Seeking Alpha

Atle Willems, CFA's  Instablog

Atle Willems, CFA
Send Message
Atle Willems, CFA, is an equity investor with a long-term view investing in undervalued listed shares with solid operational track records and sensible balance sheets. He holds a master's degree in finance from Nottingham University Business School, a bachelor's degree in business... More
My company:
Liabridge
My blog:
EcPoFi - Economics, Politics, Finance
View Atle Willems, CFA's Instablogs on:
  • The U.S. Stock Market Risk Indicator, September 2014

    The U.S. stock market risk indicator for September declined slightly from the August all-time high. This slight decline was largely driven by a declining stock market and a money supply growth rate which declined at a slower pace than it did in August.

    The indicator continues to signal that future stock market returns will be very poor at best.

    (click to enlarge)

    Read this article for back ground information.

    Disclosure: The author is short MYY.

    Tags: Economy, Stocks, Macro
    Oct 01 8:27 AM | Link | Comment!
  • The U.S. Stock Market Is Running Out Of Monetary Rocket Fuel

    Originally published on EcPoFi 20 September 2014.

    On Wednesday the Federal Reserve announced it would taper its asset purchases by another $10 billion starting next month. Fed monthly asset purchases will by then have been reduced from $85 billion a month in December last year to "just" $15 billion from October, a reduction of 82.4%.

    (click to enlarge)

    This Fed taper is greatly reducing the overall monetary stimuli. The U.S. stock market is now therefore rapidly running out of the monetary rocket fuel that contributed to its rather smooth, and ever continuing, surge since March 2009.

    Adding the increases in Fed assets and the Austrian True Money Supply, the year on year growth rate in the total monetary stimuli has now dropped from 15.8% in October last year to the current 11.2%. The growth rate will continue to drop fast going forward unless the Fed reverses its current policy course.

    (click to enlarge)

    As a result of the Fed taper, the percentage point change in the total monetary stimuli growth rate is now currently 2.7 percentage points lower than at the same stage last year (11.2% vs 13.9%). Furthermore, the growth rate has now dropped for nine consecutive weeks, hardly good news for the stock market.

    (click to enlarge)

    Disclosure: The author is short MYY.

    Sep 26 4:10 AM | Link | Comment!
  • The Short Version Of The "Austrian" True Money Supply (TMS), As Of 25 August 2014

    As I've mentioned on quite a few occasions before, the drop in the 5-year growth rate (both the year on year growth rate and the percentage point change in the growth rate) has for some time resembled the decline leading up to the 2008 banking crisis (as indicated by the circles in the chart above). To highlight this resemblance, the chart below depicts the percentage point change in the growth rate compared to last year for the periods 24 December 2001 to 11 September 2006 and 1 August onward.

    (click to enlarge)

    The chart not only demonstrates the resemblance between the percentage point change during the two periods, it also shows that this time around the growth rate is declining faster than it did during the 2001 to 2006 period. Even if the rate of growth continues to decline, the U.S. economy might still avoid some kind of a crisis for many more months if the 2001-2006 period is any guide to the future.

    Now, nobody should expect the economy to react to this decline in the growth rate of the money supply in exactly the same way as it did last time around when it culminated in a full-fledged banking crisis. But regular readers of this blog will be familiar with the notion that the money supply does not have to fall in absolute terms to trigger an economic reaction (i.e. a recession or depression). Rather, all that is needed to provoke a reaction is a decline in the rate of growth. As Hayek pointed out in his book Prices and Production:

    If the results of our theoretical analysis were to be subjected to statistical investigation, it is not the connection between changes in the volume of bank credit and movements in the price level which would have to be explored. Investigation would have to start on the one hand from alterations in the rate of increase and decrease in the volume and turnover of bank deposits and, on the other, from the extent of production in those industries which as a rule expand excessively as a result of credit injection. Every increase in the circulating media [money supply] brings about the same effect, so long as each stands in the same proportion to the existing volume; and only an increase in this proportion makes possible a further increase in investment activity. On the other hand, every diminution of the rate of increase in itself causes some portion of existing investment, made possible through credit creation, to become unprofitable.

    It follows that a curve exhibiting the monetary influences on the course of the cycle ought to show, not the movements in the total volume of circulating media, but the alteration in the rate of change of this volume.

    Hayek's theories and those of the Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT) in general are the reasons why this weekly report looks at the growth rate of the money supply on a weekly basis, including the rate of change.

    Keen readers and students of the ABCT should however be aware that things are somewhat different this time around: rapid bank credit expansion for a long period of time is what fueled the money supply growth leading up to the 2008 banking crisis. Since then however, money supply growth has been driven by the Fed monetizing government debt. The difference hence lies in how the new money has entered the economy and who as a result has become dependent on ever new injections of money. This is key in identifying bubbles. For example, as the U.S. government has expanded rapidly over the last six years (yes, it expanded before this as well), the period since 2008 might be identified much more as a period of over-consumption rather than businesses malinvesting funds (as was a dominant feature of the last bust, e.g. housing). What we do know however is that independent on how the new money enters the economy, the new money is quickly dispersed in the economy and does alter economic structures and prices, including asset prices, in a way that would not happen if money was not created out of thin air. The stock market is an obvious example (e.g. here), or as Fritz Machlup explained in 1931 (The Stock Market, Credit, and Capital Formation),

    "A continual [nominal] rise of stock prices cannot be explained by improved conditions of production or by increased voluntary savings, but only by an inflationary credit [money] supply"

    (click to enlarge)

    However, bank lending this year has shot upwards once again and, as I've written earlier, the U.S. economy is once again entering the situation the ABCT attempts to explain; an increase in credit unbacked by a commensurate amount of prior savings granted to businesses (e.g. here).

    (click to enlarge)

    This report is issued weekly, normally on Fridays. Visit the short version of the Austrian True Money Supply archive here.

    Disclosure: The author is short MYY.

    Sep 11 4:47 PM | Link | Comment!
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

More »

Latest Comments


Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.