pebblewriter

Tag: FOMC

  • Algos: “We’ll Take it From Here”

    More fun and games from the market-rigging department…

    If SPX’s rally has impressed you, check out the Nikkei.  Since its Aug 26 lows, NKD is up a whopping 13.8% — more than twice SPX’s impressive 6.0%.Do what I did and google “Japan” and “economy” for the past month and you’ll see nothing but negative stories including this one which confirms a “worsening economy” even before the effects of the recent 25% increase in the consumption tax have been absorbed.

    So, why the 13.8% rally?  Unlike the Fed, the Bank of Japan makes no secret of the fact that it buys stocks.  In fact, the BoJ and the government pension fund are the two biggest owners of stocks in the Nikkei 225.

    Thanks to negative rates, investors pay the BoJ to hold their cash.  So, it costs the bank nothing to buy up everything in sight.  All they have to do is make sure the stocks never decline in value.  This is accomplished in two ways: (a) buying more stocks (throwing good money after bad); and, (b) by manipulating the currency (the yen carry trade.)

    Lately, the yen carry trade has been working overtime.  At some point the yen could theoretically get too cheap; so, the USDJPY is reset lower most nights when the low-volume futures markets are more easily propped up.

    When the cash market opens, though, the USDJPY takes off.  I’ve highlighted the period between 6:30am and 4:00pm in the chart below.  The effects on the NKD are immediate.  A few nanoseconds later, the S&P 500 futures join in.  The algorithms which drive 90% of all US equity volume watch USDJPY like a hawk.

    What happens if, for some reason, the USDJPY can’t be driven any higher or is busy resetting when extra assistance is needed?  We’ve written often about the benefits derived from hammering VIX futures.  Another favorite of central banks is oil futures.

    As the chart below shows, it works exactly the same way as the yen carry trade.  The only difference is that higher oil prices reverberate through the real economy, affecting nearly every business and consumer in fairly short order.  So, the manipulation requires a little more finesse. The Fed has its own trading desk, presumably with the ability to dabble in the futures market. Their cost of funds is essentially zero as they can print money any time they like.  Imagine how fun it will be when interest rates go negative and investors pay them to drive stock prices higher.

    continued for members… (more…)

  • Why Interest Rates Must Not Rise

    In May 2014 many of us were shocked by a report that Ben Bernanke, who had recently departed the Fed, told a group of wealthy investors that he did “not expect the federal funds rate…to rise back to its long-term average of around 4%” in his lifetime.

    I remember feeling Bernanke’s statement represented both extraordinary hubris and wishful thinking. Surely, the trillions being pumped into the financial system would drive inflation to levels that would produce higher rates.  After all, I reasoned, the bond market isn’t as easily manipulated as is the stock market.

    Last year, I called attention to the fact that the cost of servicing the US debt had broken out to new highs [see: Why Rising Rates are a Problem This Time.]  Even though interest rates had fallen dramatically, the spiraling debt had send annual interest expense on that debt to roughly $450 billion in FY 2017.

    Bernanke’s 2014 words came back to me as I did the math.

    Clearly, if rates were to normalize the interest expense would be unmanageable… Between 2000 and 2007, the average interest rate was 4.84%.  On the current $20.6 trillion balance, that would mean an annual interest expense of roughly $1 trillion.

    Of course he was confident in his prediction!  He understood that rates could never be allowed to rise.  A return to normalcy — and, I don’t believe this to be an exaggeration — would absolutely destroy the economy.

    I had always found the Treasury’s increasing dependence on short-term, floating rate and inflation-indexed borrowings a bit unsettling. Why not lock in a boatload of 30-yr bonds at 2.1%?  Now we know.

    In their wisdom (or desperation…time will tell) the central bankers and those maxing out America’s Gold Card have bet our very futures that Bernanke was right — that everything will be okay in the end…as long as the end never gets here.

    By the way, here’s an update of the above chart…which has been appropriately renamed.

     

     

     

  • Not Exactly Reassuring…

    The markets weren’t exactly reassured by Powell’s testimony yesterday.  Bottom line, no one in their right mind buys the idea that we can have such strong GDP and wage growth but still need such accommodative policy. IMO, Powell was curt and sometimes downright evasive, which didn’t help matters.

    Stocks plunged to our initial downside target, closing well below the SMA10 (a rarity, lately) with additional downside potential this morning.

    AAPL tested its channel top and retreated.  As we discussed yesterday, this failure to break out has weighed on the overall market.continued for members… (more…)

  • Backtest Accomplished

    Members, remember to request access to @pebbletrades if you’d like intraday notices of important updates.  Only about 20% of you are currently signed up, and I’d like to use it more often to signal when important target tags or changes to a forecast occur. If your identity isn’t discernible from your Twitter handle, drop us a line so we’ll know to approve you.

     *  *  *

    SPX/ES backtested their necklines in dramatic fashion yesterday.  As we discussed, they had their choice of a gentle sloping path (which stretched to Wednesday or Thursday) or a sharp plunge.

    SPX opend off 13 points and never looked back.  The losses accelerated until it reached our downside target and VIX reached our 21 target — also a backtest.

    The swift recovery in the closing hour and the overnight ramp job send the message that the worst is over for now.  But, of course, we’ll want to see some follow through for confirmation.

    continued for members… (more…)

  • Update on Gold: Dec 26, 2018

    Back on August 15, we noted that gold was nearing an important downside target.  From Charts I’m Watching: Aug 15, 2018:

    [Gold] has reached triple support –the .618, yellow TL off the 2011 highs, and the red TL from 2010.  We’ve targeted 1173.60 since the yellow TL broke down in May and gray channel broke down in June.  I strongly suspect it will bounce here.

    GC dipped slightly lower, bottoming out at 1167.10 the following day, then began an arduous climb that reached our 1268.30 target last week.

    As it threatens a breakout, we’ll take a fresh look at the road ahead.

    continued for members…

    (more…)

  • FOMC: What Elephant?

    Over the last 20 years, we’ve seen two yield curve (2s10s) inversions: essentially all of 2000 and Dec 2005-May 2007.  The inversions themselves posed no issues for equity markets.  It was the dramatic unwinding of those inversions that produced crashes.Eight months ago, we almost had another.  2s10s had fallen to a trend line connecting those two previous curve lows. Instead of bouncing, however, 2s10s continued falling — reaching a low of .18 on Aug 27.

    Unfortunately, the optics of this approach to an inversion are troublesome.  It is commonly believed that inversions presage recessions.  So, the brain trust in the Eccles Building has a little tightrope walking to do.

    They need to increase the short end of the curve to stave off (understated) inflation and build some cushion for the next financial calamity.  But, to avoid an inversion, they must scale back their intervention in the 10Y — at least enough so it can keep pace with the rapidly rising 2Y.

    Eagle-eyed observers might note that both recently out above the trend line connecting previous highs. Not so coincidentally, this occurred as the above-referenced trend line connecting the 2s10s lows was breached and equities began their Jan-Feb swoon.Can the Fed keep the plates spinning a little longer?  Without question.  Especially if Powell is successful in convincing investors algos that the economy is strong but there is no wage pressure and inflation poses no real threat.

    Should that narrative fail, however, the spectre of higher rates alongside soaring debt levels might finally awaken equity and bond investors to the elephant in the room.

     *  *  *

    So far, the damage resulting from Friday’s channel breakdown has been contained to the August highs.  But, still ahead, EIA inventory reports and the FOMC statement and press conference.

    continued for members… (more…)

  • Update on Gold: Apr 11, 2018

    In our last major update [see: Jan 26 Update] we noted that gold, 1355 at the time, had reached the same price level at which it had frequently reversed.  Even though we’d had a bullseye at 1377-1380 for over a year, it had stopped short several times.

    GC is sitting just below the neckline of the huge IH&S that could result in a significant breakout.  The fly in the ointment: I don’t think TPTB will let it break out.  So, you should either take profits here in the 1348-1365 range, or at least set your stops at this level.

    As it happened, 1365 (reached the day before) was the cycle high.  Gold tumbled 4.1%, then bounced around between roughly 1308 and 1362 for the next two months.  Our interim posts caught most of the moves:

      * * *

    Feb 8: Analog Details  “[Gold] has dropped 4.1% since reversing where expected in late Jan, and just reached fanline and double channel support [1321.] Could it finally be ready to tag 1377-1380?”  Bottomed that day, rallied to 1364 over the following week (+2.51%.)

    Feb 15: Where to, Next?  “GC might have run out of steam here [1360.] Cautious types should consider taking profits, while the daredevils out there remain focused on 1380.” Topped out the following day at 1364 (+2.95%.)

    Feb 27: Powell’s French Toast   “Gold is getting clobbered…our analog suggests a Mar 1 turning point. The SMA100 should be around 1303 by then and would be a better bounce spot.”  Bottomed on Mar 1 at 1303.60 (+4.15%.)

    Mar 27: Algos to Markets – All Better  “GC, which tagged its 1362 resistance yet again, has retreated once more… It still has a good shot at 1380, but only if/when DXY finally breaks down.” Reached 1369.40 today (+5.05%.)

     * * *

    So, here we are, sitting on a tidy 14.7% gain.  It’s not terrible for 2 1/2 months work, considering gold has only netted a 0.9% gain during that period.  But, I hate to leave money on the table. Is it time to pull the plug on 1377-1380?  Or, are we about to reach or exceed it?

    continued for members…

    The two major factors at work are the ongoing saga of the US dollar and the possibility of a shooting war with Russia in Syria.  I can’t speak to the question of a war other to say anything’s possible, especially with the crew currently running the ship.

    The dollar is another matter.  While it normally rises and falls in sync with interest rates, this relationship reversed at the end of 2017.    At that point, DXY logged another leg lower while TNX spiked. At just shy of 3%, the TNX became a drag on equities — the whole “going broke” thing [see: Why Rising Rates Are a Problem This Time.]  But, as the gyrations in equities picked up again, great care was taken to ensure it didn’t plunge in value.

    I suppose the thinking was that lower rates would weaken the dollar’s appeal.  Or, maybe it was just fear of a yield curve inversion.  In any case, TNX’s purple TL has refused to break down. DXY also refuses to break down.  And, this could go on for quite a while.  It needs to tag the bottom of the rising purple channel.  But, until mid-July rolls around, that would mean dipping below the .618 at 88.423.  So, it’s quite possible TPTB will prop it up for another three months! 

    Remember, Mnuchin publicly stated he wants to support the USD.  And, it goes without saying that he, like every central banker, loathes any serious price appreciation in gold, as it undermines the value of the mighty dollar. One silver lining, EURUSD suggests a shorter timeframe, say Jun 5.  But, even two months would be a long time to wait for another few points.  An escalation in MENA tensions could obviously accelerate things.  But, is it worth taking the risk for 10-15 points?  I think not.  I’d pull the plug or at least enter stops here at 1367.  If it pops above 1380, great.  No argument with going long, again.  DXY could drop to 87 tomorrow, and GC could easily reach 1377-1380 or higher.

    But, if DXY continues sideways, and unless war breaks out in the next day or two, it seems likely that gold’s next move will be lower.  The most obvious support is at the rising white channel bottom and SMA100, currently around 1315.2-1318.  If the channel breaks down again, the SMA200 will reach the purple channel line later this month, probably around 1300.  I’ll update things if we see a material deviation in either direction.

    GLTA.

     

     

  • The Market’s Latest “Lucky” Bounce

    That’s a relief!  For months, pundits have been arguing whether the Fed needed to hike interest rates three times or four times this year — you know, because of all the growth coming down the pike.

    Fed Über-Dove and “Man Who Thinks Market Integrity is Overrated” Jim Bullard just announced that the correct number is zero.  That’s right.  Everything is perfect just like it is.

    Amazingly, and quite by coincidence, this pronouncement occurred on the exact same day that several stock market indices were in danger of falling below a very important technical level of support: their 200-day moving averages.  As we discussed on Monday, falling below the SMA200 isn’t usually very healthy for markets.

    For visitors and new members, this seems like a good time to take a walk down memory lane.  This isn’t Mr Bullard’s first rodeo.  Nor is it the first time “someone” did something clever to ensure the market’s continued ascent.

    The S&P 500 illustrates the phenomenon quite well, having experienced a number of such fortunate events at crucial times. October 2014 – Bullard!

    Bullard appeared on Bloomberg to explain that another round of QE might be in order. As “luck” would have it, this enabled SPX to reverse right as it reached important Fibonacci support, ending a 9.9% tumble and narrowly averting an official correction.

    Big assist from USDJPY, which soared 16% over the next 7 weeks in spite of the fact that more QE should have weakened the US dollar.  The Yen Carry Trade in all its glory.

    August 2015 – USDJPY!

    This 12.5% correction was set up by USDJPY falling back below a critical Fibonacci level (the .618 at 120.11) in the wake of SPX reaching a key Fibonacci extension (the 1.618 at 2138.)

    We had correctly forecast the top [see: The Last Big Butterfly] but it was unclear whether or not USDJPY could remain above 120.  SPX plummeted when 120 finally fell but, as “luck” would have it, was (temporarily) rescued by USDJPY’s bounce back above it.

    February 2016 – Oil!

    The price of West Texas Intermediate Oil (CL) had fallen 77% between Aug 2013 and Feb 2016.  While this crushed inflation to a manageable level, it made investors in and lenders to energy-related companies pretty nervous.

    As “luck” would have it, CL bottomed out on Feb 11, 2016 — the exact same day that SPX reached that critical Fibonacci support level of 1823.  CL doubled over the next four months, and SPX rebounded sharply.  By accurately forecast the bottom in oil, we could confidently call a bottom for SPX [see: USDJPY Finally Relents.]June 2016 – USDJPY!

    Stocks plunged in the wake of the Brexit vote.  As “luck” would have it, USDJPY — which had used CL’s rally as an opportunity to reset — picked this particular day to bottom out and spiked 8% higher over the following month.

    Futures had sold off by 6.5%, but by the time SPX opened the next morning the recovery was well underway.  It was soon back above its recent highs and the critical 1.618 extension at 1.618.  In other words: new all-time highs.

    November 2016 – Trump*!  Unfortunately for stocks, the US election results weren’t conducive to a rally.  Once Trump’s election became apparent, futures plummeted over 5% in a matter of hours.  SPX had bounced off its SMA200 a few days earlier.  Unless something was done quickly, it would drop through this key support the following morning.As “luck” would have it, USDJPY picked this particular day to bottom out.  It spiked 5% over the next few hours and 18% over the next few weeks — a supersized version of the exercise which had saved stocks post-Brexit.

    And, if that weren’t enough, VIX — the widely accepted indicator of fear and volatility — plummeted even as futures were plunging.  It’s the equivalent of calling your insurance broker to cancel your homeowner’s policy as a hurricane bears down on your beach house.  How very, very “lucky” indeed.Futures recovered almost all of their losses by the time the cash market opened the following morning. VIX went on to shed over 50% of its value and broke down through trend line support (above, the white arrow.)

    Stocks were soon registered new all-time highs. The talking heads called it the “Trump Rally” and attributed the gains to the incoming president’s pro-business orientation and deal-making acumen. But, I think it deserves an asterisk…on account of the incredible “luck” involved [see: Why the Trump Rally is a Fraud.]

    The SPX chart isn’t labeled as such, but the rise from 2138 to 2703 (the next major Fib level) wouldn’t have been possible without continued support from oil and VIX.  After doubling in value, CL proceeded to construct a well-formed rising channel (below, in purple) that was very supportive of stocks.  It oscillated between the channel’s top and bottom like clockwork — until December 2017.  We’ll come back to that.Also during that time, VIX was trying something new.  After years of occasionally bouncing off the bottom of a long-term channel (below, the yellow arrows) it decided to plunge below that channel bottom and spend 80% of its subsequent days in the cellar — reaching new all-time lows in the process.This sent a strong all-clear signal to stocks (or, at least the algos that trigger stock purchases) that the coast was clear. It was completely safe to buy stocks, which they did — producing a rally that accelerated all the way up to the 2.24 extension at 2703.

    December 2017 – Oil!

    At that point, oil’s breakout (remember the purple channel above?) and the onslaught of new, daily lows in VIX combined to give SPX the boost it needed to climb above that resistance.  I mean, how “lucky” can you get?  It popped above 2703 and tacked on another 6.3% for good measure.

    Unfortunately for stocks, though, there was a practical limit to how high CL could go without creating problems.  Someone had forgotten that higher oil prices mean higher inflation.  And, higher inflation means higher interest rates.  And, when you’re $21 trillion in debt and pass a tax bill and budget that greatly widen the deficit considerably…higher interest rates are not exactly lucky [see: Why Higher Interest Rates Are a Problem This Time.]

    Between that realization and a growing disconnect between price and supply & demand, CL had to drop.  When it did, and the (dashed, red) trend line from August 2017 finally broke down, stocks didn’t take it well.SPX plunged almost 12% over the next two weeks, one of the sharpest corrections ever.  Luckily, the SMA200 was there to catch it.  A few days later, CL popped back above its channel top and SPX recovered to back above 2703.

    As the bounce began to fade, we had a surprise message from Bullard that “too many rate hikes could slow the economy.”  It was enough to extend SPX’s bounce for another few weeks.  But, ultimately it slipped back down below 2703 to tag its SMA200 again.  And, again.  And, again.  And, again.

    By then, DJIA and RUT had finally risen to the point where they could tag their SMA200s as well.  SPX bounced at our 2561 target.  Investors were in luck!  Until this morning.

    April 2018 – Bullard!

    Apparently, someone forgot to explain to the Chinese that we were supposed to win the trade war (winning them is easy!)  This morning, we found out that China had the gall to fight back.  When I was woken by an price alert at 3:15 this morning, the futures were off 55 points.  SPX would open back below its SMA200.

    But, the futures didn’t know what they were up against!

    Then came Larry Kudlow, the guy who in May 2008 called the impending Great Financial Crisis a “non-recession recession.”  Some people might have misunderstood; but, obviously he meant it would be much worse than a recession.  (I can’t wait to find the pot of gold!)

    As “luck” would have it, the market was quite pleased with all this positive scuttlebutt.   ES, once down 55 points, closed up 34 points.  SPX and the Dow rose about 1%.  RUT added 1.30%.  And, COMP — which never did tag its SMA200 — popped 1.45%.  Take that, 200-day moving average!

    Bounces are nice, whether driven by oil, the USDJPY or Fed cheerleaders.  This one got SPX back above its SMA200, which is a good start.  Next comes the 2.24 Fib, which SPX has crossed some twenty times in the past two months.  Can it rise back above and stay there this time?

    Oil’s limitations haven’t disappeared.  Managing inflation and interest rate expectations will continue to dominate its price action.  Lately, the market has a very narrow range within which it feels comfortable.

    USJDPY is threatening to break out from a falling flag pattern, but one has to wonder why it hasn’t done so already.  Japan got no love from Trump in the trade war chatter to date.  It’s quite possible they’re done cooperating with currency intervention. VIX, after popping back above the yellow channel bottom in dramatic fashion in February, has fallen back to a trend line (red, dashed) from its January lows.  Every time it pops above the trend line, SPX stumbles.  Every time it drops below it, SPX rips.  Today, it tagged it and reversed lower – hence the day’s gains.  It has plenty of additional downside potential, with the potential to drive stocks back above 2700.  But, again, it hasn’t done so yet.

    It makes one wonder whether SPX will be allowed to put in a lower low in order to make the corrective wave look a little more conventional and give COMP a shot at its SMA200.  We have oodles and oodles of downside targets if SPX’s SMA200 should fail.  That white dot at 2138 in the chart above is there for a reason [see: More Where That Came From.]

    There are countless other factors I haven’t even mentioned: our yield curve model (which tentatively turned bullish today), 10yr note rates, the US dollar’s buoyancy, various momentum indicators, and the continuing sagas of FB, TSLA, AMZN and DB — all of which have played a role in the market’s gyrations (mostly of the bad luck variety.)

    Whatever happens, it’s hard to imagine we could reach new highs without plenty more luck.  Trade safe, and stay tuned.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Does the Yield Curve Matter? A Closer Look

    I called a top in SPX on May 20, 2015 [see: The Last Big Butterfly] because it was about to reach the 1.618 Fib extension at 2138 — our upside target from way back in 2012.  SPX peaked the following day and fell over 300 points before it was all over.

    What I didn’t notice at the time was the bond market. We’ve focused on this from time to time, most recently on Dec 29 [see: Should You Fear the Yield Curve?]  We noted at the time that while the spread between 10Y and 2Y was dropping rapidly, it only represented a warning unless it bottomed out and rose rapidly.  From that post:

    …the above shows that while the potential is there for a recession, this is just an early warning at this time. If the yield curve bottoms out here and rapidly steepens, we’ll have a lot more to worry about.

    Two sessions later, the spread did bottom out, and has been on a tear ever since.  What does this mean?  Let’s look at how things unfolded in the past.

    The spread had been tightening since Dec 31, 2013.  It bottomed in Feb 2015 and began rising again.  In early May, it broke above a trend line (red, dashed) connecting its highs.

    About the same time that SPX was peaking, it backtested that TL and continued higher.  It broke trend (purple, dashed) around Jul 31, a few days before SPX fell off a cliff.  It broke down to new lows (the red, dotted line) in Jan 2016, about the same time that SPX bottomed out.What the yield curve said, then, in simple terms:

    – a breakout from the downtrend marked an equity top (bearish)
    – a breakdown of the subsequent uptrend was really bearish
    – a break to new lows represented a potential bottom (bullish)

    Before I go any further, I want to point out that there were four significant bottoms in 2015-2016.  The first two came close to backtesting the 1.272 Fib at 1823, but didn’t quite make it.  The second two did.Now, let’s look at the same period, but comparing the 10Y (TNX) itself to SPX.  Note that SPX peaked shortly after TNX reached the falling red TL, and began having trouble once TNX broke out.

    SPX fell off its cliff when TNX fell back through the rising purple TL, making bottoms each time TNX did. On Jan 20, 2016, TNX tested its Aug and Sep lows, at which point SPX bottomed at 1812.  A week later, TNX plunged below the previous bottoms and didn’t bounce until it reached the Jan 2015 lows (dashed, purple line.)

    The message delivered by TNX was slightly different from the 10Y2Y:

    – rising up to tag the falling trend line represents a bearish turning point
    – breaking out above it is okay, as long as the uptrend continues
    – a breakdown of the subsequent rebound is really bearish
    – stocks won’t bottom until TNX does

    If we look at the chart below, we can see that the 10Y tracked the 10Y2Y quite closely until it diverged in late 2015 in a failed effort to support stock prices.  It didn’t provide decisive support until it bottomed in Feb 2016 at its Feb 2015 lows.  For a few brief days, the divergence disappeared.Why is this even remotely interesting, you might ask?

    As in 2015, we have also experienced a huge divergence between the 10Y2Y and the 10Y itself.  This is noteworthy in and of itself.But, the comparison gets even more interesting.   As in 2015, we have had an extended slump (14 months vs 17 in 2015), a breakout above the falling red trend line, and a backtest of the trend line.The big differences, so far, are that the spread hasn’t gone on to new highs and that the (presumed) low came as spreads were peaking and only two weeks (versus 8 months) following the peak.

    But, so far, the lessons from 2015 are holding.  The breakout above the falling red TL definitely produced a drop in stocks.  The backtest of the red TL has occurred, but it hasn’t quite reached the purple TL.  As long as it continues bouncing and doesn’t drop back through that TL, stocks should be able to continue rising.  The day it drops back through it, things could get nasty.

    Next, let’s look at the current TNX chart.  We could look at the drop since the Mar 2017 highs, but it was rather short-lived and the subsequent rebound has resembled a moon shot.  Instead, let’s look at the big picture.

    A trend line from the 2008 highs connected with the 2010, 2011 and 2017 highs.  After reversing at each, TNX was accompanied by a large drop in stocks.  TNX’s reversal from its 2013 highs never produced a stock selloff; but, then again, it didn’t quite reach the TL.

    Zooming in a little, we can see that TNX reached this trend line a couple of times in 2017: first, in March, when its reversal accompanied by a mild 78-pt drop in SPX, and again on Dec 20 in a reversal which never gathered any steam.  TNX was back to and punched through the TL on Jan 8.  It reached another TL (gray) drawn through other recent highs on Jan 22 at 26.65.  This was a potential top, meaning the bond folks breathed a sigh of relief.

    On Jan 26, however, it popped up through the gray trend line.  Not so coincidentally, that was the day that SPX peaked.Remember our lessons from TNX in 2015:

    1. reversing off the falling trend line represents a bearish turning point – it didn’t reverse

    2. breaking out above it is okay, as long as the uptrend continues – it did, but as it approached 3%, folks started getting nervous.

    3. a breakdown of the subsequent rebound is really bearish – we got a potential reversal at 29.43, but it has a long ways to go before reaching the rebound trend line, currently at 24.40.

    Interestingly, that TL intersects the falling red TL at about 24.60 on Mar 13, the day that CPI for February is reported.

    And this is where it gets interesting.  If TNX continues to rally, bond folks and equity folks will get nervous (the fiscal fiasco.)

    If it were to fall to the rising purple trend line and backtest the red trend line at 24.60, it might be somewhat bearish unless: (a) it reflects a big drop in inflation (in keeping with my oil and gas forecast) and (b) it rebounds there.

    If it fell below 24.60, the TNX lessons suggest that SPX would be in big trouble.  With a Fed meeting a week later, we can assume Powell et al would be focused on preventing that from happening.  But, as our analog suggests, this preceeds an important inflection point by just a few weeks.

    If TNX falls through 24.60, remember lesson 4…

    4.  stocks won’t bottom until TNX does

     *  *  *

    Now, onto our analog update. In our initial post and follow up from Feb 6-7 [see: Analog Watch], we anticipated SPX would rebound from 2533 (our downside target) to 2765 by Feb 14 and 2812 by Feb 23.  Instead, it bounced from 2532.69 to 2742 on Feb 16 and to 2789 — 23 points short and 4 days late — by Feb 27.

    An adjustment was clearly necessary, given that SPX and ES bottomed on different days.  We’ll try to reconcile the two, along with some economic forecasts which are definitely outside the norm.

    continued for members… (more…)

  • Why Rising Rates Are a Problem This Time

    A sharp drop in interest rates has traditionally been a negative for stocks.  The chart below shows that most significant declines in 10-year yields over the years were associated with steep drops in the S&P 500.  Usually, equity losses precipitated the drops in yield.  As stock declines accelerate, money flows into bonds — raising prices and depressing yields.  The crashes of 2000-2003 and 2007-2009 are striking examples.  So are the corrections of 2010, 2011, 2015 and 2016.

    There were several exceptions, when stocks were supported through carry trades and other algo-stroking forces: the 15% rise in SPX between Dec 2013 and Feb 2015, the minor 6.1% drop between Mar and Jul 2016, and the 2.5% rise between Mar and Sep 2017.

    But, significantly, not a single equity correction occurred without a concurrent and significant drop in yields.  This begs the question, then, of whether increases in yields are positive for stocks.

    In 2008, yields bottomed almost 2 months before stocks did in 2009.  But, in the 2000-2003 crash, yields bottomed 9 months after stocks.  Most other yield rallies from significant bottoms also lagged stocks: 4 months in Oct 2010, 9 months in Jul 2012, 3 months in Jan 2015, 5 months in Jul 2016.

    It would seem at least some bond buyers take a “show me” approach, waiting until the coast is clear in equities before shifting money back into bonds.  This analysis ignores the considerable influence that Fed purchases had on bond yields — an influence which the Fed maintains will diminish over the next few years.

    So, what are we to make of the latest spike in yields which began on Sep 7, 2017?  The 10Y rose from 2.03% to 2.94% through Feb 21.  SPX rallied along with it, up almost 17% by Jan 26 — then promptly did a gut wrenching 11.8% nosedive in only 2 weeks.

    Fortunately for the bulls, it got a strong bounce off its 200-day moving average and subsequently bounced to its 61.8% retracement. But, pundits seem fixated on the 10Y with rates nudging up against 3%.  Does it matter?

    In a word, yes.  Even though 3% is still well below historical yields, the level of debt has risen dramatically over the years.  The chart below shows the annual interest expense (the orange line) and the US’ rapidly growing pile of debt. Superimposed over each is the average interest rate (the black line) paid on that debt.

    Even though interest rates have flatlined since 2013, the expense of servicing the rapidly expanding debt has risen sharply — recently breaking out to all-time highs.

    Clearly, if rates were to normalize the interest expense would be unmanageable.  How unmanageable, you ask?

    Between 2000 and 2007, the average interest rate was 4.84%.  On the current $20.6 trillion balance, that would mean an annual interest expense of roughly $1 trillion.  And, we haven’t even begun to talk about the effect on consumer debt, the mortgage market, debt issued to fund corporate buybacks, etc.

    Obviously, an increase in the 10Y yield doesn’t immediately reprice the entire pile of debt.  But, it’s a clear step in the wrong direction.  And, investors are right to be concerned.  I imagine the Fed is also quite concerned — which is why I put a target of 2.85% on the 10Y back on Jan 10 [see: China – It’s Not Me, It’s You.]

    Not only did it represent channel and Fib resistance, but it seemed like a good tipping point for what I expected to be rising concern (one can hope) about our shaky fiscal situation.  TNX overshot it a little, which has been fairly common over the years (Feb 2011, Sep and Dec 2013, etc.)

    Those previous overshoots typically helped stocks get past resistance.  It might work this time, too.  But, judging from the mood out there, I don’t believe stocks will be led higher by higher interest yields this time.  And, I have trouble believing the Fed isn’t working to put a lid on long rates – yield curve be damned.

     *  *  *

    Related Posts:

    Where To Next?
    The End is (Probably) Near
    CPI: The Charade Continues
    Update on Bonds: Jan 29, 2018