Washington Square Capital Management Blog

The third quarter saw equity markets trade substantially lower from where they began—the S&P 500 index started the quarter at 1,320.64 and ended at 1,131.42, a loss of nearly 15%.  On October 4^th, the S&P 500 saw an intraday low of 1,074.77, which marked a decline of more than 20% from the 2011 high of 1,370.58 reached on May 2.  This level was important both from a technical and psychological standpoint since a 20% major index decline is the metric used to determine whether or not we have entered a bear market.  Equity markets have bounced back over the past several days, but it remains to be seen whether we are entering a longer term bear market in stocks or if we are merely experiencing a “soft patch”.

So what has caused this decline in stocks?  There are several factors at play:

US Economic Data

The US economic picture, which we have long viewed as being fragile and artificially supported by government stimulus, is showing substantial cracks in its façade.  In early August, the US GDP for Q1 was revised down from an initial estimate of 1.9% to .4%, a huge 1.5% move down.  Second quarter GDP came in at 1.3%, well below analyst estimates of 1.9%.

While many market commentators at the time pointed to the Congressional budget standoff and the S&P’s lowering of the US credit rating to AA+ as the reasons for the stock selloff, it’s now apparent that the problems run much deeper.  Over the course of the quarter, as employment, housing, manufacturing and consumer sentiment data rolled in, it became clear that the selloff was a response to a US economy losing its footing rather than a gridlocked Congress (although that certainly didn’t help matters).

Federal Reserve policy

From our perspective, the stock market rally of the past two plus years can largely be attributed to the stimulus policies of the Federal Government and the monetary policies of the Federal Reserve rather than an organic economic recovery.

While government stimulus has largely dried up after Republicans regained control of Congress in the 2010 mid-terms, the Federal Reserve has continued to implement a monetary easing policy with ever more inventive sequels to the original QE.

These measures include: ZIRP (zero interest rate policy), quantitative easing (versions QE1 and QE2) and POMO (permanent open market operations).  While the economy and unemployment rate has seen little in the way of tangible benefits as a result of these strategies (although it could be argued that the Fed’s policies helped stave off a Depression), interest rates remain at rock bottom levels and the stock market has roared back to life. The question on every investor’s mind is whether this is a sustainable burst of energy, or a sugar high that will soon wear off.

If the latter is the case (which we believe) then it appears the stock market has gotten ahead of itself and its bullish trajectory does not accurately reflect the fragility of the economy.  Instead of an organic recovery driving the markets, it seems stocks are being buoyed by the Fed’s policies and can only continue moving upwards if the Fed keeps refilling the punch bowl of liquidity.  But what happens if the Fed decides to end the party and cease its easy monetary policy—will the economy be able to expand on its own?

Increasingly, it looks like this decisive moment has arrived. When the QE2 program expired at the end of June, the Fed elected not to renew it. Instead of entering into another round of buying bonds with cash, as many investors hoped/expected, the Fed went in a different direction.  On August 9^th the Fed announced its expectation that it would extend the ZIRP policy through 2013 in an effort to keep interest rates low and encourage lending.  On September 22^nd, they also announced Operation Twist, an action in bond markets designed to push down long term interest rates on everything from mortgages to business loans, giving consumers an additional incentive to borrow and spend money.  This approach was first used in the 1960’s (originally named after the dance craze that swept the nation).

While both of these measures are intended to help support the economy, they failed to elicit the same level of excitement in stock investors as the first two rounds of quantitative easing. We remain skeptical of these policies since, in our mind, the problem is not high interest rates, but rather the desire and ability of businesses and consumers to borrow. If businesses do not believe expanding their operations will be profitable, they will not borrow to do it. If households do not believe they will earn more in the future, they will not borrow to finance home-purchases and consumption today. And if loan and credit officers across the country do not believe the economy and employment will grow in the next few years, they will not extend credit. The problem is not the supply or price of credit (the interest rate), rather it’s the demand for it.

European Sovereign Debt Crisis

Ah, our dear old friend, the problem that just won’t go away, no matter how many summits are organized to exorcize it.  It seems we always devote some space to this topic every quarter and this letter will be no different.

The problems in Greece and in other European debt-ridden nations, reared its ugly head again this quarter.  However, the focus shifted a bit from the nations themselves to the European banks which hold much of this bad debt on their balance sheets.

The major concern many economists and market participants have is that several of these banks would not survive a Greek default.  So, if Greece were to go down, it could create a cascading, domino-like event, similar to what was narrowly averted during the 2008 credit crisis.  The prevailing view is that the countries and banks are so interconnected that one failure – a European country or a bank – could potentially bring down the entire system.  Of course, nobody knows for sure whether or not this is really the case, but elected officials do not seem interested in testing this hypothesis after witnessing firsthand the economic carnage that was unleashed when Lehman Brothers failed. The trouble, however, is that their constituents do not want to pay for the cost of rescuing Greece or even large pan-European banks.

In our view, this train-wreck will continue to play out in slow-motion for the next several months. The solution has to involve some restructuring of Greek debt, and some mechanism to conclusively stop the damage from spreading to Spain and Italy. We do not hold out high hopes for a speedy resolution though. The outlines of the solution have been known for quite some time, but the relevant political and regulatory actors do not appear to have the will or courage to take decisive action and implement it.

So where does this leave investors?

We think the status quo will continue for the near future: structural headwinds in the US economy will persist and the debt problems in Europe are still a long ways from being resolved.  Barring another massive monetary intervention by the Federal Reserve (QE3), we believe stocks will continue their slide lower. If there is a QE3 announcement too soon, we think there’s a pretty substantial chance it will be seen by the markets as a sign of desperation on the part of the Fed. We believe the chance that Congress manages to enact meaningful tax or budget reform, or additional fiscal stimulus, is negligible as we enter the presidential election cycle.

We have seen a few weeks of remarkable volatility within financial markets. Stock indexes have moved hundreds of points in both directions with some regularity. Interest rates, bonds and the FX markets have also seen very sharp moves in each direction. We believe this period of volatility will continue for the next few months as the European crisis grinds towards its inevitable conclusion and signs of stress in China make themselves apparent.

As a result, we continue to recommend a defensive portfolio for clients, with high quality, short term/intermediate bonds and cash making up the bulk of client holdings.

We think there will be an opportunity to buy high quality stocks on the cheap in the coming weeks/months and have targeted a list of companies using the following criteria:

1. Large cap, US-based companies that have significant exposure overseas, particularly in developing markets
2. Companies that have sustainable, attractive businesses and a history of paying dividends to investors through tough market cycles
3. Preference for defensive/non-cyclical industries like consumer goods and utilities rather than banks or financials

We believe that, longer term, investments in these types of companies will perform well.  In the short term, they will provide cash flow through dividends, so investors will benefit by being paid to hold these stocks in the event the stock market trades in a flat or negative trajectory.

“It’s like deja vu all over again.” — Yogi Berra

Let’s take a look at some economic bullet points, shall we?

* The stock market, after peaking in April, is in the midst of a summer swoon.

* The sovereign debt crisis in Europe is getting progressively worse.

* Unemployment remains stubbornly high and the housing market remains stagnant.

* Gold continues to climb as investors speculate that safe haven currencies like the USD, Euro and Yen will see continued pressure as debt levels mount.

*Quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve has recently expired and Government Stimulus money has run dry.

*Investors wait with baited breath as Fed chairman Ben Bernanke is due to give a highly anticipated speech at the annual Jackson Hole economic summit.

Sound like a good encapsulation of where the financial markets are today?   Perhaps,  but I’m actually describing where things stood last summer on the eve of the Jackson Hole summit.  While a lot has certainly changed in the past twelve months, many of the problems facing the global economy remain the same.

And so here we are, almost exactly a year later, and the markets are waiting/hoping/praying that tomorrow Ben Bernanke can pull a rabbit out of his hat in his Jackson Hole address like he did last August, when it looked as if the stock market rally was sure to falter.

So how did things play out last summer?

As we wrote in our last quarterly letter:

“When Ben Bernanke announced the QE2 plan on August 27^th, 2010 the S&P 500 was trading at 1,064 (mired in a summer slump after peaking at 1,217 on April 23^rd). Once the QE2 announcement was made, equity markets promptly rallied for the next 8 months, peaking at 1,370 in April 2011 on the belief that the Fed’s policies would provide the necessary support and impetus to boost economic growth.”

Many stock market bulls believe that a third round of quantitative easing will deliver similar results.  While we concede that another round of QE will likely give the stock market a short term boost, we don’t believe it will cure any of the underlying ills that the economy suffers from (high unemployment, anemic housing market, low consumer confidence etc).

But never mind all that negativity, a stock enthusiast might say, will there be a QE3?

It’s hard to predict.  The Fed’s dual mandate is to provide economic growth and boost employment.  While it can be argued that the last two rounds of quantitative easing helped the US economy avert a depression, the main beneficiaries of these market interventions, particularly the last round, seems to have been stock holders — not exactly the constituency most in need of the Fed’s support.   And to compound the problem, two byproducts of these policies have been rising commodity prices and a weakening dollar, which creates a whole host of other issues for consumers.

Given that the Fed’s fiscal policies have come under increasing criticism from all corners of the financial and political world, including from some of the Fed’s own Board of Governors, it seems to us that another QE round would be enacted only as a policy last resort.  It’s also entirely possible that the next fiscal action from the Fed would not be a QE package, per se, but rather something resembling Operation Twist, which was an approach used in the 1960′s.

But if the financial markets continue their move further south, the question becomes: what other entity could possibly intervene to provide support?  Congress has demonstrated, through the debt ceiling fiasco and the rise of Tea Party influence over the Republican party, that a stimulus bill would almost certainly be dead in the water.  And as we get closer to the 2012 elections, it becomes increasingly difficult for our elected leaders (namely Obama) to institute major economic policy decisions without being accused of playing politics, particularly in the toxic partisan environment of Washington.

So, really, that leaves the Fed as perhaps the only game in town when it comes to market intervention.  If things get worse, then there may be increased pressure on the Fed to act since they have the mandate and resources to step in — whether that means tomorrow or at a future date remains to be seen (and regardless what your views are on the Fed’s policies, at least they can reach a decision and act on it in a timely manner — unlike our distinguished members of Congress).

So, has this summer sell-off and rampant speculation of potential Fed action hanged our investments thesis?  Not really.  We remain cautious and reiterate what we said in our last quarterly letter, in July, before the stock sell-off began:

“We are a bit skeptical that equity markets can rally further without this backstop and recommend clients remain defensive until it becomes clearer that the economy can stand on its own two feet absent the crutch of Federal Reserve support.”

The second quarter of 2011 saw equity markets close down slightly over the last quarter – the S&P 500 began the quarter at 1,325.83 and ended at 1,320.64.  Losses were on track to be far more substantial until the last week of June when the S&P 500 rallied over 50 points in the final 4 trading days after news of the Greek bailout and some encouraging US economic data.

Commodities, after experiencing an impressive two year long run-up, fell sharply in the second quarter.  Crude oil, which touched $115.52 per barrel on May 2^nd, sold off to $89.61 by June 27^th as economic indicators pointed towards a slowing global economy.  Mirroring the equity market rally, crude oil (and commodities as a whole) rebounded a bit in the last week of the quarter, closing at $95.08 on June 30^th.

Perhaps the biggest news this quarter was the highly anticipated end of the Federal Reserve’s second quantitative easing program.  QE2, as it has come to be known, saw the Fed invest $600 billion into US treasuries in an effort to keep interest rates low, promote economic growth and stave off any signs of deflation.  It is debatable whether or not this program resulted in any long-term benefit for the US economy, but it certainly did provide monetary rocket-fuel for the rally in stocks and commodities.

When Ben Bernanke announced the QE2 plan on August 27^th, 2010 the S&P 500 was trading at 1,064 (mired in a summer slump after peaking at 1,217 on April 23^rd). Once the QE2 announcement was made, equity markets promptly rallied for the next 8 months, peaking at 1,370 in April 2011 on the belief that the Fed’s policies would provide the necessary support and impetus to boost economic growth.

Now that the second round has expired, and the possibility of a third round looks ever less likely, market participants may wonder whether equity markets can continue to move higher without that monetary stimulus.  We are a bit skeptical that equity markets can rally further without this backstop and recommend clients remain defensive until it becomes clearer that the economy can stand on its own two feet absent the crutch of Federal Reserve support.

Greek Debt. Another summer and another quarterly letter with a section devoted to the debt problems in Europe. And despite the passage of the latest round of bailout/austerity measures in Greece, we don’t believe this problem is going away anytime soon. Most observers expect Greece to restructure its debt over the next few years. As with the Russian default of 1998, any restructuring or default, though widely anticipated, will shock the markets. We expect concern will move rapidly to other countries in peripheral Europe as Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italy will likely be the next group to find themselves sitting in the debt crisis crosshairs. As with most crises of confidence, European authorities will have to decide where best to build a firewall. Tough decisions will be made and in its exhaustion, Europe will likely realize that not every troubled sovereign can or should be saved. We believe neither Spain nor Italy can be abandoned, and we do not believe Ireland deserves to be. But as with many things that spur strong emotions, these events may take on a life of their own and force elected representatives to act in a knowingly destructive manner, simply to deflect virulent public opinion.

Debt ceiling debate. Meanwhile back on our side of the pond, a similar dynamic is playing out. With their 2010 reclamation of the House still fresh, Republicans appear determined to use their voting power to force budget cuts before approving a raise in the debt ceiling. Democrats, meanwhile, strongly prefer reducing corporate tax breaks and other revenue raising measures as a solution. Both sides are still far apart, but we expect they will find a workable solution before the August 2^nd deadline.  In our view, a workable long-term solution must involve both revenue raising measures and cost-savings in major programs, especially Medicare/Medicaid. We agree with many market commentators that a default on US debt would be catastrophic and hope cooler heads will prevail ending this game of debt/budget chicken sooner rather than later.

Regards,

Louis Berger                                                                                        Subir Grewal

We recently re-read a very good piece on Risk management lessons to remember from the credit-crisis 2007-2009 published by BlackRock. The document is well worth a read, and we recommend it highly for all professional investors.

There are, however, a couple of things we wish the authors had added to the note. Particularly with regard to understanding the institutional and legal context within which investments are made.

Portfolio managers must understand what happens when the market fails and a security enters liquidation: Investors should examine a potential investment through the eyes of a distressed investor prior to committing capital. Investing in distressed securities is a very specialized field that requires a lot of specific expertise. However, that should not dissuade the average investor from subjecting the investment to a  simple smell test. What happens to this security if the issuer becomes financially distressed?Who will they choose to pay first, and whom will the courts force them to pay and in which order. Part of our investment process focuses on what would happen in a distress or liquidation scenario (and what conditions would bring the issuer to that point). This occurs naturally to us because we invest in debt instruments, where return of principal is the paramount concern. We always evaluate both bonds and stock whenever we consider an investment in a company, i.e. look at the entire capital structure. We try to understand how decisions would be made in a liquidation, who would have authority to make decisions, and who would receive what portion of the liquidation proceeds in which order. We are generally wary of anything that has been through multiple layers of securitization. Understanding issuer and obligor motivation in a complex securitization requires peeling many layers of control. This is generally not worth the effort unless the returns being offered are extraordinary.

Investors should understand the financial history of the jurisdiction they are operating in, and how that impacts both law and convention: This usually falls under the rubric of operational risk, and is often an after-thought, but we believe portfolio managers must understand this. Many supposedly astute investors found themselves on the wrong side of the pond when Lehman Brothers failed (see NYTimes and DealBook). Hedge Funds with assets held within Lehman Brother’s UK prime brokerage operation found themselves facing an uncertain claim on securities they had believed were in segregated accounts. In marked contrast, the experience of the ’29 crash led to very different rules and conventions in the US, and this limited the impact on US prime brokerage clients. The lesson here is larger than a simple admonition to read custody and brokerage agreements carefully. You really do need to understand the cultural environment within which the law of the land came to be formed, and the environment in which it will be interpreted. This is part of the reason investments in China always give us pause. We’re simply not sure what underpins property rights in a jurisdiction where the collective memory of private ownership goes back half a generation at best. For that matter, we have similar concerns about Russia.

This brings up a much larger, third issue. As many ivory towers exist on Wall Street and the City of London as in Cambridge and Oxford. Many portfolio and risk managers in the institutional investment management world operate in the rarefied, highly specialized world of large corporations with armies of highly paid professionals in each division. The rough and tumble world of actual business, where businesses fail, frauds exist and people go bankrupt, is often as alien as Titan’s toxic atmosphere.

We held our first “webinar” earlier this month on the timely topic of municipal bonds. We have posted the narrated presentation at www.youtube.com/wsqcapital for the benefit of those who were unable to attend. We plan to host three webinars this quarter:

• Thursday, April 21: What Makes an Investment Socially Responsible? (April 22 is Earth Day!)
• Wednesday, May 25: Sudden Wealth: How to Make the Money Last
• Tuesday, June 21: Shopping for Life Insurance: Do’s and Don’ts

To register for any of these webinars, please visit blog.wsqcapital.com. We will continue to add recordings of future presentations to our page on youtube. Feel free to pass along an invitation to anyone in your circle interested in learning more about these topics.

IRA contributions, Roth IRA conversions

Most taxpayers can make IRA contributions for the 2010 tax year up until the individual tax-filing deadline, which is April 18, 2011 this year.

Roth IRA conversion rules have changed and virtually anyone can now convert a traditional IRA into a Roth IRA. Partial conversions of an IRA account are also permitted. Please contact us if you’d like to discuss specific issues surrounding your circumstances.

Interest Rates & QE2

In prior letters, we have discussed the extraordinary measures the Federal Reserve and other central banks around the world have taken to keep interest rates at historic lows. Short-term rates in the US remain below current inflation levels, which means savers are being penalized for holding cash. This is no doubt due to the actions of the Fed which continues to purchase the bulk of newly issued US Treasuries under its Quantitative Easing program. We estimate short and medium-term rates are 1.5% to 2.0% below where they would otherwise be.

Meanwhile, the flames of inflation have begun to flicker. A combination of increased demand and easy money policies has driven up food and commodity prices. If this trend continues, maneuvering through the obstacle course of rising inflation will take a toll on the global recovery. And as is usually the case, the burden will be heaviest for the world’s poorest who spend a higher percentage of their income on necessities. We are beginning to see some policy action and rate hikes in developing markets. Unless inflation levels stabilize quickly, this will begin to impact global trade. We caution bond investors that future returns are likely to be lower than those in recent years past. We continue to recommend high-quality bonds with 3-5 year maturities.

Budgets and Bluster

The issues facing most developed-market governments are remarkably similar whether we are talking about Greece, Ireland and Spain, or the US, California and Illinois. The long-term challenge involves tackling unfavorable demographics and enacting the painful policy reforms required to tackle the cost of social programs. In the short term, the double-whammy of a real-estate/financial crisis requiring an immense expenditure of government support, followed by a great recession driving down tax revenues have created huge deficits. The exact mix differs: in Ireland the cost of a bank bail-out has supercharged the national debt, whereas in Greece the crisis is compounded by a culture of tax-evasion and protectionism. In the US, the core problem is reforming Medicare and a health-care system that takes in more revenue per person and results in lower levels of health than those in other developed countries.

The imminent congressional debates over the federal budget and the national debt ceiling will bring fiscal issues front and center in the US. As the 2012 election campaign kicks off over this summer, we expect fiscal issues will be key in every race. In Europe, meanwhile, the moment of reckoning for Greece, Ireland and Portugal fast approaches. European institutions will either have to come up with a plan for debt-restructuring or direct support to assist struggling governments in the short-term. Meaningful progress towards the longer term demographic and policy challenges will also need to be made.

Nature, Energy and Politics

The March 11 earthquake and tsunami took a terrible toll on the people of Japan. The economic damage is also enormous as a significant percentage of the area’s power generation and distribution capacity has been offline for weeks, impacting businesses and residences across the main island of Honshu. Rolling blackouts have affected many areas, including Tokyo. Two nuclear power generation facilities (Fukushima I and II), with a total of ten operational reactors between them, suffered severe damage. It is now clear that all the reactors at Fukushima I will need to be scrapped. A large amount of fuel from the operating reactors and spent fuel stored at the facility has been damaged and released into the environment. The situation remains critical and the full extent of the crisis is still unknown.

Nuclear power generation requires operational and design expertise far more specialized than other forms of energy production. In general, the industry has recognized this and a great deal of thought and effort has been put into improving design and procedures. We should also not forget that most other forms of energy generation carry their own risks, and often a higher carbon footprint. For instance, the production and burning of coal costs numerous miners their lives every year, and damages the respiratory systems of populations globally. Hydro-electric dams have failed due to design faults or natural disasters causing a large number of casualties. We firmly believe renewable energy must be at the core of any long-term solution to global energy needs. Nevertheless, replacing our current energy infrastructure is a multi-decade project and represents an enormous investment. One step towards that process would be to accurately account for the true health and environmental costs of all forms of energy production. As things currently stand, the conventional energy industry derives numerous economic benefits from tax-breaks, favorable industrial policy and political gridlock in assessing the true environmental cost of greenhouse gas emissions.

With all this in mind, we believe certain modern nuclear plant designs can play a role as a crucial bridge technology. In many fast-growing economies, nuclear power is the only viable alternative to coal and gas for large scale power generation. It is clear though, that the nuclear industry will face tough public scrutiny and a risk re-assessment is underway. We are particularly concerned about the operational safety of nuclear power in countries without a strong tradition of accountability, independent oversight and open public discourse (see China). Some of these concerns are acute for certain developed nations such as Japan, which has few energy resources of its own and relies on nuclear power for 24% of its electricity needs. As a result, we continue to view long-term investments in renewable energy favorably.

Upheaval in the Middle East

Mass protests in the Arab world have captured the world’s imagination since the sudden, largely peaceful overthrow of Ben-Ali in Tunisia. We certainly do not believe every group engaged in protest has benign intentions and recognize that in some countries one repressive regime may be replaced by another. That said, we are hopeful the power of public protest and increasing civic engagement by ordinary citizens will transform the moribund political and economic regimes in the region. For the time being, we expect this part of the world will continue to experience upheaval over the next decade or more. In many of these societies, oil wealth has distorted economies and politics. A demographic bulge is now bringing about rapid change. Investors should remain aware that demographic and political change may cause certain markets to be disrupted over the next decade.

We are positive on emerging markets in the long-term, but advise caution for the present since asset prices have risen very rapidly. Further rises in oil prices could accelerate inflation and lead to a slow-down in global growth, which would impact emerging markets negatively.

Regards,

Louis Berger                                                                                        Subir Grewal