Interesting Commentary by Ray Dalio

RenoJay

Full time employment: Posting here.
Joined
May 4, 2013
Messages
609
Ray Dalio is the founder of the largest hedge fund and has had a very impressive investing track record. I thought this analysis he posted on LinkedIn of where our current economy/credit cycles fits in with history was quite informative.

Here are a couple interesting quotes from the article:

"For all of the previously described reasons, the period that we are now in looks a lot like 1937."

"Also, tighter monetary policy slows prospective earnings growth, which makes most investment assets worth less. For these reasons, it is common to see strong economies being accompanied by falling stock and other asset prices..."
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that link. Read it quick, need to spend more time on it. It does a good job of describing where we are today and the forces and tools available to affect outcomes. It is good for me to see the bigger picture items, when I tend to get near sighted and focused on my individual investments.
 
With this volatility, it is possible. If Apple is a bellwether... the after market mood today does not look great. And the Fed is not helping. The fed chair cannot empathize with the middle class family .. the guy has a $112 Million Networth.
 
I wonder if anyone in 1937 knew they were heading into the Great Depression?
 
You are about 10 years too late. 1937 was in middle of the depression.

From an investing perspective, the stock market cratered about 90% from 1929-1932. Then it rose a lot. But then in 1937, it dropped in half again. This is a large reason why I've been bearish. Our amazing bull market of past 10 years was created mostly by favorable monetary policy, and it's not clear to me whether the economy can really stand on its own two feet. I mean if little quarter point interest rate moves are rollicking the market, is there really any "there" there as far as sustainability?
 
That was really informative, I think I knew most of the pieces, but he put them together in a very clear and concise fashion. What I didn't know was about the long-term (75-100) year debt cycle. It is scary because the difference between 75 and 100 years is a big deal. I also completely believe that policymakers really don't know how to deal with it.
 
Gonna give this a read after I get some chores done.
 
I am guessing that most of us are aware of a good portion of what he wrote in regards to the economic cycles that we experience. I did enjoy the strategy summary of keeping the separate parts of policy in harmony. I think he's correct in stating that many times we are late to the party as the cycle winds down. I would say mainly due to the political pressures that are put on the federal reserve and other world banks to keep economic activity on the plus side.

I mostly learned the relationship policy had on widening the chasm between classes over an economic cycle. Very enlightening. I do see us at the end of a productivity or industrial cycle.

The numbers from December were encouraging but I certainly don't see them as a long term trend. We saw considerable consumer spending which as we all know drives our economy. How that relates to consumer debt for the first quarter should tell us something.

Now all eyes are on profits and trends for corporations to start cutting labor. If that becomes the norm then we're in for a long winter.
 
Ray Dalio recently released a book entitled Principles for Navigating Big Debt Crises. The 471-page pdf file is allowed to be downloaded by the public. I am reading it.

In the introduction, he wrote

As an investor, my perspective is different from that of most economists and policy makers because I bet on economic changes via the markets that reflect them, which forces me to focus on the relative values and flows that drive the movements of capital. Those, in turn, drive these cycles. In the process of trying to navigate them, I’ve found there is nothing like the pain of being wrong or the pleasure of being right as a global macro investor to provide the practical lessons about economics that are unavailable in textbooks...

Later, he wrote

... While being a successful investment manager is hard, it’s not nearly as hard as being a successful economic policy maker. We investors only have to understand how the economic machine works and anticipate what will happen next. Policy makers have to do that, plus make everything turn out well—i.e., they have to know what should be done while navigating through all the political impediments that make it so hard to get it done. To do that requires a lot of smarts, a willingness to fight, and political savvy—i.e., skills and heroism—and sometimes even with all those things, the constraints under which they work still prevent them from being successful...
 
I wonder if anyone in 1937 knew they were heading into the Great Depression?

IMHO, the question is did they know they were heading into a World War.

There is nothing like a good war to drive economic growth, albeit the wrong kind of growth.
 
That was really informative, I think I knew most of the pieces, but he put them together in a very clear and concise fashion. What I didn't know was about the long-term (75-100) year debt cycle. It is scary because the difference between 75 and 100 years is a big deal. I also completely believe that policymakers really don't know how to deal with it.

Do they even want to deal with it?
 
IMHO, the question is did they know they were heading into a World War.

There is nothing like a good war to drive economic growth, albeit the wrong kind of growth.

Yes. WWII was what finally broke the economic malaise in this country. The baby boom afterward did the rest.
 
Ray Dalio recently released a book entitled Principles for Navigating Big Debt Crises. The 471-page pdf file is allowed to be downloaded by the public. I am reading it.
Thanks for the heads up. I downloaded the PDF.
 
Thanks for sharing this great article! It's a really excellent summary of the macroeconomic and political drivers of the markets.

Just wish I had a spare $7.5 billion lying around so I could buy a slice of his Alpha fund.

I'm not a Tony Robbins fan by any means, but his All Seasons Portfolio is straight from Dalio and is obviously robustly-constructed. A non-starter for pure Boglehead types obviously but interesting to look at it for others:

https://portfoliocharts.com/portfolio/all-seasons-portfolio/
 
On another thread, I shared this chart from the Federal Reserve.

It is also appropriate here.

drecon_0508.gif
 
....
Here are a couple interesting quotes from the article:

"For all of the previously described reasons, the period that we are now in looks a lot like 1937."

...

In 1937 the unemployment rate was still sky high. Something like 15% in contrast to today's 3.9%. Also I think most families had the a single income so if Dad was out of work .... curtains. So the emotional stress of a modest downturn could be very high and create instability.
 
Similar, but different?

When the dollar was re-pegged to gold at $35 per oz. in January 1934, the US essentially went back on a gold standard. Gold reserves constituted 85% of the monetary base and changes in those reserves accounted for most of the changes in the monetary base. Because the US received large gold inflows in the mid-1930s, monetary policy was expansionary. This was the primary reason for the economic recovery (Romer 1992).

But when the Roosevelt administration began to worry about the potential for higher inflation, the Treasury Department decided to sterilise all gold inflows starting in December 1936. In essence, its new gold holdings were held in an inactive account rather than with the Federal Reserve, where it would have become part of the monetary base and money supply. Thus, instead of allowing the monetary base to grow with the inflow of gold, the monetary base was essentially frozen at its existing level.

The economy faltered in the spring of 1937 and tanked in the autumn of 1937. In February 1938, having realised its error, the Treasury ended its policy. In April 1938, the Treasury implemented its exit strategy and began desterilising its inactive gold holdings. The economy began to recover in June 1938.

The effect of the gold sterilisation policy on the monetary base is shown in Figure 2. The gold stock and monetary base grew consistently from 1934 to 1936. Although gold stocks continued to grow in 1937, the monetary base flatlined because of the sterilisation. The non-sterilised gold stock is flat until the Treasury began desterilising its gold holdings in April 1938.
The impact of gold sterilisation and higher reserve requirements on the money supply can be separated by noting that gold sterilisation affects the monetary base while reserve requirements affect the money multiplier. In a recent paper (Irwin 2012), I find that changes in the monetary base were much more important than changes in the money multiplier in explaining the abrupt end to the growth of the money supply in 1937.

Notice also that gold inflows into the US essentially ceased in late 1937 until mid-1938. The sudden halt to gold inflows was due in part to fears that the Roosevelt administration would respond to the recession by devaluing the dollar, just as it had done in response to the Great Depression in early 1933. (Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, seems to have been the view of financial markets.) However, gold began surging back into the US in September 1938 when Hitler’s territorial demands on Czechoslovakia (the Munich crisis) set off fears of a European war.

If we are to avoid the mistakes of the past, it is important to have an accurate assessment of what those past mistakes were. The severity of the Recession of 1937-38 was not due to contractionary fiscal policy or higher reserve requirements. By contrast, the policy tightening associated with gold sterilisation was not modest – it did not simply reduce the growth of the monetary base by a few percentage points, it stopped its growth altogether. While the Federal Reserve is often blamed for its poor policy choices during the Great Depression, the Treasury Department was responsible for this particular policy error.

The recession of 1937-38 occurred long ago, but it does have policy lessons for today. It suggests that, in a weak recovery, a pre-emptive monetary strike against inflation (which was very low at the time, as it is today) is capable of producing a devastating recession.
 
In 1937 the unemployment rate was still sky high. Something like 15% in contrast to today's 3.9%. Also I think most families had the a single income so if Dad was out of work .... curtains. So the emotional stress of a modest downturn could be very high and create instability.

Very true. But the high unemployment rate in 1937 was way down from its peak around 1932, much like our extremely low unemployment is way down from it's peak around 2010. Not suggesting that the comparison of years is perfect; just that the articles I've read from those who are academic and get into the weeds suggest this is more of a time for caution than exuberance. (Although even most of them are calling for a "relief rally" right around now.)
 
While this history is interesting, I don't make my investment decisions based on where I think the economics is taking us. I do not pretend to understand all the currents and cross currents.

Rather I base my plans on the data mainly from the Fed Reserve. Specifically things like the yield curve, unemployment trend, PE10 rank over the last 30 years, trend of the SP500, equity returns versus bonds.

Most of the time this means I'm fully invested as I am now.
 
Just wanted to mention the downturn in 1937 was 100% created by the fed. Unintentionally....... Un like what the blog suggests. By basically lowering the interest rate to zero at the slightest hint of inflation / via gold sterilisation policy during the recovery. Makes me think interest rates will continue to rise until we see real recessionary signals. Just a guess.............
 
Back
Top Bottom