Stockchase Opinions

Larry Berman CFA, CMT, CTA A Comment -- General Comments From an Expert A Commentary COMMENT Oct 21, 2024

Educational Segment. Implications of US election.

Last week, Stan Druckenmiller said that markets have started to price in a Trump victory. Let's unpack that.

A bunch of smart people created an (untradeable) index that lists the companies that would benefit the most or least from a Trump win. Since July 21, when Biden dropped out of the election and Harris got a big bump in the polls, the companies based on a Trump win initially came down.

Since July 21, the total US market has gone up. But the stocks that would benefit most from a Trump victory are still down. Originally, Trump was going to win against Biden; whereas now it's a lot closer against Harris. But recently, a Trump victory is heading up.

On a long/short chart, you're long the companies if Trump wins, and short the companies if he loses. Since July, the chart was initially down, but recently stronger. So the charts have turned. 

Look to polling and predictive markets, where people can make a bet on who's going to win the election. If Trump wins you get paid, and if he loses you get $0. A chart on the predictive market initially showed higher probability of a Harris win, but recently things have gone the other way. Markets are thinking now that Trump is going to win. If you look at polling from a company like Five ThirtyEight, for example, they're now saying that Trump's ahead. 

So lots of indications that Trump's going to win. But it's a Trump sweep of both the House and Senate, and the Presidency, that would be the worst outcome for the market. Right now, Senate's looking like 51 seats for Republicans. The House race is going to be very close, but best guess right now is that both House and Senate go GOP.

Best outcome for the market would be Harris in the White House, split Congress with gridlock and not a lot of spending. The bond market, such as TLT, is trading as though it'll be a Trump sweep. He's all about cutting taxes, which means more debt financing, and that's inflationary.

Larry's all for putting $$ back in people's pockets, but that will limit the Fed's ability to cut rates, and the market's not priced for this right now. If we get a sweep, initially markets will rally. He'd recommend selling, not buying, into that rally. The cost of money would go up, the Fed would be less accommodative, and that will eventually hit equity multiples. Now, he can't tell you exactly when.

Bond yields are backing up. Someone came out today with a 5% US 10-year bond. If Trump loses, he's probably going to jail. If he loses, the Trump Media stock, DJT, will be worth nothing. If he wins, the stock will keep going. If it breaks below $25, bearish on Trump until election. If it keeps going higher, Trump's going to win.

It's the ideal tool to help you make quicker, more informed decisions for managing and tracking your investments.

You might be interested:

COMMENT
TSX hit new intraday high today. What's driving that?

It's been the same themes all year long. If you look at the core sector leadership groups, it's been financials, industrials, and materials really driving the bus. Materials have been exceedingly strong.

There's been continued hedging in portfolios against inflation. Inflation is sticky. While the Fed is now cutting rates, it probably increases the longer-run chances for inflation. You can see that in the long-term treasury bonds.

The TSX is benefiting because the sector makeup in our market is a more inflation-oriented index.

COMMENT
Not much correlation between stocks and sectors.

The problem with market-cap-weighted indices is that they can become exceedingly overweight certain sectors. 

So if you look at the S&P, it's underperforming almost all global markets YTD. It's a very growthy index, and some of the sectors that are really working are very small pieces of the S&P. For instance, materials make up ~3%. Whereas in the TSX, the materials sector is a much larger piece (in the teens). 

In a market right now that's uncorrelated, it means that there are haves and have-nots. For active portfolio managers, it means there's an opportunity to add value.

COMMENT
Other markets compared to the S&P.

From 2007-2024, the all-world index (ex-US) had almost no return. Whether you were looking at Europe, South America, or Asia. Japan had 33 years of no return.

But in the last 18 months, international equities are outperforming the US. Part of that has to do with ~31-32% of the all-world index being financials, and financials have been very steady. Materials is a much larger piece of the global index. There are also a lot of great industrial companies. 

International investors wound up very focused in the US because it was the only game in town. But now their markets and their currencies are doing a little better, and so we're seeing capital rotate back to international stocks.

COMMENT
TSX record high on Wednesday, down today. What's driving investors?

TSX is largely gold, so that's what's driving the bus. It's the only sector outperforming the index this year, and it's outperforming by so much that it's raised the average of everything else.

Under the surface, the infrastructure stocks they own are doing pretty well. So he's happy with where things stand.

COMMENT
Gold.

We're in some sort of changing of the world order. US government taking positions in private companies. Ongoing trade war which escalates and de-escalates day by day. A lot of that is filtering into gold. His firm is a bystander in  this. They own a bit, but not a lot. 

He's been watching the dichotomy between gold and Bitcoin. Bitcoin is supposed to be digital gold and better because it's portable and costs less to store. But it's not performing the same way gold is. That tells him that adoption isn't there yet. As well, when the person on the street is chatting about gold, that's a warning sign of bubble-like behaviour.

The changes we're seeing in the US treasury market and in many countries makes it hard to tell exactly how assets should be valued. Assets are valued relative to each other. A year ago, gold was clearly undervalued relative to other assets, and now that's changed.

You can make logical arguments both that there's room to run higher, as well as that we're overheated here and due for a pullback.

COMMENT
Client safety.

Some investors like the entertainment and streaming segments, but his firm doesn't find those areas durable enough for their clients. That world just moves too fast for them.

Just this morning, he had a discussion with a client who's retiring at the end of this year. She's 58 and has worked for the same company for 30 years. It's not as though she's retiring with a massive portfolio, but it's enough for her to live off of. This portfolio has to take her to, say, 98 years old. That's 40 years. She needs something that's very durable and will last that length of time. Produce income for her to spend, protect the downside, and provide some upside if there are worries about inflation or currency debasement.

COMMENT
Oil.

Interestingly, whole Canadian energy space has been pretty resilient. Gradually people are returning to Canada on the basis of our lower decline rates, better prospects for transporting oil out of the country, and a government that might support further investment. Good case to be made that oil prices could rally from here. 

In 2026, you'll really want to watch drilling plans for US shale drillers. If they're not drilling, that could set the stage for a pretty good environment in Canada.

HOLD
Canadian banks.

He's underweight, and has been for some time. His portfolio position on banks is ~15%, compared to 20-25% of the index. It's not a market-timing call, but more of a long-term structural call. Better places to put $$. For individual clients, he doesn't mind selling some bank stocks to fund expenses. Otherwise, he's happy to hold and collect the dividends. 

All of them are quite rich, he's not buying right now. And we're still not at peak reset for Canadian home mortgages, which will be end of this year and into next. He'll be watching that.

COMMENT
Trevor Rose’s Insights - Trevor’s most-liked answers from 5i Research

Investing 101: Lump-Sum vs. Cash Flows

Time is money, and money is time. One of the founding principles of investing is that cash upfront is almost always better than spread out over a period of time. To achieve the same ending amount, less money is required if it is provided in full upfront than spread out over time. To demonstrate this, we show below that $10,000 upfront grows to ~$25,000 in 12 years, growing at an annual rate of 8%. Conversely, an investor would require 12 payments of $1,225 ($14,700 total) earning 8% annually to have $25,000 by the end of 12 year period. Therefore, $10,000 upfront growing at 8% achieves the same ending goal as $14,700 spread out over 12 years.
Unlock Premium - Try 5i Free