A month ago, a downbeat David Einhorn exclaimed "will this market cycle never turn?" Despite solid Q3 performance, Einhorn admitted that "the market remains very challenging for value investing strategies, as growth stocks have continued to outperform value stocks. The persistence of this dynamic leads to questions regarding whether value investing is a viable strategy. ...
Tyler Durden considers the following as important: Business, David Einhorn, Economic bubbles, Economy, Fail, Finance, financial markets, Great Recession, Greenlight, Greenlight Capital, Growth stock, investment, Lehman, Lehman Brothers, money, None, Oxford Union in England, Oxford University, Short, Stock Market, Too Big To Fail, US Federal Reserve, Value Investing
This could be interesting, too:
Lance Roberts writes After A Decade, Investors Are Finally Back to Even
Lance Roberts writes Market Believes It Has Immunity To Risks
Jeffrey P. Snider writes European Data: Much More In Store For Number Four
Jeffrey P. Snider writes US Sales and Production Remain Virus-Free, But Still Aren’t Headwind-Free
A month ago, a downbeat David Einhorn exclaimed "will this market cycle never turn?"
Despite solid Q3 performance, Einhorn admitted that "the market remains very challenging for value investing strategies, as growth stocks have continued to outperform value stocks. The persistence of this dynamic leads to questions regarding whether value investing is a viable strategy. The knee-jerk instinct is to respond that when a proven strategy is so exceedingly out of favor that its viability is questioned, the cycle must be about to turn around. Unfortunately, we lack such clarity. After years of running into the wind, we are left with no sense stronger than, 'it will turn when it turns'."
Such an open-ended answer, however, is a problem for a fund which famously opened a basket of "internet shorts" several years prior, and which have continued to rip ever higher, detracting from Greenlight's overall performance.
This, in turn, has prompted Einhorn to consider the unthinkable alternative: "Might the cycle never turn?" In other words, is the market now permanently broken.
While the Greenlight founder did not explicitly answer the question, in a speech yesterday at The Oxford Union in England, Einhorn made it extremely clear just how farcical he believes this market, and world, has become, pointing out that the problems that caused the global financial crisis a decade ago still haven’t been resolved.
“Have we learned our lesson? It depends what the lesson was,” Einhorn, the co-founder of New York-based Greenlight Capital, said at the Oxford Union in England on Wednesday.
Infamous for his value investing style and bet against Lehman Brothers that paid off in the crisis, Bloomberg reports that Einhorn said he identified several issues at the time of the crisis, including the fact that institutions that could have gone under were deemed too big to fail.
The scarcity of major credit-rating agencies was and remains a factor, Einhorn said, while problems in the derivatives market “could have been dealt with differently," and in the “so-called structured-credit market, risk was transferred, but not really being transferred, and not properly valued.”
“If you took all of the obvious problems from the financial crisis, we kind of solved none of them,” Einhorn said to a packed room at Oxford University’s 194-year-old debating society.
Instead, the world “went the bailout route.”
“We sweep as much under the rug as we can and move on as quickly as we can,” he said.
Einhorn didn’t avoid discussing his underperformance, citing several failed bets that companies’ stocks would decline. He didn’t name the stocks he was shorting, but insisted that none of the companies are “viable businesses.”
Value investing has worked over time, but “it’s not working at all right now,” and in fact “the opposite seems to be working,” he said.
Greenlight remains focused on developed markets, and has no plans to change that, he said.
Which reminds us of his exasperated conclusions from the latest Greenlight letter to investors:
Given the performance of certain stocks, we wonder if the market has adopted an alternative paradigm for calculating equity value. What if equity value has nothing to do with current or future profits and instead is derived from a company’s ability to be disruptive, to provide social change, or to advance new beneficial technologies, even when doing so results in current and future economic loss?
It’s clear that a number of companies provide products and services to customers that come with a subsidy from equity holders. And yet, on a mark-to-market basis, the equity holders are doing just fine.
Ah yes, the Fed-funded "deflation trade" which lowers prices for goods and services courtesy of ravenous investors who will throw money at any "growth" idea, without considerations for return or profit, because - well - more such investors will emerge tomorrow. After all, in this day and age of ZIRP, what else will they do with their money.