|
Around 33 centuries ago, one of the most famous men in history hiked up a
mountain probably now known as Jabal al Lawz in today's northwestern Saudi
Arabia. There Moses met with God. God Himself carved commandments into stone
tablets for Moses to share with His people, the Israelites. These commandments
eventually became a major part of the legal foundation for western civilization.
One of these commandments preserved in the book of Exodus is "You shall not
bear false witness against your neighbor." While most obviously commanding
us not to lie, I believe this commandment goes well beyond lying. It probably
also includes presenting true information in such a way that it will likely
mislead when interpreted. A modern word that comes to mind along these lines
is "nuancing".
Sadly the financial markets are full of this kind of thing. Charts, with their
wealth of information, are one of the easiest ways to intentionally mislead
others. Depending on the analyst's selection of data to use, time period to
cover, axis type of chart (linear or logarithmic), and vertical axis span,
the obvious interpretation of a chart can vary radically. It is not hard to
present true information yet know it will be misinterpreted.
I have a personal anecdote on this. When I was around 13 years old or so,
one of our national Senators came to speak at my school. This was well before
the PowerPoint days so he presented his charts on big sheets of paper on easels.
The Senator showed us one chart with a very sharp rate of increase. After he
finished, I walked down to the front of the gym to take a closer look. It turns
out his vertical axis wasn't zeroed.
What had looked like a mammoth 500% increase from the crowd was probably less
than 10% when the tiny-labeled non-zeroed vertical axis was considered. In
my young self-righteous fury, I actually wrote this Senator a letter chastising
him for his misleading chart. His office even answered me. It was the first
time in my life, and the last time, that I ever bothered writing to a politician.
It's as useful as talking to a turnip.
At Zeal we love charts since they offer such an awesome and unparalleled perspective.
We have already custom built thousands of different charts over the years and
I am looking forward to personally building thousands more. But every time
I create a chart, I try to carefully consider how it will likely be interpreted.
I want my charts to accurately reflect and illuminate the particular
market I am researching.
Unfortunately today a terribly misleading chart is tainting perceptions of
the mighty global commodities bull. I cannot count the times I have seen analysts
and investors use and misinterpret it. Most of these misinterpretations are
unintentional, due to simple naiveté. But disturbingly I have also seen
it used to intentionally mislead when an analyst knows better. This chart bearing
false witness is a big problem.
If it was an obscure chart few investors considered, I wouldn't care all that
much. But unfortunately this false-witness chart happens to be of the famous
CRB index. The CRB index, of course, has been the flagship commodities index
for decades. Having the CRB mislead on commodities' true bull-market progress
is as appalling as if the NASDAQ failed to reflect technology stocks' true
performance.
The reason CRB charts are bearing false witness today is because this index's
new custodians radically changed its composition back in July 2005.
The CRB's traditional equal weighting and geometric averaging among its component
commodities were trashed. This tenth revision of the CRB created a new version
of this index unlike any before in history. I wrote an essay back then explaining
all of this.
The unprecedented tenth-revision CRB, or CRBr10, is utterly dominated by energy.
Energy comprises 39.0% of this new index compared to 17.6% in the ninth-rev
CRB, the CRBr9. So when oil corrected in late 2006, the new CRBr10 plummeted.
The CRB's total breakdown led many analysts, including long-time contrarians,
to wrongly conclude this commodities bull was over. I wrote another
essay in January 2007 pointing out how horribly flawed it was to assume
the CRBr10 and CRBr9 were comparable.
After that essay, some traders graciously wrote in to tell me about the CCI,
or Continuous Commodity Index. The CCI is really the traditional CRBr9 we are
all used to. It was created to preserve the historical ninth-rev CRB interpretation
of commodities' performance in this new CRBr10 era. In February 2007, I wrote an
essay on the CCI. I was so thankful and relieved to learn of its existence
because it restored the accuracy and comparability of the traditional flagship
CRB index.
Now a year later it is very disappointing to see most analysts and investors
continue to focus on the new CRBr10 rather than the old CRBr9 in the form of
the CCI. The CRBr10 is fine when viewed in isolation only since its
July 2005 birth. But when it is grafted on to the old historical CRBr9, it
bears false witness. Almost no charts acknowledge this big break in continuity
and hence their obvious interpretation is hopelessly flawed.
So this week I want to revisit the true CRBr9 in its new life as the CCI versus
the CRBr10. Your perception of commodities performance in 2007, and their future
prospects, will be very different depending on which CRB you ponder.
While commodities continue to look rather anemic from the CRBr10 perspective,
they look amazing from the true historical CRBr9 perspective.
In these charts, the CRB is rendered in blue. Up until July 2005, it is the
ninth-revision CRB. After July 2005, the tenth-rev CRB is grafted in. This
is the way virtually all analysts today present the CRB, with no note of the
huge discontinuity. Meanwhile the new CCI, the comparable continuation of the
CRBr9, is rendered in red. You have to consider it to truly understand the
CRB's progress in historical context.

You really have to journey back in time to understand the devastating impact
of the CRB's false witness. Between late 2001 and mid-2006, the CRB index was
in an absolutely beautiful secular uptrend. Its support was rock solid and
never failed. If an investor wanted to know how commodities were doing as a
sector, all he had to do was check out a CRB chart. Due to the natural smoothing
effect of the CRB's geometric averaging, you couldn't ask for a nicer and tighter
uptrend.
Then stealthily in July 2005, the tenth revision of the CRB index since its
1957 birth went into effect. It started trading on July 12th, a quiet time
of the year when the markets don't get a lot of attention. And there really
weren't a lot of folks talking about this transition. I wrote a
single essay on it, published on the quiet July 4th vacation week, and
then got back to more tradable analysis. So not many traders knew the CRB had
even changed.
And for the tiny fraction that did know, things didn't look all that different
initially. As this chart shows, the CRBr10 dutifully continued up within the
CRBr9's tight secular uptrend for a year after the revision happened. So by
the time mid-2006 arrived, virtually everyone in this sector had long forgotten
about the obscure tenth revision of the CRB. Back then we all charted the CRB
across its tenth revision as if it was perfectly historically contiguous.
Then in late-summer 2006, the oil price started plummeting. In the old CRBr9
days, this index wasn't
heavily influenced by crude oil. Oil was only 5.9% of it by weight and
the geometric averaging greatly smoothed out individual commodity impacts.
But in the CRBr10 oil was suddenly its largest component by far with a massive
23.0% weighting, 4 times higher. And the traditional geometric averaging no
longer existed to moderate its impact on the entire index.
For the first time in its entire bull, the CRB plummeted. It sliced through
both its rock-solid support and key 200-day moving average like a hot knife
through butter. Investors were shocked and terrified. Since everyone had long
forgotten the CRB revision, they truly believed the same old historical
CRB had violated its long secular support. The sky really was falling technically
in CRB-land, so commodities Armageddon looked to be upon us.
This breakdown led to all kinds of very bearish theories on commodities. Even
former commodities enthusiasts were falling all over themselves heralding the
end of the commodities bull due to this high-profile CRB breakdown. But the
problem was this breakdown was false. The CRBr10 was breaking down,
but it wasn't comparable to anything historically, especially the CRBr9's
uptrend. The standard trans-revision CRB chart, as presented and interpreted,
was bearing false witness.
I again wrote about the new oil-dominated
CRB in October 2006, trying to help investors see the real picture. But
I felt like the little Dutch boy trying to plug the dike as it was hopeless
trying to stop the flood of commodities despair. At that time, unfortunately
I wasn't yet aware of the CCI so I had no CRBr9 to compare to the CRBr10
in my charts. So I had to ask investors to take it on faith that the old
CRB would not have corrected anywhere near as hard with oil as this new CRB
did.
Before that breakdown, the CRB carved its bull high in mid-2006 which was
99% above its early 2001 lows. Since then, the headline CRB has just ground
sideways. It did rally in 2007, but as of the end of the year it still hadn't
managed to eclipse its May 2006 high. To a technician, the headline CRB looks
like it has just carved a massive double top ahead of a secular bear. Thankfully
this is a false witness.
In these charts, the only truly comparable lines are the blue CRBr9 one up
until the tenth CRB revision in mid-2005 and the red CCI one after. This
is the only way the CRB index is constructed and calculated the same way
to ensure perfect comparability. While the headline CRBr10 swooned, the historical
CRBr9 was stronger than ever living on in the form of the CCI. The true CRBr9
just hit all-time nominal and bull highs!
In December, on fully seven separate trading days, the CCI ascended to new
closing highs. They are the highest levels yet seen in this bull and the highest nominal levels
ever. But if you adjust the CRB for inflation as is necessary
and prudent over multi-decade timespans, this index would have to soar well
over 1000 today to hit a new all-time real high.
Thus bull to date, the truly comparable CRBr9 was up 160% as of late last
month! And technically-oriented traders should note that its secular support was
never broken! Not only did the CRB not break support, but its old secular
resistance actually became new higher support as the CRB broke out of its secular
uptrend in early 2006 ahead of oil's sharp correction. And that infamous oil
correction really didn't even faze the CRBr9 due to oil's modest equal weighting
and the old-school geometric averaging.
So as you can see, your interpretation of late 2006 and 2007 in commodities
is radically different depending on whether you consider the new CRBr10 or
the traditional CRBr9. Either way, the CRBr10 is simply not comparable to
the CRBr9 in past years. So even if you like the CRBr10, and it does have its
merits, it is illogical and misleading to graft it on to the CRBr9 with no
explanation. Hence I propose big warning symbols on all trans-2005 CRB charts
to stop them from bearing false witness and misleading investors.
This vast gulf between ninth-rev and tenth-rev CRB performance is even more
interesting when viewed just since the tenth revision. The traditional CRBr9
in the form of the CCI held pretty tight with the new CRBr10 for its first
quarter of existence, but then the CCI started to pull away. This gap has only
continued to widen since. Actually this is rather curious considering the CRBr10's
huge oil weighting and oil's massive upleg in 2007.

Since the day the CRBr10 went live, it is only up 15%. Meanwhile the CRBr9
in CCI form has soared 52%! There is really no comparison between the CRBr9
and the CRBr10. In your mind, carefully consider the blue CRBr10 line in isolation
and then the red CRBr9 line in isolation. Your interpretation of this commodities
bull's performance of late will vary tremendously based on which CRB you are
pondering.
One has broken its support and 200dma, and is just now clawing back up to
what really looks like a secular double top. In pure technical terms, this
is not a market I'd want to invest in. Meanwhile the other one looks incredibly
bullish. It is climbing ever higher in a beautiful uptrend while periodically
bouncing off both its support and 200dma like clockwork. And its rate of ascent
is not extreme so it certainly looks like a healthy secular bull, not an out-of-control
bubble.
In CRBr10 terms, 2007 was a strong year but no new highs were made and commodities
were merely recovering to a potential double top. But in CRBr9 terms, 2007
was an amazing year with consistent new highs emerging within a healthy
unfolding secular bull. There was nothing at all to be concerned about technically
and the uptrend points to continuing higher prices ahead.
So whether you are a commodities investor, speculator, or analyst, please
realize that today's CRB is nothing at all like the historical one you remember
from the first half of this decade. Today's CRB is only comparable back to
July 2005, and it is utterly dominated by oil. In a very real sense, the CRBr10
is largely an oil proxy. It really doesn't reflect other commodities' progress
all that well.
If you are trading commodities or commodities stocks, know that any CRB chart
that stretches back past mid-2005 is not comparable. It compares apples to
oranges and is totally useless across the tenth revision. So any time you see
technical CRB conclusions reached across mid-2005, know they are nonsensical.
At best the person reaching the conclusions is naïve and at worst he is
intentionally misleading you. Any long-term CRB chart that mixes the CRBr9
and CRBr10 bears false witness to this commodities bull's true progress.
If you are an analyst, and are blessed to be in a position to influence traders,
for heaven's sake please don't use long-term CRB charts to make points! Use
the CCI instead, which is perfectly comparable from today all the way back
to the ninth CRB revision in late 1995. If you are using trans-2005 CRB charts
to make technical points, and your readers read an essay like this one, you
will instantly and irrevocably lose lots of credibility. And in this business
credibility is everything. We have to tell the truth, always, and never
bear false witness.
Any comparison of the CRB across its radical tenth revision in July 2005 is
hopelessly flawed. The CRBr10 is nothing like the nine CRB revisions that came
before it. It is an entirely new beast altogether. Now the CRBr10's calculation
methodology is valid, and superior in some ways, but it is simply not comparable
with the past CRB. If you want an accurate and true reflection of this commodities
bull's progress, you have to use the true historical ninth-rev CRB now known
as the CCI.
So as we head into 2008, please realize that today's tenth-rev CRB is essentially
just a proxy for oil. Oil's swings utterly dominate this index. When oil corrects
soon here as it
ought to, the CRB is going to get pummeled down hard. It will indeed look
like a double top on a long-term chart. And the commodities Chicken Littles
will come out of the woodwork boldly proclaiming that "the sky is falling!" Don't
believe it.
Instead look to the old-school Continuous Commodity Index, where the historical
ninth-rev CRB we all know and love lives on in new form. An oil correction
will weigh on it too, but the CCI will probably only get dragged back down
to support at worst. I am all but certain that even the most wicked oil correction
you can imagine won't be enough to cause the CCI to fall under its support
and break its uptrend. With oil's traditional equal 5.9% weighting and geometric
averaging, it just can't do that much index damage.
At Zeal we live to study and trade the markets, so we really pay close attention
to stuff like the tenth CRB revision that can really trip up investors who
aren't aware of it. As students of the markets we constantly strive to deeply
understand them. We have to be accurate and truthful in our analysis and we
don't want to mislead anyone. So we won't foist off some long-term chart as
comparable if it is not in reality.
Even before I learned of the wonderful CCI's existence, we remained big commodities
bulls through the entire CRBr10 breakdown. From our research we knew it was
just a temporary oil thing. And we continue to be very bullish today, buying
elite commodities stocks to amplify the gains in their underlying commodities.
Despite periodic bearish analyses claiming the contrary, this commodities bull
is very much alive and well, thriving really, today. Fortunes continue to be
won.
We just published the popular new January 2008 issue of our acclaimed
monthly newsletter that has our outlook for key commodities sectors in
early 2008. Subscribe today to
get our latest cutting-edge analysis and see the actual real-world trades
we are making based on all our research. First-time e-mail-PDF-edition subscribers
will even receive a complimentary copy of this new newsletter, with your
formal subscription starting next month.
The bottom line is the flagship CRB commodities index, if charted across its
tenth revision in mid-2005, bears false witness. It misleads traders into assuming
that the ninth-rev and tenth-rev CRBs are comparable even though nothing could
be farther from the truth. The only truly comparable CRB is the CCI, which
continues the ninth-revision CRB's components, weighting, and calculation methodology.
If you see someone trying to draw technical CRB conclusions across mid-2005
without using the CCI, know you are being misled. Odds are the analyst is merely
naïve, but in some cases the false witness may be intentional to further
the analyst's own hidden agenda. You can't thrive and trade optimally during
a secular bull without a comparable and accurate yardstick to measure its entire
bull-to-date performance.
|