Trustnet Magazine 61 April 2020 | Page 12

Cover story [ MARKET CRASHES ] 12 / 13 The dotcom bubble The financial crisis You are likely to already be well acquainted with the dotcom bubble and its causes – mainly greed and a severe dislocation between prices and reality. A UK-based investor who stuck their money in the MSCI World index at its peak in 2000 would have had to have waited until 2010 to break even. Hale says it may be the bear market that is closest to the one we are currently experiencing. “Bear in mind the bust started in 2000 and went through 2003, because in 2001 we had 9/11 which was completely out of the blue,” he says. “Translate that to today where we’ve had a mega rally led by the FAANGs and then out of the blue we had Covid-19. So there are similarities there in terms of cause and effect. “Remember that bear markets don’t just last a month, this one could go on for some time, particularly if the lockdown gets extended for longer.” Yet Hale notes it was possible to make money through much of this bear market by avoiding the tech hype and keeping an eye on fundamentals. “Value stocks outperformed quite significantly after the bust,” he adds. “It was a fairly short-lived affair, though. You get one opportunity with value, but it tends to work very well.” Again, you are likely to be well acquainted with what happened in the run-up to 2008 – mortgages were handed out in the US to people with no hope of paying them off, these loans were bundled together with hundreds of others and sold on. Then, when the housing market eventually went south, the banks didn’t know how much exposure everyone else had to these toxic loans and stopped lending. Yet Merian’s head of global asset allocation John Ricciardi says the lessons learned after the Great Depression should have stopped these conditions building up in the first place. “Lending at that time was related mostly to housing. Then you had a liquidity crisis when the banks couldn’t lend and you had forced sales of collateral, which meant housing,” he notes. “It was the Banking Act in 1933 which said banks can only lend a certain percentage of their reserves, it limited it to about eight times capital, and it separated commercial banking from investment banking. “The third thing was, it forced them to diversify. Before, if TRUSTNET there were a GE [General Electric] factory near a bank, 90 per cent of its mortgages would be to GE employees. Then if GE got in trouble, that was it.” Ricciardi says the reason why this all blew up in the financial crisis can be attributed to the removal of these protections in the late 1990s. “They said: ‘We don’t have to keep it at eight times capital anymore. We can use our own financial models, which will allow us to go to, guess what, 30 times. We don’t need to have diversification away from the housing market because it has never fallen.’ “They just let it all come back exactly the way it was. And guess what? It only took one cycle for the whole thing to come back again. It all went into effect in 2000. By 2004 the whole thing was back and by 2006 the whole thing was crashing again, exactly as before.” Commentators warn that every crash is different and it would be unwise to draw too many conclusions about the direction of the current crisis from previous bear markets. Yet as Mark Twain once said: “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” trustnet.com