Declines in Transports, Dr. Copper, and Equity Volumes are Seasonal Weakness (Until October)

Monday, August 13th, 2012

by Don Vialoux, EquityClock.com

Upcoming US Events for Today:

• No Significant Events Scheduled

Upcoming International Events for Today:

1. The Bank of Japan releases the Minutes from its July meeting at 7:50pm EST.

The Markets
Markets in the US ended positive on Friday, despite concerning signs of economic contraction with China posting a disappointingly low trade surplus number for the month of July. Investors were expecting a surplus of $33.0B, up from the $31.7B reported previous, but the actual was a mere $25.2B. A shockingly low increase in exports at only 1.0%, off from the 8.8% analyst expectation, was the predominant factor behind the weak headline number, which is being pinched primarily by slowing demand from Europe. According to Econoday.com, “this was their worst performance for a non-holiday month since November 2009.” The impact of slowing exports from China is being picked up in the Baltic Dry Index (BDI), which tracks the price to ship freight over the world’s oceans. The BDI is once again pushing towards the lows of the year, signaling that economic fundamentals remain severely depressed. This is typically a leading indicator to equity market weakness.

The Baltic Dry Index is not the only shipping gauge that is under pressure. The Dow Transportation Index has been significantly underperforming the market for almost a month, hinting of weak demand for goods. The Dow Transports typically confirm broad market equity moves, leading markets higher when economic fundamentals are strong, and leading the markets lower when fundamentals are weak. The fact that this cyclical industry, Transportation, is not showing the same upside momentum as what the broad market showing is a significant concern. Higher oil prices are also pressuring transportation stocks, a situation which is seasonally typical into September and October.

Turning to the equity markets, last week saw the lowest equity market volumes for a non-Christmas holiday week in years. The S&P 500 ETF (SPY) was shown on Friday with a 4-day volume moving average. The fifth day, Friday, only weakened the average further. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is also showing a similar volume profile to SPY. Now take a look at the NYSE Primary Exchange Index, which showed the lowest 5-day volume average since the 1990’s. Low volume implies low conviction, often a precursor to market declines. Volumes are typically lower than average during the summer months, albeit not as low as present levels, picking up once again in September as traders return to their desks from summer vacation. As a result, September and October are known to be the most volatile months on the calendar as regular trading resumes.

Concerning activity remains evident in the price of Copper, often referred to as “Doctor Copper” due to its ability to predict broad market moves. Copper has maintained a long-term declining path over the past year, underperforming the market in the process. With expectations of further monetary stimulus overriding economic fundamentals, it would be expected that copper would react positively as well, producing positive results and outperforming the market before central bank officials confirm activity, similar to what occurred prior to the last two QE programs. Investors in the cyclical metal are showing signs of skepticism toward the prominent stimulus expectations, perhaps warning that fundamental concerns are still too serious to ignore. Copper seasonally declines between August and October due to economic factors, such as weak manufacturing demand.

Despite a number of warning signals that remain intact, bullish characteristics are prevailing within the price action of equity markets. The S&P 500 continues to maintain a trend of higher-highs and higher-lows following a June low. Significant moving averages (20, 50, and 200-day) are curling positive. Even bond prices are showing signs of coming under pressure, a positive for equity markets. Sell signals for broad market indices have yet to be confirmed, so although risks are increasing, maintaining appropriate allocations to equities appears prudent until technical indicators roll over. Seasonal tendencies for Presidential election years turn negative into September, so equities are within a window where a peak could be realized at any time. Be prepare to react accordingly.

Sentiment on Friday, as gauged by the put-call ratio, ended neutral at 0.99. The ratio broke out of a falling wedge pattern, which could be the precursor to elevated levels of volatility. The VIX has fallen back to levels where the market has been known to correct as complacency reaches extremes. Volatility remains seasonally positive through to October.

S&P 500 Index

Chart Courtesy of StockCharts.com

TSE Composite

Chart Courtesy of StockCharts.com

Horizons Seasonal Rotation ETF (TSX:HAC)

• Closing Market Value: $12.37 (unchanged)
• Closing NAV/Unit: $12.39 (unchanged)

Performance*

* performance calculated on Closing NAV/Unit as provided by custodian

Click Here to learn more about the proprietary, seasonal rotation investment strategy developed by research analysts Don Vialoux, Brooke Thackray, and Jon Vialoux.

Tags: Baltic Dry Index, Baltic Dry Index Bdi, Bank Of Japan, Broad Market, Christmas Holiday, Don Vialoux, Economic Contraction, Economic Fundamentals, ETF, ETFs, Exports From China, Headline Number, Leading Indicator, Lows, Market Equity, Market Weakness, Oil Prices, Predominant Factor, Seasonal Weakness, Significant Events, Trade Surplus, Transportation Index, Transportation Stocks
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

U.S. stock market – long-term indicators favor bulls

Tuesday, August 7th, 2012

I published a post yesterday on the short-term technical outlook of the U.S. benchmark S&P 500 Index (SPX 1401.35 �‘0.51%), referring to conflicting indicators but stating that the rally could have more legs. When the message of the short-term charts is murky, it is often useful also to consult long-term indicators to provide some guidance.

Let’s consider, by means of example, monthly data for the S&P 500. A simple 12-month rate of change, or ROC, indicator seems to pick up the major turning points quite well. Let me say straightaway that monthly indicators are of little help when it comes to market timing, but they do come in handy for defining the primary trend. The ROC line below zero depicted bear trends quite clearly, as in 1990 (not shown), 1994, 2000 to 2003, and from 2007 to March 2009. Right now, the ROC line is “safely” in positive territory after threatening to breach the zero line in June.

The combination of a series of higher lows (i.e. rising bottoms) and positive longer-term momentum probably gives the bulls the benefit of the doubt, but needless to say I will be watching this space quite closely.

Source: StockCharts.com

Tags: Amp, Benchmark, Benefit Of The Doubt, Bottoms, Bulls, Guidance, Legs, Lows, Market Timing, Momentum, Rally, Spx, Technical Outlook, Term Charts, Term Indicators, U S Stock Market, Zero Line
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

Bond Model Positive = Risk Off

Tuesday, August 7th, 2012

by Guy Lerner, The Technical Take

Our bond model turned positive one week ago, and since the bottom in March, 2009, this has generally meant “risk off” for the markets.

Figure 1 is a weekly chart of the SP500.  In the lower panel is an analogue representation of our bond model.  Currently with the value “up”, the bond model is positive and we should expect higher bond prices and lower yields.  Looking at the SP500, I have put buy and sell signals on the price bars that corresponds to those times when the bond model is positive.  As you can see, the bond model was positive during the market tops of 2010 and 2011.  In each instance, rising bond prices was forecasting economic weakness that ultimately led to QE2 and Operation Twist.

Figure 1. SP500 v. Bond Model/ weekly

Since March, 2009 with the bond model positive (i.e., falling yields), the SP500 has gained 14.99% on a cumulative basis, and as you can see, the majority of the gains occurred in the initial thrust from the lows.  Since 2010, buying equities when the bond model is positive has produced a little gains for your efforts.  But there has been a lot volatility.  Clearly, this has been the “risk off” period.  In contrast, since March, 2009 with the bond model negative (i.e., rising yields), the SP500 has gained 39.04% cumulatively.  All 9 trades have been winners.

In summary, our bond model is positive.  Over the past 2 years, this has coincided with economic weakness and an equity market top in 2010 and 2011.

Copyright © The Technical Take

Tags: Analogue, Bond Market, Bond Prices, Cumulative Basis, Economic Weakness, Figure 1, Guy Lerner, Initial Thrust, Lows, Market Tops, Qe2, risk, S&P500, Signals, Trades, Volatility
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

Technical Talk: Upside breakout for S&P?

Sunday, August 5th, 2012

The comments below were provided by Kevin Lane of Fusion IQ.

As seen in the chart below the S&P 500 Index (SPX 1390.99 �‘1.90%) held its 100-day moving average yesterday (green line) near 1,350 and today is bouncing on ECB news and better-than-expected-non-farm payrolls – does anyone smell election year mark-ups? That said, the Index is still setting higher lows since its June low, which is bullish; however it has also been capped near the 1,385 area (red line) for a while now. The Index continues to remain locked in a range, with resistance at 1,385, and near-term support at 1,350. [PduP: The closing level on Friday was 1,391.] Whichever way it breaks, momentum will surely follow. More meaningful support lies near the 1,330 – 1,325 band (purple-shaded lines and arrows) as this was the area where the S&P 500 double-bottomed recently. This is the area that is most critical in regard to keeping the market together.

There are conflicting data that could support a breakout (i.e. more consistent levels of news highs, low long exposure levels and low levels of bullish sentiment) or a breakdown (i.e. weak action in cyclicals and transports, especially truckers). However, if forced to choose, we are leaning towards an upside breakout. That said, we won’t be ashamed to pull the rip cord if key supports are broken as this would take the breakout call off the table. After all, being wrong once in a while is inevitable, however, ignoring an oncoming truck (i.e. a break of support) assuming you can swerve around it, is never a smart strategy!

This game is about knowing when to press forward, when to sit tight and watch, when to retreat and, most important, knowing when to change strategies if need be!

Source: Source: Kevin Lane, Fusion IQ, August 3, 2012.

Tags: Amp, Arrows, Bullish Sentiment, Consistent Levels, Cyclicals, Election Year, Exposure Levels, Iq, Lows, Mark Ups, Meaningful Support, Momentum, Non Farm Payrolls, Red Line, Rip Cord, Smart Strategy, Spx, Transports, Truckers, Ups
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

The Price Action is Not QE-Like

Wednesday, July 25th, 2012

Think back to those QE days when the market went up day after day after day for months on end without more than a single pullback of more than 1%.  Yes, the good old days.  Certainly, there was a lot of angst in the air not because prices were going higher but because to participate in the rally you had to hold your nose, jump in and pray that the end wasn’t tomorrow.

During the QE days, the market never pulled back and it only went up.  Looking at the price structure — which is the path that prices take as they swing from low point to high point and back again — we note a series of higher lows.  See figure 1, a 60 minute bar chart of the S&P Depository Receipts (symbol: SPY).  The black dots are key pivot points, which are the best areas of support (buying) and resistance (selling).

Figure 1. SPY/ 60 minute

The area inside the gray bars is the time frame from December 9, 2011 to March 1, 2012.  During that time, the market blasted off because of the belief in Operation Twist and the European Long Term Refinancing Operations.  What we note is 12 consecutive, higher key pivot points over 3 months, which is an extraordinary amount of time without a pullback that breaks support.  This kind of price action was also seen during QE2 (12 consecutive, higher key pivot points over 3 months) and QE1 (8 consecutive, higher key pivot points over 3 months) .

Now contrast this with the current market environment.  See figure 2, a 60 minute bar chart of the SPY.

Figure 2. SPY/ 60 minute

Since the bottom in June, prices have traveled within a well defined trend channel, and it is only over the past 2 days that prices have fallen from this channel.  But more importantly, the pattern of higher lows, which is characteristic of unabated buying seen during Operation Twist and the QE’, is not being seen.  In fact, prices have struggled and appear to be rolling over.

Tags: Amount Of Time, Amp, Belief, Current Market, Depository Receipts, Dots, Gray Bars, High Point, Lows, March 1, Market Environment, Pivot Points, Price Structure, Pullback, Qe, Rally, Refinancing, Resistance, Time Frame, Trend Channel
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

Biderman: “The Most Damage Is Caused By Those Who Are Not As Smart As They Think They Are”

Wednesday, July 25th, 2012

 
It is not often we double-dip in the Sausalitan’s soliloquies but tonight’s glorious truthiness from Charles Biderman, CEO of TrimTabs, is worth the price of admission. After explaining that the only way he could be any more bearish is to be double-levered – and that he believes that besides “believing in miracles” this market will see the March 2009 lows once the market-rigging is fully exposed, he makes probably the most clarifying statement we have heard regarding our central-planners-in-chief. With regards to Messrs. Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama: “The most damage is caused by those who are not as smart as they think they are.” They continue to believe they are smart enough to fix all our financial problems (and Europe’s – if they would just listen to Timmay) by building a bridge over the recession – thanks to asset-buying and ZIRP. “The only problem is we are running out of bridge and are nowhere near recovery” is how he sees it and reflecting on the massive gains that have been made on short-dated Treasuries as the Fed (who is the one buying them) extends the ZIRP horizon – it is clear that this is nothing but a huge Ponzi scheme.

Tags: Bernanke, Building A Bridge, Central Planners, Ceo, Europe, Geithner, Horizon, Lows, Market Rigging, Massive Gains, Messrs, Miracles, Obama, Ponzi Scheme, Price Of Admission, Recession, Soliloquies, Treasuries, Trimtabs, Truthiness
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

Extraordinary Strains (Hussman)

Sunday, July 22nd, 2012

by John Hussman, Hussman Funds

Just weeks after the enthusiasm over Europe’s plan to plan for the possibility of using the European Stability Mechanism to bail out Spanish banks, the subtle technicality – that direct bailouts would make all of Europe’s citizens subordinate to even the unsecured bondholders of Spain’s banks – has predictably deflated that enthusiasm. On the growing recognition that addressing Spain’s banking problem will mean taking those banks into receivership, wiping out unsecured debt (much of which unfortunately was sold to unknowing Spanish savers as secure “savings” vehicles), and having the Spanish government sort out the damage, Spanish 10-year debt plunged to new lows last week (see chart below), and Spanish yields hit fresh Euro-crisis highs. At the same time, interest rates in Germany, Finland, Holland, Denmark and Switzerland all moved to negative levels looking 2-5 years out. The world is paying these governments to lend money to them, because the only way to acquire other default-free, non-commodity assets is to hire armored trucks and secure vaults to take delivery of physical currency. This set of conditions is not normal or sustainable, and indicates extreme credit market strains in Europe.

The Euro also hit a fresh 2-year low last week at 1.21, just a shade above its 2010 crisis low of 1.20. Likewise, the yield on 10-year U.S. Treasury bonds dropped to 1.45%, matching the historic low it reached a few weeks ago. Yields were higher even in the depths of the Great Depression, when the S&P 500 was trading at less than 2 times the pre-Depression level of earnings, the Shiller P/E on 10-year normalized earnings was less than 5, and the S&P 500 was yielding 16%. As a side note, many analysts seem almost woozy at the “incredible value” that supposedly exists in stocks because the 2.3% yield on the S&P 500 exceeds the 1.45% yield on 10-year Treasuries. It’s worth pointing out that prior to the point that inflation took off after 1960, the yield on the S&P 500 exceeded the yield on Treasury bonds in fully 93% of the data.

Keep in mind that once you subtract out the necessary compensation for default risk (which is rapidly increasing in Spain, for example), interest rates represent the value that the economy places on time. Long-term interest rates have plunged to record lows, and real interest rates are negative after inflation. What interest rates are telling you; what the Federal Reserve is telling you; what the equilibrium created by lenders and borrowers is telling you – is that time is economically worthless and that economic malaise will extend for years.

This does not reflect a well-functioning economy. To the contrary, if you look across history and across nations, strong prospects for sustained economic growth are typically accompanied by high real interest rates, because the demand for capital is robust and good ideas have to compete for funding. Interest rates are an indication of both the demand for loans and the incentive to save. It is not “stimulative” to depress interest rates in an environment where households, businesses and governments are desperately trying to reduce debt. That policy may insult the value of time enough to deter people from saving, and to reduce the immediate penalty for assuming even larger amounts of debt (as the U.S. government continues to do), but it should be clear that these actions move the economy further from a sustainable equilibrium, not closer to it.

I do expect that it will be possible to navigate the coming years well, but it will not be by locking in negligible yields and depressed risk premiums in the futile hope that one plus one will end up being something other than two. Prospective returns vary a great deal over the course of the market cycle, and the strategy of varying risk exposure in proportion to the prospective compensation for that risk will be essential.

On the economic front, as we expected based on leading economic evidence, new orders and order backlogs have dropped abruptly in recent reports. These indices are short-leading indicators of production, which is likely to show a striking decline beginning in the July data. Note carefully whether any positive surprises are in May and June data, because these reports will still be mixed. I continue to expect negative employment changes in the coming months, though as I’ve noted before, we may only find this out later on revisions rather than the initial prints in real-time. In any event, I am convinced that we will ultimately learn that the U.S. economy, slightly trailing the global economy, entered a new recession in June.

While July components are still coming in, the chart below shows the most recent condition of coincident U.S. economic data, reflecting a variety of Fed surveys and Purchasing Managers surveys.

The key question – in view of extreme credit market strains in Europe, and accelerating economic deterioration in the U.S. – is why the S&P 500 continues to trade within a few percent of its April bull market high. The answer is simple: investors are scared to death of missing the widely anticipated market advance that they expect to follow a widely anticipated third round of quantitative easing. Good economic news may be a relief for investors, but bad economic news in this context is just as much of a relief because it brings forward the anticipated delivery date of the sugar. The follow-up question, however, is that if more QE is widely anticipated, and a market advance is widely anticipated to result, isn’t that the precise definition of an event that is already priced into the market?

If you look at the Federal Reserve’s own research on quantitative easing – large scale asset purchases (LSAPs) – nearly every paper emphasizes the “portfolio balance” effect. Put simply, as the Fed removes longer-term Treasury securities from the menu of portfolio choices available to investors, it forces investors to consider alternative securities, raising their prices and lowering their yields – with a particular impact in driving down the risk premiums of risky securities. Indeed, as we’ve noted, QE has generally been effective in helping stocks to recover the peak-to-trough loss that they have suffered in the prior 6-month period (though the most recent LSAPs in the UK and Europe have been failures in that regard).

Still, once risk premiums are already deeply depressed (we estimate the likely 10-year prospective total nominal return for the S&P 500 to be only 4.8% annually), once stocks are trading near their bull market highs, and once Treasury debt already sports the lowest yield in history, should investors really expect much of a portfolio-balance effect from further attempts at QE? Frankly, I doubt it, but in the eventuality of a third round of QE, we’ll focus on our own measures of market action – not on any blind faith in the Fed.

The more troubling issue is that Fed papers on the effectiveness of QE focus almost singularly on the effect of QE on interest rates and risk premiums in the financial markets, with the notable absence of any analysis of the resulting effect on the real economy. This is like showing that squirting gas into an engine will make the engine run faster, without any concern for the fact that there is no transmission that connects the engine to the wheels. In a nutshell, the problem with QE is the lack of any material transmission mechanism from monetary interventions to real economic activity. This is a problem that the Fed should have recognized years ago, because there is strong and consistent historical evidence that real economic activity has very weak “elasticity” with respect to financial market fluctuations, particularly in equity values. Invariably, a 1% change in the value of the stock market is associated with a change of just 0.03-0.05% in GDP, and even that change is transitory. What the Fed has been doing is little but bubble-blowing, while at the same time driving the global financial system further from equilibrium rather than toward it.

Unfortunately, I expect these efforts to continue, but I also expect that it will be useless in averting an unfolding global recession. If the Fed was to initiate a third round of QE near present levels, it would likely be disappointing in the sense that it would fail to reverse economic weakness and at the same time would fail to drive equity prices higher than they already are, or interest rates materially lower than they already are. This would damage confidence in the Federal Reserve and force it to resort to language about monetary policy working with “long and variable lags.” Moreover, at a 1.45% yield and an 8-year duration on a 10-year bond, any interest rate increase of more than about 18 basis points a year will now produce a negative total return for the Federal Reserve over the period that the bonds are held, which comes at public expense (reducing the amount of interest that the Fed would otherwise turn over to the Treasury). As a result, talk is presently much cheaper than action. It seems likely that another round of QE will await obvious economic weakness and a significant spike in risk premiums – probably best measured by the depth of the drawdown in the S&P 500 from its most recent 6-month peak. Still, given that the rationale for much higher risk premiums is very real, it’s not clear that QE will have durable effects on stocks even in that event.

In short, a broad array of observable evidence suggests extraordinary strains in Europe, and abrupt though expected deterioration in U.S. economic activity. The Federal Reserve certainly has policy options, but those options have no material transmission mechanism to the real economy. We’ve always viewed the Federal Reserve as having an important and legitimate role in providing liquidity to the banking system in the event of heavy withdrawals; creating new reserves in return for high-quality, default-free securities backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. This remains an important role, but the Fed’s actions have gone far beyond this role into areas that distort financial markets without transmission to economic activity. That’s just a reality we have to accept, and we’ll respond to further interventions with particular attention to trend-following measures of market action.

Here and now, we remain defensive in the face of accelerating strains the global economy – new highs in Spanish yields, negative interest rates across more stable European countries, new lows in the Euro and U.S. Treasury yields, collapsing new orders and backlogs, a sudden plunge in the employment component of the Philly Fed index, collapsing M2 velocity, and other factors. Due to some modest interest-rate considerations, our estimates of prospective return/risk have improved negligibly from the most negative 0.5% of historical observations, and are now among the most negative 0.8% of historical data. This rare extreme keeps us on red alert for now.

Market Climate

As noted above, accelerating strains are evident both in the global economy – particularly Europe – and in the U.S. economy. Stock valuations remain stretched on the basis of normalized earnings. Profit margins are nearly 70% above their historical norms at present, but these margins reflect very high deficit spending and very weak savings rates – something that can be related to corporate profit margins through accounting identities. Unless one anticipates continued deficits indefinitely, either revenues will revert closer to the level of labor compensation, or less likely, labor compensation will increase toward the level of revenues, but in any event the gap will tend to narrow. This may not be an immediate outcome, but stocks are instruments with an effective duration of over 40 years (mathematically, the duration of stocks is essentially equal to the price-dividend ratio, regardless of growth rates or repurchases). The very long-term stream of cash flows matters enormously in asset valuation.

One of the immediate issues I have with stocks here is the “exhaustion syndrome” (see Goat Rodeo) that has re-emerged in recent weeks. Examining the rare past instances of this syndrome, in 1961, 1987, 2000, and early-2008 among others, the key feature is a breakdown in measures of market action from an overvalued, overbought extreme, followed by a recovery rally toward the prior high and accompanied by earnings yields below their level of 6-months earlier. Normally, the recovery carries the market back to the prior “line” of support that surrounds the peak. The emergence of this exhaustion syndrome may seem benign or unimportant, but it has historically been an important precursor of major market declines. Given what are already significant challenges for both the economy and for the prospective return/risk tradeoff in stocks, my concerns about the potential for deep market losses remain elevated.

Investors often have the impression that the market simply collapses once a bull market peak is set, but this isn’t typical. What is typical is exactly the sort of exhaustion pattern we’ve observed since April. To illustrate this, the chart below presents market behavior around several market peaks that were also followed by an exhaustion syndrome as we observe today. The bull market peaks are aligned at 1.0. The remaining scale is set as a fraction of that peak. Time is measured in trading days before and after the bull market peak. Note that after a quick initial decline from the bull market peak, it’s typical for the market to recover much of the lost ground before the downside progress continues, in some cases producing the “exhaustion syndrome” that we presently observe. Exhaustion syndromes can go on for several weeks, but have historically been very dangerous advances to trade, because more often than not, there is a bear market just behind them. This was not the case in three instances: the July 1998 instance – followed by a decline of only 18%, the July 1999 instance – down only 12% over the next several months, and of course the instance in late January of this year, which occurred at about 1326 on the S&P 500 and still hasn’t yet resolved into losses beyond the weakness we saw in May. It’s possible that the market outcome will be benign in this case, and that the market will go on to set further bull market highs. We have no intention of taking that improbable gamble in the face of present headwinds.

Strategic Growth and Strategic International continue to be fully hedged, with a staggered-strike option position in Strategic Growth (which raises the strike prices of the put side of our hedge). We presently estimate the time-decay or “theta” of the staggered-strike position at about 0.25% of assets monthly – which we are willing to accept based on the extremely negative outcomes that are typical of the current climate, and the expectation that we will not remain in this position for a long time. Strategic Dividend Value is hedged at about 50% of the value of its stock holdings, and Strategic Total Return continues to carry a duration of just over one year, with about 10% of assets in precious metals shares and a few percent of assets in utility shares and foreign currencies.

Copyright © Hussman Funds

Tags: 10 Year Treasury, Armored Trucks, Bondholders, Commodity, European Stability, Great Depression, Hussman, Hussman Funds, John Hussman, Lows, Receivership, Shiller, Spanish Banks, Spanish Government, Strains, Technicality, Time Interest, U S Treasury, U S Treasury Bonds, Unsecured Debt, Vaults
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

Muddling Through…But for How Long? (Sonders)

Sunday, July 15th, 2012

July 13, 2012

by Liz Ann Sonders, Senior Vice President, Chief Investment Strategist, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.,
and Brad Sorensen, CFA, Director of Market and Sector Analysis, Schwab Center for Financial Research
and Michelle Gibley, CFA, Director of International Research, Schwab Center for Financial Research

Key Points

• Equity markets rebounded from their lows, but the move has been less than enthusiastic and convincing. Earnings season is upon us and corporate commentary and outlooks may take the focus away from the macro world—at least for a time.
• Muddling through is the popular phrase on the Street for what’s occurring in the US economy. But how long before a break is made one way or the other—both in the economy and the markets?
• Any progress made at the most recent European Union (EU) Summit appears to have been short-lived and any credible long-term solutions remain illusive. Additionally, Chinese growth continues to slow and concerns over a “hard landing” are growing.

Muddling through. Not the most inspiring phrase and we must admit that we are already tired of hearing it, even as we use it ourselves. But it appears to be the best description of what’s occurring in so much of the world currently. In Europe, policymakers continue to take one step forward, followed relatively quickly by one step back; avoiding a complete collapse, but really coming no closer to an actual resolution to their debt crisis and economic problems—muddling through. In China, growth has slowed and policymakers have been slow to respond and appear willing to accept a lower pace of improvement in exchange for deflating a real estate bubble and containing inflation—muddling through. And in the United States, stocks appear to be largely trading in a range, with neither the bulls nor the bears able to grab the reins and establish a trend; while economic data is mushy, but not overtly negative—muddling through.

The question is how long before the muddling stops and a sustainable direction is established? Unfortunately, while we believe a day of reckoning is drawing nearer and the ability of policymakers to use slight of hand to “fool” the markets into thinking solutions may be forthcoming is growing thin; it appears to still be at least a few months away, and the largely sideways action in stocks is likely to persist.

That doesn’t mean that investors who need to add to their equity exposure should wait until a definitive trend is established. By that time, much of the move will likely be passed and there is always the possibility of unforeseen events impacting the markets to a substantial degree—the so-called fat tail scenarios discussed in the last Schwab Market Perspective. For investors that have a time horizon of five years or longer, we continue to believe equities are attractive here. Valuations appear reasonable, but there are ample near-term hurdles, including the “fiscal cliff,” China’s growth, the US slowdown and the ongoing eurozone debt crisis. If the expectations hurdles have been set low enough , we could see some sharp rallies unfold among riskier asset classes, but there remain negative tail risks as well, and volatility and uncertainty are not likely going away in the near-term.

As we head into the peak of second quarter earnings season, corporations have the spotlight as the macro picture has entered a quieter zone. Judging by the elevated preannouncement ratio for the quarter, we expect to hear uncertainty and caution in the outlooks, as tax policy remains uncertain, the ultimate outcome in Europe continues to be illusive and China’s growth is slowing. With many companies having preemptively announced negative developments with their second quarter performance, expectations have been lowered, which would traditionally set up the possibility of upside surprises. However, we’re concerned that there may be further disappointments to come as the global economy continues to weaken. Regardless, it’s hard to imagine the corporate picture driving action for long as macro developments will likely again take hold as fall approaches.

Recession increasingly likely?

As mentioned above, the US economy appears to be muddling through, but concerns over a return to a recession have grown. Chief among the disappointing reports was the Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) Manufacturing Index, which came in at 49.7, down from 53.5 and below the 50 level that denotes the dividing line between an expanding or contracting manufacturing sector. This was the lowest reading since July of 2009, but it’s important to note that the index traditionally doesn’t start to indicate recession for the broader economy until it drops below 44.

ISM indicates softness but no recession-yet

Source: FactSet, Institute for Supply Management. As of July 6, 2012.

More concerning was the new orders component-the more forward-looking part of the report-collapsing by 12.3 points, which was its biggest monthly drop since October 2001.

New orders are more concerning

Source: FactSet, Institute for Supply Management. As of July 6, 2012.

However, the service side of the ledger was a bit more positive. Although weakening, the ISM Non-Manufacturing Index remained above 50 at 52.1.

Additionally, the labor market continues to disappoint, although we do continue to see job additions. The ADP Employment report surprised on the upside at 176,000 new jobs for June but the broader government labor report was again disappointing, as only 80,000 new jobs were added. In contrast to the previous month, the unemployment rate remained unchanged at a still-elevated 8.2%. Remember, the unemployment rate is one of the most lagging of all economic indicators, and we have recently seen a positive reversal in unemployment claims, a leading economic indicator.

There are some automatic stabilizers that can help to stimulate economic growth when it slows. One that has been working quite well lately is the reduction in oil prices as demand growth has slowed, helping to put more money in consumers’ pockets. Additionally, other commodity costs have eased as well, although there is growing concern that the heat wave hitting much of the country is causing corn crop problems which has resulted in elevated corn prices. With corn used in so many food items, as well as in ethanol and other products, it is something we are keeping an eye on moving forward.

Government…muddling is thy name!

It’s difficult to imagine employers gaining a lot of confidence and willing to take additional risk by hiring a lot of new workers when they have so much uncertainty surrounding taxes, regulations and ongoing healthcare costs…exacerbated by the looming fiscal cliff. And while politicians on both sides of the aisle appear to recognize the problems this uncertainty is causing, definitive action still appears unlikely. At this point, we believe the most likely scenario is that the lame duck Congress following the elections will pass a three-to-six month extension of current policy so the new Congress can deal with it in 2013—thus avoiding the worst case scenario, but still leaving it hanging out there. One important note, however, due to the WARN Act, government contractors have to preannounce potential job cuts ahead of time. So if we still don’t have a deal before the election, we will likely have multiple mass layoff announcements made, especially from defense contractors, which could have a negative drag on sentiment.

Europe struggles to make progress

Speaking of a negative drag on sentiment, European policymakers have taken squabbling to an art form. More than two years into the sovereign debt crisis, progress remains disappointingly slow. Yet another European summit to curb the sovereign debt crisis has come and gone, and despite unveiling another “grand plan,” doubts remain, and muddling along continues.

The aim for the recent summit was to break the vicious cycle between weak peripheral countries and their weak banks. Low expectations were exceeded, but market relief was short-lived amid lack of details and still-missing components that are likely needed to quell the crisis. Meanwhile, each successive “grand plan” has had a shorter relief rally, as market participants are becoming less patient, while policymakers appear to lack urgency.

Market relief remains tenuous

Source: FactSet, iBoxx. As of July 10, 2012.

Spain remains a concern because its banking system needs capital, estimated at 37 billion euros by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and 51-62 billion euros in stress tests conducted by consultants hired by the Spanish government. A separate audit on an individual bank-by-bank basis is due in late July.

The problem is the source of capital infusions for Spain’s banks:

• If banks are bailed out by the Spanish government, the Spanish government itself may need a bailout.
• One outcome of June’s summit potentially allows bailout funds to directly recapitalize banks. However, common eurozone-wide bank supervision is required first, and this is a complicated process that may not happen until the second half of 2013.
• The latest “plan du jour,” is to give Spanish banks 30 billion euros in emergency funding without expanding Spain’s government balance sheet. However, this stop-gap plan will not bolster confidence definitely in our opinion, as it not large or quick enough and lending nations remain resistant.

Incompatible cultures and politics hamper agreement on broad solutions and time has been wasted. As the debt crisis has become a crisis of confidence, each successive failure increases the risk that market confidence cannot be restored – once confidence is lost, it is difficult to gain back. From a long-term perspective, a break up of the euro remains an increasing possibility, which could improve the longer-term outlook, but would likely be accompanied by extreme volatility at the time of occurrence.

However, we don’t believe Europe will achieve either full union or break-up in the near-term, resulting in muddling through as the most likely scenario. As such, the rollercoaster loop of sentiment is likely to remain in place, and we continue to believe European stocks will be under-performers.

Global synchronized slowdown

The economic slowdown has gradually spread from Europe in the fall of 2011, to China in the first quarter of 2012, and now the United States appears to be joining. As a result, the JPMorgan Global Composite Purchasing Manager Index (PMI) shows global economic growth falling perilously close to contraction territory.

Global economy losing steam

Source: FactSet, Bloomberg. As of July 10, 2012.

A look under the hood is even more concerning, as the JPMorgan Global Manufacturing PMI has fallen to 48.9. The service economy has been a source of relative strength, but manufacturing has dropped, and manufacturing tends to lead economic trends, as it is more tied to the business cycle. Additionally, the new orders component of global PMIs dropped significantly in June, evident not only in the US ISM report mentioned earlier, but even China cited the United States as a new sign of weakness in June. Lastly, with inventories falling at a slower pace than orders globally, the implication is that an inventory destocking cycle could be upon us, which could result in lower economic activity in the future.

Is there a hard landing in China?

The gloomy sentiment stick appears to have been handed off from Europe, where slow growth appears to be “accepted” by markets, to China. The definition of a hard landing in China is debatable. We think of it as roughly a 3% decline from the potential growth rate of the economy, similar to the decline to zero growth in the United States. This would equate to roughly a 6% level for a hard landing in China, in our opinion.

If China’s gross domestic product (GDP) is still growing more than the 6%, what’s the fuss? We want to redirect the conversation away from “China hard landing” to the “stall speed” concept, where growth slows enough to become self-reinforcing. While an imprecise science, particularly in an immature economy, it feels to us like we are hovering around stall speed in China, much like we are in the United States.

We believe more fiscal stimulus needs to begin quickly to stave off the economic downturn in China. China’s response has been underwhelming thus far, either because growth hasn’t fallen enough, aging demographics have resulted in slower tolerable growth, the desire to not repeat prior mistakes and bubbles, or a desire to prudently allow steam to come out of the economy as it transitions to a consumer-based economy. Regardless, slower growth is likely to be the new normal for the Chinese economy in our view, a concept with which markets are still grappling.

China’s growth has global stock investment implications. Unrelated to economic growth, we believe the Chinese stock market has become less attractive over the intermediate term due to profit-reducing bank reforms, and the large weight of the financial sector in Chinese indexes.

However, we are still believers in the growth story of emerging markets (EM) as a group relative to developed markets. A more forceful fiscal stimulus in China has the ability to stimulate economic growth and stock performance in many Asian nations, which constitute the largest portion of the EM universe.

While a lot of negativity appears to be priced into EM stocks, the impact of the global slowdown is still being priced into developed market stocks, where earnings misses and negative stock reactions indicate that the extent of the weakness may not yet be priced in.

Lastly, we’d be remiss if we didn’t mention nuggets of good news, including inflation falling globally, a change in attitude from austerity to growth, and global central bank easings. Our base case is a global slowdown, not a crash, and investment opportunities remain. Read more international research at www.schwab.com/oninternational.

Important Disclosures

The MSCI EAFE® Index (Europe, Australasia, Far East) is a free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure developed market equity performance, excluding the United States and Canada. As of May 27, 2010, the MSCI EAFE Index consisted of the following 22 developed market country indexes: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

The MSCI Emerging Markets Index^SM is a free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure equity market performance in the global emerging markets. As of May 27, 2010, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index consisted of the following 21 emerging-market country indexes: Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand and Turkey.

The S&P 500® index is an index of widely traded stocks.

Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur fees or expenses and cannot be invested in directly.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Investing in sectors may involve a greater degree of risk than investments with broader diversification.

International investments are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Investing in emerging markets can accentuate these risks.

The information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy or completeness is not guaranteed. This report is for informational purposes only and is not a solicitation or a recommendation that any particular investor should purchase or sell any particular security. Schwab does not assess the suitability or the potential value of any particular investment. All expressions of opinions are subject to change without notice.

The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.

Tags: BRICs, Charles Schwab, Chief Investment Strategist, Chinese Growth, Collapse, Debt Crisis, Earnings Season, Economic Data, Economic Problems, European Union, inflation, Liz Ann, Long Term Solutions, Lows, Macro World, Outlooks, Real Estate Bubble, Reins, Research Key, Sector Analysis, Senior Vice President
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

3 reasons Eurozone’s investors love Danish bonds

Sunday, July 15th, 2012

by Sober Look

Would you pay Denmark’s government 0.6% to hold your money for two years? Sounds strange, but that’s exactly what investors are now doing. Denmark’s government paper yields just hit new lows. And it’s not only the short-term bills with the negative yield (short term bills sometimes go negative when investors seek immediate liquidity). The 2 and 3-year notes are now also comfortably in the negative territory as Eurozone’s investors simply can’t get enough.

Denmark’s 2 and 3-year government yields

Why do the Eurozone investors love Demark’s bonds so much that they are willing to lock in negative yields for 2-3 years? Here are 3 key reasons:

1. Eurozone based investors are not taking much FX risk because Denmark keeps EUR-DKK exchange rate tightly pegged.

DKK per 1 euro

2. Investors love Denmark’s economic fundamentals, particularly the relatively low government debt and deficit.

Source: Bloomberg/BW

3. Keeping funds outside the Eurozone may provide a hedge against potential problems associated with the monetary union’s stability.

Bloomberg/BW: – If the euro crisis worsens, foreign capital may keep pouring in, negative rates or no. Says Ian Stannard, chief European currency strategist at Morgan Stanley in London: “For an international investor with euro zone exposure, buying Danish assets can be a hedge against the extreme scenario of the euro breaking up.”

SoberLook.com

Tags: Bloomberg, Bw 3, Currency Strategist, Demark, Dkk Exchange Rate, Economic Fundamentals, Euro Zone, Extreme Scenario, Government Debt, Government Paper, International Investor, Key Reasons, liquidity, Lows, Monetary Union, Morgan Stanley, Negative Territory, Stannard, Term Bills, Zone Exposure
Posted in Markets | Comments Off

Faber Says Germany Should Abandon the Euro

Wednesday, July 4th, 2012

 
Marc Faber, publisher of the Gloom, Boom and Doom Report, spoke with Bloomberg Television’s Betty Liu this morning and said that, “If I were running Germany, I would have abandoned the eurozone last week.”

Faber went on to say, “In the case of Greece, one should have kicked out Greece three years ago. It would have been much cheaper.”

Link if video does not play: Faber on Europe

Faber on the eurozone crisis:

“If you put one or 100 sick banks in a union, it does not change the fact that they’re sick. In my view the markets are rallying because they were grossly oversold. When markets are grossly oversold, especially markets of Portugal, Spain, Italy, France, then any news that is not disastrous news propels stocks higher. I think that combined with seasonal strength in July, the rally has carried on somewhat. But it is another cosmetic fix, a quick fix that does not solve the long-term fundamental problem of over investment in the euro zone. And what it does, basically, it forces Germans to continue to finance people in Spain and Portugal and Greece that are living beyond their means.”

“If I were the Germans, if I were running Germany, I would have abandoned the eurozone last week…It is a costly decision, but losses are there and somewhere, somehow, the losses have to be taken. The first loss is the banks. In the case of Greece, one should have kicked out Greece three years ago. It would have been much cheaper.”

On whether he’s picking up European equities:

“Yes. In Portugal, Spain, Italy, and France, the markets are either at the lows of March 2009, or lower. Along with bad companies and the banks, there are also reasonably good companies. Stellar companies, but they have been dragged down. I see value in equities, regardless of whether the eurozone stays or is abandoned.”

“[I’m buying] anything that has a high yield, or what I perceive to have a relatively safe dividend. In other words, I do not expect the dividends to be slashed by 90%…I am not buying banks, but maybe they could rally. I am just not buying them because I think there will be a lot of equity dilution and recapitalization. I’m not that keen on banks.”

Mike “Mish” Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Tags: Bloomberg Television, Boom, Costly Decision, Disastrous News, Divi, Dividend, Doom, Euro Zone, European Equities, Fundamental Problem, Germans, Gloom Boom And Doom Report, high yield, Italy And France, Italy France, Liu, Losses, Lows, Marc Faber, Portugal Spain
Posted in Markets | Comments Off