Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Goldman Sachs And The Big Hedge Funds Are Pushing Leverage To Ridiculous Extremes
TEC ^ | 01/14/2013 | Michael Snyder

Posted on 01/20/2013 5:43:44 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Goldman Sachs And The Big Hedge Funds Are Pushing Leverage To Ridiculous Extremes

By Michael, on January 14th, 2013

Goldman Sachs And The Big Hedge Funds Are Pushing Leverage To Ridiculous Extremes - Photo by bfishadow on FlickrAs stocks have risen in recent years, the big hedge funds and the "too big to fail" banks have used borrowed money to make absolutely enormous profits. But when you use debt to potentially multiply your profits, you also create the possibility that your losses will be multiplied if the markets turn against you. When the next stock market crash happens, and the gigantic pyramid of risk, debt and leverage on Wall Street comes tumbling down, will highly leveraged banks such as Goldman Sachs ask the federal government to bail them out? The use of leverage is one of the greatest threats to our financial system, and yet most Americans do not even really understand what it is. The following is a basic definition of leverage from Investopedia: "The use of various financial instruments or borrowed capital, such as margin, to increase the potential return of an investment." Leverage allows firms to make much larger bets in the financial markets than they otherwise would be able to, and at this point Goldman Sachs and the big hedge funds are pushing leverage to ridiculous extremes. When the financial markets go up and they win on those bets, they can win very big. For example, revenues at Goldman Sachs increased by about 30 percent in 2012 and Goldman stock has soared by more than 40 percent over the past 12 months. Those are eye-popping numbers. But leverage is a double-edged sword. When the markets turn, Goldman Sachs and many of these large hedge funds could be facing astronomical losses.

Sadly, it appears that Wall Street did not learn any lessons from the financial crisis of 2008. Hedge funds have ramped up leverage to levels not seen since before the last stock market crash. The following comes from a recent Bloomberg article entitled "Hedge-Fund Leverage Rises to Most Since 2004 in New Year"...

Hedge funds are borrowing more to buy equities just as loans by New York Stock Exchange brokers reach the highest in four years, signs of increasing confidence after professional investors trailed the market since 2008.

Leverage among managers who speculate on rising and falling shares climbed to the highest level to start any year since at least 2004, according to data compiled by Morgan Stanley. Margin debt at NYSE firms rose in November to the most since February 2008, data from NYSE Euronext show.

So why is this so important?

Well, as a recent Zero Hedge article explained, even a relatively small drop in stock prices could potentially absolutely devastate many hedge funds...

What near record leverage means is that hedge funds have absolutely zero tolerance for even the smallest drop in prices, which are priced to absolute and endless central bank-intervention perfection - sorry, fundamentals in a time when global GDP growth is declining, when Europe and Japan are in a double dip recession, when the US is expected to report its first sub 1% GDP quarter in years, when corporate revenues and EPS are declining just don't lead to soaring stock prices.

It also means that with virtually all hedge funds in such hedge fund hotel names as AAPL (the stock held by more hedge funds - over 230 - than any other), any major drop in the price would likely lead to a wipe out of the equity tranche at the bulk of AAPL "investors", sending them scrambling to beg for either more LP generosity, or to have their prime broker repo desk offer them even more debt. And while the former is a non-starter, the latter has so far worked, which means that most hedge funds have been masking losses with more debt, which then suffers even more losses, and so on.

By the way, Apple (AAPL) just fell to an 11-month low. Apple stock has now declined by 26 percent since it hit a record high back in September. That is a very bad sign for hedge funds.

But hedge funds are not the only ones flirting with disaster. In a previous article about the derivatives bubble, I pointed out the ridiculous amount of derivatives exposure that some of these "too big to fail" banks have relative to their total assets...

According to the Comptroller of the Currency, four of the largest U.S. banks are walking a tightrope of risk, leverage and debt when it comes to derivatives. Just check out how exposed they are...

JPMorgan Chase

Total Assets: $1,812,837,000,000 (just over 1.8 trillion dollars)

Total Exposure To Derivatives: $69,238,349,000,000 (more than 69 trillion dollars)

Citibank

Total Assets: $1,347,841,000,000 (a bit more than 1.3 trillion dollars)

Total Exposure To Derivatives: $52,150,970,000,000 (more than 52 trillion dollars)

Bank Of America

Total Assets: $1,445,093,000,000 (a bit more than 1.4 trillion dollars)

Total Exposure To Derivatives: $44,405,372,000,000 (more than 44 trillion dollars)

Goldman Sachs

Total Assets: $114,693,000,000 (a bit more than 114 billion dollars - yes, you read that correctly)

Total Exposure To Derivatives: $41,580,395,000,000 (more than 41 trillion dollars)

Take another look at those figures for Goldman Sachs. If you do the math, Goldman Sachs has total exposure to derivatives contracts that is more than 362 times greater than their total assets.

That is utter insanity, but we haven't had a derivatives crash yet so everyone just keeps pretending that the emperor actually has clothes on.

When the derivatives crisis happens, things in the financial markets are going to fall apart at lightning speed. A recent article posted on goldsilverworlds.com explained what a derivatives crash may look like...

When one big bank faces some kind of trouble and fails, the banks with the largest exposure to derivates (think JP Morgan, Citygroup, Goldman Sachs) will realize that the bank on the other side of the derivatives trade (the counterparty) is no longer good for their obligation. All of a sudden the hedged position becomes a naked position. The net position becomes a gross position. The risk explodes instantaneously. Markets realize that their hedged positions are in reality not hedged anymore, and all market participants start bailing almost simultaneously. The whole banking and financial system freezes up. It might start in Asia or Europe, in which case Americans will wake up in the morning to find out that their markets are not functioning anymore; stock markets remain closed, money at the banks become inaccessible, etc.

But for now, the party continues. Goldman Sachs and many of the big hedge funds are making enormous piles of money.

In fact, according to the Wall Street Journal, Goldman Sachs recently gave some of their top executives 65 million dollars worth of restricted stock...

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GS -0.76% handed insiders including Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein and his top lieutenants a total of $65 million in restricted stock just hours before this year's higher tax rates took effect.

The New York securities firm gave 10 of its directors and executives early vesting on 508,104 shares previously awarded as part of prior years' compensation, according to a series of filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission late Monday.

And the bonuses that employees at Goldman receive are absolutely obscene. A recent Daily Mail article explained that Goldman employees in the UK are expected to receive record-setting bonuses this year...

Britain’s army of bankers will re-ignite public fury over lavish pay rewards as staff at Goldman Sachs are expected to reward themselves £8.3 billion in bonuses on Wednesday.

The American investment bank, which employs 5,500 staff in the UK, will be the first to unveil its telephone number-sized rewards – an average of £250,000 a person – as part of the latest round of bonus updates.

The increase, up from £230,000 last year, comes as British families are still struggling to make ends meet five years after banks brought the economy to the brink of meltdown.

Wouldn't you like to get a "bonus" like that?

Life is good at these firms while the markets are going up.

But what happens when the party ends?

What happens if the markets crash in 2013?

When you bet big, you either win big or you lose big.

For now, the gigantic bets that Wall Street firms are making with borrowed money are paying off very nicely.

But a day of reckoning is coming. The next stock market crash is going to rip through Wall Street like a chainsaw and the carnage is going to be unprecedented.

Are you sure that the people holding your money will be able to make it through what is ahead? You might want to look into it while you still can.

Goldman Sachs New World Headquarters



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Society
KEYWORDS: derivatives; goldmansachs; hedgefunds; leverage

1 posted on 01/20/2013 5:44:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

There is no downside to leverage when the Federal Government steps up to cover your losses.


2 posted on 01/20/2013 5:47:06 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Excellent, cogent, and well written article. Thanks for posting. Leverage is very dangerous, but it is easily quantified, and assessed. Derivatives are far more dangerous because for the most part it's a completely unregulated marketplace. As the author correctly notes, it takes a failure by just one party to topple the entire house of cards.

One simple example easily illustrates the insanity. By some estimates, the total value of all derivatives that devolve from APPLE as the underlying stock is more than 100x the amount of Apple's capitalization. IOW, the tail here is clearly wagging the dog.

Wall Street never learns. My first experience with a major market correction was the late 80's. All during the run-up to the correction, we were told that "portfolio insurance" would protect everyone, that risk had all but been eliminated. And everyone believed it. Until everyone wanted to sell at the same time, the computers generated nothing but sell orders, and there were NO buyers until prices had taken a huge haircut.

Everyone forgets the one universal truth about financial markets. They are a zero sum game. For every buyer, there is a seller, for every winner, a loser. Wealth is not being created here, just rearranged.

3 posted on 01/20/2013 5:59:56 AM PST by ken5050 ("One useless man is a shame, two are a law firm, three or more are a Congress".. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So what does this mean to me? Should I liquidate my 401K and take a huge tax hit, and then buy the metals?

Or is it too late, were all gonna die?


4 posted on 01/20/2013 6:02:52 AM PST by Wildbill22 (They have us surrounded again, the poor bastards- Gen Creighton Williams Abrams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I’ll admit to not knowing all that much about hedge funds but what should be done about this? When they fail don’t bail them out? or pass some regulations now in order to prevent (or lessen) the impact when everything falls apart?


5 posted on 01/20/2013 6:05:45 AM PST by escapefromboston (manny ortez: mvp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Ping.


6 posted on 01/20/2013 6:13:45 AM PST by upchuck (America's at an awkward stage. Too late to work within the system, too early to shoot the bastards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Where does Frank-Dodd fit into this?

The liabilities being carried by those banks and brokerages is so hugh, even the gvt won’t be able to help when this carefully crafted house of cards comes tumbling down.


7 posted on 01/20/2013 6:17:05 AM PST by upchuck (America's at an awkward stage. Too late to work within the system, too early to shoot the bastards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

These big banks were bailed out with taxpayer-funded ‘loans’ in 2008 because they were too big to fail. Now those same banks are even bigger with even more leverage. The wrong lesson was learned.


8 posted on 01/20/2013 6:30:48 AM PST by Flick Lives (We're going to be just like the old Soviet Union, but with free cell phones!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I think the bottom line is that they are conducting a test to determine if they are truly too big to fail.

It’s kind of a “Tower of Babel” thing. They figure that if they “win”, they will build a financial tower all the way to heaven, and be like gods.

They are not big on imagining what will happen if their magnificent scheme doesn’t work.

Because, you know, taxpayer funded mud brick and slimy accounting gimmicks are such perfect building materials.


9 posted on 01/20/2013 6:59:16 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

LEVERAGE was canceled at the end of season 5.
bazinga!!


10 posted on 01/20/2013 7:41:03 AM PST by bravo whiskey (“People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What do utterly immoral people do, when they know the end is unavoidable, say a terminal diagnosis individually, or for an example writ large, a mile wide asteroid is going to hit in a month? Go on a wild spending spree, fuelling all manner of orgies and gluttony?

That’s what this looks like to me. Get it while you can.


11 posted on 01/20/2013 8:01:38 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

To make it simple. The margin rate is 50% when buying or selling stocks. However the use of futures drops that rate to about 5%. It is the use of futures on the S&P, Dow, Bonds etc that allow for massive leverage. It is 8 AM do you know where your hedge fund manager is.
Thought 2 - In all my years as a broker I never saw anyone nailed for insider trading when selling short!
Thought 3 - Goldman Sucks etc using the above are nothing less than pirates. LOL


12 posted on 01/20/2013 8:19:18 AM PST by stocksthatgoup (ZERO DARK THIRTY (coming soon to an embassy near you))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

To make it simple. The margin rate is 50% when buying or selling stocks. However the use of futures drops that rate to about 5%. It is the use of futures on the S&P, Dow, Bonds etc that allow for massive leverage. It is 8 AM do you know where your hedge fund manager is.
Thought 2 - In all my years as a broker I never saw anyone nailed for insider trading when selling short!
Thought 3 - Goldman Sucks etc using the above are nothing less than pirates. LOL


13 posted on 01/20/2013 8:19:17 AM PST by stocksthatgoup (ZERO DARK THIRTY (coming soon to an embassy near you))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
Everyone forgets the one universal truth about financial markets. They are a zero sum game. For every buyer, there is a seller, for every winner, a loser. Wealth is not being created here, just rearranged.

Trading is not a zero sum game due to timing.

A buys at 1000 shares at 30 in 2008
B buys at 100 shares at 40, A sells the 100 in 2009
C buys at 100 shares at 50, A sells the 100 in 2010
price drops...
C sells 100 shares at 40, A buys the 100 in 2011
price goes back up...
B sells 100 shares at 45, A buys the 100 in 2012

Results:
A - 2,000 profit
B - 500 profit
C - 1,000 loss

When one person profits it does not mean that another has to necessarily lose any money at all, and vice versa.

It is quite possible in a rising market that most traders profit.

The problem with the stock market is the basic idea of trading stocks with imperfect information and allowing the price to float, instead of trading at book value. The higher the market price of a stock gets above the company's underlying book value, the more room it has to fall. Also, the SEC and its rules are a mirage that the SEC is actually protecting anyone or anything, when the SECs rules are what makes the information imperfect.

If I offer to sell a small local convenience store that I own for $245,000 any buyer with any brains at all would require that I show them the books so they knew the past few years sales and costs. If something didn't smell right, they'd ask for a lot of information to make sure there were no hidden problems.

When we buy and sell stock ticker symbols, their management releases quarterly statements and supposedly anything significant in between on special disclosures. But we really have no idea what is going on inside that company. So we go to "analysts" (the establishment's firms) and ask them to divine information for us. Now, they supposedly do not have "inside" information, but they are so smart they studied the details of the public information, and they have some wizardly "industry knowledge" - that they start prognosticating for us what the price of the STOCK will do. Not only how the company will do financially, but how the market will view that and reflect their views in buying and selling patterns of the stock !

Now carefully note (like watching 3 card monte)... the SEC rules actually say that prognosticator, the firm we trade through, and the SEC... - NONE of them guarantee that we will not lose our original investment. So we are completely on our own, taking on 100% of the risk.

What really is happening on wall street is globalists control many of the big finance firms, be they banks, investment banks, private equity, etc. When we invest in their little world, they get to use our money as leverage. JPMorgan, for example - it has more than 2 trillion in assets. Now, those assets do not belong to the international banksters, but JPM. And JPM is publicly held, so it's technically owned by millions of shareholders (it has almost 4 billion shares outstanding). But the board of directors and senior management are making the decisions. And it's 73% institutional-owned, so the composition of that board is pretty tightly controlled. But it's key influence is this: JPM is essential for U.S. government borrowing. Ergo, we have the board and executives at JPM and a few other major firms speaking to our dear leaders as creditors that they need in order for government to function, and having deep connections financially and idealogically to our elite universities and major news media outlets and entertainment industry, which means they can make or break politicians in elections.
14 posted on 01/20/2013 8:20:17 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What is the problem? The tax payer will bail them out-—Again!


15 posted on 01/20/2013 8:44:36 AM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

B F L


16 posted on 01/20/2013 7:51:38 PM PST by Max in Utah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson