A Bullish Financial Sector Equals A Bullish Phisix?

For the Phisix to breakout of the 4,400 level, this requires either leadership by the component heavyweights (of the Phisix basket) or general market buoyancy. Although I believe that both are related or that the causal linkage isn’t clear; in a bullmarket either the general market’s sanguine sentiment lifts component heavyweights or vice versa.

For starters, last week’s action in Financial sector seems to give us a clue:

One would note that major banking issues appear to recoil from their February-March troughs and have mostly been on an uptrend since.

Last week Banco De Oro [BDO-green] and Metrobank [MBT-red] spearheaded the Financial’s dazzling performance up 6.03% and 7.17%, respectively. BDO represents 4.12% of the Phisix weighting while MBT is 4.71% as of Friday’s close.

Also in the chart are Security Bank [SECB-blue], Bank of the Philippine Islands [BPI-black] and last week’s chart feature Philippine National Bank [PNB-orange], all three are also on a seeming uptrend but SECB has outperformed what appears to be a lagging BPI and PNB.

Nonetheless, BPI has the largest weight in the Financial sector index (28.69%), while SECB has 8.52% and PNB 3.98%.

All told, the 5 issues comprise 81% of the Financial sector index. I purposely omitted China Bank [CHIB] because of its lack of liquidity.

Anyway, SECB as of Friday’s close represents 1.88% of the Phisix basket while BPI is 6.33% as of Friday’s close.

The above only shows that 3 (BDO, MBT, SECB) out 5 seems on a steady ascent. The laggards BPI and PNB (while also on an uptrend but has been consolidating) may eventually follow.

Two, the actions of the Phisix (blue line) seems closely or strongly correlated with actions of the Financial sector (green line). The implication is that a continued upswing in the financial sector should translate to an ascendant Phisix.

Three, the financial sector is only marginally higher (.08%) on a year to date basis. The current uptick represents a recovery from an earlier decline rather than from a sustained advance. Only SECB has been considerably up by 9.74% y-t-d.

In short, the prospective actions in the financial sector suggest that the balance of risks seem tilted towards the upside than the downside.

This makes the financial sector a likely good place to position for an eventual Phisix breakout.

[Disclosure: I have no position in any of the abovementioned banks, but I am looking at the possibility to add one]

How To Go About The Different Phases of The Bullmarket Cycle

``I’m hopeful that the answer is obvious: the market reflects vastly more information than the individuals. Yet we persist in listening to individuals in order to explain the markets. Executives point to analyst reports or discussions in the media to try to understand what’s going on with their stock. The media find an esteemed strategist to explain yesterday’s market move. Don’t ask the ants, ask the colony. The market is the best source for understanding expectations.” Michael J. Mauboussin

I’d like to point out that NOT all bullmarkets are the alike.

Bullmarkets come in different phases which effectively translate to different approaches in the management of portfolios under such evolving circumstances.

Thus it would be a darned big mistake to treat bullmarkets like a one-size-fits-all or a “whack a mole”[1] game- where everytime a mole randomly pops out of the hole, one takes a whack at them with a mallet in the hope to score a point.

Unlike the whac-a-mole, the goal isn’t about scoring points. In the financial markets, the goal is about maximizing profits—unless there are more important sublime goals that supersedes the profit motive such as thrill-seeking or ego tripping (i.e. the desire to brag about the ability to “time the market”—which bluntly speaking is based MOSTLY on luck).

Nevertheless it always pays to first to identify the phases of the bullmarket before deciding on how to approach deal with it.

To borrow the bubble cycle as defined by market savant George Soros, we can note of the following phases[2]:

-the unrecognized trend,

-the beginning of the self-reinforcing process,

-the successful test

-the growing conviction, resulting in a widening divergence between reality and expectations,

-the flaw in the perceptions

-the climax

-the self reinforcing process in the opposite direction

Bubble cycles reveals of these recognizable patterns from the hindsight view (see figure 4).

Figure 4: Stages of The Boom Bust cycle

But unfolding bubbles can be identified real-time by the prevailing market actions, the psychology that undergirds market action, as well as economic data on credit dynamics. Remember, booms are always lubricated by credit—a sine qua non of all bubble cycles.

And this has been NO stranger to us.

For instance, the Philippine Phisix has had minor boom-bust cycles within the secular bullmarket cycle of 1986-1997 (right window).

One would note of the Soros boom tests in the two marked red ellipses which closely resembled the typical boom bust paradigm (left window).

In 1994-1997, the climax or the “massive flaw of perception” had been highlighted by the prominent label of “Tiger Economies”[3] (new paradigm) on the ASEAN-4, which of course, turned out to be a massive flop.

As a side note, let me tell you that the Philippines won’t be anywhere near a Tiger Economy UNTIL we learn to adapt and embrace economic freedom as a way of life. Boom bust cycles will not substitute for real growth from free trade. Instead what these policy induced actions will bring about is a false sense of prosperity and security which eventually will be unravelled.

Yet, if we read or watch media, and assume that the people imbues what media says as gospel of truths, then the prospects of a “Tiger Economy” remains an ever elusive dream. As corollary to this, the belief in the salvation by the political leadership who is assumed to take the role as economic messiah is a sign of either ignorance or immaturity or dogmatic espousal of superstition as truth.

Going back on how to read market cycles, the point I wish to make is that one should be cognizant of the operational phases of the market cycle, and adapt on the actions that befit the underlying circumstances.

At present, I would say that the Phisix has been transitioning from the “successful test” towards the “growing conviction” phase.

Figure 5: PSE Sectoral Groups: Industry Sector Rotation and Tidal Flows

And this phase will be characterized by sporadic explosive moves on select issues. But these activities will be rotated among specific issues or among issues within sectors.

So issues or sectors that may seem to have been in dormancy or has materially lagged will likewise see rejuvenated price movements overtime, while current market leaders may stall or temporarily underperform. Remember the axiom—no trend moves in a straight line, this should always apply. Otherwise those that manages to move in temporary defiance of this, would eventually pay a steep price later (Remember the BW scandal?). Hence, every action has its corresponding consequence.

And as the major benchmark continues to rise; the price levels of almost ALL issues will likewise keep in pace but differ in terms of degree, the timing and the time-motion of each price actions. But eventually, the cumulative actions would produce a net effect of having the “rising tide lifts all boats” phenomenon.

This has long been our Machlup-Livermore model.

For instance, today’s top performing sectors used to be last year’s laggard and vice versa (see figure 5).

During the last quarter of last year, the mining industry (black candle) and the service sectors (light orange) led the Phisix (red circle), and all the rest (red-banking, blue-holding, green-commercial Industrial and maroon-property) performed dismally.

And up to this point, last year’s top performers have essentially traded places with last year’s laggards, where the latter have taken much of the today’s limelight. Remember the proclivity of the crowd is to read today’s action as linear, hence while crowd may be right in major trends they are always wrong during turning points. And this applies both to specific issues and general activities on the marketplace.

And one of the latest spectacular moves has been in the property sector (maroon) which has likewise been among laggards going into July (the property sector was the third worst performer then).

But last week appears to be payback time for key property issues, as the property benchmark spectacularly skyrocketed by over 8% to nearly take the top spot which it now shares with the leaders.

And I’d venture a guess that based on the relative impact of inflation on stock market prices, today’s laggards will be doing a redux of last year’s actions soon.

To be blunt, the rotational effects will buoy the service sector and the mining industry. And a glimpse at the chart seems to show that such phenomenon may have already commenced!

Let me add that as the growing conviction phase deepens (I would presume that a break above the 2007 high should underscore this), the frequency of rotational explosive moves will increase.

Thus, trying to “time the market” will only result to missed opportunities, the chasing of higher prices and an increasing risk exposure to one’s portfolio.

Bottom line: We shouldn’t essentially “time” the market per se as the mainstream would define it, instead we should identify, read, analyse and act according to the whereabouts of the bubble cycle.

In other words, any “timing” must focus on the possibility of the emergence or rising risks of a major inflection point, in accordance to the stages of a bubble cycle. Meanwhile, all the rest of the one’s subsequent actions should be focused on the virtues of “waiting” and some “rebalancing”.

---

[1] Wikipedia.org, Whac-A-Mole

[2] Soros George, The Alchemy of Finance p.58

[3] Wikipedia.org Tiger Cub Economies

What The Distribution Of S&P 500 Sector Weightings Seem To Say

Bespoke has a nice depiction in the distribution of weightings among different sectors constituting the US S&P 500.

Bespoke writes,

``Technology is currently the biggest sector in the index at 18.9%, and it has been the biggest since it overtook the Financial sector early on in the financial crisis. There has been quite a bit of movement in sector weightings in recent years. At the bear market low in March 2009, the Financial sector made up just 8.9% of the index. It has charged back since then and has nearly doubled its weighting to 16.3%. Consumer Discretionary, Industrials, and Technology are the only other sectors that have increased their weightings during the current bull market. Health Care has really dropped off, going from 16.1% at the bear market low to its current level of 11.8%. Energy has also dropped quite a bit from 14.3% to 11%. There are now five sectors with weightings that are between 10.5% and 11.8%. Utilities, Materials, and Telecom continue to have very low weightings, and combined they still make up less than the 7th largest sector. The performance of any of these three sectors has a very minimal impact on the overall direction of the market." (bold emphasis added)

Some observations:

-The steady growth of the technology sector, and its apparent leadership today appears to reflect on the fast evolving US economy into the information age.

-The recent upsurge of the financial exhibits massive inflationism

-who says the US consumer is dead? Consumer discretionary outperformed the others, second only to financials based on the changes on March 2009 and the current

-the growth of in the industrials also suggest that the US economy is seeing some 'progress'

-at the current circumstance, there is a tight competition in 5 sectors: health care, consumer staples, energy, consumer discretionary and industrials, where I think energy has been underappreciated.

Sectoral Performance In US, China And The Philippines

``[Asia is] a very different dynamic compared with the rest of the world. Most banking systems in Asia are flush with liquidity as they have a surplus of deposits over lending. So if [corporates] have in the past financed in the international bond markets, when it comes to refinancing they can turn to the local market alternatives because plenty of banks are still willing to lend”- Jason Rogers, a credit analyst at Barclays Capital Asia-Pacific corporate bonds surge

In bubble cycles, the object of a speculative bubble, after a bust, normally takes years to recover.

To cite a few, the Philippine Phisix following the 1997 Asian Crisis episode hasn’t fully recovered even 12 years after, Japan’s Nikkei 225 and its property sector remains in doldrums following the bust in 1990 (that’s 19 years!), and the technology centered dot,com bust during the new millennium in the US has left the Nasdaq miles away from its peak, 9 years ago.

The recent bubble cycle phenomenon evolved around the US real estate sector which had been funded by the financial industry. In short, these two sectors-financials and real estate accounted for as the epicenter of the bubble cycle crisis. So given the nature of bubble cycles, I originally expected the same dynamics to unfold.

The fundamental reason for this is due to the market clearing process or the process of liquidating clusters of malinvestments acquired during the bubble.

And since bubble blowing or the “boom” phase is a process underpinned by policies that is cultured by the markets over time, the liquidation or the “bust” phase likewise employs the same time consuming process but in reverse.

But I guess this dynamic doesn’t seem to be the case today or put differently, this time looks different.

Why?

Because US money managers have largely been overweighting the financial sector, see Figure 5.

Figure 5: Bespoke Invest: Institutional Sector Weightings

According to Bespoke Invest, ``money managers collectively have 18.5% of their long portfolios in the Financial sector, which is the highest weighting for any sector. Technology ranks second at 16.8%, followed by Health Care (12.9%), Energy (12%), and Industrials (10.3%).

``The second chart compares these weightings with the sector weightings of the S&P 500. As shown, institutions are overweight the Financial sector the most and underweight Consumer Staples the most.”

Obviously, the enormous backstop provided for by the US government to the US financial sector has circumvented the natural process of liquidations from fully occurring.

Hence, the intriguing outperformance led by the money managers piling into a sector under the government “umbrella” to seek profits or “economic rent”.

Yet, despite such outperformance, government intrusion to the industry will likely result to more systemic distortions.

To quote Professor Mario Rizzo in a recent paper ``These are agents whose discretionary behavior, insulated from the normal discipline of profit and loss, can significantly affect the course of economic effects. Thus, discretionary behavior on the part of monetary authorities (the Fed), fiscal policy makers (Congress or the Executive), or even in some cases private monopolists, can increase uncertainty faced by most economic agents (“small players”). They will have to pay more attention to trying to guess the perhaps idiosyncratic behavior of the big players. Economic variables will become contaminated with big-player influence. It will become more difficult to extract knowledge of fundamentals from actual market prices.”

Again, pricing signals are becoming less efficient due to government intervention (more difficult to extract knowledge of fundamentals from actual market prices) and is likely to heighten systemic risks (can increase uncertainty faced by most economic agents) arising from the asymmetric behavior of the industry participants shaped by regulators (insulated from the normal discipline of profit and loss).

In combination with the toxic assets stacked in the bank balance sheets, I would remain a skeptic over US financials.

Interesting Parallels In China And The US, Possible Opportunities

It is interesting to see how some parallels can be gleaned from the institutional interest in US stocks and in China’s recent sectoral performance.

While Financials, Materials, Consumer Cyclicals, Energy and Industrial outperformed the S & P 500, in China, Energy, Materials, Financials, Technology and Industrials constituted the top 5 during the latest run on a year to date basis, see figure 6.

Figure 6: Bespoke Invest: China’s Sectoral Performance

In other words, except for Consumer Cyclicals in the US and Technology sector in China, there seems to be some common interests from respective domestic investors-energy, materials, financials and industrials.

In the Philippines, the top 3 sectors have been Mining and Oil, Industrial (energy) and holding companies, whereas financials and services (telecoms) have been laggards.

Except for the financials, basically we see the same pattern playing out.

More interesting insights from Bespoke Invest, ``Sector performance in China paints an interesting picture. In typical selloffs, sectors that lead the rally see the steepest declines, while laggards in the rally tend to outperform. In this selloff, however, this trend is much less evident. The chart below shows the average performance of Chinese stocks by sector during the rally and since the peak on 8/4. While Energy led the rally and has seen the sharpest decline, in other sectors the relationship has been much less evident. For example, Utilities and Telecom Services were in the bottom four in terms of performance during the rally, but during the decline they have also been among the weakest sectors with the second and third worst performance.” (emphasis added)

Given the degree of corrections, it appears that China’s financials are on the way to outperform but could still play second fiddle to Energy.

So while I would remain a skeptic over US financials, it’s a different story for China and for Asia.

Nonetheless if we follow Dennis Gartman’s 7^th rule of his 22 trading rules, ``Sell markets that show the greatest weakness, and buy those that show the greatest strength. Metaphorically, when bearish, throw your rocks into the wettest paper sack, for they break most readily. In bull markets, we need to ride upon the strongest winds... they shall carry us higher than shall lesser ones”, then this would imply that energy, materials and financials could be the best performing sectors over the coming years and could be the most conducive place to be in to achieve ALPHA.

That’s also because China has aggressively been bidding up global resource and energy stocks, for reasons we cited in China's Strategic Resource Accumulation Continues.

Finally, this brings up a possible “window of opportunity” arbitrage for the Philippine markets. Since the local financials have severely lagged the recent rally and IF the same US-China patterns would play out sometime in the future, then positioning on financials on market weakness looks likely a feasible trade.

In addition, the underperformance of the telecom sector which has patently diverged with technology issues has piqued my interest and could be a point of discussion for another day.