Category: Market Action

The Great White Short?:

Foreign investors went on an unprecedented selling spree of Canadian bonds in June, offering further evidence of Canada’s fading international appeal.

A record $19-billion decline in foreign-held bonds, more than double the previous high set a decade ago, slashed what has become a reliable source of investment driven by Canada’s stellar reputation for financial outperformance.
…
Recent years saw a consistent net inflow of foreign funds into Canadian securities in excess of $100-billion annually. But of late, the global investing community has grown leery of Canadian real estate, slowing growth and vulnerability to softening commodity prices. Hedge funds lined up to bet against Canada – the trade dubbed the Great White Short.

Over the first half of this year, net spending on Canadian bonds by non-residents amount to $16-billion, “a fraction of the net inflow chalked up during the first half of each of the prior five years,” Warren Lovely, an economist at CIBC World Markets, said in a research note.
…
The Canadian dollar would certainly feel the effect of any sustained deterioration in the demand for Canadian bonds. That relationship could also help explain some of the dramatic currency volatility seen from mid-June to early July, when the Canadian dollar dropped by four cents against its U.S. counterpart, [chief currency strategist at Bank of Nova Scotia] Ms. [Camilla] Sutton said.

Just in time for Christmas:

Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) will introduce a wristwatch-like device named the Galaxy Gear next month that can make phone calls, surf the Web and handle e-mails, according to two people familiar with the matter.

The Galaxy Gear will be powered by Google Inc.’s Android operating system and go on sale this year to beat a potentially competing product from Apple Inc. (AAPL), the people said.

It was a mixed day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts off 3bp, FixedResets gaining 5bp and DeemedRetractibles down 22bp. The performance highlights table is as lengthy as we have come to expect recently: insurers are notable on the losers’ end, but somebody has decided they really, really like BAM! Volume was well above average.

The sale of Aviva’s US unit to Apollo has been approved with substantially the same conditions as the Sun Life – Guggenheim deal:

The key heightened policyholder protections to which Apollo agreed include:

Heightened Capital Standards. Apollo has agreed that Athene will maintain Aviva New York’s Risk-Based Capital Levels (RBC Levels) at an amount not less than 450 percent. (Capital serves as a buffer that insurers use to absorb unexpected losses and financial shocks – better protecting policyholders.)

Backstop Trust Account. Apollo has agreed that Athene will establish a separate backstop trust account totaling approximately $35 million to provide additional protections to policyholders above and beyond the heightened capital levels. If Aviva New York’s RBC levels fall below 450 percent, the funds in the backstop trust account will be used to replenish (“top up”) Aviva New York’s RBC levels to at least 450 percent. The $35 million in the trust account will be held separately from other Aviva New York’s funds for seven years and dedicated to the sole purpose of protecting policyholders.

Enhanced Regulatory Scrutiny of Operations, Dividends, Investments, Reinsurance. Apollo has agreed that any material changes to Athene’s plans of operations of Aviva New York, including investments, dividends, or reinsurance transactions will require the prior written approval of DFS.

Stronger Disclosure and Transparency Requirements. Aviva New York will file quarterly RBC level reports to DFS – rather than just the annual reports required under New York Insurance Law. Additionally, the insurer will disclose to DFS necessary information concerning corporate structures, control persons, and other information regarding the operations of the company.

The Bank of Canada has released the Bank of Canada Review – Summer 2013 with articles:

• CSI: A Model for Tracking Short-Term Growth in Canadian Real GDP
• The Accuracy of Short-Term Forecast Combinations
• Monitoring Short-Term Economic Developments in Foreign Economies
• Big Data Analysis: The Next Frontier

Nothing very interesting, I’m afraid – I didn’t read any of them.

Bonds got hit today:

Yields (USGG10YR) on 10-year notes, a benchmark for corporate and consumer borrowing rates, climbed above 2.8 percent for the first time in two years as reports showed U.S. initial jobless claims declined last week to the lowest level in almost six years and confidence among U.S. homebuilders rose in August to the highest level since 2005. Treasury data showed private investors abroad sold a record amount of notes and bonds in June, when Fed policy makers indicated they are considering a slowing of their quantitative-easing policy.

Yields on Canadian 5s, 10s and 30s were all up 4bp.

And, logically enough (which is not always the case) the Canadian preferred share market got thumped today, with PerpetualDiscounts losing 85bp, FixedResets off 16bp and DeemedRetractibles down 50bp. The performance highlights table is suitably enormous. Volume was extremely high.

Vasco Cúrdia (San Francisco Fed) and Andrea Ferrero (New York Fed) write a provocative note titled How Stimulatory Are Large-Scale Asset Purchases?:

In November 2010, the Fed’s policy committee, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), announced a program to purchase $600 billion of long-term Treasury securities, the second of a series of large-scale asset purchases (LSAPs). The program’s goal was to boost economic growth and put inflation at levels more consistent with the Fed’s maximum employment and price stability mandate. In Chen, Cúrdia, and Ferrero (2012), we estimate that the second LSAP program, known as QE2, added about 0.13 percentage point to real GDP growth in late 2010 and 0.03 percentage point to inflation.

Our analysis suggests that forward guidance is essential for quantitative easing to be effective. Without forward guidance, QE2 would have added only 0.04 percentage point to GDP growth and 0.02 to inflation. Under conventional monetary policy, higher economic growth and inflation would usually lead the Fed to raise interest rates, offsetting the effects of LSAPs. Forward guidance during QE2 mitigated that factor by making it clear that the federal funds rate was not likely to increase.

Our estimates suggest that the effects of a program like QE2 on GDP growth are smaller and more uncertain than a conventional policy move of temporarily reducing the federal funds rate by 0.25 percentage point. In addition, our analysis suggests that communication about when the Fed will begin to raise the federal funds rate from its near-zero level will be more important than signals about the precise timing of the end of QE3, the current round of LSAPs.
…
The second feature in our model concerns the transmission from the risk premium to the economy. We consider an economy with two types of investors. The first can invest in both short- and long-term assets. For them, a lower risk premium prompts them to reallocate their portfolios, but doesn’t change their spending behavior. If all investors behaved this way, a change in the risk premium would not affect the economy.

The second type of investor buys only long-term bonds, for example to match asset duration with life events, such as retirement date. If long-term yields fall, these investors have less incentive to save and may allocate more money to consumption or investment in nonfinancial assets. This boosts aggregate demand and puts upward pressure on inflation.

These two types of investors represent a form of financial market segmentation, allowing for the risk premium to affect economic activity. The degree of segmentation is determined by what fraction of investors buy only long-term bonds. The higher the proportion of such investors, the more LSAPs affect the real economy.
…
Asset purchase programs like QE2 appear to have, at best, moderate effects on economic growth and inflation. Research suggests that the key reason these effects are limited is that bond market segmentation is small. Moreover, the magnitude of LSAP effects depends greatly on expectations for interest rate policy, but those effects are weaker and more uncertain than conventional interest rate policy. This suggests that communication about the beginning of federal funds rate increases will have stronger effects than guidance about the end of asset purchases.

I don’t find it entirely convincing but it is, after all, only a letter. Consider the first type of investor, the non-segmented one:

The first can invest in both short- and long-term assets. For them, a lower risk premium prompts them to reallocate their portfolios, but doesn’t change their spending behavior. If all investors behaved this way, a change in the risk premium would not affect the economy.

OK, so they reallocate their portfolios, but what do they buy? And, more importantly, what do the people they buy from do with their money?

One thing that they buy on reallocation, of course, is Apple Corporation bonds. Apple doesn’t need the money, they just stick it in the bank. No gain there. What does the bank do with the money? Ideally, they would lend it to a smaller business – or an expanding business – which will then buy equipment, hire staff, and produce YouTube videos of kittens and make immense profits.

But that’s kind of risky, so what they do – especially in Canada – is lend the money to government employees so they can buy larger houses. There’s not really all that much of a gain there, either.

I really have trouble conceptualizing the path of monetary stimulus throughout the economy, but I find it hard to believe that the asset reallocation of Investor #1 has zero effect, although I’m willing to believe that it may be small. I will also suggest that there is a third type of investor, such as pension funds and insurance companies, that get hurt to some extent (depending on how well they are hedged) by lower yields and actually have to reduce distributions and increase contributions when yields fall. Negative convexity! I hesitate to estimate the importance of this group, though – it might be just a rounding error.

Another problem is the nature of business today. How much capital do businesses really need in order to make their widgets? It’s not like the 1950’s, where you had to build a factory and the factory needed steel, so somebody else had to build a foundry. While capital is still needed – remember the price-tag on the Energy East pipeline? – I suggest that it is less important than it used to be.

I mean, look at my business! I would love to expand and I will, as soon as enough of youse guys get off your duffs and send me large quantities of money to manage. So what do I need to expand? A few computers … technically a capital expense, but in business terms it’s petty cash. Premises – that will come out of revenue. Salaries – that will come out of revenue. What do I need capital for? My decision as to whether to expand or not has absolutely nothing to do with the Prime Rate.

There are two types of business to be in: you can make things, or you can make entertainment. Entertainment (more formally, “services”) is not all that much capital intensive, and entertainment is taking over the economy. So how can you stimulate an economy with money if the system doesn’t need money? At least not directly. One might object – particularly if you are an economics lecturer hoping for tenure – that it does need education and therefore tenured professors and therefore lots of money. But, I say to that, we’re already saturated in education. It’s a very tricky question and someday I’ll take a rock-solid economics course so I can get a better handle on things.

Maybe my economics course should start with a piece from S&P titled Repeat After Me: Banks Cannot And Do Not “Lend Out” Reserves:

• Many talk as if banks can “lend out” their reserves, raising concerns that massive excess reserves created by QE could fuel runaway credit creation and inflation in the future. But banks cannot lend their reserves directly to commercial borrowers, so this concern is misplaced.
• Banks do need to hold reserves (as a liquidity buffer) against their deposits, and banks create deposits when they lend. But normally banks are not reserve constrained, so excess reserves do not loosen a reserve constraint.
• Banks in aggregate can reduce their reserves only to the extent that they initiate new lending and the bank deposits created as a result flow into the economy as new banknotes as the public demands more of them.
• QE does aim to ease financial conditions and spur more bank lending than otherwise would have occurred, but the mechanisms by which this happens are much more subtle and indirect than commonly implied.
• If the excess reserves created by QE were to be associated with too much credit creation, central banks could readily extinguish them.

…
To understand the first issue, note the composition of a central bank’s balance sheet (see table 1) and note an identity linking the two sides. Abstracting from the central bank’s capital (5) and some other possible minor items, the central bank balance sheet identity is:

Assets (A) = Reserves (R) + Banknotes in circulation (BK) + Government deposits (GD).
…
There you have it. This being an identity and reserves being a liability of the central bank, their aggregate level can change in three, and only three, ways (6). Reserves go up (or down) when:

(1) The central bank increases (decreases) its assets;

(2) The public decreases (increases) the amount of cash (banknotes) it wants to hold;

(3) The government reduces (increases) its deposits at the central bank because it makes net transfers to (receives net transfers from) the private sector (7).

Most importantly, banks cannot cause the amount of reserves at the central bank to fall by “lending them out” to customers. That possibility is not allowed for in the identity because bank lending does not enter into it. Assuming that the public does not change its demand for cash and the government does not make any net payments to the private sector (two things that are both beyond the direct control of the banks and the central bank), bank reserves have to remain “parked” at the central bank. To express wonder that banks don’t lend out their reserves or that they park them at the central bank is to fundamentally misunderstand the balance-sheet mechanics of credit creation and how QE works.
…
None of this is to say that the unwinding of QE and other nonconventional policies will be smooth and will not cause volatility in financial markets. Volatility is to be expected and needs to be managed both by policymakers and by market participants. But fears that banks stand to “lend out” the excess reserves that they currently have “parked” at central banks is not something that anyone, least of all central banks aiming to speed up the recovery or defend their inflation targets today, should worry about. I doubt that Keynes would have.

There’s an interesting piece on Bloomberg about the Fed Governor Sweepstakes … it seems my preference for Summers is not widely shared:

Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Janet Yellen is the most qualified and most likely candidate to run the central bank, according to the majority of private economists in a Bloomberg News survey that showed Lawrence Summers trailing by wide margins in both categories.

Sixty-five percent said Yellen probably will be President Barack Obama’s selection to replace Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, while 53 percent said she would do the best job, according to an Aug. 9-13 poll of 63 economists. Twenty-five percent said Summers, Obama’s former top economic adviser, would be the nominee, while 10 percent said he would be best. Six percent said former Fed Vice Chairman Donald Kohn is most likely choice.
…
Ward McCarthy, chief financial economist at Jefferies Group LLC in New York, said that Summers isn’t the best pick because he hasn’t served at the central bank and “has no experience with monetary policy.”
‘
“This is an important job, and as brilliant as he may be I don’t think this is a time for on-the-job training,” McCarthy said. Yellen and Kohn both “are the perfect choices for Fed chairman,” said McCarthy, a former Richmond Fed economist.

“They’re very credible,” he said. “They’re also very familiar with what the Fed is doing now so there’s no learning curve. They’ve committed their lives to monetary policy so there’s an accumulated body of knowledge and understanding and expertise that’s unparalleled.”

It was another mixed day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts down 48bp, FixedResets up 23bp and DeemedRetractibles gaining 12bp. There was no clear pattern in the Performance Highlights table, except that there were a fair number of PerpetualDiscounts in the bad part. Volume was very high.

PerpetualDiscounts now yield 5.73%, equivalent to 7.45% interest at the standard equivalency factor of 1.3x. Long corporates now yield about 4.75%, so the pre-tax interest-equivalent spread is now about 270bp, a slight (and perhaps spurious) increase from the 265bp recorded August 7 but well above the post-Crunch, pre-Tapering average of around 200bp.

Everything is Morgan Stanley’s fault!

Institutional investors’ allocations to dollar-denominated bonds have dropped to the lowest level since 2007 as strategists at Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase & Co. see a shift away from the debt that may fuel higher borrowing costs.

Holdings by investors from pensions to endowments fell to 26.2 percent of assets in the second quarter, from 30.1 percent in the corresponding period of 2012, according to the Wilshire Trust Universe Comparison Service, which tracks plans that oversee $3.46 trillion. Morgan Stanley’s $1.8 trillion wealth management unit has been advising clients to cut bond allocations to the lowest in more than five years, Chief Investment Strategist David Darst said.
…
Institutional investors such as corporate and public pensions have reduced their median allocation to U.S. bonds from 32 percent of their assets in the last three months of 2011, according to data compiled by Wilshire Associates Inc., whose Trust Universe Comparison Service tracks more than 1,700 plans.
The current proportion of dollar-denominated debt holdings is the least since the fourth quarter of 2007, Kim Shepherd, a spokeswoman for the firm, said in an e-mail.

“There is movement by institutional investors out of investment-grade bonds,” said Eileen Neill, a managing director in the consulting division of Wilshire, a Santa Monica, California-based financial advisory firm. “It’s not out of fear of bonds, it’s out of necessity because of the low yields. They’re moving to higher yielding bonds and emerging markets debt.”

Individual investors have been shifting to stocks from bonds as well. The gap between flows into bond mutual funds and exchange-traded funds and those focused on equities widened to $70 billion in June, the most ever, according to JPMorgan analysts led by Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou in London.

The bank-owned Toronto Stock Exchange is up to its usual tricks today. It sold me very expensive data indicating that the “last” quote for CIU.PR.C was 6.83-23.99. When I went to their website to check the last few trades, I was informed that the “last” quote was 24.41-23.99 … bid bigger than the ask. Not even the most cursory editor … so in despair, I have put it into HIMIPref™ as 22.99-23.99.

Wonder of wonders, it was mixed day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts off 12bp, FixedResets down 16bp and DeemedRetractibles gaining 9bp. Lots of volatility, with FixedResets prominent on the down side. Volume was high.

Nothing happened today.

The Canadian preferred share market got smacked again, with PerpetualDiscounts losing 113bp, FixedResets down 34bp and DeemedRetractibles off 28bp. BAM issues were prominent on the very lengthy Performance Highlights list, and not on the good part of it either! Mind you, the good part wasn’t all that lengthy. Volume was quite high.

Nothing happened today.

It was another terrible day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts losing 67bp, FixedResets off 32bp and DeemedRetractibles down 63bp. The Performance Highlights table is suitably enormous, with bank issues making a relatively rare ascent into prominence amongst the losers. Volume was above average.

I’ve just had a look at A Review of the Oncology Under-Dosing Incident by Jake J. Thiessen, Ph.D. … the report on the chemotherapy scandal in which neither hospitals nor purchasing agents made the slightest effort to determine just what it was they were buying or had bought.

What a whitewash.

The early days of the incident began with the discovery of a questionable MHS GEMCITABINE product on March 20, 2013 at the Peterborough Regional Health Centre.

This, of course, is bullshit. The early days of the incident began with the tendering of the contract to supply the drug. The contract was incompetently drafted and handling of the delivered materials was also incompetent. He didn’t address (or even acknowledge) the kickback negotiated as part of the contract.

As a former chemist, the part I like best is:

The clear difference factor in bulk reconstitution preparation lies in the overfill within the normal saline bags used in hospitals and by MHS. That is, although a bag may be nominally labeled to contain 100, 250, 500 or 1000 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride, the actual volume may be somewhat larger. Such overfill is widely known and is not limited to diluents. For example, Baxter had declared its overfill (shown in Appendix 4). Both the GPO and MHS were apparently aware of such overfills. The degree of overfill is not standardized; it becomes part of a manufacturer’s finished product specifications. The reason for this overfill is that the fluid bags are to some extent permeable to water. That is, water can move through the membrane and then evaporate from the outside surface. On storage, the contents of the bags can thereby decrease. The product’s shelf life is defined by the length of time it would normally take before the contents are reduced to the aforementioned nominal contents (e.g., 100 mL) on the label. Obviously, the rate of loss is determined by the permeability of the bag, fluid volume to surface ratio, and the storage conditions. This influences both the overfill variability used by a manufacturer and the contents determined at any point in time

So it is known that the concentration of active material in the bags will increase over time, but the clowndorks in charge of preparing medication for administration use the bags as a source of stock solution at the concentration shown on the label.

Don’t get sick in Ontari-ari-ari-o.

As a nod to the ostensible subject of this blog (Canadian preferred shares. Remember?) I’ll highlight Assiduous Reader adrian2‘s trip down memory lane to May, 2008, when we were all trying to figure out just what these funny new Fixed-Reset thingamajigs were all about.

It was another day of sickness in the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts off 1bp, FixedResets down 16bp and DeemedRetractibles losing 19bp. The Performance Highlights table is again very lengthy, but with no obvious patterns. Volume was high.

Nothing happened today.

Another crushing day for the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts losing 77bp, FixedResets off 8bp and DeemedRetractibles down 23bp. There is a suitably lengthy Performance Highlights table, suitably featuring PerpetualDiscount losers, but with an impressive number of FixedReset losers and a few winners to provide some variety. Volume was quite high.

PerpetualDiscounts now yield 5.64%, equivalent to 7.33% interest at the standard equivalency factor of 1.3x. Long corporates now yield about 4.7%, so the pre-tax interest-equivalent spread is now about 265bp, an extremely sharp widening from the 240bp reported July 31.

The Fabulous Fab verdict is having its intended effect: funding prospects for the SEC have brightened:

The win adds weight to pledges by SEC Chairman Mary Jo White to reinvigorate the regulator, seeking more onerous settlements in some cases and, if necessary, taking them to trial. It also could bolster support for a 27 percent budget increase for the agency that Congress is considering.
…
“The SEC needed at least one scalp from the financial crisis, or they were going to face a lot of heat from Congress,” said Adam Pritchard, a University of Michigan law professor who previously worked as a lawyer for the regulator.

The only thing that might actually have a chance of working is going after incompetent idiots, such as Laura Schwartz and Alan Roseman of ACA Management LLC, which funded the deal due to analysis critically based on an investment technique called “Follow the Leader”. Fortunately for them and many, many of their peers, though, gross incompetence is not a legitimate target for a regulator, so we’ll have to leave that one up to the clients, ha-ha. I suppose it’s nice to see that Laura Schwartz has her own problems.

Canadian pension plans are about to get hit by the pointy end of longevity risk:

The bottom line in the Towers Watson report is this: Just as things are looking up for pension plans, the fact that we’re living longer may soon officially change assumptions, undoing the recent gains from stronger stock markets and rising interest rates.

Towers Watson based its report on new, draft mortality tables unveiled last week by the Canadian Institute of Actuaries. These are used to measure how much pension plans require to meet their obligations to retirees going forward.

“Although the effect will vary from plan to plan, adoption of the proposed mortality tables and acceptance of the study’s prediction of future mortality improvements could also immediately increase pension accounting liabilities by 5 per cent to 10 per cent for many plans, potentially impacting corporate income statements and balance sheets,” Towers Watson said.

The proposed new tables increase the life expectancy of a 60-year-old man by 2.9 years, and for a woman by 2.7 years.

Mind you, pensions have had a good year:

U.S. state and local-government pension investments gained the most in two years in fiscal 2013, overshadowed by intensifying scrutiny of underfunded municipal-retirement plans following Detroit’s record bankruptcy.
Public pensions booked a median gain of 12.4 percent for the 12 months through June, powered by a surge in U.S. stock prices to a record, Wilshire Associates said today in a report. The funds chalked up an annualized three-year median return of 11.4 percent while their assets surpassed a pre-recession peak to reach $2.9 trillion, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures.

Spend-Every-Penny is beginning to address the Canadian mortgage problem – in his own socialistic way:

The Crown corporation has notified banks, credit unions and other mortgage lenders that they will each be restricted to a maximum of $350-million of new guarantees this month under its National Housing Act Mortgage-Backed Securities (NHA MBS) program. The decision comes in the wake of “unexpected demand” for the guarantees, a spokeswoman for CMHC said in an e-mailed statement.

Hurray! When demand outstrips supply … ration the commodity! Isn’t that the Canadian way?

Bloomberg has an interesting story showing how Wal-Mart haters can be efficiently exploited:

In the city of Selma, a Central Valley town south of Fresno, Wal-Mart accused Save Mart of being behind an anti-Wal-Mart group, Save Our Selma Coalition, in a 2005 filing requesting a subpoena. Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart built its store anyway. In Tracy, California, WinCo accused Save Mart in 2007 of directing a lawsuit filed by neighborhood group Tracy First against the city for approving a new WinCo store, according to a state court document. WinCo also built its store.

[Consultant Burt] Flickinger said Save Mart’s territory still only has one Wal-Mart supercenter for every 150,000 people, compared with one for every 45,000 in Alabama.

“It’s not for lack of trying either,” Flickinger said.

The only thing that can possibly make wind power economical is storage. In Ontario we’ve blown the budget on not-ready-for-prime-time technology, but market leaders are doing research:

On a windy island 500 miles north of Tokyo, Japan is about to experiment with a battery designed to transform the way electricity is supplied and at the same time boost Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s economic rescue plan.

The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry is investing 20 billion yen ($203 million) on a Sumitomo Electric Industries Ltd. (5802) device to be used by Hokkaido island’s utility to store excess solar and wind power, stabilizing flows to consumers.
…
The battery, which uses the metal vanadium to store electrical energy in electrolyte tanks, has been researched from Australia to China and promises to handle the sort of large power surpluses that can develop on a transmission grid.

Speedy subways or slow LRTs for Toronto? Well, here’s the London experience:

Crossrail, Europe’s largest construction project, costing an estimated 15 billion pounds ($23 billion), will cut commuting times by as much as half, enticing tenants to rent offices in once-overlooked corners of the City. Plans for buildings from Farringdon through Smithfield to the Thameslink overland rail station to the south represent the City’s biggest development pipeline since 2011, when a cluster of towers went up near the Lloyds of London insurance building, said Peter Rees, the City’s planning officer.

CRUNCH! The Canadian preferred share market took a shellacking today, with PerpetualDiscounts losing 102bp, FixedResets down 88bp and DeemedRetractibles off 72bp. The Performance Highlights table is suitably enormous and comprised entirely of losers. Volume was high, but nothing extraordinary.

I suspect that the problem is a massive batch of sell orders placed through Citigroup Global markets (Broker #123). Now, I am hesitant to criticize traders for their trading, because I have no way of knowing who their client is or what their instructions were …. but I will go so far as to say their selection of trading algorithm is a red flag. In many cases they used what I call a “drip algorithm” (the cool guys probably call it something else) whereby you sell 100 shares at market every X seconds. It is the easiest thing in the world to spot and a marvellous thing to exploit. Just sit on the bid and get N different fills over the next NX seconds. It has the advantage from the seller’s perspective of getting done, guaranteed: since when will a market order not get filled? It has the advantage from the buyers’ perspective of being the way most likely to take the market price down to ridiculous levels. To sum up: somebody is probably a moron, but there’s no way of knowing who: the seller or the trader. And the seller might have been doing something better to compensate on the other side of his trade.

“Drip Algorithms” might work OK in a deep, liquid market, but in the thin little world of Canadian preferreds … sorry, Charlie.

The US jobs number was no great shakes:

“This number isn’t an earth-shaker,” John Manley, who helps oversee $222.7 billion as chief equity strategist for Wells Fargo Funds Management in New York, said in a phone interview. “It is debatable if it was good or bad. It was OK. The number still indicates the Fed is going to be there for a while, that is not bad.”

The 162,000 increase in payrolls last month was the smallest in four months and followed a revised 188,000 rise in June that was less than initially estimated, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington. The median forecast of 93 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for a 185,000 gain. Workers spent fewer hours on the job and hourly earnings fell for the first time since October.
The unemployment rate was forecast to drop to 7.5 percent from 7.6 percent, according to the Bloomberg survey median.

Matthew Klein of Bloomberg points out:

The BLS report also tells us what kinds of jobs were added. Here again, the news is not particularly encouraging. More than half of the jobs added last month were either in retail trade or “food services and drinking places.” People employed in those sectors tend to have much shorter work weeks and much lower hourly wages than everyone else.

Even worse, a recent paper by Canadian researchers suggests that many of the people taking these jobs are relatively over-educated. The authors argue that, since 2000, globalization and technological advancement have reduced the demand for “high-skilled” workers. Desperate for employment, these workers ended up pushing the “lower-skilled” out of the job market entirely. This may help explain why the share of people aged 25 to 54 counted as being in the labor force has plunged by 3.5 percentage points since 2000.

The quality of jobs being created is probably connected to the depressing performance of incomes and the decline in the work week. Hourly pay has grown by just 1.9 percent over the past 12 months — basically unchanged since the end of 2009. The data from the BEA tell a similar story. Real after-tax incomes fell in June. Americans still have less purchasing power than they did in November 2012. Our standard of living has barely improved over the past year.

There’s some good, if politically motivated discussion at hotair.com.

Assiduous Reader nervousone begs me to point out:

James, if you’re going to mention the July number in an upcoming comment, show them you’re ahead of the game and make me proud . . . please include this [final paragraph] from todays release,

“The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for May was revised from +195,000 to +176,000, and the change for June was revised from +195,000 to +188,000.”

No one else will mention it . . . or trade on it (well almost no one else).

The twenty minutes bracketting the jobs announcement is entertaining. Every cowboy in the world is placing a bet on what the number will be and how the market will react to it, then reversing the trade a few minutes afterwards, taking whatever P&L there might be – so there’s lots of volume and the dealers jack up their spreads.

Of perhaps more importance than the revisions is the quality of the jobs. Lots of times they’re part-time, or all government, or (as in the current case) largely crummy jobs … there’s a lot more to the number than the headline.

I’m sure that somebody, somewhere, has a proper econometric model that incorporates the data – all the data – in a sensible manner (possibly feeding into a Taylor Rule based system) whereby a sensible person could actually trade at prices that made sense, once the spreads returned to normal; but in such a rational system, the jobs number would (a) be only one of many inputs, and (b) be foreshadowed by the ADP number anyway. I have, however, never seen such a system.

In Canada, those with jobs are buying houses:

Sales of existing homes in both Toronto and Vancouver, the country’s two most precarious housing markets, hit their highest level for the month of July since 2009 last month.

Greater Vancouver saw a 40.4 per cent year-over-year increase in sales over the Multiple Listing Service, while the Greater Toronto Area saw a 16-per-cent increase.
…
The Toronto Real Estate Board, meanwhile, noted that last month was the third highest July on record for the city, and pointed to an eight per cent year-over-year increase in the average selling price, to $513,246, as evidence that market conditions are tightening (though averages can be skewed by the types of homes that are selling).

There’s a little reaction to the politicization of the next Fed appointment:

Since the president in an interview with Charlie Rose June 16 indicated he wouldn’t reappoint Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, intrigue over his successor has grown to a level where Fed experts and former administration officials are concerned that the selection process is so political it could have long-lasting ramifications for the markets, the eventual nominee’s confirmation hearings and the Fed as an institution.

“What’s really unfortunate is how public and polarized this debate has gotten,” Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive officer at Pacific Investment Management Co., the world’s biggest mutual fund, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television. “This has an impact for the market going forward.”

The president and White House officials have spent the last week trying to defuse an escalating public contest between Lawrence Summers, Obama’s former top economic adviser, and Janet Yellen, the Fed’s current Vice Chair.

Confronted by a chorus of concerns about Summers — and letters from House and Senate Democrats voicing support for Yellen — Obama on Capitol Hill told his party’s lawmakers on July 31 that he has interviewed “lots” of candidates. He threw a new name into the mix, former Fed Vice Chair Donald Kohn, as he and his aides tried to buy some time, saying the choice was weeks away and not until autumn.

The post-mortems on the Fabulous Fab verdict are coming in:

Fabrice Tourre, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) vice president found liable for his role in a failed $1 billion investment, may have lost his case because jurors rejected his defense that as a junior employee he wasn’t primarily responsible for the transaction.

“Being 28 years old and one of several employees of Goldman Sachs isn’t a defense,” Tom Gorman, a former lawyer with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Enforcement Division, who is now in private practice, said in an interview.

Tourre was a highly paid specialist working in a particular area who asked people to invest billions of dollars in a product he created, Gorman said.

I think the part “asked people to invest” part is a bit overstated, although technically true. He was a salesman. He had a product. Sold it. Big deal. It is the role of a Portfolio Manager to select good stuff from oodles and oodles of bad they are offered every single day.

Megan McArdle of Bloomberg has a good perspective:

The picture you get from reading about the testimony in the Fabrice “Fabulous Fab” Tourre case is of a bunch of people behaving like idiots. Tourre appears willing to say anything to potential buyers to close the deal. The people buying his mortgage bonds don’t inquire as to whether hedge-funder John Paulson’s “equity perspective” is equivalent to an “equity investment”; they just assume it is, and give Fab Tourre a bunch of money.

But was all this illegal? My impression from watching coverage of the case was that the Securities and Exchange Commission’s case against Tourre was pretty weak. That’s why his lawyers rested without calling any witnesses. And these defenders aren’t arrogant idiots; one securities lawyer I know says they’re “top notch.”

So why did the jury find against him? It’s not exactly clear. “At the end of the day, he probably could have done the right thing,” one, a 61-year-old school principal, said. “But he chose to play the game.”
…
One hears it over and over, in writing about the financial crisis: “Why isn’t someone in jail?” Fab Tourre is someone. To be sure, he isn’t a very important someone. And he’s not actually going to jail, because this was a civil trial. But we can’t indict “the game.” Fab Tourre may have been the closest substitute we could find.

It was a day of modest declines in the Canadian preferred share market, with PerpetualDiscounts off 4bp, FixedResets down 5bp and DeemedRetractibles losing 6bp. Volatility was relatively high, but with no clear pattern. Volume was very low, since many hard-working participants in the highest paid profession on earth took the afternoon off ahead of the long weekend; this provides more time to complain about the appalling work ethic prevalent among bar and restaurant staff.