Friday, May 22, 2020

Excerpts from 


Ray Dalio's


"The Changing World Order, Chapter 1"


Alternate Title: Cycles of Rising and Declining Empires



I read Chapter 1 of Ray Dalio's The Changing World Order and copied below the parts that I'd like to remember. Think of this as a shorter version of the original piece which can be read that much more quickly. 

The Changing World Order may be found on LinkedIn (Intro, Ch.1, Ch. 2) or on its own website. Chapter 1 was first published on 3/29/20. 

By way of general stock market context, US equities peaked on Feb. 19, Covid-19 shelter-in-place started in San Francisco around March 11 and is still on-going although some relaxation started less than a week ago, US equities bottomed on March 23 and have rallied since then. The S&P 500 Index is up 32% from its 3/23 close (trough) to its 5/22 close (most recent date). From 2/19 peak to 3/23 trough, it had dropped 34% close to close. It is now sitting 13% below its 2/19 close.

Font color convention: Everything in black font represents a verbatim excerpt from the original script. My own comments as well as section titles appear in blue font such as this very sentence.

From the Introduction,

3 major forces at play, globally:


1) excessive DEBT levels
2) extreme wealth INEQUALITY
3) rising POWER of China

Three ways that wealth was gained throughout history


Throughout History Wealth Was Gained by Either Making It, Taking It from Others, or Finding It in the Ground.

Why most people miss the big shifts in history


I believe that we are now seeing an archetypical big shift in relative wealth and power and the world order that will affect everyone in all countries in profound ways.  This big wealth and power shift is not obvious because most  people don’t have the patterns of history in their minds to see this one as “another one of those.” 

General pattern of uptrend with cycles around it


Most Everything Evolves in an Uptrend with Cycles Around It. E.g. chart of productivity (real GDP per person) over the last 500 years. 

Driving forces: knowledge, education.


How does a debt bust come about?


Almost all debt busts, including the one we are now in, come about for basically the same reason of extrapolating the uptrend forward and over-borrowing to bet heavily on things going up and being hurt when they go down.

What reverses economic and market declines?


Looking over the whole of the cases I examined, I’d say that past economic and market declines each lasted about three years until they were reversed through a big restructuring process that included restructuring of the debt and the monetary and credit systemfiscal policies of taxation and spending, and changes in political power.  The quicker the printing of money to fill the debt holes, the quicker the closing of the deflationary depression and the sooner the worrying about the value of money [i.e. inflation] begins. 

The US cycle from 1930 to today: default, war, new world order, peace & prosperity, stress test (currently), destruction/reconstruction (forthcoming)


In the 1930s US case, the stock market and the economy bottomed the day that newly elected President Roosevelt announced that he would default on the government’s promise to let people turn in their money for gold, and that the government would create enough money and credit so that people could get their money out of banks and others could get money and credit to buy things and invest (1932-1933).  As shown in the [next] chart, that created a big improvement but not a full recovery.  Then came the war (1939-1945), which resulted from fighting over wealth and power as the emerging powers of Germany and Japan challenged the existing leading world powers of Great Britain, France, and eventually the US (which was dragged into the war).  The war period raised economic output of things that were used in war, but it would be a misnomer to call the war years a “productive period”—even though when measured in output per person, it was—because there was so much destruction.  At the end of the war, global GDP per capita had fallen by about 12%, much of which was driven by declines in the economies of countries that lost the war. The stress test that these years represented wiped out a lot, made clear who the winners and losers were, and led to a new beginning and a new world order in 1945.  Classically that was followed by a lengthy period of peace and prosperity that became overextended so that all countries are now, 75 years later, being stress tested again.


Relative Wealth


The chart below shows you the relative wealth and power of the 11 leading empires over the last 500 years. Note 12 major wars. More on the metric plotted on the y-axis later.

Netherlands: power of the 1600s
UK: power of the 1800s
USA: power of the 1900s, specifically starting in 1944 Bretton Woods /end of WWII
China: power of the 1500s (and 2000s?)




(Geek’s note: Additionally, the lines shown on the chart are 30-year moving averages of these indices, shifted so that there is no lag.  I chose to use the smoothed series because the volatility of the unsmoothed series was too great to allow one to see the big movements.)

The chart below goes back an additional 900 years.

Note China.


Measure of Wealth and Power


The single measure of wealth and power that I showed you for each country in the prior charts is made up as a roughly equal average of eight measures of strength.  They are: 1) education, 2) competitiveness, 3) technology, 4) economic output, 5) share of world trade, 6) military strength, 7) financial center strength, and 8) reserve currency. 

The chart below shows the average of each of these measures of strength, with most of the weight on the most recent three reserve countries(i.e., the US, the UK, and the Dutch).

(Note the lag for Reserve Status Peak (black line) relative to the Empire Peak (year 0 on the chart). Lets' calculate this for the US. To get the Reserve Status Peak, we add ~70 years from the chart below (Reserve Status peak year) to ~1960 from two charts above (US overall peak year). Result: ~2030. That’s when the US dollar as global reserve currency would peak. We seem to have at least ~10 more years to go, as of May 2020.)

(Note the leading variables: blue, green, red. They are Education, Competitiveness, Innovation & Technology. They all make good intuitive sense.)






Those who build empires allocate resources well by coordinating their economic, political, and military forces into a profitable economic/political/military system.

Signs of peak Power & Wealth


People: Those who become richer naturally tend to work less hard, engage in more leisurely and less productive activities, and at the extreme, become decadent and unproductive.

Debt: When the richest get into debt by borrowing from the poorest, it is a very early sign of a relative wealth shift. 

Copying: Those who are most successful typically have their ways of being more successful copied by emerging competitors, which also contributes to the leading power becoming less competitive. 

Over-extension: The leading country extends the empire to the point that the empire has become uneconomical to support and defend. True for the US today.

Intolerable unfair wealth gap: Economic success naturally leads to larger wealth gaps because those who produce a lot of wealth disproportionately benefit. True for the US today.

Causes of decline in Power & Wealth


The decline phase typically happens as (1) the excesses of the top phase are reversed in a mutually reinforcing set of declines, and (2) because a competitive power gains relative strength in the previously described areas. 

(More on “mutually reinforcing” below.)

Dynamics of rising and falling Power & Wealth


To summarize, around the upward trend of productivity gains that produce rising wealth and better living standards, there are cycles that produce 1) prosperous periods of building, in which the country is fundamentally strong because there are a) relatively low levels of indebtedness, b) relatively small wealth, values, and political gaps, c) people working effectively together to produce prosperity, d) good education and infrastructure, e) strong and capable leadership, and f) a peaceful world order that is guided by one or more dominant world powers. These are the prosperous and enjoyable periods.  

When they are taken to excess, which they always are, the excesses lead to 2) depressing periods of destruction and restructuring, in which the country’s fundamental weaknesses of a) high levels of indebtedness, b) large wealth, values, and political gaps, c) different factions of people unable to work well together, d) poor education and poor infrastructure, and e) the struggle to maintain an overextended empire under the challenge of emerging powerful rivals lead to a painful period of fighting, destruction, and then a restructuring that establishes a new order, setting the stage for a new period of building. 

Looked at even more simply, the items shown below are the main forces that drive the rises and declines of countries.  For any country, the more items it has on the left, the more it is likely to ascend; the more items it has on the right, the more it is likely to decline.  Those that make it to the top acquire the characteristics on the left (which causes them to ascend), but with time they move to the right, which makes them more prone to decline, while new competitive countries acquire the characteristics to the left until they are stronger, at which time the shift occurs. 





Because all of these factors, both ascending and descending, tend to be mutually reinforcing, it is not a coincidence that large wealth gaps, debt crises, revolutions, wars, and changes in the world order have tended to come as a perfect storm. 

Last two empire transitions




Next, I review Chapter 2.



Author is also on Twitter

Wednesday, April 22, 2020

Chamath Palihapitiya's 

2019 Annual Letter

March 9, 2020


CEO of Social Capital, a private VC firm



The annual letter itself may be found here: https://www.socialcapital.com/annual-letters/2019

Instead of creating a lengthy series of Tweets, I decided to quote those excerpts that I had found noteworthy. Everything is verbatim quotes except for the titles.

Capital Misallocation


"The cost of the entire Apollo program was $25 Billion or $150 Billion in today’s dollars.

Big Tech spent $75B on R&D in 2018 alone. Put another way, this means that in two 2018 equivalents of R&D spending, Big Tech could have sent people to the moon and back. It's fair to say, however, that what we have witnessed instead can graciously be described as something less ambitious and impactful than that."

(Under "Big Tech", Chamath specifically names FAAMG: Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Google.)

Investing isn't a Team Sport


"I’ve learned that investing isn’t a team sport. Company building is a team sport but capital allocation isn’t. It's about a few good decisions, from time to time, supported by a lot of idiosyncratic thinking, reading and debate. I’m thankful to my team who helps me make these good decisions."

Value of Cash


"Selling, when appropriate, and generating cash in a thoughtful way seems to be a prudent decision for the next several years."

Candid, Honest Opinions


"Many of the opinions raised thus far are complicated and potentially off-putting. That said, our track record has reaffirmed our need to be, if nothing else, candid and honest."

Focusing on What's Most Important to Oneself;

The Transition from Gilded Age to Progressive Era


"As we enter the final years of the Gilded Age and usher in the Progressive Era, a more civilized culture will hopefully abound. Today, it’s not just the stock market but also the fragmentation, polarization and judgement that are at all time highs.

Is this really the hallmark of a society that is progressive? No. It's the remnants of unhappiness, resentment and anger that personify the Gilded Age. That said, it's so much easier to be happy and see the bigger picture when you focus on what matters. So how does one focus on what matters? I’ve found it possible by asking questions like “what matters to me?” and “what is important to me?” These may sound like the most basic questions but they are also the most critical. And especially now, these are the questions that need lucid, non-judgemental [sic] answers from each of us.

For me, I have learned that my family, my health and what I know (knowledge) are the most important things that matter to me. Work, money and friendships are important but come strictly after the first three. What doesn’t matter? Everything else, particularly, what others think about me and my decisions."


Author is also on Twitter


Tuesday, March 31, 2020

Selected Slides from Jeffrey Gundlach's Webinar entitled "A Tale of Two Sinks"


Date of webinar: March 31, 2020.

By way of context, US stocks as represented by the S&P 500 peaked at 3,393.52 on Feb. 19 and then went on to crash by -36% before rallying by +18%. SPX now stands at 2,584.59 as of the close for March 31, 2020. This level is -24% below the Feb. 19th peak, meaning that 1/3 of the -36% loss has been retraced. Note that this is a month-end close, so I think it is biased on the upside.

The state with the largest manufacturing sector is Indiana. The one with the smallest is Washington DC. Gundlach believes that the coronavirus pandemic can lead to a revival of US manufacturing.


In the past ~10 days, US Congress did $2 trillion of fiscal stimulus, the Fed did $4 trillion of monetary easing and reduced interest rates by 1% (on a Sunday). As a result, the Fed's balance sheet now stands at 30% of GDP, up from the 19% figure at the right edge of the chart below. The US still has a long way to go before becoming like Japan. Gundlach believes "there's another stimulus package coming," which would raise the charted figure to 50%. (Note that US GDP in 2019 was $21.4 trillion.) The "30%" and "50%" figures are figures quoted by Gundlach in his webinar. The "$2tn" and "$4tn" figures are from my own recollection.


The Fed's $4 trillion monetary easing caused the latest snapback (black line) in bonds. The big drop prior to it coincides with the stock market crash from Feb. 19 to March 23.


The recent "violence" in the corporate bond market resembles the 2008 moves. Along with 2008, these are the only times since 1998 (22 years) that we've seen such large moves. The current turmoil shouldn't be taken lightly, coronavirus or no coronavirus.


The current cross-sectional view of the bond market is as follows, expressed in terms of year-to-date returns. The reason that Investment Grade AA bonds are flat (first item on the left) is because of the $4tn monetary easing of the past ~10 days.


This is how municipal bonds got decimated in the past month. Gundlach commented that "the Fed will need to send money to the states." That's how bad of a shape they will soon find themselves in. Declining revenues from sales and income taxes.


We now turn to some fundamentals which form the underpinnings for the above charts as well as the future.

Jobless claims & Unemployment. Last week's initial jobless claims number was 3.2 million. This week's is expected to be even larger. The most recent 4-week average (charted below) is the highest ever in the past 52 years (since 1968).

US Budget Deficit and Unemployment Rate.  As unemployment increases (see previous chart), federal tax revenues will decrease. This will put upward pressure on the Federal Budget Deficit. Furthermore, this deficit is already at an elevated level relative to the business cycle -- we're not even in a post-recession period! This all means that more Treasury bonds will need to be issued. So the question is, what happens to long term government bond yields? This factor taken in isolation by itself means upward pressure on yields because a higher interest rate has to be offered to clear a larger supply of bonds. (However, there are other confounding factors such as flight to safety, lack of other attractive alternatives, low economic growth, and Fed intervention which all put downward pressure on these yields.)

Afterthought (3/31/2020): To the extent that markets are free, my prognosis is that government bond yields will rise. To the extent that they're controlled, they will fall or remain low.




The Dollar and Twin Deficits. The "twin deficits" refer to the Federal Budget Deficit and the Current Account Deficit; see here. The chart below shows that they tend to track and forecast the Dollar with a 2-year lead. As an isolated single factor, because the Twin Deficits are expected to increase -- they are trending down in the chart below (red line) -- and as suggested by the previous chart, they will put downward pressure on the Dollar. (However, there are other confounding factors such as flight to safety and global dollar liquidity shortage which put upward pressure on the Dollar.)


Afterthought (3/31/2020): To the extent that markets behave orderly, my prognosis is that the dollar will fall. To the extent that they behave chaotically, the dollar will rise.  Looking at ~30 years of history (above chart) may not be enough for drawing the right conclusion given the current state of affairs globally.


Banking sector. European banks are in worse shape than American banks, and have been so since 2008. However, neither is in as bad of a shape as Japanese banks. Japan has been conducting easy monetary policy including an ultra low interest rate policy since 2008 (see 2nd chart from the top).


Other charts:

  1. Comparison of current stock market crash to previous ones. Covers snap-back and time until trough.
  2. 2020 US GDP forecasts. Shows that the US will most likely experience recession this year.
Random comments:

  1. Crude oil (WTI) is at $20 /barrel. The 2016 low has been taken out. Saudi Arabia decided to increase production after failing to reach an agreement with Russia. This will decimate the US shale oil industry, especially those with leverage.
  2. Gold is bounding around. Gold miners are a mixed bag; they will go up because of their correlation with gold; they will go down because of their correlation with stocks. Gundlach is bearish gold miners.
  3. Gold is "real money". That's why it makes sense to look at the SPY:GOLD ratio.
  4. Copper:Gold ratio tracks the 10-year Treasury yield pretty well. There are fundamental reasons for this. Copper is correlated with economic growth. Gold is inversely correlated with real yields.
  5. List of "agency" and "non-agency" REITs:
    1. Agency: NLY, AGNC
    2. Non-agency: NRZ, CIM, TWO, MFA
  6. Stock market: If "normal" is January 2020, we will "never" go back to that level. Those were Gundlach's words.




Author is also on Twitter.

Thursday, February 13, 2020

Where are we Today in the Credit Cycle?

according to Matt Eagan, Loomis Sayles


Matt Eagan presented at a webcast organized by Litman Gregory. (Here's how the two are linked.)

Bottom Line: We are in "late cycle" if not at the tail end of "expansion" (Slide 4). The best time to be adding exposure (as in investor) to this asset class (which is fixed income & credit) would be after a downturn is over, in my opinion, or when the Risk Premium is high and Default Loss is low (as in Jan. 2016; slides 13, 18). 

Note added on March 31, 2020: US stocks as measured by the S&P 500 would go on to peak on Feb. 19 and crash by -36% before rallying by +18%.

Vocabulary
  • OAS = option-adjust spread
  • IGRP = investment grade risk premium
  • HYRP = high yield risk premium
  • NIPA = national income and product account

Dollar
  • They expect the dollar to "remain firm" mainly due to coronavirus. Prior to that, they were expecting green shoots outside of the US and had been bearish on the dollar. No more.

China & Coronavirus 
  1. Most companies in China cannot stand being closed for more than 3 months from a cash flow viewpoint.
  2. When SARS hit (2003), China represented 4% of global GDP whereas it now represents 18%. The impact of coronavirus can be 4 times as large.

Selected Slides





















Author is also on Twitter



Wednesday, January 22, 2020

Review of Global Growth over Past Decade


This is an article that was published in the FT on Jan. 22, World 2020 section, p. 2.

"2019 saw the lowest global growth of the decade."

"Growth expectations for this year have been scaled down."






Author is also on Twitter.

Friday, January 10, 2020

Lyn Alden's Expectations for the Next Decade

US Stocks, Bonds, & Gold



(Last edited on Oct. 2, 2020 and prior to that on Jan. 24, 2020)

Excerpts below are from Lyn Alden's newsletter dated Jan. 6, 2020. Lyn Alden's Twitter handle.

Overview. I provide broad brush strokes discussing asset allocation across US stocks, US bonds, and gold when the holding period is expected to be a decade. This material comes from Lyn Alden. I then provide my own thoughts; I've done this in blue font. Finally, I provide my afterthoughts, which I've done in purple font.


Outline

  1. US Corporate Earnings
  2. Short-term vs Long-term Forecasting
  3. US Stock Returns over the Next Decade
  4. Stocks vs Bonds?
  5. Stocks vs Gold?
  6. US vs International Stocks (& US Dollar)
  7. Concluding Remarks


Corporate Earnings
Last year (2019), the US stock market (as represented by the S&P 500) returned almost 30% whereas the year before it, returns were -6%; source. Looking at corporate earnings -- this chart -- you wouldn't have guessed so; corporate earnings grew by 20% in 2018 and by less than 1% in 2019.

Lyn Alden describes the current situation for corporations as follows:
"With corporate earnings growth at a potential standstill against a backdrop of rising labor costs and heavy balance sheets, the next step for many corporations if they want to further boost their earnings in the short term is to reduce their labor force.
And rising unemployment is typically the final nail on the coffin for a business cycle. We haven’t had that yet during this business cycle."
My personal thoughts: (1) John Hussman has been pointing out deteriorating market internals for a while; for example, see this Tweet. (2) Many pundits are forecasting a US recession sometime in 2020 or otherwise in 2021. See Duke CFO Survey via this Tweet. A US recession would be bearish for stocks ...



Short-term vs Long-term Forecasting
Lyn Alden writes,

"It is one of those unintuitive aspects of finance that it is easier for fundamental investors to predict long-term returns than short-term returns, although both exercises are quite challenging."

These charts contain supporting evidence if not a definite proof. They show that forward P/E ratios have a higher correlation with returns over 5 years than with returns over 1 year. (This correlation corresponds to the "R^2" figures in the charts. "R^2" is read as "R-squared".) The difference is by a factor of almost 5: R^2 of 46% vs R^2 of 10%.

The thing to note is as follows. In moving from the chart on the left to the one on the right, the dispersion of dots around the orange trendline shrinks. Its meaning is that there's less variance in 5-year forward returns than in 1-year forward returns.




US Stock Returns over the Next Decade

The Cyclically-adjusted Annualized S&P 500 Earnings Yield (blue line) has a high correlation with forward 10-year returns (orange bars). This can be visually confirmed from this chart. (Cyclically-adjusted Annualized S&P 500 Earnings Yield is simply 1 divided by CAPE Ratio where CAPE Ratio is the Shiller P/E Ratio. This is none other than Stock Price divided by 10 years worth of Earnings averaged. For more details, see here.)

US stock forecast for the coming decade: Not good. The blue line is the second lowest it has ever been since 1925, almost 100 years ago. (This forecast is consistent with John Hussman's; see here for example.)



Since inflation is a factor influencing consumption, it may be preferable to look at real returns instead of nominal returns. The above chart showed stock returns in nominal terms. This chart (orange bars) shows them in real terms. The blue line is the same as before.


The point here is that currently the Inverse CAPE Ratio is low. At two other instances in history, when this Ratio was low, inflation decimated stock returns. That was in the late 60's and early 70's and for a shorter period in 1999 and 2000. Could this happen again? Hmmm ...

My personal thoughts: John Hussman says that if we sorted the S&P 500 constituents by P/S ratio and grouped them into deciles, we would see that all deciles are overvalued relative to their own history; see chart via this Tweet. So, what is an investor who is still interested in investing in US stocks supposed to do? It might make sense to partition the universe of stocks by economic sector and sort by P/S ratio ... Then, one would invest in the low P/S sectors or go long the low P/S sectors while shorting the high P/S sectors. Since the energy sector is the sector with the worst return over the past 10 years, it may very well be the sector with the lowest P/S ratio ... 

I did a Google search and discovered that Barclays has products based on sector CAPE ratio; see here for an Index which invest in the US. They also have similar indices which invest in Europe and Asia Pacific. Furthermore, they have an Index based on individual stocks' CAPE ratio as opposed to sector CAPE ratio; see here. It's not clear to me which one would perform better ... (Interesting side discovery: Shiller Barclays Global Multi-Asset Index. Somewhat similar to Elm Partners' Balanced Fund.)

Afterthoughts: One should look at the above charts and pretend that it's 2009 and the stock market has crashed. One should then ask: what was the CAPE Ratio back then and what did it feel like if you were to go long the US stock market? It must have felt scary or very uncertain. So, the right investments today would be those that feel scary or uncertain, and not those which make you feel safe and certain. (US stocks certainly feel safe and certain. At least, to me they do.)

An article printed in the FT in December also cautioned that stock market returns over the next decade are expected to be lower than the last 3 decades and much lower than the last decade. See this Tweet thread

Stocks vs Bonds?
The yield-to-maturity of 10-year US Treasuries (blue line) shows a pretty good correlation with 10-year forward inflation-adjusted returns on 10-year US Treasuries (orange bars). 



US bond forecast for the coming decade: Not good. It's quite possible that the next decade will resemble the period from the late 1930's through the mid 1970's when inflation-adjusted government bond returns were negative. (Note that currently, the 10-year US Treasury bond has a yield of 1.8% and more than $10 trillion worth of European and Japanese bonds have a negative yield; this figure was as high as $17 trillion last summer.)

Lyn Alden writes,

"Overall, the current situation for stocks and bonds is reminiscent of the 1960’s, in my view. Investors generally have a recency bias, and often use the past business cycle or two as a likely model for how the next one will play out. However, I think some of the older periods, like the late 1960’s or late 1930’s, have more in common with today’s situation than the late 2000’s or late 1990’s."

My personal thoughts: Buying bonds make sense only if one is expecting deflation. We should keep in mind the presence of $200-$300 trillion in unfunded entitlements in the US. Coupled with fiscal deficits, they seem to call for lots of increases to the money supply. This doesn't sound like deflation. (Thinking of Ray Dalio and this Tweet.)

Afterthoughts: The reason bonds performed well from 1980 until the present is because interest rates were falling. Bonds generate their returns in two ways. One is through capital gains which come about when interest rates fall. The other is through coupon payments which is their yield. An investor buying bonds today and holding them until maturity would be locking in a very low yield. (I can't get excited about a 1-2% yield on a US Treasury bond.) Given that yields are low, an investor's hopes for any capital gains would have to rest on yields falling even lower. Yields falling even lower than where they are would correspond to a heightened demand for bonds or a reduction in their supply ...

If the US enters recession, a number of corporations will probably default on their bonds. This will cause bond yields to rise; i.e. there will be bond selling en masse because bond-holders would want to reduce their risk of loss on future defaults. Bond prices will fall. (Stocks too?)

The only way that bond prices can undergo a heightened period of buying is if there was a crisis which caused investors to seek shelter in bonds; predominantly in government bonds, and assuming that they viewed such bonds as a safe haven. How or why would one view bonds of an over-indebted sovereign nation as a "safe haven" is hard for me to fathom. This is the reality for most developed countries, including the US, Europe, and Japan. (Under this scenario, gold is likely to shine. High-grade corporate bonds may offer better returns than sovereign bonds.)


Stocks vs Gold?
Lyn Alden writes,

"This chart shows the outperformance or underperformance of the S&P 500 compared to gold over the subsequent 10-year period (orange bars) based on various levels of the Cyclically-adjusted S&P 500 Earnings Yield (blue line).

As the chart shows, gold has historically outperformed stocks whenever stocks were this expensive."



Please compare with the third previous chart, the one showing nominal forward 10-year returns for stocks.

Gold forecast for the coming decade: Good!
My personal thoughts: What Alden doesn't discuss but which may be consistent with her bullish thesis on gold might be a bullish thesis on Commodities in general.

Afterthoughts: Aside from CAPE considerations, gold bulls have their own arguments as to why investors should be buying gold. For example, they point to heightened central bank gold buying; this Tweet provides a chart. Grant Williams' talk from last November contains interesting charts in favor of buying gold.

Fundamentally, three factors influence gold's price: US real interest rates, US dollar, and US money supply. Gold moves inversely to the first two and alongside of the third factor. In other words, gold's price increases when US real interest rates fall, the US dollar falls, or the US money supply increases. For more details, see my earlier blogpost here

Here's one way that people might perceive gold rising with rising inflation. When inflation increases, if nominal yields don't rise because of capital controls, it would mean that real yields are falling, and gold does rise with falling real yields. Recall that the nominal yield on a bond is equal to the real yield plus the inflation rate. Real yields are highly correlated with real economic growth as measured by real GDP growth. In an environment where there's not much economic growth (e.g. today), real yields will be low. (I've used the words "yield" and "interest rate" as synonyms.)

For the positive correlation between real yields and economic growth; see the paper by Professor Richard Werner. (This is inconsistent with how central banks act, which is to lower interest rates in order to spur economic growth, but that's another story.)


US vs International Stocks? (& US Dollar)
Lyn Alden's argument regarding this topic is that we ought to expect dollar weakness, which is usually bullish for international stocks relative to US stocks ...

I will refrain from discussing further because I don't have much insights on international stocks.

My personal thoughts: Assuming that we were to hedge the currency risk, it would make sense to invest in countries with low CAPE Ratios. Alden lists her preferred countries here; they include Russia, South Korea, and Singapore. Meb Faber lists his here

(This paragraph added on Oct. 2, 2020) Investing in low CAPE ratio countries on itself isn't a sufficient criterion because the decision would only be based on a cross-sectional comparison. One has to also compare a country's current CAPE ratio to its own historical past. Only if the current CAPE was depressed relative to historical CAPE would investing in a particular country make sense.

I used Google search to discover Star Capital which has a list of CAPE by country here; they list Russia and Turkey as the only countries with single-digit CAPE Ratios; Greece is also single-digit, but it has the only negative-valued CAPE Ratio listed!

Barclays has an interactive tool which provides historical charts of CAPE by country spanning 1982 to the present. The cheapest countries at the moment are Russia, Korea, Singapore, Spain, and Turkey.

The Dollar. There are two schools of thought on the dollar. One school believes that the US dollar has to weaken; see Tweets 1 & 2 referencing currency expert A.G. Bisset. Alden also falls within this group and has written about it, so does Luke Gromen and bond manager Jeffrey Gundlach.  America's "twin deficits" (fiscal deficit + current account deficit) are going to kill dollar strength. See here for an explanation of twin deficits. See chart of twin deficits by country. 

Alden has written about trade deficits (which is part of current account deficits) as the major driver of the US dollar here and here.

There is a second school of thought which says that even though the dollar has to weaken, it doesn't mean that it will. This school of thought includes macro traders / fund managers Brent Johnson, Raoul Pal, and Jim Rogers.

We need to keep in mind that both groups might be correct but over different time horizons. The second school of thought believes that the dollar will strengthen first before weakening. This second school tends to shun international stocks and sticks to the US due to safety / crisis concerns.

A chart of US dollar shows mild weakening since late September (i.e. 3.5 months ago). Recall that the "repo rate spike" occurred on Sept. 16, 2019 and led to the Fed starting not-QE which was intended to increase dollar liquidity. This increased dollar liquidity shows up in the chart as dollar weakness. (In order to judge the dollar's longer-term trend, one would need to look at a chart going further back than just 4.5 years.)




Afterthoughts: Alden summarizes nicely here by saying that there are three factors which determine the direction of the dollar:

1) US current account balance ("deficit" would be bearish for US dollar)
2) global dollar liquidity shortage ("shortage" would be bullish for US dollar)
3) US central bank policy ("expansionary" would be bearish for US dollar)

Brent Johnson explains his bullish dollar view in these two interviews dated Q4 2019.

Investment strategy. Investors who aren't comfortable going all-in and following the above recommendations could break up their investment budget into, say, three parts. They would invest one part now. They would invest the second part once they had perceived the arrival of some inflection point; e.g. dollar peak. Finally, they would invest the third part after that inflection point had passed. This would give them the opportunity to jump ship if they had a change of mind mid-way. It would also allow them to educate themselves further in the interim, something which always helps: it brings conviction. In general, investing ought to be viewed more as an on-going process than a one-shot thing. 


Concluding Remarks

Resources: List of ETFs for asset allocation, by Lyn Alden. (Note that there's not one Commodity ETF mentioned therein; so here's where these are listed.)

Issue of  ConfidenceI searched my Tweets for the word "dollar" to see whether I had overlooked anything worth mentioning. Here's one thing that stood out. It's Martin Armstrong saying that "Confidence is the ultimate determinant of Price" -- link to Tweet. Something to keep in mind when making forecasts about the dollar (or making asset allocation decisions).

Currency of the Previous World Power. Before the US became the world's greatest power, that privilege belonged to Great Britain, up until the end of WWII probably. So, I asked myself, what happened to the British Pound in the last 100 years? A Google search revealed charts here and here from which I was able to calculate a -1.28% yearly depreciation rate for the British Pound relative to the US dollar. (The "-1.28%"is the average of -1.37% and -1.18% calculated from the two sources. The first rate spans 1920-2019 whereas the second rate spans 1953-2019.) If we assume that going forward, the US dollar will depreciate at the same rate as the British Pound, it'll mean that in order for the Dollar to lose 10% of its value, it would take 8 years. For it to lose 25%, it would take 22 years and for it to lose 50%, it would take 54 years. (In contrast A.G. Bisset is forecasting a more significant dollar depreciation over the next 15 years: about -50%. See chart. A -50% drop over 15 years corresponds to a yearly drop of -4.52%. In the referenced chart from A.G. Bisset, the average Dollar depreciation over the past 3 cycles was -53.5%.)

(US vs British InflationThe source for the first chart of these two charts was this website. It had "inflation calculators" for both the British Pound and the Dollar. I used it to infer that over 1900-2019, goods denominated in British Pound experienced an average annual inflation rate of 2.94% whereas the corresponding rate for goods priced in US dollars was 4.03%. But I seem to be digressing, except to note that with the Dollar being the global reserve currency, the dollar-denominated goods experienced higher inflation of the two ...)



Author is also on Twitter


Selected Charts on Gold

from “CRIKEY!! (What’s Going on With Gold?)" by Grant Williams


Link to Grant Williams' talk given in Nov. 2019 at the Precious Metals Summit, Switzerland.

Comments and observations are as of Nov 2019.

Gold Price, when measured in terms of a basket of currencies (as opposed to the US dollar), has broken to a new 35-year high.


Comparing Gold's Price to the Dow Jones, gold appears to be undervalued relative to the Dow Jones (yellow circles). Overvaluations (red circles) occurred at historically significant points in time ...


Not only has the gold price lagged the S&P 500 since 2011, but gold miners (GDX ETF) and junior gold miners (GDXJ ETF) have fared significantly worse.


The Silver Price chart has a cup-and-handle formation spanning 40 years!




Author is also on Twitter