Author Topic: The 2y / 10y treasury yield curve just inverted. Everyone out of the water?  (Read 3852 times)

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
After several minor yield curve inversions over the past couple of months, the definitive inversion between the yield on the 2y treasury and the 10y treasury happened today. Expect more of the same in the coming months.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-year-treasury-yield-pushes-back-above-2-5-as-curve-continues-to-flatten-11648552294?mod=mw_latestnews

This has historically meant we can expect a recession within the next 6 months to 2 years, though stocks tend to rise for a few months before the recession. The expectation is that rapidly rising interest rates will kill the economic expansion like they did in 1999-2000, 2004-2007, and several times in earlier market history.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/fedfunds#0


We definitely have at least 2% of remaining increases to go, with inflation running above 5%. That's larger than the rate hikes which led to the 2000 Nasdaq bust. So the questions are:

1) Will you maintain your stock-heavy AA for at least a few more months, chasing pre-recession gains per the historical pattern but at the risk of getting caught long when the herd starts to flee? Average time from inversion to recession = 16 mos. Average 12 mo S&P 500 performance after inversion: +11%. Phrased another way: When you know the bust is coming, how long does it continue to make sense to stay in the market in pursuit of the remaining gains?

2) Is it reasonable to think if the Fed raises the Fed Funds Rate to 2.5%, the S&P500's PE ratio will drop from the current 26.4 to about 20, where it was in 2019 and also in 2005 (times when the Fed Funds Rate was last at 2.5%)?

3) What percentage chance of happening do you assign to the following scenarios?
     a) A 25% S&P 500 drawdown due to a 2.5% FFR by this time next year.
     b) The S&P 500 up 11% twelve months from now, per the average.
     c) Both A and B, but at different times
     d) A bear market starts within the next three or four months.

4) Which of the following has the biggest potential to cause another financial / banking crisis during the coming recession?
     a) Losses in the bond market
     b) Losses in the stock market
     c) Mortgages
     d) A cryptocurrency crash
     e) A default on sovereign bonds by Russia or its allies takes down a couple of large banks.
     f) COVID breaks loose and ravages China.
     g) China invades Taiwan.
     h) A European recession alongside the cutoff of Russian gas.

sailinlight

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 353
Top is in?

EvenSteven

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 993
  • Location: St. Louis
A lot of people enjoy analyzing and timing the bond markets and the stock markets. I don't particularly enjoy that, and I've determined that I am lousy at it.

As an alternative, I've accepted that over the course of my investing life, sometimes my investments will perform poorly. C'est la vie.

1) I will remain with a heavy stock allocation through any market decline.

2) I think that is in the range of reasonable outcomes.

3) a) 30%; b) 40%; c) 25%; d) 10%

4) a and h

Mr. Green

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4539
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
What do you move your money into if stocks are about to drop? Bonds seem like a bad play if we're projecting interest rates to rise at least 2%. RE seems like a bad play if interest rates are going to rise considerably and there is a slow down in the RE market. Going to cash seems like a bad play with inflation running red hot. Gold or commodities maybe? Almost feels like trying to pick the smallest loser.

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2596
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
Yup, still a TINA market.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4583
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
I have been expecting a recession for years, so not sure what I would change if I knew it were coming tomorrow. I mean, I'd I actually knew I knew, I guess I could sell everything, then buy low, but I don't know that much.

Also, people have been pointing to this that or the other inversion for over a year as the definitive proof. Yawn.

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Yup, still a TINA market.

I agree. We are in a market where bonds have negative yields and prices that are falling. As far as I can tell I can put my money into equities, real estate, or gold. And I don't like gold or owning real estate (REIT maybe).

charis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
Why do you keep starting threads about market timing and how's that been working for you?

less4success

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 188
Did it un-invert by the end of the day? (Or am I just blind?)

https://home.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/TextView?type=daily_treasury_yield_curve&field_tdr_date_value_month=202203

Edit: regardless, it was inverted at the end of 4/1.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2022, 10:01:09 AM by less4success »

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2596
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
I have been expecting a recession for years, so not sure what I would change if I knew it were coming tomorrow.

2020 was officially deemed a recession.  Blink and you missed it, I guess.

https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021

Heckler

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
I rebalanced back up to my 30% bonds in early March, as per my IPS.   Sold off some of my almost Top Canadian stocks, to buy more Europe and SP500 and bonds.

Turns out my bonds are now making more monthly interest than ever, and as long as I don't sell them, they produce income, which is called FU money.

vand

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2345
  • Location: UK
Inversion matters, because in an ordinary world you should always get paid more for committing your money for longer.  This is consistent with the principle of the time value of money being that all else equal, having an apple today is worth more than having an apple tomorrow, and a lot more than having an apple in 10 years from now.

YC inversion is consistent with investors saying that they want lower returns for committing their capital for longer. Why would any sane investor do that? It can only happen because they expect turmoil in the short term. 

It's like if you committed to a 3 month gym contract and it working out cheaper per month than committing to a 12 month contract, which itself is cheaper than committing to a 3yr contract. If the gym needs immediate funds to resolve some liquidity issues to keep running then its possible you could see that situation arise, but it woudn't happen normally.

vand

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2345
  • Location: UK
I rebalanced back up to my 30% bonds in early March, as per my IPS.   Sold off some of my almost Top Canadian stocks, to buy more Europe and SP500 and bonds.

Turns out my bonds are now making more monthly interest than ever, and as long as I don't sell them, they produce income, which is called FU money.

And yet your bonds are lose more purchasing power than ever.

Paper Chaser

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
The only way that I see this mattering is if you're planning to FIRE with very little cushion in the next few months.
My timeline is measured in years, and my plan accounts for unexpected expenses, inflation, dips in the market, etc. For me, a market drop just means that stocks are on sale.

svosavvy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Western NY
After several minor yield curve inversions over the past couple of months, the definitive inversion between the yield on the 2y treasury and the 10y treasury happened today. Expect more of the same in the coming months.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-year-treasury-yield-pushes-back-above-2-5-as-curve-continues-to-flatten-11648552294?mod=mw_latestnews

This has historically meant we can expect a recession within the next 6 months to 2 years, though stocks tend to rise for a few months before the recession. The expectation is that rapidly rising interest rates will kill the economic expansion like they did in 1999-2000, 2004-2007, and several times in earlier market history.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/fedfunds#0


We definitely have at least 2% of remaining increases to go, with inflation running above 5%. That's larger than the rate hikes which led to the 2000 Nasdaq bust. So the questions are:

1) Will you maintain your stock-heavy AA for at least a few more months, chasing pre-recession gains per the historical pattern but at the risk of getting caught long when the herd starts to flee? Average time from inversion to recession = 16 mos. Average 12 mo S&P 500 performance after inversion: +11%. Phrased another way: When you know the bust is coming, how long does it continue to make sense to stay in the market in pursuit of the remaining gains?

A:I am currently slightly underweight S&P 500 (about 10-15% off ":ideal" weight) for the now with that money in cash USD and some CHF.  This is a slow parasitic loss and don't recommend, hopium waiting for a "buyable" bottom which may not come.  I look at my Kroger stock and just shake my head that a razor thin margin company in an inflationary environ trades at the PE it does, just incredible.  Same in my ConEd stock as well.

2) Is it reasonable to think if the Fed raises the Fed Funds Rate to 2.5%, the S&P500's PE ratio will drop from the current 26.4 to about 20, where it was in 2019 and also in 2005 (times when the Fed Funds Rate was last at 2.5%)?

A: I have no idea on this one.  I would say your question is like asking how many points a sports team will score in a game vs whether or not they won it.  Earnings compression through mentioned headwinds can throw PE's way out of whack.  There are a lot of great reasons to believe companies will make less relative earnings next year pick one or a basket of them (recession in Europe, energy availability, less stimulus in the system, political mayhem).

3) What percentage chance of happening do you assign to the following scenarios?
     a) A 25% S&P 500 drawdown due to a 2.5% FFR by this time next year.
     
A:Drawdown plausible, 25%?Probably less. Could see a technical bear, retrench consolidate and go higher.

     b) The S&P 500 up 11% twelve months from now, per the average.

A:Again plausible, will be interesting if we print a new high in the next month, that would be telling of our ability to discount bad news.

     c) Both A and B, but at different times

A:Probably

     d) A bear market starts within the next three or four months.

A: I think that is too early.  Possibly 6 months, I am interested to see what the consumer looks like after summer.  While oil has diminished in market cap weighting of the S&P, travel and services could get a face punch from fuel issues.  We have to see if we can shake off the bad news or not.  One thing is for sure markets are very forward looking.  The "stock market" will be the first to know and we will all be scratching our heads looking in the mirror at the past.  I am very interested in crypto flows, I think there is a heck of a lot of borrowed money there. Mysterious tanking there would be a symptom imo.  Also, just this morning mortgage applications are way down.  Cooling there may be a clue.


4) Which of the following has the biggest potential to cause another financial / banking crisis during the coming recession?
     a) Losses in the bond market.

A: The yield crowd has been forced into equities, real estate. When borrowing to buy equities/properties stops making sense.

     b) Losses in the stock market

A:When it becomes harder to get borrowed money, decreased supply and/or higher rates.

     c) Mortgages

A: see above

     d) A cryptocurrency crash

A: I think it all comes down to ease and terms of borrowing :caveat margin requirements.

     e) A default on sovereign bonds by Russia or its allies takes down a couple of large banks.

A: There will be some equity pain re: Russia.  Remains to be seen how much, I am guessing less than expected.  Containment and confidence will be key.

     f) COVID breaks loose and ravages China.

A: I think this is a non market moving one.

     g) China invades Taiwan.

A: I think this is a low outlier.  I could be wrong.  You could see some military posturing in that side of the world though esp South China Sea.

     h) A European recession alongside the cutoff of Russian gas.

A: I think we are in the process of baking that in. I am interested in how Europe weakness may affect the US markets.

Just my non professional opinion

djadziadax

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 184
As I stated on another thread, I was advised (if I wanted to de-risk somewhat in this market) to move 20% of the portfolio in cash (i.e. MM). I thought that was very good advice, as the rationale was to give yourself some protection from draw downs and have some dry powder when the draw down occurs, but not get out of the market completely so that you don't miss out on any potential gains. I sold my high growth fund.

I did that on Monday in my 401K as not to be tax penalized.

The people I follow for financial advise have all surmised that the FED is serious about raising rates which, according to all previous rate hikes, WILL affect valuations across markets negatively. So it feels like these next couple of months may be the last breath of the strong bull - but it ALL really depends on whether the FED goes through with it or not and now many if any 50pt hikes there will be.

Mohamed El-Erian was saying that if he were the FED, and given a choice between high inflation (10%) and high rates (crushing the economy), he would go with high inflation. So...it will all become clear as to the FEDs real intentions in May.

As for where to put money other than cash, energy ETF or specific energy companies may be a good hedge. I am not versed in options so I that avenue of hedging is not open to me at the moment.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4583
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
I have been expecting a recession for years, so not sure what I would change if I knew it were coming tomorrow.

2020 was officially deemed a recession.  Blink and you missed it, I guess.

https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021

Well, I probably did forget, but I had the same AA and the same reaction as I have had this year.

FINate

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3157
As always, my AA will remain unchanged. Heavy total stock market and REIT. My cash equivalents are, for reason's I won't go into here, larger than desired so we're spending it down on recent big ticket expenses (e.g. HVAC replacement, other such silliness) and reinvesting the rest. If we tip into recession and my investments take a hit I know they will recover with time. But cash? I don't believe the Fed will bring inflation under control anytime soon, and even if they do, it's clear they will do everything possible to prevent deflation. In other words, cash loses value every day, and there's almost no possibility that it will ever recover value lost.

Mr. Green

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4539
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
As I stated on another thread, I was advised (if I wanted to de-risk somewhat in this market) to move 20% of the portfolio in cash (i.e. MM). I thought that was very good advice, as the rationale was to give yourself some protection from draw downs and have some dry powder when the draw down occurs, but not get out of the market completely so that you don't miss out on any potential gains. I sold my high growth fund.

I did that on Monday in my 401K as not to be tax penalized.

The people I follow for financial advise have all surmised that the FED is serious about raising rates which, according to all previous rate hikes, WILL affect valuations across markets negatively. So it feels like these next couple of months may be the last breath of the strong bull - but it ALL really depends on whether the FED goes through with it or not and now many if any 50pt hikes there will be.

Mohamed El-Erian was saying that if he were the FED, and given a choice between high inflation (10%) and high rates (crushing the economy), he would go with high inflation. So...it will all become clear as to the FEDs real intentions in May.

As for where to put money other than cash, energy ETF or specific energy companies may be a good hedge. I am not versed in options so I that avenue of hedging is not open to me at the moment.
If you're expecting significant interest rate increases you'd be much better off in TIPS than cash.

blue_green_sparks

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
  • FIRE'd 2018
If the rates go up a bit more, I will buy a brokered CD's ladder (instead of bonds) to act as the "fixed" component of my allocation. Better rates than bonds and almost as liquid (just in case). They are selling at a discount now of course. I did have a few juicy 3 to 5% CDs in my IRA, but they have since all expired and now my allocation is cash heavy. So far, our living expenses have not really budged higher, but we have not made any large purchases either.

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
After several minor yield curve inversions over the past couple of months, the definitive inversion between the yield on the 2y treasury and the 10y treasury happened today.

The other thing that I don't quite understand is: there has been so much manipulation of the yield curve by the Fed with QE that I'm not sure that the 2/10 signal is still valid. But I don't happen to know how to analyze that.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
After several minor yield curve inversions over the past couple of months, the definitive inversion between the yield on the 2y treasury and the 10y treasury happened today.

The other thing that I don't quite understand is: there has been so much manipulation of the yield curve by the Fed with QE that I'm not sure that the 2/10 signal is still valid. But I don't happen to know how to analyze that.

QE just ended, so in theory the signal we're getting today is the signal free of manipulation. Yet the Fed's artificial demand for longer duration assets (like the 10y treasury) should have pushed UP prices and pushed DOWN yields, to the extent it changed prices at all. What we're observing is falling yields for 10y treasuries even without the Fed's intervention.

Perhaps the Fed wanted to get a clean signal for a couple of months and that's why they didn't announce QT at the March meeting, as the inflation numbers would seem to suggest they should have.

BicycleB

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Location: Coolest Neighborhood on Earth, They Say
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
Reading this thread for education.

Re non-cash non-bond investments, I am glad I diversified into something that sounded commodities-like to me a couple months ago. I went with a little gold, some gold mining stock and some stock in a potash company, MOS. The mining and potash companies have been my best investments since then (MOS up more than 60%) but I don't know whether buying more now is wise. The reason I went into them was to implement a longer term diversification plan, not to do intentional market timing. Not planning any changes right now personally.

The "diversification" above is less than 10% of portfolio; majority of assets still in stock index funds/ETFs. Other diversification moves included shifting part of my "cash" into a short term TIPS ETF (VTIP) and some of my very small bonds allocation into a long term TIPS ETF. My hope there was to preserve some of the portfolio-balancing, recession-resistant properties of bonds and cash with less inflation damage. No changes planned from Fed moves.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2022, 10:27:24 AM by BicycleB »

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
After several minor yield curve inversions over the past couple of months, the definitive inversion between the yield on the 2y treasury and the 10y treasury happened today.

The other thing that I don't quite understand is: there has been so much manipulation of the yield curve by the Fed with QE that I'm not sure that the 2/10 signal is still valid. But I don't happen to know how to analyze that.

QE just ended, so in theory the signal we're getting today is the signal free of manipulation. Yet the Fed's artificial demand for longer duration assets (like the 10y treasury) should have pushed UP prices and pushed DOWN yields, to the extent it changed prices at all. What we're observing is falling yields for 10y treasuries even without the Fed's intervention.

Has it "ended?" Don't they still have a bunch of those bonds in their account? They stopped buying but they also haven't sold them off.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
After several minor yield curve inversions over the past couple of months, the definitive inversion between the yield on the 2y treasury and the 10y treasury happened today.

The other thing that I don't quite understand is: there has been so much manipulation of the yield curve by the Fed with QE that I'm not sure that the 2/10 signal is still valid. But I don't happen to know how to analyze that.

QE just ended, so in theory the signal we're getting today is the signal free of manipulation. Yet the Fed's artificial demand for longer duration assets (like the 10y treasury) should have pushed UP prices and pushed DOWN yields, to the extent it changed prices at all. What we're observing is falling yields for 10y treasuries even without the Fed's intervention.

Has it "ended?" Don't they still have a bunch of those bonds in their account? They stopped buying but they also haven't sold them off.

I'd say it's ended in terms of whether the Fed's actions are affecting price discovery in the day-to-day auctions. As long as it sits unsold, the Fed's balance sheet doesn't affect the day-to-day price of treasuries. It might as well not exist, or be sitting in a long-term B&H investor's account.

Some of these bonds and mortgages are steadily maturing or get paid off, and when that happens currency exits the economy and goes to the Fed's balance sheet. So in that regard, the Fed is not like a normal investor reinvesting their maturing bonds, but again, there's no reason an investor should factor that into their decision about whether to accept an X% yield and Y% duration risk on a bond.

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
I'd say it's ended in terms of whether the Fed's actions are affecting price discovery in the day-to-day auctions. As long as it sits unsold, the Fed's balance sheet doesn't affect the day-to-day price of treasuries. It might as well not exist, or be sitting in a long-term B&H investor's account.

I'm not sure that I agree. If I buy up a bunch of gold, then stop buying gold, did I really not impact the price going forward?

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
I'd say it's ended in terms of whether the Fed's actions are affecting price discovery in the day-to-day auctions. As long as it sits unsold, the Fed's balance sheet doesn't affect the day-to-day price of treasuries. It might as well not exist, or be sitting in a long-term B&H investor's account.

I'm not sure that I agree. If I buy up a bunch of gold, then stop buying gold, did I really not impact the price going forward?

I think you did not, unless we're talking something on the scale of the Hunt brothers cornering the silver market in the 1980s or hedge funds causing a short squeeze in some small stock. An open market auction clears at the highest price any of the buyers are willing to pay and the lowest price any of the sellers are willing to take. If you step into this market and become the highest-bidding buyer or the lowest-selling seller, your transaction affects the quoted price, but once you step out of the market and go home, you're not in the market any more and the market consists of the same buyers and sellers who were there before. Then your historical trade does not affect the price going forward because you are not there to set a bid or ask price.

At the height of QE, the Fed's massive purchases represented less than 1% of the average daily volume. That puts the size and efficiency of the treasury market into perspective!

BicycleB

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5271
  • Location: Coolest Neighborhood on Earth, They Say
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
If QE was the Fed buying 1% or so of the purchases, why was that so powerful? Or was it a paper tiger?

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
What do you move your money into if stocks are about to drop? Bonds seem like a bad play if we're projecting interest rates to rise at least 2%. RE seems like a bad play if interest rates are going to rise considerably and there is a slow down in the RE market. Going to cash seems like a bad play with inflation running red hot. Gold or commodities maybe? Almost feels like trying to pick the smallest loser.

I don't buy the TINA argument. There are lots of alternatives to going long cash, bonds, or stocks. You can hedge your long stock positions with options. You can buy futures funds. You can go short stocks or bond funds. You can buy or short commodities funds. You can harvest time decay. You can do vertical spreads, butterflies, condors, straddles, strangles, covered calls, calendar spreads, or just buy long calls. You can switch to investments in other countries or currencies. Outside of the financial markets, you can make energy efficiency investments, buy solar panels, buy antiques or art, buy a full health diagnostic panel and interpretive services, buy timberland or oil wells, get an interest-bearing checking or savings account, pay down a mortgage or other debt, engage in private lending or private equity, or literally keep physical cash in a safe.

I'm leaning toward options-hedged stock positions that allow some upside for the next year, but strictly cap the downside. There is a case to be made for a large asseet allocation to cash though. If you really think inflation will be in the 4-7% range for the next couple of years, then you should also believe that investments will lose more value than the cash itself, because investments are prospects to receive cash in the future. The most straightforward example is bonds with yields longer than a year or two, because the discounting math directly reduces their value.

 
The only way that I see this mattering is if you're planning to FIRE with very little cushion in the next few months.
My timeline is measured in years, and my plan accounts for unexpected expenses, inflation, dips in the market, etc. For me, a market drop just means that stocks are on sale.

I've accumulated most of what I need to retire, so my decisions around the coming market drop will determine whether I actually retire next year, 10 years from now, or somewhere in between. I don't think there has been in modern history a rate hiking series in the 2-3% range within 12 months or so that wasn't eventually accompanied by a severe bear market. I took the image below from https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/yield-curve-inversion-isn-t-a-foolproof-indicator-of-recession-this-time where a financial journalist is arguing the futures market is wrong and he is right. OK, buddy.

One of the arguments for why rates won't rise this fast is that "something will break" before the series can complete. What exactly does that mean? It means a financial crisis driven by collapsing asset prices and seized bank lending, a bubble popping in the bond, stock, crypto, or real estate markets, a bank blowup or sovereign debt crisis, suddenly rising unemployment, or other outcomes that are unequivocally bad for investments. When I look at the chart, I see the possibility that the speed of rate hikes could outpace the development of the next crisis, which is worse.

The potentially positive paths I can see right now are (a) a new COVID-19 variant emerges and ravages the economy this summer or fall, or (b) inflation rates suddenly decline all on their own due to a withdraw of QE, resolution of commodity supply issues, and resolution of logistical issues leading to a rapid overrun in inventories ( https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RETAILIMSA). If either of these happens, assets could retain their currently high values and still-hot earnings and margin growth could propel them higher. This reasoning may justify a hedged stock position for the next year or so.


djadziadax

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 184
The potentially positive paths I can see right now are (a) a new COVID-19 variant emerges and ravages the economy this summer or fall, or (b) inflation rates suddenly decline all on their own due to a withdraw of QE, resolution of commodity supply issues, and resolution of logistical issues leading to a rapid overrun in inventories ( https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RETAILIMSA). If either of these happens, assets could retain their currently high values and still-hot earnings and margin growth could propel them higher. This reasoning may justify a hedged stock position for the next year or so.

It does not looks like either a) or b) will be options. On a) no new variant emerged in the US in the summer (give the pattern of last two years, and people's resistance for any type of restrictions are huge even in deep blue cities, plus we have vaccines, home test, anti-viral drugs. On b) supply chains are severely stressed from COVID and especially now from the "special operation." Just look at fertilizer, metals, all commodities basically. Looks at Europe - closing steel mills due to high energy prices, not serving french fries because of self-rationing of sunflower oil, rolling blackouts for businesses due to lack of gas reserves. It is simply bad and will take many many months for this to settle, if not years.

On the other hands, mid-terms are approaching, so QT may end and QE may continue, while rates don't rise so fast...but many circumstantial signals are pointing to difficulties for the market.

I personally have a large exposure to metalics. I have moved to 20% cash.  But in a 20% total market drop, not sure you can eek out good enough return (say 7-10% to counter inflation) from the strategies you are talking about unless you are TALEB!
« Last Edit: March 31, 2022, 11:06:08 PM by djadziadax »

Weathering

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 81
Bond yields (short and long) are demonstrating exactly what everyone is thinking. That is, inflation will be high for the next few years and then revert back toward 2-3%. Therefore, if money will be tied up for only the next few years (2 years) then it needs to pay an interest rate closer to the rate of current inflation as compared to money that will be tied up longer (10 years).

An analogy would be booking a hotel room for Friday and Saturday night vs booking a room for a week starting on a Friday. The average rate for the Friday-Sunday stay will be higher than for the week-long stay, but the week-long stay does include higher rates for Friday-Sunday within its overall price.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6665
ChpBstrd - I heard of two expected 0.50% rate hikes a few days ago, so next week I'll be curious to see if CNBC and Bloomberg treat three 0.5% as the new market consensus.  You can almost tell what week it was in 2022 based on the number of expected rate hikes.

Could an inverted yield curve just be reality?  For example, inflation might be 7% this year and 4% next year, so a 2 year treasury needs to compete with very high inflation.  But a 20 year treasury expects inflation closer to 2% in the long term, so it's yield should be lower than the 2 year, matching inflation expectations.  So maybe the yield curve inversion is just reflecting the reality of inflation being high right now, and fading over the next year or so?

Mr. Green

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4539
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
I don't buy the TINA argument. There are lots of alternatives to going long cash, bonds, or stocks. You can hedge your long stock positions with options. You can buy futures funds. You can go short stocks or bond funds. You can buy or short commodities funds. You can harvest time decay. You can do vertical spreads, butterflies, condors, straddles, strangles, covered calls, calendar spreads, or just buy long calls. You can switch to investments in other countries or currencies. Outside of the financial markets, you can make energy efficiency investments, buy solar panels, buy antiques or art, buy a full health diagnostic panel and interpretive services, buy timberland or oil wells, get an interest-bearing checking or savings account, pay down a mortgage or other debt, engage in private lending or private equity, or literally keep physical cash in a safe.
Great googly moogly! Is that all? I doubt most folks here are considering 95% of that. I would say that's all too complicated for me, but it's not. I just don't want to. I like easy. Do a thing, and put my mental energy into non-financial areas of my life. It's what I love about having won the game already! More power to you though if you want to pursue all those different hedges.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2022, 09:13:08 PM by Mr. Green »

Paper Chaser

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
The only way that I see this mattering is if you're planning to FIRE with very little cushion in the next few months.
My timeline is measured in years, and my plan accounts for unexpected expenses, inflation, dips in the market, etc. For me, a market drop just means that stocks are on sale.

I've accumulated most of what I need to retire, so my decisions around the coming market drop will determine whether I actually retire next year, 10 years from now, or somewhere in between. I don't think there has been in modern history a rate hiking series in the 2-3% range within 12 months or so that wasn't eventually accompanied by a severe bear market.

The 4% rule takes care of an awful lot of my concern in these areas. If you've truly accumulated enough, and have a proper asset allocation, then I'd be focusing a lot more on SORR mitigation than exotic investing strategies rooted in market timing.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2022, 07:24:51 AM by Paper Chaser »

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Bond yields (short and long) are demonstrating exactly what everyone is thinking. That is, inflation will be high for the next few years and then revert back toward 2-3%. Therefore, if money will be tied up for only the next few years (2 years) then it needs to pay an interest rate closer to the rate of current inflation as compared to money that will be tied up longer (10 years).

An analogy would be booking a hotel room for Friday and Saturday night vs booking a room for a week starting on a Friday. The average rate for the Friday-Sunday stay will be higher than for the week-long stay, but the week-long stay does include higher rates for Friday-Sunday within its overall price.
ChpBstrd - I heard of two expected 0.50% rate hikes a few days ago, so next week I'll be curious to see if CNBC and Bloomberg treat three 0.5% as the new market consensus.  You can almost tell what week it was in 2022 based on the number of expected rate hikes.

Could an inverted yield curve just be reality?  For example, inflation might be 7% this year and 4% next year, so a 2 year treasury needs to compete with very high inflation.  But a 20 year treasury expects inflation closer to 2% in the long term, so it's yield should be lower than the 2 year, matching inflation expectations.  So maybe the yield curve inversion is just reflecting the reality of inflation being high right now, and fading over the next year or so?

Another narrative around these same interpretations is that markets expect rates to rise in the short term, cause a nasty recession, and then be cut for the next several years in response to that recession. This would involve higher average rates over the next couple of years and lower average rates over the next 10.

That has been the pattern for the past several decades of rate hiking campaigns. Historically, rate hikes in the cumulative 2% range have always tipped the US into recession, and oil prices >$100/barrel have been associated with recessions too.

I still think there is a case to be made for "transitory" inflation, just on a timeframe of 1-3 years that nobody is expecting. 2020 and 2021 were unprecedented in terms of how much cash was created out of thin air to be pumped directly into consumers' bank accounts, and in the amount of QE performed. All that has ended now, and consumer demand is coasting on the savings glut some households experienced in 2021. Eventually the effects of this adrenaline shot will wear off, monetary velocity will return to natural levels, inventories will catch up and overshoot, and price pressures will reduce, but it could take years to clear all this excess new money out of the system (spoiler alert, it ends up in the hands of rich people investing in treasuries, bonds, and stocks). That's why the Fed isn't responding too forcefully to 7+% inflation numbers - policy has already changed dramatically from a year ago, and they'd like to get some good numbers rather than over-tightening.


MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6665
Another narrative around these same interpretations is that markets expect rates to rise in the short term, cause a nasty recession, and then be cut for the next several years in response to that recession. This would involve higher average rates over the next couple of years and lower average rates over the next 10.

That has been the pattern for the past several decades of rate hiking campaigns. Historically, rate hikes in the cumulative 2% range have always tipped the US into recession, and oil prices >$100/barrel have been associated with recessions too.

I still think there is a case to be made for "transitory" inflation, just on a timeframe of 1-3 years that nobody is expecting. 2020 and 2021 were unprecedented in terms of how much cash was created out of thin air to be pumped directly into consumers' bank accounts, and in the amount of QE performed. All that has ended now, and consumer demand is coasting on the savings glut some households experienced in 2021. Eventually the effects of this adrenaline shot will wear off, monetary velocity will return to natural levels, inventories will catch up and overshoot, and price pressures will reduce, but it could take years to clear all this excess new money out of the system (spoiler alert, it ends up in the hands of rich people investing in treasuries, bonds, and stocks). That's why the Fed isn't responding too forcefully to 7+% inflation numbers - policy has already changed dramatically from a year ago, and they'd like to get some good numbers rather than over-tightening.
The CNN Fear & Greed Index is a convenient way to check market sentiment, since they have 6 different gauges of market sentiment.  1/3rd are extreme fear, 1/3rd extreme greed, and 1/3rd in the middle - so it shows "neutral".  Another interpretation is a market split between extreme fear and extreme greed.
https://money.cnn.com/data/fear-and-greed/

It's possible both are correct, like you said: good performance now, recession later.  One article I read examined market performance before the past 11 recessions.

Range of months : worst ... best performance
1  ...  6    : -19% ... +10%
6  ... 12   : -10% ... +11%
12 ... 18  : -1% ... +17%
18 ... 24  : 0% ... +18%
https://www.seeitmarket.com/what-history-says-about-recessions-and-market-returns-17861/

From memory, I believe yield curve inversions signal a recession is likely in 18 to 24 months.  That gives a range from -1% to +35% for the next year of stock market returns, using history as a guide to the future.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
I don't buy the TINA argument. There are lots of alternatives to going long cash, bonds, or stocks. You can hedge your long stock positions with options. You can buy futures funds. You can go short stocks or bond funds. You can buy or short commodities funds. You can harvest time decay. You can do vertical spreads, butterflies, condors, straddles, strangles, covered calls, calendar spreads, or just buy long calls. You can switch to investments in other countries or currencies. Outside of the financial markets, you can make energy efficiency investments, buy solar panels, buy antiques or art, buy a full health diagnostic panel and interpretive services, buy timberland or oil wells, get an interest-bearing checking or savings account, pay down a mortgage or other debt, engage in private lending or private equity, or literally keep physical cash in a safe.
Great googly moogly! Is that all? I doubt most folks here are considering 95% of that. I would say that's all too complicated for me, but it's not. I just don't want to. I like easy. Do a thing, and put my mental energy into non-financial areas of my life. It's what I love about having won the game already! More power to you though if you want to pursue all those different hedges.
I have my own learning to do and I don't claim to be a Wall Street genius or anything, but I do caution against the attitude that long stock and long bond fund positions are all one needs to know. These may be the easiest investments for retail investors to get into, but the on/off nature of their returns and surprising correlation are exactly how retail investors get into loss-cutting mode after taking on more risk than they can stomach and it's how retirees get into SORR binds. It's why most people think stock market returns are about timing luck.

I remember talking to elderly people decades ago who never invested in anything but bank CDs, because in their era bank CDs were the easiest thing to invest in. $1500 fees to buy mutual funds on top of several-hundred-dollar commissions were common as recently as the 1990's, and maybe 1% of the population knew a thing about securities analysis (the high school dropout rate was over 20% for much of the late 20th century). Our fancy spreadsheets and portfolio analysis websites using data back to the 1800's tap into financial assets that seemed exotic to all but a few thousand financial specialists in certain neighborhoods of Chicago and New York, up until about two or three generations ago. Stocks and bonds still seem exotic and risky to a large percentage of the population today, and friends of mine who work at banks still talk about $500k CD balances, rolled over year after year for lifetimes by working class people who don't understand anything else.

Having a brokerage account invested in stocks as a middle class person in 1950 was as unusual in that time as day trading forex swaps is today. Most people didn't see the point of spending hours reading financial statements, understanding the differences between various classes of shares and debts, or comprehending the interplay between demographics, demand, inflation, interest rates, and debt. Those who thought they knew enough in that era earned CD returns for their lifetimes. When we discuss history (often for purposes of justifying unhedged index fund portfolios) we treat stock returns as if anyone could have pulled out their 1950 smartphone and clicked "buy", for free, on a total market index ETF charging a 0.05% annual ER. It's fantasy masquerading as statistics to imply those returns were actually available to normal people who lacked top-1% financial educations.

Likewise, we should consider that perhaps we are too reliant on the old standbys, too quick to do what is easy rather than investing hundreds of hours into self-education, and too prone to measuring our own success against (a) what worked last time, and (b) what other people are doing.

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2596
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin

I have my own learning to do and I don't claim to be a Wall Street genius or anything, but I do caution against the attitude that long stock and long bond fund positions are all one needs to know. These may be the easiest investments for retail investors to get into, but the on/off nature of their returns and surprising correlation are exactly how retail investors get into loss-cutting mode after taking on more risk than they can stomach and it's how retirees get into SORR binds. It's why most people think stock market returns are about timing luck.

...

Likewise, we should consider that perhaps we are too reliant on the old standbys, too quick to do what is easy rather than investing hundreds of hours into self-education, and too prone to measuring our own success against (a) what worked last time, and (b) what other people are doing.

I could say the same thing about owning individual stocks vs. indexing.  My AAPL shares are within $4 of their 52-week high, not anywhere near a low.  As good as cash, while other stocks are down at the moment.  (tempting to rebalance...)  If I needed more cash right now, I have no doubt what I would do.  I sleep well at night, too.

But that doesn't mean I recommend this approach to many others.  Indexing is simple, so to me it's like elementary school.  People who are satisfied with indexing, or struggle to stay interested, I don't even go into something more complicated.  They would only get into trouble because they don't have the time, passion, or discipline necessary to get more involved in investing.

Options adds on another layer to this; they are more time-sensitive than long-term fundamental investing.  There are more angles to watch.  Many more people have lost money "dabbling" in options than have made it.  Those who "get" it, stick with it, and keep learning can do well.

talltexan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5344
What about the 10yr/3 mo curve? Did anyone think to check that one?

vand

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2345
  • Location: UK
What about the 10yr/3 mo curve? Did anyone think to check that one?

The Fed basically controls the short end of the treasury curve, in this age of ZIRP and NRIRP it doesn't tell you anything other than the level of delusion going on at the Fed
« Last Edit: April 06, 2022, 10:30:00 AM by vand »

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6665
What about the 10yr/3 mo curve? Did anyone think to check that one?
CNBC / Bloomberg mostly seem to use 2y/10r, which I assume is the preference for stock market investors.  But I've also seen articles claim that 3mo/10yr is a more reliable signal.
https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-2-year10-year-yield-curve-inverts-first-time-since-sept-2019-2022-03-29/

Financial.Velociraptor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Houston TX
  • Devour your prey raptors!
    • Living Universe Foundation
2/10 YC is no longer inverted.