Pay attention to index volatility

Now that Canadians are recovering from their Thanksgiving turkey dinners, it is time to pay attention to the marketplace once again.

One chart I will bring to your attention is the volatility index, VIX. It measures the implied volatility of the S&P 500 index. It is also equated with being the “fear index”. Implied volatility of the marketplace is highest during market crashes.

Historically, when the VIX goes under 18, it does not bode well for the marketplace – it’s a good rule of thumb (the lower the better) to watch out for complacency. Obviously since VIX is not a predictive index, you should not base your outlook on it, but it does convey the information that market participants are not betting on a crash (or a spike up) in the near term.

Traders that expect some form of volatility can bet on both sides of the marketplace – by purchasing a call and a put at a strike price, they will win if the market goes up or down a certain quantity. For example, right now with the S&P 500 at 1164, you can purchase a December expiry (December 17, 2010) call and a put, with a breakeven point of 7% movement (roughly 40 points in either direction). Conversely, you can profit if you sell the same options and the market does not move further than 7%.

Playing options are very difficult since you are fighting very good mathematical models, so I do not recommend them for casual investors. Most option-based literature I’ve found makes it sound like an easy game, but it is truly not. The only thing worse than playing a very difficult game is being mislead into thinking that the game you are playing is easy. This goes for the stock market in general, but especially option trading.

Shaw Cable bill escalating

Shaw Cable services most of Western Canada and they have been steadily escalating their prices each year. I only use them for cable internet services and subscribe to the high speed service.

The bill has had the following escalation curve, with sales taxes included (12%):

January 2008: $45.87
May 2009: $46.99 (+2.4% from previous)
September 2009: $49.23 (+4.8% from 4 months ago)
September 2010: $52.64 (+6.9% from 12 months ago)

Total since January 2008: +14.8%

While I have had few issues with my service, I do not believe that these price increases are “inflationary” in nature, and rather reflect economic elasticity – customers are likely not to go through the hassle of canceling and getting the alternative service (TELUS’ ADSL) to save a few dollars.

The standard corporate line is likely “We have to do this to make improvements to our network”, but the service itself has not changed since getting it – anecdotally, it feels slower, but this could just be because there is more garbage that gets sent through the internet these days.

The price increases are getting to the point where I am examining options. TELUS’ high speed internet service (without bundling) is $37/mo pre-tax, compared to Shaw’s new price of $47/mo pre-tax. Is one service better than the other? Is switching a seamless process (i.e. will I have loss of service)? It is these types of questions/risks that make me wonder whether it is worth $134/year to make a switch decision.

It is clear that the companies are only competing against each other for marginal customers, and will not engage in price competition for their existing customers.

In terms of publicly traded stocks, while it is clear that Shaw (TSX: SJR) and TELUS (TSX: T) will not double their equity valuations overnight, they do represent a store of value assuming that no other companies will be able to disrupt the wireline broadband marketplace. The same holds true for equivalent companies on the eastern side of the country (to name some: Bell, Videotron, Rogers). TELUS also has diversification in their wireless marketplace, but this is being chipped away by the deep-pocketed Orascom subsidiary, Wind Mobile.

You get what you pay for… sometimes

An article (link) on the proliferation of finance-related sites on the internet offering all sorts of advice.

My only comment on this is that you get what you pay for. And even if you pay for it, sometimes you still don’t get what you pay for.

Your only real defense is to be able to ask critical questions and be able to correctly evaluate the people you deal with.

As for the internet, I have a high aversion to people that do not use their real names. A few anonymous sites out there are fairly well written, but when you attach your name to your writing, you are telling the world out there that you are willing to risk your reputation with your written word.

Talking finances and social relationships

The best finance writer on the internet today, in my opinion, is David Merkel. Everything he writes is absolute wisdom that he has accumulated over his experiences and career as an insurance firm asset manager.

His last post on the typical “What should I do?” question that a lot of people (who don’t devote nearly as much time to the marketplace) give is something that I’ve had to deal with quite often.

The true issue is that whenever you start to mix together money and social relationships together, you end up with the potential for lots of trouble. This is why I never wade into the issue of finances in conversations unless if the other side explicitly brings it up and is clearly seeking my opinion on a matter. A few of my friends and colleagues know I write prolifically over the internet, but most do not.

My usual line of conversation, after being asked “the question” (What do I do with my lump sum of accumulated savings that I haven’t earmarked for my mortgage that is collecting dust in the bank account) is me asking a question back, “When do you need the money, and can you suffer, say a 20% loss and still be ‘okay’ about it?”

The typical answer I receive is, “I don’t know. Maybe two years? But I would still like to see the money there, while it would not kill me to lose 20% of it, I still would not like that to happen!”

Whenever I hear this, if this was my money with a similar risk profile, I’d probably spread it around some relatively safe convertible debentures that are due to mature in a couple years. Doing a cursory scan of the Canadian market you have about a 5% yield to maturity on decent 2-year term corporate issues out there, and going up to about 7% depending on what your definition of “relatively safe” is.

On Merkel’s post, he states:

I say to my friends asking advice, “Remember, I am your friend. I will take no money, but I won’t hold your hand and guide you either. I will give you very basic advice, and it is up to you to learn and implement it.” I don’t want to be a financial planner, but I don’t want to leave friends in a lurch.

Recommending debentures to others requires them to do quite a bit of homework (at a very minimum, fishing for prospectuses on SEDAR). It also requires them to deal with financial instruments that are quite unlike what they have previously been exposed to (at most, buying and selling common shares). There is little chance of this (them researching prospectuses, getting a ballpark valuation and doing the transaction) happening. Not helping either is that with most brokerage firms in Canada, they charge an arm and a leg to trade debentures.

So as a result, instead what I end up saying is, “Get a 2-year GIC. I believe [a CDIC-insured financial entity] has a 2-year GIC going on at a rate of 2.4%, which is a good market rate compared to other institutions. Even if you go to [big known Canadian bank], you can get about 2% which is not bad either.”

The usual response back, “But Sacha, 2.0-2.4% is NOTHING! Can’t I get a higher return on my money?”.

Then I just say, “Yes, you can probably get more, but this means taking more risk, and means taking a lot more time to follow and know the market you are talking about getting into. At least with the GIC, your money will be there for another day, and if you get more comfortable with investing, you can use that money. It is better earning zero return on your money than a negative return. If you really, really want to gamble, take 10% of your money and put it in a brokerage account where you can trade around and likely lose it – you can consider this as a form of tuition.”

By this point their eyes glaze over, they say thank you, and then the conversation goes to something else. After a few months, you usually end up discovering they invested the money in some sort of “balanced” mutual fund that charges a 2.5% management expense ratio and posted good 2-year past performance numbers strictly due to the fact that everything has gone up between then and now, especially in the fixed income world. You know that they will lose money in the future, but there is nothing you could or should do other than just smile and move on to a different topic.

Bank of Canada raises rates 0.25%

As I was speculating, the Bank of Canada has raised interest rates by 0.25%, which is a change from 0.75% to 1.00%.

The key guiding paragraph to determine future rate hikes is in the last paragraph. From the July 20 statement:

Given the considerable uncertainty surrounding the outlook, any further reduction of monetary stimulus would have to be weighed carefully against domestic and global economic developments.

From the September 8 statement:

Any further reduction in monetary policy stimulus would need to be carefully considered in light of the unusual uncertainty surrounding the outlook.

The phraseology of changing “would have to be weighed” with “would need to be carefully considered” suggests that the Bank of Canada is not necessarily totally done raising rates, but it is not out of the question if data warrants so.

The next Bank of Canada scheduled announcement is October 19, 2010 and the last one for the year is December 7, 2010.

3-month Bankers’ Acceptance Futures are at 1.24% for September and 1.3% for December. Both are trading about 0.15% up from yesterday as a reaction of today’s news. The futures imply there is roughly a 20% chance of a rate increase between now and years’ end.