Buffett’s famed annual letter is due to be released this weekend. With that, today we want to talk a bit about his record, his philosophy on markets and successful investing and the high conviction stocks that he has in his $130 billion plus Berkshire Hathaway stock portfolio.
First, only one living investor has a length of track record that can compare to Buffett’s. That’s fellow billionaire Carl Icahn. Icahn actually has a better record than Buffett, and it spans a little longer. But he gets a fraction of the attention of the man they call the Oracle of Omaha.(more…)
Today the rebound in oil led a significant turnaround for stocks. With that, the broader sentiment of uncertainty across markets tends to abate. Broader commodities swung from negative to positive. And yields on the U.S. 10-year Treasury, which were in deep decline this morning, swung to positive territory by the afternoon.
If you own stocks, a house, have a job or need to eat, you should cheer for higher oil prices.
As we’ve talked about quite a bit in recent weeks, cheap oil, at this point in the global economic recovery, is a catalyst to destabilize the global economy. While consumers gain a few bucks from cheaper gas, the oil industry leans closer to the edge of bankruptcies and weak oil exporting countries toward default. That would be very bad news (global financial crisis, round 2). So the longer we’re down here, and the more persistent these low levels appear, the riskier the world looks. And when the world looks risky, people sell stocks, and other relatively risky assets and they hold cash or buy U.S. Treasuries (which pushes yields lower).
For proof, here’s a look at the 10-year yield on the U.S. Treasury note.
Keep in mind, the Fed raised rates in December! They did so when the 10 year was trading at a yield of 2.20%. The yield is now 45 basis points lower. And even though a voting Fed member said yesterday that in her view, a second hike was still on the table for next month, the market has still virtually priced out the possibility of any further hikes for the rest of the year.
Why? Because other parts of the world are moving (or are moving deeper) into negative rate territory, because economic conditions continue to soften, mostly driven by sentiment and weakening inflation prospects. A big driver of that mix is the oil price crash.
In the next chart, you can see how yields, despite the December rate hike, have tracked oil lower.
Again, when people think the world looks risky, they pile into the safest parking place for capital on the planet, U.S. Treasuries –and that drives yields on Treasuries lower. While that flow of capital has certainly occurred, the pressure on yields from speculators is also a big component.
If you recall, we discussed a couple of weeks ago how markets can have it wrong – sometimes very wrong. If indeed, the market is wrong on this one, there is a tremendous opportunity to ride yields back to the 2.25% area. And it may be a violent move.
But oil will be the driver.
As we said, oil turned the tide for stocks today. Here’s a look at the relationship of oil and stocks over the past three months.
In this longer term chart above, you can get perspective on where oil prices stand relative to history. You can see in this chart the sharp rise, the sharp fall and the rebound from the depths of the global financial crisis.
That rebound was all China. China stepped in and used their three trillion dollars in foreign currency reserves AND their massive fiscal stimulus package to gobble up cheap commodities.
And you can see this most recent price crash was triggered by move by the Saudis to block an OPEC production cut in November 2014. It was the night of the Thanksgiving holiday in the U.S. and oil was trading about $73. We haven’t seen that price since.
The low at the depths of the financial crisis was 32.40. That’s about where oil closed today. We’ve made the case in recent weeks that, if OPEC refuses to cut production (likely), the central banks could/should step in and buy oil (the ECB, BOJ and/or China).
Bryan Rich is a macro trader and co-founder of Billionaire’s Portfolio,a subscription-based service that empowers average investors to invest alongside the world’s best billionaire investors.
Oil has surged to open the week. If you’ve been reading our daily pieces over the past few weeks, you’ll know how important oil is for global markets at this stage. With that, strong oil today has translated into higher stocks, higher broad commodities, a slight bump higher in interest rates and better investor sentiment in general.
It was just fourteen days ago that Chesapeake Energy, one of the largest producers of oil and natural gas was rumored to be choosing the path of bankruptcy. That rumor was immediately denied by the company. And soon thereafter, the reality set in for markets that a scenario like that would conjure up post-Lehman like outcomes. Oil has since put in a bottom and bounced more than 25%. Chesapeake has now bounced 46% from the lows just the last six trading days.
It’s at extremes in markets where the biggest and best investors have historically made their money – running into risk, when everyone else is running away.
With that, today we want to take a look at a few stocks with the biggest upside, and an important “risk buffer” in what is a high risk sector at the moment (energy). This risk buffer? Each stock has the presence of a big-time billionaire investor.
Self-made billionaire energy trader Boone Pickens has said he expects oil to return to $70 this year. On his $70 prediction, he’s also said that if he misses it will be because oil is “over $70, not under $70.” If Pickens is right about oil prices, each of these stocks below have huge upside:
1) Oasis Petroleum (OAS) – Billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson owns nearly 4% of this stock. The activist hedge fund SPO Advisory owns 14% and has been buying the stock on almost every dip. When oil was last $70, OAS was trading $25 or 500% higher than current levels.
2) Chesapeake Energy (CHK) – Billionaire investor Carl Icahn owns 11% of CHK and recently added to his position around $13. The last time oil was $70, Chesapeake was $25. That would be more than a 1000% return from its price today.
3) EXCO Resources (XCO) – Billionaire investors Wilbur Ross and Howard Marks own more than 30% of this energy stock. The last time oil was $70, EXCO was $3.30. That would be almost a 330% return from its price today.
4) Consol Energy (CNX) – Billionaire David Einhorn owns 12.9% of this stock. When oil was last $70, Consol traded for $40 or almost 500% higher than current levels.
5) Williams Companies (WMB) – Carl Icahn Protégé, Keith Meister of the activist hedge fund Corvex Management, owns $1.1 billion worth of WMB. The last time oil was $70, WMB traded for $50 – more than 300% higher than its current levels.
As we’ve said, persistently cheap oil (at these prices) has become the new “too big to fail” — it’s a systemic risk. It’s hard to imagine central banks will sit back and watch an OPEC-rigged price war put the global economy back into an ugly downward spiral. And time is the worst enemy to those vulnerable first dominoes (the energy industry and weak oil producing countries).
The best investors like to go where the biggest risks are — that’s where the biggest returns can follow. And they’ve been getting aggressive in energy and commodities.
Without question, energy stocks have been beaten up and left for dead. If indeed Chesapeake is a leading indicator that it’s all backing away from the edge, there will be big money to be made in these stocks.
We already have one of the best performing stocks in the entire stock market for the month of February in our Billionaire’s Portfolio, billionaire-owned Freeport McMoran. Click here and join us!
Stocks have roared back in the past several days. It’s been led by commodity stocks, the area that has been beaten up and left for dead. Not surprisingly, the bounce in that area has been multiples of the broader stock market bounce (which is 7% in less than a week).
As we’ve discussed in recent weeks, in the world we live in, global economic stability continues to rely on central bank influence. And, indeed, after one of the worst starts for stocks in a New Year ever, it was central bank verbal posturing to open the week that has turned the tide for global markets. On Sunday, the head of the BOJ spoke, warning that they were watching markets closely and stood ready to act, and then on Monday, the head of the European Central Bank said, effectively, the same. The result: the BOJ comments sparked a 10% rally in Japanese stocks in a matter of hours. With that lead, the S&P 500 has now rallied 7% in three days, crude oil has bounced 20%, and global interest rates are bouncing back (which, last week, were pricing in recession).
Like it or not, in a world where the economy remains structurally fragile after the global financial and economic crisis, the central banks remain in the driver’s seat and they know that promoting stability is the key to recovery and ultimately returning to sustainable economic growth. As we approach the March ECB and BOJ meetings, with weak oil prices persisting, we continue to think the central banks may outright buy oil and commodities to remove the risk of oil industry bankruptcies and the domino effect that it would spark. As an additional benefit, it would likely turn out to be a very profitable investment.
Today we want to talk about the quarterly SEC filings that came in this week. All big investors that are managing over $100 million are required to publicly disclose their holdings every quarter. They have 45 days from the end of the quarter to file that disclosure with the SEC. It’s called a form 13F. While these filings have become very popular fodder for the media, what we care more about is 13D filings. Those are disclosures these big investors have to make within 10 days of taking a controlling stake in a company. When you own 5% or more of a company’s stock, it’s considered a controlling stake. In a publicly traded company, with that sized position, you typically become the largest shareholder and, as we know, with that comes influence. Another key attribute of this 13D filing, for us, is that these investors also have to file amendments to the 13D within 10 days of making any change to their position.
By comparison, the 13F filings only offer value to the extent that there is some skilled analysis applied. Thousands of managers file 13Fs every quarter. And the difference in manager talent, strategies and portfolio sizes run the gamut.
With that caveat, there are nuggets to be found in 13Fs. Let’s talk about how to find them, and the take aways from the recent filings.
First, it’s important to understand that some of the positions in 13F filings can be as old as 135 days. Filings must be made 45 days after the previous quarter ends, which is 90 days. We only look at a tiny percentage of filings—just the investors that we know have long and proven track records, distinct approaches, and who have concentrated portfolios.
Through our research over 15 years, here’s what we’ve found to be most predictive:
Clustering in stocks and sectors by good hedge funds is bullish. Situations where good funds are doubling down on stocks is bullish. This all can provide good insight into the mindset of the biggest and best investors in the world, and can be a predictor of trends that have yet to materialize in the market’s eye.
For specialist investors (such as a technology focused hedge fund) we take note when they buy a new technology stock or double down on a technology stock. This is much more predictive than when a generalist investor, as an example, buys a technology stock.
The bigger the position relative to the size of their portfolio, the better. Concentrated positions show conviction. Conviction tends to result in a higher probability of success. Again, in most cases, we will see these first in the 13D filings.
New positions that are of large, but under 5%, are worthy of putting on the watch list. These positions can be an indicator that the investor is building a position that will soon be a “controlling stake.”
Trimming of positions is generally not predictive unless a hedge fund or billionaire cuts a position by 75% or more, or cuts below 5% (which we will see first in 13D filings). Funds also tend to trim losers into the fourth quarter for tax loss benefits, and then they buy them back early the following year.
With that in mind, we want to talk about a few things we did glean from these recent filings.
First, the old adage “buy when there is blood in the streets” was evident last quarter, as many of the top billionaire investors loaded up on stocks in the fourth quarter. That was BEFORE the further declines this year.
Top billionaire investors Paul Singer, David Tepper and Chase Coleman of Tiger Global all increased their equity exposure (buying more stocks) over the last quarter. And billionaire investors still love health care stocks. John Paulson, Bill Ackman, Dan Loeb and Larry Robbins loaded up, with Paulson putting 56% of his portfolio in health care.
Billionaires are starting to bottom fish in energy. Seth Klarman, David Tepper, Carl Icahn and Warren Buffett all either added to, or initiated new stakes in energy stocks. Tepper now has 12% of his entire equity portfolio in energy stocks! This obviously coincides well with the theme that energy and commodity stocks are starting to bottom.
Also notable, in recent weeks, the 13D filings have been coming in fast and furious as investors are taking advantage of the decline this year.
Analyzing these filings is part of our process in our Billionaire’s Portfolio. With that in mind, this week we followed one of the best billion dollar (plus) activist hedge funds into a stock where they own 12.5%, have three board seats, and are in the process of replacing the CEO. These are are three key ingredients in the success of activist campaigns: 1) a big concentrated position (12.5% stake), 2) control (board seats), and 3) change (a new CEO). This activist fund has won on 82% of its campaigns since 2002 and has a price target on this stock that’s more than 150% higher than the current share price. To join us you can subscribe to our Billionaire’s Portfolio (here).
As we headed into this past weekend, we talked about the threat that the oil bust poses to the global financial system (not too dissimilar from the housing bust), and we talked about the prospect of central bank intervention over the thinly traded U.S. holiday (Monday).
Both the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank did indeed go on the offensive, verbally, promising more action to combat the shaky global financial market environment.
To follow the stock picks of the world’s best billionaire investors, subscribe at Billionaire’s Portfolio.
The result was a 9.5% rally in the Japanese stock market from Friday’s close. And all global markets followed suit. Within the white box in the chart below, you can see the central bank induced jump in the Nikkei (in orange) and the S&P 500 futures (in purple).
Source: Billionaire’s Portfolio
This is purely the influence on confidence by the two central banks that are now driving the global economic recovery (the BOJ and the ECB). However, the potency of the verbal threats and promises has been waning. Big words have marked bottoms along the way over the past several years for stocks, and the overall ebb and flow of global risk appetite. But it’s becoming more evident that real, bold action is required. And given that it’s cheap oil that represents the big risk to financial stability at the moment, we’ve argued that central banks should outright buy commodities (particularly oil). And we think they will.
Source: Billionaire’s Portfolio
In 2009, despite the evaporation of global demand, oil prices spiked from $32 to $73 in four months after China tapped its $3 trillion currency reserves to snap up cheap commodities. Within two years, oil was back above $100.
China’s role in the commodity market was a huge contributor to the recovery in emerging markets from the depths of the global financial and economic crisis. Brazil went from recession to growing at close to 8%. Many were saying emerging markets had survived the recession better than advanced markets, and that they were driving the global economic recovery. And Wall Street was claiming a torch passing from the developed world to the emerging world as the future of growth and leadership.
How are emerging markets doing now? Terrible. Not surprisingly, it turns out the emerging market economies need a healthy developed world to survive. And now with the additional hit of the plunge in commodity prices, Venezuela (heavily reliant on oil exports) is very near default. Brazil and Russia are both in recession. The longer oil prices stay down here, Venezuela will be the first domino to go, and others will follow. With that, we expect intervention to come. And as you can see in the response to the Nikkei overnight, it will pack a punch – and if it’s bold, a lasting one. Remember, as we said last week, historical turning points for markets often come from some form of intervention (public or private policy).
Billionairesportfolio.com, run by two veterans of the hedge fund industry, helps self-directed investors invest alongside the world’s best billionaire investors. To see which ideas we follow in our Billionaire’s Portfolio, join us at BillionairesPortfolio.com.
When housing prices stalled in 2006 and then collapsed over the next three years, the subprime lending schemes quickly became exposed.
Mortgage defaults led to a banking crisis. Due to the highly interconnectedness of banks globally, the problems quickly spread to banks around the world. A banking crisis led to a global credit freeze. When people can’t access credit, that’s when it all hits the fan. Companies can’t meet payroll, don’t have the liquidity to make new orders. Jobs get cut. Companies go bust. Finally, the microscope on overindebtedness of consumers and corporates, turns to countries. Deficits leads to debt. Debt leads to downgrades. Downgrades leads to defaults.
For the most part, defaults were averted because central banks and governments stepped in, in a coordinated way, to backstop failing banks, failing companies and failing countries. From that point, continued central bank stimulus has 1) enabled banks to recapitalize, 2) foiled additional shock events, and 3) restored confidence to employers (to hire), to investors (to invest) and to consumers (to spend again).
As we’ve discussed in the past two weeks, persistently low oil prices represent a risk on par with the housing bust. And in recent days we’re seeing the signs of another global financial and economic crisis creeping uncomfortably closer to a “part two.”
As we’ve said, this time would be much worse because governments and central banks have exhausted the resources to bailout failing banks, companies and countries. But central banks, namely the Bank of Japan and/or the European Central Bank do have the opportunity to step-in here, become an outright buyer of commodities (particularly oil), as part of their QE programs, to avert disaster. But time is the oil industries worst enemy and therefore a big threat to the global economy. The longer policymakers drag their feet, the closer we get to the edge of global crisis — a crisis manufactured by OPEC’s price war.
Unfortunately, there are the building signs that the market is beginning to position for the worst outcome…
Key bank stocks in Europe are trading at levels lower than in the depths of both the global financial crisis (2009) and the European sovereign debt crisis (2012).
Source: Reuters, Billionaire’s Portfolio
The credit default swap market for key industries is sending up flares. This is where default insurance can be purchased against a company or country – and the place speculators bet on a company’s demise. Billionaire John Paulson famously made billions betting against the housing market via credit default swaps. Now the fastest deteriorating companies in Europe are banks. And the fastest deteriorating companies in North America are insurance companies (a sector that tends to have investments in high yield debt … in this case, exposure to the high yield debt of the oil and gas industry).
Source: Markit
The early signal for the 2007-2008 financial crisis was the bankruptcy of New Century Financial, the second largest subprime mortgage originator. Just a few months prior the company was valued at around $2 billion.
On an eerily similar note, a news report hit this morning that Chesapeake Energy, the second largest producer of natural gas and the 12th largest producer of oil and natural gas liquids in the U.S., had hired counsel to advise the company on restructuring its debt (i.e. bankruptcy). The company denied that they had any plans to pursue bankruptcy and said they continue to aggressively seek to maximize the value for all shareholders. However, the market is now pricing bankruptcy risk over the next five years at 50% (the CDS market).
Still, while the systemic threat looks similar, the environment is very different than it was in 2008. Central banks are already all-in. On the one hand, that’s a bad thing for the reasons explained above (i.e. limited ammunition). On the other hand, it’s a good thing. We know, and they know, where they stand (all-in and willing to do whatever it takes). With QE well underway in Japan and Europe, they have the tools in place to put a floor under oil prices.
In recent weeks, both the heads of the BOJ and the ECB have said, unprompted, that there is “no limit” to what they can buy as part of their asset purchase program. Let’s hope they find buying up dirt-cheap oil and commodities, to neutralize OPEC, an easier solution than trying to respond to a “part two” of the global financial crisis.
It’s unimaginable that governments and central banks that have coordinated and committed trillions of dollars in guarantees, backstops, commitments and outright bailouts will stand by and let weak oil prices (rigged by OPEC) undo everything they’ve done over the past seven years to create stability and manufacture a global economic recovery.
Oil represents a systemic threat to the global economy. Just as housing created a cascade of trouble, through the global financial system, then through countries, the oil price crash can do the same.
When you see forecasts of $20 oil or lower, and some of it is coming from Wall Street, these people should also follow by telling you to buy guns and build a bunker, because that’s what you would need if oil went there and stayed there.
Not to mention, if they believe in that forecast, they should be formulating a plan for what they will do to make a living going forward, because their employers will likely go bust in that scenario.
The persistence of lower oil, especially less than or equal to $20 oil, would financially ruin the U.S. energy sector. Oil producing countries would be next, starting with Russia (and ultimately reaching the big OPEC nations). A default in Russia would create tremors in countries that hold Russia sovereign debt and rely on trade with Russia. Remember the fallout from the Asian Crisis? A default in Russia was the catalyst. Oil driven sovereign defaults would create a massive flight of global capital to safety and global credit/liquidity would dry up, again. All of this would put the world’s banks back on the brink of failure, just as we experienced in 2008. The only problem is, this time around, the global economy cannot absorb another 2008. Governments and central banks have fired their bullets and have nothing left to fend off another near global economic apocalypse.
With that, we have to believe that this crash in oil prices will not persist, especially when it’s being rigged by OPEC. Intervention now (or soon) is easy (relatively speaking) and returns the world to the recovery path. Intervention too late will require more resources than are available.
What’s the solution? An OPEC cut in production has a way of swinging oil in the other direction dramatically. Back in 1986, just a hint of an OPEC cut swung oil by 50% in just 24 hours. This assumes that the pressure builds on OPEC and they realize that the game of chicken that they are playing with U.S. producers has put themselves, also, precariously close to an endpoint.
Alternatively, we made the case last week that either China, the Bank of Japan or the European Central Bank could step in and outright buy commodities as a policy response to their ailing economies. Both the ECB and the BOJ in the past two weeks have said that there are “no limits” to what they can buy as part of their respective QE programs. That would immediately put a floor under crude, and likely global stocks, commodities and put in a top in sovereign bonds. Remember, when China stepped in, bought up and hoarded dirt cheap commodities in 2009, oil went from $32 to above $100 again.
So what’s the latest on oil?
Chart
This morning, the threat intensified. Oil dropped 5%, trading below the very key level of $30 per barrel. It was driven by an earnings report from the huge oil and gas company, BP. It reported a $6.5 billion loss. The company followed with an announcement of 7,000 job cuts by the end of 2017. Shares of BP stock are now trading back to 2010 levels, when the company was facing the prospects of bankruptcy after the fall–out from its gulf oil spill. This is one of the largest oil and gas companies in the world trading at levels last seen when people were speculating on its demise.
With the move in oil this morning, global stocks took another hit. Commodities were hit and sovereign debt yields were hit (with U.S. 10–year yields falling below 1.9%).
While there is a lot of talk about China and concerns there, clearly oil is what is dictating markets right now.
Take a look at this chart of oil vs. the S&P 500…
You can see the significant correlation historically in the price of oil and stocks. And you can see where oil and stocks came unhinged back in July 2014. The dramatic disconnect started in November 2014 (Thanksgiving Day) when an OPEC meeting concluded. The poorer members of OPEC called for production cuts. Saudi Arabia blocked the requests. That set off the plunge in oil prices.
You can see clearly in this chart where the price of oil is projecting the S&P. And stocks at those levels suggest the scenario we described above (global apocalypse round 2).
Again, a capitulation from OPEC is probably less likely. More likely, a central bank steps in to become an outright buyer of commodities (especially cheap oil). For those that have been shorting oil (and remain heavily short), either scenario would put them out of business quickly.
At this stage, OPEC is not just in a price war with U.S. shale producers, but it’s playing a game of chicken with the global economy. We’ve had plenty of events over the past seven years that have shaken confidence and have given markets a shakeup – European sovereign debt, Greece potentially leaving the euro, among them. In Europe, we clearly saw the solution. It was intervention. Oil prices are creating every bit as big a threat as Europe was; it’s reasonable to expect intervention will be the solution this time as well.
(more…)
