With the $15B Archegos blowup over the weekend creating headlines, it’s a good time to revisit the role that leverage plays in investing. Leverage is a powerful tool that works both ways as it accelerates wins and losses. With the cost of debt at historically low levels, it can be tempting to borrow as much as possible. What types of leverage are typically applied by successful investors and where do things go wrong? Let’s take a closer look.
By now you’ve likely read about the South Korean family office Archegos owned and operated by former Tiger hedge funder Bill Hwang. It’s rumored that the full $15B net asset value of his family office has been wiped to $0. Archegos had entered into contracts with Goldman, Nomura, Credit Suisse, and others based on the prices of publicly traded securities. Those contracts allowed Archegos to lever their exposure 5:1, more or less. That means if the publicly available price of their positions moved up 20%, they doubled their money. If that price fell by 20%, they lose 100%.
It may seem insane that either party ever agreed to such a deal. However, this contract is fairly common. It’s interesting to note that Bill Hwang had already paid $40m+ in investment-related fines and was banned from trading in Hong Kong. However, for each party involved, the temptations of high commissions and the opportunity for extreme gains were far more interesting than risk management. For context, Bear Stearns was levered 35:1 before their blowup. Lehman Brothers was 30:1 and Long Term Capital Management was levered 25:1. Some part of human nature will always seek excess.
It is interesting to note how many investment banks were linked to Archegos. Goldman and Morgan Stanley unwound their positions first, leaving Credit Suisse and Normura as the bag holders with billions in losses. It raises the question of contagion risk. Too many financial professionals are notorious for leaning on weak statistics for risk management. When trades go south, they claim that a “five standard deviation event” happened that should have never happened. Standard deviation metrics should not be relied on for risk management.
Should the same banks that run our global financial system be allowed to enter excessively risky trades with high-risk gamblers like Bill Hwang? The Glass Stegall act attempted to separate these activities from core banking but that was ultimately repealed by President Clinton in 1999. Banks have rallied so far this year and rallies tend to reduce investor perceptions of risk.
We see much greater upside in the leading fintech firms than the major banks. Paypal doesn’t have the same risks as Citibank where an employee accidentally wired $500m to the wrong address, or Wells Fargo which is paying an estimated $3B fine for their fake account scandal. Both of those issues can be solved with better software and better systems architecture.
One of the benefits of the rise of the leading fintechs like Square, Paypal, Fiserv, Visa, Fidelity International, etc is they are focused on bringing real innovation and improvements to the finance sector. Most of the technology spend at large banks is spent on maintaining existing systems rather than improving existing ones.
The bank contagion risk is a real risk. The many employees of the large investment banks are incentivized to continue to sell commission-based structured notes of all shapes and sizes. Some of those contracts and derivatives will result in billions of dollars of losses, just like they did with Credit Suisse and Nomura. One client blowup shouldn’t have such a significant impact, but it did nonetheless.
How to apply leverage yourself
Mortgages are the most common household leverage tools. Wealthy families can borrow at rates lower than 3%, which they should take advantage of. Some people prefer, for psychological reasons, to have no debt whatsoever. Given the general long-term stability of housing prices, real estate investors tend to utilize more leverage than any other asset class. The excesses of the housing bubble in ‘08-’09 allowed real estate investors and owners to buy homes with 100% leverage, no money down and fully levered.
Options contracts provide easy access to cheap leverage, but it’s not always clear how powerful that leverage can be until you experience it yourself. Options investing can provide exceptional returns, as well as losses. LEAPs, long-dated in the money call options, are popular tools to invest with low-rate leverage. If you would like to know how LEAPs can be used effectively, please let us know.
Brokerage firms also allow clients to borrow against their portfolios. We typically advise against this as it creates possible negative exposure to extreme events, like the COVID-19 selloff last year. Today, most portfolio lending goes towards financing medium-sized purchases like cars, houses, boats, etc. Buying items on leverage backed by your portfolio assets may seem strange but it’s common practice today. Sometimes it makes sense to explore this avenue. Often it’s better to leave debt out of the portfolio picture entirely.
Take a look at the full picture. Before assessing leverage, start by detailing your expected expenses over the next 5-10 years. We break them into classes of essential, important and discretionary. Compare that to your total assets picture, both current and future assets. As long as you more than cover your expenses, you can afford to engage additional leverage and additional risk to enhance returns and open other financial doors. Risk of ruin is always the most important risk. We don’t often recommend additional leverage unless someone asks about it. Let us know if you would like to dive in deeper on how to use effective strategies.
This communication may include forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements (including words such as “believe,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “may,” “will,” “should,” and “expect”). Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, we can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. Various factors could cause actual results or performance to differ materially from those discussed in such forward-looking statements.”
“Historical performance is not indicative of future results. The investment return will fluctuate with market conditions.
Past performance is not indicative of any specific investment or future results. Views regarding the economy, securities markets or other specialized areas, like all predictors of future events, cannot be guaranteed to be accurate and may result in economic loss to the investor.
Investment strategies, philosophies, allocations and holdings are subject to change without prior notice.
This communication is intended to provide general information only and should not be construed as an offer of specifically tailored individualized advice.
While the Adviser believes the outside data sources cited to be credible, it has not independently verified the correctness of any of their inputs or calculations and, therefore, does not warranty the accuracy of any third-party sources or information.
Adviser does not endorse the statements, services or performance of any third-party vendor.
Unless stated otherwise, any mention of specific securities or investments is for hypothetical and illustrative purposes only. Adviser’s clients may or may not hold the securities discussed in their portfolios. Adviser makes no representations that any of the securities discussed have been or will be profitable.
Any IPO alerts are purely informational and should not be construed as recommendations to invest.
Adviser is not licensed to provide and does not provide legal, tax or accounting advice to clients. Advice of qualified counsel or accountant should be sought to address any specific situation requiring assistance from such licensed individuals.
Any case studies or hypothetical client profiles are for demonstration purposes only. They illustrate the breadth and depth of the many clients we represent at various life stages. Any similarities to actual Adviser’s clients past or present are strictly coincidental. Individual advice and results will vary based on each client’s circumstances, objectives and prevailing economic conditions.