You are on page 1of 6

Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long -

More Enter Symbol(s) or Keyword(s) SEARCH

WELCOME WBWilhelm | Log Out

My Account/Billing Messages

Home News & Commentary Stock Picks & Pans Markets Technology Funds/Q&A Portfolio Data & Tools Online Extras Daily Stock Alert

Home > Funds / Q&A > Funds Page > Interview



Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be

1. Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be
Ray Dalio, Chief Investment Officer, Bridgewater Associates Long
By SANDRA WARD 2. Buffett Sees Green in Vulcan's Debt
3. A Blast of Energy and Commodity Stocks
AN INTERVIEW WITH RAY DALIO: This pro sees a long and painful 4. Cramer's Star Outshines His Stock Picks
depression. 5. The Silver Lining to the Geithner Selloff
clients of Ray Dalio's Bridgewater Associates and subscribers to its Daily
Observations. Dalio, the chief investment officer and all-around guiding light of PRINT

the global money-management company he founded more than 30 years ago,

began sounding alarms in Barron's in the spring of 2007 about the dangers of
excessive financial leverage. He counts among his clients world governments DIGG
and central banks, as well as pension funds and endowments.

No wonder. The Westport, Conn.-based firm,

whose analyses of world markets focus on
credit and currencies, has produced GET RSS
long-term annual returns, net of fees,
averaging 15%. In the turmoil of 2008, Bridgewater's Pure Alpha 1
fund gained 8.7% net of fees and Pure Alpha 2 delivered 9.4%.

Here's what's on his mind now.

Barron's: I can't think of anyone who was earlier in describing the

deleveraging and deflationary process that has been happening
around the world.
Dalio: Let's call it a "D-process," which is different than a recession,
Matthew Furman for Barron's
February 9
"The regulators have to decide how and the only reason that people really don't understand this process
• Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be
banks will operate. That means they are is because it happens rarely. Everybody should, at this point, try to Long
going to have to nationalize some in
some form." -- Ray Dalio understand the depression process by reading about the Great February 2
• A Cure for the Real-Estate Blues
Depression or the Latin American debt crisis or the Japanese experience so that it becomes part of their
frame of reference. Most people didn't live through any of those experiences, and what they have January 5
• For a New Year, Signs of a Bottom
gotten used to is the recession dynamic, and so they are quick to presume the recession dynamic. It is
very clear to me that we are in a D-process. Search Interview for the following word(s):

Why are you hesitant to emphasize either the words depression or deflation? Why call it a D-process?
Display all Interview articles
Both of those words have connotations associated with them that can confuse the fact that it is a
process that people should try to understand. VIDEO CENTER See all Videos

Wall Ready for Rebound

You can describe a recession as an economic retraction which occurs when the Federal Reserve tightens Wall Street analysts haven't
monetary policy normally to fight inflation. The cycle continues until the economy weakens enough to gotten bearish enough
about corporate earnings,...
bring down the inflation rate, at which time the Federal Reserve eases monetary policy and produces
an expansion. We can make it more complicated, but that is a basic simple description of what
recessions are and what we have experienced through the post-World War II period. What you also
need is a comparable understanding of what a D-process is and why it is different. Investors React Negatively
to Uncertainity in TARP 2
Bob O'Brien in the Stocks

1 of 6 2/12/2009 8:57 PM
Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long -

You have made the point that only by understanding the process can you combat the problem. Are you Today Video Minute says
investors bid up bank
confident that we are doing what's essential to combat deflation and a depression?

The D-process is a disease of sorts that is going to run its course.

When I first started seeing the D-process and describing it, it was before it actually started to play out
this way. But now you can ask yourself, OK, when was the last time bank stocks went down so much?
When was the last time the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve, or any central bank, exploded like it
has? When was the last time interest rates went to zero, essentially, making monetary policy as we
know it ineffective? When was the last time we had deflation?

The answers to those questions all point to times other than the U.S. post-World War II experience.
This was the dynamic that occurred in Japan in the '90s, that occurred in Latin America in the '80s, and
that occurred in the Great Depression in the '30s.

Basically what happens is that after a period of time, economies go through a long-term debt cycle -- a
dynamic that is self-reinforcing, in which people finance their spending by borrowing and debts rise
relative to incomes and, more accurately, debt-service payments rise relative to incomes. At cycle
peaks, assets are bought on leverage at high-enough prices that the cash flows they produce aren't
adequate to service the debt. The incomes aren't adequate to service the debt. Then begins the
reversal process, and that becomes self-reinforcing, too. In the simplest sense, the country reaches the
point when it needs a debt restructuring. General Motors is a metaphor for the United States. STOCKS TO WATCH BLOG
February 12, 2009, 4:37 pm
As goes GM, so goes the nation? Mortgage Relief Prospects Spark Late-Session
The process of bankruptcy or restructuring is necessary to its viability. One way or another, General TECH TRADER DAILY
Motors has to be restructured so that it is a self-sustaining, economically viable entity that people want February 12, 2009, 5:30 pm
to lend to again. Rackable Q4 Revs Light; Sets Huge Buyback Plan

This has happened in Latin America regularly. Emerging countries default, and then restructure. It is an
essential process to get them economically healthy.

We will go through a giant debt-restructuring, because we either have to bring debt-service payments
down so they are low relative to incomes -- the cash flows that are being produced to service them --
or we are going to have to raise incomes by printing a lot of money.

It isn't complicated. It is the same as all bankruptcies, but when it happens pervasively to a country,
and the country has a lot of foreign debt denominated in its own currency, it is preferable to print
money and devalue.

Isn't the process of restructuring under way in households and at corporations?

They are cutting costs to service the debt. But they haven't yet done much restructuring. Last year,
2008, was the year of price declines; 2009 and 2010 will be the years of bankruptcies and
restructurings. Loans will be written down and assets will be sold. It will be a very difficult time. It is
going to surprise a lot of people because many people figure it is bad but still expect, as in all past
post-World War II periods, we will come out of it OK. A lot of difficult questions will be asked of policy
makers. The government decision-making mechanism is going to be tested, because different people
will have different points of view about what should be done.

What are you suggesting?

An example is the Federal Reserve, which has always been an autonomous institution with the freedom
to act as it sees fit. Rep. Barney Frank [a Massachusetts Democrat and chairman of the House Financial
Services Committee] is talking about examining the authority of the Federal Reserve, and that raises
the specter of the government and Congress trying to run the Federal Reserve. Everybody will be
second-guessing everybody else.

So where do things stand in the process of restructuring?

What the Federal Reserve has done and what the Treasury has done, by and large, is to take an
existing debt and say they will own it or lend against it. But they haven't said they are going to write
down the debt and cut debt payments each month. There has been little in the way of debt relief yet.
Very, very few actual mortgages have been restructured. Very little corporate debt has been

The Federal Reserve, in particular, has done a number of successful things. The Federal Reserve went
out and bought or lent against a lot of the debt. That has had the effect of reducing the risk of that debt
defaulting, so that is good in a sense. And because the risk of default has gone down, it has forced the
interest rate on the debt to go down, and that is good, too.

However, the reason it hasn't actually produced increased credit activity is because the debtors are still
too indebted and not able to properly service the debt. Only when those debts are actually written

2 of 6 2/12/2009 8:57 PM
Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long -

down will we get to the point where we will have credit growth. There is a mortgage debt piece that
will need to be restructured. There is a giant financial-sector piece -- banks and investment banks and
whatever is left of the financial sector -- that will need to be restructured. There is a corporate piece
that will need to be restructured, and then there is a commercial-real-estate piece that will need to be

Is a restructuring of the banks a starting point?

If you think that restructuring the banks is going to get lending going again and you don't restructure
the other pieces -- the mortgage piece, the corporate piece, the real-estate piece -- you are wrong,
because they need financially sound entities to lend to, and that won't happen until there are

On the issue of the banks, ultimately we need banks because to produce credit we have to have banks.
A lot of the banks aren't going to have money, and yet we can't just let them go to nothing; we have
got to do something.

But the future of banking is going to be very, very different. The regulators have to decide how banks
will operate. That means they will have to nationalize some in some form, but they are going to also
have to decide who they protect: the bondholders or the depositors?

Nationalization is the most likely outcome?

There will be substantial nationalization of banks. It is going on now and it will continue. But the same
question will be asked even after nationalization: What will happen to the pile of bad stuff?

Let's say we are going to end up with the good-bank/bad-bank concept. The government is going to put
a lot of money in -- say $100 billion -- and going to get all the garbage at a leverage of, let's say, 10 to
1. They will have a trillion dollars, but a trillion dollars' worth of garbage. They still aren't marking it
down. Does this give you comfort?

Then we have the remaining banks, many of which will be broke. The government will have to
recapitalize them. The government will try to seek private money to go in with them, but I don't think
they are going to come up with a lot of private money, not nearly the amount needed.

To the extent we are going to have nationalized banks, we will still have the question of how those
banks behave. Does Congress say what they should do? Does Congress demand they lend to bad
borrowers? There is a reason they aren't lending. So whose money is it, and who is protecting that

The biggest issue is that if you look at the borrowers, you don't want to lend to them. The basic
problem is that the borrowers had too much debt when their incomes were higher and their asset
values were higher. Now net worths have gone down.

Let me give you an example. Roughly speaking, most of commercial real estate and a good deal of
private equity was bought on leverage of 3-to-1. Most of it is down by more than one-third, so
therefore they have negative net worth. Most of them couldn't service their debt when the cash flows

3 of 6 2/12/2009 8:57 PM
Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long -

were up, and now the cash flows are a lot lower. If you shouldn't have lent to them before, how can
you possibly lend to them now?

I guess I'm thinking of the examples of people and businesses with solid credit records who can't get
banks to lend to them.

Those examples exist, but they aren't, by and large, the big picture. There are too many nonviable
entities. Big pieces of the economy have to become somehow more viable. This isn't primarily about a
lack of liquidity. There are certainly elements of that, but this is basically a structural issue. The '30s
were very similar to this.

By the way, in the bear market from 1929 to the bottom, stocks declined 89%, with six rallies of
returns of more than 20% -- and most of them produced renewed optimism. But what happened was
that the economy continued to weaken with the debt problem. The Hoover administration had the
equivalent of today's TARP [Troubled Asset Relief Program] in the Reconstruction Finance Corp. The
stimulus program and tax cuts created more spending, and the budget deficit increased.

At the same time, countries around the world encountered a similar kind of thing. England went
through then exactly what it is going through now. Just as now, countries couldn't get dollars because
of the slowdown in exports, and there was a dollar shortage, as there is now. Efforts were directed at
rekindling lending. But they did not rekindle lending. Eventually there were a lot of bankruptcies, which
extinguished debt.

In the U.S., a Democratic administration replaced a Republican one and there was a major devaluation
and reflation that marked the bottom of the Depression in March 1933.

Where is the U.S. and the rest of the world going to keep getting money to pay for these stimulus

The Federal Reserve is going to have to print money. The deficits will be greater than the savings. So
you will see the Federal Reserve buy long-term Treasury bonds, as it did in the Great Depression. We
are in a position where that will eventually create a problem for currencies and drive assets to gold.

Are you a fan of gold?


Have you always been?

No. Gold is horrible sometimes and great other times. But like any other asset class, everybody always
should have a piece of it in their portfolio.

What about bonds? The conventional wisdom has it that bonds are the most overbought and most
dangerous asset class right now.

Everything is timing. You print a lot of money, and then you have currency devaluation. The currency
devaluation happens before bonds fall. Not much in the way of inflation is produced, because what you
are doing actually is negating deflation. So, the first wave of currency depreciation will be very much
like England in 1992, with its currency realignment, or the United States during the Great Depression,
when they printed money and devalued the dollar a lot. Gold went up a whole lot and the bond market
had a hiccup, and then long-term rates continued to decline because people still needed safety and
liquidity. While the dollar is bad, it doesn't mean necessarily that the bond market is bad.

I can easily imagine at some point I'm going to hate bonds and want to be short bonds, but, for now, a
portfolio that is a mixture of Treasury bonds and gold is going to be a very good portfolio, because I
imagine gold could go up a whole lot and Treasury bonds won't go down a whole lot, at first.

Ideally, creditor countries that don't have dollar-debt problems are the place you want to be, like
Japan. The Japanese economy will do horribly, too, but they don't have the problems that we have --
and they have surpluses. They can pull in their assets from abroad, which will support their currency,
because they will want to become defensive. Other currencies will decline in relationship to the yen and
in relationship to gold.

And China?

Now we have the delicate China question. That is a complicated, touchy question.

The reasons for China to hold dollar-denominated assets no longer exist, for the most part. However,
the desire to have a weaker currency is everybody's desire in terms of stimulus. China recognizes that
the exchange-rate peg is not as important as it was before, because the idea was to make its goods
competitive in the world. Ultimately, they are going to have to go to a domestic-based economy. But
they own too much in the way of dollar-denominated assets to get out, and it isn't clear exactly where
they would go if they did get out. But they don't have to buy more. They are not going to continue to

4 of 6 2/12/2009 8:57 PM
Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long -

want to double down.

From the U.S. point of view, we want a devaluation. A devaluation gets your pricing in line. When there
is a deflationary environment, you want your currency to go down. When you have a lot of foreign debt
denominated in your currency, you want to create relief by having your currency go down. All major
currency devaluations have triggered stock-market rallies throughout the world; one of the best ways
to trigger a stock-market rally is to devalue your currency.

But there is a basic structural problem with China. Its per capita income is less than 10% of ours. We
have to get our prices in line, and we are not going to do it by cutting our incomes to a level of Chinese

And they are not going to do it by having their per capita incomes coming in line with our per capita
incomes. But they have to come closer together. The Chinese currency and assets are too cheap in
dollar terms, so a devaluation of the dollar in relation to China's currency is likely, and will be an
important step to our reflation and will make investments in China attractive.

You mentioned, too, that inflation is not as big a worry for you as it is for some. Could you elaborate?

A wave of currency devaluations and strong gold will serve to negate deflationary pressures, bringing
inflation to a low, positive number rather than producing unacceptably high inflation -- and that will last
for as far as I can see out, roughly about two years.

Given this outlook, what is your view on stocks?

Buying equities and taking on those risks in late 2009, or more likely 2010, will be a great move
because equities will be much cheaper than now. It is going to be a buying opportunity of the century.

Thanks, Ray.

E-mail comments to

The Top 1,000 Advisers Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It

We shine a spotlight on the nation's best Will Be Long
financial advisers, whose skills are even AN INTERVIEW WITH RAY DALIO: This pro
more valuable in times like this. (Video) sees a long and painful depression.

Sponsored Links
Six Sigma Training
Green Belt to Master Black Belt

Business/IT Courses
8 Week Program from Villanova. 100% Online. Find Out More. Free Info!

AARP Auto - Official Site

Over 50? Save $388 On Auto Insurance. Start Saving! Free Quotes Now!

$12,000, $7,000/Month
I Was Laid Off. I Got A $12,000 Grant. Now I Make $7,000 A Month...


Related Articles from

A 'Bailout Bill' for New York Feb. 05, 2009 SPONSORED BY
A Polonius Assault on Banking Feb. 03, 2009
Bailouts Threaten Nations' Debt Ratings Feb. 01, 2009
Europe's Growing Crisis Puts the Fed at Risk Feb. 01,

Related News from WSJ Digital Network

Banks Seeking Aid to Undergo 'Stress Test' Feb. 10,
Emerging-market debt being viewed as less-risky
investment Feb. 06, 2009

powered by Sphere

5 of 6 2/12/2009 8:57 PM
Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long -


The Wall Street Journal Digital Network Customer Service Other Services

Our network comprises business and financial news web sites read by millions of Barron's Online | Barron's Magazine Reprints
business decision-makers around the world. Barron's is America's premier financial
Contact Us Conferences
magazine, renowned for its market-moving stories and in-depth reporting.
Privacy Policy Updated Classifieds
Barron's Online | The Wall Street Journal Online | MarketWatch | All Things Digital
Subscriber Agreement & Terms of Use Digital Delivery

Help Advertising

My Account/Billing Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
All Rights Reserved Log Out

6 of 6 2/12/2009 8:57 PM