I broke one of my own investment management rules….

I have to make a confession. I broke one of my investment rules. I traded in May instead of in June when I normally would.

I typically trade only quarterly, but this time was different. I only lasted two months.

What was the trigger? One of our stocks has been soaring past single-holding thresholds lately and I thought I’d like to re-balance on a high note.

Find out more here.

Why I am not changing my portfolio now that the yield curve is no longer inverted

New reports indicate the yield curve in the US is no longer inverted. Since many suggested that when the yield curve did recently invert it was time to raise cash by selling risky equities, what are they saying now?

Presumably it’s time to put cash back to work in risk-on trades.

I’m not making any changes to my portfolio, just like I didn’t when the yield curve inverted.

My reasons are much the same as before, but in reverse:

  1. My cash levels are largely unchanged through the inversion and return to “non-inversion” so I don’t need to make adjustments
  2. I already have good exposure to riskier equities: for example about 20% in technology stocks
  3. I have nearly 50% in equities now, and am slightly overweight, so I don’t need to add more
  4. Markets remain at the higher range of valuations compared to historical norms so I see no reason to increase equity exposure
  5. I don’t know which risk-on stocks to buy as I like the ones I already have and don’t feel compelled to add to them
  6. It is unclear if there is likely going to be a recession anytime soon so I can’t make a case to change my portfolio accordingly, even if I was so inclined (which I am not)
  7. It’s not cleat to me what a yield curve “un-inversion might be forecasting, if anything
  8. i am assuming, without evidence to the contrary, that the chance of recession in the near term is as likely as ever, so there is no obvious signal to make any re-allocations
  9. Odds are there won’t be a recession in the near term as most indicators, including the yield curve, don’t point to one
  10. The US Fed could still surprises by lowering interest rates, and the Bank of Canada is signalling a pause in raising rates, both of which could help equities
  11. If I did buy more risk-on equities would I then “have” to sell them if the yield curve re-inverts?

i know it’s very boring but staying the course is working well for me. My portfolio is up about 7% so far this year. That’s well ahead of my 4.5% annual goal.

 

Why I am not changing my portfolio even though the yield curve has inverted

On Friday it was reported that the yield curve in the US inverted for the first time since the last (great) recession. This is supposed to be a reliable harbinger for a future recession in 12-18 months.

What does it mean when the yield curve inverts?

It means the US short-term interest rate (as measured by the 3 month Treasury Bill rate) is now higher than the long-term interest rate (as measured by the 10 year Treasury Bill rate). An inversion like this is generally regarded as a negative market/economic sentiment that can affect economic and market behaviour.

The yield curve inversion has sent some scurrying to make changes to their portfolios by raising cash, selling riskier stocks and becoming more defensive (buying utilities, telcos, REITS and consumer staples equities).

Why I am not scurrying to do anything on the news:

  1. I already have some cash (about 10% of my portfolio, including high-interest savings and short-duration bonds maturing later this year)
  2. I already have good exposure to defensive equities: ~18% utilities + ~11% consumer defensive + ~6.5% communications services + ~3.5% real estate = ~39.0% defensive
  3. I have less than 50% of our total portfolio in equities so a market downturn should be offset somewhat by non-correlated holdings in fixed income, cash and bullion (this was true in 2018, when my portfolio returned ~+1% in spite of equity drawdowns in Canada and the US)
  4. If I sell something to raise cash there could be tax consequences in our non-registered accounts, due to potential capital gains being taxed
  5. I don’t know which non-defensive equities to sell to raise cash – I like all my holdings for the long haul or I wouldn’t own them
  6. Recessions tend to be short and I believe my long-term portfolio is structured well for riding out short-term events
  7. An inverted yield curve has reportedly accurately predicted upcoming recessions eight times (by some sources) since 1968 but, if on January 1, 1968, I bought and held the S&P 500 (^SPX) I would have made a return of 2.81K% in spite of the eight recessions (including the Great Recession of 2008-09)
  8. According to Forbes, the chance of a recession in the next year is always about 27% (based on their data pointing to 16 recessions since 1960) and today the chance is 30%, hardly more than average
  9. If the chance of recession is 30% next year there is also a 70% chance there won’t be a recession next year which means, based on probabilities alone, I should be buying risk-on stocks
  10. If the US Fed surprises by lowering interest rates, that could change the situation immediately
  11. I don’t know how to time when to start re-buying the risk-on equities I am supposed to sell now – presumably when the yield curve corrects to non-inversion

I am not saying a recession won’t happen in 2019-20. It may well.

What I am saying, as a long-term investor who buys, holds and monitors a portfolio of retirement assets designed for all markets, who relies primarily on asset allocation rules when making security weighting decisions, and who makes limited and selective trades intended to improve overall portfolio quality, I don’t react to news like this.

Do you?

 

 

 

Maybe the US president does affect markets after all

Many thought when Donald Trump became US president markets would react badly. How wrong was that?

Tax cuts and de-regulation have provided a boost to markets. However trade policy has also provided uncertainty. Rising interest rates, often not good for equities, have been seemingly offset, so far, by low unemployment and inflation and rising corporate profits.

With the most recent events in Washington, including Trump’s out-of-left-field tweet announcing an immediate troop withdrawal in Syria, followed by resignations by Defence Secretary Mattis and US anti-ISIS Envoy McGurk, Trump asking if he can fire Fed Chairman Powell, Trump associates being indicted and convicted by Mueller and other prosecutors, the Trump foundation closure due to inappropriate use of funds, the government shutdown that Trump said he would be proud of, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin’s calls today to top banks to check on their liquidity (was that even a problem?), to name a few, may mark a tipping point where the unpredictable deeds of Trump and his administration start to affect consumer and business confidence as well as market sentiment.

Investors have to be scratching their heads and wondering where all this is going and how much damage the seeming chaos might bring. 2019 doesn’t look like it will get much better with unresolved trade issues with China and others, the ongoing Mueller investigation and with the Democrats taking a majority role in the House of Representatives, where they will have the power of subpoena to conduct ever more investigations into Trump et. al. No one knows what tweet will next emanate from Trump’s fingers.

Powell is signalling a slowing of interest rate increases for next year. That might help markets settle. But forecasted profit growth is also slowing for 2019, same for global growth. Trump’s erratic behaviour seems to be amplifying uncertainty.

I can’t help thinking 2019 will be more volatile than 2018 as the drama, or do I say crisis, south of the border plays out.

We certainly live in interesting times.

Update: The Washington Post has a piece about how investor expectations may be adjusting to the reality of a Trump presidency.

 

More on sequence of returns risk

Sequence (of returns) risk is something I mentioned in my recent piece about my upcoming third quarter portfolio review. Sequence risk is a major factor in my planning as our household heads into retirement in the near future.

Looking at the current valuation of the S&P 500 vs. underlying gross national product is a bit sobering.

More on this here.

Previewing my next quarterly household portfolio review

September brings my next quarterly portfolio review and my next, self-imposed, securities trading window (I only trade four times a year). I have been giving a fair bit of thought this summer to what’s next for our portfolio.

Here’s a preview of my thinking….

 

 

 

 

 

My latest article on secular trends and investing has been published in Canadian MoneySaver

Canadian MoneySaver published my latest article on thematic investing in the July/August 2018 edition.

This time I discuss the investment opportunities in alternative energy. While there are headwinds in the short to medium term, long term this theme offers considerable potential, especially in Asian markets.

See more here (paywall): Canadian MoneySaver

My Q2 2018 portfolio review has been published

I’ve published my second quarter of 2018 portfolio review. In it I discuss my current take on managing our household portfolio, some of the trades I’ve recently made and my thoughts for the rest of the year.

See my review here.

The June 2018 OSC content has been published

The material from the June 12, 2018 Ottawa Share Club meeting has been published. It includes:

  • Peter’s slides presented by Brad and Eric on the use of advisors through the investment lifecycle.
  • Peter’s appendix about the difference between a dealing representative and an advising representative.
  • Margot Pomerleau’s slides on how to work with a financial advisor.
  • A pamphlet from Margot Pomerleau’s firm on the complaints process for retail investors in Canada (bonus material).

See all the content here.

Breaking my own asset allocation rules

I have a confession to make. I have broken my own asset allocation rules with my second quarter trades.

I bought more equities even though I was already a bit overweight in them.

Why did I do this?

My reasoning is as follows:

  • I have a relatively low target equity weight to begin with (46% of our portfolio)
  • I had a lot of cash on hand (way over 10% of our portfolio)
  • I have more cash becoming available due to savings, bond maturities, dividends and interest in the next 12 months or less
  • quite a bit of that cash was in our TFSAs and I wanted to get that money working at better than than bond returns since the returns are tax free
  • bond yields are still not that attractive in spite of rising rates (~3.1% yield-to-maturity on a five-year investment grade corporate bond)
  • there are a lot of relatively good deals in consumer staples, utilities and telecommunications right now – several companies are off their highs and are trading at reasonable multiples
  • these three sectors are pretty defensive and could do OK in a recessionary environment
  • I only bought high quality equities with relatively low risk and often decent dividends (with one or two exceptions)
  • I did not add any new positions, just added to our existing holdings to increase their position size to something more in line with our average position size
  • Next quarter is another opportunity to review our portfolio and decide if we should trim some of the big gainers, especially in technology, which are starting to become more dominant single positions in our holdings

What I bought (all in our TFSAs):

  • Algonquin Power (AQN) – initially bought in my Canadian TFSA and journalled to my US TFSA to get the dividend that is paid in US dollars without conversion back to Canadian dollars
  • Bell Canada Enterprises (BCE)
  • Fortis (FTS)
  • Loblaw (L) – has a relatively low dividend
  • ONEX (ONEX) – this is an exception as it is a growth stock with a very small dividend in the multi-sector holdings industry
  • North West Co (NWC)
  • Telus (T)

I also bought some bonds:

  • CALLOWAY-I 3.985% 30MY23
  • FAIRFAX FINL 4.5% 22MR23
  • CANADIAN WESTERN BANK Maturity Jun 16 2022 Coupon 2.737

So, after this investment “spree,” our weightings vs. targets are as follows:

Asset Type Planned Actual Variance
Equities 46.0% 51.9% 5.9%
Bonds 36.0% 29.6% -6.4%
Bullion 9.0% 9.1% 0.1%
Total Cash/Near Cash 9.0% 9.4% 0.4%
TOTAL 100.0% 100.0%

All in all, we’re still in a pretty conservative posture and continue to have flexibility with cash levels if needed.

More to come in early July when I publish my Q2 portfolio review.

Brad’s updates to Steven Brown’s retirement forecaster tool are now available

Brad updated Steven Brown’s Retirement Forecaster Excel spreadsheet tool (version  2.7.2). The changes are as follows:

Version 2.7.2 provides support for defined benefit (DB) pension plans with a Bridge Benefit (such as the Fed Government or Ontario Teachers) and the accompanying DB Survivor pension. Detailed input instructions are provided on the Instructions sheet, under the Instructions section.

You may access the material on Brad’s page here.

Secular trends fantasy portfolio launch

I’ve launched a new fantasy portfolio on the money4retirement.ca website to track secular, or thematic trends for investors.

A secular trend is:

An investment trend associated with some characteristic or phenomenon that is not cyclical or seasonal but exists over a relatively long period.

The rationale for doing this and the initial portfolio structure is presented here.

The first secular trends fantasy portfolio tracking report (and its benchmark) is presented here.

I’ve also added a new menu option called “Secular trends and investing” on the site for quick access.

The eCommerce secular trend made news today

WalMart, the once-stodgy bricks and mortar retailer, made news today with its largest acquisition ever – $15B US for 75% of eCommerce retailer Flipkart in India.

It reportedly beat out Amazon for the deal.

WalMart shares dropped 3% on the news.

Amazon’s shares rose 1%.

Softbank appears to have done very well. Other players were involved including Alphabet, Microsoft, Tencent Holdings and Naspers.

The deal hasn’t fully closed yet….

More from Bloomberg here.

 

The decks from the April 2018 OSC meeting are posted

The decks from Mark Seed on DRIPping and from myself (Michael Patenaude) on the Q1 2018 OSC fantasy portfolios and sector allocations presented at the April 17, 2018 Ottawa Share Club meeting are posted here.

America is indeed exceptional – with government debt

“In its newly released April 2018 Fiscal Monitor, the International Monetary Fund projected that the United States is the only — yes, only — advanced economy in the world expected to have its debt burden get worse over the next five years.” – Washington Post

Tax cuts, and the possibility of more or extended tax cuts. Who’s going to pay the government’s demographically-driven growing bills?

What’s next, cut entitlements? That doesn’t sound recessionary to me (/s for sarcasm!).

By contrast, Canada is doing pretty well with its debt management. Ignore the noise, focus on the facts. Glad to be north of the border.

My 2018 first quarter portfolio review is now published

I’ve completed my first quarter portfolio review.

Quite a difference from last year so far. Our household portfolio is flat so far this year. That’s a bit better than some of the major indexes, but not all.

I have a link in my review to some evidence that markets in the US might be soft until the mid-terms, and then could rebound a lot. So hopefully things will improve as the year progresses.

Find out more here.

What US macro risks are investors facing these days?

It’s been over a year since I last wrote about macro risks emanating from the US and how they might affect Canadian investors.

Given how many changes are taking place in the macro environment recently, and how influential the US macro situation is for Canadians, I thought it would be interesting to do an update. The idea is to try to identify major driving factors that might affect US, Canadian and global equity markets in an effort to reduce the “surprise factor,” which may in turn lead to bad investment decisions (out of fear or panic).

So what does the macro risk profile look like south of the border? No one really knows for sure of course, but it is interesting to contemplate, especially if you have any US holdings in your portfolio.

Let’s take a look at some of the frequently-cited risks that may affect investors and try to determine if relative risk levels have increased or decreased since my last effort at this in January 2017.

I have listed them from what I propose are the highest to the lowest risks.

Notation used:

⇑ = risk is increasing

⇔ = risk is not changing

⇓ = risk is decreasing


Tax Risk = ⇑ (increased risk rating since Jan/17)

Definition: the risk that an investment will lose its value or return on capital because of taxation (most investments are subject to this risk)
My take: Recently, Trump decided to impose new taxes, in the form of tariffs, on steel and aluminum, and on various goods manufactured in China. China is already beginning to retaliate, raising the prospect of a trade war. It is unclear if Trump will lay on even more tariffs. It remains to be seen what the economic impact of new tariffs will be but the general consensus appears to be net negative due to rising costs of goods for consumers. Corporate and limited personal income tax cuts were delivered in December 2017 so that matter is settled for now.


Political Risk = ⇑ (same risk rating as Jan/17, but the overall risk is likely higher)

Definition: the risk that an investment will lose value because of political action in a country where one has investments, including one’s own country
My take: While his core support seems to be holding, the US president remains erratic and sensational in policy pronouncements, his cabinet turnover is record-setting, new cabinet and legal advisory appointments are arguably increasingly controversial and recently look like they are veering hard to the right of political spectrum and more confrontational in tone. Relations with Iran may become increasingly strained while relations with North Korea could possibly (but not likely) improve (the new national security advisor, John Bolton, advocates war with both countries). The president continues to accommodate, even congratulate Russia while many observers suggest this is inappropriate given demonstrable evidence of Russian interference in the last US election among several other concerns. The Mueller investigation continues to slowly gain momentum on three fronts: Trump’s possible (likely?) obstruction of justice; Trump/team conspiracy with Russia to tip the last election; and Trump/family financial dealings, including potential money laundering. New revelations about Cambridge Analytica’s role in the 2016 election and potential connections to Russian interference are gaining a bit more traction. The trial for Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, begins in July and further indictments by Mueller in other cases remain likely. The ongoing investigation means a constitutional crisis could easily be triggered if Trump does indeed fire the Special Council as he reportedly intended to do last summer, and may be more inclined than ever to do given his recent appointment of Joseph diGenova, who claims the domestic security establishment (a.k.a. “deep state”) in the US is trying to frame Trump. The possibility of impeachment is likely remote still, but increasing. There are mid-term elections in November which could lead to one or both Houses of Congress flipping to the Democrats, thus hobbling Trump’s agenda and making him accountable. Given all this uncertainty, I believe political risk is elevating in the US and by extension the world.


Market Risk = ⇑ (same risk rating as Jan/17, but the overall risk is likely higher)

Definition: the risk that an investment can lose its value in the market (applies to equities and fixed-income investments)
My take: Given the US market had been climbing steadily since November 8, 2016, the recent pullbacks have been long overdue. Most market gyrations tend to be short-term in nature and are of little consequence to long-term investors. Many commentators still claim the market is over-valued based on historical price/earnings ratios. Overall though the backdrop of corporate earnings, economic growth and planned orderly increases in interest rates contribute to medium term optimism in equity markets. There are no compelling hints of a recession yet on the horizon. Having said that, volatility has been increasing so far in 2018 (the ^VIX is up 125%), in large part due to increasing political, inflation and tax uncertainties. Market risk is being reflected CNN’s Fear and Greed Index (7% out of 100%) and in the recent drops in major indexes. Of the three major US indexes, only the NASDAQ is in the black so far this year. I would suggest market risk is rising due to heightened uncertainty in the political and tax environments discussed in this post and the recent increase in volatility.


Legislative Risk = ⇔ (reduced risk rating since Jan/17)

Definition: the risk that an investment will lose value or benefits because of new legislation (all investments are subject to this risk)
My take: This risk is related to political risk. The most recent spending law (as of writing today still unpassed before a midnight deadline) appears to be ignoring fiscal conservatism. Regulations related to offshore drilling, the environment and banking have been changed and, again, in the short to medium term are being well-received by investors. Longer term, these changes could be damaging to the US economy by contributing significantly to increased US fiscal indebtedness, reckless banking practices, over-stimulation of the economy, environmental degradations and potential knock-on inflationary impacts. NAFTA talks drag on, with some signs the US may be softening its position, especially in the auto sector. If a new deal is not struck soon, there will be little time for Congressional ratification, leaving the future uncertain. We don’t know what else could be forthcoming in the legislative and regulatory environment, but presumably not too much will change before at least the fall mid-term elections. If in fact a Democratic House of Representatives emerges, this would likely provide a damper on Trump’s legislative agenda.


Interest Rate Risk = ⇔ (reduced risk rating since Jan/17)

Definition: the risk that an investment will lose value due to a change in interest rates (applies to fixed-income investments and sometimes to equity investments depending on investor expectations for interest rate changes)
My take: Interest rates are still on track to rise three times this year (once already this week) even with the appointment of a new Fed Chairman. With two more rate increases promised in 2018, on top of this week’s rate increase, the market should be prepared. Wage inflation, in large part due to low unemployment coupled with economic growth, could also be a driver of higher than expected interest rates later this year, which could be bad for equity markets. We saw the market react to some of these expectations earlier in the year. Due to the combined effects of tax cuts and increased deficit spending expected this year, the US federal debt will climb, which is not positive for rates longer term. This is a tough one to forecast at the best of times but on balance it would seem interest rate risk in the short to medium term has decreased since January 2017.


Purchasing Power Risk = ⇔ (reduced risk rating since Jan/17)

Definition: the risk that an investment will lose its purchasing power due to inflation (applies particularly to cash and fixed-income investments)
My take: This risk is somewhat related to interest rate and tax risks in that the main concern would be higher-than-expected inflation, driven by wages, higher health care costs and possibly new tariffs, but counterbalanced to some degree by lower personal and corporate taxes. If Trump’s policies end up being inflationary then purchasing power may erode. This would likely take some time to happen. On balance the risk of higher inflation, from a very low level since the 2008/09 financial crisis, has probably increased, but for the short to medium term does not appear very likely to happen. The recent tax cuts, especially to individuals, will marginally add to purchasing power in the short to medium term and low unemployment could eventually cause wages to go up, improving purchasing strength of individuals.


Liquidity Risk = ⇔ (same risk rating as Jan/17)

Definition: the risk that an investment will not be easy to sell when needed (applies to some equities that don’t trade in large volume, fixed-income investments and real estate and other property that may be hard to sell quickly at an equitable price)
My take: I don’t see any reason to think liquidity risk has changed since January 2017– at least not in the short term. If some of the other risks in this post materialize, this could change, and possibly quickly. I leave this risk at the mercy of “black swans” without changing the risk rating from January 2017.


Reinvestment Risk = ⇓ (same risk rating as Jan/17)

Definition: the risk that an investment will be reinvested at a lower rate of interest when it matures (applies to fixed-income investments)
My take: If we expect interest rates to continue an orderly climb higher in 2018, new money that is being invested in fixed income should attract higher rates. If one deploys fixed income funds to rate reset preferred shares and/or bond funds or bond/GIC ladders of short to medium term duration (e.g. five years or less) then reinvestment risk should be falling.


Are there any actionable ideas here?

I believe that several risks I am tracking are falling, but the three risks that I believe are increasing (political, taxation and market) could have major impacts in the short to medium term. Longer term I remain somewhat optimistic.

But….

With rates rising south and north of the border, and related sector rotation, there has been pressure on utilities, telecoms, consumer staples, materials and energy this year. Bond prices are slightly weaker so far this year as rates rise. I recently added to both utilities and bonds.

If the technology sector continues to outpace this year, I will at some point likely need to re-balance to reduce the percentage this sector represents in our portfolio. It is roughly 20% now and rising.

As stated over a year ago when last reviewing macro risks, I continue to balance short-term risk with longer term secular trends. Since January 2017 I have bought an ETF for robotics. I continue to hold biotechnology and water-themed ETFs and I continue to hold Shopify in the e-Commerce space (although I trimmed it somewhat last year). I am researching both alternative energy and cybersecurity as other possible investment themes for new cash in the future (and likely will be writing articles on them for Canadian MoneySaver).

In conclusion, it remains pretty much stay the course for me. I have an expectation that things will be more volatile in equity markets in 2018 compared to 2017. So I remain prepared for that eventuality. Otherwise, who knows?

Be greedy when others are fearful?

Just a quick post to point out that for the third time so far this year, CNN’s fear and greed index is down below 10 (on a scale of 0 to 100). This suggests, by its seven measures, investors are “extremely fearful” of the US equity markets right now.

Hmmm. What’s on sale in the markets? (Hint: telecoms, consumer staples, energy, utilities and materials).

The material from the OSC March 13, 2018 meeting is posted

See the material from last Tuesday night’s meeting featuring:

  • Callum Sutherland, Financial Security Advisor, Freedom 55 Financial deck on Behavioural Finance and RRIF plus Annuity Strategy
  • Dave and Eric’s presentation on Market Corrections
  • Notes taken by Andre about PJ’s suggested trade in the OSC

See the content here.