9/25/2024

High Valuations - September 25, 2024

Market Resilience, Naturally Occurring Shifts in Sentiment, and Valuation

We expect greater market volatility over the next few weeks, which may raise investor concerns that high stock valuations levels will fuel a major stock market decline. While I share those concerns on an emotional level, the data does not yet indicate that major declines are likely. The reasons are:

  1. The Macro Market Resilience Index is still in the upleg of their its cycle and the Exceptional Macro is present. These conditions are positive for the stock market.
  2. The naturally occurring shifts in investor optimism likely to cause the volatility are currently only short-term in nature. The long-term trend continues to be for naturally occurring optimism
  3. While widely used valuation metrics are high compared to the last few decades, a long-term perspective shows that valuation metrics have trended higher. This trend makes it difficult to determine when valuation metrics are excessively high.

Current MRI readings and our forecasts of naturally occurring sentiment shifts are shown on page 3 of the weekly pdf.  The upper panel shows that the Macro MRI and Exceptional Macro both indicate strong market resilience. While the Micro MRI is in the downleg of its cycles, there are no indications of stress based on its recent price action, which is used to determine the MRI. 

Page 3 also shows in the lower panel that the periods of pessimism are likely to be temporary; the market will recover relatively quickly from declines that do take place. The Short-Term Driver shown in the lower panel of the graph indicates we will probably experience more ups and downs in the market over the next few weeks. The Long-term Driver, however, indicates that the longer-term shifts in sentiment will favor investors being optimistic.   

Thus, the markets may be more volatile over the next few weeks, but we should not get overly concerned that these will lead to deeper, more sustained losses. 

Valuation

Greater volatility will be unsettling to many investors who are already concerned about high valuations.  High valuations often precede market declines because investors come to believe that stock prices are too high compared to corporate earnings and company assets. With that widespread realization, there become more sellers of stocks than buyers. Recent business news headlines reflect this concern:

    - Fed's Rate Cut Sends Already-Stretched Valuations Even Higher https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-09-20/risk-appetites-rage-as-powell-proves-hero-in-high-priced-markets

     - Valuation Angst Is Being Stoked by Fed’s Big Cut: Credit Weekly https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-09-21/valuation-angst-is-being-stoked-by-fed-s-big-cut-credit-weekly

 

Metrics we have used in the past point to currently high valuation levels. Figure 1 below shows current valuations for the DJIA, S&P 500 and NASDAQ for the data available through Bloomberg. 


Figure 1

The table above presents a picture that reinforces the concerns reflected in the headlines. Focusing on Price/Book and Price/Sales, current levels are at or close to the upper end of their ranges, as indicated by their high percentile levels.

However, there is objective data that dampens concerns about current valuation levels.  First, while the above chart shows all the data available through Bloomberg, data is available for earlier periods through other sources. Figure 2 below shows our calculation of a statistic like Price/Book for US stocks beginning in 1926.  The data is from Kenneth French at Dartmouth.  It shows that this valuation metric has increased over time. 

Figure 2

CPM calculations using data from French, K. R. (n.d.). Data library. Dartmouth College, Tuck School of Business. Retrieved September 25, 2024, from https://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/data_library.html


The most recent date for his data is early 2024, so we cannot see the current reading, but we can see a clear trend of higher Price/Book valuation levels over time. A similar image is seen in a metric that approximates a Price/Earnings ratio, as shown in Figure 3 below for years beginning in 1951.  

Figure 3

CPM calculations using data from French, K. R. (n.d.). Data library. Dartmouth College, Tuck School of Business. Retrieved September 25, 2024, from https://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/data_library.html


While the extended timeframes shown above provide a broader context, our own research may be more compelling. It indicates that we are currently in a phase of the stock market during which most investors are unusually tolerant of high valuation metrics. More specifically, the Price/Earnings ratio for the S&P 500 is significantly higher during phases like the our current phase compared to all other phases of the market since 1940. Yet, the rate of economic growth during prior similar phases is not any higher than in other phases. This supports our view that these dynamics have a strong component of investor emotion as opposed to a view of economic forces. The difference in valuation ratios is a statistically significant finding.  We expect this period of tolerance for high valuation levels to last for several more quarters.  Please reach out if you would like more information about this research. 

Investors in general, are behaving as though one or both of the following are true:

  • There has been a long-term trend toward higher stock valuations, and this trend will continue. In this context, current valuations are not excessively high.
  • During this phase of the market, investors are simply more tolerant of high valuations. Since this phase is expected to last several more quarters, these high valuations are not worrisome.
They are also behaving as though the following is true:
  • The pandemic stimulus has elevated valuations, and once its effects have fully worked through the economy—potentially leading to an economic slowdown—valuations will decline.

The third is our primary concern. However, as time passes and we observe how the economy evolves, we will better understand the magnitude of this potential factor contributing to high valuations.


End


9/11/2024

New Content in Weekly Report - Sep 11 2024

Contents:

  1. New Chart on Page 3: A new chart illustrates DJIA price movements over the last 52 weeks and provides insight into naturally occurring periods of investor optimism and pessimism.
  2. Valuation – A Major Concern of Our Time: The stock market's high valuations, while historically significant, are currently tolerated.
  3. Change in Mutual Funds on Page 1 of the Report: We've switched to Schwab mutual funds for comparison, due to their performance and lower minimum investment.
Feel free to skip sections.

1. New Chart on Page 3

A new chart is on page 3 of the weekly report, and is shown as Figure 1 below. I will introduce it here and then give a step-by-step interpretation.  The chart has upper and lower panels.  The upper panel shows the price movements of the DJIA stock index over the last 52 weeks through the most recent Friday, which is indicated by the vertical line descending to the date on the horizontal axis. The upper panel also shows the Market Resilience Indexes up through the most recent date. 

Figure 1

The lower panel shows four of our new physics-based drivers. These drivers indicate when there is likely to be naturally occurring periods of collective investor optimism and pessimism based on shifts in the degree of solar energy striking Earth. As implausible as this sounds, this phenomenon is supported by research done by the US Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Our research over the last several years has revealed a way to quantify and use objective, independent, and exogenous physics-related data that correspond to shifts in collective investor sentiment, which can be seen in price changes of the stock index.

The physically-measurable shifts can be forecast with reasonable accuracy several months in the future. We have calibrated key drivers to our long-standing MRI over a multi-decade test period with reasonable statistical significance.  These forecasts give us an idea of upcoming periods of market vulnerability that we want to avoid. The forecasts (i.e., the next few weeks) are highlighted by the light green box at the lower right corner of the figure.

If you are already familiar with the MRI descriptions, skip section 1 in the web page linked below and review sections 2 through 4 for a description of the drivers and what they tell us. 

    The MRI and Drivers are described on this webpage.

I would be happy describe more about the drivers and how we developed them.  Please contact me for more information.

Step-by-Step Review of Page 3

The upper panel of the chart on Page 3 is in Figure 2 below. 

Figure 2


A few points are noteworthy:

The short-term peaks and troughs of the DIA correspond to the peaks and troughs of the Micro MRI. This is the intended relationship between the two series.

  • The short-term peaks and troughs of the DIA correspond to the peaks and troughs of the Micro MRI. This is the intended relationship between the two series.
  • The Macro MRI (light blue line) had a negative trend early in the period shown and began to develop a more positive slope when the Exceptional Macro (dark blue line over the light blue Macro MRI) appeared.  This is the expected behavior of the two series.
  • Beginning about halfway through the period shown, the Exceptional Macro (dark blue line over the light blue Macro MRI) appeared off and on over many months. It has recently ended yet again. This on-and-off behavior is not common over the last several decades. 
  • An important (although difficult to see in the figure above) difference between the current and prior Exceptional Macro endings is that currently the slope of the Macro MRI (light blue line) has a higher positive slope than the at any time over the 52+ weeks shown.  This indicates that the current long-term trend of the stock market is positive.

An important dynamic is shown in Figure 3 below. The Macro MRI began to steepen at about when the Long-Term Driver shifted to a more optimistic stance.

Figure 3



In Figure 3 above, you can see that, for most of the period shown, the Long-Term Driver was just above the dashed purple line. This indicated that the long-term natural investor sentiment was only mildly optimistic. Looking back, this stance corresponds to the shallow slope of the Macro MRI during this period.  When the Long-Term Driver indicated greater optimism, not only did the Exceptional Macro re-appear, but also the slope of the Macro MRI became more positive.

In Figure 4 below, you can see that the DJIA price and the Micro MRI tended to track the periods of naturally occurring optimism and pessimism. This is shown by the vertical dashed lines.

Figure 4

The Short-Term Driver in Figure 4 above also indicates that there is likely a period of increased naturally occurring optimism later this month, during the week of Friday September 27, which is highlighted by the green ellipse in the lower right corner of the figure. Just above the Short-Term Driver line there are horizontal green lines that indicate when the driver signals are particularly strong.  One such green line is occurring later this month indicating additional strength.

Because our forecasts extend beyond the date shown (week of September 27) we can see a period of naturally occurring short-term pessimism occurring in October.  This may be when the MRI indicate that portfolios should take a more conservative stance. 

Figure 5, below, shows the addition of the Flash Driver. It occurs infrequently, but when it does occur the stock market tends to behave erratically.  This was the case in the most recent episode, as shown below between the two dashed lines. It is important to keep in mind that we know about changes in the drivers a couple of months they happen.   

Figure 5

Again, the Flash Driver has infrequent episodes and one is not expected for another several months. 

The fourth driver is the Minor Flash Driver, as shown in Figure 6 below. While its effect is not statistically significant over our multi-decade test period, these minor flashes often occur when the DJIA makes more dramatic moves, as has recently happened. 

Figure 6


In Figure 6 above, the Minor Flash Driver occurred the week of August 23. This was about the same time as other drivers indicated greater naturally occurring optimism so we cannot easily determine what effect each driver had.  This series of optimistic shifts are shown in Figure 7 below. 

Figure 7


The Short-Term and Long-Term drivers moved higher in mid-August, along with the Minor Flash Driver.

The market is not being affected only by these naturally occurring shifts. Real-world events indeed have an impact. A good way to think about the naturally occurring shifts is that optimistic shifts amplify good real-world news. The pessimistic shifts amplify the negative real-world news. 

In Figure 7 above, we see that the Short-term Driver has indicated pessimism last week and this week. Market behavior last week and this week is generally consistent with this shift. 

Yet, we see the Short-term Driver indicating greater optimism later this month. While the algorithms and our longstanding process do not consider these drivers, the algorithms are currently operating in a manner consistent with the drivers. Thus, I see no need to step in and override the established disciplines.

Beware of MRI and Drivers Synchronizing or Converging on a Negative Trend

In the notes on the website linked above and again here, we describe in sections 3 and 4 what we look for when the MRI and their drivers begin to be synchronized or to converge on a negative trend. When this happens, it is a warning sign that the markets may succumb to the period of naturally occurring vulnerability. As they converge and become more synchronized, I closely monitor the algorithms to ensure they are responding appropriately.  In the current situation, a potential convergence may occur later this year.

Comment

In a perfect world, investors would respond most to economic (e.g., corporate earnings growth) and market conditions (e.g., valuation). Yet, statistically speaking, collective investor sentiment and stock market behavior are heavily affected by the natural forces measured by the physics-based drivers. In our testing, the drivers explain over 70% of the stock market’s price momentum (how quickly prices change). Thus, these relationships are worth our attention.  

While I am concerned that high stock valuations will begin to limit the upside of the stock market, the MRI do not indicate the high stock valuations are impeding upward movement.  The strongest case for there being a drag on the stock market is the on-and-off nature of the Exceptional Macro, which is highly unusual by historical standards.  But that alone is not likely to lead to a sharp stock market decline.

Forward Visibility and Reduce Stress

While we do not yet incorporate the physics-based drivers into our algorithms (although we have used the status of the drivers to reduce trading by omitting those likely to be quickly reversed), this information is important. Many Focused 15 users traded their accounts through the COVID crash and recovery, which was an exceptionally challenging period for investors. Today, many users are concerned about the high stock valuations. The forward visibility provided by the physics-based drivers can help reduce the stress and risk of investing in the stock market by highlighting naturally occurring periods of vulnerability that might cause investors in general to panic about economic and market concerns. We can be more tolerant of short-term losses that are simply a naturally occurring aspect of stock market investing   

2. Valuation – The Concern of Our Time

A majority of Focused 15 users have a high level of concern about stock valuations.  Indeed, valuations for the US stock market are high by historical standards.  The Figure 8 below shows three valuation metrics for the major US stock indexes.

Figure 8

Focusing on Price/Book and Price/Sales ratios, all are close to, or above, the 90th percentiles of the levels since the inception of the data series on Bloomberg.[1]  The Price/Earnings ratios are all above the 80th percentile. We consider Price/Book and Price/Sales to be more reliable indicators of stock market valuation compared to the Price/Earnings ratio.

As mentioned in earlier posts, our research indicates that the long-term phase of the market we are now in is remarkably tolerant of high valuations. We believe the most realistic way to interpret this condition is that high stock valuations will not be a catalyst for a major stock market decline. The catalyst will need to be some yet-to-emerge economic weakness or calamity. Tolerance for high valuation has been present for several years and we expect it to remain true for at least the next several quarters.

I will continue to mention valuation because of its long-term importance.  Valuation is more important in every other long-term phase of the market. The next time we will experience a phase tolerant of high valuations like the one we are in now in is over a decade away. Thus, it is not appropriate to conclude that valuation is not an important characteristic.

3. Change in Mutual Funds Listed on Page 1 of Weekly Report


We have changed the mutual funds listed for comparison. We will now be listing Schwab mutual funds on the weekly report. The reasons for the change are:

  • The short- and long-term performance of the Schwab funds are more consistent with expectations. Over a reasonable period, we expect the more aggressive funds (i.e., those with higher stock allocations) to perform better than those with low stock allocations. However, the Vanguard funds do not have this expected relationship.
    • Over the short period listed in the table below, the moderate (60|40) and aggressive (80|20) Vanguard funds have similar performance. See column B in Figure 1 below.
    • Over the long period, the aggressive (80|20) fund actually had worse performance than the middle fund (60|40), as shown in column C. The pattern displayed is contrary to expectations.
    • The Schwab funds have a performance pattern consistent with expectations, as shown in column E and F.
  • The minimum investment in the Schwab funds is $1, which makes them more convenient for smaller accounts.

Figure 9


The Focused 15 portfolios returned -2.3% over the short period (12/31/2021 – 9/6/2024) listed in Figure 9 above and would be generally comparable to the numbers in columns A and D. While our portfolios have underperformed, they have lower risk (as shown on the weekly report). Also, they have the potential to return a much higher return than any of the funds listed over the long period shown.

Potential Future Strategy

Not now, but In the future, we may use the Schwab funds in a strategy portfolio. The strategy would be to make infrequent shifts among these three funds (SWCGX, SWBGX, SWHGX) based on the long-term trend of the market, as indicated by the Macro MRI. There would be less trading but lower returns than we can expect from trading the ETFs as we now do. However, some may find this strategy attractive because of the lower trading required.

End

 


[1] Data for the DJIA begins in November 1997, for the S&P 500 in February 1991, for the NASDAQ 100 in October 2002.












6/19/2024

Weekly Note - June 19, 2024

 Divergence Now, Convergence Later

Last week’s note discussed how the “cap-weighted” construction technique used in the S&P 500, NASDAQ, and many other stock indexes causes them to become more heavily concentrated in stocks that have done well. Generally, they place heavier weight over time in stocks that have had higher price gains. They reduce weight over time in the stocks that have performed relatively poorly.  This tends to be the opposite of what we want to do as investors, which is to buy low and sell high. Thus, the cap-weighting construction of these indexes results in them having a more prominent boom-and-bust performance pattern.

The DJIA does not use this weighting scheme; it uses a scheme that gives each stock a more stable weight over time. This stable weighting scheme is one of the key reasons we make extensive use of the DJIA. The company that manages the S&P 500 (ticker SPX) also has an equal-weighted index called the S&P 500 Equal Weighted (SPW).  Adoption of the SPW has been slow; it is not often mentioned in the press.   

The stock for NVIDIA has returned almost 150% this year. Its strong performance is related to its role in AI. With its strong performance, it is having a big impact on cap-weighted indexes and related ETFs. 

The figure below shows the return for 2024 through last Friday of the cap-weighted indexes S&P 500 (SPX) and the NASDAQ-100, which both hold NVIDIA.  It also shows the S&P 500 Equal-Weighted index (SPW), which holds NVIDIA at the same weight as the other stocks it contains, and the DJIA, which does not hold NVIDIA. 

The image is one of stark divergence, with the cap-weighted indexes performing much better than the more equal-weighted.  By design, we have both types in our portfolios with higher weight in the more equal-weighted DJIA because we want to avoid the boom-and-bust patterns. Our strategy is to gain most of our returns using leverage to magnify the returns of the DJIA rather than to depend exclusively on cap-weighted indexes for returns. We participate in the themes present in the NASDAQ but we have a lower maximum target weight for the related ETF. 

Right now, our target weights reflect the divergence shown above.  We hold more NASDAQ and less DJIA. 

Going forward, the two types of stock indexes are likely to converge.  There are two general scenarios to convergence.  The first is that the NASDAQ will drop toward the DJIA. This would take place if investors conclude that the price of AI-related stocks has moved up too far and needs to drop to more reasonable levels. This scenario may involve the DJIA moving lower and the NASDAQ moving lower as well. The second scenario is that the DJIA will gain to catch up to the AI-heavy NASDAQ. Of course, there may be a combination of these two scenarios.   

While our models do not explicitly indicate right now which scenario is more likely, we can see the MRI dynamics of the NASDAQ and they suggest divergence may last at least a few weeks more.  As of last Friday, the resilience conditions for NASDAQ were (see this page for a discussion of terms: https://focused15investing.com/language):

    Macro MRI: 48th percentile since 1972. This is midway in its normal range. 

    Exceptional Macro: Not present.  It ceased to be present April 19, about two months ago.

    Micro MRI: 53rd percentile. Again, midway through its cycle

This means that the NASDAQ currently has two of the three MRI in the uplegs of their cycles.  The Macro MRI can move much higher from here, since that MRI is only midway through its normal range. 

Regarding the NASDAQ’s Micro MRI, it was at the 53rd percentile last week.  In normal markets, the Micro MRI moves up about 12 percentile points a week. This pace suggests that it will be high in its normal range (about the 80th percentile) in about 3 weeks, approximately July 5th.  Unless the Exceptional Macro reappears before then, the end of the upleg of the Micro MRI would be a reasonable time for the NASDAQ to pause and possibly move lower; the NASDAQ will then have just one of the three MRI providing resilience. 

Our research on the naturally occurring shifts in sentiment supports this general timeframe for weakness in the stock market. The natural shifts indicate that a period of naturally occurring vulnerability began late-May and vulnerability will accelerate beginning mid-July. Thus, if a price decline needs to happen for economic reasons, it is likely to take place between now and mid-August.  This suggests that if the NASDAQ does need to drop in price, it is more likely to do so before mid-August. If the NASDSAQ does not drop to converge with the path of the DJIA by then, the DJIA may then move higher toward the path of the NASDAQ. 

In terms of valuation, both the DJIA and NASDAQ have high price/book and price/sales ratios.  These ratios are above the 90th percentiles for both indexes and have been for several quarters, suggesting that price declines for the NASDAQ and the DJIA may be needed. 

Of course, we will respond to any changes indicated by the algorithms before then.   

=====

6/13/2024

Weekly Note - June 13, 2024

Major Stock Market Indexes are Becoming AI Theme Funds

Major stock indexes are becoming more like theme funds for artificial intelligence. Indexes like the S&P 500 have moved higher because they have relatively high weightings in major technology companies that are currently beneficiaries of the AI theme. Our portfolios are not participating in the AI theme as much as is the S&P 500, largely because a) the DJIA, which we use, does not hold NVIDIA stock, which has returned 144% this year, and b) the weighting technique used by the DJIA, which will be discussed later, makes it less sensitive to themes in general.

While these factors have affected performance this year, avoiding themes is a stronger long-term benefit. Our portfolios will not suffer the large declines associated with once-successful themes that turn into bubbles, and then collapse.

Risk Associated with Index Concentration

Because of how many stock indexes, including the S&P 500, are constructed, the indexes will become more concentrated in the AI-related stocks if these stock continue to perform better than the rest of the market. A high concentration of an index in a narrow theme creates risks for investors. As the prices of the stocks move higher, they can go too high and overshoot what might be a fair value for the theme and become more susceptible to rapid price declines. While we cannot easily determine beforehand when the theme will peak, as prices continue to move higher they are more likely to come to the peak.

The most common index construction scheme is to weight the stocks in the index by market capitalization, which is the price of the stock multiplied by the number of shares it has outstanding (available to investors in the marketplace). This is called “market capitalization weighted,” or "cap weighted" for short. 

Assume we have an index of two stocks. If stocks A and B each have 100 shares in the marketplace but stock A trades for $10 per share and stock B trades for $20 per share, the market capitalization of stock A is $1000 and for B it is $2000. The index will have 33.3% of its total weight in stock A and 66.6% in B. If a year later the price for A remains the same but B increases to $30, the market capitalizations are $1000 for A and $3000 for B. As a result, the index will now have 25% of its total weight in A and 75% in B, because of the price increase of B. Thus, cap weighted indexes tend to add weight to stocks that are performing well and take money away from those performing poorly. But this is buying high and selling low, which is not what one wants to do. One should reduce the weight of the stock as it moves to extremely high levels.

In contrast, the DJIA does not cap weight the stocks it holds. It simply weights them according to a rather old-school scheme based on share price. The result is that the DJIA index is not as aggressive about adding weight to stocks as they move higher in price and it tends not to become highly concentrated in hot themes. It is for this very reason that we make heavy use the DJIA.

Figure 1 below shows the weight of the five companies with highest capitalization in the NASDAQ and the S&P 500. They tend to be beneficiaries of the AI theme, especially NVIDIA.

Figure 1



The NASDAQ has over one-third of its total weight in just five stocks, while the S&P 500 has 26%. These are high concentrations in these technology companies. In contrast, the DJIA has just 13% of its weight in these stocks.

Figure 2 below shows the return of these stocks from January 1 through June 7, 2024.

Figure 2



Even if AI is good for the economy over the long term, the prices of the AI stocks may move higher than is justified over a shorter timeframe. A similar condition happened with the dot-com boom in the late 1990s. We all use the internet now and recognize that the dot-com economic trend has been valid, but there was a dot-com stock price boom-and-bust 20+ years ago that wiped out many investors.

One metric used to estimate if the price has moved too high is to evaluate the Price/Sale ratio, which is the current price per share divided by the sales of the company (over the most recent 12 months) per share. This ratio can be calculated for a company or an index. Figure 3 below shows the Price/Sales ratio for the five companies along with the Price/Sales ratios for various indexes as a comparison.

Figure 3
 


NVIDIA is often the face of the current AI theme because its chips are in high demand for AI electronics. It has a Price/Sales ratio of almost 40, which means that if sales stayed at the current level for the next 40 years, it would take all of those 40 years of sales revenue to equal the current value of the company. Of course, investors in NVIDIA are implicitly hoping that sales will grow and be much greater than they are now and will justify the current high price.

For comparison, the NASDAQ 100 index (reflecting a mix of 100 stocks) has a price that is about 5 times the most recent 12 months of sales revenue. The S&P 500 and DJIA have even lower prices compared to their annual sales.

The NVIDIA stock price will at some point be sufficiently high that investors conclude that continued price increases are not realistic. At that point, prices will decline. If it does decline dramatically, the AI theme will have been a bubble even if AI continues to spur broader economic growth.

Many industry professionals understand the problems of cap weighted indexes and have tried various approaches to address them. A common approach is to create an index with the same stocks but simply equally weight them in the index, and equal weighted versions are offered by the companies that offer the cap weighted indexes. The equal weighted versions are not nearly as popular. 

Using an equal weighted scheme results in no one stock or narrow theme getting significantly larger than the other stocks in the index. Figure 4 below shows the equal-weighted versions of the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ indexes and weights of those same stocks in the cap weighted version.

Figure 4



As you can see, the weighting technique has a big impact on the weights of these stocks and, in turn, the degree to which the index will be influenced by a theme such as AI. This difference affects performance periodically when strong themes boost the returns of a small number of stocks. Figure 5 shows the performance for 2024 through June 7.

Figure 5
 



The cap weighted versions of the indexes have performed much better than the equal-weighed versions, primarily because of NVIDIA and the AI theme. Figure 5 makes the equal weighted versions look like poor investments this year. However, over the last roughly 24 years, the DJIA and the NASDAQ have had similar performance, as shown in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6


Over the period shown, the DJIA returned 7.6%, annualized, and the NASDAQ returned 7.7%, annualized. However, the DJIA gives us more reliable signals and the NASDAQ has more dramatic drops, which is why we emphasize the DJIA in our portfolios.

=======






5/30/2024

Weekly Note - May 29, 2024

Current MRI Conditions for the DJIA

If you are unfamiliar with the terminology we use to discuss market resilience please see this link: https://focused15investing.com/language.

As you may recall, the MRI are measures of current market conditions based on the price changes of the index. The MRI are responsive to changes in market conditions but do not allow us to see how conditions might change over the coming weeks and months. The current conditions are:
The Macro MRI is currently in the upleg of its cycle indicating that the long-term trend of the market is positive. 

The Exceptional Macro MRI is present but is weakening and close to the end of its run.
The Micro MRI has moved up rapidly over the last month. Here are the percentile levels over the last few weeks:

    •    April 26: 3rd percentile
    •    May 3: 4th
    •    May 10: 16th
    •    May 17: 41st
    •    May 24: 43rd
The pace of this upleg was rapid, especially in the middle of the month. While the Micro MRI is still in the upleg of its cycle, it is approaching the halfway mark (roughly the 50th percentile). It is possible for it to move meaningfully lower from here but, as of last week, it has not done so.

Taken together, the MRI suggest that we may be nearing a short-term period of greater vulnerability for the DJIA.

In contrast to the MRI, our second set of tools gives us a view of how conditions may change over the coming weeks and months. They measure the naturally occurring shifts in sentiment that are likely to take place over the coming weeks. As mentioned in prior notes, these tools have indicated that at about this time (the end of May) investors are likely to become more pessimistic. Investors can be expected to put a more negative spin on whatever news and events take place. The price declines of the DJIA over the recent days and weeks are probably reflecting both negative news (e.g., persistent inflation and high interest rates, geopolitical tensions) and the more negative disposition of investors.

While we cannot forecast the news, we can forecast the naturally occurring shifts in sentiment. The naturally occurring pessimism is likely to continue into July. At the moment, the MRI may now be detecting the shift to greater market vulnerability.

Because of the expected pessimistic bias of this period, as well as high stock valuations, our portfolios have been only moderately aggressive in 2024. Our lack of aggressiveness has hurt the comparison of our portfolios to the S&P and other portfolios. Yet, our focus is not on these other portfolios. Our portfolios will not be their most aggressive until we move through this period of naturally occurring pessimism and the MRI signal greater market resilience.

Regarding stock valuations, they are high by historical standards and are above the 90th percentile levels since 1997. The price/book, price/sales, and price/earnings ratios of the DJIA are higher than 90% of the readings since 1997. 

Higher Earnings Growth of NASDAQ Stocks

Our NASDAQ-linked ETF has performed much better than that for the DJIA. The largest four stocks in the NASDAQ ETF are Microsoft, Apple, NVIDIA, and Amazon. Together, they represent almost 30% of the entire ETF. These are high growth companies and likely to have higher growth than the top four of the DJIA ETF, which are United Healthcare, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, and Caterpillar. The higher growth of the NASDAQ companies has made them less sensitive to higher interest rates and has been sufficient to give that ETF much better performance over the last several months. The NASDAQ ETF may be, at least initially, less sensitive to the naturally occurring pessimism and negative economic news than the DJIA ETF.

A Personal Note (update from prior note)

Personally, I would welcome stock price declines because of high stock valuations. There have been ample opportunities over the last three years for the stock market to decline and achieve a more normal valuation level, but it has not done so. As you may recall, our research indicates that we are in a phase of the market in which investors are remarkably unconcerned about valuations. There were similar phases in 1997, 1982, 1970, and 1958. These periods did not see major declines (i.e., losses greater than 20 percent) compared to other market phases and earnings growth did ultimately take place and justify the higher valuation levels. While we can infer from the current MRI that these historical precedents are thus far representative of the current phase, the situation does appear to be changing.

4/17/2024

Article by Edward Harrison of Bloomberg

The article below is by Edward Harrison, senior Editor at Bloomberg. The article puts into context deficit spending and high interest rates. I have added a few explanatory words in parentheses. His main points are:
  • Government spending around the world will remain high because of security issues (wars), infrastructure, and imperative needs (climate change).
  • Governments are spending more money than they receive in taxes, therefore increasing deficits.
  • Higher interest rates are needed to attract investors to buy the government bonds needed to support the spending.  
  • Globally, 88 countries will hold elections this year and it is unlikely that candidates will announce they will raise taxes to reduce deficits. They would lose the election if they did.
  • Increasing and high interest rates will be bad for bond investors.
  • The economic stimulus created by deficit spending on the part of governments accelerates economic growth and can be good for risky investments, such as stocks. Stocks benefit from economic growth because the growing economy boosts profits. Recall from my recent note that companies can pass along the higher costs of doing business to their customers (https://marketresilience.blogspot.com/2024/04/weekly-note-april-10-2024.html).

Global Deficits Will Keep Interest Rates High

By Edward Harrison

(Bloomberg) -- For the first time in nearly 60 years, the US government is attempting to effect fiscal stimulus to both increase social well-being and stave off geopolitical threats. That (1970s) episode ended in high inflation. This time the guns-and-butter policy is global. And so, it makes sense to think inflation, and therefore interest rates, will remain somewhat elevated. How that will affect asset prices is not yet clear.  

Deficit spending is here to stay

I was scrolling through Bloomberg’s website this morning to catch up on the news when I saw a piece that put everything into perspective for me. The headline? Climate change to cause $38 Trillion a year in damages by 2049. Don’t get me wrong; this newsletter article is not going to be about climate change per se. Instead, I am thinking about the pressing and sundry reasons that will fuel persistent fiscal deficits globally for years to come.

In a world in which those deficits act as stimulus for the private sector, the only logical conclusion is that monetary policy is likely to be tighter to offset those deficits. The combination means higher near-term economic growth, persistently higher inflation and higher interest rates. For investors in government bonds, that’s going to be bad news, at least until long-term interest rates stabilize at a higher plateau and then decline. But then bond investors can join savers in reaping the benefits of higher rates while equity investors will have to judge whether discount rates or (profit) growth end up mattering more.

Secular trends pushing up inflation will also push up deficits

Let’s start this piece, not with climate-directed deficits but, with the secular forces I mentioned last week as keeping inflation higher. The three big ones are increased defense spending, de-globalization and a relative dearth of seasoned workers as Baby Boomers are replaced by the Baby Bust generation. Of those tectonic shifts, only the demographic trends won’t be driven by government directive. Add climate- and infrastructure-led spending to the mix and you have a triumvirate of secular trends — security spending, re-shoring, and infrastructure investment — that governments around the world will take an active role in fostering. To use a phrase from the Cold War days, we’re talking about guns-and-butter (the government spending money to fight battles AND keep people fed) fiscal spending.

The pandemic started this. We hadn’t had a global pandemic of such horrifying magnitude for 100 years. And so, all the rulebooks on government spending, debt and deficits were torn up as countries struggled to keep people from dying while also keeping the economy afloat. Having just left that period with climate-related disasters and geopolitical tensions front and center, governments are alert to taking the same tack to the aforementioned almost existential problems. And that has relaxed deficit taboos everywhere.

Take Italy, for example. The country expects a deficit of 4.3% this year and 3.7% for 2025. That’s certainly down from the still pandemic-influenced level 7.2% in 2023 but it’s well above the now defunct Maastricht criteria on debt and deficits in the EU. And the 2025 level is higher than previous government projections…

The world’s two biggest economies, the US and China, are very much leading the charge on this level. In recently published remarks, the IMF says, “in both economies, public debt is projected under current policies to nearly double by 2053.”

Deficits are money in your pocket

Here’s the thing. Unlike monetary policy, which acts with long and variable lags because its transmission to the economy is uncertain, fiscal policy works straight away. Deficit spending is basically money in your pocket. The government spends money into the economy and then claws back some percentage of that through taxes. If it taxes us less than it initially spent, it has basically created a windfall for the private sector.

For every dollar of deficit, advanced economies issue government securities with interest that cover those deficits to the penny. And so deficits translate penny for penny into a net increase in non-government financial assets as this government debt is the usually considered the safest benchmark financial asset in any currency area (though the eurozone complicates that concept). This is exactly why people talk about deficit spending needing to increase during recessions as fiscal stabilizers like unemployment insurance kick in to prevent economic freefall.

Think of how this worked in the pandemic during lockdowns. Governments around the world told you to stop working in order to prevent the spread of Covid-19 killing millions more. Many people were thrown out of work due to that shutdown of the economy. But knowing that the loss of income from large swathes of the population would cause a Great Depression, governments simply created money by fiat and credited people’s bank accounts so they could live as if they were receiving a constant paycheck from work.

Having spent that money into existence by keystroke, they then issued government debt to cover most of the spending. Governments didn’t increase taxes to cover the additional spending because doing so would collapse the economy. They simply let deficits balloon. And the result was a massive net transfer of assets into the private sector. We ended with an economy that saw a temporary collapse in output from being idle but that had the financial assets to make up that loss over time, preventing the short, sharp recession from having a measurably negative impact on financial assets and home prices.

How much money are we talking about

If we want to get a sense of how much governments are adding to demand today, the IMF’s recently-published figures are a good place to start. They estimate that the primary deficit, that is the percentage of government spending not covered by tax receipts not including interest expense, was 5.5% in 2023. In 2024, a year not affected significantly by Covid-19, they think that percentage only goes down to 4.9%.

What’s more, the IMF notes that “88 economies representing more than half of the world’s population “ will hold elections this year. The reality is you are not going to see incumbent politicians raising taxes in an election year to bring a deficit in check — unless they want to lose the election…

So 5% seems like a pretty good baseline to think of in terms of net transfer from the public sector. And since governments spend 30% or more of total output in advanced economies, we’re talking about 1-2% of GDP added by those deficits. That’s a big change in the baseline rate of growth.

I have nothing to say here about the need for increased defense, infrastructure or government-aided investment spending — nor about how whether that additional spending should be matched by increased taxes. That’s a political question. The reality, however, is that governments across the globe have decided to spend more without taxing more. That policy mix increases overall demand for goods, services and employment in the economy, likely raising the baseline level of inflation.

The Fed gets it now

So after months of inflation coming down as our post-pandemic economy normalized, we’ve stalled. With those added deficits, who says the baseline level of inflation isn’t 3% instead of the Fed’s 2% target. If it is — and I believe it is certainly higher than 2% — the Fed and other central banks have a decision to make. Do they try and get back to 2% by making monetary so restrictive it sends us into a recession or do they accept a higher level of inflation?

It’s a tricky question, in the 1970s in the US, for example, inflation declined after the first Oil Shock for months after the recession ended. Eventually it stalled at 5% though. And then it rose. That’s the outcome central banks are looking to avoid…

But how restrictive do they make policy? And what will be the impact on inflation? We don’t know and neither do they.

At a minimum, the Fed gets it. Just this week Fed Chair Jerome Powell said we will see the Fed’s target fed funds rate at these levels for longer than he had anticipated. He’s not making a judgment on whether inflation is permanently higher or whether the Fed will tolerate 3% inflation, mind you. He’s just stating the obvious that, with core consumer price inflation (CPI) close to 4%, more work needs to be done before the Fed cuts rates.

What that means — with the Fed’s target fed funds rate stuck at 5.33% and 10-year yields more than three-quarters percentage-points lower — is that long-term interest rates have to rise over time. After all, why would I buy your debt and pay you less money for taking on interest rate risk for longer unless I thought rates were going to come down? I wouldn’t. So the longer rates stay elevated, the less I and other investors are likely to think rates come down. That means the government must pay higher long-term rates. And all interest rates across the economy rise as a result.

The lesson for (bond) investors is mostly about downside risk

The lesson for holders of Treasury securities is clear then. Hold your assets and prepare for them to be worth less. Now you could hold to maturity and not lose any money. But the opportunity cost means you lose anyway. So holders of Treasury bonds are worse off. And I assume the same is true globally because the secular increase in deficit spending is a secular phenomenon. And what the Fed does has global implications because of the importance of the US dollar.

Beyond that, things get a bit murkier. For fixed income, whether we mean investment-grade bonds, high yield bonds, leveraged loans, private credit or mortgage-backed securities, higher yields on longer-term safe government assets mean higher yields on these other fixed income products too. But higher rates generally mean more financial distress too. So we should expect the spread in yield between government bonds and other fixed income products to go up.

Spreads are pretty low now because the economy has been so good. And for lower-grade bonds, there is always the potential for a credit rating upgrade as the economy holds. So it’s not a hard and fast rule that higher yields mean wider spreads. Nevertheless, on the whole, between higher government yields and spreads, I would expect fixed income products to suffer somewhat in an indefinitely higher for longer period.

Of course, eventually long-term yields peak, either because all of the eventual higher-for-longer impetus gets priced in or because the economy deteriorates and it becomes clear rates will go lower. So the period of pain for Treasury holders is limited. And since, the prospect of higher fed funds rates isn’t on the table yet, many will simply ride it out. When the economy turns down, that’s when lower-rated fixed income products will feel it most.

What about equities? If government deficits are boosting inflation because they’re also boosting growth, I would think the growth side outweighs the inflation side. A better economy makes it easier to discount (higher growth rates) well into the future…

Deficit spending helps risk assets (e.g. stocks)

On the whole, I tend to think the prospect of higher deficit spending is good for the economy in the medium-term and therefore buoys risk assets (such as stocks). Two years ago I wrote about how equities fared during the 1970s. My conclusion was that, equities did really well during the mid-1970s upturn. From the October 1974 bottom to the November 1980 for the S&P 500 you saw a 15% annualized (stock market) return during the worst inflation we’ve seen in a century.

But equities got savaged during the two oil shocks and the two other recessions after guns and butter was adopted before nosebleed interest rates crashed inflation with the economy. So overall, the 1970s was a lost decade as a result.

In the near-term then, geopolitical risks and climate change are likely to add to deficit spending in a way that buoys risk assets. The real question is what happens with monetary policy. Right now, central banks are telegraphing their desire to stick a soft landing. But if inflation remains sticky for longer, that calculus could change, and the probability of a soft landing with it.

=================

4/15/2024

Market Comment - April 15, 2024

Global markets have been shaken since my note last Wednesday. Renewed inflation concerns have caused commodities to gain in price, and stock and bond prices to decline. The wars in the Mideast and Ukraine also have investors on edge. For reasons discussed below, the best strategy right now is to maintain our current positions in DJIA- and NASDAQ-linked ETFs, although I will review conditions daily. 

Last Friday (April 12), the Micro MRI, which tracks the short cycles of return and indicates market resilience, was at the 10th percentile of levels since 1918. This is a very low level (note 1) and suggests that the stock market will soon experience a short-term move higher as it reverts toward its long-term mean, indicating greater resilience for the market.

It appears that our physics-based driver of short-term investor emotion has a meaningful relationship to the DJIA for the last several weeks. The figure below shows price of the DJIA (brown line) ending last Friday. It also shows the Physics-Based Driver (purple) and the Micro MRI (green).



The Driver is at a low point this week and can be expected to move higher next week. Because of the way we calculate the driver, we can forecast the Driver several weeks into the future. The next upleg of the Driver is reasonably steep. The figure also shows that at the beginning April, the DJIA (brown) and Micro MRI (green) began to move in tandem with the Driver (purple), which I discuss below. 

A consistent image emerges for the current week: a) the Micro MRI (recently at the 10th percentile), and b) the upswing of the Micro Driver (purple) both indicate that the market is likely to be more resilient soon. Getting out of the market now is not prudent; doing so would miss the anticipated rebound. 

The longer-term MRI (not shown) indicate that staying in the market is appropriate as well. As of last Friday, the Macro MRI is still in the upleg of its cycle and unambiguously so. The Exceptional Macro has been present for several months as well. These are reliable indicators of a positive longer-term trend in the stock market. The algorithms that evaluate the MRI also indicate that staying in the stock market is prudent. 

The path of the Physics-Based Driver has been apparent for some time. In the April 10 blog post:  https://marketresilience.blogspot.com/2024/04/weekly-note-april-10-2024.html, I mention an upcoming test of the stock market’s strength. We are in the middle of that test and, at least so far, it does not appear that the market will get an A+.  Unfortunately, the conditions described above did not allow time to pull our money out of the stock market and then get in before the anticipated rebound. 

Moving in Tandem

Historically, when the DJIA, Micro MRI, and the Physics-Based Driver move in tandem, as apparent in the figure above, it is a warning sign for future market weakness. Generally speaking, when the market follows the Driver, the market will decline when the Driver inevitably moves to the downleg of its cycle, shifting from investor optimism to pessimism.

If tandem movement continues in the current situation, we may see the market move higher in response to the conditions described above and then experience long-term weakness in the May/June timeframe. I will provide additional thoughts later this week.

=============

Note 1 - You may recall from a recent note that the Micro MRI made a trough in mid-March, moved higher for a week or two, and then resumed its downleg April 4. Forming a trough and resuming the downleg of its cycle is not uncommon and is often related to current events. That appears to be the case in this instance. In most historical cases, the best strategy is to ride through the decline, which is what our algorithms are programmed to do.    

 

4/10/2024

Weekly Note - April 10, 2024

Sections in this note:

  • Comment on Performance
  • High Stock Valuations
  • Upcoming Test of Stock Market Strength
  • Historical Precedents Support a Positive Outlook for Stocks
  • Stocks Tend to Hold Value During Extended Inflationary Periods
  • Corporate Earnings are Resuming a Positive Trend

Comment on Performance

The performance of our portfolios has been lower than our target returns. While our losses have not been as great as the alternatives that many investors use, we have not participated in the periodic gains of the stock market. Please be patient through this period. Our strategy is to be aggressive when the market is resilient and to be conservative when the market is vulnerable to declines. Over the last few years, we have been better at avoiding declines than capturing resilience.

In 2023, uncharacteristically ambiguous signals from our key metrics and high stock valuations resulted in portfolios that were more conservative than needed. For investors sensitive to losses, this may have been appropriate. But we will need to be more aggressive to generate our target returns. Our portfolios can be much more aggressive than they are now, and they will be when we have stronger positive signals.

High Stock Valuations

Stock valuations for the DJIA continue to be high, hovering at about the 90th percentile of levels since the late 1990s - a level they have been at for several quarters. As you may recall from prior notes, our recent research indicates that during historical market phases like the current phase, valuations have been significantly higher than in other phases. This observation suggests that we need not be concerned about valuations. However, disregarding higher valuations will be more prudent in a few weeks, as discussed below.  

Upcoming Test of Stock Market Strength

The stock market is coming to a test of its strength and the extent to which it can support currently high valuations. Since late December of last year, the stock market has been supported by two important drivers of resilience: a) the Exceptional Macro Market Resilience Index, which over most of the last 100 years has indicated a strong bull market, and b) a period of naturally-occurring optimism. An important feature of naturally-occurring optimism is that we can forecast how it will change over the coming several weeks, which we cannot do with the MRI. 

While still present, the Exceptional Macro is showing signs of weakening. It is not appropriate to act on this alone because it may strengthen, but it is worth noting, considering the upcoming end of the naturally-occurring optimism. 

The naturally-occurring optimism will start to fade over the next week or two. In that short period of time, we will see the strength of the current bull market and its ability to support high stock valuations without the tailwind of naturally-occurring optimism.

The next period of (long term) naturally-occurring optimism is likely to start in June (roughly). As we move through the weeks from now through May, it will become clearer if it is prudent to shift to a more aggressive model portfolio on page 2 of the weekly pdf. 

We will make the portfolios more conservative if it looks like the market is failing the test. We will make the change outside of the regular trading schedule if needed.

Historical Precedents Support a Positive Long-Term Outlook for Stocks

Historical precedents support a positive outlook for the stock market. Of the last 80+ years, 1989 is the year that has similar market dynamics in terms of both MRI and naturally-occurring shifts in optimism. That year saw strong returns.  If the market follows these precedents, we might expect a gain of over 5% over the next three months.  

That said, the performance of the DJIA over the last three months has been lower than the average of similar periods. This suggests that the market is being weighed down by other factors, one of which may be high valuations. 

Stocks Tend to Hold Value During Extended Inflationary Periods

Stocks tend to hold their value during inflationary periods.  Figure 1 below shows the Consumer Price Index over the last 100+ years in the lower panel.  The steeper the line, the higher the inflation rate.  Periods of high inflation are indicated.  The DJIA (log scale) is in the upper panel. 

Figure 1


Figure 1 shows that during the high-inflation periods the DJIA had flat returns or gains. None of the periods has extended stock market losses.  Major losses occurred after the 1929 stock market crash. During this period, the CPI declined – a period of deflation. 

The point for us today is that stocks tend to be reasonable investments during inflationary periods.  Companies can pass along to consumers the higher prices they incur while doing business.

Corporate Earnings are Resuming a Positive Trend

Corporate earnings are moving higher, which supports the view that companies can maintain earnings growth during inflationary periods.  Figure 2 below shows the price of the DJIA (log scale) and the earnings of companies in the index (log scale) since 1997. “A” indicates when earnings resumed their upward path, despite higher inflation. 

Figure 2


Figure 2 suggests that the recovery in corporate earnings is underway. While consumers dislike inflation, corporate earnings tend to be insulated from its effects. 

The negative impacts of inflation tend to come from the battles to fight inflation.  The Fed increases interest rates to slow economic growth. Slower growth reduces corporate earnings and may lead to economic recession.  As of now, however, the Fed’s focus appears to be on when interest rates should be reduced to encourage growth as opposed to when to increase rates to slow economic growth.  The threat of higher interest rates seems, at least for now, not to be a major threat. 

=========== 







2/21/2024

Weekly Note - February 21, 2024

 Please see this page for descriptions of the language used to discuss the MRI:

      https://focused15investing.com/language

This note discuses a) current market conditions, b) why there is historical precedent for high stock valuations we are experiencing, and c) an article about pessimistic views of the markets. Sections a and b have been revised for clarity and updated to reflect current statistics (highlighted in yellow).  Section c is new this week.  

A. Current Market Conditions 


The positive long-term trend of the stock market continues. The Macro MRI is in the upleg of its cycle, moving to the 39.1th percentile of levels since 1918 as of last week, up from the 38.6th percentile the prior week. This is a relatively low level and suggests that the positive long-term trend of the DJIA can continue for some time. This marks 8+ weeks of consistent movement higher – a level of consistency that did not exist last year.

The Exceptional Macro is also present. Last year, this very important indicator shifted erratically between being present and not, a pattern that has rarely occurred over the last 100+ years. It has been consistently present for the last several weeks.

The Micro MRI, which tracks the short cycles of market resilience, has been in the downleg of its cycle the last several weeks. As of last week, it was at the 37th percentile of levels since 1918, making a rapid drop from the 81st percentile three weeks prior. A ten-point drop per week is a typical pace. Over this same period, DJIA stock prices have not experienced dramatic and have even moved higher, which is the expected behavior only when the Exceptional Macro MRI is present (as it is now). Thus, the market action of the last month has been consistent with normal market behavior from the perspective of the MRI.

If the Micro MRI downleg continues at its recent pace, it will reach a low level in its historical range, say, the 20th percentile, in the next few weeks. It will then soon shift to the upleg of its cycle. At that time, we are likely to have all three of the MRI indicating market resilience. If the conditions do indeed evolve in this way, the DJIA may then mover higher more quickly.

As I have discussed with many users over the last few weeks, we were more defensive in January than the algorithms have called for. We wanted to confirm that there is indeed greater stability in the Macro and Exceptional Macro MRI considering the high current stock market valuation levels. We have seen a sufficient level of stability and, as the section below describes, high valuation levels appear to be common in similar historical periods. Thus, our portfolios are becoming more aggressive. If these trends and conditions continue, we will hold less Box #2 Cash and have higher target weights in the DJIA- and NASDAQ-linked ETFs toward the end of February or in early March.

B. Historical Precedents for High Stock Valuations Ratios 


A remaining concern from the 2022/23 period has been high stock valuations. The stock price declines of 2022/23 were not deep enough for important valuation metrics such as Price-to-Earnings and Price-to-Book ratios to decline meaningfully. Valuation ratios have remained stubbornly well above their average levels since 1997, the earliest year for which we have data for the DJIA’s valuation metrics.

Over the last several months, we have evaluated cycles of market resilience that are much longer than the multi-year cycle of the Macro MRI. These might be called “Mega cycles” and are clearly identified by our recently-developed drivers of risk tolerance. Mega cycles began in 1942, 1958, 1970, 1982, 1997, 2009, and 2022 (the current one).

We evaluated the Price-to-Earnings ratio for the S&P500 stock index (which has more Price-to-Earnings ratio history than does the DJIA) compared to various segments of the Mega cycle. Over the first roughly 4 years of the Mega cycle, the Price-to-Earnings ratio of the S&P was significantly higher than it was in other portions of the Mega cycle. This suggests that investors are inherently more optimistic during the first segment of the Mega cycle. During the first four years, the Price-to-Earnings ratio of the S&P 500 starts high, moves higher as prices move higher, and then drops as higher corporate earnings occur.

This pattern would explain why high valuation levels have persisted. If the historical pattern continues, high valuation levels could remain elevated for several more quarters. This implies that high valuation levels alone may not produce a drop in DJIA prices.

The most recent Mega cycle began in 2009. It was preceded by a 53% decline in the DJIA. The DJIA did not experience a drop of that magnitude prior to the beginning of this cycle. The most recent similar Mega cycle began in 1997. It took two-and-a-half years for prices to peak after the beginning of that cycle. If that cycle is relevant to this one, it is likely to be a few quarters before prices peak. There was a great deal of anxiety about high valuations in the late 1990s, just as there is now.

The MRI are currently moving in a manner consistent with this longer-term outlook. If the MRI diverge from this outlook, we will follow the MRI.

The impact of this research is that we will be more tolerant of high valuation ratios in determining Box #2 Cash levels and the ETFs included in the portfolios.

C. Pessimistic Views

I am aware of the concerns voiced by well-respected investment professionals described in this article: 

I believe the views have merit and I feel similar emotions. However, market conditions are not currently right for a major decline. Current conditions are most consistent with a market weakness through the first week of March, followed by greater market resilience. Current market behavior is consistent with this view.  

Should conditions change and indicate greater market vulnerability, we will trade outside of the regular trading schedule.