Making Hay Monday – July 1st, 2024
Making Hay Monday
High-level macro-market insights, actionable economic forecasts, and plenty of friendly candor to give you a fighting chance in the day’s financial fray.
Charts of the Week
Chris Galizio, Sourced from Trader Ferg
Goldman’s former star commodities strategist Jeff Currie believes we are in the midst of a natural resources super-cycle, as do I. However, in a recent podcast with MacroVoices’ Erik Townsend, he cautioned that past commodity hyper-bull markets have been characterized by violent price spikes and sudden plunges. As a result investors, particularly those who have been lulled into complacency by the U.S. stock market’s uncannily smooth uptrend over the last 15 years (with brief shakeouts) are at risk of bailing out at inopportune times.
Illustrating the extreme volatility inherent in commodities, there may not have been a bull market as stupendous as that of gold a century ago in Weimar Germany, at least as measured by its vaporizing currency. Despite the hyperinflation that was engulfing that country, setting the stage for Hitler’s first attempted power grab, gold had several steep sell-offs. Yet, for those who stuck with the world’s oldest currency throughout its wild gyrations, it provided a lifeline from the financial ruin that befell most German citizens in those convulsive years.
Rosenberg, BWD
Housing prices have remained stubbornly high despite lofty interest rates. That combination has left affordability at one of its worst points of all-time. Perhaps the primary supporting factor behind the price levitation has been a limited number of existing homes hitting the market. This is mostly because owners have been understandably reluctant to give up their low-rate mortgages. Lately, though, there has been a surge of existing homes listed for sale. In fact, they have broken out to a multi-year high and appear to be trending higher, potentially considerably.
Evergreen Compatibility Survey
Special Message
Before getting into this week’s highlighted investment, we thought we should emphasize our growing belief that a correction, quite possibly a deep one, is close at hand.
Consider this another “Take Profits” suggestion. The first time I did that was in early 2021 under my former newsletter’s banner.
It was controversial in the extreme.
There was a misunderstanding, likely my fault, that I meant readers should get out of the stock market. This caused me to clarify in the next edition that “taking profits” wasn’t the same as a call to totally cash out. Rather, I was suggesting targeting the market segments that looked irrationally overvalued. As I’ve written on many occasions, the special objects of my derision were what I’ve long called the COPS: Crazy Over-Priced Stocks.
In many cases, they kept rising through much of 2021. However, some — particularly the most egregious COPS example: the meme stocks — hit their crescendo in early 2021.
The ultimate meme meteor back then was GameStop. On a split-adjusted basis, it rose from barely above $1 in the summer of 2020 to what would prove to be its highwater mark of $81 by late-January 2021.
Less than a month later, it had imploded back to $10 — a loss of nearly 90%.
It’s fair to say that turned its fanbase into a bunch of screaming meemies… or at least it should have.
It rose nearly seven-fold over the next few weeks. Yet, by the end of 2021, it was cut in half from that level. At the low point early this year, around $10, it had lost another two-thirds from its year-end 2021 price. It then proceeded to rocket back to an intra-day high of $65 in early June, as usual on questionably bullish news. From there, it’s been another 60% plus faceplant.
This type of casino behavior is one reason to be leery of current market conditions. But there is much about which to be apprehensive as we’ve been relaying over the past three Haymaker editions. Ironically, a new potential downside trigger might be last week’s presidential debate.
The reason for the irony is that Donald Trump clearly won, or perhaps, more accurately, Joe Biden unquestionably lost and the stock market has a decided preference for the former president with the most unusual hair style. The bond market was a different story, as it sold off at the end of last week, despite friendly news on inflation and the economy.
Bonds logically concluded that another blast of Trumponomics would be highly likely to entail a further spending blow-out, due to additional tax cuts. This, and other pro-growth Trump policies, might turn the economy around; a good thing, but quite possibly at the cost of an inflation rebound. There is the very real chance that America could see a replay of the UK’s Liz Truss moment in the fall of 2022. That was when the then-British Prime Minister unveiled an ambitious – and, ultimately, ill-advised – tax cut in the face of an already precarious fiscal position. In other words, much like what Mr. Trump may attempt.
In the wake of Ms. Truss’ plan, the UK bond market promptly did a cliff dive. This triggered her nearly overnight (technically 44 nights, but who’s counting?) resignation and bestowed upon her the decidedly un-great distinction of being Great Britain’s shortest-serving Prime Minister.
The present reality is that the U.S. government’s funding has become dangerously skewed toward short-term maturities. This has left it decidedly illiquid, with the long end of the U.S. bond market already displaying the hallmarks of fragility and illiquidity. At this point, a buyers strike caused by perceived inflationary policies is the last thing it needs to endure.
Felder (Sourced from Luke Gromen)
What could also aggravate the long-duration bond market’s anxiety, again ironically, would be the economy looking increasingly recessionary. As I’ve conveyed of late, there is mounting evidence that the almost universally accepted soft landing is encountering some serious turbulence as it attempts to touchdown. (The raft of consumer-facing companies that are reporting punk results, like Nike last week, is a real-time illustration of the economic deterioration.)
The reason this could be troubling for long bonds – after what Jeff Gundlach refers to as a Pavlovian rally on bad economic data – is the likelihood of a very aggressive government response to a recession. The inflationary implications of that have the potential to cause longer-term rates to rise along with recession fears, a highly ironic outcome indeed.
To reiterate, this is once again not a call to exit the stock market. Rather, it is a more strident suggestion to cash in some gains on any of your highly extended positions. In particular, I’d recommend exiting those where fundamentals are questionable. A big clue in that regard would be any security where insiders are selling hand over fist. (Please see the Down for the Count section).
On the other hand, as you’ll soon read, there are some market niches which have already corrected significantly. In the case of this week’s showcased essential commodity, the long-term story is truly glowing.
“To the making of these fateful decisions, the United States pledges before you, and therefore before the world, its determination to help solve the fearful atomic dilemma – to devote its entire heart and mind to finding the way by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life.” -Dwight D. Eisenhower, excerpted from his famous “Atoms for Peace” speech (delivered in 1953 before the United Nations)
Here’s Looking At “U”…
Shutterstock
Champions
The Western world has found itself in perhaps the strangest policy situation a civilizational collective could ever envision. Our way of life hinges on accessible, viable, and infrastructurally compatible energy sources which, for reasons stemming from ideology more than science, were long out of favor not so much with the public, but with public policymakers. To put it succinctly, oil and gas were seen not as life-enriching, energy-dense building blocks of modern civilization, but as necessary evils to be banished from usage at some indeterminate (but always just around the corner) date.
Fine, we suppose, but what about an alternative?…
Subscribe to Haymaker to read the rest.
Become a paying subscriber of Haymaker to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.
A subscription gets you:
 | Subscriber-only posts and full archive |
| Post comments and join the community |
IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES
This material has been distributed solely for informational and educational purposes only and is not a solicitation or an offer to buy any security or to participate in any trading strategy. All material presented is compiled from sources believed to be reliable, but accuracy, adequacy, or completeness cannot be guaranteed, and David Hay makes no representation as to its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness.
The information herein is based on David Hay’s beliefs, as well as certain assumptions regarding future events based on information available to David Hay on a formal and informal basis as of the date of this publication. The material may include projections or other forward-looking statements regarding future events, targets or expectations. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. There is no guarantee that any opinions, forecasts, projections, risk assumptions, or commentary discussed herein will be realized or that an investment strategy will be successful. Actual experience may not reflect all of these opinions, forecasts, projections, risk assumptions, or commentary.
David Hay shall have no responsibility for: (i) determining that any opinion, forecast, projection, risk assumption, or commentary discussed herein is suitable for any particular reader; (ii) monitoring whether any opinion, forecast, projection, risk assumption, or commentary discussed herein continues to be suitable for any reader; or (iii) tailoring any opinion, forecast, projection, risk assumption, or commentary discussed herein to any particular reader’s investment objectives, guidelines, or restrictions. Receipt of this material does not, by itself, imply that David Hay has an advisory agreement, oral or otherwise, with any reader.
David Hay serves on the Investment Committee in his capacity as Co-Chief Investment Officer of Evergreen Gavekal (“Evergreen”), registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The registration of Evergreen in no way implies a certain level of skill or expertise or that the SEC has endorsed the firm or David Hay. Investment decisions for Evergreen clients are made by the Evergreen Investment Committee. Please note that while David Hay co-manages the investment program on behalf of Evergreen clients, this publication is not affiliated with Evergreen and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Investment Committee. The information herein reflects the personal views of David Hay as a seasoned investor in the financial markets and any recommendations noted may be materially different than the investment strategies that Evergreen manages on behalf of, or recommends to, its clients.
Different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk, and there can be no assurance that the future performance of any specific investment, investment strategy, or product made reference to directly or indirectly in this material, will be profitable, equal any corresponding indicated performance level(s), or be suitable for your portfolio. Due to rapidly changing market conditions and the complexity of investment decisions, supplemental information and other sources may be required to make informed investment decisions based on your individual investment objectives and suitability specifications. All expressions of opinions are subject to change without notice. Investors should seek financial advice regarding the appropriateness of investing in any security or investment strategy discussed in this presentation.
20240702
