Thursday, September 21, 2017

The Morning Call--Surprise, surprise

The Morning Call

9/21/17

The Market
         
    Technical

The indices (DJIA 22412, S&P 2508) had a somewhat volatile day, most of it around the initial news on the latest FOMC moves (much more below), and ended modestly up, closing again on all-time highs.  Volume rose; breadth continued strong.  Both remain above their 100 and 200 day moving averages and are in uptrends across all time frames. 

The VIX (9.8) was clipped by 4%, leaving it below the upper boundary of its short term downtrend, below its 100 day moving average (now resistance) and below its 200 day moving average (now resistance).  It is now below the lower boundary of its long term trading range, drawing near its former all-time low.  The question as to whether or not the VIX has bottomed is about to be answered.

Even though short term interest rates rose on the FOMC statement, the long Treasury yield declined, suggesting the bond investors believe that the impact of a slowing economy will have a greater effect on long rates than a rise in short term rates.  TLT finished above its 100 and 200 day moving averages (both support) and the lower boundaries of its short term trading range and its long term uptrend. 

The dollar rose, but remained in short term and very short term downtrends and below its 100 and 200 day moving averages and in a series of seven lower highs. 
           
GLD got whacked, ending above its 100 and 200 day moving averages (both support) and the lower boundary of a short term uptrend.

Bottom line: long term, the indices remain strong viz a viz their moving averages and uptrends across all timeframes. Short term, they closed above the resistance level marked by their August highs, meaning that there is no resistance between current price levels and the upper boundaries of the Averages long term uptrends.

On the other hand, all those gap openings among the major indices still need to be closed. 

Finally, the FOMC’s statement had the expected effect on GLD (down) and the dollar (up).  TLT’s pin action suggested bond investors are not as convinced as the Fed that the economy is strengthening.  And equity investors’ initial response seemed to indicate that the Fed action had been well discounted.

I remain uncomfortable with the overall technical picture.
           

    Fundamental

       Headlines

            The sole US stat of the day was August existing home sales which were disappointing.  Overseas, August UK retail sales and August Japanese exports were well above expectations; August German PPI was in line.

            ***overnight, the Bank of Japan left monetary policy unchanged: Moody’s downgrades China’s credit rating due to soaring debt growth.

            Of course, the major focus of investors was the FOMC statement and the subsequent Yellen press conference.  I should start by saying that I was wrong about Fed actions. 

            What were the important points?

(1)   left the Fed Funds rate unchanged. Ok, I thought that would happen,

(2)   suggested strongly that a Fed Funds rate hike would occur in December.  I had doubted that,

(3)   most important, it laid out the schedule for unwinding QE which [a] will start next month and [b] most importantly, Yellen said that it would be adhered to irrespective of short term economic developments.  I did not believe it would lay out a firm schedule and certainly didn’t think it would emphasize the lack of flexibility in unwinding its balance sheet.  The importance of this latter point is that if the FOMC has decided that it is now time to tighten, the risk is that it will continue with that policy for far too long just as it did with easing,

(4)   also of importance, forecasts of future growth and inflation [its dot plot that registers each FOMC member’s individual specific estimates and then calculates the median forecast] has a usually wide spread of expected outcomes, especially in the out years.  That indicates that there is wide disagreement among the members, or dare I say uncertainty/confusion. Of course, we already know this because this group has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that it couldn’t forecast its way out of a wet paper bag.   Indeed, in Yellen’s press conference, she admitted that the Fed had no idea why inflation was as low as it is.  The points here are [a] the Fed’s economic model is broken; the numbers have never matched up to the real economy; so why would they now?  [b] in other words, the Fed’s new found confidence in the economy is meaningless.  Unwinding QE was never about the economy anyway; it was about the Fed’s fear of disrupting the markets.  In short, the economy hasn’t improved to the degree that the Fed would have you believe; the Fed has just decided that it can’t hold off normalizing any longer.


Here is the red lined version of the FOMC statement and the dot plot along with some analysis.

                        More from Goldman and Deutschebank (medium):

            What does this mean aside from the stated obvious?  On the assumption that Yellen et al aren’t jerking us around (again), it means my Fed thesis (QE did little to help the economy so its removal will do little to hurt it; but it spawned the egregious mispricing and misallocation of assets and the destruction of price discovery, all of which will be reversed) is about to be tested---proven right or wrong. 

            To be clear, I thought that the Fed should have started the normalization of monetary policy years ago.  Indeed if there is one thing that I have made clear is that the Fed has never made that transition correctly in all of history and this time, it had waited far too long.  So while it has done what ultimately had to be done, I believe that it just did it too late and now the piper needs to be paid.  When exactly that occurs is open is question, but, in my opinion, the fuse has now been lit.

            How fast it may burn (assuming that it does) could depend on a couple of factors that I have discussed before; but as a reminder:

(1)   the likelihood that any fiscal stimulus will impact economic growth is questionable.  It certainly is no reason for the Fed to start tightening. I have mentioned the Reinhart/Rogoff study numerous times; but if their conclusions are correct, tax reform and infrastructure are not apt to have much impact on growth.  Indeed, to the extent that they further raise the national debt/budget deficit, they will only further negatively impact economic growth and further aggravate Treasury financing problems,

(2)   speaking of which, the debt ceiling has been raised which means the Treasury is going to be coming to market for new money.  Further, any additional deficit spending resulting from the Trump/GOP tax reform/infrastructure agenda will create the need for more new financing.  The Fed not be reinvesting funds will only add to that need. 

On the other hand, the Fed has been a non-price sensitive buyer of Treasuries [i.e. its motive for buying was not to earn a return but to pump money into the financial system].  Meaning that the new buyers will be more price conscious [read lower bidders].  This sudden change in supply/demand plus the alteration of the buy side’s price objectives is something the market hasn’t experienced in eight years and we don’t know how it will react.  It may be totally unaffected.  I don’t believe that will occur; but we just don’t know.

            Of course, the bottom line as to whether I am right or wrong on my QE unwind/ down Market thesis is how stocks perform.  In the end, nothing else matters. 

            How many warnings do you need (medium):

       Investing for Survival
   
            Why value investing is so difficult.

    
    News on Stocks in Our Portfolios
 
Economics

   This Week’s Data

            August existing home sales fell 1.7% versus a slight anticipated rise.

            Weekly jobless claims fell 23,000 versus expectations of a 19,000 increase.

            The September Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index came in at 23.0 versus estimates of 18.0.
           

   Other

            Quote of the day (short):

Politics

  Domestic

  International War Against Radical Islam


Visit Investing for Survival’s website (http://investingforsurvival.com/home) to learn more about our Investment Strategy, Prices Disciplines and Subscriber Service.




No comments:

Post a Comment