3 Jan 2025

The UK indices fell by 1-2% in Q4. If the stock market is a reflection of how investors feel about the UK’s economic prospects, it is not a very pretty sight. Over the year the FTSE 100 rose by 5.6%, the All Share by 5.5% and the FTSE 250 by 4.7%. The UK ten year gilt yield rose from 4.1% to 4.6%, implying lingering worries about inflation and meaning that the cost of servicing the UKs vast debt is likely to be as uncomfortable as ever. I have noticed that my stockbroker is now offering me direct access to government debt issues. From memory, the last time this was done was in the 1990s. This is welcome to me but also carries a faint whiff of desperation. The rise in US ten year government bond yields matched those of the UK (4.0% to 4.55%) while other European yields rose more gently. German ten year yields, at 2.35% (from 2.2%) suggest that investors in Europe are more worried about low growth than inflation.  A number of UK companies made cautious comments about their prospects, typically allocating some blame to the now notorious budget effort by the UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves. In particular retailers are dismayed by the rise in employers’ NI contributions as well as the expected increase in minimum wage. My portfolio suffered warnings from Shoe Zone, Kingfisher and Pets At Home. Shoe Zone (18 December) Consumer confidence has weakened further following the Government’s budget in October 2024, and as a result of this budget, the Company will also incur  significant additional costs due to the increases in National Insurance and the National Living Wage. These additional costs have resulted in the planned closure of a number of stores that have now become unviable. The combination of the above will have a significant impact on our full year figures Kingfisher (25 November) Solid underlying trading in August and September; weak market and consumer in the UK and France in October, impacted by uncertainty related to government budgets in both countries Pets At Home (27 November) In the October Budget, the government announced planned changes to the National Living Wage and employers National Insurance Contributions....

9 Aug 2024

Just the other day, or rather in November 2017, I wrote a post entitled “Prepare to turn left”. After the global financial crisis the UK had endured seven years of “austerity” according to a narrative that was becoming widely accepted as fact. Theresa May’s Conservatives were enfeebled by her hapless attempt to add to her majority with a surprise election (she lost her majority).  This sounds very familiar now but then it was mildly surprising that the Tories didn’t dare attempt any traditional Conservative policies, such as tax cuts, to entice investment. Instead Mrs May decided that her legacy would be to sign the Net Zero abomination (other views are available) into law in order to sabotage any attempts by her successors to spare its innumerable victims. The legislation was waved through in 2019 despite her own Chancellor, Phillip Hammond, saying that it would cost £1 trillion.  With no apparent motivation to challenge the prevailing coalition spirit that had prevailed since 2010 (and endures to this day) I wrote that the Conservatives were doomed to be their own opposition. Below is what I published then and I am delighted to reproduce it now (my new highlights) because the chances are that we have just elected a new government of comparable weakness.  So what does a weak Conservative government do in these circumstances? The answer follows two left wing agendas. First, it interferes in private sector businesses to combat perceived unfairness, but with little regard for the unintended but arguably predictable consequences. This has already happened in the case of private landlords and energy companies. The curious strategy appears to consist of little more than trying to ensure that the provision of housing and energy are as unprofitable as possible. Perhaps there are sound ethical reasons for this but one sure consequence is that investment is discouraged. Why commit capital to an area where the government has a record of applying penalties, apparently motivated by the wish to punish rather than the need to generate tax revenue? Discouraging investment is not a practice normally associated with Conservatives. So perhaps the second left wing policy can compensate – direct investment by the government itself. The new...

18 Jan 2023

For the first time in five quarters The FTSE 250 outperformed the FTSE 100 (+9.8% vs +8.1% compared to Q3). This does not change the fact that the big-cap index with international exposure trounced its smaller more domestically exposed rival over the year as a whole (+1% vs -20%). But some recovery by FTSE 250 shares would be very welcome in the face of much public negativity about the UK economy. In my Q3 report I wrote that half a dozen shares must be long term buys. I invest in line with what I perceive as probability and necessarily one is sometimes correct. While I take a brief lap of honour I shall recite as follows – Sainsbury +40%, Tesco +20%, Halfords +39%, Kingfisher +23%, Pets At Home +27%, M&S +52%. I own all those shares but the only one that I actually bought at the end of Q3 was M&S. The government bond markets have been interesting, as I wrote here on 23 December. Over the quarter UK 10 year gilts fell from 4.23% (a peak induced by the Bank of England, not Liz Truss) to 3.67%, a normalisation from an excellent buying opportunity. US 10 year Treasuries were flat at 3.88%, summing up the unresolved debate between inflation mongers and recession peddlers. German yields rose from 2.1% to 2.5%. CHINA AND NUMBERS Finally, a geopolitical strategist named Peter Zeihan mentioned something that I have seen before – namely that China, in addition to reporting dodgy population and Covid numbers, has long overstated its GDP growth. While this might seem just the grandiose bull of an authoritarian government, it has huge mathematical implications once you take into effect the compounding effects over time. An overstatement by 3% of a number that is itself already overstated will, in twenty five years, produce a GDP number that is distorted by 100%. It could be that the reason why the world has withstood the repeated closure of the Chinese economy is that China is not as important as its official GDP numbers...

8 Oct 2022

The FTSE 250 fell by 8.0% in Q2 and is down by 25.5% year to date. The FTSE100 is down by just 2.7% year to date, a massive and, in my experience, unprecedented outperformance. On average FTSE 100 companies are larger and more international meaning that they are typically earning dollar revenues, a very good cushion in recent months. UK ten year government bond yields began the quarter at 2.06% and ended it at 4.1%, a rout that was ludicrously attributed to a trivial mini budget. As I wrote recently, this has been coming for a long time and the cause is a combination of relentless excessive borrowing, to which the nation appears to be addicted, and blundering behaviour by the Bank of England which naturally fails to accept responsibility. The overdue correction in government bond yields was certainly not confined to the UK. Ten year German Bund yields soared from 1.2% to 2.1% and US Treasuries more modestly from 3.02% to 3.8%. As those yield movements imply, Europe has a bigger inflation threat because most commodities are priced in dollars. Stock investors in the US have seen most commodity prices well off their highs and are disappointed that the Fed appears to be set on continuing to dampen an economy that appears to be slowing down quite nicely. It is worth mentioning that most US commentators see a bad recession across Europe as a given. I have been buying two year Gilts yielding above 4% in the knowledge that these represent a very viable alternative to stocks, at this difficult time, as they say when flags are flying at half mast. There is no doubt that many share prices are very low and some of them may even be cheap. I have been looking at retailers. Sainsbury, Tesco, Halfords, Kingfisher and Pets at Home all have solid balance sheets and yield between 4.5% (Pets) and 7.5% (Sainsbury).Marks & Spencer, which must be selling hair shirts, pays no dividend for some reason but its historic free cash flow yield is 33%. Barring serious management blunders, which are of course quite possible, these companies are long term buys. I am tempted to write that there...

16 Jan 2017

Here are two pieces of great news for the citizens of relatively rich, relatively developed, relatively Western economies. Women can increasingly combine career and motherhood rather than having to choose between them: and improved healthcare (if not exercise and diet) mean that people on average are living to greater ages. Fifty years ago, the UK average birthrate per woman was 2.9 (over her fertile life, not per pregnancy, obviously). Now it is 1.8. No doubt this is down to a combination of reasons which you can work out for yourself. Given that medical science has not yet worked out how to allow men to give birth you might imagine, if the UK’s experience is typical, that in the long term the global population will decline, on the rough basis that each woman should on average have two babies to replace those falling off the perch at the far end of life’s journey. Were it not for the fertility of some African countries, where birthrates of >5 per woman are quite common, mankind might become an endangered species.  According to the World Bank, the average fertility of women in the world was 2.5 in 2016 and the necessary “replacement rate” is 2.1. So the human race looks as if it will walk on for a while. Yet the story for developed nations is quite different. BIRTH RATE IN DEVELOPED NATIONS – FLACCID France (2.0), the US (1.9) and the UK (1.8) are doing their best (all, note, countries with histories of racially diverse immigration). The EU, which only promotes immigration from within itself, is overall at just 1.6 and Germany (1.4), Italy (1.4) and Spain (1.3) are below average. China, just unwinding its one child policy, is at 1.6 and Japan, perhaps the world’s most notorious ageing nation, is at 1.4. But the populations of established nations like the US, Germany and the UK are certainly not declining yet. Instead we have decades ahead in which the population will continue to grow but will age significantly. This is important for all kinds of financial reasons, none of them good. The last time that the fertility rate in the UK was at the “replacement rate” of...