저자: HowardMarks · 외국인
요약 보기
이 영상은 현재가 역대 최악의 경제 환경이라는 진단으로 시작한다. 분기 GDP가 30~40% 감소할 수 있고 실업률은 대공황을 넘을 수 있다는 점을 강조한다. 과거 1991년과 2001~2002년에 하이일드 채권 디폴트율이 10%씩 나타났고, 이번에는 20%까지 갈 수 있다고 본다. 부채가 과도한 기업과 투자구조 중 일부는 붕괴를 피하지 못할 것이라고 전망한다. 도덕적 해이를 경계한다. 위험을 감수한 주체가 손실을 보지 않고 정부의 보호를 받으면 위험 선호가 사회 전체로 번진다고 본다. 항공사들이 2010~2019년 잉여현금흐름의 96%를 자사주 매입에 쓰고 이제 정부 구제를 받는 사례를 든다. 상승장은 낙관→확신→영원한 호황이라는 3단계를 거치며, 3단계에서 부채 확대와 위험 행위가 늘고 결국 정점과 반전이 온다고 설명한다. 자신은 높은 불확실성, 낮은 기대수익, 높은 자산가격, 저수익 세계의 고위험 행태라는 네 요인 때문에 오래 보수적이었지만 너무 일렀다고 인정한다. 연준과 정부의 개입으로 글로벌 대공황은 피했다고 평가하며, 의도치 않은 부작용이 있더라도 개입 자체가 잘못이라는 뜻은 아니라고 말한다. 특정 자산 가격 방향에 대한 단기 예측은 없고, 장기적으로 위험 감수 문화와 부채 문제에 대한 경계가 핵심이다.
다듬은 글
We are living in the worst economy that anyone alive today has ever seen. You have to be over 80 to remember the 30s, er, to see anything worse . And maybe we have it even worse than then. It is believed that the unemployment rate will reach a higher level than during the Great Depression. People are talking about a 30-40% drop in GDP in the second quarter.
As far as we know, I mean there are no exact quarterly records, but as far as we know, there has never been such a quarterly decline in GDP. So we are in the worst economic environment, let's say , of all time. And one would think that this would lead to the greatest upheaval in history. This may not happen thanks to the actions of the Fed and the government.
I think we will still have a very significant episode of upheaval. You know, in 1991 and in 2001-2002, we had two years of 10% defaults in the high-yield bond universe. We can get 20% defaults in high-yield bonds in any case. And there are still many highly indebted companies and investment structures that desperately need large amounts of cash to avoid collapse, and some of them will not get what they need and will fail.
Another thing I want to mention is the impact on society, because there is the concept of moral harm. Moral hazard is when people who engage in risky behavior and cause bad things to happen that they should pay for are supported and protected from the consequences of their risk. And therein lies the importance of the quote about hell.
For business and investment to function properly, there must be a fear factor. I'm afraid of losing my clients' money. It makes me conservative, and it has shaped my career. And my colleagues at Oaktree, Bruce K., my partner, we both embody that conservatism, and that has led us to stay higher in the capital structure and try to invest in companies that have a better future, even if they are in financial distress.
Hmm . When people are not afraid , when they believe that they can engage in risky financial practices and will be protected from the consequences, it creates a risk appetite in society, which, in my opinion , is undesirable for economies, companies, and markets. Howard, some people would say we've already been there.
In the 10 years leading up to this pandemic, corporate borrowers were increasingly able to build up debt, and the stock market, and in some cases the bond market, rewarded them for it. Yes. Now you have a number of individual examples that echo what you just said. Airlines, for example. M-hm. American airlines collectively used 96% of their free cash flow generated between 2010 and 2019 to buy back shares, apparently borrowing heavily to do so , and now they are being bailed out by the government.
Maybe this only applies to airlines, but it does support your point to some extent. If we are in that situation now, and if we are in it after the crisis of this pandemic is over, Howard, and the financial markets, society and the economy return to something more like normal, what does that mean? If there is no punishment for bad behavior, for recklessness, where will we end up?
You know the answer. If there is no punishment for the consequences of bad behavior, then bad behavior will continue and increase. Airlines, I don't think airlines were doing share buybacks with the expectation that if there was an economic crash and their business went down to almost zero, the government would bail them out.
I mean, they might have thought about it somewhere deep down, but I don't think it was part of the plan. The bottom line is that the upswing, the economic growth, and the market rally have lasted too long, and that tends to crowd out caution and prudence. You know, back in the early 70s, someone gave me knowledge about the three stages of a bull market.
The first stage, when only a few smart people believe in the possibility of improvement. The second stage is when most people accept that improvement is happening, and the third stage is when everyone around them believes that things can only get better forever. So if you go on long enough and you get to this third stage, and everyone forgets about the pain of the global financial crisis, and everyone forgets about the possibility of a recession, and everyone thinks the good times are going to last forever, then you take on more debt, buy back stocks, and engage in risky practices.
You look back and say, "Well, over the last five years, the person who made the most money was the one who took the most risks." I'll join in on this too. This breeds this type of behavior in itself , and of course, it's an unhealthy situation that eventually leads to a peak and a reversal. I've been very cautious in recent years, as you know, my view of the market was that it would be characterized by high uncertainty, low expected returns, high asset prices, and risky behavior by people trying to make high returns in a low- return world.
And these four factors told me and Oakree that we live in a risky world. I've been talking about this for years , but I did it too soon. By the way, another great saying in our business is that being too ahead of your time is the same as being wrong. We were too ahead of our time. We were conservative for many years, but we believed that because of the conditions I listed, the market was vulnerable to an external influence, a shock, something that would cause it to fall.
Now people tell me they weren't crazy. They were not euphoric. They haven't lost their minds. People have said to me before, " I know the good times can't last forever, but I can't think of anything that could stop them." "And no one could." You know, we haven't laid the groundwork for a recession or inflation or anything else that could stop it.
And you know what? Something incredible for most of us came as an outside influence and yet stopped the good times. And that's exactly what we have now. But market conditions created vulnerability to external shocks, which exacerbated the damage from the virus. Some will say that the Fed has no choice but to step in and do what it can.
Howard, but don't you worry that by doing this they have set the stage for even more recklessness in the future? First of all , Eric, I absolutely agree with those people who believe the Fed had no choice. Thank God they did what they did. Bruce and I, you know, will be back by March 18th or 19th. We have been actively discussing the possibility of a global depression, a very serious economic impact for many years, and the actions of the Fed, the Treasury Department and other central banks, in our opinion, have prevented this, and no one is talking about a global depression anymore.
So I am absolutely among these people. But it's very important to note that if something has unintended negative consequences, it doesn't mean it was a mistake. I believe there could be negative consequences from these actions. But that, of course, doesn't mean they shouldn't have been done.
Comments 0