Posts Tagged ‘Oil and Gas’

Rob Fraim’s Call on Energy

Wednesday, September 17th, 2008

September 17, 2008 - The fall in the price of oil during the past two months may not have surprised everyone, but its dramatic nature and swiftness was unexpected. One analyst who got it right was Rob Fraim of Mid-Atlantic Securities. With crude down by almost 40%, a new report on energy has just been published by Rob.

This report is worth perusing for two reasons: (1) Rob has a good long-term track record in this sphere, and (2) a common-sense approach and findings with which I mostly concur. Here are some excerpts from his current report.

Today I will tackle one of the (many) issues with which market participants are grappling. And I will have a sector recommendation that has “hero or a goat” implications for the writer of this missive.

I am cogitating on the disruptions and disasters in the financial sector – and the implications for the broad market. At some point you will hear from me on that subject as this mess unfolds and I feel that I have actionable thoughts to share.

Today though – we talk energy.

I’ll probably get tons of e-mail taking exception to my conclusions and citing multitudinous arcane bits of Economist World data. And I will gladly receive these and will appreciate the input. But that doesn’t have to mean that I will necessarily agree or find reason to change my conclusions.

I am approaching this … and I don’t want to use the word “gut feeling” – given that I believe that I have sound reasons for my opinion on this – but there is a certain amount of “feeling” involved in the process and conclusions. What I see in market action, what I hear from clients, what I sense in the mood of market participants, what I observe in the market’s reaction to events. And with all due respect to economists, the market is often more art than science. So I don my proverbial beret, pick up my figurative brushes and paint, and present my art project. Some fact, some feel, lots of opinion.

What a bleak mood in the energy patch. What a sickening slide. What the h*** happened? What an … opportunity?

Back on June 10, in a piece I wrote entitled “Oil – Whither Goest Thou? ”I gave the opinion that crude oil – then at $136 a barrel was overextended and due for a correction. I said that the $100 or so area looked about right. Of course oil promptly rallied to $147 or whatever it was and I was a stoopie-head for a little while. But since then, well … hey, hey what a genius, huh?

You don’t believe that I actually got something right? OK, you force me to quote/copy/paste. Here is an excerpt from the June 10 flash in which I recommended lightening up on energy stocks:

“Do I think that oil is going to $50? Not a chance? Not $50, not $60, not $80. But I do think that there is a better than average chance that we are going to revisit $100-ish and stabilize there for a while.

“This being the case I am suggesting that reaping some profits and reducing energy positions a bit might be a wise move – at least on a trading basis. Keep a core holding for the long-term, but lighten up. Sell some stuff. Write some covered calls. Hedge a bit. Maintain the core but trade with part of your energy investments. Do something other than get whipsawed.

“… It would not surprise me to see $100-105 oil by the end of the year. That probably equates to gasoline in the $3.50-ish area.”

Of course after that I went on to elaborate brilliantly (oh all right it wasn’t that brilliant, but I did elaborate) on the reasons why I was – at that time, in June – becoming cautious on energy. Recapping (sans the details) the reasons for the selling recommendation were:

a) Demand destruction resulting from changing consumer and transportation industry driving habits and vehicle choices

b) The potential for a rise in the US dollar

c) Slowing demand for China with the Olympics build-out winding down

d) Modest production growth – specifically from Russia

e) Comments from the Saudis saying that there was no justification for the rise in oil prices that had occurred.

Hmm … not too shabby on those points if I do say so myself.

And then I stated the following:

“When the crowd is virtually all leaning in one direction on a sector, you have to take advantage of it at some point. You just have to. Right now everybody says that financials are garbage and energy is gold, and we of course know all of the reasons for both. But just you wait and see… 12 months, 18 months out – when quality banks have risen 30% in price – the analysts will fall in love with them again. And if energy stocks go down 20% the cries to sell will erupt. We have to take the opposite side of the masses sometimes. We. Just. Have. To.”

So as it turns out I was reasonably on target with those comments and the call to reduce energy holdings for a while. (You know what they say about even a blind squirrel finding an acorn every now and then.) Now the burning question on the minds of my readers is this: “What now, Rob?” Well, again, I don’t know how many minds are burning and hearts yearning to hear the answer, but I’ll take a crack anyway.

I don’t expect a huge rally in oil in the near term, but I do believe the correction has just about run its course. Recently when crude approached $100 on the way down, OPEC began the “defending” process by announcing some production cutbacks – hoping to maintain $100 as floor of sorts. But now with the disruptions across all segments of the market, oil prices have moved right through that level – particularly yesterday as panic hit all markets, trading below $92 as I write this. I would not be surprised to see OPEC coming back with more production curtailments.

I am somewhat more bullish on natural gas prices than many analysts I have read, more based on seasonality, but also because of increased focus on natural gas use. (We’ve all seen the Boone Pickens/Aubrey McClendon ads. And we are approaching an election – what politician is going to badmouth natural gas? Heck, Nancy Pelosi said that  it isn’t even a fossil fuel. As to the seasonality play, I have had some success through the years in buying natural gas stocks in the fall prior to our entering the heating season for a trade out as spring approaches.

So, I’m kind of reasonably positive on oil itself – the commodity – for the short term. I’m growing more bullish on natural gas – against the opinion of some smart people who feel otherwise.

The key point though is that I am getting significantly more interested in the stocks of the energy companies. Why? Because it doesn’t take $140 oil for the energy companies to make a lot of money. They do very nicely at $100 and the resultant decline in gasoline prices (once we get past this hurricane pricing anomaly) will calm down some of the finger-pointing and windfall profit-espousing by the politicians.

And the prices of the energy company stocks – oil and gas producers, drillers, coal companies, energy trusts, MLPs, alternative energy … the whole bunch of them – have just absolutely plummeted over the last couple of months and it (again I hate to use the word but here I go) feels like a bit of a selling crescendo taking place.

I have made the comment to a number of people the last few days that it seems that we have margin clerks running billion dollar portfolios. We know there was a liquidation of a large energy-focused hedge fund recently. The sector action of late feels/smells/acts like there is more forced selling taking place. And as one astute observer pointed out to me, in addition to the margin clerks, you have to factor in the risk management people at the funds. Forced selling of another sort. On top of that there seem to have been some significant fund redemption requests at hedge funds – particularly by fund-of-fund groups, which are notoriously fickle and prone to pull out.

So now that everything energy-related has been hammered we hear all of the after-the-fact cautionary/bearish thoughts: China doesn’t want any energy anymore … all commodities are going to fall another 50% they say … the economy is going to totally destroy energy demand … we’re all going to bike to work and cook on campfires … we’re going to be awash in cheap oil … blah, blah, yadda, yadda.

We’ve heard it all lately. I’m just not totally buying it. I’m not convinced that the big picture has shifted totally.

I believe that the stocks of energy companies have more than discounted the decline we have seen and then some. 50% declines in stock prices have not been out of the ordinary. I don’t think you have to be a raging, snorting bull on the commodities themselves to believe that the producers of energy products and services will be very nicely profitable – even at today’s lower-than-before prices for oil and gas.

And my very astute friend Jeffrey Saut at Raymond James (who has been spot on about energy and who has become more bullish of late) pointed out something very interesting yesterday. Evidently China – the previous “buyer at the margin,” the force that kept sopping up all supply for so long, which contributed to the big rise in energy before – has been pretty much out of the energy markets for a couple of months. The reason: pollution concerns during the Olympics and the Paralympics (the games for those with disabilities.) Many factories and industries were shut down and idled during that period so as to improve air quality during a time of so many visitors and so much world attention being focused on China. (We know China is image-conscious. Just ask the little girl who was not considered pretty enough to sign the anthem live and was replaced by a more attractive lip-syncher.)

The Paralympics end on September 17, and this means that China may very soon reopen manufacturing and transport – particularly so since there is a massive earthquake rebuilding to be done. And they could well be back in the energy market as buyers almost immediately – like on the 18th. The implications for the energy commodities are positive and a psychology shift in those markets could quickly spill over to the beaten up stocks of the energy companies.

Big picture, let’s not forget a few key energy points:

1. Production in many places is peaking or has peaked. Mexico appears to have peaked and Russia – a recent source of supply and the currently the 2nd largest oil producer – is doing things in a way that is short-term profitable for them, but long-term counterproductive. They are investing very, very little in new exploration (the capital intensive part of the business) – opting instead to try to squeeze out production from existing fields. That’s cheaper production for them in the short run, output has peaked and they are depleting those fields. Ultimately, they stand to be left with played out reserves and few new prospects – since they are skimping horribly on cap-ex and exploration now. It’s like the landlord who spends all the rent and doesn’t maintain the building. Eventually it catches up to him as the structure falls apart. Or the pharmaceutical company that does no R&D even though patents are expiring. Russia is milking the cow but not feeding it.

2. The low-lying fruit in the oil business has been picked. The potential “super giants” being explored and developed now – Brazil’s Carioca/Sugarloaf and the Bakken formation in the US for example, while exciting are also challenging and very expensive to produce on a per barrel basis. Same with the huge Canadian tar sands projects. Tar sand fields have been known of for years, but until oil reached high prices it was economically impractical to extract oil there.

There is still plenty of oil out there, but it is not the cheaply available, “poke a stick in the ground and watch it flow” type of oil. Prices will have to remain high to justify development.

3. While the world got a bit “China and India crazy” there for a while as regards energy consumption, the basic premise remains valid. As these huge populations become more urban and industrialized in nature – with cars, the need for electricity, etc. – there will be growing demand for the foreseeable future. Oh there will be the month-to-month ups and downs of course and everybody will obsess about that. But big picture – demand grows.

4. Alternative energy sources – and look, I’m a big believer that we have to develop new ways to provide power – are a long way from meeting our energy needs. And while they may do so one day, for now those needs must be met from both traditional (fossil) and progressive (alternative) sources. I believe that we need to break the oil addiction via new sources. But that is a process over a generation of time, not an immediate reality. For now, to quote Mr. Pickens, we have to drill, drill, drill.

5. We need more electrical power. Badly. Some experts say as many as 30 new power plants are needed ASAP. We might be oil addicted, but we are electricity junkies of the first magnitude. Computers, multiple TV sets, cell phones, iPods, recessed lighting all over the house, floodlights in the yard, plug-in cars on the way, so many appliances and gadgets in every home that it would have seemed like The Jetsons to a 1960s observer. And what runs power plants? While it might be alternative sources as time goes on, right now and for a good while to come, it’s fuel of the old-style. Natural gas and coal mostly.

6. And speaking of natural gas, I like Pickens’ idea of automobile conversion. We have lots of natural gas produced domestically and it is comparatively clean and certainly readily available. And what does that mean for the future price of natural gas? The same natural gas that runs the power plants being used to run our cars? Not too hard to figure out.

7. If this financial system mess puts pressure on the US dollar that has the obvious effect of causing oil prices to rise, all other things being equal, as it will take more dollars to exchange for one barrel.

By the way, I recently talked to a coal industry contact – a coal broker – who said that although the stock market doesn’t indicate it, the coal business is not bad at all. Pricing is off of the peaks, but still pretty strong and holding. He said that a lot of buyers – utilities in particular – have been playing a waiting game, looking for lower prices. But with winter approaching they don’t have much time left to get their supplies locked in. Some of the buyers have tried to play hardball with him – saying that they would just buy cheaper from someone else. But there isn’t much of “someone else” out their. Demand season is coming up and there’s not a lot of excess.

Additionally, people forget that most coal is sold under long-term contracts, not in the spot market. So the stock market got spooked about falling oil and gas prices and extrapolated that to coal – when in fact these short-term energy market gyrations have less impact on earnings than they do in other energy areas. Heck, lower fuel prices actually kind of help the coal companies in one regard since they are big fuel users for their equipment.

Coal got nutty a few months back and stock prices were way overdone to the upside as hot money chased the relatively small market cap of the whole sector. But after 50% to 60% declines across the board for the coal stocks over the last little bit? Getting very interesting I think.

Oil, coal, natural gas, alternative energy sources, E&P companies, drillers and service companies, energy trusts, MLPs…all have their own particular appeal in a portfolio. I cannot discuss specific companies here, but if you would like to know which stocks I like in which areas, drop me a note or give me a call.

I thought about finishing up this little blurb and sending it out earlier today, but it has been busy – for obvious reasons with the whole Lehman/Bank of America/Merrill Lynch/AIG/Washington Mutual/etc. etc. mess today. And as it turns out it was just as well, since the energy sector (using oil as a proxy) and the market in general have clearly been weak. Some will attribute the $4 drop in crude today to economic weakness and upcoming lower demand. I tend to believe that it is more a function of forced selling, an aversion to risk in the markets, and the old “sell what you can not what you want to” phenomenon. I don’t know exactly where oil bottoms, nor would I be likely to be correct in pronouncing an exact moment for the general market decline.

But I am intrigued enough by energy sector valuations and energy sector prospects to recommend “re-loading” positions starting right now.

As always, I hope that I’m right in the first minutes and days after such a call. But I probably won’t be. However for the weeks and months ahead … I have a good level of confidence in the ultimate success of the idea.

Source: Rob Fraim, Mid-Atlantic Securities, September 16, 2008.

Courtesy: Investment Postcards

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Markets | No Comments »


Commodity Snapshot

Saturday, August 30th, 2008

Below we provide Bespoke’s trading range charts of ten major commodities.  The green shading represents two standard deviations above and below the commodity’s 50-day moving average, and moves above and below indicate extreme overbought and oversold levels.  It’s no news that commodities have suffered major pullbacks over the last two months, and the charts below provide a good view on how bad it has been.

After trading at the top of its range for what seemed like forever, oil finally traded to the bottom of its range late last week, and after touching extreme oversold territory, it finally bounced for a couple of days, only to see big declines again on Friday.  Like most other commodities, natural gas unfortunately hasn’t gotten a bounce.  Since touching 13.58 in early July, nat gas is down 42%.

While gold declines from $1000 to under $800 make the headlines for precious metals, platinum and silver have actually gotten hit harder.  From their peaks, silver has fallen 38% and platinum has fallen 40%.

Corn, wheat, orange juice and coffee have actually staged some pretty good rallies off of oversold levels over the last couple of weeks.  Wheat almost touched overbought territory last week, but all four are still well off their highs earlier this year.

Oilnatg

Goldsilver_2

Platcopp

Cornwheat

Ojcof

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agriculture, Commodities, Crude Oil, Gold, Oil and Gas, energy | No Comments »


Pickens: Water is the New Oil

Tuesday, June 24th, 2008

T. Boone Pickens, the legendary corporate raider and oilman believes that water is the new oil. A recent BusinessWeek article discusses his investment and and his convictions on the water supply opportunity and his company, Mesa Water’s plans. This is an interesting story, microcosmic of the critical issue and opportunity in water that is bubbling up globally.

Here are a couple of excerpts:

Into this environment comes Pickens, who made a good living for a long time extracting oil and gas and now, at 80, believes the era of fossil fuel is over. So far he has spent $100 million and eight years on his project and still has not found any city in Texas willing to buy his water. But like many others, Pickens believes there’s a fortune to be made in slaking the thirst of a rapidly growing population. If he pumps as much as he can, he could sell about $165 million worth of water to Dallas each year. “The idea that water can be sold for private gain is still considered unconscionable by many,” says James M. Olson, one of America’s preeminent attorneys specializing in water- and land-use law. “But the scarcity of water and the extraordinary profits that can be made may overwhelm ordinary public sensibilities.”

“Water is a commodity,” he says. “Heck, isn’t it like oil? You have to come back to who owns the water. The groundwater is owned by the landowner. That’s it.” When it comes to potential buyers, Pickens cares about only one thing: how much they’re willing to pay. “Do I care what Dallas does with the water? Hell no.”

Read the full article: 

There Will Be Water, Susan Berfield, BusinessWeek, June 12, 2008

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Markets, Water | No Comments »


Derek Webb Interview, Part 1 - Outlook and Investment Strategy

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

Derek WebbMay 12, 2008 - GreenLightAdvisor.com recently interviewed [Part 1] Derek Webb, Portfolio Manager, Webb Asset Management. Here are some excerpts from Part 1, in which Mr. Webb shares his outlook and his thoughts about how he trades in volatile and range bound markets. Here are some excerpts:

Regarding the Fed’s recent moves…

Anytime the Fed puts this much liquidity in to the system it’s like blowing into a pipe; all that pressure has to go somewhere—When the Fed drops hay bails of money out of the helicopter, those hay bails of money are like molecules. They have to attach themselves to something.

When you look at the huge amount of money put into the system because of the Long Term Capital Meltdown and Russia—now that liquidity event created the internet bubble. This is no different.

All of this liquidity is going to find a home. I’ll tell you that I think it’s finding its home right now. Fundamentally I am very bullish because of all this liquidity.

On his investment focus…

Through our quantitative homework we found that the delta or change in earnings is the only thing that’s predictable in terms of determining the direction of a stock’s price. That’s all we focus on; that’s all our research focuses on. So, where is that delta accelerating right now—it’s in commodities. Agriculture is number one, Oil and gas are number two, some base metals number three, like copper—The shine has kind of come out of precious metals in the short run, but I don’t think that trade’s over, I think it’s more of a seasonal thing right now.

On when to sell:

[Firstly], If we saw one analyst lower EPS forecasts for Potash, for example, WE WOULD BE OUT. Analysts are out there doing site visits. They’re doing their homework – as long as they’re raising their numbers we’re going to be long. As soon as we would see them hold steady or lower their numbers we would be out.

Secondly, if the earnings themselves just start to de-accelerate, meaning we are looking at a smooth line of earnings, not to get complicated, but we look from 3 quarters ago out to the next quarter and if that rate of change de-accelerates were out.

Thirdly, one negative earnings surprise and we’re out.

And lastly, if the relative strength indicator of the stock de-accelerates were out.

We’re ruthless on all our positions.

And lastly, if the relative strength indicator of the stock de-accelerates were out.

PART 1: Derek Webb Interview, GreenLightAdvisor.com.

Visit Webb Asset Management for more information.

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agriculture, Banks, Canadian Stocks, Commodities, Credit Markets, Crude Oil, Economy, Financials, Gold, Markets, Oil and Gas, inflation | No Comments »


Don Coxe’s Recommendations (Basic Points, 04/29/2008)

Monday, May 5th, 2008

May 5, 2008 – Here we feature the recommendations of Don Coxe, BMO Capital’s Chief Investment Strategist. As usual, his paragraphs are eloquent and provide significant guidance.

Don Coxe’s Investment Recommendations,  excerpted from Basic Points, The Hinge of History II, April 29, 2008

1. In long-only equity portfolios, continue to underweight Wall Street banks and others that have been reporting high exposure to perfumed products of indeterminable value, including those which last year revealed—under duress— high exposure to SIVs. Within the financials, emphasize those whose loan losses are of the traditional, cyclical variety—not in derivatives or in untraditional banking businesses. Good banks that have stuck to their knitting—and whose CEOs compensation has suffered along with their stock prices—should be retained.

2. In long/short portfolios, be long commodity stocks and short bank stocks that make headlines for untraditional losses. That trade hasn’t been working lately, but it remains an overall portfolio risk-reducer. The list of banks that have shown great skill and profitability by going heavily into new kinds of products and new kinds of accounting is roughly as long as the list of major copper, oil and gas producers that profited by selling heavily forward.

3. A financial-led bear market within a financial-led recession can be particularly perilous if central banks run out of ways to reflate the system—and surprisingly benign if the central banks’ rescues remain timely. To date, the central banks have been up to the job—if propping up a badly-behaving financial sector is a key component of their job descriptions. Result: the overall stock market has outperformed our expectations. We still don’t like the risk/reward ratio.

4. Dividends become more attractive as central banks cut rates. The problem for investors is that many of “The Great Dividend-Paying Stocks” are financials that have been reporting ghastly blunders. In many cases, their payout ratios have climbed far above the 50% threshold that has made these stocks better investments than bonds. Opportunities remain—and dividends may be the only positive return most US stocks will deliver this year.

5. Although North American consumers have yet to see the cost pass-through in major foodstuffs of $6 corn and $8 wheat, it will come sooner or later. Based on past periods of food inflation, one of the first consumer cutbacks is on eating out. Restaurant stocks are especially unappetizing when food costs soar out of control.

6. Gold has pulled back from its high because the dollar stopped falling and the bank bailouts seem to be working. Remain overweight gold as a clear-cut hedge against further bad news on both those fronts.

7. The Canadian dollar decoupled from the euro, failing to rally to new peaks—which makes little sense to us. US clients should continue to use Canadian government bonds and Canadian short-term investments as alternatives to Treasuries and US cash.

8. Within the commodity group, continue to accumulate the leading agricultural stocks. Given the spectacular performance of the fertilizer stocks, the best bargains currently on offer are in the farm machinery companies. The global food crisis will almost surely cripple the opposition to GM seeds, which means the seed stocks have great upside room.

9. Within debt portfolios, continue to emphasize inflation hedge bonds—preferably in strong currencies. Treasuries remain overvalued, despite the recent strong run-up in yields from barely-observable levels.

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agriculture, Banks, Commodities, Credit Markets, Crude Oil, Economy, Financials, Fixed Income, India, Markets, contango, energy, gold stocks, inflation | 1 Comment »


Oil Stocks vs. Oil

Thursday, May 1st, 2008

May 1, 2008 - Courtesy of Bespoke Investment Group - Below we highlight the historical ratio of the S&P 500 Oil and Gas group versus the price of oil over the last ten years.  When the red line is rising, oil stocks are outperforming the commodity and vice versa when the line is declining.  For the last year, the red line has been trending downward, meaning the commodity has been outperforming oil stocks.  The ratio got down to 5 in mid-March, which was the lowest level seen since March 2003.  At these levels, the ratio typically bounces and heads higher for awhile, meaning oil stocks would begin to outperform the price of oil.  This could mean oil prices rise less than oil stocks or fall at a faster pace.

Oilstocksoilratio

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Markets, Oil and Gas | No Comments »


How Solid are the BRICs? (Part 2)

Sunday, February 3rd, 2008

Feb. 3, 2008 - The nature of the economic strength and stability of the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) countries is a less well known or understood fact among investors. There remains a wide gap between perceptions and reality.

Remember 1997 and 1998? Many investors, excited about the growth of Asian and emerging countries in the late nineties and invested their money found out about credit related risk first when the 1997 ‘Asian Contagion’ occurred and was followed upon by the Long Term Capital Management bailout which unfolded in 1998. These events destabilized global markets and investors were taken by surprise as markets melted down.

For this reason, its important to go back to that time and re-examine Malaysia and Thailand, as examples, of where investors were excited by the rapid economic growth, but ignored the then inherent high credit risk, much to their expense. A decade ago (yes, a decade ago) when all of this was happening, only 3% of the grand total of emerging markets sovereign debt was rated as investment grade by any of the ratings agencies.

In 1997, only 10 out of 120 companies that form the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, had ADRs. 

Excited by the G7 debt-financed growth, investors made bets that were inherently risky to their preservation of capital, not simply volatile. Circa 1997, emerging markets were in debt to the industrialized world by about $100-billion in the current account deficit column, and dependent on the kindness of their G7 financiers.

When the Malay and Thai governments were unable to meet current account obligations, and started printing money in order to meet them, the Fed blew the whistle upon discovering that sufficient reserves were not available to support the currency valuations. Hence the overnight slashing of Asian currencies.

At best, the general sentiment surrounding emerging markets has remained sceptical, and for this reason, as fundamentally sound as the BRIC countries economies are today, the market has been adopting the BRIC investment story very gradually. This time though, it is credit worthiness that is being overlooked.

 

Source: Merrill Lynch October 2006

 

Source: Merrill Lynch, October 2006

Today, emerging markets sit atop a current account surplus in excess of $700-billion, and it is the industrialized G7 who are in debt, by the same amount. Longer term surpluses in excess of $3-trillion are to be found on the balance sheets of mostly the BRIC countries today in the form of Foreign Exchange surpluses, and trade surpluses. China alone now nurses a trade and forex surplus nearing US$1.5-tillion. Russia, has managed to build up reserves of US$450-billion as well as Putin’s US$150-billion ‘contigency’ fund, set aside so that it may sidestep any kind of financial shock. India has amassed a forex surplus of around US$275-billion. Brazil’s forex reserves now stand at US$178-billion.

BRIC countries have been financing the debt, and driving the growth of G7 countries for the last 5-7 years. China has emerged as the worlds manufacturing hub, while India has come on very strong as its counterpart hub in services, both providing Western firms access to inexpensive educated and -or- highly-skilled labour. Russia, under Putin, has successfully emerged as a highly profitable energy and raw materials producer, second in oil and gas reserves to Saudi Arabia. Brazil has changed the regional balance in the Americas by turning itself into the winds of east-west trade in hard and soft commodities and using its strength to bolster its new economic clout in relation to North America. 

China’s growth is less dependent on the health of the US economy, as is commonly perceived. A recent Economist article points out that China’s true exports-to-GDP ratio is actually below 10%, that China has been quite successful to date at rebalancing its economy in favour of domestic growth as a driver. As for India, 87% of its GDP is consumed domestically, making it quite independent from the risk of the US threatened consumer hegemony. Russians are enjoying three times the disposable income of 7 years ago and driving consumption growth, as are Brazilians.

North American and European companies are looking to these consumers to drive demand and growth to their top and bottom lines.

In a word, things have changed.

They have changed in a very meaningful, very important way. The relationship that now exists between emerging markets and G7 countries is ‘symbiotic.’ and interdependent.

Source: Merrill Lynch, October 2006 

Today, around 60-70% of emerging markets sovereign debt is investment grade rated and all 120 companies that form the key MSCI Emerging Markets Index have ADR listings.

In 1997-1998, the world’s biggest western banks took advantage of bailout conditions to take ownership of Asian banks, once protected by thousand-year-old protectionist laws. Today, powerful and wealthy Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) are bailing out the same banks, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, and Morgan Stanley.

On Wall Street in the past few weeks, the sums have been bigger and the actions more benign—at least so far. This week Merrill Lynch and Citigroup became the latest to get the sovereign-wealth treatment, picking up a further $6.6 billion and $14.5 billion respectively, much of it from governments in Asia and the Middle East (see article). Sapped by the subprime crisis, rich-world financial-services groups have been administered nearly $69 billion-worth of infusions from the savings of the developing world in the past ten months, according to Morgan Stanley.

 

SWFs

  

Commodities are not the only source of sovereign wealth. Many Asian emerging markets have been running current-account surpluses at the same time as they have been managing their exchange rates. As they have mopped up dollars, using government bonds, they have accumulated reserves. At first these went into safe, liquid assets like American Treasury bonds—the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98 was still a recent memory and many countries were keen to amass reserves. But economies like China, South Korea and Taiwan now have more reserves than they need to defend themselves against shocks. Their governments understandably want to earn a higher return than Treasury bonds will pay, so they create a fund to manage their assets. Source: The Economist, Jan. 17, 2008, Asset-Backed Insecurity

It has become such that neither Emerging Markets nor the G7 can allow each other to be destabilized, as evidenced by the large, noted, SWF investments, as they have each other’s economic ‘lives’ in the balance.

You might get the idea that emerging markets are correlated more to the US than they actually are, when you see that they have suffered like western stock markets, from a selloff. Their correlation is low, between .30 and .40, not zero or negative. There are those who would have us believe that the decoupling thesis is suffering from the same disease as the bull market. Those are probably the same folks, who last year began to re-write their theses from decoupling to recoupling to suit themselves this year, as the need to raise cash by selling the last two year’s profitable trades became an increasingly inevitable requirement, in order to shore up balance sheets.

Our expectation is that the credit squeeze ailing the market will come to a reversal point, at some point over the next 2-4 weeks as the banks round the corner on the cash call that has forced the wholesale liquidation of emerging markets and commodities related investing.

Emerging Markets are strong, and some of their [inflationary] growth pressures may get somewhat solved by a slowdown in the US, in the form of an imported soft landing. This is by no means advice, but if you subscribe to this thesis, then there is reason (for those of us on the buy-side) to believe that there will be a recovery in the decoupling thesis, and thus emerging markets equities throughout the second half of the year, from the current lows.

First, however, until the cash call is complete, and the future of the monoline insurers (MBIA, ABK) is resolved in the form of perhaps a bailout, we may continue to see more downside.

Now may prove to be a good time to nibble at emerging markets and commodities again and add or gain exposure as they are far more attractively priced. Here are a variety of ETFs and open ended funds (Canadian fund companies with offerings) that provide broad (diversified) and narrow exposure (country and regional funds) to BRIC and emerging markets.

On the AMEX

“Total” Emerging Markets ETFs
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index Fund (EEM)
PowerShares FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Portfolio (PXH)
SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ETF (GMM)
Vanguard Emerging Markets ETF (VWO)
   
Dividend Emerging Markets ETFs
WisdomTree Emerging Markets High-Yielding Fund (DEM)

Multi-Region (but not Total) Emerging Markets ETFs
BLDRS Emerging MKTS 50 ADR Index Fund (ADRE)
Claymore/BNY BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) ETF (EEB)
streetTRACKS SPDR S&P BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) 40 ETF (BIK)
iShares MSCI BRIC Index Fund (BKF)

Latin America Regional ETFs
iShares S&P Latin America 40 Index Fund (ILF)
SPDR S&P Emerging Latin America ETF (GML)

European Emerging Markets Regional ETFs
SPDR S&P Emerging Europe ETF (GUR)
Middle East and Africa Regional ETFs
SPDR S&P Emerging Middle East & Africa ETF (GAF)

India - Barclays iPath India ETN (INP)

On the Toronto Stock Exchange
Claymore BRIC ETF  (CBQ.T)
Open Ended Funds (Canadian)

Broad Mandate Emerging Markets

Tmpleton Emerging Markets
AGF Emerging Markets
Pro FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index
TD Emerging Markets 
United-Emerging Markets Pool Cl A
CI Emerging Markets
United-Emerging Markets Pool Cl W
BMO Emerging Markets
Brandes Emerging Markets Equity
CIBC Emerging Markets Index
National Bank Emerging Markets

Region/Country Mandates
Excel India Fund
Excel China Fund
Excel Chindia Fund
Excel Emerging Europe Fund
Templeton BRIC Fund

 

People who read this post also read these:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Markets | No Comments »


Remain Heavily Underweight Banks

Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008

Welcome to the GreenLightAdvisor Blog! We will do our very best to share our thoughts, insights and observations on markets, economics and investing. We spend a great deal of time looking around for the really important stories in any given week and the point of this blog is to attempt to put it all together the way that we see it. We don’t claim to be omniscient, but whatever we do find out we will try to share with you. You too are free to share your thoughts and opinions with us. We would love to hear from you.

We kick off this blog with some of our thoughts on the stories that we have selected.

One of the finer pieces that we have read recently was Don Coxe’s Basic Points, consistently one of the best monthly letters in the investment universe. In his most recent letter, Mr. Coxe shares his thoughts on 2007, the right and the wrong, and his recommendations for 2008. Here are his recommendations:

1. Remain heavily underweight banks, particularly investment banks that have displayed monumental stupidity. Do not assume that a change at the top will automatically convert them nto temples of wisdom, (unless it is accompanied by demands for the departing to repay bonuses based on bets that turned out disastrously). Better to assume that, like subprime-based CDOs, there are layers of rot that can make the entire product dangerous  to your financial health.  

2. Remain overweight Emerging Markets, emphasizing those that are oil, gas, and/or food exporters.  

3. Soaring food costs threaten stability for some Third World economies. We have been ardently endorsing India since we returned from our leave of absence a year ago. We are now more cautious, because a weak monsoon could be politically and economically destabilizing at a time of $4 corn  and $10 wheat.  

4. Remain heavily overweight gold—both stocks and the ETF. Gold is almost as good a protection against banking problems as SKF—the UltraShort Financials ETF—a security which may not be a suitable investment in some portfolios.  

5. We continue to believe that the Agricultural stocks are the pre-eminent investment class of our time. Farm incomes are rising rapidly, and, in the US, farms and farm land are the real estate assets that are rising in value and are virtually immune to foreclosures. That means the leading Ag companies have great pricing power and minimal credit problems. We now hear suggestions that because food inflation has finally made it to the cover of The Economist, it is time to start moving toward the exits. Not so: We think that fine cover story could be the atonement—At Last!—for the magazine’s famous 1999 cover: $5 Oil. 

6. Remain overweight oil and gas producers, including the Alberta oil sands producing companies. As disappointed as we are with the new royalty schemes in that province, Alberta certainly remains more attractive than Nigeria or Angola—and much more attractive than Russia, Kazakhstan,  or Venezuela.  

7. We think it is time to begin accumulating the refiners that are equipped to handle heavy high-sulfur crude. The collapse of the crack spread has savaged refiners’ earnings, but that will eventually rebound. The Saudis have virtually turned out the Light, and less and less of the oil that the Gulf states will be lifting will be of the most desirable grades.  

8. Retain the base metals stocks that have long-life unhedged reserves in secure areas. Even if there is a global recession caused by global collapses of subprime paper and LBO loans, it will not be deep enough to drive base metal prices back to 2004 levels—but would be worrisome enough  to push further mine development even farther into the future.  

9. When borrowing, borrow where possible in dollars. When investing, invest  where possible in other currencies.  

10. Stagflation is a bad backdrop for bonds—and for non-commodity stocks. The central bankers could have headed it off had Wall Street behaved with a modicum of morality, but the Fed and its brethren are forced into sustained reflation because of the global solvency crisis. Corporate earnings for most sectors will not meet current optimistic Street forecasts, and rising  inflation will reduce the market’s P/E.        

In our opinion recommendation #1 is advice that should be taken very seriously, as financials may be the current market’s proverbial falling knife, and for the time being, it could be that just as investors may think they are getting a bargain in the sector, that they may find themselves with more risk right now than they bargained for. It is going to be some time before the banking and credit market situation unwinds. I would stay away from financials until things in the credit market clear up some more or the bad news no longer has any downside effect. Junk bond and counterparty risks remain an issue. In our opinion, this is an excellent starting point to explore some new areas and ideas for investment in 2008 and onward. We have the highest respect for Don Coxe, his track record, his eloquence and candour, and the manner he has blazed the trail for many investors to look outside of their comfort zone, at areas such as India, gold and metals and agricultural commodities.