CHARTS: 
A LIVING MAP OF HUMAN GREED, FEAR AND FALLIBILITY 


An amazing number of pundits are sniffy about technical analysis, ranking it roughly on a par with psychic reading, astrology and tea-leaf divination.  But traders know better.  They know that chart patterns are not remotely random but serve as


  1. A shared map of the field of conflict, complete with battle lines and targets for attack and retreat, and
  2. An unblinking 200-year pictorial record of human economic progress and evolution, as represented by the most primitive of human behaviours, fear and greed


Gold chart, March 2010: A set of random marks on paper, or a battlefield between well-defined forces of fear and greed?



Go into any trading room in the City or Wall St and you'll be overwhelmed by the number of flickering chart screens, with hypnotized traders serviced by highly-paid charting analysts and technical strategists. 


Indeed a certain hideous breed of investment nerd - the 'Quant' - has now proliferated throughout the financial services industry, its sole purpose being to identify and exploit mathematical probabilities unearthed by studying market behaviour.



Age-old investment strategies practised by the likes of famed investor Warren Buffett  (find great companies, buy them cheap and hold their stock forever) now seem quaint and out-of-place in such a cold, automated, quantitatively-traded universe.  Don't get me wrong, those time-tested strategies remain the benchmark.  But this is how the likes of Goldman Sachs make money in 2010.  And friends, if technical analysis is valued that highly in the hallowed halls of Goldman, it'll do just fine for me. 



---------------------------



Now, I said I'd show you something special - and it's coming - but I need you to hang in there with me just a brief moment longer. 


What we're exploring here is the possibility that, by focusing on a proven predictor of the economy - the stock market - there may be trustworthy technical clues which can help us see where both are likely to head over the long term.  If there are, we would be able to rise above the conflicting chatter of economists, politicians, theorists and even the smartest individual investors, to see the true picture.  Such a picture would give us a reliable and tremendously valuable head start in helping us make some of the most critical investment decisions of our lives.


With that tantalizing prospect in mind, then, let's take a brief look at one of the simplest types of analysis I use: one which, I've discovered, works extraordinarily well.





WHEN GOOD MARKETS GO
BAD


Study charts long enough and you discover something oddly comforting: when conditions get out of whack stock price behavior, made up as it is of decisions by flesh and blood human beings, remains highly predictable from one decade to the next.  Extremes of fear and greed look pretty much the same in 2009 as they did back in 1929.


One market crash and recovery took place in 1929, one in 2009 -
can you tell which is which?*



Back in the summer of 2008, in those rose-tinted days before the collapse of Lehman Brothers, I was staring at a monthly chart of the Dow Jones Index and saw something most peculiar:



(Please open up the above chart and check the blurb, which will hopefully illuminate.) 



It struck me that, since the appearance of just one of these 'low-hanging' price bars was a rare and often bullish event, two in succession might signify something twice as interesting.  


So I checked back over eighty years of history.  There were only seven precedents. 


Five suggested a crash was dead ahead. 


Although markets were becoming increasingly nervy in early September, nothing in the news made an imminent crash the most likely outcome.  Still, I could not ignore the stark results of my study and sent the results in an email to one friend who was still invested in stocks:





Here's the first of those bullet points, a little local difficulty you might have heard about from the dim-and-distant 1930s:




Descent into the Depression - after two successive months (in red) spent sitting below the two-month average, the market recovered into mid-1930 - then began a 90% decline




At the same time as I was urging my friend to get out of the market, there were a plethora of star investors publicly exhorting us all to buy in.  These included the Oracle of Omaha himself, Warren ('world's greatest investor') Buffett and our own Anthony ('the silent assassin') Bolton, for thirty years the most successful money manager in Britain.  Perhaps if they had seen this humble little analysis they might have waited just a wee while longer before putting their millions to work, because less than three weeks later, this happened:   






No, folks, that seemingly insignificant little chart pattern was anything but random: it depicted a market so weak it was incapable of rallying even under grossly over-sold conditions. The market had clanged a warning across the decades, clear as a bell, to anyone willing to hear.



*1929 on the left, 2009 on the right.  The 1929 recovery failed at that point - stocks fell 90%.


------------------------




STOCK MARKET HISTORY
RARELY REPEATS,
BUT IT SURE AS HELL DOES RHYME



This is only the most dramatic example of many I could reel off in which a seemingly minor technical clue given off by markets portended a major move.  For those willing to put money to work, paying attention to such clues can lead to major profits or, just as important, the avoidance of monster losses.


Again: when everything is stripped away what we are looking at is not some obscure technical process but the playing out of those basest of human emotions, fear and greed, which as we all know never change. That is what makes the study of past market behaviour during peaks and panics so reliable. 


Research and experience suggest that the most powerful signals are those which, like the one shown above:

  • Look back over decades of market behaviour

  • Appear under the most extreme conditions



  • Show a consistent set of outcomes which are



  • Logically explicable in terms of investor psychology





Well, dear reader, I'm happy to say that all of these conditions apply to the chart I've dragged you through this technical hedge backwards to see.  It is simple, un-varnished, exclusive as far as I know and is the closest thing to a crystal ball on the future of your current investments you're ever likely to see.   




THE CHART OF THE CENTURY



Please right-click to enlarge in a separate tab or window




The above covers the period from 1977 to the present day, represented by the Dow Jones Industrial Average.  Please also open the next chart in a new tab or window - it covers the years 1920 - 1948.






The monthly bars in red and white illustrate the movement of the Dow, which is tracked by the lower indicator in blue and magenta, called the Rate of Change




ROC OF AGES



The Rate of Change (ROC) is one of the oldest and most widely-used measures of price momentum.  It compares the closing price of the current month with the closing price x-number of months ago - in this case 10 months ago, which is standard.  Wherever the line is rising above zero, the price is higher than it was 10 months before, and the higher the line rises, the more powerful the momentum of the move.  Very, very rarely, the momentum lifts off the charts and may become so extreme that it simply cannot be sustained.



In December 2009, the Rate of Change reached 47.6 (the red horizontal line in the charts), its highest level since 1983.  Prior to that, no readings as high had been registered since the Great Depression.



A very few readings have come within a whisker (two points) of the current peak, so I've included those to get a larger number of samples.**  Let's look at them one by one, in reverse order, and examine what happened next in each case. 



  • JUNE 1999:  While the dot-com bubble went stratospheric in the Nasdaq, the broader stock market as represened by the Dow edged down a little before heading up to a final peak 7 months later.  It then oscillated sideways for the following 8 months before finally rolling over into a major decline which lasted two more years.       
                                      Total loss peak-to-trough: 39%


    • JULY 1987:  Managed one more month of gains before starting the slide which ended in the notorious Black Monday crash of October '87.       
                                      Total loss peak-to-trough: 42%


    • APRIL 1983:  Edged down for 4 months, up to a slightly higher peak 3 months later, then sold off for 8 months before starting a strong recovery.            
    Total loss peak-to-trough: 17%



    • JANUARY 1939:  Declined sharply for 3 months before rising gently to a marginally higher high 5 months after that.  Then began a sideways crawl for 7 months leading to a major crash and a further decline lasting two years. 
    Total loss peak-to-trough: 41%



    • JANUARY 1936:  Suffered a slight correction two months later but quickly recovered and surged to a brave new high 11 months after that.  The market crashed immediately thereafter, wiping out all gains made over the previous year - and more. 
    Total loss peak-to-trough: 50%



    • APRIL 1933:  Zoomed straight up to a peak 3 months later then oscillated sideways for 12 months, only barely reaching a new high.  A strong recovery followed.  The only example where prices never fell below the level of the first month of the study.  However, in the middle of that period there was a:
    Total loss peak-to-trough: 24% 




    • NOVEMBER 1928:  Rose for 2 months, fell for 2, then shot up to a peak 5 months later.  That high was to last 25 years, as the market crashed immediately thereafter. 
    Total loss peak-to-trough: 89%



    **Looking at the intervening years from 1950s to the '70s shows exactly the same dynamics but the extremes in the indicator were not so great, emphasizing the significance of the current reading.  You can find a chart of that period in the Stocks section of this month's Investment Outlook.





    DO NOT IGNORE THIS SIGNAL




    The fact is that over the past century, this level of extreme momentum has appeared in one of only two circumstances: at the kick-off to the greatest bull market in history (1983) OR as a prelude to major crash events and bear markets (1928, 1936, 1939, 1987, 1999).  The only other instance (1933) led to a four-year bull market - yet ALL the gains made in that advance were wiped out in a terrible crash and recession from 1937 - '42.


    From a technical perspective, the level of the ROC is showing us that the market has used up pretty much all its gas.  Any short-term (up to one year) gains from this point are virtually certain to be given back. 


    Why?  Historically, stocks by this stage of an advance no longer seem so cheap and investors who have bought in start to zip up their wallets - just as sellers begin emerging from hibernation; the prospect of rising interest rates looms and with it a fear that the economy will not sustain its growth; and importantly, private investors remain on the sidelines: Joe & Jane Schmo, still bruised from the previous downturn, remain reluctant to jump in even after such a huge rally (don't forget, they've been hit by two big crashes in the space of a decade - not surprisingly then, the latest data continues to show that new money is flowing not into stocks but into supposedly 'safer' bonds).  The problem is, Joe and Jane's participation is essential to fuel the next phase of the stock market advance.


    What is most likely, then, is a period of one to two years when the market treads water before either breaking higher (thus signalling a genuine economic recovery) or lower (portending a probable double-dip). 


    We are either at the end of the beginning, or the beginning of the end, of this recovery. 


    Investors wondering whether to buy into renewed optimism - eg. take on a property, plough money into risky pension assets, buy stocks - would be wise to stay safe and await the verdict of the market, which will predict the overall direction of the economy, before making any long-term commitments.  Because unless enough new buyers eventually emerge who see early evidence of a sustained recovery, as they did in 1983 or 1933, investors will get vertigo and the market and economy are certain to collapse. 




    ------------------------




    Friends, after six months of meandering, we finally have a clear map of the terrain.  With the information above, this blog has now moved beyond the realms of speculation, bombast and light humour and passed well and truly into the danger zone where real money, property values, pension pots and hard won savings are at stake. 


    My own views on where we're headed are irrelevant in the face of such historical evidence.  I've learned through experience to trust certain technical indicators over my own hunches or anyone else's 'expert' opinion.  Indicators don't have a bullish or bearish bias; they aren't subject to fear, greed, complacency, selective memory or willful blindness and they cannot fall asleep at the switch; they aren't emotionally invested in any particular outcome and, unlike human financial advisors, they don't take a cut if they persuade you to invest on their advice; they are the best objective guide to the future we have - we just have to listen when they speak.


    So if the market decides after a while that the economy is going to recover despite my conviction that it cannot, there's no point in me thumb-sucking about it.  Bruising as it would be, I'll  have to accept that my theories were simply mistaken, take it like a man and get on with making money.  


    But if I turn out to be right, some important decisions will soon have to be made: decisions about where we can most safely store our cash and how best to protect our pensions and investments in a worst-case scenario.  Of course it will also represent a stupendous opportunity for those willing to put money on a falling market.


    These prospects are what I'll begin to look at in this month's Investment Outlook, which you'll find posted below or in the archive section. 



    ---------------------------




    This has proved rather a sobering post to write, but next month I hope to rediscover my mirth as that great three-ring circus that is the UK General Election swings into town.  Thanks as ever for reading, and do join me again from Sunday April 4thHave a great month!










    MARCH 2010 Investment Outlook






    In this month's On the Money, I presented an eye-opening glimpse into our investment future using a very simple type of technical analysis.  Considering how significant - and imminent - are the potential dangers and opportunities it reveals, let's see what the probable scenarios mean for various types of asset, including an extended section this month on that least-loved investment class, CASH & SAVINGS. 




    PROPERTY

    • If stocks survive the next one-to-two years then begin to advance, foreshadowing a sustained recovery in the economy, house prices will likely move higher.  That is not, however, the most probable historical scenario - see charts and analysis in this month's On the Money blog.

    • Right now, the UK market is topping out.  Both the Nationwide and Halifax indexes registered falls in February.


    • Our situation is mirrored in the US, where prices and sales are beginning to fall once again

    • US commercial property is on the edge of a cliff - and hundreds of banks are lined up like sitting ducks on the rocks below.  Elizabeth Warren of the Congressional Oversight Panel gives this simple, jargon-free introduction to her recent alarming report:



        

      BONDS


      • Whether this bubble is set to burst or just pause a while before bubbling up further, now is a perilous time to buy

      • UK gilts remain unattractive: while worries about our government debt increase, bond traders are proving quick to sell as the pound tumbles  

      • I am looking for any large spike in yields in a crisis as a potential opportunity to buy UK gilts for the long term


      COMMODITIES

      • As mentioned here before, it remains all about the US Dollar; amidst the incessant talk of inflation it is creeping deflation that is now taking hold (see Cash below), and a continuation of that trend will see the dollar rise further and commodities in big trouble


      • The dollar now seems vulnerable to a pullback to its 200-day moving average currently around $78.68.  If so, we're likely to get a quick spike higher in GOLD...


      • While OIL could shoot up to $90, not good news for petrol prices or overall energy prices in a cash-strapped economy


      STOCKS

      • It's time to take a long hard look at the charts I detailed in my March On the Money post.  I'm posting them here again for your convenience and also include the years from 1947 - 1982 for further comparison:

       Dow Jones 1982 - 2010
      & the Rate of Change

      1947 - 1982
       1920 - 1948


      • Unless a strong burst higher materializes similar to the 1936 example or we find ourselves in a sudden crash scenario a la 1987 (both of which at this point seem unlikely) we will essentially trade sideways for some months; one or two more breaks to a new high are probable before a serious sell-off begins

      • The first of these new highs is close to being hit in the US and has already occured in the UK FTSE100.  We will probably take a few weeks to form a top, then drop back towards the lows we saw in February

      • I've now taken profits in the trade I described last month, which proved remarkably successful and pain-free, and will look to set up an aggressive short trade to take advantage of any coming downswing as and when signs of technical weakness appear. 




      CASH:

      INVESTMENT'S UGLY DUCKLING



      Boy, could an investment class get any uglier?


      If there's one whinge you hear more than any other these days when people talk money it's "my savings rate is crap."


      I know it is, Mrs Pugh.  Banks are laughing in the faces of their customers, offering pitiful rates to those savers who require instant access to their cash (which is of course 99% of us).  With inflation currently ticking up, money sitting in these accounts is actually eroding in value at a steady pace.


      But a few moments spent searching the monesphere - through comparison sites like moneysupermarket and moneysavingexpert in the UK, bankrate in the US - will open up lots of alternatives if you don't mind being a little more crafty and strategic in your search for a decent return. 


      For example, Santander (who now own what were once Abbey and Alliance & Leicester) have just set up an instant access ISA offering a market-busting, virtually-guaranteed-not-to-fall one-year rate of 3.5%.  If there isn't a stampede into this account I'll eat my bonus.


      There are also ways to game the various 'regular savings' accounts which pay a much higher interest rate but on fairly small amounts and with onerous conditions. 


      But this isn't the place to pore over the minutiae of all the various products as you can do that perfectly well yourself and, in any case, rates are constantly changing.    


      However what I can usefully do is suggest a framework for how one might view and use cash and savings as part of an overall financial strategy




      THE TAO OF CASH


      I was unfortunate enough to catch LBC radio presenter and former 'The Apprentice' contestant James Maxx a little while back, cheer-leading the property market on his Sunday finance show.  He chided one nervous listener for daring to consider selling her buy-to-let property. "The question is, where else would you put that money? That's what people need to ask themselves!" he finger-wagged. "You've got to consider the alternatives!" (as if there were none). "If you're just going to put that money in cash", he spat, "aren't you better off leaving it where it is?"


      Oh James, no wonder you didn't win.


      This typifies the complacent and frankly cock-eyed attitude to risk displayed by those who got us into the mess we're now in.  Duh!  Property is not a risk-free investment compared to cash!


      If you buy a house to live in for half-a-lifetime, that's one thing.  But viewed purely as an investment, property is vastly more risky unless you hold for the very long term. It carries the substantial risk of capital depreciation if you time your purchase poorly, and can bankrupt you if you can't keep up your repayments. It is often illiquid (ie. you can't get at the money in your investment if and when you need it, since it's difficult to realize the value immediately even if you're able to sell. And as we saw in late 2008, when the market mood turns it can become very difficult to sell, overnight).


      Cash invested wisely generates a safe, predictable yield which can easily match or exceed that of a rental property, though of course there's no asset appreciation; but when you've seen an historic bubble in property values, which has popped worldwide yet still only barely begun to deflate in the UK, it's only a 24-carat fool who believes the rewards to be had now are sure to be greater than the risks.


      I obviously doesn't mean to suggest that property is always a worse investment than cash - long-term it is of course far superior.  But I'm giving this example of sloppy thinking to illustrate that one always has to compare the risks of investing in an asset with its potential rewards at a particular point in time - and compare it to the alternative of cash.


      So let's do just that.


      Here, courtesy of the Financial Times, are the returns from some popular asset types over the last decade compared to a boring fixed-interest savings account.


      Please click to enlarge


      Smart cookies who got out of stocks and shares in 2000 at the peak of the dot-com bubble and stuffed their wad into fixed-interest savings bonds comfortably outperformed stocks and other liquid asset classes over the past decade, with virtually no risk or analysis and barely a sleepless night. 


      Much of the speculative money which came out of stocks after the dot-com bust in 2000 went into property, helping create a bubble with returns which as we know outstripped everything else.  But unless you believe that, having popped, the property bubble can now be re-inflated (something never before seen in history), could it be that boring old cash will once again triumph over riskier assets in the next decade?  



      WHY CASH WILL SOON BE KING ONCE MORE


      After the enormous run up in stocks we've seen in 2009, I believe there is an extremely high probability that

      • cash, invested smartly in fixed-rate savings over the next few months, will trounce stock returns over a one-to-two year period whatever the economic outlook


      That's right: whether my overall opinion about the direction we're heading in is on the money or not, I am very confident you'll be better off in cash.  How can I be so sure?



      Returns of US Dow Jones index at current Rate of Change
      1977 - 2010

      Returns of US Dow Jones index at current Rate of Change
      1920 - 1946



      Here again are the two charts I examined in depth in March's main post, but this time their returns up to two years out are highlighted.  In each and every case where stocks had become as over-extended as they are now, their return over a one or two-year period was at best flat to minimally positive, at worst extremely negative


      Sometimes stocks ran up in the first year but, as we discussed in the blog, they could not sustain the momentum and always fell back or crashed in the second.  In one or two cases stocks troughed after a year then began rising strongly in a sustained bull market.  Were that to happen, any cash savings could very easily be transferred back into the market.  It is in my view an extremely rare, virtually no-lose situation.


      US and UK markets move in near lock-step, with occasional and minimal variations, so don't count on our situation over here being any better.  In fact, even if you discount this particular technical indicator, the evidence is unambiguous.  I looked at the aftermath of every single major sell-off (20% or more) over the last century.  Once stocks had staged a rebound which lasted 12 months as ours has, returns going forward one to two years further out were,  overwhelmingly, either flat or down.  For a picture of the period from 1947 - 1982, take a look in the section above on stocks.  



      BOTTOM LINE ON CASH:
      KNOW WHEN TO LOVE IT, KNOW WHEN TO LOATHE IT


      • Love cash when risks to your other assets are elevated

      There is, as we've seen, a big risk in holding shares over the next one to two years; there has also been a stampede of buying into bonds, creating a potential bubble with similar dangers.  Property is walking a narrow path between two chasms: rising mortgage rates on one side and a double-dip recession the other.  Either of these would in my view lead to house prices declines and, over the course of the next couple of years, one of these is highly likely to occur. 


      While the potential rewards in these assets are so questionable, you are simply better off in solid, boring, risk-free cash.  No, it's not going to make you rich, but look:


      There are periods in history when the economic environment rewards - and other times when it punishes - risk-taking behaviour.  We have experienced a 25-year high summer when it truly was time to get rich.  We are now in the early stages of an economic winter in which crippling debt has to be excised, bad businesses and business models flushed out and banking and household finances restored to health before we can make any further long term advance. 


      In this environment, asset prices are extremely vulnerable.  Japan has gone through this process for the last twenty years - their stock market is STILL 72% lower than it was at its height in 1990 and Tokyo property prices are STILL 70% below their peak.  Many intelligent investors are being sucked into this current market advance in the belief that our troubles are behind us.  Having seen nothing but asset price gains for their entire adult lifetime, they have become insensible to risk, literally unable to comprehend the possibility that the tide has turned against them.  Increasingly they are back buying property, back partying  like it's 1999 and ordering Cristal like it's 2007.  But very few of them will still be standing in ten or fifteen years by the time this whole thing is through. 


      So the trick will be to take great short-term opportunities when they arise, to party by all means, but be ready to evacuate the building at a moment's notice.  The priority for really smart investors is now not to get rich but to stay solvent - not 'return-on-capital', but the return of capital. 




      • Loathe cash when inflation and asset prices look set to rise long term

      A short term drift higher in inflation is one thing - in the UK, that looks to be our current situation.  But if I'm wrong about the economy and a solid recovery takes hold - something we should find out within the next year - you should flee cash and invest in some hard assets.  Low inflation is fine for most assets but the theoretical risk we face, if demand rises too fast and the monetary genie bursts out of its bottle, is of runaway inflation.  In a worst case scenario, the ghosts of Zimbabwe could yet rise in England's green and pleasant land.


      Serious inflation is least bad for property and best for precious metals such as gold.  Inflation-linked bonds are a somewhat less titilating alternative, of which more in a moment.  Stocks, despite olde investor lore, factually do not do well in highly inflationary periods.



      • Love cash the most when asset prices and everyday prices are falling - long or short term!



      FOLKS - DEFLATION, NOT INFLATION,
      IS THE BASELINE RISK


      For the first time in decades, developed nations are facing a major threat of deflation.  And it's not theoretical, it's right here, right now.  Both the UK and US dropped into deflation for a while in 2008, the Eurozone is hovering just above the zero line and last month, the US core rate officially dipped into deflation for the first time in living memory.  Whatever one's opinion of the outlook, the current trend is not up for debate: we're going down.


      The US Consumer Price Index excludes housing costs, otherwise it would show a nation firmly in the grip of deflation


      In deflation, where prices fall generally and asset prices are hard hit, your cash gains in value.  As house prices deflate, that money you're saving for a deposit will buy you more.  The price of consumer goods also falls, giving your pound greater purchasing power.  And since your debts stay the same even as your assets deflate in value, the only guard against those debts overwhelming your ability to pay is to sell those assets and hold plenty of cash.


      In deflation, typically, institutions are prone to fail, so it's important to keep your cash in the safest spots.  Generally speaking the government guarantees cash deposits up to £50,000 but there are pitfalls.  We'll examine what's truly safe in a later post, should the economic picture become markedly more dangerous.


      The UK is currently getting a mini-burst of inflation, but almost all analysts believe it's only temporary and, for once, I agree.  Technical factors (to do with the way the figures are measured) plus the return of VAT to 17.5% from 15% and rising energy costs have plumped up the headline rate, but later this year the primary trend towards falling prices is likely to re-establish itself.  Why?





      For the last sixty years it has been employment costs which have determined the likelihood of inflation.  So-called unit labour costs have continued to be a consistent leading indicator - and now they point firmly towards deflation.




      But for now, UK interest rates on deposits are either holding steady or rising.  The pound has been selling off as fears about our government debt grow in the bond markets, which is pushing rates higher.  This is lining up to provide us with an excellent opportunity.




      GET SQUIRRELING


      • Be sure to use your tax-free ISA allowance this year if you haven't already.  Taxes have only one way to go from here for all of us - up.  A cash ISA will shelter £3600 from the Chancellor's clutches before April 6th (£5,100 if you're 50+). 

      • From April 6th, everyone can stash away another £5,100 in cash tax-free. 

      • I'll be looking for signs over the next few months that stocks are topping, or that savings rates have stopped rising, to start switching money into fixed-rate ISAs and savings.  I will of course be sharing my discoveries with you, dear reader, in these columns. 

      • If we get a major UK bond sell-off with an accompanying rise in savings rates, that should be seen as a tremendous opportunity to lock in a high return.  I'll specifically be looking at two-year (and longer) fixed-interest savings rates which allow me to withdraw funds from my account before the end of the fixed term.  This flexibility will be extremely important and could be crucial to the success of the strategy.

      • To guard against the small risk of runaway inflation, I'll be looking to make an (initially modest) investment in gold and / or inflation-linked bonds.


      Enough already!  I'm off to soak up a damn good dose of spring sunshine.


      The febrile state of our currency markets, sovereign debt anxieties around Europe and our impending General Election all increase the potential for some kind of crisis - and opportunity - during March.  So, be sure to tune in next time - all the essential news will, of course, be here, posted Sunday April 4th.


      Meantime, have a great month!