Macro and Credit - The fourth wall

"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery, French pilot and writer

While enjoying the festive season in Paris, we watched with interest a couple of interesting credit and market events that made us think about a theatrical reference which we decided to use as our title analogy. The fourth wall is the imaginary "wall" at the front of the stage in a traditional three-walled box set in a proscenium theatre, through which the audience sees the action in the world of the play (or markets). Speaking directly to, otherwise acknowledging or doing something to the audience through this imaginary wall – or, in film and television, through a camera – is known as "breaking the fourth wall" (think Ferris Bueller's day off...). The fourth wall being an established convention and given our disregard for conventions (us being contrarian), we will, therefore, in this first of the year conversation "break the fourth wall". The acceptance of the transparency of the fourth wall is part of the suspension of disbelief (or delusion) between the "fictional" recovery we have commented on numerous occasions and you, the audience.

Before we dive more into our first conversation of the year, which will relate once more to the state of affairs in the credit and macro space, we would like to make a quick parenthesis on two subjects of interest of ours, namely idiosyncratic risks in credit markets and the state of shipping (given for us it is not only a deflationary indicator, but a credit indicator as per our past conversations).

A good illustration of the idiosyncratic risk in the credit space was once more illustrated on the 29th of December by the price action relating to the "sucker punch" delivered to the senior bond holders of Novo Banco, the supposedly "good part" of former Portuguese bank Banco Espirito Santo - graph source Bloomberg:

- graph source Bloomberg

So what happened on the 29th of December that spooked the "innocent" senior financial bond holders you might rightly ask dear audience? Well, Bank of America Merrill Lynch in their note on Novo Banco from the 4th of January tells it all:

"The Bank of Portugal announced that, as part of the resolution of BES, it was transferring five bonds from Novo, back to the ‘bad bank’, BES. We believe that the resolution of BES could be viewed as a process and not a discrete series of events, since Novo is still a ‘bridge’ institution (the intention is that the resolution of Novo is complete when it is sold, although the deadline for the sale now appears to be indefinite). In our view, recovery on these securities should be viewed as uncertain as BES’s total assets were only €197m at end-2014 compared to a negative net asset position of €2.7bn, before the transfer of a further €2bn of senior bonds. It is our understanding that the senior bonds’ Governing Law is Portuguese. We note that in the original resolution of BES, the Bank of Portugal, as resolution authority, has reserved the right to move assets and liabilities between ‘bad’ bank and ‘bridge’ bank. In addition, the BoP appears to have chosen large denomination seniors, to avoid imposing losses on retail bondholders. In any case, with the transferred securities trading at ~€11, and BES now to be liquidated. 

Further losses could lie ahead 

Novo has in effect been given a further €2bn in capital post-transfer which, according to the company, means that its CET1 ratio has now increased to 13%. However, Negocios, at the end of 2015, reported that a further €2bn of ‘irregular’ loans linked to the ancien regime of the bank had been discovered (the newspaper adduces these irregular loans as the reason for the senior bail-in). The newspaper reports that the provisions relating to these exposures may be taken in 4Q15 (and beyond) leading to a significant deterioration in the accounts of the bank. Note Novo Bank did not comment on the press reports. The June report already detailed a loss of €252m. We would expect this to deepen through year end as provisioning likely catches up with the asset quality decline we saw at the bank in 2015. 

Cheap but we await clarity 

In our view the 5% bonds are quite cheap, with yields of nearly 10%. However, many erstwhile bondholders of Novo are now nursing substantial losses from their senior exposures – we assume this could lead to a degree of reluctance to take exposure on the name, at least for a while, which could mean poor technicals for the bonds. We understand that Novo is now better capitalised. However, this capital could come under pressure in the coming quarters if more losses are recognised. Events of the past few weeks have highlighted Novo’s problems and the fact that the deadline for its sale is no longer subject to public disclosure suggests a drawn-out sales process, especially as Santander has just bought Banif, so arguably does not necessarily need to add to its Portuguese assets." - source Bank of America Merrill Lynch

No, these bonds are not "cheap" and should be avoided. 

In addition to senior bond holders nurturing their losses, as of the 1st of January, depositors are now "pari passu" with senior creditors and are indeed next in the line of fire should additional "hidden losses" materialize (they will). When it comes to recovery assumption, we read with interest CMA (now part of Capital IQ)'s take on the estimated recovery value. They estimate it to be at 1%. You read that correctly. So much for an assumed recovery value of 40% for senior CDS. 

We might be sounding yet again in 2016 as a broken record but, we told you before dear readers, in the next downturn in credit, recovery values, rest assured, will be much lower. That's a given.

Moving on to the second part of our parenthesis namely "shipping", and "cheap credit", we read with interest the FT's recent article on the subject from the 3rd of January entitled "Cash burning up for shipowners as finance runs dry":

"The challenges facing DryShips are among the most acute of those facing nearly all dry bulk shipping companies after a slump in earnings drove most owners’ revenues well below their operating costs. Owners are haemorrhaging cash. Owners of Capesize ships — the largest kind — currently bring in around $3,000 a day less than the $8,000 they cost to operate. The losses for the many owners who have to service debts secured against vessels are far higher.
Basil Karatzas, a New York-based corporate finance adviser, points out that in an industry that has already been making steady losses for 18 months, such substantial losses quickly mount up.
“If you have 10 ships and you’re losing $3,000 to $4,000 per day per ship, that’s, let’s say, $40,000 per day, times 30 in a month, times 12 in a year,” he says. “You are losing some very serious money.”
The question is how long dry bulk owners — and the private equity firms which have invested heavily in the companies — can survive the miserable market conditions.
Michael Bodouroglou, chief executive of Paragon Shipping, another New York-listed dry bulk shipowner, says that owners are looking to negotiate partial repayments, standstills and payment moratoriums with their banks.
“They’re trying to batten down the hatches, reduce costs as much as they can,” he says.
Yet the brief arrest — seizure over unpaid debts — in November in Singapore of the Sparta, a Capesize dry bulk carrier controlled by private equity firms, illustrates why shipowners are especially pessimistic about this slump. The vessel’s arrest, at the request of Deutsche Bank, has been widely interpreted as a sign that banks’ readiness to keep amending loan terms to allow owners to ride out the slump might be coming to an end." - source Financial Times

We chuckled because although some pundits have the memory span of a goldfish, we don't and we clearly remembered the warnings we gave back in December 2013 on the billions poured by Private Equity players in the shipping industry in our conversation "All that glitters ain't gold":

"There is a wave of private equity money flowing into shipping, which for us is yet another manifestation of "mis-allocation" and "Cantillon Effects".We have long argued that "Shipping is a leading credit indicator", as well as a "leading deflationary indicator". We have also discussed at length the link between consumer spending, housing, credit and shipping back in August 2012.
The latest manifestation of the consequences of "cheap credit" and record cash is leading outside players such as private equity investors to dip into the structured finance shipping business

Whereas traditional shipowners tend to hold vessels for at least 20 years, private equity groups hope to turn a quick profit by listing companies or selling their vessels once charter rates and ship valuations recover.

The issue of course for our private equity friends that they will soon discover is that if quick profits depend on valuations, they also depend on "recovery". We think they are bound for some disappointment as overcapacity is still plaguing the industry. " - Macronomics, December 2013

Given the "evident signs" of the recovery as displayed in the latest dismal print for the Baltic Dry Index to 467, a new record low (since its creation in 1985), one might wonder if indeed the PE players will make their "quick buck" on their "shipping" ventures. We don't think so:

- source Bloomberg.

Why we don't think so? Because "cheap credit" has led to "malinvestments" with PE pundits placing bets on a business they hardly know, and they have added overcapacity to overcapacity. Simply put, there is a "shipping" glut.

One can ascertained QEs and ZIRP have been deflationary by looking at the fall in the US of M2 "velocity":

-source CLSA

In similar fashion in the shipping industry, the "velocity" of ships aka their speed has been as well falling as reported by Bloomberg in their article entitled "Slowing Boat From China Provides Clue to Health of World Trade" from the 17th of December:

"Even with fuel at its cheapest price in almost a decade, the ships that carry goods around the world have been reducing speed in line with the slowdown in China, the biggest exporter.
Shipping companies have been “slow steaming” since the global financial crisis in 2008, as a way to save costs and keep as many ships active as possible. Vessels are now operating at an average of 9.69 knots, compared with 13.06 knots seven years ago, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. 

That means Nike sneakers and Barbie dolls made in China can now take two weeks to arrive in Los Angeles and a month to reach Le Havre, France -- a week longer than if the ships were moving at full speed. And there’s scope for ships to go even slower, according to A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S.
“This is the new norm,” said Rahul Kapoor, a Singapore-based director at Drewry Maritime Services Pvt. “The overall speed of the industry has gone down and there’s no going back.”
In the boom years before the 2008 financial crisis, shipping lines expanded fleets and ran ships as fast as they could to keep up with the surging demand for goods manufactured half a world away. As demand dropped, the lines were left with too many vessels, and customers eager to reduce inventory, who would rather pay a lower rate to receive goods than guarantee quick delivery." - source Bloomberg

The new norm has been slower M2 velocity, slower growth, slower shipping. For the PE punters who have played the "recovery" game, they will have to face the "music". End of our parenthesis.

In this week's conversation, given the on-going "bloodbath" in the oil space, we will look at some of the implications. We will also look at the debilitating state of the credit markets once more.

Synopsis:

• US Energy sector (ETF XLE) versus oil price - Much more downside to come
• Credit - The credit cycle has turned and global financial conditions are tightening
• Final chart - Correlations getting higher in a macro-driven market

• US Energy sector (ETF XLE) versus oil price - Much more downside to come

While watching the continuous downward spiral of oil prices, what really struck us is the resilience from the US energy sector in the equity space versus the price of oil. We are convinced that there is more downside to come on the equity side - graph source Bloomberg from the 6th of January:

- graph source Bloomberg.

Whereas at the end of 2008, oil and XLE where trading roughly at the same levels, today it appears to us that ETF XLE as a proxy for the oil equity sector is still at least 30% above the lows of 2009 with an oil barrel at a much lower level. More pain to come, we think...

On a side note, should a rebound of oil happen at some point in 2016, one sure way of playing it would be through Fx via the Canadian Dollar (CAD) and/or the Norwegian Krona (NOK). 

Whereas, equities present more downside risk, credit has already significantly underperformed in recent month in fact as indicated by Barclays in their Oil and Gas monthly note from the 5th of January indicates the following:

"High Yield Energy Bonds Drop 23.6% in 2015 

The Barclays high yield energy index decreased 12.2% in December, the second largest monthly decline since 1991 (worst was October 2008 at -19.2%). This month’s drop leaves high yield energy down 23.6% for the year, underperforming the overall high yield market by 19.1% in 2015. In December, high yield energy credits moved lower because of a 12% decline in front month WTI and a collapse in natural gas prices to a low of $1.75/mmBtu on warm winter weather. By rating category, BB bonds returned -11.6%, B bonds returned -13.6%, and CCCs returned -12.9%. The independent index declined 18.3% in December, reflecting sharp decreases in the unsecured bonds of California Resources, Legacy Reserves, Vanguard Natural Resources, and Memorial Production Partners. Oilfield services dropped 8.4% on decreases in Seadrill, Atwood Oceanics, and CGG. New issue activity dried up completely in December, leaving year-to-date high yield energy issuance at $33bn, down from $55bn issued in 2014. 

Leverage Sensitivities and Breakevens at $40/bbl WTI 

We recently published an E&P update on leverage sensitivities and breakevens at $40/bbl WTI (report). In the report, we show sensitivities to debt/EBITDA in 2016 assuming $40/bbl WTI and $2.25/mmbtu Henry Hub, close to where strip prices are today. Two-thirds of the peer group has leverage north of 5.0x and five companies have leverage north of 10x (SandRidge, California Resources, MEG Energy, Denbury, and EXCO). However, hedging gains account for almost half of the peer group EBITDA in 2016, leaving unhedged debt/EBITDA at an average of 20x. Under this screen, 16 of the 27 companies we model have leverage north of 10x. Lowest leveraged companies under a $40/2.25 deck include Concho Resources (2.2x), Hilcorp Energy (3.2x), Baytex Energy (3.7x), and EP Energy (3.8x). Although not our base case, we note that Moody’s recently lowered its 2016 price forecast to $40/2.25, potentially foreshadowing additional ratings downgrades. 

Hedging Protection is Limited in 2017 

In our latest hedge study (report), we found that high yield E&P companies have protected 36% of 2016 oil and gas production and only 12% of 2017 production. While some high yield producers used the rally in oil to $60/bbl in May 2015 to fortify hedges, few producers have added to hedges in 4Q15 given the decline in strip prices. Almost half the peer group remains unhedged in 2017. As of 3Q15, we estimate that the peer group had a hedge book value of $12.6bn, with Antero Resources leading the peer group at $2.8bn. Top hedgers in 2016 and 2017 include Memorial Production Partners and Antero Resources, with an average 78% and 76% of 2016/17 production hedged, respectively. Credits with no hedges in place for 2016/17 include Goodrich Petroleum, MEG Energy, Midstates Petroleum, and Swift Energy. Energy Spreads Wider in DecemberIn December, energy spreads widened 292bp, to 1,296bp, compared with 58bp of widening for the overall market. December’s move left energy spreads trading 636bp wider than the high yield market, cheap compared with the 10-year average of 38bp through. The sharpest outperformance came in the oilfield services subsector, which widened as little as 5bp versus the high yield market." 

- source Barclays

Given the lack of hedges for some as reported by Barclays, should the "oil conundrum" continues, meaning lower for longer, no doubt to us that some players are going to face the default/restructuring music in 2016. 

This brings us to the second point of our conversation relating to credit and the current state of affairs.

• Credit - The credit cycle has turned and global financial conditions are tightening

While looking at the evolution of Global Fx reserves and their evolution since 2003 and in comparison with the recent periods, one being 2008 and the start of the rise in the cost of capital since mid 2014, if we use the evolution of these Global Fx reserves as a proxy for "global liquidity", one can ascertain that an expansion of these reserves indicates expansion, whereas a fall, indicates a global contraction - graph source Macronomics / Bloomberg:

One can notice from the above chart that during the financial crisis of 2008, between the 31st of July and the 31st of March 2009, Global Fx reserves tightened by 4.86% ($339 bn in 8 months, roughly $42bn per month). Since the 31st of July 2014 until the 31st of December 2015, Global Fx reserves have fallen by 6.39% ($768 bn in 17 months = roughly $45 bn per month). The on-going "liquidity" crisis, which is indeed a very big US dollar "margin call", is not only much bigger than in 2008, but, is lasting much more longer!

So even if some "pundits" tell you that at these levels High Yield is a "bargain", dear reader you should think again, although no doubt there are some interesting credit story out there (much more likely in Europe where leverage is lower), credit in the High Yield space continues to deteriorate in the US, hence our recommendation of moving higher in the rating spectrum for the last few months and favor Europe from a relative value perspective (better credit metrics).

When it comes to US High Yield we have to agree with Bank of America Merrill Lynch's take from their latest High Yield strategy chartbook from the 6th of January, "Winter is coming":

"2014 redux 

Last year was a lot like 2014, only amplified. Bigger oil slump, worsening fundamentals and gappier price movements in HY, more geopolitical turmoil, and higher EM volatility. These factors were already eroding investor sentiment within HY when the US economy also buckled, showing signs of a slowdown at the heels of an already faltering global economy. The news of liquidation of several HY funds due to mounting losses from distressed credits turned out to be the last straw, driving US HY to a return of -4.6%, its first negative annual return in a non-recessionary period. The only bright spot: mutual fund redemptions were comparatively much lesser last year (-$10bn) vs 2014 (-$21bn), which arguably gave US HY a level of support. Across asset classes, US HY was the second worst performer. Only EM equities underperformed more, while less risky securities such as Treasuries, Munis, and Mortgages were the best performers. Leveraged Loans outperformed HY returning -0.69bps despite the heavy outflows (-$25bn). 

Winter is coming 

It’s a binary world we live in: 2015 returns were heavily dragged down by commodities, outside of which the index was roughly flat (tab 1.01). Half the HY universe by market value today trades at 310bps, while the other half is at 1050bps. The distressed list has a disproportionate representation of commodities (33%). However, this dispersion doesn’t bode well for US HY, as our fears of valuations eventually catching up to fundamentals have not abated. Default and distress ratios are increasing, even outside commodities:

and while rating migrations ex-commodities have not reached 2011 levels, they are heading in the wrong direction. CCC issuance has plummeted (chart below) and the US-domiciled USD HY market has seen a net annual contraction for the first time since 2008:

We expect all of this to continue well into 2016, putting more pressure on non-commodity paper. In terms of opportunities, we think Fallen Angels will provide a unique one to HY investors in 2016 as demand for higher quality paper increases, especially in light of reduced primary market activity. We also like Leveraged Loans for many of the aforementioned reasons, and believe they will outperform bonds once again this year." - source Bank of America Merrill Lynch

2016, no doubt will be an interesting year for US High Yield particularly given the contagion risk, should market turmoils continue to run unabated as it seems to be the case so far. As displayed in Bank of America Merrill Lynch's data, not only leverage is higher than in 2008, but earnings have been falling faster in terms of EBITDA YoY changes:

Even Ex Energy earnings are falling...

We know nothing, Jon Snow 

Is it possible that the world remains in its current bifurcated state? Yes, if oil prices don’t bounce back and ex-commodity fundamentals don’t degenerate further. We can sympathize with the commodity bears given the levels of global oversupply, but corporate earnings power has been eroding for one too many quarters (charts above), and top cycle behavior has surfaced one too many times this past year for us to think that the corporate credit cycle has not turned. This is the foundation of our opinion that spreads have more room to widen from here, and a broader default cycle is looming, especially if outflows pick up. The more nuanced questions for 2016 and beyond however, include: what will be the direction of the global economy and how will that impact the business cycle back home? Will events in the HY market be enough to create another impediment for the US economy? Enough to turn the business cycle? The answers to these, we don’t know yet." - source Bank of America Merrill Lynch

So, don't push your luck dear reader, we might be breaking the fourth wall, but "overplaying" the "beta" game when the US credit cycle has turned is, we think asking for more trouble than "carry".

What we have long argued during the course of 2015 is that the more correlations were getting "positive" the higher the number of "sucker punches" aka large standard deviation moves. It is no surprise to us, that the year ended, for some bond holders of Novo Banco, with a bang as described earlier in our conversation. When it comes to 2016, given cross asset correlations have risen, we do expect even more "sucker punches" being delivered hence our mention of "risk reversal" opportunities in our last conversation of the year 2015. When it comes to a macro-driven market as "central banks' put" are losing their "magic", correlations unfortunately are still moving higher, which, we think is a sign of great instability brewing.

• Final chart - Correlations getting higher in a macro-driven market

We already discussed the rise in +/-4 standard deviations moves or more in various asset classes back in August 2015 in our conversation "Charts of the Day - Positive correlations and large Standard Deviation moves":

"Cushing's syndrome" aka central banking "overmedication" leads to a rise in "positive correlations. There is a growing systemic risk posed by rising "positive correlations. Since the GFC (Great Financial Crisis), correlations have been getting more positive which, is a cause for concern" - Macronomics, August 2015

The correlation between macro variables such as bund yields, FX and oil and equity market factors (Momentum, Value, Growth, Risk) is now higher than the correlation between macro variables and the market. There lies the crux of central banks interventions. There is now deeper inter-linkages in the macro economy as well as financial markets globally post crisis. This is confirmed by our chosen chart from Bank of America Merrill Lynch's Credit Derivatives Strategist note from the 6th of January entitled "When credit met technical analysis":

"Correlations getting higher in a macro-driven market 

The credit CDS index market is a macro risk gauge. Post the global financial crisis and the subsequent central bank interventions, we find that pairwise correlations among different credits are now at a different (higher) regime (chart 4). 

Macro shocks (oil, Greece, China, EM risks, Fed, ECB) dominate credit markets. We see little prospect of the current market set-up changing in view of ECB QE.

Pairwise correlations across different asset classes have also been trending higher. Chart 5 shows the cross-asset pairwise correlations for equity, credit, implied vol and FX markets both in Europe and the US. Note that recently cross-asset correlations were at the highest level in a decade."

- source Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Sorry to be breaking again the fourth wall dear readers, but, in our book, rising cross asset correlations is not a good sign for a smooth ride, but, at least indicates, there is convexity and risk reversal opportunities out there...and volatility is therefore a buy...

"A heart well prepared for adversity in bad times hopes, and in good times fears for a change in fortune." - Horace

Stay tuned!

Credit - The Donk bet

"There are three roads to ruin; women, gambling and technicians. The most pleasant is with women, the quickest is with gambling, but the surest is with technicians." - Georges Pompidou, former French president (1969-1974)

While watching the much anticipated LTROs refund on Friday, as well as the economic data during the week  with the rebound of the European PMI which we had anticipated (France being an outlier, but, our readers  know it doesn't come to us as a surprise), Spain's Economy Minister Luis de Guindos took center stage for us on Friday by declaring on Bloomberg TV: "Spain doesn't need any sort of bailout", adding that the target for the budget shortfall this year is "achievable" and concluding his remarks by "The perception of the Spanish economy has improved and will continue to do so over the next weeks and months". 

Given last week's title analogy referred to poker games in general and the art of bluffing in particular, we thought we had to use yet another poker game reference in our title namely the "Donk bet".

 The "Donk bet" being:

1. A bet made by a donk, i.e. one that is generally considered weak or to demonstrate inexperience or lack of understanding of strategy.
2. A bet made in early position by a player who didn't take initiative in the previous betting round. It was named because this move is often considered indicative of a weak player (since it is more often reasonable to expect a continuation bet). - source Wikipedia

It seems to us that Spain's Economy Minister has not fully demonstrated his understanding of the "Fabian Strategy" of Mario Draghi. Our "Generous Gambler" has been trying to "call the clock" (using another poker game reference) on Spain  namely trying to discourage them to take a long time to act.

We would therefore "agree to disagree" with Mr de Guindos given Spain pose the biggest threat to the survival of the Euro. In fact the Spanish Misery index has beaten Greece as the crisis bites and unemployment has reached 26.60% as indicated by Bloomberg:

The European Commission prediction for Spain’s budget shortfall last year is already wider than the EU’s goal of 6.3 % of gross domestic product. The target for 2013 is 4.5 %...

We quoted in our conversation "Agree to Disagree" Henry Queuille. Henri Queuille was the epitome for "professional politician": he served three times as Prime Minister and was 21 times minister in a French government under the IIIrd and IVth French Republic. He was the symbol of the inefficiency and the failure of the French IVth Republic:

"Politics is not the art of solving problems, but to silence those who ask." - Henri Queuille

It appears to us that Mr de Guindos is indeed a true disciple of Henri Queuille when we listened to his latest Bloomberg interview. As a matter of Spanish "quote" comparison, BBVA's Chief Operating Officer Angel Cano said in April 2010 that asset quality was probably going to be "stable from now on". Looking how "stable nonperforming loans have in been in Spain, one can wonder whether or not a Henri Queuille award should be set up in Europe for the best delusional political quote, but, we ramble again...

So in true poker fashion, one can posit "there's indeed plenty of action in this game". In this week's conversation we will therefore look at what lies ahead for the Spanish banking sector in general and Spain's real economy in particular in conjunction with the LTRO impact of the early refund. But first a quick credit overview.

US PMI versus Europe PMI - source Bloomberg

"Short term, we do expect a minor reduction in the divergence as reflected in credit prices such as the US leveraged loan cash price index versus its European peer." - Macronomics, The Fabian Strategy, 5th of January 2013

We explained the divergence in our conversation "Growth divergence between the USA and Europe" and we indicated early January that this divergence should persist in 2013. 

The uncanning similarity of the US leveraged loan cash price index versus its European peer with the above PMI graph - source Bloomberg:

"Loan prices have risen to 97.72 cents on the dollar, the highest since July 2007, from 59 cents in December 2008, as concern eases that the world’s largest economy will slide back into recession. Leveraged loans and high-yield, high-risk bonds are rated below Baa3 at Moody’s Investors Service and lower than BBB- at S&P." - source Bloomberg.

The current European bond picture with the continuing fall in Spanish and Italian yields with rising Core European yields - source Bloomberg:

In relation to our "Flight to quality" picture, Germany's 10 year Government bond yields have been recently rising above 1.60% and the 5 year CDS spread for Germany has been rising in tandem in the process - source Bloomberg:

2 year German bond yields versus 2 year Japanese yields, yet another "sucker punch" courtesy of the LTRO's refund anticipations. From 0% yield to 0.23% in January 2013 - source Bloomberg:

Credit and volatility wise, the Itraxx Crossover index (representing the credit risk gauge for 50 European high yield entities) have as well falling in tandem but with volatility (a subject we recently touched on) breaking through important levels similar to the regime of 2004-2007 - source Bloomberg.

Credit wise, what really caught our attention was not only the "new regime" in volatility (or should we say Central Banks' dictatorship via "financial repression"), but, the US High Yield space, where Tenet Healthcare has issued a 7 year bond with a single "B" rating with a coupon of 4.25%, which is an "all time low" level for a primary yield level on a single "B" credit on a 7 year bond.  

As we have discussed in our first credit conversation of the year "The Fabian Strategy", we don't believe the hype in credit and as we argued in our conversation "Hooke's law" previously the "credit mouse-trap" has been set by Central Banks. Well done...

We also recently reflexionate around the return of mega leveraged buyout transactions such as DELL inc  in our recent conversation "The return of LBOs - For whom the Dell tolls".  Record low borrowing costs in the market for junk bonds (high yield) where LBOs are financed is creating the ideal set up for a leverage buyout   buying spree: "There will be about $135 billion in LBO volume this year, compared with an average of $100 billion during the past two years, and below the $600 billion annual peak of 2006 and 2007, he said. Credit-default swaps typically surge on LBO speculation because the debt added to a company’s balance sheet to fund the takeover erodes its credit quality and leads to ratings downgrades. 
“As the recent experience with Dell illustrates, the risk of LBOs has a particularly large impact” on Markit’s investment-grade benchmark, pushing it a net 2 basis points wider, Bank of America’s Mikkelsen and Yuriy Shchuchinov wrote in a Jan. 23 note. Their model shows 14 percent of the index’s underlying credits are feasible LBO candidates. 
 Credit-default swaps on Quest Diagnostics have climbed 38.5 basis points to a mid-price of 123 basis points since Bloomberg News first reported Dell’s buyout discussions with private- equity firms, according to data provider CMA, which is owned by McGraw-Hill Cos. and compiles prices quoted by dealers in the privately negotiated market. 
Buying Protection:   
That was “precipitated by investors’ buying protection on names that have traditionally been considered LBO candidates,” following the Dell news, according to a note dated Jan. 23 from Barclays Plc analysts led by Shubhomoy Mukherjee. Credit-default swaps tied to Nabors surged 42 basis points to 191, the highest since July, and contracts on Avnet Inc.’s debt climbed as high as 254 basis points on Jan. 14 before falling to 178 basis points yesterday, CMA data show. Those on Falls Church, Virginia-based Computer Sciences Corp. added 40.5 basis points since Jan. 11 to 193 yesterday. Buyout firms announced a record $1.6 trillion of acquisitions from 2005 to 2007. The end of that era was “quite painful for many overleveraged deals and many PE firms and their investors have continued their long wait to reach that point where they can exit and take their gains,” CreditSights Inc. analysts Glenn Reynolds and Ping Zhao wrote in a note."  - source Bloomberg - Dell Lifts Default Risk on Next Buyout Targets: Credit Markets.

Could that be another indication of a "Donk bet" taking place in the credit space? We wonder...

As we have argued last week's Dell LBO conversation:
"One thing for sure with which we clearly agree on with CreditSights, is that the yield curve management policies of the Fed is clearly pushing investors into higher risk assets to reach for return in this "Yield Famine" induced environment of "Financial Repression" (probably out of their comfort zone too...)."

Moving on to the Spanish "Donk bet", no disrespect to Mr de Guindos and Mr Cano but we will have to agree with Citi's recent note on Spanish Banks - Iberoamerican Big Picture from the 21st of January:
"A change in the latest asset quality deterioration trend is needed for the sustainability of the banking system. If at a system level we maintain the loan contraction and the NPL growth during the next 5 quarters, the NPL ratio for the corporate segment would increase to 29.1% in 4Q13E from 16.6% in 3Q12. As expected the key drivers of the NPL growth will be the construction and the real estate sectors" - source Citi

"Just as an example, if we maintain the yoy loan contraction and the NPL growth during the next 5 quarters, the NPL ratio for the corporate segment would go from 16.6% in 3Q12 to 29.1% in 4Q13E. Just keeping the contraction deleverage pace stable pace with the stock of NPLs, the NPL ratio would increase to 18%." - source CITI

So much for "stability Mr Cano. So much for "improvement Mr de Guindos.

In last week's conversation "Cool Hand" we discussed the Bank of Spain's recent willingness in stemming the  war for deposits taking place in Spain:
"By trying to put an end to the deposit wars, the Bank of Spain ambitions to reduce the pressure on banks' earnings and profitability which would reduce the capital shortfall for some Spanish banks and the level of capital injunctions needed. It is once again a "Fabian strategy", buying time that is."

Citi's recent note on that matter is as follows:
"On 8 January 2012, the Spanish press reported that the Bank of Spain had “recommended” the largest banks in Spain to limit the yield of saving products. Other banks followed shortly. The measure apparently would also affect guaranteed funds and commercial paper products. The penalty for high yield deposits would consist of higher capital requirements, which would not affect foreign banks operating in the country (ie Banco Espirito Santo, ING). 

The press sources differ in the way the penalty is going to work, given the lack of official statements from Bank of Spain, the interpretation of the law can vary significantly. We expect a law to regulate this “recommendation” shortly. The Bank of Spain has taken this measure in order to reduce the cost of funding for the banks, which are expected to transfer part of this reduction to lower lending rates. We have to take into account that, according to the 3Q12 results, banks are already reducing the yield of loans after the repricing cycle during 2012. 

How do we understand the new recommendation? It will apply to the new savings production from banks — 85% of the new production of the banks won’t be able to exceed the yield limits set in the table below (Figure 4). The banks exceeding this limit will need to comply with higher core capital requirements, according to the press up to 125bps more from the current 9.0% requirement. The latest reports point out that the deposits above €10 million won’t be affected by the new requirement, supporting big corporate and public deposit accounts." - source CITI

The larger than expected EUR 137.2 billion initial repayment from the first three year LTRO (consensus was for 84 billion), we will have to wait until mid-march to get the geographical breakdown from National Central Banks in order to assess the complete picture for European countries.

But some Spanish banks such as Banco Sabadell indicated on the 11th of January, that the bank was planning to repay EUR 4.8 billion of LTRO funding (20% of the total requested) according to Citi's note.

As far as profitability for Spanish banks is concerned, as indicated by Citi's note:
"Given that the last LTRO was already announced in February 2012, it should be fully included in analysts’ estimates, reducing revenues expectations for 2015. Below we can find the revenue consensus estimates of our coverage universe. It is not only that revenues seem high, in our view, it is also that consensus seems to be missing the LTRO effect in 2015 revenue estimates, as they are expected to grow by 7% on average (ex Santander and BBVA)." - source Citi

An interesting analysis from Citi, while there are not missing out on the LTRO impact on earnings, we think they are lacking some essential points in relation to Spanish banks.

-First missing point - the issue of puttable bonds which we discussed in our conversation "When causation implies correlation":
"Banco Santander SA, Spain’s biggest lender, is placing its trust in bondholders by issuing 4.4 billion euros ($5.7 billion) of fixed-income securities that investors are able to redeem before maturity.
Bonds with put options make up 36 percent of Santander’s debt funding this year, compared with 9 percent in 2011, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. While the bonds have lower interest rates, they leave the bank vulnerable to a potential 7 percent increase in the 33.4 billion euros it must repay next year. Investors have already demanded early repayment on 1 billion euros of the notes." - source Bloomberg
Puttable bonds are indeed a typical instrument used by financial institutions under stress. For us, a big red flag." - source Macronomics, When causation implies correlation, 27th of October 2012

-Second missing point - the issue of the dwindling capacity in absorbing potential losses at the parent bank due to partial IPOs discussed in the same October conversation:
Another red flag we think for Santander, comes from its dwindling capacity in absorbing potential losses at the parent bank by its increasing policy of partial IPOs such as the one done in Mexico as indicated by CreditSights in their report Spanish Banks - The Value of Empires from the 22nd of October:
"In Santander's case especially, the capacity of equity in its foreign subsidiaries to absorb potential losses at the parent bank is being reduced by its policy of partial IPOs(the goal being to list all the most significant subsidiaries within five years – see Santander: Partial IPO in Mexico). The erosion of loss absorbing capacity that this implies at parent or group level is reflected in the Basel 3 reform that will ultimately prevent banks from including in consolidated CET1 capital any surplus equity contributed by minorities in excess of the subsidiaries' minimum regulatory requirements." - source CreditSights" 

-Third missing point being one of Macronomics's favourite namely the importance of "Goodwill" (see our conversation from November 2011 - "Goodwill Hunting Redux"):
"Large Goodwill Impairments increase the debt to equity ratio.
It is therefore paramount to track goodwill impairments in relation to future banks earnings."

Goodwill:
"Goodwill is an accounting convention that represents the amount paid for an acquisition over and above its book value. Under the accounting rules European banks use, the International Financial Reporting Standards, companies have to write down goodwill on their balance sheets if the underlying assets have permanently deteriorated in value."

In December 2010 ("Goodwill Hunting - The rise in Goodwill impairments on Banks Balance Sheet"), this is what we discussed as a reminder:

"When a bank acquires another one, goodwill as intangible asset goes on its balance sheet. When a medium bank acquires a smaller one, goodwill is created onto the balance sheet. But, when the medium bank is acquired by a larger one, there is a compounding effect given that the larger bank will also create some more goodwill of its own and therefore inflates its balance sheet.

As the process goes on and on, for banks on the acquisition war path, you find more and more goodwill making up the capital."

We also indicated at the time:

"Looking at non-cash intangible assets (i.e., goodwill) can be a good indicator and used as a proxy to determine the health of banks.

The significance of the write-downs on Goodwill is often presaged as rough waters ahead. These losses often take a real bite out of corporate earnings. It is therefore very important to track the level of these write-downs to gauge the risk in earnings reported for banks."

When one looks at European banks, Spanish bank Santander, Credit Agricole and Italian bank Intesa are carrying the most "Goodwill" as indicated in the table below from Bloomberg:

"A mere 5% of the 800 billion euros of outstanding goodwill was impaired in 2011, with about 19.2 billion (2.4%) relating to financial services, according to an analysis of 235 public European companies by the European Securities and Markets Authority. The top 24 European banks' combined goodwill fell to 173 billion euros at FY07, from a 2007 peak of 233 billion euros, with further impairments likely." - source Bloomberg.

In relation to the "real economy" in Spain and the on-going "Donk bet", Spanish recession has deepened in the last quarter of 2012 with GDP contracting 0.6% from the previous 6 months when it slipped 0.3%. So while Spanish Economy Minister Mr de Guindos is seeing an improvement in the perception of the Spanish economy, there is a difference between perception and reality. Even the European Commission on the 22nd of January indicated Spain would miss its 2012 deficit target. with a GDP contraction forecast of 1.4%, taking the deficit to 6% for 2013, not the "ambitious" 4.5% Mr de Guindos seems so sure of.

What matters is loan growth for economic growth to resume in Spain. We do not see it happening in 2013 for the "real economy" - graph below source Citi:

As indicated in the article from Charles Penty in Bloomberg from the 21st of January 2013 entitled - "Spain Banks selling debt still won't cut loan costs:
"The prospect of diminishing competition for retail deposits may boost lending margins. Reports that the Bank of Spain wants lenders to cap the yields they offer on deposits are positive for banks because it would provide relief for their funding costs and bolster margins, Sergio Gamez, an analyst at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, wrote in a Jan. 10 note to clients. Bank behavior may make it hard for Spain to rejuvenate an economy mired in a five-year slump and headed for a further contraction this year, said Tobias Blattner, an economist at Daiwa Capital Markets in London. Spain’s economy will shrink 1.5 percent this year after contracting 1.4 percent in 2012, according to the median forecast of 38 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. “The interest rates that banks are charging to lend to companies aren’t going down and that’s a big worry,” Blattner said. “There are no signs yet of a pass-through by banks of their lower funding costs to the real economy.”" - source Bloomberg

We hate sounding like a broken record but, no credit, no loan growth, no loan growth, no economic growth and no reduction of aforementioned budget deficits:
"So austerity measures in conjunction with loan book contractions will lead unfortunately to a credit crunch in peripheral countries, seriously putting in jeopardy their economic growth plan and deficit reduction plans."- "Subordinated debt - Love me tender?" - Macronomics, October 2011

From the same Bloomberg article: 
“If they’re using wholesale debt that costs 3 to 4 percent to replace ECB funding that costs 0.75 percent, that means substantial pressure on margins,” Creelan-Sandford said. Banks are trying to wring more revenue from loan books as they seek to absorb the rising cost of a clean-up of 180 billion euros of real estate assets ordered by the government last year, he said. Banks in other nations have dropped their lending rates, ECB data show. German rates declined to 2.9 percent from 3.9 percent a year earlier, while French companies pay 2.2 percent, down from 3.2 percent. In Portugal, the cost of a loan for as much as 1 million euros fell to 6.7 percent from 7.6 percent, while Irish banks charge 4.6 percent, compared with 5.3 percent. Spanish companies are petitioning Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, who says one of his priorities in government is to create conditions for credit to recover in Spain. The Spanish Confederation of Small and Medium-Sized Companies said in a Jan. 17 statement that it didn’t see “normal” financing conditions returning until 2016 at the earliest and that the lack of funding put firms in a “situation of extreme weakness.” - source Bloomberg

It is deflation in Europe and Spain is still mired in a deflationary spiral. 

On a final note the VIX volatility index passed the 5 year level as Bank CDS fall further as indicated in the Bloomberg chart from the 21st of January:

"The VIX Index, a widely-used measure of market risk often called the investor fear gauge, fell to its lowest level in more than five years as macroeconomic concerns, including those regarding the U.S. fiscal cliff, recede. Certain bank revenue streams remain correlated to volatility, with lower volatility increasing demand for risky assets, pressuring prices higher, and vice versa." - source Bloomberg

"There is no gambling like politics." -   Benjamin Disraeli, British statesman

Stay tuned!

Play it again Ben - The "dubious" return of Cov-lite financing and other leveraged plays...

While every one is focused on Oil's recent surge linked to the contagion of unrest in the Middle-East, Bahrein, Lybia and co, looks like crazy leverage credit is rearing its ugly face again.

Remember 2006 and the craze for LBOs financed with Cov-lite loans? Well guess what, the boys are back in town!

Albert Einstein Quotes - Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results...

Definition of Credit Market insanity:

"Any statistician will tell you, a good outcome for a bad risk doesn't mean the risk wasn't bad; it just means you happened to get lucky."

Below is a link to what was discussed at the latest Wharton School of Business annual restructuring conference in February:

http://www.gurufocus.com/news.php?id=123115

"The overwhelming consensus among Panelists and Speakers was that we are experiencing a credit bubble and precipitous drop in risk premiums across asset classes, particularly in High Yield Bonds and Leveraged Loans."

"The consensus was that 6.7% was far to low a yield for HY bonds, even thought it is not an all times low on a spread basis, and that it did not portend well for those long HY at these prices."

Get ready for a bumpy ride ahead:

"The longer-term outlook gives cause for apprehension. Some of the concerns evidenced were: the large maturity wall between 2012 and 2015 which is currently comprised of debt trading well below par and unlikely to be refinanced; earnings going up against much tougher 2010 comps in 2011, large fiscal deficits and federal debt in the US combined with state and municipal debt; US bank balance sheets with large amounts of distressed and defaulted debt marked as hold-to-maturity with bid ask spreads so far apart that it is not getting worked off; regional banks sitting on commercial real estate loans that have been amended and extended that are likely to be the next shoe to drop in terms of debt restructurings; and European Sovereign Debt concerns along with skepticism regarding European bank balance sheets."

In respect to the US credit markets:
"With respect to the US credit markets, panel participants shared the view that we are nearing a top and that there will be a second distressed wave in the not so distant future."

Pre-flight "investor" safety briefings:

Keep your seat belt fastened
Before take-off and "hard" market landing ensure that your:
Seat belt is tightly fastened...
In the event of a crash landing, adopt the recommended brace position.
Place your hands on your head with your elbows on the outside of your thighs and your feet flat on the floor.

The panelists went on according to the same article:
"An interesting term was used for current state of bank amendments, “Amend and Pretend”, indicating that there is still an unwillingness on the part of banks to acknowledge certain problem credits."

One of the most important point of the article:

"The Distressed Hedge Fund Panel participants lamented the return of some of the worst practices such as HoldCo PIK dividend recaps and the triumphant return of cov-lite deals so shortly after many had believed the credit markets had learned from its past excesses."

Yes, Cov-Lite deals are back. Lessons learned? Doesn't seem like it.

This is what Bethany McLean, known for her work on the Enron scandal and the 2008 financial crisis, had to say in her article - Corporate Subprime
The default crisis that never happened:

"When most of us think about the credit bubble that burst in 2008, we think about the lax terms of mortgage loans. But many corporations, particularly those that were bought out by private equity firms, also got debt on lax terms. This debt was known as "covenant-lite," because the normal terms of corporate credit—such as a requirement that a company, say, maintain a certain level of profits—were waived by deal-hungry lenders.

After it all went pop, banks regretted the cov-lite loans almost as much as mortgage originators regretted their "no documentation" loans to home buyers. Cov-lite loans plunged in price. At his retirement dinner in May 2007, Anthony Bolton, Fidelity's investment guru, said, "Covenant-lite borrowing … will come back at some stage to haunt the banks." Indeed, Goldman Sachs and other big firms took massive losses when they sold or marked down the price of the bonds they were stuck holding. One person involved in negotiating these deals says his banking clients swore, "Never again."

But less than three years later, cov-lite loans are back. "With a vengeance," my friend David Pesikoff, a Texas-based hedge-fund manager, assures me. Has the world of finance gone insane? Not necessarily. The return of cov-lite loans makes a certain sense in the current financial environment. But I find myself wondering what that says about the current financial environment."

Well, Bethany me too, I am also asking myself if they have gone insane again.

Looks like the street smart (Hedge Fund community...) attended the Wharton conference...

Gwen Robinson posted on the 5th of June 2007 the following article on Cov-lite loans:

Cov-lite loans: bubble-time or a sign of maturity?

Secondary spread of covenant-lite loans has narrowed dramatically:

The answer was bubble Gwen...

Bethany goes on in her article:

"This calculus shifted in 2006, because the financial world was awash in credit. Yields on debt were so low that investors were searching for something, anything, that paid just a little bit more. Subprime mortgages were one answer, but so were cov-lite loans made to highly indebted takeover targets, which paid just a wee bit more in interest (and at the peak of the mania, it really was just a wee bit) than super-safe debt. A big market for these loans existed in so-called "collateralized loan obligations," or CLOs, which were a sister of the "collateralized debt obligations," or CDOs, that snapped up subprime mortgages. Investors such as insurance companies bought slices of the CLOs, which were assigned varying levels of risk by the rating agencies, just as they bought slices of the CDOs.

Another reason for the rise in cov-lite loans was the relationship of mutual convenience between private equity firms and Wall Street banks. Private equity firms wanted cheap money on easy terms to finance all those big buyouts. Because private equity firms made such great clients—all those fees generated by buyouts!—Wall Street banks vied to give them what they wanted. Cov-lite loans were used to finance some of the biggest, best-known deals of the era, like KKR's buyout of Alliance Boots and Thomas H. Lee and Bain Capital's buyout of Clear Channel. According to the credit rating agency Standard & Poor's, $32 billion in cov-lite loans were issued between 1997 and 2006. Most of that came in 2006. In the first six months of 2007, cov-lite volume hit a stunning $97 billion, according to an S & P piece called "The Leveraging of America: Covenant-Lite Loan Structures Diminish Recovery Prospects."

Bethany adds:

"There are other similarities between the credit bubble and the current credit market. Banks still want to please their biggest clients, the private equity firms. And CLOs are once again a brisk market for whatever higher-yielding debt that can be found. That's because CLO managers aren't paid to have cash on hand, and all that refinancing of risky debt has resulted in an inflow of cash. They have to invest the money somewhere—and in order to justify the existence of the CLO in the first place, it has to be somewhere that offers a decent yield."

Some facts as per Bethany's great article:

"According to S&P, more than 25 percent of first-lien loans (those that have the first call on a company's assets) issued in 2011 have cov-lite structures. The $8.8 billion in such issuance so far this year already tops the total for all of last year, and it isn't even March. Among the private equity deals that used cov-lite loans are the buyouts of Del Monte and J. Crew, according to market participants."

And Bethany concludes:

"The fact that the Fed rode to the rescue doesn't necessarily mean that cov-lite loans were a good risk to begin with. You also might see in the desperate hunt for yield some uncomfortable parallels to the bubble years. Weren't we all supposed to have learned that too much debt is bad for us? Whether the cov-lite deals getting done right now will face a day of reckoning is anyone's guess. But at the very least, these deals strike me as a sign that some kind of reckoning is in store. I hope I'm wrong about that."

I hope too.
From the Standard & Poors website:

Full Index analysis: Loans return 10.13% in no-drama 2010

"If, on the other hand, the economic recovery fizzles for whatever reason – the known worries have been recounted in this space many times – loans would likely slip as risk-margins widen and the asset class loses its luster with retail investors, which poured a record $16.2 billion into prime funds in 2010, according to Lipper FMI, pumping up demand."

At the Wharton Restructuring conference, the panelists commented:

"One panelist noted the CityCenter refinancing at over 8x leveraged through the first liens and 12x through the seconds as one of the “worst deals ever done”, and a strong indication of an over-heated credit market. Another instrument highlighted as being fundamentally unsound are the surplus notes being issued by mono-lines, these are deeply subordinated securities that have little security and function more like preferred stock. They are being marketed to aggressive credit investors reaching for yield, a strategy that most agreed would end badly for those investors. Distressed investors were cautioned against style drift into chasing large-cap HY."

They went on:

"The Distressed Hedge Fund panelists identified the low quality refinancing being done over the last year as a strong source for potential distressed names over the next 18-24 months. Steve Moyer noted that between 2012 and 2016 there are $650bn dollars in maturities coming due, $150bn of which is Ca1 or below. Many of these issues are trading well below par and are unrefinanceable which will present opportunities for distressed investors. Moreover, Shawn Foley of Avenue Capital cited a JP Morgan report indicating that the majority of CCC rated paper has less than 1 turn of equity beneath it, a proposition he considered unsustainable."

Want a perfect storm?

"The primary concern among all conference participants for both credit instruments and the economy is the anticipation of a substantial increase in inflation. With PPI up almost 9% and CPI up only 3%, companies are suffering margin compression. Companies will be forced to raise prices which will eventually lead to wage increases to compensate for that higher price level. Commodity prices for cotton, wheat and corn are all near record highs while industrial commodities and oil have also moved higher signaling inflation in the pipeline. In addition, food price rises in non-producer countries in the third world are a major source of global instability and are large factor in the civil unrest in the Middle East. Mid-caps are particularly vulnerable due to a lack of pricing power and international diversification."

What about banks balance sheets?

"It was estimated that banks are still sitting on $2 trillion of mostly middle market loans that they have yet to take a write-down on. And while the Fed has pressured financial institutions to deal with their books with respect to residential housing, construction and building products, they have been far more lenient with respect to other sectors. That is particularly the case with commercial real estate, most of which is on the balance sheets of regional banks. When commercial real estate will start restructuring en masse was also a prime topic for discussion. The 2005-2007 vintage LBOs were considered to be the best class of candidates for restructuring opportunities now and in the future."

And finally the icing on the cake:

"The key take away from a distressed investor’s point of view, is that while there are currently some opportunities in less liquid middle market names, the overall HY and leverage loan markets are experiencing a 2005-2007 type bubble."

Good night and good luck: