Stocks opened higher despite more sour economic news, but ended the day in the red as the reality that Treasury's "stress test" for the ailing banking sector was more smoke, mirrors, politics and PR than an actual remedy.
Secretary Tim Geithner's "plan" to resolve the banking and financial crisis has good probability to extend the recession by not addressing the core problems. (See earlier post below for details on Treasury's plan.)
Blow by blow, here's how the day went, as interpreted by Wall Street's desperate price discovery process (at least somebody's working).
8:30 am: The Commerce Dept. issues monthly Durable Goods Orders report for January, citing a deep decline of 5.2% from the previous month, the sixth straight monthly drop. It's evident that Americans have their wallets and purses closed tight. Some even have forsaken carrying such.
The Labor Dept. announces 667,000 new weekly unemployment claims nationally. The 5.1 million currently receiving benefits is the highest since the department began keeping records in 1967. The federal government celebrated the occasion by adding $25 to the weekly benefit. Each week, an additional $127,500,000 of taxpayer money will be spent, beginning immediately.
9:30 am: The markets open with sharp gains, ignoring the dire economic reports. The Dow is up 80 points in the first ten minutes. the other major indices are up more than 1%. Bank of America is up 0.69 at 5.85.
10:45 am: The Dow reaches what will eventually be the high of the day - 7400 - up 130 points. 26 of 30 Dow stocks show gains. Bank of America peaks at 5.89, up 0.73.
1:13 pm: Having given up all of the day's gains, the Dow briefly falls into negative territory. Bank of America is up only 0.24 at 5.40.
3:15 pm: Stocks are in full retreat, with the Dow lower by 97 points. Bank of America is down 0.05 at 5.11. There are now only nine Dow components with gains. Most have completely rolled over.
4:00 pm: Markets close with all indices near the day's lows. It's the 8th losing day in the last 10. The Dow closes below 7200 for the second time this week. 22 Dow components close with losses, 8 with gains. Bank of America finishes with a cheerless win of 0.16, at 5.32.
Dow 7,182.08, -88.81 (1.22%)
NASDAQ 1,391.47, -33.96 (2.38%)
S&P 500 752.83, -12.07 (1.58%)
NYSE Composite 4,713.02, -40.15 (0.84%)
Market internals verified the session's finish. Declining issues outgunned advancers, 3755-2761. New lows: 460; new highs: 4, the lowest number of new highs I have seen since October of 2007. Volume was high once again, as investors alternately test and flee from equities.
NYSE Volume 1,482,993,000
NASDAQ Volume 2,348,150,000
Commodities were split. Crude oil for April delivery was up $2.72 to an unsustainable $45.22. Gold continued to correct on profit-taking, losing $23.60, to $942.60. Silver tumbled 94 cents, to $12.98, an excellent buying opportunity for long term investors.
Today's results were startling, stunning, unprecedented in the level of pessimism on display, expressing a remarkable distrust of government and overwhelming lack of confidence in the economic future. There is little doubt among investors that the government has failed to offer reasonable solutions to stem bank losses, job losses, income deterioration and revive - or even stabilize - the economy.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Treasury's Stress Test is Not a Plan at All
Editor's Note: I've had to break today's market coverage into two parts due to a need to provide some clarity on what the administration is planning to do with the nearly-insolvent banking sector. This entry will cover that issue, while the usual post - after 4:00 pm - will cover the day's market activity.
We've been hearing about Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's "stress test" for the nation's largest banks in shrouded tones for over a week. Finally, late yesterday, some details of the plan emerged - in an exclusive interview with Jim Lehrer on the PBS Newshour - and elsewhere.
What the stress test will entail is having the banks examine their ability to function under a variety of very broad circumstances - first, a "moderate" scenario, in which unemployment
This commentary, by Adam S. Posen, Dep. Director, Peterson Institute for International Economics, lays out some guidelines which the Obama administration is conveniently avoiding.
And here's Paul Krugman opining in the New York Times that nationalization - in other words, having the federal government take over some banks, clean them up and resell the new, functioning, properly-capitalized entities to private investors.
Geithner and the Obama administration isn't listening, despite Krugman having won the Nobel Prize for Economics and other, similarly spot-on economists and commentators urging the government to make the appropriate hard choices, as opposed to the current piecemeal approach which hasn't - and isn't likely to - work.
The assumptions in the stress testing offers banks to look at two different sets of scenarios, a baseline and an extreme, or worst case outlook.
Under the baseline scenario, unemployment is at 8.4% in 2009 and 8.8% in 2010, housing prices decline by 14% in 2009 and another 4% in 2010, and the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) falls by 2.0% in 2009 and rises by 2.1% in 2010.
In the worst case set-up, the assumptions are that unemployment reaches 8.9% in 2009 and 10.3 in 2010, housing prices fall 22% in 2009 and another 7% in 2010, and the nation's GDP falls by 3.3% in 2009 and gains 0.5% in 2010.
The banks will have about six weeks to report back to Geithner with either a confirmation that they're "OK" or a request for more funding from the government. That it will take six weeks to complete what is essentially nothing more than the testing of a theoretical set of circumstances against real world assets and liabilities suggests that the entire plan is nothing more than a politically-motivated cover-up for the banking giants which actually control the government.
This Bloomberg article suggests that the "worst case" scenarios laid out by the government are not severe enough, and that the banks will not not then be looking at what possibly lies ahead for the US economy.
The assessments may indeed be less severe than what's ahead, though the housing price assumptions appear somewhat on the money. Suppose GDP falls by 5% this year and another 2% next? What if unemployment hits 10.2% this year? Then the stress tests won't be testing the banks for reality and the entire plan will fail, meaning we will be sunk into a deeper recession for a longer time by supporting zombie banks which are at the heart of the problem.
In Geithner's interview with Lehrer, a the Treasury Secretary voiced a number of interesting comments, including, on the solvency of the banks involved:
In other words, Geithner seems to be wanting to tell us that the banks are sound, despite what's been reported concerning trillions of dollars worth of bad loans, even more toxic credit default swaps and continuing credit-creation issues.
Geithner would have us believe that all of these pre-existing conditions have suddenly, magically, vanished. It's not a believable scenario.
On "nationalization", Geithner opined, "it's the wrong strategy for the country and an unnecessary strategy." Again, Geithner would have us believe that what's always worked for smaller, insolvent institutions, that being take-over by FDIC, recapitalization and an eventual return to a functioning entity on the other side, is not acceptable for the largest banks in the nation.
This is the kind of thinking which inspires skepticism in the banking system and the government's remedies. This approach would allow the likes of John Mack, Lloyd Blankfien, Vikram Pandit and Kenneth Lewis to continue to run their failed institutions - the same ones which caused the crisis in the first place - with only a limited amount of scrutiny and accountability.
This would allow the same excesses in the securitization of loans and largely unsupervised lending and investing activity to continue, while failing to address the toxic loans and swaps at the root of the problem.
There will be no accountability for what's already occurred, no civil or criminal charges brought against the bank and finance executives whose institutions already have benefited from taxpayer capital infusions. The same executives who nearly brought the world's financial system to its knees will remain at the controls of their now-defunct banks.
Naturally, the banks have lined the coffers of both the Obama administration and all members of congress with campaign contributions, so there will be no opposition from any government official - elected or otherwise - to this plan whatsoever.
The stress test and Geithner financial band-aid plan should be recognized for exactly what it is: further denial of the root of the crisis and a sure recipe for disaster.
We've been hearing about Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's "stress test" for the nation's largest banks in shrouded tones for over a week. Finally, late yesterday, some details of the plan emerged - in an exclusive interview with Jim Lehrer on the PBS Newshour - and elsewhere.
What the stress test will entail is having the banks examine their ability to function under a variety of very broad circumstances - first, a "moderate" scenario, in which unemployment
This commentary, by Adam S. Posen, Dep. Director, Peterson Institute for International Economics, lays out some guidelines which the Obama administration is conveniently avoiding.
And here's Paul Krugman opining in the New York Times that nationalization - in other words, having the federal government take over some banks, clean them up and resell the new, functioning, properly-capitalized entities to private investors.
Geithner and the Obama administration isn't listening, despite Krugman having won the Nobel Prize for Economics and other, similarly spot-on economists and commentators urging the government to make the appropriate hard choices, as opposed to the current piecemeal approach which hasn't - and isn't likely to - work.
The assumptions in the stress testing offers banks to look at two different sets of scenarios, a baseline and an extreme, or worst case outlook.
Under the baseline scenario, unemployment is at 8.4% in 2009 and 8.8% in 2010, housing prices decline by 14% in 2009 and another 4% in 2010, and the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) falls by 2.0% in 2009 and rises by 2.1% in 2010.
In the worst case set-up, the assumptions are that unemployment reaches 8.9% in 2009 and 10.3 in 2010, housing prices fall 22% in 2009 and another 7% in 2010, and the nation's GDP falls by 3.3% in 2009 and gains 0.5% in 2010.
The banks will have about six weeks to report back to Geithner with either a confirmation that they're "OK" or a request for more funding from the government. That it will take six weeks to complete what is essentially nothing more than the testing of a theoretical set of circumstances against real world assets and liabilities suggests that the entire plan is nothing more than a politically-motivated cover-up for the banking giants which actually control the government.
This Bloomberg article suggests that the "worst case" scenarios laid out by the government are not severe enough, and that the banks will not not then be looking at what possibly lies ahead for the US economy.
The assessments may indeed be less severe than what's ahead, though the housing price assumptions appear somewhat on the money. Suppose GDP falls by 5% this year and another 2% next? What if unemployment hits 10.2% this year? Then the stress tests won't be testing the banks for reality and the entire plan will fail, meaning we will be sunk into a deeper recession for a longer time by supporting zombie banks which are at the heart of the problem.
In Geithner's interview with Lehrer, a the Treasury Secretary voiced a number of interesting comments, including, on the solvency of the banks involved:
"These banks now have very substantial amounts of capital relative to what you would have seen in the US economy going into previous recessions."
In other words, Geithner seems to be wanting to tell us that the banks are sound, despite what's been reported concerning trillions of dollars worth of bad loans, even more toxic credit default swaps and continuing credit-creation issues.
Geithner would have us believe that all of these pre-existing conditions have suddenly, magically, vanished. It's not a believable scenario.
On "nationalization", Geithner opined, "it's the wrong strategy for the country and an unnecessary strategy." Again, Geithner would have us believe that what's always worked for smaller, insolvent institutions, that being take-over by FDIC, recapitalization and an eventual return to a functioning entity on the other side, is not acceptable for the largest banks in the nation.
This is the kind of thinking which inspires skepticism in the banking system and the government's remedies. This approach would allow the likes of John Mack, Lloyd Blankfien, Vikram Pandit and Kenneth Lewis to continue to run their failed institutions - the same ones which caused the crisis in the first place - with only a limited amount of scrutiny and accountability.
This would allow the same excesses in the securitization of loans and largely unsupervised lending and investing activity to continue, while failing to address the toxic loans and swaps at the root of the problem.
There will be no accountability for what's already occurred, no civil or criminal charges brought against the bank and finance executives whose institutions already have benefited from taxpayer capital infusions. The same executives who nearly brought the world's financial system to its knees will remain at the controls of their now-defunct banks.
Naturally, the banks have lined the coffers of both the Obama administration and all members of congress with campaign contributions, so there will be no opposition from any government official - elected or otherwise - to this plan whatsoever.
The stress test and Geithner financial band-aid plan should be recognized for exactly what it is: further denial of the root of the crisis and a sure recipe for disaster.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Stress and Confusion on Wall Street
Is this Wall Street's week of reckoning?
Monday, stocks slid near 12-year lows. Tuesday's snap back rally offered some relief, but it was back to selling for most of the session on Wednesday. There isn't a trader alive who can tell where stocks will go Thursday and Friday.
Paramount among the issues yet to be resolved is the fate of the nation's 19 or 20 largest banks (The press and the government can't even agree on a number, that's how confused the condition is.) as the government commits them to various and sundry "stress tests."
According to what's been gleaned from two days of congressional testimony by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and the infrequent mutterings from Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, government authorities will go into banks this week armed with accountants, number-crunchers and statistical models in an attempt to determine the general health of these mega-banks (over $100 billion in assets; are there any left?) and their ability to function normally under severe economic conditions.
Once these stress tests are completed, the government then should have a clearer understanding of what's needed to fix them, or whether they should be taken over by regulators, broken up, forced into bankruptcy or left alone. All of this has left Wall Street in a very confused condition, and the very thing the market appreciates least is uncertainty.
Stocks took on water early on, retracing most of Monday's decline by the noon hour. After that, there were a number of rallies, all of which eventually failed, despite stocks peeking into positive for about half an hour near the close. By 3:40 pm, however, the charade was over, and stocks sold off in a decided fashion.
Dow 7,270.89, -80.05 (1.09%)
Nasdaq 1,425.43, -16.40 (1.14%)
S&P 500 764.90, -8.24 (1.07%)
NYSE Composite 4,753.17, -68.57 (1.42%)
Other factors entered into the decision-making of investors, not the least of which was the report from the National Association of Realtors on January Existing Home Sales, which showed continuing deterioration in the real estate market with both the number of sales and the median price falling - a continuation of trends which have persisted for 14 months.
Granted, the general economy is not pretty, but the global economy is still standing. The questions posed by investors are precisely how well the economy is functioning and how well it will be in the near future. Nobody has yet offered solid answers to those important queries, and that's exactly what's causing investors to flee from stocks.
When the government does finally provide some further clarity, it should cause some soothing, though prospects will still remain mostly uncertain. It's what the government actually plans to do with the banks that will have the most impact, though the field is pretty well split on that judgment as well.
So, get used to wild trading swings, directionless markets, interpretations of news and then interpretations of the interpretations, punditry, thin analysis, politics and more nonsense about how to "fix" things than the market can bear.
Eventually, there will be resolution, but most humans being impatient when it comes to their financial futures, the waiting part is the hardest. And we are waiting. Get ready for at least six to nine more months of this before the market finds a floor (nice word for bottom), washes out the weak hands and moves ahead. Unless the government stimuli are completely worthless, at some point the market will simply revert back to fundamentals and investing can revert to something approaching normalcy.
For now, however, US and world markets are about as far removed from normal as they can be.
On the day, losers outdid gainers, 4193-2341, while new lows finished ahead of new highs, 489-13. Volume was on the high end, owing to the frenetic nature of the trading.
NYSE Volume 1,800,731,000
Nasdaq Volume 2,404,619,000
Oil priced higher by $2.54 a barrel, closing at $42.50. Gold continued to suffer from profit-taking, losing $3.30, to $966.20. Silver presented itself as a buy, losing 12 cents, to $13.91. Other commodities finished mixed, in keeping with the overall tone of the day, which was confused.
If you are in this market, you are on your own. I continue to only buy silver sporadically, on dips, and, despite mentioning that one could not be faulted for venturing into equities at this juncture, I am in no way advising anybody to do so. It's still a very dangerous, still bottomless, environment.
Monday, stocks slid near 12-year lows. Tuesday's snap back rally offered some relief, but it was back to selling for most of the session on Wednesday. There isn't a trader alive who can tell where stocks will go Thursday and Friday.
Paramount among the issues yet to be resolved is the fate of the nation's 19 or 20 largest banks (The press and the government can't even agree on a number, that's how confused the condition is.) as the government commits them to various and sundry "stress tests."
According to what's been gleaned from two days of congressional testimony by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and the infrequent mutterings from Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, government authorities will go into banks this week armed with accountants, number-crunchers and statistical models in an attempt to determine the general health of these mega-banks (over $100 billion in assets; are there any left?) and their ability to function normally under severe economic conditions.
Once these stress tests are completed, the government then should have a clearer understanding of what's needed to fix them, or whether they should be taken over by regulators, broken up, forced into bankruptcy or left alone. All of this has left Wall Street in a very confused condition, and the very thing the market appreciates least is uncertainty.
Stocks took on water early on, retracing most of Monday's decline by the noon hour. After that, there were a number of rallies, all of which eventually failed, despite stocks peeking into positive for about half an hour near the close. By 3:40 pm, however, the charade was over, and stocks sold off in a decided fashion.
Dow 7,270.89, -80.05 (1.09%)
Nasdaq 1,425.43, -16.40 (1.14%)
S&P 500 764.90, -8.24 (1.07%)
NYSE Composite 4,753.17, -68.57 (1.42%)
Other factors entered into the decision-making of investors, not the least of which was the report from the National Association of Realtors on January Existing Home Sales, which showed continuing deterioration in the real estate market with both the number of sales and the median price falling - a continuation of trends which have persisted for 14 months.
Granted, the general economy is not pretty, but the global economy is still standing. The questions posed by investors are precisely how well the economy is functioning and how well it will be in the near future. Nobody has yet offered solid answers to those important queries, and that's exactly what's causing investors to flee from stocks.
When the government does finally provide some further clarity, it should cause some soothing, though prospects will still remain mostly uncertain. It's what the government actually plans to do with the banks that will have the most impact, though the field is pretty well split on that judgment as well.
So, get used to wild trading swings, directionless markets, interpretations of news and then interpretations of the interpretations, punditry, thin analysis, politics and more nonsense about how to "fix" things than the market can bear.
Eventually, there will be resolution, but most humans being impatient when it comes to their financial futures, the waiting part is the hardest. And we are waiting. Get ready for at least six to nine more months of this before the market finds a floor (nice word for bottom), washes out the weak hands and moves ahead. Unless the government stimuli are completely worthless, at some point the market will simply revert back to fundamentals and investing can revert to something approaching normalcy.
For now, however, US and world markets are about as far removed from normal as they can be.
On the day, losers outdid gainers, 4193-2341, while new lows finished ahead of new highs, 489-13. Volume was on the high end, owing to the frenetic nature of the trading.
NYSE Volume 1,800,731,000
Nasdaq Volume 2,404,619,000
Oil priced higher by $2.54 a barrel, closing at $42.50. Gold continued to suffer from profit-taking, losing $3.30, to $966.20. Silver presented itself as a buy, losing 12 cents, to $13.91. Other commodities finished mixed, in keeping with the overall tone of the day, which was confused.
If you are in this market, you are on your own. I continue to only buy silver sporadically, on dips, and, despite mentioning that one could not be faulted for venturing into equities at this juncture, I am in no way advising anybody to do so. It's still a very dangerous, still bottomless, environment.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Nice Bounce, But the Dow Is Headed to 5237
Tuesday was get even day for the bulls, wiping out most of Monday's losses, almost as though they never happened. But they did, as we know, with the Dow, S&P and NYSE Composite all breaking below support and hitting new lows.
So, while Tuesday will likely go down in the books as a simple snap-back rally, Monday was the more portentous of the two days, and we are now sure as shootin' going back to the 7100 level, though just when that happens is an open question.
Dow 7,350.94, +236.16 (3.32%)
NASDAQ 1,441.83, +54.11 (3.90%)
S&P 500 773.14, +29.81 (4.01%)
NYSE Composite 4,821.73, +187.95 (4.06%)
The likelihood of a rally is very good here, as the market was technically oversold. There are still speculators with cash in hand, dying to jump in and today was one such day. Their hopes of quick, easy money will be soon dashed. It took three months to retrace back to the November 20 lows, so surely a 2-4 month time span is surely appropriate for a revisit to 7114.78, yesterday's close.
For the rest of this week, though, and into next - prior to the Friday, March 6 BLS Non-farm Labor report - prospects are reasonably good for gains.
We've entered a period of the recession and bear market that may prove difficult to track and predict. Major indices have taken half off their 2007 peaks, so further deterioration should be slower and more agonizing. We could witness a period of sideways action for some months, but an eventual, final purge is needed and we haven't gotten to such capitulation yet. That could come in 6 weeks or 9 months. It's up to the markets and highly dependent on how well the government handles the crisis, which, up to this point, hasn't been very promising.
Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, testifying before congress today, said, "it is reasonable to expect the recession to end this year." Should we believe him? Maybe, maybe not. Recall, this is the same man who said that the subprime problem was "contained" back in the first quarter of 2008, so we know that his powers of prediction and grasp of the situation are less than accurate. Furthermore, he's presided over the worst economic catastrophe since the 30s, and as of yet his solutions haven't produced any positive developments. Still, even a broken clock is right twice a day, so, by calling for an end of the recession in 10 month's time, the erstwhile chairman has provided himself plenty of room for error.
Yesterday, I postulated that this recession, being larger and far different than anything other than the Great Depression, is going to last longer and plunge the US economy deeper than the others, which generally last 16-24 months. I am still looking at a horizon of 27-30 months duration, which puts recovery off until January 2010 at the earliest and June 2010 at the latest, using September through December 2007 as the actual start of the recession.
So, where's the bottom? I ran some calculations, using a fairly simplistic - but I believe sound - formula: comparing the price of the Dow Jones Industrials to the annual growth rate of US GDP.
I found an excellent site for tracking GDP growth rates by region and country back to 1961, here.
Using 1992 as a baseline, annual GDP growth over 17 years (1992-2008) came to 2.94%. Then, using the same baseline for the Dow, I calculated that 2.94% growth on top of the Dow at 3200 (an average closing price from January-March 1992, a very stable period). The result was 5237. Mark that number down, because that's where the Dow is headed.
To get an idea of just how overinflated the Dow (and stocks in general) had become from 2005-2008, consider that starting at 3200 in 1992, the Dow grew by more than 9% per year over that 17-year span. It's simply not believable, rational or normal for stocks to advance at such an exceptional rate. 2-5% is more like it, and that's why - back in the good old days before 1980 - investors sought out stocks more for their dividend yields than their growth potential.
Obviously, the internet and the coming of age of baby boomers brought in a gaggle of rubes who knew little about investing, and the market now has rewarded them justly by eviscerating most of their money. The market is probably going to take a little more before it's done.
One can argue that my analysis is too cursory, arbitrary and that it doesn't account for inflation or dividends, and to that I say, well, do your own analysis, please! I encourage all investors to analyze, slice and dice and dissect the markets for price discovery. There are many methods, and I believe mine will prove as sound as any. I'll state right here and now that I'll be within 400 points of the eventual, true bottom, and I'll accurately predict the market bottom to occur between August and November of this year. (Hey, it's only my reputation at risk here.)
Getting back to Tuesday's issues, besides Bernanke blathering at the insipid senators and lethargic legislators, the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index dropped 18.55% in the 4th quarter of 2008 from the same period in 2007. Nationally, home prices are down 23% since their mid-2006 peak, suggesting that the decline is far from over.
Between the stimulus plan, bank bailout and foreclosure plan forwarded by the president and congress over the past few weeks, the housing market should bottom out by this time next year, with a total national decline of 34-38%, though many homes in what were once the hottest markets could fall by 50% or more.
Consumer confidence checked in today with a record low reading of 25.0, The Conference Board reported.
On the day, advancers finally held the edge over declining issues, 5271-1401. New lows continued ahead of new highs, 736-9. Volume was very strong, a function both of pent-up demand and furious short-covering.
NYSE Volume 1,841,785,000
NASDAQ Volume 2,371,004,000
Commodities were once again mixed. Crude oil futures finished $1.52 higher, at $39.96. Precious metals continued to be hit by a profit-taking wave, as gold pushed lower by $25.50, to $969.50. Silver presented investors with a buying opportunity, down 46 cents, to 14.00.
As mentioned before, gold and silver still look attractive at current levels and they will present buying opportunity over the next few weeks and months. Stocks are still risky, though if you are day-trading, good gains are possible for quick-turn artists.
So, while Tuesday will likely go down in the books as a simple snap-back rally, Monday was the more portentous of the two days, and we are now sure as shootin' going back to the 7100 level, though just when that happens is an open question.
Dow 7,350.94, +236.16 (3.32%)
NASDAQ 1,441.83, +54.11 (3.90%)
S&P 500 773.14, +29.81 (4.01%)
NYSE Composite 4,821.73, +187.95 (4.06%)
The likelihood of a rally is very good here, as the market was technically oversold. There are still speculators with cash in hand, dying to jump in and today was one such day. Their hopes of quick, easy money will be soon dashed. It took three months to retrace back to the November 20 lows, so surely a 2-4 month time span is surely appropriate for a revisit to 7114.78, yesterday's close.
For the rest of this week, though, and into next - prior to the Friday, March 6 BLS Non-farm Labor report - prospects are reasonably good for gains.
We've entered a period of the recession and bear market that may prove difficult to track and predict. Major indices have taken half off their 2007 peaks, so further deterioration should be slower and more agonizing. We could witness a period of sideways action for some months, but an eventual, final purge is needed and we haven't gotten to such capitulation yet. That could come in 6 weeks or 9 months. It's up to the markets and highly dependent on how well the government handles the crisis, which, up to this point, hasn't been very promising.
Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, testifying before congress today, said, "it is reasonable to expect the recession to end this year." Should we believe him? Maybe, maybe not. Recall, this is the same man who said that the subprime problem was "contained" back in the first quarter of 2008, so we know that his powers of prediction and grasp of the situation are less than accurate. Furthermore, he's presided over the worst economic catastrophe since the 30s, and as of yet his solutions haven't produced any positive developments. Still, even a broken clock is right twice a day, so, by calling for an end of the recession in 10 month's time, the erstwhile chairman has provided himself plenty of room for error.
Yesterday, I postulated that this recession, being larger and far different than anything other than the Great Depression, is going to last longer and plunge the US economy deeper than the others, which generally last 16-24 months. I am still looking at a horizon of 27-30 months duration, which puts recovery off until January 2010 at the earliest and June 2010 at the latest, using September through December 2007 as the actual start of the recession.
So, where's the bottom? I ran some calculations, using a fairly simplistic - but I believe sound - formula: comparing the price of the Dow Jones Industrials to the annual growth rate of US GDP.
I found an excellent site for tracking GDP growth rates by region and country back to 1961, here.
Using 1992 as a baseline, annual GDP growth over 17 years (1992-2008) came to 2.94%. Then, using the same baseline for the Dow, I calculated that 2.94% growth on top of the Dow at 3200 (an average closing price from January-March 1992, a very stable period). The result was 5237. Mark that number down, because that's where the Dow is headed.
To get an idea of just how overinflated the Dow (and stocks in general) had become from 2005-2008, consider that starting at 3200 in 1992, the Dow grew by more than 9% per year over that 17-year span. It's simply not believable, rational or normal for stocks to advance at such an exceptional rate. 2-5% is more like it, and that's why - back in the good old days before 1980 - investors sought out stocks more for their dividend yields than their growth potential.
Obviously, the internet and the coming of age of baby boomers brought in a gaggle of rubes who knew little about investing, and the market now has rewarded them justly by eviscerating most of their money. The market is probably going to take a little more before it's done.
One can argue that my analysis is too cursory, arbitrary and that it doesn't account for inflation or dividends, and to that I say, well, do your own analysis, please! I encourage all investors to analyze, slice and dice and dissect the markets for price discovery. There are many methods, and I believe mine will prove as sound as any. I'll state right here and now that I'll be within 400 points of the eventual, true bottom, and I'll accurately predict the market bottom to occur between August and November of this year. (Hey, it's only my reputation at risk here.)
Getting back to Tuesday's issues, besides Bernanke blathering at the insipid senators and lethargic legislators, the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index dropped 18.55% in the 4th quarter of 2008 from the same period in 2007. Nationally, home prices are down 23% since their mid-2006 peak, suggesting that the decline is far from over.
Between the stimulus plan, bank bailout and foreclosure plan forwarded by the president and congress over the past few weeks, the housing market should bottom out by this time next year, with a total national decline of 34-38%, though many homes in what were once the hottest markets could fall by 50% or more.
Consumer confidence checked in today with a record low reading of 25.0, The Conference Board reported.
On the day, advancers finally held the edge over declining issues, 5271-1401. New lows continued ahead of new highs, 736-9. Volume was very strong, a function both of pent-up demand and furious short-covering.
NYSE Volume 1,841,785,000
NASDAQ Volume 2,371,004,000
Commodities were once again mixed. Crude oil futures finished $1.52 higher, at $39.96. Precious metals continued to be hit by a profit-taking wave, as gold pushed lower by $25.50, to $969.50. Silver presented investors with a buying opportunity, down 46 cents, to 14.00.
As mentioned before, gold and silver still look attractive at current levels and they will present buying opportunity over the next few weeks and months. Stocks are still risky, though if you are day-trading, good gains are possible for quick-turn artists.
Monday, February 23, 2009
The Sinking, Stinking S&P 500
The drumbeat of bad news and frightened investors continued unabated on Monday, after the government and Citigroup discussed plans to increase the level of US government ownership in the once-giant financial firm to as much as 40%.
Oddly enough, Citi was one of just two stocks on the Dow 30 to finish the day with gains. Odd, because on Friday, the White House issued a statement expressing that "banks in private hands" was their preference, which stabilized rapidly falling stocks, especially those of Citi and Bank of America (BAC), the other Dow issue which finished the day on the upside.
27 other Dow issues finished in the red on Monday; General Motors (GM) was unchanged at 1.77. The gains on the two banking stocks were minimal. Citigroup (C) ended the day up 0.19, to 2.14, while Bank of America gained 0.12, closing at 3.91.
While two of the largest US banks grappled with insolvency issues, the real story was witnessing the S&P 500 fall below the November 20 support level at 752.44. The NYSE Composite also broke through that same November 20 support (4651.21) during the session. Since the Dow broke down last week - and continued in free fall today - that leaves only the lonely NASDAQ as the one major index still above its 2008 bottom (1316.12).
Dow 7,114.78, -250.89 (3.41%)
NASDAQ 1,387.72, -53.51 (3.71%)
S&P 500 743.33, -26.72 (3.47%)
NYSE Composite 4,633.78, -170.73 (3.55%)
The headline numbers were more than sufficiently validated by internals. Losers beat gainers by a massive number, 5471-1183, nearly a 5-1 margin. New lows dominated new highs, 940-12. Regarding the highs-lows, it should be noted that new lows have held sway - on a day-to-day basis - every day for nearly 16 months, except for 5 or 6 instances, according to our own figures.
Volume moderated a bit, as expected, since options expiration was Friday.
NYSE Volume 1,612,611,000
NASDAQ Volume 2,040,330,000
With a dearth of either economic reports of corporate filings, investors had to fly somewhat blind, but even a bat could tell that sentiment was clearly negative, as the economy works through one of the worst recessions of all time.
The NASDAQ, S&P and NYSE Comp. are already off more than 50% from their October, 2007 highs, and the Dow is within 36 points of being exactly half of its all-time closing high of October 9, 2007 (14164.53).
Commodities continued lower as well. Crude oil for April delivery was off $1.59, to $38.44. Gold slipped $7.20, to $995.00. Silver fell 4 cents, to $14.45. The metals were hit by some profit-taking, as they have been on a tear of late, though this pause may not last long before the next leg up occurs.
The shiny stuff may be about the only true safe haven available right now as stocks are simply too risky, though some traders are moving into high-grade (BBB and above) corporate bond issues and munis, on the back of the government's recently-approved stimulus bill.
As far as a bottom in stocks is concerned, there is none in sight, though some idea of the length of the recession may provide a clue. Typically, recessions last 16-24 months, but since this one is anything but typical, it almost certainly run past the long end of that span. Since the downturn began roughly in December, 2007, we may be only 14 months in, meaning that 2009 should pretty much be written off. If the recession lasts 27 months (long by any measure except that of the Great Depression), recovery could begin March 2010.
If the markets begin to move roughly six months prior to the actual economic recovery, then October of this year may be a rough mark for a bottom and a potential time frame to begin nibbling at stocks.
With prices beaten down severely in many sectors, it would not be imprudent to take some calculated risks - especially if you have a long time horizon and ample discretionary funds - sooner. stocks have been hammered so badly, many are beginning to appear downright cheap. Nobody will be blamed for jumping the gun at this level, though only with small caliber bullets.
Oddly enough, Citi was one of just two stocks on the Dow 30 to finish the day with gains. Odd, because on Friday, the White House issued a statement expressing that "banks in private hands" was their preference, which stabilized rapidly falling stocks, especially those of Citi and Bank of America (BAC), the other Dow issue which finished the day on the upside.
27 other Dow issues finished in the red on Monday; General Motors (GM) was unchanged at 1.77. The gains on the two banking stocks were minimal. Citigroup (C) ended the day up 0.19, to 2.14, while Bank of America gained 0.12, closing at 3.91.
While two of the largest US banks grappled with insolvency issues, the real story was witnessing the S&P 500 fall below the November 20 support level at 752.44. The NYSE Composite also broke through that same November 20 support (4651.21) during the session. Since the Dow broke down last week - and continued in free fall today - that leaves only the lonely NASDAQ as the one major index still above its 2008 bottom (1316.12).
Dow 7,114.78, -250.89 (3.41%)
NASDAQ 1,387.72, -53.51 (3.71%)
S&P 500 743.33, -26.72 (3.47%)
NYSE Composite 4,633.78, -170.73 (3.55%)
The headline numbers were more than sufficiently validated by internals. Losers beat gainers by a massive number, 5471-1183, nearly a 5-1 margin. New lows dominated new highs, 940-12. Regarding the highs-lows, it should be noted that new lows have held sway - on a day-to-day basis - every day for nearly 16 months, except for 5 or 6 instances, according to our own figures.
Volume moderated a bit, as expected, since options expiration was Friday.
NYSE Volume 1,612,611,000
NASDAQ Volume 2,040,330,000
With a dearth of either economic reports of corporate filings, investors had to fly somewhat blind, but even a bat could tell that sentiment was clearly negative, as the economy works through one of the worst recessions of all time.
The NASDAQ, S&P and NYSE Comp. are already off more than 50% from their October, 2007 highs, and the Dow is within 36 points of being exactly half of its all-time closing high of October 9, 2007 (14164.53).
Commodities continued lower as well. Crude oil for April delivery was off $1.59, to $38.44. Gold slipped $7.20, to $995.00. Silver fell 4 cents, to $14.45. The metals were hit by some profit-taking, as they have been on a tear of late, though this pause may not last long before the next leg up occurs.
The shiny stuff may be about the only true safe haven available right now as stocks are simply too risky, though some traders are moving into high-grade (BBB and above) corporate bond issues and munis, on the back of the government's recently-approved stimulus bill.
As far as a bottom in stocks is concerned, there is none in sight, though some idea of the length of the recession may provide a clue. Typically, recessions last 16-24 months, but since this one is anything but typical, it almost certainly run past the long end of that span. Since the downturn began roughly in December, 2007, we may be only 14 months in, meaning that 2009 should pretty much be written off. If the recession lasts 27 months (long by any measure except that of the Great Depression), recovery could begin March 2010.
If the markets begin to move roughly six months prior to the actual economic recovery, then October of this year may be a rough mark for a bottom and a potential time frame to begin nibbling at stocks.
With prices beaten down severely in many sectors, it would not be imprudent to take some calculated risks - especially if you have a long time horizon and ample discretionary funds - sooner. stocks have been hammered so badly, many are beginning to appear downright cheap. Nobody will be blamed for jumping the gun at this level, though only with small caliber bullets.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
