Howard Marks - "Here They Go Again"
Marks, the Chair of Oaktree Capital Management, identifies several worrisome trends:
- some of the highest equity valuations in history
- the so-called complacency index at an all-time high
- the elevation of a can't-lose group of stocks
- the movement of more than a trillion dollars into value-agnostic investing
- the lowest yields in history on low-rated bonds and loans
- yields on emerging market debt are lower still
- the most fund raising in history for private equity
- the biggest fund of all time for levered tech investing
- billions in digital currencies whose value has multiplied dramatically
Another set of ingredients is listed here:
There is no shortage of commentary on the potential for a significant market correction. There is no way to predict when a correction will take place.
Some potential strategies:
- reduce exposure in equities and go to cash
- have the patience to wait for up to three or four years for a correction with the thought that it could be profitable to re-enter the market when valuations are more attractive
- economize: reduce spending in the meantime and make no major long-term financial commitments
Here is an extract from a previous post which was published in January 2016. It is all the more relevant at the present time.
When
to Sell - The Thinking Process
The
decision to sell is much harder than the decision to buy for a
variety of reasons. On the one hand, it can be a recognition of
"failure" in the event that the selling price falls below
the purchase price. On the other, it forestalls the possibility of
further gains if the selling price increases above the purchase
price.
Most
treatises on the matter start by listing reasons for selling. Many of
the following reasons are inter-related:
- stock becomes "over valued"
- the onset of adverse changes in management and boards of directors
- company's failure to deliver on its business plan e.g. botched product launch, inability to secure financing etc.
- company's ability to compete declines
- a take-over makes the assets less desirable
- a "major" event causes severe (and potentially irreparable damage) to a company's business e.g. major legal actions with major settlement costs
- undesirable external changes in the company's operating environment e.g. adverse socio-political developments
- need to rebalance a portfolio in the event that the price runs up significantly
- a better investment opportunity emerges
- need to meet margin calls
- need for cash for personal purposes
- tax loss at the year end
I
suspect that most investors sell out of fear - fear that they will
experience yet further losses if they hold on in an environment of
general market pessimism.
Thinking
About Selling Should Start Before the Purchase
This
is the key lesson I have learned. I'll use an analogy. A few years
ago, I snowboarded on a large western mountain, my first time on
anything with a vertical over 1000'. It was a bit intimidating until
I had a chat with an advanced skier at the head of a long run. His
practice was to visually scout out the slope beforehand: to look for
changes in gradient, snow conditions, light etc - every thing that
might affect his run. He then charted a mental path down the slope,
noting points where he would turn, reduce/increase speed and
potential bailout points if things got difficult. This done, he set
out way points to guide him. His other piece of advice was to ski
only to the end of the line-of-sight path and to stop and lay out
another line once another part of the slope came into view.
I
started to use this approach and found that life on the slopes became
a lot easier and more enjoyable.
It's
much the same with investing, especially with respect to the decision
to sell.
- I state my investment thesis
- I establish some "way points" and monitor them closely
- If the course of the company changes I start to investigate the validity of my investment thesis
- The investigation may cause me to sell, buy more, or revise my thesis in light of further information e.g. a decline in the stock price may be the result of a transitory condition
- At yearly intervals (more or less) I review my investment thesis - akin to surveying the next line of sight on the slope.
It
is very important to define one's investment horizon. For most of my
investments, the horizon exceeds five years. It is largely the
result of the type of company I invest in - cyclical resource-based
enterprises or others where businesses move more slowly e.g. the
North West Company. As a result, I am prepared to accept
considerable variation in the price of a company's stock. The
current decline decline in the stocks of Deere and Rocky Mountain
Dealerships is a case in point. At some point, the agricultural
cycle will recover along with the price of these stocks. I see no
reason to sell now and try to time the market. My original
investment thesis has not changed.
On
the other hand, investments in other types of businesses involve
shorter time horizons. High tech enterprises are an example: the
risk of technological obsolescence or loss of market share to
competitors often creates volatile circumstances for investors. In
the case of precious metals, I have noted that prices are volatile.
I have decided to speculate but only with funds I am prepared to lose
if everything goes south ... and never to use leverage. In this
instance, my waypoints differ from my other investments.
The
central point is to develop a "mental model". It will
differ for each investor in accordance with variables such as a
person's tolerance for "risk" and "volatility",
the sector, and the reasons for investing. It is more of an art than
a science.