Tuesday, August 17, 2010

China lending update. Is bank lending speeding up or slowing down?

It has been a while since I have updated you on the bank lending situation in China.   This is not due to me slacking off (I'll admit to a slower pace of posts recently, but I have some good excuses, really)  following this topic.  The data source, People's bank of China, has suddenly been a little more reticent in publishing this data in English and as my Chinese language skills are a bit lacking this data series has languished....

Data released recently shows a continuing trend of official slowing in the rate of loan growth.  I put official in italics because there appears to be some off balance tomfoolery going on. . .

From Caixin Online:
Despite regulatory directives aimed at preventing banks from removing loans off their balance sheets to dodge credit restrictions, China's banks did not slow down their pace in packaging loans as wealth management products.

Banks and trusts cooperated on wealth management products, effectively allowing them to shirk their responsibilities toward credit limits imposed nationwide under the central government's macroeconomic controls.
In the first half 2010, according to trust company reports, the value of wealth management products cooperatively offered by banks and trusts rose to 2.6 trillion yuan, topping the previous year's 1.77 trillion yuan.

This amount combined with the 4.58 trillion yuan in on-the-books, new credit issued by banks in the first half brought total lending in China through June 30 to near the 7.5 trillion yuan limit set by the government for all 2010.
[The 4.58 trillion yuan number matches my data.  Look at the 'wealth management products' value of 2.6 trillion.  Greater than 50%  of the 'on the books official' value of 4.58 trillion.  Continuing . . ]
By charging fees as well as commissions of up to 2 percent, banks earn more than trusts when they jointly market bank-trust products. Moreover, by cooperating with trusts, banks keep customers otherwise unavailable due to credit controls, since off-book business doesn't require bank capital and thus avoids CBRC capital constraints.
When companies start hiding assets off balance sheet it rarely ends well.

If you are wondering where all that money is going, this blog entry by staff at the World bank is stunning. Not only for the information presented but the absolute lack of surprise. (ht Mish)
In Chenggong, there are more than a hundred-thousand new apartments with no occupants, lush tree-lined streets with no cars, enormous office buildings with no workers, and billboards advertising cold medicine and real estate services – with no one to see them.
I went to China in 2003 and I can assure you I NEVER saw a single piece of urban pavement that was not completely full of cars, trucks, bikes, scooters, etc at all times.   I have mentioned empty Chinese cities before such as Ordos. How many more empty cities in China are there? Andy Xie has wrote about this before. Here is his latest article regarding the excess housing stock in China:
What distinguishes China’s property bubble from others is its unprecedented quantity dimension. China just doesn’t have any constraint limiting supply. The current debate about the quantity of empty flats is about the extent of quantity excess. The stock of empty flats measures the size of the quantity bubble. Taiwan experienced a price-cum-quantity bubble in late 1980s. At the time the market quantified the number of empty flats by obtaining data from the electricity supplier on flats without usage of electricity. The stock of empty flats measured this way was about 15% of the total households. Some analysts are trying the same tactic to quantify the volume of empty flats in China. The problem with this methodology is the complexity of China’s housing conditions.  . . . While the data are not accurate, we can confidently conclude that China doesn’t have absolute housing shortage and the per capita space is above Europe and Japan’s level. Indeed, if we adopt Japan’s standard, China already has sufficient urban housing space for everyone in the country, i.e., there is housing for every person in the countryside to move into city. . .  Four unique factors may explain China’s unique phenomenon.

1) Sustained negative real interest rate has led to declining demand for money and rising appetite for speculation. Greed and fear of inflation are working together to form unprecedented speculative demand for property.
2) The massive amount of gray income looks for a ‘safe’ haven. China’s gray income of various sorts could be around 10% of GDP. In an environment of rising inflation and depreciating dollar-the traditional safe haven, China’s rising property market is becoming the preferred place for this money.
3) China’s masses have no experience with property bubble. The property crash in the 1990s touched a small segment of the society. Foreigners and state-owned enterprises were involved. Geographically, it was restricted to Southern freewheeling zones like Hainan and Guangdong and Shanghai. Most people in China don’t know that the country had a property crash. Lack of fear is turbo-charging the greed.
4) Speculators believe that the government won’t let property price fall. They correctly surmise that local governments all depend on property for money and will try every effort to prop up its price. But, their faith in the government omnipotence is misplaced. In the end, market is bigger than government. Government behavior can delay, not abolish market force. Nevertheless, this faith in government is removing the fear over the downside. Hence, the speculative demand just grows with credit availability unchecked.

When this bubble goes pop you better have some popcorn and a good seat because the explosion will best any action film explosion sequence.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Housing update -- Some good news. Some bad news.

The good news is it appears the number of people with late home loans may have peaked.  From the data released by Fannie Mae and presented at blog Paper Money it looks like the percentage of seriously delinquent home loans may have peaked and is on the way back down.

Unfortunately one reason the late pay rate is falling is Fannie Mae foreclosing on homes. From Calculatedrisk one can see the total real estate owned (REO) by the big 3 goverment agencies continues to rise.   These homes owned will need to be eventually sold by the Gov't agencies and until both the late pay rate and excess inventory is worked off home prices will remain sluggish at best.

Another wrinkle is the late pay rate may be declining if Fannie Mae is increasing their foreclosure rate and 'clearing out' some of the late payers by taking their homes.  Only when both the late payer rate and REO's in inventory are on the decline can we start considering the worst of the storm as having passed.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

A word about the change in Fed policy today

Today the Federal Reserve altered their policy regarding principal payments on their Mortgage Backed Security holdings.

From the press release:
To help support the economic recovery in a context of price stability, the Committee will keep constant the Federal Reserve's holdings of securities at their current level by reinvesting principal payments from agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in longer-term Treasury securities. The Committee will continue to roll over the Federal Reserve's holdings of Treasury securities as they mature.
The stock market immediately moved upwards from the news, reducing the losses for the day.  The ten year treasury bond shot upwards in value.

A few comments regarding the change in policy:

Before the announcement the Fed intended allowing MBS principal paydowns to slowly reduce the Fed's balance sheet over time which would have reduced the quantity of narrow money in the economy.  With this news the the Fed's balance sheet will remain the same size (for now) but the composition will change from GSE backed assets to Treasury bonds and bills.

If the Fed had allowed the MBS paydowns to shrink their balance sheet the narrow and broader money supplies would have shrunk as well.  As you can see from this chart the M2 gauge of money supply has been very sluggish of late and shrinking the Fed balance sheet at this time would have slowed M2 growth even further.

This measure is not stimulative, no more money is going to be injected into the system.

If the economy was on the mend why did the Fed alter their strategy of slowly removing this stimulus?

Friday, July 30, 2010

Hugh Hendry watch

Here's some linkage and video of hedge fund manager Hugh Hendry.

NY Times article - July 19, 2010

Vdeo interview posted July 23:

Monday, July 26, 2010

Chinese property developers cut prices.

From Chinadaily:
BEIJING - More property developers have began to cut prices and adjust their business portfolios to cope with sluggish transaction numbers due to government tightening of the real estate sector.   According to Li Wenjie, general manager of property agency Centaline China's North China Region, most Beijing developers have lowered prices by 15 percent on new projects.
Shenzhen-based Vanke, the country's largest real estate firm, made public sale prices of a large-scale project in Beijing over the weekend, with units priced 1,600 yuan ($236) lower than the expected price of 15,000 yuan per square meter.

Shanghai-headquartered Shimao Group just launched an upscale residential project called "Royal Garden" in Beijing's Central Business District area at a price of 65,000 yuan per sq m. The average price of similar projects nearby has been close to 70,000 yuan per sq m.
Of course the article quotes real estate firms spinning the lower prices but as I have mentioned previously first volume slows and then the price cuts start.  Is the beginning of the end or just the end of the beginning? 

Consumer credit keeps rolling downhill.

Earlier this month the Fed released the consumer credit data for May.  Total consumer credit keeps rolling downhill with no sign of slowing down.  I've included a longer term year over year chart as well as a more recent graph showing total consumer credit outstanding.

As you can see from this longer term year over year chart a sustained decline in lending has not occurred since this data series began at the end of World War II.  This is just one example of how this recession is different than all other post WWII slowdowns.

Looking at graph #2 for a shorter time period one again sees the steady decline in consumer credit.  Compare this to the early 90's where consumer credit levelled off but did not decline. 

In my opinion until the employment numbers start to seriously improve and home prices start creeping upwards we are going to see continued declines in consumer credit and thus sluggish growth (at best) in the overall economy.

Source: Federal Reserve

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Unemployment claims and Google trends continue to diverge

One of my topics (and headscratchers) recently has been the disparity between the Google Trends unemployment data and initial unemployment claims data from the government.  While both of them are trending upwards the difference between the two data series grows. 

Here's a few possible reasons why:

  • The Google Trends data changes. A lot.  As I update my data series I have noticed the entire set has changed (all the way back to 2005!) up to 10%  Comparing the older and newer data series gives you the same shape of the graph for year over year purposes but seeing data change that much is perplexing.  I've emailed Google about this but we'll see if I get any response. 
  • The strong seasonality of layoffs (Go look at the government non seasonally adjusted data. It is very 'spikey') could be making the two series non comparable at this time of year. Even though both series are compared on a year over year basis something may still be incorrect.
  • There could just be anxiety about losing ones job right now and those searches are showing up in the Google data.
  • Census workers are getting laid off right now and looking for new jobs but they may not be showing up in the unemployment claims data.
  • The Google data is relative to all other searches which should remove the bias of greater internet usage over time but it may not properly isolate this specific function used more as compared to others. 
Looking at the data you can see both series tend to follow the same direction but the Initial Claims data leads the Google Trends data (the graph is of a 30 day simple moving average of the daily data)  This time the Google data is leading the Initial Claims data (or is just plain wrong)  I could perhaps be asking too much of the Google data as well. Considering the slope of both is upwards I should perhaps call it good . . .

I don't have any bets placed due to this data but I'm still hopeful something can come of this series.  In a few hours we'll see if I'm still banging my head against a wall or onto something.

Source: Federal Reserve, Google