Short Large Cap US Tech Stocks

On the contrary, I have determined from studying various photographs of Michael Burry that he is approximately 5’8’’ (sarcasm). Here, “the Big Short” is referring to his portfolio as of November 15, 2022.

If you have been watching the stock market at all over the past year, you are probably aware that it has been crashing. As of December 19th, the NASDAQ is down about 33% from its highs, while the S&P 500, which contains the 500 biggest companies in the US by market cap, is down about 20%. This is a significant loss of value, to be sure, but I believe the market has quite a bit farther to go before it reaches a bottom. Furthermore, I think most of this falling will happen in 2023. Allow me to explain my reasoning.

There is a near infinite amount of data one can use in order to make predictions about the stock market and individual companies. It is easy to become overwhelmed, confused, and “lost in the weeds” of the veritable ocean of information. For that reason, I like to keep things simple whenever possible. And while it may be nearly impossible to predict day to day price action, long to medium term predictions can be made with a significant degree of accuracy.

There are four basic sources of information that I am using in order to make my prediction. They are:

  1. Increasing interest rates by US Federal Reserve Bank and other central banks
  2. The inverted yield curve of the bond market
  3. Price to Earning Ratios (P/E)
  4. Analogous bear markets and market crashes throughout history

1. Increasing Interest Rates

In an effort to keep the economy running strong during Covid lockdowns, the US Federal Reserve Bank and other central banks around the world increased the rate of quantitative easing and began pumping money into the economy while slashing interest rates to near zero. This was one of the main factors that led to the runaway inflation that we have been experiencing for the last year or so. To bring inflation back down to the target 2% mark, the Fed has been increasing interest rates on a monthly basis. This has the effect of increasing the cost of borrowing money, increasing debt servicing cost, and overall tightening financial conditions so that spending is reduced and the cycle that drives inflation is slowed. The federal funds rate is now at 4.3% and the target rate, while not known at this point, is thought to be around 5%.

When trying to measure the effects of these interest rate hikes on the economy, one will notice that there are significant lags between when the interest rates are raised and the effects begin to materialize. Up until only a couple of months ago, most economic indicators, like unemployment rates, continued to run red hot. Only now are we starting to see some substantial cracks in the economy. Considering that the fed isn’t done hiking rates and they have indicated their intention to keep the rate high “until the job is done”, it is safe to say the economic climate is going to get far worse, and there is high likelihood of a recession.

2. Inverted Yield Curve  

A yield curve inversion occurs in the bond market when the yield (interest rate) of short-term (2 year for example) treasury bonds becomes higher than that of long-term bonds (10 year for example). In a normal, healthy economy, long-term bonds yield higher interest payments than short-term ones, because your money is tied up for a longer period of time. However, in periods of financial turmoil, this can become reversed, and this “inversion” has historically been a very reliable indicator of a recession. In fact, every time the yield curve has inverted in the last 47 years, a recession has followed shortly thereafter.

To understand why this phenomenon reliably predicts recessions, one must first understand how it is created. It is driven by two main factors: interest rates and investor psychology. As the Fed raises interest rates, the yield on short term bonds goes up as a direct result, because the new interest rate becomes the cost of borrowing, and bonds are a debt instrument – a means by which one party loans money to another. The second part of the equation, investor psychology, causes demand for long term bonds to increase, as investors take their money out of riskier assets and opt for safer long-term bonds, and this, in turn, drives the yield of long-term bonds down. So in sum, as interest rates rise, investors begin to ‘price in’ a period of short-term financial turmoil, and this phenomenon has been a reliable indicator of past recessions.

Above, we can see how the yield curve went from being healthy one year ago to inverted as of December 19, 2022.

3. Price to Earnings Ratios

Now that we’ve set the stage for a recession, let’s consider how this will likely affect equity valuations. There are many ways to value businesses, but since my philosophy is to keep things simple whenever possible, let’s look at price to earning ratios (P/E ratios) which compare the market cap of a company to its annual profit. P/E ratios are the foundation of business valuation; a P/E ratio of 10 or less is usually considered in “value” territory while a ratio over 20 can be indicative of either overvaluation or expected growth. In other words, if you expect a company to grow it’s earnings in the next couple of years by 3x, you might be willing to pay a high multiple for its current earnings; however, if this growth does not pan out, you may have overpaid and it will take a long time to recoup your investment.

The average P/E ratio in the S&P 500 currently is 19.79 while the historic average is 15.99. This indicates that it should, at the very least, return to the mean in the midst of a recession. Furthermore, many large cap tech companies are starting to see drops in revenue and earnings as the economy slows. If they are still priced for growth while their revenues and earnings are shrinking, what needs to happen? The answer is the stock price needs to fall.

4. Analogous Bear Markets and Market Crashes

The final source of information that I want to consider in support of my bear thesis are previous market crashes. History tends to repeat itself, so we can learn about what is likely to happen this time around by studying similar events from the past.

In March of 2000, the S&P Index reached a peak of $1527. It then spent the next two and a half years plummeting before finally reaching a bottom of $800 in November of 2002; that’s a loss of about 52% of its value. In the next market crash, the 2008 financial crisis, it reached a peak of $1561 in October of 2007 before bottoming at $683 in March of 2009, about a year and a half later. This time it lost about 56% of its value. Though these bubbles and subsequent crashes had different causes, they resulted in a similar loss of value in a similar amount of time.

Looking to another analogue, the “Black Monday” crash of 1987 happened in a much shorter period of time, only 3 months, but it lost a comparable 44% of its value by the time it bottomed. Considering, as I stated in the first paragraph, that the S&P 500 has only lost about 20% of its value so far (as of December 19th 2022), if it has indeed bottomed already, that would make it a far shallower crash than ones in recent history. When you consider these comparisons coupled with the number of headwinds facing the market currently, it seems very unlikely that we have reached a bottom.

A chart of the “Dotcom Bubble” and subsequent crash in the year 2000

What Should you Do?

If you have read the Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham – essentially the bible of “value investing” – you would have encountered Warren Buffet’s favorite passive investing strategy which is to simply buy into the S&P 500 Index and hold over a long period of time. Since the S&P 500 is made up of businesses that generate value, it goes up long term, so if you are willing to wait long enough, you won’t lose money. However, since the arguments I have presented show that the S&P 500 is likely to fall in the next year, a better strategy would be to sell it short over a short period of time. There are various ways to do this, but the simplest way is to buy shares of an inverse ETF that tracks it, for example the Pro Shares Ultrashort S&P 500, ticker symbol SH. There are also leveraged ETFs which will amplify returns (or losses) by 2x or 3x, but I do not recommend holding those longer than two months. For a list of some inverse index ETF’s, check out https://etfdb.com/etfs/inverse/equity/

One thing I have learned from observing the current market crash is that not all companies crash at the same time. Instead, highly speculative assets, like crypto, and fundamentally unsound companies crash first, while assets with real world value, like real estate, and fundamentally sound companies are the last to go. And, in fact, some companies may never crash; energy producers, for example, are doing very well recently. The big, fundamentally sound companies that I think need to crash are ones that appreciated rapidly in 2020 and 2021, obviously benefiting from the loose financial conditions. For example, Apple and Nvidia are two ‘blue chip’ companies that are now sporting unrealistic P/E ratios in light of their near-term growth prospects. Both are seeing revenues declining and this trend is likely to continue for the entirety of 2023 at least. Shorting these names, with a plan to cover within a year, would be a safe bet as of today, December 19, 2022.

I would avoid shorting any of the speculative names that have already lost ~90% of their value in the last year, depending on your appetite for risk. Although it is quite likely many such companies will continue to go down, some may see violent moves upward due to acquisition rumors or other factors.

Scam Bankrupt-Fraud and the Modern-Day Tulip Mania of Crypto

Is crypto a ponzi scheme?

On November 11, 2022, Sam Bankman-Fried’s cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, after it was unable to fulfill its short-term financial obligations to customers and creditors. This bankruptcy was preceded by a collapse in the price of virtually all cryptocurrencies, and it sent a wave through the crypto world causing prices to plummet yet further, forcing many crypto holders and organizations into financial distress. Recently, the crypto platform BlockFi also filed for bankruptcy due to “significant exposure” to FTX (https://www.investopedia.com/blockfi-review-5216103).

I felt compelled to write about this because I have long been a skeptic of crypto, and the web-3 mania that spread across the globe from 2020 to 2022 was so obviously fated to end badly that I found myself anticipating the crash nearly the entire time. People trading pictures of monkeys for millions of dollars? What could possibly go wrong? Now that the crash is happening before our eyes, I think it’s time for some somber reflection. Furthermore, there is a deep irony in the fact that one of the main merits of crypto has supposedly been its lack of government regulation, and now that investors have lost big, they are crying for the government to step in and help them get their money back.

             

Bankruptcies, exit scams, and frauds are so common within the crypto space that it is seemingly more difficult to think of organizations that have not been affected by such events than it is to think of ones that have. QuadrigaCx, Bitfinex, Terra Luna, Three Arrows Capital, Voyager, Celsius, Genesis, Gemini, Coinflex, and now FTX, Alameda Research, and BlockFi. I’m sure there are more that I don’t know about. One of the main virtues of crypto, according to its proponents, is that it takes power away from governments and banks who have historically controlled currencies. Since governments can print money at will and set policy around how it can be used, they have too much control over it. A ‘decentralized’ currency has no governing body, the antiestablishment crypto bro will enthusiastically assert as he’s driving your Uber, and therefore it is superior to so-called ‘fiat’ currencies. The obvious problem with this which has become exceedingly apparent in light of recent events: government regulations of state issued currencies are often there to benefit citizens. Fiat money is certainly not without its problems, but cryptocurrencies have proven to be remarkably volatile, impractical for everyday transactions, and facilitative to scams, money laundering, and the purchase of illegal goods and services.

We are all currently experiencing one of the main drawbacks of fiat currency. It’s what happens when governments introduce too much new money into the system thereby keeping interest rates artificially low for an extended period of time: inflation. But even during times of relatively extreme inflation, the Canadian dollar is only losing around 10% of its value annually (official estimates are slightly lower but some speculate the real inflation rate could be as high as 15%). Bitcoin, on the other hand, has lost 68% of its value over the last year, and it’s one of the least volatile cryptos. There are a plethora of so-called shitcoins that have plummeted 80% or more over that same period. With volatility such as this, it’s difficult to imagine how you could design an economy around crypto. Can you imagine if you lost 80% of your life savings in one year just by keeping it in your bank account?

So, what gives a currency its value anyway? How do we decide what you can buy with a dollar of fiat money? To a certain extent, the value of the dollar is the result of a collective societal agreement. These coins or pieces of paper have no inherent value, but we all decide that they can be exchanged for goods and services. However, this agreement is bolstered by the government which attempts to keep the value of the dollar relatively stable through monetary policy and by guaranteeing that the dollar will indeed remain the standard for exchange of value within the country’s boarders. Therefore, collective psychology, established standards for trade, and government monetary policy prevent the dollar from swinging wildly in value which is good for society as a whole. What then should the value of a bitcoin be? The answer is unclear. The supply is limited by design, but it cannot readily be exchanged for goods and services, and it is not backed by any governing body (except for maybe El Salvador?). So essentially, the value of a bitcoin is whatever someone else is willing to pay for it, and this method of valuation has lead to swings by hundreds of percent within a single year. Until there is some stability to this currency, would you really want to integrate it into the economy?

Unfortunately, the extreme fluctuations in price of crypto have been one of the main factors that has led to the rash of bankruptcies in the space. In the case of FTX, the exact details are still murky and will likely remain so until legal proceedings are carried out, but it sounds like FTX and its sister company, Alameda Research, were both borrowing heavily against crypto “assets” that were essentially invented out of thin air. During the mania, when the price of every pointless shitcoin was going to the moon, it seemed like an ingenious business model to simply borrow against your cryptos and reinvest into more cryptos. However, when the price of these tokens collapsed and FTX needed to repay loans and fulfill customer withdrawals, it found itself short of sufficient liquidity and was therefore forced to declare bankruptcy. This was, at the very least, a massive failure of risk management by FTX; whether it constitutes outright fraud will be for the courts to decide.

A website describes how opening a cryptocurrency account can reward you with superior returns compared to a bank account. However, at least your money is still there when you open your boring, regular bank account.

As one of the largest financial bubbles in history rapidly deflates, one is reminded on the dotcom era in which many hopeful internet enterprises imploded after irrational speculation drove their values into the stratosphere. However, once the dust settled, the legitimate companies emerged from the rubble, and of course, internet technology itself went on to change the world in previously unimaginable ways. I think we will see a similar phenomenon this time around with blockchain technology. It seems to have a significant utility for the decentralized sharing of resources and operation of systems. Though, what exact lasting roles blockchain will have remains to be seen.

SolarWindow Technologies Inc. (WNDW) – Analysis

Introduction

SolarWindow Technologies Inc. trades on the OTC Markets under the symbol WNDW, and in the last 2 months, it has spiked in price from $3.50 per share to about $11 – a jump of over 300%. It’s market cap now sits at $582M.

What has caused this spike in price? Surely the company must have shared some good news with investors. Perhaps a new contract worth millions? Or a massive quarterly earnings? Not exactly.

Below is an excerpt from a promotional newsletter sent recently to potential investors:

“But back to Jeff… We were on a Zoom call yesterday and he was telling me about this solar company that is using a spray coating to generate electricity from glass windows.

If you think about it, skyscrapers are nothing more than giant solar collection devices. And this $4 company Jeff was telling me about has a technology called “liquid electricity” that can be applied to rigid glass or plastic in ultra-thin layers. Boom, instant skyscraper photovoltaic device.

The company just hired an executive from SoftBank and is getting ready for its Asian build-out. With Biden in the White House and the green-energy gravy train just getting started, this company won’t be $4 for long. Click here now — this is one opportunity you don’t want to miss.”” – https://www.stockgumshoe.com/reviews/green-chip-stocks/checking-out-siegels-pitch-about-spray-on-solar-cells-and-elon-musks-big-bombshell/

The newsletter goes on to make outlandish claims about SolarWindow’s technology:

“Its invisible, see-through coating can go on ANY window — on ANY building — to capture sunlight and convert it into electric power.

It can turn every skyscraper, house, hospital, and school into its own power plant — capable of generating endless clean electricity, 24 hours a day, seven days a week!”

              What’s going on here? It is a common underhanded strategy employed by firms seeking to attract investors: a company pays for publications to release positive news stories about them. Though I do not know for sure if this paid promotion, it certainly looks like it.

              Let’s take a deeper look at the business to see if it is as attractive an investment as this newsletter wants us to believe.

The Business

              SolarWindow Technologies is engaged in research and development of transparent solar panels that can essentially serve as both a window and a solar panel. While intriguing, this technology is not new, and in fact, WNDW has been around since at least 2003. Brace yourself for the next part: in those 17 years of operation, they have not earned a single dollar of revenue. Not only that, they don’t even have any products for sale.

A highlight from their most recent 10k:

We have experienced significant losses, have not generated any revenues and expect losses to continue for the foreseeable future.

We have not generated any revenue since inception and do not expect to generate any substantial amounts of revenue for the foreseeable future. We had a net loss of $7,353,062 and $6,887,678 for our fiscal years ended August 31, 2020 and 2019.”

If you’re new to investing, you might wonder how a company can survive for nearly 20 years without earning any money. Well, that’s investor money they’re burning. Whether it comes from public offerings or venture capital firms, they are surviving solely on investor cash.

Next you might be wondering about the technology they are working on. Why has it taken to so long to commercialize? The problem with solar windows is that they are expensive to produce, maintain, and install, and they do not produce sufficient power to justify the cost. WNDW is not the only company trying to push this technology; companies such as Clearvue Technologies (OTCMKTS:CVUEF), and Sharp (OTCMKTS:SHCAF) tout similar products, and there are others too. Still, the technology hasn’t really gained traction. Whether it will or not is a matter of speculation, but looking at WNDW’s own statements in its 10k, I am willing to bet it won’t happen anytime soon.

This all looks rather pessimistic, so now let’s take a look at the management team to see if it inspires any confidence.

The Team

              How many people would you imagine a company worth half a billion dollars employs? 100? 1000? Try 3. According to WNDW’s most recent 10k, they have just 3 full time employees, one of which is CEO Jatinder Bhogal.

              A quick look at Bhogal’s LinkedIn profile reveals that he is also CEO of Vector Asset management, who WNDW conveniently receives tens of thousands worth of “consulting services” from monthly. Not only that, but Bhogal also previously served as CEO of Renova Care, a suspiciously similar “pre-revenue business” that has managed to sell nothing besides a dream to foolish investors. A quick glance onto Yahoo Finance forums reveals allegations of fraud have been swirling around Renova Care for years, though it does not seem any lawsuits have yet been filed.

              One thing is for certain, though: Bhogal has made a fortune off WNDW, and his fortune continues to grow, despite the company never earning a single penny. The most recent 10Q reveals that Bhogal was granted 2,500,000 stock options in WNDW exercisable presumably at around 4$ per share. At the current price, Bhogal could make about $17.5M in profit simply by exercising his stock options and selling. In addition, Bhogal receives $34,167 per month through his work as a “consultant” for WNDW, and he was reimbursed for $156,000 in expenses for the last 3 months alone.

              When a company that earns zero dollars is spending money like this, it’s only a matter of time until they run out, which leads me to my final point.

Conclusion

WNDW burned $5.6M in cash last quarter, at the current burn rate, it won’t be long until their cash reserves of $8.5M run out, forcing them to seek financing at the expense of current shareholders. A secondary stock offering or round of investment from a VC firm will send the share price back into the dumpster where it belongs. If Bhogal is smart, he will do an offering now, while the delusional euphoria is at its peak and the share price is maximally inflated.

SolarWindow Technologies appears, to me, to be a venture designed to funnel money away from investors into the pockets of its founders. The persistent lack of any revenue or commercially available products leads me to believe this 3 person company worth half a billion dollars is criminally overvalued.

It is therefore a STRONG SELL/SHORT