Jeff Black A Comment -- General Comments From an Expert A Commentary N/A Sep 25, 2012

This rally has been one that everyone's hated because it didn't make a whole lot of sense. We still have all this tariff noise, though there has been some de-escalation. A lot of hedge funds sold near the bottom. People are scrambling to try to keep up and chase this market higher. 

Tariffs are hard for people to deal with. There's an acronym going around -- TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out). And it's what the market is starting to believe. By and large, what market participants got wrong in April was that earnings in the US and Canada actually held up better than people thought. Forward guidance held up better. There is some de-escalation, maybe 2 steps forward and 1 step back (as today with China). 

You have to ask yourself some questions. Does Trump want to be unpopular? No. Does he want to lose the midterms, which are not too far off? No, but he probably will if he puts the economy into recession. Softer inflation data came out in the States today. But it's sell in May and go away, and we still have this opaqueness.

We end up with the next 18 months looking pretty good, with a big beautiful bill coming in with deregulation, tax cuts, spending, etc. And all that will be good for the economy. But the short term will see tough markets.

What they're saying is that this number captured the front-running of trying to get ahead of tariffs, and that we'll still see the negative effects. But there is all this optimism with this new government being much more stimulative for Canada. Getting more projects off the table and boosting inter-provincial trade. 

It's nice to see this better-than-expected number. What does that mean for the BOC next week? Probably will be on hold and not lower rates. Our currency is going up, which isn't as much a secular Canada call as it is a weak greenback.

Investors can take comfort in that he thinks we've seen the big moves down. But we're still going to have trading ranges. Markets are back near highs, so you don't need to go full-in. And it is May.

Still cheaper than the banks, and with better growth and lower payout ratios. Great place, plus it's fairly down the line exempt from tariffs.

New money always has to be put to work. So you have to ask yourself:  what should I own, and how much of it? Where should I be on asset allocation -- at, over, or under? And it all depends on the economic outlook, which is hazy. Prices are expensive here.

So he's trying to find places that are going to work regardless of the cycle.

You still have to own US stocks, especially if they're cheaper and more compelling. 

He might be naive, but we have Team Carney in place. You have to be considered a "bad country" to be punished with taxes to such a large degree. He believes we'll be able to avoid the worst. It might mean going against the OECD. But Canada has to do what it has to do.

Consistent Compounder & Lessons Learned: Apple Inc.

Market cap: US$3.1 trillion. YTD return: about -17 per cent. One-year: eight per cent. Five-year: 161 per cent. Twenty-year: 15,325 per cent.

In 1986, lots of investors bought Apple shares at less than 10 cents a share (price adjusted for splits). If you bought then and still own shares your return would have been — wait for it — 240,609 per cent. Apple succeeded for many reasons but essentially it revolutionized technology with the iPhone, iPad and services, achieving massive sales and recurring revenue. But it also had huge success simply branding its products. Often its products were not much better than competitors’, such as the iPod versus an MP3 player. But the company’s marketing convinced consumers that its brand has status. With product success the company then shifted to higher-margin services, which investors value more highly.

Lessons learned: Create products that people love and invest in your brand as much as you invest in technology.
Unlock Premium - Try 5i Free 

You have to think about what consumer prices are going to look like and how consumers may have to cut back. 2/3 of all economic growth comes from the consumer. If they have to cut back on spending, then changes are that profitability may be weaker in the coming quarters.

His team sets a plan and sticks to it. In a 30-stock portfolio, he'd have about 4 Canadian, 13 US, and 13 international. It's not where the companies are domiciled, it's about where the revenue streams are coming from. 

He's gotten emails over the past weeks about the CAD vs. USD. Important to understand that currency risk becomes benign over a 10 to 20-year time horizon. If you think about the USD vs. CAD, the annual change over 25 years has been 0.2%. With Europe, it's been 0.6%. So don't fret.

His approach is to have a list of stocks, and each client's portfolio is customized with 30 names. They look at the percent weightings in the portfolio. When it comes time to do some buying, they look at the ones with the lightest weight because those are the ones that are down the most. The expectation is that, at some point in time, profits will return and stock prices will turn around and start to go up again.

Stay in the game. Protecting your losses is much more important than how much you make.

The way they manage risk is to not only keep the percent weightings in line, but also to keep 50% in the 4 inelastic industries:  consumer, healthcare, financials, and utilities. The other 50% can go in the more volatile technology or industrial sectors. By country, again, he keeps that 20/40/40 mix among Canada, US, and international. 

He wants to have 50% in large caps, where most of the profits are being used to pay out dividends, and that's the income side of the portfolio. Still wants to have another 40-50% in small-mid caps; that's because more of the profits are going back into the business for capital appreciation over time. This way, you get that nice blend of income and growth. Dividend growth offsets inflation.

He doesn't have to chase sectors or areas because they're already global managers. So when EMs and Europe took off, they were already there and benefited from it.

He favours insurance companies over banks right now. What's going to happen when all those people who bought houses in 2020 with 20% down, with 5-year fixed mortgages at 1.5%? The value of their home has dropped 20%, now they have no equity in their house, and they suddenly become high risk. 

Canadian banks haven't yet had to face this problem. If payments double or triple, and more income has to be allocated to debt repayment, that will impact loan loss provisions and profitability. Most banks raised provisions, but not enough. BOC may have to lower rates to keep the economy going, and that's not good for banks either.