Lately, we’ve been getting several questions from clients regarding the performance of our taxable accounts. While we can’t publicly publish performance numbers due to legal constraints, we are always happy to walk you through your portfolio’s performance in detail! Just contact your lead advisor if that is something that interests you.

In the meantime, we can share our approach to structuring our taxable accounts: our tax-sensitive, wide mode, and builder strategies, to be exact. Now, you’ll have a line of sight into what goes on behind the scenes with your money.

Full warning, this is going to be a deep dive! We’ve done our bests to make these concepts graphics-oriented, but this topic does require a fair amount of data and tables. So hang with us.

How We Measure Performance

To start, let me set the stage that all the numbers you’re about to see are based on hypothetical accounts. Everyone’s account won’t always reflect these traits; they are simply the theoretical models to evaluate performance against benchmarks. That way, if our portfolios aren’t tracking the way we expect, we will know why.

How do we monitor our account performance? We’ve made it simple with the acronym S-A-M-U-R-A-I:

Specified in advance

Appropriate

Measurable

Unambiguous

Reflective of current investment options

Accountable

Investable

Throughout this blog, we’ll walk through examples of how we monitor performance — using only the highest Chartered Financial Analyst, CFA, standards.

Manager Selection

Regarding manager selection, our approach is generally to ask, “Did you beat your benchmark or not?” And, more importantly, “What benchmark did you choose to measure it against?”

Any easy way to think of this concept is pictured above. Look at the big box (above) as our benchmark, with increasing performance and excess return. The excess return can either do better or worse than the benchmark. For example, over the last five years, there has been a negative access return.

Asset Class Domes

Asset class domes are the mix of stocks and bonds in your portfolio. These can exist across all asset classes, but the math gets more confusing each time you add additional asset classes. For this example, let’s consider a 60/40 portfolio.

At GWS, we generally recommend overweighting equity and underweighting fixed income, especially given today’s inflation risk. If you’re in bonds, you risk eroding your principal and purchasing power.

So, if you had a risk profile that suggested you should be a balanced investor, GWS would likely recommend an 80-20 allocation but measure it to a 60-40 benchmark. Then, you have precise data to use to analyze if our active weights helped or hurt performance.

Another way to look at this is with a bar chart. On the left, you have stocks, where we have 80% vs. 60% in the benchmark and 20% bonds vs. 40% bonds. Then, if you get into more detail, you can see the net difference of 20% positive and negative. That’s the way we look at portfolios; what’s the net relative to the benchmark?

Now let’s look at the effects of performance. For example, we have stocks performing at 12% and bonds performing at 4% in our hypothetical with weights.

We would say stocks multiplied by 60% equals an 8.8 in benchmark between the stocks and the bonds. But 7.2% of that 8.8% was attributed to equity performance. Then, if we look at bonds, we get 160 basis points.

Now, let’s look at our 80-20 allocation. We added 20% extra to stocks, resulting in a 9.6% return for our equity position and 0.8% for our bonds. That’s 10.2 vs. 8.8 — meaning investors are pretty happy relative to their benchmarks.

——

For detailed performance metrics, please don’t hesitate to contact your lead advisor. And, in the meantime, be sure to keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

All examples are hypothetical and are for illustrative purposes.

The opionions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or reccomendations for any individual. All performance references is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested into directly.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

Federal debt is a new hot topic on our minds today. Currently, we’re looking at more than $28.3 trillion — which breaks down to more than $85,132 in debt per U.S. citizen. How long can we sustain this level of debt — and are we in danger of watching it collapse?

Let’s start by comparing the 2000 to 2021 debt clocks, which show us how drastically debt has increased over time. You can even watch the live debt clock here.

As you are comparing these images, keep in mind that the U.S. has seen an 18% increase in population (281 people to 333 million). The workforce has increased 21%, growing from 103 million people to 125 million. That means the workforce has grown faster than the population, with the millennials being a large part of growth.

Next, let’s look at CPI, money over time. A basket of goods that was $169 in 2000 would now cost you $266.83. So what do those changes look like from 2000 compared to 2021? Again, the revenue or GDP (Gross Domestic Product, shown in green) is at $22.1 trillion, and the federal tax revenue is bringing in $3.4 trillion.

When comparing both data sets below, we can see that the GDP is now at $22 trillion, where it was at $9.5 trillion in 2000 – a 131% increase. Then, if we look at tax revenue, we have a 78% increase since 2000. Remember, there was a surplus in 2000, so now we’re at $3.4 trillion in revenue.

So, let’s talk about the different tax breakouts. We have income tax with an 83% increase, payroll tax at a 108% increase, and corporate tax revenue with a rise of 7%. Therefore, revenue has grown, but you can see the corporate tax has stayed the same due to the recent tax law changes favoring taxing income over corporations.

U.S. National Debt

As of June 11th, U.S. national debt was at $28.3 trillion. The federal spending was at $6.7 trillion with a deficit of $3.2 trillion. Comparing this to 2000, we can see the GDP grew 131%, our national debt grew almost 400%, and our government spending has grown 285%. Thus, government and deficit spending are showing up as debt, ultimately exceeding GDP growth.

Where is the government spending so much money? The bulk of it can be traced to the four following categories:

• Medicare and Medicaid: 298% Increase

• Social Security: 180% Increase

• Interest on Debt (Net): 77% Increase

• Defense and War: 137% Increase

Why is our debt expanding at a faster rate than GDP?

It’s disconcerting to realize that our debt is growing more quickly than our GDP. What is the reason for this? Well, several items show as government liabilities coming out of budgets that are still unfunded. These unfunded liabilities equal a whopping $148 trillion, and they include Medicare and Social Security.

Another factor is heightened payroll taxes. In 2000, we had payroll tax revenue of $640 billion and Social Security of $400 billion. So essentially, we were collecting more than what we were paying out.

Medicare Enrollment

Let’s look at Medicare and Medicaid next, where we continue to see increased enrollment. In 2008, we were at $605 billion in net spending, with a trend going up to $1.2 trillion through 2030. Spending will continue to progress — not to mention become more complicated with government borrowing as the expansion is monetized.

If we include the expense for interest rates on government spending in 2000 and 2021, we have $5.6 trillion in debt. The average interest in 2000 was 4%, where today, the average claim is 1.4%. That’s a significant reduction in the rate.

The moral of the story? National debt may not be going anywhere soon. But by staying ahead of it and understanding it, we can make more informed decisions about the way we invest our money.

—-

Keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

Stock investing includes risks, including fluctuating prices and loss of principal.

Economic forecasts set forth may not develop as predicted, and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested directly.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

Inflation as a Major Headline

Going back to 2004, inflation was still reasonably new. We can see that going into 2014, the number of people searching for inflation was significantly higher.

Now, inflation has been dominating the headlines. According to the graph below, the Purchasing Price Index (PPI) and Consumer Price Index (CPI) have gone up relative to where they have been. However, this is an annualized component. As one product moves up in value, there’s usually less money for most consumers to spend elsewhere. Therefore, other products are going to pull back.

Look Under the Hood

What’s driving the broad index up?

On the far left of the bar chart, we see reopening prices, such as transportation services. For example, as the economy’s reopening, people are buying airline tickets. The increase in sales of those tickets will create demand, causing an increase in value. Air travel is also very energy-dependent, so there will be increases in fuel. Remember, we have temporary supply disruptions, not just the demand component.

Also, car prices have driven the CPI up. Semiconductor manufacturers anticipated lower demand in the automobile industry. The number of conductors in cars was only the ignition, but fuel injection and LCDs have become more popular. The cost is 50% of manufacturing; however, there is a significant shortage. Therefore, new cars are not coming off the lot as fast, and demand for used cars has gone up dramatically, pushing the CPI up.

Supply or Money Problem?

Traffic coming from Asia going into Los Angeles ports is causing a backlog due to high demand, ultimately making it difficult to get products in the United States. There have been about 19 ships anchored, with the average waiting time at 6.6-6.8 days before drop off. They expect the wait to be cleared by June 1st. The supply of goods coming in and the amount of imports is causing price increases.

Then, we have lumber. Sawmills have been closed during COVID because they didn’t expect housing to increase rapidly. As people move from California and New York to states with low taxes and less regulation, they’re leaving their houses unsold. Not only will the supply of lumber need to be steady, but it will also increase because there’s a need for a lot more homes. Another unique characteristic of the coronavirus is dining out, causing a ketchup package shortage. It’s both a supply and demand problem.

Then, there’s the infrastructure problem, and there have been investments in renewable energy. For example, Texas had 20-30% of its energy supported by renewables and newly built gas power plants. We’ll find many solutions that aren’t known over the next several years as this becomes more pervasive. Therefore, new infrastructure is not necessarily dependable.

Now, we don’t just have the new infrastructure, but antiquated infrastructure as well. The bridge crack in the bottom left (above) is connecting West Memphis with Missouri. Not only did it stop the traffic crossing, but the barges couldn’t cross underneath it. However, whenever we look at the infrastructure bill, it’s not dealing with a lot of this; it is more helping individuals and people. There’s been a lot of criticism on what is considered infrastructure on the bill.

Economic Recovery

We will see rising prices in commodities, and one area that’s been a big boom has been copper. Chile had an election to add complications, and the far left in-country has now gained control of the government. They want to nationalize a lot of the commodities procurement industry, which is the primary industry of Chile. They produce 67% of the copper production globally.

In addition, they’re significant producers of lithium, which is crucial for electric vehicles. One of the bottlenecks for electric cars becoming the norm is the amount of lithium that we can extract. Some people are working on making it synthetic, just as much as they are with synthetic diamonds. If we can’t go to the alternative energy and store other power, there will be additional upward pressure on oil.

Wages have Risen

Significantly lower wages below $60,000 have sharp increases. There will still be people getting paid more to be on unemployment and will not take the jobs. We can see it’s certainly affecting the market because the lower-income areas have to compete against benefits.

The more money the lower-income gets, the more they will use for consumption. So they’re going to buy more food, upgrade their shelter, and buy clothing because they have been skimped in those categories. As their wealth increases, their next dollar will be spent on those categories. It’s not going to be spent on savings, stocks, and other financial assets. Therefore, we might see consumer prices from higher wages on the lower-income be an additional wave to deal with inflation.

Stimulus

If we look at the government spending and personal savings rate on the graph above, we can see that a lot of that money is still sitting idle and ready to be put into the market. There’s likely to be a nice uptick in retail sales because most of this money will make it into the economy as stores begin to reopen to the total capacity.

In the market, inflation expectations on bonds are projected to be 2.5-3% inflation for the foreseeable future. It should lead to higher interest rates, but if the Fed is acting as the market and buying up bonds, you could see interest rates stay stable with inflation high.

Price Points for Dollar Cost Averaging

We can see that the S&P 500 bounced off its 50-day moving average. There’s a good chance that we go through the 50-day moving average and try to get some consolidation in the market. However, there could be a concern with the infrastructure and stimulus bills being passed sooner rather than later.

Then, if we glance through the technicals above, considerable cap value is coming back while the S&P 500 is doing better than most international asset classes. We can see commodities near the top, with real estate doing well and Gold moving up.

—-

Keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

Economic forecasts set forth may not develop as predicted, and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested directly.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

The Roaring Twenties

We continually compare what we’ve gone through over the last decade to the roaring twenties. If we go back and look at the stock market, especially the crash as we went into the thirties, a lot was going on more than just the stock market.

GWS compares what is happening currently to the twenties because of how the money supply was used: coming out of the progressive era with World War I just ending. Much of the government spending was curtailed because the war had ended, and we had an advanced period of central banking. However, there was also a legacy component of cutting government spending and taxes to stimulate the economy. But what wasn’t happening in the 1920s was the rampant laws and unfair capitalism.

Money Supply in the 1920s

In the twenties, we had a currency that was outstanding with not much change. It was timed deposits, what we call Certificate of Deposit (CD) now, and demand deposits increasing behind the scenes. So, the central bank started to grow because there was a gold-backed system. We can see it can affect the money supply in Column 8 (below), rising about 70% over the decade.

Gatewood Wealth Solutions believes that the amount of money being created will make it into capital markets or capital assets first and cause an appreciation in those assets. Between 1920-21, we went through a recession with a lot of the government spending is for World War l with deflation in the system. Therefore, the federal reserve saw it in the index and began to expand the money supply.

Also, when World War I ended, Europe was very much devastated, and they needed foreign loans—allowing these foreign loans to be made by the U.S. to Europe. In turn, the loans were used mainly to buy exports from the U.S., specifically agriculture. The overall point is when we see the money supply expand, the market expands right along with it.

The graph above is looking at the annual percentage of change in the money supply. The yearly change is quite variable: 4% up to 10% of basically 0% right before the crash. However, it does not state when the money supply got near zero in terms of new and additional money into the system.

We can see (above) the money supply takes off with a lag coming out of the first recession. Then, there’s a more stable money supply as growth begins to slow. Next, we get into the 24-25 period when England is trying to go to the gold standard. The Fed lowers interest rates again, and we see lag, but it corresponds to an increase in capital markets. The money supply begins to stabilize for a short amount of time with a little bit of flatness in the market. Lastly, going into 1928-29, we start to see the Fed slow, getting down to a 0.7% growth rate. Then, the crash occurs.

However, the point is, the money supply was increasing dramatically along with the capital markets. Though the money supply expanded in the right direction, we didn’t see inflation growing somewhat rapidly. The Fed was expanding the money supply based on a stable basket price and allowing them to continue to raise the money supply and see the capital market.

In the Inflation Basket graph above, we can see a 68% increase in the total money supply over time, but we do not see inflation above 4% whenever we measure it as a basket of goods. Coming out of World War l, command and control components were put on the economy to provide war goods. As those were ending, a lot of the government spending was ending too. Therefore, as the economy restructured, prices were falling in the goods in the basket without stabilization. The Fed used an inflation basket to gauge how much money they should create to get to a stable price.

The economy in the 1920s

Most places that people lived were getting electricity, and with that comes new labor-saving appliances such as a vacuum, washing machine, and toaster. Also, instant communication is occurring through mass media, such as the radio. You were able to pick up a phone and connect with people across the world. The new invention of a vehicle came about to go further away to find better economic opportunities. Like today, we have a lot of new technology coming in, causing an increase in productivity.

This is all one big cycle as farms were starting to be mechanized. The tractor was becoming something that farmers were using to increase agricultural output dramatically. People were leaving the urban environment because farms could produce food. Therefore, the higher-cost producers had to go, but there was plenty of jobs at the factory. The demand for labor kept prices up, causing the production capacity of the economy to grow faster than the money supply.

However, it was causing an imbalance because food prices started to decrease. Money was being borrowed for the farm implements. Therefore, there were a lot of bankruptcies, especially whenever there was inflation. The Fed eventually slowed the money supply causing the crash.

“If we’re living in something like the 1920s, will we have the same outcome?”

GWS does not think the next phase will look like the 1930s. We believe the Fed will be swift to continue to expand the money supply because they’re not concerned about a rise in inflation. They would welcome inflation to offset some of the deflationary pressures.

Averaging out the average 2% will allow prices to increase. If we can’t maintain this productivity gain that we’ve had over the last couple of decades, our experience will be more like the 1970s, where you have inflation as the outcome and not deflation.

—-

Keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

Economic forecasts set forth may not develop as predicted and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested directly.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

Government Total Expenditures

The amount of government spending recently has been very high. We have two bills, infrastructure, and stimulus, being massive ticket items. During the 2008 crisis, everyone was agitated about the $1 trillion spent for the bailout. However, today we’re doing two $2 trillion bills. The government spending is undoubtedly high, and we’re starting to see that show up in the reports for companies.

Inflation Concerns

The graph below is looking at inflation concerns regarding earnings reports of companies and the correlation to inflation. When companies are giving their updates on goods, services, materials, labor, and the rest of their spending, it correlates with Consumer Price Index (CPI). We can see that it’s up 12%, which is enormous.

However, we see an uptick in the concerns by companies, and we can see the CPI correlates with consumer products. We’ve been as high as this before, and we did not go negative in the previous recession from lockdowns. So, we’re going off a higher base, and we’re already above-target inflation of 2%.

Who is Seeing Inflation First?

Producers see the inflation in the pricing first. Here is just a snippet of several reports from different companies that are talking about significant price increases as they produce the product:

FAST (Industrials): “We are experiencing significant material cost inflation, particularly for steel, fuel, and transportation costs.”​

GIS (Staples): “Looking ahead, as we experienced a higher inflationary environment, our first line of defense will continue to be our strong holistic margin management cost-savings program. In addition, we are taking actions now and in the coming months […] to drive net

price realization that will benefit our FY2022. “

CAG (Staples): “we see input cost inflation accelerate in many of our categories and across the industry.”​

LW (Staples): “while the pandemic-related effects on our supply chain were the primary drivers of our cost increases, we also realized higher costs due to input cost inflation in the low single-digits. We expect that rate will begin to tick up in the coming quarters as edible oil and transportation costs continue to increase.”​

STZ (Staples): “similar to previous years, we’re expecting substantial inflation headwinds in the low to mid-single-digit increase range, largely related to glass and other packaging materials, raw materials, transportation, and labor costs in Mexico. “​

PPG (Materials): “We experienced a significant acceleration of raw material and logistics cost inflation during the quarter. Coming into the year, we were expecting an inflationary environment and had prioritized selling price increases across all of our businesses. This has helped us achieve solid price increases year-to-date. With a higher inflation backdrop, we have already secured further selling price increases and are in the process of executing additional ones during the second quarter. “​

DOV (Industrials): “What we are going to fight against between now and the end of the year […] is inflationary input costs between raw materials, labor, and price/cost. […] the way it’s looking, we may have to intervene on price again in certain of the businesses over the balance of the year.”​

TEL (Tech): “I would expect our margins to modestly improve as we work our way forward here into the third and fourth quarter based on some of the actions that are underway and our ability to combat some of the inflationary pressures out there. […] Certainly, we’re feeling the biggest inflation right now is on the freight side. The freight inflation has been significant. And as we battled through there and there’s a variety of reasons for that, including higher air freight and so forth in terms of that. And that’s not unique to TE. Certainly, I think that’s been as well-publicized across the overall supply chain. […] labor cost is not a major issue on the inflation side, but labor availability in certain places that COVID is more impacting continues to drive some inefficiencies.”​

These companies are discussing significant price increases as they produce their product due to supply and demand. If you look at the import price in the graph below, you can see a much higher spike than the CPI. The CPI is a blue line, and it is going parabolic. We also see it in the producer price index (PPI). As the companies push those out, then stock prices will continue to move up, which is a good thing.

Transitory – Short Term Components of Current Issues

What’s causing the current issues are transitory (short-term component) at the moment. If we look at just how many ships are trying to get into ports due to the back-order on goods, you will see how incredibly expensive a shopping container goes for. It comes down to the supply and demand component because many people have done without specific goods, and they’re trying to restock.

Although unemployment is high, we see a labor shortage in the lower wages across the board looking at the supply chain because it was disrupted due to the pandemic. Do we see this fixing itself over time? Yes, this is what we call transitory as supply-demand will come to a balance. However, we also have a monetary policy that is not transitory, which will be seen in food prices as they go up substantially.

There is also a discretionary component for the low and middle income, where if prices are going up on things they’re demanding, and they have to use more of their paycheck to purchase these items. Then, they will have less of their salary to pay for other things. Therefore, everyone’s inflation basket and experience are different. We can start to look at different groups on how inflation affects them differently. If we look at the bottom 10% (the median earner), we could see inflation is much higher than if we’re looking at the top 10% of earners.

Suppose it’s not a significant percentage, and everyone else has had to cut back elsewhere. In that case, the higher income will be able to spend money and go further because inflation is moving prices.

Biden’s Tax Plan

Political unrest will support calls for higher taxes on higher-income earners. This is not a phenomenon that just happened in 2020. It has been going on for quite some time. We’ve made the argument that it’s the federal reserve and their monetary policy that has benefited people with assets over those that make income.

The 1% and big divide between the different economic levels is something that’s been prolonged. Therefore, it is easier to propose higher tax increases. The current tax plan wants to raise the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%, restore top individual rates from 37% to 39.6%, subject wages above $400,000 to social security payroll tax, and taxes on capital gains as ordinary income.

We’ve been able to “print” money, and there has not been the inflationary effect, so why raise the taxes? If Biden’s tax plan were to pass, this would not solve all the problems because it may not impact the number of government receipts coming in, and people change their behavior.

Also, there is a proposal to have the IRS donate $88 billion over the next ten years to make sure people are not gaming the tax system. Suppose you have to pay people to prevent any additional gaming of the system. In that case, that’s money that you’re not going to spend on the other government items, and it proves the point that when people are going to do a lot of things to prevent the tax from actually hitting right.

Although this is a higher than average tax increase, if we look at both of them together, it’s not the highest. Supporters and critics of President Biden’s tax plan have made various claims about the size of the tax proposals, ranging from “not big enough” to the “biggest tax increase in history,” however it can be both.

By comparison to these past tax increases, in the first year, Biden’s tax plan would increase federal revenue by 0.68% GDP, making it the tenth-largest tax increase since the 1940s. In the second year of Biden’s plan, when the temporary expansion of the Child Tax Credit expires, the plan would increase federal revenue by 1.52% GDP, tying for the fourth-largest tax increase as a share of GDP since the 1940s.

In addition, Biden’s proposal would raise significant revenue. The plan would also have a negative long-run effect on the American economy, lowering long-run output and after-tax incomes.

If we look at the tax foundation table above, they assume GDP will drop 1.62% on our future growth. Our capital stock will decrease, and it’s the capital that allows for wage increases long-term. The more efficient your tools are that make you more productive; the more you can sell, and the higher wages you can pay.

Then, we would see a wage rate drop because of the tax increase. It’s not just the wealthy that are going to feel this. The rich create businesses and spend a lot of the money to affect the people they hire if they have less of that. Then, it would cause an estimated half-million lost jobs due to tax increases.

Tax Revenue

Now, let’s talk about tax revenue as a way to close the gap. We can change the way taxes are received, but that’s not the problem. The problem is the amount of government spending. The graph to the left shows you the volatility and the growth rate compared to revenue. Revenue is relatively steady, and it continues to move up.

The graph on the right shows the revenue and stability (the green line) versus the spending. The spending is growing, and at the bottom, you can see the deficit. Therefore, it’s the government spending that is causing a lot of the problems. So, if we want to make a significant impact on the deficit, the bigger thing to focus on at the moment is government spends.

—-

Keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

Economic forecasts set forth may not develop as predicted and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

This information is not intended to be a substitute for specific indivudalized tax advice. We suggest that you discuss your specific tax issues with a qualified tax advisor.

All investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. No strategy assures success or protects against loss. There is no guarantee that a diversified portfolio will enhance overall returns or outperform a non-diversified portfolio. Diversification does not protect against market risk.

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested directly.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

Demographics and Destiny

Demographics is destiny, not density. This map shows how many more people live in other countries compared to our own. We can see China and India are the densest and most populated countries.

To understand how this affects the economy, we need to go back to the Keynesian model. It shows Gross Domestic Product (GDP) equals consumption plus investment plus government spending, and exports and imports will have some effect. The two things that matter the most are consumption and investment choices. Everyone is constantly consuming things, but some have different ratios on consumption versus investment.

GDP measurement

GDP = C + I + G + (X – M)

(Consumption and Investment)

Senior Population

If you look at the senior population, frequently industrialized and developed nations have significant savings from the previous production. When we think about them as only consumers, it’s a lowercase c. Why? Because many people call them “annoyingly wise” with their consumption. In other words, they have to be much wiser on how they consume. We would consider this lifestyle bucket to have many savings if it’s an industrialized country, but there are low consumers in the GDP model.

Producer Population

Now, if we look at the producer population, they will be consumers while being significant producers. Goods that are coming into the economy will be produced by the age group of 18-65. Their choices between consuming versus investing will be highly related to how many people are dependent upon them.

Suppose you look back to the senior population, and they don’t have savings to live off of. In that case, they’re going to put a drag on the producer population because their consumption versus investment choices are different. Meaning they may have a parent to be supported. This leads to less money for investment causing GDP to grow more dramatically. Therefore, the lower the senior population dependency on the producer population, the faster the GDP can grow.

Borrowing Population

Then there’s the borrowing population. This population is no longer in childhood, and they are getting educations, starting families, or starting their first job. They are not big producers yet, but they have a lot of demand for borrowing because they’re investing in future production. They have a symbiotic relationship with the senior population because they can loan to this group as they develop their skills.

Child Population

The child population is a significant factor in the producer population regarding consumption. If you don’t have many kids, you tend to have more investment in other things in your life. Therefore, children will be a big part of the producer’s consumption versus investment choices. Just because children are mainly only consumed does not mean that’s a drawback because they’re detrimental to long-term growth. Remember, they’re the future producers as well.

Expanding Population

The population pyramid above is an expanding population often relating to an expanding economy with the age bands on the left. Then, you have it divided by how many people are male or female. For productivity of making more children, the ratio of women is far more critical than the number of men. It’s the norm of the population, when the more women you have, the higher the fertility rate. The ratio of men to women will have different economic impacts, like China has fewer women than men because of their prior one-child policy.

If you look at the pyramid, we can see that the segment comprises mainly young people. The further we go up the less impact that has. This is met with good capital structure and technology and could be a booming economy in the next 20 to 30 years.

Stationary Population

Here is a stationary population. We see the children and the producing population are pretty steady. However, there is a little bit of a decrease here, but you can easily make that up with immigration. We can see that this will be just a stationary economy with no significant liability for demographics in the future.

Population Dividend

Next, we have the population dividend. If you get an example where the fertility rate is low in a country with not many children or elderly for the producer population to support, then the choices on consumption versus investment change. All the excess money is going into the growing the economy faster, which is a massive boon for the economy. The population dividend turns into a population liability.

Population Liability

As individuals retire, there’s a decreasing amount of people that are producing within the economy. If there were plenty of savings that the senior population has to live off during production, then there will be more imports coming in to support them as they decrease spending.

Demographic Comparisons

What are the four countries we have been talking about? The first one expanding is Mexico, with a very young population that is multiplying. The next one, the United States, is right next door to Mexico, where the immigration is coming from the Southern border. The current population dividend is China, and they do not have a lot of savings for their senior and the current producer population. They are becoming wealthier, but not fast. Lastly, we have Japan for population liability. Japan in the eighties-nineties was taking over the world because they were in a population dividend.

Japan and China Comparison

China has a 20-year lag to Japan. Japan was in the expanding phase through the sixties to seventies. Then, they started to move into the producer population. By the eighties to the nineties, they were reaching the population dividend. Then, 2000 happened, and things began to turn, and the economy not growing much since.

Production Function: Growth Rate of GDP Overtime

Y(t)= A(t)K(t)aL(t)1-a

(Current Capital Stock, Technology Development, and Labor Population)

The growth rate of GDP over time has a couple of more factors with a fairly complex equation, but we can keep it simple as:

1. Do you have a current capital structure?

2. Do you have factories and tools that are already there in the economy?

3. Are they good at developing that capital structure further?

These three components are the primary factors on how fast an economy is going to grow over time.

—-

Keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

All investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. No strategy assures success or protects against loss. There is no guarantee that a diversified portfolio will enhance overall returns or outperform a non-diversified portfolio. Diversification does not protect against market risk.

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested into directly.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

Market Bubble?

When we’re thinking about the market, one thing that is on our minds is the market in a bubble? You turn on your TV and, you often get an oversimplified definition: priced earnings P/Es are high, sell your stocks. This is on people’s minds because they see previous valuations in 2000 and 2008. So, it is a fair statement to say valuations are stretched.

Price to Earnings Ratio

The price of the S&P 500 divided by its trailing earnings gives you the price-to-earnings ratio. You can use all sorts of measures for price-earnings, such as trailing or forward. Specifically, we’re using a high standard here.

The graph looks at the last 12 months of earnings and shows how much you pay per dollar of earnings. This is how you can value stock, and you don’t have to worry about inflation. When earnings increase, the value of stocks should, too. Therefore, a relative valutation of price to earnings is a great way to compare stocks prices over time.

What is the Alternative?

The alternative in the year 2000 and 2008 were bonds. If you would have sold in the 2000 timeframe, the ten-year was paying over 5.5%, and inflation was reasonably low, especially during the recession. However, today we don’t have higher yields in the bond market. We’re at 1.74%, and inflation expectations are running at 3.3%. Not only is the interest rate low, but inflation is above what that interest rate is paying.

We wanted to put numbers to the story, so here is a more straightforward way of looking at it.

We are showing 33, as the highest P/E- S&P 500, looking at the past 12 months where we know there were some rough patches. The average for stocks is about 2x higher and 3x higher on the average of bonds. Therefore, bonds could be more overvalued than stocks based on historical standards. The only way to improve the P/E ratio on a bond is to have the price decrease. For stocks, the P/E ratios can improve via a drop in stock price, our fear or by earnings moving up, our hope. Earnings moving up is what we expect for stocks currently.

Earnings Season

As we enter earnings season, the expectations for earnings are high. We’re likely to see “record-breaking” numbers because we’re looking back 12 months ago. There were low to no earnings coming in due to the global pandemic.

Just as we compared bonds to stocks using a P/E multiple, we can easily compare stocks to bonds via a normal valuation for bonds by converting both to a yield. The Fed model above compares the earnings yield of stocks to the earnings yield of a bond. Whenever one is over the other, that’s the undervalued asset class, and you should invest. If we go back to the sixties, you should have been buying stocks, not bonds, based on the earnings yield. Then, to the eighties, we can see both lines matched up together. As interest rates decreased on bonds, stocks looked more attractive and were also bid up at the same rate. We can see the red line (stocks) is over the blue line (bonds) right now. Once again, not just looking at the P/E, but looking at the earnings yield, we can see stocks are more attractive versus bonds looking at the overall investment opportunity set.

Fixed Income Market Dynamics

The interest rate is the downside risk of bonds. At 1.74% on the 10-year, we’re having one of the worst starts over the last 40 years for bonds. Just another 1%, and we would see further decreases of 7-9% in the ten-year treasury. So there’s undoubtedly some downside risk in bonds.

Government spending can cause interest rates to increase because there’s only so much money that can be invested. The way that the U.S. has been offsetting a significant steep increase is by printing money, but that can cause inflation expectations, which can also cause interest rates to move up.

Ultimately, I think the risk for fixed-income is the long-term risk of inflation. Especially at low-interest rates, because if interest rates increase and you see the drop in your treasury, over time, it’s just going to appreciate at the higher interest rate and give you back all the cash you expect.

There’s never going to be any more upside to the bond from when you bought it. So if we had a $1000 bond and it pays us 1% while holding it for 20 years, you will get about $1,200 at the end. $1,200 is more than $1000, but what about that purchasing price in $1,200?

In the cost of basket goods, assume the basket today costs $100. We’re going to inflate it by 2%, 4%, and 6%.

The bond appreciated 20% at a 2% inflation, so the $100 basket of goods cost you $150. Now at 4%, it’s more than double at over $200 in 20 years. It is unusual to see 6% inflation over 20 years, but if you did, it would be over $300. Another way to think about this is to compare the bonds to the cost of goods. In other words, what is the effect of my purchasing power on that basket of goods, assuming that I’ve invested and I’m earning 1% and I’m losing 2%, 4%, or 6%.

In the 2%, you’re losing 1% to inflation each year. At 4%, you’re losing 3%, which has historically been the expected norm for inflation. Then, at 6%, you’re losing over half to inflation each year.

The income that you’re going to get on the bonds will be taxed. Typically you buy bonds where there is some cost or investment management fees. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility to be somewhere between 3-5%, especially since 3% has been the historical norm on the loss of purchasing power. We have a mission to help clients become financially self-reliant, and bonds will not fill that role. Gatewood Wealth Solutions doesn’t see bonds playing a role in preserving purchasing power and wealth at the current low interst rates.

—-

Keep up to date on Gatewood Wealth Solutions through our daily 3x3s and our weekly market insights on our YouTube, LinkedIn, and Facebook accounts.

Disclosures:

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results.

All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested directly. The economic forecasts outlined in this material may not develop as predicted, and there can be no guarantee that the strategies promoted will be successful.

All investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. No strategy assures success or protects against loss.

Securities and advisory services are offered through LPL Financial, a registered investment advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC.

Bonds are subject to market and interest rate risk if sold prior to maturity. Bond values will decline as interest rates rise, and bonds are subject to availability and change in price.