Contrarian Profits |
| Posted: 03 Apr 2009 08:59 AM PDT Oil is a hot topic. Even when I was five my mother always moaned about how much gas prices had gone up. Before I got my first car, I was already an expert at locating the cheapest gas stations. So I felt particularly betrayed that oil prices didn’t move down much further like I predicted they would here. But listen, I don’t like losing. So when I realized was wrong, I decided to look at a chart of the Light Crude Oil Contracts ($WTIC) and see what it told me.
A number of technically bullish things have happened over the past 30 days that has turned me into a fully fledged oil bull. First of all, oil has been making higher highs and higher lows since bottoming in late December. Second, oil has rallied above its 50 day moving average and since then that average has acted as support. Third, just a few weeks ago the 20 day moving average crossed above the 50 day moving average. This is known as a bullish cross. Lastly, the fact that both the RSI and Slow Stochastic have turned up after hitting 50 suggests the underlying trend is strengthening. Listen if you’re buying for the long-term, this is a sweet spot to buy it at. If you’re a short-term technical trader, this is still a sweet spot to enter into. If oil keeps rallying then I don’t expect any headwinds untill the $70 mark. By that time, the 200 day moving average should also be around there (marking a huge resistance point) |
| How To Play Today’s Mark-To-Market Accounting News Posted: 03 Apr 2009 08:04 AM PDT While the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) couldn't possibly compete with the G20 summit in terms of headline-grabbing power, the organization did join with the world's top leaders in breaking some good news that fueled the stock market's fire. Nothing as groundbreaking as the G20, but more a clarification of its position and verbalization of some important changes to mark-to-market accounting (MMA). Let's see why this news is so significant and how it contributed to the stock market's rally - as we predicted here a couple of months ago… Mark-To-Market Accounting: What It MeansIn case you're unfamiliar with the "mark-to-market" term, here's what it means: Mark-to-market is an accounting concept that says you should mark the assets on your books according to what the market price is for them today. It doesn't sound like a very revolutionary idea until you dig into it a little deeper. Because in order to determine a fair price for something, there has to be a market for it. When a market does not exist due to lack of demand, supply, or fear, prices do not reflect the long-term reality, but rather a short-term occurrence that may or may not last. For banks, this is a big deal because their massive mortgage-backed asset portfolios are mark-to-market, based on the last sale, rather than what the mortgages will ultimately pay. For example, if the last sale at 22 cents on the dollar, then that's where they have to mark their assets. At such low levels, the banks must then post more collateral to meet margin requirements (they call it the leverage ratio), resulting in a weaker balance sheet and write-offs against income. So what if there is no market? Does that mean your asset is worthless? The Rule Change That Could Save BillionsTheoretically, the answer to the question above is "yes." But practically speaking, it's a no. The middle ground, which was announced today, is a "mark-to-model" system, whereby fair value is determined by the quality of the paper and the expected income by the time the paper matures. And it could save the U.S. Government and taxpayers a few hundred billion dollars. Because financial companies like banks can reduce the capital allocated to margin and improve their capital ratios, bank stocks like Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC), Bank of America (NYSE: BAC), JP Morgan (NYSE: JPM) and Citigroup (NYSE: C) took off. All four made double-digit percentage moves at the open. Exciting news, right? But hold on to your enthusiasm for a minute… The Panic PartyIt's not that MMA didn't offer some leeway to the financials that were affected by this rule. But interpreted in its strictest form, it became some type of Wahabi interpretation of the Koran: Way out there. Let me explain further… Back in the fall, when there was no market for many of the mortgage assets held by banks, investors, analysts and short sellers questioned the value of these assets. The banks could have (and should have) just ignored it and marked the assets to what they believed they were worth, based on their grade and discounted cash flow. But they took a different route - by far the worst of the two. They overreacted and bowed to the pressure of marking their assets, most of which are paying (and will continue to pay) until maturity at levels reflecting fire-sale prices. I guess they figured that since everyone else was panicking, why not join the party? But here's why they shouldn't have jumped off the with all the other lemmings… The High Leverage-High Loss, Lose-Lose SituationWhen banks mark assets to the market, they also have to mark their capital requirements to meet minimum standards for leverage. So if the asset is worth 100% of its face value, and the leverage at the time was 30-to-1, things would be fine. But if that asset was marked down by 80%, all of a sudden that leverage would balloon, leaving the bank with one of two options… Either increase capital to reduce the leverage, or go out of business by selling those assets at fire-sale prices. Across the financial spectrum, both happened. Some banks went under (WAMU and IndyMac) because the weight of the increased leverage was too much to bear, while others had to raise capital or take it from the government. However, some simply pocketed the money and decided not to lend it to stimulate borrowing. Instead, they used it to bolster capital requirements, which contributed to this "credit crunch." Irresponsible Merrill + Sluggish Accountants = Widespread PanicWhat should have happened is this: Banks mark to a model that showed a higher value - something that the FASB allowed. Basically, they would have had to mark their assets held to maturity on their books, using reasonable assumptions. They probably would have, except for one problem… Last fall, Merrill Lynch sold a huge portfolio of its mortgage-backed securities at 22 cents on the dollar - a decision that caused widespread panic because that's what established the market. While the banks did not mark to that price, investors made the assumption that the price was set and banks should adhere to it. We all know what happened next. Stocks got punished, banks panicked, and the vicious circle of capital raising, dilution, government intervention, and market sell-offs began in earnest. Had the FASB come out that day and said what it did today - that it supports taking the mark-to-model route, despite what the market was saying - we could have avoided a lot of bloodshed. Course, that would require accountants making quick decisions - something they're not exactly renowned for. Maybe we'd still have seen some abuses of the rule. And perhaps it will be abused now, as I'm sure a lot of assets will be marked up. But overall, banks will now have the luxury of determining fair market value in the absence of an orderly market. And more importantly, they can reduce the capital required to back these loans, taking pressure off their balance sheets. So what should we do about it? The Investment Strategy You Should Use On Bank Stocks NowJust as it was a good time to sell put options on these shares over the past few weeks, it might be just as good now to sell call options. And I see this as an opportunity to sell out-of-the-money (OTM) call options against your financial stocks. Today's mark-to-market news, along with volatility, means you'll get more premium for your options. Take advantage of that. I'm not saying that if you own Wells Fargo at $15.50 today that you should sell the $17.50 calls. Rather, you could sell $30 or $35 calls - because even those calls are paying a pretty fat premium. And take the January 2010 $40 call options… which imply that the price will fully double in eight months - and will pay you $1.40 per contract today. That's the equivalent of collecting a fat 10% dividend! To which I have to say, "Ain't volatility sweet?" |
| Global Investment News Briefs Friday, April 3, 2009 Posted: 03 Apr 2009 05:12 AM PDT February Factory Orders Turn Positive; Fixed Mortgages at Record Low; GM Seeks Gov't Money For Hybrids; Chile: Copper Prices Heading North; IBM Lowers Bid for Sun; Oil Surges 9% on Dollar Weakness
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Contrarian Stock Market Investing News - Featuring Bargain Stocks To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Inbox too full?  Subscribe to the feed version of Contrarian Stock Market Investing News - Featuring Bargain Stocks in a feed reader. | |
| If you prefer to unsubscribe via postal mail, write to: Contrarian Stock Market Investing News - Featuring Bargain Stocks, c/o Google, 20 W Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 comments
Post a Comment