by Rachel Annis
Equity Analyst, Gradient Analytics LLC (a Sabrient Systems company)
“Only time can heal what reason cannot.” – Lucius Annaeus Seneca
In response to the pandemic-driven economic downturn, both Congress and the Federal Reserve have intervened with fiscal and monetary support in the form of direct subsidies, loans, bailouts, tax rebates, supplemental unemployment benefits, ultra-low interest rates, support of capital markets, reduced regulatory constraints, and quantitative easing (QE). The Fed expanded its purchase program beyond Treasury bonds to also include municipal bonds, corporate bonds of both investment and speculative grade, as well as ETFs for the first time. While these policies can raise aggregate demand, employment, and investment in the short run, excess liquidity also supports inefficient firms that otherwise might not survive. The increased prevalence of these firms, as well as the valuation metrics at which their stocks trade can muddy the waters for analysts and thus contribute to a misallocation of capital. These firms also weigh on productivity growth going forward.
Because the downturn was spurred by the pandemic rather than the typical overheated economy and inflation, it has yielded several surprises for investors. For instance, despite unemployment reaching record levels, consumers spent more than expected on home repairs and remodeling which boosted sales at stores like Home Depot (HD) and Lowe’s Companies (LOW). Likewise, residential home sales have surged despite escalating unemployment. An intuitive expectation of an inverse relationship between the two would be incorrect, at least thus far. Outperformance of online retailers, like Amazon.com (AMZN), over some traditional recessionary picks, like Procter & Gamble (PG), has also been unexpected. Moreover, this was the first recession that drove people to spend more time outdoors, giving a boost to firms like sports vehicle maker Polaris (PII). However, the question to ask is: Is this burst of COVID-driven growth anomalous and short-lived, or is it sustainable?
Another aspect to highlight is the conjectural nature of forward estimates and current valuations. The wild swings in near-term consensus estimates between earnings cycles seem to be highly speculative and largely based on the latest news headlines rather than analysis of underlying firms’ fundamental metrics. Similarly, it appears that some previously struggling firms are getting an unsustainable boost by pivoting to create products that help customers deal with COVID-19 impacts. In this article, I explore examples of two firms for which analysts anticipate rising near-term growth rates specifically driven by COVID-19 related tailwinds that we do not believe are sustainable longer-term. Read on....
Was that really a breakout? With the S&P 500 struggling around the 2,000 level for the past two weeks, Friday’s strong finish might seem like a bullish breakout. But the market has already given us a couple of false breakouts at this level, and although I see higher prices ahead, I’m still not convinced that we have seen all the near-term downside that Mr.
Today, with no new economic data, the market struggled through its third consecutively negative day of trading after a six-day winning streak. What’s the difference? We have traded a dubious, yet serious, problem in Syria for a much more tangible, and perhaps less solvable battle, among Congress.