WEBVTT - Oaktree Capital Management Co-Chairman Howard Marks Talks Stock Valuations

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:07.800 --> 0:00:09.920
<v Speaker 2>I'm very pleased to say that joining us on this program,

0:00:10.080 --> 0:00:12.719
<v Speaker 2>Howard Mark joins us for more. Howard, Welcome to the program, Sir.

0:00:12.800 --> 0:00:14.760
<v Speaker 2>I want to start. We want to start with a

0:00:14.760 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 2>central question that you pose yourself, why asset price is

0:00:17.840 --> 0:00:19.960
<v Speaker 2>so strong in the face of what you view as

0:00:20.040 --> 0:00:23.120
<v Speaker 2>negative developments? Howard, can you share your thoughts with us?

0:00:24.200 --> 0:00:25.840
<v Speaker 3>I'm glad to be with you this morning.

0:00:25.960 --> 0:00:29.479
<v Speaker 1>Of course, as the quote you just put on the

0:00:29.520 --> 0:00:34.760
<v Speaker 1>screen indicates, you know, this is all just feeling and.

0:00:36.840 --> 0:00:37.520
<v Speaker 3>An opinion.

0:00:37.720 --> 0:00:41.080
<v Speaker 1>None of this is factual, but it does seem that

0:00:41.840 --> 0:00:45.440
<v Speaker 1>stocks are expensive relative to what I call fundamentals or

0:00:45.960 --> 0:00:50.840
<v Speaker 1>you might call reality. And you know, the outstanding reason,

0:00:50.920 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>I think is that you know, there hasn't been a

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:58.720
<v Speaker 1>serious market correction in sixteen years, so people get out

0:00:58.720 --> 0:01:05.959
<v Speaker 1>of the habit of thinking about market corrections. The biggest

0:01:06.080 --> 0:01:08.640
<v Speaker 1>single mistake I've been thinking a lot what is the

0:01:08.680 --> 0:01:09.600
<v Speaker 1>biggest single.

0:01:09.360 --> 0:01:10.520
<v Speaker 3>Mistake investors make?

0:01:11.080 --> 0:01:14.320
<v Speaker 1>And I've concluded that it is that they conclude that

0:01:15.120 --> 0:01:17.000
<v Speaker 1>the way things are today is the way it will

0:01:17.000 --> 0:01:19.200
<v Speaker 1>always be, and the things that have been happening will

0:01:19.240 --> 0:01:23.640
<v Speaker 1>always continue to happen. Whereas reversion to the mean is

0:01:24.400 --> 0:01:26.880
<v Speaker 1>much more likely. So I just think that it's worked

0:01:27.000 --> 0:01:32.120
<v Speaker 1>very well. Being an equity investor has worked very well.

0:01:32.240 --> 0:01:35.840
<v Speaker 1>Doing it on leverage has worked even better. Concentrating in

0:01:35.880 --> 0:01:39.360
<v Speaker 1>a few stocks has gone very well. Investors are by

0:01:39.440 --> 0:01:45.240
<v Speaker 1>nature optimistic, and that optimism dies hard. And you know,

0:01:47.720 --> 0:01:50.680
<v Speaker 1>I just think that the fluctuations of the market are

0:01:50.680 --> 0:01:57.720
<v Speaker 1>mostly related to psychological fluctuations, and people go from neutrality

0:01:57.960 --> 0:02:00.720
<v Speaker 1>to liking stocks, to liking them a lot, to liking

0:02:00.760 --> 0:02:04.880
<v Speaker 1>them a ton, to liking them too much, and that's

0:02:04.920 --> 0:02:07.320
<v Speaker 1>the continuation that creates.

0:02:08.639 --> 0:02:09.119
<v Speaker 3>Bubbles.

0:02:09.200 --> 0:02:13.520
<v Speaker 1>And you know, we're we probably in the early days

0:02:13.560 --> 0:02:15.240
<v Speaker 1>of that when.

0:02:15.040 --> 0:02:18.639
<v Speaker 4>You talk about liking Howard, maybe liking these assets a

0:02:18.680 --> 0:02:22.320
<v Speaker 4>little bit too much. Can you put into perspective the

0:02:22.440 --> 0:02:25.839
<v Speaker 4>last time you saw this type of environment that left

0:02:25.919 --> 0:02:29.639
<v Speaker 4>you thinking, maybe some of the opportunities aren't as great

0:02:30.120 --> 0:02:31.800
<v Speaker 4>when it comes to buying some of these assets at

0:02:31.800 --> 0:02:34.840
<v Speaker 4>the current valuations. Is there another time that this sort

0:02:34.880 --> 0:02:39.639
<v Speaker 4>of reminds you of in any capacity?

0:02:39.760 --> 0:02:45.120
<v Speaker 1>Well, I guess, Lisa, the last time was probably around

0:02:45.880 --> 0:02:53.000
<v Speaker 1>a ninety ninety seven when the market was kind of

0:02:53.000 --> 0:02:59.200
<v Speaker 1>falling in love with tech stocks, and you know, the

0:02:59.240 --> 0:03:01.880
<v Speaker 1>market was rocking the long People were not worried about

0:03:01.919 --> 0:03:05.360
<v Speaker 1>the level of valuations. People are extremely optimistic about the

0:03:05.400 --> 0:03:11.680
<v Speaker 1>opportunities for the Internet. And you know, Alan Greenspan famously

0:03:11.800 --> 0:03:15.680
<v Speaker 1>cautioned that there might be irrational exuberance.

0:03:17.680 --> 0:03:19.320
<v Speaker 3>Now I picked ninety seven.

0:03:21.000 --> 0:03:25.920
<v Speaker 1>Because even though green Span was concerned about exuberance, the

0:03:25.960 --> 0:03:29.480
<v Speaker 1>market went on to rise for another two and a

0:03:29.520 --> 0:03:32.920
<v Speaker 1>half to three years. So remember I said, we're in

0:03:32.919 --> 0:03:38.040
<v Speaker 1>the early days. We're not at a critical at a nutty.

0:03:39.840 --> 0:03:40.400
<v Speaker 3>Valuation.

0:03:41.960 --> 0:03:44.480
<v Speaker 1>I'm certainly not ringing the alarm bells, as the quote

0:03:44.480 --> 0:03:48.000
<v Speaker 1>that you had on the screen said, no reason to

0:03:48.000 --> 0:03:52.040
<v Speaker 1>think there'll be a correction soon. But the point is

0:03:52.080 --> 0:03:53.119
<v Speaker 1>that things are expensive.

0:03:54.320 --> 0:03:56.800
<v Speaker 3>They may go on, they may go on to become.

0:03:56.480 --> 0:03:59.160
<v Speaker 1>More expensive, but the fact that they're expensive it should

0:03:59.160 --> 0:03:59.800
<v Speaker 1>not be lost.

0:04:00.280 --> 0:04:02.160
<v Speaker 4>And Howard, I think a lot of people point to,

0:04:02.360 --> 0:04:05.320
<v Speaker 4>in terms of the echoes of the late nineties, the

0:04:05.320 --> 0:04:08.720
<v Speaker 4>tech sector of the market as being the most overvalued.

0:04:08.840 --> 0:04:10.640
<v Speaker 4>What I thought was so interesting about your memo is

0:04:10.640 --> 0:04:13.160
<v Speaker 4>that that wasn't your take, that that wasn't your bigger

0:04:13.240 --> 0:04:16.000
<v Speaker 4>concern in the market at a time when people are

0:04:16.080 --> 0:04:18.919
<v Speaker 4>counting on a certain robustness of growth and a certain

0:04:19.040 --> 0:04:22.440
<v Speaker 4>kind of inflationary backdrop. Why is it that tech Is

0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:24.480
<v Speaker 4>it the focus of your concern this time around?

0:04:27.400 --> 0:04:31.480
<v Speaker 1>A tech contributes to the aura that surrounds the markets,

0:04:31.560 --> 0:04:33.520
<v Speaker 1>And a lot of people have been citing the fact

0:04:33.560 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 1>that this so called magnificent seven stocks I, Amazon, and

0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:42.200
<v Speaker 1>Alphabet have been contributing disproportionally to the rise, and they

0:04:42.400 --> 0:04:48.240
<v Speaker 1>responsible for more than seven stocks. Their dollar gains have

0:04:49.839 --> 0:04:52.520
<v Speaker 1>been responsible for more than half of all the gains

0:04:53.120 --> 0:04:54.880
<v Speaker 1>in the five hundred stocks in the S and P

0:04:55.040 --> 0:04:57.159
<v Speaker 1>seven out of five hundred.

0:04:57.720 --> 0:05:00.880
<v Speaker 3>But they're great companies, they're at high valuation. I think

0:05:00.880 --> 0:05:03.440
<v Speaker 3>that I can't say those valuations are excessive.

0:05:04.360 --> 0:05:09.279
<v Speaker 1>But the other four hundred and ninety three stocks are

0:05:10.120 --> 0:05:13.560
<v Speaker 1>quite highly valued, not as highly as the magniz as seven,

0:05:13.600 --> 0:05:16.159
<v Speaker 1>but nobody says they're the same quality companies, quite.

0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:17.680
<v Speaker 3>Highly valued relative to history.

0:05:18.200 --> 0:05:25.320
<v Speaker 1>And it is the the fact that high valuations are

0:05:25.400 --> 0:05:29.080
<v Speaker 1>being applied to more average companies that I think is

0:05:29.360 --> 0:05:33.440
<v Speaker 1>more alarming than the fact that exceptional valuations are being

0:05:33.480 --> 0:05:35.000
<v Speaker 1>applied to exceptional companies.

0:05:35.560 --> 0:05:37.760
<v Speaker 2>How there's a quote you use in this memo. I

0:05:37.839 --> 0:05:40.320
<v Speaker 2>enjoyed this quote. He said, he who knows only his

0:05:40.440 --> 0:05:43.839
<v Speaker 2>side his own side of the case knows little of that.

0:05:44.520 --> 0:05:46.039
<v Speaker 2>And then I worked through the rest of the memo

0:05:46.200 --> 0:05:48.479
<v Speaker 2>and there was a conclusion there about credit. And I

0:05:48.560 --> 0:05:51.360
<v Speaker 2>just wonder whether you focus on equities in this note

0:05:51.680 --> 0:05:53.960
<v Speaker 2>offers you a credit perspective on how much value is

0:05:53.960 --> 0:05:55.160
<v Speaker 2>offered in credit right now?

0:05:57.040 --> 0:06:02.599
<v Speaker 1>Well, you know, it's it's as John Stewart Mill said,

0:06:02.640 --> 0:06:05.760
<v Speaker 1>and I believe it was eighteen fifty nine, you have

0:06:05.800 --> 0:06:08.919
<v Speaker 1>to know all the sides of the story to understand

0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:16.719
<v Speaker 1>whether your side holds water. And I cite the bull

0:06:16.839 --> 0:06:21.160
<v Speaker 1>case there for why the market isn't overvalued. I think

0:06:21.240 --> 0:06:24.320
<v Speaker 1>that's that's part of the job. But as you say,

0:06:25.320 --> 0:06:29.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, my conclusion is that it's it's not. As

0:06:29.160 --> 0:06:31.520
<v Speaker 1>I said before, I'm not raising an alarm bell, but

0:06:31.760 --> 0:06:35.840
<v Speaker 1>I do think it's time for some caution. And you know,

0:06:36.640 --> 0:06:38.240
<v Speaker 1>this is a little bit of what we call on

0:06:38.320 --> 0:06:42.120
<v Speaker 1>Wall Street talking your own book. But you know what

0:06:43.400 --> 0:06:47.640
<v Speaker 1>I do, what oak Tree does, is mostly something called

0:06:47.760 --> 0:06:55.680
<v Speaker 1>credit buying the debts of companies, and debt is inherently

0:06:58.440 --> 0:07:05.240
<v Speaker 1>more defensive than equities. And you have a promise of payment,

0:07:05.600 --> 0:07:09.680
<v Speaker 1>you know what your return will be if they pay interest.

0:07:09.760 --> 0:07:13.360
<v Speaker 3>In principle has promised, and most of the time they do. So.

0:07:14.160 --> 0:07:16.760
<v Speaker 1>I just think that this is a time to put

0:07:16.800 --> 0:07:20.440
<v Speaker 1>a little more defense into your portfolio, and investing in

0:07:20.560 --> 0:07:24.560
<v Speaker 1>credit as opposed to equities is one way to do it.

0:07:24.600 --> 0:07:25.720
<v Speaker 4>Is it still defensive?

0:07:25.800 --> 0:07:26.120
<v Speaker 2>Howard?

0:07:26.120 --> 0:07:29.800
<v Speaker 4>If you're looking at credit spreads the tightest since nineteen

0:07:29.880 --> 0:07:33.120
<v Speaker 4>ninety eight, I'm looking at investment grade credit spreads, you're

0:07:33.160 --> 0:07:36.120
<v Speaker 4>thought to be a more defensive part of the credit market.

0:07:36.160 --> 0:07:38.920
<v Speaker 4>I mean, is that sort of question what it means

0:07:38.920 --> 0:07:41.440
<v Speaker 4>for it to be defensive where the evaluations are high

0:07:41.480 --> 0:07:43.160
<v Speaker 4>there as well?

0:07:43.240 --> 0:07:43.400
<v Speaker 3>Well?

0:07:43.440 --> 0:07:48.800
<v Speaker 1>First of all, it's what you see debt or fixed

0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:52.560
<v Speaker 1>income or bonds or what I call credit, all different

0:07:52.560 --> 0:07:57.040
<v Speaker 1>words for the same thing. Is different in nature from

0:07:57.080 --> 0:08:02.320
<v Speaker 1>equities because you do have a promised contractual rate of return.

0:08:03.160 --> 0:08:07.640
<v Speaker 1>And you can say that the promised contractual return isn't

0:08:08.320 --> 0:08:12.520
<v Speaker 1>as high as it has been historically, or the increment

0:08:12.760 --> 0:08:16.000
<v Speaker 1>that it provides over treasuries to compensate for the credit

0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:19.960
<v Speaker 1>risk isn't it as higher as high as it has

0:08:20.000 --> 0:08:24.760
<v Speaker 1>been historically. But you can't say that they don't promise

0:08:24.760 --> 0:08:29.880
<v Speaker 1>seven and a half percent, and a promise of seven

0:08:29.960 --> 0:08:31.440
<v Speaker 1>and a half percent, you're going to pay for some

0:08:31.440 --> 0:08:34.920
<v Speaker 1>fees here once in a while, going to encourage encounter

0:08:35.400 --> 0:08:40.040
<v Speaker 1>a credit loss. I think it's highly likely to provide

0:08:40.400 --> 0:08:43.520
<v Speaker 1>let's say, a return in the sixties over the next

0:08:43.520 --> 0:08:49.800
<v Speaker 1>ten years, a contractual guarantee approaching something in the sixes

0:08:49.960 --> 0:08:54.280
<v Speaker 1>over the next ten years. Is I think more defensive

0:08:54.840 --> 0:08:58.640
<v Speaker 1>than being in the stock market at these elevated valuations.

0:08:58.800 --> 0:09:00.680
<v Speaker 3>That's the point.

0:09:01.000 --> 0:09:06.240
<v Speaker 1>And you know you just said tighter than they have

0:09:06.360 --> 0:09:13.440
<v Speaker 1>been since ninety eight. And if you looked at where

0:09:13.480 --> 0:09:17.320
<v Speaker 1>they were in ninety eight, and you hypothesize that put

0:09:17.400 --> 0:09:19.920
<v Speaker 1>an investment in a portfolio hyio bonds in ninety eight,

0:09:20.960 --> 0:09:24.720
<v Speaker 1>how did you do over the last seventeen years, twenty

0:09:24.720 --> 0:09:25.319
<v Speaker 1>seven years?

0:09:25.559 --> 0:09:29.240
<v Speaker 3>And I think you did fine. That's my point. It

0:09:29.720 --> 0:09:30.520
<v Speaker 3>has a high.

0:09:30.320 --> 0:09:37.120
<v Speaker 1>Probability of doing fine, whereas stocks, if the valuations are elevated,

0:09:37.840 --> 0:09:41.839
<v Speaker 1>have some reasonable probability of doing less than fine.

0:09:43.080 --> 0:09:50.400
<v Speaker 4>Is the United States still the focal point for defensive investments?

0:09:51.120 --> 0:09:52.600
<v Speaker 3>You know?

0:09:53.280 --> 0:09:55.640
<v Speaker 1>I think I said in the memo that I think

0:09:55.679 --> 0:09:58.120
<v Speaker 1>the US is still the best place in the world

0:09:58.200 --> 0:10:02.960
<v Speaker 1>to invest. The things that make the US exceptional the

0:10:03.000 --> 0:10:05.600
<v Speaker 1>spirit of innovation, the free markets, the rule of law,

0:10:05.760 --> 0:10:11.560
<v Speaker 1>the capital markets, the growth and dynamism, the great companies.

0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:14.760
<v Speaker 3>These things are still all true.

0:10:14.920 --> 0:10:17.880
<v Speaker 1>But as I said in the memo, we're the best place,

0:10:18.040 --> 0:10:19.800
<v Speaker 1>we may be a little less best than we used

0:10:19.800 --> 0:10:25.320
<v Speaker 1>to be. The world is thinking that maybe the US

0:10:25.679 --> 0:10:28.440
<v Speaker 1>is a little best less best than it used to be,

0:10:28.960 --> 0:10:37.079
<v Speaker 1>and I can't argue against that. I mean, fundamentally, as

0:10:37.120 --> 0:10:45.199
<v Speaker 1>an investment environment, I think things are a little bit deteriorated.

0:10:46.880 --> 0:10:49.120
<v Speaker 4>Is there a place that you see has more opportunities

0:10:49.200 --> 0:10:52.440
<v Speaker 4>right now just based on valuations and based on maybe

0:10:52.840 --> 0:10:57.199
<v Speaker 4>affirming up of contract law and other aspects that really

0:10:57.320 --> 0:10:59.880
<v Speaker 4>lead to a robust investment backdrop.

0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:04.319
<v Speaker 1>Well, as I say, I still think we're the best

0:11:04.320 --> 0:11:05.360
<v Speaker 1>place in the world to invest.

0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:16.559
<v Speaker 3>And you know, we're a great car at a high price.

0:11:17.840 --> 0:11:21.840
<v Speaker 1>You can get some cars around the world that are

0:11:22.120 --> 0:11:24.680
<v Speaker 1>not as great as ours cheaper.

0:11:26.760 --> 0:11:27.920
<v Speaker 3>Which do you prefer.

0:11:29.120 --> 0:11:33.880
<v Speaker 1>Less good at a cheaper price or better at a

0:11:33.920 --> 0:11:34.880
<v Speaker 1>more expensive price.

0:11:36.120 --> 0:11:39.320
<v Speaker 3>So you know, other parts of the world do not

0:11:39.400 --> 0:11:39.800
<v Speaker 3>have our.

0:11:39.760 --> 0:11:47.800
<v Speaker 1>Dynamism, and lots of places in the world are overregulated

0:11:48.320 --> 0:11:53.680
<v Speaker 1>compared to the United States, But if they're on sale

0:11:54.120 --> 0:11:59.840
<v Speaker 1>relative to the US, it's not unreasonable to want to

0:11:59.840 --> 0:12:01.760
<v Speaker 1>have some representation there.

0:12:02.720 --> 0:12:04.920
<v Speaker 2>Howard wonderful to get your thoughts. As always so you've

0:12:04.960 --> 0:12:06.920
<v Speaker 2>been generous with your time. We appreciate it. Thank you

0:12:07.040 --> 0:12:09.640
<v Speaker 2>very much, the legendary Howard Marks there of O Tree

0:12:09.640 --> 0:12:12.880
<v Speaker 2>Capital Management. Following the release of his latest memo in

0:12:12.920 --> 0:12:13.800
<v Speaker 2>the last week or so,