Weekly Wrap-up: The Sixy-Four-Billion-Dollar Question

By: Adam Oliensis | Thu, Jun 1, 2006
Print Email

Dear Speculators,

In a world in which it's very hard to distinguish between economic growth and credit growth, between credit growth and liquidity, and between liquidity flows and technical trends in financial markets...in a world in which financial markets reflexively impact economic growth as much as they reflect economic fundamentals, it's almost fair to say that the Technicals ARE the Fundamentals.

In the world as I've just described it, it would behoove us to take a look at the relative performances of stock indices in order to get our bearings on what these financial markets are telling us about the world we live in...or at least about what these indices "believe" is the case about this world.

Paramount in my mind is the 4-year cycle on the SPX.

While the SPX has been slow in responding to the downward pull exerted by this cycle, the low of which is due in the July-October '06 time frame, the 1966 analogue appears again to be fully in play.

Whether the current 4-year cycle plays out in a Soft Landing scenario like 1994 or with a Hard Landing scenario like 1966 may depend more upon Inflation and on how the FOMC directs policy in reaction to (anticipation of?) Inflation than on anything else. So, before we look more deeply into the relative strength of various stock-index charts, let's look more closely at the Inflation story and why the markets are so fixated on it -- at why the stock market is now trapped in a depraved dialectic with its own doppelganger, in which good news is bad news and bad news is good news.

Why is inflation such a big deal? Because if the FOMC perceives inflation to be increasing at a benign rate (less than +2%/year) then the Committee can let loose the reins a bit and allow the economy to run (grow) at a relatively unimpeded rate. But if the Committee perceives inflation to be growing at a more malignant rate (most would say at greater-than +2%/year) then it will be obligated to pull tight the reins (raise rates, invert the yield curve, and flush institutions out of various Carry Trades), slowing economic growth in order to brake the rate of inflation.

So, what happens in the stock market over the coming 6-12 months will be at some level a function of how successfully or unsuccessfully the Fed deals with the very narrow tolerance between the "Rock" (the need to prevent inflation) and the "Hard Place" (the wish to prevent a recession).

When Deflation was the scary headline topic on everyone's mind the FOMC committed to keeping interest rates low for a "considerable period." However, in the wake of years of loose money, the data now suggests that deflation is no longer a threat, but rather we are at risk of seeing rising INflation.

And it doesn't matter whether you look at the PCE Price Deflator (Headline +2.9% Y/Y, Core +2.1% Y/Y, as shown above) or the CPI (Headline +3.5% Y/Y, Core +2.3% Y/Y, as shown below)...

...the underlying story being told by both these pictures is one of rising Headline Inflation with a lagging increase in Core Inflation.

What's most impressive, thought-provoking, and unique about these pictures is the lack of precedent for the sustained disparity between Headline and Core Inflation. And this lag has led to a generally too-high level of complacency about the prospects for either CPI or PCE Inflation going forward.

What makes me say, "too much complacency?"

Let's think for a moment about the logic behind WHY the CORE number is so much more highly regarded than the Headline number. It's because the Headline number tends to be more volatile and potentially deceptive. So economists look to the Core number in order to discern the real underlying trend. But the underlying trend in WHAT? Is the Core number the "end" that economists seek? Or is it the means by which they try to prognosticate the trend in the HEADLINE number?

Obviously, the answer is the latter. The value of the Core Number is that it has often been a better gauge of what the HEADLINE number WILL BE than has been the Headline number.

But how about now? How about during this unprecedented 2-year period when Headline CPI and PCE Deflator have diverged upward from their respective Core counterparts? Have the Core numbers been better indications of what aggregate inflation will be? NO!

Why?

Because the countries from whence we import finished goods (e.g., China and Japan) have been engaged in competitive devaluation of their currencies, artificially pressing down on Core Inflation, while the countries from which we buy raw materials and many hard commodities (oil, gold, silver, copper, etc.) have been much less active in playing Devaluation Dominoes.

I would submit for your consideration that Devaluation Dominoes in the FX markets has fooled economists into believing that the prospects for future inflation are more benign than they indeed are. And the mechanism by which economists have been fooled is the sustained artificial depression in Core CPI transmitted via inordinately devalued Asian currencies in which are denominated the wholesale prices of a significant fraction of our finished goods.

With the end of Japan's Zero Interest Rate Policy (which should work to strengthen the Yen) and with China steadily (if slowly) allowing the Yuan to float higher, Asian currencies are generally bound to likewise appreciate relative to the dollar. Consequently we should see the Ex-Energy Imports begin to appreciate in price as well, forcing Inflation at the Core higher.

Note: Either or both of 2 factors are most likely to prevent a significant rise in inflation: 1) a drop in commodities prices, especially in Energy and Metals, 2) an unanticipated further surge in productivity.


All of the following 6 indices retraced about 50% of their October-May advances, except the Dow Industrials which gave back slightly less than 50%.

These indices have all completed 3-day bounces up from severely oversold conditions. Note that the Dow Industrials and the OEX continue to show positive Relative Strength in the 2nd pane (Rel. Str.) while the other indices show marked deterioration on that line. The bias over the past 2+ weeks has been to put money to work in the very-Large-Cap names.

The CRB Index, the Morgan Stanley Cyclical Index, and the Dow Transports have all retraced somewhat less than half of their October-May gains.

Apparently the market continues to believe that any cyclical slowdown will be modest in scope. I suspect that these indices will show markedly negative Relative Strength before the market is done with retrenching the past 3+ year's gains.

These Speculative Indices have been underperforming for quite some time, with the except of the Nasdaq Composite, which has only show deterioration on its Rel. Str. Line since mid April.

Biotech has been lagging since late February and retraced about 85% of its May-Feb. advance. That index's Rel. Str. Line has just crossed about the Rel. Str. 20-dma and may be showing initial signs of life. The NDX has likewise retraced about 85% of its Oct.-Jan rally, but its Rel. Str. Line has been less robust over the most recent 3-day rally. The SOX has filled its November continuation gap, but has yet to fill last October's breakaway gap, down to 430-35. We continue to expect that gap to fill before the mid-term retrenchment is complete.

With one exception the following charts are showing essentially positive Relative Strength.

Financials, Consumer Staples, and Utilities held up well during the market's recent sell-down. The Health Care sector (XLV) pulled all the way back to its October low. The 4 charts that have held up well are essentially no higher than they were last November. They have resisted going down only because they had not run up.

If this is what the market calls leadership, then, Houston, we have a problem.


EARNINGS

The consensus estimate for all 3 of our Earnings lines achieved new all-time highs again last week. However, it is difficult for the stock market to take these estimates seriously in the face of the potential for accelerating inflation.

If inflation picks up, then Real GDP Growth will have to be slowed by policy decisions. And if that happens, EPS will have a lot of trouble matching expectations (bad for the market). However if inflation is slowed (headline is leading core, and that means ENERGY and METALS would have to drop in price), then Real GDP Growth can be allowed to continue apace, and EPS may meet or beat current expectations (good for the market).

Can the FOMC flush the speculators out of the Energy and Metals markets without inducing a recession? That's the Sixty-Four-Billion-Dollar Question.

If you would like to read more about The Dynamic Trading System or subscribe to The Agile Trader Index Futures Service, please click HERE.

Or if you would like a free 30-day trial to The Agile Trader (in which we trade the less volatile QQQQ/SPY and the Rydex Funds) CLICK HERE.

Best regards and good trading!

 


 

Adam Oliensis

Author: Adam Oliensis

Adam Oliensis,
Editor The Agile Trader

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

ALL PERFORMANCE RESULTS ARE HYPOTHETICAL.

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS SUBSEQUENTLY ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM.

ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKET IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS.

DOG DREAMS UNLIMITED INC.(DDUI), WHICH OWNS AND OPERATES THE AGILE TRADER, HAS HAD LITTLE OR NO EXPERIENCE IN TRADING ACTUAL ACCOUNTS FOR ITSELF OR FOR CUSTOMERS. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS TO COMPARE TO THE HYPOTHETICAL RESULTS, CUSTOMERS SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY WARY OF PLACING UNDUE RELIANCE ON THESE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS.

Trading commodity futures may involve large potential rewards, but also carries large potential risks. You must be aware of the risks and be willing to accept them in order to invest in the futures markets. Dont trade with money that you cannot afford to lose. The past performance of any trading system or methodology is not necessarily indicative of future results.

The Agile Trader and all individuals affiliated with The Agile Trader assume no responsibilities for your trading and investment results.

As a publisher of a financial newsletter of general and regular circulation, The Agile Trader cannot tender individual investment advice on the suitability and performance of your portfolio or specific investments. Refer to your registered investment adviser for individualized advice.

In making any investment decision, you will rely solely on your own review and examination of the facts and the records relating to such investments. Past performance of our recommendations is not an indication of future performance. The publisher shall have no liability of whatever nature in respect to any claims, damage, loss, or expense arising out of or in connection with the reliance by you on the contents of our Web site, any promotion, published material, alert, or update.

Trading commodity futures involves substantial risk of loss. DDUI and all individuals affiliated with DDUI assume no responsibilities for your trading and investment results.

Copyright © 2003-2010 The Agile Trader, LLC All rights reserved.

All Images, XHTML Renderings, and Source Code Copyright © Safehaven.com