(New York)

One of the big mysteries in this recovery has been the fact that wages have not risen much despite the fact that employment has expanded greatly. Investors have gotten used to massive amounts of new jobs being created, but also to quite meager wage gains. Economists have been somewhat stumped as to why, but a new explanation makes a lot of sense—monopsony. Those with an economics background will immediate recognize the term. It refers to when there are many suppliers of something but only one buyer. In this case it is being applied to the labor market—there are tons of available workers, but quite few employers, especially in more isolated locations. This means the employer has sole negotiating power in dictating wages, leading to widespread wage stagnation despite a competitive labor market.

FINSUM: This seems like the outcome of all the corporate consolidation that has occurred over the last few decades. There are less employers, so they collectively have more power to hold down wages.

(New York)

We have just experienced a major market rout. Stocks are off over 5% in the last two days, largely because of almost esoteric worries about rising rates. The big question for investors is “where do we go from here?”. Well the Financial Times has tried to answer the question, and their answer is pretty simple—higher. The paper thinks this tumult will prove short-lived as they contend that it is really recession that ends bull markets, and the US isn’t anywhere near one right now. They suspect corporate earnings will come in strong in the next month and right the market ship.

FINSUM: We agree that this seems like the most likely outcome of the current rout, especially given the strength of the economy. However, we do have an outside worry that investors’ minds are finally changing about the risk/reward of stocks given rising rates and a toppy-looking economy.

(New York)

We have been running a lot of stories lately about the best investments for a rising rate environment. The reasons are obvious. However, instead of pointing out ETFs for allocation etc, we found a good piece interviewing money managers about how they are handling their portfolios. Some of those interviewed are relying on short-term bonds to minimize their rate risk. Since the yield curve is quite flat, you get almost no extra compensation for the rate risk of holding longer maturity bonds. One manager highlighted that bonds in the 2-5 year window were a sweet spot. Some also said the market is over-discounting inflation and that inflation linked assets were a good idea.

FINSUM: Short-term bonds seem a like good play, but we have also been impressed with the interest rate hedged ETFs out there, which often go long corporate bonds and short Treasuries to offset any losses. They seem to have performed well.

(New York)

Junk bonds have had a rough monthly, and it is not hard to see why. The rise in yields and the anxiety about stocks have combined to push yields on junk steeply higher, from 6.18% on October 1st to 6.61% now. In aggregate, the bonds are down 1%+ this month. However, the truth is that the losses could have been much worse, and within that idea, is an important story. That story is that ETFs, which have offered much greater ease of access to investors, actually seemed to have supported prices in the recent turmoil. The head of bond trading at Oppenheimer put it best, saying “The ETF market, which was supposed to subtract liquidity from credit markets, is actually adding liquidity by aggregating the risk and bringing in people who want to take macro risk as opposed to micro bond level risk … The ETF market ends up providing the live bid-ask spread that even the credit markets themselves cannot generate”.

FINSUM: This is a fascinating argument as it runs counter to the long-running narrative about how fixed income ETFs could cause a big blow up because of a “liquidity mismatch” between ETFs and the underlying asset.

(New York)

If you are looking for the canary in the coal mine for the current market turbulence, look no further than a handful of stocks that should show investors where things are headed. Especially for the Dow. The index’s gains this year have largely come from three stocks: Apple, Boeing, and UnitedHealth Group. 16 stocks in the 30-stock index have losses this year, but because of the quirky way the Dow is calculated, some smaller market capitalization companies have much more weight than larger ones (weighting is done by share price not market cap). Accordingly, this trio has outsized importance to the index, and if they fall, the Dow is likely to get badly hurt.

FINSUM: The Dow is quite funky, but this story points out just how vulnerable the whole index looks right now.