Site icon the janus observer

September 2 – September 8, 2016

Advertisements

Whoa, that’s a lot of corporate debt… So, who is going to pay for China’s corporate debt balance? High Yield Bond Market decoupling from reality.

Headlines

Briefs

Special Reports / Opinion Pieces

Graphics

Fidelity – Five scenarios for stocks – Jurrien Timmer 8/25

FT – Emerging markets on track to set sovereign debt record – Elaine Moore 9/4

FT – Brazil hopes gambling will reverse its fortunes – Samantha Pearson 9/5

WSJ – Now Companies Are Getting Paid to Borrow – Christopher Whittall 9/6

FT – Why emerging market bonds are not the answer for the yield-starved – Jonathan Wheatley 9/6

FT – Inflation-linked gilt returns have gone through the roof – Joel Lewin 9/6

FT – Three things that could derail the eurozone’s recovery – Mehreen Khan 9/7

Featured

*Note: bold emphasis is mine, italic sections are from the articles.

China: the former EM darling. James Kynge. Financial Times. 1 Sep. 2016.

“For most of the last 15 years, China was a darling for emerging market investors as its demand for commodities lifted the economic fortunes of countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia. But now, as China struggles with the hangover from its debt-fueled boom, fund managers are increasingly shunning Asia’s giant.”

“The main deterrent is China’s corporate debt. Although this issue has been well-flagged in recent years, disquiet over its size and sustainability is deepening. A recent report by S&P Global Ratings, the rating agency, estimates that China’s total outstanding corporate debt in 2015 was $17.8tn, or 171% of GDP, making China’s corporate debt mountain by far the world’s largest in both absolute and relative terms.”

“Not only is the ratio of Chinese company debt to GDP more than double that in the US and eurozone, it is projected to grow far more quickly as an increasing number of heavily-indebted corporations ramp up their borrowing simply to repay debts that are coming due. By 2020, China’s outstanding corporate debt will be $32.6tn, while its share of global company borrowings will have risen to 43% from 35% last year, according to S&P estimates.”

“The S&P report estimates that $13.4tn, or nearly half, of total credit demand in China by 2020 will be for refinancing purposes.”

While there are many differences of opinion as to how this shakes out, with either a major meltdown or some internal growing pains (and everything in between), we shall see.  Either way, keep an eye on this one.

Does It Matter If China Cleans Up Its Banks? Michael Pettis. Mauldin Economics. 31 Aug. 2016.

This article really follows the one above and I highly recommend reading the whole thing.

Let me try and paraphrase: imagine you’re a new company and you want to take on debt to help you grow the business. Okay, sounds good and it works.  The additional debt allows you to buy assets that help you to become more productive and hence grow sales/profits faster than the amount of debt and its associated servicing costs.  Boom, you’re a hero and making lots of money.

So you do this some more and some more and some more. Eventually, your rate of productivity slows for every piece of debt you take on.  Oh and did I mention that because you’ve been rolling over the debt to really juice growth, now your debt balance is quite a bit bigger than your total sales.

Fortunately, your cost of debt is low and you can keep on operating, but your lender is no longer willing to extend you credit, so you start talking to your suppliers to provide you with “credit-like” loans – meaning, hey why don’t you front me some money to buy more products from you and I’ll pay you back once I sell the goods to my customers.

Okay, this keeps on working, but eventually you’re running out of good options so you start looking for your highest possible rate of return projects regardless of the risk… ‘Come on lucky number 7.’

Oh and as to the debt, well, you’ve accumulated so much of it that it has become the lender’s problem and it’s such a big problem that it’s also their depositors’ problem (your mom and pop savers).

So what do you do and who is going to take the ‘haircut’…

The High Yield Bond Market Has Never Been This Decoupled From Reality. Tyler Durden (alias). Zero Hedge. 3 Sep. 2016.

From JPMorgan’s Peter Acciavatti: “Recovery rates in 2016 are extremely low… for high-yield bonds, the recovery rate YTD is 10.3% (10.5% senior secured and 0.5% senior subordinate), which is well below the 25-year annual average of 41.4%… As for loans, recovery rates for first-lien loans thus far in 2016 are 24.5%, compared with their 18-year annual average of 67.2%.”

From Edward Altman of NYU’s Stern School of Business: “Our approach to recovery rates is not centered on sectors. What we’ve looked at carefully over 25 years is the correlation between default rates and recovery rates. As you would expect, when the former rise to high or above-average levels, you always observe the latter dropping to below-average levels. This strong inverse relationship is as much a function of supply and demand as it is of company fundamentals. So if we are expecting a higher default rate in 2016 and even 2017, then we would expect a lower recovery rate. Already in 2015, the recovery rate dropped dramatically relative to 2014 even though the default rate was below average; we saw a 33-34% recovery rate versus the historical average of 45%, measured as the price just after default.”

“In the 30-year life of the so-called junk bond market, the chasm between reality and central-planner-created markets has never been wider.”

Bottom line, despite being able to collect less and less on defaulting debt (meaning you would ordinarily be less eager to buy more high yield debt or at least want greater compensation for the risk), pricing for high yield debt continues to rise…

Other Interesting Articles

Bloomberg Businessweek

The Economist

Bloomberg – Another Sign Manhattan Real Estate Is Feeling the Pain 8/31

Bloomberg – Saudi Arabia Said to Weigh Canceling $20 Billion of Projects 9/6

CoStar – Blackstone’s New Non-Traded REIT Begins Selling Shares 9/7

Economist – That 2008 comparison (again) 9/6

FT – Pension solution lies in long-term thinking 8/30

FT – HK property developer hangs hopes on art market 9/3

FT – Shanghai divorces highlight China’s property conundrum 9/4

FT – Why negative interest rates sometimes succeed 9/5

FT – Bank of Japan: great expectations 9/5

FT – Analysts laud ‘remarkable’ pick-up in emerging markets 9/5

FT – China banks shed staff and slash pay in cost-cutting drive 9/6

FT – Rocket’s writedown raises red flags 9/6

InvestmentNews – Ex-CFO at REIT formerly controlled by Nicholas Schorsch indicted 9/8

NYT – Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan Muse Over a Cookie-Cutter Supreme Court 9/5

NYT – Subprime Lender, Busy at State Level, Avoids Federal Scrutiny 9/6

WSJ – Bank of Japan’s New Unease With Negative Rates 9/5

WSJ – The Problem With Dividend Stocks 9/5

WSJ – Why Chinese Bank Stocks Can’t Fly Too High 9/6

WSJ – How China Insurance Crackdown Could Rain on Deal-Making Parade 9/7

WSJ – Europe’s Bond Market: Even Further Through the Looking Glass 9/7

WSJ – Goldman Sachs Has Started Giving Away Its Most Valuable Software 9/7

 

Exit mobile version