SueHelen
- 19 Mar 2004 23:49
- 430 of 626
Some investors go for the gold
IHT Saturday, March 20, 2004
World of Investing
One of my heroes is the late Julian Simon, an economist at the University of Maryland, who challenged the conventional wisdom that the world was getting overpopulated and would soon run out of food and other critical resources.
.
The best evidence of increasing demand and diminishing supply is, of course, higher prices. So, to prove his point, Simon in 1980 made a famous bet with Paul Ehrlich, who had been predicting catastrophic shortages.
.
Ehrlich, a biologist at Stanford University, could pick any five metals he liked. If the inflation-adjusted price of the metals in 1990 was higher than in 1980, then Ehrlich would win. Each of the metals - copper, chrome, nickel, tin and tungsten - fell in price, by an average of about 40 percent.
.
"Simon's central point," wrote the columnist Ben Wattenberg in 1998, "was that natural resources are not finite in any serious way; they are created by the intellect of man, an always renewable resource."
.
In other words, human intelligence, with the right economic incentives, can find ways to get more oil out of the ground or substitute plastic for metal or use less copper, or none at all, to transmit telecommunications signals.
.
Partly because of Simon's influence, I have always been reluctant to buy stocks in the natural-resource, precious-metals or materials sectors. My motto is: "Don't invest in things. Invest in brains."
.
Yet there is one reason to invest in things that I can recommend without reservation. Things - or commodities, as they are also known - have very little correlation with stocks or bonds.
.
A recent brochure from Morgan Stanley made the point in a compelling way. The investment bank charted the performance of six asset classes - Nasdaq stocks, European stocks, large-capitalization U.S. stocks, corporate bonds, Treasury bills and managed futures - from 1980 to 2002. None of the six "has consistently outperformed all other types of investments," Morgan Stanley wrote.
.
The brochure was designed to persuade investors to spread their investments over several Morgan Stanley funds, to smooth out market cycles and "achieve greater returns."
.
I don't know about the latter, but I do know that by spreading your assets across several categories that don't move up and down together, you'll moderate the ups and downs of your portfolio's value.
.
Right now, there is a separate case for investing in commodities: They're going up in price. The Goldman Sachs Commodity Index has doubled since the end of 1999, and the Dow Jones-AIG Commodity Index has risen about three-quarters since mid-2001.
.
There are three reasons for these increases.
.
First, the dollar has fallen lately, which means that it requires more dollars to buy a commodity with constant value. Second, supplies have been tight because businesses cut back on expansion during a worldwide recession and are still reluctant to invest heavily in getting things out of the ground or turning them into products.
.
Finally, demand is rising, especially as China booms, gathering raw materials from around the globe to feed its people and its industries.
.
China, as Charles Allmon writes in his well-respected Growth Stock Outlook newsletter, "consumes more copper than any other nation, and they're growing as a formidable oil guzzler."
.
In the long term, according to Allmon, "China's demands on raw material and commodities could change the price equation drastically."
.
There are a number of ways to invest in commodities, depending on your net worth and your stomach for risk.
.
Managed futures look like mutual funds: pools of commodity futures overseen by managers who buy and sell contracts. They are typically limited partnerships with restrictions on who can invest - you need a high, or at least midlevel, net worth - and on when you can take your money out.
.
Managed futures are sold through brokerage firms, and the commissions are high - 4 percent a year is not unusual. Initial investments can be lofty, and, because trading is often frenetic, you can run up big tax liabilities in a good year. Be sure you understand what you are getting into.
.
Commodities futures contracts,which are promises to buy or sell a certain amount of stuff on a specific date - say, 1,000 barrels of light sweet crude oil in June 2005 - are an extremely risky business. Investors typically use tremendous leverage, putting up small amounts of cash to "control" large positions. If you have a "long" position and prices rise, you can make a lot of money in a short time; but if prices fall, you can get wiped out - and then some. This is an investment where you can lose more than you put up. Your liability is unlimited, and nine of 10 commodity speculators (let's not call them investors) lose money. My advice: Stay away.
.
Mutual funds exist that specialize not in commodities themselves but in companies that profit from the extraction and production of them. One of the best-known is T. Rowe Price New Era. For the 10 years through Feb. 29, New Era returned an annual average of 11 percent, or about four-tenths of a percentage point less than the S&P 500.
.
More important, however, its correlation to the stock market has been very, very loose - which is what you want in a portfolio. In 2000, when the S&P fell 9 percent, New Era rose 20 percent; in 1997, when the S&P rose 33 percent, New Era rose just 11 percent. Currently, 60 percent of its assets are in oil and gas stocks, including large holdings in Devon Energy, an Oklahoma-based exploration and production company, and Total, the integrated French oil giant.
.
New Era's second-largest holding, after Devon, is Newmont Mining, which has reserves of gold totaling 87 million ounces. Newmont also produces silver, copper and zinc. Precious metals like gold and silver are considered good stand-ins for commodities as a whole, and investors see them as a store of value in dangerous times. While you can buy the real thing in bars and coins, the paper version is more convenient.
.
One of the best precious-metals mutual funds is First Eagle Gold, co-managed by the talented Jean-Marie Eveillard and rated five-star by Morningstar, has more than tripled over the past three years, but its long-term record is more modest: an average of 7 percent a year since 1994.
.
Vanguard Precious Metals may be a wiser choice, with no load and annual expenses of only 0.6 percent. Although it has lagged First Eagle lately, the fund has returned an annual average of 22 percent over the past five years and 5 percent over the past 10. Top holdings include Cia. Minas de Buenaventura, a Peruvian company with shares that trade on the NYSE, and Placer Dome, based in Canada.
.
In the end, I still believe in betting on brains. But in an era of stock volatility, terrorism, a falling dollar and a rising China, it is not unreasonable to make at least a small side bet on things.
.
James K. Glassman's e-mail address is jglassman@aei.org.
< < Back to Start of Article World of Investing
One of my heroes is the late Julian Simon, an economist at the University of Maryland, who challenged the conventional wisdom that the world was getting overpopulated and would soon run out of food and other critical resources.
.
The best evidence of increasing demand and diminishing supply is, of course, higher prices. So, to prove his point, Simon in 1980 made a famous bet with Paul Ehrlich, who had been predicting catastrophic shortages.
.
Ehrlich, a biologist at Stanford University, could pick any five metals he liked. If the inflation-adjusted price of the metals in 1990 was higher than in 1980, then Ehrlich would win. Each of the metals - copper, chrome, nickel, tin and tungsten - fell in price, by an average of about 40 percent.
.
"Simon's central point," wrote the columnist Ben Wattenberg in 1998, "was that natural resources are not finite in any serious way; they are created by the intellect of man, an always renewable resource."
.
In other words, human intelligence, with the right economic incentives, can find ways to get more oil out of the ground or substitute plastic for metal or use less copper, or none at all, to transmit telecommunications signals.
.
Partly because of Simon's influence, I have always been reluctant to buy stocks in the natural-resource, precious-metals or materials sectors. My motto is: "Don't invest in things. Invest in brains."
.
Yet there is one reason to invest in things that I can recommend without reservation. Things - or commodities, as they are also known - have very little correlation with stocks or bonds.
.
A recent brochure from Morgan Stanley made the point in a compelling way. The investment bank charted the performance of six asset classes - Nasdaq stocks, European stocks, large-capitalization U.S. stocks, corporate bonds, Treasury bills and managed futures - from 1980 to 2002. None of the six "has consistently outperformed all other types of investments," Morgan Stanley wrote.
.
The brochure was designed to persuade investors to spread their investments over several Morgan Stanley funds, to smooth out market cycles and "achieve greater returns."
.
I don't know about the latter, but I do know that by spreading your assets across several categories that don't move up and down together, you'll moderate the ups and downs of your portfolio's value.
.
Right now, there is a separate case for investing in commodities: They're going up in price. The Goldman Sachs Commodity Index has doubled since the end of 1999, and the Dow Jones-AIG Commodity Index has risen about three-quarters since mid-2001.
.
There are three reasons for these increases.
.
First, the dollar has fallen lately, which means that it requires more dollars to buy a commodity with constant value. Second, supplies have been tight because businesses cut back on expansion during a worldwide recession and are still reluctant to invest heavily in getting things out of the ground or turning them into products.
.
Finally, demand is rising, especially as China booms, gathering raw materials from around the globe to feed its people and its industries.
.
China, as Charles Allmon writes in his well-respected Growth Stock Outlook newsletter, "consumes more copper than any other nation, and they're growing as a formidable oil guzzler."
.
In the long term, according to Allmon, "China's demands on raw material and commodities could change the price equation drastically."
.
There are a number of ways to invest in commodities, depending on your net worth and your stomach for risk.
.
Managed futures look like mutual funds: pools of commodity futures overseen by managers who buy and sell contracts. They are typically limited partnerships with restrictions on who can invest - you need a high, or at least midlevel, net worth - and on when you can take your money out.
.
Managed futures are sold through brokerage firms, and the commissions are high - 4 percent a year is not unusual. Initial investments can be lofty, and, because trading is often frenetic, you can run up big tax liabilities in a good year. Be sure you understand what you are getting into.
.
Commodities futures contracts,which are promises to buy or sell a certain amount of stuff on a specific date - say, 1,000 barrels of light sweet crude oil in June 2005 - are an extremely risky business. Investors typically use tremendous leverage, putting up small amounts of cash to "control" large positions. If you have a "long" position and prices rise, you can make a lot of money in a short time; but if prices fall, you can get wiped out - and then some. This is an investment where you can lose more than you put up. Your liability is unlimited, and nine of 10 commodity speculators (let's not call them investors) lose money. My advice: Stay away.
.
Mutual funds exist that specialize not in commodities themselves but in companies that profit from the extraction and production of them. One of the best-known is T. Rowe Price New Era. For the 10 years through Feb. 29, New Era returned an annual average of 11 percent, or about four-tenths of a percentage point less than the S&P 500.
.
More important, however, its correlation to the stock market has been very, very loose - which is what you want in a portfolio. In 2000, when the S&P fell 9 percent, New Era rose 20 percent; in 1997, when the S&P rose 33 percent, New Era rose just 11 percent. Currently, 60 percent of its assets are in oil and gas stocks, including large holdings in Devon Energy, an Oklahoma-based exploration and production company, and Total, the integrated French oil giant.
.
New Era's second-largest holding, after Devon, is Newmont Mining, which has reserves of gold totaling 87 million ounces. Newmont also produces silver, copper and zinc. Precious metals like gold and silver are considered good stand-ins for commodities as a whole, and investors see them as a store of value in dangerous times. While you can buy the real thing in bars and coins, the paper version is more convenient.
.
One of the best precious-metals mutual funds is First Eagle Gold, co-managed by the talented Jean-Marie Eveillard and rated five-star by Morningstar, has more than tripled over the past three years, but its long-term record is more modest: an average of 7 percent a year since 1994.
.
Vanguard Precious Metals may be a wiser choice, with no load and annual expenses of only 0.6 percent. Although it has lagged First Eagle lately, the fund has returned an annual average of 22 percent over the past five years and 5 percent over the past 10. Top holdings include Cia. Minas de Buenaventura, a Peruvian company with shares that trade on the NYSE, and Placer Dome, based in Canada.
.
In the end, I still believe in betting on brains. But in an era of stock volatility, terrorism, a falling dollar and a rising China, it is not unreasonable to make at least a small side bet on things.
.
James K. Glassman's e-mail address is jglassman@aei.org. World of Investing
One of my heroes is the late Julian Simon, an economist at the University of Maryland, who challenged the conventional wisdom that the world was getting overpopulated and would soon run out of food and other critical resources.
.
The best evidence of increasing demand and diminishing supply is, of course, higher prices. So, to prove his point, Simon in 1980 made a famous bet with Paul Ehrlich, who had been predicting catastrophic shortages.
.
Ehrlich, a biologist at Stanford University, could pick any five metals he liked. If the inflation-adjusted price of the metals in 1990 was higher than in 1980, then Ehrlich would win. Each of the metals - copper, chrome, nickel, tin and tungsten - fell in price, by an average of about 40 percent.
.
"Simon's central point," wrote the columnist Ben Wattenberg in 1998, "was that natural resources are not finite in any serious way; they are created by the intellect of man, an always renewable resource."
.
In other words, human intelligence, with the right economic incentives, can find ways to get more oil out of the ground or substitute plastic for metal or use less copper, or none at all, to transmit telecommunications signals.
.
Partly because of Simon's influence, I have always been reluctant to buy stocks in the natural-resource, precious-metals or materials sectors. My motto is: "Don't invest in things. Invest in brains."
.
Yet there is one reason to invest in things that I can recommend without reservation. Things - or commodities, as they are also known - have very little correlation with stocks or bonds.
.
A recent brochure from Morgan Stanley made the point in a compelling way. The investment bank charted the performance of six asset classes - Nasdaq stocks, European stocks, large-capitalization U.S. stocks, corporate bonds, Treasury bills and managed futures - from 1980 to 2002. None of the six "has consistently outperformed all other types of investments," Morgan Stanley wrote.
.
The brochure was designed to persuade investors to spread their investments over several Morgan Stanley funds, to smooth out market cycles and "achieve greater returns."
.
I don't know about the latter, but I do know that by spreading your assets across several categories that don't move up and down together, you'll moderate the ups and downs of your portfolio's value.
.
Right now, there is a separate case for investing in commodities: They're going up in price. The Goldman Sachs Commodity Index has doubled since the end of 1999, and the Dow Jones-AIG Commodity Index has risen about three-quarters since mid-2001.
.
There are three reasons for these increases.
.
First, the dollar has fallen lately, which means that it requires more dollars to buy a commodity with constant value. Second, supplies have been tight because businesses cut back on expansion during a worldwide recession and are still reluctant to invest heavily in getting things out of the ground or turning them into products.
.
Finally, demand is rising, especially as China booms, gathering raw materials from around the globe to feed its people and its industries.
.
China, as Charles Allmon writes in his well-respected Growth Stock Outlook newsletter, "consumes more copper than any other nation, and they're growing as a formidable oil guzzler."
.
In the long term, according to Allmon, "China's demands on raw material and commodities could change the price equation drastically."
.
There are a number of ways to invest in commodities, depending on your net worth and your stomach for risk.
.
Managed futures look like mutual funds: pools of commodity futures overseen by managers who buy and sell contracts. They are typically limited partnerships with restrictions on who can invest - you need a high, or at least midlevel, net worth - and on when you can take your money out.
.
Managed futures are sold through brokerage firms, and the commissions are high - 4 percent a year is not unusual. Initial investments can be lofty, and, because trading is often frenetic, you can run up big tax liabilities in a good year. Be sure you understand what you are getting into.
.
Commodities futures contracts,which are promises to buy or sell a certain amount of stuff on a specific date - say, 1,000 barrels of light sweet crude oil in June 2005 - are an extremely risky business. Investors typically use tremendous leverage, putting up small amounts of cash to "control" large positions. If you have a "long" position and prices rise, you can make a lot of money in a short time; but if prices fall, you can get wiped out - and then some. This is an investment where you can lose more than you put up. Your liability is unlimited, and nine of 10 commodity speculators (let's not call them investors) lose money. My advice: Stay away.
.
Mutual funds exist that specialize not in commodities themselves but in companies that profit from the extraction and production of them. One of the best-known is T. Rowe Price New Era. For the 10 years through Feb. 29, New Era returned an annual average of 11 percent, or about four-tenths of a percentage point less than the S&P 500.
.
More important, however, its correlation to the stock market has been very, very loose - which is what you want in a portfolio. In 2000, when the S&P fell 9 percent, New Era rose 20 percent; in 1997, when the S&P rose 33 percent, New Era rose just 11 percent. Currently, 60 percent of its assets are in oil and gas stocks, including large holdings in Devon Energy, an Oklahoma-based exploration and production company, and Total, the integrated French oil giant.
.
New Era's second-largest holding, after Devon, is Newmont Mining, which has reserves of gold totaling 87 million ounces. Newmont also produces silver, copper and zinc. Precious metals like gold and silver are considered good stand-ins for commodities as a whole, and investors see them as a store of value in dangerous times. While you can buy the real thing in bars and coins, the paper version is more convenient.
.
One of the best precious-metals mutual funds is First Eagle Gold, co-managed by the talented Jean-Marie Eveillard and rated five-star by Morningstar, has more than tripled over the past three years, but its long-term record is more modest: an average of 7 percent a year since 1994.
.
Vanguard Precious Metals may be a wiser choice, with no load and annual expenses of only 0.6 percent. Although it has lagged First Eagle lately, the fund has returned an annual average of 22 percent over the past five years and 5 percent over the past 10. Top holdings include Cia. Minas de Buenaventura, a Peruvian company with shares that trade on the NYSE, and Placer Dome, based in Canada.
.
In the end, I still believe in betting on brains. But in an era of stock volatility, terrorism, a falling dollar and a rising China, it is not unreasonable to make at least a small side bet on things.
.
James K. Glassman's e-mail address is jglassman@aei.org. World of Investing
One of my heroes is the late Julian Simon, an economist at the University of Maryland, who challenged the conventional wisdom that the world was getting overpopulated and would soon run out of food and other critical resources.
.
The best evidence of increasing demand and diminishing supply is, of course, higher prices. So, to prove his point, Simon in 1980 made a famous bet with Paul Ehrlich, who had been predicting catastrophic shortages.
.
Ehrlich, a biologist at Stanford University, could pick any five metals he liked. If the inflation-adjusted price of the metals in 1990 was higher than in 1980, then Ehrlich would win. Each of the metals - copper, chrome, nickel, tin and tungsten - fell in price, by an average of about 40 percent.
.
"Simon's central point," wrote the columnist Ben Wattenberg in 1998, "was that natural resources are not finite in any serious way; they are created by the intellect of man, an always renewable resource."
.
In other words, human intelligence, with the right economic incentives, can find ways to get more oil out of the ground or substitute plastic for metal or use less copper, or none at all, to transmit telecommunications signals.
.
Partly because of Simon's influence, I have always been reluctant to buy stocks in the natural-resource, precious-metals or materials sectors. My motto is: "Don't invest in things. Invest in brains."
.
Yet there is one reason to invest in things that I can recommend without reservation. Things - or commodities, as they are also known - have very little correlation with stocks or bonds.
.
A recent brochure from Morgan Stanley made the point in a compelling way. The investment bank charted the performance of six asset classes - Nasdaq stocks, European stocks, large-capitalization U.S. stocks, corporate bonds, Treasury bills and managed futures - from 1980 to 2002. None of the six "has consistently outperformed all other types of investments," Morgan Stanley wrote
SueHelen
- 19 Mar 2004 23:59
- 434 of 626
Are we ready for a correction?
March 19, 2004
When the gold price peaked in 1996, attendance at the Prospectors and Developers Conference in Toronto set a new record. That record was broken this year when more than ten thousand people showed up at the Toronto Convention Centre. Is that a sign of the top?
Gold stocks are certainly not cheap. Just this week I had a meeting with a fellow who had been bar-tending for the past few years but decided it was time to get back into the exploration business -- now that things are heating up again. I met several people in Toronto with similar stories. They were around in the early Nineties, couldn’t make it during the tough years, but now they’re back.
Many old projects that didn’t quite make it during the last cycle have been dusted off, renamed, and repackaged into new companies. Investors are eager to invest and any company that can mention the words gold, silver, copper, uranium or nickel and ‘project’ in the same sentence qualifies.
A few weeks ago I made the point in my newsletter that recent financings have become rather extreme. Looking at the amount of money being raised in comparison to the quality of the projects, and the terms of the financings that are available, it appears investors are no longer concerned with the return of their capital, never mind a return on their capital. All they care about is not missing the next hot deal.
These are all signs that we have to be more cautious. I don’t know if Warren Buffet actually said this or not, but he is credited with saying investors should be brave when others are scared and scared when other are brave. Well, most investors in the market today seem very brave. If you feel like sending me an email explaining just what a sissy I am, or chastising me for not having any “faith” in the gold bull market, then you’re one of the brave I am talking about.
I believe gold is money, and its price is a function of its role as money. I also believe that we are likely to see gold trade over a thousand dollars an ounce before too long (see previous columns). But I also think the market is getting ahead of itself judging by the quality of the deals I am seeing and the prices they command.
So what, you may say. So what if the gold stocks appear expensive. If the gold price doubles from its current level then all these stocks are dirt cheap at their current prices, and they are all likely to increase ten-fold from where they are now. Perhaps, but not necessarily.
If you look at last week’s chart you’ll notice that the actual gold price in constant 1990 dollars is currently above the theoretical gold price. That indicates gold is currently overpriced (if we compensate for the US dollar’s exchange rate since 1990). It also means that for gold to increase significantly from here the US dollar must devalue.
Ultimately the United States has to balance its trade account. That means the currencies of China, Japan, Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Korea and Europe -- the United States’ largest trading partners -- are the ones against which the dollar is most likely to weaken the most. That’s not to say the dollar will not decline against currencies such as the South African rand or the Australian dollar. It is very likely that the dollar will be weak across the board.
As the dollar weakens, almost everything the United States imports will cost more in dollars. Metals, oil, uranium and gold will increase in dollar terms because their prices are set on international markets and not on domestic markets. The prices of these commodities, and of gold, are therefore a function of exchange rates.
If the gold price in other currencies does not increase nearly as much as it does in US dollars, then gold mining and exploration stocks may well be over-extended since most of the companies operate internationally, outside the US.
The best place to be invested for leverage to the gold bull market, which is really just a dollar bear market, is the good ol’ US of A. The problem is finding quality companies at reasonable prices to invest in. I have identified a few (that I own and regularly discuss in my newsletter) but, given that most junior exploration companies (predominantly what I invest in) are quite expensive at the moment I have been looking for alternative places to put capital.
Since the world is not going to use less energy in the future I am quite interested in that sector. I already own a few uranium exploration companies, but that market is both small and has become expensive; it seems like every investment banker I meet wants to do a uranium deal. That notwithstanding, uranium may actually be one of the better commodity plays, especially given Cameco’s (world’s larges uranium producer) predictions about the uranium market.
There is a real push in the United States to find alternative energy sources, especially renewable forms of energy. One kind in particular seems very attractive: geothermal power generation. I have devoted almost a decade to understanding mineral exploration; geothermal development is similar to mineral exploration in many respects. Even the potential rewards of proving up a viable geothermal project are comparable to finding an economic mineral deposit.
There is a small Canadian company developing a geothermal project close to the mining operations in north-central Nevada. The project is close to infrastructure, the mines need power, Nevada has many existing geothermal power plants – so we are dealing with proven technology – and there is a demand for renewable energy.
I will discuss this company in today’s email to subscribers. If you’re interested in finding out what I personally invest in go to www.paulvaneeden.com and subscribe.
Paul van Eeden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul van Eeden works primarily to find investments for his own portfolio and shares his investment ideas with subscribers to his weekly investment publication. For more information please visit his website (www.paulvaneeden.com) or contact his publisher at (800) 528-0559 or (602) 252-4477.
This article expresses the opinion and views of Paul van Eeden. While every attempt is made to ensure the accuracy of information presented, nothing can be guaranteed. Paul van Eeden does not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions.
2004 All rights reserved. No part of this website may be copied or distributed without Paul van Eeden's written permission.
http://www.kitco.com/weekly/paulvaneeden/mar192004.html