In the same category

This is Why I Don’t Short Anything Anymore

IMG Auteur
Published : March 09th, 2016
1505 words - Reading time : 3 - 6 minutes
( 0 vote, 0/5 ) , 10 commentaries
Print article
  Article Comments Comment this article Rating All Articles  
0
Send
10
comment
Our Newsletter...
Category : Editorials

The moment of maximum pain.

Goldman Sachs called for the end of the epic short-covering rally that had whipped crude oil, oil & gas drillers, and the broader markets into froth over the past three weeks. As if on cue, the rally started to unwind today. But it was scheduled for demise from get-go. When oil fundamentals are this terrible, they eventually rule.

And here is what that rally did: It inflicted maximum pain and destruction on the short sellers that had piled into the trade.

Last week was the climax of a run that had started on February 12. Crushed energy companies, especially those lurching toward bankruptcy – the most shorted companies around – had a blistering week as short sellers had to buy back shares to cover their positions, or else get their heads handed to them.

When a stock you’re shorting rallies 100%, you face total wipe-out. But it doesn’t stop there. Losses are theoretically unlimited. If the stock rallies 200% or 300%, you lose multiple times the amount of the original bet. If your bet was big enough, you might lose everything you own. Shorting is not for those who easily vomit.

And no one feels sorry for shorts when they get massacred. “Serves them right,” is the normal response. “How dare they bet against me!”

Skyrocketing 200% or more in three weeks is precisely what some of these near-bankrupt most-shorted stocks did. But the short-covering rally extended far beyond a few energy stocks. Christine Hughes, Chief Investment Strategist at OtterWood Capital explained the phenomenon this way:

Since the February 11th low, the best performing stocks in the Russell 1000 have been the names with the highest short interest (short interest is the amount of shares investors have sold short but not yet covered).

In terms of short interest, the top quintile – the top 20% most shorted stocks – in the Russell 1000 jumped 27.1% in three weeks. The next quintile rose 16.4%, and so on. The chart Hughes cited shows the dynamics of the short-covering rally, and supports the theory that that’s all it was:

One of the most shorted stocks going into the rally was Chesapeake Energy. By mid-February, short interest was 235 million shares, about 40% of the public float! Any squiggle in the market triggers a fear among short sellers of losing their house and first born, and they scramble to cover their short positions by chasing the now soaring shares skyward to try to buy them at ever more elusive prices.


It’s a terrible feeling. It’s the moment of maximum pain. But their concerted efforts to buy these shares at whatever price reverse a crash. Shorting is a form of plunge protection!

Chesapeake ended February 12 at $1.59 a share. On March 7, shares closed at $5.23 a share. They’d rallied 228% in three weeks. For shorts, an excruciatingly painful event. And the very fear of getting mauled like this contributed to this epic short-covering. But today, the short squeeze came unglued, and shares re-plunged 18% to $4.27.

Shorts betting that the shares will go to zero in a debt restructuring may ultimately be proven right, but if timing is off by only a few days, they may, so to speak, lose their house and first-born in the process.

The bitter irony? The short-covering rally in the energy sector was driven by the short-covering rally in crude oil, but Chesapeake gets 72% of its production from natural gas, 11% from natural gas liquids, and only 17% from oil.

But US natural gas hasn’t participated in the rally. It’s still trading at totally collapsed prices, after a death spiral that started in 2009. It has already pushed smaller natural gas drillers into bankruptcy. Folks are betting that Chesapeake, the second largest natural gas driller in the US behind Exxon, is the big wale, and that the natural gas bust will only end after that big wale washes up on the beach.

That equations hasn’t changed. The price of oil is nearly irrelevant to Chesapeake. Yet, its shares rallied more than those of oil drillers.

The logic of the shorts can be perfect, but if timing is off by just a few days and a temporary miracle happens or the CEO utters some ludicrous piece of hype, then shorts get their heads handed to them.

And that’s why I no longer short anything, no matter how obvious the bet. I leave that up to braver souls. Because it’s just me out there, against the forces that will hype the shares with all their might, supported without questioning by much of the financial media, and they all try to run shorts into the ground.

But a megaphone that is big enough to trigger the crash of a stock takes some risks out of shorting. Short sellers like Citron Research or Muddy Waters poke around the company and find some dirt. After they quietly take a short position, they publish their research via their big megaphone, and it shows up everywhere.

If the stock, like Valeant, is a hedge-fund darling, the reaction is brutal. Hedge funds, aware of the first-mover advantage, try to get out the door first, thus guaranteeing a selling spree that spooks other investors. And it spreads from there. After shares have plunged 75%, we find out that Citron has exited its short position, laughing all the way to the bank.

But short sellers that cannot cause a stock to crash and simply follow their own logic, figuring perhap

It’s a terrible feeling. It’s the moment of maximum pain. But their concerted efforts to buy these shares at whatever price reverse a crash. Shorting is a form of plunge protection!

Chesapeake ended February 12 at $1.59 a share. On March 7, shares closed at $5.23 a share. They’d rallied 228% in three weeks. For shorts, an excruciatingly painful event. And the very fear of getting mauled like this contributed to this epic short-covering. But today, the short squeeze came unglued, and shares re-plunged 18% to $4.27.

Shorts betting that the shares will go to zero in a debt restructuring may ultimately be proven right, but if timing is off by only a few days, they may, so to speak, lose their house and first-born in the process.

The bitter irony? The short-covering rally in the energy sector was driven by the short-covering rally in crude oil, but Chesapeake gets 72% of its production from natural gas, 11% from natural gas liquids, and only 17% from oil.

But US natural gas hasn’t participated in the rally. It’s still trading at totally collapsed prices, after a death spiral that started in 2009. It has already pushed smaller natural gas drillers into bankruptcy. Folks are betting that Chesapeake, the second largest natural gas driller in the US behind Exxon, is the big wale, and that the natural gas bust will only end after that big wale washes up on the beach.

That equations hasn’t changed. The price of oil is nearly irrelevant to Chesapeake. Yet, its shares rallied more than those of oil drillers.

The logic of the shorts can be perfect, but if timing is off by just a few days and a temporary miracle happens or the CEO utters some ludicrous piece of hype, then shorts get their heads handed to them.

And that’s why I no longer short anything, no matter how obvious the bet. I leave that up to braver souls. Because it’s just me out there, against the forces that will hype the shares with all their might, supported without questioning by much of the financial media, and they all try to run shorts into the ground.

But a megaphone that is big enough to trigger the crash of a stock takes some risks out of shorting. Short sellers like Citron Research or Muddy Waters poke around the company and find some dirt. After they quietly take a short position, they publish their research via their big megaphone, and it shows up everywhere.

If the stock, like Valeant, is a hedge-fund darling, the reaction is brutal. Hedge funds, aware of the first-mover advantage, try to get out the door first, thus guaranteeing a selling spree that spooks other investors. And it spreads from there. After shares have plunged 75%, we find out that Citron has exited its short position, laughing all the way to the bank.

But short sellers that cannot cause a stock to crash and simply follow their own logic, figuring perhaps correctly that Chesapeake is heading toward zero, can become cannon fodder within a few days. And that’s how it was designed to be.

Just how overvalued are stocks, particularly small-caps? According to Wall Street, even the question is wrong! Stocks are always a buy. The future looks bright. And even if it doesn’t, analysts come up with “adjusted” earnings to blind even innocent bystanders. But now, actual earnings are tanking and P/E ratios are blowing out. Read…  OK, I Get it, this Stock Market Is Going to Be a Mess


 

<< Previous article
Rate : Average note :0 (0 vote)
>> Next article
Wolf Richter is based in San Francisco. Entrepreneur with over twenty years of C-level operations experience, including turnarounds and startups.
Comments closed
  All Favorites Best Rated  
With respect Keith the lenders cover their backsides with all sorts of instruments. They don't lose in the long run.
That's why they are banks.
I do not care one iota if someone loses when I win.
I just don't lose more than I win because I have stops (always) and crucially I 'NEVER set a limit' and in fact because I do not know what the market is going to do in the future I let the market take me out.!! That is really IMPORTANT
Its all vey impersonal.
I spend no more than 15 mins a day doing my thing ,which I call "go with the flow trading" and if that is going short some stock then so be it.
F.Y.I ---I mostly trade Indexes,currencies, and PM's but my favourite is Spreads in the Futures commodities markets.
SW

PS: There are crooks in all walks of life and for sure in trading but I do not think that it is as bad as it is made out in some sections of media.
As an end of day trader like myself all the info is in, be it good ,bad, or manipulated so what happened in the previous 24hrs is history and I simply go with the flow,long short, or stay out. PS currently I am short the $AUD/USD as at 14 march i will tell you when I am taken out!!!
Shorting stock should be banned from the market, selling stock owned by a another person is stealing, there is no difference of selling your neighbor's house on the internet without telling him!
The shorting is used mostly by big firm to manipulate the market.
Rate :   0  1Rating :   -1
EmailPermalink
When you short stocks you actually borrow them so there is no stealing involved.
The fact is that short sellers help to put a floor under the market because they will want to buy back at sometime to cover. Banning is silly.

Currently I am short Gold,why not it is short term going down.

All that aside, it is safer to simply short stocks by buying Puts where a loss is limited and a profit potentially huge.
The problem is the stock owner is not advised that someone as barrow is stock (that's stealing), who is stupid enough to leg is shared to be devaluated. I herd that some bank leg shares from their customer with interest per day, but the customer are unaware and don't get a penny.
Rate :   1  1Rating :   0
EmailPermalink
When I short I borrow the shares directly from the bank/owner/broker I deal with.
No problemo.
They are happy to lend because there is a fee.
Its a contract...not theft.
I stress again that short sellers do provide a floor in market.
Of course that could fall through but new buyers may enter at cheaper prices.
Its called trading.
... and the bank are often lending shares from an unsuspecting owner .... short sellers do not provide a 'floor' ... that is rubbish .. a short seller wants the price of a share to go to zero .. so if by 'floor' you mean zero .. then I would agree .. but otherwise you are as I said talking rubbish.

That said, I do not have a problem with one person betting the price of a commodity/share going up, while another bets the reverse. Under this circumstance the net position across the two parties is zero .. and should not affect the market itself.

The above, however, is not what happens in practice. Naked shorting is commonplace in the markets, and in the gold/silver markets, paper shorts are reported to exceed physical supply .. which implies a great deal of instability .. and huge profits for those in the 'know'.

Moreover, the 'lending' share business earns hedge funds billions of dollars ... and that money comes from the pockets of the unsuspecting .. ie those who have their assets loaned without their permission.

Once a hedgie takes a sizeable position it is no coincidence in my view that papers start talking a share down ... in other words - in the world of media and mass communication manipulation is rife.... all of which needs to be reigned in.
Well Keith,I've read your reply a couple of times and really I simply think that you do not know what you are talking about.
When I short shares I do not want them to go to Zero...if they are worth nothing then they are worth nothing so therefore nobody will be buying or selling them.
Plus...Get this...there is no shortage of supply in the gold and silver markets. Never has been and never will be.

Ive been in this game for 40 odd years and I can tell you that if you can last that long making profits it has nothing to do with luck.
It has to do with knowing what and when to trade and that includes (among many other things) borrowing shares and shorting.

Markets go up and down and any time someone buys and or sells it affects the market.
Methinks you are caught up in all the so called manipulation RUBBISH, and using that as some sort of excuse for losses you have made,but I sincerely hope that is not the case.
Rate :   1  0Rating :   1
EmailPermalink
When a share goes pop ie is worth zero .... you have the money because you have borrowed and sold .. while the lender has the shares worth zero ..... so .... buy back your shares for zero .. and sell them onto the lender for zero ....

big clue .... 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 * 0 =0.

In respect of shorting, naked shorts .. it goes on and is illegal . for the most part ....I forget which US company it was ... but it had 150% of its shares on loan at one time ...

I survive in the markets .. make a bit ... lose a bit less ... but are they crooked ... yep .. there is money and people involved. what'dya expect?
Rate :   1  0Rating :   1
EmailPermalink
Keith 95

Hi. As stated I would let you know...I was "taken out" yesterday after it turned around.

Just on 80% profit on that trade.(shorting the AUD/USD)
Good article - I feel your pain.
note the article text is posted twice.
Latest comment posted for this article
Keith 95 Hi. As stated I would let you know...I was "taken out" yesterday after it turned around. Just on 80% profit on that trade.(shorting the AUD/USD) Read more
S W. - 3/16/2016 at 10:19 PM GMT
Top articles
World PM Newsflow
ALL
GOLD
SILVER
PGM & DIAMONDS
OIL & GAS
OTHER METALS
Take advantage of rising gold stocks
  • Subscribe to our weekly mining market briefing.
  • Receive our research reports on junior mining companies
    with the strongest potential
  • Free service, your email is safe
  • Limited offer, register now !
Go to website.