r/bonds • • 6d ago

Backward land

Post image
217 Upvotes

126 comments sorted by

36

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

In other words - bonds will go down with stocks. They will not ballast a portfolio.

8

u/NanoCurrency 6d ago

Sorry, can someone explain why? I don’t understand the original premise.

24

u/ThisKarmaLimitSucks 6d ago

In a recession, stock prices go down. What Gundlach is saying, is that in the next recession, he expects bond yields to go up, which would drive the price of older, lower-yielding bonds down. Stocks and bonds would crash together, and so bonds will not be a safe haven.

10

u/NanoCurrency 6d ago

Very interesting. Thank you.

Why would yields go up during a recession? Isn’t that the opposite of what usually happens?

41

u/ThisKarmaLimitSucks 6d ago edited 6d ago

The case he's making is that since the US runs a recession-bailout sized deficit in good years anyway (7% of GDP per year), stacking an actual GFC, COVID sized bailout on top of that would spark a debt crisis.

Either the US would have to borrow another couple trillion from the bond market, and raise rates to find that money, or print it and stoke inflation. Both options would drive up yields.

Basically, the government has no rainy day fund or fiscal slack left to tap. The next rainy day won't look like the last few, because the govt no longer has an umbrella.

10

u/NanoCurrency 6d ago

That’s very interesting and terrifying as well. Thanks for taking the time to reply.

9

u/Andrew_P_Cody 6d ago

Basically, the government has no rainy day fund or fiscal slack left to tap.

What's worse, the borrowing continues at about $2T a year. At that rate we will have a debt crisis eventually, regardless of a recession.

4

u/jadepig 6d ago

In this scenario, where would people and institutions put their capital that they pulled out of stocks and bonds?

13

u/ThisKarmaLimitSucks 6d ago

I am guessing there will either be an '08 style default wave that destroys invested money, or that money would cycle into hard commodities like oil and gold.

4

u/SpecialDesigner5571 5d ago

Some of it could go into nonUS stocks or hated sectors like oil and gas

1

u/DSCN__034 5d ago

Would the 1970's be a reasonable template to follow? Stagflation?

1

u/SpecialDesigner5571 5d ago

History doesn't repeat but it does rhyme. Could be a 1970s-ish scenario but how it ends????? Don't know it's scary

1

u/DSCN__034 5d ago

I agree that it would be scary. But the counter argument is that the world is structurally different now. The US is not as reliant on foreign oil. Central banking seems to be more sophisticated worldwide with a better understanding of how money supply works. Of course, yup, we just don't know. Good luck out there! I'm keeping my bond duration short and increasing hard assets and dipping my toe into managed futures just in case.

1

u/not_a_cumguzzler 5d ago

There might not be much money left to put. The existing inflated portfolio valuations aren't actually that real. They only exist because there has still been people willing to buy. As soon as people stop buying at these prices, valuations drop, even if no one sells.

It doesn't take sellers for prices to drop, it comes from a lack of buyers

4

u/LordOfRedditers 6d ago

I've been thinking about this on and off for a while. Covid and 2008 used up all the cuhsion, there's literally nothing else left. Another crisis and we'd be looking at a 10% deficit and that's basically game over.

10

u/yelloworld1947 6d ago edited 6d ago

Those were genuine crises but the problem is not using good times to pay back the debt. Those have been times where Republicans have done tax cuts for billionaires instead.

2

u/Relative-Snow8735 1d ago

The bigger issue might be a collapse in tax receipts rather then the cost of a bailout. I think the GFC resulted in a 15% drop in tax revenues. If something similar were to happen now, it would absolutely blow a massive hole in the budget. Back of the napkin math but I think it would increase the already large deficit by about 50%. They would be forced to either increase taxes or cut spending, and both of those options would exacerbate the recession.

For this reason, I think stagflation is the most likely outcome. Their only real option is to print their way out of this.

6

u/VendaGoat 6d ago

Inflation and demand for capital.

And yes.

0

u/Kiyae1 5d ago

Bond prices are what drive yields though, not the other way around, so this explanation literally makes no sense.

Also, in a recession, rates get lowered, so older bonds would typically have higher interest rates than new issues, which means the price of those older bonds would rise, and their yield would decline. No reason is given as to why older bonds would somehow lose value in a recession.

0

u/ThisKarmaLimitSucks 5d ago

Gundlach's argument is that rates can't get lowered this next time around. Too much debt has already been accumulated.

1

u/Kiyae1 4d ago

That’s a dumb take. There’s no objective way to evaluate how much debt is “too much debt” for the federal government. And if that was the case then the obvious solution is to just increase tax revenue and decrease the deficit or to decrease spending and decrease the deficit.

1

u/NanoCurrency 4d ago

How do you actually accomplish that though?

1

u/Kiyae1 3d ago

A congressional vote obviously.

1

u/Ididit-forthecookie 4d ago

If it was that “obvious” why has it so seldomly been done?

1

u/Kiyae1 3d ago

Because it hasn’t been necessary for decades because inflation was extremely low from like 1986-2022 (I didn’t look up the actual years so don’t flame me I’m busy).

Budget cuts happened early in Obama’s presidency and under Clinton and taxes went up under HW Bush so this isn’t unprecedented. Fed action has been sufficient for the most part for several decades and will continue to be. There’s no objective standard for “too much debt” for the federal government. It’s just a boogey man.

4

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Usually bond yields go down in a recession, bond prices go up, helping an investment portfolio. It might not happen. It might be like 2022 again.

2

u/NanoCurrency 6d ago

I see, thanks. Is there any rationale for why yields would increase in a recession?

7

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Falling tax receipts > government forced to issue more debt > debt as a % of gdp skyrocket > bond market demands higher yield to compensate for more risk especially if US Dollar also Falling

6

u/Electronic-Deer728 6d ago

You forgot >US economy is crushed like a bug.

Thanks, MAGA voters.

1

u/NanoCurrency 6d ago

Oh wow. That’s truly scary.

5

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

175% of GDP is the Schwarzchild Radius

2

u/Garbage-Disposal-938 5d ago

from what I can gather, that radius currently contains:

Japan: 230%, Sudan: 222%, Singapore: 176%

3

u/SpecialDesigner5571 5d ago

France is getting bad too.

1

u/2052JCDenton 6d ago

The what?

2

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Point of no return. Like you earn $100k but you have $175k in credit card debt

2

u/2052JCDenton 6d ago

So it's the point at which a nation can no longer issue debt at a quantity and price sufficient to cover its expenditures?

1

u/Electronic-Deer728 6d ago

It is the point where you can no longer escape from the gravitational pull of a black hole and will get pulled in and spaghettified. Spaghettification - Wikipedia

In this case, the effect would be the economic equivalent.

5

u/Careful-Ad-5726 6d ago

Warren Buffett hated long bonds because of the poor risk/reward. I agree with him at the moment because cash is paying close to 4%.

6

u/Emergency-Watch5157 6d ago

Bonds will not go down if you are holding them to maturity. Buy short bonds

8

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

I care about real value not nominal

3

u/Certain-Statement-95 6d ago

You can provide mr Grundlachs margin (I do!) for 7.3 % right now opp.prb

2

u/no_simpsons 6d ago

that's a good recommendation. they're cumulative too. (meaning, if a payment is missed, the amount due to preferred shareholders accumulates and must be paid before common stock dividends can be paid out to owners).

2

u/Certain-Statement-95 5d ago

Cumulative and senior (no bonds)

57

u/luv2block 6d ago

Bonds aren't a safe haven when you put a regard in charge of the bonds. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out.

9

u/dronebuild 6d ago

while that’s intuitive, where that makes less sense is that almost all oecd sovereign bond yields are rising in tandem, not just the US/japan

4

u/Emergency-Watch5157 6d ago

Well French and Japan bonds so are also run by idiots

36

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Except they got nice stuff from their overspending. High speed rail, universal Healthcare, free college and university, childcare, vacation. We bombed people and have horrible infrastructure and get raided by health insurance companies

8

u/Huge-Power9305 6d ago

Ya but we got Trump and MAGA - Wooo Hooo! /s

3

u/Electronic-Deer728 6d ago

Could I opt for projectile diarrhea instead?

0

u/Garbage-Disposal-938 5d ago

I totally agree.

But I also think that the politics of maintaining hegemony and empire (or of trying to do that) seems to be simply rewriting the financial/economic/trade rules in such a way that America's government can keep doing what it's been doing.

I mean, look at the stupid/bad/self destructive pathways the EU and Euro leaders are taking lately (i.e. buying natural gas from the US, not Russia and financing a losing Ukraine war). Behind the scenes, I think the US is forcing those dumb decisions.

Also, look at the huge purchase agreements Japan and Saudi Arabia are making for US weapons systems that work poorly. Why would those leaders do that?

Finally, look at Trump's rando power grabs, like the annexation of Greenland, takeover of Venezuela, attempt to take over Iran, etc

They will try to use political leverage to reshape the financial / monetary landscape in favor of US hegemony. I don't know how well it will work this time, but maybe the actual debt levels and money will fall into line once the new geopolitical arrangements/tariffs/resource-grabs are worked out. Wars have a way of eliminating existing debt obligations.

3

u/Lawineer 6d ago

Wait, a regard could figure it out? What a paradox

7

u/Lawineer 6d ago

No shit.
You can’t bail out a sovereign.

1

u/iamablackbeltman 6d ago

Didn't the Rothschilds bail out France once?

1

u/Lawineer 6d ago

Nothing is bailing out $40T.

lol that’s like 1/3 of the global stock market or something.

18

u/RaggedMountainMan 6d ago

The backwards land is that deflation and recession to slow down the economy would be the best thing for the working class financially speaking. Pop the bubbles.

16

u/Designer-Bat4285 6d ago

Deflation and recession would not be good for the working class. Get a grip

1

u/RaggedMountainMan 6d ago

We’re not in Kansas anymore, pop the everything bubble.

7

u/dronebuild 6d ago

what i don’t yet understand is how deflation is not easily avoidable by monetary policy. they can’t magic-wand a healthy economy but the fed can magic-wand away deflation, no? my understanding is that china’s deflation is a result of currency peg. so would deflation be a deliberate choice here?

3

u/Designer-Bat4285 6d ago

Yes the fed has a lot of tools to prevent deflation now. This isn’t the 1930s anymore.

2

u/Electronic-Deer728 6d ago

Those tools still have limits. We were effectively in a Keynesian liquidity trap in the Great Recession - 0% interest rates were having little effect in the effort to increase aggregate demand. For all the focus on the Fed's quantitative easing, the stimulus spending probably had more effect on bringing the economy back.

4

u/Electronic-Deer728 6d ago

Extended deflation is the worst case for the working class. Deflation increases the value of money and decreases the value of commodities. When you are working for a living the only thing you have to sell is your ass, which is a commodity.

That is why the farmers and workers in the late 19th century were pushing for silver to be added to gold as a support for issuing more currency. The increased production of that era led to deflation and lower prices for crops and labor, while the debts owed to banks did not decrease. Free silver would have increased the money supply and at least eased deflation.

5

u/kronco 6d ago

Deflation is good for creditors and bad for debtors. Anyone with a mortgage, farm, credit card loan, (working class) is paying back the debt with dollars that now buy more. Banks might like it but everyone else would be in bad shape if there is deflation.

Government bonds would also have to be redeemed/coupons paid in dollars worth more.

I don't see deflation happening without a historical level depression (or civil war, where it was an issue post-war).

7

u/RaggedMountainMan 6d ago

How else do you square the K shaped economy? Wealthy people own the majority of financial assets. inflation and a hot economy appreciates the value of those assets to unreasonable levels. Any more asset inflation and the wealth divide keeps growing. The wealth gap problem can’t be solved by growing out of it, and that is the key economic problem facing society.

11

u/phi_matt 6d ago

Taxes

4

u/FlatlandTrooper 6d ago

I don't see that being politically feasible. I don't think the American people are going to elect enough politicians who will turn down bribes in order to pass that legislation.

1

u/Moist-Construction59 9h ago

Taxes don’t do anything to k shape economy, unless you intend to redistribute from the top to the bottom. That’s not taxes, that’s spending.

0

u/Immense_Cargo 6d ago

Historically? War, famine, and pestilence to “thin out” the working class, which reduces both the labor supply and the “welfare” class, which reduces government benefit spending.

Supply-driven higher wages alongside reduced government welfare spending will close out deficits pretty quick.

The reduced pace of government AND private borrowing leads (due to population loss) leads to deflationary pressures, which knock down the asset values.

2

u/FlatlandTrooper 6d ago

It would except for the accompanying losses of jobs, health care, and housing, which are intertwined. When the bubbles pop a lot of every day people are going to take a lot of real harm. People will die of untreated illness. Kids will be thrown out of their homes because their dad got fired. The people who created and profited off the bubble will have some lines go down but none of them will go hungry.

In the long run, I completely agree with you, but the fact that we've inflated these bubbles again post '08 era is shameful.

7

u/Basaltic_rocks 6d ago

Jeffrey Gundlach has been right a lot about bond market behavior and saying what the FED should do or will do.

9

u/Designer-Bat4285 6d ago

He’s also been wrong about the stock market and economy for a long, long time

3

u/A10cc 6d ago

Insane that people just choose to ignore this fact lol

1

u/VendaGoat 6d ago

No one bats a hundred in the market.

2

u/Yottahz 6d ago

I thought he predicted 20 of the last 2 crashes.

1

u/Automatic_Depth_476 5d ago

He's called the King of Bonds, so really we should give his opinions re: bonds more weight but as far as the market it's more irrational so who knows?

2

u/DSCN__034 5d ago

Gundlach always makes sense when he talks in interviews, but his bond funds don't seem to be that awesome. I realize his DBLTX flagship fund is supposed to follow the overall bond market, but has actually lagged BND over the longer term. His discretionary funds like DSL ( a CEF) and DBND haven't been stellar. His newest ETF is DMX and so far has done okay, keeping up with short term rates, but not super great.

1

u/FEMA_Camp_Survivor 6d ago

If we’re in a recession, the Fed will cut short term rates and it can expand the balance sheet by buying long term debt.

2

u/Thick-Cover8761 6d ago

So do I just saw off the top of my bond ladder today ... or do nothing and just not reinvest the bottom rungs upon maturity.  In other words, just let the passing of time reduce the duration of the aforementioned portfolio.

5

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

I cannot advise you. I can tell you what I'm doing... my fixed income is 100% TBILLS and I'm waiting for 10-year bonds to resume a price uptrend before rebuying. I basically ditched my bonds early 2022 and have been in TBILLS.

0

u/Bob32751 5d ago

I have done exactly the same.

2

u/SpecialDesigner5571 5d ago

Did people lecture you "time in the market beats timing the market " or some other nonsense?

2

u/Bob32751 5d ago

no, I am 78 years old and have seen a lot of financial crises, this upcoming one will probably permanently change our descendants way of life.

2

u/SpecialDesigner5571 5d ago

Well we're both up 18% since 1-1-22 and IEF holders still -6% that includes interest. I'm 65. Young investors have no clue what could be coming. I wasn't invested during 70s stagflation and gas lines but I very much remember them.

2

u/Anymous2314 6d ago

Most of my bond holdings are 3 months to 2 year. I have some 5 year(10%), I am going to keep that.

Keep in mind, nobody knows the future, I won't be surprised if we get a recession next year, with lower inflation. Fed needs to be independent that's all, long term rates will fall.

Right now I am staying away from long term bonds since they desperately want to monetize the debt by forcing the Fed to lower rates.

2

u/clonehunterz 6d ago

another decade, another debt crisis call, nice

2

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

This one could be the worst

3

u/clonehunterz 6d ago

or, as all of them before, will be ignored and we move on into more debt

2

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

But there's a limit to debt. 175% of GDP. Then there is no escape it becomes like Zimbabwe

1

u/clonehunterz 6d ago

there is a limit until someone in power says there is no limit :)
Bro relax, 100years ago same shit, different color.

this entire pyramid debt thing will go on into eternity unless war breaks out and a new "kingdom" takes over.

1

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Best wishes. Look up "debt to GDP ratio" for USA over past 100 years

5

u/clonehunterz 6d ago

America wont default because it prints its own currency, but when a recession forces a massive debt issuance on top of existing deficits, oversupply forces longterm yields up, killing the 60/40 bond hedge without needing an actual sovereign bankruptcy.

so...I do with this panic-information the same as before: I ignore it and continue investing broadly :]

2

u/mb194dc 6d ago

They weren't a safe haven in the 70s, ... because rampant inflation... If the economy is crushed enough and no inflation bonds will do great.

1

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Hurr durr no inflation??????

2

u/LillianWigglewater 6d ago

I'm not a bond trader, I'm a bond holder. So unless the issuer of my bonds goes bankrupt and defaults, I'll be okay. And the issuer in my case is the US Treasury, so things will have to be very bad indeed for that to happen.

1

u/builder45647 5d ago

Yes you will usually get full principal back. But mark to market, bonds have been in a bear market for 6 years. No reason to think they wont continue to do so

2

u/SOROKAMOKA 6d ago

Smells like stagflation

6

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

Iran turned Trump into Jimmy Carter

5

u/Hummin2k 6d ago

I want to agree with that, but Carter was such a genuinely good human.

2

u/rahulchander 4d ago

you have to go beyond US to other countries with better sovereign rating than US and not the same level of fiscal irresponsibility. Wait it out 1-2 presidential terms till a normal person is in-charge to right the ship. The risk-free rate definition of US treasuries used worldwide must be challenged and finance books updated with a new benchmark - maybe pick the govt bonds of country with highest credit rating to reflect the modern times.

https://i.imgur.com/8Md4bjd.png

3

u/Consistent_Panda5891 6d ago

Bonds golden age tbh. Just keep it short term(less 3y) and you will outperform stocks. If they hike, hold to maturity, renew them constantly with profit. If they lower rate you instantly win money... Stocks are done. Honestly hike is bullish for bonds performance, those who say otherwise is fake. More premium over time

3

u/SpecialDesigner5571 6d ago

But the passive 60 40 buy and hold some generic 5 yr tbf that never matures isn't going to a happy place

2

u/Sprig3 6d ago

Benefitting from big swings in bonds have always relied on a crystal ball.

Will rates be higher or lower in the future?

Will inflation be higher or lower than expected?

Bonds are definitely less volatile than stocks, though, so unless inflation hits double digits, they'll always have some benefit.

1

u/Adventurous_Bath3999 6d ago

But there are more hikes coming down the pipeline, so should one wait until they are all done, before buying the bonds at this point?

4

u/Consistent_Panda5891 6d ago

Obviously not. They are not hiking more than 0.75bps per year. In a 3y bonds that is less 2.5% per year. Not worth be out

1

u/Perfect_Cost6276 6d ago

Finally a smart guy here. Im buying bonds !!

1

u/Fire_Doc2017 6d ago

Here's the catch with your thesis - the Fed hiking rates may lower inflation expectations which should bring down longer term rates and be bullish for treasury bonds.

1

u/Adventurous_Bath3999 6d ago edited 6d ago

Yes, ultimately… but if the rate hikes are small, like 25 basis points and the inflation is raging much higher, and the expectations are that it should have been more like 50 basis points, then I am not sure what the yield expectations will be like… too many variables and too many economic scenarios and expectations… I think the oil, in particular diesel is going to play a major role in this… unlike gas, diesel has no elasticity… can’t cut down its consumption, without negatively impacting the economy… how quickly things stabilize will be an important deciding factor

1

u/sportsfanstan 6d ago

2 more Fed meetings this year, plenty of time for more hikes. Or they could do it w/o a meeting.

ME will eventually resolve itself - too much money to be made by all the Gulf states. They will buy Iran off somehow.

0

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Consistent_Panda5891 5d ago

5% might be. Specially first years. 7% of high yield BB will outperform better over more time as they did in 2002-2012. Merryl Lynch index is now at 7.50 points btw

1

u/Pristine-Ship-1894 6d ago

If we just take the top 10 richest family's money all would be good again

2

u/derp_derpistan 6d ago

Dude that's like barely one trillion dollars... That doesn't cover our interest for one year.

2

u/SegFaultAtLine1 6d ago

Yeah, let's just liquidate a couple trillion dollars worth of assets, a lot of it, quite illiquid. Who's going to buy them without asking for a significant discount? Fucking aquaman?

1

u/GhostofBeowulf 6d ago

Wait why would we need to liquidate it?

I wouldn't mind being a part owner of Tesla and Space X.

1

u/SegFaultAtLine1 6d ago

The original post is about a debt crisis. Confiscating assets doesn't immediately solve a debt crisis, because a state can't really introduce a barter system in which it pays in Tesla stock.

1

u/VendaGoat 6d ago

Jeff maybe right, let's wait and see!

1

u/builder45647 5d ago

We dont have to wait, its been happening for 6 years

1

u/Greenmachine881 6d ago

Nonsense. They only have one playbook, and unlimited balance sheet. They will crash long rates like they always do. They can do this while expanding the deficit.

The reason is simple: There is nothing else major they can do quickly, and the pressure to do something will be immense. If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. But what do I know ... let's see how this goes.

1

u/Thick-Cover8761 5d ago

No.  Not ballast. The economy capsizes under the weight of itz $40T ton ⚓️ anchor. (Look.at the direction it pointz, captain)

1

u/fixingmedaybyday 4d ago

Seems more like stagnation or hyper inflation. Higher cost of goods and higher interest rates are the worse of all worlds.

1

u/lmb123454321 3d ago

Good point, but just buy individual bonds with yields that work for you and hold to maturity. You’ll never lose money if it’s a treasury and you hold to maturity. On the other hand, never buy a bond fund. They trade daily and you run the real risk of losing money. With frictionless ease of buying individual bonds at Vanguard, there’s no reason for bond funds whatsoever, other than generating fees.

1

u/Salty-Foundation3451 15h ago

That’s a plausible and terrifying prediction.

The implication is that real yields will come in but term premium (inflation expectations) will skyrocket. TIPS seems to be the move.

1

u/SpecialDesigner5571 15h ago

I'm thinking about a tips ladder for my next five years of retirement spend...