Friday, September 19, 2014

Seth Klarman-20140917

http://olduvai.ca/?p=28061

Seth Klarman: “We Are Recreating The Markets Of 2007″ | Zero Hedge
Exceprted from Seth Klarman’s Baupost letter to investors,
We don’t know now (nor do we ever know) what the overall market will do. As we’ve discussed in recent letters, there are reasons for investors to be frightened but also numerous individual opportunities worth seizing. Today’s limited opportunity set means that we are still holding sizable cash balances, about 35% of the portfolio at June 30. This dry powder will become more valuable if the markets become more turbulent.
Equity markets continue to hit successive record highs, volatility remains strikingly low in equity and most other markets, and inflation is ticking higher. Investors have clearly grown weary of worrying about risky scenarios that never seem to materialize or, when they do, don’t seem to matter to anyone else. U.S. GDP, for example, was recently restated to minus 2.9% for the first quarter of 2014. Normally, this magnitude drop signals recession. Equities, nevertheless, marched relentlessly higher.
…
In today’s ebullient markets, we see many investors ratcheting up their own risk levels–buying substandard credits and piling up leverage are two favorite methods–in an attempt to generate near-term performance.
…
The financial markets could be getting closer to an inflection point, where the economic weakness that the bond market seems to be reflecting derails the more optimistic equity market.Or perhaps things can go on forever exactly as they are: a “Goldilocks” stock market resulting from a tepid economy, dampened volatility, and relentlessly low interest rates. Amidst the market rally, complacent investors continue to ignore a growing array of global trouble spots. Contrary to claims from the Obama Administration, the world is not a tranquil place at present. As such, risks facing investors seem to be rising but are not yet priced into the markets.
…
Late in a market cycle–when bargains are increasingly hard to find, valuations are lofty, and most investors have been scoring handsome gains for a number of years–we can say from experience that history tends to rhyme. Money becomes more freely available to pursue even the most marginal of opportunities. Dollars pour into venture capital, and the largest buy-side firms take strategic stakes in hot, late-stage private investments just prior to an expected big money IPO. Specialized funds are raised, regularly and easily, to invest in things like Greek private investments, Spanish real estate, or European non-performing loan pools. Willing investors abound for these. It doesn’t matter that market prices have mostly rebounded, prospective returns are thereby limited, and the capital in those funds is likely to be put to work whether or not prices warrant and even if conditions on the ground deteriorate. With investment bankers and hedge fund executives canvassing Europe today to bet on recovery, you have the increasingly common circumstance of proliferating “opportunity funds,” absent only the investment opportunity. Some clients of hedge funds today are, in a sense, disintermediating themselves, funding new entities to bid higher for the same sort of assets their other, more disciplined managers are already bidding more judiciously for. The discipline problem in this case is not that of the legacy managers; it may just be that of the clients.
The pressure to reach for return virtually ensures that many investors will take greater and greater risk for less and less potential reward at market peaks. If you can’t find bonds that yield 8%, better grab those offering 6%. Or 4%. If you need 8% to meet your bogey (assumed pension fund returns, for example, or promised returns to investors), then you will be prone to own increasingly risky assets or leverage up the safer ones. These pressures, as much as any indicator, are today signaling danger. Investors today are bidding ever higher amidst frenzied competition to buy pools of non-performing loans, and then leveraging them up to get double-digit returns. Mortgage securities backed by questionable loans issued to dicey borrowers now trade close to par and yield a downright stingy 3-5% where they once yielded a generous 15-20%. A recent brokerage report excitedly touted the new HoldCo PIK Toggle notes of a Croatian consumer goods retailer. Nearly every word of that description is a flashing red light to seasoned investors.
To put it a bit differently, writer and investor John Mauldin is right when he says that there is “a bubble in complacency.” Fear has effectively been banished. The members of the Fed know it. Stock traders who chase the market to new highs almost daily know it. Implied volatilities (and realized volatilities) are historically low (the VIX Index recently hit a seven-year low), and falling. The Bank for International Settlements recently cautioned that financial markets are euphoric and in the grip of an aggressive search for yield. The S&P has gone over 1,000 days without a 10% decline, according to Birinyi Associates. Dutch and French 10-year government bond yields are at 500 and 250 year lows, respectively; Spain, 225 years. Spanish debt yields were recently inside of U.S. levels.
Increasingly, hopes and dreams are being capitalized as if the future is certain and nothing can go wrong, as if up cycles such as the present one don’t inevitably sow the seeds of the next decline. The European Central Bank recently cut its deposit rate to an unprecedented minus 0.1%, and Mario Draghi assured that he isn’t finished. Can this be done without consequence? Investors have become numb to risk because such policies continue, seemingly forever, and new measures (such as European and now even Chinese QE) are regularly threatened and claimed to be costless and reliably effective. We are far from convinced of this; indeed, the higher the level of valuations and the greater the level of complacency, the more there is to be concerned about. Even as reported inflation remains quite subdued, signs of incipient cost increases are increasingly evident. We are seeing them, for example, in apartment rents, construction costs, and salaries of newly minted engineering graduates and oilfield workers.
Like global equity markets, credit markets have been surprisingly resilient, and our worry meter is high here, too. Ecuador recently issued $2 billion of ten-year bonds, as the market shrugged off its 2008 default. Kenya also completed a $2 billion offering, the largest ever debt sale by an African country, according to The Wall Street Journal. That offering attracted $8 billion worth of bids. In the U.S., issuance of low-grade credit is at record levels, as is covenant-lite issuance. Yields are at or near historic lows, which is especially nutty for junk credits, including the hideously risky CCC-rated issues. June CLO issuance set a record. Given changes in regulation, Wall Street has far less capital available to support the trading of this burgeoning junk issuance and the corresponding surge in debt ETFs. A sudden change in rates or sentiment could lead to serious market instability. When is harder to predict than if. While we are not predicting imminent collapse (market timing is not our thing), we are saying that a selloff, greater volatility, and investor losses would hardly be surprising from today’s levels.
In markets, it’s always hard to tell, in the words of the old commercial starring Ella Fitzgerald, Is it real or is it Memorex? Is the market nearly triple its spring 2009 level because things are better, or do things feel better because the market has nearly tripled? Indeed, we can do a simple thought experiment that might be revealing: How would everything feel if the S&P 500 were suddenly cut by one-third or one-half? Would such a drop drive astonishing bargains, or would the U.S. economy soon falter, with festering problems such as unemployment, the federal, state and local deficits, the long-term fiscal situation, and the creditworthiness of most sovereigns suddenly seeming ominous?

It’s not hard to reach the conclusion that so many investors feel good not because things are good but because investors have been seduced into feeling good—otherwise known as “the wealth effect.” We really are far along in re-creating the markets of 2007, which felt great but were deeply unstable when shocks started to pile up. Even Janet Yellen sees “pockets of increasing risk-taking” in the markets, yet she has made clear that she won’t raise rates to fight incipient bubbles. For all of our sakes, we really wish she would.

Quotes of the day

20140920
Making it boring. Your biggest enemy in investing is your own emotions.

20140923
9/14..Yen Chih Lai 天天都在重複一樣的事情,不是笨而是貪
有些詐騙模式連改都沒改,一樣有人被騙9/10.壹.檢調破吸金集團 扣3.8億現鈔及2賓利名

Sunday, June 15, 2014

Tax Rates Research

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4cbce9940101fn4m.html
http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Taiwan/Local%20Assets/Documents/2012_Newsletter/2012.04.01.pdf


Hong Kong
Income:
-Dividend: 0%
-Capital Gain: 0%

Transaction Cost:
-Commission: Negotiation
-Stock Settlement fee:
-Transaction levy: 0.003% per side
-Investor compensation levy: 0.002% per side(suspended since Dec,19, 2005)
-Trading fee: 0.005% per side
-Stamp duty: 0.1% per side. Subject to exemption
-Trading Tariff: HK$0.5 to the Exchange on each and every purchase or sale transaction.
                         The decision on whether or not to pass the trading tariff on to investors is at the                                  discretion of brokers.

*IPO stocks are different.

https://www.hkex.com.hk/eng/market/sec_tradinfo/trancost.htm
http://www.easecurities.com.hk/en/About/TS%20063.pdf
https://baby.boom.com.hk/zh/service_support/online_trading_commission_fees/



http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Tax/dttl-tax-hongkongguide-2013.pdf
http://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/services/Tax/regional-tax-centers/asia-pacific-tax-centre/Documents/CountryProfiles/HongKong.pdf

Singapore
http://www.tej.com.tw/twsite/Default.aspx?TabId=203

Dividend:
Capital Gain:
對非居民不課股息稅及預提稅,但股息發放時會扣掉公司所得稅18%



US
Income:
-Dividend: 30% (regardless source of income)
-Capital Gain: 0%

###
http://www.unh.edu/oiss/determining-whether-you-are-resident-or-non-resident-tax-purposes
Determine residency for tax purpose:
"
 In general:
F and J student visa holders are considered residents after
five calendar years in the U.S.
"



Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Inflation, Interest and Equity markets


股票市场的游说者,你们错了!
by Joe Chang

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_50c88c400101quvl.html

Market Interest rates = benchmark interest rates + expected inflation

DCF uses market interest rates as discount rates.

When you have high inflation, even though the economy is doing well, you can still have bear equity market because the discount rates, due to high inflation rates, is too high. This is evidenced by research by Warren Buffett.

Right now, China has very high inflation rates, because Chinese government has printed too much money to revive economic growth. This leads to low efficiency in money allocation. SOEs can borrow money easily, while private companies are hard to borrow.

【 財經 】調查顯示中國民間借貸利率平均23.5%

2014-05-29 20:10:02
http://finance.sina.com.hk/news/-33452-6731337/1.html

According to the research, average private lending rate is 23.5% while bank lending rate is 7.3%. The huge gap gives SOEs unfair advantages over private companies. When SOEs are borrowing cheaply, it is at the cost of the public. Inefficient investment causes overcapacity across industry.

To expect a healthy economy, instead of lowing interest rates or easing reserve requirement, interest rates should be raised, and private company should be able to compete in a fair game.


http://www.appledaily.com.tw/realtimenews/article/new/20140424/385229/
跟通膨關聯度高 美股還有得漲


PE is inversely correlated with inflation, evidenced in USA
http://www.crestmontresearch.com/docs/Stock-Inflation-and-PE.pdf

Scattered chart perceives tailed risk of inflation. When inflation is too high or when inflation is negative(deflation), PE are low. When inflation is between 0%-5%, PE are high. When inflation is within 2-3% range, PE is the highest(22x)


What the Gap Between CPI and PCE Means for Fed Overshooting
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/06/20/what-the-gap-between-cpi-and-pce-means-for-fed-overshooting/
PCE(Personal consumption expenditure) is highly correlated with CPI.



Thursday, May 22, 2014

Useful Market indicators

-Valuation: USA / Japan / India / REITS


World Stocks 
PE, Dividend Yield(

World stocks ranked by Dividend Yields

http://www.dividendchannel.com/slideshows/?slideshow=mreits&page=1&confirm=1
SLIDESHOW: 10 Top Ranked High Yield REITs

http://www.valueforum.com/reits/high-yielding.mpl
http://www.dividendyieldhunter.com/real-estate-investment-trusts-reits-sorted-alphabetically
http://www.topyields.nl/the-25-highest-yielding-reits.php

http://www.dividend.com/dividend-stocks/reits-dividend-stocks.php
REITS Dividends

http://www.canadastockchannel.com/slideshows/?slideshow=mreits&page=1
SLIDESHOW: 10 Top Ranked High Yield Canadian Real Estate Stocks


http://f10.eastmoney.com/hkf10/ahgzyjtj.aspx?code=00895
A/H shares premium/discount


http://www.macrotrends.net/1335/dollar-gold-and-oil-chart-last-ten-years
Dollar-Oil-Gold

The future is now

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc140428.htm


Price to Sales VS. Price to Earnings

PE can be inflated because now there is assumption that cyclically high profit margin will be permanent.

Market Capitalization to GDP is approaching historical high and from experience,
subsequent market returns will be negative.

For buy-and-hold investors, 7-10 years of investment horizon is not enough. Probably 50 years of horizon should be applied to justify.


關於華爾街現狀及巴菲特遺產投資建議

adapted from:
http://cn.wsj.com/big5/20140519/inv114423.asp?source=newsletter


幾
年來大家普遍認為,隨著金融危機之後聯邦立法機構向曾經利潤豐厚的交易業務開刀,華爾街大型上市公司的規模和利潤都會萎縮。

Quartz網站上的一篇文章列出了一些關於萎縮的具體數字。作者馬克﹒迪坎布裡(Mark DeCambre)寫道:“美國五大銀行──摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase)、高盛(Goldman Sachs)、美國銀行(Bank of America)、花旗集團(Citigroup)和摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)──報告2014年第一季度交易收入總額216億美元,較上年同期下降10%,較2009年達到的歷史峰值367億美元下降41%。”

迪坎布裡的文章用一些制作精妙的圖表描述了這種萎縮。文章指出,交易業務受打擊最慘的部分被稱為“FICC”。這是固定收益、外匯和大宗商品的英文首字母縮拼。

他寫道:“這個領域曾經是摩根士丹利和高盛等公司的主要利潤引擎之一,但這種情況已經變了。”

這些變化發生在“沃爾克規則”(Volcker Rule)和“巴塞爾協議III資本規則”等措施之後。前者關閉了銀行自營賬戶的交易活動,後者限制了銀行可以借來擴大其頭寸之回報及風險的資金額度。

華爾街公司仍然可以為對沖基金和保險公司等大型機構客戶交易証券。但在過去一年,這些更加傳統的交易業務也承受了壓力。這是出於另外一個原因:技術創新。

迪坎布裡寫道:“也就是說,電子交易──包括備受詬病的高頻交易──已經大大地壓縮了股票交易員代表客戶匹配買賣訂單這項傳統工作的利潤空間。”

雖然這些大型華爾街機構可能略為穩健且更容易想出應對辦法,但它們將無法利用一度讓它們變得神秘莫測、激動人心、肯定也更加危險的交易獲取“黑箱”利潤。不過,如果說大多數股東並沒有掉太多眼淚的話,那也是可以理解的。

過去兩年,華爾街巨頭的股價表現大都好於整個大盤股市場。

在此期間不認可華爾街股票策略師持續不斷的看漲宣言的人可能會覺得,約翰﹒赫斯曼(John Hussman)是投資界為數不多的老實人之一。

赫斯曼是赫斯曼基金公司(Hussman Funds)的總裁,多數時候看跌。他在最近一份報告中寫道,大市已經被大幅高估。

你會看到他是用收入而非利潤來給市場估值,因為他認為市盈率估值方法蘊含的利潤率假設是不可靠的。

赫斯曼寫道:“雖然証據可能讓一些人甚感驚奇,但還是要睜大眼睛看看:標普500成分股公司的股價/收入比中位數目前已經大大高於2000年的市場峰值。標普500成分股的股價/收入比平均值現在已經高於那次泡沫期間除了2000年一季度、三季度之外的任何時候。”

需要說明的是,過去五年的很多時候,赫斯曼都曾大錯特錯。其他人也很少認為當前股價比2000年泡沫高峰時期更貴。但他的分析至少值得一看。

在本專欄文章的最後,我將介紹有人針對沃倫﹒巴菲特(Warren Buffett)今年早些時候所發言論的一種批評。這種批評很有見地,某種程度上跟巴菲特是針鋒相對的。巴菲特這些言論發表在為他所創辦的投資控股公司伯克希爾哈撒韋(Berkshire Hathaway)所寫的2013年年度致股東信中。

巴菲特曾在他的遺囑中留下受托管理人應當如何投資他為妻子所留遺產的建議。巴菲特在致股東信中描述了這些建議,贏得了指數投資者們的讚揚。巴菲特的指導意見是“將10%的現金放進短期國債,90%的現金放進某個費用非常低的標普500指數型基金(我推薦先鋒集團(Vanguard)的)”。

但《福布斯》(Forbes)撰稿人布賴恩﹒波特努瓦(Brian Portnoy)認為,對於大多數投資者來講,這樣的建議遠遠談不上分散化,因為它是嚴重重倉持有大盤股。他寫道:“正如人們深刻理解且有充分証據証明的,面向關聯度更低的資產的敞口會形成更加優化的投資組合,所以從美國大盤股分散到任何數量的其他股票、債券、房地產和另類資產類別都是行得通的。”

他還批評巴菲特選擇標普500那樣的市值加權指數。他寫道:“在2000年熊市之前,標普500大約29%的成分股都是科技型企業,其中很多估值過高。同樣在2008年危機之前,標普500當中相當大比例的敞口是面向金融、房地產和房貸相關股票,而其中很多都是當年整個市場下跌37%的原因。”

他寫道,除了採用市值加權指數,其實還有更好、更新的指數投資方針,“有時候稱為‘基本面’或‘智能’貝塔系數──對某些股票或風險因素採用不同的加權方法”。

考慮到很多投資者深受巴菲特觀點的影響,波特努瓦的適度抱怨是可貴的,有拋磚引玉的作用。

JOHN KIMELMAN

(本文譯自《巴倫周刊》)

(本文版權歸道瓊斯公司所有,未經許可不得翻譯或轉載。)