ECRI Leading Index as an Investment Tool

Email this post Print this post
By David Rosenberg - June 10th, 2010, 11:30AM

Another interesting chart, via David Rosenberg

The ECRI not only leads but is also more timely than the ISM since the data are released weekly and the index covers the whole economy, not just manufacturing.

We divided the ECRI into four different phases:

1. From the trough to zero (coming out of recession).
2. From zero to the peak (“sweet spot” of the cycle — from the end of the recession to the cycle peak in growth).
3. From the peak back to zero (past the peak in growth; economy slows but not back in recession).
4. Zero back to the negative trough (heading back into recession).

>

ECRI Weekly Leading Indicator: Growth Rate

click for ginormous graphic

courtesy of Gluskin Sheff

>

More David Rosenberg after the jump…

From late 2008 to the fall of 2009, we were in Phase 2. Since last October, we have been in Phase 3 and it looks like we could be here for a while.

In Phase 3, historically, the S&P 500 has provided tiny positive returns (average price appreciation of +1.3%). Tech, industrials and energy are the top performing cyclicals, along with health care and staples in the more defensive area. This cyclical-defensive barbell works well — basic materials, consumer discretionary, financials and utilities tend to lag the most. In the credit market, this is a period to be focussing on reducing duration and scaling into quality: Baa spreads tighten, on average, by 11bps but widen in the high-yield space by an average of 13bps.

Nothing is to say that we will automatically revert to Phase 4 just because we are in Phase 3 right now, although we are only 5.1% away from zero, even with policy rates still close to 0%. Then again, this was a credit cycle, not a rates cycle. It was credit that created the 2003-07 boom, and it was credit that created the 2007-2008 bust. A 5.5% peak in the funds rate was hardly the culprit, and we know that it was not a 0% rate in late 2008 that triggered the 2009 renewal in economic activity and investor risk appetite but rather the Fed’s massive expansion of its balance sheet and the government’s willingness to push the fiscal deficit to record peace-time levels. In this sense, any analysis that relies on the classic post-WWII recession-recovery experience — even this one — has to be viewed in the context of a secular credit contraction, which began two years ago.

In Phase 4, the S&P 500 on average declines 6.3% with eight of the 10 sectors declining — a barbell of being long energy on the cyclical side and consumer staples on the defensive side has worked well.

Consumer cyclicals, technology, industrials and financials are crushed in this segment of the ECRI cycle; telecom, utilities and health care do not perform as well as staples but are areas where at least you don’t typically get beaten up (for relative-return folks). The CRB is down an average of 3% but gold and oil tend to be supported by a weaker U.S. dollar. The yield on the 10-year note rallies an average of almost 40bps; as with equities, corporate bonds are hurt in this quadrant — Baa spreads widen about 60bps and high-yield by close to 100bps. We have to be mindful that this can very well be the next phase of the cycle even without the Fed raising rates.

The ECRI bottomed this cycle a good four months before the equity market did and for those folks that paid attention, like Jim Grant, kudos to them.

Because from the trough to zero — Phase 1 — the equity market rallies on average by 12% with all 10 sectors in the green column, led by tech, consumer discretionary and basic materials. Energy, telecom and utilities tend to lag behind. Financials are basically market performers. The government bond market is still rallying in this segment and the curve is steepening — that along with a slight softening in the U.S. dollar provides a positive liquidity backdrop, which in turn is conducive to spread narrowing in the credit market (average tightening of around 40bps in investment-grade and 200bps in junk).

Comments

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

4 Responses to “ECRI Leading Index as an Investment Tool”

  1. Our Man in NYC Says:

    What’s interesting, is that the Leading Indicators could be a particularly good tool going forwards especially if you believe that Equity E Yields and Bond Yields will break their 35-year correlation (and return to something more akin to their long-term lack of correlation). If so Equities will tie more closely with the economic cycle (and thus likely be re-rated, since they’re more cyclical thus deserve a higher risk premium). To take an example, in Japan since the start of the 90′s…if you’d sold out when the leading indicators peaked, you’d have done a great job of missing out on pretty much all of the gut-wrenching collapses in the market.

  2. PDS Says:

    I dunno Mr Rosenberg….seems to me in this cycle we skipped Phases 2 and 3 and went right to Phase 4!!!

  3. keiza Says:

    I find Rosenberg’s analysis to be a bit fallible. The ECRI weekly leading index uses stock prices itself in its construction, so to construct a forecast of equity prices from an index that already includes equity prices is redundant.

  4. bondjel Says:

    Why is he using ECRI’s Growth Rate rather than their plain Leading Index? I’ve gone back and looked at the data since 2000 and the Growth Rate seems much more difficult to interpret than the plain Leading Index. If you look at the Growth Rate the top of the 2000s growth was reached on Jan 30, 2004, while the Leading Index topped out June 8, 2007. I would certainly find the latter more useful than the former. I wonder if Rosenberg likes the Growth Rate better because it may be more supportive of his generally bearish posture?

54 queries. 2.723 seconds.