|
January 2007
Homeland
Insecurity?
Homeland
Insecurity?...To ourselves, the single most important issue
for the real US economy and financial markets in 2007 is the fate
of US residential real estate and the credit markets that support
this asset class. Despite all the claims by the Fed that
current weakness in housing is "isolated", without
sounding too simplistic, we know that historically the character
of the housing cycle has indeed had a direct impact on US payroll
employment and consumer spending behavior. In other words,
at least according to the message of historical experience,
housing is anything but isolated. It's an integral part of
the ongoing rhythm of the real economy. So as we look into
2007, we suggest that the changing nature of the housing cycle
will be very important to real world economic outcomes as well as
financial market outcomes. But at least within the context
of the current cycle, we believe it's also very important to keep
in mind that the changing character of the housing cycle will
impact monetary action in perhaps a very big way. In fact,
we think this has already started in terms of the Fed being
incredibly accepting of ongoing systemic liquidity creation,
especially since the summer of last year. Despite the fact
that the Fed/Treasury/Administration talks a good game in terms of
theoretically being vigilant regarding ongoing inflationary
pressures, they are anything but monetary policemen as they are
indeed the key provocateurs in monetary expansion (otherwise know
as monetary inflation). And given that less and less current
financial liquidity is finding its way into the real estate
markets, that brings up the possibility that once again monetary
excess will find its expression in the financial markets.
Can we make the case that the worse it gets for the real world
housing cycle, the greater the possibility that liquidity excess
allowed to be generated as a counterpoint to the deterioration in
housing may impact the financial markets? Moving into 2007,
we believe these are the very simple macro dynamics perhaps most
important to investment survival.
In
the spirit of trying to keep our finger on the reality of the
housing cycle and anticipate monetary actions to come, we thought
we'd very briefly review current housing cycle dynamics relative
to historical experience in an attempt to get a sense for where we
are and what may be to come . For anyone who has tuned into
the ongoing infomercial that is CNBC as of late, and actually
allowed the volume to be turned up, you already know that the
favorite pastime of so many of the current commentators spewing
"information" on this media platform has now become
calling the bottom for the housing cycle. Without question,
we fully expect this to continue throughout the year to come and
perhaps well beyond. For as you know, we witnessed exactly the same
experience six short years ago in yet another asset class when
headline and mainstream commentators repeatedly attempted to call
the bottom for the tech cycle and its related stocks. But we
all know, or should know, how and when asset class cycles truly
bottom, right? They bottom when no one is any longer calling
for the bottom. They bottom in silence. In terms of
housing? At least according to the relatively important
cacophonous CNBC chorus of the moment, we're not even close to a
bottom. But, as always, that's our opinion. Let's
look at the facts, shall we?
Bottoms
Up?…So
where do we start? With starts, of course. To
try to maintain our bearings, we want to have a quick run through
the history of residential real estate cycles of the past 45+
years by having a look at housing starts and permits.
We ask you, what could be more fundamental and crucial data
points for the industry as a whole? (Answer: Not
much.) Okay, this is
what we’ve put together. We’ve
gone back and looked at both depth and duration as applied to the
history of housing permits and starts data.
We’re documenting duration (monthly) of peak to trough
cycles in terms of starts and permits. And lastly, we’ve calculated percentage declines in starts
and permits over all down cycles.
For each we start off with a long term chart followed by a
quantitative table that’s essentially documenting what you see
in the charts. First at bat is the historical cycle of housing starts:

You
already know that in the most recent residential real estate cycle
we lived through the longest duration in the up cycle for starts
on record. It’s
more than clear above. It
just so happens that the recent peak in housing starts was seen in
January of 2006, as you’ll see in the table below.
We’re maybe eleven months into the decline.
What does history tell us to expect?
Just have a look.
| Historical
Housing Starts Cycles |
| Peak |
Trough |
Duration |
%
Decline |
| |
| 2/64 |
10/66 |
30
mos. |
54.0% |
| 10/72 |
2/75 |
28
mos. |
63.6 |
| 4/78 |
11/81 |
43
mos. |
61.9 |
| 2/84 |
1/91 |
83
mos. |
64.7 |
| |
| AVERAGE |
46
mos. |
61.6% |
| |
| 1/06 |
? |
11
mos. so far |
29.9%
so far |
The
average cyclical peak to trough decline in starts historically
spanned a 46-month time frame.
The shortest contraction on record over the past 45 years
was twenty-eight months. Can
it really be that the current down cycle is done after only eleven
months? We think not. Moreover, the average percentage decline in starts from cycle
top to bottom historically has been just shy of 62%. So far our current experience has been 30.0%.
There’s no question that the recent cycle has seen a very
steep drop over a compressed period of time, but common sense tells us this is nothing unusual
given the prior unprecedented up cycle length.
In the past we’ve pointed out to you the literal
unblemished consistency in cycle bottoms at or below 900 thousand
in every cycle since 1960. Do
we now really bottom at almost twice that level?
Moreover, IF we again reach historical cycle bottom experience so
clearly visible in the chart on starts, we’re set to drop
another maybe 45% from here.
Has the market already priced that in?
Again, we think not. If
the bulls are correct and stabilization/bottoming has occurred, as
we are increasingly hearing, then this will be the shortest and
most shallow down
cycle for housing starts on record in a half century at least.
Just ask yourself, set against the context of historical
experience, are you willing to bet the bottom in starts has
already arrived? (Hint:
The deck is stacked heavily against you if you called a
bottom. Want to try
again?)
We’ll
make this quick. We’ve gone through the same conceptual process with housing
permits as in the case of starts.
As you’ll see in the chart and in the data, the results
are strikingly similar to the starts data and historical message.

| Historical
Housing Permits Cycles |
| Peak |
Trough |
Duration |
%
Decline |
| |
| 2/64 |
11/66 |
33
mos. |
50.0% |
| 12/72 |
3/75 |
28
mos. |
70.7 |
| 6/78 |
10/81 |
40
mos. |
63.1 |
| 2/84 |
1/91 |
83
mos. |
60.4 |
| |
| AVERAGE |
46
mos. |
61.1% |
| |
| 1/06 |
? |
11
mos. so far |
31.4%
so far |
For now, history is very strongly suggesting to
us that the bottom calling game in the residential real estate
cycle is still in the early innings.
As with most asset cycles, we fully expect the real bottom
in residential real estate to come when everyone stops the
headline media bottom calling.
Exactly how it played out with tech stocks over the
2000-2002 period. The
pattern of human behavior surrounding cycles of asset class price
movements never changes. As
Jesse Livermore once said about the financial markets, “only the
wallets do (change)”.
Remember, the real bottom comes when no one is any longer
calling for it. We’ve
got a ways to go yet. But
the story clearly does not end with starts and permits by any means.
At
least for now, and remember we're currently in the midst of the
slow calendar period for real estate sales, inventory remains an
issue. A big issue. In terms of new homes under
construction, isn't it clear that we are simply barely off of
major cycle highs at this point? It sure as heck appears
so. And this is what Bob Toll calls "dancing on the
bottom of the cycle"? With all due respect, we beg to
differ. In our view of life, THE issue for both public and
private builders at this point is stranded capital, plain and
simple. It just so happens that our home state of California
is a poster child for this issue. For many a home builder in
the wonderful golden state, per lot sunk costs prior to sticking a
backhoe in the ground to dig a T-footing foundation can run into
six figures without even breathing hard. Entitlement, permit, environmental, utility
hook-up, infrastructure costs, etc. have been and continue to be
huge. Municipalities have clearly partaken in the current
real estate cycle largesse in a big way vis-à-vis fees and costs
assessed builders. So when the cycle music
stops, many a builder may find itself with huge sunk costs in what
are literally buildable lots of the moment, and that's about it. What do
builders faced with significant stranded capital do at the top of
a cycle? Build faster and move the inventory. It's
simply economics 101. If you saw the recent housing starts
report, you know exactly what we're talking about. Starts up
above expectations, but permits clearly down. In terms of stranded
capital in the homebuilding business, it's start'em, build'em and
sell'em at this point. It's no wonder the following chart
looks as it does. Although we're not industry experts by any
means, it sure appears to the untrained eye that we are nowhere
near "stabilization", let alone any type of definitive
bottom.

In
addition to the current level of new homes under construction, the
character of housing inventory is further illuminated by the sheer
nominal number of homes for sale in the US, again remembering that
the current is the slow period for sales. Interestingly, but certainly
not surprising by any means, is the fact that the percentage of
homes put up for sale in 2006 with either expired listings or
taken off the market were at a level not seen in many a
moon. Will these folks give selling a second shot in 2007?
If so, it's a pretty darn good bet that we've not yet seen the top
for this indicator in the current cycle. As is clear,
current levels of US homes for sale is really light years above
prior historical peaks. And against this context, mainstream
commentators are calling for a bottom in housing? C'mon, do
you think we're complete idiots?

As
a final corollary to residential housing inventory and just where
we are in the current cycle is the following historical view of
months supply of houses on the market at current sales
rates. A few comments if you don't mind. First,
looking back over history, we're at a relatively important juncture
here. Every single time over the last forty years at least
that months supply of homes for sale has been at eight months or
above, we've either been entering or in an official
recession. No exceptions. We're in the low six month
range right
now, but it sure seems a good bet this goes higher given the
extent and magnitude of the prior up cycle. For now this
remains to be seen. Moreover, please be aware that quite
importantly, cancellations are not counted in this
measure. You already know that it's not uncommon for
cancellation rates at the moment among many of the large public
homebuilders to run in the 40%+ range. That's one big
number.
Secondly,
at least in terms of historical experience, spikes in this measure
have preceded price softness or declines. After all it's
only human nature in action. The first behavioral stage of
every asset class cycle decline is denial. And the denial of
the moment is over price. Sellers are reluctant to drop
prices and buyers reluctant to pay current prices. The
character of this data series moving into 2007 should be quite the
"tell" as to how the housing cycle plays
out.
Finally,
notice in the chart above that at prior cycle peaks in the number
of homes for sale in the mid-1970's, early 1980's and late 1980's,
months supply of homes for sale was well above current cycle
experience so far. The explosion in current cycle number of
homes for sale suggests months supply at present is nowhere near a
peak. We'll just have to see how it all unfolds.

We'll
stop here. As you know, we could continue on for pages with
charts and commentary pointing out the very meaningful differences
in current cycle dynamics relative to historical cycle
bottoms. The simple message is that unless we are about to
very meaningfully depart from what has been very consistent
historical experience, the housing cycle isn't even close to a
bottom right here. And yes, these facts certainly will not
stop the CNBC carnival barkers from attempting to attract
"takers" based on one-off sound bites moving
forward. But in terms of the real world, at the end of 3Q
2006, household real estate holdings totaled just shy of $20.5
trillion. Household holdings of common stocks in the same
period registered $8.3 trillion. Bottom line? The
housing cycle is the key to the real US economy in 2007 as
transmitted through US consumer behavior. So far, US consumers
have weathered the increasingly darkening skies for domestic real
estate quite well. As of 3Q 2006, our friends at Freddie Mac
tell us that 89% of refis done were cash out refis.
Households clearly continue "to believe". But
cycle dynamics sure seem to suggest that "belief" in
residential real estate as an ever producing fountain of wealth
creation will be more than tested in 2007. Can US households
and ultimately investors in US financial markets handle the
truth? We're about to find out dead ahead.
Action
And Reaction...As is very important to remember at all points
in time, what happens in the real economy and what happens in the
financial markets, that are ultimately a reflection of economic
reality, can be two different things over very short periods of
time. As investors, we need to constantly distinguish
between the personal need to be right in terms of fundamental
outlook and yet putting into actual practice what it takes to make
money. In the financial markets, as is true in many physical
laws of nature, for every action there is a reaction. And
set against the reality of the housing cycle we indeed expect
reaction.
Again,
although it's a very simplistic comment, the Fed will not sit
still and watch housing deteriorate to any meaningful degree in
2007. Why? Because at least historically, the
correlation between the US housing cycle and US consumer spending
dynamics is about as tight as anything we've ever seen. You
can see it clearly in the relationship between the NAHB housing
index (National Association of Homebuilders) and the year over year rate of change in real personal
consumption expenditures (consumer spending) below.

As
has been the case for so long now, liquidity will be the order of
the day in terms of counter cyclical artillery to hold back the
fallout influence of any further housing cycle deterioration.
As we mentioned, it's already well under way. The following
chart is again the historical months supply of homes for sale now
set against the historical movement of the Fed Funds rate.
Highly correlated directionally? You bet.

But
what seems quite the differentiating factor in the current period
is that during this cycle housing price acceleration was not
choked off in large part by restrictive credit. Short
rates have clearly influenced the cost of adjustable financing,
but the cost of conventional financing is up maybe 100 basis
points at present from its current cycle lows. And it's
really only in the past month or so that very questionable
subprime activities have begun to become problems as witnessed by
shifting credit spread activity.
Question. Is it really a 100 basis point increase in the
cost of conventional financing that is responsible for bringing
the greatest residential real estate cycle in history to its
knees? We know at this point that current cycle excess has
been in both mortgage credit availability and physical
supply. So as the current housing cycle continues to play
out, we anticipate the Fed will fight any type of continued
deterioration every step of the way, as was exactly the case with
the tech/greater equity bust early in this decade. Given the
leverage both in residential real estate and the US economy as a
whole, they really have no other alternative at this point except
monetary inflation. Remember, these are not the policemen,
but the provocateurs of price inflation. So from a practical
standpoint, we need to monitor Fed artillery supply
(monetary/liquidity expansion) as well as direction of rounds
being fired (to where does the liquidity flow?). And this
can and will have a direct impact on financial market outcomes. The
more the Fed/Treasury/Administration/Wall Street attempts to fight what we believe will be continued
deterioration in the real world of US residential real estate with
monetary inflation, the more excess liquidity driven financial
speculation may unfold. This has been our immediate history,
so why not our immediate future?
We'll
leave you with an excerpt from a recent (November '06) Fortune
interview with Treasury Secy. Paulson. And we'll also leave
you with a question to ponder. Is this personal conjecture
on the part of Paulson, or is this simply implicit policy at this
point?
| Aren't you concerned
that GDP growth dropped to 1.6% in the latest quarter?
That's kind of anemic, and we've seen a downturn in the
housing market. Convince us we're not going to have a
recession next year.
"I can't convince you. But
as I looked at the third quarter, I felt good because I
saw a major correction in the housing market, and I knew
that was going to take more than one percentage point off
GDP. And then I'm looking at the rest of the economy -
strong corporate profits and investment, good growth
outside the U.S., strength in the construction sector away
from housing, and then an equity market that has gone
up and added $1 trillion in value.
I know how much people care
about housing. But I would be quite hopeful that through
401(k) plans, pension plans, and elsewhere that the
average American is feeling an uplift from the
appreciation of the equity market that would be very
offsetting to any potential decline in housing." |
Please
remember, the reality of the US economy and how that reality is
mirrored over the short term in financial markets can be two very
different things. Being right and making money as investors
can be two different things. Especially in today's world of
interest rate and credit derivatives mushroom clouds. We
know exactly how the Fed/Treasury/Administration/Wall Street
reacted to the tech stock bust. Should be really expect
anything different conceptually in terms of a reaction to a
housing downturn? We think not. Listen to what Paulson
said above. Listen. The decline in housing is not
going to occur without one big "reaction". Capiche?
Although
we are far from being in possession of a crystal ball, given the
immediate US circumstances we have just described, what does this
portend thematically looking ahead? Personally, we expect
sector and overall financial market volatility to increase looking
forward. Regardless of the US residential real estate cycle
outcomes near term, the clear theme of meaningful long term
economic growth in emerging markets (China, India, Brazil, Russia,
etc.) remains fully intact. Any type of meaningful softness
in these markets driven by US consumer behavior/credit cycle
dynamics over the short term should be seen as long term
opportunities. If the Fed accelerates its monetary reflation
efforts from here, non-dollar investment vehicles as well as
investments negatively correlated with the US dollar are deserving
of consideration. Global labor arbitrage opportunities
remain intact. Any pressure on US corporate profits will
only increase labor arbitrage activities. Hence, cash rich global blue chips truly
focused on enhancing shareholder value (as opposed to simply
supporting stock options programs) remain of interest. Total
rate of return, yield tilt, and a defensive sector focus in US
markets appears the appropriate stance at this point. Set
against historical context, the length of the current economic
expansion and equity market up cycle are long in the tooth.
Finally, and this is always the case, well defined and executed risk management disciplines
are paramount. Long term investment survival is not about
hitting home runs. It's all about consistently not striking
out.
We
wish you and your families a healthy, peaceful and prosperous New
Year ahead.
|