(New York)

The public and the media are flabbergasted at how the US stock market has seemed to defy everything we are seeing in “real life”. As of Friday, however, things started to make a little more sense because of good job numbers. Given the general disconnect between markets and the economy, it is important to take a step back and digest what markets really seem to be saying. In our view, the message is clear: not only is the economy going to bounce back, but a year from now, things are going to be better than they were before COVID.

FINSUM: The markets are making a very bold call and essentially pricing for perfection. However, it might not be that unrealistic. If the Fed and the government remain very accommodative, it is not outside the realm of possibility that by the end of June 2021, the economy is larger and potentially healthier than in Feb 2020.

(Washington)

It has been long in the works. So long, in fact, that many seem to have forgotten about it. Yet here it is—a new fiduciary rule from the DOL, almost three years after the last one was vacated. The new version of the rule has just been delivered to the White House for review by the Office of Management and Budget. This starts a multi-month process that may lead to its implementation, but given how late the rule is arriving it may not get enacted before Trump could potentially leave office. If Trump wins the election, the timing is irrelevant, but if he loses and the rule has been in place less than 60 days when the new president takes over, it can very easily be reversed.

FINSUM: We have not yet seen a good summary of the contents of this rule, but will be covering it as soon as possible. The only thing we have heard is that the new rule is “is primarily a prohibited transaction exemption intended to replace the Best Interest Contract Exemption”.

(Washington)

Friday saw the release of what appeared to be absolutely stellar jobs numbers. Instead of the jobless rate potentially hitting almost 20%—which was the forecast—the opposite happened: the unemployment rate fell to 13.3% in May from over 14% in April. Markets soared. However, the reality is that those numbers are both highly inflated, and unrealistic. Firstly, the Bureau of Labor Statistics counted those who are currently furloughed and unpaid as “employed”. It admitted that if it hadn’t done so the unemployment rate would have jumped to over 16%. Secondly, the big jump in hiring was at least partly, and probably hugely, because of an artificial government rule in the PPP program. Small businesses had to hire employees back by the end of June to have their loans turn into grants, so there were artificial incentives to put people back on payroll even I the absence of true business demand.

FINSUM: If you take these two facts together, it becomes clear that the May data is not really a reflection of an economic pickup, so don’t make any predictions based on this.

(New York)

It has been a long, long, time since value stocks really had a shining moment. Growth has been outperforming value for over a decade now. However, strategists at JP Morgan say that value stocks may start to shine very soon. This underlying parts of this economy—weaker but still improving—are the exact conditions where value stocks traditionally shine. These pre-requisites for success seem likely to stay in place. There does not appear to be a second wave of infections brewing, there is ample government support for the economy, and economic data is trending more positively than negatively.

FINSUM: The typical rotation into value (such as in 2008-2009) takes over 100 days and has 18% upside. The logic here is sound, but we still wonder if value will outperform growth.

(Washington)

A whole squad of industry players are trying to stop the SEC’s new Reg BI in its tracks. From individual firms (like Michael Kitces’) to trade groups, many are filing lawsuits to stop the implementation of Reg BI. One of the critical arguments seems to be that the new Reg BI does not sufficiently protect investors under the rules of the Dodd-Frank Act. One principal at XY Planning Network says, simply, “Reg BI makes it more difficult for customers to differentiate between financial planners who are bound by fiduciary obligations and for broker-dealers who may consider their own financial interests”.

FINSUM: Both broker-dealers and RIAs are against this rule. For the former, it complicates life, and for the latter, it muddles some of their “fiduciary” thunder. Nonetheless, it seems the rule is likely to implemented on schedule.

(New York)

Investment bank research teams all over Wall Street have been sounding the alarm about how untether from reality markets seem to be. Many are warning investors of another big fall in stocks, and at the same time are telling corporate customers to tap markets for funding as much as they can before another fall. Now hedge funds are joining too, saying it is time to pull back. One manager said “The markets are priced to perfection … The stability in equity markets does not reflect the job losses and the insolvencies ahead of us globally”. Paul Singer of Elliott Management made a specific call, saying “our gut tells us that a 50 per cent or deeper decline from the February top might be the ultimate path of global stock markets”.

FINSUM: In principal a big fall seems warranted, but it is hard to fight the Fed.

(New York)

Morgan Stanley says the big gains in travel stocks are way overblown and will likely prove dangerous to investors. Carnival, Royal Caribbean, and Norwegian have all seen their shares rise in the double digits recently as investors have grown increasingly optimistic about their prospects and their cash reserves. However, Morgan Stanley threw cold water on those sentiments, saying “The cruise industry will take longer than almost any other form of travel to return to normal” as it downgraded the stocks to Underweight (two of them were already Underweight). UBS also pointed out that there will likely be no meaningful cruise activity until next year.

FINSUM: Even once cruises get running again, all it will take is one minor flourish of COVID—and the associated news cycle—for the whole sector to freeze up again. Too risky to invest in at this point.

(New York)

In a recommendation that speaks volumes to clients about the bank’s position on the markets, Citi put out a note to corporate clients this week which instructs them to tap markets for as much funding as they can get right now because the market is totally unrealistic. According to the co-head of investment banking at Citi, “We definitely feel that the markets are way ahead of reality. We really are telling every client to tap the market if they can because we think the pricing now couldn’t get any better”. He continued, “Markets are pricing a V [shaped recovery], everyone’s coming back to work, and this is going to be fine … I don’t think it’s going to be that easy quite frankly”.

FINSUM:A V-shaped recovery is highly unlikely at this point. We think the Nasdaq being where it is isn’t illogical because of how many of its constituents benefit from COVID. But for everyone else, this level of optimism seems disconnected from reality.

(New York)

Don’t be fooled by this rally. Many research analysts, including those at Citi, say that this big rise in markets is not being driven by bulls, but by bears. One of the odd parts of these gains has been that money has been continuously flowing out of equity funds since March, but prices have risen despite that. The reason why may be that instead of bulls buying stocks, the gains have been driven by short-sellers buying back short positions they opened at the start of COVID.

FINSUM: This is good, simple analysis from Citi. Their additional comment could not have summed it up better: “From here, a move higher will need new longs and inflows”.

(New York)

For the better part of a decade now, major socio-political disruptions never seem to rattle markets. Think back to Occupy Wall Street, the events in Hong Kong over the last year, or the protests in the US over the last week. The question is why? The main reason is that historically speaking—think the entire 1960s and up through the 1992 riots—markets and the economy were never particularly affected by social unrest in the months following big social disruptions/protest.

FINSUM: Essentially the argument here is that there is no precedent for needing to worry about social unrest. That approach only makes sense until protests do cause a big problem.