|
Until this week, each swoon in the stock market was followed by not much more
than "three-day wonders" - also there were a few of the common one and a half
day rallies - often seen within a severe decline.
This rebound could be of an intermediate nature. The selling climax occurred
with a major policy effort to end the panic, which will soon be deemed to be
successful. However the rebound is technical, which could also be called natural.
Just how natural this is, as well as the response by policymakers is fascinating,
and could be described as much more than panicdotal evidence. Major financial
events can be remarkably methodical.
History records a number of crashes or panics and many of them have occurred
in the fall of the year. One of the big bubbles blew out in May of 1825 and
the usual phase of heavy liquidation was delayed from the typical start in
late September. The crash completed in January, 1826 when officials congratulated
themselves in taking dramatic steps to end the panic.
As we outlined last summer, one of the blunders in policymaking has been to
assume that once started, a panic will last forever - unless somebody does
something. Also discussed was that once started a stock market crash typically
ran for some 55 trading days when exhaustion prompted the rebound.
Using the Nasdaq Comp, the high was set at the end of October at 2861 and
the plunge from high close to the low close ran for 55 trading days to Wednesday's
selling climax. To the interday low of 2203 the loss was 23%. During the week
there has been considerable noise about stimulus and central bank rate cuts
- all coordinated, of course. It is worth noting that earlier stimulus attempts
would likely be futile until the selling climax.
The record is sufficiently reliable to suggest a rule. A crash will run for
around 55 trading days, with the final stages severe enough to stimulate central
bankers into headline-making action. Even without policy utterances the rebound
would naturally occur. Sadly, officials making the heroic gestures seem unaware
of the equivalent gestures made by their counterparts during a number of previous
examples.
One of the outstanding examples of the initial 55-day disaster abruptly ended
the 1Q2000 tech blow off. That crash ran 52 trading days to the low and the
rebound started on day 55. The 1987 crash ran 51 days to the low and after
a quick test the rebound started on day 55. The notorious 1929 crash ran for
55 trading days. Even if this evidence was known to interventionist economists,
it is doubtful that it would change the ardent belief that the 1929 crash was
due to a policy blunder when the discount rate was increased from 5% to 6%
in August. After all, central banking is a perfect system that only fails when
somebody at the top makes an error. Regrettably, that is an ad hominem argument
so often employed by socialists when plans go wrong.
In most cases the 55-day crash was the initial distress that ended a financial
mania. The 1987 panic was within the context of a bull market.
Considering the enormity of the credit problems, this crash can be described
as the initial panic in a long post-bubble contraction. Policymakers are adding
to their long record of futile gestures.
|