Finance

Monday – Friday, 5:00 – 6:00 PM ET

Fast Money Podcast
Full Episodes

PayPal tumbled 16% this week, but one top analyst is making a bullish long-term case for the struggling stock.
The company’s underperformance follows leadership uncertainty. PayPal’s chief financial officer, John Rainey, announced last week he’ll leave the company in late May. Yet, Bruderman Asset Management’s Akshata Bailkeri made an optimistic case for PayPal on CNBC’s “Fast Money” this week.

The firm’s equity analyst likes the stock for three reasons:

1. Post-pandemic sales could pick up

Bailkeri, whose firm owns PayPal shares, thinks sales will pick up in a post-pandemic world.
“We believe that the online percentage of these retail sales should pick up in 2023,” said Bailkeri. “PayPal is a primary beneficiary of it.”

2. Its spin-off from eBay is beneficial

She contends PayPal as a stand-alone company also bodes well for the stock. Even though its stock is lower now, PayPal shares reached all-time highs last July.
“EBay is no longer really an overhang,” Bailkeri said. “The company has had significant growth even after spinning out of the company in 2015.”

3. It’s an attractive valuation over a five-year horizon

PayPal is trading at a significant growth-adjusted discount versus its competitors, according to Bailkeri. She sees the stock’s volatility as a buying opportunity for gains over the next five years.
“You’re looking at long-term online trends and movements from cash to cashless growing,” she said. “That’s more reflective in a five-year view than maybe in the next couple quarters.”

Where PayPal is heading

Overall, Bailkeri expects double-digit percentage returns for PayPal over the next five years due to strong secular trends.
“People are going to continue to shop more online and have more payments that are in the digital space,” she said.
PayPal, which reports earnings on Wednesday, is down 26% so far this month.
Disclaimer

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

IT STARTED IN America, but the surge in inflation has spread to the rest of the rich world. Consumer prices across the OECD club of mostly rich countries are rising by 7.7%, year on year, the fastest pace of increase in at least three decades. In the Netherlands, inflation is nearing 10%, even higher than in America, while in Estonia it is over 15%. How forcefully should central banks respond to the inflationary surge? The answer depends on how much damage inflation is causing. And that depends on whom you ask.Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on More

THE FORTUNES of the world’s second-biggest economy hinge on two kinds of hesitancy. The first is over vaccines. China’s elderly are surprisingly reluctant to get inoculated against covid-19. That has saddled the country with a vulnerable population that could die in large numbers if the government abandons its controversial “zero-covid” policy. But this uncompromising stance, which tries to stamp out any outbreak of the virus, obliges China to impose ruinous lockdowns on some of its most productive cities, including Shanghai, where some residents have been confined to their homes for over 30 days.Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on More

THE LASTING effects of the covid-19 pandemic on the economy are starting to become clear. Surveys suggest that Americans who can work from home are likely to do so for two or three days a week in the post-covid world, compared with hardly at all in 2019. Companies have regained their appetite for capital spending. And the pandemic appears to be provoking a shift towards higher levels of entrepreneurship around the rich world.Economists are mainly focusing on the surge of new firms in America. But the trends are wider. Using data for a range of rich countries we estimate that in the fourth quarter of 2021 the number of “enterprise entries”—ie, newly formed companies—was 15% higher than the average before the pandemic (see chart). An extra 1m or so firms have sprung to life across the OECD group of mostly rich countries since the first lockdowns, compared with the pace of business creation before 2020.Not everywhere is booming. In the 2000s Italians founded about 400,000 firms a year. They probably formed half that number in 2021. But most places are more vibrant. In America during the 2010s the share of people who worked for large companies (ie, those with more than 1,000 employees) was rising. In 2021 it fell, with the proportion of people working for small firms moving up. Britain is experiencing similar trends. In Germany new business creation is slightly higher than it was in 2019. And in France the number of startups is about 70% higher than was usual before the pandemic. Who said the French didn’t have a word for “entrepreneur”?Some of these new firms are in glamorous industries. Caroline Girvan incorporated her fitness business in Northern Ireland in October 2020. (Her at-home videos, which your correspondent has discovered are impossibly difficult to keep up with, have racked up more than 250m views.) With global venture capital booming, startups from Triple Whale (e-commerce) in Columbus, Ohio, to Payrails (fintech) in Berlin are receiving lots of investment. Yet most of the companies set up during the pandemic have nothing to do with Silicon Valley or its pretenders. They are construction firms, consultancies and the like.More entrepreneurship is likely to be good for the economy. New businesses try out fresh ideas and ways of doing things, while drawing capital and people away from firms that are stuck in their ways. Many economists draw links between the low rate of entrepreneurship after the financial crisis of 2007-09 and the weak productivity growth of the 2010s. In addition, a recovery with lots of startups tends to create more jobs, since young firms typically seek to expand and thus hire new staff.Three explanations for the startup boom stand out. The first relates to family finances. From about 2017 onwards labour markets in the rich world noticeably strengthened, putting money in workers’ pockets. With a financial cushion in place, people may have felt comfortable trying something new—which might explain why business creation picked up shortly before the pandemic. Then governments plumped the cushion considerably, as they handed out vast amounts of cash via stimulus cheques or furlough schemes in 2020 and 2021. At the same time, people cut back on spending. The result was a huge rise in saving, and an acceleration in startups.The second factor relates to economic reallocation. The pandemic has prompted profound changes in consumption habits, meaning that demand has shifted across both geographies and industries. City centres are less busy than suburbs, while industries favoured by social distancing—online retail, for instance—remain more popular than activities that require in-person attendance. Entrepreneurs are responding. In France the number of hospitality startups is 22% below its pre-pandemic level, but those in the information and communication sector are up by 26%.The third explanation is hard to measure, but could have the longest-lasting effects. The pandemic, by reminding people that life is short, may have encouraged them to take more risks. It would not be the first time. In America from 1918, after the first world war had ended and the Spanish flu epidemic had faded, an even bigger startup boom began, as more people plucked up the courage to set out alone. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, business and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly newsletter. More

AS INFLATION SURGES and central banks start to reverse the ultra-easy monetary policies that defined the past 14 years in financial markets, one of the starkest signs of the period of cheap money is fading away. The pool of negative-yielding bonds is evaporating.Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on More

CHINA MERCHANTS BANK has always stood out from the pack. It was founded by a former communist guerrilla in 1987 as China’s first commercial lender with a corporate-shareholding structure. It is part of a group with ties to a Qing dynasty project that sought in the 19th century to build an indigenous steam-powered shipping industry in order to compete with the West. The English name “merchants’‘ is a poor rendition of the Chinese, which is better translated as “investor recruitment”.Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on More

OVER THE quarter-century before the pandemic, global manufacturing was transformed by the emergence of complex supply chains, through which firms could efficiently produce all sorts of goods at low cost and enormous scale. The pandemic put these supply chains through the wringer, causing wild swings in demand while forcing repeated lockdowns that frustrated both production and distribution. The result has been a surge in shipping delays, shortages of critical components and soaring prices.Governments have become keener to boost domestic production, the better to reduce their vulnerability to disruptions in foreign supplies. But new work by the IMF suggests that this would be misguided. Supply chains held up better during the pandemic than is often assumed, it argues, and greater self-sufficiency is likely to leave countries more vulnerable to future shocks, not less.The covid recession was unusual. Trade in goods fell sharply at its onset—by 12% in the second quarter of 2020, relative to late 2019—but then bounced back faster than has been common in recent downturns. To better understand these gyrations, the fund’s economists built a model that predicts trade patterns based on levels of spending within economies. They found large differences between the amount and type of trade predicted by the model and what actually happened during the pandemic—a sign of covid-related weirdness.The virus distorted trade in part through its effects on domestic economies. Places that experienced higher caseloads and more restrictive lockdowns imported more goods than expected, given the blow to overall GDP, for instance. That in part reflects a shift in demand away from services and towards goods such as home electronics and protective equipment. Covid also interfered with the production of some goods at home, which then needed to be imported instead.But lockdowns in some places also had spillover effects elsewhere. During the first half of 2020, the researchers note, about 60% of the decline in a country’s imports could be explained by lockdowns in its trading partners. These ripple effects hit goods that were reliant on long supply chains the hardest. But the drag was smaller when the places that were locked down had greater capacity to telework. And crucially, the effect of restrictions declined over time, as working patterns and supply chains adapted. Exporters in places that ended strict lockdowns earlier saw big gains in market share, with bigger increases occurring in the production of supply-chain-intensive goods.A lack of data means that the fund’s analysis stops in mid-2021, after which a series of unfortunate events, from stranded ships to war, led to port backlogs and rising costs. Nonetheless, the fund reckons the model might suggest how best to protect an economy against disruptions. The answer is not by reshoring production, but by diversification: sourcing inputs from a wider variety of countries, and using components that can easily be substituted for if supply problems arise.In most countries, the vast majority of components used to make goods tend to be sourced domestically. About 69% of parts in Europe and more than 80% in the western hemisphere are produced at home, for example. If a firm were to choose to import a critical component instead, it would face a more diverse choice: the market share of the average exporting country in the average industry is a little under a third. Re shoring would therefore tend to reduce the diversification of a supply chain rather than increase it, by making production even more dependent on a single country: the home economy. That could prove costly. The fund estimates that in the face of a big disruption (one that causes a 25% drop in labour supply in a single large producer of critical inputs), the average economy could be expected to suffer a fall in GDP of about 1%. Greater diversification stands to reduce the damage by about half.Encouraging diversification is a tricky matter. The fund suggests that lowering barriers to trade and investing in infrastructure could help. Geopolitical tensions, sadly, mean that openness to deeper integration is in short supply. But the gains to be made, at least, are now clearer. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, business and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly newsletter. More

BEFORE THE pandemic, there were a few accepted facts about the euro zone. Heavily indebted southern member states would try to persuade northerners to agree to jointly issue bonds, and fail. Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, would talk of a big common budget, only to be met by opposition in Berlin. And everyone agreed—some would say pretended—that Italy’s government debt was manageable. That helped give the European Central Bank (ECB) political cover to buy Italian bonds during downturns.Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on More