The U.S. Federal Reserve has consistently indicated to investors their intentions to raise short-term interest rates this year. One of the more outspoken proponents of raising rates has clearly been Atlanta Fed President Dennis Lockhart. In a Wall Street Journal interview earlier this month, Lockhart indicated that he expected rates to increase in September. Then, just this past Monday in a speech in Berkeley, California, he once again reiterated the call for short-term rates to increase this year, even if not in September.
Right now, the consensus view of mainstream economists echoes the public statements of Lockhart and his Fed colleagues on rates. In fact, according to a recent survey from the National Association of Business Economics, 77% of economists surveyed indicated they believed the Fed would ultimately raise rates before the end of the year.
So, notwithstanding the strong consensus view that interest rates will increase this year, our firm is sticking with our long-held view that rates will remain both lower and near zero for longer than most people believe. From our analytical perch, there are five key reasons we believe this:
Click here to continue reading on Fortune.
Takeaway: 2Q looks fine. The back half is a stretch. 2016 needs to come down.
We don’t like TIF into the print as we think 1) back half numbers look too high, and 2) this model is extremely poorly positioned for the consumer climate we’re forecasting. There are definitely redeeming qualities about the name – most notably the Brand (and that’s pretty much it). But it is trading near a peak multiple (18.5x) on peak margins (21%), peak earnings ($4.24E), peak returns (18%), has the worst cash conversion cycle we’ve ever seen (490 days), while sentiment is sitting at all-time highs. It’s feast or famine – if one of those metrics breaks, then they all do.
Common perception seems to be that “just because TIF blew up earlier this year, it can’t blow up again.” We simply disagree. The environment has changed significantly, and the company’s guidance for back half growth “in the double digits” is not going to happen. Could the company grow earnings in the 4-6% range? Yes. It can. But that implies at least a $0.15 guide down. Importantly, that could/should cause the consensus to revisit its $4.75 estimate for next year, which we don’t think is achievable. We think a base case is $4.50, with downside to $4.00 as the macro environment worsens.
Historically, TIF’s multiple change has been fairly explosive. As you can see, when earnings have been revised meaningfully up or down, we’ve seen TIF’s multiple relative to the S&P move by up to 40%. The point is that a $4.00 earnings number won’t get a high-teens multiple. It will get something in the low teens while the market waits for earnings to find a bottom. Using that logic, it is not unrealistic to model a $50 stock -- $30 lower. Are we making a call right now for such severe downside? No, we’re not. But that’s where the research initially appears to be headed.
Mother Macro Could Make $4.00 (or less) A Reality?
Consider the following… Domestic economic growth is now well past-peak in rate-of-change terms for this economic expansion, with US GDP growth getting tougher in the 2nd half of 2015 vs. the 1st half. That means, if you held all other risks equal, the probability is higher that growth slows in Q3 and Q4 than Q2. And the last two cycle tops didn’t have this mother of all demographic secular slowings – and note that this isn’t just the US -- the chart below represents better than 90% of Tiffany’s earnings.
2Q: Overall, 2Q looks ok to us. Street estimates imply a slowdown in the 2 year constant currency comp by ~200bps. That seems fair. LVMH and Kering both noted rebounds in jewelry sales in their second quarters. Additionally, TIF's comp has directionally followed the organic growth of LVMH watch and jewelry sales for the past 4 quarters. A potential positive is the Tiffany T collection which could/should boost penetration of the higher margin gold/silver fashion product. TIF’s US e-commerce business implies healthy demand in 2Q – though the trends look problematic into 3Q. It’s only 6% of TIF’s business, but is a good barometer for overall demand. Furthermore, TIF’s SIGMA chart looks very bad. Inventories are out of whack with the P&L in a way that is unlikely to be a 1-quarter fix without a meaningful margin event.
Here’s where we think the problem lies. Comp estimates are reasonable against easy compares, but Q3 margin comp is toughest of the year (even worse on 2 year rate). SG&A growth was just 1% in Q4 last year, yet the street looking for SG&A leverage in this Q4 as the company despite the company putting more capital into its new watch collection and "Will You" engagement campaign. FX pressure is likely to ease in Q4, but what helps revenue and GM will hurt SG&A. The Street has 11% EPS growth in Q3 and Q4. We see it more as flat Q3 and HSD Q4.
The total percentage of successful long and short trading signals since the inception of Real-Time Alerts in August of 2008.
LONG SIGNALS 80.64%
SHORT SIGNALS 78.57%
Takeaway: Below is a report by Hedgeye macro analyst Darius Dale detailing why we removed DXJ from Investing Ideas.
Japanese shares have remained one of the best performing DM global equity markets as of late. That being said, we don't believe it makes a ton of sense to bet that this outperformance continues from here (at least not in the immediate-term). A confluence of domestic and international factors suggest it is now appropriate for investors to book gains – be they absolute or relative – on the long side of Japanese equities (DXJ).
I) No Easy Money Anytime Soon: Despite that fact that Headline CPI, Core CPI and PPI all continue to slow on a sequential and trending basis, recent commentary out of the BoJ – led by Governor Haruhiko Kuroda – continues to be [inappropriately] sanguine on the outlook for reported inflation in Japan. In addition to that, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was out over the weekend effectively granting the BoJ leeway in its pursuit of the +2% inflation target amid the recent plunge in crude oil prices while also confessing his complete faith in the BoJ’s handling of monetary policy. The key takeaway here is that the Cabinet Office is unlikely to lean on the BoJ to ease in the near term, which, on the margin, reduces the likelihood of QQE expansion in 2H15. Specifically, increased wiggle room in obtaining key policy objectives delays the advent of presumably desired policy support measures from the perspective of Japanese equity market participants.
II) China Headwinds: Clearly the recent devaluation of the Chinese yuan put dour outlook for regional and global growth at the center of investors’ concerns. Last Friday, Chinese growth – in Manufacturing PMI terms – hit a 77-month low with the advent of the flash Caixin-Markit report for the month August. As such, we can reasonably conclude that investors are commensurately worried about the outlook for corporate earnings growth in Japan given the headwinds to exports stemming from Chinese #GrowthSlowing (Japan’s 2nd largest export market at 18.1%), as well as the recent bout of defensive strength in the yen amid global contagion.
III) Correlation Risk: Speaking of global contagion, the recent melt-up in the Japanese yen (up +3.1% since Thursday’s close) and melt-down in the Nikkei 225 (down -11.1% since Thursday’s close) should remind investors that the Japanese equities remain tightly correlated to monetary policy expectations – despite growing calls for a sustainable decoupling. Specifically, cyclical bouts of global risk aversion have historically proved positive for the Japanese yen. This is largely due to the yen’s status as both a global funding currency and Japan’s status as an international capital allocator. Its net international investment surplus of ~$3.1T is equivalent to 75% of the country’s GDP and compares to a -$6.8T deficit for the U.S.
All told, while we still continue to see long-term upside for Japanese equities amid sustainable higher-highs in the USD/JPY exchange rate as the LDP and BoJ’s +3% GDP and +2% Core CPI targets clash with heinous demographic dynamics that should lead to perpetually easier monetary policy at the margins. Given the immediate-to-intermediate-term headwinds outlined above, however, we consider it prudent for investors to step to the sidelines for now.
Takeaway: Waiting for Case Shiller to comport with CoreLogic is akin to waiting for Godot. The good news, however, is that this sets up well for 4Q.
Our Hedgeye Housing Compendium table (below) aspires to present the state of the housing market in a visually-friendly format that takes about 30 seconds to consume.
Today's Focus: July New Home Sales & June Case-Shiller HPI
New Home Sales: NHS in July retraced last month’s dud, rising +5.4% MoM and accelerating to +26% YoY. As we’ve highlighted previously, and as the 1st chart below illustrates, July represented a quirky month from a comp perspective. Year-over-year comps begin to steepen considerably in 3Q (July comp =+7% vs June = -12%) but the sequential was easy given last month’s retreat and, on an absolute basis, July 2014 represented the lowest level of sales in 2-years.
Geographically, sales rose sequentially across all regions except the Midwest while year-over-year sales growth was positive across all geographies with growth of +39% and +29% in the Northeast and West, respectively, leading the gains. As a percentage of the total market, New Home share rose to 8.3% in July from 8.1% in June (LT average = ~11.4%) as existing sales made another post-crisis high in the latest month.
On the supply side, the inventory of new homes rose 3.8% month-over-month to 221K on a unit basis while decelerating -80 bps sequentially to +7.3% YoY.
Summarily, in the immediate-term the comp setup for NHS is less favorable while the longer-term mean reversion opportunity in the New Home Market remains both conspicuous and favorable relative the magnitude of upside available in the existing market. Further, in a global environment characterized by price deflation and 0% +/- growth, a deceleration to low-teen’s sales growth may indeed be the Cyclops in a blind Macro land.
HPI: Concentrated Deceleration vs Diffuse Gain, Month 2
The Case-Shiller 20-City HPI for June released this morning – which represents average price data over the April-June period – showed home prices declining -0.12% MoM while holding flat at +4.9% year-over-year. For a second month, all 20 cities reported sequential increases on an NSA basis while, on an SA basis, 10-cities reported declines. Performance by City along with associated city index weightings is illustrated in the scatterplots below
Notably, and also for the 2nd consecutive month, the 20-city series and the National HPI (which covers all U.S. Census divisions ) have shown divergent, albeit modest, 2nd derivative trends. Whereas the 20-city series showed modest deceleration, the National HPI showed modest acceleration. This dynamic stems largely from the index weighting methodology and the fact that index heavyweights New York, San Francisco and Chicago all showed MoM declines and sequential YoY deceleration.
The deceleration in the 20-city series also stands in contrast to both the CoreLogic HPI for June and the multi-month trend in the FHFA HPI series which continue to reflect accelerating price growth. As it stands, we remain inclined to side with the CoreLogic/FHFA data as it's more leading and accords with the rising demand, tightening supply dynamic prevailing currently.
In our view, the more important release will be next week’s CoreLogic data for July along with the short-term projection for August.
About New Home Sales:
Each month the Census Department releases the New Home Sales report, which measures the number of newly constructed homes that have been sold in the month. The difference between the New Home Sales report and the Starts and Permits report is that New Home Sales only includes single family spec homes built and sold by builders, and does not include condos, apartments, or owner-built units. This is why New Home Sales typically run at roughly half the rate of Starts.
About Case Shiller:
The S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index measures the changes in value of residential real estate by tracking single-family home re-sales in 20 metropolitan areas across the US. The index uses purchase price information obtained from county assessor and recorder offices. The Case-Shiller indexes are value-weighted, meaning price trends for more expensive homes have greater influence on estimated price changes than other homes. It is vital to note that the index’s printed number is a 3-month rolling average released on a two month delay.
Frequency and Release Date:
The S&P/Case-Shiller HPI is released on the last Tuesday of every month. The index is on a two month lag and therefore does not reflect the most recent month’s home prices.
Joshua Steiner, CFA
Christian B. Drake
real edge in real-time
This indispensable trading tool is based on a risk management signaling process Hedgeye CEO Keith McCullough developed during his years as a hedge fund manager and continues to refine. Nearly every trading day, you’ll receive Keith’s latest signals - buy, sell, short or cover.