Is Financial Knowledge Key to Successful Investing?

The public doesn’t know how to manage their finances, that’s according to a study commissioned by the US SEC.

From the Wall Street Journal Blog,

Good news for those intent on committing fraud. Bad news for most everyone else. American investors apparently don’t know much about anything financial.

According to a review released Thursday of years of surveys of individual investors, they are presumably ripe for the picking by fraudsters because they don’t have much knowledge to counteract any outlandish offerings.

Here’s the key and rather astonishing quote: “These studies have consistently found that American investors do not understand the most basic financial concepts, such as the time value of money, compound interest and inflation. Investors also lack essential knowledge about more sophisticated concepts, such as the meaning of stocks and bonds; the role of interest rates in the pricing of securities; the function of the stock market; and the value of portfolio diversification…”

That is from the Library of Congress, which conducted the review on behalf of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC, for its part, needed to study Americans’ financial literacy and assess what investors wanted to know about investments and advisers and how they wanted to receive the information. The SEC had a mandate for all that from the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act.

This generalized lack of knowledge (there certainly are plenty of exceptions) is particularly worrisome since more and more people are responsible for their own investment decisions as part of defined-contribution retirement plans, usually 401(k)s.

The Library of Congress said: “If employees do not have the requisite knowledge, they will not be prepared to make informed decisions regarding the management of their financial affairs, including investing for a secure retirement.”

The public (not limited to Americans) may not be technically sophisticated in the realm of finances but to claim that they are “not be prepared to make informed decisions regarding the management of their financial affairs” looks outrageously untrue.

This misleading assertion presupposes that government should play a role to compel people to get educated "financially".

In reality, America’s standard of living has been higher than most of the world because of capital accumulation.

As the great Ludwig von Mises wrote,

The average standard of living is in this country higher than in any other country of the world, not because the American statesmen and politicians are superior to the foreign statesmen and politicians, but because the per-head quota of capital invested is in America higher than in other countries. Average output per man-hour is in this country higher than in other countries, whether England or India, because the American plants are equipped with more efficient tools and machines. Capital is more plentiful in America than it is in other countries because up to now the institutions and laws of the United States put fewer obstacles in the way of big-scale capital accumulation than did those foreign countries.

Americans not only knew but appropriately acted to manage their state of affairs through the productive balancing of savings and investments which resulted to such high levels of capital accumulation

Moreover, having financial knowledge does not necessarily translate to having the expertise for “investing for a secure retirement”

In reality, financial knowhow does not make one infallible from loses.

In debunking the idea that financial success comes out of high IQs, I recently wrote,

The landmark bankruptcy by Long Term Capital Management in 1998 had been a company headed by 2 Nobel Prize winners. The company’s failure has substantially been due to flawed trading models.

In 2008, the 5 largest US investment banks vanished. These companies had an army of economists, statisticians and quant modelers, accountants, lawyers and all sort of experts who we assume, because of their stratospheric salaries and perquisites, had high IQs.

When Queen Elizabeth asked why ‘no one foresaw’ the crisis coming, the reply by the London School of Economics (LSE)

"In summary, Your Majesty," they conclude, "the failure to foresee the timing, extent and severity of the crisis and to head it off, while it had many causes, was principally a failure of the collective imagination of many bright people, both in this country and internationally, to understand the risks to the system as a whole."

Imagination had been scarce because the same army of experts heavily relied on mathematical models in dealing with investments. They did not follow the common sense advise by the real experts.

These people had all the supposed “expertise” yet they all burned investor's money.

The failure of pseudo financial mastery explodes the idea that “generalized lack of knowledge” will not enable people “to make informed decisions”.

To add, if one looks at the list of the victims of fraud committed by scam artist Bernie Madoff, they had hardly been about financial ignorance

Again I wrote,

Thus, it is no different when Bernard Madoff bamboozled $50 billion off from the who’s who list which includes top rated financial institutions among them banks, (e.g. BNP Paribas,Banco Santander, Fortis Bank Netherlands, HSBC Holdings, Nomura Holdings, Royal Bank of Scotland and etc.) insurers (CNP Assurances, Clal Insurance, Harel Insurance) and Hedge funds (Tremont Group Holdings, Fairfield Greenwich).

To consider, these institutions account for as supposedly smart money outfits since they are backed by an army of “elite professionals”, e.g. economists, accountants, risk managers, quants etc…). Yet at the end of the day, smart money seemed like everybody else; they got what they deserved because they substituted prudence with fad

In reality, inflationist “bubble” policies, which obscures price signals and whets the speculative or gambling appetite, have been the principal influence to fraud.

As a side note: even the most successful stock market investor Warren Buffett admits of occasional investing mistakes.

In Manias, Panics and Crashes Charles Kindleberger’s insight has been highly relevant, (I quoted from my previous article)

Commercial and financial crisis are intimately bound up with transactions that overstep the confines of law and morality shadowy though these confines be. The propensities to swindle and be swindled run parallel to the propensity to speculate during a boom. Crash and panic, with their motto of sauve qui peut induce still more to cheat in order to save themselves. And the signal for panic is often the revelation of some swindle, theft embezzlement or fraud

Bottom line: having financial knowledge is necessary but not sufficient reason for securing financial success.

Relevant theory backed by quality information from the desire to profit (stakeholder's dilemma) has to be used as framework for such analysis.

Morris Cohen in his 1944 book, A Preface to Logic provides a useful insight (quoted by Professor Don Boudreaux)

There can be no doubt that statistics deals with actuality, and that knowledge of actualities is always empirical, i.e., that we cannot obtain knowledge by purely a priori methods. There is, however, no genuine progress in scientific insight through the Baconian method of accumulating empirical facts without hypotheses or anticipation of nature. Without some guiding idea we do not know what facts to gather. Without something to prove, we cannot determine what is relevant and what is irrelevant.

And this should be complimented by emotional intelligence and self-discipline.

Chart of the Day: Capital Accumulation is Key to Economic Prosperity

Professor Steve Landsburg posted on his blog a graph from a textbook of his colleague exhibiting the tight correlations between the increase in capital and economic prosperity.

Professor Landsburg writes,

But the overall picture is clear: More capital per worker means more output per worker, and more output per worker means more income per worker. This relationship — in fact, the nearly linear relationship that you see on the graph — is just what standard economic theory predicts. It’s nice to see that prediction so powerfully confirmed.

Capital here refers to physical capital — the machinery, factory space and office equipment that allows workers to be more productive. A garment worker with a sewing machine produces more blouses per hour than a garment worker with a needle and thread; therefore the garment worker with a sewing machine earns higher wages. (A good rule of thumb is that workers are paid about 2/3 the value of what they produce.) If you want rich garment workers, you need a lot of high-quality sewing machines. If you want rich farm workers, you need a lot of high-quality tractors…

As a caveat, it isn’t just the capital that is important, instead it is the political economic environment which allows the citizenry to accumulate capital that matters most.

Professor Landsburg explains further, (bold emphasis mine)

Do not, however, jump to the conclusion that if, say, Nigerians had access to Japanese levels of capital, then Nigerian wages would rise to Japanese levels. Part of the reason Nigerians have so little capital is that capital is used less efficiently in Nigeria, so people choose to accumulate less of it. To move up this ladder, you need to do more than just accumulate capital — you’ve got to be the sort of country where capital is worth accumulating. What that entails will be a topic for a future post.

As the great Ludwig von Mises wrote in 1955, (bold emphasis mine)

It is the insufficient supply of capital that prevents the rest of the world from adjusting its industries to the most efficient ways of production. Technological "know how" and the "passion for productivity" are useless if the capital required for the acquisition of new equipment and the inauguration of new methods is lacking.

What made modern capitalism possible and enabled the nations, first of Western Europe and later of central Europe and North America, to eclipse the rest of mankind in productivity was the fact that they created the political, legal, and institutional conditions that made capital accumulation safe. What prevents India, for example, from replacing its host of inefficient cobblers with shoe factories is only the lack of capital. As the Indian government virtually expropriates foreign capitalists and obstructs capital formation by natives, there is no way to remedy this situation. The result is that millions are barefoot in India while the average American buys several pairs of shoes every year.

America's present economic supremacy is due to the plentiful supply of capital. The allegedly "progressive" policies that slow down saving and capital accumulation, or even bring about dissaving and capital decumulation, came later to the United States than to most European countries. While Europe was being impoverished by excessive armaments, colonial adventures, anticapitalistic policies, and finally by wars and revolutions, the United States was committed to a free enterprise policy. At that time Europeans used to stigmatize American economic policies as socially backward. But it was precisely this alleged social backwardness that accounted for an amount of capital accumulation that surpassed by far the amount of capital available in other countries. When later the New Deal began to imitate the anticapitalistic policies of Europe, America had already acquired an advantage that it still retains today.

Wealth does not consist, as Marx said, in a collection of commodities, but in a collection of capital goods. Such a collection is the result of previous saving. The anti-saving doctrines of what is, paradoxically enough, called New Economics, first developed by Messrs. Foster and Catchings and then reshaped by Lord Keynes, are untenable.

If one wants to improve economic conditions, to raise the productivity of labor, wage rates and the peoples' standard of living, one must accumulate more capital goods in order to invest more and more. There is no other way to increase the amount of capital available than to expand saving by doing away with all ideological and institutional factors that hinder saving or even directly make for dissaving and capital decumulation. This is what the "underdeveloped nations" need to learn.

Bottom line, economic prosperity can only be attained through a market economy (economic freedom or laissez faire capitalism). Interventionism or politicization of the allocation of scarce resources can only result to the opposite—capital consumption.

Laissez Faire Capitalism and City Competitiveness

The Economist devised a new measure of competitiveness applied to cities.

They write

The 120 cities in the index are home to some 750m people and $20.2 trillion worth of GDP, 29% of the world's total. High concentrations of skilled residents, infrastructure and institutions mean that the top of the index is dominated by America and western Europe, with 24 cities in the top 30. Comparing the index to the EIU's cost of living data (a measure of western-style living expenses), identifies those cities which also represent good value for money for the ambitious expatriate.

Explaining their findings, they add

Well over half of the world’s population now lives in cities, generating more than 80% of global GDP. Already, global business is beginning to plan strategy from a city, rather than a country, perspective.

Given the rapid growth and development of many cities, particularly in emerging markets such as China and India, competition between them for business, investment and talent will only get fiercer.

Size alone does not determine a city’s growth potential. While some megacities, such as New York and Tokyo, are immensely influential, there are smaller ones, such as Hong Kong and Singapore, which have established themselves as globally competitive centres in recent years. Meanwhile, emerging market cities such as Ahmedabad and Tianjin are witnessing double-digit economic growth and have the potential to grow even faster.

Competitiveness, however, is a holistic concept. While economic size and growth are important and necessary, several other factors determine a city’s overall competitiveness, including its business and regulatory environment, the quality of human capital and indeed the quality of life. These factors not only help a city sustain a high economic growth rate, but also create a stable and harmonious business and social environment.

The scatter plot diagram has a substantially significant message: the state of competitiveness is highly correlated with the standards of living. The more competitive a city is, the higher standards of living and vice versa. Given the above, the US and the west has, at present, the highest level of competitiveness, which similarly extrapolates to the highest ranking of standard of living. Meanwhile, Africa and Latin America has lagged.

And what has been the causal link which drives the correlation between competitiveness and quality of living?

The answer is capital accumulation via laissez faire capitalism

The great Professor Ludwig von Mises already explained this more than half a century ago or that the city competitiveness index merely validates Professor von Mises. (bold emphasis mine)

The truth is that the accumulation of capital and its in­vest­ment in machines, the source of the comparatively greater wealth of the Western peoples, are due exclusively to laissez-faire capi­talism which the same document of the churches passionately misrepresents and rejects on moral grounds. It is not the fault of the capitalists that the Asiatics and Afri­cans did not adopt those ideologies and policies which would have made the evolution of autochthonous capitalism possi­ble. Neither is it the fault of the capitalists that the policies of these nations thwarted the attempts of foreign investors to give them “the benefits of more machine production.” No one contests that what makes hundreds of mil­lions in Asia and Africa destitute is that they cling to primitive methods of production and miss the benefits which the employ­ment of better tools and up-to-date technological designs could be­stow upon them. But there is only one means to relieve their distress—namely, the full adoption of laissez-faire capitalism. What they need is private enterprise and the accumulation of new capital, capitalists and entrepreneurs. It is nonsensical to blame capitalism and the capitalistic nations of the West for the plight the backward peoples have brought upon themselves. The remedy indicated is not “justice” but the substitution of sound, i.e., laissez-faire, policies for unsound policies.

Of course times have been changing. Globalization has been prompting for the laggards (like Africa) to embrace more capitalism therefore becoming more competitive. Whereas debt plagued welfare states of West has led to a diminishing competitiveness. This should lead to a wealth convergence.

Self Development: Success= Compound Efforts + Fire In the Belly

Earlier I posted here a great article by Agora Publishing’s Bill Bonner on how to use ‘efforts’ similar to interest rates: by compounding—the length and quality of exposure determines expertise or specialization or productivity.

Austrian Economist Professor Gary North expands the discussion, see link here.

But this time Professor North’s article comes with an additional tip: Fire in the Belly or PASSION (calling).

The reason I am posting topics related to self-development is to help newbies readers like my children. [I noticed that many readers of this blog are from schools, which I presume could mostly be students]

The lessons here applies to almost anything most especially to investment.

The following are excerpts from Prof. North’s wonderful article supplemented by my headings (blue bold emphasis mine)

1. Compound efforts needs FUTURE orientation

It is not a matter of brains. It is a matter of character. From time to time, we do hear of young men who seem to understand as teenagers how little time men have, and how large the payoff is for hard work, high thrift, and dedication to the mastery of some field. These are the super-performers discussed in books like Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers. They invest their crucial 10,000 hours before they reach age 21.

But it is not just character. It is something else. It is their understanding of time. They recognize that effort and assets invested early in life have a compounding effect. This makes an enormous difference at age 40 or 50, if a person finds the right niche in which to invest his time.

To do this, a young person needs future-orientation. This is exceedingly rare among the young. As Ben Franklin put it in 1750, "A child thinks that twenty pounds and twenty years can never be spent." A few musical artists figure it out early, or at least consent to their parents' demands while they are still forming their habits in life. But few understand it with respect to money.

2 Capital accumulation or wealth is a PROCESS

In Chapter XVIII of his magnum opus, Human Action (1949), Ludwig von Mises presented the case for the importance of time perspective as a source of thrift, capital formation, and wealth. He called this outlook "time-preference." Some people are present-oriented. They want satisfaction now. They will not lend money at low rates of interest. They borrow at high rates. Others are future-oriented. They save at low rates of interest. They refuse to pay high rates of interest when borrowing.

He made a profound observation on why we are rich compared to earlier generations.

Our activities are designed for a longer period of provision because we are the lucky heirs of a past which has lengthened, step by step, the period of provision and has bequeathed to us the means to expand the waiting period.

Mises recognized that modern man is the heir of generations of capital formation and thrift.

3. Future Orientation MUST come with PASSION

FIRE IN THE BELLY

There are good employees who meet the criteria of predictable performance. But they will remain employees if they do not have fire in the belly.

Some people call this character trait an obsession. It probably is. Others call it ambition. It often is. Still others call it visionary. It always is…

The person with no fire in his belly is unlikely to take the risks that mastery require. Mastery is a high-risk endeavor. It is more than routine maintenance. It is a matter of putting your reputation on the line in something like full public view.

Rockefeller and Carnegie had fire in the belly. They helped to create a new, far richer world. Both of them switched to charitable giving when they got old. Their money bankrolled some of the most insidious projects of the so-called New World Order. They were better at piling up wealth than giving it away. They had no skills at giving it away. They would have done more good for mankind in their lifetimes if they had stuck to their knitting. But super-rich men cannot escape their responsibility for managing great wealth in this way. Their piled-up capital will be inherited....

I think a person must have this fire in the belly: his calling. I define calling as the most important thing you can do in which you would be most difficult to replace. This may be a person's occupation, but only rarely. It was an aspect of John Wooden's job, but it reached far deeper than his job. After he retired, his calling remained. His influence grew greater over the years as a result of the foundation of his life, which was also the foundation of his occupational success...

Fire in the belly keeps a person from getting sidetracked. He may go over a cliff.

That’s why applied to the stock markets, I vehemently oppose simulation games (because this lacks the element of the stakeholder’s problem) or short term trades (yes even taught by schools!!!).

This is because any person who is dominated by present orientation extrapolates to a lack of depth in analysis or thinking, in trading—limits to gains while enlarging risks (with emphasis on the frequency more than the magnitude), amplifies emotional approach to the markets, and renders one vulnerable to social conformity rather than rigorous independent thinking which is a prerequisite to getting ahead of the curve.

I hope this helps.

How Valid is The Concept of American Exceptionalism?

A comment prompted me to share my insight on the so-called American exceptionalism

American exceptionalism, according to Wikipedia.org, refers to the theory that the United States is qualitatively different from other nations.

America is allegedly “qualitatively different” in two ways (from Wikipedia.org):

-via Alexis de Tocqueville, “emergence from a revolution, becoming "the first new nation", and developing a uniquely American ideology, based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire”

-via American Communist Party (1920s), their belief that "thanks to its natural resources, industrial capacity, and absence of rigid class distinctions, the United States of America might for a long while avoid the crisis that must eventually befall every capitalist society.

Wikipedia further adds, ``Although the term does not imply superiority, some writers have used it in that sense.”

I would reckon that every nation’s history is in many ways unique or implies exceptionality, except that to quote Winston Churchill, “History is written by the victors”.

This means that the string of America’s successes may have prompted many writers to overconfidently believe that America’s successes represent a permanent state of order.

In my view, this could be analogized to the famous but worrisome Wall Street maxim “This time is different”.

Also the thought of America’s “exceptionalism” seems guilty of what is called as the survivorship bias or to quote the Wikipedia, “the logical error of concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and inadvertently overlooking those that didn't because of their lack of visibility”

Moreover, there is a time consistency problem with both assertions: the ideology of liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire can’t be seen as exclusively unique to the American race, since these can be learned and assimilated by other nations. The world does not operate on a vacuum. People learn and adapt.

Alternatively, if these traits represent the core of exceptionalism, then any significant erosion would also risk reducing such perceived ‘exceptionality’.

Thus, exceptionalism largely depends on how the US struggles to maintain this “uniquely American ideology”, and similarly, how other nations respond to incorporate on such success model as their own.

I am less inclined to respond to the American Communist Party view: industrial capacity is simply an output of this “unique American ideology” while natural resources depends on the economic value assigned to it by the market, while the absence of class distinction seems like an opaque premise—all forms of government have ‘rigid’ class distinctions.

Also in response to implications that America had been endowed with wealth by birthright, it must be remembered that the essence of the annual Thanksgiving Day celebration emanates from a painful chapter of US history, where the Pilgrims experimented with and suffered from the collectivist state which eventually prompted them to espouse the “unique American ideology”.

Writes Heritage Foundation Conn Carroll, (bold emphasis mine)

When the first Pilgrims founded the Plymouth Colony, all property was taken away from families and transferred to a “comone wealth.” In other words, the Pilgrims tried to do away with private property. The results were disastrous. According to Bradford, the stronger and younger men resented working for other men’s wives and children “without any recompence.” And the women forced to cook and clean for other men saw their uncompensated service as “a kind of slavery.” The system as a whole bred “confusion and discontent” and “retarded much employment that would have been to [the Pilgrims’] benefit and comfort.” Unable to produce their own food, some settlers “became servants to the Indians,” cutting wood and fetching water in exchange for “a capful of corn.” Others tragically perished.

It was not until private property rights were restored and every man was allowed to “set corn for his own particular” that prosperity came to the colony. Bradford reported, “This had very good success for it made all hands very industrious. … [M]uch more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. … Women went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn.”

More, American exceptionalism does not imply that other countries have been accursed to suffer from ‘codified poverty’. This perspective unjustly sees Americans as in a state of permanent entitlement.

There are reasons why society suffers from impoverishment, but the least of which is that people volunteer to be poor.

The principal cause why many are poor is due to economic repression or policies that interdict people to trade, inhibit the exchange of ideas that leads to innovation and importantly suffer from lack of capital.

As Ludwig von Mises once wrote, [bold highlights mine]

What distinguishes contemporary life in the countries of Western civilization from conditions as they prevailed in earlier ages, and still exist for the greater number of those living today, is not the changes in the supply of labor and the skill of the workers and not the familiarity with the exploits of pure science and their utilization by the applied sciences, by technology. It is the amount of capital accumulated. The issue has been intentionally obscured by the verbiage employed by the international and national government agencies dealing with what is called foreign aid for the underdeveloped countries. What these poor countries need in order to adopt the Western methods of mass production for the satisfaction of the wants of the masses is not information about a "know how." There is no secrecy about technological methods. They are taught at the technological schools and they are accurately described in textbooks, manuals, and periodical magazines. There are many experienced specialists available for the execution of every project that one may find practicable for these backward countries. What prevents a country like India from adopting the American methods of industry is the paucity of its supply of capital goods. As the Indian government's confiscatory policies are deterring foreign capitalists from investing in India and as its prosocialist bigotry sabotages domestic accumulation of capital, their country depends on the alms that Western nations are giving to it.

Finally American exceptionalism can be represented by the state of US dollar functioning as the world’s premier currency reserve or forex anchor.

From Google

Looking at the above, I’d say that American exceptionalism has been on a decline and will likely suffer from a further loss of competitiveness, in the condition that her government continues to implement policies that corrodes her “unique American ideology”.

Not Just A Bear Market Rally For Philippine Phisix or Asia

``Key question then: why do smart people engage in negative thinking? Are they actually stupid? The reason, I think, is that negative thinking feels good. In its own way, we believe that negative thinking works. Negative thinking feels realistic, or soothes our pain, or eases our embarrassment. Negative thinking protects us and lowers expectations. In many ways, negative thinking is a lot more fun than positive thinking. So we do it. If positive thinking was easy, we'd do it all the time. Compounding this difficulty is our belief that the easy thing (negative thinking) is actually appropriate, it actually works for us. The data is irrelevant. We're the exception, so we say. Positive thinking is hard. Worth it, though.”- Seth Godin The problem with positive thinking

For many, the basic premise for today’s global market rebound has due to a “bear market rally”.

Dem Dry Bones

This especially holds true for the advocates of the global ‘deflation’ outcome and for those who interpret markets based on conventional methodology.

Nevertheless, predictions have underlying analytical foundations.

The basic pillar for such sponsorship is that the US will remain as the irreplaceable source of demand for the world. But laden with too much debt and hamstrung by a vastly impaired banking system, US consumers will be unable to take up the slack emerging from the recent bust, while the world will unlikely find a worthy substitute, and as consequence, suffer from the excruciating adjustments from the structural excesses built around them during the boom days.

Hence, the Dem Dry bones deduction-Toe bone connected to the foot bone, Foot bone connected to the leg bone, Leg bone connected to the knee bone. BOOO! We are faced with a Global Deflation menace.

We have spilled too much ink arguing against the seemingly plausible but fallacious argument simply because all these oversimplifies human action without taking into account how people will respond to altering conditions (creative destruction), overemphasis on the rear view mirror and importantly, such arguments tremendously underestimates the role money plays in a society (inflationary policies).

Moreover, the assumption that the world has been scourged with its arrant dependence on the US seems downright exaggerated as today’s market actions have shown.

In other words, yes while increased globalization trends has indeed integrated or has deepened the interlinkages of a large segment of global economies, particularly financial and labor markets and investment flows, it hasn’t entirely converged every aspect of the marketplace or the economy.

That’s because nations have their own cultural, religious and geographical traits that are unique to themselves that function as natural barriers.

Yet all these have significant impact on the motional profile of a country’s political economy. So every country (in terms of government and its constituents) will have to deal with its inherent domestic forces as much as it has to deal with fluctuating external factors, and all these dynamics will result to different or divergent responses.

Hence, national idiosyncrasies (or decoupling dynamics) will be retained and will continue to do so because of such intrinsic barriers. This, in spite of a prospective deepening globalization trends.

So individual values and actions will significantly matter more than perceived macro assumptions advanced by sanctimonious ivory tower experts.

This also means that the assumption that markets or economies will be totally convergent or “coupled” to each other is another false concept.

Four Stages of Bear Markets

Figure 1: US Global Funds: 4 Stages Of The Typical Secular Bear Market

Many have used this chart, the “four stages in the typical secular bear market”, which has floated around in the cyberspace, to justify the significance that today’s rising markets account for as a bear market rally (see figure1).

Right at the nadir of the market meltdown, triggered by the institutional bank run in the US [see October 26^th Phisix: Approaching Typical Bear Market Traits], we described how the Philippine Phisix reached the typical bear market levels in terms of depth or degree of losses and the timeframe covered, ``We are presently 15 months into the present bear market which begun in July of 2007. The last time the Phisix shadowed the US markets it took 28 months for the market to hit a bottom. I am not suggesting the same dynamics although, seen in terms of the US markets, the recent crash seems different from the slomo decline in 2000.”

From a hindsight view, we have been validated anew- we did not match the longest “slomo” decline of 28 months during the 1999-2001 cycle, but nevertheless clocked in as an extended cyclical bear market (15 months peak-to-trough), in terms of duration compared to 1987 (13 months) and 1989 (11 months).

Nonetheless the above chart of the 4 stages of a bear market has indeed traced out the bear market dynamics of the Phisix over the 1999-2002 period (see figure 2) but on a different timeframe scale relative to the US.

Figure 2: PSE Phisix: 4 Stages of Phisix Bearmarket

The Philippine market appears to have a slightly shorter cycle than its US counterpart if we are to base it on the first 3 stages (59 months US vis-à-vis 56 months). That is to repeat, in the context of a SECULAR bear market cycle.

But, I would caution you from interpreting the same operating dynamics today as that with 2001.

Besides, I would admonish any tautology that actions in the US markets should correlate with the Philippine markets-they shouldn’t. Not because of exports and not because of remittances.

Secular Bull-Cyclical Bear, Where The Rubber Meets The Road

The Philippines (Phisix and the economy) has essentially had some mixed blessings from its less globalized economy and market; she didn’t outperform during the boom days and conversely, didn’t fare as badly during the global recession.

But overall I don’t see this as being net beneficial for the country since trade openness and economic freedom is the source of capital accumulation. The semblance of any of today’s success could be attributed to more on luck than from any policy induced measures.

However, because boom bust or business cycles are fundamentally credit driven, then our eyes must focus on where the rubber meets the road.

The Philippine economy and its banking system have currently been operating from significantly reduced systemic leverage (in fact the private sector debt has been one of the lowest in Asia see Will Deglobalization Lead To Decoupling?).

Another, the crisis adjustment pressures or the market clearing process coming off the excesses from the pre-Asian crisis boom have had most of its imbalances ventilated during the 1997-2003 cycle. That’s the essence of bear markets-sanitizing excesses and balancing imbalances.

In addition, the Philippine banking system has been extremely liquid, where total resources in the banking system as of April 2009 at Php 5.8 trillion (BSP Tetangco speech August 11^th).

Domestic banking system’s Non Performing Loans (NPL) has returned to pre-Asian Crisis levels of around 4%, which serves as evidence of the market clearing process (BSP Tetangco).

Besides, because the domestic banking system’s balance sheets have been least impaired due to largely missing out on the highly levered securitization shindig, the Philippine banking system remains adequately capitalized, well above the risk ratios as per BSP regulations (10%) and Bank of International Settlement (8%) standards (BSP Tetangco).

This low systemic leverage reflects, as well as, on our emerging Asian market peers, in contrast to the US and European counterparts.

Thus, Philippine economy and its financial markets appear to be coming off on a clean slate, enough to imbue additional leverage in the system to power the Philippine Phisix and the economy to another bubble.

Sorry to say, but central bankers, being legalized cartels, are innately enamored to blowing bubbles, due to the unlimited potentials to issue credits via the fractional reserve banking platform (or issuing of money more than bank holds in reserve) from which all global central banks operate on.

Lastly, the recent bear market cycle emanated from contagion effects than from internal adjustments from massive structural misallocations, which is what the US economy has presently been undergoing. This means that adjustments from the bust are likely to be minor.

So, distinctions matter.

In short, the last bear market cycle that the Philippine Phisix suffered WAS NOT a secular bear market but a cyclical one.

Inflation: Keys To Future Investment Returns

The same reasons are behind why the historically low interest rate regime pursued by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) has generated significant traction in the economy, as we have been anticipating.

Proof?

According to the BSP, Real estate loans have been picking up as of June 2009, so as with Automobile loans, credit card receivables and other consumer loans (appliance and other consumer durables and educational loans) over the same period.

And all these have likewise been reflected on the Phisix, which as of Friday’s close has been up 51.16% on a year to date basis, driven by local investors [as discussed in last week’s Situational Attribution Is All About Policy Induced Inflation].

This compared to the 2003-2007 cycle which had been foreign dominated. That’s another key point to reckon with.

Moreover, from a chartist viewpoint, not all the bearmarkets have the same patterns, (see figure 3)

Figure 3: Philippine PSE: 18 year Cycle

At over the 23 years from where the Philippine Phisix has undergone a full cycle (secular bull and secular bear market 1985-2003 or 18 years), the ‘cyclical’ bear market in 1987 (45% loss in 13 months) did show a short resemblance to the 4 stage bears, but the 1989 market had been a V-shaped recovery (62% loss in 11 months) [pls see blue ellipses].

The point is that there is a material difference in the performance of bear markets during secular and in cyclical trends.

In cyclical markets, while bear markets can be deep, they are likely to recover rapidly compared to secular bear markets, whose correction process takes awhile, for structural reasons stated above.

Apparently, the action in today’s market appears to account for such cyclical trend dynamics.

Because no trend moves linearly, we should expect bouts of interim weaknesses. However, this should serve, instead, as buying opportunities.

Moreover, I’d like to bring to your perspective the long term cycle of the Phisix as exhibited by the pink channels. You’d notice that the long term channel isn’t sideways or down BUT UP!!!

While other observers, especially those colored by political bias, could impute economic fortunes on this, my thesis is that the nominal long term price improvements reflect more on “inflation” than real output growth.

This is why the Phisix seems so highly sensitive to monetary fluxes. The lesser the efficient the market, the more sensitive to inflationary ebbs and flows.

And this long term chart has likewise been giving us a clue to where the Phisix is likely headed for-10,000, as emerging markets and Asia takes the centerstage of the bubble cycle.

But this inflation driven pricing isn’t relegated to the Phisix alone, but has been accelerating its influence over the world and even in the US markets.

Proof?

I am now really finding some “comfort with the crowds” (pardon me, I am also vulnerable to cognitive biases, but at least one that I am aware of) among big investing savants. Aside from Warren Buffett whom we featured in Warren Buffett’s Greenback Effect Weighs On Global Financial Markets, the world’s Bond King PIMCO’s top honcho, Mr. William Gross recently wrote about how asset pricing dynamics will be fueled by inflation.

These are the strategic scenarios which he enumerated as having a high probability of playing out:

(bold/underline highlights mine)

-Global policy rates will remain low for extended periods of time.

-The extent and duration of quantitative easing, term financing and fiscal stimulation efforts are keys to future investment returns across a multitude of asset categories, both domestically and globally.

-Investors should continue to anticipate and, if necessary, shake hands with government policies, utilizing leverage and/or guarantees to their benefit.

-Asia and Asian-connected economies (Australia, Brazil) will dominate future global growth.

-The dollar is vulnerable on a long-term basis.

In other words, US dollar vulnerability, QE and other monetary ‘bridge financing’ non interest rate tools, aside from fiscal policies and low interest rates are all inflationary policies that are “keys to future investment returns”.

Whereas Asia and Asian-connected economies, given their edge of low systemic leverage, unimpaired banking system and the thrust towards trade and financial integration with the world commerce, are likely to assimilate most of the circulation credit “inflation”, hence their likely dominance in terms of attaining the highest global economic “growth”.

I’m not suggesting that credit expansion equals sound economic growth. Instead what I am saying is that economic growth in Asia and emerging markets will be based on the public’s response to the incentives set forth by policies to sop up credit.

In short, conventional analysis will continue to find enormous disconnect as inflationary policies amalgamates its presence on the markets.

But at least Mr. Gross have been candid enough to unabashedly admit looking for opportunities to strike lucrative deals with the government based on special ‘privileges’, “shake hands with government policies, utilizing leverage and/or guarantees to their benefit”…or euphemistically this is called political entrepreneurship or economic rent seeking from the US government!

Well, more signs of the Philippinization of the America.

The Applause Goes To Inflation

I wouldn’t shudder at the thought of policy tightening given the near unison of voices from the global authorities to extend the party.

Since inflation is a political process, then let us tune in to the statements of the political authorities to get a feel on their pulse and the possible directions of the markets.

From Caijingonline, ``China's economy is at a crucial juncture in its recovery and the government will not change its policy direction, Premier Wen Jiabao was cited as saying by Xinhua news agency September 1”…``China will stick to its moderately loose monetary policy as it strives to meet economic goals, Wen said during a meeting with visiting World Bank President Robert Zoellick.” (emphasis added)

From Bloomberg, ``China’s banking regulator said it will take years to implement stricter capital requirements for banks, seeking to assuage concerns the rules will cause a plunge in new lending.”

From Wall Street Journal, ``World Bank President Robert Zoellick said Wednesday it is too early for China to roll back its stimulus measures as the country's economic recovery could still falter.”

From Bloomberg, ``European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet said the bank won’t necessarily raise interest rates when the time comes for it to start withdrawing other emergency stimulus measures. The term ‘exit strategy’ should be understood as the framework and set of principles guiding our approach to unwinding the various non-standard measures,” Trichet said at an event in Frankfurt today. “It does not include considerations about interest policy.”

From Wall Street Journal, ``Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, warned world governments against “premature exits from monetary and fiscal policies” despite signs that “the global economy appears to be emerging at last from the worst economic downturn in our lifetimes.”

From Bloomberg, ``Federal Reserve officials in their August meeting discussed extending the end-date for purchases of mortgage bonds to minimize any market disruptions, and expressed concern about the pace of a likely economic recovery.”

As presciently predicted by Ludwig von Mises in Human Action, ``The favor of the masses and of the writers and politicians eager for applause goes to inflation.”

The global political leadership sensing short term triumph from current policies will continue to exercise the same “success formula” to limn on the illusion of prosperity.

Their actuations are so predictable.

The Deflation Bogeyman

I wouldn’t be a buyer of the global deflation thesis especially under the context that deflation is a monetary phenomenon.

That’s because the only transmission mechanism from so-called deflationary pressures, via the recession channel, would be from remittances and exports, which isn’t deflationary in terms of the potential to wreak havoc on the domestic banking system or even on the 40% informal cash based economy.

Said differently: Slower or negative exports or remittances will NOT contract the money supply and won’t be a hurdle from a Central Bank determined to inflate the system!

In the US, the fact that tuition fees from Ivy League Schools have been exploding to the upside, in spite of today’s crisis, dismisses the deflationary nature in the absolute sense for the US economy [see Black Swan Problem: Deflation? Not In Ivy League Schools].

What the US has been undergoing is a statistical deflation- a price based measure from the preferred numbers by the establishment.

In terms of political dimensions, scare tactics (deflation bogeyman) has been repeatedly used by authorities to justify inflationary policies to wangle out concessions aimed at rescuing select (political interest groups) entities or industries at the expense of the society.

And I think that the ultra low inflation (BSP) in the Philippines reflects on the same statistical mirage.

Just this week my favorite neighborhood sari-sari store (retail) hiked beer prices by 5%! While beer may not be everything (it may even be a store specific issue, which I have yet to investigate), looking at oil prices at $68 today from less than $40 per barrel in March signifies a price increase of 70%!

Seen from a lesser oil efficient use economy, the transmission mechanism, whose effect may have lagged, could be more elaborate than reflected on government based statistical figures.

To consider both the US and the Philippines will have national elections in 2010, senatorial and Presidential-senatorial respectively. So it wouldn’t be far fetched that the incentive for incumbent authorities from both countries to intervene (directly or indirectly) in order to create the impression of a strong economic recovery for the sole purpose of generating votes.

The fact the Philippine Peso continues to slide against the US dollar in the face of stronger regional currencies seems so politically suspicious.

The Peso’s woes can’t be about deficits (US has bigger deficits-nominally or as a % to GDP), or economic growth (we didn’t fall into recession, the US did), remittances (still net positive) or current account balances (forex reserves have topped $40 billion historic highs) or interest rates differentials (Philippines has higher rates).

In sum, when you factor in all the major variables that could influence the Phisix- local politics (national elections), geopolitics (such US elections), the “anxiety” from global central bankers which should translate to prolonged or extended monetary inflation, continued loose domestic monetary policies, long term technical trends, inflation sensitive fundamental issues (as systemic leverage, banking system) and the potential response from the public to loose monetary policies-it would seem highly probable that the domestic stock market is likely to continue with its long term ascent.

So I would NOT reckon this to be a bear market rally especially not from the flimsy excuse of global deflation.

Figure 4: Bloomberg: Possible Bear Market Rally

Bear market rally could be a US phenomenon (see figure 4), but is unlikely for Asia and Asian Emerging Markets.

Nevertheless, I would use the US dollar index, gold and oil as my main barometers for measuring liquidity conditions.