Weekly Energy Update (July 13, 2023)

by Bill O’Grady, Thomas Wash, and Patrick Fearon-Hernandez, CFA | PDF

Falling U.S. inflation is raising hopes that the Fed’s tightening cycle is coming to an end.  That has lifted oil prices, triggering a breakout above the recent trading range.

(Source: Barchart.com)

Commercial crude oil inventories rose 5.9 mb, well above the 0.1 mb draw forecast.  The SPR fell 0.4 mb, putting the total build at 5.5 mb.

In the details, U.S. crude oil production fell 0.1 mbpd to 12.3 mbpd.  Exports fell 1.8 mbpd, while imports fell 1.4 mbpd.  Refining activity rose 2.6% to 93.7% of capacity.

(Sources: DOE, CIM)

The above chart shows the seasonal pattern for crude oil inventories.  After accumulating oil inventory at a rapid pace into mid-February, injections first slowed and then declined.  This week’s build is contraseasonal; current inventories are in line with seasonal levels.

Fair value, using commercial inventories and the EUR for independent variables, yields a price of $59.77.  Commercial inventory levels are a bearish factor for oil prices, but with the unprecedented withdrawal of SPR oil, we think that the total-stocks number is more relevant.

Since the SPR is being used, to some extent, as a buffer stock, we have constructed oil inventory charts incorporating both the SPR and commercial inventories.  With another round of SPR sales set to happen, the combined storage data will again be important.

Total stockpiles peaked in 2017 and are now at levels last seen in 2002.  Using total stocks since 2015, fair value is $94.27.

Market News:

 Geopolitical News:

 Alternative Energy/Policy News:

  View PDF

Asset Allocation Bi-Weekly – The Green Shoots of Re-Industrialization (July 3, 2023)

by the Asset Allocation Committee | PDF

In a little-noticed report last month, total construction spending in April was up a modest 6.1% from one year earlier, but private nonresidential construction spending was up a whopping 30.2%.  That marked the fourth straight month in which private, nonresidential construction, a proxy for commercial construction, was up more than 20.0% year-over-year.  In contrast, outlays on public works (such as roads, bridges, and sewer systems) rose 15.1% in the year to April, while private residential construction spending fell 9.7%.  We believe these figures confirm an important new trend in the U.S. economy that will have big implications for certain asset returns going forward.

The strength in commercial construction may seem surprising, given today’s high vacancies and the pessimism regarding properties such as office buildings and shopping malls.  Those sectors continue to face major headwinds, and they certainly were not responsible for this recent rise in commercial construction.  The jump in commercial building has primarily come from new factory construction, especially manufacturing facilities for electronics and information-processing goods. Total outlays on factory construction in April were more than double their level in the previous April, with a year-over-year rise of 104.4%.  Expenditures on just the subsector of electronics and information-processing factories nearly quadrupled, showing an astounding increase of 271.8% on the year.  Of course, some of this increased spending simply reflects the high inflation in prices for construction inputs ranging from labor to cement.  Nevertheless, the spending increases far exceed any reasonable estimates of inflation for construction inputs.  The spending figures, therefore, confirm a huge rise in real factory construction.

The frenzy in building new electronics factories provides some of the first statistical evidence of U.S. re-industrialization, i.e., the rebuilding of the nation’s manufacturing, construction, and mining sectors as companies shift production back home from Asia or elsewhere abroad.  We suspect that a lot of the new factory construction reflects the recently announced, high-profile projects for electric-vehicle batteries, semiconductors, and other green-energy or info-technology goods.  However, we doubt that the recent spending uptick includes much of the hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies provided by last year’s Inflation Reduction Act or the CHIPS Act.  Slow bureaucratic and administrative procedures would suggest that most of those subsidies will only kick in later.  In addition, higher military budgets have not yet had their full impact on the defense industrial base.  The recent increase in factory construction, therefore, is probably only the beginning of a much larger, longer-lasting uptrend.

As geopolitical tensions between China and the West worsen, and as Chinese economic growth slows, we think the U.S. will be a key beneficiary of companies “near shoring” or bringing production back home.  New data suggests even Europe will see some re-industrialization.  The data shows that global businesses acquired or leased 9.6 million square feet of industrial space in the European Union during 2022, marking a 29% increase over the previous year.  The uptake of factory buildings comes even as weak consumer demand in the region pushes down contracts for retail and warehousing space.  Re-industrialization in the EU could accelerate even further if its member states adopt U.S.-style subsidies or if their defense spending increases spur an expansion in their defense industrial bases.

As the world fractures into relatively separate geopolitical and economic blocs, we have been arguing that re-industrialization will take root in the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, in Europe.  The data discussed here shows re-industrialization has indeed started to take root and is now pushing up green shoots that are likely to grow further.  Over the long term, this re-industrialization will be a mixed bag for Western societies.  It will likely make the West more resilient to external supply shocks and provide more opportunities for workers without a four-year college degree, but these new facilities and the shortened supply chains they represent will be less efficient than under the extreme globalization of the last few decades.  The result will likely be persistently higher inflation and interest rates.

Fortunately, shorter-term prospects are more positive. The building boom will likely support demand even as the overall economy slips into recession.  The new, highly modern factories being built could also quickly boost worker productivity when they come on line. Finally, since rebuilding the nation’s factory sector will require repairing and expanding roads and other infrastructure, it could also help reverse the recent fall in state and local government investment that we recently wrote about. For these reasons, we believe this re-industrialization will provide a short-to-medium term boost to several different stock sectors, such as broad industrials, construction companies and the service providers that serve them, providers of construction materials and equipment, and perhaps even real estate investment trusts (REITs) that focus on industrial properties.

View PDF

Bi-Weekly Geopolitical Report – Distinguishing My Wife From a Hat, an AI Story (June 26, 2023)

Thomas Wash | PDF

In his book, The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales, Oliver Sacks, a neurologist, details his experience with patients suffering from varying neurological disorders. In one such case, he dealt with a man who had lost the ability to recognize faces. The patient was a university music teacher who had always been known for his calm and collected demeanor but had suddenly began behaving strangely. He would sometimes fail to recognize his students and was often seen patting the top of water fountains and parking meters as if they were small children. His antics were widely regarded to be jokes since he didn’t have trouble communicating, and his musical ability was as good as it had ever been.

It wasn’t until the patient was diagnosed with diabetes that he sought professional help. Aware of the disease’s impact on his eyesight, he visited an ophthalmologist, who reassured him that his vision was fine but referred him to see Dr. Oliver Sacks for a neurological exam.

During the visit, Dr. Sacks noticed something was off about the patient. The man seemed to be having trouble perceiving Dr. Sacks fully. Instead of looking directly at Dr. Sacks’ face, the patient fixated on certain parts. He gazed at Dr. Sacks’ nose, chin, right ear, and right eye, but never his face as a whole. After telling the patient the exam was over, the man attempted to find his hat but instead reached for his wife’s head and tried to lift it as if he were about to put it on. To Dr. Sacks’ surprise, the patient’s wife treated this as if it were an everyday event.

The case of the man who mistook his wife for a hat is a great illustration of how artificial intelligence (AI) neural networks process information. Like the patient, neural networks do not have the ability to look at an entire image to judge what it is. Instead, they break down images into parts, specifically into an array of numbers called pixels. AI models (neural networks) see images by recognizing patterns in the numbers that represent the image. They can make distinctions between different objects through training which then teaches them to associate certain patterns with specific objects. Just like the patient who needed to see an eye, nose, and mouth to know that he was looking at a face, AI models need numbers to achieve the same task.

This report provides a beginner-friendly introduction on how AI learns and processes information. We will begin by discussing the similarities between AI and our brains. Next, we will explain how AI works and explore some of its most important applications. We will then discuss some of the challenges and limitations of AI. We end the report with market ramifications. While this is not intended to be an exhaustive summary of AI, readers should come away with a stronger understanding of the technology and why it is such a big deal.

Read the full report

Don’t miss the accompanying Geopolitical Podcast, available on our website and most podcast platforms: Apple | Spotify | Google

Weekly Energy Update (June 22, 2023)

by Bill O’Grady, Thomas Wash, and Patrick Fearon-Hernandez, CFA | PDF

Oil prices may be establishing a new trading range between $67 and $75 per barrel.

(Source: Barchart.com)

Commercial crude oil inventories fell 3.8 mb when compared to the forecast build of 0.5 mb.  The SPR fell 1.7 mb, putting the total draw at 5.6 mb.

In the details, U.S. crude oil production fell 0.2 mbpd to 12.2 mbpd.  Exports rose 1.3 mbpd, while imports declined 0.2 mbpd.  Refining activity declined 0.6% to 93.1% of capacity.

(Sources: DOE, CIM)

The above chart shows the seasonal pattern for crude oil inventories.  After accumulating oil inventory at a rapid pace into mid-February, injections first slowed and then declined.  This week’s draw is consistent with seasonal norms.  The seasonal pattern would suggest that stocks should fall in the coming weeks, but this pattern has become less reliable due to export flows.

Fair value, using commercial inventories and the EUR for independent variables, yields a price of $58.21.  Commercial inventory levels are a bearish factor for oil prices, but with the unprecedented withdrawal of SPR oil, we think that the total-stocks number is more relevant.

Since the SPR is being used, to some extent, as a buffer stock, we have constructed oil inventory charts incorporating both the SPR and commercial inventories.  With another round of SPR sales set to happen, the combined storage data will again be important.

Total stockpiles peaked in 2017 and are now at levels last seen in 2002.  Using total stocks since 2015, fair value is $93.15.

Market News:

(Source: Reuters)

 Geopolitical News:

 Alternative Energy/Policy News:

  View PDF

Asset Allocation Bi-Weekly – The Great Divergence (June 20, 2023)

by the Asset Allocation Committee | PDF

The S&P 500 is up 10% year-to-date and briefly reached the 4,200 level in late May. The recent rally in equity markets has been driven by the rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI), which has bolstered tech stocks. In fact, much of this strong performance has come from the five largest tech companies, which now account for 24.7% of the index’s value, a record high. This concentration has led some investors to fear that a bear market similar to the dot-com bubble burst of 2000 may be on the horizon. The pessimistic outlook is related to concerns that the underperformance of the broader index has generally followed previous periods of high market concentration.

The chart above shows the relative performance of the S&P 500 Market Capitalization and Equal Weight indexes over the past 30 years. During times of uncertainty, investors tend to pile into established companies with large market capitalizations. These firms are typically better positioned to weather a downturn as they have more resources and access to capital. In this environment, the Market Cap index generally outpaces its Equal Weight counterpart. However, this outperformance does not usually last long. When the market recovers, investors often go bargain hunting as the lesser names are likely to offer more value. Thus, the Equal Weight index can outperform the Market Cap index over an extended period. That said, the recent unevenness is different than in previous market rallies.

The 2020 tech rally was driven by monetary and fiscal stimulus. The Federal Reserve injected billions of dollars into the financial system, which lowered interest rates and encouraged investors to take on more risk. Additionally, many households had excess savings due to the COVID-19 pandemic stimulus, which increased the number of retail investors. Overall, tech stocks benefited as investors looked for better returns. However, the rally was not sustainable.

As the Federal Reserve began to tighten monetary policy in 2022, interest rates rose and investors became more risk-averse. This led to a sharp decline in tech stocks, which continued until early 2023, when people began to focus on the investments that Microsoft (MSFT, $346.10) had made in machine-learning company OpenAI. The investments signaled the company’s commitment to artificial intelligence and its potential to usher in a new technology wave.

The craze for AI reached new heights in May after chipmaker Nvidia (NVDA, $431.33) forecasted that strong demand for AI chips could help the company generate $110 billion in revenue in 2024. The news led to one of the biggest tech rallies in two decades as the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite Index rose by more than 7% in May.

Analysts have compared the release of AI-related products such as ChatGPT to the advent of the internet browser, calling it a game-changer. Although still under development, the product has a wide range of potential uses, from content creation to task automation. The technology’s diverse applications have encouraged investors to purchase AI-related stocks at a premium as they are willing to pay for AI-related companies based on their future cash streams as opposed to current earnings.

Unlike the dot-com boom of the early 2000s, many of the companies developing AI technology are not startups. The major movers in AI are established tech giants, such as Microsoft, Amazon (AMZN, $126.50), Alphabet (GOOG, $124.77), Meta (META, $280.34), Baidu (BIDU, $148.19), Tencent (TCEHY, $45.55), and Alibaba (BABA, $92.13). These companies have proven track records of success, and they are unlikely to fail if the AI bubble goes bust. As a result, the recent rally in tech stocks poses significantly less risk than the internet mania of the early 2000s because the firms driving the rally are more stable and have better track records of profitability.

While the Market Cap index has outperformed recently, this outperformance is unlikely to last. Economic growth is expected to slow in the second half of the year, which could lead to a new down-leg in the market. As demand decreases, earnings will likely be negatively impacted, leading to a decline in stock prices. However, we do not expect the repricing of major tech companies to lead to a market crash. Instead, we believe other stocks within the S&P 500 will be less affected. Consequently, the Equal Weight index may recover against the Market Cap index toward the end of the year. Additionally, these companies could be very attractive once economic growth begins to pick up.

View PDF

Weekly Energy Update (June 15, 2023)

by Bill O’Grady, Thomas Wash, and Patrick Fearon-Hernandez, CFA | PDF

Oil prices may be establishing a new trading range between $67 and $75 per barrel.

(Source: Barchart.com)

Commercial crude oil inventories rose 7.9 mb when compared to the forecast draw of 1.5 mb.  The SPR fell 1.9 mb, putting the total build at 6.0 mb.

In the details, U.S. crude oil production was steady at 12.4 mbpd.  Exports rose 0.8 mbpd, while imports were flat.  Refining activity declined 2.1% to 93.7% of capacity.

(Sources: DOE, CIM)

The above chart shows the seasonal pattern for crude oil inventories.  After accumulating oil inventory at a rapid pace into mid-February, injections first slowed and then declined.  This week’s outsized build puts inventories back at seasonal norms.  The seasonal pattern would suggest that stocks should fall in the coming weeks, but the seasonal pattern has become less reliable due to export flows.

Fair value, using commercial inventories and the EUR for independent variables, yields a price of $57.11.  Commercial inventory levels are a bearish factor for oil prices, but with the unprecedented withdrawal of SPR oil, we think that the total-stocks number is more relevant.

Since the SPR is being used, to some extent, as a buffer stock, we have constructed oil inventory charts incorporating both the SPR and commercial inventories.  With another round of SPR sales set to happen, the combined storage data will again be important.

Total stockpiles peaked in 2017 and are now at levels last seen in 2002.  Using total stocks since 2015, fair value is $92.53.

Market News:

  • The IEA released its forecast for oil demand over the next five years. The group estimates that expanding EV usage will dampen gasoline demand and thus lead to a peak in global oil demand after an almost continuous rise for 80 years.

  • As the above chart shows, oil demand is forecast to fall dramatically mostly due to negative growth for road transportation.  We have serious doubts that this will actually occur, but oil producers, especially those beholden to shareholders, have to be aware of this forecast since it suggests that investment in new production is at risk of being stranded.  Therefore, shareholders are likely to demand a shareholder return instead of investment into new production, and it appears this trend is already beginning to happen.  This forecast is likely to add to bullish pressure for prices, especially if demand exceeds expectations.
  • Oil prices continue to mark time in the wake of the OPEC+ announcement. Our take is that the U.S. wants prices around $60 per barrel and the Saudis have a target of at least $80 per barrel.  Because of this, we are sitting in a netherworld between these two price points.  Worries about Chinese demand are acting as a bearish factor on prices and offsetting the supply cuts coming from OPEC+.
  • U.S. crude oil exports have been increasing, but we are starting to get close to capacity at some export facilities.
  • Natural gas production in the Permian Basin has hit a new record high.
  • There is always tension between commodity project development and environmental concerns. Oil drilling in the Amazon Delta is pitting oil drillers against environmentalists.
  • Much to our surprise, it looks like the U.S. will add 3.0 mb to the SPR. Of course, this injection pales in comparison to the sales over the past year.  We note the Biden administration wants to purchase another 12.0 mb over this coming year.
  • Venezuela has suffered falling oil production for years. However, we are starting to see a slow recovery in this area.  As Russian sanctions change global oil flows, the U.S. has begun easing sanctions on Caracas.

 Geopolitical News:

 Alternative Energy/Policy News:

  View PDF

The Case for Hard Assets: An Update (June 2023)

by Bill O’Grady & Mark Keller | PDF

Background and Summary

Secular markets are defined as long-term trends in an asset. There are both secular bear and bull markets. In most markets, there are also cyclical bull and bear markets, often tied to the business cycle, and in some markets, there are seasonal bull and bear markets that are usually tied to annual production or consumption cycles. For example, a secular bull market in bonds is characterized by falling inflation expectations that trigger steady declines in interest rates. A secular bear market in bonds is caused by the opposite condition―rising inflation expectations which lead to consistently rising interest rates. In comparison, a cyclical bull market in bonds is often related to the business cycle and monetary policy.

In general, secular cycles tend to last a long time. Using bonds as an example, we are likely concluding a four-decade secular bull market which encompassed several cyclical cycles. The length tends to be tied to specific characteristics of each market.

Commodity markets have secular cycles as well. Commodity demand is mostly a function of economic and population growth, whereas commodity supply comes from agriculture, ranching, mining, and drilling. As this chart shows, commodity producers face a serious secular headwind—capitalist economies tend to persistently improve their efficiency in producing finished goods from raw commodities. Commodity production is also subject to steady improvement in productivity.

Read the full report

Bi-Weekly Geopolitical Report – The Issue of the Terms of Trade (June 12, 2023)

Bill O’Grady | PDF

In a recent Bi-Weekly Geopolitical Report, we discussed the emergence of the petroyuan.  One of the important aspects of that report was that foreign nations were beginning to pay for oil in their own currencies.  As we noted in the report, George Shultz and Henry Kissinger negotiated a deal with the Saudis, where in return for providing security support, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia agreed to price oil in U.S. dollars.  The ability to pay for oil in one’s own currency is powerful.  Essentially, a country can then print money for oil, but obviously, it’s not quite that simple.  If a country abuses that power, it could find itself losing its ability to do so.

In the aforementioned report, we noted that America’s aggressive use of financial sanctions was leading some countries to explore alternatives to the dollar-based reserve system.  After the U.S. sanctioned Iran and Russia, effectively isolating both nations from the global payments system, other nations worried about also running afoul of Washington and began to work on developing an alternative payment mechanism, which included the ability to pay for oil in a currency other than U.S. dollars.

What has surprised us, so far, is the absence of response from Washington to this development.  If the Nixon administration felt that paying for oil in dollars was important, if President Carter expanded the U.S. security role to include the Persian Gulf’s oil flows, and if President Bush liberated Kuwait, why hasn’t there been more of a pushback against denominating oil in other currencies?

Examining this question has led to an unexpected outcome—America’s terms of trade (TOT) have now changed due to the shale revolution, and that adjustment has changed the risk profile for the global economy.  Our assertion is that the U.S. realizes that, due to this change, insisting on pricing oil in U.S. dollars could foster financial instability.  And so, for now, Washington is willing to tolerate the pricing of oil in other currencies.

In this report, we will begin with an examination of U.S. TOT, including an analysis of its effect on the dollar.  Once this context is established, we will detail the risks that come from the dollar/oil relationship, which has led the U.S. to no longer insist on pricing oil in dollars.  We note the factors that have led to this change in the terms of trade may not be permanent, which could lead the U.S. to reverse its stance to allowing oil to be priced only in dollars.  We will close with market ramifications.

Read the full report

Don’t miss the accompanying Geopolitical Podcast, available on our website and most podcast platforms: Apple | Spotify | Google

Weekly Energy Update (June 8, 2023)

by Bill O’Grady, Thomas Wash, and Patrick Fearon-Hernandez, CFA | PDF

Oil prices continue to trade in the lower part of the trading range despite the Saudis’ announcement of a unilateral production cut.

(Source: Barchart.com)

Commercial crude oil inventories fell 0.5 mb when compared to the forecast build of 1.5 mb.  The SPR fell 1.9 mb, putting the total draw at 2.3 mb.

In the details, U.S. crude oil production rose 0.2 mbpd to 12.4 mbpd.  Exports fell 2.4 mbpd, while imports declined 0.8 mbpd.  Refining activity jumped 2.7% to 95.8% of capacity.

(Sources: DOE, CIM)

The above chart shows the seasonal pattern for crude oil inventories.  After accumulating oil inventory at a rapid pace into mid-February, injections first slowed and then declined.  As the average line shows, we are nearing the seasonal draw period, although that pattern has become less reliable with the U.S. exporting crude oil.

Fair value, using commercial inventories and the EUR for independent variables, yields a price of $59.61.  Commercial inventory levels are a bearish factor for oil prices, but with the unprecedented withdrawal of SPR oil, we think that the total-stocks number is more relevant.

Since the SPR is being used, to some extent, as a buffer stock, we have constructed oil inventory charts incorporating both the SPR and commercial inventories.  With another round of SPR sales set to happen, the combined storage data will again be important.

Total stockpiles peaked in 2017 and are now at levels last seen in 2002.  Using total stocks since 2015, fair value is $93.27.

Market News:

 Geopolitical News:

 Alternative Energy/Policy News:

(Source: Capital Economics)

  • Hydrogen remains a potential replacement for hydrocarbons. However, the production of hydrogen can come from both “dirty” and “clean” production methods, which has led to a color coding of hydrogen.  The Biden administration is trying to create a regulatory path for fostering the development of the fuel that will go along with a subsidy program to boost production.  The subsidy program still requires decisions about what will be covered.  The industry wants loose standards, while environmentalists are pressing for only the “greenest” of sources.  Although we don’t know the outcome yet, this administration tends to try to split the middle on these issues, which will tend to please no specific group.

  View PDF