Jubliation has replaced fear, and the consensus is now that the second-worst bear market in US history ended on March 9th and it’s all champagne and roses from here.
In the meantime, let’s review what happened after the two other biggest bear market bottoms of the past century, 1932 and 1974 (see Prof Shiller’s chart above). In both cases, as now, the market had a sharp rally off the lows.
In real terms (after adjusting for inflation), the 1932 market almost doubled in a year. The 1974 market, meanwhile, jumped about 35% over two years.
But it’s what happened after that that matters now.
After doubling off the low, the 1930s bear market pushed another 50% higher over the next three years to 1937 (not bad!). But it then got cut in half again, and it remained below the 1937 peak for 15 years. In 1949, 17 years after the 1932 bear-market low, when the next secular bull market finally began again, the market was 50% below the 1937 rebound peak and about 70% below the 1929 bull-market peak.
In 1974, the market rebounded 35% in a couple of years. In 1982, however, eight years later, when the actual bull market began, it was back below the 1974 low. The 1973 peak, of course, was lower than the 1966 high, so the bear market that ended in 1982 was actually 16 years long.
That’s why they call them "secular" bear markets.
So even if March 9th was the bottom of a Great Bear Market that took stocks down 60%+ in 9 years from the 2000 peak (in real terms), let us not celebrate too much about what is likely coming next. As Jeremy Grantham has said, the great bear markets don’t hurry, and this one probably has a long way to run.
Here’s Merrill strategist David Rosenberg on this topic. Rosenberg, by the way, thinks the bear-market rally has now run its course and we’re going to quickly retest the March lows:
At this time, we believe it is necessary to provide clients with some historical
perspective from the last colossal credit collapse in the 1930s, understanding that
RealPoint provides a comprehensive April CMBS delinquency report. A must read for both our readers and Merrill Lynch REIT analysts. Main charts extracted below. Most notable is the explosion in 90+ day delinquencies for March relative to April. In fact the deterioration is accelerating across all metrics: no second derivative green shoots anywhere in sight in CRE land.
The roasting is to be expected, the seating of CNBC propaganda machine Jim Cramer next to chief of staff and apparent media liaison Rahm Emanuel (fwd to 7:02 and 10:47) not so much, although not that very surprising.
Deepak Moorjani shares the below letter, which initially appeared in NYT’s DealBook, but subsequently was taken down for reasons known, and now only a big gaping 404 hole remains in its place (http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/another-view-deutsche-banks-culture-of-risk/). Moorjani, who is currently involved in litigation with Deutsche Bank, shares his perspectives on his former firm’s risk policies and the culture and reward structure that encouraged these with Zero Hedge readers. The story is all the more relevant as it intersects a core theme for Zero Hedge, that of commercial real estate and the skewed risk/return investment perspective from the bubble years, which we may very well be returning to if the administration gets its releveraging ways.
When speaking about the banking sector, many people mention a “subprime crisis” or a "financial crisis” as if recent write-downs and losses are caused by external events. Where some see coincidence, I see consequence. At Deutsche Bank, I consider our poor results to be a “management debacle,” a natural outcome of unfettered risk-taking, poor incentive structures and the lack of a system of checks and balances.
In my opinion, we took too much risk, failed to manage this risk and broke too many laws and regulations.
For more than two years, I have been working internally to improve the inadequate governance structures and lax internal controls within Deutsche Bank. I joined the firm in 2006 in one of its foreign subsidiaries, and my due diligence revealed management failures as well as inconsistencies between our internal actions and our external statements.
Beginning in late 2006, my conclusions were disseminated internally on a number of occasions, and while not always eloquently stated, my concerns were honest. Unfortunately, raising concerns internally is like trying to clap with one hand. The firm retaliated, and this raises the question: Is it possible to question management’s performance without being marginalized, even when this marginalization might be a violation of law? Two years later, our mounting losses are gaining attention, and I offer my experiences and my thoughts in the hopes of contributing to the shareholder and public policy debate.
Born and raised in Toledo, Ohio, I was infused with Midwestern values of hard work, individual responsibility, honesty, quiet integrity and fiscal prudence. After careers in New York City and Menlo Park, Calif.,
There has been some media and political debate lately over who if any entities may have profited from a Chrysler bankruptcy due to CDS holdings. As is often the case, when you get the mainstream media entering the ever so slightly more complex world of CDS contracts, many of the theories that develop have the same "logic" that is underpinning the current market rally.
A little due diligence in this case reveals relevant facts. The 2019 White & Case filing from the Chrysler docket has some critical disclosure:
4. None of the Chrysler Non-TARP Lenders hold any credit default swaps or hedges with respect to their holdings of Senior Debt.
In other words, the original Non-TARP holdouts, who owned $295 million of Senior Debt, did not have one Chrysler Credit Default Swap to their name. Thus, being unhedged they did not stand to benefit at all from a Chrysler bankruptcy and any claims that they implicitly or explicitly pushed the company into bankruptcy are nonsensical (granted the question stays open of whether they had CDS at any point in the past, although that can not be gleaned from the filing).
If there really are CDS holding culprits (and we really are talking LCDS here) they would be in the non-holdout creditor camp. But most likely, CDS holders did not have secured long positions in the first place, and bankruptcy beneficiaries would likely not be found anywhere in the list of secured or unsecured creditors. However, due to the LCDS nature of the holdings, this is a case unlike GM or the recent finance company bankruptcies. Now, in GM things will likely get more interesting, as DTCC reports that the company has roughly $33.6 billion and $2.4 billion in gross and net CDS exposure, respectively.
As for any allegations that AIG was a taxpayer funnel again, this is not the case, as AIG rarely if ever underwrote single-name CDS (and much less LCDS). Thus comparing the AIG gift to banks in early 2009 with fund flows in the Chrysler and, soon to be, GM bankruptcies is in the apples and oranges realm.
According to The Fed’s "More Adverse" scenario prime delinquencies will reach 3-4%.
Well, how about this?
(Click for a larger image)
Note that the PRESENT serious delinquency rate on Fannie’s credit book for single family homes is at 3.15%, up from 2.42% last quarter.
What’s worse is that a lot of the paper Fannie holds was written before the bubble. If you look at only the "bubble-era" paper (e.g. ALT-A) or even prime paper written in 05, 06 and 07 the numbers are going to be far worse.
We have the largest lender in the United States reporting current "prime" serious delinquencies, almost all of which will end up as foreclosures, equal to the most serious stress tested level right now and twice the so-called "baseline" scenario.
Furthermore, Fannie’s credit-related expenses nearly doubled quarter/over/quarter and was 2/3rds of the full year 2008 expense in one quarter alone!
Folks, there is absolutely nothing to support any claim that these "stress tests" were or are realistic when market performance in the nation’s largest lender and one that allegedly has written all "prime" mortgages states (not "suggests") that their credit book delinquency rate has reached the "more adverse" stress level already.
Nowhere in the "mainstream media" (e.g. CNBC, etc) has this been mentioned but it is literally right in your face while reading the Fannie quarterly report.
Everyone is entitled to be optimistic.
But nobody, especially not anyone in the government, has the right to intentionally mislead the markets and investors as to the validity of what they’re allegedly doing.
Given the Fannie report, which was known to the government (since it is under conservatorship) for a significant amount of time prior to being filed, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for The Fed’s "Stress Test" report to be published without a footnote indicating that the "most adverse" metrics had been proved met by the largest prime mortgage lender and guarantor in the United States already.
Investors deserve a government that does not intentionally mislead them.
If you are buying into this rally and the recovery of the
Tyler Cowen says congress is letting others take the responsibility – and the potential blame – for decisions it ought to be making:
There’s Work to Be Done, but Congress Opts Out, by Tyler Cowen, Economic View, NY Times: The longer the financial crisis runs, the more policy makers at the Treasury, the White House and the Federal Reserve are working around Congress rather than with it. It’s not that anyone is behaving illegally or unconstitutionally, but rather that Congress seems to want to be circumvented and to delegate more power to the executive branch as well as to the Fed, at least temporarily.
While Congressional leaders are consulted on the major policies, Congress is keeping its distance, perhaps to minimize voter outrage. This way, Congress can claim credit if a recovery comes, but deny responsibility if the price tag ends up higher than advertised or if banks seem to be receiving unfair benefits from the government.
Trillions of dollars of financial commitments have been made without explicit Congressional approval. … The traditional division of labor among policy makers was that the Fed determined the quantity of money in the economy — it set monetary policy — and Congress decided precise government expenditures — it handled fiscal policy. These new programs blur that distinction and, in essence, the Fed is running some fiscal policy. … A full description of important financial policies handled outside of Congress would more than fill this column and would add up to trillions of dollars in potential commitments and guarantees…
Both Democrats and Republicans are at fault for this apparent abdication of responsibility. The Republicans are focused on blaming the Democrats for bailouts, since they know the policies can go through without their support. The Democrats want to enjoy the benefits of making commitments and guarantees without accepting accountability or responsibility for them.
It’s a common theme in American history that crises expand the power of the executive branch of government, and that is part of what is happening here. Even the Federal Reserve, which … is supposed to be quasi-independent, has ceded much of its power to the Treasury. … Just as the Bush administration brought a growth of executive power in foreign policy and
The State’s revenues continued to deteriorate in April. Total General Fund revenues were down $1.89 billion (-16%) from the latest estimates found in the 2009-10 Budget Act.
Personal income taxes were $1.06 billion below the estimate (-12.6%), corporate taxes were below the estimate by $831 million (-35.6%) and sales taxes lagged the estimate by $108 million (-19.9%).
Some of April’s sales tax receipts were pushed into early May, but declining taxable transactions still drove sales tax receipts well below the Budget Act projection. While California’s sales tax rate went up April 1, revenues from the new rate will not be seen until May.
Compared to April 2008, General Fund revenue in April 2009 was down $6.3 billion (-39%). The total for the three largest taxes was below 2008 levels by $6.3 billion (-40.3%). Sales taxes were $452 million lower (-50.9%) than last April, and personal income taxes were down $5.7 billion (-43.6%). Corporate taxes were $142 million below (-8.6%) April of 2008
Sales tax collections year to date are short $327 million (-1.8%) from the 2009-10 Budget Act. Income taxes were $653 million lower (-1.7%) than expected, and corporate taxes were $788 million lower than expected (-9.5%).
The State’s other revenue streams were $299 million below (-6.7%) the estimates. Because the 2009-10 Budget Act contained actual revenue through February 2009, these disparities only occurred in the months of March and April.
The propositions to raise taxes are already short, and borrowing money from the lottery is sheer madness. California citizens have a chance to tell the spendthrifts to go to hell. All it takes is an appropriate NO vote on 5 of 6 California 2009 ballot propositions on May 19.
This is a non-trading topic, but I wanted to post it during trading hours so as many eyes can see it as possible. Feel free to contact me directly at firstname.lastname@example.org with any questions.
Last fall there was some discussion on the PSW board regarding setting up a YouCaring donation page for a PSW member, Shadowfax. Since then, we have been looking into ways to help get him additional medical services and to pay down his medical debts. After following those leads, we are ready to move ahead with the YouCaring site. (Link is posted below.) Any help you can give will be greatly appreciated; not only to help aid in his medical bill debt, but to also show what a great community this group is.
The other day I posted what I consider to be an elemental chart about income growth (or lack thereof) since the recovery began. Neil Irwin explained that the only people who’ve seen a recovery in wage growth were those who were already doing well anyway.
This has had a huge impact on the rich-poor divide that everyone’s been talking about these past few years. Here is another possible root cause behind the new dynamic, via Richard Kirshenbaum at the New York Observer:
In the past month, a group of radical Islamic extremists based in the Middle East beheaded at least 23 people and enforced a ban on Christianity by arresting a group of people for practicing the faith in a private home.
No, I’m not talking about ISIS. The real culprit is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, one of the America&rsqu...
Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.
Price Deflation Hits Italy First Time in 55 Years
The Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) reports that consumer price inflation declined by 0.1% from August 2013 to August 2014.
Italian consumer prices fell 0.1 percent year-on-year in August of 2014, matching preliminary estimates. The country’s annual inflation rate touched the negative territory for the first time in nearly 55 years due to a drop in energy prices.
Year-on-year, prices of energy fell 3.6 percent in August, mainly driven by a 1.2 percent drop in cost of non-regulated energy products. Additional downward pressures came from food ...
If GOOGLE, the NSA, and Bill Gates all got together in a room with the task of building the most accurate trading algorithm… it wouldn’t just be any ordinary system… it’d be the greatest trading algorithm in the world.
Well, I hate to break it to you… they never got around to building it, but my colleagues at Market Tamer did.
Although the stock market displayed weakness last week as I suggested it would, bulls aren’t going down easily. In fact, they’re going down swinging, absorbing most of the blows delivered by hesitant bears. Despite holding up admirably when weakness was both expected and warranted, and although I still see higher highs ahead, I am still not convinced that we have seen the ultimate lows for this pullback. A number of signs point to more weakness ahead.
In this weekly update, I give my view of the current market environment, offer a technical analysis of the S&P 500 chart, review our weekly fundamentals-based SectorCast rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, and then offer up some actionable trading ideas, including a sector rotation strategy using ETFs and an enhanced version using top-r...
Reminder: OpTrader is available to chat with Members, comments are found below each post.
This post is for all our live virtual trade ideas and daily comments. Please click on "comments" below to follow our live discussion. All of our current trades are listed in the spreadsheet below, with entry price (1/2 in and All in), and exit prices (1/3 out, 2/3 out, and All out).
We also indicate our stop, which is most of the time the "5 day moving average". All trades, unless indicated, are front-month ATM options.
Please feel free to participate in the discussion and ask any questions you might have about this virtual portfolio, by clicking on the "comments" link right below.
To learn more about the swing trading virtual portfolio (strategy, performance, FAQ, etc.), please click here
In a report published Monday, Compass Point analyst Michael Tarkan reiterated a Buy rating and $21.00 price target on Navient Corp (NASDAQ: NAVI).
In the report, Compass Point noted, “We reiterate our Buy rating on NAVI shares after analyzing updated credit data within the company's private student loan trusts, which indicate continued YOY improvement in delinquency and default rates. The data captures statistics for trusts originated from 2002 through 2014 for the three months ended August 31, 2014, providing a good leading indicator for 3Q14 credit trends. The ongoing improvement should give management flexibility to continue to lower provision expenses to drive earnings higher.”
The CBOE Vix Index is in positive territory on Friday morning as shares in the S&P 500 Index move slightly lower. Currently the VIX is up roughly 2.75% on the session at 13.16 as of 11:35 am ET. Earlier in the session big prints in October expiry call options caught our attention as one large options market participants appears to have purchased roughly 106,000 of the Oct 22.0 strike calls for a premium of around $0.45 each. The VIX has not topped 22.0 since the end of 2012, but it would not take such a dramatic move in the spot index in order to lift premium on the contracts. The far out-of-the-money calls would likely increase in value in the event that S&P500 Index stocks slip in the near term. The VIX traded up to a 52-week high of 21.48 back in February. Next week’s release of the FOMC meeting minutes f...
Despite the various opinions on Bitcoin, there is no question as to its ultimate value: its ability to bypass government restrictions, including economic embargoes and capital controls, to transmit quasi-anonymous money to anyone anywhere.
Opinions differ as to what constitutes "money."
The English word "money" derives from the Latin word "moneta," which means to "mint." Historically, "money" was minted in the form of precious metals, most notably gold and silver. Minted metal was considered "money" because it possessed luster, was scarce, and had perceive...
Author Helen Davis Chaitman is a nationally recognized litigator with a diverse trial practice in the areas of lender liability, bankruptcy, bank fraud, RICO, professional malpractice, trusts and estates, and white collar defense. In 1995, Ms. Chaitman was named one of the nation's top ten litigators by the National Law Journal for a jury verdict she obtained in an accountants' malpractice case. Ms. Chaitman is the author of The Law of Lender Liability (Warren, Gorham & Lamont 1990)... Since early 2009, Ms. Chaitman has been an outspoken advocate for investors in Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (more here).
Reminder: Pharmboy is available to chat with Members, comments are found below each post.
Well PSW Subscribers....I am still here, barely. From my last post a few months ago to now, nothing has changed much, but there are a few bargins out there that as investors, should be put on the watch list (again) and if so desired....buy a small amount.
First, the media is on a tear against biotechs/pharma, ripping companies for their drug prices. Gilead's HepC drug, Sovaldi, is priced at $84K for the 12-week treatment. Pundits were screaming bloody murder that it was a total rip off, but when one investigates the other drugs out there, and the consequences of not taking Sovaldi vs. another drug combinations, then things become clearer. For instance, Olysio (JNJ) is about $66,000 for a 12-week treatment, but is approved for fewer types of patients AND...
Note: The material presented in this commentary is provided for
informational purposes only and is based upon information that is
considered to be reliable. However, neither MaddJack Enterprises, LLC
d/b/a PhilStockWorld (PSW) nor its affiliates
warrant its completeness, accuracy or adequacy and it should not be relied upon as such. Neither PSW nor its affiliates are responsible for any errors or omissions or for results obtained from the use of this information. Past performance, including the tracking of virtual trades and portfolios for educational purposes, is not necessarily indicative of future results. Neither Phil, Optrader, or anyone related to PSW is a registered financial adviser and they may hold positions in the stocks mentioned, which may change at any time without notice. Do not buy or sell based on anything that is written here, the risk of loss in trading is great.
This material is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security or other financial instrument. Securities or other financial instruments mentioned in this material are not suitable for all investors. Any opinions expressed herein are given in good faith, are subject to change without notice, and are only intended at the moment of their issue as conditions quickly change. The information contained herein does not constitute advice on the tax consequences of making any particular investment decision. This material does not take into account your particular investment objectives, financial situations or needs and is not intended as a recommendation to you of any particular securities, financial instruments or strategies. Before investing, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, as necessary, seek professional advice.