Is Risk-Free Really Risk-Free?
In Outside
the Box I try to bring you ideas that are, well, outside the box.
This is increasingly important as we all find ourselves locked into confined
social, political, and economic spaces that prevent us from seeing different
perspectives. Often those perspectives are important, and sometimes they’re
critical.
Today we will go even further outside the box than
usual and consider a thought that is practically unspeakable to many. Is
short-term US Treasury debt really “risk-free,” as financial advisors often
say?
Of course it is, goes the argument. The US government
is the world’s foremost economic and military power. No other country is even
close. We have always paid our government’s debts and we always will. “Full
faith and credit” is as sure as sunrise and sunset.
What if that’s no longer true? My friend Michael Lebowitz of 720 Global wrestles with this dark but
necessary question in the short paper below. It is provocative and important.
On another note, thank you to everyone who responded
to the survey I mentioned last week. You gave me many ideas we are pursuing,
the end result of which will be both higher-quality and more frequent
information from me.
Sadly, getting where we need to go may involve some
trade-offs. I’ll keep you informed as plans develop. Click here if you missed the survey and want to give me
your ideas.
One bit of feedback I’ll share: Many readers said my Outside the Box
introductions are too long and I should let the guest writers speak for
themselves. Fair enough – I’ll get out of the way and let you read on. Have a
great week.
John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Box
The Mind Blowing Concept of “Risk-Free’ier”
By Michael Lebowitz, 720 Global
- The
Earth is flat
- Cigarettes
are healthy
- Leeches
are the cure for everything
- The
universe revolves around the Earth
- California
is an island
- Red
wine is healthy, unhealthy, healthy…
Facts are essential as they offer humans a sense of
stability in a chaotic world. For instance, we find comfort in the “fact” that
the life-sustaining sun will continue to shine for billions of years. If there
were serious doubts about this fact, our lives would be very different today.
In this article, we debunk a “fact” that serves as the
foundation for the pricing of all financial assets. It was not that long ago
that people who thought the earth round were labeled delirious madmen. Today,
questioning the “risk-free” status of U.S. Treasury securities (UST), as we do,
will lead many financial professionals to decry our prudence as foolish
irrationality. That said, we would rather assess the situation objectively than
get caught “swimming naked when the tide goes out”.
Mesofacts
In a must-read article entitled, My Leitner-esque Moment, Kevin Muir of The Macro Tourist
blog broaches the topic of sovereign debt risk and, in what must be a moment of
temporary insanity, questions the so-called
“risk-free” status of UST.
Sovereign debt risk exists and said bonds default from
time to time. Despite history and facts, associating the word “risk” with UST is for some
reason blasphemous amongst financial professionals. The yields of UST are
treated by all investors, even those nay-sayers like Muir and ourselves, to be the risk-free rate. This
argument does not refer to the risk of changing yields but more importantly to
that of credit risk.
All financial and investment models and theories
assume that UST have no credit risk which, by definition, implies zero
chance of default. What in this world has no risk? If you can name
something, congratulations, we cannot.
For background, consider that sovereign debt defaults
have been commonplace among big and small countries. The graph below shows the
frequency by country since 1800.
Graph
Courtesy Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff
Go back further in time, and almost all nations can be
added to that list. The United States stands alone as an economic and military
powerhouse that has never defaulted. (It
is important to note that many people, ourselves included, believe the U.S.
defaulted when it went off the gold standard.)
Despite America’s perfect credit record thus far, it
would be false to assume that UST are “risk-free”. This type of fact, assumed
by the masses, is what Samuel Arbesman, the author of The Half-Life of Facts,
calls a mesofact. A mesofact, unlike the known effect of gravity, is not a fact
of the natural order destined to last for eons. Nor will it have a very short
existence, like the fact that the sun is currently shining on my garden. Essentially, a mesofact is one that has
temporary permanence.
We refuse to debate whether UST are risk-free as we
patently know that cannot be true. Instead, we consider the mindset of a bond
trader and describe the ways we might measure U.S. credit risk.
The Mindset of a Bond Trader
“This
next part of my post might be difficult to accept. Many will simply write off
the theory as the ravings of a lunatic.”
Kevin Muir’s quote precedes a discussion about whether
or not a U.S. corporate bond can trade at a yield below that of a similar
maturity UST.
Can a corporate bond be even less risky than
“risk-
free”? The concept of “risk-free’ier” is mind-bending.
Fresh out of college, on day one on a trading desk, a
bond market trainee is taught the practical (non-academic) concept of spreads.
Unlike stocks, which trade at a dollar price and are not easily comparable to
the price of other stocks or indices, all bonds trade at a yield spread to some
benchmark, usually UST. Frequently, in fact, the dollar price of a bond is not
even computed until after a trade is consummated.
To better describe this pricing methodology let’s
relate it to the solar system. Bonds closest to the sun (UST) are the highest
rated. As one travels away from our starting point, and the distance between
planets and the sun increases, the perceived credit risk and therefore the
yield spread over “risk free” Treasuries increases. In the fixed income
universe, AAA-rated corporate and municipal bonds tend to trade with the
tightest (or smallest) spread to comparable maturity UST as they have lowest
default probability. Traveling further out the credit curve toward lower-rated
bonds, the spread increases as default risk increases and the certainty of
repayment decreases. The graph below shows the gyrations of various corporate
bond indexes aggregated by credit ratings and their spread to UST over time.
Data
Courtesy: St. Louis Federal Reserve (FRED)
In bond trader parlance, one would say the up and down
movements of the lines above represent tightening (spread is declining) or
widening (spread is increasing) relative to Treasuries. The graph below takes
the orbit, or the percentage spread between BBB-rated corporate bonds and UST
from 1997 to today, and plots it in a circular format to help further highlight
this concept. (The orbit-like axis markers (0-8) are the percentage spread
between BBB bonds and UST).
Data
Courtesy: St. Louis Federal Reserve (FRED)
Back to the solar system. If we told you that, over
the last few years, Mercury was tracking progressively closer to the sun, you
would likely assume the orbit of Mercury is changing. Although inconceivable
based on current scientific knowledge, what if it was determined that Mercury’s
orbit was unchanged and the altered distance was due to the re-positioning of
the sun? Similarly,
what if the spreads of
non-Treasury bonds were not 100% reflective of the factors that determine the
yield for each security but also a change in the perceived risk in the
benchmark itself?
Altered State
The U.S. Treasury Department is expected to issue over
$1 trillion of debt in each of the next four years. This is additive to the $21
trillion debt load that is currently outstanding and must be refunded when
bonds mature. Even more troubling, the growth rate of forecasted debt issuance
is almost twice the size of the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) most
optimistic economic growth forecast. As we have argued on many occasions, such
a divergence between the debt burden and the means to service and payoff the
debt cannot continue indefinitely. Deficits
and debt do matter, and given this unsustainable
situation, there is inherent credit risk in UST despite what finance professionals
may tell you.
Ironically, there are currently two popular ways to
measure the credit risk of the risk-free security, and neither of them
currently reflect the absence of risk. The two commonly followed gauges are the
credit ratings assigned to UST via the credit rating agencies and Credit
Default Swaps (CDS) traded in public markets. Currently two of the three major
credit rating agencies (Moody’s and Fitch) assign the highest credit rating of
AAA to the debt of the United States. S&P rates them at a less than perfect
AA+. Credit default swaps (CDS) are derivative contracts that enable an
investor to buy insurance on the default risk of a debt issuer. If the issuer
defaults, the insurance holder is made financially whole. The CDS of the United
States currently trades at 27.5 basis points, which implies the odds of default
are about 1.50-2.00%
A Third Way to Measure Default Risk
As Kevin Muir implies in his article, there is a third
way to evaluate credit risk. Kevin wonders about the implications of a corporate
bond trading at a lower yield than a U.S. Treasury of comparable maturity. We
take that thought a step further. Could the spread between corporate bonds and
UST, even though they are currently positive, be expressing heightened credit
concerns for Treasury securities as opposed to less default risk for
corporations?
What if the spread of AAA rated corporate bonds to UST
were to tighten by ten basis points over the next month? Bond traders will
robotically claim the spread tightening is a function of increased demand,
reduced supply and/or a better economic outlook for the bond issuer. Given current circumstances, is it
unreasonable to suggest that the yield on the corporate bond was unaffected and
the yield on the U.S. Treasury increased due to credit concerns?
Might it be possible the
Sun has, against all conceivable logic, moved?
This concept is extremely hard to grasp, especially
for those of us with decades of experience trading bonds. There are many
instances in finance where a large majority of participants are gripped by
muscle memory and habit. They are wed to the idea that the future credit
history of the U.S. will be what it has been in the past. If we are to be
successful investors over the long run, especially at crucial turning points, we
must fight false assumptions, bad habits and challenge the durability of even
the most basic “facts”.
Summary
Debunked facts are not only common but reflect a
healthy progression of human knowledge. Such advancement, otherwise known as
innovation and productivity, has led the human race to longer life spans,
improved technologies, and greater economic well-being.
The fields of finance and economics, unlike most
sciences, do not always seem to ascribe to the notion of incremental learning.
Those in the financial community tend to repeat the same errors of the past.
Just the past 100 years provides ample evidence of this through multiple
boom-bust periods in which those Ph.D.’s from the best universities made the
same critical mistakes. As such, the “growth” of logic and critical thinking in
economics tends to be more cyclical than incremental. Mesofacts are presumed
permanent, effectively stifling progress.
“I
find it funny that the most vocal critics about the spiraling upward
out-of-control government debt are often those investors’ most likely
advocating positions in long-dated sovereign bonds as a place to hide. The
surprise of this cycle will be that risk-free sovereign bonds provide no safety
against the next crisis, but will instead themselves be the source of the
instability. Think about hedging against the unthinkable happening.”
– Kevin Muir
We concur with Kevin. No one has a crystal ball with
the mystical ability to know when the imbalance of debt will overwhelm the
nation’s ability to pay for it. We would argue that the United States is
well beyond that point of no return and the missing piece of the puzzle is the
point at which investors realize that fact. One glance at recent patterns of buyers of UST argues that
some of our largest foreign sponsors may be asking these very same questions.
That said, all investors should recognize that U.S. Treasury debt does indeed
have credit risk and that risk is growing.
We intend to persuade you to think about things in
ways that few do. In doing so, you will be able to rise above the large
majority of investors that get caught in the sinkhole of cyclical thinking.
Compounding your wealth depends on it.
Michael Lebowitz, CFA
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario