Category: employment

The Un-Recovery Machine

Leave a comment

December 4, 2016

I’ve titled this week’s blog “The Un-Recovery Machine” for a reason I’ll explain toward the end of the blog as I look at the lack of growth in household income for the past 16 years.  Lastly, I will show how easy peasy it is to do a year end portfolio review. First, I’ll look at the latest job figures and a quick five year summary of a few key stats of stewardship under the Obama administration.

The economy added 180,000 jobs in November, close to estimates.  Obama will leave office with an average monthly gain of 206,000 jobs over the past five years, a strong track record. The president has a minor influence on the number of jobs created each month but each president is judged by job growth regardless.  We need to have a donkey to pin the tail on when something goes wrong.

The real surprise this month was the drop of .3% in the unemployment rate to 4.6%.  Some not so smart analysts attributed the drop to discouraged workers who dropped out of the labor force.  However, the number of dropouts in November was the same as October when the unemployment rate declined only .1%.  Seasonal factors, Christmas jobs and variations in survey data may have contributed to the discrepancy.  What is clear is that the greatest number of those who are dropping out of the labor force are the increasing numbers of boomers who are retiring every month. I’ll look further at this in a moment.

The number of involuntary part-timers has dropped from 2.5 million five years ago to 1.9 million, about 1.3% of workers. This is a lower percentage than the 1970s, the 1980s, and the first half of the 1990s.  It is only when the tech boom and housing bubble grew in the late 90s and 2000s that this percentage was lower.

Growth in the core work force is a strong 1.5%, a good sign.  These are the workers aged 25-54 who are building families, careers and businesses.  The change in the Labor Market Conditions Index (LMCI) turned positive again in October.  This is a composite labor index of twenty indicators that the Federal Reserve uses to judge the overall health of the labor market.  They have not released November’s LMCI yet.  This index showed negative growth for the first part of the year and was the chief reason why the Fed did not raise interest rates earlier this year.

The quit rate is back to pre-recession levels at a strong 2.1%.  This is the number of employees who have voluntarily quit their jobs in the past month and is used to gauge the confidence of workers in finding another job quickly. The highest this reading has ever been was 2.6% just as the dot com boom was ending in 2001.  Too much confidence. When the housing boom was frothing in the mid-2000s, the quit rate was typically 2.3%, a level of over-confidence. 2.1% seems strong without being too much.

Another unwelcome surprise this month was a .03 decline in the average hourly wage of private workers.  On the heels of a welcome .11 increase in October, this decline was disappointing. One month’s increase or decrease of a few cents is statistical noise.  The year-over-year increase gives the longer term trend.  For the past five years, the yearly increase in wages has been unable to get above 2.5%, which was the annual growth in November.

The greatest challenge that the incoming president will face is the ever growing ranks of Boomers who are retiring.  In 2007, the number of those Not in the Labor Force was 78 million.  These are adults who can legally work but are not looking for work, and includes retirees, discouraged job applicants, women staying home with the kids, and those going to college.  That number has now grown to 95 million, an increase of 2 million workers per year, and will only keep growing as the 80 million strong boomer generation continues to retire each month.   The millenials, those aged 16 to 34, are a larger generation than the boomers but will not fully offset the number of retirees till the first half of the 2020s.  If any president can explain this in very simple terms, it is Donald Trump, who has mastered the art of communicating a message in short bursts.

//////////////////////////

Construction and Local Employment

Construction employment matters.  When growth in this one relatively small sector drops below the growth of all employment, that signals a weakness in the overall economy that indicates a good probability of recession within the year.  It’s not an ironclad law like the 2nd law of thermodynamics but has proven to be a reliable rule of thumb for the past forty years.  Fortunately, the economy is still showing healthy growth in construction employment that has outpaced broader job gains for the past four years.

The puzzle is why construction spending is an economic weathervane.  It has fallen from 11% of GDP in the 1960s to slightly over 6% of GDP today. (Graph )   Yet when this  relatively small part of the economy stops singing, there’s something amiss.

Real construction spending (in 2016 dollars) is currently at a healthy level of $175K per employee, 16% above the low of $151K in the spring of 2011.  Although we have declined slightly in the past year, the average is about the same level as late 2006 – 2007 and is above the spending of the 1990s.  As a rule of thumb in the construction industry, an employee is going to average 33% in wages and salaries. That doesn’t include the cost of employee benefits, insurance and taxes which will bring the total cost of the employee above 40% of the total cost.   So, if spending is $175K, we can guesstimate that the average worker is making about $58K.  When I check with the BLS, the average weekly earnings in construction is $1120, or almost $58K.  As a side note: that 40% employee cost is used by some contractors as a rule of thumb for a bid total when estimating a job.

During the recession many workers dropped out of the trades.  Older workers with beat up bodies cut back on hours, went on disability or took early retirement.  Younger workers who saw the layoffs and lack of construction employment during the recession turned their sights to other fields.  Workers who do come into the trades find that the physical transition takes some getting used to.  Even workers in their twenties discover that muscles and joints working 8 – 10 hours a day need some time to adapt.

The average workweek hours for construction workers hit at a 70 year high in December 2015 and is still near those highs at 39.8 hrs a week.  In some areas the lack of applicants for construction jobs is constraining growth.  In Denver, construction jobs grew by almost 20% in the past year and that surge is helping to attract  workers from other states.  The unemployment rate in Denver is 2.9%, below the 3.5% in the entire state.  (BLS Denver  Colorado)  This pattern is not confined to Colorado. Very often economic growth may be strong in the cities but weak and faltering in rural communities throughout the state.  For decades this has caused some resentment in rural communities who feel that politicians in the cities dominate policy making in each state.

Local employment

The Civilian Labor Force, those working and actively wanting work, is growing in all states except Alaska, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma and Wyoming (BLS here if you want to look up your city or state stats).  Some of the changes may be demographic.  I suspect that is the case in New York and New Jersey. The decline in some states are those related to resource extraction.  Employment in states with coal mining and oil production has taken a hit in the past two years.  In Colorado, the 11% gain in construction jobs has offset a 12% decrease in mining jobs.

/////////////////////////////

Household Income

On a more sobering note…In 1999 real median household income touched a high $58,000 annually.  Sixteen years later that median was $56,500, a decline of about 3%.  There’s a lot of pain out there.

For readers unfamiliar with the terminology, “real” means inflation adjusted.  “Median” is the halfway point.  Half of all incomes are above the median, half below.  Economists and market analysts prefer to use the median as a measure of both incomes and house prices to avoid having a small number of large incomes or expensive houses give an inaccurate picture of the data.

Both parties can take responsibility for this – two Republican administrations (Bush) and two Democratic (Obama) terms. There have been a number of different party configurations in the Presidency, House and Senate, so neither party can reasonably lay the blame at the other party’s feet.  The “new” more idealogically pure Republicans  in the House regard the “old” Republicans of the two Bush terms as traitors to conservative ideals.  Never mind that a lot of those “old” silly Republicans are still taking up room in the House.

Both parties have borrowed and spent a lot of money but little has flowed down to the American worker.  So much for the imaginativeness of trickle down economic theory.  When George Bush assumed office in January 2001, the Federal Public debt totalled $5.6 trillion.  When he left office in January 2009, the debt had almost doubled to $10.7 trillion.  Under Obama’s two terms, the debt nearly doubled again, crossing the $19.4 trillion mark in June 2016.  $14 trillion dollars of Federal borrowing and spending since early 2001 has not helped lift the incomes of American families.  It is a damning indictment of both major parties who have lost touch with the everyday concerns of many American families.

Can Donald Trump be the catalyst that miraculously turns the Washington whirlpool of money into an effective machine?  Doubtful, but let’s stay hopeful. 535 Congressmen and Senators, each with an outlook, a constituency, and an agenda funded by a coalition of lobbyists, are going to fight against giving up control.  Spend the money on my constituents. they will say.  Republicans throw out the phrase “limited government” to their base voters who whuff, whuff and chow down.  Once elected, many Republican politicians are as controlling as their Democratic counterparts, only in different areas of our lives. A Republican controlled government will push for more regulations on women’s health, regulations on people’s moral and social behaviors, a proposal to reinstitute the draft, and threats to private companies who move jobs out of the U.S.   Donald Trump recently enacted Bernie Sanders’ prescription for keeping jobs in America.  He no doubt threatened Carrier’s parent corporation, United Technologies, that they would lose defense contracts if Carrier moved all those 1000 jobs to Mexico.

So Donald Trump, the leader of the Republican Party, is following a socialist play book.  We are going to see more of this because Trump is the leader of the Trump party, not wedded to any particular ideology.  He is a transactional leader who plays any card in the deck to win, regardless of suit. Chaining oneself to ideals is a good way to drown in the political soup.

Republicans in Washington have consistently betrayed conservative ideals of financial responsibility and a smaller government imprint on the daily lives of the American people.  Democratic politicians cluck, cluck about progressive principles but Democratic voters find that their leaders have left them a pile of chicken poop. Unlike Republican voters, Democrats haven’t developed the organizational skills to make personnel changes in party primaries. Both parties are infected with old ideas, loyalties and prejudices.

Because of this, retail investors – plain old folks saving for their retirement – can expect increased volatility in the next two years.  We may look back with fondness at these last two years, a peaceful time of few accomplishments in Washington, and a sideways market in stocks and bonds.  A balanced portfolio will help weather the volatility.

Mutual fund companies and investment brokers track this information for us and we can access it fairly easily online at the company’s website.  Even if we have several places where we keep our funds, it is a relatively simple paper and pencil process to calculate our total allotment to various investments. We don’t need to be precise.  We are not launching a rocket to Mars.

If I have $198,192.15 at Merry Mutual and they say I have 70% stocks and 30% bonds, I can write down $140 in stocks, $60 in bonds.   Then over to my 401K at the Ready Retirement Company to find out that I have $201,323.39 balance, with 80% stocks and real estate funds and 20% bonds.  I write down $160 for stocks and $40 for bonds.  Then over to my savings account at Safety Savings where I have $39,178.64, which I include with my bonds.  I write down $40.  Finally, over to my CDs at the First Best Bank in my neighborhood where I have $32,378.14 in CDs of various maturities.  I include those with my bonds and write down $32. Maybe I have an insurance policy with some paid up value that I want to include in my bonds.

So, adding it all up, my stocks (more risk) are $140 + $160 = $300.  My bonds/cash (less risk) are $60 + $40 + $40 + $32 = $172.  $300 + $172 = $472 total portfolio value.  $300 stocks / $472 total = .635 which is about 64%.  So I have a 64% / 36% stock / bond split and I have figured this out without expensive software, or an investment advisor.

Depending on my comfort level, knowledge and expertise I may want some software or some advice from a professional but I know where my allocation lies.  I am on the risky side of a perfectly balanced (50% / 50%) portfolio and how do I feel about that?  If I do talk to an advisor or a friend I can tell them up front what my allocation is and we will have a much more informed conversation.

Small Hope Amid Tragedy

Leave a comment

July 10, 2016

The horrific news from Dallas on Thursday night and Friday morning understandably drowned out this month’s extraordinary employment report. No one anticipated job gains of 287,000 that were far above the consensus average estimate of 170,000.  Like last month, the BLS numbers are way off from those from the private payroll processor ADP, which reported gains of 172,000.

The strike at Verizon that started in May and ended in June involved 38,000 workers and skewed the BLS numbers down in May, then reversed back up again in June.  BLS methodology does not adjust for a strike involving so many workers, leading some to criticize such a widely followed methodology.  Because these estimates are prone to error, I think we get a more reliable picture by averaging the two estimates from the BLS and ADP.  As we can see in the graph below, economic growth during the past five years has been strong enough to stay ahead of the 150,000 monthly gains needed to keep up with population growth.

Those working part time because they couldn’t find full time work have dropped by 1.4 million in the past year – a positive sign. Although the supposed recovery is seven years old, it is only since the spring of 2014 that the ranks of involuntary part timers have consistently decreased.  Today’s level is almost 7 million less than it was two years ago but is still 2/3rds more than pre-Crisis levels.

This month’s 1/10th uptick in the participation rate was a welcome sign that more people are coming back into the workforce.  Although the unemployment rate ticked up two notches to 4.9% this was probably due to more people actively looking for work. An important component of the economy is the core work force aged 25 – 54, which continued to show annual growth in excess of 1%, a healthy sign.

////////////////////////////

CWPI (Constant Weighted Purchasing Index)

Earlier in the week, the monthly survey of Purchasing Managers (PMI) foreshadowed a positive employment report. A surge in new orders in the services sector and some healthy growth in employment helped lift up the non-manufacturing PMI to strong growth.  The Manufacturing index grew as well.  The CWPI composite of both surveys has a reading of almost 58, indicating strong growth.  The familiar peak and trough pattern that has continued during the recovery has changed to a steadier level.  New Export Orders in both manufacturing and services reversed direction this month.  The strong dollar makes American made products more expensive to buyers in other countries and presents a significant obstacle to companies who rely on exports.

Last month’s survey of purchasing managers in the services sector indicated some worrying weakness in employment.  This month’s reading suggests that a surge in new orders has reversed the decline in employment, a trend confirmed by the BLS report later released at the end of the week.

A few months ago I was concerned that the familiar trough that had developed in the spring might continue to weaken.  This month’s survey put those fears to rest.

//////////////////////////

Housing Bubble?

Soaring home prices in some cities has led to speculation that, ten years after the last peak in the housing market, we are again approaching unaffordable price levels.  Heavy migration into the Denver metro area has made it the third hottest housing market in the U.S., just behind San Francisco and Vallejo (northeast of SF) in California (Source). Despite bubble indications in these hot markets, the Case Shiller composite of the twenty largest metropolitan areas does not indicate that we are at excessive levels.

In the period 2000 through mid-2006 when housing prices peaked, annual growth was more than 10%.  Ten years have passed since then.  In the 16.5 years since the start of 2000, annual growth has averaged 4%.  While this is almost twice the 2% rate of inflation, it is approximately the same as the rate of growth during the past century.

//////////////////////////////

In the past two weeks following the Brexit vote in the U.K. the S&P500 has rebounded 6%, recovering all the ground lost and then some. It is near all time highs BUT so are Treasuries.  When both “risk on” (stocks) and “risk off” (Treasuries) both rise to new highs, it creates a tension that usually resolves in a rather ugly fashion as the market chooses one or the other.

Housing Heats Up

Leave a comment

June 5, 2016

In parts of the country, particularly in the west, demand for housing is strong, causing higher housing prices and lower rental vacancy rates.  For the first quarter of 2016, the Census Bureau reports that vacancy rates in the western U.S. are 20% below the national average of 7.1%.  At $1100 per month, the median asking rent in the west is about 25% above the national average of $870 (spreadsheet link).

With a younger and more mobile population, home ownership rates in the west are below the national average (Census Bureau graph). Housing prices in San Francisco have surprassed their 2006 peaks while those in L.A.are near their peak.  Heavy population migration to Denver has spurred 10% annual home price gains and an apartment vacancy rate of 6% (metro area stats).

From 1982 through 2008, the Census Bureau estimates that the number of homeowners under age 35 was about 10 million. These were the “baby bust” Generation X’ers who numbered only 70% of the so-called Boomer generation that preceded them.

Shortly before the financial crisis in 2008, a new generation came of age, the Millenials, born between 1982 and 2000, and now the largest age group alive in the U.S. (Census Bureau). Based on demographics, homeownership should have increased to about 13 million in this younger age group, but the financial crisis was particularly hard on them.  Starting in 2008, homeownership in this younger demographic began to decline, reaching a historic low of 8.8 million in 2015, a 15% decline over seven years, and a gap of almost 33% from expected homeownership based on demographics.

In response to lower homeownership rates, builders cut back and built fewer homes.  I’ll repost a graph I put up last week showing the number of new homes sold each year for the past few decades.

Look at the period of overbuilding during the 2000s, what economists would euphemistically call an overinvestment in residential construction.  Then, financial crisis, Great Recession and kerplooey!, another technical term for the precipitous decline in new homes built and sold. As the economy has improved for the past two years, the demand for housing by the millennial generation, supressed for several years by the recession, has shifted upwards.  More demand, less supply = higher prices.  This younger generation prefers living closer to city amenities, culture and transportation, causing a revitalization of older neighborhoods.  In Denver, developers are buying older homes, scrapping them off, and building two housing units where there was one. Gentrification influences the rental market as well as affordable single family homes and pushes out families of more modest means in some parts of town.

The housing market really overheats when rentals and home prices escalate at the same time. During the housing boom of the 2000s, many tenants left their apartments to buy homes and cash in on the housing bonanza.  Rising vacancies put downward pressure on monthly rents.  Move-in specials abounded, announcing “No Deposit!”, “First Month Free!” or “Free cable!” to attract renters. This time it’s different.

Rising rents and home prices put extraordinary pressure on working families who find they can barely afford to live in central city neighborhoods which offered low rents and affordable transportation.  They consider moving to a satellite city with lower costs but face longer commute times and additonal transportation costs to get to work.  Demographic trends shift more slowly than building trends but neither moves quickly so we can expect that housing pressures will not abate soon until the supply of multi-family rental units and single family homes increases to meet demand.

////////////////////////

Incomes

For the past four decades, household income has declined, as Presidential contender Bernie Sanders is quick to point out.  Some economists also note that household size has declined greatly during that time as well so that comparisons should take into account the smaller household size.  A recent analysis  by Pew Research has made that adjustment and found that middle class incomes had shrunk from 62% of total income in 1970 to 43% in 2015.

But, again, comparisons are made more difficult because some categories of income, which have risen sharply in the past few decades, are not included.  Among the many items not included are “the value of income ‘in kind’ from food stamps, public housing subsidies, medical care, employer contributions for individuals (ACS data sheet).  Generally, any form of non-cash or lump sum income like inheritances or insurance payments are excluded.  There is little dispute with the exclusion of lump sum income but the exclusion of non-cash benefits is suspect.  An employer who spends $1000 a month on an employee health benefit is paying for labor services, whether it is cash to the employee or not.

The lack of valid comparison provokes debate among economists, confusion and contenton among voters.  The political class and the media that live off them thrive on confusion. Those who want the data to show a decline in middle class income cling to the current methodology regardless of its shortcomings.

//////////////////////////

Employment

The BLS reported job gains of only 38,000 in May, far below the gain of 173,000 private jobs reported by the payroll processor ADP and below all – yes, all – the estimates of 82 labor economists. The weak report caused traders to reverse bets on a small rate increase from the Fed later this month.

Almost 40,000 Verizon employees have been on strike since mid-April and just returned to work this past week. On the presumption that a company will hire temporary workers to replace striking workers, the BLS does not adjust their employment numbers for striking workers.  However, most employers of striking employees hire only as many employees as they need to, relying on salaried employees to fill in.  Do strikes contribute to the spikes in the BLS numbers?  A difficult answer to tease out of the data. In the graph below we notice the erratic data set of the BLS private job gains (blue line; spikes circled in red) compared to the ADP numbers (red line; spike circled in blue).

Each month I average the BLS and ADP estimates of job gains to get a less erratic data swing.  The 112,000 average for May follows an average of 140,000 job gains in April – two months of gains below the 150,000 new jobs needed to keep up with population growth.  Let’s put this one in the wait and see column.  If June is weak, then I will start to worry.

Home Sweet Asset

Leave a comment

April 3, 2016

Normally we do not include the value of our home in our portfolio.  A few weeks ago I suggested an alternative: including a home value based on it’s imputed cash flows.  Let’s look again at the implied income and expense flows from owning a home as a way of building a budget.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau take that flow approach, called Owner Equivalent Rent (OER), when constructing the CPI, and homeowners are well advised to adopt this perspective.  Why?

1) By regarding the house as an asset generating flows, it may provide some emotional detachment from the house, a sometimes difficult chore when a couple has lived in the home a long time, perhaps raised a family, etc.

2) It focuses a homeowner on the monthly income and rent expense connected with their home ownership.  It asks a homeowner to visualize themselves separately as asset owner and home renter. It is easy for homeowners to think of a mortgage free home as an almost free place to live. It’s not.

3) Provides realistic budgeting for older people on fixed incomes.  Some financial planners recommend spending no more than 25% of income on housing in order to leave room for rising medical expenses.  Some use a 33% figure if most of the income is net and not taxed.  For this article, I’ll compromise and use 30% as a recommended housing share of the budget.

A fully paid for home that would rent for $2000 is an investment that generates an implied $1400 in income per month, using a 70% net multiplier as I did in my previous post. Our net expense of $600 a month includes home insurance, property taxes, maintenance and minor repairs, as well as an allowance for periodic repairs like a new roof, and capital improvements.

Using the 30% rule, some people might think that their housing expense was within prudent budget guidelines as long as their income was more than $2000 a month.  $600 / $2000 is 30%.

However, let’s separate the roles involved in home ownership.  The renter pays $2000 a month, implying that this renter needs $6700 a month in income to stay within the recommended 30% share of the budget for housing expense.  The owner receives $1400 in net income a month, leaving a balance of $5300 in income needed to stay within the 30% budget recommendation. $6700 – $1400 = $5300.  Some readers may be scratching their heads.  Using the first method – actual expenses – a homeowner would need only $2000 per month income to stay within recommended guidelines.  Using the second method of separating the owner and renter roles, a homeowner would need $5300 a month income. A huge difference!

Let’s say that a couple is getting $5000 a month from Social Security, pension and other investment income.  Using the second method, this couple is $300 below the prudent budget recommendation of 30% for housing expense.  That couple may make no changes but now they understand that they have chosen to spend a bit more on their housing needs each month.  If – or when – rising medical expenses prompt them to revisit their budget choices, they can do so in the full understanding that their housing expenses have been over the recommended budget share.

This second method may prompt us to look anew at our choices.  Depending on our needs and changing circumstances, do we want to spend $2000 a month for a house to live in?  Perhaps we no longer need as much space.  Perhaps we could get a suitable apartment or townhome for $1400?  Should we move?  Perhaps yes, perhaps no.  Separating the dual roles of owner and renter involved in owning a home, we can make ourselves more aware of the implied cost of our decision to stay in the house.  A house may be a treasure house of memories but it is also an asset.  Assets must generate cash flows which cover living expenses that grow with the passage of time.

/////////////////////

The Thrivers and Strugglers

“Bravo to MacKenzie. When she was born, she chose married, white, well-educated parents who live in an affluent, mostly white neighborhood with great public schools.”

In a recent report published by the Federal Reserve Bank at St. Louis, the authors found that four demographic characteristics were the chief factors for financial wealth and security:  1) age; 2) birth year; 3) education; 4) race/ethnicity.

While it is no surpise that our wealth grows as we age, readers might be puzzled to learn that the year of our birth has an important influence on our accumulation of wealth.  Those who came of age during the depression had a harder time building wealth than those who reached adulthood in the 1980s.

Ingenuity, dedication, persistence and effort are determinants of wealth but we should not forget that the leading causes of wealth accumulation in a large population are mostly accidental.  It is a humbling realization that should make all of us hate statistics!  We want to believe that success is all due to our hard work, genius and determination.

//////////////////////

Employment

March’s job gains of 215K met expectations, while the unemployment rate ticked up a notch, an encouraging sign.  Those on the margins are feeling more confident about finding a job and have started actively searching for work.  The number of discouraged workers has declined 20% in the past 12 months.

Employers continue to add construction jobs, but as a percent of the workforce there is more healing still to be done.

The y-o-y growth in the core workforce, aged 25-54, continues to edge up toward 1.5%, a healthly level it last cleared in  the spring of last year.

The Labor Market Conditions Index (LMCI) maintained by the Federal Reserve is a composite of about 20 employment indicators that the Fed uses to gauge the overall strength and direction of the labor market.  The March reading won’t be available for a couple of weeks, but the February reading was -2.4%.

Inflation is below the Fed’s 2% target, wage gains have been minimal, and although employment gains remain relatively strong, there is little evidence to compel Chairwoman Yellen and the rate setting committee (FOMC) to maintain a hard line on raising interest rates in the coming months.  I’m sure Ms. Yellen would like to get Fed Funds rate to at least a .5% (.62% actual) level so that the Fed has some ability to lower them again if the economy shows signs of weakening.  Earlier this year the goal was to have at least a 1% rate by the end of 2016 but the data has lessened the urgency in reaching that goal.

ISM will release the rest of their Purchasing Manager’s Index next week and I will update the CWPI in my next blog.  I will be looking for an uptick in new orders and employment.  Manufacturing lost almost 30,000 jobs this past month – most of that loss in durable goods.  Let’s see if the services sector can offset that weakness.

///////////////////////////

Company Earnings

Quarterly earnings season is soon upon us and Fact Set reports that earnings for the first quarter are estimated to be down almost 10% from this quarter a year ago.  The ten year chart of forward earnings estimates and the price of the SP500 indicates that prices overestimated earnings growth and has traded in a range for the past year.  March’s closing price was still below the close of February 2015.  Falling oil prices have taken a shark bite out of earnings for the big oil giants like Exxon and Chevron and this has dragged down earnings growth for the entire SP500 index.

Income Distributions

Leave a comment

February 7th, 2016

Updates on January’s employment report and CWPI are at the end of this post.  Get out your snowboards ’cause we’re going to carve the political half-pipe! (*v*)
(X-Game enthusiasts can click here)

////////////////////////////////

To Be Rich or Not To Be Rich

Every year the IRS takes a statistical snapshot of the almost 150,000,000 (150M) personal tax returns it receives.  There are some interesting tidbits contained in these tables that will put the lie to many a politician’s claim in this election season.  The IRS lists the number of returns for each of some twenty income brackets.  They also list the exemptions claimed for each of these income brackets and let’s turn to that for some interesting insights.

From Table 1.4 we learn that there were 290M exemptions claimed in the 147M tax returns filed in 2013, or almost two exemptions per return.  In 1995 (Table 1, same link as above) the number of exemptions claimed was 237M for 118M returns, exactly two exemptions per return. Exemptions are people that need to be fed, clothed, and housed.

Census Bureau surveys (CPS) over the past few decades show that households are shrinking.  Conservatives assert that median household income has stagnated simply because there are fewer people and workers in households today compared to the past.  If this were true, IRS data would show a greater decrease in exemptions over an 18 year period. We can’t say that one or the other data source is “true,” but that averaging data from the two sources probably gives a more accurate composite of income trends in the data.  Census data probably overcounts households while the IRS undercounts them.  Conservatives who advocate less government support will ignore IRS data that conflicts with their beliefs.

30% of the exemptions were claimed by tax returns with adjusted gross incomes (AGI) of less than $25,000, or less than half the median household income. (AGI is earned income and does not include much of the income received from government social programs.)  Only 2M exemptions, or 2/3 of 1%, were claimed by tax returns with an AGI of $1M or more.  Out of 315 million people in the U.S., there are only two million “fat cats” with incomes above $1,000,000.

Presidential contender Bernie Sanders tells his supporters that he is going to tax the rich to help pay for his programs.  IRS data shows just how few there are to tax to generate money for ambitious social programs. Mr. Sanders says he will get money from the big corporations.  Corporations with lots of well paid lawyers are not going to give up their money peacefully.

Instead, Mr. Sanders’ plans will rely on taxing individuals who can not erect the legal or accounting barricades employed by big corporations.  11% of exemptions were claimed by those making more than $200,000, a larger pool of potential tax money. Doctors, lawyers and other professionals will “Feel the Bern.”  It is not unusual for a middle class married couple in a high cost of living city like New York or Los Angeles to make $200K.  Mr. Sanders has his sights on you.  You are now reclassified as rich.

Here is a well-sourced analysis of the net cost to families.  Most will save money.  Unfortunately, Mr. Sanders made the political mistake of admitting that he would raise taxes, but…  No one paid attention to the “but.”  Should he win the Democratic nomination, Mr. Sanders will “feel the Bern” as Republicans use the phrase against him.  He might have used a phrase like “my plan will lower mandatory payments” to describe the combined effect of higher income taxes and no healthcare insurance payments.

The author calculates that the top 4% will spend a net $21K in extra taxes less savings on health care premiums.  The author probably overstates the effect on those at the top because he uses an average instead of a median, but we could conservatively estimate an additional $10K for those with AGIs in the $200K-$300K range.

****************

Earned Income Tax Credit

The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is  a reverse income tax for low income workers, who get a check from the federal goverment.  For the 2014 tax year, over 27 million returns received about $67 billion from the government for an average of $2400 per receipient (IRS).  In inflation adjusted dollars, this is up 50% from the 2000 average of $1600.  The number of receipients has expanded 50% as well, growing from 18 million to 27 million.  Although Democrats often tout their support for the poor, it is Republican congresses that are largely responsible for expanding this support for low income families.  Republicans may talk tough but are more than willing to reach out a helping hand to those who are giving it their best effort.  There is a practical political consideration as well.  An analysis of IRS data by the Brookings Institute found that, in the past fourteen years, the poor have shifted from urban areas largely controlled by Democrats to the outlying suburbs of metropolitan areas, where Republicans have more support. In short, Republicans are taking care of their voter base.

****************

Constant Weighted Purchasing Index (CWPI)

The manufacturing sector, about 15% of the economy, continues to contract slightly, according to the latest Purchasing Manager’s Survey from ISM.  The strong dollar and a slowdown in China have dragged exports down.   Extremely low oil prices have impacted the pricing component of the manufacturing survey, which has reached levels normally seen during a recession.

 

For some industries, like chemical products, the low oil prices have boosted their profit margins.  Most industries are reporting strong growth or at least staying busy.  Wood, food, beverage and tobacco manufacturers and producers report a sluggish start to the year, as reported to ISM.

The services sectors have weakened somewhat in the latest survey of Purchasing Managers, but are still growing, with a PMI index reading of 53.5.  Above 50 is growing; below 50 is contracting.  The weighted composite of the entire economy, the CWPI, is still growing strongly but the familiar up and down cycle of the recovery is changing.  Both exports and imports are contracting

The composite of employment and new orders in the non-manufacturing sectors has broken  below the 5 year trend.  It may turn back up again as it did in the winter of 2014, but it bears watching.

*************************

Employment

Each month theBureau of Labor Statistics  (BLS) surveys thousands of businesses and government agencies to compute the number of private and public jobs gained or lost during the month.  The payroll processing firm ADP also tallies a change in private jobs based on paychecks generated from thousands of its client businesses.  If we subtract government jobs from the BLS total, we should get a total number of jobs that is close to what ADP tallies.  As we see in the graph below, that is the case.

Economists, policy makers and the media look at the monthly change in that total number of jobs.  This change is miniscule compared to the 121 million private jobs in the U.S.  A historical chart of that monthly change shows that BLS survey numbers are more volatile than ADP.

I find an averaging method reduces the monthly volatility.  I take the change in jobs as reported by the BLS, subtract the  change in government employment, average that result with the ADP report of jobs gained or lost, then add back in the BLS estimate of the change in government employment.  This method produces a resulting monthly change that proves more accurate in time, after the data is subsequently revised by the BLS.  Based on that methodology, jobs gains were close to 175K in January, not the 151K reported by the BLS or the 205K reported by ADP.

There was a lot to like in January’s survey.  The unemployment rate fell below 5%.  Average hourly earnings increased by 1/2%.  Manufacturing jobs added 29,000 jobs, the most since the summer of 2013.  This helped offset the far below average job gains in professional and business services.  Year-over-year growth in the core work force aged 25-54 increased further above 1%.

The bad, or not so good, news: job gains in the retail trade sector accounted for 1/3 of total job gains and were more than twice the past year’s average of retail jobs gained.  Considering that job growth in retail was near zero in December, this may turn out to be a survey glootch.  Food services were another big gainer this past month.  Neither of these sectors pays particularly well.  The jump in manufacturing jobs probably contributed the most to lift the average hourly wage.

The Labor Market Conditions Index (LMCI) is a cluster of twenty or so employment indicators compiled by the Federal Reserve.  December’s change in the monthly index was almost 3%.  In the forty year history of this index, there has NEVER been a recession when this index was positive.

We are innately poor at judging risk.  We derive indicators and other statistical tools to help us balance that innate human weakness with the strength of mathematical logic.  Still, people do not make money by NOT talking about recession.  NOT talking does not pay commissions, does not generate the buying of put options, expensive annuities, and other financial products designed to make money on the natural gut fears of investors.  Next week I’ll look at the price stability of our portfolios.

Ominosity

Leave a comment

January 10, 2016

Happy New Year!

Wait, get rid of the exclamation point.

Happy New Year.

After this week!  What are you kidding me?!  Get rid of the Happy.

New Year.

Ok, that’s better.  The New Year was not so happy when the market started its first day of trading last Monday.  For the tenth consecutive month, manufacturing activity in China contracted, which weighed down commodities (DBC down over 4%), energy stocks (XLE down 7%), emerging markets (EEM down more than 8%) and the broader market, which was down 6%.  Even stocks (Johnson and Johnson, Coca-Cola) regarded as relatively safe dividend paying equities suffered losses of more than 3 or 4%.  Investors and traders were re-pricing future profits and dividends.

December’s powerful employment report buoyed the mood for a short time on Friday morning but traders soon turned their attention again to China and the broader market fell about 1% by day’s end.

Given the decline in stocks, one would guess that the price of bonds, hard hit during the past few weeks, had showed some strong gains.  TLT, a popular ETF for long term Treasuries, gained more than 2% during the week but remains range bound since last August.  Treasuries are a safe haven for risk averse money, but the prospect of rising interest rates mutes the attractiveness of long term bonds.

Growth in the core work force aged 25 – 54 remains strong, up over 1% from last year.  The number of people not in the labor force dropped by 277,000 from last month, a welcome sign.  However, we need to put aside the politics and look at this in a long term perspective.  For the past twenty years, through good times and bad, the number of people dropping out of the workforce each year has grown.

This demographic trend is more powerful than who is President, or which party runs the Congress.  Depending on our political preferences, we can attribute this 20 year trend to Clinton, Bush, Obama, Democrats or Republicans. The job of the good folks running for President this year will be to convince voters that their policies and prescriptions can overcome this trend.  Our job, as voters, is to believe them.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently released a report of a ten year comparison of the reasons why people have left the work force.  Based on this BLS analysis, a Bloomberg writer who had not done their homework mistakenly reported that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of 20-24 year olds who had retired.

This “statistic” points out a flaw in BLS and Census Bureau data. BLS data is partially based on the Current Population Survey, or CPS.  Interviewers are not allowed to follow up and challenge the responder.  Both the BLS and the Census Bureau have been aware of the problem for at least a decade but I don’t think anyone has proposed a solution that doesn’t present its own challenges.

Looking at Chart 3 of the BLS report, the percentage of retired 20-24 year olds was .2% in 2004, .6% in 2014. The number of retired 16-19 year olds was .2% in 2004 and .2% in 2014. Do we really believe that there are almost 200,000 retired 16-19 year olds in this country? See page 16 for the BLS discussion of this problem.

Now, let’s put ourselves in a similar situation.  We are 22 and have recently graduated from college and are having trouble finding a job that actually uses our education.  Because of this, we are staying at our parent’s home.  We answer our parent’s landline phone (Census Bureau is not allowed to call cell phones).  Somebody from the Census Bureau starts asking us questions.  In response to the question why we are not working, we are presented with several choices, one of which is that we are retired (see pages 16 and 17)  Sarcastically we answer that yeh, we are retired.  The questioner can probably tell by our tone of voice that we are being sarcastic but is required to simply record our response.  How valid is that response?

Understand that problems of self-reporting and questionnaire design underlie all of the data from the monthly Household Survey, including the unemployment rate. This gives those with strong political views an opportunity to claim that government statistics are part of a conspiracy.  Claims of conspiracies can not be disproved, which is why they are so persistent throughout human history.

Each year some research firms predict a global recession. Ominosity is the state of sounding ominous and this year is no different. Adam Hayes, a CFA writing at Investopedia, gives some good reasons  that he believes such a widespread recession is possible. All of these risks are present to some degree.

What makes me less convinced of a global recession is the strength of the U.S. economy.  Just as China “saved” the world during the financial crisis, the U.S. may play the role of the cavalry in this coming year. Let’s look at some key data from the recent ISM Purchasing Manager’s index.  This is the new orders and employment components of the services sectors which comprise 85% of the U.S. economy.  Growth remains strong.

Recessions are preceded by a drop in new orders and by a decline in employment.  When payroll growth less population growth is above 1%, as it is today, a recession is unlikely.

Let’s climb into our time machines and go forward just 11 months.  It is now December 2016 and the IMF has enough data to make a post-facto determination that the entire world’s economy went into recession in March 2016.  We look at the SP500 index.  Holy shit!  We climb into our time machines, go back to January 2016 and sell all of our stocks.  Missed that cliff.

What about bonds? Should we sell all those?  Darn it, we forgot to check interest rates and bond prices when we were ahead in the future.  Back into the time machine.  Go forward again.  U.S. Fed halted rate increases in March 2016, then lowered them a 1/4 point.  The ECB had kept interest rates negative in the Eurozone and bond prices have stayed relatively flat.  OK, cool.  We get back in our time machines and go back to January 2016 and decide to hold onto our bond index funds.  The interest on those is better than what we would get on a savings account and we know that we won’t suffer any capital losses on our investment during the year.

We take all the cash we have from selling our stocks and put them entirely in bonds.  Wait, could we make a better return in gold, or real estate?  Back in the time machine and back to the future!  But now we notice that the SP500 index in December 2016 is different.  So is the intermediate bond index.  What’s going on?  The future has changed.  Could it be the Higgs boson causing an abnormality in space-time?  Maybe there’s something wrong with our time machine.  But where can we find a mechanic who can diagnose and repair a time machine?  Suddenly the thought occurs to us that a lot of other investors have gone into the future in their time machines, then have returned to the present and bought and sold.  That, in turn, has changed the future.

The time machine is called the human brain.  Each day traders around the world make decisions based on their analytical and imaginative journeys into the future.  The Efficient Markets Hypothesis (EMH) formulated by Eugene Fama and others postulates that all those journeys and decisions essentially distill all the information available on any particular day.  Therefore, it is impossible to beat a broader market index of those decisions.

Behavioral Finance rests on the judgment that human beings are driven by fear and greed which causes investors to make mistakes in their appraisals of the future.  An understanding of the patterns of these inclinations can help someone take advantage of opportunities when there is a higher likelihood of asset mispricing.

Each year we read of those prognosticators who got it right.  Their time machine is working, we think, and we go with their predictions for the coming year.  Sometimes they get it right a second year.  Sometimes they don’t.  Abby Cohen is a famous example but there are many whose time machines work well for a while.  If I could figure a way to fix time machines, I could make a fortune.

New Year Review

Leave a comment

January 3, 2016

As we begin 2016, let’s take a look at some trends.  It is often repeated that the recovery has been rather muted.  As former Presidential contender Herman Cain once said, “Blame Yourself!”  You and I are the problem.  We are not charging enough stuff or we are making too much money. Debt payments as a percent of after tax income are at an all time low.

At its 2007 peak, households spent 13% of their after tax income to service their debt.  Currently, it is about 10%. In early 2012, this ratio crossed below the recession levels of the early 1990s.  By the end of 2012, this debt service payment ratio had fallen even below the levels of the early 1980s.  Almost six years after the official end of the Great Recession the American people are behaving as though we are still in a recession.  An aging population is understandably more cautious with debt.  In addition to that demographic shift, middle aged and younger consumers are cautious after the financial crisis. We gorged on debt in the 1990s and 2000s and paid the price with two prolonged downturns.  Having learned our lessons, our overactive caution is now probably dragging down the economy.

In this election year, we can anticipate hearing that the sluggish economy can be blamed on: A) the Democratic President, or B) the Republican Congress.  It is Big Government’s fault.  It is the fault of greedy Big Companies.  Someone is to blame.  Pin the tail on the donkey.  Blah, blah, blah till we are sick of it.

************************

Auto Sales

The latest figures on auto sales show that we are near record levels of more than 18 million cars and light trucks sold, surpassed only by the auto sales of February 2000, just before the dot com boom fizzled out.  On a per capita basis, however, car sales are barely above average.  The thirty year average is .054 of a vehicle sold per person.  The current sales level is .056 of a car per person.  Automobile dealers would have to sell an addiitonal 900,000 cars and light trucks per year to have a historically strong sales year.

************************

Construction Spending

In some cities, housing prices and rents are rising, and vacancies are low.  We might assume that construction is booming throughout the country.  Six years into the recovery per capital construction spending is at 2004 levels and that does not account for inflation.  Levels like this are OK, not good, and certainly not booming.

*************************

Employment

The unemployment rate and average hourly wage may get most of the public’s attention but the Federal Reserve compiles an index of many indicators to judge the health of the labor market.  Positive changes in this index indicate an improving employment picture.  Negative changes may be temporary but can prompt the Fed to take what action it can to support the labor market.  Recent readings are mildly positive but certainly not strong.

*************************

Stock Market

Many of the companies in the SP500 generate half of their revenue overseas.  Because of the continuing strength of the dollar, the profits from those foreign sales are reduced when exchanged for dollars.  According to Fact Set, earnings for the SP500 are projected to be about $127 per share, the same level as mid-2014.  In the third quarter of 2015, the majority of companies reported revenue below estimates.  As 4th quarter revenue and earnings are released in the coming weeks, investors will be especially vigilant for any downturns in sales as well as revisions to sales estimates for the coming year.  It could get bloody.

A Change Is Gonna Come

Leave a comment

December 6, 2015

A horrible week for many families.  When we count the dead and injured in mass shootings, we often neglect to include the family and friends of each of these victims.  If we conservatively estimate 20 – 30 people affected for each victim, we can better appreciate the emotional and economic impact of these events. Shooting Tracker lists the daily mass shootings (involving four or more victims) in the U.S. in 2015.  What surprised me is that, in most cases, the shooter/assailant is unknown.

A strong November jobs report sent equities, gold and bonds soaring higher on Friday.  Markets reacted negatively on Thursday following a lackluster response from the European Central Bank(ECB) and comments by Fed chair Janet Yellen indicating that a small rate increase was in the cards at the mid-December Fed meeting.  The SP500 closed Thurday evening below November’s close.  Not just the close of November 2015, but also the monthly close of November 2014!

Overnight (early Friday morning in the U.S.), the ECB said that they would do whatever it took to support the European economy. Shortly after the cock crowed in Des Moines, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released November’s labor report, confirming an earlier ADP report of private job gains.  By the end of trading on Friday, the SP500 had jumped up 2%.  However, it  is important to step back and gain a longer term perspective.  The index is still slightly below February 2015’s close – and May’s close – and July’s close.

Extended periods of price stability – let’s call them EPPS – are infrequent.  Markets struggle constantly to find a balance of asset valuation. Optimists (bulls) pull on one end of the valuation rope.  Pessimists (bears) pull on the other end.  Every once or twice in a decade, neither bears nor bulls have a commanding influence and prices stabilize. Markets can go up or down after these leveling periods: 1976 (down), 1983 (up),  1994 (up), 2000 (down), 2007 (down), 2015 (?)

**************************

Year End Planning

Mutual funds must pass on their capital gains and losses to investors.  Investors who have mutual funds that are not in a tax-sheltered retirement account should take the time in early December to check on pending capital gains distributions either with their tax advisor or do it themselves.  Most mutual fund companies distribute gains in mid to late December.  Your mutual fund will have a list of pending December distributions on their web site.  For those retail investors in a rush, you might just scan through the list and look for those funds that have a distribution that is 5% or more of the value of the fund, then look and see if it is one of your funds.

An EPPS tends to produce relatively small capital gains but this year some mid-cap growth funds and international funds may be declaring gains of 7 – 10% of the value of the fund.  An investor who had $50,000 in some mid-cap growth fund might see a capital gain distribution of $4,000 on their December statement.  When an investor receives the statement in January 2016, it is too late to offset this gain with a loss.  Depending on the taxpayer’s marginal tax rate, they could be on the hook to the tax man for $700 – $1200.

Let’s say an investor is anticipating a $4000 capital gain distribution in a taxable mutual fund in late December.  Most mutual fund companies list the cost basis of each fund in an investor’s account. An investor who had a cost basis that was higher than the current value of the fund could sell some shares in that fund to offset some or all of the capital gain distribution in the other fund.  This is called tax loss harvesting.  Again, remind or ask your tax advisor if you are unclear on this.

Here is an IRS FAQ sheet on capital gains and losses.  Here is an article on the various combinations of short term and long term gains and losses.

**************************
CWPI

The latest ISM Survey of Purchasing Managers (PMI) showed that the manufacturing sector of the economy contracted in November.  October’s reading was neutral at 50.1.  November’s reading was 48.6.

The services sector, which is most of the economy, is still growing strongly.  Both new orders and employment are showing robust growth.   

However, manufacturing inventories have contracted for five months in a row.  For now, this decline is more than offset by inventory growth in the service industries.  However, the drag from the manufacturing sector is affecting the services sector.  The trough and peak pattern of growth in employment and new orders since the recession recovery in 2009 has begun to get a bit erratic.  Nothing to get too concerned about but something to watch.

The Constant Weighted Purchasing Index combines the manufacturing and service surveys and weights the various components, giving more weight to New Orders and Employment.  Both components anticipate future conditions a bit better than the equal weight methodology used by ISM, which conducts the surveys.  In addition, there is a smoothing calculation for the CWPI.

During this six year recovery, the CWPI has shown a wave-like pattern of growth.  Since the summer of 2014, growth has remained strong but there has been a leveling in the pattern as the manufacturing sector no longer contributes to the peaks of growth.

Despite the underlying growth fundamentals, there are some troubling signs.  In response to activist investors, to boost earnings numbers and maintain dividend levels, companies have bought back shares in their own company at an unprecedented level.  In some cases, companies are taking advantage of low interest rates to borrow money to make the share buybacks. (U.S. Now Spend More on Buybacks Than Factories, WSJ 5/27/15)

*******************************

Labor Report

46,000 jobs gained in construction was a highlight of November’s labor report and was about a fifth of all job gains.  Rarely do gains in construction outweigh gains in professional services or health care. This is more than twice the 21,000 average gains of the past year. The steady but slow growth in construction jobs is heartening but a long term perspective shows just how weak this sector is.

Involuntary part-timers, however, increased by more than 300,000 this past month, wiping out a quarter of the improvement over the past year.  These employees, who are working part time because they can not find full time work, have decreased by almost 800,000 over the past year.

The core work force, those aged 25-54, remains strong with annual growth above 1%.

Other notable negatives in this report are the lack of wage growth and hours worked.  Wage growth for all employees is a respectable 2.3% annual rate, but only 1.7% for production and non-supervisory employees.  This is below the core rate of inflation so that the income of ordinary workers is not keeping up with the increase in prices of the goods they buy.

Hours worked per week has declined one tenth of an hour in the past year, not heartening news at this point in what is supposed to be a recovery.  Overtime hours in the manufacturing sector has dropped 10% in the past year.

******************************

Inflation

The core CPI is a measure of inflation that excludes the more volatile price changes of food  and energy.  While the headline CPI gets the attention, this alternative measure is one that the Federal Reserve looks at to get a sense of the underlying inflationary forces in the economy.  The target annual rate that the Fed uses is 2%.

October’s annual rate was 1.9%.  November’s rate won’t be released till mid-December. However, Ms. Yellen made it pretty clear that the Fed will raise interest rates this month, the first time since the financial crisis. I suspect that prelimary reports to the Fed on November’s reading showed no decline in this core rate.  With employment gains and inflation stable, the FOMC probably felt comfortable with a small uptick in the bench mark rate.

Portfolio Allocation and Timing

Leave a comment

November 15, 2015

Gone Fishin’ Portfolio

I found this portfolio in a pile of old paperwork.  The idea is to allocate investment dollars in a number of buckets, then more or less forget about it, rebalancing once a year.  The portfolio is 60% stocks, 30% bonds, 10% other

I compared this broadly balanced portfolio #1 with a simpler version #2: 60% stocks, 40% bonds.  Because the Vanguard mutual fund VTSMX is weighted toward U.S. large cap stocks, I split the stock portion of the portfolio with an index of small cap value stocks VISVX.  The 40% bond component is an index of  intermediate-term corporate grade bonds VFICX.  I also included a very simple portfolio #3 without the split in the stock portfolio.  The 60% stocks is represented by one fund VTSMX.  The results from Portfolio Visualizer  include dividends.

Note that there is little difference between Portfolios #2 and #3 over this time period.  Although the Gone Fishin’ portfolio lagged the other two during this time period, it did do better during the period 2000 – 2006.

*****************************

Market timing

Another approach is a fairly simple market timing technique as shown in this paper “A Quantative Approach to Tactical Asset Allocation”  There is no heavy math in the paper.  The timing rule is simple:  buy the SP500 when the monthly close is above the 10 month moving average; sell when the monthly close is below the 10 month average.  Using this system, an investor would have sold an ETF like SPY on the first trading day of September this year  because August’s close was below the ten month average.  After the index rebounded in October and closed above the 10 month average, an investor would have bought back in on the first trading day in November. The average “turnaround,” a buy and a sell signal, is less than one a year.  These short term swings are sometimes called “whipsaws,” where an investor loses several percent by selling after a quick downturn then buying in after prices recover quickly.  The payoff is that an investor avoids the severe 50% drawdowns of 2008 and 2000.

The author of the paper performed a 112 year backtest on this system. He excluded taxes, commissions and slippage in the calculations and used the closing price on the final day of the month as his buy and sell price points. He notes some reasons for these omissions later in the paper which I found inadequate. I recommend using the opening price (ETF) or end of the day price (mutual fund) of the day following the end of the month as  a practical real world backtesting strategy.  Very few individual investors can buy or sell at the closing price and there can be a lot of price movement, or slippage, in the final trading minutes before the close.

Commissions can be estimated at some small percentage.  To exclude commissions is to estimate them at 0% and present an investor with unrealistic returns, a common backtesting fault of many trading or allocation systems.  The same can be said for taxes.  Even if the guesstimate is a mere 1%, it is better than the 0% effective estimate of tax costs when excluded from the backtest.

The difference in annual real, or inflation-adjusted, return between this timing model and “buy and hold” is 4/100ths of 1% per year (p. 23) Because the timing model avoids the severe portfolio drawdowns of a buy and hold stratgegy (p. 28), that tiny difference translates into a difference in compounded return that is less than 1% which produces a huge 250%+ difference in portfolio balances at the end of the 112 year testing period.  None of us will be investing for that long a period but it does illustrate the effect of small incremental differences.

The author then combines an allocation model with the timing model using five global asset classes: US stocks, foreign stocks, bonds, real estate and commodities, assigning 20% of the portfolio to each class.  He backtested this allocation with the same timing strategy vs a buy and hold strategy (p. 30-31).  The advantages of the timing strategy are apparent during severe downturns as in 1973, 2000 and 2008.  A buy and hold strategy took eight years after 1973 to recover and catch up to the timing strategy.  The buy and hold strategy never caught up to the timing strategy after the 2000-2003 downturn in the market.  In 2008, it fell even further behind, highlighting the superiority of the timing strategy.

Returns are important, of course, but volatility and drawdown are especially critical for older investors who do not have as many years to recover.  From 1973 – 2012, the timing model has only one losing year – 2008 – and the loss for the entire portfolio was a mere 6/10ths of a percent (p. 32).

*****************************

October jobs report

A few weeks ago I linked to an article on Reagan’s former budget director David Stockman.  On his web site, he presented a sobering and thorough analysis of the October jobs report.

Stockman breaks down the numbers into “breadwinner” higher paying jobs and the relatively lower paying leisure and hospitality jobs that account for too much of the jub creation in the past fifteen years.  Goods producing jobs – those in manufacturing, construction, mining and timber – are still far below 2000 levels.

“massive money printing and 83 months running of ZIRP [zero interest rate policy of the Federal Reserve] have done nothing for the goods producing economy or breadwinner jobs generally.”

*****************************

Obama’s numbers

A president has far less effect on the economy than the political rhetoric would have one believe.  Despite that fact, each President is judged on his “numbers” as though he were a dictator, a one man show.  With one year to go in his second term, here are the latest numbahs from the reputable FactCheck.

The Active and the Inactive

Leave a comment

October 4, 2015

A disappointing September jobs report capped off a third week of losses a rescue from a third week of losses in the stock market.  The initial reaction on Friday morning was a 1.5% drop in the SP500. Over the past several weeks, the stock (SPY) and long term Treasury market (TLT) have become little more than speculative gambles on when the Fed will raise interest rates.  Until Friday’s jobs report, the choices were mainly restricted to October or December 2015. Janet Yellen voiced a commitment to raising interest rates this year in comments (see last week’s blog) at the U. of Massachusetts.  However, the lackluster jobs report ushered in another choice – March of 2016.  By the closing bell on Friday, the SP500 had gained 1.5%, a reversal of 3% on the day and a gain of 1% in the index for the week.

Emerging markets bounced up almost 5% this week, showing that there are enough buyers who are willing to invest at these low price levels.  The Vanguard ETF VWO formed a “W” pattern on a weekly chart and strong volume.

Despite the tepid job growth of 142,000, the unemployment rate remained steady because more than 300,000 left the work force.  Probably the biggest surprise was that July and August’s job gains were revised downward as well.  I had been expecting an upward revision in August’s numbers.

The Labor Force Participation Rate (CLF) declined .2% to 62.4%.  The CLF rate measures the (number of people working or looking for a job) / (number of people who can legally work).  There is another measurement that I have used before on this blog: the ratio of (people not working or looking for a job) / (the number of people working).  Let’s call it the Inactive Active ratio, or IARATIO.

Visually, the blue CLF rate doesn’t show us much; it is a relatively monotonic data series.  In contrast, the decades long fluctuations in the red IARATIO present some useful information.  We can see a simple answer for the federal budget surplus at the end of the 1990s, when the ratio of inactive to active workers was very low. Although politicians like to claim and blame for every data point, the simple truth is that there were almost as many adults working as not working in the late ’90s. Working people tend to put in more than they take out of the kitty.  For two decades there was a striking correlation between the Federal Surplus/Deficit and the IARATIO.

At about .75, the ratio of this past recovery was similar to that of the first half of the 1980s.  In the past two years, the IARATIO has dropped to .72, a good sign,  similar to the readings of 1986, a time of economic growth.

The ever greater number of Boomers retiring over the next decade will put upward pressure on this IARATIO.  The fix?  More jobs. Jobs solve a lot of problems, both for families and government budgets.