E.S. Browning

The GOP and The Stock Rally

Posted by Paul Vigna on September 27, 2010
Dow Jones Industrials, Economy, Markets, S&P 500 / Comments Off

Stocks have been getting quite the lift from both the election cycle and the Fed’s loose money policies, while mixed economic data have been just encouraging enough to keep the bulls contented. This allowed stocks to craft a technical break-out, and sans some game-changing bit of news, it may hold through at least election day.

Hold is about what they’re doing today; futures up a hair on a relatively quiet morning. Wal-Mart offering $4.6B for South Africa’s Massmart and Unilever in a deal for Alberto-Culver. Dallas, Richmond Kansas City Feds post regional surveys this week. Chicago PMI on Thursday. Final reading on 2Q GDP comes Thursday, ISM manufacturing survey comes Friday.

S&P 500 futures up 1.30, DJ futures up 16. Ten-year yield at 2.55%, euro’s flat at $1.3492, although it was weaker earlier.

I opined on Friday’s News Hub that the election cycle, and the Fed, were driving things here, and there’s an article in today’s Journal that bears out at least the former. We’ve been hearing for some time that traders are looking to the election, and the widespread notion that the GOP will take back at least one or even both houses of Congress. E.S. Browning says, in fact, the market is already pricing it in:

Investors are debating whether the November election will have an impact on the stock market. Actually, it probably already has.

In election years, the stock market typically hits a roadblock in the first half of the year, as investors worry about the looming vote. But money managers typically are looking three to six months ahead when making investment decisions, and by summer they are forced to start looking past the November vote. Much of the election rally can take place before the outcome is known, as investors worry less about the looming election and focus on the coming year.

The thinking on the Street seems to be that the GOP is more business-friendly, for one thing, and will act as a counterweight to the “anti-business” Obama administration (although it’s beyond me how any party that would front that monument to appeasement called the Dodd-Frank Bill could be described as “anti-business.”) Maybe. But this isn’t necessarily a moment in history that will benefit from gridlock. If the GOP, which apparently stands for “Glenn Or Palin” these days, just grinds Washington down to a halt, we will be even worse off for it.

Miller Tabak’s Dan Greenhaus makes the point:

We cannot envision gridlock being good for markets or the economy at this point in time. Will there be a halt to some policies the market perceives as harmful? Of course. But with the economic realignment ongoing, the country would be served by a rectilinear and somewhat unified Congress. We hope that the decision making process becomes more unified from here, but the probability of such unification remains less than absolute.

I’m not saying the Dems have all the answers; Lord knows they don’t. But this idea that a Republican victory in November is going to be a panacea is just so much GOP pablum.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s Time To Go To The Mattresses

Posted by Paul Vigna on July 13, 2010
Dow Jones Industrials, Federal Reserve, Markets, S&P 500 / 8 Comments

The hot new investment craze.

If buy-and-hold is really dead, should the average guy be in the stock market at all?

There were two articles in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, both interestingly enough by E.S. Browning, that weren’t treated this way, but really should be read together, as companion pieces. Because putting the two together provides some insights in just what “the market” is telling us. It doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the economy.

The first is “Small Investors Flee Stocks,” the second is Browning’s Abreast of the Market column, “The Herd Instinct Takes Over.” The first paints a picture of small-time investors throwing in the towel on the stock market after all the battering and pummeling, just selling and finally getting out. The second notes that the market is moving in lockstep to a greater degree than at any time since 1987, as investors all adopt the same strategies, many focusing on exchange-traded funds, rather than invididual stocks. This has the effect of dragging the entire market in one direction or another, with fundamentals left out in left field.

From the first article:

Small investors’ faith in stocks, which surged in the 1990s, has collapsed since the technology-stock debacle and the Enron and WorldCom scandals of 2000-2002. The 2007-2009 financial crisis only made things worse. Now, the pullback among ordinary investors means they are a declining force in a market that is increasingly dominated by professionals.

So you have a picture of individual investors, after a decade of getting knocked around like a pinata, finally giving up on stocks, and the market more and more becoming an insular place dominated by insiders who are all following the same set of numbers.

Does the individual investor really stand a chance? The market’s own internals are making it harder for average investors to build a nest egg, a retirement, to “get rich.” So average investors, being gullible perhaps but not totally stupid, are doing the natural thing: dumping stocks. Why shouldn’t they? The market zips around like a pinball, now up, now down, turns a dime, rises when the news is bad, and falls when the news is good. Why should the average American keep playing this game?

Continue reading…

Tags: , , , , , , ,