Submitted by Christoph Gisiger via Finanz und Wirtschaft,
Itâs one of the most important questions this year: Where are bond yields in the United States heading next?
For Jeffrey Sherman the answer seems to be obvious: ÂŤUpÂť, he signals with his thumb while at lunch at the Los Angeles headquarters of DoubleLine Capital. The Deputy Chief Investment Officer at the renowned fixed income boutique of bond king Jeffrey Gundlach expects more turmoil for financial markets and draws parallels to 1987, the year of the monster crash. At this time, the lively and approachable Californian spots the most attractive opportunities in the commodity sector since commodities tend to perform well in the late stage of the cycle.
Mr. Sherman, tensions in the financial markets are rising. As someone who likes financial history, what are your thoughts when you look at the big picture?
From a short-term perspective, it sure feels like 1987: a little spookiness in the stock market and yields rising. So there are a lot of parallels to 1987. For example, tariffs, a weak dollar and a new Fed Chairman. And remember, there was the crash before the crash. That year, the stock experienced some jitters already in April and about six months later you had the big crash on Black Monday.
That day in October 1987 the Dow Jones suffered its biggest loss in history. At that time people pointed to electronic trading and new financial products like portfolio insurance. Do you spot similar risks today?
People blame quants, people blame algorithms, people blame risk parity. But Iâm not convinced. The reason we had this sell off is not algos or risk parity. Itâs because of humans. For instance, we all have been told that ETF buyers are buy and hold investors forever. But theyâre buy and hold investors until theyâre not, until they panic. Thatâs why these websites for electronic trading like Betterment and all the other Robo-Advisers were down on February 5th. I think even Fidelity had an issue because of the huge volume. So why did all these people try to log in? They werenât logging in to buy, they were logging in to sell!
Whatâs next for stocks?
I think youâll see it again. If bond yields rise you are going to see another scare. Itâs the velocity, itâs the speed at which this correction happened: 10% in roughly three to four days, thatâs a big move. But whatâs interesting is that the bond market was not behaving in a manner which is consistent with the recent past. It didnât seem like it wanted to rally. Bond yields essentially ended flat that week if not slightly higher. To us, that causes us pause. It means that this correction was an equity market story and bonds werenât even paying attention to it. Basically, the bond market said: look we continue to trade on fundamentals. We have bigger deficits, we have a growth story, so yields need to be higher.
So what has changed in the bond market?
What has changed is the tax cut. The tax plan really started in the middle of September and thatâs when you saw the bond market reacting. Thatâs when President Trump felt he had to do something and it took him and congress the rest of the year to get it done. At that point, the market had shifted from its disinflationary mindset to a moderate inflation mindset. And thatâs the repricing that has been taking place.
Is the tax cut really a game changer for the US economy?
As critical as people were initially of the tax cuts, the cuts are beneficial in 2018 for roughly 98% of the working class. That means that there is more money to be spent or saved. Also, there is something about paycheck growth versus one-time bonuses. In the former case, people tend to spend more, especially people low-income earners because they are the spenders by definition. They donât make enough money to save. So I think there is the potential to get a little bit of inflation. Because if it is that expansion from the consumer, it will look growthy, but it will also look inflationary. But how long it persists is the multi trillion-dollar question.
Whatâs more, the tax cuts will bloat the deficit even more. Whatâs your take on that?
We have an administration and a Congress which want to spend money. For instance, Senator Rand Paul was filibustering for about two hours, ranting about the increase in the deficit and then voted for the tax plan. Itâs hypocrisy. So I think they will continue with this deficit binge.
How will this impact the midterms in fall?
People are speculating if the Democrats are going to take over. Socially, they probably could. But they are going to have a hard time economically to take over either the House or the Senate; simply because the tax cuts are going to trickle through and many workers are going to get the benefit of minimum wage. So even the people who arenât truly getting a tax cut are getting a pay hike. They are going to say: âLook how well we did.â So for the Republicans the timing is beautiful. But I think it reverses in 2020. Thatâs something we have been talking about for a few years: Itâs not the 2016 election that really is the one thatâs going to be a pivot. Itâs going to be 2020. The reason for that is that the deficits are going to explode, and this administration seems to love debt.
And how do you cope with political risks like the Muller investigation form an investorâs perspective?
The Mueller investigation looks bad. I mean that thing gets worse every week or two. But markets donât care. They only care if there is an impeachment and then you will get a short-term correction. But itâs very hard to impeach the president. Even if the Democrats get it in one arm of congress they would have to get it through the Senate. So they would have to go to trial in the Senate and the Republicans still have a blocking majority there. And the Republicans showed that theyâre loyal to Trump. So itâs practically impossible. But there is always political risk in the world. And typically, the flight to quality trade is what works. Thatâs why you own high quality bonds like Treasuries, Japanese government bonds and things like that.
So where are US bond yields heading in 2018?
I think weâre going to 3.25 to 3.5% on ten year Treasuries. We broke through most levels on the ten year bond and on the thirty year bond. They have broken their downward channels. Coming in the year it was like: âHey, we will probably test 3% on the ten year by the first half of the year. Then in January it turned into: âYou know, itâs probably the first quarterâ. Now itâs maybe March because the bond market does not want to rally. But itâs not just technicals. Weâre talking about the Fedâs balance sheet, weâre talking about expanded deficits and weâre talking about less revenue coming in for the government. Donât forget tax cuts arenât free.
What does that mean for the new Fed chief Jerome Powell and his plans to tighten monetary policy further?
In March heâs going to hike the Federal Funds Rate. But if you want to hike interest rates three or four times this year plus do the balance sheet unwinding then I think weâre going to have a problem early 2019. I think the financial markets will respond and thatâs not good for risk assets. So Iâm not convinced that the Fed will take this entire path because I think it becomes painful. This was all set up by Yellen around a year ago. Since then, a lot of fundamentals have changed in the debt market. The plan was set up when yields were lower and before we were set to double the deficit. So itâs really hard to say how the path will look like for the Fed. Thatâs why we were all listening and watching how Powell behaved when he took the stage this week. It looks like the Fed is going to be more hawkish. But If you want to finance all that debt, you kind of need some dovish people on the board of the Fed. You donât really want Hawks on there.
Where do you see the biggest risks if something goes wrong?
Itâs not that we are extremely bearish on the world. But if rates go up it will put some upward pressure on spreads. And if you respect financial history, what the Fed has always done is hike until something breaks. We definitely had the debt build up. Looking at debt to GDP, people talk a lot about a bond bubble. But itâs not in the treasury market and itâs not in the housing market. Itâs in Corporate America.
Whatâs wrong with Corporate America?
Many companies really lived on due to this low interest rate environment. Zombie companies, those that earn less than they pay in interest, are on the rise again. Thatâs why you have to watch the corporate market. Right now, itâs not a problem. But letâs say we go to 4% on ten year Treasuries. Does a 6% high yield bond make sense? Probably not. Itâs probably 9% or 10% because you have to worry about refinancing. So this is something that hasnât really happened historically. In fact, the high yield market lived through the entire secular bond bull market. So if we go into this structural bear market, the junk bond market is toast. You are going to have 30% to 40% default rates. Thatâs extreme thinking. But letâs just take it back down: A 4% on the ten year bond seems completely plausible. So how do you think these risk assets respond? And what does it mean for other markets? People have become complacent with high yield bonds. They assume they donât default hardly ever. But we know thatâs not true. Thereâs a reason they carry this kind of rating.
Junk bonds tend to act more like stocks in their market behavior than other bonds. Whatâs your outlook on equities?
One of the most dangerous things is naive extrapolation. Last year, most equity markets advanced more than 20% in dollar terms. So I think some of the risk this year is this naive extrapolation of this recent experience. Itâs this recency bias that people think that it just can continue forever. So the risk is that people get complacent and think that equites can always go up.
What is your recommendation when it comes to investing in stocks?
In the US, itâs very difficult to say stocks are cheap. In terms of valuations, when you think about the CAPE ratio for instance, you have roughly a 33 ratio on the US market, something closer to 22 to 23 on Europe and about 18 on emerging markets. So what you see is that the European market and emerging markets are a lot cheaper. Also, if you buy into this thesis that we will continue to have this coordinated global growth story, then the emerging markets should be the biggest benefactor. So the ideas is that if you want to deploy new money into equities itâs probably best to kind of shy away from the US because everybody knows the story about the tax reform already. US stocks are priced I wonâtâ say to perfection but to a pretty rosy scenario. So if yields push significantly higher itâs really hard on a discounted cash-flow basis to rationalize all of that.
So where do you spot more attractive opportunities for investors right now?
Commodities is our choice investment for investors to get diversification at low prices. Itâs an area that tends to do well late in the cycle. Itâs a fundamental story. Â The consumption side has been increasing and thereâs upside to that. If we go from 3.5% global GDP growth to 4% that changes the consumption dynamics significantly. Also, commodities are cheap by historical levels which means it looks like they have room to run. People have kicked them out of their portfolios because of how bad they did for years. Itâs an asset class that has underperformed the S&P 500 since the financial crisis every year. But if you get some inflation itâs going to be exhibited in this part of the market. Commodities arenât perfect on inflation. But theyâre pretty good when you have changes in unexpected inflation â and thatâs what investors are waking up to.
And which commodities do like most?
I like industrial metals. Copper is kind of iffy at times. However, thereâs a strong case for nickel due to demand from electric vehicle production. And if we get growth, zinc still looks interesting because itâs used in galvanizing steel. So I think industrial metals have momentum. Iâm optimistic for the precious metals as well. If we do get inflation signs you will see that in the gold and silver price. Whatâs more, I still think oil goes higher. I think demand will pick up and we will get back to $80. Maybe not this year. Maybe it takes two years. But if the growth story is true the energy market is too cheap still.