(Washington)

On Wall Street has run what we consider to be a very bad article, but we thought our readers might enjoy, or cringe, in hearing about. In an article entitled “Why Financial Planners Should Support a Strong Fiduciary Rule”, the director of consumer protection for the Consumer Federation of America manages to make almost no discernible argument. Attacking those who oppose the fiduciary rule, the article fails to make any salient points in support of the current DOL version of the rule. In fact, the most interesting part of the article is actually an inadvertent support of those who oppose the DOL rule. The author acknowledges that commissions-based payments are no more inherently conflicted than fee-based accounts.

FINSUM: This article was incredibly mind-numbing. While we have been in consistent opposition to the DOL rule, we are not against fiduciary duty in principal, and have been trying to find arguments in its favor. In this piece we kept reading and reading waiting for a good point to be made, but it never arrived.

(New York)

If you are a hybrid BD/RIA, you need to pay attention. FINRA is trying to loosen the strictures in which you might find yourself. In particular, FINRA wants to make changes to its outside business activity rule. It no longer wants to force hybrid B-Ds to have compliance tracking for their RIA businesses. Being legally liable for such businesses can prove a major cost burden. “The motive for taking a percentage payout on the RIAs advisory business will go away”, says one industry insider.

FINSUM: This will certainly be a welcome change for the many hybrid RIAs who deal with the current FINRA rule.

(New York)

The media and many bond market gurus would have you think the ceiling is caving in on bonds. Talk of a massive bear market, surging inflation, and big losses abound. How to make sense of it all? The answer, if there is one, is that reversals in rate environments tend to take a long time, and have historically lasted 2-3 decades before reversing back. Therefore, bond yields may continue to climb steadily, but this shouldn’t be bad for the stock market, so big losses may be avoided. In fact, slowly rising rates can spark structural bull markets. It would also be helpful for pension funds to have higher yields as they could be safe in assuming better returns, helping fund the huge national pension deficit.

FINSUM: We just are not that worried about bonds. The Fed still seems fairly timid, there is high natural demand for yields because of demographics, and inflation and growth aren’t all that strong.

(San Francisco)

While most publications have been running stories arguing that it may be time to get out of the FAANGs, Barron’s has a run a piece to the contrary, saying that they have more room to run. While the piece admits that the group of stocks is under a lot of pressure and is highly priced, it contends that it is not time to pull out yet. The argument is that despite accusations of misbehavior and threats from Trump, the sector will remain the centerpiece for growth investors. If the economy continues to chug (meaning stay under 3% growth), then tech’s steady growth will remain attractive.

FINSUM: We tend to like this view. Despite how richly these companies are valued, we think there is still room for medium-term value growth as regulation is still a way off and their fundamental businesses are solid.

(New York)

A lot of investors are looking for income, and over the last several years it has been hard to come by. While yields are rising, they are still very low by historical standards. With that in mind, Barron’s has run a piece selecting the best income stocks from a sector not considered as much as it should be—biotech. Many biotech companies have strong overseas cash flow, and solid yields. For instance, Pfizer, which rose just over 13% last year, sports a 3.7% yield. Abbvie and Amgen are also good looking stocks, both offering dividends just below 3%. Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, and Bristol-Myers Squibb are also names to look at.

FINSUM: These are definitely some good names to look at, especially as there has not been much focus on biotech for income over the last year.

(New York)

For the last year there has been increasing public frustration with tech companies. Gone is the general perception of Silicon Valley being inherently good, replaced with an angry skepticism over data leaks, election manipulation, and automation. Now there is tangible change in the air amongst investors too. Jana Partners, along with Calstsrs, have just begged Apple to investigate the iPhone’s impact on kids, and it seems representative of a larger trend against the tech industry. There is also rumbling about regulation on the fringes, and increasing skepticism about the social impact of Amazon, in particular its effect on Main Street, jobs, and inflation (although the general public NEVER misses inflation).

FINSUM: We think there is a big change brewing for the tech industry, and that the next decade will likely be a lot more difficult than the last.

(New York)

The big bond gurus of Wall Street, Bill Gross and Jeffrey Gundlach, both struck fear in the hearts of bond investors yesterday, saying that the recent Treasury sell-off confirmed that a bond bear market had begun. However, Morgan Stanley is now pushing back against that assertion, saying that Treasuries are still offering value and should be fine. “This isn’t the bear market you’re looking for” says Morgan Stanley. MS says that the Fed is not likely to react sharply to inflation and that the Chinese aren’t going to stop buying Treasuries outright, both factors which will support the market.

FINSUM: While there are some headwinds related to possible tightening, on the whole there are a number of fundamentals which seem likely to continue to support both Treasuries and credit (like demographics—we know we often mention this point).

(New York)

The big discount brokerages might be poised for an ugly PR nightmare. In an expose type article, the WSJ has highlighted how big discount brokers like TD Ameritrade and Fidelity hide the fact that their account managers have conflicts of interest. Such managers often tell clients they don’t get paid on commission and therefore don’t have conflicts of interest. Yet in reality they do have incentive pay that biases their advice to steer clients into more expensive products. One former manager from Fidelity comments that “You’re omitting certain facts that the client would probably appreciate understanding before you launch into a sales pitch on why you think this product is better”.

FINSUM: This is definitely something that those who use discount brokerages should be aware of. It remains to be seen what the fallout from this expose might be.

(New York)

Banks are soon to be reporting their fourth quarter earnings, and Barron’s has put out an article advising investors on which stocks to buy ahead of the release. JPMorgan will report first and its numbers will have big implications for the sector. The piece cites analysts and says that Wells Fargo, Zion’s Bank, and Suntrust Bank look likely to do well, while investors should be underweight Goldman Sachs, CIT Group, and US Bancorp.

FINSUM: The tax package is going to be an interesting part of bank earnings both this earnings season and next, as some banks may do unusual tax maneuvers.

(New York)

If you are sitting on the sidelines, or want to sit on the sidelines but fear missing out on gains, then you may be exactly representative of the market. Bloomberg argues that part of what is fueling the self-perpetuating cycle of market gains right now is what it calls FOMO, or fear of missing out. At present, the fear of missing gains seems to have eclipsed all downside fears, which could be a sign of euphoria, or part of what Wall Street terms a “melt up”. Bloomberg argues that the really scary part of the current melt up is that it doesn’t really have to do with the economy, it is just psychologically driven.

FINSUM: The market is valued so richly that one can’t help but look over their shoulder, but the doom and gloom stories are still getting old. That said, the CAPE ratio (you know, Shiller’s ratio), is the highest it has EVER been (yes, greater than 1929).