7/12/15: Another "Nothing to See Here" Chart for M&As

I have written over the recent months about the over-heating present in the global (and especially N. American) M&A markets (see posts here,  here and here) so it is only reasonable from continuity perspective to post some more data on the subject. Here it is :

Source: @Jim_Edwards

Looking at the volumes of M&A deals since around the start of 2Q 2014 through today, one cannot escape a simple conclusion: absent organic growth in revenues, and with shares buy-backs now being discounted in the markets (belatedly awakening to the reality of unsustainable valuations in the equity markets), current levels of M&A (over at least 18-21 months period) are simply, certifiably, clearly bonkers.

23/10/2012: Signs, Indicators and Noise

From time to time in the past I used to look at CDS spreads for sovereigns. I have not done so in a while. In fact, I have not even updated my database for these in a while. Why? Because something is dodgy about the sovereign assets' market that is manipulated by the sovereigns. And here's a quote from the TF Market Advisors that sums it up well enough:

"One of the effects of the central bank policies is that many of the more obscure parts of the market that you could look to for clues or early warning signs have been eliminated. Sure these markets still exist, but the information from them is so manipulated that it is difficult to get a clear read."

1. LIBOR : "Between Fed lending programs, LTRO, and the lawsuits, I have no clue what to make of LIBOR other than it probably isn’t a whole lot of use as a sign of anything."
2. EUR/USD 3 month basis swap : "...was another useful indicator showing the relative strength of US banks versus European banks. Again with LTRO and various central bank global swap lines, this measure has become useless. With banks willing to use central bank liquidity without fear of reprisals or negative stigma, they do, and this rate hovers right around where the governments would like it to be."
3. European sovereign CDS : "has become far more difficult to interpret as all these naked bans get enforced. French CDS went from 106 on the 11th of October to 65 today, in pretty much a straight line. I have difficulty thinking of one real reason that France could have done so well – they have funded ESM, instituted some domestic policies that seem dubious at best, have had weak economic data, and are marching to the beat of their own drum in the Euro in a way that indicates willingness to take on more debt, yet they are tighter. This makes it hard to figure out what is going on in European bank CDS."
4. US Treasury Yields : "...are very difficult to figure out. The Fed owns over 35% of treasuries with maturities 5 years and longer. Almost everything you would look at and try and infer from the treasury market is skewed by that."
5. Economic data "has even come under attack. In general I don’t believe the data is manipulated, particularly not for political purposes (but there are a growing number of people who do). But I do think they try and cover up their own mistakes. Jobless claims came in at 337k or something (pre upward revision) two weeks ago. There was a lot of concern, and some very good economists spoke to the BLS and came up with the conclusion that one big state had not sent in their quarter end revisions in time. There was some confirmation of this, but then some sort of denial. Missing the deadline would be an honest mistake in my opinion, it shouldn’t happen, but I can see how it could. Then last week, we posted 388k as the number. Now we have data that looks like 369k, 342k, and 388k. Is the reality that had they properly accounted for the missing number, that the claims have been 369k, 365k, 365k? If so, we have okay but steady claims. If the actual data is correct (which I don’t think it is) then we would have seen some euphoric hiring followed by aggressive firing. I find that harder to believe."

Note, I wrote about US jobless claims figure here.

There is a major problem, folks. While we can debate the numbers left, right and center, what is clear is that the current environment (political, monetary and policy) is becoming less and less transparent. The market signals are being distorted (willingly and via the law of unintended consequences) and this does not bode well for the future. 

1/1/2012: Groundhog Year 2012 - part 1

In the tradition of looking back at the year passed, let's take a quick view of one of my favorite indicators for risk assets fundamentals: the VIX index.

CBOE Volatility Index finished the year well off the inter-year highs, but nonetheless in an unpleasant territory. VIX closed December 2011 at an elevated 23.40, ahead of December 2010 close of 17.75, 2009 close of 21.68 and only behind the December 2008 levels of 40.00. December 2007 close was 22.50 and December 2006 was 11.56.

More unpleasant arithmetic emerges when we consider inter-annual performance. Historical maximum for daily close (from January 1990 through present) is 80.86, while maximum for 2010-present was 48.00 set on August 8, 2011.

The historical average for VIX is 20.57, while the average for January 2008-present is 27.74, for January 2010-present is 23.38 and for 2011 as a whole - 24.20, implying that wile 2011 was not the worst performing year on the record, it was certainly worse than 2010. Table below summarizes annual data comparatives.

Average intra-day volatility actually marks 2011 as the worst year on record. Average intra-day spread for VIX stands at 9.28 in 2011 against 8.97 in 2010-present and 9.08 in 2008-present. And both 3mo and 1mo dynamic standard deviations posted poor performance for VIX in 2011, making it the worst year on the record other than 2009. VIX dynamic 1mo semi-variance closed the year on 7.80 and annual average of 4.26 against 2010 average of 3.96 and 2009 average of 5.78.

Charts below highlight the fact that 2011 was a poor year for fundamentals-based analytics:

All above suggest that volatility is the starting point for 2012. Welcome back to the New 'Groundhog Day' Year.