Smiling While Gold Sinks

If you’re a long-term trend follower, this is exactly the kind of move you like to see. A trend gets started in one month and – despite a few hiccups along the way – keeps moving lower and lower over the next 5 months, giving you time to get short…

Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

And then one day:

Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

A drop of more than $80 in a single day is huge… Every 1$ move in the price of an ounce of gold is a $100 change in the value of a gold contract. Anyone who stayed in a long gold position through it all is down $8490 per contract as of this writing (Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results). And to think, it was just two days ago that Goldman Sachs recommended going short gold. In the annals of timely calls, that was a pretty impressive one. The online commentariat has been discussing this move at length, from the gloating naysayers to the chorus of gold bugs gnashing their teeth in frustration.

We don’t tend to get too deeply involved in that argument here. Managed futures isn’t a place where someone can get very far trying to argue over what gold should or shouldn’t do. Ritholtz posted a pair of great quips regarding gold today:

“Gold is a commodity, not a currency.”

And

“Gold is a trade, not a religion.”

We couldn’t agree more. And some of the CTAs we track are following that advice – Covenant Capital Aggressive has been short for months, and Quest Partners Original was short ahead of today’s move as well. We’ll see how much further gold has to fall, but those CTAs – and anyone who took Goldman’s advice earlier this week – are certainly smiling today.

Bye Bye Gold?

Gold has fallen more than 10% since last October, and the SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) ETF has been tumbling right alongside (Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results). But last week, a significant milestone in the decline was reached: GLD dipped below its 100-week moving average (MA):

Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

Despite talk of India and Russia beefing up their physical gold reserves; despite inflation fears in the US driven by Fed monetary easing; despite all the reasons gold bugs told us gold just had to go higher… gold has gone lower. Maybe people are more into diamonds now, but whatever the reason – a few items jumped out at us in looking at the chart of GLD above:

  • We’re still not below the 2012 lows, so at least one support level is still in place.
  • The last time GLD traded below its 100-week MA? Late 2008. The last time before that? Never. (GLD was only launched in 2004)
  • Since it last crossed below its 100-week MA, GLD is up more than 100%.
  • At 547 days since its last high (8/22/2011), this is the longest GLD has ever had between new highs.
  • The 100-week MA for GLD has never decreased. Granted, GLD started in late 2004, just in time to follow a historic rise in gold prices, but still… the 100-week MA has always been increasing. Surely, at some point, we will see a declining 100-week moving average?

Last time, GLD’s foray below the 100-week MA was relatively brief, and was followed by a succession of new highs over nearly the next 3 years. But this time? As we often say, trees don’t grow to the sky. Gold bugs often come equipped with a filter that makes everything look bullish for their favorite metal – calling this just a consolidation before the next breakout higher. But the dominant narrative now appears to be that a strengthening economy will mean no new easing from the Fed. Without cheap money stoking fears of inflation, there could be even more downward pressure on the yellow metal.

Some of the CTAs we track are currently cheering the decline with short positions in gold, including Covenant Capital Management Aggressive and Quest Partners, LLC AlphaQuest Original. And what if the gold bugs are vindicated in the end with a reversal of this trend leading to rising gold prices? Well, then these managers will likely exit their positions, and perhaps even go long. But for now, they are hoping to see even lower lows, and some more distance between prices and the 100-week moving average above. 

Ignoring the Biggest CTA Trade in Years

Several news organizations couldn’t help but fall all over themselves this week talking about how George Soros made a billion in the Yen and other U.S. Funds Scored Big in the Yen. We hope this isn’t the contrarian indicator that kills the trade, as the Yen is on a historic slide – new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has been following through on his initial efforts to devalue Japan’s currency. Not even the hullaballoo over the G7’s criticism earlier this week was able to elicit more than a temporary hiccup in the trend:

Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

With a big move like this, there are always going to be plenty of people making money (and many who are losing money). But when the press started pointing out the big winners this week, we couldn’t help but notice a glaring omission: no mention of CTAs. We know that quite a few CTAs have made (or are currently making) money on short Yen trades, including Covenant Capital Management Aggressive, Briarwood Capital Management Diversified, Mark J. Walsh & Co. Standard, and Integrated Managed Futures Corp. Global Concentrated. (Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results).

One of the best trades for managed futures in years, and not even a mention in mainstream coverage about it? Well, Bridgewater gets a mention toward the end of the WSJ article, but no one seems able to decide whether they’re a hedge fund or a CTA (for our money, they’re the former, though BarclayHedge counts them as a CTA). Just another day in our industry, and a reminder of why the lack of hedge fund/CTA distinction in the media rubs us the wrong way.

The Heat is On

No, not the Glen Fry hit from the 80’s Eddy Murphy classic Beverly Hills Cop – we’re talking about heating oil. Though far less discussed than its close crude oil-based cousin (gasoline), heating oil has been on just as much of a tear over the last couple of months. It’s up nearly 12% since the December 10th low:

Chart courtesy Finviz.com. Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

Over the same period, crude oil is up 11% and gasoline is up 16%… but with the Northeast expecting a historic Nor’easter today – Heating Oil is seeing a bit more of a jump than Crude Oil (even though it is made from Crude Oil). Why?

Well, there’s the usual concern about the storm disabling some refining capacity. Beyond that, heating oil is a strange commodity, and  most of its domestic use takes place in the Northeast. In fact, “about 6 percent of US homes rely on heating oil as their primary source of warmth, with about 80 percent of them in the Northeast.” And the trading for heating oil is on the smaller side in terms of volume (average of 48,000 per day in January versus crude oil at 208,000, or natural gas at 125,000) No other commodity we can think of is so localized in its demand base, and thus so likely to impacted by a single regional event. But even with its special status and , it is in more multi-market portfolios that we come across than you might expect.

Two such programs we track already have a stake in this scenario. Covenant Capital Aggressive is currently long heating oil, and would definitely be pleased with a further spike in prices. Auctos Capital, on the other hand, is short the HO calendar spread (short March, long April), meaning they’d rather see a mild response to short-term weather concerns. As New Englanders prepare for another battering from Mother Nature, we’ll be watching to see if the snows out East cause the markets to turn up the heat.

The Touch… The Feel… of Limit Moves in Cotton

It’s been a bumpy month or two in the markets, with reversals reminiscent of last year’s wild ride, punctuating continued fears about global growth. However, one commodity in particular has been whipsawed by the worry: cotton.

Cotton is no stranger to volatility. After surging over 92% in 2010 and plummeting over 30% in 2011, it seemed as though it was on a slow and gradual downward slope for 2012. That is, until nose-diving in May to accumulate the largest drop in prices in over two decades. Despite an uptick this month, it’s still down close to 20% on the year.

Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. Chart courtesy Finviz.com.

However, that being said, just look at the circled portion of this chart. Volatility in cotton has undeniably ratcheted up recently, with several limit up/limit down days piling up over the past few weeks – and an incredible four limit moves over the past five days.  For those foreign to the commodity futures markets, a limit up or limit down move may seem unnerving, but for those familiar with futures trading, it’s just a part of the process. For those in the managed futures space, it’s usually even less of a concern. As we’ve written about before, these limit moves are a part of the process, and are addressed through various risk management controls. Obviously, there’s always going to be risk involved in managed futures, and a limit move could be in an unfavorable direction, but a limit up or down day probably isn’t going to result in a program blowing up.

Still, how have the moves in cotton been impacting managers? The about-face in the market at the beginning of June likely pushed several trend followers out of their positions, but some programs, like Covenant Capital and APA Strategic Diversified, remain in their short positions with open trade profits (past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results).

There are conflicted beliefs on what comes next in cotton, with some arguing that prices have dipped too low and others believing that it’s simply a casualty of the global downturn. But with news like this hitting the wires these days, who knows? Maybe the Twitter folks have it right (no, don’t be silly, this isn’t a trade recommendation – it’s the opinion of one person).

Managed Futures Drawdowns- Been There, Done That

For as long as we have been talking about futures trading and managed futures in particular, we have been talking about drawdown periods as a necessary evil for this type of investment. They appear when you are least expecting them, last longer than you would like them to, and generally are about as fun as a root canal (day after day for weeks and months). But all programs not named Madoff go through such losing periods – and it is the ability of investors to have confidence in the program they have invested in through such periods which usually marks the difference between success and losses in the managed futures space.

Along those lines, one of the managers on Attain’s recommended list, Covenant Capital Management, is sitting at a drawdown of about -15% in their Original Program after hitting a bit of a rough patch. They recently sent out a letter to investors, essentially saying that they haven’t changed anything, drawdowns happen, and they have been here before. It’s just the sort of letter which gives investors in the program the confidence they need to stick through the drawdown. This is rather standard fare for such managers (nobody is going to say “run for the hills”), and Covenant adds that they are not announcing the drawdown is over – it may continue. But Covenant did something we haven’t really seen before in their letter: highlighting just what they mean by “we’ve been here before,” with excerpts from some of their past client letters (all the way back 10 years).

When you overlay the dates of their past client letters onto their performance history and read the ancient (in financial terms) text, you can’t help but feel that they actually have been here before, and they were saying then just what they are saying now. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, but to us, the sentiment gained from seeing just how they have been there before is a whole lot better than a general line about how drawdowns always happen, and they expect to come out of it.

Covenant VAMI

Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

A. January 2002 letter, Original Program down -27% : “…we are left only with evidence that we have traded through a bad period for our method of trend following. We remain convinced that our system works, that it will prevail, and that our investors will prosper.”

B. September 2005 letter, after 4 years of 20%+ returns in Original Program:  “While superior returns over the short term are welcome, we must remind ourselves that eventually our long-term returns will level out within a range closer to our long-term expectancy. It is important that we continue to expect drawdowns of at least 10-15% during any given year. Additionally, we expect a drawdown of 20-25% every 5-7 years. As our track record clearly shows, we’ve had such a drawdown before, and it will happen again at some point in the future. At the end of January 2002, we were in a -27% drawdown and had lost money in 6 of the preceding 7 months. Since then, we have made 274% in less than 4 years. This is why we insist that CCM should be a >7 year investment, during which there will be many good and bad periods.”

C. March 2007 letter, during a -13.3% Original Program drawdown: “Since its inception the CCM program has endured longer and more severe drawdowns than the current one. To date, the program has always returned to profitability and progressed on to new highs. Although we cannot predict how and when the current drawdown will end, we can assure investors that the model will continue to be traded in the same disciplined manner that has always returned to profitability in the past.”

D. September 2010 letter, after going +19%,+15%, and +23% in the Original Program for the three years of the financial crisis: We expect for markets to periodically rally as they have lately, that expectation is the foundation upon which the entire trading model is built. What we know for certain is that, statistically speaking, large price moves happen more often and to larger degrees than they should. However, we cannot and do not predict when these price moves will occur. Markets often remain flat or choppy for extended periods of time. During these periods, our trading program will lose money as we await the prolonged trending markets from which we profit.”

E. May 2012 letter, during a -15% Original Program drawdown: The current drawdown as of May 14 for the Original Program is approximately 14.9% which is still within our expected annual range for drawdowns… We cannot predict the future path of the current drawdown or its eventual recovery. We do know that our trading model has recovered from historical drawdowns and gone on to make new highs.”

We know it hurts when you are in a drawdown, and there is no guarantee Covenant or any other program will go on to make new highs. But in our opinion the above glimpse into the history of the manager’s comments (not just the track record itself) shows that Covenant has been through this time and again. When you look at things through the lens of 13 years of history, the current move seems like just another drawdown to be climbed out of in due time.

Contact us for a copy of the full letter.

Aim for the Bottom, Race to the Top?

Ouch- rough day to be in a long-only commodities fund yesterday, wasn’t it? While commodities across the board were mostly down (including Silver’s ugly 6.64% plunge), the Grains sector took the most consistent beating. It was one week ago today that we crowned Cocoa the winner in the race to new 2011 lows after the nosedive taken by most in early October, and, apparently, Grains got jealous, because Soybean Meal, Rough Rice, Wheat, and Oats all dipped below their respective lows for the close yesterday, along with a tagalong from Softs- Sugar. Congrats, guys. Welcome to the losers circle.

Source: Finviz; Disclaimer: Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

Not in the losers circle were several of the managers we track, with Covenant Capital, Global Ag, Integrated Managed Futures Concentrated, and James River Navigator short Wheat, and Clarke Capital Worldwide short Soybean Meal. We said at the beginning of the year that we thought managed futures gains in 2011 would come from shorting commodities, and while a handful of managers does not a trend make, and while acknowledging that there are still plenty of managers out there who haven’t been able to shake October’s sting… here’s cautious optimism that we were right.

Powered By Mow - Wordpress Popup Plugin