Showing posts with label Market. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Market. Show all posts

Sunday, July 15, 2012

Analysis: In the U.S. housing market, recovery or Lost Decade?

(Reuters) - The worst U.S. housing crisis since the Great Depression has been declared over. But is it?

What some of Wall Street's forecasts for a recovery may be underestimating are tectonic shifts in the U.S. economy that make the housing market a different place from a decade ago.

Record levels of student debt, 15 years of flat incomes and the fact that nearly half of homeowners are effectively stranded in their houses look likely to weigh on prices into the indefinite future.

Several housing experts have said the market is in danger of drifting for years. In a bleaker scenario, the fragile U.S. economic recovery could slip back into recession if Europe's crisis deepens or the political impasse in Washington triggers a new budget crisis, putting the housing market at risk again.

"We've gone through half of a lost decade since the crisis started in 2007," said Robert Shiller, co-founder of the Case-Shiller U.S. housing price index and an economics professor at Yale University.

The so-called Lost Decade in Japan occurred after the speculative bubble in the 1980s, when abnormally low interest rates fueled soaring property values. The ensuing crash has continued to afflict the Japanese economy ever since.

"It seems to me that a plausible forecast is, given our inability to do stimulus now, for Japan-like slow growth for the next five years in the economy. Therefore, if there is an increase in home prices, it's modest," said Shiller.

A Reuters poll published on Friday showed most economists think the U.S. housing market has now bottomed and prices should rise nearly 2 percent in 2013 after a flat 2012.

GENERATION STAGNATION

Consider the plight of college graduates, who go on to become the biggest group of first-time U.S. home buyers.

Many graduate into a climate of falling wages and soaring rents, members of the most indebted generation in history who owe an average $25,000 in student loans.

They elbow their way into a labor market so rough that the number of people with jobs is at a 30-year low, health and retirement benefits are shrinking and the young workers face a greater chance of losing their jobs than any generation before.

For Steve Blitz, chief economist at ITG Investment Research in New York, the housing market improvement has gotten as good as it can without more improvement in the labor market.

"I don't see it worsening unless the economy goes back into a recession, but I think it's more a case of stagnating," Blitz said.

It is not just the employment picture that makes the prospect of a housing recovery so precarious.

Housing prices and income usually move in lock step. But real median household income is stuck at the same level as during the Clinton Administration in 1996 -- at about $49,000.

That means the housing market will remain troubled for "an extended period of time," according to Sam Khater, a senior economist at housing data company CoreLogic.

"It's not about job growth. It's about income growth," says Khater.

Back in 1996, the median home price was around $80,000. When house prices soared to $200,000 in 2006 -- the market peak -- it was due to jumbo mortgages, not jumbo pay raises.

Banks lured consumers with low interest rates that later turned much more expensive and blew up monthly payments, eventually helping to cause the housing crash.

On the one hand, the housing implosion has created a bonanza for those buyers who can take advantage of it: U.S. real estate is now 36 percent cheaper than in 2006.

In nearly every city, it now costs less to own than to rent.

But many would-be homeowners cannot buy. Lenders have virtually locked them out of the market by denying them mortgages, according to statistics from the Federal Housing Administration and a recent Morgan Stanley research report.

In May, consumers able to close on a mortgage had, on average, a near-perfect credit score. They could afford a 19 percent down payment on their new home. And they were still on track to spend no more 24 percent of their income on their new house, according to the Ellie Mae Origination Insight Report.

"Most of the population can't meet current mortgage underwriting standards," says trade publication Inside Mortgage Finance founder Guy Cecala. "They're getting eliminated before they even get to the door."

Some believe this credit freeze is only going to worsen. Washington is considering new mortgage regulations that would shift more responsibility for bad loans away from taxpayers and investors and toward banks.

"If all these new rules that Washington is talking about are put into place, it would be even harder to get a mortgage," said Brian Lindy, an analyst at Amherst Securities Group, which released a report in May entitled "The Coming Crisis in Credit Availability."

Even for those who can afford to, buying a house can be a harrowing experience. After watching a nation crash and burn, plenty of people remain in shock. They are loath to take the risk anytime soon.

As research firm S&P Capital IQ's Robert Kaiser said at a recent housing conference: "Consumer confidence simply hasn't recovered enough to support the housing market."

BUSTED CONVEYOR BELT

The housing market, as economists often like to point out, is a conveyor belt. A homeowner sells a house. The new buyer moves in, and the seller buys a better house. In time, that buyer in turn sells, and buys a better house.

Normally these so-called move-up buyers are the housing market's biggest consumer group. They are what keep that conveyor belt moving.

Today the apparatus is broken.

That's because about half of homeowners with mortgages simply can't move.

Twenty-four percent owe more on their houses than they are worth. Another 25 percent are equity poor, meaning they have less than the 20 percent of equity required for a down payment to trade up to a new home, according to housing-data company CoreLogic.

Sean O'Toole, the CEO of foreclosure-data aggregator ForeclosureRadar.com, estimates that it will take at least another decade, at the housing market's current pace of growth, for homeowners who are underwater just to break even on their houses.

"We went from $4.5 trillion of mortgage debt in 2000 to $10.5 trillion of debt in 2008 -- and we are still only down to $9.8 trillion," says O'Toole.

"All those people with negative equity, they can't sell. They are stuck in a prison of debt."

A HIT WITH MULTI-GENERATIONAL HOMES

The U.S. housing market is actually hundreds if not thousands of markets.

Cities such as New York and San Francisco have joined other world cities, like London and Hong Kong, to form a global housing market that aligns its fortunes with the wealthy elite.

Then there's Stockton, the California city that filed for bankruptcy in June. A recent Rockefeller Institute of Government research report suggested it could turn into a ghost town with its lack of jobs and abundance of abandoned, foreclosed homes.

Still, there's no doubt that in most places the housing market appears to have bottomed out and is now gathering strength.

The places that were hit hardest -- like the warm states where baby boomers go to retire -- are snapping back, and some states with strong income and job growth, like the natural gas haven of North Dakota, are solid.

"I don't think it's a head-fake, because when you look across all your price measures and construction measures on the starts side, you're seeing broad-based indication of improvement," says Beata Caranci, deputy chief economist at TD Bank Group in Toronto.

But even those who say the recovery is on are subdued. "We have to be a little bit cautious," said Caranci. "It's the beginning of a recovery."

The Case-Shiller home price index, considered a bellwether of the U.S. housing markets, rose in May for the third consecutive month.

Those price hikes, however, reversed just a sliver of the wealth lost since the housing peak: $200 billion of the $6.7 trillion that has evaporated since 2006, according to a recent Bank of America report.

Some of the biggest jumps -- such as the 10 percent year-over-year price gains in foreclosure-filled cities like Phoenix and Miami -- were largely due to banks holding back inventory. That's because of lingering legal problems from the so-called robo-signing foreclosure scandal as well as a reluctance to flood the market, according to CoreLogic's Khater.

"Don't let the volatility in prices fool you," he said. "Yes, prices are increasing in some markets, but in the longer term it has to come back to incomes, and unless incomes are increasing, price increases are not sustainable."

At this point in a typical cycle, executives at the homebuilding companies are usually the loudest members of the housing recovery pep squad. Yet the mood has been subdued in the most recent round of earnings conference calls with homebuilder executives.

In late June, Lennar, the third-largest homebuilder in the United States, reported a rise in new orders for the fifth straight quarter, helping to push share price to a year high in July.

Executives had foreseen that, after the housing crash, family members would start to live together as a way to save. Lennar started designing a new home that included a 600-square-foot apartment with its own entrance called the "Multi Gen Home." It has been a hit.

Nonetheless, Lennar's chief executive officer, Stuart A. Miller, told analysts in June that he was nervous about uttering the word recovery.

"I don't think that there's reason for exuberance right now -- except for the fact that the beatings have stopped."

(Additional reporting by Cezary Podkul and Tim Reid; Editing by William Schomberg, Mary Milliken and Prudence Crowther)


Amazon Cell Phone Center

Saturday, January 21, 2012

MEMC Struggles to Shine in a Gloomy Solar Market (The Motley Fool)

MEMC Electronic Materials (NYSE: WFR - News), a supplier of silicon wafers to solar and semiconductor manufacturers, is planning to restructure its business, which would involve slashing its workforce by 20%, or 1,300 jobs. In addition, the company plans to put some of its facilities on hold in order to ride the slump in the renewable-energy sector.

Weak demand along with painfully low silicon prices in the semiconductor and solar industry are driving the changes. The restructuring would help the company trim its operating costs and strengthen its operating cash flows for the near term. Let's take a look at the company's latest third-quarter figures.

Woeful figures
The latest quarterly results were highly disappointing, with a 31% sequential fall in MEMC's top line and a net loss of $94.4 million.

But it's not just MEMC that's facing the heat. Industry peers like LDK Solar and ReneSola have also witnessed sharp falls in revenue as well as profitability margins. This is forcing them to either cut capacity or close up shop altogether.

MEMC's restructuring process is expected to cost the company $700 million in the fourth quarter. As part of its restructuring plan, it will also cut the capacity of its Portland, Ore., crystal facility and leave idle its polysilicon facility in Merano, Italy.

Apart from this, MEMC would also combine its solar material facility, which is struggling at present, with its SunEdison solar development unit. The hope is to improve efficiency and expand in the solar sector, which is considered less vulnerable to price swings, barring the present slowdown.

Facing the heat
Polysilicon prices have witnessed a tremendous crash since manufacturers raced to raise their production capacity when prices were at loftier levels of $500 per kilogram. Since then, the price has plunged over the years to as little as $25.

To make matters worse, the solar energy market in Europe is facing sunstroke as subsidies have started to shrink, thus adversely affecting demand. Moreover, Chinese competitors are relentlessly dumping their cheap products, causing prices to go southward.

The Foolish bottom line
After MEMC burned its hands with falling polysilicon prices, its restructuring initiative is definitely a welcome change. With its exit from the bottomless pit of solar materials, the company can now focus on restoring the stability of its margins and its business as a whole. So what do you Fools think about the company? Leave your comments in the box below.

Keki Fatakia does not hold shares in any of the companies mentioned in this article. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Amazon Cell Phone Center

Saturday, December 3, 2011

Home market being held back by wary first-timers (AP)

By DEREK KRAVITZ, AP Real Estate Writer Derek Kravitz, Ap Real Estate Writer – Wed Nov 30, 11:01 am ET

WASHINGTON – This should be a great time to buy a first home. Prices have sunk to 2002 levels. Sellers are waiting anxiously as homes languish on the market. Mortgage rates are their lowest ever.

Yet the most likely first-time homeowners, especially young professionals and couples starting families, won't buy these days. Or they can't. Or they already did, during the housing boom. And their absence helps explain why the housing industry is still depressed.

The obstacles range from higher down payments to heavy debt from credit cards and student loans. But even many of those who could afford to buy no longer see it as a wise investment. Prices have sunk 15 percent in three years.

"I've looked for a home, but the places we can afford with the money we have are not that great," says Seth Herter, 23, a store manager in suburban St. Louis. "It also doesn't seem smart anymore to buy with prices falling. Buying a home just doesn't make sense to us."

The proportion of U.S. households that own homes is at 65.1 percent, its lowest point since 1996, the Census Bureau says. That marks a shift after nearly two decades in which homeownership grew before peaking at 70 percent during the housing boom.

The housing bubble lured so many young buyers that it reduced the pool of potential first-timers to below-normal levels. That's contributed to the decline in new buyers in recent years.

In 2005, at the height of the boom, about 2.8 million first-timers bought homes, according to the National Association of Realtors. By contrast, for each of the four years preceding the boom, the number of first-timers averaged fewer than 2 million.

Still, the bigger factors are the struggling economy, shaky job security, tougher credit rules and lack of cash to put down, said Dan McCue, research manager at Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. The unemployment rate among typical first-timers, those ages 25 to 34, is 9.8 percent, compared with 9 percent for all adults.

"The obstacles facing first-time buyers are big, and it's changing the way they look at home ownership," McCue says. "It's no longer the American Dream for the younger generation."

First-timers usually account for up to half of all sales. Over the past year, they've accounted for only about a third.

A big reason is tougher lending standards.

Lenders are demanding more money up front. In 2002, the median down payment for a single-family home in nine major U.S. cities was 4 percent, according to real estate website Zillow.com. Today, it's 22 percent.

And one-third of households have credit scores too low to qualify for a mortgage. The median required credit score from FICO Inc., the industry leader in credit ratings, has risen from 720 in 2007, when the market went bust, to 760 today.

Homes in many places are the most affordable in a generation. In the past year, the national median sale price has sunk 3.5 percent. Half the homes listed in the Tampa Bay area are priced below $100,000.

The average mortgage rate for a 30-year fixed loan is 4 percent, barely above an all-time low. Five years ago, it was near 6.5 percent. In 2000, it exceeded 8 percent.

When the economy eventually strengthens, the housing market will, too. More people will be hired. Confidence will rise. Down payments won't be so hard to produce.

The question is whether first-time buyers will then start flowing into the housing market. That will depend mainly on whether they think prices will rise, said Mark Vitner, senior U.S. economist at Wells Fargo.

"It's a guessing game as to when things will turn around," Vitner said. "But until they do, you won't see young people buying homes."


Browse your computer here

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Creative Destruction in the Housing Market (The Motley Fool)

At a conference in Vancouver, Canada, last summer, a moderator asked apocalyptic analyst Doug Casey what the solution to our economic mess was. "Explosives," he replied. It echoed a theme put forth by former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon during the Great Depression. "Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate farmers, liquidate real estate. ... It will purge the rottenness out of the system," Mellon famously said in 1931.

Casey wasn't alone. In 2008, then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson phoned former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, seeking his input on ways to stabilize the economy. Greenspan "suggested that there was too much housing supply and that the only real way to really fix the problem would be for the government to buy up vacant homes and burn them," according to the book Too Big to Fail.

Warren Buffett offered a similar approach in his 2009 letter to shareholders. There are only three ways to fix the housing crisis, Buffett wrote. The first, and most effective: "Blow up a lot of houses." Last year, Detroit Mayor Dave Bing took him up on it, proposing plans to bulldoze 10,000 vacant homes and empty buildings over three years.

What are these people thinking? Nothing crazy, actually. They've grasped the heart of what's crushing the housing market: There are simply too many homes.

Some numbers to chew on: From 2001 to 2006, 11.0 million homes were built in the United States. During that period, a net 7.8 million new households were formed. That 3.2 million-home gap represents the overbuilding that pushed housing into bubble territory. During the boom years, those extra homes were easily absorbed into the market because so many speculative buyers were purchasing two homes, five homes, 10 homes, just to flip them for profit. Now that that casino mentality has been deflated, demand for housing has returned to its roots -- buying just to have a place to live. That means those 3.2 million homes built in excess of people's living needs are now sitting idle. The nationwide home vacancy rate is currently 2.5%, up from about 1.5% before the bubble.

Which raises the question: What do you do with these vacant homes? Some have been following the advice of Casey, Greenspan, Buffett, and Bing. They're blowing them up.

Bank of America (NYSE: BAC - News) just announced plans to demolish 100 Cleveland homes, with similar plans already under way in Chicago and Detroit. Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC - News) and JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM - News) have donated thousands of homes to local governments and nonprofits, many of which will likely be razed.

The incentive for banks to destroy homes is straightforward: Banks owe property taxes on homes repossessed during foreclosure, and some homes are so derelict that repairing them to a sellable condition is often costlier and a bigger hassle than just blowing the damn things up.

The trend will never get big. Even if tens of thousands of homes are destroyed, the effect would be trivial. But the fact that banks are merely considering demolishing homes underlines that the single most important factor holding the housing market back is excess inventory.

The good news is that inventory is being cleared out naturally, and quickly. New home construction has slowed to a pace not seen in recorded history, now at just one-third of 1959 levels, when recordkeeping began. Far more households are being formed today than new homes are being built. That has the same effect as blowing up homes -- in either case, excess inventory is being cleared out. Extrapolating from current levels, it's not hard to make the argument that we could actually face a housing shortage in another few years.

How crazy does that sound? About as crazy as someone telling you four years ago that banks would be destroying homes today. And yet, that's where we are.

Fool contributor TMFHousel. The Motley Fool owns shares of Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase. The Fool owns shares of and has created a ratio put spread position on Wells Fargo. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Browse your computer here

Analysis - Bank of America's mortgage market share plunges (Reuters)

Charlotte, North Carolina (Reuters) – Bank of America (BAC.N) is set to lose nearly all the mortgage market share it gained by buying Countrywide Financial Corp in 2008, in the latest sign of how painful the acquisition has been for the bank.

The Charlotte, North Carolina bank said this month it is no longer buying mortgages made by smaller banks known as correspondent banks, which accounted for half of its mortgage volume.

Stripping out correspondent lending from the first half of the year would have left the bank's market share at about 8.5 percent, barely above its 7.8 percent market share before buying Countrywide, according to Inside Mortgage Finance data.

Bank of America's correspondent lending business came mainly from Countrywide, which was the largest U.S. mortgage lender when the bank bought it in 2008.

The $2.5 billion purchase saddled Bank of America with more than $30 billion of mortgage losses and legal costs, according to analysts.

"It's a total disaster," Guy Cecala, publisher of industry newsletter Inside Mortgage Finance, said of the deal.

In January 2008, the bank said the Countrywide acquisition would make it the largest U.S. mortgage lender and servicer, which would in turn make Bank of America the premier consumer lender overall.

Since then, the bank has lost mortgage market share from exiting businesses like subprime lending and lending through brokers. These types of loans helped make Countrywide the biggest U.S. mortgage lender but also triggered big credit losses for the company.

By giving up correspondent lending, Bank of America is likely to drop one spot to No. 3 in mortgage volume, behind Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N), which has 25.7 percent of the market, and JPMorgan Chase & Co's (JPM.N) 12.7 percent.

In 2007, Bank of America was No. 5 in market share, while Countrywide was No. 1, with 16.8 percent market share.

By shedding correspondent lending, Bank of America is giving up a chance to buy loans made when underwriting standards are solid, Cecala said. The loans typically meet terms laid out by government-controlled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or other government agencies.

But Dan Alpert, managing partner with investment bank Westwood Capital LLC, said Bank of America was making a smart move. These loans typically don't produce a lot of revenue for banks and can be of lesser quality. That's because smaller banks are originating the loans to be sold to other banks, which package them into securities for investors.

"By nature, you're going to be less cautious if someone down the line is buying the paper," he said.

WORST YEAR IN A DECADE

Banks are jostling for mortgage market share in a much smaller business now as the housing crisis wears on. Inside Mortgage Finance expects lenders to make about $1.2 trillion in loans this year, down from about $1.5 trillion last year and $2.4 trillion in 2007. "There is no question that 2011 will be worst mortgage lending year in a decade," Cecala said.

Bank of America spokesman Rick Simon said the bank will continue to focus on making loans directly to consumers, as part of its strategy to deepen relationships with the 58 million American households the bank does business with.

The bank's total share of the mortgage market will decline, but the bank is hoping to "offset some of the loss through the stronger retail focus," Simon said.

With Bank of America exiting the correspondent business, experts said smaller banks will likely sell loans to competitors and to Fannie Mae (FNMA.OB) and Freddie Mac (FMCC.OB) instead.

Wells Fargo was the biggest correspondent lender in the first half of this year, with $56.3 billion in loans, accounting for 37 percent of its total originations.

(Editing by Steve Orlofsky)


Browse your computer here

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

The Coming No Jobs Market Rally (The Motley Fool)

By Adam J. Crawford Adam J. Crawford – Tue Oct 4, 3:06 pm ET

The September jobs report looms large. And if the September jobs number due out this Friday is another goose egg (or worse), one would expect another sharp market decline. But that might not be the case this time or, at least, it shouldn't.

A Fed fix
The market could rally on a lackluster jobs report. Why? Sustained high unemployment may embolden the Federal Reserve to provide an additional dose of market medicine on top of the recently announced "Operation Twist," which is simultaneously selling $400 billion of short-term Treasuries and buying $400 billion of longer-term Treasuries. The head of the Fed said as much.

In his most recent public statements, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke spoke of a "range of tools" that could be used to promote a stronger recovery. While Bernanke didn't reveal the contents of his toolbox, we all know his favorite tool because he's used it twice before.

More QE
A third round of quantitative easing will likely follow future poor economic data. And the stock market will likely rally as it has after the previous two rounds. But the precious metals could be the best way to capitalize on additional stimulus.

Stimulus is inflationary, and the precious metals are a popular inflation hedge. If the Fed continues pumping money into the economy, gold and silver will likely continue to rally despite the recent precious metal meltdown.

Look for the gold and silver miners to do well under this scenario. Some names to consider are Pan American Silver (Nasdaq: PAAS - News), Yamana Gold (NYSE: AUY - News), Barrick Gold (NYSE: ABX - News), Newmont Mining (NYSE: NEM - News), and Hecla Mining (NYSE: HL - News).

The bottom line
Another poor jobs report could provide justification for the Fed to resume quantitative easing. This will likely boost the market and, in particular, precious metals. But be forewarned, nothing is a sure thing; predicting the actions of the Fed is similar to predicting the direction of a Phil Mickelson tee shot.

Fool contributor free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Browse your computer here

Friday, September 2, 2011

Banks stocks lead market lower, ending 4-day rally (AP)

NEW YORK – Stocks fell Thursday, ending a four-day rally, after regulators took action against a former Goldman Sachs subsidiary over its mortgage and foreclosure practices. Traders were also nervous that a jobs report due out Friday could revive worries of another recession in the U.S.

Goldman Sachs fell 3.5 percent after the Federal Reserve ordered the bank to review foreclosure practices at Litton Loan Servicing, saying there was a "pattern of misconduct and negligence" at the unit. Bank stocks fell more than the rest of the market as investors worried about regulatory moves against other banks. Financial stocks in the S&P 500 dropped 2.4 percent, the most of the 10 company groups that make up the index.

"There's obviously a lot of fear in the marketplace," said Ann Miletti, managing director and senior portfolio manager at Wells Capital Management. "Right now, the market's just lacking confidence."

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 119.96 points, or 1 percent, to close at 11,493.57. It rose as many as 103 points shortly after 10 a.m., when a key manufacturing report showed evidence of growth in August. Analyst had expected a decline.

The gains didn't last. By 10:30 a.m. indexes were trading mixed and stayed that way until 1:30 p.m., when the Fed announced its action against Goldman Sachs. Stocks drifted lower for the rest of the day, with bank stocks losing the most.

The Federal Reserve said there were "deficient practices" in mortgage loan servicing and the processing of foreclosures at Goldman's former Litton unit. Goldman also reached a settlement with a New York state banking regulator over Litton in which it agreed to stop controversial practices such as the "robo-signing" of documents. That settlement was also announced Thursday.

Other banks followed Goldman lower. Citigroup Inc. lost 3.4 percent and PNC Financial Services Group Inc. fell 3.2 percent. Bank of America Corp., which is facing many lawsuits over its dealings in mortgage-backed securities, also fell 3.2 percent.

The regulatory actions showed that problems related to the mortgage crisis in 2008 remain far from over, said Quincy Krosby, market strategist at Prudential Financial. Krosby also said investors were nervous ahead of the Labor Department's jobs report due out Friday.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 14.47 points, or 1.2 percent, to 1,204.42. The Nasdaq composite index fell 33.42, or 1.3 percent, to 2,546.04.

The Dow, S&P and Nasdaq all had their worst August since 2001 after fears of an economic slowdown in the U.S. and debt issues in Europe put investors on edge.

Trading volume was relatively light at 4.3 billion shares. Many traders were on vacation. Low volume suggests that relatively few investors were driving the market's gains and losses.

Rob Lutts, president and chief investment officer of Cabot Money Management, said he expected volume to remain very low until early next week, when many traders return to work after Labor Day. "That's when we'll see what's really going on," Lutts said.

SAIC Inc. fell 13.5 percent, the most in the S&P 500, after the technology company issued a full-year earnings forecast that was below analysts' expectations. The company, which provides engineering and technology services to the military and other agencies, cited tightening government budgets.

Retailers rose after reporting strong sales last month, despite wild swings in the stock market and worries about the economy. August is an important month for back-to-school shopping, which can account for up to 25 percent of retailers' annual revenue. Macy's Inc. rose 2.1 percent; Costco Wholesale Corp. rose 1.2 percent.

About three stocks fell for every one that rose on the New York Stock Exchange.


Browse your computer here

Summary Box: Banks stocks lead market lower (AP)

RALLY OVER: Stocks fell, ending a four-day rally, after regulators took action against a former Goldman Sachs subsidiary over its mortgage and foreclosure practices. Investors were also worried that a jobs report due out Friday could revive fears of a new recession.

UP, THEN DOWN: The Dow Jones industrial average fell 119.96 points, or 1 percent, to 11,493.57. It rose as many as 103 points shortly after 10 a.m., when a manufacturing report showed evidence of growth in August. It turned lower after regulators announced enforcement actions against a former subsidiary of Goldman Sachs at 1:30 p.m.

RETAIL SALES: Retailers rose after several companies reported August sales gains that beat analysts' estimates.


Browse your computer here

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

A Glimpse of Market Panic (The Motley Fool)

Reuters blogger Felix Salmon posted an interesting picture yesterday. It shows the correlation among S&P 500 stocks, which recently hit the highest point in at least 30 years -- higher than the crash of 1987 and higher than the 2008-2009 market meltdown.

In English, stocks are moving in the same direction more than ever before. Either everything is going up or everything is going down. Aug. 8 was the first time in 15 years that every stock in the S&P 500 closed down. Even in the most chaotic days of the 2008 financial crisis, a few stocks managed to eke out a gain. And even during the most jubilant days of the 1999 stock bubble, a few names performed poorly. Not lately. Daily moves have been an all-or-nothing game.

This points to two things. One is a general sense of panic. There's very little rationality in today's stock moves. Rather than a cool, calm analysis, whatever is moving stocks seems to be operating with an attitude of "get me in now or get me out now." If we are heading into a recession, cyclical companies like General Motors (NYSE: GM - News) or Alcoa (NYSE: AA - News) would probably be dinged hard. But would Google (Nasdaq: GOOG - News)? Or Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN - News)? Unlikely. Both are being pushed by the tides of whichever way the market is moving. It's an emotional reaction that has little to do with what the stock market is supposed to reflect -- the collective estimate of business values.

That's one explanation. Another is that what's moving the market is the opposite of emotional -- programmed computers following algorithms. According to Gary Wedbush of Wedbush Securities, high-frequency computer trading has made up 75% of total stock market volume this month. These programs don't care about discounted cash flows, innovation, or good management. They care about buying and selling faster than the other programs. There's very little public information on high-frequency trading, but it's nearly certain that they exacerbate market moves in either direction -- deeper down days and bigger up days.

In either case, it's safe to say that there's a good amount of madness in today's market. Frankly, that's a good thing. The best opportunities come from exploiting those who are freaking out or those who have a different time frame than you. As Ben Graham says, "In the short run, the market is a voting machine, and in the long run, it is a weighing machine." That's as true today as it's ever been.

Fool contributor Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of General Motors, Google, and Amazon.com Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy


Browse your computer here

Thursday, August 18, 2011

4 Big Market Pullbacks Few Remember Anymore (The Motley Fool)

After stocks posted the most volatile stretch of trading since the 1930s last week, the Dow is down about 10% from its May highs. Some feel this is a bad omen. If the market is forward-looking, perhaps the recent sell-off is indicating a second recession. Maybe something worse.

It very well could be. But there's no way of knowing today. The old quip that analysts have predicted nine of the past five recessions is spot-on. The biggest driver of any economy -- confidence -- simply can't be forecast.

That limitation is painfully evident in the stock market. There's a long history of big market pullbacks that ended up as much ado about nothing. Here are four examples.

April 2010-July 2010: Dow falls 14%
You don't have to look far to find a market pullback on par with what we've just experienced. Just last summer, fears of a double-dip recession exploded as Greece's finances unraveled and the Federal Reserve's monetary policy medicine wore off. Google searches for the phrase "double dip" went up 20-fold.

The fears never materialized -- at least not as investors predicted. Intervention by the European Central Bank and a new round of quantitative easing by the Fed sparked a rush back into risky assets. Within a year, the Dow rallied more than 30% and job creation hit a multiyear high.

March 2005-April 2005: Dow falls 8.5%
After dropping interest rates to then-historic lows early last decade, the Fed began inching rates up ever so slowly in 2004. As inflation picked up in early 2005, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan told Congress he felt interest rates were still "fairly low." By most accounts, those two words alone gave investors a sense that the Fed would start aggressively raising rates, pushing the economy into recession.

A recession eventually hit, of course, but not for years, and not because of high interest rates. After the 2005 pullback, the Fed stayed its course of gradual interest rate increases, the economy boomed for another three years, and the Dow rallied more than 40%.

July 1998-August 1998: Dow falls 19%
How misguided nostalgia can be: Most remember the late 1990s as an investing utopia, but the summer of 1998 actually brought one of the biggest market plunges since the Great Depression.

After Russia unexpectedly defaulted, the global economy went into shock. Commodity prices plunged, creating more worry that other commodity-centric countries would also collapse.

Perhaps most caught off-guard was a hedge fund called Long Term Capital Management. With a few billion dollars of capital, LTCM borrowed roughly $100 billion to purchase derivative contracts with exposure to more than $1 trillion in assets -- truly one of the grandest adventures in leverage the world had ever seen.

The fund essentially went bankrupt after Russia defaulted. That created its own panic. With a portfolio that size, and with every Wall Street bank intertwined in the mix, the thought of liquidating LTCM's assets scared investors silly. It was the first true experience with "too big to fail." Economists weren't just worried about a recession. The word depression was on people's minds.

Wall Street eventually bailed out LTCM, mainly to save themselves. Fears subsided almost instantly, and 1998 and 1999 ended up as two of the strongest years the country has ever seen.

August 1987-October 1987: Dow falls 34%
Most investors actually do remember this period. It lived in infamy as the crash of 1987, when stocks fell 22% in a single day.

But there are two important lessons from the 1987 crash that often go ignored.

First is how inconsequential it was to long-term investors. Stocks recovered about half of total losses within days of the crash, and were at fresh highs within two years.

Second is the cause. While still debated today, most accept that the crash of '87 was triggered by an inane financial product called portfolio insurance, in which computers automatically sold stocks to avoid losses, hedged with put options and futures contracts. Portfolio insurance could have worked on a small scale, but became so popular in the 1980s that it ended up cannibalizing itself: Normal stock selling begot more selling, which begot more selling, and so on. It spiraled until computers were effectively trying to sell the entire market at once -- and not because they were bearish on the value of businesses, but simply because they were programmed to sell.

Remembering that lesson is as important today as it has ever been. Computer trading now makes up some 60% of total market volume. These computers don't care about economic data, and they aren't studying the intrinsic value of businesses. They're merely trying to outwit one another, often by holding stocks for a few hundredths of a second. The volatility these computers are capable of creating is crucial for long-term investors to be cognizant of -- or better yet, to ignore. A big market plunge isn't always a harbinger of real economic pain. It can be nothing more than a few computers playing tag.

Eye on the prize, Fool
There are plenty of other examples. Corrections of 10% or more are almost an annual ritual. The lessons gleaned from each one should be clear: Markets are volatile; get used to it. Markets aren't perfect seers; they often misjudge the future. And whatever has markets wound up will eventually work itself out.

This too will pass; patient investors will win. That will be just as true over the next 50 years as it was over the past 50.

Check back every Tuesday and Friday for Morgan Housel's columns on finance and economics.

Fool contributor TMFHousel. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Browse your computer here

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Apollo Residential shares down in market debut (AP)

NEW YORK – Shares of Apollo Residential Mortgage Inc. are sliding in their market debut.

The New York real estate finance company plans to invest in residential mortgage assets in the United States. It had priced its offering of 19 million shares at $20 apiece.

The stock opened Friday at $19, and traded as high as $19.10.

But by midmorning, it was down $1.23, or 6.1 percent, to $18.77 and had fallen as low as $18.12 earlier.

The stock is traded under the symbol "AMTG" on the New York Stock Exchange.


Browse your computer here

Friday, June 10, 2011

Slow economy weighing on stock market, finally (AP)

By MARK JEWELL, AP Personal Finance Writer Mark Jewell, Ap Personal Finance Writer – Fri Jun 10, 12:29 am ET

CHICAGO – The stock market comeback has proceeded at a rapid clip for more than two years. Yet the economic recovery has been frustratingly slow.

Now a spate of disappointing economic news is interrupting the market rally. It has money managers questioning whether the market can pull out of reverse and again leave the sputtering economy in its dust. If it does, credit the same factor that's driven stocks up 89 percent since their bottom in March 2009: record corporate profits.

It's a concern that will be top-of-mind at the annual Morningstar Investment Conference. The nearly 1,700 financial planners and fund managers in Chicago this week face a more complicated picture about where to put their clients' money.

It's hard to find any clear choices two years after the recession's official end in June 2009, with 9.1 percent unemployment, falling housing prices and weak consumer spending.

Stocks have fallen five weeks in a row, and appear headed toward a sixth. The Standard & Poor's 500 index is down 6 percent since the end of April. Many financial analysts think this slump is more serious than the market's other pauses in the past two-plus years.

Chuck de Lardemelle, who co-manages a pair of stock-and-bond funds, IVA Global and IVA International, recently trimmed the stock holdings in his two funds to around 68 percent.

His chief concern: The recoveries in the economy and the market may be unsustainable unless consumers feel confident enough to spend more freely. Their spending is crucial because it drives about two-thirds of the economy.

"People aren't interested in expanding the house, or buying a new car, because they're in bad shape," de Lardemelle says.

Yet corporate profits remain at record levels, due in part to expense cuts made during the recession. That's the main reason de Lardemelle thinks stocks might continue their comeback, despite the challenges consumers face.

"It's the golden age of corporate profits," he says.

These indicators show the different paths the economy and the market have taken -- and why fund managers are so concerned:

THE ECONOMY

• The economy is recovering at a slower pace than it has following past recessions. The nation's gross domestic product — the economy's total output of goods and services — grew 3 percent in the first 12 months of this recovery. That was about half the average first-year growth of 6.2 percent following recessions since 1949, according to Standard & Poor's Equity Research. The growth rate continued to lag the historic average in the just-completed second year of the recovery, and is predicted to do so again in the third.

• Unemployment is off its highs, but it's still high. The unemployment rate was 9.1 percent last month, compared with 9.5 percent when the recession ended. That's a 4 percent decline in the rate, over two years. Coming out of previous recessions, improvement in the jobless rate has typically been far more rapid — 14 percent on average at this stage of a recovery, according to Moody's Analytics.

• Wages are only creeping higher. Hourly compensation is up 3.3 percent since the recession ended, according to Moody's. That's about one-third of the average 9.8 percent rise at this stage of a recovery. If wages aren't rising fast enough, consumers can't help the economy.

• The housing recovery remains elusive. A report last week found home prices in big metro areas have sunk to their lowest since 2002. Since the bubble burst in 2006, prices have fallen more than they did during the Great Depression.

THE STOCK MARKET

• Stocks have had a much stronger comeback. The S&P 500 is up 45 percent from the end of the recession.

That's far ahead of the average 24 percent gain historically posted at this stage of a recovery, according to Moody's.

But there's a caveat, one that market pros are well aware of. If historic patterns hold up, any market gain in the third year of this recovery should be modest. The average gain has been 4.9 percent, according to S&P. — Companies are earning record profits. Wall Street analysts expect full-year operating profits among the S&P 500 to rise nearly 18 percent this year, according to S&P Equity Research. That would make 2011 a record year. In 2012, another record is forecast, with a projected 14 percent rise in earnings. But, another caveat: Heavy equipment makers like Caterpillar and Cummins and even consumer products maker Procter & Gamble are generating an increasingly larger share of their earnings abroad, where emerging markets are growing more steadily.

Stocks still look cheap. The S&P 500's price-earnings ratio — a measure that shows investors how much they're paying for a dollar in earnings — is modest by historical standards. The P/E, based on operating earnings for the last 12 months, is 15.5 — below the median of 18.1 since 1988, according to S&P. The market is even cheaper, with a P/E of 13.7, based on earnings projections for this year.

Brian Peery, a manager at Hennessy Funds, points to such data in arguing that the bull market isn't at an end. He expects stock returns to average around 8 percent per year over the next three to five years. Double-digit gains aren't likely, given the rough patch the economy is in.

A key short-term challenge is this month's wind-down of a $600 billion bond-buying program by the Federal Reserve known as quantitative easing. It's one of a series of stimulus measures the government took to promote investment in riskier assets like stocks.

Then there's the deficit, which has de Lardemelle worried because investors are likely to grow increasingly pessimistic about the government's ability to meet its obligations. They may demand higher yields, raising the government's borrowing costs to further hamper the economy.

"Their answer has been, `Let's print money, and hope the consumer comes back,'" de Lardemelle says of U.S. policymakers. "The consumer won't be back anytime soon."

___

AP Personal Finance Writer Dave Carpenter contributed to this report.

Questions? E-mail investorinsight(at)ap.org


Browse your computer here

Thursday, June 2, 2011

6 Investing Tips for Today's Market (U.S. News & World Report)

The S&P 500 has nearly doubled since reaching a low point in March 2009. Many factors impact the economy and the markets including high energy costs, financial problems in many European countries, and our own debt issues in the U.S.

That said, here are six investment tips to consider:

It isn't different this time. There will always be issues facing investors. There has always been some sort of event happening in the world that many "experts" thought would be our economic undoing. With all due respect to the folks at PIMCO, I'm not so sure that what they call a "New Normal" is anything more than a continued evolution of our economy and the investing environment.

[In Pictures: 6 Numbers Every Investor Should Follow.]

Start with a financial plan. A clear understanding of your goals, your time frame to achieve those goals, and your risk tolerance is a vital first step in determining your asset allocation. Investing without this type of vision and direction is the first step down the road to failure.

Save as much as you can. Recent studies have shown that the biggest factor in accumulating enough assets for retirement or any financial goal is the amount saved. While investment returns are important, saving on a regular basis is vital.

[See the top-rated Fidelity funds from U.S. News.]

Asset allocation is critical. Studies have shown that how you allocate your investments accounts for 90 percent or more of the return from your investments. The "lost" decade of 2000-2009 certainly reinforced this notion. While returns from large-cap stocks were flat or slightly negative, other asset classes such as bonds and small-cap stocks held up fairly well. While not a great decade, diversified portfolios still did reasonably well.

Monitor your holdings. It is important to review your holdings regularly against appropriate benchmarks. This includes mutual funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and individual stocks. Even index funds need to be reviewed to ensure that costs remain low and that the fund is tracking its benchmark closely. For actively managed funds, make sure the manager is earning the extra fees they are charging over and above an index fund in the same investment style. For stocks, how is the holding doing against peers in their industry? Set a target selling price for each stock before you buy it.

[See How to Maintain Your Lifestyle in Retirement.]

Seek professional guidance if you need it. Is this comment biased and self-serving? Not really. How many "do-it-your-selfers" panicked and sold at the bottom in late 2008 or early 2009 only to see the market take off on them? There are many people who do an excellent job of managing their own investments. However a qualified adviser can add a degree of knowledge and perspective that might benefit many investors.

Sorry to disappoint, but investing is not sexy or trendy. It takes persistence, monitoring, and commitment. This isn't to say that your strategy and approach shouldn't change over time, but rather that these changes should be the result of evaluating your situation and needs. Changes should not be based on the words of the last guest on a financial news show.

Roger Wohlner, CFP®, is a fee-only financial adviser at Asset Strategy Consultants based in Arlington Heights, Ill. where he provides advice to individual clients, retirement plan sponsors, foundations, and endowments. He recently cofounded Retirement Fiduciary Advisors to provide direct investment and retirement planning advice to 401(k) plan participants. Follow Roger on Twitter and LinkedIn.


Browse your computer here

Friday, May 27, 2011

S&P identifies troubling trends in CMBS market (Reuters)

NEW YORK, May 26 (IFR) – Increasingly aggressive property appraisals, so-called "incentive management fees" for hotel properties, and the limited return of "pro forma" underwriting are among the troubling trends that Standard & Poor's cites as red flags in the quickly evolving revival of the commercial mortgage-backed security market.

In a report released earlier this week, Standard & Poor's identifies several new trends - and a return to questionable "old" trends - in recent CMBS transactions. The U.S. CMBS market experienced "a somewhat swift evolution between late 2009 and early 2011, as single-borrower transactions gave way to a market characterized by relatively larger, more complex multi-borrower deals," the rating agency wrote. Several structural features have been loosened, while some property valuations are overly optimistic, S&P wrote.

"We continue to see instances where we believe that valuations are questionable, especially within the larger loans for certain property types, particularly office and hotel, in primary markets," wrote S&P credit analyst James Manzi. "This is probably attributable to the fact that lending is very competitive in these types of markets, where insurance companies, pension funds, foreign investors, and REITs could be bidding alongside CMBS issuers.

"The part that we believe should be most alarming to investors is that the appraisals appear to be building in upside in rents and occupancy to arrive at a value for the properties in question instead of using in-place rents and tenancy at the time of closing," Manzi added.

S&P also cited numerous examples of a limited return of pro forma underwriting. According to S&P, the phrase "pro forma" indicates that some aspect of the loan underwriting for a collateral property is based on the occurrence of an anticipated (future) event, such as a projected increase in rents or an assumption that a tenant will occupy a currently vacant space and begin to pay rent.

Most of the loans flagged by S&P have leasing or occupancy issues. For instance, a loan on the Promenade Shops at Aventura, outside of Miami, was in the JPMCC 2010-C2 CMBS transaction, and the property appraisal reflects a so-called "stabilized value", meaning that the appraisal utilized certain assumptions about future income, rather than realistic "as-is" value.

In the case of Promenade Shops, though a lease was in place at closing for a tenant, Nordstrom Rack, the space was vacant at closing, and no rent was payable until the property was occupied. "While scenarios like this are perhaps not ideal, they are less risky, in our opinion, than scenarios in which loans assume significant increases in rents or occupancy during their term, as was the case with many pro forma loans that were underwritten during the peak years," Manzi wrote.

S&P also noted that several 2011-vintage CMBS deals include lodging, or hotel loans, in their top 10 loans. The sector is generally considered less stable than the other core commercial property types, primarily because hotels reset their room prices daily.

But what is more troubling is a structural twist that S&P cites on a hotel loan (Marriott Crystal Gateway in Crystal City, Virginia) within the DBUBS 2011-LC1 CMBS transaction relating to a so-called "incentive management fee" due to Marriott.

Term-sheet details for the transaction show that the fee to Marriott was senior to the so-called debt service payment to the lender, which is highly unusual, S&P says, and "will take a significant chunk from net cash flow when it happens", the analysts wrote. "As such, one would need to assume a significant increase in revenue per available (hotel) room (known as 'RevPAR') to offset it."

Manzi said that in S&P's estimate, the hotel's average daily room rate would need to increase approximately 30% to maintain the most recent trailing-12-month net cash flow, assuming the fee increase happened today.

The rating agency also noted there have been more loans in recent deals with single-tenant exposure, which is generally more risky than buildings with large, diversified tenant rosters. Moreover, several top-10 loans in recent CMBS offerings are based on leases that expire before loan maturity. In that situation, there is always the risk that the tenant will not renew; there is a significant time and cost involved with replacing a major tenant if it leaves or defaults.

S&P said it is also watching other trends including: an increase in the number of partial-term interest-only loans, a weakening of "recourse carve-outs" for bankruptcy and fraud, and an increase in deal structure complexity, as measured by the number of bond classes per transaction.

(Adam Tempkin is a senior IFR analyst)


Browse your computer here

Thursday, March 10, 2011

South Korea: Don't Call It an "Emerging Market" (The Motley Fool)

By Tony Arsta, Motley Fool Asset Management Tony Arsta, Motley Fool Asset Management – Mon Mar 7, 10:09 am ET

The following commentary was originally posted on FoolFunds.com, the website of Motley Fool Asset Management, LLC, on Feb. 25. With permission, we're reproducing it here in its original form.

As I hurtled from one end of South Korea to the other on a bullet train traveling in excess of 200 miles per hour, I had two thoughts: "These hodo kwaja are delicious, and this country sure doesn't look emerging to me."

Let me explain.

First (and more importantly), hodo kwaja are bite-sized walnut cakes -- usually filled with a red bean paste -- that are quite satisfying. For an extra treat you can wash them down with soju, the local firewater. In moderation, of course.

Second, MSCI Barra does not include South Korea among its 27-country list of developed markets, instead calling it emerging. This despite the fact that South Korea is right and truly emerged, with a fully industrialized, diverse economy and a per-capita GDP on par with Japan's and higher than Spain's, Italy's, or New Zealand's. If this makes you wonder what people are buying when they invest in emerging market ETFs, well it should. Korea's no more an emerging market than Pittsburgh is a city on the Pacific.

Truth be told, even within Asia, South Korea flies under the radar. This country of nearly 50 million is the sixth-largest exporter in the world. It is perfectly situated between China and Japan, two of its largest trade partners, and it sports a debt-to-GDP ratio that the U.S. and many European countries can only dream of. Were it not for the fact that South Korea has the tendency to be shot at by its crazy neighbor to the north, at face value it would seem to be a dream market for investors.

Investing challenges lead to "emerging" tag
MSCI cites numerous reasons for Korea's categorization as "emerging" rather than "developed," including the lack of an "active offshore market" for its currency. We've experienced some other impediments to investing in Korea. Many Korean companies seem indifferent -- at best -- to attracting foreign investors. Among even the largest Korean companies, many only release their financial statements in Korean, creating significant barriers to foreign investors trying to find and analyze pertinent corporate information.

The Korean regulatory regime sets the tone: When we first launched the Independence Fund, we had to jump through myriad hoops just for the right to participate in the Korean markets. Of the markets where we are now able to trade, it was the most difficult nut to crack by far. Regardless, these obstacles are surmountable and what's more, once you get past them, I believe that the Rodney Dangerfield-esque quality of the Korean market hides some real opportunities.

And, of course, North Korea keeps things exciting.

Tensions rise before visit
In the weeks prior to our early-December arrival, North Korea shelled the island of Yeongpyong, killing several South Korean soldiers and civilians. Tensions were still quite high and while our Korean host insisted it was safe, she disclosed that several foreign firms had canceled visits. Nevertheless, from the moment Bill Mann and I arrived at Incheon International Airport, we found that it was business as usual wherever we went (and one company we visited, Woongjin ThinkBig, had its stylish headquarters in Paju, about 5 miles from the North Korean border).

While many of the Koreans we spoke to admitted being nervous in the immediate aftermath of the attack, all had returned to their regularly scheduled lives. In fact, the most common lingering sentiment was one of frustration at the South's government for appearing too timid in response. This spoke to a great miscalculation on the part of the North: For years they have been able to count on popular opinion in the South pressuring the government not to retaliate. This time around, we definitely got the impression that many South Koreans were sick of the North's provocations.

Another thing we found interesting: We spoke to several South Koreans who were openly hostile to the concept of even reuniting South Korea with the North. It makes some sense: Over the past 50 years North Korea has so totally cut itself off from the South that while older Koreans have family members with whom they'd love to reunite, many in the younger generation lack this direct emotional link. To them, North Koreans are as foreign as Bhutanese, with whom they have almost no contact and little in common.

Unease = Opportunity
We take no pleasure in human suffering, but sometimes investing isn't for the squeamish. The fact is that unease between the two Koreas can lead to investment opportunities. Despite the political concerns, South Korea's KOSPI index performed very well in 2010, gaining 22%. We have identified several worthy investment candidates in the country, including some, such as Posco, that represent long-term holdings for the Independence Fund.

One name that regular Declarations readers may recognize is Sung Kwang Bend Co. This pipe fitting manufacturer headquartered in Busan has been a staple of our Top 11 list for several months now. As is common among Korean companies, Sung Kwang Bend generates more than half its sales from exports. Our meeting with the company went well -- except for the part of the factory tour when I was almost run over by a forklift (it was probably my fault).

Apart from the industrial companies in Busan, we also met with several consumer-oriented companies in and around Seoul. We saw a diverse range of products, including cosmetics, snack cakes, textbooks, and ginseng extract. Many of these companies provide us a back-door play into China, deriving sales from the most populous nation while maintaining the corporate governance standards of a more mature market.

One example of this dynamic is Orion Corp. Not to be confused with dozens of other Orions around the world, this one makes Choco-Pies (full disclosure: I'm eating one right now) and other snacks; it also runs all legal sports betting in Korea, a synergy that surpasses my understanding. But sticking to just the confectionery segment, Orion earned half its 2009 revenue domestically and the other half overseas, mostly in China. Back in 2005, that split was 82% domestic. While Korean sales grew only 3% per year over the ensuing years, overall segment revenue expanded by 17% a year thanks to accelerating sales into China, Russia, and even Vietnam.

Catching the Korean Wave
Despite the formidable companies we met, the hottest export seems to be the so-called Korean Wave -- Korean TV, music, and film are increasing in popularity throughout the rest of Asia, and I must admit I found the pop music to be obnoxiously catchy. But the highlight of the trip may have been when Bill and I were simultaneously offended and delighted by the name of a restaurant in downtown Seoul -- Fat Panda: American Style Chinese Food. We asked our host about it and he said, "I love American-style Chinese food!" So what do we know?

For all of the obvious prosperity in Korea, it can be difficult finding small- and mid-cap companies in which to invest. This is particularly true because so much business in Korea operates through conglomerates, or chaebol. Americans will recognize the name Samsung, but apart from the electronics sold into North America, Samsung includes groups operating in the chemical, financial, and apparel industries, to name just a few. Other recognizable names include LG and Hyundai.

The last meeting of our trip was with Hyundai Mipo Dockyard, a publicly traded shipbuilder in the Hyundai chaebol. Hyundai Mipo is a subsidiary of Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries, a more diverse shipbuilding company. Hyundai Samho is itself a subsidiary of Hyundai Heavy Industries, which calls itself the worlds No. 1 shipbuilder, in addition to having a hand in countless other industrial projects. In turn, a large portion of Hyundai Mipo's assets are invested in shares of its parent, Hyundai Heavy. This type of intertwined ownership is not uncommon in Korea, and with a little digging can lend itself to undetected investment opportunities (or pitfalls).

Despite its hurdles, South Korea has established a rich and vibrant economy with strong growth, low unemployment, and plenty of opportunity. It has earned its stripes as one of the so-called Asian Tigers, and we believe it is still well-positioned for future growth. Many of our favorite Korean companies fly under the radar of the typical global investor, but with a patient eye we believe there will be plenty of values to uncover.

For further reading I suggest: Nothing to Envy: Ordinary Lives in North Korea by Barbara DemickTroubled Tiger: Businessmen, Bureaucrats and Generals in South Korea by Mark CliffordA Single Shard by Linda Sue ParkBest English-language local news source: Chosun IlboBest English-language North Korean government news agency: Korean Central News AgencyFavorite Korean song: So Nyeo Shi Dae, "Run Devil Run"Under the radar Korean restaurant: Haeun Maru, Busan

Editor's note: Tony Arsta is not able to engage in discussion on the boards or in the below comments section. Tony does not own shares of any companies mentioned.


Browse your computer here

Monday, March 7, 2011

South Korea: Don't Call It an "Emerging Market" (The Motley Fool)

By Tony Arsta, Motley Fool Asset Management Tony Arsta, Motley Fool Asset Management – Mon Mar 7, 10:09 am ET

The following commentary was originally posted on FoolFunds.com, the website of Motley Fool Asset Management, LLC, on Feb. 25. With permission, we're reproducing it here in its original form.

As I hurtled from one end of South Korea to the other on a bullet train traveling in excess of 200 miles per hour, I had two thoughts: "These hodo kwaja are delicious, and this country sure doesn't look emerging to me."

Let me explain.

First (and more importantly), hodo kwaja are bite-sized walnut cakes -- usually filled with a red bean paste -- that are quite satisfying. For an extra treat you can wash them down with soju, the local firewater. In moderation, of course.

Second, MSCI Barra does not include South Korea among its 27-country list of developed markets, instead calling it emerging. This despite the fact that South Korea is right and truly emerged, with a fully industrialized, diverse economy and a per-capita GDP on par with Japan's and higher than Spain's, Italy's, or New Zealand's. If this makes you wonder what people are buying when they invest in emerging market ETFs, well it should. Korea's no more an emerging market than Pittsburgh is a city on the Pacific.

Truth be told, even within Asia, South Korea flies under the radar. This country of nearly 50 million is the sixth-largest exporter in the world. It is perfectly situated between China and Japan, two of its largest trade partners, and it sports a debt-to-GDP ratio that the U.S. and many European countries can only dream of. Were it not for the fact that South Korea has the tendency to be shot at by its crazy neighbor to the north, at face value it would seem to be a dream market for investors.

Investing challenges lead to "emerging" tag
MSCI cites numerous reasons for Korea's categorization as "emerging" rather than "developed," including the lack of an "active offshore market" for its currency. We've experienced some other impediments to investing in Korea. Many Korean companies seem indifferent -- at best -- to attracting foreign investors. Among even the largest Korean companies, many only release their financial statements in Korean, creating significant barriers to foreign investors trying to find and analyze pertinent corporate information.

The Korean regulatory regime sets the tone: When we first launched the Independence Fund, we had to jump through myriad hoops just for the right to participate in the Korean markets. Of the markets where we are now able to trade, it was the most difficult nut to crack by far. Regardless, these obstacles are surmountable and what's more, once you get past them, I believe that the Rodney Dangerfield-esque quality of the Korean market hides some real opportunities.

And, of course, North Korea keeps things exciting.

Tensions rise before visit
In the weeks prior to our early-December arrival, North Korea shelled the island of Yeongpyong, killing several South Korean soldiers and civilians. Tensions were still quite high and while our Korean host insisted it was safe, she disclosed that several foreign firms had canceled visits. Nevertheless, from the moment Bill Mann and I arrived at Incheon International Airport, we found that it was business as usual wherever we went (and one company we visited, Woongjin ThinkBig, had its stylish headquarters in Paju, about 5 miles from the North Korean border).

While many of the Koreans we spoke to admitted being nervous in the immediate aftermath of the attack, all had returned to their regularly scheduled lives. In fact, the most common lingering sentiment was one of frustration at the South's government for appearing too timid in response. This spoke to a great miscalculation on the part of the North: For years they have been able to count on popular opinion in the South pressuring the government not to retaliate. This time around, we definitely got the impression that many South Koreans were sick of the North's provocations.

Another thing we found interesting: We spoke to several South Koreans who were openly hostile to the concept of even reuniting South Korea with the North. It makes some sense: Over the past 50 years North Korea has so totally cut itself off from the South that while older Koreans have family members with whom they'd love to reunite, many in the younger generation lack this direct emotional link. To them, North Koreans are as foreign as Bhutanese, with whom they have almost no contact and little in common.

Unease = Opportunity
We take no pleasure in human suffering, but sometimes investing isn't for the squeamish. The fact is that unease between the two Koreas can lead to investment opportunities. Despite the political concerns, South Korea's KOSPI index performed very well in 2010, gaining 22%. We have identified several worthy investment candidates in the country, including some, such as Posco, that represent long-term holdings for the Independence Fund.

One name that regular Declarations readers may recognize is Sung Kwang Bend Co. This pipe fitting manufacturer headquartered in Busan has been a staple of our Top 11 list for several months now. As is common among Korean companies, Sung Kwang Bend generates more than half its sales from exports. Our meeting with the company went well -- except for the part of the factory tour when I was almost run over by a forklift (it was probably my fault).

Apart from the industrial companies in Busan, we also met with several consumer-oriented companies in and around Seoul. We saw a diverse range of products, including cosmetics, snack cakes, textbooks, and ginseng extract. Many of these companies provide us a back-door play into China, deriving sales from the most populous nation while maintaining the corporate governance standards of a more mature market.

One example of this dynamic is Orion Corp. Not to be confused with dozens of other Orions around the world, this one makes Choco-Pies (full disclosure: I'm eating one right now) and other snacks; it also runs all legal sports betting in Korea, a synergy that surpasses my understanding. But sticking to just the confectionery segment, Orion earned half its 2009 revenue domestically and the other half overseas, mostly in China. Back in 2005, that split was 82% domestic. While Korean sales grew only 3% per year over the ensuing years, overall segment revenue expanded by 17% a year thanks to accelerating sales into China, Russia, and even Vietnam.

Catching the Korean Wave
Despite the formidable companies we met, the hottest export seems to be the so-called Korean Wave -- Korean TV, music, and film are increasing in popularity throughout the rest of Asia, and I must admit I found the pop music to be obnoxiously catchy. But the highlight of the trip may have been when Bill and I were simultaneously offended and delighted by the name of a restaurant in downtown Seoul -- Fat Panda: American Style Chinese Food. We asked our host about it and he said, "I love American-style Chinese food!" So what do we know?

For all of the obvious prosperity in Korea, it can be difficult finding small- and mid-cap companies in which to invest. This is particularly true because so much business in Korea operates through conglomerates, or chaebol. Americans will recognize the name Samsung, but apart from the electronics sold into North America, Samsung includes groups operating in the chemical, financial, and apparel industries, to name just a few. Other recognizable names include LG and Hyundai.

The last meeting of our trip was with Hyundai Mipo Dockyard, a publicly traded shipbuilder in the Hyundai chaebol. Hyundai Mipo is a subsidiary of Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries, a more diverse shipbuilding company. Hyundai Samho is itself a subsidiary of Hyundai Heavy Industries, which calls itself the worlds No. 1 shipbuilder, in addition to having a hand in countless other industrial projects. In turn, a large portion of Hyundai Mipo's assets are invested in shares of its parent, Hyundai Heavy. This type of intertwined ownership is not uncommon in Korea, and with a little digging can lend itself to undetected investment opportunities (or pitfalls).

Despite its hurdles, South Korea has established a rich and vibrant economy with strong growth, low unemployment, and plenty of opportunity. It has earned its stripes as one of the so-called Asian Tigers, and we believe it is still well-positioned for future growth. Many of our favorite Korean companies fly under the radar of the typical global investor, but with a patient eye we believe there will be plenty of values to uncover.

For further reading I suggest: Nothing to Envy: Ordinary Lives in North Korea by Barbara DemickTroubled Tiger: Businessmen, Bureaucrats and Generals in South Korea by Mark CliffordA Single Shard by Linda Sue ParkBest English-language local news source: Chosun IlboBest English-language North Korean government news agency: Korean Central News AgencyFavorite Korean song: So Nyeo Shi Dae, "Run Devil Run"Under the radar Korean restaurant: Haeun Maru, Busan

Editor's note: Tony Arsta is not able to engage in discussion on the boards or in the below comments section. Tony does not own shares of any companies mentioned.


Browse your computer here

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Funds ride the bull market rebound, and then some (AP)

BOSTON – The pain of the stock market meltdown is becoming a more distant memory thanks to the stunning rebound of mutual fund returns.

An extreme example: Since the market bottomed in March 2009, real estate mutual funds have risen an average 195 percent, according to Morningstar. They invest primarily in real estate investment trusts, which were lifted by improving prospects for the income-producing commercial properties that REITs own. A $10,000 investment at the market's low has swelled to nearly $29,500. Investors in the top-performing Pimco Real Estate Real Return Strategy fund (PETAX) saw an equal investment grow to nearly $42,000.

Investors can't expect to latch onto a rising market at just the right time. Yet the gains have been so large across the board that virtually anyone who didn't give up on stocks has seen a big payoff. The average returns for 16 of Morningstar's 21 domestic stock fund categories were greater than 100 percent through last week, beating the 95 percent return of the Standard & Poor's 500 index. Even the two categories with the smallest returns — utilities funds and health care funds — are up more than 60 percent.

"The categories that have done the best over the last year or two are the ones investors should be more cautious about," Morningstar fund analyst Ryan Leggio says. "They don't offer the same risks and rewards as they did a year ago, when they were much cheaper to buy."

Most of the top-performing funds in this bull market specialize in unusually volatile stocks. So it's important to note that they fell more steeply than the 57 percent drop in the S&P 500 from its October 2007 peak to March 2009. That means they had a bigger pit to climb out of to get investors back to where they started — a goal many of the recent hottest funds have yet to achieve.

In fact, nine of the top 10 individual stock funds over the past 24 months have bottom-rung 1-star ratings on Morningstar's 5-star scale. That system measures past returns, while also considering how much risk a fund took to achieve them.

Still, their supersized gains since the market turned the corner offer a reminder that the best short-term opportunities can often be found in the hardest-hit areas. That was a tough move to make in early 2009, when it seemed the market's free-fall might not end.

But when prospects brightened that spring, the stock funds that had lost the most "just snapped back really hard," Leggio says.

One example of how volatile the top-performing funds have been: Ariel Fund (ARGFX) is up 229 percent since the market bottom. That surge came after the fund lost 55 percent from the market's peak-to-trough, compared with the 45 percent average decline for its mid-cap blend fund peers.

A look at a few of the top-performing domestic stock fund categories since the market bottom, and the outlook for the market segments they specialize in:

_Real estate: Although the recovery of the housing market remains stalled, the outlook for REITs has been improving. Their fortunes have little to do with single-family home price trends. Instead, REITs are all about the commercial and industrial property markets, which are being lifted by the economic recovery.

One reason these funds have recently been popular: Investors, especially income-seeking retirees, are drawn to the fact that REITs are required to pay out most of their operating income as dividends. With yields for 10-year government Treasury bonds around 3.5 percent, REITs' average 4-percent dividend yields look attractive. Historically, REIT dividend yields have averaged around 6 percent.

REITS were offering investors almost 10 percent yields in March 2009, when their prices became so cheap that their yields surged (prices and yields move in opposite directions). But if 10-year Treasury yields keep rising, as they have this week, REITs could look less attractive, sending REIT stocks down.

_Industrial: Mutual funds specializing in industrial stocks such as manufacturers and chemical companies have been the second-strongest domestic stock category, with an average 162 percent gain. Most indicators suggest an economic recovery will continue, so the outlook for these funds remains good. However, it's open to debate whether stock prices already reflect those expectations.

_Small companies: Small-cap funds, which specialize in stocks of companies valued at less than $2 billion, ranked high. They posted an average gain of about 140 percent. Small companies are typically more dependent on borrowing and near-zero short-term interest rates have lifted their stocks. Although rates have nowhere to go but up, few economists expect a sharp rise anytime soon. However, because small-caps have fared better in the bull market than large-caps, the situation could reverse itself. Typically, large-caps regain the lead as a bull market begins to lose momentum.

• Financial: Funds specializing in stocks of banks and other financial companies have risen an average 133 percent. They were helped as the credit troubles that sent these stocks into their 2008 tailspin eased. Like industrials, financial stocks often move closely in synch with the economy, so they could continue to rebound. But credit issues vary widely from bank to bank, so generalizations are tough to make.

_Technology: These mutual funds, up an average 133 percent, are an exception among the bull market's top-performing categories. The others rebounded from unusually sharp drops during the meltdown. Tech funds have been faring relatively well all along, and have the best 3-year record among all domestic stock fund categories. Their average annualized gain is nearly 10 percent. Credit consumers' insatiable demand for gadgets, which withstood the recession. That demand shows little sign of slowing — year-to-date, tech funds are up an average 6 percent, second-highest among all categories.

____

Questions? E-mail investorinsight(at)ap.org.


Browse your computer here

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

The Irrelevant Stock Market (The Motley Fool)

Reuters blogger Felix Salmon wrote a very interesting op-ed in The New York Times last week about our increasingly irrelevant stock market:

... the glory days of publicly traded companies dominating the American business landscape may be over. The number of companies listed on the major domestic exchanges peaked in 1997 at more than 7,000, and it has been falling ever since. It's now down to about 4,000 companies, and given its steep downward trend will surely continue to shrink.Nor are the remaining stocks an obvious proxy for the health of the American economy. Innovative American companies like Apple and Google may be worth hundreds of billions of dollars, but most of them don't pay dividends or employ many Americans, and their shares are essentially speculative investments for people making a bet on how we're going to live in the future.Put another way, as the number of initial public offerings steadily declines, the stock market is becoming little more than a place for speculators and algorithms to compete over who can trade his way to the most money. ...Meanwhile, the companies in which people most want to invest, technology stars like Facebook and Twitter, are managing to avoid the public markets entirely by raising hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars privately. You and I can't buy into these companies; only very select institutions and well-connected individuals can. And companies prefer it that way.

Sadly, he's all sorts of right. The only reason a company should go public is to gain access to capital markets. If they can privately obtain all the capital they need and bypass the public circus of high-frequency traders, quarterly earnings roasts, and regulatory flame-throwing, then by all means they should do so.

But to play devil's advocate, the decline of public markets might not be as bad as it looks.

The number of listed companies shouldn't be of upmost importance in judging markets' relevancy. The quality of those companies should get some weight, too. The number of listed companies may have peaked in 1997, but what kind of companies were these? Data from the World Federation of Exchanges shows the Nasdaq is responsible for essentially the entire decline since then -- fully 35% of Nasdaq listings vanished between 1998 and 2003. Maybe these were good companies looking to escape the rigors of public life. Or maybe they never should have been public to being with -- because they weren't real companies, just dot-com dreams someone managed to take public. More than 65% of Nasdaq companies were profitable last year. My humble data source doesn't go back far enough, but one can only imagine it was a fraction of that in 1997.

And Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL - News) and Google (Nasdaq: GOOG - News) may not pay dividends or employ many people, as Salmon notes, but neither, presumably, do Facebook or Twitter, the privately held stars he mentions. Twitter, in fact, recently employed just 300 people -- the equivalent of 0.002% of the population of Billings, Mont. And 72% of S&P 500 companies do actually pay a dividend. For every dividend-free Apple or Google, one can point out an Intel (Nasdaq: INTC - News) or MSFT (Nasdaq: MSFT - News), which are innovating, employing, and paying good dividends to shareholders. Good companies worthy of your money are still public. Many of them. Probably more than there ever have before. Even with 4,000 listed companies, the average investor is still completely overwhelmed with opportunity. Most would be better off with fewer listed companies tempting them to invest in areas they have no hope of understanding.

In the end though, I don't think Salmon's larger point can be argued. Companies don't have the incentive to be public today that they did in years past. Other options are available, and the annoyances of public life are multiplying in force.

Will this trend continue? Is it something investors should worry about?

You tell me.

Fool contributor Motley Fool Inside Value recommendations. Google is a Motley Fool Rule Breakers pick. Apple is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor choice. The Fool has written puts on Apple. The Fool owns shares of and has bought calls on Intel. Motley Fool Options has recommended a diagonal call position on Intel. Motley Fool Options has recommended a diagonal call position on Microsoft. The Fool owns shares of Apple, Google, and Microsoft. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Browse your computer here