The value of technical analysis of stock market trends

Someone asked; how do you use technical analysis (charting) as an investment manager?

I’ll share a simple and succinct example.

Below is a chart of a popular stock market index. What do you see when you look at it?

I see an overall uptrend based on this time frame, which is only year-to-date.

I see it’s experiencing a normal-looking interruption in the short term, so far.

As such, I’m looking for signs of which direction it’s going to move, by observing which direction it does move.

Without adding a single “technical indicator” for statistical or quantitative analysis, I see the stock market using this proxy has been drifting generally sideways since February.

spy spx ytd trend following

However, it has made higher highs and higher lows, so it’s a confirmed uptrend.

Looking closer, are shorter term, I see the green highlighted area is also in a non-trending state, bound by a range. I’m looking for it to break out; up or down.

setting stop loss for stocks

If it breaks down, I will look for it to pause around the red line I drew, because it’s the prior low as well as an area of trading before that. I would expect to see some support here, where buyer demand could overcome selling pressure.

If it doesn’t, I’d say:

Look out below!

Do I trade-off this? Nope.

Am I telling you to? Nope.

But, if I wanted to trade off it, I could. This is an index and the index is an unmanaged index and cannot be invested in directly. But, for educational purposes, assume I could enter here. Before I did, I would decide my exit would be at least a break below the red line. Using that area as an exit to say “the trend has changed from higher lows to lower lows, which is down, I’ll exit if it stays below the line.

Of course, the same strategy can be applied quantitatively into a computerized trading system. I could create an algorithm that defines the red line as an equation and create a computer program that would alert me to its penetration.

This is a succinct and simple glimpse into concepts of how I created my systems.

I hope you find it useful.

I developed skills at charting before I created quantitative systems. If someone doesn’t believe in either method, they probably lack the knowledge and skill to know better.

Let me know if we can help!

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm. Investing involves risk, including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Investor fear has been driving the stock market down

I like to observe the return drivers of price trends. Though I primarily focus on the direction of the price trend and volatility, I also consider what drives the price trend.

Yesterday I suggested the stock market was at a point of pause and possible reversal back up in The stock market is holding its breadth… for now.  I shared some examples of how the percent of stocks in a positive trend had declined to a point that could indicate the selling in the near term could be drying up.

So far, today’s sharp reversal up seems to confirm at least a short term low.

Up until today, the S&P 500 stock index was down about -6% off its high. In May it dropped -8% before reversing back up to a new high. I express these drawdowns in the % off high chart below. This is year-to-date, since January 1.

Just for reference, this -6% decline looks more similar to May when I expand the time frame to 1 year instead of just year-to-date. We also see the October to December waterfall decline was a much deeper -20%.

Of course, if you look close enough, the pattern prior to the much steeper and deeper part of that fall looks similar to now, with the price trend testing the prior low, recovering, then falling sharply another -10%. I’m not pointing this out to say it will happen again, but instead that it’s always a possibility, so risk management is essential.

What is driving this decline?

Fear.

It’s that simple.

Some are afraid of another recession signaled by an inverted yield curve, others of the Trump Tweets, others by the Fed lowering interest rates or not doing it fast enough. I’ve heard some hedge funds are afraid China will invade Hong Kong, others are concerned of the China tariffs. Some people probably wake up afraid and fear everything that can possibly happen, as such, they experience it as if it did.

I prefer to face my fears and do something about them.

Investors have reached an extreme level of fear in the past few weeks as evidenced by the -6% decline in the stock index. We can also see this reflected in the investor sentiment poll. The AII Sentiment Survey shows optimism is at an unusually low level and pessimism is at an unusually high level for the 2nd consecutive week.

investor sentiment extreme trading

Such extreme levels of investor sentiment often proceed trend reversals. So, these extreme fear measures along with the breadth measures I shared yesterday, I’m not surprised to see the stock market reverse up sharply today.

Another interesting measure is the Fear & Greed Index, which is a combination of multiple sentiment indicators believed to measure investor sentiment. The Fear & Greed Index has reached the “Extreme Fear” level, so by this measure, fear is driving prices.

fear greed index

Over time, we can see how the Fear & Greed Index has oscillated up and down, swinging from fear to greed and back to fear again. I highlight the current level has reached the low point it typically does before it reverses up again, with the exceptions of the sharp panics in 2018.

advisor money manager using fear greed index extreme behavior

I have my own proprietary investor sentiment models, but here I share some that are simple and publicly available. I’m not suggesting you trade-off of these, as I don’t, either, but instead use them to help modify your investor behavior. For example, rather than use these indicators to signal offense or defense, investors may use them to alert them to their own herding behavior. Most of the time, we are better off being fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.

These measures aren’t quite robust enough to be timing indicators by themselves, my signals are coming from other systems and I’m using these to illustrate what’s driving it.

Over the past 12 months, as of right now the stock index is up 2.48%. That’s including today’s 1.5% gain.

Only time will tell if it holds the line, but as I’ve zoomed in to a 3-month time frame, we can see the first line of support that needs to hold.

We are long and strong at this point, so;

Giddy up!

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm. Investing involves risk, including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Argentina stock market loss is a reminder of single country ETF risk

If we looked at the MSCI Argentina ETF on July 4th, its gains year to date were astonishing.

Below is a chart of both iShares MSCI Argentina & Global Exposure ETF (AGT) and Global X MSCI Argentina ETF (ARGT) price trend from January 1st to July 4th.

The Global X MSCI Argentina ETF (ARGT) invests in among the largest and most liquid securities with exposure to Argentina. Both of the ETFs intend to track the MSCI All Argentina 25/50 Index.

On the iShares MSCI Argentina and Global Exposure ETF website, iShares highlights the theme:

Why AGT? Currently, the second-largest economy in South America, Argentina has recently implemented policies to make its market friendlier to foreign investors (World Bank. Based on 2015 GDP)

However, International investing involves risks, including risks related to foreign currency, limited liquidity, less government regulation and the possibility of substantial volatility due to adverse political, economic or other developments. These risks often are heightened for investments in emerging/developing markets or in concentrations of single countries.

Yesterday, the ETF priced in U.S. dollars dropped -24%. Just like that, in a single day, most of its year-to-date gain evaporated.

 at Bloomberg reports “Argentina’s 48% Stock Rout Second-Biggest in Past 70 Years” and;

  • Only Sri Lanka has suffered a worse single-day drop since 1950
  •  South America nation endured similar one-day sell-off in 2002

Single countries can be subject to the possibility of substantial volatility and loss of value due to adverse political events.

Argentina’s peso also fell -15% after a surprising primary election outcome. CNN says It seems investors how populists could replace the country’s current, business-friendly government.

Bloomberg goes on to say:

“That marked the second-biggest one-day rout on any of the 94 stock exchanges tracked by Bloomberg going back to 1950. Sri Lanka’s bourse tumbled more than 60% in June 1989 as the nation was engulfed in a civil war.”

The top 5 shows 1-day percent declines from -36% to -62%:

Global X MSCI Argentina ETF AGT ARGT

 

You can probably see why I say we must actively manage the possibility of loss through tactical risk management methods. Tactical risk management methods may include predefined exits, hedging, and position size control. Of the 40 or so single country ETFs I include in my global universe of ETFs, it necessarily requires the realization that any single country can result in a loss like Argentina.

 

I built my risk management systems with the possibility of these enormous losses in mind, so we can probably be more prepared than those with no plan to direct and control the exposure to the possibility of loss.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm. Investing involves risk, including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

All investors are market timers

All investors are market timers.

It isn’t just tactical traders.

I’ve been hearing more about “market timing” recently from some investment advisors saying they aren’t market timers.

But they are.

We all are.

And timing is everything. Like it or not.

I start off with general definitions of market timing from a Google search.

According to Wikipedia:

Market timing is the strategy of making buying or selling decisions of financial assets (often stocks) by attempting to predict future market price movements. The prediction may be based on an outlook of market or economic conditions resulting from technical or fundamental analysis.”

This definition indicates “by attempting to predict future market price movements” is what draws the distinction of “market timing.”

Next is Investopedia:

“What Is Market Timing?

Market timing is a type of investment or trading strategy. It is the act of moving in and out of a financial market or switching between asset classes based on predictive methods. These predictive tools include following technical indicators or economic data, to gauge how the market is going to move.

So, it seems the distinction they make for “market timing” is a prediction.

Yet, everyone must necessarily make a prediction about the future to invest or trade.

For the passive indexers who buy and hold index funds, they necessarily make a prediction those funds past performance will resemble future results. They assume the stock and bond markets will have a positive return over the long term. The truth is, that is not a certainty, but a prediction on their part. In fact, choosing a time to rebalance their asset allocation is market timing, too, especially if they do it in response to price trend changes.

For value investors who actively look to add stocks they believe have been undervalued by the market, and/or trade for less than their intrinsic values, they are necessary market timing. When they sell a stock that has reached full value, they are timing the exit. It’s market timing. Some may even reduce or hedge overall stock exposure when the broad stock indexes are overvalued, which is also a timing decision. The more aggressive value investors, such as a value hedge fund, may use leverage to buy more stocks after their prices fall in a bear market. It’s market timing.

For momentum investors. it’s about following the historical trend. Momentum investing is a system of buying stocks or other securities that have had high returns over the past three to twelve months, and selling those that have had poor returns over the same period. It’s market timing as it assumes on average they’ll achieve more gains from the positive trends than losses from the negative trends. Extrapolating the recent past into the future is necessarily market timing.

What about non-directional trading strategies like certain options spreads and volatility trading? They still require and entry and an exit and timing the trade. Being invested in the stock market, buy the way, is explicitly short volatility, so when volatility expands stocks usually fall.

I want to be long volatility when it’s rising and short or out when it isn’t. I want to be in an options positions that on average result in asymmetry: more profit, less loss.

For example, an options straddle is a non-directional trading strategy that incorporates buying a call option and a put option on the same stock or ETF with the same strike and the same expiration. With a non-directional trade, we may have a two in three chance of making money because we can profit if the stock moves up or down. It requires movement, which is a prediction of the price expanding and timing it. It’s market timing.

Rather than trying to debate against “market timing” it seems more useful to admit we are all doing it in all we do, one way or another.

I embraced that long ago, and for me, I realize timing is everything.

But that doesn’t mean it always has to be perfect timing, either.

Asymmetry results from the average gains overwhelming the average losses, so the timing could have no edge if the profit-taking and loss cutting systems are robust.

All investors are market timers. The market timers who make the biggest riskiest bet are the passive index asset allocators who make no attempt to manage their risk, assuming past performance is indicative of future results.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Global Asset Allocation hasn’t done any better

I’ve been hearing of how different active management strategies haven’t performed as well as the S&P 500 stock index the past five years. I can’t say it’s a big surprise since the SPX has been well into an overvalued level since 2013.

iShares Global Asset Allocation ETFs are an interesting example for GAA. Each of them has a percent in stocks and a percent in bonds. According to iShares:

Each iShares Core Allocation Fund offers exposure to U.S. stocks, international stocks, and bonds at fixed weights and holds an underlying portfolio of iShares Core Funds Investors can choose the portfolio that aligns with their specific risk considerations like investment time horizon; for example, those with longer investment time horizons may consider the iShares Core Aggressive Allocation ETF.

Each ETF has a fixed allocation to stocks and bonds.

ishares global allocation ETF

So, the difference between them as they go from conservative to aggressive is what percent is in stocks vs. bonds. iShares Core Allocation brochure says these ETFs harness the experience of BlackRock and the efficiency of iShares ETFs to get a broad mix of bonds and global stocks. BlackRock is the largest asset manager in the world, so if it’s global allocation you want, I’m guessing these may be hard to beat. I’ve not invested in them nor do I recommend them, but I think they make for a good example of what can or can’t be accomplished with Global Asset Allocation.

Global Asset Allocation hasn’t done much better than alternative strategies. Over the past five years, the total return for the most aggressive ETF is 31%. Simple math says that’s around 6% over five years.

So, by this measure, Global Asset Allocation doesn’t come close to putting 100% of your money into a stock index fund. Below we see the SPY, for example, has doubled the iShares aggressive allocation and tripled the conservative allocation.

But, who invests all their money in the stock index all the time?

I don’t believe I know anyone who does.

Why?

A picture is worth a thousand words. The stock index has declined over -50% twice since 1999, so it could certainly do it again.

Next, we compare the S&P 500 which is fully invested in stocks all the time to their conservative allocation in terms of % off high to observe historical drawdowns. Clearly, there is a huge difference in the downside risk as well as the upside reward. For a conservative investor who can’t handle -50% drawdowns or more than, say -20%, investing all their money in something that declines that much isn’t an option.

When the valuation level is so expensive, it increases the possibility a big bear market may happen again.

The Shiller PE Ratio for example, is the second-highest it’s ever been. In fact, the only two times it was higher was Black Tuesday before the largest crash in American history and the 1995-99 bubble. This has also been the longest economic expansion in U.S. history.

Shiller PE Ratio

So, we shouldn’t be surprised to see another bear market and recession in the years ahead. However, my main point here is these higher valuation levels suggest higher risk levels, so many active management strategies have probably taken less risk in the past five years.

But, it doesn’t seem Global Asset Allocation from the largest asset manager in the world hasn’t done any better.

May as well be honest and realistic about it.

Not convinced?

Think you or your investment advisor can do better than iShares managed by BlackRock at Global Asset Allocation?

Ok, I’ve added four more well known Global Asset Allocation funds. To keep the chart clean, I’m only comparing them to the top-performing iShares ETF, which of course is the most aggressive since it’s a bull market.

None of these funds have achieved a better result. The two best known active global allocation funds, BlackRock Global Allocation, and PIMCO All Asset have achieved a total return of only 15% the past five years.

The past five years have been very unusual. It’s a period of the longest economic expansion in U.S. history and the longest bull market.

It isn’t going to last forever.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

The volatility expansion is here…

Since I mentioned it a week ago, volatility has indeed expanded.

In fact, it’s increased 32% today alone.

Implied volatility as observed by the VIX has almost doubled the level it was a week ago.

The Fear & Greed Index is now at the “Extreme Fear” level. VIX is one of the signals it uses to measure the degree of investor panic.

how to use fear greed index

Clearly, the options market has now priced in more expected movement in the range of prices. When I mentioned it a week ago, it implied a 12% range, now it’s 23%.

The S&P 500 stock index is down 3.35% today.

stock market 2019

We’ll see if this is enough panic selling today to drive prices low enough to attract new buying demand.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Trend following: no system will adapt perfectly to all conditions all the time.

I just came across this Wall Street Journal article about trend following as I was searching for something.

Jan 9, 2019 – Trendfollowing investment strategies—a computer-based way of … Trendfollowing algorithms turn bearish at swiftest pace since 2008 as …

 

Below that headline, when I clicked on it, was:

“Trend-following algorithms turn bearish at swiftest pace since 2008 as machines steer more trades”

Clearly, since publication January 9th it wasn’t a productive signal from trend-following if we look at the S&P 500 stock index and mark the date of the article as I did with the green highlight below.

trend following performance 2019 stocks stock market

The last several years has been more challenging for trend following systems and investment managers applying the strategy. The challenge is more an issue for less experienced portfolio managers and their investors if they’ve never operated through periods when trends and volatility is more hostile for the strategy.

Trend following performed well during late 2007 to early 2009 period. Most investment managers executing the strategy were CTA’s applying it to futures contracts as “Managed Futures”, though a few of us were doing it with stocks and a global universe of ETFs.

This performance during the crash gave trend following a reputation of being a risk management strategy, or at least a crisis risk hedge. While trend following does have the potential to capitalize on sustained trends and avoid or profit from downtrends, periods of changing trends can be more of a challenge. It depends on the time frame we apply and how we use the signals from trend-following indicators.

According to CME about trend following:

“Trend following systems aim to identify and exploit sustained capital flows across asset classes as markets move back out of and into equilibrium, often after prolonged imbalances. Other CTA styles thrive on volatility and choppy price action that accompanies these flows, as well as a variety of other market phenomena.”

They go on to say:

“The market conditions that have traditionally been difficult for CTAs employing trend following strategies have been those in which there is no follow through on trends, such that prices are mean-reverting. As a result, many CTAs incorporated additional strategies in an effort to capture these types of market characteristics as a complement to their trend following.”

Trend following trading systems are primarily expected to prosper most during periods of strong, clear, and sustained price trends. Some market conditions may be difficult for these strategies. We’ve observed most trend-following strategies have experienced somewhat hostile conditions over the past five years.

A price trend is a price that drifts in one direction or another. Volatility refers to the day-to-day range in price swings. A market condition can be trending or non-trending, volatile or smooth. A condition of strong, clear, sustained, price trends with low volatility may be a more pleasant experience that is easier to stick with. Just the opposite is a market condition with no clear directional price trend that is very volatile in its day-to-day price swings. If the time frame doesn’t match up well, these trend following systems will get whipsawed as they enter a trend just before it reverses back down, or it exits a trend at a low price before it reverses up.

Volatile market conditions are typically hostile conditions for both passive and active strategies. A risk management objective may be to reduce exposure to volatility during these periods. Even a condition of strong, clear, and sustained price trends may be so volatile in its day-to-day range that it may shake us out of otherwise profitable positions. On the other hand, a smooth, clear, sustained price trend may be easier to stick with, but volatility is sometimes low at the end of a sustained trend as investors are complacent just before it reverses.

Although we’ve observed most trend-following and momentum strategies have experienced somewhat unfriendly conditions over the past five years, those of us who have applied them over many market cycles for two decades or more know the systems don’t always match the trends perfectly. However, we have confidence over enough market cycles and trends these methods can be robust and result in asymmetric returns. Sometimes the asymmetric returns are achieved by avoiding large losses as my own systems did 2007 to 2009 and other times by exposure that results in relative outperformance and alpha as I saw 2005 to 2008.

Investment programs can be designed to fit different market conditions, but no system will adapt perfectly to all conditions all the time. An expectation of perfection may be a risk to the investor’s capital if it causes the investor to abandon a good program during a losing streak or drawdown. What investors should focus on is what results the investment manager has achieved over long periods of full market cycles.

For me, I have known that no system will adapt perfectly to all conditions all the time, so I manage my systems to get closer to what I want. I have automated systems that we operated mechanically. That is, the computerized trading programs generate signals and trades that can be executed systematically without any thought or oversight if we wanted. However, I’ve been operating dozens of these systems for 16 years now and was a chartist for years before that. I’ve learned how the systems operated having observed thousands of their signals in real-time in real life. From that, along with already having some skill at charting price trends, I’ve developed intuition about when my systems may be in hostile conditions. As such, in my primary portfolio, I play a shell game with them – pun intended. That is, I observe market conditions such as trend direction, momentum, and volatility expansion and contraction and decide which system to apply, when. The variations are based on trend following vs. countertrend, trend time frames shorter-term to longer-term, and different equations and algorithms to define the trend. These systems are also applied to different universes of markets like individual stocks, sector ETFs, international, bonds, etc.

Back to the WSJ article:

Computer Models to Investors- Short Everything WSJ Trend Following article

Fortunately, I didn’t follow that trend.

For example, the chart below is the period leading up to the date of the Wall Street Journal article “Computer Models to Investors: Short Everything” so we know how the stock index looked at the time.

trend following sell signal 2019

Charting the trend another way, here is the same index and time frame, but past on its % off high, which is the drawdown. We observe the stock market index declined nearly -20% from October 2018 to January 2019 and then recovered about 7% of the loss by the date WSJ published the article.

stock market drawdown decline 2018

If an investment manager had gone short as the article suggested trend-following models signaled, they would be down about -17% since. Of course, those models could have signaled to reverse from short to long before now.

Fortunately, I didn’t follow that trend. I participated in the last 2018 downtrend more than I prefer, but I’ve since captured the gains in 2019 to make up for it. It’s because in late December I was buying when others were fearful. I increased exposure at lower prices and have held it since. I applied my countertrend strategy, not my trend following strategy. How did I know to do that? I didn’t know for sure, but my analysis suggested a high probability of an asymmetric entry as I shared in An exhaustive analysis of the U.S. stock market and then later in a following An exhaustive stock market analysis… continued. 

I sometimes share my observations of market conditions here, but I always write them for myself. Having done this for over two decades now, I don’t underestimate the edge gained from the ability to revisit what I really observed and believed at the time and how it all unfolded. As I suggested in Investors follow the trend after the fact, count on it, 

ALL TIME NEW HIGH STOCK MARKET STOCKS 2019

Here we are seven months later and investor sentiment has changed dramatically from absolute panic last December to optimistic and that’s driving prices higher. Investors see headlines of the stock indexes finally reaching all-time new highs again, which probably reinforces their optimism the higher it trends.

So, most trend-following models have already signaled “buy” and be participating in the uptrend. Again, no system will adapt perfectly to all conditions all the time. An expectation of perfection may be a risk to the investor’s capital if their expectations and ego cause them to abandon a good investment program during a losing streak or drawdown.

Self-discipline and persistence seem to be required by all strategies.

We’ll see how it all unfolds from here…

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell any security. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or any recommendations made by the firm.. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information and data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

A few observations on Global Macro and Trend Following

A few observations on #GlobalMacro and #TrendFollowing

As I see it, trend following can be global macro and global macro can be trend following. I call my primary strategy “global tactical,” which is an unconstrained, go-anywhere combination of them both and multiple strategies.

There is no way to predict the future direction of the stock market with macroeconomics. There are far too many variables and the variability of those variables change and evolve. The way to deal with it is to simply evolve with the changing trends and direct and control risk.

For me, it’s about Man + Machine. I apply my proprietary tactical trading systems and methods to a global opportunity set of markets to find potentially profitable price trends. Though my computerized trading systems are systematic, I use their signals at my discretion.

I believe my edge in developing my systems and methods began by first developing skill at charting price trends and trading them successfully. If I had started out just testing systems, I’d only have data mined without the understanding I have of trends and how markets interact.

Without the experience of charting market trends starting in the 90’s I probably would have overfitted backtested systems as it seems others have. A healthy dose of charting skill and experience helped me to avoid systems that relied on trends that seemed unlikely to repeat.

For example, if one had developed a backtested system in 2000 without experience charting those prior trends in real-time, they’d have focused on NASDAQ stocks like Technology. The walk forward would have been a disaster. We can say the same for those who backtested post-2008.

All portfolio management investment decision-making is very challenging as we never know for sure what’s going to happen next. The best we can do is apply robust systems and methods based on a positive mathematical expectation and a dose of skilled intuition that comes with experience.

As such, ALL systems and methods are going to have conditions that are hostile to the strategy and periods you aren’t thrilled with the outcome. For me, self-discipline comes with knowledge, skill, and experience. I am fully committed, steadfast, and persistent in what I do.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information provided is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

The normal noise of the market?

We shouldn’t be surprised to see stock prices pull back closer to their average true range in the days ahead. Such a pullback or stall would be normal.

Below I highlight the strong momentum Technology sector XLK ETF as an example of stock prices in some sectors finally reaching their prior highs. In addition to the price trend reaching a point of potential overhead resistance at the prior high, we observe this trend is also outside the upper volatility band of average true range.

TECH SECTOR MOMENTUM XLK $XLK $IYW

Most of the time, we should expect to see a price trend stay within this range. If a price trend breaks out of the range higher or lower, it can be evidence of a trend change. In this case, the short term trend has been up since January, the intermediate trend has been sideways, non-trending and volatile since last September. Sine the short term trend has been an uptrend since January, I view the upside breakout above the volatility band a signal the trend may be more likely to pull back within the channel range.

The broad stock market S&P 500 index ETF SPY doesn’t look a lot different than the Technology sector, except it’s about -2% away from reaching its September 2018 high.

stock market SPY $SPY

The bottom line is, looking at the directional price trends they are up in the short term but reaching a point they could see some resistance from the prior highs. At the same time, my momentum systems suggest the trends are reaching an overbought level and the price and expanded outside their average true range channel.

A small short-term pullback in stock prices from here would be within the range I consider normal noise of the market.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information provided is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Giddy up…

As expected, the U.S. stock market declined briefly, then found enough buying enthusiasm to drive prices to a new breakout above the March high.

As I concluded in Strong stock market momentum was accompanied by broad participation:

“…though we shouldn’t be surprised to see short term weakness, we could suppose the longer term trend still has room to run.”

As we see in the chart below, while the U.S. stock market is trending with absolute momentum, the strongest relative momentum has been in other countries around the globe.

global macro asymmetric risk reward .jpg

Though my short term momentum systems signaled weeks ago the current uptrend may become exhausted and it did, the reversal back up and continuation since then appears bullish.

At this point, it appears some global stock markets are in uptrends and may have more room to run. For asymmetric risk/reward, I cut my losses short and let the winners run on.

Giddy up…

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information provided is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Welcome to March! A review of global asset allocation and global markets

In the first two months of 2019 global asset allocation has gained 4% to 8.6%. I use the iShares Core Global Allocation ETFs as a proxy instead of indexes since the ETFs are real world performance including costs. The four different allocations below represent different exposure to global stocks vs. bonds.

global asset allocation ETF ETFs asymmetric risk reward .jpg

I’m not advising anyone to buy or sell these ETFs, but instead using them as an example for what a broadly diversified global asset allocation portfolio looks like. Most financial advisors build some type of global asset allocation for their clients and try to match it with their risk tolerance. The more aggressive clients get more stocks and the most conservative clients get more bonds. Of course, this is just asset allocation, so the allocations are mostly fixed and do not change based on market risk/reward. This is very different than what I do, which is focus on asymmetric risk/reward by increasing and decreasing exposure to risk/reward based on my calculations of risk levels and the potential for reward. So, my system is global, but it’s tactical rotation rather than fixed allocation.

The iShares Core Allocation Funds track the S&P Target Risk Indexes. So, BlackRock is the portfolio manager managing the ETF and they are tracking S&P Target Risk Indexes. Here is their description:

S&P Dow Jones Indices’ Target Risk series comprises multi-asset class indices that correspond to a particular risk level. Each index is fully investable, with varying levels of exposure to equities and fixed income and are intended to represent stock and bond allocations across a risk spectrum from conservative to aggressive.

In other words, they each provide varying allocations to bonds and stocks. The Conservative model is more bonds, the Aggressive model is more stocks.

S&P Target Risk Conservative Index. The index seeks to emphasize exposure to fixed income, in order to produce a current income stream and avoid excessive volatility of returns. Equities are included to protect long-term purchasing power.

S&P Target Risk Moderate Index. The index seeks to provide significant exposure to fixed income, while also providing increased opportunity for capital growth through equities.

S&P Target Risk Growth Index. The index seeks to provide increased exposure to equities, while also using some fixed income exposure to dampen risk.

S&P Target Risk Aggressive Index. The index seeks to emphasize exposure to equities, maximizing opportunities for long-term capital accumulation. It may include small allocations in fixed income to enhance portfolio efficiency.

Below is an example of the S&P Target Risk Index allocations and the underlying ETFs they invest in. Notice their differences is 10% to 20% allocation between stocks and bonds.

Global Allocation Index Construction

These ETFs offer low-cost exposure to global asset allocation with varying levels of “risk,” which really means varying levels of allocations to bonds. I say they are “low-cost” because these ETFs only charge 0.25% including the ETFs they are invested in. Most financial advisors probably charge 1% for similar global asset allocation, not including trade commissions and the ETF or fund fees they invest in. Even the lowest fee advisors charge at least 0.25% plus the trade commissions and the fund fees they invest in. With these ETFs, investors who want long-only exposure all the time to global stock and bond market risk/return, they can get it in one low-cost ETF. However, they do come with the risks of being fully invested, all the time. These ETFs do not provide any absolute risk management.

As an unconstrained, go-anywhere, absolute return manager who does apply active risk management, I’m unconstrained from a fixed benchmark, so I don’t intend to track or “beat” a benchmark. I operate with the limitations of a fixed benchmark. My objective is to create as much total return I can within a given amount of downside risk so investors don’t tap out trying to achieve it. It doesn’t matter how much the return is if inveestors tap out during drawdowns before it’s achieved. However, I consider global asset allocation that “base rate.” If I didn’t think I could create better asymmetric risk/reward than these ETFs I wouldn’t bother doing what I do. I would just be passive and take the beatings in bear markets. If we can’t tolerate the beatings, we would invest in the more conservative ETF. I intend to create ASYMMETRY® and win by not losing, and that necessarily requires robust risk management systems and tactics.

Now that we know what they are, below are their total returns including dividends looking back over time. (To see the full history in the prospectus click: iShares)

In the chart below, we see the global asset allocation ETFs are attempting to get back to their September 2018 high. While the S&P 500 stock index is still down about -4% from its September 2018 high, the bonds in these ETFs helped reduce their drawdowns, so they have also recovered their losses better.

global tactical asset allocation asymmetric risk reward

To be sure, below are the drawdowns. The iShares Core Conservative ETF is only 30% stocks and 70% bonds, so it had a smaller drawdown and has recovered from it already. I added the S&P 500 in this chart with is 100% stocks to show how during this correction, the exposure to bonds helped offset losses in stocks. Diversification does not guarantee a profit or protect against a loss in a declining market. Sometimes diversification and even the broadest global asset allocation fails like it did in 2008.

GLOBAL TACTICAL ASSET ALLOCATION ASYMMETRIC RISK REWARD DRAWDOWN

We can look inside the ETF to see their exposures. Below we see the iShares Core Moderate ETF which is 60% stocks and 40% bonds largest holding is the iShares Core Total USD Bond Market ETF (IUSB) at 50% of the fund.

iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF

Below is the 1-year total return chart including dividends for its largest holding. It has gained a total return of 2.9% the past year. All of the gains were this year.

iShares Core Total USD Bond Market ETF (IUSB)

Next, I added the other two largest holdings iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) and iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF (IDEV). The weakness was worse in international stocks. 

GLOBAL ASSEST ALLOCATION ADVISORS TACTICAL

No total return chart is complete without also looking at its drawdowns. The combination of the total return chart and the drawdown is what I call the ASYMMETRY® Ratio. The ASYMMETRY® Ratio is the total return divided by the risk it took to achieve it. I prefer more total return, less downside drawdown.

global tactical asset allocation drawdown risk management

The point is, global stocks and bonds have recovered much of the losses. As we would expect so has global asset allocation. The only issue now is the short term risk has become elevated by my measures, so we’ll see how the next few weeks unfold.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information provided is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Strong stock market momentum was accompanied by broad participation

Not only has the broad stock market indexes like the S&P 500 advanced sharply with great momentum since late December 2018, but its breadth has also been impressive.

The percent of stocks trading above their 50 day moving averages shows about 92% of stocks are in short term uptrends. This advance not only confirmed the price trend momentum but suggests participation has been broad. More stocks are above their 50-day moving averages that late 2017.

percent of stocks above the 50 day moving average trend following asymmetric risk reward

The downside is we are necessarily observing only the past and the past doesn’t assure future performance. In fact, once 92% of stocks are already in shorter-term uptrends, we can start to wonder at what point the buying enthusiasm is exhausted. That is, indicators like this may be observed for signs of an inflection point.

percent of stocks above 200 day moving average trend following

However, the percent of stocks above their 200 day moving averages is at 63%. So applying that same line of thinking, though we shouldn’t be surprised to see short term weakness, we could suppose the longer term trend still has room to run.

We’ll see…

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management exclusively to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information provided is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Putting my short-term technical analysis tactician hat on and hedging off equity risk

I’m dialing in to look at shorter-term technical analysis as my risk management systems are suggesting a risk of a stock market decline is becoming elevated.

tactician technical analysis analyst tactical manager trader

Zooming in to shorter time frames, the U.S. stock market advance appears to be becoming exhausted.

The chart below is the SPDR® S&P® 500 ETF, yesterday on a 5-minute chart. Now that’s zooming in! I’m not a day trader, but I’m monitoring the trend for signs of buying exhaustion and/or selling pressure to potentially take over. Yesterday this index ETF was up nearly .75% in the morning, then you can see it drifted down to close well below its VWAP for the day.

SPY VWAP MOMENTUM RELATIVE STRENGTH TREND FOLLOWING

The next chart shows the SPY trend going back for about six months. The recent stock advance has been impressive and I’m sure glad we participated in it, but I’m now applying some situational awareness. The strong momentum since the late December 2018 low could be becoming exhausted and may find some resistance for higher prices, at least temporarily.

SPY

As a tactician, since we had heavy exposure to stocks, I’ve been gradually reducing exposure and today started hedged off some equity risk to offset some of my market risks. I did that as opposed to taking large profits and realizing taxable gains. Fortunately, we took advantage of last years volaltity and made the best of it by executing significant tax loss harvesting. This time I decided to hedge some of our gains rather than realize them.

I may be wrong, but my risk management systems are elevated for at least a short term exhaustion, so I expect we’ll see some selling pressure overwhelm buying at some point from here. If it doesn’t, then it’s a good sign the momentum may be here to stay a while, but I’ll probably still wait for a reversal down to add more exposure in my tactically managed portfolio. My objective is asymmetric risk/reward, and from this starting point, I see more potential for downside than upside for stocks. My systems aren’t always right, but the magnitude of the gains are larger than the losses when it’s wrong. I call it ASYMMETRY®.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor and provides investment advice and portfolio management solely to clients with a signed and executed investment management agreement. The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. All information provided is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed and should be independently verified. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Global asset allocation takes a beating in 2018

Most financial advisors and financial planners recommend to their clients some type of global asset allocation. Their global asset allocation models usually include a range of bonds, U.S. stocks, and International stocks. Some may include what are considered alternative investments like real estate (REITs), private equity, or tactical trading, but most of them keep it plain vanilla. This asset allocation method is called “strategic asset allocation” since it usually applies some form of portfolio optimization of historical returns and volatility to determine the weight between stocks and bonds.

Who can blame them? asset allocation and diversification is easy to sell and easy to defend. If someone sells their business or retires with a large 401(k), it’s easy to sell them on diversifying their assets. If the markets go down it isn’t their fault, it’s the market that’s doing it. Is it too much drawdown or volatility? They just recommend a change to less stocks and more bonds. Of course, that only works when bonds aren’t falling too.

Since many actively managed mutual funds failed to avoid losses during the last bear market 2007 to 2009, many advisors shifted their strategic asset allocation from actively managed mutual funds to index funds. It’s easy to see why; their clients lost a lot of money, even as much as -40% for a balanced portfolio of 60% stocks and 40% bonds. If they were more invested in stocks, it was as much as -50% or more.

If a mutual fund was supposed to be “active,” I can see how such losses would be unacceptable. If an investor is paying more for portfolio management, they probably expect to have a more asymmetric risk/return profile than what long-only exposure to stock indexes all the time would provide for less cost. Index funds and ETFs are cheap because they simply provide exposure to market risks and rewards. They provide this exposure all the time, so when markets fall as they do in a bear market, they lose value and have no stop loss for risk management.

I also use index ETFs to gain exposure to markets, countries, and sectors, but I don’t just buy and hold them, I increase and decrease my exposure to actively manage my risk/reward. My objective is an asymmetric risk/reward, so I want to avoid the larger losses as I try to capture gains. For me, it starts at the individual position level and flows through to the portfolio level. I’m entering positions we expect to result in an asymmetric risk/reward payoff; positions with a higher expected gain than its potential loss. I do this over and over, and they don’t all have to result in asymmetry. We just need the average gains to exceed the average losses over time to achieve a positive asymmetric risk-return profile. It’s an absolute return objective, meaning our focus is on our own payoffs and risk-reward profile, not trying to track what a stock index is doing. My strategy is unconstrained from the limitations of a fixed benchmark. Our objective is more about making money with a predetermined amount of absolute risk, not relative returns and tracking indexes. As such, the return stream is expected to be unique.

That isn’t what active mutual fund managers do.

The typical active mutual fund has an objective of relative return vs. an index benchmark. As I’ve been an investment manager for over two decades, I’ve seen the relative return comparisons become more and more intense. Brokerage firms and investment advisors have created sophisticated performance reporting programs to compare their performance to chosen benchmarks. Active mutual funds have a mandate to “beat” and index. For example, some of them aim to beat the large growth, mid value, or small growth asset classes. Most of them attempt to beat their benchmark by filtering through the stocks in the index and picking better stocks. If a relative return is their objective, they are not focused on managing downside risk. Instead, they are focused on tracking the benchmark and getting ahead of it. Many of them probably attempt it by holding a more focused portfolio or with a portfolio of the higher momentum stocks relative to the benchmark. Since risk management isn’t their objective, they view any overweight in cash as a risk of underperformance. That’s what traditional “active managers” do. What I do is typically called “tactical management” since my objective is absolute return, not relative return, and I want to actively control my drawdowns through risk management. For example, I could be positioned in all cash in a bear market, hedged, short, or long volatility.

So, there is an important distinction between “active managers” with a relative return benchmark-beating objective and those of us with an unconstrained strategy and focus on absolute returns. Mutual funds are typically relative return managers trying to beat a benchmark, hedge funds are typically absolute return managers creating their own unique return stream. Although, typically means that isn’t always the case.

Ok, so, the headline was about the performance of Global Asset Allocation this year.

Back to global asset allocation.

Some financial advisors and media enjoy disparaging all types of active management. They talk about how relative return managers like most mutual funds don’t beat their benchmarks. They’ll point out how absolute return hedge fund type strategies may manage downside risk, but don’t earn as much return as an all-stock portfolio. Most of the time, it isn’t a reasonable comparison. For example, saying the Barclays Hedge Fund Index underperformed the S&P 500 the past decade isn’t complete without also considering the drawdowns. In the last bear market, the S&P 500 declined -56% while the Barclays Hedge Fund Index that includes a composite of thousands of hedge funds declined only -24%. I will suggest the stock index loss was so large most tapped out while the Barclays Hedge Fund Index was low enough that investors could have held on.

It doesn’t matter how much the return is if the risk is so high you tap out before its achieved. 

This year has been a challenging and hostile year for all investment strategies.  While those who adhere to a long-only fully invested asset allocation all the time will talk about the performance of active managers, theirs isn’t much to speak of, either. I know a lot of advisors, and we work with some who invest in my portfolio. Most of their global asset allocations are very simple, and now many of them use index funds and charge an advisory fee for the asset allocation and rebalancing.

There are some mutual funds that offer a varying method of asset allocation. I am not recommending any of these funds, this is for educational and informational purposes only. Some popular ones that come to mind are BlackRock Global Allocation (MDLOX), Arrow DWA Balanced. PIMCO All Asset All Authority (PAUAX), DFA Global Allocation 60/40 (DGSIX). BlackRock Global Allocation, Arrow DWA Balanced, and PIMCO All Asset All Authority are active allocation funds while DFA Global Allocation is a passive allocation fund managed by Dimensional Fund Advisors. Below are their year-to-date total returns, including dividends. (To see their full history click on the links in their names above.)

Global Asset Allocation Funds

I know financial advisors who are big advocates of large asset managers like Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA), PIMCO, and BlackRock. Advisors often tout how large they are and how many academics or how many analysts and portfolios managers they have on staff. I included the Arrow DWA Balanced fund because it’s managed by Dorsey Wright, which isn’t as large, but I know advisors use it. Most advisors who offer asset allocation models are doing their own asset allocations for their clients. The above returns are the result of each of these asset managers doing the allocation and investment selection. So, I would expect when it comes to global asset allocation, those funds should be as good as it gets. How is a financial planner who isn’t a portfolio manager going to do better?

Some may say “What about Vanguard? They are some of the cheapest funds you can buy?”. I don’t know of a Vanguard global asset allocation fund like the DFA fund, but they do have a balanced 60/40 fund that doesn’t include exposure to international. Below is their balanced allocation fund along with their International stock fund. Though their fund isn’t down -7% like the global allocation funds, if you added 20% of their International to make it “global,” we can see it would be similar.

vanguard asset allocation funds

Since indexing and ETFs have become more popular than mutual funds, today we have some interesting ETFs that track global asset allocation indexes so we can better understand the return streams of global asset allocation.

iShares is a BlackRock company, the world’s largest asset manager with $6.29 trillion in assets under management. If an investor thinks a large size with many professionals is the key to investment success, they would probably BlackRock is the best. Of course, I don’t agree, since the most skilled portfolio managers I know are small, focused, specialized firms with all their skin in the game. BlackRock’s iShares offers the iShares Core Allocation Funds, which are ETF allocations of ETFs. Each iShares Core Allocation Fund offers exposure to U.S. stocks, international stocks, and bonds at fixed weights and holds an underlying portfolio of iShares Core Funds. Investors can choose the portfolio that aligns with their specific risk considerations like investment time horizon and risk tolerance; for example, those with longer investment time horizons and higher risk tolerance may consider the iShares Core Aggressive Allocation ETF.

More specifically, the iShares Core Allocation Funds track the S&P Target Risk Indexes. So, not only do you have BlackRock’s portfolio management managing the fund, but they are tracking S&P Target Risk Indexes. Here is their description:

S&P Dow Jones Indices’ Target Risk series comprises multi-asset class indices that correspond to a particular risk level. Each index is fully investable, with varying levels of exposure to equities and fixed income and are intended to represent stock and bond allocations across a risk spectrum from conservative to aggressive.

In other words, they each provide varying allocations to bonds and stocks. The Conservative model is more bonds, the Aggressive model is more stocks.

S&P Target Risk Conservative Index. The index seeks to emphasize exposure to fixed income, in order to produce a current income stream and avoid excessive volatility of returns. Equities are included to protect long-term purchasing power.

S&P Target Risk Moderate Index. The index seeks to provide significant exposure to fixed income, while also providing increased opportunity for capital growth through equities.

S&P Target Risk Growth Index. The index seeks to provide increased exposure to equities, while also using some fixed income exposure to dampen risk.

S&P Target Risk Aggressive Index. The index seeks to emphasize exposure to equities, maximizing opportunities for long-term capital accumulation. It may include small allocations in fixed income to enhance portfolio efficiency.

Below is an example of the S&P Target Risk Index allocations and the underlying ETFs they invest in. Notice their differences is the 10% to 20% allocation between stocks and bonds.

Global Allocation Index Construction

These ETFs offer low-cost exposure to global asset allocation with varying levels of “risk,” which really means varying levels of allocations to bonds. I say they are “low-cost” because these ETFs only charge 0.25% including the ETFs they are invested in. Most financial advisors probably charge 1% for global asset allocation, not including trade commissions and the fund fees they invest in. Even the lowest fee advisors charge at least 0.25% plus the trade commissions and the fund fees they invest in. With these funds, investors who want long-only exposure all the time to global stock and bond market risks and returns, they can get it cheap in one fund.

Now that we know what they are, below are their total returns including dividends year to date in 2018. (To see the full history click: iShares)

global asset allocation fund ETF

The % off high chart shows their drawdowns from their price high.

global asset allocation ETF ETFs

Global asset allocation is having a challenging year in 2018 because U.S. stocks, International stocks, and bonds are all down this year.

Of course, a calendar year doesn’t mean a lot. What we do over 15 or 20 years or more is what matters. But, as low-cost index asset allocation advisors talk about the performance of active managers and hedge fund type managers, 2018 has included conditions that have been hostile for all kinds of strategies.

As I said yesterday if this market volatility and correction develops into a full bear market, the asset allocations that are fully exposed to downside risk will test investors’ tolerance for drawdowns.

How deep can drawdowns be for such a globally diversified portfolio? Looking at the historical % off high of DFA Global Allocation and Vanguard Balanced gives a historical example. Even two of the efficient allocation funds available had drawdowns of around -35% to -40% in the last bear market. If it’s done it before, it can certainly happen again.

DFA Global Allocation Vanguard Balanced

Those of us applying active risk management and hedging strategies aim to limit the drawdowns within a tolerable amount rather than allowing them to become too large. For me, more than -20% becomes exponentially more difficult to tolerate and recover from. We have to deal with the -10% or so drawdowns sometimes since we can’t avoid them all. We necessarily have to take some risk to gain exposure to the possibility of gains.

Ok, so my headline was a little exaggerated. Drawdowns of -5% to -12% isn’t exactly a “beating”, but that’s the kind of headline we often see about active management and hedge funds.

You can probably see why I believe it’s essential to actively manage risk and position capital in the direction of price trends.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

What’s going to happen next for the stock market?

The popular stock indexes are now down about -5% year to date.

dow jones stock market

The popular stock indexes are now about -13% off their highs.

stock market dow jones spx spy dia

I don’t normally include the NASDAQ since it’s so overweight the Technology sector, but it’s down -17% off its high and the Russell 2000 small-cap index is down -19%. The year started off very strong and is ending with weakness so far.

nasdaq russell 2000 dow jones

I pointed out earlier this year that Emerging Markets and Developed countries stock markets were already in a bear market if we define it as -20% off highs. Here we see they are down even more than the U.S. stocks year to date.

emering markets stocks

I warned before that with interest rates rising, bonds may not provide the crutch they have in past stock market declines. That has been the case in 2018. Even with the long-term Treasury gaining recently from being down -12%, it’s still down -6% year to date.

BOND ETF TLT LQD AGG ETFS

Many investors are probably wondering what’s going to happen next. I said a week ago in Stock Market Observations that stocks have fallen far enough that “We would expect to see some potential buying support at these levels again.” For these popular stock indexes, they are now at the point of the February and April lows and reaching an oversold level by my momentum measures.

We are looking for signs that selling pressure is drying up as those who want to sell have been exhausted and new buying demand increases to take over. Some signs of stock prices reaching a low enough point to attract more buying than selling are observed in investor sentiment measures and breadth indicators.

A simple easy to follow gauge of investor sentiment is the Fear & Greed Index, which is a composite of seven Investor sentiment measures. The investor sentiment reached an “Extreme Fear” zone again.

investor sentiment fear greed index

Investor fear by this measure has been high for the past few months. At some point, we would expect to see those who want to sell have sold. However, if this stock trend becomes a bear market we would expect to see this gauge remain low for a long time. Although, the stock indexes will swing up and down along the way.

fear and greed over time investor sentiment stock market

Another observation of investor sentiment reaching an extreme was last week’s AAII Investor Sentiment Survey. Last week pessimism spiked to its highest level since April 2013, while optimism fell to an unusually low level.

bearish investor sentiment

For some historical context, the % of bearish investors has reached the high level it did at the 2016 stock market low. When investor fear reaches such extremes, it’s a contrary indicator.

bearish sentiment

A bear market is a process, not an event. At -13% it’s hard to say if this will become a bear market, though there are some potential drivers that could cause stocks to fall more over time.

The first warning sign for the big picture is earlier this year the Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500 reached the second highest level ever, with data going back before 1880.

Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500

The only two times the Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500 had reached this “overvalued” level was 1929 and 1999. Of course, 1929 was followed by The Great Depression and 1999 was followed by the Tech Bubble Burst. The only time I pay attention to the PE ratio is for a big picture assessment of valuation when it reaches extreme highs or lows. At such a high level of valuation, we shouldn’t be surprised to see volatility and stocks decline. The unknown is if it keeps declining much more to reach an “undervalued” level at some point. So far, with -13% decline, the Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500 has declined from 33 at the beginning of the year to 28 now. Twenty or higher is considered high, 10 or less is considered low. It is what it is.

A bear market is a process, not an event, which means the stock market will swing up and down along the way. For example, historical bear markets are made up of swings of -10%, +8%, -14%, +10%, each swing doesn’t make a higher high, but instead prints a lower high and lower lows. The good news is, the swings are potentially tradable. However, for those tactical traders who attempt to trade them, it isn’t easy and it doesn’t always feel good. These kind of periods are volatile, so a skilled tactical trader has to increase and decrease exposure to the possibility of gain and loss. For me, predefining risk is essential, but so is holding the predetermined exposure to give a trend room to play out.

Some potentially positive news is the breadth indicators suggest most stocks are participating in the downtrend. That doesn’t sound positive unless you realize as stocks get washed out on the downside the selling pressure is eventually exhausted, at least temporarily. Below is one indicator we observe to see what is going on inside S&P 500 stock index. It’s the percent of the 500 stocks in the index that are trending above their 50-day moving average. When this indicator is low, it signals stocks may be nearing a level of selling exhaustion as most of them are already in downtrends. However, if this does become an actual bear market of -20% or more, we’ll see this indicator swing up and down along with the price trend. At this point, it’s in the green zone, suggesting the stocks may be near the “washed out” area so we could see some demand take over supply in the days or weeks ahead.

As you can see below, the percent of stocks above their 50 day moving average has now reached the low level it did in February and back in August 2015 and January 2016 that preceded a reversal back up.

percent of stocks above 50 day moving average

I shared my observations of this breadth indicator back in February when I explained it in more detail if you want to read it Stock Market Analysis of the S&P 500. I also shared it in October when the current downtrend started. In October, the percent of stocks above their 200 day moving average was still high and hadn’t declined much. That isn’t the case now. As you can see, even this longer term breadth indicator is now entering the green zone. As more stocks have already declined, it becomes more and more likely we’ll see selling exhausted and shift to buying demand as prices reach lower more attractive levels for institutional investors.

As you can see below, the percent of stocks above their 200 day moving average has now reached the low level much below February and now down to the levels reached in August 2015 and January 2016 that preceded a reversal back up in stocks.

stock market breadth percent of stocks 200 day

Another indicator that measures the participation in the trend is the S&P 500 Bullish Percent index that I have been observing for over two decades. This is the percent of stocks on a Point & Figure buy signal, which often traces a pattern something similar to the 50 day and 200-day moving averages as it has the past four years. As we see below, this indicator is reaching the low level not seen since August 2015 and January 2016 that preceded a reversal back up.

buliish percent index

At this point, we haven’t yet seen enough buying enthusiasm to overwhelm the desire to sell. But, many of these indicators I’ve been monitoring for nearly two decades are reaching a level we should see some shift at some point. If we don’t, the stock market may enter into a more prolonged and deeper bear market. However, historically lower lows are made up of cycle swings along the way, so we should still see at least some shorter-term uptrends.

I’m starting to hear a lot of “bear market” talk in the news and on social media, so I thought I would put the current decline into context. My mission isn’t to take up for the stock market, but instead to present the facts of the trends as they are. I was defensive at the beginning of the year and then added more exposure after prices fell. I predefine my risk by predefining my exits in all of my positions, so any exposure I have has a relatively short leash on how low I’ll allow it to go before I cut my loss short, rather than let the loss get large. I am never a market cheerleader, but because I was already defensive near the peaks, I may have the potential to take advantage of the lower prices. I’m almost always going to be a little too early or a little too late and that is fine. It’s never been perfect but has still achieved the results I want the past two decades.

To put the current decline into historical contacts, we can simply compare it to the last decline of -10% or more, which was around August 2015 and January 2016. For nearly two years, the stock index was range bound with no upside breakout.

stock market 2015 2015 decline bear market

Looking closer at the % off highs, we see the late 2015 decline was -12% and the first few months of 2016 was about -15%.

stock market decline 2015 2016 asymmetric risk reward

Here is 2018. So far, it isn’t actually as much of a decline.

bear market stocks stock market

Another interesting observation I’ll share is the trend in the CBOE S&P 500 Volatility Index (VIX). Below is the 2015 to 2016 period again with the S&P 500 in the top panel and VIX volatility index in the bottom panel. We see the VIX spiked up sharply around August 2015 when the stock market decline. However, when the stock market recovered the loss and then declined again to a lower low, the VIX index didn’t reach the same high level the second time. The volatility expansion wasn’t nearly as high even though the stock index reached an even lower low.

VIX VOLATILITY expansion 2016

We are observing that same divergence in volatility this year. The VIX spiked over 100% when stocks fell -12% around February this year. The stock market recovered and printed a new high in September, then has since fallen -13% from that high. This time, however, the implied volatility VIX index hasn’t spiked up nearly as high.

divergence volatility expansion vix

What could it mean? When the VIX increases it is an indication of expected future 30-day volatility implied by the options on the stocks in the S&P 500. When the VIX increases, it means options traders are probably using options to hedge against market declines. I’m guessing it could signal that hedging and possible selling enthusiasm could be drying up. That seems to be what it suggested in 2015 to 2016 when it did the same, then the stock market trended up into 2017.

We’ll see how it all unfolds from here, but the stock market has clearly reached an inflection point. Stocks have trended down to a low enough level we should see some buying demand if it’s there. You can probably see why I believe markets require me to actively manage my risk through predefined exits and hedging to extract from it the asymmetric risk-reward I want.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Stock Market Observations

The S&P 500 stock index retests October low for the third time. It is only 1.2% above the February and April low, but so far holding the line.

SPY STOCK MARKET

We would expect to see some potential buying support at these levels again. In fact, we’ve already observed some positive reversal today from lower levels. At one point the S&P 500 was down nearly -2% and has reversed back up to near positive. If the lower prices continue to attract buying interest and the current intraday trend continues it could close positive.

SPY VWAP

I pointed out earlier in the year the rising implied volatility indicated by the CBOE S&P 500 Volatility Index was expecting a volatility expansion. The VIX correctly predicted a volatility expansion in 2018.

VIX SPY SPX VOLATILITY EXPANSION ASYMMETRIC

At this point, the Technology, Communication Services, and Materials sectors have turned positive for the day.

SECTOR ETF ROTATION TREND FOLLOWING

Three sectors that have trended above their April lows are Technolgy, Healthcare, and Consumer Discretionary.

trend following stock market sector etfs

The bottom line is when stocks reach a low enough point to attract new buying demand that overwhelms selling pressure, we’ll see the stock market trend back up. We should soon see if the stock market trends down well below its prior lows into a potential bear market level or reverses back up to continue its longer-term uptrend.

The direction of the trend conveys the truth.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Here comes the volatility expansion

Nine days ago in VIX level shows market’s expectation of future volatility I shared an observation that the implied volatility VIX, a measure of expected future volatility that is implied by option prices, had reached an extremely low point. I explained what that means and how I use it:

When the market expects volatility to be low in the next 30 days, I know it could be right for some time.

But, when it gets to its historically lowest levels, it raises situational awareness that a countertrend could be near.

Today we have some volatility expansion.

The VIX Volatility Index has gained 35%. It implies the market now expects higher volatility. Specifically, the market expects the range of prices to spread out over 15% instead of 12%.

VIX $VIX Volatility Expansion asymmetry asymmetric convexity divergence

The popular stock indexes are down over -1% for the first time in a while.

stock market asymmetry asymmetric risk

As I said nine days ago, it should be no surprise to see some volatility expansion. Volatility is mean reverting, which means it tends to oscillate in a high and low range and reverse back to an average after its reaches those cycle highs and lows.

Implied volatility had reached its historical low end, so it’s expanding back out. Stock prices are also spreading out and declining so we shouldn’t be surprised to see more movement in prices in the coming weeks.

At around the same time volatility was contracting and calm, my momentum indicators were signaling stock indexes and many individual stocks were reaching short-term extreme levels that often preceded a short-term decline. These systems prompt me tactically reduce exposure to stocks to dynamically manage our risk.

Only time will tell how it all plays out. We’ll see how it unfolds from here.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. 

Stanley Druckenmiller on his use of Technical Analysis and Instinct

Stanley Druckenmiller has a 30-year track record that is considered “unrivaled” by many. From 1988 to 2000, Druckenmiller was a portfolio manager for George Soros as the lead portfolio manager for Quantum Fund. He founded Duquesne Capital to manage a hedge fund in 1981 and closed the fund in August 2010.

Kiril Sokoloff of Real Vision interviewed him recently and shared parts of the interview on YouTube.

I watched the full 90-minute interview and noted some observations I’ll share.

Speaking of dealing with “algo trading” and “the machines,” Kiril Sokoloff asks Stan Druckenmiller:

“Let’s talk about the algos. We haven’t seen the algos sell, we’ve only seen them buy. We saw a little bit of it in February when there was some concentrated selling. We saw it in China in 2015, which was scary. Most people weren’t focused on that but I was and I think you were, too.

They (algos/machines) are programmed to sell when the market is down -2%. The machines are running and can’t be stopped and a huge amount of trading and money is managed that way. We’ve been operating in a bull market and a strong economy.

What happens when it’s a bear market and a bad economy, will things get out of hand?”

So, knowing that and knowing we’re at risk of that any moment… what are you watching for? …. how are you protecting yourself? What are you watching for? 

Stanley Druckenmiller answers:

“I’m going to trust my instincts and technical analysis to pick up this stuff up. 

But what I will say… the minute the risk reward gets a little dodgy I get more cautious than I probably would have been without this in the background.”

What was most fascinating about the rare interview of Stanley Druckenmiller is that some of us have figured out a successful tactical trading global macro strategy using the common elements of price trends, relative strength, risk management, and momentum combined with a dose of instinct all applied to global markets.

You can see for yourself at:

This wasn’t the first time Stan Druckenmiller spoke of his use of technical analysis and charts. In Part IV “Fund Managers and Timers” of The New Market Wizards in 1992, Jack Schwager included an interview with Stanley Druckenmiller titled “THE ART OF TOP-DOWN INVESTING.”

When asked what methods he used, he spoke of earnings, and then:

“Another discipline I learned that helped me determine whether a stock would go up or down is technical analysis. Drelles was very technically oriented, and I was probably more receptive to technical analysis than anyone else in the department. Even though Drelles was the boss, a lot of people thought he was a kook because of all the chart books he kept. However, I found that technical analysis could be very effective.”

Then, he was asked about his experiences during the 1987 stock market crash:

Jack Schwager: What determined the timing of your shift from bullish to bearish?

Stanley Druckenmiller: It was a combination of a number of factors. Valuations had gotten extremely overdone: The dividend yield was down to 2.6 percent and the price/book value ratio was at an all-time high. Also, the Fed had been tightening for a period of time. Finally, my technical analysis showed that the breadth wasn’t there—that is, the market’s strength was primarily concentrated in the high capitalization stocks, with the broad spectrum of issues lagging well behind. This factor made the rally look like a blow-off.

Jack Schwager: How can you use valuation for timing? Hadn’t the market been overdone in terms of valuation for some time before you reversed from short to long?

Stanley Druckenmiller: I never use valuation to time the market. I use liquidity considerations and technical analysis for timing. Valuation only tells me how far the market can go once a catalyst enters the picture to change the market direction.

Jack Schwager: The catalyst being what?

Stanley Druckenmiller: The catalyst is liquidity, and hopefully my technical analysis will pick it up.

Well, that sounds familiar.

What is most fascinating to me is that I’ve come to the same conclusions through my own experience over more than two decades without knowing Stanley Druckenmiller or others similar to him beforehand. I have to admit that I didn’t remember having so much in common with his strategy because I read The New Markets Wizards so long ago.

Some of us have discovered very similar beliefs and strategies through independent thinking and our own experiences. When I discover that others have found success I see the common characteristics and that confirms what drives an edge.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

 

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

VIX level shows market’s expectation of future volatility

Volatility is a measure of the frequency and magnitude of price swings up and down in a market or stock over a period of time.

  • Lower volatility is when prices are calmer and don’t swing up and down as much.
  • Higher volatility is when price movement spreads out, and prices swing up and down in a wider range.

We can measure volatility using two general methods:

  • Realized Volatility: based on actual historical price data. For example, we can see realized volatility by looking at historical standard deviation or average true range.
  • Implied Volatility: is a measure of expected future volatility that is implied by option prices. For example, the VIX Index is a measure of expected future volatility.

The VIX Index measures the market’s expected future volatility based on options of the stocks in the S&P 500® Index. The VIX Index estimates expected volatility by aggregating the weighted prices of S&P 500 Index put and call options over a range of strike prices.

The last observation I shared of the trend and level of VIX was VIX Trends Up 9th Biggest 1-day Move. I pointed out the VIX level had been very low, and it was an observation of complacency. The VIX spiked up nearly 300% – a volatility expansion. Actually, we could call it a volatility explosion.

The current level of the VIX index has settled down to a lower historical level suggesting the market expects the future range of the price of the S&P 500 to be lower. Below is the current level relative to the past year.

Looking at the current level of 12 compared to history going back to its inception in 1993, we observe its level is indeed near its lowest historical low.

The VIX Index is intended to provide a real-time measure of how much the market expects the S&P 500 Index to fluctuate over the next 30 days. The VIX Index reflects the actual order flow of traders.

Since investors tend to extrapolate the recent past into the future, they usually expect recent calm markets to continue and violent swings to persist.

After the stock market declines and volatility expands, investors extrapolate that recent experience into the future and expect volatility to continue. Sometimes it does continue, but this time it gradually declined as the price trend became calmer.

When markets have been calm, traders and investors expect volatility to remain low. Before February, the VIX implied volatility had correctly predicted low realized volatility for months. But, both realized and expected volatility was so low that many investors were shocked when stock prices fell sharply, and volatility expanded.

When the market expects volatility to be low in the next 30 days, I know it could be right for some time. But, when it gets to its historically lowest levels, it raises situational awareness that a countertrend could be near. It’s just a warning shot across the bow suggesting we hedge what we want to hedge and be sure our risk levels are appropriate.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

The Big Picture Stock and Bond Market Valuation and Outlook

Wondering what to expect from this starting point for stocks and bonds?

The starting point matters. From this starting point, the expected return is a calculation of earnings growth, dividend yield, and P/E ratio.

Below is the current Shiller PE Ratio for the S&P 500 stock index. The Shiller PE Ratio is the second highest level it’s ever been. It’s second only to the stock market bubble 1995-2000 and higher than Black Tuesday before the Great Depression. This measure suggests investors are highly optimistic as they have priced in high expectations about stock prices and earnings.

Current PE price earnings ratio historical pe average hi low

Below are the historical average (mean) and the highest and lowest level of the PE ratio of the S&P 500 based on Shiller. The median is around 15, undervalued is below 10, overvalued it above 20.

Current Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500

Next, we observe the 10 Year Treasury Yield. Interest rates are about as low as they’ve ever been. So, investors buying bonds and holding today are yielding about as little as they ever have. The challenge going forward is if interest rates rise, the value of current bond holdings will fall, so their price of bonds will fall. When we observe this chart, it’s a reminder of how low interest rates are and how high they could go for investors who buy and hold bonds or bond funds.

10 Year Treasury Rate Yield

Though it is unlikley we’ll see the extremely high interest rates of the late 1970s, the current rate is 2.82% which is much lower than the 4.57% long-term average and 3.85% long-term median. The point is: interest rates could easily trend up to the 3% to 5% range which would drive the current bond values down. As bond prices fall, it will have a negative impact on fixed asset allocations to bond or bond funds.

10 Year Treasury Rate Current long term average low high maximum

The interest rate was only 1.5% in July 2016. Since then, interest rates have already trended up to 2.82%. How has that 1.32% increase impacted the price of the bonds?

The iShares 7-10 Year Treasury Bond ETF (IEF) seeks to track the investment results of an index composed of U.S. Treasury bonds with remaining maturities between seven and ten years. If you had invested in this ETF in July 2016 at the low, it’s down -9.33%. It’s been down over -10% from it’s high.

It’s a little worse for the longer-dated bonds. The iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF seeks to track the investment results of an index composed of U.S. Treasury bonds with remaining maturities greater than twenty years. If you had invested in this ETF in July 2016 at the low, it’s down -13.8%. It has been down about -20% from its 2016 high.

From this starting point, we observe a historical extreme stock valuation levels, the second highest level, ever. Observing this high valuation level provides us situational awareness that volatility expansion and a bear market is a real possibility from these levels.

What makes for an even more challenging situation for investors is interest rates are at a historical extreme low looking back over a century. At such low interest rates, we shouldn’t be surprised to see them rise. As interest rates rise, bond prices fall. Falling bond values will have a negative impact for buy and hold investors in a fixed allocation to bonds. So, bonds may not be the crutch they are expected to provide diversified portfolios when stocks fall. Diversification does not guarantee investment returns and does not eliminate the risk of loss.

Going forward from this starting point, traditional diversification of a stock and bond portfolio is unlikely to provide the investment returns investors want.

We believe risky markets require active risk management and tactical decisions with a focus on asymmetric risk/reward. To discover what we call ASYMMETRY®, contact us.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Global Market ETF Trends

Looking at the broad global markets, U.S. stocks are in a positive trend along with the U.S. Dollar. International stocks, commodities, and foreign currency are trending down.

With the directional trends and momentum being in U.S. stocks, though not without volatility, that has been our focus this year.

International stocks including both developed countries $EFA and emerging markets $EEM are trending down so far in 2018 as the U.S. Dollar $UUP is trending up.

The U.S. Dollar $UUP is trending similar to U.S. stocks $SPY in April.

The dollar has an inverse correlation with foreign currency like the Euro.

With the rising dollar $USD, gold $GLD is trending down even more than the Euro currency $FXE.

So, the overall broad observation of global macro picture is clearly a rising U.S. Dollar and U.S. stocks that are diverging from other markets.

Mike Shell is the Founder, and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Managed Portfolios and ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Asymmetry of Loss: Why Manage Risk?

“The essence of portfolio management is the management of risks, not the management of returns.” —Benjamin Graham

Why actively manage investment risk?

Why not just buy and hold markets and ride through their large drawdowns?

Losses are asymmetric and loss compounds exponentially.

The larger the loss, the more gain is required to recover the loss to get back to breakeven.

The negative asymmetry of loss starts quickly, losses more than -20% decline start to compound against you exponentially and with a greater magnitude the larger the loss is allowed to grow.

If your investment portfolio experiences a -20% loss, it needs a 25% gain to get back the breakeven value it was before the loss.

asymmetry of loss losses asymmetric exponential

At the -30% loss level, you need a 43% gain to get it back.

Diversification is often used as an attempt to manage risk by allocating capital across different markets and assets.

Diversification and asset allocation alone doesn’t achieve the kind of risk management needed to avoid these large declines in value. Global markets can fall together, providing no protection from loss.

For example, global markets all fell during the last two bear markets 2000-2003 and 2007-2009.

global asset allocation diversification failed 2008

It didn’t matter if you had a global allocation portfolio diversified between U.S. stocks, international stocks, commodities, and real estate REITs.

Diversification can fail when you need it most, so there is a regulatory disclosure required: Diversification does not assure a profit or protect against loss.

This is why active risk management to limit downside loss is essential for investment management.

I actively manage loss by knowing the absolute point I’ll exit each individual position and managing my risk level at the portfolio level.

Active risk management, as I use it, applies tactics and systems to actively and dynamically decrease or increase exposure to the potential for loss.

My risk management systems are asymmetric risk management systems. Asymmetric risk management intends to manage risk with the objective of a positive asymmetric risk/reward.

My asymmetric risk management systems are designed to cut losses short, but also protects and manages positions with a profit.

After markets trend up for a while without any significant interruption, investors may become complacent and forget the large damage losses can cause to their capital and their confidence. When investors lose confidence in the markets, they tap-out when their losses are allowed to grow to large.

I prefer to stop the loss before it gets too large. How much is too large depends on the client, but also the math. As seen here, I have a mathematical basis for believing I should actively manage investment risk.

It’s why I’ve been doing it for two decades. Because I understood the math, I knew I had to do it over twenty years ago and developed the systems and tactics that proved to be robust in the devastating bear markets I’ve executed through since then.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder, and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Managed Portfolios and ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Trend following applied to stocks

A stock must be in a positive trend to earn a huge gain…

A stock must be in a downtrend to produce a large loss…

The common factor? the direction of the trend…

That’s what investors like about the concept of trend following.

We want to have capital in trends that are rising and out of trends that are falling.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

 

 

Stock market investor optimism rises above historical average

“Optimism among individual investors about the short-term direction of the stock market rebounded, rising above its historical average.”

AAII Investor Sentiment Survey

The AAII Investor Sentiment Survey is a widely followed measure of the mood of individual investors. The weekly survey results are published in financial publications including Barron’s and Bloomberg and are widely followed by market strategists, investment newsletter writers, and other financial professionals.

It is my observation that investor sentiment is trend following.

Investor sentiment reaches an extreme after a price trend has made a big move.  After the stock market reaches a new high, the media is talking about and writing about the new high, which helps to drive up optimism for higher highs.

When they get high, they believe they are going higher.

At the highest high they are at their high point — euphoria.

No, I’m not talking about cannabis stocks, I’m just talking about the stock market. Cannabis stocks are a whole different kind of high and sentiment.

A few years ago, I would have never dreamed of making a joke of cannabis stocks or writing the word marijuana on a public website. Who had ever thought there would be such a thing? But here I am, laughing out loud (without any help from cannabis).

Back to investor sentiment…

Excessive investor sentiment is trend following – it just follows the price trend.

Investor sentiment can also be a useful contrarian indicator to signal a trend is near its end. As such, it can be helpful to investors who tend to experience emotions after big price moves up or down.

  • Investor sentiment can be a reminder to check yourself before you wreck yourself.
  • Investor sentiment can be a reminder to a portfolio manager like myself to be sure our risk levels are where we want them to be.

Although… rising investor optimism in its early stages can be a driver of future price gains.

Falling optimism and rising pessimism can drive prices down.

So, I believe investor sentiment is both a driver of price trends, but their measures like investor sentiment polls are trend following.

For example, below I charted the S&P 500 stock index along with bullish investor sentiment. We can see the recent spike up to 43% optimistic investors naturally followed the recent rise in the stock price trend. investor sentiment July 2018

However, in January we observed something interesting. Investor sentiment increased sharply above its historical average in December and peaked as the stock market continued to trend up.

Afterward, the stock market dropped sharply and quickly, down around -12% very fast.

Maybe the investor sentiment survey indicated those who wanted to buy stocks had already bought, so there wasn’t a lot of capital left for new buying demand to keep the price momentum going.

The S&P 500 is still about -2.4% from it’s January high, so this has been a non-trending range-bound stock market trend for index investors in 2018. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was last years more gaining index and it is still -6% from its high.

stock market 2018 level and drawdown

The stock index will need some buying enthusiasm to reach its prior high.  We’ll see if the recent increase in optimism above its historical average is enough to drive stocks to new highs, or if it’s a signal of exhaustion.

Only time will tell…

I determine my asymmetric risk/reward by focusing on the individual risk/reward in each of my positions and exposure across the portolio. For me, it’s always been about the individual positions and what they are doing.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

Does Your Firm Use Active ETFs?

Christi Shell was recently asked by ETF.com “Does your firm use active ETFs”.

Christi Shell Capital Management

Her answer from the interview:

Our portfolio manager, Mike Shell, doesn’t currently include active ETFs in our universe of tradeable ETFs, but that doesn’t mean he’d never include them. He tactically shifts between ETFs, based on investor behavioral measures and supply/demand. So our portfolio management style itself is the active management; we are, essentially, actively managing beta.

We use ETFs to gain specific exposure to a return stream such as a sector, country, commodity or currency. With an index ETF, we pretty much know what we’re going to get inside the ETF. (Of course, indexes are reconstituted by a committee of people, so we don’t know in advance what they’ll do. However, an index follows some general rules systematically.)

Therefore, if we discover an ETF we believe has a strategy and return stream that we want access to, then we would add it, whether it’s active or not.

Christi Shell is Managing Director and Certified Wealth Strategist® at Shell Capital Management LLC. Christi has 27 years in financial services ranging from bank management to wealth management giving her a unique skill set and experience to help clients get what they want.

Source: http://www.etf.com/publications/etfr/does-your-firm-use-active-etfs

Global Stock and Bond Market Trends 2Q 2018

Yesterday we shared the 2nd Quarter 2018 Global Investment Markets Review, which used a broad range of indexes on performance tables to present the year-to-date progress of world markets. The issue with a table that simply shows a return number on it is it doesn’t properly present the path it took to get there. In the real world, investors and portfolio managers have to live with the path of the trend and we can see that only in the price trend itself. So, today we’ll look at the price trends of stocks, bonds, commodities, real estate, sectors, and other alternatives like volatility. I don’t just look for potentially profitable price trends in stocks and bonds, I scan the world.

How is the market doing this year? Which market?

First, a quick glance at global markets including commodities, stock indexes, volatility, ranked by year-to-date momentum. We wee the CBOE Volatility Index $VIX has gained the most. One clear theme about 2018 is that volatility has increased and this includes implied or expected volatility. Overall, we see some asymmetry since the markets in the green are more positive than the markets in the red. The popular S&P 500 stock index most investors point to is in the middle with only a 2% gain for the year. Commodities like Cocoa, Lumber, Orange Juice, and Crude Oil are leaders while sugar, live cattle, and soybeans are the laggards. Most investors probably don’t have exposure to these markets, unless they get it through a commodities ETF.

 

Most investors probably limit themselves to the broad asset classes, since that’s what most financial advisors do. So, we’ll start there. Below are the trends of broad market ETFs like the S&P 500, Aggregate Bond, Long-Term Treasury. For the year, Emerging Markets has the weakest trend – down nearly -6%. Developed Markets countries are the second weakest. The rising U.S. Dollar is helping to put pressure on International stocks. The leader this year is Commodities, as we also saw above. The Commodity index has gained 8% YTD.

What about alternative investments? We’ll use liquid alternative investments as an example since these are publicly available ETFs. I’ve included markets like Real Estate, Private Equity, Mortgage REITs, and the Energy MLP. Not a lot of progress from buying and holding these alternative investments. This is why I prefer to shift between markets trying to keep capital only in those markets trending up and out of those trending down.

liquid alternative investments

The Volatility VXX ETF/ETN that is similar to the VIX index has gained so much early in the year I left it off the following chart because it distorted the trends of the other markets. It’s one of the most complex securities to trade, but we can see it spike up to 90% when global markets fell in February.

VIX VXX

Looking at the price trend alone isn’t enough. It would be incomplete without also considering their drawdowns. That is, how much the market declined off its prior high over the period. Analyzing the drawdown is essential because investors have to live with the inevitable periods their holdings decline in value. It’s when we observe these decline we realize the need for actively managing risk. For me, actively managing risk means I have a predetermined exit point at all times in my positions. I know when I’ll exit a loser before it becomes a significant loss. Many say they do it, I’ve actually done it for two decades.

The alternative investments are in drawdowns YTD and Energy MLP, and Mortgage REIT is down over -10% from their prior highs. The Energy MLP is actually down -51% from its 2014 high, which I don’t show here.

alternative investment drawdowns risk management

Next, we go back to the global asset class ETFs to see their drawdowns year-to-date. We don’t just experience the gains, we also have to be willing to live with their declines along the way. It isn’t enough to provide an excellent investment management program, we also have to offer one that fits with investors objectives for risk and return. The most notable declines have been in Emerging Market and developed international countries. However, all of these assets are down off their prior highs.

GLOBAL ASSET CLASS RISK MANAGEMENT TREND FOLLOWING 2018

Clearly, markets don’t always go up. The trends so far in the first six months of 2018 haven’t offered many opportunities for global asset allocation to make upward progress.

This is why I rotate, rather than allocate, to shift between markets rather than allocate to them. We also trade in more markets than we covered here, like leading individual stocks. The magnitude of these drawdowns also shows why I believe it is essential to direct and control risk and drawdown.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

 

 

 

2nd Quarter 2018 Global Investment Markets Review

It is no surprise to see global equity markets stall after such a positive trend last year. As we will see, the weakness is global and across both bonds and stocks.

Before we review the year-to-date gains and losses for indexes, I want to share some of the most interesting asset allocation indexes I’ve seen.

Keep in mind: we don’t offer this kind of asset allocation that allocates capital to fixed buckets of stocks and bonds and then rebalances them periodically. As a tactical portfolio manager, I don’t allocate to markets, I rotate between them to focus my exposure on markets in a positive trend and avoid (or short) those in a negative trend. I don’t need to have exposure to falling markets. We consider our portfolio a replacement (or at least a compliment) to traditional “asset allocation” offered by most investment advisors.

I want to present some global asset allocation indexes because, in the real world, most investors don’t allocate all of their investment capital to just stocks or just bonds; it’s some combination of them. If they keep their money in cash in the bank, they aren’t investors at all.

To observe what global asset allocation returns look like, we can look at the Morningstar Target Risk Indexes:

The Morningstar Target Risk Index series consists of five asset allocation indexes that span the risk spectrum from conservative to aggressive. The family of asset allocation indexes can serve as benchmarks to help with target-risk mutual fund selection and evaluation by offering an objective yardstick for performance comparison.

All of the indexes are based on a well-established asset allocation methodology from Ibbotson Associates, a Morningstar company and a leader in the field of asset allocation theory.

The family consists of five indexes covering the following equity risk preferences:

  • Aggressive Target Risk
  • Moderately Aggressive Target Risk
  • Moderate Target Risk
  • Moderately Conservative Target Risk
  • Conservative Target Risk

The securities selected for the asset allocation indexes are driven by the rules-based indexing methodologies that power Morningstar’s comprehensive index family. Morningstar indexes are specifically designed to be seamless, investable building blocks that deliver pure asset-class exposure. Morningstar indexes cover a global set of stocks, bonds, and commodities.

These global asset allocation models are operated by two of the best-known firms in the investment industry and the leaders in asset allocation and indexing. I believe in rotating between markets to gain exposure to the trends we want rather than a fixed allocation to them, but if I all I was going to do is asset allocation, I would use these.

Now that we know what it is, we can see the year-to-date return under the YTD column and other period returns. All five of the risk models are down YTD. So, it’s safe to say the first six months of 2018 has been challenging for even the most advanced asset allocation.

Below are the most popular U.S. stock indexes. The Dow Jones Industrial Average which gained the most last year is down this year. The Tech heavy NASDAQ and small-cap stocks of the Russell 2000 have gained the most.

The well-known bond indexes are mostly down YTD – even municipal bonds. Rising interest rates and the expectation rates will continue to rise is putting pressure on bond prices.

Morningstar has even more indexes that break bonds down into different fixed-income categories. Longer-term bonds, as expected, are responding most negatively to rising rates. The most conservative investors have the more exposure to these bonds and they are down as much as -5% the past six months. That’s a reason I don’t believe in allocating capital to markets on a fixed basis. I prefer to avoid the red.

Next, we observe the Morningstar style and size categories and sectors. As I wrote in Growth has Stronger Momentum than Value and Sector Trends are Driving Equity Returns, sectors like Technology are driving the Growth style.

International stocks seem to be reacting to the rising U.S. Dollar. As the Dollar rises, it reduced the gain of foreign stocks priced in foreign currency. Although, some of these countries are in negative trends, too. Latin America, for example, was one of the strongest trends last year and has since trended down.

At Shell Capital, we often say that our Global Tactical Rotation® portfolios are a replacement for global asset allocation and the so-called “target date” funds. Target date funds are often used in 401(k) plans as an investment option. They haven’t made much progress so far in 2018.

It is no surprise to see most global markets down or flat in 2018 after such a positive 2017.

But, only time will tell how it all unfolds the rest of the year.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Is it a stock pickers market?

Is it a stock pickers market?

Sometimes the stock market is trending so strongly that the rising tide lifts all boats. No matter what stocks or stock fund you invest in, it goes up. That was the case much of 2017.

Then, there are periods when we see more divergence.

When we observe more divergence, it means stocks, sectors, size, or style has become uncorrelated and are trending apart from each other.

I pointed out in Sector Trends are Driving Equity Returns; there is a notable divergence in sector performance, and that is driving divergence in size and style. Growth stocks have been outperformance value, and it’s driven by strong momentum in Technology and Consumer Discretionary sectors.

When specific sectors are showing stronger relative momentum, we can either focus more on those sectors rather than broad stock index exposure. Or, we can look inside the industry to find the leading individual stocks.

For example, Consumer Discretionary includes industries like automobiles and components, consumer durables, apparel, hotels, restaurants, leisure, media, and retailing are primarily represented in this group. The Index includes Amazon, Home Depot, Walt Disney, and Comcast. Consumer Discretionary is the momentum leader having trended up 9.7% so far this year as the S&P 500 has only gained just under 1%.

momentum sectors

If we take a look inside the sector, we see the leaders are diverging farther away from the sector ETF and far beyond the stock market index.

momentum stocks consumer discretionary sector NFLX AMZN AAPL

In fact, all the sectors 80 stock holdings are positive in 2018.

The Consumer Discretionary sector is about 13% of the S&P 500. As you can see, if these top four or five sectors in the S&P 500 aren’t trending up it is a drag on the broad stock index.

ETF Sector Allocation exposure S&P 500

So, Is it a stock pickers market? 

When we see more divergence, it seems to be a better market for “stock pickers” to separate the winners from the losers.

Another way to measure participation in the market is through quantitative breadth indicators. Breadth indicators are a measure of trend direction “participation” of the stocks. For example, the percent of the S&P 500 stocks above or below a moving average is an indication of the momentum of participation.

Below is the percent of stocks above their 50 day moving average tells us how many stocks are trending above their moving average (an uptrend). Right now, the participation is symmetrical; 52% of the stocks in the S&P 500 are in a positive trend as defined by the 50 day moving average. We can also see where that level stands relative to the stock market lows in February and April and the all-time high in January when over 85% of stocks were in an uptrend. By this measure, only half are trending up on a shorter term basis.

SPX SPY PERCENT OF STOCKS ABOVE 50 DAY MOVING AVERAGE 1 YEAR

The 200-day moving average looks back nearly a year to define the direction of a trend, so it takes a greater move in momentum to get the price above or below it. At this point, the participation is symmetrical; 55% of stocks are above their 200-day moving average and by this time frame, it hasn’t recovered as well from the lows. The percent of stocks above their 200-day moving average is materially below the 85% of stocks that were participating in the uptrend last year. That is, 30% fewer stocks are in longer trend uptrends.

SPY SPX PERCENT OF STOCKS ABOVE 200 DAY MOVING AVERGAGE 1 YEAR

In the above charts, I only showed a one-year look back of the trend. Next, we’ll take a step back to view the current level relative to the past three years.

The percent of stocks above their 50 day moving average is still at the upper range of the past three years. The significant stock market declines in August-September 2015 and December-January hammered the stocks down to a very washed out point. During those market declines, the participation was very asymmetric: 90% of the stocks were in downtrends and only about 10% remained in shorter-term uptrends.

SPX SPY PERCENT OF STOCKS ABOVE 50 DAY MOVING AVERAGE 3 YEARS

The percent of stocks above their 200 day moving average also shows a much more asymmetrical situation during the declines in 2015 and 2016 when the stock index dropped around -15% or more. Only 20% of stocks remained in a positive trend.

SPX PERCENT OF STOCKS ABOVE 200 DAY MOVING AVERAGE 3 YEARS

Is it a stock pickers market?

Only about half of the stocks in the index are in uptrends, so the other half isn’t. So, if we avoid the half that are in downtrends and only maintains exposure to stocks in uptrends and the trends continue, we can create alpha.

But, keep in mind, that doesn’t necessarily mean we should have any exposure at all in the S&P 500 stock index because happens to have the highest sector exposure in the leading sectors.

But, for those who want to engage in “stock picking”, the timing has a higher probability now to diverge from the stock index than last year because so fewer stocks are in uptrends and more are in downtrends.

For individual stocks traders willing to look inside the box, this is a good thing.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Commodities are trending with better momentum than stocks

Commodities are trending with better momentum than stocks

Commodities are trending with better momentum than stocks over the past year.

A commodity is a raw material or primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee. A commodity is a basic good used in commerce that are usually used as inputs in the production of other goods or services.

Soft commodities are goods that are grown, such as wheat, or rice.

Hard commodities are mined. Examples include gold, helium, and oil.

Energy commodities include electricity, gas, coal, and oil. Electricity has the particular characteristic that it is usually uneconomical to store, and must, therefore, be consumed as soon as it is processed.

The Commodity Trend

At first glance, we see in the chart commodities ETF Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking ETF has trended meaningfully above the popular S&P 500 index of U. S. stocks. The relative outperformance is clear over this one-year time frame. Commodities, as measured by this ETF, are in an absolute positive trend and registering relative momentum.

Commodity ETF trend following commodites natural resources $GNR $GSG $DBC

Examining a price trend is incomplete without also considering its downside. On the downside, I look at the % off high drawdowns over the period. We see that commodities were more volatile than stocks before 2018 with four dips around -4%. Since the stock market -10% decline that started in February, commodities declined, too, but not as much as U. S. stocks.

asymmetry ratio commodity drawdown

Looking back at the trend chart, I added a simple trend line to show that communities are trending directionally better than the popular U. S. stock index. So, my quantitative Global Tactical Rotation®  system that ranks an unconstrained global universe of markets including bonds, stocks, commodities, currencies, and other alternatives like real estate signaled this trend has been generating asymmetric risk/return.

commodity ETF trend commodities

What is the that Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking ETF? (the bold emphasis is mine)

The Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund seeks to track changes, whether positive or negative, in the level of the DBIQ Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Index Excess Return™ (DBIQ Opt Yield Diversified Comm Index ER) plus the interest income from the Fund’s holdings of primarily US Treasury securities and money market income less the Fund’s expenses. The Fund is designed for investors who want a cost-effective and convenient way to invest in commodity futures. The Index is a rules-based index composed of futures contracts on 14 of the most heavily traded and important physical commodities in the world. The Fund and the Index are rebalanced and reconstituted annually in November.

This Fund is not suitable for all investors due to the speculative nature of an investment based upon the Fund’s trading which takes place in very volatile markets. Because an investment in futures contracts is volatile, such frequency in the movement in market prices of the underlying futures contracts could cause large losses. Please see “Risk and Other Information” and the Prospectus for additional risk disclosures. Source: Invesco

The challenge for some investors, however, is that Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking ETF generates a K-1 tax form for tax reporting. That isn’t a terrible issue, but it means instead of receiving the typical 1099 investors receive a K-1. Some investors aren’t familiar with a K-1, and they can obtain them later than a 1099.

Then, there may be other investors who simply prefer not to own futures for the reason in the second paragraph of the above discription: “Because an investment in futures contracts is volatile, such frequency in the movement in market prices of the underlying futures contracts could cause large losses.” In reality, all investments have risk and stocks can have just as much risk of “large losses” as commodity futures, but it’s a matter of investor preference and perception.

Since we have a wide range of investor types who invest in my ASYMMETRY® Investment Program I could gain my exposure to commodities in other ways. For example, the SPDR® S&P® Global Natural Resources ETF often has a similar return stream as ETFs like DBC that track a commodity futures index, except is actually invests in individual stocks instead.

Key features of the SPDR® S&P® Global Natural Resources ETF

  • The SPDR® S&P® Global Natural Resources ETF seeks to provide investment results that, before fees and expenses, correspond generally to the total return performance of the S&P® Global Natural Resources Index (the “Index”)

  • Seeks to provide exposure to a number of the largest market cap securities in three natural resources sectors – agriculture, energy, and metals and mining

  • Maximum weight of each sub-index is capped at one-third of the total weight of the Index

Below we see the price trend of this ETF of global natural resources stocks has been highly correlated to an ETF of commodities futures.

global natural resources ETF replacement for commodity ETF no K1

In fact, as we step the time frame out to the common inspection date of each ETF in 2011, the SPDR® S&P® Global Natural Resources ETF has actually outperformed Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking ETF overall in terms of relative momentum.

commodity ETF global natural resources trend following no K1

The bottom line is, commodities “stuff” is trending up over the past two years and when the price of “stuff” is rising, that is called “inflation”.  Commodities and global natural resources have been in a downtrend for so long it shouldn’t be a surprise to see this trend reverse up. Only time will tell if it will continue, but if we want exposure to it, we can predefine our risk by deciding at what price I would exit if it doesn’t, and let the trend unfold.Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.Buying and Selling ETFsETFs are flexible and easy to trade. Investors buy and sell them like stocks, typically through a brokerage account. Investors can also employ traditional stock trading techniques; including stop orders, limit orders, margin purchases, and short sales using ETFs. They are listed on major US Stock Exchanges.

ETFs are subject to risk similar to those of stocks including those regarding short-selling and margin account maintenance. Ordinary brokerage commissions apply. In general, ETFs can be expected to move up or down in value with the value of the applicable index. Although ETF shares may be bought and sold on the exchange through any brokerage account, ETF shares are not individually redeemable from the Fund. Investors may acquire ETFs and tender them for redemption through the Fund in Creation Unit Aggregations only. Please see the prospectus for more details. After-tax returns are calculated based on NAV using the historical highest individual federal marginal income tax rates and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. Actual after-tax returns depend on the investor’s tax situation and may differ from those shown. The after-tax returns shown are not relevant to investors who hold their fund shares through tax-deferred arrangements such as 401(k) plans or individual retirement accounts. Performance of an index is not illustrative of any particular investment. It is not possible to invest directly in an index. As with all stocks, you may be required to deposit more money or securities into your margin account if the equity, including the amount attributable to your ETF shares, declines. Unless otherwise noted all information contained herein is that of the SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF. S&P – In net total return indices, the dividends are reinvested after the deduction of withholding tax. Tax rates are applied at the country level or at the index level.

 

 

Expected Volatility Stays Elevated in 2018

Expected Volatility Stays Elevated in 2018

In late 2017, implied volatility, as measured by the VIX CBOE Volatility Index, was at abnormally low levels. I pointed out many times that vol is mean reverting, so when expected volatility is extremely low we can expect it to eventually reverse. The VIX spiked up over 200% in February and has remained more elevated than before.

VIX $VIX #VIX VOLATILITY INDEX CBOE RISK MANAGEMENT ASYMMETRIC ASYMMETRY

In the chart, I used a 50-day moving average for observation of how the VIX has remained more elevated than pre-February.

Volatility is asymmetric; when the stock market falls, implied volatility tends to spike up.

The VIX long-term average is 20, so the current level of 15-16 still isn’t high by historical measures, but the expected volatility is elevated above where it was.

Below is the VIX so far in 2018 in percentage terms. It shows the 200% gain that has since settled down, but it’s remaining higher than before.

VIX VOLATILITY 2018 RISK MANAGEMENT ASYMMETRY GLOBAL ASYMMETRIC ETF ETFS

The VIX has spiked up 45% the past 5 days.

VIX VOLATILITY ASYMMETRIC SPIKE GAIN THIS WEEK 2018 ASYMMETRY RISK

As I shared in The enthusiasm to sell overwhelmed the desire to buy March 19, 2018, I expect to see more swings (volatility) than last year, and that would be “normal” too. I said:

I define this as a non-trending market. When I factor in how the range of price movement has spread out more than double what it was, I call it a non-trending volatile condition.

Until we see either a new all-time high indicating a continuing longer-term uptrend or a new low below the February and April low indicating a new downtrend, the above holds true.

It’s a good time for a VIX primer from the CBOE:

What does it mean?

Some consider the VIX the “fear gauge”. When there is a demand for options, their premiums rise. Investor demand for options typically increases when they are concerned about the future, so they use options to hedge or replace their stocks with limited risk options strategies. Rising volatility also drives the VIX, since the VIX Index is a calculation designed to produce a measure of constant, 30-day expected volatility of the U.S. stock market, derived from real-time, mid-quote prices of S&P 500® Index

What is volatility?

Volatility measures the frequency and magnitude of price movements, both up and down, that a financial instrument experiences over a certain period of time. The more dramatic the price swings in that instrument, the higher the level of volatility. Volatility can be measured using actual historical price changes (realized volatility) or it can be a measure of expected future volatility that is implied by option prices. The VIX Index is a measure of expected future volatility.

What is the VIX Index?

Cboe Global Markets revolutionized investing with the creation of the Cboe Volatility Index® (VIX® Index), the first benchmark index to measure the market’s expectation of future volatility. The VIX Index is based on options of the S&P 500® Index, considered the leading indicator of the broad U.S. stock market. The VIX Index is recognized as the world’s premier gauge of U.S. equity market volatility.

How is the VIX Index calculated?

The VIX Index estimates expected volatility by aggregating the weighted prices of S&P 500 Index (SPXSM) puts and calls over a wide range of strike prices. Specifically, the prices used to calculate VIX Index values are midpoints of real-time SPX option bid/ask price quotations.

How is the VIX Index used?

The VIX Index is used as a barometer for market uncertainty, providing market participants and observers with a measure of constant, 30-day expected volatility of the broad U.S. stock market. The VIX Index is not directly tradable, but the VIX methodology provides a script for replicating volatility exposure with a portfolio of SPX options, a key innovation that led to the creation of tradable VIX futures and options.

To learn more about the CBOE, Volatility Index VIX visit their VIX website.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

 

Is the economy, stupid?

Many investment professionals admit they are unable to “time the market.”

What is “market timing,” anyway? Wikipedia says:

Market timing is the strategy of making buy or sell decisions of financial assets (often stocks) by attempting to predict future market price movements. The prediction may be based on an outlook of market or economic conditions resulting from technical or fundamental analysis.

One reason they “can’t time the market” is they are looking at the wrong things. The first step in any endeavor to discover what may be true is to determine what isn’t. The first step in any endeavor to discover what may work is to determine what doesn’t.

For example, someone recently said:

“A bear market is always preceded by an economic recession.”

That is far from the truth…

The gray in the chart is recessions. These recessions were declared long after the fact and the new recovering expansion was declared after the fact.

The most recent recession:

“On December 1, 2008, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) declared that the United States entered a recession in December 2007, citing employment and production figures as well as the third quarter decline in GDP.”

So, the economist didn’t declare the recession until December 1, 2008, though the recession started a year earlier.

In the meantime, the S&P 500 stock market index declined -48% as they waited.

While the recession officially lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, it took several years for the economy to recover to pre-crisis levels of employment and output.

The stock market was below it’s October 2007 high for nearly six years.

Economists declared the recession had ended in June 2009, only in hindsight do we know the stock market had bottomed on March 9, 2009. The chart below shows the 40% gain from the stock market low to the time they declared the recession over. But, they didn’t announce the recession ended in June 2009 until over a year later in September 2010.

Don’t forget for years afterward the fear the economy will enter a double-dip recession.

If you do believe some of us can predict a coming stock market decline or recession, it doesn’t seem it’s going to be based on the economy. Waiting for economics and economic indicators to put a time stamp on it doesn’t seem to have enough predictive ability to “time the market” to avoid a crash.

I suggest the directional price trend of the stock market itself is a better indicator of the economy, not the other way around. Then, some other signals begin to warn in advance like a shot across the bow.

But, for me, it’s my risk management systems and drawdown controls that make all the difference.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Is this correction and volatility normal?

With perfect hindsight, we now all know that January 26th was the recent price peak in the U.S. stock market. Since then, the S&P 500 has declined about -10% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average about -12%. For simplicity, I’m going to focus on U.S. stock market here.

I wasn’t surprised to see the decline and am not surprised to see “more volatility,” because it would be getting back to “normal.”

But I see recent price action has sure gotten the attention of many on social media. Some even seem dazed and confused.

I’m not surprised about that, either.

On January 11, before stock market declined prices started swinging up and down (volatility), I shared an observation with my friends on Twitter and a warning:

On January 24th, I again warned of complacency. The message was clear:

At this point, this is a normal and expected “correction” of what was an upside overreaction in the prior months. The stock index has declined about -10%, regained some of the loss in March and more recently retested the February 8th low. As long as the lows hold, I consider this a normal correction.

stock market spx

Sure, the decline was sharp and fast, but that’s no surprise for me after such an upside move. I said it was “expected” because, as I pointed out above, 2017 was very abnormal because it lacked the typical -5% to -10% declines we normally see over most 12 month periods in the stock indexes.

Another way I define a “normal correction” is a simple trend line drawn under the price over the past 12 months. Without adding a lot of complicated looking indicators to express it, below we see the stock index has just “reverted to its trend.” The peak in December and January was an abnormal overreaction on the upside, which I pointed out as it was happening. The recent -10% decline has simply put the trend back in a more normal range.

stock market normal correction trend

What is normal, typical, or expected? 

I’m observing a lot of commentaries as if this correction and volatility isn’t normal.  The fact is, many people often include their emotions and feelings along with price action.

Investors perceive what they believe is driving a price trend and what they believe is always true for them.

The February decline was commonly blamed on “the machines,” which got a little silly.

This time, it’s geopolitics.

I believe it’s just the market, doing what it does, and there are so many drivers at the same time I don’t bother to attempt such a narrative. My narrative is simple; the force of sellers took control and outweighed the enthusiasm of buyers.  It is just the market, doing what it does.

I’ve been seeing and experiencing these trends so closely for so long and I remember the regime shifts. I want to share with you my observations of what have been “normal” corrections in terms of drawdowns. A drawdown is the % decline from a prior price high to its low. I show only the period of the past 9 years, which is one of the longest bull markets in history (without a -20% decline).

stock market historical bear market length drawdowns

As you can see, since April 2009, we’ve seen four declines of -15% or more and it took them several months to recover.

These declines of -15% or more are why many people have been unable to hold on to the stock market since the March 2009 low with any meaningful allocation to stocks. When prices fall -10%, investor sentiment shifts from greed to extreme fear. Some of them may even begin to tap out by selling their stock holdings for fear of more losses.

To be sure, here is an investor sentiment indicator at the February 8, 2018 low.

Investor sentiment Februrary 8 2018

In fact, investment managers like me who have dynamic risk management systems may even sell to reduce exposure to loss as an intentional drawdown control. But this time, as I pointed out, the stock market was already at risk of a reversal before this decline. So, a robust risk management system may have reduced exposure before the decline, not after.

We find that declines over -10% get more attention, especially when they get down to -15%. Those can also be more hostile conditions for trend systems, too, as risk management systems cause us to exit and later re-enter.

The point is, over the past 9 years a -15% decline has been a “normal” occurrence and there are many -5% (or more) declines too.

It is only at a -10%, so far, and that’s not unusual.

I intentionally used the last 9 years. Not to show an arbitrary 9 year period, but instead to intentionally leave off March 2009. I did that because the first three months of 2009 was a -24% decline, a continuation of the 2008 waterfall decline. The stock market was still in the bear market that began October 2007. So, this wouldn’t be complete without a reminder of what that period looked like before I go on to show the pre-2008 period.

All bear markets do necessarily begin with declines of  -10%, -15%, -20% . They are actually made of many swings up and down along the way. We often hear people speak of the last bear market as “2008” as though the only loss was the -37% decline in the S&P 500 in 2008.

That is far from reality.

The decline was -56%.

2008 stock market drawdown length of bear market

The drawdowns we’ve seen since 2008 are more than twice what we saw in the bull market from 2003 to 2008 after the “tech wreck.” Below we see the typical decline then was closer to -5% with only a few getting into the -7% or more range. 2004 to 2008 bull market low volatility

Clearly, it was a lot easier to hold a larger allocation of stocks, then.

What is normal and what has changed?

The last 9 years has been more hostile for passive asset allocation investors to hold on to their stock positions because the declines were -15% or so and take months to recover. It’s also been more challenging for active risk managers since a drawdown control system necessarily reduces exposure as prices fall with the intent to control drawdown.

But, to define what is normal today, a -10% to -15% decline is within a normal corrective drawdown.

The recent past matters simply because that’s what investors and traders anchor to. Most people put more emphasis on the recent past. Our experience and how much we’ve studied and observed the trends determine how much we can recall easily. I’ve been an investment manager most of my life, over two decades now. For me, it hasn’t been a hobby or part-time venture, it’s what I do and who I am. So, my memory of these trends and intuitions about what is normal, or not, is what it is.

If you are wondering, here are the drawdowns for the S&P 500 going back about 70 years. I highlighted the -15% declines or more, which obviously gets investors attention.

stock market bear market length and dradowns

Clearly, there are a lot of -15% or greater declines. In fact, there are several -30% and three in the -45% or larger drawdowns.

Knowing this, it’s why I say:

We believe world markets require active risk management to avoid large losses and directional trend systems to position capital in profitable price trends.

And, I also say:

It doesn’t matter how much the return is if the downside risk is so high you tap out before it’s achieved.

But at this point, you can probably see that the current -10% decline is so far within a “normal correction.”

Though, as I shared in The enthusiasm to sell overwhelmed the desire to buy March 19, 2018, I expect to see more swings (volatility) than last year, and that would be “normal” too.

I define this as a non-trending market. When I factor in how the range of price movement has spread out more than double what it was, I call it a non-trending volatile condition.

Markets decline to a low enough point to attract buying demand. Only time will tell how it all plays out from here.

If you enjoyed this, I encourage you to read “What About the Stock Market Has Changed? A Look at Ten Years of Volatility” 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

What’s going to happen next?

S&P 500 has declined to the 200-day moving average. I don’t trade the moving average, but include it as a reference for the chart. More importantly, the stock index is also near its low in February.

By my measures, it’s also reached the point of short-term oversold and at the lower price range that I consider is within a “normal” correction.

I know many traders and investors were expecting to see a retest of that low and now they have it. So, I expect to see buying interest next week. If not, look out below… who knows how low it will need to go to attract buying demand.

 

Mike Shell is the founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right.

The is no guarantee that any strategy will meet its objective.  Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The observations shared are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual.

Apparently there was more enthusiasm to sell

The U. S. stock market as measured by the S&P 500 declined -2.57%.

The shorter-term investor sentiment measures suggest fear is driving the stock market. That may be a positive signal since investor sentiment gets it wrong at extremes.

I don’t have anything more to share beyond what I wrote earlier this week, which I have reprinted below:

My systems define this as a non-trending market. When I factor in how the range of price movement has spread out more than double what it was, I call it a non-trending volatile condition. It is useful for me to identify the market regime because different trend systems have different results based on the situation. For example, non-trending volatile market conditions can be hostile situations for both passive and trend following strategies. However, countertrend systems like the swings of a non-trending volatile market.

Trend following systems thrive in markets that are trending and smooth. When a market is trending and smooth, the trend following system can earn gains without having to deal with significant adverse price action. When a market trend shifts to non-trending and volatile, the trend following signals can result in whipsaws. A whipsaw is when the price was moving in one direction (and the trend follower buys) but then quickly reverses in the opposite direction (and maybe the trend follower exits with a loss). Even if the trend following system doesn’t enter and exit with a loss, in a non-trending volatile market the trend follower has to deal with the same hostile conditions as a passive investor as the market swings up and down.

My U. S. equity exposure since early February has come from my shorter term countertrend systems. My focus and the focus of my systems isn’t to predict the direction of markets but instead to identify when a market is undergoing a regime change or shifts to a distinct environment. I don’t analyze the markets to try to predict what it will do next. I look at what the market is actually doing and react to it.

 

Mike Shell is the founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter @MikeWShell

The is no guarantee that any strategy will meet its objective.  Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

 

The enthusiasm to sell overwhelmed the desire to buy March 19, 2018

The enthusiasm to sell overwhelmed the desire to buy. The S&P 500 stock index closed down -1.42% today. Stocks trended down most of the day and at 2:35pm it was down -2%. As you can see on the chart, it reversed up in the last 90 minutes and closed with positive directional movement. It almost closed above its Volume Weighted Average Price (VWAP).

There are many notable economic reports out this week, so maybe investors are concerned about to the jobs report and the Fed FOMC Meeting. The options market has priced in a 94% chance of a rate hike, so it shouldn’t be a surprise. But, this week is the first FOMC meeting for the new Chairman Powell.

Implied volatility in recent weeks is one of many signals that suggest a volatility regime change. The CBOE Volatility Index® (VIX® Index®) is a key measure of market expectations of near-term volatility conveyed by S&P 500 stock index option prices. The VIX® doesn’t seem to want to go back to those prior low levels, so the expectation is higher volatlity.

At this point, the decline today was nothing too abnormal. The stock index is -3.% off it’s high a few weeks ago and -5.4% off its all-time high. However, as you can see below it is within a normal trading range. Speaking of trading range, notice the bands of realized volatility I added to the chart are drifting sideways rather than trending up or down. I see higher lows, but equal highs in the most recent trend and lower highs looking back to January. The VIX is expected volatility, the blue bands are realized volatility.

My systems define this as a non-trending market. When I factor in how the range of price movement has spread out more than double what it was, I call it a non-trending volatile condition. It is useful for me to identify the market regime because different trend systems have different results based on the situation. For example, non-trending volatile market conditions can be hostile situations for both passive and trend following strategies. However, countertrend systems like the swings of a non-trending volatile market.

Trend following systems thrive in markets that are trending and smooth. When a market is trending and smooth, the trend following system can earn gains without having to deal with significant adverse price action. When a market trend shifts to non-trending and volatile, the trend following signals can result in whipsaws. A whipsaw is when the price was moving in one direction (and the trend follower buys) but then quickly reverses in the opposite direction (and maybe the trend follower exits with a loss). Even if the trend following system doesn’t enter and exit with a loss, in a non-trending volatile market the trend follower has to deal with the same hostile conditions as a passive investor as the market swings up and down.

My U. S. equity exposure since early February has come from my shorter term countertrend systems. My focus and the focus of my systems isn’t to predict the direction of markets but instead to identify when a market is undergoing a regime change or shifts to a distinct environment. I don’t analyze the markets to try to predict what it will do next. I look at what the market is actually doing and react to it.

 

Mike Shell is the founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter @MikeWShell

The is no guarantee that any strategy will meet its objective.  Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

When I apply different trend systems to ETFs

In my portfolio management, I primarily want to identify trends and get positioned with that trend. As long as there is uncertainty, we’ll see trends. Investor sentiment and expectations underreact to information causing the price to adjust gradually and that’s what produces a trend. The trend following systems I wrote about in My Introduction to Trend Following are designed to buy an asset when its price trend goes up, and sell when its trend goes down, expecting price movements to continue.

We also see the overreaction of investor sentiment and their expectations. After price keeps rising, investors may become overly enthusiastic, which causes prices to overreact and move up to an extreme that matches their sentiment. We saw that the last part of 2017 and it continued in January. We say these markets have become “overbought” and mathematical indicators can signal a countertrend.

We also sometimes see investor sentiment and their expectations plunge as they panic when prices are falling. We say these markets have become “oversold” and mathematical indicators can signal a countertrend. Looking back over the past two months, we may have seen an overreaction on the upside, then an overreaction on the downside. I say that because the stock market very quickly dropped -10%, then recovered most of it a few weeks later.

Someone asked recently “Do you invest and trade in all ETFs and stocks using the same trend system?” The answer is “not necessarily.” As I described above, trend following and countertrend systems are very different. Trend following systems can be multiple time frames, but usually longer trends of at least several months to years. Countertrend moves are normally shorter term as a market may get overbought or oversold, but it doesn’t usually stay that way a long time. For example, the S&P 500 was overbought the last few months of 2017 and that was an anomaly. It was one of the most overbought periods we’ve seen in the stock indexes. So, it was no surprise to see a fast -10% decline.

My point is, different trend systems can be applied to markets. Both trend following and countertrend are trend systems, they just intend to capitalize on a different trend in behavior – overreaction or underreaction.

When I apply my countertrend systems to markets, a great illustration is the high dividend yield market. A great example is the Global X SuperDividend® ETF $SDIV which invests in 100 of the highest dividend yielding equity securities in the world.

Below is a price chart in blue and it’s dividend yield in orange over the past five years. As you can see, the price trend and dividend yield have an inverse correlation. As the price goes up, the dividend yield from that starting point goes down. That is, if we invest in it at higher prices, the dividend yield would have been lower. But, as the price goes down, the dividend yield from that starting point goes up. If we invest in it at lower prices, our future income from dividend yield is higher.

 

For example, I highlighted in green the price was at its low when the yield was also at its highest at 8%. Investors who bought at the lower price earn the higher yield going forward (assuming the stocks in the index continue paying their dividend yields). If we invested in it in 2014 the yield was 6%. High yielding stocks are not without risks. High yielding stocks are often speculative, high-risk investments. These companies can be paying out more than they can support and may reduce their dividends or stop paying dividends at any time, which could have a material adverse effect on the stock price of these companies and the ETFs performance. You can probably see how an ETF that includes 100 of these stocks may be more attractive to gain exposure rather than risking a few individually.

This is an example of when we may use a countertrend system. As I am more inclined to invest in positive trends, this is an example of a situation I may be more willing to buy low. But, I always focus on Total Return. All of my systems include Total Return data that includes the dividend yield, not just the price trend. So as I explain this, keep in mind we still apply my risk management and trend systems but we consider and account for the high yield that makes up its total return.

Below is a chart of the Global X SuperDividend® ETF $SDIV from the low point in 2016 (I highlighted in green above). I charted both the price trend by itself as well as the Total Return which includes dividends. Had someone invested in it at the low, we saw above their yield would be 8% and the impact is evident in the difference. With the dividend yield included, the return was 36% and 18% without it. In other words, the dividend was half the return over this period. The higher the dividend yield at the point of entry, the more it can have an impact on Total Return.

As a special note for our investment management clients who are invested in ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical. We do not reinvest dividends. Instead, we want the cash dividends to go into the cash portion of our portfolio. Since we usually have some positions that generate a monthly yield, it provides the cash balance we need to cover any slippage between trades, investment management costs, as well as provide cash for other investments. I mention this, because any position we hold like this with a high yield may not appear to have as large of a percentage gain since it only represents the price return, not the total return. That is simply because we are using the cash instead of reinvesting the dividends.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

 

My Introduction to Trend Following

I have noticed more investors are talking about “trend following” these days and more traders and advisors are calling themselves trend followers. As a professional portfolio manager who has been applying trend systems to global markets for two decades, one of the most common questions I get asked is “how did you get started?” Specifically, how my investment strategy, risk management, and trend systems evolved over time.

I’ll explain it here, so you know where I am coming from.

Why do you think we learn math by hand before using a machine?

We learn to do the math manually because it teaches us the basics before we use a computer. We learn to ask the right questions, turn problems into math formulas, then do the calculations. By working it out manually by hand, we get a feel for the math, an instinct for it.

I learned trend following the same way.

What is trend following?

Trend following or trend trading is a trading strategy according to which one should buy an asset when its price trend goes up, and sell when its trend goes down, expecting price movements to continue.”

My first introduction to the term “trend following” was John Murphy‘s Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets: A Comprehensive Guide to Trading Methods and Applications published by New York Institute of Finance in 1999. It was the first book I read clearly dedicated to charting price trends and technical analysis.

In the early 1990’s the first book I read on investment and trading was How to Make Money in Stocks: A Winning System in Good Times and Bad by William J. O’Neil. He described a systematic quantitative approach to screen for stocks with high relative price strength, high earnings growth, and then determine the entry and exit viewing a price chart. O’Neil’s research discovered the best stocks display seven common traits just before they make their biggest gains.  O’Neil calls his strategy the CAN SLIM® Investment System. The CAN SLIM® system for deciding what to buy is based on things like strong earnings growth, which is believed to be the primary driver of a stocks price trend. Once he has screened for this criteria, O’Neil applies trend following to stocks because he requires them to be in a positive trend.

After researching and applying his investment system for years in the late 1990’s, I wanted to create my own system that fit me.  My first interest was to become more advanced in understanding and identifying directional price trends. Naturally, that was the beginning of my extensive research that began with studying every book I could find on technical analysis and completing every training program I could.

I went on to read over 500 books covering a broad range of portfolio management topics including trading, technical analysis, and maths like probability and statistics. I wanted to understand how markets interact with each other, what typically drives trends, and what trends look like. Studying price trends naturally led me to investigate investor sentiment, trading psychology, and investor psychology. I have always had a strong interest in math and I think in terms of systems and algorithms, so fifteen years ago I shifted from looking at charts visually to testing and developing trading systems based on price trends.

By 2006, I had already been testing and developing quantitative computerized trading systems for a few years, but I was still also working on the craft of charting and CAN SLIM®. In 2006, I flew out to Santa Monica, CA to attend the first CAN SLIM® Masters Program training with O’Neil and his portfolio managers and passed the exam for the CAN SLIM® Masters certification. I also had become skilled at all kinds of charting including bar charts, point & figure charting, and candlestick charting. I believe becoming a craftsman at all of these different methods provided me with unique skills to understand price trends, how markets interact, and developing computerized trading systems.

I have spent over two decades fully immersed in learning about methods of identifying trends and systems and how to trade them across multiple time frames and multiple markets. My own experience started with basic charting, evolved with more technical analysis tools, then I developed computerized trading systems based on the knowledge and skills I cultivated. Reading books (or writing them) only discovers knowledge. The only way to develop skill is through the intentional practice of actually doing it.

Before I share one of the first things I read on trend following, I want to explain there is more than one way to execute a trend system.

Whether you are an investor who invests in an investment program or a trader who makes the portfolio management decisions in an investment program, you have to choose which fits you and your own beliefs. I can only tell you what I believe. What you believe is true, for you. As I have been successful doing what I do, I can only tell you that the key to success if finding what fits you. Reading information like this is intended to help you decide what you believe and what you don’t believe.

I see tactical traders applying two main methods for trend following.

Some of them say they are “rules-based” others say they are “systematic”, but we don’t often see them say they are “discretionary” even if they are. Here is how I see it.

Discretionary trend following trading and investment decisions can include a wide range of operations, but I’m specifically talking about a discretionary trend follower. A discretionary trend follower is someone who looks at a chart, sees the signal, sees that it looks right, and pulls the trigger. The discretionary trend follower may be rules-based and may have a systematic process, but the discretionary trend follower is ultimately making the decision to buy or sell.

Systematic trend following trading and investment decisions apply a set of rules and procedures for trading and investment decisions. To me, a trend follower can be systematic but also be discretionary. A systematic “discretionary” trend follower may be still discretionary but has rules and a process. For example, they look at a chart, see the signal, see that it looks right, and pulls the trigger. Or, a trend follower can be systematic and automated by a computerized trading system that generates the signals. However, when the professional investment industry says “systematic trading” or “systematic trend following” we usually mean more automated and mechanical.

Automated Systematic trend following is necessarily systematic because it’s when we use a computer program to generate the signals automatically. But, a fully systematic trend follower who is automated has a program that not only generates a trend following signal but also generates trade instructions to the broker. A fully mechanical and automated trend following system is computerized to the point that it enters the trades.

I explained these operational methods so you will know where I am coming from as you read about trend following in a technical analysis book. Which of these you believe is best is up to you. I believe that either discretionary trend following or systematic with automation both have the potential to work. It’s just a matter of which method fits you. There are potential advantages and disadvantages of both methods of application and depending on your personal preference, you’ll see them that way. If you are an investor in an investment program, you need to invest with a portfolio manager that fits your preference. If you are a trend following trader, you may lean toward one or the other.

Some traders simply like looking at charts and making their decision that way. They need to see the signal and see that it looks right according to their rules to get the confidence to execute. Others may not be so skilled at seeing the signal on a chart, or maybe they don’t want to spend their time doing it so we can program a computerized system. It seems many new systematic traders weren’t good at discretionary decisions using charts, so their backtesting makes them feel more confident. Only time will tell if these newer systematic traders will be able to follow their automated systems when they invariably don’t perform as they hoped all the time.

Ultimately, it comes down to beliefs and confidence. If you aren’t confident in your ability to see the signal and execute from a chart consistently, then an automated system may help. Some trend followers gain more confidence seeing the signal and pulling the trigger. Those same trend followers would likely have difficulty executing system generated trades.

I often hear things like “our systematic model removes the emotion”, which is far from the truth. Anyone who believes an automated system will remove their emotional issues will eventually experience a whole new set of emotions they may not have felt yet. But, some have a real problem with pulling the trigger, so an automated system may help if they have someone else execute the trades. For example, a professional money management firm like mine has professional traders who execute our trades. But, this still doesn’t assure anyone the trend follower will be able to follow the system through different market conditions.

If someone lacks the self-discipline required to pull the trigger, execute the trades, and follow whatever systems they follow, no method or automation will help. If a trader or investor lacks self-discipline, that issue has to be resolved another way before they’ll find success.

I know at least 100 or so professional investment managers who have been tactical trading including trend following a few decades. I’ve seen a range of experiences and outcomes. I can tell you that it isn’t easy. The only people who will say it is are those who aren’t actually doing it. Developing an edge either personally as a discretionary trader or through an automated trading system requires a tremendous amount of knowledge, skills, and self-discipline. Few have it, but some of us do. I believe in human performance because I’ve experienced it first hand. It’s like hockey or Indy racing. Anyone can attempt it, but only the most dedicated will achieve long-term success. Rest assured, discretionary or systematic, it’s still a human endeavor as long as it’s their money.

By now, you may be wondering what I believe and what I do.

I do a combination of these. I am Man + Machine.

I started charting over two decades ago and applied what I knew to develop computerized systems fifteen years ago. I still enjoy drawing charts like I share here on ASYMMETRY® Observations to see how trends are unfolding. I have several systems that are fully automated that trade all kinds of markets. I’ve learned a lot from just operating them for so long. But ultimately, I use my systems to inform decisions and generate signals and I have the necessary discipline to pull the trigger by sending instructions to my professional traders who execute my trades. That’s what works for me. What works for others may be different. I know where I am sitting right now and it’s where I want to be.

Without further ado, I present one of the first things I read on trend following published in 1999. As you will see, trend following and technical analysis are related. Trend following uses technical indicators like trend lines, moving averages, directional movement, and momentum to generate signals for following trends.

John Murphy is a well-known technical analyst whose books I have read for over two decades. His first book I read was Technical Analysis of the Futures Markets published in 1986 which was charting applied to commodities futures. One of my first introductions to the “trend following” strategy was John Murphy’s Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets published in 1999. I share the following with permission from John Murphy. He starts with the philosophy or rationale of technical analysis, which has an objective of following trends in hopes they will continue. The rest of the book describes many ways to actually identify trends.

Excerpt from Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets:

“There are three premises on which the technical approach is based:

  • Market action discounts everything.
  • Prices move in trends.
  • History repeats itself.

The statement “market action discounts everything” forms what is probably the cornerstone of technical analysis. Unless the full significance of this first premise is fully understood and accepted, nothing else that follows makes much sense. The technician believes that anything that can possibly affect the price— fundamentally, politically, psychologically, or otherwise— is actually reflected in the price of that market. It follows, therefore, that a study of price action is all that is required.

All the technician is really claiming is that price action should reflect shifts in supply and demand. If demand exceeds supply, prices should rise. If supply exceeds demand, prices should fall.

The technician then turns this statement around to arrive at the conclusion that if prices are rising, for whatever the specific reasons, demand must exceed supply and the fundamentals must be bullish. If prices fall, the fundamentals must be bearish.

Most technicians would probably agree that it is the underlying forces of supply and demand, the economic fundamentals of a market, that cause bull and bear markets. The charts do not in themselves cause markets to move up or down. They simply reflect the bullish or bearish psychology of the marketplace.

As a rule, chartists do not concern themselves with the reasons why prices rise or fall. Very often, in the early stages of a price trend or at critical turning points, no one seems to know exactly why a market is performing a certain way.

While the technical approach may sometimes seem overly simplistic in its claims, the logic behind this first premise— that markets discount everything— becomes more compelling the more market experience one gains.

It follows then that if everything that affects market price is ultimately reflected in market price, then the study of that market price is all that is necessary.

By studying price charts and a host of supporting technical indicators, the chartist in effect lets the market tell him or her which way it is most likely to go. The chartist does not necessarily try to outsmart or outguess the market.

All of the technical tools discussed later on are simply techniques used to aid the chartist in the process of studying market action.

The chartist knows there are reasons why markets go up or down. He or she just doesn’t believe that knowing what those reasons are is necessary in the forecasting process.

Prices Move in Trends

The concept of trend is absolutely essential to the technical approach. Here again, unless one accepts the premise that markets do in fact trend, there’s no point in reading any further.

The whole purpose of charting the price action of a market is to identify trends in early stages of their development for the purpose of trading in the direction of those trends. In fact, most of the techniques used in this approach are trend following in nature, meaning that their intent is to identify and follow existing trends.

There is a corollary to the premise that prices move in trends— a trend in motion is more likely to continue than to reverse. This corollary is, of course, an adaptation of Newton’s first law of motion. Another way to state this corollary is that a trend in motion will continue in the same direction until it reverses.

This is another one of those technical claims that seems almost circular. But the entire trend following approach is predicated on riding an existing trend until it shows signs of reversing.”

 

He explained the philosophy or rationale of technical analysis, which has an objective of following trends in hopes they will continue. The rest of the book describes many ways to actually identify trends.

As I see it, trend following uses technical indicators to generate signals for following trends.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

The observations shared in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Betting on price momentum

“Don’t fight the tape.”

“Make the trend your friend.”

“Cut your losses and let your winners run.”

“These Wall Street maxims all mean the same thing—bet on price momentum. Of all the beliefs on Wall Street, price momentum makes efficient market theorists howl the loudest. The defining principle of their theory is that you cannot use past prices to predict future prices. A stock may triple in a year, but according to efficient market theory, that will not affect next year. Efficient market theorists also hate price momentum because it is independent of all accounting variables. If buying winning stocks works, then stock prices have “memories” and carry useful information about the future direction of a stock.”

James O’Shaughnessy, What Works on Wall Street: A Guide to the Best-Performing Investment Strategies of All Time 1st Edition (1996) 

 

Investment management can take many years of cycles and regimes to understand an edge.

It takes at minimum a full market cycle including both bull/bear markets to declare an edge in an investment management track record.

But we also have different regimes. For example, each bull market can be different as they are driven by unique return drivers. Some are more inflationary from real economic expansion driving up prices. Others are driven by external manipulation, like the Fed intervention.

I’ve been managing ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical for fourteen years. It’s an unconstrained, flexible, adaptable, go-anywhere global tactical program without the limitations of a fixed benchmark. I pursue absolute returns applying dynamic risk management and unconstrained tactical trading decisions across a broad universe of global currency, bonds, stocks, and commodities.

So, I can tell you the bull market 2003-07 was a regime of rising commodities, foreign currency, and international producers of commodities. In this bull market, U.S. equities have dominated. We can see that in the chart below. If your exposure up until 2008 was only U.S. stocks, you would be disappointed as Emerging Markets countries like China and Brazil were much stronger as was commodities. We can also see how those markets have lagged since the low in 2009.

Everything is impermanent, nothing lasts forever, so this too shall change eventually.  Those who believe the next decade will be like the past do not understand the starting point matters, the return drivers, and how markets interact with each other. Past performance is never a guarantee of future results.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

Investment results are probabilistic, never a sure thing. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

Stock pickers market? Sector rotation with stocks for asymmetric reward to risk

After yesterdays 1.1% gain for the S&P 500, it is back in positive territory for the year. It’s been a very volatile start for 2018 with an abnormally strong trend in U.S. stocks late 2017 continued in January only to be wiped out in February. Below is a visual representation, showing the period November 2017 to the low last month. I point that out to show how quickly a trend can change and prior gains of 12% in just a three-month time frame and be erased in a -10% decline over 9 days. Most of the decline was in two days over that period.

With that said, as the broad stock market is lagging in its third month of the year so far, two sectors are leading. Consumer Discretionary (XLY)  and Technology (XLK). At Shell Capital, we monitor global market trends at the broad market level like the S&P 500 which is diversified across 500 stocks that are a part of 10 sectors. These sectors are tradable via ETFs. We can quickly get broad exposure to the overall stock market, or we can get more granular and get exposure to a sector in a low-cost structure with Sector ETFs.  I also monitor the individual stocks inside the sector ETF. When the overall market is in a positive trend, most of the stocks in a sector should be trending up. But, when the overall market has struggled to trend up, like this year-to-date, fewer stocks are trending up inside a sector.

The popular narrative becomes “it’s a stock pickers market.”

I don’t say that myself, I just observe when it is “a stock pickers market” naturally through my daily quantitative research. Here are some examples of my observation.

I pointed out yesterday in Buying demand dominated selling pressure in the stock market that only 32% of the 500 stocks in the S&P 500 are above their 50-day moving average. After yesterdays stock market gain, the participation increased to 40%. The 50-day moving average is a short-term trend indicator, so if 60% of the stocks are below that trend line, we can infer “most stocks are in short-term downtrends.” As of yesterdays close, only 203 (40%) of the S&P 500 are above their 50-day moving average, which means 297 are below it. You can probably see if the price trend continues up, we should see more and more stocks participate in the trend. In fact, if we don’t see more stocks participate, it necessarily means only a few stocks are driving the broad index trend up. I would consider that “a stock pickers market.” Of course, the trick is to see this in advance, or early enough in the stage to capitalize on it. We don’t have to know in advance what’s going to happen next, and we don’t, we just need to observe it soon enough to capture some positive asymmetry (P>L).

I like a visual representation, so here is the chart of the S&P 500 Percent of Stocks Above 50 Day Moving Average. I colored the top part of the chart red and labeled it “Higher Risk Zone” and the lower part green with the label “Lower Risk Zone”. The observation is when 80% of stocks are already trending positive that momentum is a good thing, but as a skilled risk manager, I begin to prepare for change. After most stocks are already trending up, the stock market has been trending up, so a skilled risk manager prepares for a countertrend reversal that is inevitable at some point. As I shared in my observation near the low, Stock Market Analysis of the S&P 500  when nearly all the stocks were already in negative trends as a skilled risk-taker, I look for that to reverse, too.

 

This is only a small glimpse at what I look at for illustration purposes to make the point how I can quantify a “stock pickers market.” After 83% of stocks were already in downtrends I shifted from a risk manager stance to risk-taker mode looking. That is, shifting from a reversal down in January after prices had already trended up to an extreme, to preparing for the decline to end after the stock index quickly dropped -10% and my many indicators were signaling me when and where to pay attention. I shared this to represent that I was not surprised to see certain stocks lead a trend direction when so many had shifted from positive trends to negative trends in a short-term time frame.

This leads me to my main point, which is very simple. A simple way to observe a “stock pickers market” is to see that certain stocks are leading the trend. Because so may stocks were in short-term downtrends, it isn’t a surprise to see a few strong relative strength leaders inside a sector. For example, in the Sector ETF performance table below, two leading sectors are Consumer Discretionary (XLY)  and Technology (XLK). They are up about 6-7% as the broad stock index is up 1.77%. Let’s see what is driving their stronger relative momentum.

Looking inside the Sector for the Leading Stocks 

Reviewing the holdings of the Consumer Discretionary $XLY ETF,  Amazon.com Inc $AMZN is 20.69% of the Consumer Discretionary Sector and has gained +30.28% for the year. A 20% weighting of a stock that has gained 30% results in a 6% contribution to the portfolio return. That is, this one large position has contributed 100% of the sectors return year-to-date. There are 84 stocks in the ETF. This doesn’t mean the other 83 stocks are flat with no price change. Instead, some of them were also positive for the year and some are negative. So far this year, they have offset each other. Some stocks in the sector have gained more than Amazon, but it makes the simple example because it’s exposure is the largest at 20%. Netflix $NFLX, for example, is the sector ETFs biggest gainer up 64%, but it’s 4.63% of the portfolio. However, because it’s gain is so strong this year its contribution at the portfolio level is still significant at 3% of the 5.66% YTD gain in the sector ETF. That is an extreme example. Why is it extreme? Let’s look at price charts of the year-to-date price trend, then the drawdown, which expresses the ASYMMETRY® ratio. The ASYMMETRY® ratio is a ratio between profit and loss, upside vs. downside, or drawdown vs. total return.

First, we observe the price trend for 2018 of the Consumer Discretionary Sector ETF $XLY, Netflix $NFLX, and Amazon $AMZN. The divergence is clear. But, you may notice they all had a drawdown a few weeks ago. All to often I see the upside presented, but not enough about the path we would have to endure to achieve it. To get a complete picture of asymmetric reward to risk, we want to see the drawdown, too, so we understand the ASYMMETRY® ratio.

Those are some big impressive short-term gains in those stocks. Clearly, this past performance may not be an indication of future results.  Too bad we can’t just know for sure in advance which is going to trend up with such velocity.  We can’t catch every trend, but if we look in the right way we may find some. In order to take a position in them, we’d have to be willing to experience some downside risk, too. As a portfolio manager, I decide how much my risk is in my positions and at the portfolio level by predefining when I’ll exit a losing position. But, to understand how much downside is possible in stocks like this and the sector ETF, I can examine the historical drawdown. We’ve seen a drawdown in the stock market already this year. Below we see the Consumer Sector ETF drawdown was about -8% a few weeks ago. Amazon wasn’t more, even though it’s gain is much more than the sector. That’s what I’m calling positive asymmetry and good looking asymmetric reward to risk in regard to the trend dynamics. Netflix declined -13%, but its gain is much higher. This is what leading stocks are supposed to look like. They have their risk and they could decline a lot more than the market if investors lose their enthusiasm for them, but we can manage that risk with our exit and drawdown controls.

I often say that it doesn’t matter how much the return is if the risk and volatility are so high you tap out before it is achieved. To better understand that, I want to show two more charts of these stocks. Below is what the YTD price change looked like at the February low. If investors watch their holdings closely and have emotional reactions, you can see how this would be viewed as “I was up 45% and now only 30%.” Many investors (and professional advisors) have difficulty holding on to strong trends when they experience every move.

One more chart to illustrate how it doesn’t matter how much the return is if the risk and volatility are so high you tap out before it is achieved. I don’t believe we can just buy and hold and reach our objective of asymmetric reward to risk. I believe risk must be managed, directed and controlled. To make the point, below are the historical drawdowns that have been -60% to -90% in these three. It doesn’t matter how much the return is if the risk and volatility are so high you tap out before it is achieved! To extract positive asymmetric reward to risk, we must necessarily do something different than buy and hold.

This may make you wonder: Why buy a sector ETF if you can buy the strongest stocks?

The divergence isn’t normally this wide. In a trending market, more of the other stocks would normally be participating in a trend. This is why I first explained that in an upward trending market we normally see the majority of stocks eventually trending together. When that is true, the sector ETF provides good exposure and limits the selection risk of just one or two stocks. Make no mistake, individual stocks are riskier. Individual stocks are more subject to negative news like disappointing earnings reports, negative product outlook, or key executives leaving the company, etc. So, individual stocks are more volatile and subject to trend in much wider swings both up and down. But for me, I apply the same risk management systems to predefine my risk at the point of entry drawdown controls as the trend unfolds in the stock, up or down.

Yes, it’s been a “stock pickers market” so far and that trend may continue. It just means that fewer stocks are leading the way for now and in a healthy trend more stocks will participate if the short-term uptrend continues to make higher highs and higher lows. As a tactical portfolio manager, my focus is on what seems to offer the positive ASYMMETRY® of a positive asymmetric reward to risk.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

Investment results are probabilistic, never a sure thing. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Selling pressure overwhelms buying demand for stocks for the third day in a row

Well, I guess by saying on Tuesday I’m planning to write a comment when the stock index closes up or down 1% or more I’ve turned myself into a regular ole Mark Twain.

If you’ve ever read the “about” page, I poke some fun:

Mark Twain’s mother once said:
“I only wish Mark had spent more time making money rather than just writing about it”.

I go on to say:

Today there is no shortage of writings about the capital markets and portfolio management. Many who write about money and the management of it provide no evidence to suggest their beliefs are useful. That is, they do a lot of talking and writing, a lot less doing. We are left to wonder if they have good results. The author of ASYMMETRY® Observations is no Mark Twain.

Ok, so March isn’t getting off to the best start so far. The stock market as measured by the S&P 500 closed down -1.45% today. Below is the intraday chart. This index was down most of the day, but it did trend up off of its low after 2PM.

stock market spx spy march 1 2018

Zooming out to a few months instead of intraday, the SPY didn’t care at all that I drew that black line to show the prior low. It traded right below it. Of course, we don’t own this index at Shell Capital, so I am just sharing this as an observation.

stock market index asymmetry

We can get more granular by looking at the individual sector changes instead of the broader S&P 500 index that includes some of them all. Below, I show that the Utility sector was the only sector in the green (barely), which is no surprise since it has been the laggard for a while.

sector trend rotation march 2018

We can drill down even more into the sectors and see the ETF subsectors. Here we see some shades of green.

sector trend following

Next, we could look at stocks within the sectors, but that’s enough detail for now.

I will add that today was a global market decline as several other countries stock markets participated. Japan declined more while Mexico, Peru, and Egypt gained. The emerging markets index which includes Mexico only declined -0.19% today.

global ETF trend outlook march 2018

Finally, below is the same table of bar charts I used earlier in February Global Market Trends, but this one is only the past three days. The U.S. stock market has declined the past three days, so I wanted to see what other markets have done over the same period. Let’s just say that a diversified portfolio of global asset allocation wouldn’t have helped since many markets are down like commodities and international markets.

global asset allocation trend

If you haven’t read February Global Market Trends I encourage you to. Near the end, I discussed if an investor should pay too much attention to daily market swings. My purpose of writing this is to summarize what happened and that is always necessarily in the past. The future may be different.

How does this affect us at Shell Capital? I predefine my risk by knowing in advance when I’ll exit my positions if they decline. I do it to control my risk in each position and for drawdown control at the portfolio level. So, I respond accordingly.

If this keeps up, it looks like I’ll be eating dinner at my desk every evening, typing away like Mark Twain 🙂

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

Investment results are probabilistic, never a sure thing. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

February Global Market Trends

After a very positive January for U.S. and international stocks, in February it only took 10 days for the S&P 500 to decline -12% intraday and a -10% drawdown based on closing price.

stock market decline drawdown februrary 2018

Yet, February ended with the S&P 500 only down -3.5% after that -12% intra-month drawdown.  For the month, International (MSCI EAFE) and Emerging Markets declined the most viewing the below board based indexes. The U.S. Dollar gained 1.8%.

global market returns february 2018 loss drawdown

Next, we view February global market returns relative to the S&P 500 stock index by holding it constant. This visual shows us how much markets gained/lost net of the S&P 500, Though in the absolute trend table above I showed bonds declined in absolute return, they gained relative to the S&P 500,

global market trend returns relative to spx spy S&P 500

Of course, one month isn’t a trend. In fact, I’m going to explain how this is an intentional logical inconsistency. Speaking of one time period in isolation, be it a month, year, or series of years is just an arbitrary time frame. What’s worse is viewing just the result over a time frame, like the month of February above, in just a table format.

A return stream is precisely that; a stream. A return stream is a continuous price trend in a continuous specified direction. Continuous is forming an unbroken whole; without interruption. So, I like to view return streams as price trends on a chart so I can see how the trend really unfolded over the period. Observed as a visual price trend, we see both the good and the bad of the price action along the way. You can probably see how it does that better than a simple performance table, monthly return % of the period or the bar chart above.

stock market decline februrary 2018

In the chart above, we see how much the price trends of those markets declined along the way before closing the month yesterday. I wrote about the short-term risk reversal in Stock Market Analysis of the S&P 500 suggesting it may reverse back up at least temporarily and retrace some loss and it did.

Now, what is essential about looking at performance data and trends is what the investor experiences. Investors experience what they choose to experience. For example, suppose and the investor is fully invested in the stock market, they could experience the month one of three ways.

  • If the investor only looks at his or her month-end statement, they would experience either the month end “-3.5%”.
  • If the investor watches their account or market indexes closely every day, they experienced every daily move and the full -12% decline and then some recovery.
  • Some may not pay any attention at all either because they are disinterested or they have an investment manager they trust to manage their risk-taking and risk management for them.

Investors and traders get to choose what time frame they watch things. I’ve always observed that “watching it too closely” can lead to emotional mistakes for many. For me, I’m paying attention and may zoom in and pay more attention when trends get more volatile or seem to reach an extreme. But, I’m a tactical portfolio manager, it’s what I do. I can view short term or long term trends alike with self-discipline. I have an edge that has been quantified by a long track record of 14 years in the current portfolio I manage.

I said this recently on Twitter:

If the investor doesn’t like to see such losses like those experienced in many markets in February, they may choose to instead not be fully invested in stocks all the time. That’s what I do. I’m not invested in any specific market all the time. My exposure to risk and return increases and decreases over time based on trends and my risk systems. I intentionally increase and decrease my exposure to the possibility of loss and gain. I’m also unconstrained so I can do it across any global market like bonds, currency, stocks, commodities, or alternatives like REITs, inverse (shorting), or volatility.

According to the American Association of Individual Investors, the decline was so quick most individual investors didn’t seem to respond:

Majority of Investors Avoided Taking Action in Recent Market Correction

“This week’s Sentiment Survey special question asked AAII members what portfolio action, if any, they took in response to the recent market correction. The majority of respondents (62%) said they didn’t make any change or only made a small change. Many of these respondents described themselves as being focused on the long term, viewing this month’s correction as being only temporary in nature or not severe enough to warrant any action. A few of these respondents described the correction as lasting too short of a time for them to take advantage of it. Nearly 33% respondents said they took advantage of the decline to buy stocks or funds. Some said they took advantage of the reduced prices to either add to current positions or buy new holdings. Just 7% of respondents said they sold stocks during the correction. A small number of respondents said they sold some positions and then bought new positions.”

I say investors should find and do what helps them, not make it worse. Know yourself, know your risk, and know your risk tolerance. That’s what we do.

So, that is what happened during the month of February, and a little asymmetric observation to go with it.

 

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

Investment results are probabilistic, never a sure thing. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

The most important rule of trading is to play great defense, not great offense.

It is fascinating to read Market Wizards: Interviews With Top Traders published in 1989 again and see how much the portfolio management strategy of another ole boy from Tennessee is nearly identical to my own. I read the book the first time in the early 1990’s so it may have had an impact on me as a young tactical trader as I evolved over time.

“The most important rule of trading is to play great defense, not great offense. Every day I assume every position I have is wrong. I know where my stop risk points are going to be. I do that so I can define my maximum possible drawdown. Hopefully, I spend the rest of the day enjoying positions that are going in my direction. If they are going against me, then I have a game plan for getting out.”

Paul Tudor Jones in Market Wizards: Interviews With Top Traders (p. 123). Wiley. Kindle Edition. Schwager, Jack D..

 

Asset Class Returns are Driven by Sector Exposure

The popular U. S. stock indexes closed in the red for the year Monday, erasing their big starting gains in January. As I mentioned many times; quick gains can be lost even faster. The financial news has mostly been quoting the Dow Jones Industrial Average because it had gained the most year-to-date. It had gained over 7% in January, but lost that gain, and then some, in two days. After just a few days, the Dow Jones dropped -14% in the futures market and -8% on a closing basis. That was enough to wipe out recent gains and mark the index down nearly -2% for the year.

I discussed the market risk in our portfolio commentary for our investment management clients, and we were positioned for it. I also explained it in In remembrance of euphoria: Whatever happened to Stuart and Mr. P? and In the final stages of a bull market. So, it should have been no surprise.

But, when I looked at the asset class performance table, I saw some interesting divergence. Large Cap Growth is still outperforming Small Value. As most of the U.S. equity asset classes were in the red, Large Growth remained positive on the year. I thought I would share a look as to why.

I am a tactical portfolio manager, so my focus is on finding trends and shifting to the trends I want and avoiding those I don’t. That’s a lot different than “asset allocation.” Financial advisors who create asset allocation models for their investment clients normally allocate into funds in the asset class style box. This is also typical with 401(k) plans. They offer funds that provide broad exposure to an asset class style box, rather than the individual stock market sectors I prefer to focus on. So, we often hear style box asset classes quoted like “Large Growth is beating Small Value” or “Large Caps ard leading Small Caps.”

According to Morningstar:

The Morningstar Style Box is a nine-square grid that provides a graphical representation of the “investment style” of stocks and mutual funds. For stocks and stock funds, it classifies securities according to market capitalization (the vertical axis) and growth and value factors (the horizontal axis).

Below is a recent performance for the equity markets. As you see, U.S. Large Growth was leading with a 2.89% gain year-to-date, Small Value was down -4.83%.  When we observe such a divergence, it makes us curious what is causing it.

 

To understand what is driving the return, we take a look inside to see “what is different.” Below is the sector exposure breakdown of Large-Cap Growth.  We can understand the sector exposure of the iShares Morningstar Large-Cap Growth ETF. Clearly, the big standout is heavy exposure to Information Technology. The other two larger exposures are Consumer Discretionary and Health Care.

Large Growth Stocks Outperform Small

Next, we observe the sector exposure of the Small Value asset class. We can see the sector exposure in the holdings of iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Value ETF.

The Small Value index has 22% exposure to Financials since many financial sector stocks are smaller companies. The other top sector exposures are Industrials, Consumer Discretionary, Real Estate, and Energy.

Small Value Stocks Underperforming Why are

What is different?

Clearly, the single largest difference is that Large Growth is very heavily exposed to the trend in Technology sector. Technology is 50% of Large Growth while it’s only 8% of Small Value. On the other hand, Financials is only 5% of Large Growth but its the largest exposure in Small Value at 22% of the index.

Stock market asset class returns are driven by their sector exposure. Recently, the Tech sector has been one of the mightiest trends, so it’s helped Large Growth also appear more dominant over equity styles that hold less of it. I would preferably look inside and find out what return driver is causing the difference, then get exposure to that trend in momentum.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

You can follow ASYMMETRY® Observations by click on on “Get Updates by Email” on the top right or follow us on Twitter.

Investment results are probabilistic, never a sure thing. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

In the final stages of a bull market

In the final stages of a bull market, we normally see a parabolic move to the upside, a final blowoff that gets in the last investors. Buying demand is the response of investor euphoria like I pointed out last week.

An indication of a parabolic move is seen in price channels and confirmed with momentum oscillators. Only time will tell if this is it, but in the chart, I highlight the S&P 500 stock index broke out above an upper moving average channel.

spy spx trend

Price trends usually peak with volatile swings up and down before a larger leg down. Some swing tighter than others, but there is normally a period of “indecision” that precedes an intermediate trend change or drawdown. A drawdown is a decline in the value of an investment or market below its all-time high. Below is the period leading up to the -15% drawdown in the stock index late 2015 – 2016. In the green box, I show the price trend entered a period of swings up and down before breaking an upward trend, drifting more sideways, then a-15% decline.

spy eem stock market

Next is the swings in the S&P 500 entered into what became a -18% decline in 2011. My point here is that larger legs down don’t necessarily happen all at once, there are indecisive swings that eventually fall apart.

spy 2011 decline

The top in 2007 presented much larger swings and of course ended up declining -56% over nearly two years afterward. I believe these swings up and down before a larger trend unfolds is indecision among traders and investors. Again, my point here is that larger legs down don’t necessarily happen all at once, we instead observe indecisive swings that eventually fall apart.

spy spx 2007 stock market top

Lastly, here is the 1999 – 2000 peak that also presented wings like the previous peaks. The stock market trend broke above a simple channel a few times before entering a -50% bear market.

stock market top 1999

The current trend just recently stretched above the channel and at the same time, was very overbought for months as measured by the momentum oscillators. This happened at the same time bullish investor sentiment measures was reaching record highs and volatility at historical lows. However, as seen in observations above, the U.S. stock market could just now be entering into a phase of swings up and down that could last for months or years, or it could fall apart sooner. Either way, I make this point for situational awareness.

As a portfolio manager, I don’t need to know for sure what’s going to happen next.  I just know what I’ll do next as trends unfold.

Only time will tell if this is the early stages of an end of an aged bull market or just an interruption of a euphoric “melt up”. We don’t need to know when a major top is in. It doesn’t require an ON/OFF switch. When a big bear market does come, it will be made up of many swings up and down along the way over many months. People will crave to be in, out, in out, in, out, as it all unfolds.  Adaptability is essential: the consistent willingness and ability to alter attitudes, thoughts, and behaviors to appropriately respond to actual or anticipated change in the environment.

Clearly, it’s the swings we have to be prepared for… if we want to avoid a loss trap.  In a loss trap, investors get caught in a loss and have a hard time getting out. When they lose more than they can afford or more than their risk tolerance, they are prone to tap out after large declines. To avoid the loss trap, know your risk tolerance and actively manage risk within that tolerance.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

Investment results are probabilistic, never a sure thing.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

The observations shared on this website are for general information only and are not specific advice, research, or buy or sell recommendations for any individual. Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal an investor must be willing to bear. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The presence of this website on the Internet shall in no direct or indirect way raise an implication that Shell Capital Management, LLC is offering to sell or soliciting to sell advisory services to residents of any state in which the firm is not registered as an investment advisor. Use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

In remembrance of euphoria: Whatever happened to Stuart and Mr. P?

I have recently found myself reminiscing about the late 1990’s – specifically the grand euphoric year of 1999. If you aren’t sure why then maybe you aren’t paying attention. Sometimes not paying attention is a good thing if it prevents you from following a herd off a cliff.

The four most expensive words in the English language are “this time it’s different.” – John Templeton

Lately, I’ve been reminiscing about the tech stock bubble, the .com’s, and how the Nasdaq QQQ replaced the Dow Jones Industrial Average as the favorite index by 1999. Then there were all the infamous statements like “you don’t understand the New Economy”. We’ve been talking about the funny commercials from the baby trader to the college-age guy helping the mature executive start trading online, to “Be Bullish”.

Do you remember Stuart and Mr. P? Back in 1999, there were traditional “stockbrokers” who were registered with a brokerage firm, who bought and sold stocks, bonds, and options for individual and institutional clients. If you were a stockbroker back then, like I was, you probably remember it well. Online trading was the beginning of the end for the traditional “stockbroker” firms earning a $200 commission to buy or sell 100 shares. The great thing about the evolution of online trading is it lowered trading costs dramatically. For someone like me who wanted to be a tactical money manager anyway, that was a great thing. I embraced it and went on to start my investment management company. But the point of this observation is the investor sentiment in 1999. The video below is amazing to watch 20 years later. But what fascinates me the most is how it reminds me of today; different subjects, same sentiment.

Watch:

 

That may remind you of some of the things we hear today.

Those type of commercials flooded the financial news and evening news channels in 1999. To be sure, below is a WSJ article printed about the “Let’s Light This Candle” ad on December 7, 1999. I’ll tell ya what… that’s about as close to the top as you can get.

So, I wondered, what happened to Stuart and Mr. P? 

Stuart was helping Mr. P buy Kmart stock online. Kmart was then one of America’s leading discount retailers. The Kmart Corporation was the second largest U.S. discount retailer and major competitor to Walmart. Kmart filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January 2002. Just two years after Stuart helped Mr. P buy shares online it filed for the largest ever retail bankruptcyKmart was later bought by Sears, which is now a failing company. At least Mr. P was wise enough to only buy 100 shares, young Stuart wanted him to buy 500 shares! They had no position size method to determine how much to buy based on risk, which would include a predefined exit. It is unlikely Mr. P had a predefined exit in place to exit the stock to cut the loss short. During that time, investors were only thinking about what to buy. They rarely considered how and when to exit a stock with a small loss to avoid a larger loss. After such a strong bull market, who is thinking about the risk of loss?

For those of us who remember, in the late 1990’s most investors weren’t just buying the largest retailers – they were buying technology. In hindsight, that period is now referred to as the “tech boom” or “tech bubble”. That’s because almost everyone wanted to buy tech stocks. Literally, even the most conservative seniors were cashing out bank CD’s to buy tech stock.  And… I’m not even going to get into the .com stocks, most of which no longer exist from that time.

Whether you remember the trend as my friends and I do or not, we can use historical price charts to see what happened. Below is the Technology Select Sector SPDR® ETF  since its inception 12/16/1998 to today. I’m starting with the full history to see the initial gain, before the waterfall decline. The Technology Select Sector SPDR® Fund seeks to:

“Provide precise exposure to companies from technology hardware, storage, and peripherals; software; diversified telecommunication services; communications equipment; semiconductors and semiconductor equipment; internet software and services; IT services; electronic equipment, instruments, and components; and wireless telecommunication services.”

Those were the most popular sectors, aside from the actual Internet stocks.

Below is what happened from December 9, 1999, when WSJ printed the article about the ad because it was so interesting and popular, to now. After nearly 20 years an investor buying the diversified tech sector would have just recently realized a profit, assuming they held on for 19 years.

Here is what that -80% drawdown looked like that lasted 19 years.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. “

George Santayana

 

This is a kickoff of a series of articles on this topic I have in queue on current global market conditions. Stay tuned…

Mike Shell is the founder of Shell Capital Management, LLC, a registered investment manager and portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

All Eyes are Now on the Potential Government Shutdown

If the U. S. Government shuts down, it will be the 19th time. Looking at the table below, it doesn’t seem a big deal. The table shows the 18 prior government shutdowns going back to 1976. It lists the start and end date of the shutdown and the gain or loss for the S&P 500 stock index. The average is only a -0.60% loss from beginning to end of the shutdown.

But, here are some considerations: 
1. It is too small of a sample size to draw a statistically significant inference. Basic probability needs 30 data points.
2. It only shows the gain/loss from beginning and end of the shutdown.
3. It doesn’t show what happened before and after those dates. Was there more movement/drawdown before or after?
4. It doesn’t show what happened in between the start and end date so it may have been worse.
5. It doesn’t consider market stage at the time of shutdown. Was it overvalued and overbought? Or was it undervalued and oversold?

The truth is; anything can happen.
We don’t know for sure how it will play out. With such a small sample size of prior events and without factoring in the market conditions at the time, what it did in the past doesn’t provide us with a good expectation.

The current condition: if the government shuts down this time:
1. It will be when the U.S. stock market is at the second most expensive fundamental valuation, ever.
2. When investor and advisor bullish sentiment has reached record highs, at this point a contrary indicator.
3. As recent momentum indicators are at the highest levels ever seen before, at this point a contrary indicator.

My solution? always be prepared that anything can happen.
I know how much risk I’m willing to take given the possible outcomes and define my risk by knowing when I’ll hedge or exit.

 

Mike Shell is the founder of Shell Capital and the Portfolio Manager of ASYMMETRY® Global Tactical.

What do wealthy people do differently?

This morning a financial planner who knows we are the investment manager to wealthy families asked me a great question:

“What do wealthy people do differently?”

I thought I would just sit here and write it out. These are my own observations over a few decades.

First, let’s define “wealthy”.

I’m going to define “wealthy” as someone who has already achieved “freedom”. Notice I said “freedom”, not just “financial freedom”. I’ve asked thousands of people over the past two decades “what is important about money to you?”. Ultimately, the question leads to one single word: “freedom”. So, there doesn’t seem to be a need to add “financial” in front of “freedom”. But, that isn’t to say you can’t have plenty of money without much freedom. You could say “Some people have far more money than they ever need but they still don’t enjoy their freedom because they keep working for more”. You may consider that person is still getting what they want. Some people just want to produce, and they never stop. They are still free. They have the freedom to keep doing what they love doing. In fact, some wealthy people are driven to create more wealth for a charity. No matter what our goals are in life, traveling, relaxing, time with family and friends, helping others, having enough capital to do what we want seems essential.

Having enough money to do what we want, when we want, seems to be the primary goal of most of us.

So, I define “wealthy” as someone who has already achieved “freedom”, regardless how he or she chooses to enjoy his or her freedom.

What do these people do differently than those who haven’t accumulated enough capital to say they are “wealthy”?

1. They save and invest money. The first thing that I have observed is that they simply save part of their income and invest it.

a. Save: They save it because they don’t spend more than they should. They save a large amount of themselves to use later. Even if they earn $X a year, they don’t the most they can for their home or carts. For example, a person earning $1 million a year may live in a $1 million neighborhood and a neighbor who earns $200,000 a year. Who do you think will be “wealthy”? One is stretched, the other is saving.

b. Invest: People who achieve “freedom” and the “wealthy” status don’t stop and just saving money in a bank account, they invest it. Wealthy people take the time to invest their money. Most of them invest with an investment manager who is fully committed to investment management.

2. Wealthy people care about their money. I know a lot of wealthy people, and I know just as many who aren’t. Those who are wealthy save and invest money, those who don’t spend it. As investment management clients, wealthy families are the first to complete forms, etc. as needed because they care about their money. They also appreciate investment managers who are on top of things as they would be.

3. Wealthy people are focused on that ONE thing they do best. Just like the book The ONE Thing: The Surprisingly Simple Truth Behind Extraordinary Results says: they are focused. If they are a Physician, they focus on being a great Physician. If they own a company, they focus on their business. If they are a country music artist, they focus on being the best they can be. If they are an engineer, that’s their focus. They do what they do best and they find other people to do the things they don’t want to do like lawn maintenance or whatever. If you want to earn more money to save and invest, focus on what earns you the most and pay others for the things you aren’t so great at or don’t want to do.

4. They take some risks and manage their risk. To achieve wealth, we have to be both risk-takers and risk managers. If we take no risks in life, we’ll have no chance of reward. Not graduating from college has some risks, but so does attending. Who we marry, how we title our assets, how we insure our assets, and how we manage our assets all have risks and the potential for reward. Wealthy people tend to take risks in that one thing they are best at. They go “all in”. But wealthy people also direct and control their risks. They try to take good risks that are worth taking. It doesn’t matter how much wealth we accumulate if we aren’t able to keep it. For example, many people can remember how much wealth they created on paper up to 2000 only to see it cut in half. They did it again up to 2007 through 2009, and it took years to break even. Wealthy people know to realize a real profit, you have to take a profit. To avoid a large loss, we have to cut losses off at some point. Proper planning and risk management are essential.

5. Everything is relative, but yet it isn’t to them. I know business owners as well as Physicians who I consider wealthy as well as musicians, and athletes. But, you don’t have to earn $500,000 a year all your life to become wealthy. You don’t have to earn it all in a short time, either. I know people who have a total $500,000 invested who are wealthy. They have “enough”, for them. Depending on the lifestyle, others may not become wealthy until they have over $5 million if they spend a few hundred thousand a year traveling, etc. I also know families with several hundred million. Everything is relative, but wealthy people don’t compare their wealth and assets to others. They aren’t “keeping up with the Joneses”. People who do that often have large debts because they buy things they can’t afford with money they don’t have. Or, they save and invest less.  Wealthy people don’t buy a new car or house because their friend does, or compare their investment account to others. Wealthy people may be more introverted when it comes to personal finance – their focus is on their own family needs.

What do the wealthy do differently? They discover how much capital they need to enable the freedom to do what they want when they want, whatever that may be. Income alone, or the neighborhood we live in, or the cars we drive, or memberships don’t signal that we are wealthy. Some wealthy people are still operating their business, practice,  or “working”. A distinction is that they want to and they could choose to do something else with their time if they want. Wealthy families have saved and invested enough money to have achieved freedom. To do that, they focus on the thing they do best. They delegate the other stuff to someone else. They care about accumulating and managing their money and managing their risks. They appreciate investment managers and wealth managers who help them do it.

Resolving Conflicts with Relative Strength

In “Relative Strength can be a source of conflict for Tactical Traders” I explained how two different momentum indicators are in conflict with each other and can lead to conflict in tactical trading decisions. Tactical traders may use many different indicators and methods to determine whether to enter, hold, or exit a position. If we look at two conflicting indicators like this, we have to avoid becoming conflicted ourselves.

To avoid the conflicts, define clearly what they are and how to use them. To do that, I’m going to mix up a bowl of Physics and Psychology.

The indicators essentially represent the same thing. They apply a different algorithm, but both are momentum measures that determine the speed of change in price movements. A key difference is that the basic Relative Strength I used is a simple price change over a period. That simple Relative Strength algorithm simply compares the price change over a period to determine which trends are stronger and which are weaker. Tactical Traders using this method of Relative Strength expect the stronger trends will continue to be stronger and the weaker trends will continue to be weaker. A trend in motion is expected to continue in that direction until some inertia comes along and changes it. You may recognize this from Physics:

Newton’s first law of motion states that “An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.” Objects tend to “keep on doing what they’re doing.” In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion. This tendency to resist changes in their state of motion is described as inertia.

Inertia: the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion.

We can say the same about investor behavior and beliefs when we look at confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.

That psychological bias is similar to the physics law of motion;

“Objects tend to keep on doing what they’re doing. In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion.”

Investor and trader behavior and Confirmation Bias seems to agree with the first law of motion.

You can probably see how we may develop our beliefs because of our environment. If we observe over time the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion then we may expect a trend to continue.

It gets more interesting. According to The Physics Classroom:

Newton’s conception of inertia stood in direct opposition to more popular conceptions about motion. The dominant thought prior to Newton’s day was that it was the natural tendency of objects to come to a rest position. Moving objects, so it was believed, would eventually stop moving; a force was necessary to keep an object moving. But if left to itself, a moving object would eventually come to rest and an object at rest would stay at rest; thus, the idea that dominated people’s thinking for nearly 2000 years prior to Newton was that it was the natural tendency of all objects to assume a rest position.

So, up until Newton’s first law of motion, people believed trends would eventually end instead of continue. In that same way, some people look for and expect recent price trends to change rather than continue.

We have discovered two different beliefs.

  • A trend in motion will stay in motion with the same speed and direction (unless acted upon by an unbalanced force).
  • A trend will eventually stop moving (a force is necessary to keep an object moving).

A Tactical Trader using Relative Strength based on the rate of change assumes that trend speed and direction will continue into the future. This is more in agreement with Newton’s first law.

A Tactical Trader using the Relative Strength Indicator, an oscillator,  assumes that trend speed and direction will oscillate between a range. If it reaches “oversold” it may reverse back up and if it reaches “overbought” it may reverse back down. This is more like the Physics beliefs prior to Newton’s first law when they expected a trend or motion to change.

To avoid conflicts between these two concepts and indicators, I define them separately as Trend Following and Countertrend.

Trend Following systems are methods that aim to buy securities that are rising and sell securities that are declining. Trend following is directional – it focuses on the direction of prices. Not all measures of Relative Strength are directional, but the one I used is. I simply ranked the sectors based on their price change over 3 months. That is an absolute ranking, but also a relative ranking. I may require the price change to be positive to enter a position. Some Relative Strength methods are only relative, so they don’t require a positive trend. They may enter the sectors that have a better price change over the period even if it’s negative.

Countertrend systems aim to bet against the recent price trend for the purpose of pursuing a capital gain or for hedging. In a strongly rising market, a countertrend strategy may believe the price is more likely to reverse. For example, the RSI is “overbought.” In a  declining market, a countertrend strategy may indicate the trend is likely to reverse back up. For example, RSI is “oversold.” The risk is, an oversold market can keep trending lower and an overbought market may keep trending up!

I believe there are directional trends that are more likely to continue than to reverse – so I apply Trend Following to them. That necessarily means I believe investors may underreact to new information causing the price trend to drift gradually over time to match supply and demand.

I also believe that trends can reach an extreme, especially in the short run, by overreacting to information or extremes in sentiments like fear and greed. Because I have observed trends reaching an extreme, I may apply overbought and oversold methods for countertrend trading.

When I see the chart below, I think:

“The trend is up, it has moved up fast enough to be overbought in the short term, so it may pull back some and then the trend may resume to the upside”.