Category: Chart of the Week

Is the Labor Market Approaching Full Employment?

On January 8th, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics released the unemployment rate for December 2015 and additionally on January 12th released the Job Opening and Labor Turnover (JOLT) report for November 2015. This week’s chart focuses on these two reports and the strength of the U.S. labor market as we enter 2016.

On January 8th, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics released the unemployment rate for December 2015 and additionally on January 12th released the Job Opening and Labor Turnover (JOLT) report for November 2015. This week’s chart focuses on these two reports and the strength of the U.S. labor market as we enter 2016. As the chart shows, unemployment has changed little over the past six months, ending at 5.0% for December. Furthermore, the amount of open jobs has also held steady over the same period, ending at approximately 5.4M openings as of November 2015.

The high number of open jobs could very well signal that the currently available workforce is unable to satisfy the requirements of these jobs and the economy is reaching (or already at) full employment. If the labor market is truly at full employment, we would expect to see several new dynamics emerge. First, upward pressure on wages could emerge as employers will have to offer more to potential workers for them to change jobs. Wage growth has been one of the slowest factors in the economic recovery, increasing only 1.55% during the first eleven months of 2015. Another outcome is that the jobs available require specific skills or education, thus meaning those unemployed could pursue such qualifications to obtain one of these open jobs. As job seekers choose to pursue additional training or education, they would likely drop out of the labor force, therefore further depressing the participation rate and potentially decreasing the unemployment rate through the “denominator effect.” A final outcome is that as the New Year starts and firms obtain fresh budgets, they will continue to hire, hence adding additional jobs to the labor market. While these outcomes described are not all-inclusive they do provide some insight into the current outlook for the labor market, and help explain why the Federal Reserve had sufficient confidence in the labor market to initiate the rate hike in December.

Why is Portfolio Diversification Important?

This week’s Chart of the Week shows what is commonly referred to as a “Periodic Table of Investment Returns”. It is a table showing historic calendar year returns for various asset classes ranked in order of performance from best to worst. One of the key takeaways from this table is that 2015 was a particularly challenging year for investment returns.

This week’s Chart of the Week shows what is commonly referred to as a “Periodic Table of Investment Returns.” It is a table showing historic calendar year returns for various asset classes ranked in order of performance from best to worst. One of the key takeaways from this table is that 2015 was a particularly challenging year for investment returns. With the exception of real estate, there were no major asset classes that posted double-digit gains in 2015, and except for emerging market equities, there were no major asset classes that posted double-digit losses for the year. In an environment where most asset classes posted low single-digit returns for the year (either positive or negative), it was extremely difficult for diversified portfolios to achieve their target rates of return in 2015.

The other key takeaway from this table is the importance of diversification within a portfolio. As seen in the table, there has been very little consistency in the best and worst performing asset class from year to year. In fact, since 2007 just about every asset class that was the best performing asset class for a year was also the worst performing asset class for a year during this time frame. Just because an asset class performs well in one year it will not necessarily perform well the next, and just because an asset class performs poorly in one year it will not necessarily perform poorly again the next. This illustrates the importance of adhering to strategic asset allocation targets and rebalancing portfolios back to targets over time.

1Represents YTD return as of 9/30/15.  4Q 2015 returns are not yet available.
2Represents YTD return as of 11/30/15.  December 2015 returns are not yet available.

Asset Class Benchmark
Large Cap Russell 1000
Mid Cap Russell Mid Cap
Small Cap Russell 2000
Core Fixed Barclays US Agg Bond
High Yield Barclays US Corporate High Yield
Bank Loans Credit Suisse Leveraged Loan
Developed Lg Cap MSCI EAFE
Developed Sm Cap MSCI EAFE Small Cap
Emerging Markets MSCI EM
Real Estate NFI
Hedge Funds HFRI FOF: Diversified Index
Private Equity Cambridge All PE

What Happened to High Yield?

The recent sell-off in the U.S. High Yield market has caused concern among investors and many worry that the situation will worsen before improving; this is especially concerning because of its effects on portfolio values before calendar year-end. The Credit Suisse High Yield Index returned -1.08% on Friday December 11th and recorded another down day when the markets reopened on Monday with a return of -1.39%.

The recent sell-off in the U.S. high yield market has caused concern among investors and many worry that the situation will worsen before improving; this is especially concerning because of its effects on portfolio values before calendar year-end. The Credit Suisse High Yield Index returned -1.08% on Friday, December 11th and recorded another down day when the markets reopened on Monday with a return of -1.39%. Through December 14th, high yield has dropped 4.15% for the month and 6.11% for the year. As of December 14th, the yield for the index is 9.42% and the spread is 774bp.

The declines reflect liquidity concerns in the high yield market after the closure of a junk-bond mutual fund. Many investors took advantage of low bond prices after the financial crisis, betting that the U.S. economy would recover. While that thesis proved to be a profitable one, there has been a gradual change in sentiment, with significant outflows in high yield mutual funds over the last three years, including $10.5 billion this year. So what is driving this liquidity concern and subsequent sell-off?

Many would argue that the prolonged period of low oil and other commodity prices are the primary drivers of the sell-off, and are expected to drive default rates higher for the energy portion of the high yield index. As shown in the chart above, energy and metals/minerals constitute roughly 18% of the index. With commodity prices struggling and OPEC not willing to slow production in oil, the fear is that the underlying prices will continue to fall. A further fall in prices — particularly in the energy and metals/minerals industries — will lead to greater revenue losses and a higher likelihood of defaults. Although default rates for the other sectors of the index are expected to remain close to their long-term averages, high yield funds with a significant overweight to the energy and metals/minerals sectors may suffer above average losses over the coming year.

Is It Finally Going to Happen Next Week?

In testimony before the House Financial Services Committee on November 4, Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen remarked that a rate hike was still a “live possibility” in December, should economic data remain supportive.

In testimony before the House Financial Services Committee on November 4, Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen remarked that a rate hike was still a “live possibility” in December, should economic data remain supportive. Prior to that comment, the market was unsure of any policy change at the Fed’s December meeting, with the Fed Fund’s Futures market implying a  50% probability of a rake hike. After Yellen’s comments, the probability of a hike in December jumped to nearly 70%, and currently sits at 80%, thanks to strong payroll reports over the last two months and further hawkish comments from FOMC members.

Despite this guesswork, Yellen and other members of the FOMC have stressed that the timing of the first rate hike in over nine years is less important that the pace of successive increases. While the futures market hasn’t been an overly reliable predictor of the future path of the Fed Funds rate, it is worth noting that the market appears to accept the Fed’s pledge to enact future increases in a slow and steady manner. Assuming a 0.25% increase on December 16 as a near certainty, the futures market doesn’t imply any meaningful probability of the next increase until the March 2016 meeting, with the most likely landing spot of the Fed Funds rate to be between 0.75% and 1.00% at the end of 2016. While a Fed Funds rate of 1.00% would be a notable shift from the Fed’s post-crisis zero interest rate policy, it would still be seen as highly accommodative in a historical context, and supportive of future economic growth.

How Soon Should We Expect the Next Recession?

What has become known as the Great Recession officially came to an end in June 2009. Since then, GDP has expanded to new real highs, we are approaching full employment, and the U.S. dollar is the strongest it has been in the past decade. Though various issues remain within the economy, overall things seem to be going well.

What has become known as the Great Recession officially came to an end in June 2009. Since then, GDP has expanded to new real highs, we are approaching full employment, and the U.S. dollar is the strongest it has been in the past decade. Though various issues remain within the economy, overall things seem to be going well.

The question on many people’s minds is how long can this last? Currently, we are 78 months out from the trough of the recession. Of the recessions since WWII, on average the period from the end of one recession to the start of the next lasts 58 months, suggesting we may be due. However, the last three recovery/expansion phases lasted longer than this and during the 1990s this period lasted 120 months leading up to the Tech Bubble.

Additionally, recessions do not occur simply with the passage of time; generally, there has to be a catalyst for the drop. Potential current areas of concern include slower wage growth, lower productivity, and the Fed tightening monetary policy.  However, the worst shocks to the economy are often unexpected; very few people predicted the housing crash. At this point though, there don’t seem to be any major red flags. The IMF’s most recent World Economic Outlook predicted only a 16% chance of the U.S. entering a recession through the first half of 2016. Also, with the last recession the worst since the Great Depression, it is plausible that the next crisis could be delayed as a result of people exhibiting more caution as it relates to spending and speculation. Ultimately, it is impossible to accurately predict when a recession will occur, so while the U.S. could enter a recession at anytime, we may still have several more years of expansion ahead of us.

How Much Longer Will Growth Outperform Value?

This week’s Chart of the Week examines the relative performance of growth versus value. The above chart shows the price level of the Russell 3000 Growth index relative to the Russell 3000 Value index. Growth is outperforming value when the line is in an uptrend and value is outperforming growth when the line is trending downward.

This week’s Chart of the Week examines the relative performance of growth versus value. The above chart shows the price level of the Russell 3000 Growth index relative to the Russell 3000 Value index. Growth is outperforming value when the line is in an uptrend and value is outperforming growth when the line is trending downward.

Investors may have noticed the recent outperformance of growth versus value year-to-date across small-, mid-, and large-cap. When viewed over a longer time horizon though, growth has outperformed value for almost ten years. The outperformance of growth prior to the tech bubble was much greater in magnitude; however, the current multi-year period of growth outperformance is the longest since the early 1980s.

One explanation for the current leadership of growth over value may simply be how these indices are constructed. Value indices feature a much larger allocation to the Financial and Energy sectors (representing approximately 43% of the Russell 3000 Value index as of 9/30/2015). When examining performance since the October 2007 market peak, Financials and Energy have lagged other sectors, posting cumulative returns of -20.8% and +3.1%, respectively. Areas such as Technology, Health Care, and Consumer Discretionary are among the best performing sectors since the October 2007 market peak and carry higher weightings within growth indices.

Over the long term, there will be periods when value is in favor and periods when growth is in favor. The duration of the current growth cycle calls into question how much longer growth’s outperformance will persist. Ultimately, it is extremely difficult to predict when the relative performance will shift, and yet another reminder that it is imperative to be diversified across the various size and style boxes of the U.S. equity market.

Divergent Central Bank Policy

This week’s Chart of the Week shows the divergence in Monetary Policy from the ECB, Bank of Japan and Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve discontinued its quantitative easing (“QE”) strategy October 29th 2014; in contrast, after the end of 3Q14, the Bank of Japan and European Central Bank have increased asset holdings 30% and 26%, respectively.

This week’s Chart of the Week shows the divergence in Monetary Policy from the ECB, Bank of Japan, and Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve discontinued its quantitative easing (“QE”) strategy on October 29th, 2014; in contrast, after the end of 3Q14, the Bank of Japan and European Central Bank have increased asset holdings by 30% and 26%, respectively.

During the same time period, the Euro and Yen have depreciated by over 10%, now trading at approximately 85% of their 10-year averages. The Bank of Japan and European Central Bank will continue large asset purchases for the foreseeable future in an effort to reduce borrowing costs and stimulate growth.

In the short term, foreign multinational corporations should utilize suppressed borrowing costs and weaker currencies as tailwinds for exports. This is best explained by third-party consumers’ attraction to the Eurozone and Japan’s relative prices of goods. QE’s goal to stimulate economic growth has had positive externalities on each bank’s respective currency; over the long run, the currency effect should be normalized as foreign direct investment is attracted to higher revenues and profits, yielding currency demand.

The Eurozone growth estimate of 0.3% advocates further action will be taken by the ECB through QE. Increased stimulus levels will force the Euro towards parity with the dollar for the first time in over a decade. Until there are better signs of growth from Eurozone nations, the ECB will be forced to use monetary stimulus and currency demand will continue to decline.

Babies Thrown Out With the Bathwater II: Emerging Markets Debt

Certain emerging markets countries have not been safe from being thrown out as “babies with the bathwater” during the past year’s global credit selloff trend.

Certain emerging markets countries have not been safe from being thrown out as “babies with the bathwater” during the past year’s global credit selloff trend.

This week’s Chart of the Week shows the spreads in basis points of the 10-year sovereign bonds from key Latin American, Asian, and EMEA (which stands for European, Middle Eastern and African) emerging countries.  The chart shows the widening of these spreads from December 2013 in the blue bars, through the energy dislocation of December 2014 and China’s devaluation of September 2015, to October 2015 in the red bars.  It is not surprising that Venezuela’s and Russia’s spreads are elevated as they are major oil exporters.

However, the countries that may at least in part have been subject to the “babies thrown out with the bathwater” effect have ranged from Latin America’s Mexico to Brazil, Asia’s Korea, and the EMEA region’s Bulgaria.  For example, Mexico’s spreads have widened from 112 basis points to 161 basis points from December 2013 to October 2015.  These emerging markets babies that have been thrown out with the bathwater represent possible value and interesting opportunities for emerging markets bond managers.

Are Retail Stocks on Sale?

Historically, the retail industry, a subset of the consumer discretionary sector, experiences an upswing during the winter months as holiday sales alone contribute 19% to yearly sales and Q4 earnings are generally released within the beginning of Q1. Highlighted in red is the November through February performance of the S&P Retail Select Industry Index; recession years aside, this upward trend usually holds.

Historically, the retail industry, a subset of the consumer discretionary sector, experiences an upswing during the winter months as holiday sales alone contribute 19% to yearly sales and Q4 earnings are generally released within the beginning of Q1. Highlighted in red is the November through February performance of the S&P Retail Select Industry Index; recession years aside, this upward trend usually holds.

In 2015, retail sales are expected to grow year over year by 3.7% and though this is a slight decrease from 2014’s 4.1% increase, it is still substantially above the 2.5% ten-year average. The U.S. employment rate is at a recent high of 94.8% however the participation rate has decreased to 62.4%, meaning that although the workforce appears to be buzzing along, some previous members of the workforce may be choosing to opt-out of their job searches and thus are less likely to take out their AMEX cards.

Though U.S. economic stats may be a mixed (gift) basket, currently the P/E ratio of the referenced retail index is at 22.37, down almost 30% year over year, making the retail industry seem attractive, especially for this time of year. Additionally, consumer confidence is currently at 97.6, modestly above the 93.8 level seen one year ago, leaving the U.S. consumer poised to shop ’til they drop.

High Yield: Don’t Throw the Babies Out With the Bathwater

This week’s Chart of the Week takes a look at the sell-off over the last month in risk credit as a direct result of global concern over China’s continued slowdown. Our chart shows the high yield bond spreads for each industry since the beginning of the year.

This week’s Chart of the Week takes a look at the sell-off over the last month in risk credit as a direct result of global concern over China’s continued slowdown.  Our chart shows the high yield bond spreads for each industry since the beginning of the year.

Not surprisingly, spreads for energy high yield issuers, shown in the purple, and spreads for metals/minerals high yield issuers, shown in the pink, have widened dramatically. In other words, their prices have depreciated significantly, as there is an inverse relationship between bond prices and their spreads.  This widening of energy and metals/minerals high yield bond spreads was due to the financial markets’ recognition of reduced Chinese demand for energy and metals/minerals.

However, all other sectors from chemicals, shown in the red, to utilities, shown in the orange, have seen their high yield spreads widen out as well. In our opinion, this is akin to throwing “the babies out with the bathwater.” In other words, the widening of spreads in all other industries except for energy and metals/minerals appears to be unjustifiably so.  The last two weeks have seen spread tightening across all industries as news of general stabilization has come out of China and Europe.  However, spreads for all other industries except for energy and metals/minerals remain elevated compared to where they were in the spring, suggesting some good value and opportunities in high yield within these industries.