Showing posts with label socioeconomics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label socioeconomics. Show all posts

Sunday, September 15, 2024

Unveiling the Reality Behind the Philippine PSEi 30’s 7,000: Market Concentration, Divergence, Manipulations, and the Overton Window


What's been lost in this frenzied competition for eyeballs and "likes" is the distinction between opinion and journalism. The post-truth cliche is that there is no distinction, that everything is mere opinion and spin, but this is not true: journalism is different from opinion and spin—Charles Hugh Smith 

In this issue

Unveiling the Reality Behind the Philippine PSEi 30’s 7,000: Market Concentration, Divergence, Manipulations, and the Overton Window

I. The PSEi 30 Closes Above 7,000: Is This a "Historic Moment?"

II. Foreign Inflows Targeted at Biggest Market Cap Issues, Historically Chasing Tops

III. PSEi 30 7,000: Primarily an ICTSI Show; Diverging PSEi 30 and Market Breadth

IV. PSEi 30 Rose to 7,000 on Depressed and Concentrated Volume

V. Why Ignore the Impact of the Flagrant Manipulations of the PSEi 30?

VI. The Unannounced "Historic Moments" 

Unveiling the Reality Behind the Philippine PSEi 30’s 7,000: Market Concentration, Divergence, Manipulations, and the Overton Window 

I. The PSEi 30 Closes Above 7,000: Is This a "Historic Moment?" 

Along with the region's sanguine performance, the Philippine PSEi 30 broke past 7,000. Could this signify the start of a bull market, as the media and consensus have suggested?

Figure 1

Businessworld, September 13: The PSEi achieved a significant milestone, closing above 7,000 for the first time in over 19 months. Strong foreign buying and expectations of a US Federal Reserve rate cut contributed to this historic moment. (Figure 1, upper picture) 

Historic. Moment. 

Sure, the PSEi 30 has traded above 7,000 for the last five days and closed above this threshold in the last two. However, how is reaching a 19-month high equivalent to a "historic moment?" 

Media is said to reflect the prevailing mood or express the public’s level of confidence. That’s according to the practitioners of ‘Socionomics.’ 

Could this headline be indicative of the market’s mood? 

Let’s examine public sentiment by analyzing the market internals. 

II. Foreign Inflows Targeted at Biggest Market Cap Issues, Historically Chasing Tops 

Foreign buying was certainly a factor. 

This week, aggregate net foreign inflows amounted to Php 2.7 billion, marking the fifth consecutive week of net buying and the second-largest inflow during this period. (Figure 1, lower diagram) 

However, foreign inflows accounted for only 41.44% of the average weekly turnover, the lowest in five weeks. 

This suggests that local investors have begun to dominate the transactions on the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE). 

Additionally, the scale of weekly foreign investment was far from record-breaking.

As a side note, in today’s digitally connected, "globalization-financialization" world, foreign inflows could also include funds from offshore subsidiaries or affiliates of local firms.


Figure 2

Sure, expectations of the US Federal Reserve's interest rate cuts have not only fueled a strong rebound in ASEAN currencies but have also energized speculative melt-up dynamics in the region's equity markets, driven by foreign players. 

ASEAN currencies outperformed the global market from July 10 (following the US CPI release) through September 11. (Figure 2, topmost table) 

Yahoo Finance/Bloomberg, September 12: Southeast Asian equities have cemented their position as a favorite play of money managers positioning for the Federal Reserve’s policy pivot. Four of the five best-performing Asian equity benchmarks this month are from the region, with Thailand leading the pack. The buying frenzy has put foreign inflows on track for a fifth consecutive week while the MSCI Asean Index is now trading near its highest level since April 2022. [bold added] (Figure 2, lowest chart) 

Moreover, the yield-chasing phenomenon has spilled over into the worst-performing equities, or the laggards of the region. 

Yahoo Finance/Bloomberg, September 12: After being sidelined by investors for much of this year, some smaller equity markets are suddenly winning favor. The trend is particularly evident in Asia, where Thailand, Singapore and New Zealand rank as the top performers in September. Their benchmarks have risen at least 3% each so far, even as MSCI Inc.’s gauge of global stocks has fallen about 1% following a four-month winning streak. Investor focus seems to be shifting as the world’s biggest equity markets such as the US, Japan and India take a breather, and China’s slump deepens. For many of the smaller Asian markets, a limited exposure to the artificial intelligence theme means their valuations aren’t expensive, making them attractive just as the Federal Reserve’s dovish pivot helps boost their currencies and allows some central banks to embark on rate cuts. [bold added] 

The "core to the periphery" phase indicates that investors have been pursuing yields in less developed and less liquid markets, which are inherently more volatile and considered higher risk. This shift could signify a late-cycle transition

So yes, while there may be a semblance of increased confidence due to foreign participation, this dynamic appears to be limited to the most liquid and largest market capitalization issues—those capable of absorbing significant trading volumes.

And that’s exactly the case. Except for last week’s drop to 81%, the percentage share of the 20 most traded issues relative to the main board volume has risen in tandem with the PSEi 30 since mid-June. (Figure 2, lowest image)

That is to say, the PSEi 30’s performance was largely driven by concentrated trading volume in a select group of elite stocks.


Figure 3

Using the BSP’s portfolio flow data, July’s portfolio flows represented the largest since April 2022. (Figure 3, topmost image)

However, the larger point is that foreign money flows tend to chase the peaks of the PSEi 30.

In fact, foreign investments often surged during the culminating (exhaustion) phase of the PSEi 30’s upward momentum, a pattern observed since 2013.

Will this time be different?

It’s important to note that the BSP’s portfolio flows include foreign transactions in the fixed-income markets, but the size of these flows is relatively insignificant.

In a nutshell, the purported confidence brought about by foreign participation has been largely limited to the PSEi 30. 

III. PSEi 30 7,000: Primarily an ICTSI Show; Diverging PSEi 30 and Market Breadth

Does media sentiment resonate with the PSE’s market breadth?

In a word, hardly.

The PSEi 30 rose by 1.25%, marking its second consecutive weekly advance and its ninth increase in 12 weeks since this upside cycle began in the week ending June 28th.

This week’s rebound pushed its year-to-date returns to 8.88%.

While we have seen some substantial returns due to heightened volatility in some of the PSEi 30's underperformers, such as Converge (+10.5%), Aboitiz (+8.4%), and Bloomberry (+8.3%), it was the performance of the two largest market capitalization stocks, SM (+3.47%) and ICT (+2.75%), that drove this week’s free-float gains. (Figure 3, middle pane)

The PSEi 30’s average return was 1.03%. The difference between this figure and the index reflects distortions caused by free-float weighting.

Yet, the increasing volatility in the share prices of several PSEi 30 and non-PSEi 30 firms suggests the formation of miniature bubbles.

With a 17-13 score, decliners outnumbered gainers in the PSEi 30, indicating a divergence between market breadth and the headline index.

Despite reaching the “historic moment” of the PSEi at 7,000, market breadth continues to weaken. (Figure 3 lowest chart)

Declining issues have outpaced advancing issues for the second consecutive week, with the 69-point margin nearly double last week’s 37. Declining issues led the market in all five trading sessions.


Figure 4

Yet, the market capitalization weighting of the top five issues rose from last week’s 51.15% to 51.34%, primarily due to ICT’s increase from 10.83% to 10.99%. (Figure 4, topmost chart)

Or, 5 issues command over half the PSEi 30 price level!

This week’s pumping of the PSEi 30 pushed ICT’s share price to a record high of Php 418.6 on Thursday, September 12th. (Figure 4, middle graphs)

To put it another way, ICTSI has shouldered most of the burden in pushing the PSEi 30 to 7,000.

Additionally, ICTSI's rise has been supported by rotational bids of the largest banks, SM, SMPH, and ALI (the six largest), which is publicly shaped by media and the establishment narratives through the promotion of BSP and US FED easing as beneficial to stocks and the economy.

The public has been largely unaware of the buildup of risks associated with pumping the PSEi 30, driven by a significant concentration in trading activities and market internals

The market breadth exhibits that since only a few or a select number of issues have benefited from this liquidity-driven shindig, the invested public has likely been confused by the dismal returns of their portfolios and the cheerleading of media and the establishment.

IV. PSEi 30 Rose to 7,000 on Depressed and Concentrated Volume 

Does the market’s volume corroborate the media’s exaltation of the PSEi reaching 7,000?

Succinctly, no.

To be sure, main board volume surged by 22%, increasing from an average of Php 4.9 billion to this week’s Php 5.9 billion. (Figure 4, lowest image)

However, main board volume remains substantially lower than the levels observed when the PSEi 30 previously reached the 7,000-mark.

Figure 5

Moreover, despite a 4.2% monthly surge in August that pushed year-to-date returns (January to August) to 6.94%, the eight-month gross volume fell to its lowest level since at least 2012. (Figure 5, topmost visual)

That’s in addition to the disproportionate share weight of over 80% carried by the top 20 issues on the main board volume, as noted above.

Incredible, right?

But there’s more. 

The main board volume consists of:

-Client-order transactions

-Dealer trades (usually day trades)

-Cross-trades (trades from clients in the same broker)

-Done-through (intrabroker/broker subcontract) trades 

Last week, the top 10 brokers controlled 53.84% of the main board volume, averaging 56.75% since the end of June.

Or, concentration in trading activities has also been reflected in the concentration of broker trades.

The point is, what you see isn’t always what you get.

Main board (and gross) volume doesn’t necessarily reflect broader public participation.

The sharp decline in direct participation by the public in 2023 underscores this reality. The PSE’s active accounts comprised only 17.6% of the 1.9 million total accounts in 2023—the lowest ever. (Figure 5, middle image)

Instead, trades within the financial industry have played a significant role in the PSE’s overall turnover.

For instance, in Q1 2024, the BSP noted that claims of Other Financial Corporation (OFC) on the other sectors "grew as its investments in equity shares issued by other nonfinancial corporations," and also “claims on the depository corporations rose amid the increase in its deposits with the banks and holdings of bank-issued equity shares

Have OFCs been a part of the national team? OFCs include bank subsidiaries, public and private insurance and pension firms, investment houses, et.al. (BSP, 2014)

Why would the PSE’s volume endure a sustained decline if there has been significant savings to support the alleged increase in public confidence?

Historic? Hyperbole. 

V. Why Ignore the Impact of the Flagrant Manipulations of the PSEi 30? 

Finally, why would everyone discount, dismiss, or ignore the brazen "pumps-and-dumps" and "pre-closing price level fixing" at the PSE?

In the last five days, managing the index level involved early ICTSI-fueled pumps, aided by frenetic rotational bids on the other top five to six market caps. (Figure 5, lowest images)

After surpassing 7,000-level intraday, the local version of the "national team" dumped their holdings—using the 5-minute pre-closing float—onto unwitting foreign and retail buyers.

Despite this, the PSEi 30 managed to close above the 7,000 level during the last two days—albeit on low volume, with negative market breadth and concentrated trading activities.

Still, does everyone believe that the mounting distortions in the prices of (titles to) capital goods will come without consequences for the financial markets and the real economy?

What happened to the army of analysts and economists? Has the fundamental law of economics escaped them?

Or does the management of the PSEi 30 levels represent part of the establishment’s manipulation of the Overton Window?

Sure, the mainstream media has been so desperate to see a "bull market" that they describe a 19-month high as a "historic moment."

However, much of today’s media reporting seems to be more than mere cheerleading: genuine journalism has been sacrificed in favor of copywriting for vested interests paraded as news

VI. The Unannounced "Historic Moments" 

But the so-called "Historic Moment" has manifested in many unpopular and unannounced forms.

Let us enumerate the most critical ones: 

First, systemic leverage, consisting of PUBLIC DEBT plus TOTAL bank lending, has reached Php 28.515 trillion as of July 2024, accounting for 113% of the estimated 2024 NGDP!  Public debt servicing has also reached unparalleled levels!

Second, Q2 public spending, the financial industry’s net claims on the central government (NCoCG), and the banking system’s held-to-maturity (HTM) assets have also reached all-time highs.

Third, the banking sector’s business model transformation—from production loans to consumer loans—has been unprecedented.

Fourth, the savings-investment gap has reached a significant milestone.

Fifth, PSE borrowings, led by San Miguel’s Php 1.484 trillion, have also reached historic highs.

Sixth, the money supply (M1, M2, and M3) relative to GDP remains close to its record highs in Q1 2021.

Figure 6

Seventh, the BSP’s asset base remains near the record high attained during the pandemic bailout period (as of June 2024.) (Figure 6 topmost chart)

While there are more factors to consider, have you heard any media or establishment mentions or analyses of these issues?

Don’t these factors have an impact on the "fundamentals" of the PSE or the economy?

Or are we expected to operate under a state of "blissful oblivion," or the blind belief that "this time is different?" (The four most-deadliest words in investing—John Templeton)

It not only fundamentals, the current phase of the market cycle also tells a different story than the consensus whose primary focus is on a "return to normal" phase. (Figure 6 middle and lowest graphs)

Good luck to those who believe that the PSEi 30’s 7,000 level signifies a bull market or a historic moment.

____

References

The OFCs sub-sector includes the private and public insurance companies, other financial institutions that are either affiliates or subsidiaries of the banks that are supervised by the BSP (i.e., investment houses, financing companies, credit card companies, securities dealer/broker and trust institutions), pawnshops, government financial institutions and the rest of private other financial institutions (not regulated by the BSP) that are supervised by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Jean Christine A. Armas, Other Financial Corporations Survey (OFCS): Framework, Policy Implications and Preliminary Groundwork, BSP Economic Newsletter, July-August 2014, bsp.gov.ph

 

Wednesday, May 03, 2023

Is the Delisting of Metro Pacific a Bullish or Bearish Sign for the Philippine PSE?

  

Is the Delisting of Metro Pacific a Bullish or Bearish Sign for the Philippine PSE? 

 

Is the delisting of MPI a bullish sign for the Philippine PSE?   Our brief inquiry is premised on the prism of the health of the capital markets, MPI's liquidity conditions, and socionomics. 

 

Manila Bulletin, April 27: (bold mine)  

Metro Pacific Investment Holdings Company (MPIC) is planning to voluntarily delist from the Philippine Stock Exchange after a P48.4 billion tender offer by a consortium of its significant shareholders and Mitsui of Japan. In a disclosure to the Philippine Stock Exchange, MPIC said it has received the Tender Offer Notice from a consortium consisting of Metro Pacific Holdings, Inc. (MPHI), GT Capital Holdings, Inc., Mit-Pacific Infrastructure Holdings, Inc. (MPIH), and MIG Holdings Incorporated. MPHI is a member of the First Pacific Group owning 46.1 percent of MPIC while MPIH is a joint venture of Mitsui and Japan Overseas Infrastructure Investment Corporation for Transport & Urban Development…In a disclosure to the the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, First Pacific said “The Bidders feel that the intrinsic value of MPIC’s core investments in infrastructure in the Philippines has not been fully reflected in MPIC’s share price for some time.” “The tender offer and successful delisting will allow MPIC’s minority shareholders to realize a significant premium over historical share prices of MPIC,” it added. The firm noted that, “At the same time, a delisted MPIC will be better aligned with the objectives of the Bidders to continue investing in long-term infrastructure projects supporting sustainable economic growth in the Philippines.”  

Does the delisting of Metro Pacific signify a bullish sign to the Philippine stock market? 

 

Well, for some people, it is. 

 

The following explains our humble two cents (only our opinion—not a piece of advice). 

 

In the first place, Metro Pacific is an incumbent member of the elite PSEi 30. 

 

Second, the delisting represents a paradox to the goals of the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE). The PSE has been actively recruiting firms to list. It aims to increase its membership so the PSE can improve its finances. It targets 14 IPOs this year 

 

But then a member of the PSE pulls out!  Also taken private last February was the erstwhile listed Eagle Cement!  Great.   

 

Third, developing the capital markets (financialization) requires the enlistment of more publicly listed equity and fixed-income securities.  More companies would have access to the public's savings.  Savers may benefit from capital appreciation and dividend/coupon yields of the issued securities.   The public may price shares or fixed-income securities against perceived risk-reward tradeoffs based on the discounting of their future financial performance. 

 

Prices of securities may underpin the collateral values for borrowing.  Based on its market values, equities may help fund various corporate deals, including M&As. 

 

So how will MPI's pullout improve the capital markets? 

 

Next, the news quoted its largest stockholder, First Pacific, stating that "the bidders feel that the intrinsic value of MPIC’s core investments in infrastructure in the Philippines has not been fully reflected in MPIC’s share price for some time."   

 

Have they implied that MPI's pullout represents a "market failure" via share mispricing? And the delisting, thus, marshals this enticing opportunity exclusively to the principal shareholders? Or are they blaming the market for being blind to the profitable opportunities presented?    

 

The thing is, the consensus assertively claims that a bull market is around the corner.  

 

In this case, should a bull market become apparent, could the market not price its share much higher than the tender offer? Therefore, would MPI not suffer a substantial "opportunity loss" by withholding public participation? 

 

Or, if the current majority shareholders are "confident" of the firm's "intrinsic value," why not allow the markets to share this sentiment? 

 

That is, why the choice of mark-to-model instead of mark-to-market? 

 

Or, could it be that the prospects of a bull market and the roseate fundamentals for the firm signify "elusive" aspirations? 

 

But there could be more. 

 

Could MPI’s principal shareholder have been suggesting that the market’s inability to seize and take advantage of its "intrinsic value...for some time" extrapolates to possible signs of emerging liquidity drought?  

 

Let us do a few numbers. 

 

In MPI’s 2022 annual report, its outstanding debt of Php 292.467 billion in 2022 was up 18.7% from Php 246.342 billion, or an increase of Php 46.13 billion!  It reported a net income of Php 13.14 billion, up by 13% from Php 11.7 billion a year ago.  Net debt represented 3.5x the annual marginal gains of net income. Meanwhile, the company's cash reserves dived by 25% to Php 33.6 billion in 2022 from Php 44.9 billion in 2021. Also, MPI’s market cap as of April 28 was Php 122.245 billion.  So in 2022, debt eclipsed its income, while outstanding debt signified over twice its market cap! 

 

I could be wrong; however, does the unrecognized/unappreciated "intrinsic value" constitute the outgrowth of debt over income in the face of falling cash reserves? 

 

Could taking MPI into the private indicate its undertaking remedial liquidity measures through ownership restructuring—post-delisting? That's a guess, though.

 

And let us consider the sentiment.  

 

Is the route to MPI’s exclusivity a symptom of their leadership’s mounting vulnerability? 

 

Aside from compliance costs, is public scrutiny not the primary difference between an exclusive and publicly listed firm?  

 

Is MPIC withdrawing from the public's eye because of this? 

 

It can't be a positive sign to the capital markets when PLDT revealed last year that it overspent by some Php 48 billion in the last four years.   It means that from 2019, their financial reports understated the costs and overstated the income, as previously discussed. 

 

Have the private regulator and authorities, represented by the PSE, SEC, and BSP, done enough to protect the investing public, especially the minority shareholders, and other stakeholders? 

 

And could it be a coincidence that PLDT and MPIC share the same Chairmanship?  

 

We are not interested in intrigues. But could there be a relationship between the recent developments in PLDT and the delisting of MPI?  Or could these incidences represent merely a coincidence?  


Historian Charles Kindleberger presciently wrote that different forms of corporate malfeasance occur on market tops or during bear markets. 


Our task is not to scrutinize this but to see how the current events affect the capital markets.  

 

And based on the field of socionomics, the avoidance of scrutiny could be a sign of vulnerability or a substantial erosion of confidence. 

 

This tweet from Adjunct Professor and Author Peter Atwater explains:  

Environments of low confidence are "Eras of Revelation" - when what was overlooked, ignored, or unspoken, all comes out into the open. Scrutiny naturally rises as confidence falls.  

In all of this, yet a bullish sign from MPIC's delisting?