SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (139076)2/7/2018 8:22:17 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 218074
 
i went, "hmmnnn"

bloomberg.com

The Market Time Bomb That's Bigger Than the VIXLoan funds pose a potential liquidity problem, which could have a destabilizing effect.
More stories by Stephen GandelFebruary 8, 2018, 3:11 AM GMT+8



Photographer: Otto Ballon Mierny/AFP/Getty ImagesAs bad as the stock market turbulence has been from volatility-linked products, it could be even worse some day because of exchange-traded loan funds.

Stock tumbles have a way of pointing out investments that seemed like safe bets but turned out to be unstable, propped up solely by rising markets. And when these bets unwind they tend to take down the wider market with them. In the recent market drop, volatility-linked investment funds, which in retrospect are being called an $8 billion ticking time bomb, emerged as the culprit. A number of the exchange-traded products were wiped out, and it appears the unraveling hastened the stock market's fall.

Exchange-traded loan funds bear a lot of similarity to the volatility funds that average investors have flocked to for safety, except that they are much bigger. Volatility-linked ETFs grew to include about $8 billion in investments. The PowerShares Senior Loan ETF has nearly that much in it alone. Last month, LCD, a unit within S&P Global Market Intelligence, said that assets under management in loan funds had grown to more than $156 billion, up from around $110 billion two years ago.

Critics have grumbled about bond funds for years but have been mostly ignored by investors who have piled into loan funds thinking that the floating-rate debt will protect them from losses when interest rates rise. Top bond fund manager Thomas Atteberry of FPA New Income has recently warned in investor presentations that leveraged loans may not offer the interest rate protection that investors are counting on.

But the big, potentially market-destabilizing problem hidden in bond funds has to do with liquidity. ETFs, like stocks, can be bought and sold in milliseconds. But bank loans cannot. Loans trade in over-the-counter markets with much less volume and settlement times that can stretch out a month. The worry is that investors will stampede out of loan ETFs, which account for about $10 billion of the $156 billion in loan fund investments, faster than the ETF managers can sell the underlying loans in their portfolio. This would cause a gap in the value of the ETF and the value of the loans in it, or worse, the possibility the funds may not be able to immediately come up with money for investors looking to cash out. Fear of not being able to get your money back is what causes bank runs and financial mayhem in general. The problem could be compounded by loan mutual funds, which make up a much larger share of that $156 billion and could also encounter a liquidity mismatch problem, though not as extreme as ETFs. Four years ago, Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock Inc., one of the largest providers of ETFs, warned that he thought loan ETFs, along with leveraged ETFs, were too risky for individual investors and not something his company would offer. BlackRock repeated a warning about certain ETFs on Tuesday, though it didn't identify loan ETFs directly.

And that's not the only source of potential destabilization in the loan market. The other big buyer of loans has been collateralized loan obligations, which buy and sell loans like funds but raise money like bonds. CLO offerings raised $118 billion last year, up from $72 billion the year before. CLOs don't have the liquidity problem that ETFs have, but they may have a structural problem. CLOs, to maintain their relatively high yields, typically buy loans with an average credit rating of B, which tend to have default rates in the double digits during downturns. However, most BBB bonds tied to CLO deals would start to default if just 9 percent of the loans in the CLO were to default. Recently, the loan default rate has been much lower than that, around 2 percent, and CLOs have performed well. Loan ETF providers have also combated criticism by saying theoretical liquidity problems have yet to materialize, even during the financial crisis.

Leveraging UpBorrowing in the corporate loan market hit a high last year

Source: Bloomberg

But there are signs that problems could be on the horizon, particularly globally. Credit ratios worsened in emerging markets last year, according to a report this week from S&P Global Ratings, though ratios in North America and Europe improved. Overall, global nonfinancial corporate debt grew by 15 percentage points to 96 percent of GDP from 2011 to 2017, the bond ratings agency said. "When debt is this steep and default rates are low, something's gotta give," S&P analyst Terry Chan wrote in the report.

Red Is the New BlackNetflix is one of a number of highfliers counting on debt markets to fund its growth plans

Source: Bloomberg

2018 is an estimate of analysts compiled by Bloomberg. Netflix has given a higher loss figure.

As the loan market has grown -- issuance rose 50 percent last year to $1.5 trillion -- it has become a bigger part of how large companies fund themselves, crowding out other more traditional funding markets like high-yield debt. And more large companies, including some of the market's highest fliers, are counting on credit markets to fund their growth. Netflix, for example, recently told investors that it expects its operations will burn through as much as $4 billion in cash next year. Tesla appears to have run through nearly that much last year. Telecom giant AT&T has nearly $126 billion in long-term debt, nearly double what it had just five years ago. Investors have grown nervous that a number of regional telecoms, including CenturyLink and its $18 billion in long-term debt, could be at risk of default. An investor retreat from the loan market because of some shock would certainly take a bite out of the FANG tech stocks, and likely many others.

All this is a recipe, if not for disaster, than at least a potential nasty market drop. Investors just saw what happens when $8 billion has flooded into an unsustainable investment. Imagine what will happen when even more tries to get out of another.

(Corrects name of a senior loan ETF in the third paragraph.)

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.




To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (139076)2/7/2018 8:28:25 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218074
 
... and perhaps this take explains somewhat the singularly single-minded, thick-headed, wrong-footed, near-sighted view by some from the darkest corner of the world looking in on a brightly-lit and enthusiastic party, or just that some enjoy being wrong, in error, befuddled, and wrong again

denigrate others as olives, and yet still hangs about ... so strange

bloomberg.com

China’s Outlook Seems Darkest From a Distance
Some China-based investors say observers abroad are missing a healthy pickup in the economy.
More stories by Enda CurranFebruary 8, 2018, 5:00 AM GMT+8

When it comes to analyzing China, distance seems to make investors’ views of the world’s second-largest economy grow, shall we say, less fond. Whether it’s George Soros (who’s likened China to the U.S. before the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis) or Kyle Bass (who’s said the Chinese economy is built on sand) or Jim Chanos (who’s said, memorably, that China is on a “treadmill to hell”), there’s no shortage of gloomy outlooks. Over-investment, too much debt, bubbly markets, faked data, Ponzi-like financial structures—the litany of looming pitfalls seems inescapable to many investors, especially hedge funds, based in financial hubs from Connecticut to Canary Wharf.

That negativity is a sharp contrast to the majority opinion held closer to Beijing or Shanghai. There, booming consumption, a pickup in global trade, and an increasingly innovative private sector are fueling bets that China’s generation-long economic miracle still has plenty of room to run, albeit at a slower rate than the average gross domestic product growth of almost 10 percent a year since the early 1980s. “I find it scary how many self-proclaimed US based China experts w real influence have barely lived in China, barely speak Chinese and barely have a clue …” tweeted Shaun Rein, Shanghai-based founder and managing director of China Market Research Group and author of The War for China’s Wallet, on Dec. 26. Later he was on Twitter again, wagering that the “same tired group of China’s watchers will predict China’s collapse for the 40th year in a row… and they’ll be wrong for the 40th time but western media will keep quoting them breathlessly as experts.”

It's almost time for New Year's Predictions on China's economy - my prediction? Same tired group of China's watchers will predict China's collapse for the 40th year in a row... and they'll be wrong for the 40th time but western media will keep quoting them breathlessly as experts

— Shaun Rein (@shaunrein) 1:28 PM - Dec 27, 2017

Rein may have a point, but there are plenty of investors across the Pacific who take a longer view on China. Corporate America, for one, has long seen through the fog of gloom. Chicago-based Boeing Co. is building its first overseas “completion center” for 737 aircraft on Zhoushan Island south of Shanghai. In 2016 Walt Disney Co. opened a $5.5 billion theme park in Shanghai—its biggest-ever foreign investment. Tesla Inc. says that within the next several years it plans to begin making automobiles in China, where surging demand for electric cars contributed 15 percent of the company’s revenue in 2016. Meanwhile, in December, the world’s biggest Starbucks—all 30,000 square feet of it, about half the size of a soccer field—opened in Shanghai.

Western banks, which have long coveted the vast Chinese market but had mixed success entering it, are looking at new opportunities now that President Xi Jinping promised to open up the sector to greater foreign competition. UBS Group AG is in discussions to acquire a majority stake in its Chinese securities joint venture, and Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have signaled a desire to take majority stakes in their own Chinese ventures. BlackRock, Fidelity International, UBS Asset Management, and Man Group are among global fund managers expanding in China.

If much of the commentary on China from the West remains bearish, blame Japan. Some analysts and investors base their assessments on the assumption that China is destined to share the fate of Japan, whose three-decade boom hit a wall in the early 1990s. This supposition is questionable. China is still at a much lower stage of development than Japan; on a per-capita basis, China’s GDP in 2016 was less than 40 percent of where Japan was in 1970, according to World Bank Group data. What’s more, China is a vast, multiregional economy—not an island. That means it can keep posting world-beating growth even when some regions do turn down, as happened in 2016 and early 2017 when the industrial northeast slowed as the government pushed through an economic rebalancing that promotes consumption and services.

As China enters the lunar Year of the Dog, the gloomy bears say it’s unlikely that plans to curb loans and credit expansion can succeed without denting growth. Mark Williams, chief Asia economist at Capital Economics Ltd. in London, for instance, thinks government statistics have inflated GDP readings. He reckons China’s GDP growth will slow to 4.5 percent this year, whereas the more than 100-strong research team at China International Capital Corp., the country’s first Sino-foreign investment bank, thinks the economy will actually accelerate to 7 percent.

CICC downplays the negative impact of total borrowing, which has risen to more than 2.5 times China’s GDP and is generally seen as the No. 1 risk factor facing the economy. The investment bank argues that both the state sector and households have more than enough cash on hand should trouble strike. In addition, CICC says, the most indebted sector—corporates—is sitting on cash equivalent to about 40 percent of current debt. That, according to Liang Hong, the company’s chief economist, means that while government reforms to cut debt levels in China are important, they needn’t translate into negative growth.

Another point missed by the Connecticut-set mentality is this: China’s debt is largely self-funded and will remain that way as long as the country hangs on to a healthy current account surplus, according to Michael Spencer, global head of economics at Deutsche Bank AG in Hong Kong. “Hedge funds in New York have been saying for seven years it’s going to be a crisis, but it clearly hasn’t been the case,” he says. “China is not investing New York hedge fund money. It is investing Chinese home savings.”

That’s not to say the China bears don’t have legitimate concerns. The country’s total debt from the government, households, and nonfinancial companies reached 256 percent of GDP in June 2017, already surpassing that of the U.S. (250 percent), according to the Bank for International Settlements. That’s up from 146 percent a decade ago, and it marks a faster pace of debt accumulation than occurred in the U.S. during the period leading to the housing crisis. Even officials in Beijing are taking the possibility of asset-price collapse seriously: Outgoing People’s Bank of China Governor Zhou Xiaochuan in October warned of the risk of a debt-induced Minsky Moment, and Xi has prioritized financial stability through his second term in office.



Confidence in the ability of China’s policymakers to manage the economy wavered in 2015, when an epic stock market crash and bungled exchange rate reform sent global markets into a tailspin. But more than two years on, the clear takeaway from that episode is the need to distinguish market ructions from real economic activity: Economic growth largely held up through that crisis as authorities used levers such as capital controls to stem the fallout.

For all the talk of reform, the central government retains a firm grip on the economy. The heavy fist of the state still often trumps the invisible hand of markets, credit is still channeled from state-owned lenders to state-owned firms, and local governments can still ramp up infrastructure investment at the first whiff of a slowdown. That sort of investment rationale is behind one of Xi’s signature policy initiatives—the Belt and Road initiative that Beijing says will pump $1.3 trillion into roads, ports, and other construction projects designed to connect China to trading partners across Asia and into Europe. While the state and local involvement is a plus for near-term stability, it could also be a tax on the future if capital is misallocated.

“The further away from China, the more difficult to feel all the real changes”

Banks are often identified as China’s weakest link. A deep-dive analysis by the International Monetary Fund in 2017 recommended that the nation’s lenders should increase their capital buffers to protect against any sudden economic downturn. Kevin Smith, Denver-based chief executive officer and founder of Crescat Capital LLC, says a banking implosion is inevitable; the only question is when. Smith has held short yuan bets since at least 2014, a position that helped his global macro fund gain 16 percent in 2015 when the PBOC surprised the world with its minidevaluation.

Smith was less fortunate last year when China’s economic recovery and tightening capital controls helped the yuan to rally. His fund lost 23 percent in 2017. The loss cut the fund’s annual return since its 2006 inception to 11 percent, which still outpaced the S&P 500 index’s gain of 8.8 percent during the period. Smith is undaunted. “We remain grounded in our analysis,” he says. “Credit bubbles burst. Ponzis implode. In the end, we believe China will be forced to print trillions of U.S. dollars equivalent of new money to recapitalize its banking system and bail out its depositors.” In that scenario the currency will crash, Smith says, who’s also short on various Chinese equities.

He wasn’t alone in getting the yuan bet wrong last year. Consensus estimates at the start of 2017 forecast the dollar would buy 7.15 yuan by yearend; it ended at 6.50 yuan. Headline economic data don’t tell the story of trends and developments actually taking place on the ground, from the industrial northeast to the high-tech south and the agricultural interior, says Frederic Neumann, co-head of Asian economics research at HSBC Holdings Plc in Hong Kong. And the government’s firm hand on the tiller, he says, needs to be closely watched. “The further away students of China are located, the more easily such nuances get lost, leaving many to focus more on the risks than on the promises of the country’s economic future,” Neumann says.

Because changes across China’s extensive economy tend to be subtle and gradual, it’s often hard to get a feel for the pace of development, according to Mo Ji, Hong Kong-based chief economist for Asia ex-Japan at Amundi Asset Management, who called a bottom to China’s slowdown in late 2015, well before it was a consensus view. She’s been working for the past 13 years with the Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz on analyzing China’s economy, having first met him when she studied under him for a doctorate at Columbia University. “The further away from China, the more difficult to feel all the real changes,” Mo says.

Stephen Roach may spend a lot of time in Connecticut—he’s a senior fellow at Yale in New Haven—but he’d never be accused of being part of the Connecticut set. A former nonexecutive chairman of Morgan Stanley in Asia, Roach first went to China in 1985 and still travels there four or five times a year. He says there’s a tendency to project the West’s crisis-prone outcomes onto China. “Connecticut-based hedge funds and Washington-based politicians,” he says, “are equally guilty of this long-standing bias.”

Curran is chief Asia economics correspondent in Hong Kong. Xie is a market blogger in New York.