STOCK PERFORMANCE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.....Brinker said: "There are a lot of things out there in terms of the economy to like. And that's why I've said, those of you who have ridden this wave of stock market gains, you have to give yourself a pat on the back. You have to congratulate yourself every once in a while when you're doing something extremely right. Because the bottom line is, these have been the times wherein you can make so much money in the stock market, that it is mind-boggling. Just look how much the market is up since the last major correction which bottomed in February 10, 2010 (Brinker misspoke the date).
Subscribers to the investment letter are well aware that we issued a buy signal at the bottom of that correction.....at 1829 in the S&P 500...... And the market, not counting dividends, has risen 57%..... since that time, and if you add in the dividends, it's over 60% total return since that buy signal that we published at the website after the close on February 10th, 2016 - that's a little less than two years ago - when we had the last major correction which went on for several months and bottomed finally on February 11th. We put our buy-signal after the close on the 10th - anybody buying mutual funds at the close on the 11th, actually bought in at the low of correction which was 1829. And since then a total return of over 60% in the S&P 500 Index. Pretty good, huh?
Honey EC: That is very good, Mr. Brinker. And I understand why you want to go back to your last fully invested - no cash-raised buy-signal, but the Wall Street Journal reported this today - about last year and this month:
In January 2018, the S&P 500's 7.5% gain so far is the biggest since 1987....Stocks around the world have staged one of the best-ever starts to a year, a synchronized rally that has only gained momentum following 2017s sharp gains.
In January 2018, the S&P 500's 7.5% gain so far is the biggest since 1987....Stocks around the world have staged one of the best-ever starts to a year, a synchronized rally that has only gained momentum following 2017s sharp gains.
DOLLAR COST AVERAGE.... Brinker's Marketimer model portfolios are fully invested and he is recommending dollar-cost-averaging for new stock market money.
BRINKER'S DEFINITION OF A BEAR MARKET, MAJOR CORRECTION, SMALL CORRECTION....Brinker defines a bear market as a decline of 20% or more, a major correction between 10% and 20%, and a "noisy" correction as 10% or less.
NO RECESSION, NO BEAR COMING......January 2018 Marketimer; Bob Brinker wrote: "Marketimer economic outlook for 2018 does not anticipate a recession. This suggests that the risk of a bear market decline in excess of 20% is low, unless our economic outlook changes. In the absence of a recession, the most likely risk for the stock market is the development of a mi-term off-presidential election year correction. Whether such a decline is a major correction of 10% to 20%, or a smaller decline of less than 10%, remains to be seen......"
BOND/INTEREST RATES GOING UP.... BB said that he expects the Federal Reserve to raise rate 0.25% at the March FOMC meeting.
MARKETIMER BOND FUND CHANGE COMING....Brinker told caller Brian from Reno that he plans to make changes to his Marketimer fixed income portfolio and also his balanced model portfolio III. BB said those changes will be announced in the February Marketimer which will be ready next Thursday.
Honey EC: Several comments came in this afternoon, speculating about what those changes will be. It could be almost anything. Since there are only three bond funds (the same in both portfolios), perhaps he is adding another one. Some think he may sell the fund that has large high-yield bond holdings. As Brinker likes to say: "We shall all know in the fullness of time." Stay tuned.... :)
HOUSING....BB: "New home sales are okay but will be volatile." There was a 9.3% drop in December, but the rest of 2017 was a good year, and BB said there is no reason for concern because you "have to look at a longer time frame than month to month." And when you look at 2017.....new homes sales increased 8.3%, to total rate for the calendar year of 608,000.....Inventory in the housing market has been tight around the country....
SMALL BUSINESS OPTIMISM INDEX....BB said: "You have to be impressed....at its highest level since the second quarter of 2007....That's why I get really tired of hearing these negative comments from these negative nabobs out there. The reality is, they are not paying attention, they are not doing their homework. They are not even on the same page with reality. Very sad.....
BLOOMBERG CONSUMER COMFORT INDEX....BB said: "is riding high right now....is now at 53.7, the highest level since March of 2001....So now we are talking about a Consumer Comfort Index very close to its highest level in almost 17 years - that is a major cord on the economic data front.
BEAUTIFUL JOBLESS CLAIMS.... BB said: "And when you look at jobless claims, you see beauty. Initial claims for unemployment insurance have been way down, way, way down!"
ECONOMIC REPORTS SUMMATION.....Brinker rapped up his economic reports with this: "There are a lot of things out there in terms of the economy to like. And that's why I've said, those of you who have ridden this wave of stock market gains, you have to give yourself a pat on the back. You have to congratulate yourself every once in a while when you're doing something extremely right. Because the bottom line is, these have been the times wherein you can make so much money in the stock market, that it is mind-boggling. Just look how much the market is up since the last major correction
==> Thanks to DRAHME, audio clip, nattering nabobs of negativism shot down
==> Thanks to DRAHME, audio clip, nattering nabobs of negativism shot down
SOME DESERVED CROWING......BB did a little crowing about his Marketimer projection for 2017 which pretty much hit the nail on the head at 2.3% (annual). He correctly said that 2.3% is a "significant improvement" over 2016 - which was 1.5%.
NATIONAL DEBT/DEFICIT.... For the first time in several weeks, BB did not sound the alarm on about the deficit and national debt and mistakenly claim that "no one in Washington talks about it anymore." Perhaps he missed this important step in the right direction: It’s Official=> President Trump Decreases the Debt to GDP Ratio in His First Year in Office – First Time in More than 50 Years!
===> Thanks DRAHME, audio clip of the week ahead.
===> Thanks DRAHME, audio clip of the week ahead.
FRANKJ'S MONEYTALK GUEST AUTHOR SUMMARY:
Today’s guest this 28th
day of January, 2018 was Tim O’Reilly, author of the book “WTF? What’s the
Future and Why It’s Up to Us.” Thus Bob
Brinker adds another interview devoted to a book by an author who has done some
navel gazing and in doing so, sees the future.
Either Bob or someone else in the organization seems fascinated with
these futurist authors.
If you sat and watched
paint dry instead of listening to the interview, I’d say you made better use of
your time.
He said he wrote the book
because of concerns about income inequality and the future of work. Also mentioned that “tech” does what we want
it to do and if that means getting rid of jobs then that must be what (some of
us) want.
Bob brought up the
proverbial taxi driver who paid a great deal of money for a taxi medallion who
now finds his income threatened by ride services like Uber. The guest said his brother drives a taxi in
Maryland … Bob interrupted rudely and
said, “well, he didn’t pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a taxi medallion…” Now it was Tim’s turn to interrupt and he
said that Yes, his brother did buy a medallion.
So, that was the high point
(or should I say low point) of the interview.
In response to another
question the guest wandered off into a long, long answer about the good and bad
entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley. The
founders of Uber were just a couple of rich guys who wanted to get even richer,
as an example.
After the break, Bob asked
“do we say too bad to people who got the shaft,” (from the introduction
of technology.) There was another long,
rambling answer by the guest who ended up criticizing McDonalds as a company
that had the means to pay its employees more, but doesn’t.
Bob asked if an employee’s
economic value to an employer depends on the skills they bring to the job. Tim replied that he didn’t think that was
fair and this set off another minor back and forth, then a long speech by Tim
ending with Apple as an example of a company whose three most important things
are its employees, its customers and its suppliers. Its investors are just along for the ride and
don’t matter to Apple – so says Tim O’Reilly.
Bob pointed out that the
investors being described are in the secondary market for the stock – Tim more
or less agreed, but said in effect, an investor who owns a big chunk of stock
has no right to demand that more of the corporation’s cash be returned to
investors as dividends.
After the break:
·
What about
calls to break up these outfits like Amazon, Facebook, etc? Answer: companies like these have to think about the
systemic ecosystem in which they exist.
·
Bernie from
Westlake Village CA weighed in by asking the guest if he ever employed people
and how many? The guest said he employs
about 500 people. Bernie pointed out
that artificially raising wages increases automation.
·
Tim responded
that the market dictates what skills are worth (a concept he seems to disagree
with). He said there is more to rates
of pay than the simplistic notion of the market.
·
Bob jumped in
and hammered Wal Mart for making a big deal out of their announcement to raise
wages from $9 to $11 per hour as a result of the tax cuts. He criticized Wal Mart for keeping wages so
low for so long and shorting employees on medical coverage for so long.
·
Bob mentioned
his theme that Congress should have indexed the minimum wage to inflation a
long time ago and the guest agreed.
The guest gave such long
winded answers that Bob had to interrupt him a couple of times to get the next
question in. I looked him up on the
interweb, and he was born in 1954. He is
older than he sounded over the radio – I thought he was much younger.
Honey here: This guest could go in the running for the all-time Moneytalk most boring - but your summary certainly made a "silk purse" out of it. I got the strong feeling that Brinker was having a problem finding any periods when the Tim O'Reilly was having his one-man jabberfest. :)
117 comments:
.
Smile...You sent a comment to the last Summary, and I have started today's already.
I think that most people just move on to the news summary/comments after I get it queued up for the new broadcast.
So I am copying your post here.
HB,
I think Bob is likely to be live today if nothing else to crow about being right on the GDP numbers stuck in the lower 2's as he mentioned November 19, 2017.
https://honeysbobbrinkerbeehivebuzz3.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2017-11-26T13:12:00-08:00&max-results=2&start=2&by-date=false
You are correct it is a big ship at 17.2725 Trillion GDP output.
The facts will speak for themselves.
smile
Bob coming in loud and clear........VERY optimistic opening message. I'm amped for the KNUS link after listening in PANAMA CITY....sounds great in the Midwest since WLS preempts for sports IRWIN in Skokie
.
Yes, Bob Brinker did crow about projecting economic growth for 2017 correctly @ 2.6%.
But he correctly said it was a "significant improvement" over 2016 @ 1.5%.
Thanks for posting this here HB.
I reposted the same thing before seeing your post, which you can ignore.
smile
"As you know we don't brag on Moneytalk" Brinker said with tongue planted firmly in cheek.
He does have me curious about the change he's making with his bond funds.
.
Jim....That's called "desperately dangling" a carrot to sell newsletters. LOL!
I've been trying to remember whether I've ever heard him do that before. Don't think he ever did.
Do you recall?
Honeybee said...
"Jim....That's called "desperately dangling" a carrot to sell newsletters. LOL!
I've been trying to remember whether I've ever heard him do that before. Don't think he ever did.
Do you recall?
No, I can't think of anytime he did that. My guess is that he might cut back on his junk bond fund. If he anticipates a Mid-Term election year correction such a move would make sense since such a fund would suffer quite a bit during a 10-15% correction.
Jim: Yes, I'll be curious about his upcoming bond fund changes too. I'm not a subber, so I hope Honey (or someone) will post it here.
Jim said....
"He does have me curious about the change he's making with his bond funds"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Me too....
His Osterweis fund went up 5.99% last year
His Metro West fund went up 3.66% last year
His DoubleLine fund went up 2.3% last year
Maybe he has realized that a junk bond fund is not appropriate for retirees and wants to get rid of that fund?
Robert
I guess Robert Schiller won't be a guest anytime soon.
Gabe pick some gifts you'd like on Amazon. Then make a link here for your wishlist. Followers here who use Amazon can one click give gifts to you for your many contributions here.
.
As of the January Marketimer, Brinker does not anticipate a recession - therefore no bear market.
We do need to review what he calls a bear market and how he defines "corrections." I'll do that in the summary.
.
Kerry in Boise and all. The discussion of Gabe has just ended.
If you want this blog to continue, I suggest you take a look at supporting those who spend hours each week doing the work.
HB,
Actually what I heard Brinker say if I'm not mistaken was annual GDP growth for 2017 came in at 2.3%.
Comparison to 2016 is OK in context of this being a good economy. I don't think he was making any other point.
Bob's numbers are slightly off low by .2% btw based on actual data from the source which both Biker and I confirmed:
https://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp
Bob sure was hard on those callers saying they were concerned about market valuations. If he is not careful he will get caught again like he was in 1987, and 2007.
smile
.
Smile...You are correct. I checked my notes.
It was 2017 Q4 that came in at 2.6%. The annual number for year 2017 was 2.3%
.
Klashelle...I don't publish comments that insult me - or those who are enjoying this blog and listening to Bob Brinker.
If you want to comment about the program or your opinion of Brinker, then re-write and send your comments again.
Otherwise, don't waste your time beating up on me, the blog or others - it won't see the light of day.
HB,
If you want this blog to continue, I suggest you take a look at supporting those who spend hours each week doing the work.
----
Agree with you totally HB.
I'm stunned that your name was not suggested for the wish list.
Not that you have ever stated you are looking for that sort of thing.
Geeze Louise.
smile
.
Thank you, Smile.
I guess it just PIXXeD me off, even though I knew that was probably the purpose. LOL!
I don't SELL anything. And I don't ask for much, but think it should be obvious that all I get to offset my expenses and maybe buy a cuppa coffee, is what Google pays me for any of their ads that are clicked on - or bought from.
I also get a little from Amazon if blog readers use the blog link to go there for their purchases.
John from SF said:
I wouldn't give Khashelle too much credit. Anyone who looks at your Blogger profile knows your location is Santa Cruz Mountains.
I found Bob to be very positive on the improvements in the economy today.
If any anyone has or can come up with a list of all the economic
indicators that Bob listed as having increases, I'd like to see
the list posted somewhere.
Thanks
I've actually knew who the guest was when Bob first announced him!
Tim O'Reilly is the publisher of some great software engineering books. His wikipedia page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_O%27Reilly and his company is oreilly.com
.
John from SF...Right, that it does. Did I sound like I was giving him any credit?
.
Okay. I'll delete my post.
Honeybee - regarding Klashelle, Smith & Wesson is always ready to help you..
Hey, regarding Bob's bonds comment today, I have never heard him tip off a change, early. I am curious myself.
I subscribe to both Marketimer and Fixed Income Advisor(FIA).
In the January FIA,...
The Moderate Portfolio and the Conservative Portfolio sold their positions in Metropolitan West Low Duration Bond Fund and reinvested between Fidelity Floating Rate high Income Fund and Vanguard Prime Money Market Fund.
With the portfolio changes done in FIA January, I am thinking the Marketimer change comes in the DoubleLine Low Duration or MetroWest Unconstrained - pure guess.
Don't look now but contrary to popular opinion here at about 40 mins. into the last hour of MT, Bob's often hidden but always present, R-Con hackles are really starting to rise.
Wow, this guest has me vomiting. Yet another utopian, Marxist, central-planner that thinks politicians (or someone else?) should set wages by what they think is "fair."
To his credit, Bob did push back somewhat.
.
Klashelle... You're outta here for good. Do not send any more comments unless you enjoy wasting your time.
"In the January FIA,...
The Moderate Portfolio and the Conservative Portfolio sold their positions in Metropolitan West Low Duration Bond Fund and reinvested between Fidelity Floating Rate high Income Fund and Vanguard Prime Money Market Fund."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You may be on to something....
The Fidelity Floating Rate High Income Fund has a duration of only 0.24 years according to the Fidelity website.
Today Brinker seemed even more concerned about rate increases than he usually is, so maybe he wants an ultra low duration fund in the portfolio. As if the low duration of his income funds is not low enough...
But he had that fund in the portfolio some time ago and it performed badly...then he removed it.
Hmmmm......Brinker might say, "we shall know in the fullness of time"......
In this case, when Marketimer comes out!!
Some rambling points.
*Bob states there are 2 sides to bonds regarding risk, either rate or credit. His latest stance (last 12 months or longer) has been "rate" is the risk. Rate being hitched to duration.
*With that being said above, I think Bob is okay with the Osterweis and the rate (I'm guessing that's the one referred to as junk in some of the replies in this blog) because of the fund management and portfolio turns. They're active and appear to be efficient.
*The Metro and DoubleLine mentioned in Marketimer (M) don't even make the list in FIA. I think that is real interesting.
*About 60 days ago, I read an article about Active and Passive Funds, either Fidelity High Income or Fidelity Floating Rate High Income (can't remember which one) was noted because the fund was heavy in the S&P 500. The discussion surrounded fund performance and how difficult it was for a manager to beat a passive fund. The article went on to say that a correction would be bad for the Fund - sorry, can't remember which one they focused on...something tells me it was the Fidelity High Income and not Floating Rate High Income.
*Back to Osterweis, they have a 1.3% holding (I believe that's the %) in Rite-Aid. Amazon was wanting to compete in pharmacy and Rite-Aid was discussed as an acquisition. Amazon is searching for HQ2. Out of the 20 cities vying for the HQ location, Pittsburgh and Philly are on the list. Rite-Aid's HQ is located in Camp Hill, PA. Don't know it that's a prediction or an omen, you be the judge.
*Osterweis didn't do to well in the 07-08 melt down, but faired really well (stellar) thereafter.
*Gundlach of Doubleline fame thinks the S&P finishes in the red in 2018.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/jeff-gundlach-predicts-the-stock-markets-9-year-winning-streak-will-end-in-2018-2018-01-10
>END<
I appreciate Honeybee and all of you who post comments that provide positive "insight" to help navigate the investment landscape especially Bob's comments...
Honeybee said...
"Kerry in Boise and all. The discussion of Gabe has just ended."
Honeybee,
I'm not certain that I understand this and would appreciate your clarification. Was this concerning a particular comment or is it all inclusive?
Thanks,
JC
So here is my criticism of the show today........the recent guests in the third hour all seem to talk about the same subject, future technology (Uber, robots, self driving cars, etc.) which is lacking on the subject of investing, IMO. I'd like to see more guests that actually talk about investing topics.
I will be on the edge of my seat waiting to hear the upcoming change in the MT allocation. I am going for the long shot bet and guess he will raise some cash in a money market fund.
And thanks to Honey and FRANKJ for keeping the blog going, you have our support and appreciation for the venue to banter back and forth. Keep it up!
.
The personal comments to and about Gabe, at least for today, had reached "Critical Mass" for me - and possibly for him.
KC: Thank you for your kind remarks. I give all credit to Honeybee for doing the heavy lifting that keeps things going. My "work week" extends from the beginning of the third hour to when I finish up the summary and send it on. HB's workweek is all week long, putting up the posts and filtering out stuff too. Also, reminding us of BB's past record when needed.
I agree completely with you about the repetition of these futuristic guests. They've gotten old. Maybe Bob is leery of having a guest who knows as much or more than he does. Maybe he is worried that a guest may impart some actionable advice or information and it will prompt callers to question him about it on a future show.
Thanks again for the compliment.
Yes, pure irony. BB finally hosted Jeff Gundlach last month but this week he will dump Gundlach's fund from the portfolio for lagging performance.
-Richie, Milwaukee
Honey please clarify;
Is Gabe permanently banned from posting?
.
Luella...No, and I can't imagine why you would ask.
I've read somewhere in the financial news sector that if the 10 year goes beyond 2.75% equities will plunge! Comments.
Gabe
"Yes, pure irony. BB finally hosted Jeff Gundlach last month but this week he will dump Gundlach's fund from the portfolio for lagging performance."
-Richie, Milwaukee
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Richie,
What do you mean BB hosted Jeff Gundlach?
Did he interview Gundlach on Moneytalk?
Do you know the date of that, so I can read the summary?
thanks
Robert
Also first time Bob announced he will be LIVE on the air IN ADVANCE to celebrate the "Super Bowl Sunday" anniversary of the show IRWIN in Skokie
.
Robert, and all....It was November 5, 2017 that Jeffrey Gundlach appeared as a third-hour guest on Moneytalk.
Here is Frankj's great summary of that hour
Another GDP post (am I beating a dead horse?)...
Regarding GDP, smile said (January 28, 2018 at 2:16 PM): "Bob's numbers are slightly off low by .2% ..."
The present estimate of 2.3% for the inflation-adjusted annual growth of GDP for year 2017 cited by Bob is correct based on comparing the total (4 quarters) GDP for 2016 to the total (4 quarters) GDP for 2017.
The year-over-year annual GDP growth rate from the 4th quarter of 2016 to the 4th quarter of 2017 is a somewhat different entity with a different value (2.50%). The latter could be thought of as a more recent measure of the smoothed GDP growth rate (equivalent to using a 12 month moving average to filter out meaningless quarterly volatility), which more accurately reflects the current pace of economic activity.
Ref: https://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp
___________________________
On another topic, Bob stated the reasons he doesn't use CAPE-10 for short-term (2 years or less) market timing. I always thought Shiller's CAPE-10 (or maybe CAPE-8 if you want to exclude the skewed earnings during the Great Recession) is as good of a measure of stock market valuation as anyone has ever invented. Sure it is worthless for short-term market timing, but it can be used as an indicator of the probability of potential market gains in the next decade. When the market exceeds the norms by extremes, at some point there will be gradual (or sudden) reversion to the mean. A recent example is the high market valuations of 1999-2000 were followed by a "lost decade" of low market returns.
Here is an article by Ben Carlson discussing the present market valuation and what it means to investors:
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-25/stock-market-valuations-won-t-tell-you-what-s-next
Anyone else have thoughts to share regarding CAPE and stock market valuations?
Well I think I discovered where Bob got his 2.3% GDP number. I did the math (and so did Biker) and the number I came up with for 2017 GDP growth was 2.4989% or 2.5%.
Some might say what's the big deal 2.3% v 2.5%, but I always like to deal straight with the facts so I am sticking to my 2.5% number and a brief (cough cough...) explain on where Bob got his number.
I suspect Brinker simply got the 2.3% number from the press release here:
https://bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2018/gdp4q17_adv.htm
look about half way down the page under the heading of 2017 GDP first paragraph.
Also note as an FYI on the release is a calendar of upcoming GDP number releases.
The interesting thing is my 2.5% number also shows up in the last paragraph under that same 2017 GDP heading.
Again some might say so what.
The so what is the 2.3% number is a comparison of the "annual level?" whereas the 2.5% number I calculated and Biker confirmed is the actual growth for GDP for 2017.
I know what you're thinking... the so what is the 2.3% better fits Brinker's narrative which he stated...
"For many years, we've been clicking along with an annual GDP growth rate in the low-2's, area of 2.2%...."
https://honeysbobbrinkerbeehivebuzz3.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2017-11-26T13:12:00-08:00&max-results=2&start=2&by-date=false
The 2.5% is still in the low 2's but the 2.3% allowed Brinker to crow louder as he did yesterday as I predicted 15 minutes or so before his live show.
Does anyone believe Brinker did not read 5 paragraphs down in the press release under the same GDP section, or did not purposely take the 2.3% number which was more nebulous over the number which was clearly explained as the more correct number. Just saying.
So bottom line this proves up my method of getting the correct GDP growth perspective when these numbers come out.
Also for you math junkies out there I think the 2.3% number is simply an average of the YOY quarterly numbers for the year.
2017Q1 2.00101%
2017Q2 2.20602%
2017Q3 2.29943%
2017Q4 2.49890%
the above averages to 2.25% which rounds to 2.3% and as far as I can tell based on the math if that is how the 2.3% was derived is a meaningless number.
What Brinker should have said is the annual growth in GDP for 2017 was 2.5% which compares to the 1.84% (some would round this to 2%) for 2016. Significant difference? well I don't know since we are only talking 421.1 Billion or less than 2.5% statistically insignificant.
I learned a couple of other things from this research but will save for another post.
I will say that the YOY calculation I am using has been validated but also I have proved to myself that the formula for annualized growth (which takes duration into account) can also be used and I will show this in another post for the last 6 Presidents.
Annualized Return = (Value Now / Original Value) ^ (1 /Years) - 1
For those not into the math of this post just know that you can now distinguish someone talking about GDP who knows what they are talking about vs. those that do not because the real GDP growth number is 2.4989% or 2.5% for 2017 and you can get that number from the source here:
https://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp (click on Current-dollar and "real" GDP for the xcel spreadsheet and look for the GDP in billions of chained 2009 dollars column 2017Q4 17.2725T vs 2016Q4 16.8514T)
Long winded - yes ; Informative - TBD
smile
"Robert, and all....It was November 5, 2017 that Jeffrey Gundlach appeared as a third-hour guest on Moneytalk.
Here is Frankj's great summary of that hour"
++++++++++++
Thanks Honeybee
Robert
smile:
2017Q1 2.00101%
2017Q2 2.20602%
2017Q3 2.29943%
2017Q4 2.49890%
GDP quarterly numbers published somewhere to 5 decimal places?
A couple of things to watch. As Gabe mention the 10 year T-Note benchmark is expected to rise and will impact stock values. I've heard 3% is the danger point. Treasuries are considered risk free investments. Those that invest for income will use stock dividends if the spread is under 1% over that, more will chose Treasury money. Stocks will lose value with more attractive yields on treasuries. Were talking 15% stock correction for this very powerful influence. The advice was to buy the dip. This may be within current year? The biggest losing sectors for this competition with treasury is utilities, consumer goods, and the rest of high paying dividend companies.
The dollar keeps dropping in value. Both Trump and Mnuchin talked down the dollar in recent news. The low value will push trade especially our exports. Good for international corps. This is the dirty trick China always plays. The lower dollar was mentioned as powerful of an economic stimulus as the current corp tax break. Problem is if this gets out of hand as international countries attempt the same race to the bottom. There is concern of trade wars and devaluations. In the long run a stable currency is precious and of high value to attract international investments. The low dollar is supposed to be temporary, but if not could bite us economically in long run.
Our increasing trade imbalance was just due to our increasing national wealth and companies retooling for efficiency. The new tax law has generous write offs for capital equipment. In general we have more money to spend, especially for investing in future economic growth.
Most are thinking were heading within great economic conditions and no threat of recession in near future. This is a time period with good foundation and one should stay the course, but watch the earnings. The earnings need to steady improve for continued stock growth. Don't put new money in, just wait for inevitable correction.
I've read a reference to dollar cost averaging wisdom. This guy claimed financial stats don't prove that out. Better to go all in or no less than 33% per investment. I think the financial advisers like dollar cost averaging as this will expand the path to correct bad moves. Stats apparently don't prove it's value with returns. This goes completely opposite of all the advice often and easily given.
Just a follow up on the 2018 mid term election stock market drop that Brinker mentioned in the December newsletter. I follow investor Ryan Detrick on Twitter and he had an interesting statistical posting about the subject (link below).
Going back to the year 1950, ALL 18 mid term elections have had a roughly -5% to -38% intra-year pullback with the average around -17%. Its worse if you only go back to the 1962 mid term election when all the drops have been -7% or more and the average goes to -19%.
Most of the pullbacks (13 of 18) have occurred in the second half of the year with only five prior to July (earliest was Feb. 25, 1958).
The good news is the bounce backs a year later from the intra-year lows have averaged around +32%. So if/when it happens this year, sounds like a buying opportunity to me.
But I do agree with an earlier poster who said waiting in cash for such a mid-term year pullback could be detrimental to your portfolio since the market is going up like a rocket ship on a weekly basis. A 50/50 ratio feels good to me right now.
https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/958045069822644227
frankj,
not that I am aware of... those are my calculated YOY numbers based on the last GDP data update from here:
https://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp
(click on Current-dollar and "real" GDP for the xcel spreadsheet and look for the GDP in billions of chained 2009 dollars column 2017Q4 17.2725T vs 2016Q4 16.8514T = 2.49890%)
smile
Yo Bluce,
I'm not sure if this is on other Public TV stations, but here in LosT Angeles (the land of fruits and nuts) Rice Delman in on tonight with "The Truth About Your Future."
OOOOOooooo.........MUST SEE TV!
JC
frankj: Per the reference provided by smile, the Bureau of Economic Analysis actually reports the GDP to SIX significant digits (19.7389 trillion dollars - annualized - in the 4th quarter of 2017). But nobody believes the number is known to that accuracy. LOL.
To Frankj:
Don't sell yourself short. Your weekly (or whenever Mr B chooses to work) guest summaries are most appreciated.
And now, without calling an 800 number, my wildly anticipated Super Bowl Sunday prediction:
Bob Brinker LIVE over/under 1 1/4 hours
For sure hour three is taped. First hour opens with anniversary congrats and possibly taking calls. Second hour is the key. All recorded? Starting live before a "turnover" to the archive? Driving down the field to run out the hour?
As of now my money is on the under, while constantly monitoring the weekend wind and temperature forecast for southern Nevada. All disclosed info is for entertainment purposes only.
Gosh, barely made it through the first hour of the radio show without herniating myself. Was shaking my head so much my neck began to hurt.
First BB claims he doesn't brag about his prognostications, but then he proceeds to brag about the dead-nuts accuracy of his prediction for GDP growth last year. Ok, maybe that was intended to be tongue-in-check.
But then John in Paramus calls in and asks Bob what his sentiment indicators say, since there's some positive consumer sentiment in the news. Bob proceeds to totally dodge the question by hemming-n-hawing about "well, it takes a long time to develop", and then he launches into a diatribe about how brilliant Robert Shiller is but that his work is fatally flawed, in BB's opinion. Talk about a back-handed compliment.
And finally, I'm asking anyone and especially any corporate accountants to explain why BB uses that silly midpoint terminology when giving a range of possible outcomes. For example, he will say "we are projecting GDP growth between 2.0 and 2.6 percent, with a midpoint of 2.3 percent." Really? No kidding? I never woulda figured that out on my own.
The point is, it's stupid, insulting, almost childish similar to an extra line of BS you might add to a high school term paper to meet the minimum number of words required. Just needless pap.
In BB's defense, I saw the terminology used once in some corporate publication or prospectus. Might've even been Buffet's annual report. Definitely saw it somewhere and it clicked, "Ok, here's where BB got it from. He's so sophisticated."
When's that super-moon eclipse? Any over-under propositions in Vegas for its "duration"?
Leo, Hackensack
.
Leo in Hackensack.....I totally enjoyed your post! Great entertaining, but right on target all the way. LOL!
.
Birdbrain...I agree with what you said to FrankJ. I always enjoy his guest-author summaries and know that everyone else does too.
And you are exactly right about Brinker only being live for two hours on Sunday. That is what he did last year, and I'd bet a cuppa coffee that is what he will do next Sunday.
Not to worry anyone but I just got a nasty Hindenburg Omen (HO) confirmation of a 1/18/18 HO signal off of today's data (3rd confirmation but not in a row of that 1/18 signal).
The ugly part of the signal today was NYSE new 52week highs vs new 52 week lows was a fastball down the center of the plate at 234 vs 204 respectively. McClellan Oscillator was down around -38.53
Futures are red, but hopefully dem wallstreet boyz will buy the dip and stabilize tomorrow and show down but coming back into the close. Mkt. maybe spooked by the DC. political stuff.
Get your shopping list out for those so inclined.
smile
Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase to partner on US employee health care
Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase on Tuesday announced plans to partner on ways to cut health care costs and improve services for U.S. employees.
The idea is to create a company that would be "free from profit-making incentives."
News of the deal slammed suppliers in the industry including CVS, United Health and Aetna.
Source: Jeff Cox/CNBC
The 10 year closing in on 2.75% and the Market is ever approaching the toilet!
Gabe
Biker said...
frankj: Per the reference provided by smile, the Bureau of Economic Analysis actually reports the GDP to SIX significant digits (19.7389 trillion dollars - annualized - in the 4th quarter of 2017). But nobody believes the number is known to that accuracy. LOL.
----
smile responds: Actually Biker the Trillion with decimals is my short hand the report uses Billions and appears to be a calculated number in that last column based on chained dollars of economic output.
It actually appears to be a solid number once they get thru the 3 updates for the qtr.
The presentation of the qtr annualized number is flakey, but we've beaten that to death appropriately.
One thing I did learn in the research is that quarterly number was not an aggregate of the 3 months as I assumed but rather a progressive end point for the qtr end. Will explain later with an example.
Got to put in some exercise b4 the opening bell.
smile
Well, right after Brinker was so euphoric about the stock market on Sunday we've had a two day selloff. A contrary indicator?
gabe said...
Vanguard recommends 40% exposure in International holdings of both equity and bond funds. Bogle recommends no direct exposure citing that large equity funds such as the Total Market already provides such. Brinker agrees with Bogle, however, has a smaller international exposure than Vanguard recommends. Any observations, corrections or recommendations out there?
Gabe
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gabe, I took a look at the Vanguard Target Retirement 2020 Fund Investor Shares VTWNX. That should be a reasonable approximation of Vanguard's recommendations for international equity and international bond.
The equities are 60% US and 40% foreign, exactly what you said they recommend.
However, the bonds in this Target Date Retirement Fund are only 27% foreign and 73% US.
I haven't checked any other Vanguard Target Date Retirement funds so far, but my initial impression is they might not be recommending that the bond portfolio be 40% foreign bonds, but rather a lower amount
Have you seen them specifically recommend that the bond position be 40% foreign?
Robert
Gabe, I just took a look at the Vanguard LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund (VSMGX).
40% of its stocks are foreign, and 30% of its bonds are foreign.
I think that can be taken as a good approximation of what Vanguard recommends
Robert
Responding to Jester's post, there's gonna be a wave of wacky predictions, such as "Bezos will deliver the "physician" to your location via drone, Warren will offer a Cherry Coke after your "examination" and Jamie Dimon will be laughing all the way to the bank.
I can't wait to get my prostate checked when I'm at work. Thanks guys.
-Chuck
Robert: Thanks for your input.
Gabe
Anyone have an opinion regarding what changes Bob Brinker will make to Model Portfolio III and the Income Portfolio tomorrow?
Since he is ultra concerned about a rise in interest rates, maybe he will add the Fidelity Floating Rate High Income Fund, FFRHX
It has a duration of only 0.24 years.
The downside is that this fund lost 16.5% in 2008....and the average bank loan fund lost 30%. So this is definitely not a low risk income fund.
Morningstar says: "What you get with bank loan funds like this one is, essentially no interest-rate risk because the coupons adjust with changes in interest rates. You are covered if there's a spike in interest rates, but you do get some credit risk because these are bank loans to companies and so there is some risk there."
Robert
@rjb Hi Robert, you mention that FFRHX lost 16.5% in 2008 and avg bank loan fund lost 30%....but in fall of 2008 worst recession ever stock funds were down well over 30% I had some that were down $50%....today and forward is a different economic environment so perhaps it makes better sense now ---time will tell....it's all about weighing the risk of staying with the existing bond path per Brinker or evaluating whether it makes more sense, less risk to go with his recommendations....I don't know the answer but interest rates are on the rise and the US debt too.
"@rjb Hi Robert, you mention that FFRHX lost 16.5% in 2008 and avg bank loan fund lost 30%....but in fall of 2008 worst recession ever stock funds were down well over 30% I had some that were down $50%....today and forward is a different economic environment so perhaps it makes better sense now ---time will tell....it's all about weighing the risk of staying with the existing bond path per Brinker or evaluating whether it makes more sense, less risk to go with his recommendations....I don't know the answer but interest rates are on the rise and the US debt too."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hi markjon,
Yes, stock funds were down as you say, well over 30%. The Vanguard S&P 500 Index fund was down 37% in 2008. If you owned bank loan funds that year, that fixed income fund would not have diversified your portfolio, which is what the fixed income portion of the portfolio is supposed to do.
For example, the Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund was up 5% that year. That's what the fixed income portion is supposed to do, diversify the portfolio so that when stocks tank, your overall portfolio is OK.
Experts like Larry Swedroe and many others would say that the fixed income side of the portfolio should only have high quality, low risk investments, and to take your risk on the stock side, not on the fixed income side.
Bank loan funds, and junk bond funds (like the Osterweis fund Brinker has in Model Portfolio III and the income portfolio) are not high quality, low risk investments.
But Brinker would say that the risk present today is interest rate risk, so he's willing to take credit risk by investing in lower quality fixed income investments.
You can invest in fixed income that has very little interest rate risk and very little to no credit risk, but the yield is very low.
We'll find out tomorrow what changes were made to the Portfolios!
Cheers,
Robert
.
The S&P 500 Index ended January up 5.7%.....
markjon said....."I don't know the answer but interest rates are on the rise"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I haven't heard Brinker address this, but when the federal funds rate increases..and that is supposed to happen 3 or 4 times this year...that increases the overnight interest rate.
That says nothing about what is going to happen to the rate on long term Treasuries and intermediate term Treasuries.
so when "rates" go up, we don't know what will happen to the yield curve, except that the overnight rate will go up.
The Morningstar fixed income managers of the year think that rates will go up 3 to 4 times this year, but they think the rate on the 30 year Treasury will go DOWN fairly significantly.
If that were to happen, then long bonds would go up pretty significantly.
Larry Swedroe has an article that touches on some of these things.
http://www.etf.com/sections/index-investor-corner/swedroe-rising-rates-increase-worries?nopaging=1
Swedroe: Rising Rates Increase Worries
the article was published just 5 days ago
Robert
WLS in Chicago dropping sports means no more preempting Brinker, Kudlow shows on the weekends IRWIN in Skokie
Robert....thanks for taking the time to post that link and ur comments....insightful article and good pt re: interest rates..I had to read it twice slowly to make sure I was understanding....this is how I learn! Best--Mark
rjb112 said: "I haven't heard Brinker address this, but when the federal funds rate increases..and that is supposed to happen 3 or 4 times this year...that increases the overnight interest rate.
That says nothing about what is going to happen to the rate on long term Treasuries and intermediate term Treasuries."
If the Fed continues to increase the rate of quantitative tightening (QT) (scheduled to be ramped up to full speed by this fall), it will likely also result in some change in intermediate-term interest rate increases. I don't know what will happen, but the 10 year treasury rate is already over 2.7%, the highest since 2014. QT has been discussed by Brinker from time to time where he points out that the increased rate of bond supply due to QT is scheduled to be comparable to the supply due to financing the national deficit.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmauldin/2018/01/02/the-biggest-economic-threat-in-2018-quantitative-tightening/#7dc09eec5ae4
O.k. we need to talk a little of the rough economics. We remember '08, but recall the horrible prospect of governance and negative outlook of the future. Flash forward to present day as we are still attempting to distill the change. Think of the U.S. becoming the largest exporter of energy. The tremendous impact on our economy as a result of lighten regulation burden and liability. The impact of an improvement of our tax code to economics. Having some iron within trade negations. Understanding the American underpinning of human capital being motivated for good. Pushing back on our enemies and rewarding our friends. Utilizing communication channels other than old main stream that have drifted to activist politics. You understand we are living in historical times and although our investments are always placed to advantage low risk and better returns, we need to put some retrospect with historical averages. My opinion we are headed to a very rewarding investment period.
Since we have so much technological change coming our way no other country can adapt as quick and take advantage of the opportunity. Thank you business titans of change that are motivated to maximize their competence and instincts for success and profit. We do know that having a ton of money has little to do with life span of happiness, but it does stroke the ego and motivation. Thank you rich people for taking me along with your success.
I'm not saying these same change agents wouldn't be as motivated by fiats of central control and the demand to share wealth. I'm sure they would be happy to be conform to bureaucratic governance and popularity. That's why Venezuela is doing so good.
Does anyone know of any better CD rates than the 12 months, 2% APY at Synchrony Bank? I used to be with PenFed until the middle of last year when their rates fell behind by about 1/4 percent. I ladder between 10K and 100K at Synchrony so minimums are not an issue. Thank you, Jack
Hello.
If you heard Bob say "Melt Up" on Sunday, it's the first time I can remember him using that term. In very short, it's selling bonds and taking the proceeds and throwing it into equities to capture the upward volatility/gain while simultaneously driving bonds cheaper and thereby increasing rates/yields. Bob said something to the effect "if you believe in the Melt-Up..." but i didn't hear the rest.
This link below, to me is the best explanation about bonds in a historic & current market explanation. The interviewers are horrid.
I believe "every" word this fellow, Richard Duncan, said. I say that with conviction as my thought process about bonds align with his, but he states it more clearly than I could even attempt.
It's 45 minutes in length, but I guarantee you will not be disappointed. I highly recommend.
https://www.theinvestorspodcast.com/episodes/tip173-stock-market-melt-up-w-richard-duncan/
To Anonymous - Regarding Synchrony Bank and CD's.
A buddy from Texas sent me this info. His Synchrony rate/period was the same as yours. And, he said "Navy Federal, if you have access, has a 2.25% 15 month CD up to 50k offer. They also offer a 3% 1 year CD for 3k max, but open one for you and your other half if you have one to get 6k at 3%. This is what I do for my emergency savings."
Hope that helps.
"Does anyone know of any better CD rates than the 12 months, 2% APY at Synchrony Bank? I used to be with PenFed until the middle of last year when their rates fell behind by about 1/4 percent. I ladder between 10K and 100K at Synchrony so minimums are not an issue. Thank you, Jack"
++++++++++++++++++++
Jack, are you only interested in the 12 months CD?
There's a 12 month CD with 2.11% interest rate at Virtual Bank, and a 2.10% CD for 12 months at Live Oak Bank.
You can get up to 3.0% for a 5-year CD
You can find these on bankrate.com
and also at depositaccounts.com
Robert
Duncan's podcast was interesting. He does a good job of explaining global economics, but sells a news letter subscription on the subject. Taking his explanations and seasoning with history, it looks like the U.S. is gradually backing itself into a financial corner with some future ugly global results. Duncan claims our fiat money is responsible for creation of much wealth and poor countries economic gain. It enabled us to finance wealth through national debt. Our economic system is now a government managed economy first started in WWI, but the value surged in WWII and never ceased. The Fed Reserve is a primary driver of our economy, nowadays.
We came close to an international depression in '08. When the U.S. sneezes the world catches a cold. China is totally dependent on our nation debt overspending.
Our monetary policy to inject max liquidity into a failing economy was a good move and one lessened we learned since the Great Depression debacle. Problem is during this period, citizens, also, put their faith in D.C. politics and were amazed at the benefits created by legislation, aka entitlements with magic political money.
The crux of problem seems to be the world economy is addicted to U.S. national debt spending. The dollar is guaranteed to be the standard as the result.
There is a growing division of wealth within U.S. as result of deficit spending. First, we need and can only exist within the global economy. This is nice since the trade is highly deflationary. This will facilitate our national debt growth with no inflation fears as low wages and low standard of living of the international competition to our workforce will grantee low inflation within the productive class. Think of Google hiring Indian programmers for example or international companies trading with lower cost off shore vendors.
Conversely, this phenomenon acts to propel equity values and place more wealth into the hands to those that own them.
Problem is the U.S. has an increasing hollow wealth system with ever need of increasing leverage. Also, we have a growing populace that falsely think that government and politics is a magic money machine.
Lessons learned. First this is such a complex and powerful long term problem we are helpless within this mega trend. We can not time this or adjust investments within our lifetime to some magic formulation of gold, bonds, and stocks. Do know that a strong dollar equals low cost commodities such as gold and crude oil. We have a uncharacteristic weak dollar, currently. Since, we are retiring so much government liquidity the dollar should or will soon strengthen. Know that this mega trend will force those into wealth creation into equities. Inflation fears are unfounded as this is a layover of bygone preglobal economy times.
The fed reserve needs to pull printed money out of system and currently they have a game plan to do that quite radically. This will dampened GNP growth. Meaning the fed will gladly pull money out as this result in more ammo ability upon the next great recession. The conflations of managed economy needs include: high national debt load, wealth spread, and global concerns. All of these factors look to screw the working class and cause national unrest. Politics will keep getting more vicious as citizens think it's merely a political problem. Actually, I suspect the activity is designed that way. We should have more volatility, but only if governance has a bad call. Meaning the road to reset is a narrow path with much hazard. I do think we have the best in class to handle the problem and that's a good thing.
What I would do for bump up in security is to pay off all indebtedness. Keep money in equities for the most part. Invest a little in oil or gold at strong dollar times. Lower your cost of living and look to become more self sufficient. Make sure you enjoy yourself with balance of lifestyle. Time is your most precious resource.
The 10 year is hovering around 2.75%.......not a good sign!
Gabe
Today we will find out what changes Brinker made to his fixed income fund recommendations. These changes will show up in Model Portfolio III and the Income Portfolio
Robert
gabe said...
The 10 year is hovering around 2.75%.......not a good sign!
Gabe
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Who knows Gabe, maybe in the end this will be good for savers and the many people who prefer to just save/invest in things like Certificates of Deposit in the bank. They have not been able to get decent interest rates in many years.
I remember when CDs used to pay very acceptable interest rates, even after inflation.
Currently inflation is 2% and an 18 month Certificate of Deposit in the bank pays about 2% interest. So you make nothing after inflation, and after you pay taxes on the interest, you are not keeping up with inflation.
But I know what you are saying and it's a good point.
But right now the S&P 500 is up 0.39% at 1:18 pm EST
Cheers,
Robert
rjb112 said...
"Today we will find out what changes Brinker made to his fixed income fund recommendations. These changes will show up in Model Portfolio III and the Income Portfolio."
I went online and looked at the change. I will allow Honeybee to decide when is the appropriate time to specify the change. All I will say is that he decided to lower the duration in a manner that I don't think anyone was expecting.
Are options based funds a stronger buy, better hedged for more volatility in 2018? IRWIN in Skokie
Greetings all. First time poster here. What do you speculate that Bob's plans are for getting back into longer term bonds? It seems like he's going to wait for rates to normalize and then get back in after the fund net asset values have bottomed out. Is there an advantage to this if you plan to keep the bonds longer than the fund duration? Thanks!
English grammar lesson for the day: Drudge has a headline: "Apple Sells Less iPhones."
Should be: "Apple Sells Fewer iPhones."
What is the difference between fewer and less?
According to usage rules, fewer is only to be used when discussing countable things. "Less" is used for things you cannot count. Less money, less honesty, less noise as examples. If you can count it, go for fewer.
Now back to our regular programming.
Unknown: Bob the Market Timer waiting for bond prices to "bottom out," will likely be a repeat of his massive failure to call the stock market bottom in 2008. But then, maybe he's finally got his crystal ball fixed.
Nobody ever knows where the bottoms are until some time AFTER they've happened. That said, my bond-heavy portfolio's duration is around 4.5 years and I have no plans to move anything. But YMMV.
Oh BTW, welcome to Honey's Blog.
Bluce said...
Unknown: Bob the Market Timer waiting for bond prices to "bottom out," will likely be a repeat of his massive failure to call the stock market bottom in 2008. But then, maybe he's finally got his crystal ball fixed.
Nobody ever knows where the bottoms are until some time AFTER they've happened.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Two thumbs up to that.
"Nobody ever knows where the bottoms are until some time AFTER they've happened"
It is unlikely that 'waiting for bond prices to bottom out' will work out very well.
And it could take years......
It could be a very long wait
I don't think that anyone can successfully time interest rates. At least not consistently
Robert
Congrats to AAPL and AMZN.
Gabe
.
Note to EColi....I am not going to publish your note until I am ready to tell my readers exactly what the changes were that Brinker made in Marketimer.
I despise the way Brinker "discusses" information from Marketimer on Moneytalk in such a way as to make those who don't let him pick their pockets, feel like second-class citizens.
All I will say about the "bond fund" change right now (one day after the newsletter was published) is that it is so insignificant as to be laughable - IMO.
Jim explained it well - all Brinker did was fractionally lower duration. IMO, to increase interest and give him something to toot his timing horn about.
He's been wrong for over 4 years now, so he needs to change reset his "timing" record, and this is the least he could do to accomplish that.
I have previously published Brinker's three bond fund holdings in the fixed income and balanced portfolios, so anyone who owns those three can easily make their own adjustment if they feel their total duration is too high.
.
From Fox Business this morning:
U.S. employers added 200,000 jobs in January, beating expectations, led by more gains in construction and manufacturing. Average hourly earnings jumped 2.9% the fastest pace since 2009. The unemployment rate held steady at 4.1%.
I look forward to Sunday's Moneytalk to hear if Brinker talks about the market selloff this week and whether he thinks it is the beginning of mid-term election year correction. My guess is that Brinker will only be live for two hours and then take off to watch the Super Bowl. I think in recent years Brinker also takes off the Sunday after the Super Bowl so this will most likely be the last we hear from him for a couple of weeks.
Am I fortunate in dollar averaging out of the market throughout 2017 and in the first month of 2018! during periods of high run ups.
Gabe
Two (2) horses going Sat.
Gabe
Gabe, what's your guidance? I remember you saying you were at 75% equity at the end of 2017, and your equity % had actually risen? Then how could you be dollar cost averaging out while it rose? Your name is in the middle of me-gabe-ar by the way.
The Total Stock Market closed at a bit above 2%.........just noise!
Gabe
I should of said the the Total Stock Market closed DOWN a bit above 2%......just noise!
Gabe
Confused: What I said that was my equity position was in the low 70% throughout 2017 and rising and I took a sliver off as we got these market jumps until the big move in early Jan and I moved twice given the fact my equity position (total markets domestic and foreign) plus individual holdings AMZN, AAPL, etc moved way higher than the markets named above. Sorry.
Gabe
My guy, Wesbury says add to holdings. This is not a heart attack, just heartburn. Put some dry powder to work today.
Pavlov’s Cat
After today's drop. The S & P 500 Index is now up 3.31% YTD
http://us.spindices.com/indices/equity/sp-500/
Amazon's earning beat allowed it to gain nearly 3%
Volatility is increasing.
Expect some rebound gains early next week then renewed selling.
Gabe congratulations on your Market timing. Seems like right after a big correction move you've timed the market perfectly again and again.
As a follow up to Honey's post about the S&P up 5.7% in January........history shows that when the S&P is up more than 5% in January it has never finished the year lower, 12 out of 12 times (I like those odds). Of the 12 years it has occurred, the average annual gain has been 25%!!!
I feel a rebound early next week.
HOLY BITCOIN BATMAN!
Hey, if you feel bad about the stock market, well things could be worse.
From Article on Seeking Alpha:
---------------------------------------------------
Crypto: That escalated quickly. Crypto traders will be tempted to catch the falling knife this week as regulatory concerns continue to shake out confidence in the burgeoning market.
The impact of Facebook's (NASDAQ:FB) broad ban on crypto-currency advertising is another wildcard to consider.
7-day crypto scorecard:
Bitcoin -20%
Ripple -25%
Ethereum -12%,
Bitcoin Cash -24%
Litecoin -22%
Cardano -34%
NEM -34%
NEO -11%
TRON -38%
Stellar -33%
IOTA -22%.
JC
Josie: Do you think that Gabe will go down in the history books as the first person to successfully time the market?? *
* For market timing to be considered a viable tactic, it must be done consistently through several market cycles. Otherwise, it's just luck.
Josie/Bluce: It was not my intent to time the market........My goal was to decrease my equity exposure as the market moved higher.
And so I sold periodically in 2017 and the beginning of 2018. I am now sitting at about 71% in equities in which I feel comfortable.
On to the racing front......Two (2) horses ran Sat.......both ran out of the money. You win some and lose some.
Gabe
" For market timing to be considered a viable tactic, it must be done consistently through several market cycles. Otherwise, it's just luck."
----
Actually not luck if he was following his asset allocation rules.
Also depends on what he sold - If Amazon and Apple were responsible for pushing up his equity allocation - then good on apple sale not so good on Amazon of course depending on sale price.
Never hurts to take some profits off the table after a big run. It's not rocket science.
smile
Looks like Gabe is smart and takes profits at nose bleed melt ups, he took the low hanging fruit. Good job!
Anyone think BB will sell before the next crash?
smile: I was just responding to Josie's remark that he was "market timing." Gabe himself never said that he was. I've been doing the same thing, decreasing equity exposure over the past maybe five years from 60% to 35%.
But that's mostly because I've gradually moved into preservation mode. If I turn out to be the richest guy in the local graveyard, maybe Bobby will mention me on the show.
Anyone think BB will sell before the next crash?
No, last time he kept his PERMA bull throughout 2008-2009 crash all the way to the bottom, no need to change his strategy now.
J Wales,
A great number of subscribers pay $185 a year to get that “communique “!
You know, the one that never came last time.
Pavlov’s Cat
Yellen's move on Wells was not a good omen for the financials come Monday. The market might continue to move down the toilet.
Gabe
1. Wages are creeping up. We'll see how inflation fares for 2018.
2. Housing overall is still affordable compared to the past 15 years, based on the price-to-annual income ratio. The ratio should be no greater than 3. See the below link and note that 40 out of 78 metro areas have a ratio nearly equal to, or less, than 3.
https://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/region_rankings.jsp?title=2018®ion=021
3. S&P 500's Shiller PE ratio and Trailing-Twelve-Months (ttm) PE ratio are still relatively high but about 28% below the March 2000 levels.
4. The S&P 500 has only risen about 3.5% annually for the last 18 years. Combine that with a 2% annual dividend, the S&P 500's rate of return has only been about 5.5% for the last 18 years.
AD
So maybe a 5-10% correction then on to 3k s&p & beyond once the rising rate scare subsides. Buffet has been off the grid lately. He's got cash waiting for a sale.
Rush speaks often of something like, I never assume anything anymore and will hold final analysis to suspect ulterior motives, especially within the political spectrum. Also, was listening to Kudlow discussion of FBI when he mentioned most were shocked to think the FBI politically tainted. "We probably shouldn't have been", and then he clicked off the federal department bureaucrats that are wholly aligned with left political. It's like a force of nature for this to continue. This perhaps is why Roosevelt first said government employees should never be allowed to unionize. Also, Newt offered a historical reference to Watergate, but said this is different and does not bode well for the health of nation when our civil servants are willing to offer up their trust and power to political outcomes. I did read a very good financial analysis of our investment risk whereupon the guy said nothing much to worry about, "If you want something to worry about worry about this." and he linked to a very robust political rant on using all forces available to put the country on a different path. Sorry, for the politics, but I do think this will greatly impact our future and probably unstoppable as history teaches us. My guess it could develop soon. Let's say something trips up Trump wherein the force of politics can really leverage a young new promising executive with modern thinking skills. We've seen this come from behind blindsided achievement before. Saying this, if the mid term turns into a landslide, be prepared. We might be on a precipice of change either way?
I did a review of Wellesley as compared to the international version. This is a new fund is starting to perform as advertised within recent history. It looks like we need do need to stretch out to international and achieve a bump up in stability. I do see the more successful permanent portfolios like to place some dollars within those funds to maximize diversity or linkage to U.S. stocks. Bonds including foreign, is the classic example, but small cap foreign is another separate beast as compared to S&P 500. Emerging markets and total stock market are all attractive at some percentage for this same reason.
Credible info to my evaluations, say the bond bubble is hyped up. The historical risk of such is true, but in comparison of market losses these financial instruments still do their job within offering more stability. Safety, within retirement is not a forgone conclusion to employ earnings and avoid equities. Over the long run more safety within equities if managing properly/conservatively. Best to be 70% - 85% rung in general, but do allow for the general investment environment to sway percentages.
Post a Comment