Market Update

Corporate Earnings Recession

Earnings season starts this week and the news is expected to be disappointing. Bloomberg is projecting S&P 500 earnings in the second quarter 13.8% lower than the same time last year, and earnings could be negative again in the third quarter. Two negative quarters in a row is the classic definition of a recession.

While this may sound alarming, and while the trend is clearly weak, once you unpack the numbers it does not look so bad.

Let’s start with the good numbers. First, margins are near cyclical highs. Much lower corporate taxes, lower interest rates, lower energy costs, contained wage growth since the great recession and above trend U.S. GDP growth have plumped up earnings over the last few years. A pause in growth should be expected at some point.

Quarterly S&P Sales and Earnings Trends

Moving on to the bad numbers, GDP growth is fading around the globe, tariffs are a drag on earnings (remember tariffs are just another tax), a stronger dollar is hurting exports, emerging wage inflation is starting to impact earnings (as unemployment rates reach a 50-year low) and capacity constraints have led to higher transportation and logistics costs.

So, are investors correct in being so blasé about weaker corporate earnings? At the end the day it is hard to get worked up about a pull-back in corporate earnings when the Fed and the ECB (and just about every other central bank) are loose and expected to loosen further. China is ready and able to support its economy if needed, fiscal policy around the world remains loose and the U.S. consumer is doing well.

As we mentioned last week, we will all be looking for the proverbial green shoots in earnings and GDP to confirm central bank loosening will sustain this long running economic recovery. But until we see some evidence, as well as perhaps some happy guidance this earnings season, we prefer staying conservative and liquid with the conviction there will be better opportunities ahead.

Sources: Bloomberg, Goldman Sachs, the Financial Times

Can Central Banks Balance Tariffs and Slower Economic Growth with Stimulus?

The markets seem to think so.

Last Friday the big news was far lower job growth in conjunction with cooling wage gains. This is traditionally bad news for the markets as it suggests broader economic weakness. However, to Fed watchers this is good news as it adds support for the belief the Fed will soon cut rates to stimulate the economy.

So bad news is good news, and the equity markets rallied.

The bad news of slower economic growth is nothing new. The escalation of trade war rhetoric is weighing on growth and investor sentiment. Tariffs are a tax on consumers, and the New York Federal Reserve recently argued that the cost of current tariffs have essentially wiped out the recent tax cuts for middle income consumers. Additionally, the uncertainty surrounding when and how tariffs will be implemented can freeze corporate spending decisions. Consumer spending may be the largest part of the economy, but corporate spending is more volatile and can quickly move the economic needle.

A similar bad news is good news story is also being played out in Europe and China. Last week Mario Draghi said the European Central Bank was ready to “use all the instruments that are in the toolbox” if the export-driven manufacturing sector of the economy continues to be weakened by tariffs. Europe is a large exporter to China, so if China is impacted by tariffs so is Europe. Also last week, China’s central bank governor said there’s “tremendous” room to adjust monetary policy if the trade war deepens, and he also signaled China could allow its currency to depreciate.

So, is bad news really good news?

Cheap money is not the cure for all economic ills, but it is the biggest hammer in a central bank’s tool kit. As such, we continue to view the Fed as the driver of not just bond market performance in 2019, but risk asset performance as well.

Source: Bloomberg, the Financial Times

Spring Is in the Air – We’ll see if the Fed Agrees

Spring is an optimistic time of year, with the smell of grass and fresh flowers, longer days and bright sunshine. And it is so predictable – it happens every year!

If only the economic cycle were as predictable! Recessions happen infrequently and the last one ended in June of 2009.

One of the classic tools for predicting recessions is the NY Fed’s “Probability of U.S. Recession Predicted by Treasury Spread – Twelve Months Ahead.” This model uses the difference between 10-year and 3-month Treasury rates to calculate the probability of a recession in the United States twelve months ahead. As you can imagine, the Fed has been tracking and analyzing this data for decades and it does a pretty good job.

3.18.19 bullet 1.jpg

As the data indicates, it is hard to see a recession in 2019 with the U.S. economy still so strong. But as the chart also shows, the risk of a recession can rise or fall suddenly for any number of reasons. What we take way from this data is treasury spreads indicate the economic cycle is at least in late fall: leaves are turning red and gold and there is chill in the evening air.

We will get an update from the Fed this week when the Federal Open Market Committee meets to set monetary policy. The post-meeting statement and press conference will provide insights into the FOMC’s thinking on both the economy and interest rates. We don’t expect any changes to the Fed Funds Rate, but like so many previous meetings, all eyes will be on the dot plot, which highlights committee members expectations for future rate moves.

Markets also do a good job of anticipating the changing of the season and will move ahead of an actual recession. We note investment grade credit spreads appear to have reached their cyclical tights in February 2018, and the last S&P 500 top was in September 2018.

In the coming weeks we will start getting outside more often to enjoy the sunshine, and we will also ensure portfolios are getting ready for cooler weather.

Source: NY Federal Reserve

Munis Continue Their Hot Streak – Creates Opportunities for Crossover Investors

The municipal market has started off 2019 in a strong way, with tax-exempt municipal bonds now trading at some of the richest valuations versus taxable bonds on record. Driven by robust demand (as measured by mutual fund inflows) and light supply (as measured by new issuance), the positive technical environment has been one of the main drivers of the rally.

To measure the relative value of tax-free munis versus taxable bonds, we often analyze the ratio of municipal yields versus Treasury yields. As shown in the chart below, this ratio has dropped over the past 12 months, particularly for short to intermediate maturities such as five and ten years.

3.11.19 bullet 1.png

While there are no immediate signs of this trend reversing, these absolute yield levels have created an opportunity for crossover investors to sell munis, purchase taxable bonds, and increase the after-tax yield generation on their portfolios. For example, the after-tax yield for investors in a mid-level tax bracket is 0.19% higher on a 1-year US Treasury Note as compared to a 1-year AAA municipal bond.

3.11.19 bullet image 2.png

The after-tax yield advantage is even more dramatic for corporate and taxable municipal bonds, which carry additional yield because of a credit spread premium.

These relationships are particularly relevant for our Blend Strategy, which has the leeway to invest in a mix of taxable and tax-free bonds. After increasing our allocation to tax-free municipals in the winter of 2017 during a muni market sell-off, we’ve been slowly capturing municipal outperformance by selling munis and buying taxable bonds. We executed on another leg of this trade last week as the after-tax yield opportunity has become too good to ignore.

Source: Barclays, Bloomberg

Equity Market Impact on Public Pension Funding

As we discussed on our 2019 Market Outlook Call in January, we are expecting more variability in the performance of various municipal sectors this year after what was a benign environment in 2018. The reemergence of pension funding issues is one of the reasons why.

Public pension systems have benefited from positive investment performance during the current long-running economic expansion. Investment performance has been driven by strong equity returns. For example, the total return of the benchmark S&P 500 index has exceeded 300% over the last 10 years. Equity returns do not always follow a straight line upward, however, as evidenced by the 13.5% decline of the S&P 500 in Q4 of 2018. While the Q4 equity sell-off has unfavorably impacted pension returns, most pension contributions and funding ratios are based on fund balances at the end of the fiscal year, which (fortunately for most municipalities) occurs on June 30. This will potentially enable the pension systems to offset some mid-year losses during the subsequent two quarters of the fiscal year.

The impact of the sell-off on pensions will be driven by each plan’s exposure to equities and the potential for a rebound in equity prices in Q1 and Q2. According to Bloomberg, through Wednesday February 6, “The median government employee pension, whose assets are heavily weighted toward U.S. stocks, lost 7.5 percent in the fourth quarter, according to data released…by the Wilshire Trust Universe Comparison Service. Public pensions have lost 4.9 percent since the beginning of the fiscal year on July 1.” While these returns are certainly unfavorable, equity returns since January 1 have benefited plans that are invested in equities. Through the first five weeks of the new calendar year, the total return of the S&P 500 has been approximately 9%. With the rebound this quarter, the return of the S&P 500 since July is now back in positive territory at about 1.5%.

As there is a high level of volatility in equity prices, the prospects for improved funding levels over the next few months to the close of the fiscal year are uncertain. Despite market volatility, the strong gains in equity prices have driven investment returns and improved funding levels for a vast majority of pension systems. We are more concerned for those pension plans that have continued to flounder in a period of economic expansion and solid investment returns. We expect that the systems most negatively impacted will be those sponsored by state and local governments who make annual pension contributions at levels below actuarially determined contributions. Potential market downturns will exacerbate their low funding levels, and further pressure those systems. Examples of such pension systems include the states of New Jersey and Illinois, as well as the City of Chicago.

Source: Bloomberg