Several comments came in that explored the notion of whether traders, as opposed to investors, are pushing the market around.Then a link to an article about Roubini's opinion that hedge fund closures/unwinding will cause the markets to be shut for a few days and that the worst is yet to come.
Finally a reader lamented about just wanting steady, moderate growth.
After a forty whatever percent drop you know I am leaning bullish having slightly increased long exposure.
That being said it would be foolish to deny the possibility of any seemingly extreme outcome and to be clear closing for a few days seems like a very remote possibility but almost all of the fallout of this crisis so far would have been viewed as very remote.
The one thing I would say to Roubini would be haven't hedge funds been selling all of this time? Hasn't hedge fund selling contributed to the 40% drop in US stocks, the ravaging in commodities, the pounding in emerging markets and the halving of oil (I realize oil is a commodity)? It is easy to believe the selling is not completed but that the worst is yet to come seems difficult to imagine.
One reader asked how much heed to pay to Roubini. He has been right of course in the big picture and most of the small picture. He was very early which is not a bad thing. One bit of trouble I have in trying follow him is his use of words like disaster and collapse. Reasonably speaking those are very subjective words. Someone might think of a 10% drop in housing prices as a collapse where someone else might think a collapse comes at 40%. I hear more subjective adjectives from him than specific numbers.
If your portfolio drops by half as much as the market, you keep your job and don't plan to move will this have turned to have been a disastrous collapse? Most people can count on those last two and some will have all three. So I have trouble thinking of this as a collapse but I have no argument against a rose colored glasses critique. I will say that portfolio troubles, job troubles and housing troubles can occur at anytime regardless of what is going on in the world. I have tried to mitigate all of those potential troubles with all of the portfolio stuff I've been writing about for four years, living in an inexpensive cabin that is paid for and being self-employed with two jobs.
Back to hedge funds; a year ago was there $1.5 trillion in hedge funds, maybe $2 trillion in something like 1000 hedge funds? Couldn't 20% of them be successful, either moderately or tremendously? Couldn't that 20% account for 40% of the assets in the space? Couldn't a case be made, with numbers by someone inclined to look, that much, not necessarily all, of the selling has been done? Maybe not.
In terms of is it the traders, I would not spend a lot of time on that. I think it misses the forest. I lump that in with things that are beyond your control, that and it isn't really knowable. The market is down a lot, it will either keep going down, hover or go up. I lean toward hover with an upward bias. What we can control is staying rational, sticking to a game plan and being prepared to being very wrong either big picture or tactically.
Last item is the lament for moderate but steady returns. It might be reasonable to define moderate as high single digits to low double digits, maybe 8-12% or 7-13%. Since 1950 there have only been ten years that the S&P 500 was up between 7-13%. Between 8-12% only four times since 1950. Unfortunately it just doesn't work that way.





12 comments:
Well I did not think things would get this bad this fast, but they have. I assume this is capitulation friday? If not when will we get a bounce?
From the looks of things today. This will either be the bottom, or we will be seeing the extreme Roubini outcome. I certainly never thought it would get this bad. With gold, oil, housing and stocks all imploding it looks pretty ominous.
I'm a pretty accurate contrary indicator and I'm looking at shorts today. The bounce must be just around the corner! Gulp.
With all of the finger-pointing going on at the governmental level, I'm surprised that there's not more call for regulation/oversight of the hedgies.
Somebody's making money out there and it looks like it is the guys doing intra-day trading; there's a drop in price in the morning; then it goes up for lunch and comes down in mid-afternoon only to go up again at the end of the trading session. From the comments above it does not look as if it is any of you guys, or me for that matter. Willy
I hope the market will claw back out of the hole it is in this morning. I think it is forced sellers getting out today. I don't think any rational person would sell otherwise at this point.
re: my comment yesterday about what types of traders are dominating the market moves, isn't this in principle knowable. If not, adding a few bits of information to each trade and a few supercomputers could make this knowable in the future.
jim
Roger,
You 200 DMA rule looks better and better each day. On the otherhand, some of the indexes are offering dividend yields we haven't seen for a generation. Wonder how safe dividends are?
I demand a SEC investigation of Roger's Skeletor postings. If we can stop short selling, by can't we stop Roger?
Heh. A friend at Citadel is pretty sure this is gonna be a "nasty" day. We'll see I guess.
When a market crashes even intra-day traders leaning in the right direction can get hurt because of execution problems and system breakdowns: This is a time to stand aside, watch and take notes; next week, next month or next year some assets that were already beginning to look good are going to become steals, possibly even life-changing in magnitude but ...in the meantime ...
When elephants fight it is the grass that is crushed (Swahili proverb)
As a trader (of my own money, own account), let me say "it ain't the traders".
There was a very close to random performance today, and if I had the time to prove what my gut is already certain of, I'd sharpen the pencil and show that today, there was no trend, and almost at any point in the day, the prior 30 minute history was no better indicator than a coin toss as to the likelihood of the market being above/below it's value 30 minutes later. (This is starting after the open. The SP was way off at the open and it managed to swing violently in both directions after the open.) Definitely NOT a trader's market.
I stand on my earlier comments. Equity is at the first loss position; if corporate debt (from household names) can't move at double digit yields, where's the incentive to buy equity, and what did Roger say, for 8-12% returns?
The VIX is above 70 (breaching 80) and everyone is dead certain it must come down. But that's a one way trade, and Roger's always warning us about the "sure things".
So, why not consider the unthinkable? (Since it seems that the unthinkable has been the only reliable label over these past 4 weeks (the charts really fall off from the Sept 15 bailout date...).)
What does the world look like where the VIX stays at 70?
I think it is no longer apostasy to think references to "nothing like this since the 1950s" are simply less meaningful.
While every time is different in its own way, this time may very well be sui generis. The perfect storm never before possible: an internet connected world where derivatives concocted on Wall Steet are as likely to show up in a small town of Wisconsin as they are in a small city of [Norway]. All done with leverage that simply wasn't there before. (Well, '29's margin buying excepted...)
Historically, Equity has been priced with a discount to future fundamental performance and an expected volatility of around 18%. The "self-correcting" mechanism that Alan was groping for may very well be a much higher discount to future fundamental performance, and - gagggghhhh - volatility north of 50%.
All this suggests that the folks most likely to continue to feed the beast are those most unwilling to let go of their certainty that it simply can't go on like this. Until they give up, or run out of cash, the "hopers" may just keep the ball bouncing.
R in NY
(Disclosure: I am selling premia. While I'm pretty certain that it will go on for awhile, I'm also convinced that humans are notoriously bad at estimating risk, which is why the SDS November calls 165 calls opened at $9.10 this morning. SDS at 174 (B/e) is very roughly equivalent to a SPY move to 60 ;-)
Post a Comment