(Washington)

We have some interesting new information about the recently re-drafted DOL fiduciary rule. Last week, the DOL sent what is largely considered to be its new fiduciary rule—entitled “Improving Investment Advice for Workers & Retirees Exemption”—to the OMB. The rule’s text has not been released, so to this point there has only been speculation about its contents. That said, a top industry lawyer familiar with the current process has said he expects the rule to have very close coordination with the SEC’s Reg BI. So much so, in fact that the lawyer—George Michael Gerstein, co-chair of the fiduciary governance group at Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young—expects if a firm is abiding by Reg BI it would likely be entirely exempt from the fiduciary rule. In his own words, “The DOL leadership under President [Donald] Trump has emphasized that they want the SEC to take the lead in terms of conflict of interest regulations, particularly when it comes to brokerage practices. It now seems likely that, if a broker/dealer [B/D] engages in actions that amount to providing investment advice under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act [ERISA], to the extent that the entity complies with Reg BI, that will be sufficient for meeting ERISA’s fiduciary duties.”

FINSUM: It sounds like Reg BI is going to be the dominant rule, and that anyone abiding by it may be exempt from DOL enforcement. This will likely be music to the ears of many in the industry.

(Chicago)

You might not pay much attention to them—most don’t—but closed end muni funds are an excellent deal right now. They are offering high yields relative to other fixed income peers. For example, you can readily get 5% yields on CEF muni funds, equivalent to an 8.45% taxable yield if you are in the top tax bracket. And to be clear, these are not junk muni bonds. The reason yields are so strong is leverage gained from borrowing money at short-term interest rates and buying longer-term bonds. That usually creates a risk that short-term rates could rise, causing losses. However, given the Fed’s position right now, that seems highly unlikely.

FINSUM: This is an ideal time to by CEF muni funds given the low rate risk and solid overall yields. Check out BlackRock’s MFT (5.39% yield), Putnam’s PMM (5.18%), or BNY Mellon’s LEO (5.56%).

(New York)

It seems to all be crashing down as we write. The markets had just eliminated all losses for the year and were above or near all-time highs (e.g. the Nasdaq). However, the market has all he hallmarks of irrational exuberance—indexes priced for such unlikely perfect outcomes that they just can’t stand. At 22x forward earnings, valuations are right around where they were in the tech bubble. The economy is likely to take two years to recover from the virus, but the markets only took two months.

FINSUM: The market seems to be getting a reality check this week. Legitimate fears of a second wave are growing as re-opening states are seeing hospitalizations surge.

(New York)

There has been a major change in the stock market’s attitude toward the president over the last several weeks. For a long time, the market was very concerned with Trump winning. If Trump looked weak in polls, it was bad for markets. According to RBC, for the last 12 months, the S&P 500 has moved mostly in line with Trump’s odds for reelection. According to the bank, ““For the past year, expectations as to whether Trump will win again in November (as tracked by the betting markets) have been moving in sync with S&P 500 performance … But that relationship has broken down a bit in early June, with Trump’s chances (according to the betting markets) falling and the S&P 500 surging”.

FINSUM: Markets care much more about the economy than they do Trump, and everyone seems to be betting that COVID stimulus will keep going even if Trump loses.

(New York)

The New York Times has published an interesting piece this week which argues that markets and investors are ignoring an ugly and disastrous reality: that the economy is suffering a huge and largely unprecedented collapse in demand. New data out of Europe and Japan, as well as US manufacturing demand, this week showed that demand fell sharply in May, a sharp contrast to the employment jump. The NYT argues that this systemic fall in demand will take time to play out, but that the huge decline in employment and change in behaviors will cause a rupture in demand that will play out over years.

FINSUM: The NYT piece is very bearish. We held off on covering it until new data was released overnight showing a big fall in demand.

(New York)

The public and the media are flabbergasted at how the US stock market has seemed to defy everything we are seeing in “real life”. As of Friday, however, things started to make a little more sense because of good job numbers. Given the general disconnect between markets and the economy, it is important to take a step back and digest what markets really seem to be saying. In our view, the message is clear: not only is the economy going to bounce back, but a year from now, things are going to be better than they were before COVID.

FINSUM: The markets are making a very bold call and essentially pricing for perfection. However, it might not be that unrealistic. If the Fed and the government remain very accommodative, it is not outside the realm of possibility that by the end of June 2021, the economy is larger and potentially healthier than in Feb 2020.

(Washington)

It has been long in the works. So long, in fact, that many seem to have forgotten about it. Yet here it is—a new fiduciary rule from the DOL, almost three years after the last one was vacated. The new version of the rule has just been delivered to the White House for review by the Office of Management and Budget. This starts a multi-month process that may lead to its implementation, but given how late the rule is arriving it may not get enacted before Trump could potentially leave office. If Trump wins the election, the timing is irrelevant, but if he loses and the rule has been in place less than 60 days when the new president takes over, it can very easily be reversed.

FINSUM: We have not yet seen a good summary of the contents of this rule, but will be covering it as soon as possible. The only thing we have heard is that the new rule is “is primarily a prohibited transaction exemption intended to replace the Best Interest Contract Exemption”.

(Washington)

Friday saw the release of what appeared to be absolutely stellar jobs numbers. Instead of the jobless rate potentially hitting almost 20%—which was the forecast—the opposite happened: the unemployment rate fell to 13.3% in May from over 14% in April. Markets soared. However, the reality is that those numbers are both highly inflated, and unrealistic. Firstly, the Bureau of Labor Statistics counted those who are currently furloughed and unpaid as “employed”. It admitted that if it hadn’t done so the unemployment rate would have jumped to over 16%. Secondly, the big jump in hiring was at least partly, and probably hugely, because of an artificial government rule in the PPP program. Small businesses had to hire employees back by the end of June to have their loans turn into grants, so there were artificial incentives to put people back on payroll even I the absence of true business demand.

FINSUM: If you take these two facts together, it becomes clear that the May data is not really a reflection of an economic pickup, so don’t make any predictions based on this.

(New York)

It has been a long, long, time since value stocks really had a shining moment. Growth has been outperforming value for over a decade now. However, strategists at JP Morgan say that value stocks may start to shine very soon. This underlying parts of this economy—weaker but still improving—are the exact conditions where value stocks traditionally shine. These pre-requisites for success seem likely to stay in place. There does not appear to be a second wave of infections brewing, there is ample government support for the economy, and economic data is trending more positively than negatively.

FINSUM: The typical rotation into value (such as in 2008-2009) takes over 100 days and has 18% upside. The logic here is sound, but we still wonder if value will outperform growth.

(Washington)

A whole squad of industry players are trying to stop the SEC’s new Reg BI in its tracks. From individual firms (like Michael Kitces’) to trade groups, many are filing lawsuits to stop the implementation of Reg BI. One of the critical arguments seems to be that the new Reg BI does not sufficiently protect investors under the rules of the Dodd-Frank Act. One principal at XY Planning Network says, simply, “Reg BI makes it more difficult for customers to differentiate between financial planners who are bound by fiduciary obligations and for broker-dealers who may consider their own financial interests”.

FINSUM: Both broker-dealers and RIAs are against this rule. For the former, it complicates life, and for the latter, it muddles some of their “fiduciary” thunder. Nonetheless, it seems the rule is likely to implemented on schedule.