Forum Topics Re-emergence of the Fed Put
Solvetheriddle
7 months ago

The Re-emergence of the Fed put

If we go back to late 2020 or early 2021, it is now quite apparent that central banks made a sizeable error by keeping monetary policy too lax for too long. That opened the door for the demon inflation to emerge. During this period, I have contended that an error was made but we did not know what price we have to pay for that error.

The bull scenario was a muddle through with inflation getting back into the box with a strong monetary response but not one strong enough to strangle the economy. The bear case was that the economy would be strangled as much tighter conditions were required. As an aside it is not good enough, imo, to just say we will have a recession, as those of us that have been through a few will attest it quickly becomes an assessment of what type of recession we are actually in, a “technical” recession, ie very soft, or a market clearing, gut wrenching recession, or any of the thousand variants in between. As you can expect the perma-bull and perma-bears take their expected positions on that.

Nothing is written in stone and no one knows the future but it is helpful to think about the issue in terms of probabilities and likelihood of occurrence and how those probabilities change over time and how that should be reflected in your risk appetite. ( I actually think about this a lot)

The big issue, imo, is not a recession or no recession per se, but the ability of the Fed to react to any big negative issues that are put to the economy. When we had inflation bouncing along in its unpredictable and destructive path, the ability of the Fed to react to any large negative issues was dangerously impeded, imo. The Fed would be placed into the predicament of loosening policy into high existing inflation and then could only hope that the problem quickly go away, the prospect of a long battle would be frightening. The equivalent of fighting on two conflicting fronts. The destruction of Fed credibility would be an issue and that opens a whole Pandora's box that we don’t want opened.

During 2023 we have now seen enough to say, imo, with the retreat of inflation, that the Fed has its flexibility back and it can fight a systemic issue and keep its credibility. The implication to markets and risks involved are quite large and are bullish.

My investing style is to attempt to see where the world will be in 12-18 months and play that game rather than playing off the pitch. 2023 has been a march largely in a positive direction.

What does this mean for equity strategy? I have been largely fully invested in 2023 but quite defensive as more evidence was required to move out the risk curve, imo. IMO we are now in a position where some more risk can be taken based on the facts rather than just hoping. Of course we all hope as well.


That’s my view could be wrong.

23

edgescape
7 months ago

@Solvetheriddle

How are you positioning for this? Which sectors or stocks (but can understand if you can't share stocks)?

Not a criticism per se, but I noticed in many of these posts you don't go to specifics and left feeling like there's something missing at the end of reading if you don't mind me saying.

And I'm trying to speak for the layman not just myself

5

Solvetheriddle
7 months ago

@edgescape this piece was really a call out to be weary of perms bears. everyone should at least be aware of the investment cycle and when there is a willingness for the market to take on more risk and when its the opposite. As for everyone's individual positioning, it depends on the well-worn variables, wealth levels, risk tolerance, income levels, age, experience etc etc. there is no one right answer for all imo. my sharemarket holdings are my largest asset by a long way, much more than my principal property. This (of course) influences my portfolio construction, and this will be different for everyone. My current mix is 85% quality growth, 10% income, 5% speculative. 2-3% cash. Good companies will always be good companies but their pricing moves around with varying levels of market risk tolerance --as these change i change weightings. My top 10 individual (non etf) are REA, LOV, CSL, CAR, MQG, GOOGL, PSI, RMD, EVN, WES. i can guess the average holding period about 2 years and 52% current median profit on cost. Therefore these have done well, but i am moving more risk and have been increasing LOV (as noted on SM)/PSI this year, REA probably to go lower, ALL already lower, have been adding NCk and MIN though the year which i see as more risky. when moving weights there is a large element of being opportunistic as there should always be in investing. there are some significant tax liabilities in the income segment and for certain mature growth stocks which makes changes tricky. not yet flicked the switch on more into spec/micro but am open to it much more than before-will be opportunistic. my spec positions are mainly in the SM portfolio. this gives some context when i say more risk likely to be added, i am coming from a blue chip initial position. success depends on execution. exciting times.

16

edgescape
7 months ago

@Solvetheriddle Sounds like a sensible strategy. I did add a bit on IVV recently on weakness as everyone always say it is hard to beat the market.

Plus no matter what they say, larger companies always attract the best talent with the exception when a proven leader joins a smaller company to create another large company like with DVP. Those are harder to find and require more patience. And we can't ignore the emerging leaders such as DTL who have now finally joined the blue chip index.

Appreciate the detailed response.

9