Complete Intelligence

Categories
Podcasts

Gold & Silver, Nature’s Bitcoin

Tony Nash joins BFM Malaysia for another look at the global markets, particularly discussing the “nature’s bitcoin,” which are gold and silver, the US Dollar outlook, if Tesla is a good buy right now, Microsoft, and others.

 

Listen to this podcast at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/gold-silver-natures-bitcoin

 

BFM Description

 

Tesla and Microsoft results were released last night but which company actually met expectations upon a closer look?

 

Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence helps us dissect the numbers while weighing in on the sharp rise on gold and silver’s which is defying the historical correlation between asset classes.

 

Produced by: Mike Gong
Presented by: Khoo Hsu Chuang, Wong Shou Ning

 

Show Notes

 

BFM: For more thoughts on what’s going on with markets, we speak to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Good morning, Tony. Now, markets had a choppy day last night, but still closing in the green on optimism of this spending bill and, of course, the vaccine. Now, are investors choosing to ignore the realities of what is clearly a weak, broader economy at their peril?

 

TN: Well, no. I think generally they’re trying to figure out how fast things will come back and when we look at some of the earnings, like Microsoft, they’re really, really good. And when we look at some things, like the rate at which people are coming back, say on the roads and other things, it’s looking positive. So have things got a little bit ahead of themselves? It’s possible, but I don’t necessarily think people are kind of ignoring the issues around COVID and other items.

 

BFM: Just to stay on that point a little bit, Tony. How much money do you think really will be put into the system as a result of this new spending bill? More importantly, Trump talked up, and I think allocated about two billion dollars to Pfizer for the COVID vaccine. Those two elements there, what kind of numbers in quantums can you throw into the mix here, Tony?

 

TN: I think you’re you’re looking at least at trillions. I don’t think it’ll be as large as the initial spending. I think it’ll be a bit of a tapering of the initial spending. But with the magnitude of spending to join with Pfizer and other vaccine manufacturers, they just want to be able to put a cap on this and say, “okay, as of a certain date, right now, it’s expected to be December. We’ll have a vaccine that‘ll put a limit on the risk and we can kind of set all of this stuff aside.”

 

BFM: And Tony, talking about the two bit results that came out last night. So there was Microsoft, which kind of mistreat, but Tesla, which beat. Are you a believer on Buford? Or do you actually have a preference?

 

TN: Tesla announced they’re building a factory in Texas, which is where I sit. So I’m very excited about it. But on a serious note, Tesla’s positive EPS report happened largely because they sold 428 million dollars of regulatory credits. So they’re not positive because of car sales. They’re positive because of selling regulatory credits. Investors have to look at that reality. Now, the other consideration for Tesla is it’s their fourth consecutive gap profit. So they’re now eligible for S&P 500 including. That may be a factor to pull some demand along for the stock if they are, in fact, put into the S&P 500.

 

BFM: For the benefit of the Tesla day traders. I think that’s nearly half a million of them on Robinhood. Tesla is now worth nearly 300 billion dollars, more than the entire European and American car sectors. Did you think this is a collapse waiting to happen, or do you think this going to be more upside?

 

TN: Do you know what? It’s yes. The problem with that kind of statement is it’s like there’s not even close to trading on fundamentals at Tesla. So the real question is, how excited will people get and when will that taper off? The real problem is wondering how long that excitement will be there because it’s fully sentiment. I mean, anybody who thinks Tesla trades on fundamentals. It’s really what are the expectations for next quarter’s earnings? That’s what Tesla’s trading on now.

 

Plus, a lot of excitement and a lot of Robin hood fiz. It really is sentiment based. When we see that sentiment subside, I think that’s when, I don’t think we can continue north of a three, four, 500 billion dollar valuation for a company like Tesla. As cool as it is, I think it’s very hard to continue with it.

 

BFM: And Tony, talking about things that have gone up, it’s gold and silver. Both precious metals have seen sharp rises in price levels. So what’s the reason behind the focus on these commodities? And the question, again, is this sustainable?

 

TN: Is it sustainable? Gold and silver are kind of nature’s cryptocurrency, right? They really are where sentiment goes if people are skeptical about the dollar or skeptical about risk. We saw the VIX down like two percent today. So we saw gold and silver kind of about even by end of the day. When risk is going down, gold and silver typically aren’t doing great. The dollar will stay weak for the next couple of months. But we do see bit of a dollar strength coming back later in the year. Those aren’t perfectly inverse relationships. But there really is question around what will the Fed do? If the Fed continues to expand the money supply, there is an expectation that more people will flock to gold and silver. I’m just not quite seeing that much left. But it’s possible that there is.

 

BFM: I’m not sure whether your software looks at this necessarily, but it shows for silver that the technical resistance is at 21 dollars an ounce and now it’s gone past that 22 and 3 quarters. They’re talking about twenty five dollars an ounce though. Would you agree with that prognosis?

 

TN: Yeah, we see serious resistance. I mean it’s possible. So we’ll hit 25, but we don’t necessarily see the incentive there for silver to continue to rise. We do see strong resistance at these levels. And it’s, you know, from our perspective, it’s fairly risky looking at those at the moment.

 

BFM: And Tony going back to the U.S. dollar, right? I mean, we are seeing weakness now. But you say you have expectations of it recovering towards the end of the year. What is that premise on, though?

 

TN: When the Fed and the Treasury slow down, when we start to see stability around COVID. Things like ICU beds in East Texas, there’s so much more availability. That’s like 20 percent more availability this week than there were last week. When we start to see more stability around what’s actually causing the risk in markets and there’s less of a need for the Fed and the Treasury to intervene, then we see stability in money supply.

 

And as the market recovers, we start to see or we would expect to see more velocity of the U.S. dollars. That’s kind of how quickly do people spend it, right? If we see stability in the money supply and more velocity in American spending, then that could be dollar strength. If there’s instability in, say, emerging markets or Europe or something like that, if the finance ministers could ever get it together in Europe, we’d see more strength in the Euro.

 

But there’s disharmony there and there are questions in some emerging markets. So if we see stability and velocity rise in the U.S., then we could see more investment come from overseas into the U.S., which would accelerate Dollars. We don’t necessarily expect strong dollar strength for a turn before the end of the year, but we do expect moderate dollar strength to come in before the end of the year.

 

BFM: All right. Thank you for your time, Tony. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, saying that Tesla looks like something very scary at this moment, right? It looks like the stock, at six hundred times P is extremely, I would say quite expensive. I mean, you would never think that a company that isn’t it only makes less than thousand cars could be valued at six hundred times.

Categories
Podcasts

Claims, Caution, and China

Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence speaks with BFM 89.9 about the US market rebound, what to expect in the third quarter of 2020, jobless claims and US unemployment, and Hong Kong amid the US-China cold war or trade war.

 

BFM Notes

It’s been an eventful weekend in politics, and all eyes are on whether markets will reflect the renewed uncertainty. We reached out to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, to help us break down Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell’s comments before the US Senate Banking Committee, data expectations, and what the potential impact of Hong Kong losing its special status might be on emerging market currencies.

 

Produced by: Michael Gong, Roshan Kanesan

Presented by: Noelle Lim, Roshan Kanesan, Lyn Mak

 

Listen to the BFM Podcast here.

 

 

Show Notes

 

BFM: Thanks for joining us, Tony. So now, Jerome Powells made some comments before the Senate Banking Committee pointing towards a cautious rebound in the US economy. But nevertheless, U.S. markets closed in the green on the back of some positive housing data. So could you help shed some light on what’s happening here?

 

TN: Sure. We had the positive housing data. We had a broad tech rally. We also had Boeing like 14 percent today on a test flight on the 737 Max. So it was simply a test flight and it was a successful test flight and Boeing rallied 14 percent. It’s a major component and it has an impact on broad market activity. So there are some good things happening, but certainly low expectations environment.

 

BFM: Do you expect end of quarter rebalancing by funds, would that costs significant market volatility? I mean, could you just give us some thoughts about this?

 

TN: As we’ve said before, we expect volatility to continue through probably mid-August. So we will see some rebalancing and we will see as these investors figure out what the right value is for the assets they’re invested in. So we’ll see some change. We’ll see a lot of people kind of take it in Q2. And Q3 is a brand new quarter, so they’ll wipe the slate clean. We’ve seen a lot of companies dump everything but the kitchen sink into the Q2 earnings. Well, but we expect them to. And so Q3 will be hopefully a whole new world. And and we’ll be approaching something more positive by then.

 

BFM: Right. And Tony, when we look at the every week, we’ve been paying very close attention to the jobless claims numbers, right? What are your expectations of the US Weekly jobless claims numbers this week and June Non-Farm payroll data that’s expected on Thursday or Friday overtime?

 

TN: Well, we saw a huge jump in non-farm payrolls in May of 2.5 million, which was pretty massive. Also, the unemployment rate improved from almost 20 percent to like 13 percent. So, we expect things to improve gradually. We don’t expect the two million, although I hope we do, but we don’t expect that magnitude. But we do expect jobs to continue to accumulate as companies gradually come back. So the initial wave of companies opening up in the US produced a lot of new jobs. But now we’re starting to see that continue, but not necessarily at the same magnitude. But again, if we see 2.5 million or more, that will be a delight, everyone.

 

BFM: So now, Tony, fluctuating crude prices and as well as bankruptcies like Chesapeake Energy make oil stocks seem like a bit of a risky proposition. Shouldn’t investors still be considering energy companies as part of their portfolio?

 

TN: Well, I think you have to do with caution. So we look at things like crude oil inventories in the US reached an all time high of something like 540 million barrels about a week and a half two weeks ago. So there’s plenty in storage. I think if you’re investing in energy companies, whether they’re the developers option companies or service providers or whatever, I think you just have to go in with your eyes open to know that the growth there and the draw down in inventories is not likely to be a quick one.

 

TN: So, again, it’s just you have to understand your own risk profile. You have to understand your own tolerance and then go in. I mean, when you look at something like Chesapeake, that was, it happened. And I don’t think it was a complete surprise. But you also look at BP. They sold off their chemical business to Eneos over the weekend. And so some of these companies are hiving off other businesses so they can focus on their core business.

 

BFM: So, now you know, the latest piece of news where US is going to revoke Hong Kong’s special status. So what do you make of this piece of news in the larger picture of the trade war, the Cold War between China and US?

 

TN: I think it puts Hong Kong… It’s another piece in the puzzle to put Hong Kong in a light that it doesn’t really want to be put in, which is one country, one system. Hong Kong has for the last 20, 30 years, been the special place where you can access China without all the baggage. But what we’ve seen with the security like coming in is if you’re in Hong Kong, you’re also accepting the China baggage, which means you have to self-censor your comments, which means you have to be really careful about everything you do and say. And if you’re an investor, that’s a pretty difficult place to be. And so I think, the announcements in the State Department of not selling this technically sensitive equipment there, it was inevitable.

 

I don’t necessarily think it’s a surprise. I think from the Chinese side, it may have been a surprise. But I think they were kind of deluding themselves if they didn’t expect it. So there is accountability for China’s actions and it’s been as they’ve moved into Hong Kong, there have to have been ramifications and were seeing those, and there will be more. And China will have to understand that if they want the benefits of open, say investment markets, they’re going to have to limit their desire to control a number of aspects around business.

 

BFM: Thank you very much for speaking with us this morning, Tony. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, giving us his insight into global markets.

Categories
Podcasts

Economies are sputtering, which means trade war will intensify

Here’s another guesting of our founder and CEO Tony Nash in BFM Malaysia, talking about trade war between US and China. Can these two countries actually decouple? Or is the current supply chain too dependent to do that? Can the economy have the V-shaped recovery that everyone is dreaming of, or is it just an illusion? What can the policymakers do to improve the economic outlook for this year? What can his firm Complete Intelligence see happening based on the algorithms and AI?

 

We also discussed regionalization of supply chain as a result of the Trade War in this QuickHitQuickHit episode with Chief Economist Chad Moutray of National Association of Manufacturers.

 

BFM Description:

The trade wars between the US, China and the Eurozone seem to be gaining momentum. Tony Nash, CEO, Complete Intelligence, offers some insights, while also discussing European industrial activity.

 

Produced by: Michael Gong

Presented by: Wong Shou Ning, Khoo Hsu Chuang

 

Listen to the “Economies are sputtering, which means trade war will intensify” podcast in BFM: The Business Station.

 

Show Notes

 

This is a download from BFM eighty nine point nine. So is the station. Good morning. This is BFM eighty nine point nine. I’m considering that I’m with one shotting bringing you all the way through the 10:00 o’clock in the morning and Rano 76. We are talking about markets, but well above 50 bucks sort of because of that with about 15 minutes time, we’re talking to call you. Ling was an independent panel, a political economist at Ciggy and I’m advisers will be discussing palm oil.

 

BFM: So last night in America, the stock market slumped. Investors are cautious, right How did the markets do?

 

Not so well, because there’s been clearly a resurgence in virus cases in multiple states, which puts into question the economic recovery. So, unsurprisingly, the Dow closed down three percent and S&P 500 closed down 2.6 percent, while the Nasdaq closed down 2.2 percent. Meanwhile, in Asia yesterday, only Shanghai was up, which was up 0.3 percent, while the Nikkei 225 closed down marginally by 0.07 per cent. Hang Seng was down 0.5 percent, Singapore down 0.2 percent, and KLCI was down 0.3 percent.

 

So for more clarity into the whys and wherefores of markets, we’ve got it on the line with us Tony Nash, who is the CEO of Complete Intelligence. Now, Tony, thanks for talking to us. Trump’s getting tough on China rhetoric highlights, well, obviously, the American’s concerns about being too reliant on China. And, of course, we can see that being manifested in the list of 20 companies, which is deems suspicious. In your opinion, can the two economies decouple or other interests in supply chains too heavily aligned?

 

TN: Well, I don’t think it’s possible to completely decouple from China. I think the administration are really being hard on each other. And I think the hard line from the US, you know, it’s relatively new. It’s a couple years old. But I don’t think it’s possible, regardless of the hard line for those economies to decouple and for the supply chain to decouple. We had some comments over the weekend out of the U.S. saying that they could decouple if they wanted to. But that’s just the hard line and unaware of the possibilities. We’ve been talking about, for some time, probably two and a half, three years, is regionalization of supply chains. And what we believe is happening is the US-China relations have just accelerated regionalization. It means manufacturing for North America, moving to North America. Not all of it, but some of it. And manufacturing for for Asia is largely centered in Asia. Manufacturing for Europe, some of it moving to Europe. And that’s the progression of the costs in China. And some of the risks are relative risks to supply chains highlighted by COVID} coming to the realization of manufacturers.

 

BFM: U.S. markets corrected sharply last night. So is the market actually now waking up to the reality that COVID 19 is going to be a problem for economic recovery? And this V-shaped that what many investors thought is probably a pipe dream?

 

TN: I think what markets are realizing is that it’s not a straight line. Well, we’ve been saying for a couple months is that end of Q2 or early Q3, we would see a lot of volatility. Then people started to understand how the virus would play out. Until we’ve had some certainty around the path, we will have days like today. And we’ll have a danger with an uptick as optimism comes back, what’s happening is markets are calibrating. People are trying to understand not only the path of COVID, but what those actors mean—the governments, the companies, the individuals—will do to respond, how quickly the markets come back. But what are people going to have to do? What mitigations that we’re going to have to take? What monetary and fiscal policies will governments take as well? We’re not done in that respect. So more of that’s to come, but we don’t know what’s to come there exactly. Markets have moved a lot on new case count. I don’t believe that it’s the case counts itself because a lot of these are are really mild cases. It’s just the uncertainty around how long it will last. The magnitude and the mitigation that people will take around it. There’s more of this volatility to come.

 

BFM: Tony, you might have seen the IMF‘s growth forecast, which was just announced a few hours ago. They’ve now said that global growth will shrink 4.9 percent for 2020. That’s nearly two percent worse than what they originally thought. And I think the U.S. also marked by an expectation of a negative 8 percent, down from negative 6o.1 percent. Do you think this might cause the policymakers to have an even more vigorous policy response and liquidity into the system?

 

TN: It might. I think the U.S. has shown that it’s not really afraid to be pretty aggressive. I think you may see more aggressive policy responses in other places. Obviously, Japan is very active on the monetary policy side. But we need to see more actual spending and more direct support of individuals and companies to make it through this. So, I do think that, obviously, IMF’s forecast concern people and get policymakers attention. I do think that they’re probably a little bit overblown to the downside, though. So I wouldn’t expect 8 percent decline. I wouldn’t expect a global decline as acute as they’ve stated today.

 

BFM: If you look at oil prices declined last night and I think this is on the back of U.S. crude inventories increasing. But is this also a function of COVID-19 fears in terms of how that may impact the economy’s going forward and consumption of oil again?

 

TN: Yeah, that’s interesting. The oil price is our… I think there are a number of things. The storage, of course, as you mentioned. But there’s also how much are people starting to drive again? What do traffic patterns look like? Also, how much are people starting to fly again? We really need to look at like Google Mobility data. We need to be looking at flight data. We need to be looking at looking to really understand where those indicators are headed. So when we compare a $40 a barrel of oil at $39 s barrel for WTI today, compared to where it was a month ago. The folks in oil and gas are really grateful to have that price right now. And it’s a real progress from where we were a month or two months ago. So I think what people are looking at today is the progress and then the expectation. They’re not even necessarily looking at the real market activity today. It’s all relative to a couple of months ago and it’s all expectations about a couple of months from now.

 

BFM: Last question on perhaps the data that your algorithms generated, Complete Intelligence. What kind of signs and indicators does our technology and the AI tell us about the direction the market’s going forward?

 

TN: Yeah, well, this is where we we pulled our assertion of volatility. We we really expected things to be pretty range traded for some time. So, you know, crude oil is a good example. We were saying back in February, March, the crude oil would end the quarter in the low 40s. This is WTI and here we are. So, with volatility, we’re not necessarily trying to capture the high highs and the low lows. We’re just recognizing that the markets are trying to find new prices. So it’s interesting when you look at things like the dollar. The dollar is a relative indicator for, say, emerging market‘s uncertainty and troubles as well. We did expect a dollar rise toward the end of Q1, early Q2, as we saw. But we haven’t expected the dollar to come back to strengthen until, say, September. So there are a number of indicators around trade or on currencies. And what we’re finding generally with our client base, for global manufacturers generally, are the algorithms… We’ve found that our average-based forecasting has an error rate that is about nine percent lower on average than consensus forecasts. So when we had all of the volatility of the last three, four months, consensus forecasts in many cases were 20 to 30 percent off. Ours were about nine percent better than that. Nobody expected the COVID slowdown. If we look at that from a few months ago, the bias that’s in normally of doing things, negotiating, procurement, supply chain, the revenue, that sort of thing. We take that out and this passionate… I would suggest that there is a lot of passion in the analysis from day to day when you look at three percent fall in markets today, but you can’t extrapolate today into forever. And what we can do with AI is taking emotion out of this, take a rational view of things. And really remove, not all of the error, of course, nobody can remove the error. There area a lot of the error from the outlooks in specific assets, currencies, commodities and so on.

 

BFM: All right, Tony, thanks so much for your time. And that was Tony Nash, chief executive for Complete Intelligence talking from Texas, USA. Interesting that this kind of stuff that he does at his business, tries to remove the emotional, the emotive side of the markets and give something a predictor over the future. But I think that sometimes you can’t discount too much of human emotion because it’s all driven by essentially two emotions, right? Greed and of fear.

 

But you know, basically his nugget is it’s going to be volatile. Right. Hang onto your seats. Right. Because we really don’t know. There’s too much uncertainty out there at the moment. This is a scene where it’s for oil prices or even for equity markets.

Categories
Podcasts

Mo’ Money, Mo’ Honey

Tony Nash speaks with the BFM team in Malaysia to explain what’s going on in the US markets and economy after the FOMC announcement. What it means for gold and other assets, if businesses actually spend the excess cash for capital reinvestment, how this adds to wealth inequality in America, and how do tech stocks and traditional stocks compare?

 

BFM Notes

 

In the US, the FOMC left interest rates unchanged, pledging to continue with their quantitative easing till 2022, indicating that America’s markets will continue soaring on the back of this wall of cheap liquidity.

 

Tony Nash, the CEO of Complete Intelligence in Texas, discusses the implications of what commentators are calling the Fed’s ‘yield curve control’ policy.

 

Produced by: Michael Gong

Presented by: Roshan Kanesan, Noelle Lim, Khoo Hsu Chuang

 

Listen to this podcast in BFM: The Business Station.

 

Show Notes

 

BFM: Let’s talk about the markets in the U.S. Markets whipsawed as all attention was on the FOMC meeting. The Dow closed down one percent. The S&P 500 closed down 0.5 percent. But the Nasdaq closed up in the green. 0.7 percent. What about Asia? Asia was rather mixed. The Shanghai Composite ended down 0.4 percent. The Hang Seng was marginally down by 0.03 percent. The Nikkei 225, I think they closed up about 0.2 percent. And FBM was up 0.01 percent. Just barely in the green — 0.01 percent. Now for more on global markets, we speak to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Tony, are you down the line with us?

 

TN: Yes, sir. Morning.

 

BFM: Good morning to you. Now, the FOMC left interest rates unchanged of the meeting, pledging to continue with quantitative easing till 2022. What does this tell you about the state of the economy there?

 

TN: The Fed is really just trying to create stability. We see them, like you said, the next three years, they’ll keep them the same. We think that they’ll just reinforce some of the policies they’ve already put in place. One of the areas we see them focusing on is on yield curve control, although that’s not explicit. We really see that as an area that they’re moving in to encourage capital investment.

 

We’ve really seen capital investment fall here in the States, especially since the COVID time. Oil and gas companies have trimmed billions of dollars of capital investment, for example. So if they can have low-cost borrowing through a yield curve control, it could help that.

 

BFM: What are the implications of doing this? Yield curve control that, for example, on gold?

 

TN: The environment generally with both QE, which is meant to provide liquidity, and yield curve control, which is meant to provide low interest rates, what that does is it really pushes the Dollar down. Although it’s not perfectly inverse, there is generally inverse relationship between the Dollar and gold. So if it’s intended to push the value of the Dollar down, one would expect gold to rise.

 

BFM: Tony, yield curve control can also be called money printing, which has been happening for the last ten, twelve years from an evidence shil standpoint. Have corporations actually spend some of that excess cash on capital reinvestment or have they done it in terms of paying dividends to themselves and their shareholders or even worse, share buybacks?

 

TN: Mostly share buybacks. But share buybacks and dividends, one can argue are similar. It’s just a different form of paying back shareholders. So share buybacks have really been made to be evil over the last, say, five, 10 years or something. But it’s really similar to a dividend that it brings value to the investors themselves. So is it a good thing? I don’t necessarily think so, but it is just one form of getting money back to investors.

 

It’s not necessarily helping capital investment. It hasn’t necessarily helped capital investment. And so, you know, looking at things like yield curve control, what we’ve seen is a lot of QE, but we haven’t seen as much yield curve control. So yield curve control could be one way to provide more incentive for capex.

 

BFM: Well, that hasn’t happened clearly. And to what extent do you think that that policy has exacerbated the wealth inequality in the country, in the United States, which some say has manifested themselves in some of these demonstrations you see all over the country?

 

TN: That’s a very complicated question. And we can spend a lot of time on it. So I think whether a yield curve control has done that, I can’t necessarily argue for or against it. Has QE done that? Oh, surely. I mean, QE has definitely contributed to inequality. It’s definitely contributed more to capital concentration itself than overall inequality. Capital is concentrated with the investment class rather than, say, the working class. Although that sounds very Marxist and it didn’t really mean it to sound that way, but it’s really helped to concentrate capital.

 

BFM: Well, let’s take a look at last night. The U.S. markets were mixed overnight. Is this a reality check that the recovery may not be as soon or as sharp as anticipated by investors?

 

TN: The kind of the relief rally we’ve seen over the past few weeks has really been one of really just excitement that COVID is ending and really hopeful that things will open, as well as recognition of the Fed’s activity and the Treasury’s activity of getting trillions of dollars into the economy. As investors realize how slow those openings are going to be and the impact that it will have on Q2 earnings, but potentially Q3 earnings. I think we’ll see some of this enthusiasm fall away. So markets are trying to find that level. What is that level? And because there is so much uncertainty, we don’t really know that level. This is why we’ve expected volatility through Q2 and into Q3 until there’s more clarity about the pace of opening, how that will affect different industries, and the severity of, say, a second wave. And to be honest, whether people really care about the second wave.

 

BFM: Well, NASDAQ has passed ten thousand and valuation is at the highest in the last 15 years. Where do you think tech stocks will go from here?

 

TN: It really all depends on how companies focus on things like productivity. If we continue to see layoffs and unemployment, companies may decide to invest in technology. We may see some real broad-based investment in productivity like we did twenty five to 20 years ago when companies really started to invest in computing and Internet and all these other productivity shows, it’s quite possible that we see that across large companies.

 

It’s really questionable. Have we expanded valuations as far as we can or is there further expansion there?

 

BFM: Just following up on that. We’ve seen the market recover in the U.S., but there’s definitely a divergence between how the tech stocks have performed and how the larger S&P 500 has performed. Do you think there’s a lot more room for tech stock? Do you think these two indexes will actually going to diverge at this point?

 

TN: We may see a little bit of divergence, but I don’t see that much divergence. I think there is a lot of synchronization within those indexes. We may see a bit like we saw today, but I don’t think that will continue in a massive way.

 

BFM: So when you mean synchronicity, you mean that they will track each other in a parallel? But there is a gap between something like the NY Fang index and the S&P in general. Is that due to the S&P just being weighted down by other classes of assets there?

 

TN: Sure, yeah. It’s looking at traditional businesses that have physical assets and a lot of legacy employees and retirement commitments. These sorts of things really weight down old traditional businesses. The Fang’s, for example, they don’t have a huge retirement commitments than, say, a large manufacturer that’s maybe a 100 years old has. As those things play through and this really has to do with the aging of baby boomers, really. Those retirement commitments will age with them and then they’ll phase out eventually.

 

But a lot of this is around again, those companies are not as efficient as they could be. And until they get to a level of efficiency that they need, we’re gonna see a drag on their earnings. So, of course, with guys like the Fang’s, since they have kind of virtual software related businesses, they will have valuations that are much more generous than traditional, say S&P 500 businesses.

 

BFM: All right, Tony. Thank you so much for your time this morning. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence.

I think just ending that point is how this divergence between traditional industries and tech industries had been even more highlighted by what we’ve seen.

Yeah, I think that’s really quite concerning because the alternative point of view is that of the Fed’s money printing policy, which has really accelerated exponentially the last three months. There really is no indication from Trump, from Jay Powell, that he has an exit strategy in mind or has any exit strategy at all. Because how do you unwind this much? You basically dopamine the markets without having some kind of pain. It’s very clear, I mean, even though he was quite tempered in his response, this inequality has been really exec-abated for the last 10 years.

 

Categories
QuickHit Visual (Videos)

QuickHit: We’re not going to normalize

In this episode, our expert guest Grant Wilson of Exante Data said that “we’re not going to normalize” and that countries need to make the very difficult decision to risk re-infection or re-outbreak in order to reopen the economy.

 

Grant Wilson is the Head of Asia Pacific for Exante Data, a macro advisory and data analytics company based in New York, with a broad global client roster. Exante Data was one of the first to identify and analyze the impact of Coronavirus with detailed data.

 

You can also check out our previous QuickHit episodes: How do we use up all the corn now? and How ready is the military to face COVID-19 and its challenges?

 

Show Notes

 

GW: So we saw COVID very early – mid to late January. In fact, I positioned it as a key risk factor for our clients. And as the situation evolved we just stayed with it.

 

We moved the firm increasingly towards all data through this period because we’re trying to assess how the virus is affecting the economy: [what are the] different scenarios to restart in different countries, different sectors, which is really the most germane question at the moment.

 

TN: Where do you think we are? I think the initial shock is past. Do you think we’re on a path to normalization or are we still in a hesitation phase before we get on to that normalization path or something different?

 

GW: I think it’s something different. I don’t think we’re going to normalize. I do think there are going to be industries, which have fundamentally changed coming out of this. People want to put a time frame on it, and I think you just got a run with it.

 

But to give you some examples, I’m extremely pessimistic about commercial real estate globally. The way people work has changed fundamentally, and it’s not going to change back. Whether the virus comes off a little bit more or whether we do get a second wave. The fundamental changes that are happening in terms of office environment, the digitization of communication. Those things are not going to turn around. So if you’re a large landlord or a sponsor of CMBX, derivative structure, you’ve got some real problems, and it does not matter where the virus is.

 

Similarly like public infrastructure. People are clearly using less trains, less buses, obviously less planes. Interesting that there could be a shift back to private car usage. We are trying to think through the secular things coming out of this.

 

And then for the virus itself, one of the most peculiar things is that there’s only probably a couple of countries globally that can truly achieve elimination, like to totally get rid of the virus within a proximate, self-contained environment. New Zealand’s a very good example of that. In Australia, the case counts are extremely low. So the rest of the world will not eliminate this thing. They’re gonna have to pick and make these really, really difficult decisions about how much of a virus risk and re-outbreak that they want to tolerate as against the imperatives of restarting the economy.

 

TN: A lot of the talk was about flattening the curve, which was about reducing the kind of overwhelming capacity going into hospitals so they could actually treat people. That flattening the curve discussion has changed to something different. And it seems to almost be approaching a zero-tolerance discussion where we have these lockdowns and people can’t go into work and make a living.

 

In the States, we recently saw Elon Musk threatened to move his company out of California to Texas potentially so that he could get his company to work. And the State of California or the county relented and let them come into work. Are we in a period where there’s selective lockdowns? Does flattening the curve mean anything anymore? What are you seeing in terms of the economy, industries?

 

GW: The thing is that a lot of companies, retail, hospitality, mass events, you know football games, basketball, things like that, they don’t really work in this model where you have social distancing. And so, you either really just have to go for full eradication. But it’s not possible in many of these places. You’re going to have to tolerate some reinfection risk and get on with it.

 

I’m very far away from the U.S., but we’re tracking it very closely state-by-state that there is sort of a polarization developing where Republican states are more inclined to try to restart the economy and sort of run this risk. Democratic states are still more tolerant of lockdown. And it seems increasingly politicized, and that’s not a great surprise given you’ve got a big event at the end of the year.

 

I’ve contrasted to Europe. When you listen to Angela Merkel, not Britain because Britain was very late and very confused in terms of their strategy. She’s a scientist by training and she explained very, very clearly that the first part of the strategy was to make sure that they didn’t blow through their ICU constraint. And now that they’ve achieved that, indeed they have flattened a curve. They’re not gunning for elimination. They know they can’t get there. And so they’re just trying to manage what’s known as the r0 so it doesn’t pop back up above one and you have a real explosive re-acceleration. But they’re having to live with it.

 

What still hasn’t necessarily gotten through to people, is that business models that worked previously don’t work anymore. It’s very hard to see how a lot of small and medium-term enterprises are going to make it out of this. And I think that’s the Chapter 3 or Chapter 4 version of it. But that’s the concern. There’ll be some winners and there’ll be some adaptation of the economy. But the legacy and the tail on this is just immense. It’s immense.

 

TN: So tell me this. Is there anything good that’s going to come out of this?

 

GW: There’s probably going to be a very significant re-think about climate change. This is going to be one of the first years where carbon emissions globally are going to fall. Effectively, it’s because we shut things down. It was the way that people actually wanted to get there. That’s probably one interesting data point. If you look at that area very closely, we’ve never been able to run a real-time experiment like this. So it will be very interesting to see how the effects sort of percolate through.

Categories
Podcasts

Message to Fed: More sugar please!

Tony joins BFM for another discussion on the US markets, this time, sending a message to Fed on what needs to be done. What he thinks will Powell do next and why is the Fed buying a lot of ETFs. Plus, a side topic on oil as Saudi called for a larger production cut.

 

Produced by: Michael Gong

 

Presented by: Roshan Kanesan, Noelle Lim, Khoo Hsu Chuang

 

This podcast is originally published by BFM 89.9: The Business Station.

 

 

Podcast Notes

 

BFM: The Fed chair, Jerome Powell, painted a rather negative view of the economy unless fiscal and monetary policymakers rise to the challenge. But what’s left in the toolbox, though?

 

TN: There’s quite a lot left, actually. We’ve seen a few trillion dollars spent. What we need to make sure is that that money actually gets out to businesses. So offering lower rates, nobody is really in a mood to borrow unless it’s forgivable. With the mandatory closing of a lot of small and mid-sized businesses, it’s really putting their revenue models in peril. Actually helping those businesses with cash to substitute for revenue, since this was a government shutdown, is really all they can do. But I think the next path is looking to medium-term spending programs like infrastructure. A number of these things that can go from direct cash payments to earned cash so that we can have a more viable economy again.

 

BFM: Could you elaborate more on some of the fiscal measures that you’re talking about?

 

TN: For small and mid-sized businesses, we’ve had things like the PPP, the Paycheck Protection Program. What that does is it gives about two and a half months’ worth of expenses to companies so that they can retain their staff and pay for their rent during the downtime. But what’s happened is not a lot of companies have been approved. Of those who’ve been approved, not all have gotten their money, a number of them are still waiting.

 

For small companies, they run on cash flow. They don’t have three to six months of cash sitting in the bank normally. So while they wait, they’re going bankrupt. They’re having to fire people. At the same time, we’re starting to see more and more large companies announce layoffs over the past two weeks. And so we’ve seen the devastation of a lot of small and mid-sized companies in the US. We’re starting to see that bleed into large corporate layoffs.

 

Those large companies want to see the expenses associated with those layoffs put into Q2. As we go through Q2, we’re expected to see more and more corporate layoffs, so that all those companies can pack them into their earnings reports for Q2.

 

BFM: The correction of the last couple of days, the American share market has been a bit of a test, up 30% since the March lows. A lot of billionaire investors like Stan Druckenmiller and Appaloosa management’s David Tepper say that stocks have been the most overvalued for a number of decades. What does that do for your thinking by way of your portfolio? Are you taking some money off the table? Are you getting more cautious? What are you going to do?

 

TN: The only thing we can really guarantee right now is volatility. And what is happening is they’re trying to find a new pricing level. Until we’ve found that new pricing level, really anything can happen.

 

What we’re entering right now is a phase where people are realizing that states may stay closed longer than many expected. I actually think you’re going to get a lot of push back from citizens in the U.S. Los Angeles just announced they are going to stay closed for three more months. You’re going to see a lot of unrest there. People are really pushing back because their hopes and dreams of decades of these small and mid-sized businesses are just being devastated as local officials make these decisions. I feel in the next few weeks, we’re going to see more and more people pushing back on those orders because they need to get back to work. They’ve got to run their companies. They’ve got to make some money.

 

BFM: That’s right. But this is an ongoing chasm between what’s happening on Wall Street, which is essentially a rally and Main Street, which is dying. People are divided over whether the policy response will be to get into the Fed buying equity market instruments on top of the junk ETFs and all the backstopping of the bond market. What’s your stance and what Jerome Powell is going to do next?

 

TN: They can do that. It’s certainly within their remit to lend money. The ETFs are kind of an indirect way to lend money. It’s radical, but it’s not beyond their capability. Where it looks like the Fed is going is with yield curve control. That means they’re likely to target a rate for the 10-year Treasury, and then they will spend almost unlimited cash to make sure that the rates stay there.

 

If the Treasury yield curve rises too much and people stop taking out long-term loans for infrastructure projects or for other things, if that rises too much, the Fed will push that yield curve down, let’s say, to a half percent rate so that people can borrow over long terms for cheaper. That’s the way for the Fed to encourage investing. That’s not a direct government fiscal policy, but it’s a way to get the private sector to spend cash. This is really for the larger, private sector companies. It’s a signal to me that the federal government itself is preparing itself to spend a lot more money in terms of fiscal policy, and also encourage the private sector to spend a lot more money on these long-term projects.

 

BFM: That is a theoretical concept, which hasn’t proved right in the last 10 years, because what corporations have done is that instead use that easy money to buy back shares and to return dividends to shareholders, not to invest for the long term. So that’s to be the problem.

 

TN: Well, either way, shareholders win, right? Either way, cash is spent or they get it in their return. U.S. equity markets are broadly held among most working Americans. So on some level, if that is done through share buybacks, it will help a broad base of shareholders through those equity prices. Share buybacks sound morally questionable, but either way that money is spent, it helps the broad economy.

 

BFM: So the U.S. Fed is now buying junk bonds, why ETF for the first time. Why these instruments? What’s the significance of it?

 

TN: They can’t invest directly in equities. Some of this stuff is a signal that they want to do more in debt markets. They’re too big to help out small companies. They’ve put together this main street lending program as a way to lend to, quote, unquote, small companies. But those small companies are actually pretty big. Most of the corporate entities in the U.S. are actually pretty small. The Fed is trying to alleviate the market of certain risk assets. I believe and hope that banks will lend to small and medium-sized companies. They’re trying to take the risk out of the market and off the balance sheets of banks so that those banks will invest more directly in actual operating companies that need the money and not necessarily the risky, junk bond companies.

 

BFM: A little bit on oil. Saudi Arabia has called for larger production cuts. Will the whole OPEC plus community back them? Should we expect some pushback? And what does this look like for oil prices?

 

TN: I don’t think you’re going to get a lot of pushback. We have about three months of crude supply overhang right now. Given that economies are locked down, there’s really no way to burn that off. So the only way to get prices back up to a sustainable level is really to cut off supply. Until the largest producers really slow down their production, and we can burn off some of that supply overhang, we’re not going to see prices rise much.

 

Demand’s not necessarily coming about quickly. It’s going to be gradual. As demand gradually accelerates and supply declines gradually, hopefully, we’ll meet in the middle somewhere and get a price that’s a little bit more livable for oil producers globally.

 

 

Categories
QuickHit Visual (Videos)

QuickHit: There’s no going back for O&G sector jobs

In this week’s QuickHit episode, we have Vandana Hari, CEO and founder of Vanda Insights. She has 25 years of experience in the oil and gas and we asked what she expects to see happening in the near future. Will the oil industry recover, and when? Will bankruptcies and layoffs in big oil firms continue? And what can these companies and the government do to prevent the worst from happening?

 

We also discussed the oil and gas industry in the previous QuickHit episode on what companies can do right now to win post-COVID.

 

The views and opinions expressed in this QuickHit episode are those of the guests and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Complete Intelligence. Any content provided by our guests are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any political party, religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything.

 

Show Notes

 

TN: Today we’re joined by Vandana Hari of Vanda Insights. She is one of the top energy market experts in the world. Can you tell us a little bit about your firm and what you do?

 

VH: I have been looking at the oil markets for 25 years now. I started my firm Vanda Insights, which provides global oil markets macro analysis about 4 years ago. Prior to that, I worked with Platts, which is a very well-known name in energy commodities. I looked at the pricing of crude, refined products and various other energy commodities. I covered news and analysis.

 

TN: Great. So it’s obvious why you’re here. Crude markets are in crisis. The big, big question is how long are we in this kind of sub $20, sub $30 zone? Generally, what’s your expectation for the length of that super depressed pricing?

 

VH: It’s certainly not going to be a v-shaped recovery. As we speak Brent, a benchmark crude, is trading around $22 to $23 a barrel. US WTI, another benchmark, is trading around $12 or $13 dollars a barrel. Now where do I see these going?

 

As we look out into May, and I’m taking into consideration a couple of factors there. One is that we are starting to see gradual reopening of the economy in Europe, the worst-hit countries Italy, Spain, France, Germany, and then we have the US and as we were discussing offline, Texas is looking to reopen. Some of the other US states are going to reopen as well. The oil markets will have a very close eye on these re-openings because they have the answer to demand revival. We are coming out of an unforeseen, unprecedented trough in global oil demand close to 30%–30 million barrels per day–of global oil demand has been destroyed. How does this go into May?

 

I’m expecting a very extremely slow gradual revival. There may be a bit of an impetus and upward boost to oil prices from a gradual reopening. Nothing like what we are seeing in the stock markets, though. I think that’s where stocks and stock markets and oil are going to decouple and have already started to decouple from what I can see.

 

The other element is going to be supply. So OPEC and non-OPEC alliance of 23 members. 20 out of those 23 have committed to reducing production collectively by about 9.7 million barrels per day for May and June. Now typically, that sort of an announcement, which happened back on the 12th of April would have in itself boosted oil prices. But this one didn’t. Now clearly it is seen as too little too late. Nonetheless, it will start mopping up some surplus. It’s just that it will again be very slow in giving any sort of positive signals to oil because remember, oil has to work through nearly three months of oversupply and an overhang. So the glut is going to take its time to disappear.

 

TN: It’s a demand problem, right? It’s a supply problem, but you do have lack of demand from the government shutdowns, and then there is supply continuing to come online. All of this issue, it makes me wonder bout the shale companies. I’m curious about shale and kind of privately held independent oil companies. But I also want to learn a little bit about NOCs, the national oil companies. If you don’t mind telling us, what is your view on shale? And how do you expect the NOC’s to fare after this? Do you think they’ll thrive? Do you think they’ll cut the fat? Do you think they’ll change at all, or do you think they’ll just continue to lumber along as they have for the past whatever 70 years?

 

VH: The one characteristic of this crisis is that the pain in the oil sector is being felt and will continue to be felt across the spectrum, all the way, from oil production to refining to logistics. And we can talk about logistics in a little bit as well, because that’s doing quite well now because of storage demand.

 

However, the pain is going to be felt all the way down to refining and retail. It’s also going to be spread across geographies. It’s going to be spread across the size and nature of companies, whether you are an oil major or an independent or an NOC.

 

Let’s talk about shale first. It’s not just the OPEC, non-OPEC enforced mandated cuts, but I am expecting to see major decline starting to happen in North America, in Brazil and perhaps in other places like the North Sea as well. What happens in the US is going to be key because it’s the biggest oil producer, thanks to the shale boom. Shale contributes nearly 80% of US oil production. What happens to shale is also going to hold the key to US energy independence in the future.

 

I also look at a couple of very key metrics in the shale patch. One is the weekly rig count that I monitor from Baker Hughes. The other one is a weekly count of the fracturing fleet. So in the hydraulic fracturing, it is far more jaw-dropping decline in numbers that have seen. 70% drop in the frat fleets currently versus the start of this year.

 

What all of that tells me, and we’ve done some number crunching of our own, is we expect to see close to a million barrels per day of decline in June going up to 2 million barrels per day in July. That’s something that the oil market is not quite factoring in yet. Let’s remember that shale bounced back phenomenally after the 2014-16 downturn. That’s the impression that the market has. That shale may be down on its knees, but it will bounce back. But this time, I think it’s going to be very, very different. It’s going to be nothing like a bounce back.

 

As far as national oil companies are concerned, I look at them quite closely sitting here in Asia, they are a breed in themselves. A lot of them are lumbering giants, very slow to change. Most of them are directly controlled by the government or have majority state ownership.

 

Now, one of the things that I have noticed that is going in favor of the NOC’s, especially in Asia–countries like India, China, even places in Southeast Asia–is that they have a captive, domestic, fast-growing market. These NOCs also tend to be vertically integrated, so and more often than not, Asia is a net importer of crude. They have giant refining operations and relatively less upstream or oil and gas production operations.

 

Refining is also getting hit in the current downturn. What we see refiners doing, which includes these NOCs of course, are they’re cutting back out. Port refining margins are terrible. They have gone into negative for a lot of the major products. How will the NOCs survive this? I think they come out of this with a great deal of financial strain. We have to see to what extent they get government support. Some of the NOCs, unfortunately, especially in countries like Indonesia, also struggle with fuel subsidies. So those might fare even worse in the recovery mode. Overall, I think another transition that’s going to take hold for NOCs is the investment in technology: to be more efficient whether you’re producing or refining or retailing oil. And to be more environmentally-friendly with products.

 

TN: Do you think they’ll be more productive? Do you think they’ll invest in technology? Just across the board with oil and gas companies in general. Do you think they’ll actually invest in productivity or do you think they’ll just kind of hold their breath and buckle down like they have always done? Can they afford to do that this time?

 

VH: So when it comes to technology, specifically for cleaner energy, it tends to be driven more by regulation than by market forces or by just companies one day waking up and deciding “Hey, I’m going to be more environmentally friendly.” It just doesn’t happen that way, and that’s certainly true for NOCs. I think oil majors are under a slightly different kind of dynamic. We’ve seen, for instance, only in recent weeks, BP and Shell double-down on their commitment towards greener, cleaner energy. Of course, their feet are being held to the fire by their shareholders.

 

NOCs are in a very different environment. I think a lot will depend on to what extent governments in Asia re-commit themselves to the Paris Agreement, and are part of the global drive towards cleaner energy. We have seen in recent years visible, tangible air pollution has been a major concern in cities all the way from Delhi to Beijing.

 

TN: As we as we stop under COVID, you know, air quality has improved dramatically, right?

 

VH: Yes indeed. You have to think when people go back to the new normal, and they are out and about and the pollution levels increase, what will that do in terms of pressure on these companies? So overall, I think the pressure from the environment will remain, to adopt new technologies, to move towards cleaner fuels.

 

Pressure from oil prices to be more efficient may be the case for NOCs. I see that a little bit less, and they’ll have to just pick and choose basically, right? But your big question, where does the money come from? I think that remains a major, major issue. Will they be able to raise money? So we’ve seen in the latest crisis, a few oil companies that are well-regarded, oil majors have tapped banks and raised loans. What I would personally love to see is for these NOCs to come out there a little more aggressively, because after all, they will be back in favor, thanks to the captive market. So I’d love to see them raise money with bonds, bank loans, or whatever, because they will need money from outside. There certainly won’t be enough to dip into their pockets.

 

TN: Yeah. The national accounts from any of these countries can’t really handle it. So that’s a great point.

 

We’re running long, but I don’t want to stop this conversation. So normally, I’d cut this off. But let me ask you one last question, okay? I live in Houston, Texas, and oil and gas town. We’ve seen some layoffs. But we actually haven’t seen a lot yet. You don’t live here so, you know, you can give us an unbiased view of the energy sector. What do you expect, and it’s not just Houston, of course, it’s the energy sector globally. Are we at the midpoint of energy layoffs, are we early, are we late? I mean, how bad do you expect it to get?

 

VH: I think we are probably at the beginning of it. So we have started seeing bankruptcies in the shale sector. Well, to be clear, the bankruptcies in the shale sector accelerated even in 2019. Shareholders and lenders have been becoming disenchanted with the sector for a while. But I do expect bankruptcies to set a record unfortunately in 2020, perhaps spilling over into 2021 as well.

 

But when I look at the US energy sector, I’m also paying attention to a lot of news about the US government making a lot of noise about wanting to help the energy sector. So whether it be, opening up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, allowing producers to store oil there or to giving them loans from the Fed’s Main Street Lending program. All of that, remains to be seen, and we’ve heard some ideas about banning or putting tariffs on OPEC crude and so on, which probably won’t happen. But I think some of these other measures will happen.

 

My concern is that for most companies, it will probably be too little too late. So I do expect a huge consolidation, and unfortunately a lot of layoffs. People will just have to reinvent themselves, learn new skills, because there may be no going back to oil sector jobs.

 

TN: I think you’re right. I think it’s a generational change. I think it’s a really tough time, and you know these people, it’s nothing they deserve, it’s nothing they’ve even done. But it’s just a very tough global situation where supply outweighs demand. It’s that simple.

 

So Vandana, this has been amazing. I haven’t done any of these interviews that are this long. I’m so grateful to get this much of your time. Thanks you and I’m hoping maybe we can revisit with you in a few months see where things are and take stock of what the future holds?

 

VH: It’s been my pleasure, Tony and I’d love to do this again and thank you to our viewers who’ve stayed with us all the way to the end. I hope it has been worth it.

Categories
Podcasts

In America, the economy sinks but markets surge. What gives?

 

BFM 89.9: The Business Station speaks with CEO and founder of Complete Intelligence, Tony Nash, to explain why the markets have surged and earnings seem resilient despite the US GDP falling to negative 4.8 percent.

 

Produced by: Michael Gong

Presented by: Noelle Lim, Khoo Hsu Chuang

 

Listen to the podcast, originally published in BFM 89.9.

 

 

Podcast Notes

 

BFM: We are talking to Tony Nash, the chief executive of Complete Intelligence on the American markets. Tony, thank you for talking to us. American GDP shrank by 4.8% overnight, the steepest fall since the last recession. What did you think of these numbers in terms of what you expected prior?

 

TN: It was a bit worse than many people thought. But it wasn’t as bad as it could have been. That was the thought that many people had, and markets tend to be looking forward. So looking at Q2, we now have big states like Texas and Florida and others that have started to open up fairly aggressively. So markets themselves are looking forward. And markets are looking pretty favorably on some of the opening up lines.

 

BFM: Fed Chair Jerome Powell is calling for more action from the government. What are the options and what do you hope to see?

 

TN: Well, there are options for more fiscal stimulus. The federal government could do things like an infrastructure plan. Two years ago, in his State of the Union address, the President talked about a $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan for the U.S. They could do something like that. The individual states, which really imposed a lot of these restrictions, they really haven’t had to pay up much aside from kind of the standard unemployment benefits.

 

So the states could pony up a bit more cash than they have. They’ve really been relying on the federal government to pay for this whole thing. And they haven’t really had any accountability for the decisions that they’ve made. So I think the states really need to pay up a bit in terms of fiscal stimulus.

 

BFM: The Fed has backstopped the corporate bond market in the fixed income market for some time. Obviously, you can see that exemplified in the six and a bit trillion dollars of debt on the balance sheet. Do you think they’ll come a time when the Fed backstops the equity market as well?

 

TN: I don’t know. There’s been talk about that, they’ve certainly done that in Japan and the BOJ owns a lot of the ETFs in Japan. I don’t necessarily see that happening in the U.S. because it’s a door that once you open, it’s very, very difficult to close.

 

It’s the same question with negative interest rates. And so these are activities that once you start, they tend to be very, very hard to stop. And most of the market observers don’t really want that to happen.

 

 

BFM: Q1 GDP came in minus 4.8 percent. But the consensus estimate of economist on Bloomberg reckoned there’s going to be a minus 26 percent drop in Q2. And even more astonishingly, I think a nine percent improvement in Q3. Do those two numbers strike you as a little bit extreme?

 

TN: Q2 seems a little underestimated, meaning I don’t necessarily think it’s going to be that bad. Q3? It’s possible it could be nine percent. I think given how negative it could be in Q2, you could definitely see a rebound like that. But that’s just a base effect in terms of the quarter on quarter growth. It’s not necessarily a dramatic year on year growth. In fact, year on year, that’s actually negative and a negative print. One would hope that if Q1 and Q2 are so bad that you would see a print that’s at least nine percent in Q3.

 

 

BFM: Yet markets charge ahead despite relatively bad macro data. What is this optimism based on?

 

TN: Seeing the states open, seeing some realistic plans being put together to do this, there’s a balance of doing it aggressively and carefully. I know that sounds a little silly, but we’re seeing some real push by Americans to want to open. So the state governments are going to probably do things a little more aggressively than they initially wanted.

 

There was some concern that Q1 earnings would be worse than they are. Meaning that companies may try to pack all their negative news into Q1 in hopes that Q2 will look slightly better. But sure, they’ve packed some of the negative news in Q1. But some of the Q1 earnings haven’t been as bad as people had feared. So markets are looking forward. And in the U.S., it’s a flight to safety.

 

We’re also seeing on a relative basis, U.S. markets perform fairly well as, say, non-dollar assets or overseas dollar assets come into the US.

 

 

BFM: Microsoft, Facebook, and Tesla all came out last night all the better than expected. Microsoft showing some picture of health in the corporate sector. Tesla, obviously, where car sales are concerned, then Facebook where the ad consumer market is concerned. Can we read this optimism into Q2 and possibly even into Q3?

 

TN: I think certainly Facebook and Microsoft, with people sitting at home, those two will probably do quite well in Q2. Tesla? I wouldn’t expect Tesla to do well in Q2. Auto sales have been way down in Q2. And with oil and gas prices as low as they are, the substitutionality effect of electronics from internal combustion engine cars, the incentive is not as high as it once was. So I don’t necessarily see Tesla’s performance to be better than expected. But then again, Tesla bulls are Tesla bulls. They’ll buy, and they’ll pump up the price regardless of how they perform in real life.

 

BFM: So you don’t expect this to be a broader momentum for the broader market?

 

TN: Anything focused on productivity, anything focused on virtual activity, will do very, very well. But things like car sales, again, they’ve been really difficult. Anything around entertainment or group, physical, in-person, entertainment, obviously, it’s just not possible or hasn’t been possible for those to grow. So those are going to be really, really hard for people to get optimistic about.

 

On the other hand, you’ve seen, energy firms actually performing really well today. The major oil and gas firms and U.S. markets performed really well. Part of that is on the back of gossip that the U.S. Treasury may come to the rescue with some preferential financing for American oil and gas firms. Whether or not that’s going to happen, we don’t really know yet. But that may come to pass, which may help some of these firms.

 

BFM: Talking about the oil industry, are there any structural changes they can make to improve their prospects of survival? Some of these oil majors that you spoke of?

 

TN: Oil and gas firms are incredibly inefficient. There are a lot of productivity changes the oil and gas firms could make, whether they’re NOCs, the national oil companies, or the private sector majors. Oil and gas workers tend to make a lot more than other sectors.

 

They tend to be more bloated, so there are a lot of productivity measures that can be taken. For NOCs, for the national oil companies, there can be more activities taken to make them more accountable than markets. And so I think in Malaysia, you’re lucky. Petronas performs pretty well.

 

But other NOCs don’t perform as well and you can see some major changes in terms of fiscal accountability. Assuming oil prices stay lower, accountability to the central governments and performance rather than the subsidies coming from central governments, as we’ve seen in the past, may come to pass in some countries if they can’t really afford to continue to subsidize these governments. Because, you know, we’re seeing the emerging market and middle-income country currencies come under a lot of pressure versus the U.S. dollar. If you’re seeing energy revenues decline and you’re seeing pressure on the currency, it’s really hard for some of these governments to subsidize their national oil companies.

 

Categories
Editorials

What nowcasts and unique datasets can tell tech about the coming economic shockwave

This article about nowcast is originally published in Protocol.com at this link https://www.protocol.com/nowcasts-forecast-economic-downturn-coronavirus

 

We are living through an economic event with few historical parallels. There is no playbook for shutting down many of the world’s largest economies, nor starting them back up again. But data-mining tech startups are searching out insights in unlikely places, trying to make sense of the global pandemic.

 

These companies are mining specialized datasets, from the prices of beef rounds and chuck, to traffic levels, to the volume of crude oil stored in tanks. Using a mix of machine-learning techniques, they’re spinning this data into “nowcasts”: small, nearly real-time insights that can help analyze the present or very near future. They’re far faster, more granular and more esoteric than the monthly or quarterly data drops provided by the U.S. government. Nowcasts originated in meteorology but are now being applied in economics, and the unpredictability of weather has never been more relevant to the economic outlook.

 

To glean key tech industry takeaways from the coming shifts, Protocol chatted with three data tech startups about the niche datasets they use to analyze economic events and consumer behavior.

 

One of them, Complete Intelligence, has attempted to build a proxy for the global economy that includes market data from over 700 commodities, equity indexes and currencies. Orbital Insight uses global satellite imagery to gather data on large-scale changes in traffic patterns, the business of marine ports, the movement of airplanes, and pings from cell phones and connected cars. And Gro Intelligence specializes in data related to global agriculture: crops and commodities, foreign exchange rates, and the supply and demand of food products.

 

Since these firms tend to shy away from spinning their nowcasts into takeaways (leaving that to their clients), Protocol also enlisted economists to help analyze the data and compare findings with traditional models.

 

Here’s what may be in store for tech over the coming months.

 

Top-level takeaways

 

The U.S. economy was relatively strong going into the outbreak of COVID-19. And that’s a key differentiator between this pandemic and past downturns: This is, first and foremost, a health crisis that’s spilling over into the economy — meaning that how well the economy recovers will depend heavily on what we learn about and how we handle the virus.

 

The wide range of responses to the pandemic — differing by country and, especially in the U.S., by region — mean that economic recovery will likely be protracted and uneven.

 

The U.S. is currently seeing this play out first hand in the way various states have implemented social-distancing measures. Gro Intelligence’s data showed that prices of beef rounds and chuck — which are more prevalent in home cooking — were at all-time highs in March as restaurants shut down across the country. But by using cell phone ping data, Orbital Insight found that things weren’t quite so uniform. It zeroed in on three cities representing three different stages of the pandemic — San Francisco, New York and New Orleans — then measured the percentage of time people stayed within 100 meters of their home each day. During the second half of March, the average resident of New York stayed home close to 85% of the time; in New Orleans, it was around 75%.

 

“When there is uneven distancing, there will be uneven recovery from the health crisis and therefore the economic crisis,” Krishna Kumar, senior economist and director of international research at RAND, told Protocol over email. “This might wreak havoc with cross-state goods, people movement and domestic travel.”

A heat map of San Francisco

San Francisco’s downtown is normally crowded with people, as the yellow areas on this map indicate. But after a shelter-in-place was ordered in mid-March, business districts emptied out.Image: Courtesy of Orbital Insight

 

Combine that with the far-reaching policy rollouts in the U.S. — such as individual stimulus checks, SBA loans and Federal Reserve actions — and there are a host of variables that could make the next few months difficult to predict. The stimulus may help spark a quicker recovery, but that trajectory depends on how long the downturn lasts. Experts agree that too much help could launch another crisis.

 

“A key reason for a more rapid decline in the unemployment rate from the near-term peak is the unprecedented size and speed of the fiscal and monetary response to this adverse shock, which contains measures aimed at maintaining payrolls,” researchers wrote in an April report from Deutsche Bank shared with Protocol, which addresses GDP model implications for the U.S. unemployment rate. The report forecasts the labor market returning to more normal levels of unemployment by the end of 2021 (4.4% by the last quarter of 2021 and 4% a year later), while the protracted scenario suggests the labor market won’t normalize until well into 2023.

 

Corporate debt levels hit an all-time high of $13.5 trillion at the end of 2019, and economists worry that too large a government bailout could spark a default crisis down the road — or even a corporate version of the subprime mortgage crisis.

 

“There’s a danger that we can lend carelessly,” Kumar said. “We just have to be prudent in bailing out the businesses that have future prospects and have returns to show.” He added that after the 2008-’09 financial crisis, banks in China lent heavily and, 12 years later, the time of reckoning might have finally come for those loans. “We can learn from that and make sure that we don’t end up having a state of default.”

 

Complete Intelligence’s algorithms suggest that deflation is likely already happening in China and parts of Europe as a result of COVID-19. But the data also posits that the U.S. may avoid outright deflation. The Federal Reserve has “taken unprecedented steps to inject liquidity — it stands ready to buy even junk bonds,” Kumar said. “These steps are even stronger than the ones implemented during the Great Recession of 2008. At least for now, it doesn’t look like the liquidity pipes are freezing.”

 

Oil storage statistics can also signify broader consumer economic indicators like consumption, and as of April 14, there’d been a 5% increase in crude oil stored in floating-roof tanks around the world over the past 30 days alone. (The startup applies computer vision to satellite imagery to analyze the tanks’ shadows to glean their volume.) While lower prices are good for consumers, they’ll also add to deflationary pressures, according to Kumar — and the U.S. energy sector will take a hit, likely putting a dent in GDP.

 

And a GDP hit likely translates to an impact on the already-growing unemployment rate. Using Okun’s law, a common rule of thumb for the relationship between gross national product and unemployment rate, the Deutsche Bank researchers worked out an updated economic forecast. “Our baseline parameterization,” the researchers wrote, “has the unemployment rate peak at over 17% in April — a new post-World War II high, before falling to around 7% by year end. Under a protracted pandemic scenario, the unemployment rate remains above 10% through all of 2020.”

 

What tech leaders should know

 

For one, expect less pricing power and lower margins. With the businesses shuttering across the country and high unemployment numbers, consumers by and large will have less to spend with. This could lead to supply surpluses, and in the world of tech, electronics manufacturers in particular will need to cut down on production, said Tony Nash, founder and CEO of Complete Intelligence. That will likely hit China, where a considerable amount of tech manufacturing still takes place, hard. As executives calibrate capacity and inventory, production runs will likely shrink alongside pricing power.

 

What happens in the U.S. may not affect a company as much as what happens in the global market. That could be especially true for tech companies with traditionally large sales volumes in Europe and Asia. Complete Intelligence’s machine-learning platform predicts that consumer price indexes in Europe will fall into negative territory later this year, but that deflation won’t hit the U.S. as hard as it will Europe and Asia.

 

“When China shut down, Apple had to shutter many of its stores, and Apple was one of the earliest companies in the country to feel the pain of the virus — because of the global output,” Kumar said.

 

COVID-19’s spread across the globe has come in waves, and that makes it difficult to predict its effect on the global supply chain. But experts say one time-honored strategy remains true: Diversification is key. And individual companies’ rates of recovery may depend largely on how localized their supply chains are.

 

That’s partly due to manufacturing delays that could stem from additional waves of the virus in other countries. But countries’ self-interests also play a role, Kumar said. “After 2008, many countries enacted protectionist measures,” he said. “And if they’re not able to import easily, first it’s going to increase the cost of our imports, and second, we might not even have the local capacity.” For example, there are almost no smartphone and laptop screens manufactured in the U.S.

 

We’ll also likely see tech companies prioritize different geographical supply chain footprints for future generations of products. Alongside this shift, tech giants will also likely take a harder look at which jobs they’re able to automate.

 

“We’re hearing more and more electronics manufacturers moving their manufacturing out of China, and what I’m seeing in data especially — at least for the U.S. — is moving to Mexico,” Nash said. “We don’t expect people to necessarily move their current generation of goods out of China, but as they move to new generations of goods, they’ll look for other places to de-risk those supply chains. So they may have an Asia version of that product that they continue to make there, but they may have regional manufacturing footprints for North America, for Europe and so on, so they don’t have to be as reliant.”

 

The shifts won’t just affect how things are made but also what’s being made in the first place. Necessity is the mother of all invention, as the old adage goes, and there’s a reason why so many side-gig-friendly platforms like Airbnb and Uber sprung from the last financial crisis.

 

And that’s not to mention the overhaul of how we work that many are already experiencing. We may see even traditional companies increase leniency on existing remote work and parental-leave policies, according to Kumar.

 

Conflicting recovery forecasts

 

Predictions of what recovery will look like are akin to trying to predict snowstorms in the summer.

 

Gro Intelligence CEO Sara Menker told Protocol that the U.S. could see a V-shaped recovery, similar to China’s, but that’s more likely the sooner recovery begins. Menker does concede that due to the two countries’ substantially different strategies addressing the pandemic, it’s difficult to know when we’ll be on the up-and-up again. One insight supporting the beginnings of recovery in China: the price of white feather broiler chickens. They’re a breed served almost exclusively in restaurants, and the prices now seem to be entering a V-shaped recovery after a precipitous decline. You can even track it against the reopening of Apple stores: Gro’s data shows white feather broiler prices in China started to rebound around March 6 and a clear price spike around time Apple stores reopened in China on March 13.

 

On the other hand, Orbital Insight CEO James Crawford predicts a more linear recovery, based partly on satellite imagery of roads in China’s urban centers. “In Beijing, for example, we’re not seeing a V-shaped recovery in traffic patterns,” he told Protocol. “It’s been very much a linear return, with less than half the cars on the roads now compared to pre-COVID activity levels. Although the evolution of shelter-in-place was and will be different stateside, businesses should plan for a gradual rebuild in activity as confidence grows among wary consumers.”

 

And, using global economic data like CPIs and predictions surrounding the strength of the U.S. dollar, Nash forecasts a slower recovery. “Whether you’re looking at equity markets or commodity markets, what we’re seeing from our platform is a slow return,” he said. Nash predicts volatility over the next four or five months along with the beginnings of a sustainable uptick in July — though, he said, that won’t necessarily mean a straight upward line, as there are a number of other consumption considerations involved: whether school will start again in the fall, whether football season will be reinstated, whether people can trick or treat in October, whether there are holiday parties in December. “That will define the rate at which we come back,” he said.

 

The true shape of the recovery to come is probably somewhere in the middle, according to Kumar. It’s likely too optimistic to expect a V-shaped recovery, but the more pessimistic prediction — several months of stagnation — “assumes that we can never get a grip on this disease, and given that social distancing seems to be broadly working, I think that’s too pessimistic,” Kumar said. And that’s not to mention the stimulus boost enacted by the federal government. The spark here wasn’t a financial system collapse; it was an economic shutdown. He predicts a more “checkmark-shaped” recovery, with a precipitous drop followed by a less steep, drawn-out upward slope.

 

But rolling back social distancing guidelines too early could sideline recovery as soon as it begins. Some scientists believe the potential impact of colder temperatures on the virus’ spread could lead to a second wave of infections in the fall, and even optimistic projections suggest a vaccine won’t be available until 2021.

 

“The uncertainty that we see in the health care crisis, you’re going to keep seeing in the economy,” Kumar said. “You can get sick very fast, but you’re going to recover much more slowly from your sickness. And that’s what’s going to dictate the economic pattern.”

Categories
Podcasts

Why Bank Stocks are Falling?

BFM 89.9 discusses with Tony Nash about why bank stocks are falling — the US markets were dragged down by financial stocks as big banks JP Morgan, Wells Fargo and Citigroup reported their first-quarter earnings.

 

Find this podcast originally published at the BFM: The Business Station.

 

 

Show Notes:

BFM: Right now, taking a look at the wider global markets, we speak to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete intelligence. Tony, thank you for taking the time to speak to us today. The Fed book was released showing that almost all economic data activity has stopped and the question is how difficult will it be to restart it? Do you expect even more contraction?

 

TN: Very difficult. I mean, as we’ve talked about before, this is a government-mandated shut down, so it’s going to take a lot of fiscal stimulus to get things restarted. That’s why you’ve seen governments come out with such large stimulus programs. We don’t believe it’s a situation where central banks can wave a magic wand and use monetary policy to get things started. It’s not that kind of problem. This is a problem that has to be addressed with fiscal stimulus and direct spending from governments.

 

BFM: Is there enough fiscal stimulus so far?

 

TN: No. We’re two weeks into the second quarter, and when we look at all of the country, where the orders to not work are in place, it’s going to be at least two to three to four, maybe six weeks before some countries are up and running. And because a this is government-mandated order, those governments have to find a way to compensate individuals and companies for those close-down orders. Otherwise, we’d have catastrophic economic contraction. Spending is a key component of the GDP calculation. So if you count “don’t spending” as a substitutional factor to consumption and investment, you can still grow your economy or have it not contract as much as it would. Governments are feverishly trying to find find where they can spend, but I think many governments don’t really have the money. They accumulated so much debt over the last 10 or 20 years, they don’t have the money to be able to stimulate the way they need to.

 

BFM: Tony, Mexico’s been downgraded by Fitch to just one or just one level of Junk. Do you think this portends a rash of similar downgrades by other agencies?

 

TN: Oh, sure, absolutely. I think emerging and middle income markets are going to have a tough year. And that’s the case because we have a strong US Dollar and are likely going to have a stronger US Dollar. And on a relative basis, emerging market currencies are going to have a real uphill battle. So those emerging markets that are export-dependent will have a tough time, as well as we see consumption collapse. So I don’t want to sound entirely pessimistic, and it’s actually quite hopeful once we hit, say, July or August. But, Q2 is a very, very difficult situation. And the quicker governments can get their countries moving from an economic perspective, the better off we are.

 

BFM: So Tony, let’s move back to the US for a bit. The banks, the big banks, have started releasing the Q1 results with JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and Citi or reporting significantly lower profits and more particularly huge provisions there, some as five times more than usual. What does this tell you about the broader economy? What are they expecting at least?

 

TN: Well, we’ve been trying to tackle all the bad news now. That’s for Q2. They can say, we accounted for that before and they can report better numbers in Q3. And this is all relative. A lot of companies are going to report horrific numbers for Q2. But, you know, the government is coming in and encourage loan repayment to be delayed and backed up the number of loans as well.

 

So should these provisions be larger than they are or as large as they are? Maybe that’s a prudent thing to do. But it looks really like there, you know, these provisions should have been in Q2, not necessarily in Q1. So I think they’re being conservative and I think that’s fine. But I think to some extent it’s really you just tacking all the bad news or what they expect to be the bad news into Q1 so that they can look better later in the year.

 

BFM: Yeah, that’s always what this was about to ask you, actually, Tony. Do you think they’re trying to pack as much bad news in this quarter as possible? Yes. But I think on on the call yesterday with Bank of America’s chief financial officer, he also seemed a bit, well, at sea in terms of really putting a finger on exactly what kind of quantums provisions might lead to the next quarter. Do you think they really know what’s happening around the corner, do you think?

 

TN: I don’t think they know. And I know that, the US banks are really, say take serious problems with like with PPP, these are small business loans. They’re just overwhelmed with the number of applications for these small business loans. That loan processing is truly inefficient and it’s not all the banks’ fault because it was, the US department pretty pretty quickly. So they’re kind of doing the best they can, but those are not their most efficient operations and we’re having to just adjust to where the attention is.

So I think they don’t know how bad it is. Until we know when some of these stay at home orders will be lifted, nobody really knows. And it’s the same thing in Asia as it is here. You’d see all these kids schooled, and it’s a problem, and so until it’s lifted, we really don’t know the full extent of the economic damage.

 

BFM: Well, speaking about Asia, even after better than expected March trade figures, People’s Bank of China cut medium term lending rates by 20 basis points. What do you read from what they just did?

 

TN: Honestly, guys, a 20 basis points isn’t going to do anything. I mean, nobody is going to take a loan out because it’s 20 basis points cheaper. What China needs is a very large fiscal stimulus package to make sure that their factory workers and other certain workers are given, maybe not a full wage, but enough of a wage to continue to get by. Our major worry for China this year is a very sharp contraction of industrial production, meaning manufacturing. We’re looking for contraction in exports starting in February, going through March and April, May, simply because the consumption markets are not there.

 

There is a global demand problem. So there is a demand problem domestically in China, but there’s also a demand problem in the rest of the world. So how can China, which is an assembly point and a maker of finished goods, how can China have kind of relatively normal export data when the rest of the world isn’t buying. It’s just not possible. So, you know, what we’re worried about is the industrial production contraction in China and we’re worried about deflation in China.

 

We think deflation will be worse in China than in any other parts of the world because of the dependence on manufacturing. So it’s manufacturing insures on making stuff, their workers aren’t working, and so they don’t have the money to buy stuff. And so that creates a huge gap in demand, which is likely deflationary, which is a big, big worry for us.

 

BFM: I’m wondering, though, I mean, if it’s not likely to move the needle by too much, why would it cut interest rates?

 

TN: I think a lot of central banks right now are going through the motions, hoping to kind of ride on the coattails of the big moves at the ECB, BOJ and Fed are doing, right? PBOC is is taking some big moves. So I’m not saying that they’re not doing their part. They’re definitely playing a part. But little moves like this, I think with what we’ve seen is generally a big action is taken. We saw this with the first Fed action and so does in the central bank with the OPEC move over the weekend, right? A big action is taking, and the markets really just going on, they don’t care that a big action has been taken. But what happens is a series of smaller actions are then taken, and markets take notice. So if anything, I think there’s 20 basis point cut is in one action among many that the PBOC is planning so that they can gradually feed that market expectation.

 

But again, the markets are really bored and not satisfied by a single big move. They’re looking for a series of moves, can be satisfied and to gradually kind of re-course positive expectations into markets. But 20 basis points is not going to do it, especially when you’re looking at a fall in manufacturing or fall in wages, a fall in consumption, and potential deflation. Nobody is going to take out a market rate loan when they have all these other worries to tick down the list.

 

BFM: All right. Thank you so much for spending some time with us this morning. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence.