Which Bank to Short Sell Now!

by Kris Sayce on 8 April 2010

If your editor was a trader, the big trade we’d take a swing at now would be to bet against the banks again.

But make no mistake, when we mention the word ‘bet’ we mean it. We’re not talking about rigorous fundamental analysis that we do for Australian Small-Cap Investigator or Australian Wealth Gameplan. And neither are we talking about the type of technical analysis our Slipstream Trader Murray Dawes uses.

We’re talking the kind of bet that you’d make at the TAB. The kind of bet where you take a quick glance at the form guide and then shove a few bucks on it.

Of course, there’s a big difference with this kind of bet when compared to throwing a few bucks at the nags or the dish-lickers.

That’s because typically you’ll find it hard to just place a $10 bet against the banks. And even if you could you’d find your reward pretty thin.

Back in mid-January we suggested it might be an idea to think about short-selling Commonwealth Bank of Australia [ASX: CBA] shares. We didn’t quite have the kahoonas to actually tell you to do it, which was a shame because after a brief rally it sank to around $51 a share from a peak of $57.

Today CBA is back above $57:

CBA Daily

And still we can’t think of any reason why investors would want to own bank shares. Look, we won’t go into all the reasons again – overleveraged to the housing market, $2.20 of reserves for every $100 deposited, etc…

We’ve covered all that before.

But to our way of thinking, if you like a punt and you’re not afraid of taking on a bit of risk, why wouldn’t you bet on CBA moving to the downside from here?

As I’ve mentioned, it’s a punt, and betting against the banks means betting against the entire investing mainstream establishment. But quite frankly I think it’s something worth considering. Just make sure you’re fully on top of the risks should the bank shares continue to rise – which is entirely possible.

In a moment I’ll give you some pointers of two ways to play it if you do fancy taking a punt against the banks. But before I do that, let me get some disclosure stuff out of the way first…

For starters, your editor doesn’t own any bank shares.

Second, your editor is not front running this trade. In other words we haven’t taken a position to short sell the banks prior to writing this article. And furthermore, neither have we instructed any of our associates, friends, relations, friends of relations, relations of friends, friends of associates… [Reader's voice: Enough already, we get the picture!] to enter into this trade either.

And nor will we ‘back run’ the trade by jumping on the bandwagon afterwards, riding on the coattails of potential profits.

Hopefully that makes it clear for you. As an aside, we take exactly the same approach with our tips in Australian Small-Cap Investigator and Australian Wealth Gameplan. We don’t make any personal investments in those tips either.

Our personal view – and that of Port Phillip Publishing – is that even the appearance of a conflict of interest is bad for business.

Our business is doing the research, offering advice, providing ideas you won’t read anywhere else and leaving you to potentially make profits on the tips. Simply put, we enjoy writing about stocks, the market and the economy.

We leave it up to you to put your investing dollars on the line. If you profit you’ll probably subscribe again. If you don’t, then maybe you won’t subscribe again. It’s as simple as that.

Anyway, back to our bet against the banks.

When it comes to taking a punt on falling stocks I prefer to use low-risk methods which I’ll go through in a moment. You could of course just go to your broker and ask them to short sell physical stock.

The only problem with that is the broker will typically require a minimum trade of $50,000. For most people, that’s too big of a punt. Secondly, your risk management choices are fairly limited. Not all brokers offer stop loss facilities, and even if they do, it isn’t always a foolproof way of cutting losses.

That’s why I prefer to highlight the following two methods.

The first is to use something called Contracts for Difference (CFDs). I’ll be straight up, these are highly leveraged financial products. How leveraged? Put it this way, with some CFD providers you can put down $100 and get exposure of up to $10,000!

That’s 100-to-1 leverage, and it could be the quickest way to the poorhouse if you mess it up. You’d have to be mental to use that kind of leverage without considering the risks.

And if you think we’re being hypocritical talking about massive leverage in the stock market while lambasting excessive leverage in the housing market, then we’ll cop that.

But we will make one point to argue the case. We’ve never argued that the stock market is all blue sky and no downside risk. In contrast, our property spruiking pals only ever talk about the upside and never address the downside.

As an example, have you ever read a property spruiker saying you could head to the poorhouse if you mess up the investment?

Anyway, we’ll leave that one with you to make up your own mind.

Besides, with CFDs, just because the leverage is available it doesn’t mean you have to use it. For instance, if you normally trade $5,000 lots and you have $5,000 available, you can deposit the cash in your CFD account and enter a short sell for 87 CBA shares.

That gives you around a $5,000 exposure. If the price of CBA falls then you’ll move into profit. If the price of CBA rises then you’ll make a loss.

But here’s where you can limit your losses. It’s called a Guaranteed Stop Loss. I won’t go into all the details here, get in touch with the guys at City Index or CMC Markets and they’ll give you the full rundown.

In a nutshell, for a small fee the CFD provider will allow you to set a level at which you’re guaranteed not to lose any more money than a preset amount. So, as an example you could set your guaranteed stop loss at a CBA share price of $60. If CBA trades higher than that then you’ll lose no more than around $3 per share – about $260 if you short sell 87 shares.

Short selling can be pretty risky. That’s why I’d recommend you prepare to arm yourself with the proper risk management tools such as guaranteed stop losses.

Of course the flipside is, if CBA did drop to around $51 as it did recently then you’d lock in over $500 of gains. Not a bad return by anyone’s standards.

But look, remember this isn’t personal advice. If you like the sound of what I’ve mentioned just make sure you check out all the risks with the CFD provider. And also remember that by short selling the banks you’re betting against the entire mainstream investing establishment. Talk about swimming against the tide!

The other way to potentially gain from falling share prices is to look at exchange traded options. Or just ‘options’ as they’re more commonly called.

Again, there’s a whole bunch of risks involved, so make sure you check out all the details before going ahead with anything. In fact, your broker will make you complete a risk profile document to make sure you fully understand what you’re getting involved with before they’ll accept your money.

In this instance, a handy little punt is to look at May 2010 expiry put options on CBA. Right now you can take out a put option with a strike price of $55 for just 53 cents per share.

With a contract size of 1,000 shares, you’d be looking at a total cost of $530 for just one contract. Generally speaking – we won’t go into the complex stuff here – you’d need the CBA share price to fall below $54.47 in order to return a profit.

Anything below that and you’re in the money. The important point to remember with options is that they expire. So if the CBA share price didn’t move between now and the end of May then you’d lose your entire $530.

But as I say, get in touch with your broker to find out more info.

Look, we only ever look at basic options strategies in Australian Wealth Gameplan. And for the most part we’re only interested in low risk strategies. For instance just last month we recommended subscribers consider taking out covered call options against three of the stocks in the portfolio.

In that strategy we still like the stocks, but with the market near a short term high we figured it was a good time to earn some extra income in the event that stock prices didn’t move higher.

Anyway, I thought I’d give you something a little different in today’s Money Morning. Take it with a pinch of salt if you like. You know how much we dislike the banks, and we figure this is the best way to potentially profit if they do take another turn for the worse.

We’ll keep an eye on the CBA share price and let you know whether this would have been a winning or losing trade!

Cheers,
Kris.

{ 77 comments }

61 PuntPal April 12, 2010 at 10:03 am

I flipped out here a few months ago and blamed PF and cb for pushing me over the edge. I stand by that claim, as I think they have are very good at frustrating an argument that they are clearly losing on the evidence and logic.

They resort to exaggerations and misquotes – or for me, that because of my lack of experience I am not really aware of how the real world works.

But I have come to the conclusion, that the more PF annoys me with his arrogance then the closer we are to a crash. Its the perfect proxy. Just like Joye – look at his blog, the guy is flipping out. One week the RBA are genuisses, the next they are confused. One moment we have a chronic housing shortage, the next we have had no price gains in 6 years in Sydney…they are lost in muddle of lies and deception.

See Nick, as you know, this whole house of cards is built on the arrogance of spruikers such as PF. If they don’t appear confident, then the whole bubble will be exposed, so its essential for them to appear to never doubt their position. This will be frustrating when the evidence suggests their position is on shaky ground, but you cant expect PF to concede defeat now. Not when the MSM are making a fight back with spruiking shows like the “The Block” making its anticipated return (I give that show 4 weeks before its dragged).

Just watch and enjoy. Lending figures today come out and if as expected, there are 5 months straight of a drop in lending then this could be a turning point. Our economy’s “resilience” is really all about the willingness of people to borrow money off people like PF…

62 GB April 12, 2010 at 10:17 am

PuntPal
If lending figures are down again then read Adam Carr’s response – should be good for a laugh

I think last time his comment was along the lines of “… I just dont understand why lending is falling” – that would be the bandwagon affect!!! I wonder if he has ever considered that demand was sucked forward into 2009 by the FHOG and maybe just maybe people cant afford to buy a house at these prices?

Interesting article below, the perma-bulls are tipping 10% interest rates

http://www.news.com.au/money/interest-rates-heading-for10-per-cent/story-e6frfmci-1225852259386

63 Peter Fraser April 12, 2010 at 10:27 am

GB – I would also expect lending figures for housing to be lower given the rate rises we have had and the loss of the FHOG boost.

64 PuntPal April 12, 2010 at 10:33 am

GB – he said last time that lending figures don’t make sense because of auction clearance rates and house price climbs.

He doesn’t understand which data can be fudged and which can’t be. He is the definition of confirmation bias. He looks for anything that supports his bullishness and is confused by anything that would support more trepidation. He will be jobless in 2011…along with about 8% of our population

65 Nick April 12, 2010 at 11:29 am

Puntpal….firstly let me make it clear, also to you Peter. This is not a Peter Frazer personal attack. This is an attack on what “PF” represents or portrays in this blog. If we were all on a table together having dinner I would welcome the joust with laughter in between. I don’t know him and he hasn’t done me any harm so I have no reason to “hate”. So I will correct myself and refer to Peter as “PF” just to keep it non personal. But one thing I ask of you Peter is don’t use derogatory terms as this does cut deeply to many folk and I will defend them every time with all guns blazing. As for me..ahhh go for it!!! I’ve been called everything under the sun…probably because they find it hard to pronounce my surname.
However, punpal I agree with you entirely. This is my whole point. That the “PF’s” of the world are creating the wrong message for those who feel they are not into the jargon of high finance and technicalities and are simply seeking answers to what they perceive as confusion. They look up to these “financial geniuses” as gurus but what they hear from them does not tally up with what they see and experience on “ground level”. This makes the “common folk” feel tortured between “who am I to question and expert?” to “but that’s not what my common sense says”. This has ( and is continuing to do so) devastated lives. We have been living a dream and now it’s coming time to wake up. That is why I relay my parents messages. These people experienced first hand what economic collapse means. Many of my relatives were killed under the Hitler regime and my parents escaped by the skin of their teeth. However, they don’t even balk at the mention of Hitler. Why? Because they defeated him and his regime. They won! They have always been more concerned about the “Next Hiltler”, which the world is now slowly starting to reveal, and unfortunately there is not just one of them this time.
You, puntpal, represent many people I know your age. Believe it or not, even I was once that age and shared the same doubts & frustrations. I want to play the other side of the coin..the big picture.. fore, once you understand that, you can do what is necessary to “negotiate it”. Very similar to Rugby. You know what your goal is. To get through the pack and place the ball on the other side of the paddock. That will give you points. Then come back and do it again, and again until the ref blows the whistle. (or the Big guy call your number). I recommend that you watch a movie called “The Mist” by Steven King. Watch it intently as it all makes sense in the last minute of the movie and I bet it will blow your mind. It portrays exactly what I am talking about. Stay the course puntpal. Follow your instincts and intelligence. Watch out for those “defenders” coming at you from all directions. BUT keep your eye on the prize and you WILL reach that goal. Know that I, and many others like me, are in the grandstand cheering you on.
I’ve got to go and do some more tourist things now. Peter, I have been to HK many times but this time seeing it through the kids eyes makes it even more exciting. Macau is always a buzz. But let me say that the New Territories are not as bustley (manufacturing wise) as they used to be, hence the pollution in HK is not as it was..that’s worrying.

66 SV April 12, 2010 at 11:30 am

cb@55: ANZ and NAB may want to catch up on market share, yes.

However, from point of view of MM and DR reader, this does not mean much: 1) Having now an implicit guarantee of the government, they can afford risks. There is no question the guarantee will be re-instated on demand. 2) as the history has shown, bankers’ crystal ball is no clearer than yours or mine.

Yes, as Peter alluded us to, the facts look rosy on the surface, and new lenders coming to market etc. The role of MM and DR is to warn us about the under-the-surface processes that may spoil the party.

The clouds can gather and storm start raging virtually overnight.

When sky is falling down and everyone knows it and there is no escape and no hope, MM and DR will tell you to buy in. This is how contrarians make money.

Nick, for what it’s worth, I have the deepest respect for people creating unorthodox medicines and cures and am proud to count one of such people among my closest friends. From her, I understand the problems they have to face and the resistance of the medical establishment.

Please ignore any comments mentioning “fools” and let PF blow his trumpet. Without variety of opinions, this forum will be a pointless cheering contest for the bears.

67 SV April 12, 2010 at 11:40 am

PP@61: I agree Joye is flipping out.
what is he doing talking about overprices shares and getting pasted by his own readers – It appears, Kris Sayce got to him, ha!

68 bb April 12, 2010 at 2:04 pm

GB @ post 62. Did Adam Carr actually draw upon the line “must be the bandwagon effect” by way of expalanation as to the fall in mortgage lending? What a classic! Of course there never was any bandwagon effect existing as the very same lemmings flocked to borrow more and more to pump into the Australian property bubble was there? You just have to admire a commited hypocrit. How do these fraudster sycophants of the property industry get to act in roles as independent ‘reporters’?

69 GB April 12, 2010 at 2:07 pm

bb – i meant Carr suffers from the bandwagon effect but I think PuntPal’s cognitive bias better suits Carr (@64)

70 cb April 12, 2010 at 3:33 pm

Sorry, I am lagging behind a little.
Nick – You know my views happened to be aligned with yours, virtually no matter what substantive question comes up for discussion. At the same time, I also try my best to address myself to the arguments of any particular individual. I find that as soon as an exchange becomes personal, the benefits of it for learning are quickly diminished. Having said that, I must quickly acknowledge that I have not always lived up to that ideal, and that I have myself overstepped the line a few times, allowing myself the indulgence of going beyond some gentle, good-natured, ribbing. Anyhow, that is where I am coming from.

As for the substantive points you make about some of what PF has said, I am sure he will take the time to reflect on them and given the thoughtful man I know him to be, he will benefit from them in due course. In the meantime, I applaud his considered response so far. Civility is not everything, but the very preservation of civilisation depends on large doses of it, and the more we can have of it, overall, the better.

At the same time, I can see how some comments made by PF, such as Greece’s overindulgence in debt, and its largely successful avoidance of the tax man, could be taken as being unfair, and even offensive, to Greece and its people. As you point out, Greece is far from being alone in the debt binge, and very few people, and governments, have had the fortitude and wisdom of saying NO to easy credit. Plus, what has been done to Greece, with the collusion of corrupt greek politicians, is nothing short of criminal, and now the criminal syndicates are trying to push the entire country under the water, and enslave its people into perpetuity, which is an obscenity beyond words.

They have done it to Iceland and Ireland, now they are doing it to Greece, and there will be many others to come, all sucked in with the same bag of bankster trickeries, unless the people find the backbone and start to push back. We have seen the difficulties the Vikings and the Irish are having with their attempts at pushing back, but Greece might prove to be the country on which the criminal gangasters are going to choke, because the Greek people are not likely to take this lying down. I certainly hope so.

I have seen many videos with Michael Hudson, for whom I have tremendous respect, and he has an excellent website. I would encourage everyone to visit it and have a good read about his analysis of what there is, and what there should be. This man’s understanding and theories are nothing short of eye opening.

http://michael-hudson.com/

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: