Stock Market Melt Up: November 1998 or December 2008?

Email this post Print this post
By Global Macro Monitor - October 28th, 2011, 1:00AM

Stunning!  The S&P500 at its high today was up 20.3 percent from the October 4th intraday low of 1074.77. We’re talking the S&P500, not the Brazilian BOVESPA or Hang Seng Index!  This kind of initial move in the S&P500 in just 17 trading days has happened only six times in the past sixty years.

>

Today’s move blew through the yearly breakeven level of 1257.64 and the 200-day moving average at 1274, which is now a huge technical support level if the market is going to continue to run.

>

The question is where to for year end?   Is this the November 1998 melt-up after the Russian debt default and failure of Long-Term Capital Management or is it the December 2008 head fake before the March 2009 bottom?   We’re not sure so let’s go to the charts.

The current S&P is in much better shape than in Dec. 2008 as it is now above the 50, 100, and 200-day moving averages.  The slope of the 50-day has turned up and 100 and 200-day moving averages are starting to flatten out.

It’s clear from the 1998 chart that the S&P500 was still in a major uptrend, which can’t be said of today’s market.  Interestingly the 1998 20.7 percent 17-day spike started with a similar nasty bear trap.

We’re hearing of big institutional inflows into high-yield bonds, which augurs well for risk and dividend yielding stocks.  Our sense is we continue higher as the panic for return really gets going into year end.  The 200 and 100-day are now  important support levels.   The market is overbought and should consolidate and the under invested will be buying the dips.

The Euro plan?  Lots of unanswered questions, short on detail, and not a long-term solution, in our opinion.   But Mr. Market is running over those who wait for the perfect solution and just flattening the macro bears.

Remember, John Bull can stand many things, but he can’t stand two zero percent and will trump almost any rational discourse of the fundamentals once he takes control of the market.   Always with a stop, comrades.    Good luck!

>

>

Don’t Blame PowerPoint! It’s just a vehicle

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 6:00PM

10 Thursday PM Reads

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 5:00PM

Through the miracle of Instapaper, here is my afternoon train reading:

• S&P 500 Extends Best Month Since ’74, Euro Rises on Debt Accord (Bloomberg)
• So, About That Insurance You Bought on Greek Debt… (WSJ)
• Investors: Doing yourself a favor by doing less (Abnormal Returns)
• Mr. Hoenig Goes to Washington (Economix) see also Fed Ties Purse Strings of Banks (WSJ)
• Vatican Decries Financial Excesses (Consortium News) see also Millionaires Support Warren Buffett’s Tax on the Rich (WSJ)
• David Graeber, the Anti-Leader of Occupy Wall Street (Businessweek)
• Occupy Wall Street vs. The Tea Party (How Conservatives Drove Me Away) see also The Conservatism of Occupy Wall Street (Concurring Opinions)
• Why Economic Models Are Always Wrong (Scientific American)
• Frank Gehry Turns to Asia for Architecture Projects as U.S. Growth Slows (Bloomberg)
• Apple Planning Solar Farm For Largest Data Center (TPM) see also Annals Of Business – Xerox PARC, Apple, and the truth about innovation. (Gladwell)

What are you reading?

What Do Big Corporations Pay in Taxes?

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 3:00PM

click for larger graphic

Sources: Forbes, Mint

Who Is Getting Richer ? Poorer? A LOT Richer?

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 12:00PM

That the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. At least, that is what most people believe.

That cliché is not quite accurate. The data on this subject, as detailed by the CBO and reflected in the charts below, reveals that over the past three decades, the poor got a little bit richer, the rich got a lot richer, and the most rich got phenomenally richer.

That may not fit on a bumper sticker, but it is the simple fact.

We learn these details from a newly released report on real (inflation-adjusted) average household income in the United States from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, titled Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007.

The rich got richer — almost three times as rich — over that time period:

For the 1 percent of the population with the highest income, average real after-tax household income grew by 275 percent between 1979 and 2007 (see Summary Figure 1).

>

>

The very rich — the top 1% — captured the lionshare of the growth of total market income:

As a result of that uneven growth, the share of total market income received by the top 1 percent of the population more than doubled between 1979 and 2007, growing from about 10 percent to more than 20 percent. Without that growth at the top of the distribution, income inequality still would have increased, but not by nearly as much. The precise reasons for the rapid growth in income at the top are not well understood, though researchers have offered several potential rationales, including technical innovations that have changed the labor market for superstars (such as actors, athletes, and musicians), changes in the governance and structure of executive compensation, increases in firms’ size and complexity, and the increasing scale of financial-sector activities.

>

>

And as we showed the other day (see Forget the top 1% — Look at the top 0.1% and PPT presentation), the income inequality was skewed to an even greater degree amongst that top 1% — the top 0.1% and the much wealthier 0.01% is where all the big bucks are.

This matters a great deal — but not for the silly political reasons you have been led to think. No, its not about class warfare. No, its not about redistributing the wealth.

The reason this matters is quite simple: Healthy societies have modest, but not extreme wealth and income inequalities. There are inequalities because not everyone has the same skills and capabilities, and some inequality in wealth and income provides an incentive system.

However, massive, widely disparate economic inequality has historically led to bad — and in some cases, extremely bad — outcomes. It contributes to social unrest, excessive political populism, and mob violence.

I write this as someone who, due to a fortuitous combination of luck and work, developed a skill set that is highly valued by modern society. This is in part to an accident of birth, to have an excellent education, to some serendipity. Overcoming some adversity didn’t hurt; figuring out how to turn some deficits to an advantage was hugely beneficial. Thus, I find myself in that top 1% economically; but I know deep down in my soul that if I was born 100 years earlier — and maybe even 30 years earlier — I would not have been. This makes me acutely aware of the risks and dangers of our current wide disparity of wealth and income.

Healthy societies allow their citizens to have a realistic chance at fulfilling their potential. This is done through a combination of economic freedom, enforcement of laws and contracts, legitimate democratic elections, basic education for its citizens, tax fairness, regulatory oversight of influential corporations an other entities, and the institutional value of protecting individual liberty.

Where is the United States falling short?

~~~

Summary of CBO paper after the jump; full paper here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Read the rest of this entry »

Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007

Email this post Print this post
By Guest Author - October 27th, 2011, 11:30AM

10-25-HouseholdIncome

MC Moneypenney – Tap Dat A$$et (NSFW)

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 10:30AM

Hat tip NY Observer

10 Thursday AM Reads

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 9:45AM

These are what I read, skimmed, excerpted and digested this AM:

• The big news is obviously the European Bailout:
…..-EU Sets 50% Greek Writedown, $1.4T in Rescue Fund (Bloomberg)
…..-Europe’s problems, the long-historical perspective (Daily Reckoning)
…..-Eurozone bailout questions, so little time (Alphaville)
…..-Europe’s grand gamble risks failure without ECB (Telegraph)
• Transcript of “Lost Decades: The Making of America’s Debt Crisis and the Long Recovery” (IMF)
• Fed Won’t Share Internal View Underlying Risks (Bloomberg)
• In Fight Against Securities Fraud, S.E.C. Sends Wrong Signal (DealBook)
• How GE ensures that its best employees keep getting better (Smart Blog)
• Can a monkey pick a hedge fund? (Market Watch) see also Rule Allows U.S. a Close Look at Big Hedge Funds (NYT)
• Special Report: Harrisburg, Pa: a city at war with itself (Reuters)
• China Suspected in Attacks on U.S. Satellites (Bloomberg)
• Warren Takes Credit for Occupy Wall Street (Daily Beast)
• Facebook by the Numbers (Mashable)

What are you reading?
>


Hat tip Jim Bianco

Big Picture Conference: Now Online!

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 27th, 2011, 9:00AM

By popular request, the entire conference is now available for online viewing on Fora.tv. (I will post some previews in the Video tab over the next few days).

Note to the many students who inquired about discounts: We have subsidized the video recording, editing and hosting, and your cost to view the entire conference online is $39.95 (versus $895 in person).

>
click for video

Winter is Right Around the Corner

Email this post Print this post
By Guest Author - October 27th, 2011, 8:30AM

Macro Factors and their impact on Monetary Policy
the Economy, and Financial Markets
MacroTides.newsletter@gmail.com

Investment letter – October 21, 2011

,

Winter is Right Around the Corner
We grew up in the Midwest, where the winters are often measured by wind chill factors below zero and multiple layers of clothing just to prevent frostbite. In most years, there is a day in March when the temperature ‘soars’ to 50 degrees. On those days it was not uncommon to see people walking around in shirt sleeves, relishing the opportunity to savor the first hint of spring. Months later on July 4, thousands of people would gather near Lake Michigan to watch the fireworks display. Too often, the weather failed to cooperate, and by dusk the temperature would have fallen to 60 degrees. Looking around, everyone was bundled up in sweatshirts, sweaters, stocking caps and gloves, even though it was actually a bit warmer than the spring like day in March. The same phenomenon happens with market expectations.
After a series of punk economic reports in August and September, most investors were prepared for the onset of another recession as October began. Instead of a blizzard of more bad news, reports on manufacturing, retail sales, and employment, failed to confirm that a recession had begun. The gloom was replaced by a glimmer of hope. Maybe there would be no recession after all! If this assumption proves true, the recent rally in the stock market is justified, and the market will hold on to its gains. On the other hand, if these reports were simply a phantom spring like day in the middle of winter, the stock market could prove more vulnerable to disappointment in coming months. The recession in 2001-2002 lasted just eight months and was quite shallow, but earnings estimates proved to be 25% too optimistic. In the “Great Exhale” recession of 2008-2009 estimates were off by 40%. We think the U.S. economy will weaken in the first half of 2012, potentially flirting with at least one quarter of negative growth. This scare will cause analysts to cut earnings projections by 15% or more, and should cause the stock market to fall below the lows of October 4.
Manufacturing has been one of the few sectors of legitimate strength since the recession ended in June 2009, and will likely remain resilient through the end of this year due to a tax credit that expires on December 30, 2011. This tax credit allows companies to write off any business investment booked before the end of this year. If a business is planning on making $50 million in business investments in the first half of 2012, they would be crazy not to accelerate a large portion of the investment before year end, since they would be able to write off 30% of the investment on their 2011 taxes. (or whatever their tax bracket) The investment tax credit will pull demand forward into 2011, just like the Cash for Clunkers and first time home buyers tax credit did in 2009 and 2010. In the short run, manufacturing activity will look stronger, but after January 1, business investment will drop sharply.


The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) Index rose to 51.6 in September. Any reading above 50 indicates that manufacturing in the U.S. is expanding. The ISM Index will likely hold above 50 through December as companies take advantage of a tax credit that expires on December 30, 2011 for business equipment investments. Within the September report, there were some cracks. New orders declined for a third month in a row, and order back logs fell to 41.5, the lowest since April 2009. The recent low in the ISM Index was well below the low reached when the economy slowed during the summer of 2010. Although the tax credit should give manufacturing a temporary boost, the overall trend is weakening. In addition, the slowdown in manufacturing is not just happening in the U.S. JP Morgan’s global manufacturing gauge fell .3 in September to 49.9, contracting for the first time since June 2009.

Retail sales gained 1.1% in September, and excluding autos were ahead .6%. This report heartened economists, since it showed resilience in consumer spending, which accounts for 70% of GDP. Retailers tracked by Thomson Reuters reported a 5.1% increase in same store sales in September. This led retail analysts to increase their estimates for holiday sales from the 3%-4% range to 5%-6% level. We believe these targets are overly optimistic. Traditionally, retailers begin taking delivery of holiday merchandise by late October. For this to happen, orders that are placed for goods produced overseas begin to arrive at the five busiest ports in the United Sates during August and September. The rush of holiday merchandise usually causes a spike in container volume at the ports. There was no spike in shipments in August and September at any of the five ports. In fact, each of the five largest ports reported declines from 2010 levels. In Long Beach, the second busiest port, volume in August was 14.2% lower than in 2010, and September was almost 15% lighter. Los Angeles, the nation’s largest port, reported 5.75% fewer containers in August. In Savannah, Georgia, imports were off by 4%, while they were down .9% in Oakland, and flat in New York and New Jersey.

There has been no pick up in railroad volumes associated with the holidays either. According to Burlington Northern Santa Fe, volumes in July, August and September were flat compared to 2010. The Ceridian-UCLA Pulse of Commerce Index, which tracks real time trucking activity, fell for the third month in a row. The index dipped .2% in July, 1.4% in August, and 1% in September. This represents an annual rate of decline of more than 10%, which was only exceeded in the 2008-2009 recession.

In late September, the International Air Transport Association reported freight utilization fell to 45% in July. (latest figures available) Freight utilization measures how full freight planes are, as well as the cargo space in passenger planes. This measure rose from under 40% in 2009 to over 50% in 2010. Given the weakness in all the other modes of shipping in August and September, air freight utilization has likely slipped below 45%. The transportation of goods by land, sea, and air represent the arterial system of economic activity domestically and internationally. These reports provide an unambiguous picture of a slowdown in economic activity in the United States and globally.


Although 103,000 jobs were created in September, the labor market remains incredibly weak, considering we are more than two years into the recovery. Since the recession ended in June 2009, the average length of time an unemployed worker has been out of work has increased from 24.1 weeks to 40.5 weeks in September, the longest in 60 years. Those who did manage to find a job made an average of 17.5% less than they had previously, according to Princeton economics professor, Henry Farber. Between June 2009 and June 2011, inflation adjusted median household income fell 6.7% to $49,909, based on monthly Census Bureau data. This decline is larger than the 3.2% decline in household income that occurred between December 2007 and June 2009, when the recession was in full bloom!
Over the last twelve months, inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price index, has increased by 3.9%. During the same period, average weekly wages rose only 2.1%. Even those with a job are finding it harder to make ends meet, since their cost of living is rising faster than their incomes. It is no surprise that consumer confidence remains at levels only previously seen during recessions. Given the ongoing weakness in job growth and disposable income, it is difficult to see holiday sales increasing 5%-6% this year.

Over the last 60 years, the Federal Reserve’s most powerful monetary tool has been raising and lowering the cost of money to manage the economy. Short term rates have been held just above 0% for three years, and the Fed has indicated they will hold them steady for another two years. With inflation at 3.9%, the effective ‘real’ Federal funds rate is a negative 3.6%. Despite this unprecedented level of monetary accommodation, the current recovery has been anemic, averaging less than half the average GDP growth since World War II. With its most powerful monetary tool neutered, the Federal Reserve has executed two Quantitative Easing programs to spur a pickup in job growth, housing, and overall economic growth. These extraordinary measures have failed. They did, however, contribute to an overall increase in the cost of living, which has only made life for the average family harder. This was surely not their intention. But the unintended consequences of desperate acts are rarely positive.

Read the rest of this entry »

45 queries. 1.109 seconds.