Showing posts with label funds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label funds. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Believe It or Not, It’s Happening to Gold

Last night as I was going over my charts and running my end of the day analysis the charts jumped out at me with a trade setup and wanted to share my cycle chart for gold with you. The price chart of gold below is exactly what my cycle analysis told us to look for last week WELL ahead of the today’s news and its things play out I as I feel they will then we stand to make some pretty good money as gold falls in value during the month of April.

If you have been following my work for any length of time then you know big price movements in the market like today (Tuesday, March 29th) based around the FED news ARE NOT and SHOULD NOT be of any surprise. In fact, this charts told use about today’s pop 2 weeks ago and we have been waiting for it ever since. The news is simply the best way to get the masses on board with market moves and gets them on the wrong side of the market before it makes a big move in the other direction, most times… not always, though.

Take a look at this chart below. You’ll see two cycle indicators, one pink and one blue. The pink cycle line is a cluster of various cycles blended together which allows us to view the overall market trend of biased looking forward 5 – 30 days. The blue cycle line is a cluster of much shorter time frame cycles in this tells us when we should expect strong moves in the same direction of the pink cycles or counter trend pullbacks within the trend.

One quick point to note with cycle trading is that the height and depth of the cycle does not mean the price will rise or fall to those levels, it simply tells us if the market has an upward or downward bias. The current cycle analysis for gold along with the current price is telling us that today the short term cycle topped which is the blue line and our main trend cycle is already heading lower. The odds favor gold should roll over and make new multi-month Lows in August.
gold-collapse

In short, we have been waiting for gold to have a technical breakdown and to retrace back up into a short term overbought condition. Today Tuesday, March 29 it looks as though we finally have the setup. Over the next 5 to 15 days I expect gold to drop along with silver and gold stocks. There are many ways to play this through inverse exchange traded funds or short selling gold, silver or gold stocks.

This year and 2017 I believe are going to be incredible years for both traders and investors. If treated correctly, it can be a life changing experience financially for some individuals. Join my pre-market video newsletter and start your day with a hot cup of coffee and my market forecast video.

Sign up right here > www.The Gold & Oil Guy.com

Chris Vermeulen


Stock & ETF Trading Signals

Thursday, December 24, 2015

Closed Another Winning Trade And New Forecast

Our trading partner Chris Vermeulen just sent over an email detailing his last trade of this holiday shortened week. Make sure to sign up for Chris' holiday special.....
Yesterday December 23rd we closed out a nice winning trade in XLE energy sector. If you have not yet closed the trade can should do so today and will locking an even larger gain of 4-5% return in only three days. The stock market closes early today at 1 pm ET. Today volume will be light and its not worth sitting around watching or trying to trade in my opinion. The best trade for today is to spend quality time with your family and friends.
Attached are couple charts that show where the market is currently trading with my short term analysis and why XLE position was closed yesterday. The market is primed for a sharp correction which may start Monday and if possible, we will take action, but volume will likely remain light for the rest of the year and first couple days of January, so the top may drag out a few more days. Let’s wait for a technical breakdown first before buying inverse ETFs.
overbought 1
Overbought3
overbought2

I would like to thank all my followers and subscribers for their support and kind words throughout the year. It has been an extremely difficult market to trade with the broad market trading in a Stage 3 Distribution pattern. Hedge funds, mutual funds and those who hold individual stocks in their portfolio are all down sharply for reasons I have explained and warned about all year.

Early in 2015 I published a short book talking about how the US stock market was showing significant signs of a topping along with many timing cycles and events that were also unfolding and pointed to a new bear market that will likely last through 2016 and into 2017. Thus far, everything has unfolded as expected and once this Stage 3 Distribution pattern breaks down a new bear market will have confirmed and all kinds of huge trades will start to unfold. It will be a VERY DIFFERENT year than 2014 and 2015.
Chris Vermeulen – www.The Gold & Oil Guy.com

HOLIDAY SPECIAL – GET 12 MONTH OF TRADE ALERTS FOR THE PRICE OF ONLY SIX!


Sunday, December 6, 2015

Another Elephant Trade is Setting Up


It’s a bit unusual for us to reach out to you on the weekend during family time, but this is pretty important. We want to give you a heads up so you don’t miss out on this again. Here’s the situation. Pressure in the markets is building for a big move in the next few weeks. If it hits, this could drive the trends for the coming year.

And I can tell you firsthand that many professional traders and hedge funds will be blindsided by this. They just don’t get what’s driving the markets today. And as you know, that means this set up could be unusually intense (and potentially very profitable) as everyone panics when they discover they’re on the wrong side of the move.

Listen, if you want to grow a small account quickly, then this is the kind of move you need to catch and they only happen about once a year. Now, we want to take a minute to apologize. Here’s why. Our trading partner John Carter released a great free video [click here to watch it] then a special webinar training last week and he went into full detail about this elephant trade set up and how to ride it. And the feedback has been just amazing. Which is why we feel bad.

A whole ton of you missed out because we only sent out one email invitation to register for the webinar. So on Tuesday December 8th at 8 p.m. est John is going to do an encore training for you. Since this message is going out to everyone who missed last time, we strongly encourage you to grab your spot as soon as possible because space is limited.

Click Here to Register

This is NOT a replay. The training will be live so you can use what you learn the next day. John will cover any new market developments and tell you how he is trading them in his own account. I think you’ll agree, anyone can identify a big move in hindsight, but that doesn’t do you much good, right?

That’s why we think it’s so important to be transparent and show you John's positions and results in real time. To join us for this special training, grab your spot now.

Click Here to Register

By the way, in last week’s training John mentioned a Netflix set up that was forming and several attendees jumped on that and did very, very well. Now, quick trades like that don’t always happen in a live training, but sometimes they do. Remember though, the point of this training is really about how to grow your account fast by catching these big elephant trades.

If you missed the recent big move in the Euro, or AMZN, then you don’t want to miss what we believe will be the big trade of the next 12 months.

So Click Here to Register for this special training now before you forget.

See you Tuesday evening,
Ray C. Parrish
aka the Crude Oil Trader



Get John's latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!

Thursday, July 9, 2015

It Could Never Happen Here

By Jared Dillian


I was watching the 6 o’clock news and saw images of closed banks in Greece and people lined up at ATMs. I’m sure you did, too.

This must seem surreal to most people because it seems so remote. But put yourself in these people’s shoes for a second. You have money in the bank. Suddenly you can’t get to it. After standing in long lines, you can only get 60 euros at a time, which isn’t going to last you very long.

What if you didn’t plan adequately and haven’t stashed away any cash? The banks will be closed for a while. What happens?

How do you pay for rent? Or food?
How does your employer pay you?
Do you go homeless? Or hungry?
Do you get really angry, take to the streets, blame someone or something (probably the wrong thing), break stuff, set things on fire?
Will Greece descend into anarchy?
It might.


Doomsday Preppers


Of course, not everyone in Greece is hurting. Many people saw this coming and took action. They took all their money out of the banks, put it under the mattress, or maybe stored it in a safe. Maybe they bought gold, or diamonds, or something else. These people aren’t standing in lines at ATMs. They aren’t going to go homeless or hungry.

But these people get a pretty bad rap—at least here in the US, where we call them “doomsday preppers.” Or “bunker monkeys.” Or “conspiracy theorists.” Or “gold bugs.” They take a beating. Jim Rickards tweeted the other day, “I’ll bet there a lot of Greeks saying, ‘I wish I had bought some gold.’" Truer words have never been spoken.

This week’s issue of The 10th Man is not a gold promotion, but rather a broader discussion about how you can prepare for financial catastrophe. People keep fire extinguishers and first aid kits in their cars. They test their smoke alarms twice a year. They purchase flood insurance or, in my neighborhood, hurricane shutters.
Why would you do all these things but just leave your money in the bank and hope for the best?

I have studied all kinds of financial crises in all parts of the world, from depressions to hyperinflations. The thing they all have in common is that people who do not prepare get crushed. People who are not appropriately paranoid get crushed.

There is such a thing as being too paranoid (if everything you own is in gold and hard assets, you can miss out on some meaty returns in financial assets), but a little paranoia is healthy. For a few years, I had a pretty concrete escape plan, with assets, just in case.

In case of what?.....In case of anything.

No Sympathy Whatsoever


I don’t feel sorry for Greece. I don’t feel sorry for the people in the ATM lines. They have had years to prepare for this day. Most people in similar situations don’t have so much time. I’m shocked that the banks had any deposits left at all.

Probably what will happen is that the banks will require a Cyprus-like bail-in and the depositors will take a massive haircut, getting only a fraction of what they once owned. There are no wealthy Russians to go after. The burden will fall on ordinary Greeks.

It’s also hard to feel badly for a nation of people who have chosen to pursue this ruinous political path—people who cast 52% of their votes for communists or neo Nazis, and who have proven completely unable to take any responsibility for what has transpired.

Greece will probably respond to the failure of extreme left Syriza by electing even more extreme politicians. It seems likely that they will choose a strongman to “get things done.” I think people fail to understand how totalitarianism can happen in the 21st century. Think of this as a YouTube tutorial video on the subject.

Full Faith and Credit


A financial crisis of similar magnitude will happen in the US someday. The only question is whether it will happen in 20 years or 50 or 100 or 200. But it is a virtual certainty. My only hope is that I won’t live long enough to see it.

Still, I know how to prepare for it. You know, in the old days before deposit insurance, people used to keep their money in five to ten different banks to diversify their counterparty risk. If a bank was perceived to be less creditworthy, the banknotes would trade at a discount.

I think that in the days of FDIC and various investor protections, we are lulled to sleep, believing that things really are safe when in reality, they are not. We were hours away from a complete and total financial collapse when the Reserve Primary fund broke the buck and there was a run on the money market mutual funds. We were that close.

After those dark days in 2008, I vowed that I’d never be in that position again.

You do sacrifice investment returns when you do this kind of stuff. Cash or gold or diamonds doesn’t yield anything. But then again, nowadays, neither do bonds. Don’t let the financial media shame you into thinking that taking basic emergency precautions to protect yourself financially is somehow “crazy.”

You can overdo it, though. You don’t need that many cans of pork and beans.
Jared Dillian
Jared Dillian

The article The 10th Man: “It Could Never Happen Here” was originally published at mauldineconomics.


Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Free Webinar: The 5 Step Checklist You Can Use to Find the Next Hedge Fund Darlings

Our trading partner John Carter of Simpler Stocks and Options is back this Tuesday evening June 2nd at 8 pm eastern with another one of his game changing free trading webinars and the trading methods he is covering this time are soooo simple.

You probably already know that John's webinars are wildly popular and always fill to capacity so reserve your asap and log in 10 minutes early to guarantee you don't lose your seat to someone on the waiting list.

Register Today

In this Free Webinar John Carter is going to share....

 *  How do you find these stocks in today's unpredictable market

 *  The fundamental criteria every stock should meet before you buy

 *  The technical analysis tool that I almost named my first child after

 *  Why the market conditions are perfect for this opportunity right now

     And much more....

Just Click Here to Reserve Your Seat Right Now

John sent out a great free video as a primer for this event.....Watch it Here

See you Tuesday night,
The Crude Oil Trader



Get out latest FREE eBooK "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

The Crazy Man’s Guide to the Bond Market

By John Mauldin


I invite you to inspect the following chart of 10 year interest rates in the US. If you don’t have a lot of experience with these things, let me clue you in: This is a very scary looking chart. It’s a classic head and shoulders bottom in yields.


If you’re one of those people who’s scornful of technical analysis, don’t be. Now, I don’t pay much attention to complicated stuff like Elliott Wave or Gann Angles, but there are some very basic technical formations that work reliably most of the time.

I had the good fortune of taking out a mortgage when 10-year rates were at 1.9%, which goes to show that the only time you get to top-tick stuff is by accident.

Now, this is actually not the low in yields. 10 year yields got to 1.4% a few years ago.


Of course, interest rates are even lower in Europe. Take Germany, for example:


I think that these interest rates (which are at 700 year lows in Europe) signify a bubble. Other people don’t, though—they point to x, y, and z as signs of deflation.

I’m very weary of the inflation/deflation argument. A lot of people lost a lot of money betting on inflation when there were obvious signs of inflation (QE). And I fear that a lot of people will lose a lot of money betting on deflation when there are obvious signs of deflation.

I’m a trader at heart, and I try not to get too attached to my views. I pay attention to price. And right now, the price action is telling me that the bond market might be in trouble.

Central Banks Buy High and Sell Low


The first thing you need to know about central banks is that they are the worst traders in the world. The worst. Probably the most famous example in the modern era was the Bank of England under Gordon Brown’s leadership puking its gold holdings—on the absolute lows, between 1999 and 2002. The idea was they had this gold sitting there not generating any yield, so why not sell the gold and buy paper that would generate some yield?

Whoops…..


A less famous example of bad trading by public officials would be the US Treasury’s decision to issue floating rate debt. Now, if the government has floating-rate liabilities, it should want interest rates to stay low, right?.......Whoops!


The all-time lows in rates. To the exact day.

So with all this in mind, don’t you think it’s interesting that the ECB is going to buy European debt—at 700-year low yields? At negative yields, in some cases? Central banks do not buy things on the lows. They buy things on the highs.

Of course, the ECB is not trying to make money on these transactions. Which is the whole point!

The Worst Investors in US History Strike Again


Betting on the end of what is a 30 year interest rate cycle is not a productive use of our time. This bond market has claimed the careers of many investors. It reportedly hastened the retirement of Stan Druckenmiller, arguably the greatest investor of all time, who bet against bonds heavily, thinking yields could not go any lower. They did.

Let me impart some wisdom here: The first rule of finance is that there are no rules in finance. Nothing works all the time. My favorite dumb rule of finance is the one that says your percentage allocation in bonds should be equal to your age. So if you are 60, you should be 60% in bonds.

My guess is that if interest rates rise 2%-3%, people won’t be saying that anymore.

You know what I worry about? I worry about the baby boomers. I worry about this generation, the worst investors in US history, who got carried out in the tech bear market in 2000 and got caned in the financial crisis of 2008, and after having been hammered twice in the span of 10 years in the stock market, went all-in on bonds.

Why? Bonds are safe. Everyone knows stocks are not safe.

Now, in retirement, none of these people expect their bond mutual funds to get cut in half, which would happen if interest rates went up about 3% - 5%.

Imagine if they did!

The disclaimer to all of this is that I’ve been a bond bear for many years, and I’ve been wrong. But for the first time, I think we have something approaching consensus that yields will stay low forever. People who think interest rates are going up are starting to sound crazy. I am starting to sound crazy. That probably means I’m close to being right.

If 10 year rates get above 3%, the previous high, we will know for sure. If that happens, pick up the Batphone, call the White House, sell everything. Why?

If you are still ignoring charts when they are making higher lows and higher highs, God help you.

Jared Dillian
Jared Dillian


Get out latest FREE eBooK "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here

Thursday, October 16, 2014

Calling into question what we are being told about ISIS, QE and Ebola

By John Mauldin


A note has been circulating among economists, calling into question the wisdom of another group of economists who wrote an open letter to the Federal Reserve a few years ago suggesting that one of the risks of their quantitative easing program was increased inflation. Since we have not seen CPI inflation, this latter group is calling upon the former to admit they were wrong, that quantitative easing does not in fact cause inflation. To no one’s surprise, Paul Krugman has written rather nastily and arrogantly about the lack of CPI inflation.

Cliff Asness has responded with a thoughtful letter, with his usual tinge of humor, pointing out that there has been inflation, it just hasn’t been in the CPI. We’ve seen it in assets instead. That money did go someplace, and it has disrupted markets. So why is Cliff’s letter a candidate for Outside the Box, when the markets seem to be bouncing all over heck and gone?

Because, come the next crisis, there is going to be another move for yet another round of massive quantitative easing. And the justification will be that increases in the money supply clearly don’t have much to do with inflation.

I should note that while I did not agree with the original letter (I thought we were in an overall deflationary environment, and I wrote that the central banks of the world would be able to print more money than any of us could possibly imagine and still not trigger inflation – views came in for considerable pushback), my reasons for believing QE2 and QE3 were problematic dealt with other unintended consequences. And ultimately, as global debt gets restructured (which will take many years) inflation will become a problem. Did you notice how Greek debt spreads blew out yesterday? It’s not just about oil. And trust me, France is going to be the new Greece before we know it. The people who think they can control markets and direct investors like sheep are going to be in for a huge surprise, but the nightmare is going to be visited upon the participants in the market.

We then move to a few thoughts from Peter Boockvar, in a letter he writes to savers, noting that the same people who brought you quantitative easing are also responsible for the demise of any income that might possibly have come from saving.

I wish I had good advice for your savings, but I can’t advise buying stocks that have only been more expensive in 2000 on some key metrics right before you know what, and I can’t recommend buying any long term bond as the yields also stink relative to inflation. With the Fed now saying that the dollars in your pocket are now worth too much relative to money in people’s pockets overseas and thus joining the global FX war, maybe you should buy some gold, but I know that yields nothing either. You are the sacrificial lamb in this grand experiment conducted by the unelected officials working at some building named Eccles who seem to have little faith in the ability of the US economy to thrive on its own as it did for most of its 238 years of existence. Borrowers and debt are their only friends. To you responsible saver that worked hard your whole life, may you again rest in peace.

And then we finish with some thoughts from our friend Ben Hunt, who takes exception to being told how to think and believe and act by “those smart people with degrees” who only want to do what’s best for us. Not just in economics but with regard to ISIS and Ebola and everything else. After reading Ben’s essay I called him and said, “Me too!”

I am tired of being manipulated, placated, spin-lied to (if it’s not a word it should be), mutilated, spindled, and folded.

We have to keep our eyes open and entertain the possibility that central banks will “lose the narrative,” that is, their ability to control markets with simple statements. The BIS recently had this to say:

Guy Debelle, head of the BIS’s market committee, said investors have become far too complacent, wrongly believing that central banks can protect them, many staking bets that are bound to “blow up” [at] the first sign of stress.

Mr. Debelle said the markets may at any time start to question whether the global authorities have matters under control, or whether their pledge to hold down rates through forward guidance can be believed. “I find it somewhat surprising that the market is willing to accept the central banks at their word, and not think so much for themselves,” he said. [Source: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, “BIS warns on 'violent' reversal of global markets”]

The 10 year US Treasury slipped below 2% earlier today, but has rebounded somewhat to 2.06% as I write. Oddly, the yen seems to be strengthening slightly as the stock markets once again fall out of bed. Oil continues to weaken. As noted above, Greeks spreads are blowing out. Super Mario needs to get on his bike and start peddling before that concern spreads to other nations almost as insolvent. France will soon be downgraded again. Don’t you just love October?

What an interesting time to hold a midterm election. Have a great week!
Your really thinking through the implications of a stronger dollar analyst,
John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Box

Stay Ahead of the Latest Tech News and Investing Trends...
Each day, you get the three tech news stories with the biggest potential impact.

The Inflation Imputation

By Cliff Asness, AQR Capital Management LLC

In 2010, I co-signed an open letter warning that the Fed’s experiment with an unprecedented level of loose monetary policy – in amount, and in unorthodox method – created a risk of serious inflation. Sporadically journalists and others have noted that this risk has not come to pass, particularly in consumer prices.

Recently there has been an article surveying each of us as to why; seeming to relish in, when provided, our various rationales, presumably as they sounded like excuses. It seems none of the responses provided what the authors clearly wanted, a blanket admission of error. I did not comment for that article, continuing my life long attempt not to help reporters who’ve already made up their mind to make fun of me – I help them enough through my everyday actions, they don’t need more!

More articles of similar bent keep showing up. The authors seem to find it amusing that four years of CPI data wouldn’t get people to change their economic views, while ignoring that 80 years of overwhelming evidence has not dissuaded Keynesians from the belief that this time, if they could only run everything, not just most things, they’d really get it right.

Focusing my attention, as was predestined, Paul Krugman lived up to his lifelong motto of “stay classy” with a piece on the subject entitled Knaves, Fools, and Quantitative Easing. Some lesser lights of the Keynesian firmament have also jumped in (collectivists, of course, excel at sharing a meme). Responding to Krugman is as productive as smacking a skunk with a tennis racket. But, sometimes, like many unpleasant tasks, it’s necessary. I will, at least partially, make that error here, while mostly trying to deal with the original issue separate from Paul’s screeds (though one wonders if CPI inflation had risen in the last four years if Paul would be admitting his entire economic framework was wrong – ok, one doesn’t really wonder – and those things never happen to Paul anyway, just ask him).

Let me say up front that this essay will satisfy nobody. Those looking for a blanket admission of error will get part of what they want; a small part. Those hoping I hold the line denying any misstep will also be disappointed. I believe truth, as is often the case in similar situations, lies in the middle of these and I prefer truth, as I see it, to any reader walking away sated.

We indeed warned about the risks of inflation in 2010 and the CPI has been, to put it mildly, benign since then. First, to give the baying crowd just a bit of what it wants (I will take some of it back soon), our bad (I say “our” but obviously I speak only for myself). When you warn of a risk and it doesn’t come to pass I do think you owe the world this admission, even if you later explain what it means to warn of a risk not a certainty, and offer good reasons why despite reasonable worry this particular risk didn’t come to pass. I, and many other signatories, live in the world of economic or political prognostication, in my case money management, where if you get a bit more than half your calls right you are doing quite well, more than a bit more than half, you’re doing fabulously. I’ll put our collective record up against Krugman’s (and the Krug-Tone back-up dancers) any day of the week and twice on days he publishes.

Let’s start with the big one. We did not make a prediction, something we certainly know how to do and have collectively done many times. We warned of a risk. That’s a very specific choice people like the open letter writers, and Paul, have to make all the time, and he knows this, but that doesn’t deter him. Rather, Paul engages in the old debating trick of mentioning this argument himself and dismissing it. This technique worked for Eminem at the end of Eight Mile. But let’s not be fooled by chicanery (silly Paul, you are no Rabbit). If I had wanted to make a prediction, I would have made one. I didn’t, nor did my fellow signatories. Frankly, if there are any economists, aside from those never-uncertain-but-usually-wrong like Paul, who did not think such unprecedented Fed action represented at least a heightened risk, I think it was malpractice on their part.

An honest Paul Krugman (we will use this term again below but this is something called a “counter-factual”) would have agreed with our letter but qualified that while heightened, he still didn’t think this risk would come to fruition and that he thought it was a risk worth running. Still, I will give the critics half credit here, accept half blame, and issue a demi mea culpa. By writing the letter we clearly thought this risk was higher than others did, and wished to stress it, and it has not (as most commonly measured) as of now come to bear. Our, and my, (half) bad. I hope that makes the critics (half) happy and they can stop copying each other’s articles over and over again.

Of course being able to call out risks, not just make firm predictions, is quite important. If you believe the risk of an earthquake is 10 times normal, but 10 times normal is still not a high probability, it’s rational to warn of this risk, even if the chance such devastation occurs is still low and you’ll look foolish to some when it, in all likelihood, doesn’t happen. If you can’t point out risks you are left with either silence as an option, or overly and falsely self-confident forecasts. Perhaps the latter may work for former economists turned partisan pundits but the rest of us will have to live with the ex ante and ex post ambiguity of discussing risks.

It’s a real subtlety but I think there is truth somewhere in between the current attack meme of “you predicted inflation risk and were wrong and are now hiding behind the word ‘risk’“ and “we only said it was a risk so we cannot be wrong.” I think when you boldly forecast a risk you are saying more than “this might happen but either way I can’t be blamed” and something less than “this will happen and I stake my reputation on it.” We should all be mature enough to know the difference, but apparently that ship has sailed......

Not surprisingly, the above stress on risk jibes with my personal view of monetary policy, one that might not be shared by all my co-signatories. I tend to think it matters less than most think, and matters less often than most think. I tend to view it, for finance fans, in a “Modigliani Miller” (MM) framework, where most corporate financing transactions are paper-for-paper, mattering little. But, in the MM framework bankruptcy costs do matter. Therefore most corporate capital structure decisions are irrelevant, except to the extent they increase the chance of serious financial distress, in which everyone but the lawyers lose (in many models this risk must be balanced against the tax advantages of debt).

From this perspective, slight adjustments to the target Fed funds rate based on exquisitely sensitive perceptions of the probability of economic overheating or slowdown probably make little difference (and don’t even start me on the dots), but deflation or excessive inflation are important to avoid as their damage can be great. They are the bankruptcy costs of monetary policy. Thus, I think sounding the alarm, not making a prediction, that experimental and aggressive monetary policy raised one of these risks was appropriate. But, still, I think most people engaged on the topic spend a lot of time talking about monetary policy in the same way dogs spend a lot of time talking, yes in their secret dog language, about the cars they chase. The cars aren’t affected and generally don’t care.

Now, if you thought the above was an excuse on par with, continuing my canine fixation, “the dog ate my inflation,” and not the demi mea culpa I intended, you’re really going to hate the full blown non-conciliatory excuses about to come.

Economically, I think what everyone of any political or economic stripe missed, certainly including myself, was how little money would circulate, how little would be lent and then spent. In econo-geek, how low the money multiplier would be. Money kept by banks at low but positive interest rates at the Fed clearly isn’t doing much of anything, creating inflation as we feared, or helping the economy as they hoped. To the extent inflation worriers like us were wrong, so were those predicting great economic benefits. The Fed clearly wanted this money lent by banks and spent by companies on investment and by people on consumption.

They didn’t get that, and we didn’t get the inflation we feared. This is not to say that low interest rates, real and nominal, and high prices for risky assets (and the supposed “wealth effect” that comes with them) were not Fed goals. They clearly were. But it seems these intermediate goals have not had their desired effect on the real economy.

Quantitative easing (QE) and other inventive forms of loose monetary policy have simply been less than hoped or feared. Some may declare Fed policy a great success as we’re not in a depression, but they can’t show any counter-factual, and given that this money has largely sat dormant, albeit presumably lowering risk premia (raising asset prices), it’s likely we’d have a similar record-weak recovery with or without it. How this is a victory for one side of the debate or another is beyond me, but obviously clear to Paul and his back-up singers. Of course, it’s also clear to Paul that the 2009 stimulus package saved us from this same second Great Depression (but more stimulus would of course have been much better). Yep, and if we traded good cash for just one more “clunker” we’d be growing at 5% per annum by now with a normal labor participation rate.

By-the-way, ignored in the critics’ review of the original letter was the line, “In this case, we think improvements in tax, spending and regulatory policies must take precedence in a national growth program...” On this I’m unapologetic. We were right, we’re still right, and thanks to people like Paul we’ve moved in the wrong direction. But that’s a fight for another day.

In a field without a broad set of counter-factuals we all stick too much to our priors and ideologies, and perhaps I’m doing that now. But at least I see it, and that’s always step one. Paul is stuck on step zero (if he ever gets up to “making amends” I will be around but given his history he might never get to me). But, if you’d like to advance past step zero, Paul, we’re still waiting on why Keynesianism failed to fix the Great Depression (no doubt not quite enough stimulus; just one more Hoover Dam would have done it, or, as they called it back then, “Dams for Clunkers”), strongly predicted a deep post-WWII depression, didn’t predict stagflation, and generally was on a the downward spiral to the intellectual dustbin until the great recession resuscitated it, not as a workable intellectual doctrine, but as an excuse for politicians to spend on their constituents and causes.

Also remember, much like when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, nothing is over yet. The Fed has not undone its extraordinary loose monetary policy and is just now stopping its direct QE purchases. When monetary policy is back to historic norms, and economic growth is once again strong, a normal number of people are seeking and getting jobs, and inflation has not reared its head, I think we can close the books on this one, still recognizing that forecasting a risk and having it fail to come to bear is not a cardinal sin. But which one of those things has happened yet? Paul, and others, should by now know the folly of declaring victory too early.

At the risk of enraging a whole different group (I promise I’m not denying anything I’m just making an analogy, and one I know is very far from dead on) I’m amazed that a Paul Krugman can look at 15+ years of the earth not warming and feel his beliefs need no modification or explanation, but 4 years of the CPI not inflating is reason not simply to declare victory, but to decry those who disagree with him as “Knaves and Fools.” In fact, rather than also anger Mr. Gore and Steyer, I hope they find this paragraph supportive as I’m saying these debates are rarely settled in either direction in short time frames. Now, if I were cheekier (cheek is not denial!) I’d ask if perhaps our letter was right and the inflation we predicted is in fact occurring in the depths of the ocean? Or, maybe we should ex post relabel our letter a warning of the risk of “extreme price action” including of course the extreme stability we have experienced in CPI these last few years.

Now, while not pointing to the actual ocean it is fascinating where inflation has shown up. Don’t limit your view of inflation to the CPI. No, this isn’t a screed where I claim to have invented my own consumption basket showing inflation is rising at 25% per annum – though some of those screeds are interesting. It’s the far simpler observation that we have indeed observed tremendous inflation in asset prices since this experiment began (of course this was part of the Fed’s intent – but it was meant to stoke real activity not an end unto itself!). Stocks, the spreads on high yield bonds, real estate, you name it.

Inflation is hard enough to forecast, but where it lands is even harder. If one counts asset inflation it seems we’ve indeed had tremendous inflation. While admittedly difficult to prove, as is any of this if we’re being honest as economics rarely offers proofs, you’d be hard pressed to find many economists or Wall Street professionals who don’t see current extremely high asset prices, and low forward looking returns to investors, as at least a partial consequence of the cocktail of QE, loose monetary policy, and financial repression. I understand Paul and others wanting to avoid this as not only does it show that they have no right to crow on inflation, but that the policies they advocate, and we decried, have had little effect on the economy but instead have, at least partially intentionally, exacerbated the inequality Paul spends the other half of his columns excoriating (while of course living himself off the global median income in protest and solidarity).

By the way, again the critics somehow manage to skip another prescient forecast in this same short open letter. We explicitly worried that the Fed’s policies “will distort financial markets and greatly complicate future Fed efforts to normalize monetary policy.” That’s econo-geek for “will drive financial market prices up and prospective returns down, and create financial instability when the Fed tries to stop.” Again, while this would perhaps not surprise the Fed, which actively desired low interest rates and a “wealth effect,” it seems that a fair reading shows that this much maligned letter wasn’t as wrong as the critics say, and was very right in ways the critics ignore.

Moving on, please recall that many, not all, supporters of QE and very loose monetary policy in general, did so exactly because they thought it would create some inflation, and they thought (and many still think) that’s what the economy needs. We, we the letter signers, are responsible for our own forecasts, but you might forgive us a bit for taking the other side at their word!

Bottom line, the half mea culpa above was not a throw away. When you go out of your way to warn of a risk and after a suitable period that risk has not come to bear, at least where everyone, including you, expected it, you should admit some error, and I do. But there is a still a big difference between pointing out a risk and making a forecast (hence the half admission!). A big reason this risk hasn’t come to fruition is, while not as dangerous so far as we thought, it appears QE was only mostly useless. To the extent even that is only mostly true, where effects did show up, it actually caused rather a lot of inflation, but inflation that went straight into the pockets of those who needed it least and whom Paul wouldn’t swerve his car to avoid. That is, it inflated financial assets, benefited the rich, and enhanced inequality.

So, to those who’ve been waiting for one of us to say it, you can have half the mea culpa you clearly want, but mostly Paul is wrong, and twisting the facts, and doing so as rudely and crassly as possible, yet again.

The rest of the JV team of Keynesians who have also jumped on board are doing the same thing, just with more class and less entertainment value than the master.

Now for a real prediction: Paul will continue to be mostly wrong, mostly dishonest about it, incredibly rude, and in a crass class by himself (admittedly I attempt these heights sometimes but sadly fall far short). That is a prediction I’m willing to make over any horizon, offering considerable odds, and with no sneaky forecasts of merely “heightened risks.” Any takers?

Cliff Asness is Founding and Managing Principal of AQR Capital Management, LLC

Dear Saver, May You RIP

By Peter Boockvar, The Lindsey Group LLC

Dear Saver,
To the forgotten and misunderstood soul, may you rest in peace. There just seems that nothing can save you now. You were bloody and battered after the stock market bubble crashed in 2001 and 2002. Afterward, you stuck with stocks but also decided to play it safe in real estate. That was ok for a few years but your stock portfolio fell again by 50% and while you have a great new kitchen and wood paneled library, the value of your house is now worth much less than your mortgage. I know, renting can be so much easier! But some guy named Greenspan said something about a wealth effect.

Finally you said enough is enough. You wanted a safe, conservative place for your savings where living off fixed income of mostly CD’s and bonds was possible. Maybe you’d buy an occasional stock again but maybe not. You called your local branch banker and were told that for the privilege of being a Platinum Honors client that you would be able to secure a better rate on a money market savings account. Nice! You were told that you’d be able to get .10%, more than triple the standard rate of .03% that the average person gets! Disgusted, you went online and saw this great add on the Bank of America website, it said “With a Featured CD I can earn a fixed rate on my nest egg.” Sounds enticing until you scrolled down the page and saw it paid .08% for a fixed 12 month term. It had to be a typo but unfortunately it was not.

Questioning now how you can ever retire on your savings after working hard for the past 40 years, you decided to find out who can possibly be responsible for these pathetic yields when you know your cost of living is rising well above the 1.5-2% that these statisticians at the government keep telling you. You ask what an hedonic adjustment is? Don’t worry about it because the purchasing power of your money relative to inflation has been declining day after day for at least 6 years now. This is madness you say. I agree.

You started to read the papers and watched the news and learned that the men and women that work at the Federal Reserve, mostly economists who call themselves central bankers, sit around a large table and decide what the right interest rate should be. Ok you say, they are smart, they have models created by people that likely did really well on their SAT’s, they know what they’re doing and this can’t last. Well, I’m sorry to say to you, we’re 6 years into zero interest rates and these people have no intention of ever saving your savings. You’re screwed and even though they say it’s in your best interest because zero rates and money printing will help the economy, don’t believe them anymore because the strategy has failed. After all, If these policies actually worked, I wouldn’t be writing this letter to you.

I wish I had good advice for your savings but I can’t advise buying stocks that have only been more expensive in 2000 on some key metrics right before you know what and I can’t recommend buying any long term bond as the yields also stink relative to inflation. With the Fed now saying that the dollars in your pocket are now worth too much relative to money in people’s pockets overseas and thus joining the global FX war maybe you should buy some gold but I know that yields nothing either. You are the sacrificial lamb in this grand experiment conducted by the unelected officials working at some building named Eccles who seem to have little faith in the ability of the U.S. economy to thrive on its own as it did for most of its 238 years of existence. Borrowers and debt are their only friends. To you responsible saver that worked hard your whole life, may you again rest in peace.

Sincerely yours,
Peter Boockvar
Managing Director
Chief Market Analyst
The Lindsey Group LLC

Calvin the Super Genius

By Ben Hunt, Ph.D., Salient


People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don’t realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.  – Bill Watterson, “Calvin and Hobbes”

Here is the most fundamental idea behind game theory, the one concept you MUST understand to be an effective game player. Ready?

You are not a super genius, and we are not idiots.  The people you are playing with and against are just as smart as you are. Not smarter. But just as smart.  If you think that you are seeing more deeply into a repeated-play strategic interaction (a game!) than we are, you are wrong. And ultimately it will cost you dearly.  But if there is a mutually acceptable decision point – one that both you and we can agree upon, full in the knowledge that you know that we know that you know what’s going on – that’s an equilibrium. And that’s a decision or outcome or policy that’s built to last.

Fair warning, this is an “Angry Ben” email, brought on by the US government’s “communication policy” on Ebola, which is a mirror image of the US government’s “communication policy” on markets and monetary policy, which is a mirror image of the US government’s “communication policy” on ISIS and foreign policy. We are being told what to think about Ebola and QE and ISIS. Not by some heavy handed pronouncement as you might find in North Korea or some Soviet-era Ministry, but in the kinder gentler modern way, by a Wise Man or Woman of Science who delivers words carefully chosen for their effect in constructing social expectations and behaviors.

The words are not lies. But they’re only not-lies because if they were found to be lies that would be counterproductive to the social policy goals, not because there’s any fundamental objection to lying. The words are chosen for their  truthiness, to use Stephen Colbert’s wonderful term, not their truthfulness.

The words are chosen in order to influence us as manipulable objects, not to inform us as autonomous subjects.

It’s always for the best of intentions. It’s always to prevent a panic or to maintain confidence or to maintain social stability. All good and noble ends. But it’s never a stable equilibrium. It’s never a lasting legislative or regulatory peace. The policy always crumbles in Emperor’s New Clothes fashion because we-the-people or we-the-market have not been brought along to make a self-interested, committed decision.Instead the Powers That Be – whether that’s the Fed or the CDC or the White House – take the quick and easy path of selling us a strategy as if they were selling us a bar of soap.

This is what very smart people do when they are, as the Brits would say, too clever by half. This is why very smart people are, as often as not, poor game players. It’s why there aren’t many academics on the pro poker tour. It’s why there haven’t been many law professors in the Oval Office. This isn’t a Democrat vs. Republican thing. This isn’t a US vs. Europe thing. It’s a mass society + technology thing. It’s a class thing. And it’s very much the defining characteristic of the Golden Age of the Central Banker.

Am I personally worried about an Ebola outbreak in the US? On balance … no, not at all. But don’t tell me that I’m an idiot if I have questions about the sufficiency of the social policies being implemented to prevent that outbreak. And make no mistake, that’s EXACTLY what I have been told by CDC Directors and Dr. Gupta and the White House and all the rest of the super genius, supercilious, remain-calm crew.

I am calm. I understand that a victim must be symptomatic to be contagious. But I also understand that one man’s symptomatic is another man’s “I’m fine”, and questioning a self-reporting immigration and quarantine regime does not make me a know-nothing isolationist.

I am calm. I understand that the virus is not airborne but is transmitted by “bodily fluids”. But I also understand why Rule #1 for journalists in West Africa is pretty simple: Touch No One, and questioning the wisdom of sitting next to a sick stranger on a flight originating from, say, Brussels does not make me a Howard Hughes-esque nutjob.

I am calm. I understand that the US public health and acute care infrastructure is light years ahead of what’s available in Liberia or Nigeria. I understand that Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas is not just one of the best health care facilities in Texas, but one of the best hospitals in the world. But I also understand that we are all creatures of our standard operating procedures, and what’s second nature in a hot zone will be slow to catch on in the Birmingham, Alabama ER where my father worked for 30 years.

The mistake made by our modern leaders – in every public sphere! – is to believe that they are operating on a deeper, smarter, more far-seeing level of game-playing than we are. I’ve got a long example of the levels of decision-making in the Epsilon Theory note “A Game of Sentiment“, so I won’t repeat all that here. The basic idea, though, is that by announcing a consensus based on the Narrative authority of Science our leaders believe they are stacking the deck for each of us to buy into that consensus as our individual first-level decision. This can be quite effective when you’re promoting a brand of toothpaste, where it is impossible to be proven wrong in your consensus claims, much less so when you’re promoting a social policy, where all it takes is one sick nurse to make the entire linguistic effort seem staged and for effect … which of course it was. The fact that we go along with a game – that we act AS IF we believe in the Common Knowledge of an announced consensus – does NOT mean that we have accepted the party line in our heart of hearts. It does NOT mean that we are myopic game-players, unerringly led this way or that by the oh-so-clever words of the Missionaries. But that’s how it’s been taken, to terrible effect.

I am calm. But I am angry, too. It doesn’t have to be this way … this consensus-by-fiat style of policy leadership where we are always only one counter-factual reveal – the sick nurse or the sick economy – away from a breakdown in market or governmental confidence. I am angry that we have been consistently misjudged and underestimated, treated as children to be “educated” rather than as citizens to be trusted. I am angry that our most important political institutions have sacrificed their most important asset – not their credibility, but their authenticity – on the altar of political expediency, all in a misconceived notion of what it means to lead.

And yet here we are. On the precipice of that breakdown in confidence. A cold wind of change is starting to blow. Can you feel it?

W. Ben Hunt, Ph.D.
Chief Risk Officer, Salient
Like Outside the Box?

Sign up today and get each new issue delivered free to your inbox.
It's your opportunity to get the news John Mauldin thinks matters most to your finances.

Important Disclosures

The article Outside the Box: Calling Into Question was originally published at mauldin economics


Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!

Friday, April 25, 2014

Not All Debt Is Created Equal

By Dennis Miller

Optimal diversification: We all want it. Diversification is, after all, the holy grail of portfolio management. Our senior research analyst Andrey Dashkov has said that many times before, and he echoes that refrain in his editorial guest spot below.

A brief note before I hand over the reins to Andrey. The last time the market tanked, many of my friends suffered huge losses. They all thought their portfolios were well diversified. Many held several mutual funds and thought their plans were foolproof. Sad to say, those funds dropped in tandem with the rapidly falling market. Our readers need not suffer a similar fate.

Enter Andrey, who’s here to explain what optimal diversification is and to share concrete tools for implementing it in your own portfolio.

Take it away, Andrey…


Floating-Rate Funds Bolster Diversification

By Andrey Dashkov
Floating rate funds as an investment class are a good diversifier for a portfolio that includes stocks, bonds, and other types of investments. Here’s a bit of data to back that claim.

The chart below shows the correlation of floating rate benchmark to various subsets of the debt universe.
As a reminder, correlation is a measure of how two assets move in relation to each other. This relationship is usually measured by a correlation coefficient that ranges from -1 to +1. A coefficient of +1 says the two securities or asset types move in lockstep. A coefficient of -1 means they move in opposite directions. When one goes up, the other goes down. A correlation coefficient of 0 means they aren’t related at all and move independently.

Why Correlation Matters

 

Correlation matters because it helps to diversify your portfolio. If all securities in a portfolio are perfectly correlated and move in the same direction, we are, strictly speaking, screwed or elated. They’ll all move up or down together. When they win, they win big; and when they fall, they fall spectacularly. The risk is enormous.

Our goal is to create a portfolio where securities are not totally correlated. If one goes up or down, the others won’t do the same thing. This helps keep the whole portfolio afloat.

As Dennis mentioned, diversification is the holy grail of portfolio management. We based our Bulletproof strategy on it precisely because it provides safety under any economic scenario. If inflation hits, some stocks will go up, while others will go down or not react at all.

You want to hold stocks that behave differently. Our mantra is to avoid catastrophic losses in any investment under any scenario, and the Bulletproof strategy optimizes our odds of doing just that.

When “Weak” is Preferable

 

Now, a correlation coefficient may be calculated between stocks or whole investment classes. Stocks, various types of bonds, commodities—they all move in some relationship to one another. The relationship may be positive, negative, strong, weak, or nonexistent. To diversify successfully and make our portfolio robust, we need weak relationships. They make it more likely that if one group of investments moves, the others won’t, thereby keeping our whole portfolio afloat.

Now, back to our chart. It shows the correlation between investment types in relation to floating-rate funds of the sort we introduced into the Money Forever portfolio in January. For corporate high yield debt, for example, the correlation is +0.74. This means that in the past there was a strong likelihood that when the corporate high yield sector moved up or down, the floating rate sector moved in the same direction. You have to remember that correlation describes past events and can change over time. However, it’s a useful tool to look at how closely related investment types are.


I want to make three points with this chart:
  • Floating-rate loans are closely connected to high-yield bonds. The debt itself is similar in nature: credit ratings of the companies issuing high-yield notes or borrowing at floating rates are close; both are risky (although floating-rate debt is less so, and recoveries in case of a default are higher).

    Floating-rate funds as an investment class are not as good a diversifier for a high-yield portfolio. They can, on the other hand, provide protection against rising interest rates. When they go up, the price of floating-rate instruments remains the same, while traditional debt instruments lose value to make up for the increase in yield.
  • Notice that the correlation to the stock market is +0.44. If history is a guide, a falling market will have less effect on our floating-rate investment fund.
  • The chart shows that floating-rate funds serve as an excellent diversifier for a portfolio that’s reasonably mixed and represents the overall US aggregate bond market. The correlation is close to zero: -0.03. This means that movements of the overall US bond market do not coincide with the movements of the floating rate universe.

    Imagine two people walking down a street, when one (the overall debt market) turns left, the other (floating rate funds) would stop, grab a quick pizza, get a message from his friend, catch a cab, and drive away. No relationship at all… at least, not in the observed time period. This is the diversification we’re looking for.
Floating rate funds provide a terrific diversification opportunity for our portfolio. This gives us safety, and that is the key takeaway.

Our Bulletproof income portfolio offers a number of options for diversification above and beyond what’s mentioned here. You can learn all about our Bulletproof Income – and the other reasons it’s such an important one for seniors and savers – here.

The article Not All Debt Is Created Equal was originally published at Millers Money


Don't miss this weeks great webinar with John Carter. “How HFT firms are causing you to lose money trading”. Click Here to Reserve Your Seat Now!


Monday, March 31, 2014

Inflation Is Coming, What to Do NOW

By Jeff Clark, Senior Precious Metals Analyst

We’ve all heard of the inflationary horrors so many countries have lived through in the past. Third world countries, developing nations, and advanced economies alike—no country in history has escaped the debilitating fallout of unrepentant currency abuse. And we expect the same fallout to impact the U.S., the EU, Japan, China—all of today’s countries that have turned to the printing press as a solution to their economic woes.


Now, it seems obvious to us that the way to protect one’s self against high inflation is to hold one’s wealth in gold… But did citizens in countries that have experienced high or hyperinflation turn to gold in response? Gold enthusiasts may assume so, but what does the data actually show?

Well, Casey Metals Team researcher Alena Mikhan dug up the data. Here’s a country-by-country analysis…...

Brazil

Investment demand for gold grew before Brazil’s debt crisis and economic stagnation of the 1980s. However, it really took off in the late ‘80s, when already-high inflation (100-150% annually) picked up steam and hit unsustainable levels in 1989.

Year Inflation Investment
demand
(tonnes)
1986 167.8% 20.0
1987 218.5% 42.8
1988 554.2% 61.5
1989 1,972%* 86.5
1990 116.2%** -74
Source: The International Gold Trade by Tony Warwick-Ching, 1993; inflation.eu
*Measured from December to December
**Year-end rate

During this period, investment demand for bullion skyrocketed 333%, from 20 tonnes in 1976 to 86.5 tonnes in 1989.

And notice what happened to demand when inflation began to reverse. Substantial liquidations, showing demand’s direct link to inflation.

Indonesia

Indonesia was hit by a severe economic crisis in 1998. The average inflation rate spiked to 58% that year.

Year Inflation Investment
demand (t)
1997 6.2% 11.5
1998 58.0% 22.5
1999 24.0% 11.0
2000 3.7% 8.5
Sources: World Gold Council, inflation.eu

Gold demand doubled as inflation surged. It’s worth pointing out that investment demand in 1997 was already at a record high.

Also, total demand in 1999 reached 120.8 tonnes (not just demand directly attributable to investment), 18% more than in pre-crisis 1997. But overall, once inflation cooled, so again did gold demand.

India

While India has a traditional love of gold, its numbers also demonstrate a direct link between demand and rising inflation. The average inflation rate in 1998 climbed to 13%, and you can see how Indians responded with total consumer demand. (Specifically investment demand data, as distinct from broader consumer demand data, is not available for all countries.)

Year Inflation Consumer
demand* (t)
1996 8.9% 507
1997 7.2% 688
1998 13.1% 774
1999 4.8% 730
Sources: World Gold Council, inflation.eu
*Includes net retail investment and jewelry

Gold demand hit a record of 774.4 tonnes, 13% above the record set just a year earlier. In fairness, we’ll point out that gold consumption was also growing due to a liberalization of gold import rules at the end of 1997.

When inflation cooled, the same pattern of falling gold demand emerged.

Egypt, Vietnam, United Arab Emirates (UAE)

Here are three countries from the same time frame last decade. Like India, we included jewelry demand since that’s how many consumers in these countries buy their gold.

Year Egypt Vietnam UAE
Inflation Consumer
demand (t)
Inflation Consumer
demand (t)
Inflation Consumer
demand (t)
2006 6.5% 60.5 7.5% 86.1 10% 96.0
2007 9.5% 68.5 8.3% 77.5 14% 107.3
2008 18.3% 76.8 24.4% 115.8 20% 109.5
2009 11.9% 58.4 7.0% 73.3 1.6% 73.9
Sources: World Gold Council, indexmundi.com

Egypt saw inflation triple from 2006 to 2008, and you can see consumer demand for bullion grew as well. Even more impressive is what the table doesn’t show: Investment demand grew 247% in 1998 over the year before. Overall tonnage was relatively modest, though, from 0.7 to 2.5 tonnes.

Vietnam and the United Arab Emirates saw similar patterns. Gold consumption increased when inflation peaked in 2008. Again, it was investment demand that saw the biggest increases. It grew 71% in Vietnam, and 27% in the United Arab Emirates.

And when inflation subsided? You guessed it: Demand fell.

Japan

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s plan to kill deflation pushed Japan’s consumer price inflation index to 1.2% last year—still low, but it had been flat or falling for almost two decades, including 2012.

Year Inflation Consumer
demand (t)
2012 -0.1% 6.6
2013 1.2% 21.3


In response, demand for gold coins, bars, and jewelry jumped threefold in the Land of the Rising Sun.

One of the biggest investment sectors that saw increased demand, interestingly, was in pension funds.

Belarus

Unlike many of the nations above, citizens from this country of the former Soviet Union do not have a deep-rooted tradition for gold. However, in 2011, the Belarusian ruble experienced a near threefold depreciation vs. the U.S. dollar. As usual, people bought dollars and euros—but in a new trend, turned to gold as well.

We don’t have access to all the data used in the tables above, but we have firsthand information from people in the country. In the first quarter of 2011, just when it became clear inflation would be severe, gold bar sales increased five times compared to the same period a year earlier. In March alone that year, 471.5 kg of gold (15,158 ounces) were purchased by this small country, which equaled 30% of total gold sales, from just one year earlier. Silver and platinum bullion sales grew noticeably as well.

The “gold rush” didn’t live long, however, as the central bank took measures to curb demand.

Argentina

Argentina’s annual inflation rate topped 26% in March last year, which, according to Bloomberg, made residents “desperate for gold.” Specific data is hard to come by because only one bank in the country trades gold, but everything we read had the same conclusion: Argentines bought more gold last year than ever before.

At one point, one bank, Banco Ciudad, even tried to buy gold directly from mining companies because it couldn’t keep up with demand. Some analysts report that demand has continued this year but that it has shown up in gold stocks.

What to Do—NOW

History clearly shows there is a direct link between inflation and gold demand. When inflation jumps, or even when inflation expectations rise, investors turn to gold in greater numbers. And when gold demand rises, so does its price—you can guess what happens to gold stocks.

With the amount of money the developed countries continue to print, high to hyperinflation is virtually inevitable. We cannot afford to believe in free lunches.

The conclusion is inescapable: One must buy gold (and silver) now, before the masses rush in. The upcoming inflationary storm will encompass most of the globe, so the amount of demand could push prices far higher than many think—and further, make bullion scarce.

Your neighbors will soon be buying. We suggest beating them to the punch.

Remember, gold speaks every language, is highly liquid anywhere in the world, and is a proven store of wealth over thousands of years.

But what to buy? Where? How?

We can help. With a subscription to our monthly newsletter, BIG GOLD, you’ll get the Bullion Buyers Guide, which lists the most trustworthy dealers, thoroughly vetted by the Metals team, as well as the top medium- and large-cap gold and silver producers, royalty companies, and funds.

Normally I’d suggest that you try BIG GOLD risk free for 3 months, but right now, I can offer you something even better: ALL EIGHT of Casey’s monthly newsletters for one low price, at a huge 55% discount.

It’s called the Casey OnePass and lets you profit from the huge variety of investment opportunities we here at Casey Research are seeing in our respective sectors right now—from precious metals to energy, technology, big-picture trend investing, and income investing.

Click here to find out more. But hurry—the "Casey OnePass" offer expires this Friday, April 4.

The article Inflation Is Coming, What to Do NOW was originally published at Casey Research



Sign up for one of our Free Trading Webinars....Just Click Here!


Monday, February 10, 2014

International Buying & Your Shot at 1,000% Gains

By Jeff Clark, Senior Precious Metals Analyst

 

As a gold investor in North America, it sometimes feels like I'm living in some far off land where everyone believes in fairy tales and unicorns.


Most people around me don't seem to see anything wrong with the Fed creating $65 billion a month out of thin air, hey, it's not $85 billion anymore, what a relief! It's business as usual for the US government to spend billions more than it takes in, and a public debt hovering at $17.2 trillion—up from $7 trillion just 10 years ago—seems no more alarming than a rainbow.

No surprise then that these people don't feel any need to own assets that might help them in times of crisis. Hard assets like…..gold.

I'm reminded of a visit I made to China several years ago. One night, I awoke in the middle of the night—something was crawling under the bed sheet. I shot up like a cannonball, trampolined out of bed, and hit the light switch. I searched and searched for whatever bug had made its way under the sheet, but never did find the little vermin. Still, I was so creeped out, I spent the rest of the night on the couch.

I told the staff the next morning what happened—and they did nothing. They just stared at me. They spoke English, so it wasn't that they didn't understand me. It was just that none of them seemed to think it was a big deal. One of them even chuckled. They obviously didn't appreciate the potential health hazard and had no sense of customer service. I left bemused, wondering how people could accept bedbugs as normal—or even if they did, how they could not care about a customer's experience. It was like being on another planet.

I have some of those same feelings when I think about mainstream investors today. How can they not appreciate the potential financial hazard inherent in something as obviously dangerous as today's unprecedented levels of money printing? How can they not care that they have nothing solid, like gold, at the core of their investment portfolios? It's like these people think they live on Planet Sesame Street.

Most people seem to really believe that today's heavy-handed government interventions are not only the right course of action, but will have no negative fallout. Massive currency dilution, unstoppable tides of rising debt, and never-ending fiscal imbalances are hardly a way to cure decades of money mismanagement, and certainly aren't consequence-free. How is it that this is not obvious to all?

I honestly don't know. Perhaps people are aware at some level, but the truth is just too awful to face, and so people don't.

Very few of my friends and neighbors own any gold. Rarely am I asked about it anymore, even by those who know what I do for a living. The doctor I saw last month gave me the distinct impression I could be doing better things with my money. Most of the mainstream media ignore gold, while many of the big banks loudly proclaim their latest short position as if they had some sort of divine insight.

I'm starting to feel like the proverbial lone voice in the woods….

 

But We're Not Alone!

As deluded as most Americans seem to be, that is definitely not the case for everyone in the world—the Japanese, for example, are much more prudent and levelheaded.

I wonder if my fellow citizens would feel differently if they lived in any of these countries where people have witnessed economic insanity firsthand, and are acting accordingly:

Japan was a net importer of gold in December, the first time in almost four years. Net purchases totaled 1,885 kilograms (60,604 ounces). It was only the tenth time Japan was a net monthly buyer since the end of 2005. There are reports that Japan's pension funds, which hold the world's second-largest pool of retirement assets, are buying gold.

Dubai gold jewelers just reported the strongest gold sales in seven years. Pure Gold Jewelers, one of the largest dealers in the country, reported a 25% increase in gold jewelry sales during the Dubai Shopping Festival this year.

The state of Gujarat in India reported that silver bullion imports hit a five year record from April 2013 to January 2014. Imports were more than 450% higher than the same period a year ago. The Indian government has since hiked the import duty on silver to 15%, the same rate as gold, and official imports in January subsequently fell. Smugglers will surely add silver to all those secret luggage compartments they've been using for gold.

Australia's Perth Mint said gold sales jumped 41% and silver 33% in 2013. In January, gold demand was up 10% and silver 8%.

Mexico's pension funds are now investing in gold after strict investment regulations were recently lifted. The World Gold Council says it spoke to 10 of the country's most influential pension fund managers (with over $160 billion in assets) and was told that they began investing in gold and commodities in 2013.

Central banks were once again big buyers last year. Of those that have reported so far…
  • Turkey purchased 150.4 tonnes (4.83 million ounces)
  • Vietnam 110 tonnes (3.53 million ounces)
  • Russia 57.3 tonnes (1.84 million ounces)
  • Kazakhstan 24.16 tonnes (776,762 ounces)
  • Azerbaijan 16.02 tonnes (515,054 ounces)
  • Sri Lanka 6.51 tonnes (209,301 ounces)
  • Nepal 6.22 tonnes (199,977 ounces)
  • Ukraine 6.22 tonnes (199,977 ounces)
  • Indonesia 4.04 tonnes (129,889 ounces)
  • Venezuela 1.87 tonnes (60,121 ounces)

 

And of Course, There's China….

 



Last year's record import number is impressive enough, but it's the pace that's mind-blowing. 1,139 tonnes is…
  • More than 2011 and 2012 imports combined.
  • Over 42% of global mine production last year.
  • Roughly twice as much as the amount GLD sold in all of 2013.

 

Meanwhile, Back in the Good Ol' US of A…

Gold coin demand for 2013 jumped 24%. Some headlines have pointed out that January 2014 gold and silver coin sales were down compared to a year ago—but January 2013 was the all-time record for single-month sales. Further, Eagle and Buffalo gold coin sales were more than double December's sales, and were the highest since last April. Silver coin sales in January were almost four times more than in December.

There, now I feel better.

Even if you sometimes feel like a lone wolf investing in this market, understand that worldwide demand for gold and silver bullion continues unabated. If you live in the US, realize that people in many other countries are seeing more positive headlines about gold, have more friends who own gold, and heck, could even walk into a bank to buy gold.

I don't think the people in these other countries are stupid. Whatever consequences result from the historic levels of currency dilution across the globe, they seem as sure as I do that they'll be good for gold.
What should you buy? I first recommend buying gold and silver bullion to establish a financial safety net. And then, to maximize gains on the more speculative end of your portfolio, you should look at Louis James' just-released "10-bagger List for 2014" in the February issue of International Speculator. A 10-Bagger is a stock with the potential to gain 1,000% or more—that's not a typo, we really did make 10 times our money on junior gold stocks the last time the sector rebounded, and Louis thinks that's about to happen again.

For example, one of those prospective 10-Baggers is a junior with a multimillion-ounce gold project that's run by one of our Explorers League honorees. This company is on the verge of securing the funds needed to build its exceptionally high-margin gold mine, but it's on sale. Speaking of the potential, Louis said: "If the company delivers, it'd be easy to see these 40-cent shares trading for $4" by 2015.

Investing in these stocks, and there are nine of them on Louis' list, could quite literally make you a fortune, but the opportunity to get in on the ground floor is fading fast.

Click here to learn more about Louis' 10 Bagger List for 2014 or watch the recording of our just aired one hour video event "Upturn Millionaires" to learn why the time to act is now.


International Buying & Your Shot at 1,000% Gains


Stock & ETF Trading Signals