December 13th, 2011 — MSM Newsletter
Editorial Note: This Market Structure Map first ran June 29, 2010. It’s reprinting because Tim Quast is following the lead of congresspersons by taking a “fact-finding junket” aboard a sailing vessel off the coast of Belize. It’s in the public interest.
Oscar Wilde said that illusion is the first of all pleasures. Of course he also wrote that anyone who lives within his means suffers from a lack of imagination.
Buttressed on either side with those brackets about illusion and means, let’s look today at what’s afflicting our market and why some institutions like transient trading when others don’t.
Vanguard, an institutional investor focused on passively managed funds, supports high-frequency trading. George Sauter, CIO for the Vanguard Group, wrote in the firm’s comment letter to the SEC on market structure that high-frequency volumes reduce trading costs through competition and tighter spreads. He quantifies the benefit to investors at roughly 10% over a decade. A passive fund providing 9% returns per annum would deliver only 8% returns without HFT. Continue reading →
December 9th, 2011 — MSM Newsletter
Say you were playing poker.
I don’t mean gambling, but real cards. You’re engaged with some seriousness. You’re watching how you bet and when, reading the players ahead and after you.
Then The House starts doling out stacks of chips. Would you play more or less cautiously if you had free chips?
Apply this thinking to equity markets, IR folks. In trading data, we saw European money sweeping into US equities Nov 28. Why did markets trembling Nov 25 decide by the following Monday to up the ante in risk-taking? Primary dealers implementing policy for global central banks also drive most program-trading strategies.
Thus, European money surmised that central banks would intervene, and their behavior reflected it. The rest caught on, and markets soared Nov 30 on free chips from central banks. It was short-lived. By Dec 2, we saw institutions market-wide assaying portfolio risk and locking in higher derivatives insurance. The chips were gone.
Money sat back expectantly. On Dec 8, The House delivered chips as the European Central Bank lowered interest rates. That’s devaluing the euro. At first, cheapening the euro increases the value of the dollar – which lowers US stocks (a la Dec 8). But if you’d hedged with derivatives as most of the globe did, you bluffed The House. Plus, the Fed will likely have to follow Europe’s bet up with a see-and-raise to devalue the dollar back into line with the euro (expect it next week, but before options expirations).
In poker, having “the nuts” is holding the best cards, and knowing it. Central banks have given arbitragers the nuts. Continue reading →
November 29th, 2011 — MSM Newsletter
Belated Happy Thanksgiving!
After breaking for a week as an act of giving thanks, we’re back. Karen and I joined 88,622 others in Aggieland at Kyle Field in College Station for the A&M football game last Thursday versus the Texas Longhorns. Disappointing outcome, great Thanksgiving.
There’s something special about Texas. People passing you on the street say hi and the kids say yes ma’am and yes sir. There’s a lot of what Kenny Chesney calls “the good stuff.” What may be the world’s greatest college bar, the Dixie Chicken, sits on the main College Station drag like an Old West saloon. Batwing doors, even.
Speaking of swinging doors, gyrations in markets make it awfully hard to use your stock price to measure investor sentiment (wasn’t that the idea behind exchanges?). In fact, there’s inherent contradiction between the way markets behave now and how the IR profession cultivates holders.
IR folks typically seek buy-and-hold money that does not trade. Yet executives frequently ask about the stock price. The news rushing at us round the clock tries to explain market behavior in rational terms. Yet stock prices are set by the latest fleeting bid or offer. Nine of ten times, those prices are not rational. Continue reading →
November 16th, 2011 — MSM Newsletter
Apparently, exchanges are not bastions of deep liquidity.
In a bombshell dropped at a congressional hearing yesterday, top executives for the NYSE and the Nasdaq proposed – to borrow from humorist Dave Barry, we SWEAR we are not making this up – that you pay them fees, small-cap companies, which they will distribute to market-makers to incentivize trading in ETFs that trade your shares.
Exchanges already incentivize most trades, but in the hundred most liquid names there’s great profit in the data off the consolidated tape. You small-caps offer no profit. So in addition to charging you listing fees, they now want to charge you market-making fees – but in the ETFs that hold your stocks.
Congresspersons unfamiliar with how arbitrage works and how ETFs are principally one-day investment vehicles won’t see through this self-serving and patently ridiculous proposal. The SEC may also overlook the glaring contradiction to well-functioning capital markets and approve it. Public companies don’t read exchange proposals as they should and don’t comment on them. No opposition? Approved.
For more, we’ve asked permission to re-run a blog post today by Joe Saluzzi at Themis Trading: Continue reading →
November 9th, 2011 — MSM Newsletter
There’s a saying: It’s easier to keep the cat in the bag than to get it back in there once you’ve let it out. Nobody is likely to stuff the Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) cat back in the bag.
Because ETFs are miraculous.
The biblical story of creation is that something came from nothing. Same with the Christian concept of redemption – being bought for a price without rendering equal worth in kind.
Today, we’ll share with occupants of the IR chair the divine story of how ETFs work.
Before ETFs were closed-end mutual funds. Closed end funds (CEFs) are publicly traded securities that IPO to raise capital and pursue a business objective (like any business), in this case an investment thesis. Traded units have a price, and the net asset value rises and falls on the success of managers in achieving objectives. The rub with CEFs is that share value can depart from net asset value – just like stocks often separate from intrinsic business worth.
The investment industry, with support from regulators, devised ETFs to magically remedy through Creation and Redemption this fault of nature. ETF kingpin iShares, owned by Blackrock, illustrates here, with a clever floral analogy (thank you Joe Saluzzi at Themis Trading who alerted us to it). You don’t have to buy individual flowers and face market risks because iShares puts them in a bouquet for you. Great idea. Continue reading →