(New York)

Advisors have probably started to see some discussion of so-called “opportunity zone” investing. The idea of the concept is to invest in designated “opportunity zones”, which are economically depressed areas, and reap benefits. But the real opportunity is in the tax treatment of such investments. Barron’ sums it up this way, saying “How significant? If you roll the capital gains from the sale of anything—your home, shares of Amazon.com , a Modigliani—into a “qualified opportunity fund,” and hold for 10 years, you get to defer paying capital-gains tax until the end. Then you’re taxed on just 85% of the original investment, and 0% on any money generated by that initial money”.

FINSUM: This is a very good plan for people who don’t need the immediate liquidity associated with some asset sale and want to defer a lot of capital gains. There are several firms that are setting up special funds just for this new purpose.

(Washington)

In what could be a very worrying sign for the industry, it is being reported today that the SEC may be inserting the word “fiduciary” in its new best interest rule. The word had been conspicuously absent, much to the chagrin of DOL rule advocates. However, the SEC’s own advisory committee now says the word should be included. The SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee saw a majority vote for the inclusion of the word and a fiduciary standard to be applied, something the SEC had diligently avoided until now. The Committee voted 16-3 in favor of the changes.

FINSUM: This seems very likely to now be included in the new rule. Does that mean it should no longer be called the BI rule, but the SEC Fiduciary Rule?

(New York)

The market had a relief rally right after the election results came in. Yesterday wasn’t so good. The big question on everyone’s mind is where the market is headed from here. Looking historically, the current political arrangement (split Congress, Republican presidency) is the worst for markets. The S&P 500 has had the lowest returns in the current political set up, though it has only occurred four times since 1900.

FINSUM: The market’s outlook for 2019 appears fairly bleak to flat for us. The main reason why is that there won’t be another major tax package, and the great earnings of this year will make 2019 comparisons look weak. Growth is also likely to slow.

(New York)

There are a lot of investors out there worried about rates moving higher and bond prices falling as a result. Treasury yields have moved much higher over the last year, which has spooked investors. All that said, one fund manager thinks investors shouldn’t fret too much. The reason why is that markets likely have already priced in rate hikes in, so losses shouldn’t be much. Furthermore, we have actually entered a more normal yield environment, where one can earn meaningful yields on shorter-term credits that don’t have much interest rate risk.

FINSUM: This article raises a good point about the current yield environment. While rate driven losses are worrying, we have finally entered an environment where one can earn comfortable yields on interest rate hedged portfolios.

(Houston)

Oil prices have taken a nose dive lately, and yesterday officially fell into a bear market. Prices on Brent crude fell below the $70 per barrel mark for the first time since April. US crude is even lower, with prices sitting at $59 per barrel. For most of the summer the market was worried about undersupply, but the US has been more generous with sanction exemptions on Iran, and the US, Russia, and Saudi Arabia have all boosted output, alleviating fears and pushing prices lower.

FINSUM: The oil market seems to be trading based on supply and demand fundamentals—just like it should. It is very hard to predict how things will progress.

(Washington)

The Democrats may have won the House, but they are at a definitive crossroads. While the Republicans currently have a well-defined brand and agenda, the Democrats found themselves largely without a leader and without a clear agenda (other than being anti-Trump). That means they will have some big decisions to make in the near term as they try to mount a push for the presidency in 2020. There appear to be two major policy decisions the party is considering. The first is whether pursuing a fruitless impeachment against Donald Trump would be worthwhile, and the second, and frankly more intriguing question, is whether they will adopt a “Medicare for all” platform.

FINSUM: So much hangs in the balance right now. The Democrats have let themselves be overshadowed by the Republican party and will need to find their ideological and policy footing ahead of the next election. We expect the party’s agenda will move further left in order to serve as a mobilizing foil for its base.

(Miami)

Luxury real estate is an interesting corner of the housing market for a number of reasons. It is not subject to the same sort of macro trends that affect the rest of the real estate market, such as mortgage rates directly influencing pricing and demand. Therefore, it is often overlooked as a barometer of the sector. However, if you pay attention, luxury real estate actually works as a solid leading indicator of the broader real estate market. While it is insulated, it is not immune from the same forces as its mass market brethren, and rates, stock prices, foreign buying and beyond all affect it. For instance, the chief economist at Redfin comments that “When people have more wealth because of stock gains, they have more money to spend on luxury homes … But if some luxury buyers think the stock market isn’t going to do as well, there may be an increase in investment in real estate because it’s seen as a safer place to put money”.

FINSUM: The problem with correlating the stock market and luxury housing is that both stocks rising and falling can boost luxury real estate, as rising shares mean more wealth to splash out on homes, while a weaker market can boost the sector because of safe haven characteristics.

(New York)

One of the big questions investors and analysts are still trying to sort out is who are the biggest market winners and losers as a result of the midterms. Here are some insights. The sector which seems likely to gain most is healthcare, as the risk of more regulation looks diminished, and the chances of increased government healthcare spending (as a result of the election of Democrats in key states) seems higher. The sectors which seem likely to lose out are banks and telecoms, both which seem likely to face much greater scrutiny by the now Democrat-led House.

FINSUM: We would also lump big tech into the losers category as increased scrutiny and regulation of the sector is one of the few areas of bipartisan agreement right now.

(New York)

Here is something no one was calling for before the election—the yield curve has has flattened considerably since the midterm results. The spread between two- and ten-year Treasuries got as low as 25 basis points. The market thinks the US deficit may be tighter than in an all-Republican scenario, which has sparked a rally in ten-years.

FINSUM: A flattening yield curve on its own does not necessarily indicate recession, but if it does invert, look out, as that is one of the most reliable indicators of a looming slowdown.

(New York)

Almost all of the market articles regarding the results of the midterms have been about stocks, including which sectors might thrive etc. But the real winner might be the bond market. Treasury yields have fallen and spreads between short and longer term bonds have tightened. The reason why is that traders see the forthcoming US budget as more conservative now that Congress is split. In particular, the market thinks there won’t be a big surge in infrastructure spending, and Treasury bond issuance will probably be tighter, both of which have conspired to boost prices.

FINSUM: It is quite odd to think that the election of a Democrat majority to the House would make the market expect more conservative fiscal policy, but the reality is that a divided Congress will probably be less fiscally loose because of gridlock.