Global Macro Trading Journal

Specterx said:
TINA just tells you what's happening, not whether the players are making the right moves. If you are a pension fund manager, then every month you get a bunch of money which you need to invest right away; the choices are stock indices at maybe 4-4.5% (current earnings yield+growth), or cash and bonds at negative real rates. (IMO negative real rates changes the players' psychology a great deal compared to rates which are extremely low, but still positive)

At some point it will clearly not make sense to invest in stock indices - Japan reached this point in 1989 with large caps trading at 50x-100x earnings. However, Japanese players could always invest abroad without totally swamping overseas capital markets. If U.S. capital markets get to the point where real yields (including stock earnings yields) are negative across the board, the consequences are totally unpredictable but should involve lots of fireworks.
More...
So you believe these large overvaluations, that did not happen in previous periods of negative rates like the article I posted shows, are the result of the fact that the asset management industry is much bigger these days?
 
Daal said:
So you believe these large overvaluations, that did not happen in previous periods of negative rates like the article I posted shows, are the result of the fact that the asset management industry is much bigger these days?
More...

Not just bigger, but with enormously greater information and dealing in enormously more efficient markets. Back prior to the 1960s very few entities were in the market, there was almost no access to financial data, there was no CFA curriculum or professional fund management industry, no IRAs, 401(k)s or passive funds, no 60/40 rule - virtually all the guidelines and rules of thumb that investors swear by today hadn't been invented. Investor psychology and behavior was totally dominated by the Great Depression experience. When Buffet first started out he could find healthy listed companies selling for less than net cash, which would never happen today except in peak crisis scenarios. Likewise the market will never let the index equity risk premium blow out to the 5-8%+ figures which "mean reversion" would imply - except in a temporary panic selloff, or if the assumptions/psychology regarding future interest rates changes meaningfully. It's these two specific situations that offer significant edge to active macro traders/investors IMO and we've seen that dramatically over the past two years, which have been by far the best macro trading environment since 2008 - I'm actually afraid we're in for a boring dry spell lasting at least a few years.
 
It feels to me that BTC in 2021 will be the great divider in the HF world. The funds that bought and are riding it, will be making their clients pretty happy. That ones that don't are likely to be fired. If Warren Buffett can be criticized and have its stock halved for missing the tech trend in the 90's, what about these idiotic empty suits who charge 2/20 and claim to be so smart? Clients wont tolerate these supposedly smart guys for missing the most obvious trade of all-time. They are incompent and will be treated as such
I bet some of them will realize that and buy
 
Look @Daal I understand why you want to lock up your BTC. Here's a much easier way, just don't sell. If our discussions in this thread are any representation of what you think BTC could get to, you are now a die hard HODLer.

SPX forward earnings at 33-34x is long way from 50-100x 1989 Japan. Momo and all that.
 
tsznecki said:
Look @Daal I understand why you want to lock up your BTC. Here's a much easier way, just don't sell. If our discussions in this thread are any representation of what you think BTC could get to, you are now a die hard HODLer.

SPX forward earnings at 33-34x is long way from 50-100x 1989 Japan. Momo and all that.
More...
Almost everyone who ever got involved in BTC would have benefitted from locking their BTC. Few had the discipline to not sell. Heck, some even giving them away early on. If BTC rushes to 100-150k, I might make a mistake and sell all. I want to idiot proof my strategy by locking in some. If I had perfect discipline, I would just trust myself. But I cant' fully trust my discipline, not with such exponential potential
 
I also can lock and release in parts. I can lock it for 5 years and release 1/5 a year or something like that. But most will be free so I don't see a downside. I got plenty of cash for expenses
 
I found how to "lock" BTC to completely prevent it from being sold or transacted for a period of time. There is a functionality in the BTC protocol called CheckLockTimeVerify (CLTV). The issue is that most wallets, including hardware wallets, dont support it. There is an open source wallet that does
https://coinb.in/

However, there are some security concerns around. I believe I will be able to overcome them and thus will be able to lock it sucessfuly. But I need to understand the protocol better, I'm rusty, I havent studied in almost 3 years. So it might take a while. But this is an awesome feature
Sometimes I have seen some investments where I just know that if I hold for 3-4 years without selling I will make a fortune, but not selling is super hard. Especially with every idiot on twitter talking about how optimistic they are about BTC. The trader in me wants to fade these losers. But they might be right this time.
I already would have made a bundle had I not sold any Galaxy Digital stock as its more than a 7 bagger so far. But I sold a fair amount at $2/$3/$4/$5. With stocks you just got to be disciplined, but BTC you can PROGRAM discipline. This is a great feature and its just one of them. BTC is programmable money, so I plan to learn how to use all of its features to my advantage
 
"As the world has adapted some of these iniquities have got worse. Studies suggest that about 60% of jobs in America paying over $100,000 can be done from home, compared with 10% of jobs paying under $40,000. As unemployment has soared this year, the msci index of world stockmarkets has risen by 11%. In the worst case, the un reckons, the pandemic could force over 200m people into extreme poverty. Their plight will be exacerbated by authoritarians and would-be tyrants who have exploited the virus to tighten their stranglehold on power."
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/12/19/the-year-when-everything-changed
 
"And the pandemic has led to a burst of innovative government. Those which can afford it—and some, like Brazil’s, that cannot (see article)—have suppressed inequality by spending over $10trn on covid-19, three times more in real terms than in the financial crisis. That will dramatically reset citizens’ expectations about what governments can do for them."

This ties back to the Milton Friedman article I posted last week. The role of government in society has now increased, in a way that will be extremely difficult to roll back. Universal Basic Income is likely to be a significant part of the discussion in the future. Central bank digital currencies (or even just stablecoins issued by regulated companies) will make UBI very easy. It will also enable negative interest rates

With regards to negative rates, I'm currently reading the Rogoff book "The Curse of Cash" that talks about banning cash and all its benefits. When I finish I plan to write more about it but I find it more and more likely its going to become a reality

Ultimately what this all likely means are higher structural deficits, more debt and more money priting
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top