Category Archives: Asymmetric Payoff

Bridgewater Co-CIO: The Market is Very Asymmetric Right Now

May 22, 2023 By in Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Thinking

Bridgewater Associates, Inc.Co-CIO Karen Karniol-Tambour joins Positive Sum CEO Patrick O’Shaughnessy at the 2023 Sohn Investment Conference. Below is the interview she says the market is very asymmetric right now because of the asymmetry between the upside vs. the downside, and I agree.

I’ll summarize:

If the economy enters a recession, it’s very bad for stocks, and this time the Fed is unlikely to immediately respond by lowering rates since inflation is a problem. So, the downside risk is large. It’s already priced-in to the stock market, so it won’t be a big surprise. Not a lot of upside potential.

If the economy doesn’t enter a recession, the Fed will be in a tough decision point, because inflation is unlikely to come down without a recession. If the Fed doesn’t ease like it’s already price-in, the market is going to be disappointed.

It’s asymmetric because the downside potential is greater than the upside.

The interview:

Patrick O’Shaughnessy:

What do you think that prevailing valuations, let’s say, just on like the big asset classes tell us about what the market thinks is going on? Like, what does it seem like is in prices right now, if you will, as you look at S&P 500 you know, multiples or something very basic like that?

Bridgewater Co-CIO Karen Karniol-Tambour:

WellI think the stock market is telling you that there’s going to be a modest economic slowdown, a pretty contained economic slowdown, nothing like you know a significant recession or anything like that, With that slowdown alone, the Federal Reserve is going to find that sufficient to go ease from you know, 5% to 3% extremely quickly, and that its going to do that despite where inflation is today because inflation is going to go back to totally reasonable levels that they want very very quickly. You see that kind of across stock and bond pricing you know bond pricing is telling you in places to be fine we’re not there’s no inflation from anything like resembling long term and the Fed’s about to ease pretty significantly without a significant slowdown.

Where that sort of leaves you is if the market I believe is asymmetric it’s very asymmetric because it you actually get an economic slowdown; that’s obviously very bad for stocks. I don’t have to tell you that that would be you know pretty bad for stocks. But there’s really not much of a recession priced into them it would be pretty bad. Usually the way you get out of that (as I was saying) is that every time there’s a slowdown the Central Bank just comes and eases right away. Now, not only will it be much harder for them to ease because inflation’s been more a problem. Tension is there, but that easing is already priced in and so even if they do kind of bite the bullet and say “I’m not going to worry about inflation” and ease, it’s already in the market prices it’s not going to surprise the market so much.

Then, on the other hand, if the market doesn’t slow, if the economy doesn’t slow so much, if we don’t get that kind of recession if the equity prices are right that you’re not going to get a big recession and the fed’s going to be a tough spot because I don’t really see why inflation’s going to come down with no recession. You have a very very strong labor market if nothing slows and so if they don’t ease like it’s already price they’re going to be disappointing. So, every day once we hit summer the Federal Reserve doesn’t pivot and ease that’s effectively a tightening relative to what’s priced in that’s also disappointing.

That’s a lot of room for disappointment that can happen whether the economy is strong or weak.

Patrick O’Shaughnessy:

That’s all sort of like what I’ll call you know relatively near to intermediate term future how do you think about portfolio positioning in light of that general view when you know like you for a long time it’s paid to just be long risk and have a very simple portfolio because of everything you’ve discussed. How’s that different today like how would you how do you think about positioning against this asymmetric setup that you described

Karen Karniol-Tambour:

I think it’s one of the toughest times to be an investor in many years because you know as you’re saying risk assets has been so good and I think risk assets are about as unattractive as we’ve seen a very long time and they’ve and that’s we’re seeing that come to fruition they don’t just bounce back you don’t just get kind of automatic rallies no matter what so it’s a hard time to be an investor I think as an investor you have to think about diversification in a different way diversification just wasn’t that important because the one asset people hold “equities” was just the strongest outperformer and the different places investors can kind of look they can look at geographically so they can look at geographies that have less of this tension places like Japan or China where you’re in a different situation you’re not about to hit a big Central Bank tension Japanese Central Bankers are pretty excited about getting higher inflation they’ve won for a long time and it’s far from, you know, out of control.

She basically suggests U.S. stocks are overrated and Japan stocks, Emerging Markets stocks, and Gold, are underrated.

Fundamental Valuation: Is the Stock Market Cheap or Expensive? 

July 12, 2022 By in Absolute Return, Absolute Return Objective, Asymmetric Hedge, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Counter trend, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Momentum Relative Strength, Systematic Global Macro, Trend Following, U.S. Stock Market

For me, and everyone else even if they don’t realize it, the price trend is the final arbiter.

For more than two decades, I’ve focused my efforts on developing systems to identify trends early in their stage to capitalize on trends as they continue and exit a trend if it reverses.

It all started in business school, where I earned a Bachelor of Applied Science degree in advanced accounting. It was “advanced” because I took the extra advanced classes above a typical accounting major required to sit for the CPA exam in Tennessee. It basically results in a master’s in accounting, but not really, but it’s just the same 150 credit hours.

I rarely speak of my formal college simply because I haven’t considered it a source of edge for investment management.

But maybe it has.

In some conversations recently, people have asked about my background and how I got started as an investment manager and founder of an investment firm. After further review, I’ve come to realize the knowledge I have of financial statements, and the vast details and fundamental information that make them up, is what drove me to observe very little of it really drives the market price in an auction market.

That’s something I’ve always believed, but it occurred to me during business school.

To be succinct; I very quickly discovered undervalued stocks are trading at a cheap multiple of earnings for a reason, and that’s more likely to continue than to reverse.

I didn’t have a lot of capital to play with, and it was hard earned capital. I worked as a Sheriffs’ Officer full time through college fully time, so it took me a few extra years to complete. I wasn’t about to lose too much of what I had in the stock market, so I aimed to cut my losses short early on.

I’ve focused on cutting my losses short ever since, so now I have about 25 years experience as a tactical trader with an emphasis on the one thing I believe I can best limit or control; the downside of my losers.

When I focus on limiting the downside of loss, I am left to enjoy the upside of gains.

But we can’t do that with fundamentals and valuation. Risk can only be directed, limited, managed, and controlled, by focusing on the price trend.

The price trend is more likely to continue than to reverse, as evidenced even by vast academic studies of momentum.

Because a price trend is more likely to continue than to reverse, it’s essential to realize if you attempt to buy stocks that are in downtrends, you’ll likely experience more downtrend.

So, buying what you perceive are “undervalued” stocks is like catching a falling knife they say.

I’d rather wait for the knife to fall, stab the ground or someone’s foot, then pick it up safely.

Knives a dangerous, and up close, even more dangerous than a gun, so govern yourself accordingly.

Nevertheless, the valuation of stocks and overall valuation of the market by and large can be useful to observe at the extremes in valuation.

The chart below tells the story based on Morningstar’s fair value estimates for individual stocks.

The chart shows the ratio price to fair value for the median stock in Morningstar’s selected coverage universe over time.

  • A ratio above 1.00 indicates that the stock’s price is higher than Morningstar’s estimate of its fair value.
    • The further the price/fair value ratio rises above 1.00, the more the median stock is overvalued.
  • A ratio below 1.00 indicates that the stock’s price is lower than our estimate of its fair value.
    • The further it moves below 1.00, the more the median stock is undervalued.

It shows stocks are as undervalued as they were at the low in 2011, nearly as undervalued stocks were March 2020, but not as undervalued as stocks reached in the 2008 stock market crash when the S&P 500 lost -56% from October 2007 to March 2009.

If I were to overall a drawdown chart of the stock index it would mirror the undervalued readings in the chart.

As prices fall, stocks become more undervalued by this measure.

My observation is by and large stocks are relatively undervalued, but they can get much more undervalued if they haven’t yet reached a low enough point to attract institutional buying demand.

To be sure, in 2011 when stocks were as undervalued as Morningstar suggests they are now, the stock index had declined about -19%, similar to the current drawdown of -23%.

Source: http://www.YCharts.com

The waterfall decline in stock prices March 2020 was -34%, although it recovered quickly in a v-shaped reversal, so it didn’t get as much attention as the current bear market which is down 10% less, but has lasted for seven months without a quick recovery.

Time allows the losses to sink in for those who are holding their stocks.

This time the average stock is down much more than the stock indexes, too, so if you’re holding the weakest stocks your drawdown is worse than the index.

In that case, you’re probably wondering how low it can go.

If stock prices haven’t yet be driven down to a low enough level to attract big institutional capital to buy these lower prices, stocks can certainly trend down a lot lower from here.

For example, in the 2007 – 2009 bear market known as the 2008 Financial Crisis, one I successfully operated through as a tactical trader and risk manager, the stock index dropped -56% over 16 grueling months.

The infamous 2008 crash included many swings up and down on its way to printing a -56% decline from its high in October 2007.

That’s how bad it could get.

It’s also largely the cause of the situation the U.S. finds itself in today.

Since the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve Open Market Committee have provided unprecedented support for the equity market and the bond market.

Passive investors and asset allocators have been provided a windfall from the Fed and Treasury, but it’s time to pay the debt.

For passive investors, they’ve been hammered with large losses this year and risk losing more if stock and bond prices keep trending down.

Stocks are already undervalued, but they can get much more undervalued.

Even worse, as my experience tactically operating through many declines like this since the 1990s reflects, are the paranna bites along with the shark bites.

The shark bite is from a passive asset allocator holding on through a prolonged deep bear market in stock prices as they fall -20%, -30%, -40%, -50% or more.

Because losses are so asymemtric and geometically compound aginast you, these capital losses become harder and harder to recover from.

If you lose -50%, it takes a 100% gain to get it back.

Stock market trends are asymmetric; they trend up much lower than they crash down, so that larger gain needed often takes longer, too.

So your emotional capital is at risk.

When you’re down a lot, you’re thinking and decision-making becomes cloudy and stressed because you[‘re under pressure like a pressure cooker.

You don’t know how low it can go.

If you are a buy and hold asset allocator, your loss is unlimited, as there is not point in which you would exit but zero.

Zero may be unlikely, but -50% or more isn’t, as evidenced by history.

And you’ve not been here before.

You’ve not seen this before.

The Fed has never stretched its open market operations this far before.

We just don’t know what’s going to happen next.

But, I’m prepared to tactically execute through whatever unfolds.

I’m having a great year relatively speaking. I’ve been positive most of the year and haven’t ventured far below our all-time new high.

Times like these are when my skillset is designed to show an edge.

Like many tactical investment managers like trend followers, hedge funds, global macro, I too had a period of relative underperformance of the long-only stock indexes. I held my ground but learned some new tricks during the many swings the past decade, and sharpened my countertrend axe to chip away some of the bad parts we don’t want.

But relative outperformance has never been my objective, especially not against a stock index for stock fund that’s fully invested in stocks all the time.

My objective has always been absolute return, not relative return.

My absolute return objective is what drives me to actively manage risk for drawdown control.

Like a good doctor, I aim to first do no harm… as best I can as a risk taker.

Looking at the Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500, a long-term observation, the U.S. stock market is still grossly overvalued.

The S&P 500 was the second-highest most expensive valuation in 140 years, and even after the decline this year, the stock index is still twice the valuation of Black Monday in October 1987 and

only down to its extremely overvalued level it was on Black Monday Oct. 19, 1987, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell -22% in a single day and just now down to the valuation level the stock index was on Black Tuesday in the 1929 crash.

If you believe in fundamental valuation as a gauge and a guide, anything can happen, so please govern yourself accordingly.

If you need help or have questions, contact us here.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Managed Portfolios. Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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 investment advice to buy or sell any security. This information does not suggest in any way that any graph, chart, or formula offered can solely guide an investor as to which securities to buy or sell, or when to buy or sell them. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or recommendations made by the firm. In the event any past specific recommendations are referred to inadvertently, a list of all recommendations made by the company within at least the prior one-year period may be furnished upon request. It should not be assumed that recommendations made in the future will be profitable or will equal the performance of the securities on the list. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change. Please do not make any investment decisions based on such information, as it is not advice and is subject to change without notice. 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 are deemed reliable but are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Stock Market Ahead of the Fed, and What’s Likely to Happen Next

May 4, 2022 By in Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Investor Sentiment, U.S. Stock Market

In the last observation, I shared “Implied volatility is indicating another possible volatility expansion” I pointed out that Implied volatility is indicating another possible volatility expansion.

The Volatility Index VIX was at 21, implying a range of stock prices (S&P 500) intraday of about 1.3% over the next 30 days.

On that same day, April 5th, my measure of realized, actual, historical near-term volatility was 1.6%.

Today the VIX is at 29, implying a 1.8% intraday range, and my measure of realized, actual, historical near-term volatility is 2% down a little from its 2.2% peak over the last 30 days.

Clearly, the options market is still pricing in a volatility expansion or a wider range of stock prices.

Today is a big day for stock, bond, and commodity investors and traders as the Fed FOMC will announce its plans. According to data from CME, the Fed funds futures imply an expected 99.8% chance of a 0.50% interest rate increase. So, the market is clear about its expectations of the direction of short-term interest rates.

Individual investors are more bearish than they were in March 2020.

News eventually turns negative and the environment becomes hostile. The levels of bullish sentiment and risk-taking prove to be excessive. As prices trend down it drives bearish sentiment and selling, putting further downward pressure on prices.

There is certainly cause for concern by many measures.

For example, I’ve been saying; it’s eventually going to be payback time for the windfall stock market investors have received over the last decade if you don’t actively manage risk for drawdown control.

I say it’s eventually going to be payback time for the windfall stock market investors have received over the last decade because the Shiller PE Ratio has been extremely elevated, indicating stocks are generally expensive and overvalued.

The Shiller PE ratio for the S&P 500 is a price-to-earnings ratio based on average inflation-adjusted earnings from the previous 10 years, known as the Cyclically Adjusted PE Ratio (CAPE Ratio), Shiller PE Ratio, or PE 10.

The highest the Shiller PE Ratio reached was 44 at the Tech Bubble peak in 2000, now it’s at 35, the second-highest level in 140 years, and double the average and median.

This long-term valuation measure is very bearish for the big picture.

Up until now, the high multiple of earnings prices was trading could be justified because of the very low level of inflation over the past decade.

That is no longer the case, and stock prices have trended down to reflect a new trend in inflation (rising prices.)

We haven’t seen the prices of things we buy increase this much, or the rate of change, in a long time.

The Fed has been employing radical policies to stimulate the economy and prop up the stock market since the 2008 “Global Financial Crisis”, and it’s time to pay the piper.

The windfall investors received from buying and holding stocks and bonds is an anomaly, not their skill, so govern yourself accordingly.

Past performance does not assure future returns.

At times like this, it’s more likely the opposite.

That’s the big picture, here are some observations I see when I zoom in to the here, and now.

I’ve already pointed out that individual investors are very bearish according to the AAII survey and even more bearish than at the start of the global pandemic and waterfall decline in stocks in March 2020.

By waterfall decline, I’m referring to the -34% decline in the S&P 500 in the first part of March 2020 alone.

You can probably see it’s a big deal that individual investors surveyed are more bearish now than they were then. In comparison, here is a drawdown chart from YCharts showing the S&P is currently “only” down -13% from its high, far from the waterfall decline in 2020.

In the short run, though, there are some negatives becoming more positive, at least temporarily.

The Technology Sector has earned the top weighting of over 27% of the capitalization-weighted S&P 500 stock index.

Below is the price trend for the S&P 500 Information Technology Index, which shows it has found support, or buying interest, around the current level several times this year.

While the S&P 500 Information Technology Index is a sell from a trend following perspective, it has the potential for a countertrend if it can continue to hold the line. If it doesn’t and breaks below the lows, it’s probably going to get real ugly.

Looking inside the S&P 500 Information Technology Index, I monitor the percent of stocks above/below the trend-following moving averages.

At this moment, 38% of the S&P 500 Information Technology Index stocks are above the 5-day average, 23% are above the 20 day, and only 17% are above the 50-day average and the 200-day average.

Here’s what the percent of S&P 500 Information Technology Index stocks above the 50-day moving average looks like.

Yes, it’s pretty washed out as most of the technology stocks are already in downtrends, but that doesn’t imply they can’t go lower, but instead that selling pressure has already pushed the prices down to a level we normally see at lows.

Healthcare is the second-largest exposure in the S&P 500 at 14% of the index. While isn’t only about half of the Technology allocation, it’s material position size in the index.

The S&P 500 Health Care Sector Index has also trended down to near its prior low earlier this year, and its volatility has expanded as we can see in the volatility Bollinger Band around the price trend spreading out.

Like the Technology sector, it’s bearish looking from a trend following perspective, but after prices move to an extremely high or low, we start to wonder if the buying/selling has exhausted.

To get a clue, I look at the percent of stocks in the sector relative to their trend-following moving averages.

I also measure their momentum, volatility, and relative strength for overbought oversold, relative value of options prices, but for brevity, I’m showing only the basics.

As of right now, the S&P 500 Health Care Sector Index shows 51% are above the 5-day average price, 9% above the 20-day, 23% above the 50-day, and 33% of health stocks are above the 200-day average.

Here’s the visual on a chart.

Healthcare stocks have been under selling pressure, so the question is have those with a desire to sell already sold? What we know is it is reaching a level we’ve historically seen the downtrends start to shift back to uptrends, but it could always go lower.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Next up is the S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector Index, which has earned a weighting of 11.5% in the S&P 500 index, after these three sectors are reviewed, these three of eleven sectors are 53% of the overall allocation in the broad-based index.

The recent price trend of the S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector Index looks similar to the others, as selling pressure has pushed down the prices to the prior low reached earlier this year.

Historically the S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector Index has found buying interest at this level, but we’ll soon see if buyers continue to support this level or higher, or if it trends down to a lower low and a downtrend.

Below is the breadth trend of the stocks in the S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector Index as defined as the percent of stocks above the 50-day average.

Once again, we see a washed-out condition, as 75% of the S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector stocks are below the 50-day average price, and only 25% are above the 50-day average.

My interpretation is the stock market has already been dominated by sellers.

Sellers have already pushed stocks down near the low levels they have historically bottomed and reversed back up.

But, this time is different.

We now have high and rising inflation, and that’s not great for the multiple of earnings stocks trade.

I believe in the weeks after this Fed announcement today, we’re going to see what we got.

If these price trends keep trending lower, it’s likely to be a very ugly long drawn out bear market without the Fed providing its life support.

And then there’s the bond situation, but we’d do that later.

I expect to see some bounce, but what the price trends do in the coming weeks is more telling.

If we don’t see a bounce, look out below.

Sellers haven’t capitulated, but they will.

We’ve been very busy at Shell Capital coming off the best year in 2021 we’ve had in a decade and another great year in 2022 thanks to some asymmetric risk/reward payoffs from tactical trading and long exposure to commodities and other alternatives.

Individual investors are facing the most hostile conditions in decades right now with no place to hide for stock and bond investors, so we have decided to open our door to new clients for the first time in many years. The ASYMMETRY® Managed Portfolios program provides independent custody at Folio Institutional® by Goldman Sachs. Our clients own their accounts titled in their own name at Goldman Sachs, independent of us, and they give us the authority to trade their managed accounts via our investment management agreement.

If you need help, don’t hesitate to contact us.

We couldn’t be more prepared for whatever happens next, and we’ve tactically executed through challenging conditions many times over more than two decades.

Although we can’t assure future success, we’ve stacked the odds in our favor and can do the same for you.

Send us an email to see how we can help guide you in the right direction.

Mike Shell is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Shell Capital Management, LLC, and the portfolio manager of ASYMMETRY® Managed Portfolios. Mike Shell and Shell Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment advisor focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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 investment advice to buy or sell any security. This information does not suggest in any way that any graph, chart, or formula offered can solely guide an investor as to which securities to buy or sell, or when to buy or sell them. Securities reflected are not intended to represent any client holdings or recommendations made by the firm. In the event any past specific recommendations are referred to inadvertently, a list of all recommendations made by the company within at least the prior one-year period may be furnished upon request. It should not be assumed that recommendations made in the future will be profitable or will equal the performance of the securities on the list. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change. Please do not make any investment decisions based on such information, as it is not advice and is subject to change without notice. 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 are deemed reliable but are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

The Smart Money Method: How to pick stocks like a hedge fund pro – on Asymmetric Payoffs

July 15, 2021 By in Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward, asymmetric trading, Positive Asymmetry

One of my recent reads is The Smart Money Method: How to pick stocks like a hedge fund pro (November 24, 2020) by Stephen Clapham.

Naturally, when he mentioned “Asymmetric Pay-offs” I have to share the quote:

“ASYMMETRIC PAY-OFFS

My favourite opportunities are those with asymmetric pay-offs. Here there is potential for considerable upside, but not a lot of downside (or vice versa for shorts). Sometimes, a share will have fallen out of favour with the market. It usually takes a catalyst – an event such as a change in management – for the market to become more enthusiastic, and for the share price to factor in the recovery opportunity. Whatever the idea, and wherever the source, this concept of a reward which is not commensurate with the risk is a critical objective.

As a special situation investor, I am drawn to areas where there are unusual rewards. This usually involves a higher element of risk. The trick is to find companies which have asymmetric pay-offs. In these cases, there is an element of downside risk, but the upside is significantly higher and you have a good reason to believe in the positive pay-off, because of a change in a fundamental driver.”

Stephen Clapham. The Smart Money Method (p. 32). Harriman House. November 24, 2020.

Historic day for the stock market

March 16, 2020 By in Absolute Return, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward Leave a comment

Today was just a reversal of Friday’s late-day surge.

SPX SPY TRADING

The stock market is even more washed out.

With the Federal Reserve lowering interest rates and buying back bonds, the long term US Treasury Index reversed back up.

long term treasuries

The stock indexes are down to their 2018 lows and if the selling doesn’t dry up, we may see a mean reversion of the last 10 years. It wouldn’t be surprising for many reasons, especially when we see it happens to be the area of trouble in 2015-16. Keep in mind, the Fed has been a key return driver for the last several years. It doesn’t seem to be working anymore.

spx mean reversion

I’m a risk manager, risk-taker, so I increase and decrease exposure to asymmetric risk/reward as conditions change over time. When I see signs of the selling pressure drying up or buying enthusiasm overwhelming the selling pressure, I’ll be looking to buy stocks again.

That is all.

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 in Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. Shell Capital is focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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. I observe the charts and graphs to visually see what is going on with price trends and volatility, it is not intended to be used in making any determination as to when to buy or sell any security, or which security to buy or sell. Instead, these are observations of the data as a visual representation of what is going on with the trend and its volatility for situational awareness. I do not necessarily make any buy or sell decisions based on it. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change.  Do not make any investment decisions based on such information as it is subject to change. 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 are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect a position of  Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

Profiting from the Madness of Crowds

March 10, 2020 By in Absolute Return, Active Risk Management, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Insight, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward, asymmetric trading, Asymmetric Uncertainty, Investment Risk Management, Momentum Relative Strength, U.S. Stock Market Leave a comment

If we want to profit from the madness of crowds, we necessarily need to believe and do different things than the crowd at the extremes.

You may have heard the stock market was down a lot yesterday. I consider yesterday’s price action a black swan event.  The -8% one-day decline was the worst day for S&P500 since 2008 and the 19th worst day since 1928.

The popular S&P 500 stock index dropped -7.6%, which was enough to trigger a circuit breaker to halt trading for the first time in 23 years. Circuit breakers are the thresholds when, if reached during a single-day decline in the S&P 500, trading is halted. Circuit breakers halt trading on US stock markets during dramatic price declines and are set at 7%, 13%, and 20% of the closing price for the previous day.

After yesterday’s waterfall decline, the price trend of the S&P 500 lost the 24% gain it had achieved a month ago.

stock market lost 2020 gain

Interestingly, we’re seeing “mean reversion” as the SPX is now all the way back to the same level it reached in January 2018. In investment management, mean reversion is the theory that a stock’s price will tend to move to the average price over time. This time it did.

mean reversion SPX SPY S&P 500

US equity investors would have been better off believing the market was too overvalued then and shifting to short term Treasuries. But, who would have been able to do that? Who wouldn’t have had the urge to jump back in on some of the enormous up days the past two years? There’s the real challenge: investor behavior. And yes, some may even look back and say they knew then but didn’t do anything. If we believed it then, we can go back and read out notes we made at the time. But, it wouldn’t matter if a belief isn’t acted on. I’m a trigger puller, I pull the trigger and do what I believe I should do in pursuit of asymmetric risk/reward for asymmetry.

Dow Jones is down -16.4% YTD at this point.

dow jones 2020 loss

The Dow Jones has also experienced some “mean reversion” over the 3-year time frame.

dow jones 2020 loss bear stock market

Mid-cap stocks, as measured by the S&P 400, are down, even more, this year, in the bear market territory.

mid cap stock in bear market MDY

Small-cap stocks, considered even riskier, are now down -23% in 2020.

small cap stocks are in a bear market

Clearly, the speed and magnitude of this waterfall decline have been impressive since the February 19th top just three weeks ago. Decreases in these broad stock indexes of -20% are indications of a strong desire to sell and yesterday, panic selling.

So, -20% from peak, the stock market decline has reached bear market territory and is now nearly in-line with the typical market-sell off since 1928 that preceded an upcoming recession.

Global Equity Market Decline

And by the way, it wasn’t just US equities, the selling pressure was global with some markets like Russia, Australia, Germany, Italy, and Brazil down much more.

stock stock market selloff

Extreme Investors Fear is Driving the Stock Market 

Indeed, after Extreme Fear is driving the stock market according to investor sentiment measures. A simple gauge anyone can use is the Fear & Greed Index, which measures seven different indicators.

As of today, it shows the appetite for risk is dialed back about as close to zero it can get.

what is driving the stock market

In the next chart, we can observe the relative level of the gauge to see where it is comparable to the past. While this extreme level of fear can stay elevated for some time, it has now reached the lowest levels of 2018. It’s important to note this isn’t a market timing indicator, and it does not always provide a timely signal. As you can see, at prior extreme lows such as this, the fear remained extreme for some time as the indicator oscillated around for a while. It’s a process, not an event. Investor sentiment measures like this tell us investors are about as scared as they get at their extreme level of fear is an indication those who wanted to sell may have sold.

fear greed investor sentment over time

Monitoring Market Conditions

My objective is asymmetric investment returns, so I look to find an asymmetric risk-reward in a new position. An asymmetric return profile is created by a portfolio of asymmetric risk-reward payoffs. For me, these asymmetric payoffs are about low-risk entries created through predefined exits and how I size the positions at the portfolio level. As such, I’ve been entering what I consider to be lower risk points when I believe there is potentila for an asymmetric payoff. Sometimes these positions are entering a trend that is already underway and showing momentum. The market is right most of the time, but they get it wrong at extremes on both ends. I saw that because of my own personal observations for more than two decades of professional money management, which is confirmed, markets and behavior really haven’t changed.

Humphrey B. Neill, the legendary contrarian whose book “The Art of Contrary Thinking,” published in 1954, including the same observations nearly seventy years ago.

“The public is right more of the time than not ” … but “the crowd is right during the trends but wrong at both ends.”

As market trends reverse and develop, we see a lot of indecision about if it will keep falling or reverse back up, which results in volatility as prices spread out wider driven by this indecisiveness. Eventually, the crowd gets settled on once side and drives the price to trend more in one direction as the majority of capital shifts enough demand to overwhelm the other side.

Risk Manager, Risk Taker

At these extremes, I have the flexibility to shift from a trend following strategy to a  countertrend contrarian investment strategy. My ability to change along with conditions is why I am considered an “unconstrained” investment manager. I have the flexibility to go anywhere, do anything, within exchange-traded securities. By “go anywhere,” I mean cash, bonds, stocks, commodities, and alternatives like volatility, shorting/inverse, real estate, energy MLPs, etc. I give myself as broad of an opportunity set as possible to find potentially profitable price trends. So, as prices have been falling so sharply to extremes, I was entering new positions aiming for asymmetric risk/reward. I was able to buy at lower prices because I had also reduced exposure at prior higher prices. As trends became oversold as measured by my systems, I started increasing exposure for a potential countertrend.

On ASYMMETRY® Observations, I’m writing for a broad audience. Most of our clients read these observations as do many other investment managers. My objective isn’t to express any detail about my specific buying and selling, but instead overall observations of market conditions to help you see the bigger picture as I do. As long time readers know, I mostly use the S&P 500 stock index for illustration, even though I primarily trade sectors, stocks, countries; an unconstrained list of global markets. I also share my observations on volatility, mostly using the VIX index to demonstrate volatility expansions/contractions. At the extremes, I focus a lot of my observations on extremes in investor sentiment and breadth indicators to get an idea of buying and selling pressure that may be drying up.

Market Risk Measurement 

One of my favorite indicators to understand what is going on inside the stock market is breadth. To me, breadth indicators are an overall market risk measurement system. Here on ASYMMETRY® Observations, I try to show these indicators as simple as possible so that anyone can understand.

If we want to profit from the madness of crowds, we necessarily need to believe and do different things than the group at the extremes.

One of my favorite charts to show how the market has de-risked or dialed up risk is the percent of S&P 500 stocks above the moving average. As you see in the chart, I labeled the high range with red to signal a “higher risk” zone and the lower level in green to indicate the “lower risk” zone.

percent of s&P stocks above moving average 2020

I consider these extremes “risk” levels because it suggests to me after most of the stocks are already in long term uptrends, the buying enthusiasm may be nearing its cycle peak. And yes, it does cycle up and down, as evidenced by the chart. As of yesterday’s close, only 17% of the S&P 500 stocks are trending above their 200-day moving average, so most stocks are in a downtrend. That’s not good until it reaches an extreme level, then it suggests we may be able to profit from the madness of crowds as they tend to overreact at extremes.  The percent of S&P 500 stocks above the longer-term moving average has now declined into the green zone seen in late 2018, the 2015-16 period, 2011, but not as radical as 2008 into 2009. If this is the early stage of a big bear market, we can expect to see it look more like the 2008-09 period.

We can’t expect to ever know if equities will enter a bear market in advance. If you base your trading and investment decisions on the need to predict what’s going to happen next, you already have a failed system. You are never going to know. What I do, instead, is focus on the likelihood. More importantly, I predefined the amount of risk I’m willing to take and let it rip when the odds seem in my favor. After that, I let it all unfold. I know I’ll exit if it falls to X, and my dynamic risk management system updates this exit as the price moves up to eventually take profits.

Zooming in to the shorter trend, the percent of stocks above their 50 day moving average has fallen all the way down to only 5% in an uptrend. This means 95% of the S&P 500 stocks are in shorter-term downtrends. We can interpret is as nearly everyone who wants to sell in the short term may have already sold.

stock market breadth risk management market timing

I can always get worse. There is no magical barrier at this extreme level that prevents it from going to zero stocks in an uptrend and staying there a long time as prices fall much more. But, as you see in the charts, market breadth cycles up and down as prices trend up and down.

If we are in the early stage of a big bear market, I expect there will be countertrends along the way if history is a guide. I’ve tactically traded through bear markets before, and the highlight of my career was my performance through the 2007-09 period. I didn’t just exit the stock market and sit there, I traded the short term price trends up and down. If someone just exited the stock market and sit there, that may have been luck. If we entered and exited 8 or 10 different times throughout the period with a positive asymmetry of more significant profits than losses, it may have required more skill. I like my managed portfolio to be in synch with the current risk/reward characteristics of the market. If that is what we are achieving, we may have less (or hedged) exposure at the peak and more exposure after prices fall. I believe we should always be aware of the potential risk/reward the market itself is providing, and our investment strategy should dynamically adapt to meet these conditions.

If we want to profit from the madness of crowds, it means we have some cash or the equivalent near trend highs and reenter after prices fall. It may also be achieved by hedging near highs and using profits from the hedge to increase exposure after prices have dropped. It sounds like a contrarian investor. To be a contrarian investor at extremes to profit from a countertrend, we study crowd behavior in the stock market and aim to benefit from conditions where other investors/traders act on their emotions. These extremes of fear and greed are seen at major market turning points, presenting the disciplined contrarian with opportunities to both enter and exit the market.

This crowd psychology has been observed for many decades, and unfortunately, investors and traders are excellent lab rates to study the behavior.

Believe it or not, 179 years ago, in 1841, Charles Mackay published his book “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds” in which discussing the South Sea Bubble and Dutch Tulip Mania as examples of this mass investment hysteria. People haven’t changed. As a crowd, we the people still underreact to initial information and then overreact at the extremes.

As Mackay observed nearly two centuries ago:

“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.”

Once people begin to go with the crowd, their thinking can become irrational and driven by the emotional impulses of the crowd rather than on their own individual situation.

According to studies like DALBAR’s Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behavior (QAIB), individual investors have poor results over the long haul. QAIB has measured the effects of investor decisions to buy, sell and switch into and out of mutual funds over short and long-term timeframes since 1994 and finds people tend to do the wrong things at the wrong time. If we want to create different results from the majority, we must necessarily believe and do things differently.

At this point, we’ve seen fund flows from stocks to bonds reach extreme levels across multiple time frames as panic selling set in. I’m glad to say, while imperfect as to timing, I have done the opposite by shifting to short term US Treasuries at the prior high stock prices and then started rebuying stocks last week. Of course, I have predetermined points I’ll exit them if they fall, so I remain flexible and may change direction quickly, at any time.

I’m seeing a lot of studies showing that history suggests single-day waterfall declines like yesterday were followed by gains over the next few weeks. Rather than hoping past performance like that simply repeats, I prefer to measure the current risk level and factor in existing conditions.

It’s important to understand, as. I have pointed out many times before, that the US stock market has been in a very aged bull market that has been running 11 years now. And the longest on record. The US is also in the longest economic expansion in history, so we should be aware these trends will eventually change. But, when it comes to the stock market, longer trends are a process, not an event. Longer trends unfold as many smaller swings up and down along the way that may offer the potential for flexible tactical traders to find some asymmetry from the asymmetric risk/reward payoffs these conditions may create.

It’s also important to be aware the volatility expansion and waterfall decline the past three weeks seems to indicate a fragile market structure with a higher range of prices, so we’re likely to observe turbulence for some time. These conditions can result in amplified downtrends and uptrends.

Falling prices create forced selling by systematic investment managers similar to what we saw in the December 2018 market crash. As I’ve seen signals from my own systematic trend following and momentum systems shift, it’s no surprise to see some increased selling pressure that may be helped by more money in these programs.

We are in another period of extremes driven by the “madness of crowds,” and my plan is to apply my skills and experience with the discipline to tactically operate through whatever unfolds.

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 in Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. Shell Capital is focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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. I observe the charts and graphs to visually see what is going on with price trends and volatility, it is not intended to be used in making any determination as to when to buy or sell any security, or which security to buy or sell. Instead, these are observations of the data as a visual representation of what is going on with the trend and its volatility for situational awareness. I do not necessarily make any buy or sell decisions based on it. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change.  Do not make any investment decisions based on such information as it is subject to change. 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 are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect a position of  Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

 

 

 

I’ve been here before; stocks are entering the zone

March 2, 2020 By in Absolute Return, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Counter trend, Global Directional Trends Leave a comment

Based on breadth and short term momentum indicators, the U.S. stock market is entering what I consider to be the green zone. The green zone is the lower risk area, which is the opposite of the higher risk red zone. As I pursue asymmetric risk-reward by structuring trades with asymmetric payoffs, I’d rather lower my risk in the red zone and increase it in the green zone. Said another way, to structure trades with an asymmetric payoff, I believe the positive asymmetry comes from increasing exposure in the green zone and reducing exposure in the red zone. However, it isn’t a buy or sell signal for me, but instead a risk indicator. My buying and selling is an individual position decision, but my stock portfolio is probably going to be in synch with these overall market risk analysis at extremes.

S&P 500 Percent of Stocks Above 50 Day Moving Average is an indicator showing the percentage of stocks in the S&P 500 that closed at a higher price than the 50-day simple moving average. The chart below was updated after Friday’s close. Only 3% of the stocks in the S&P 500 Index are trading above their 50-day moving average, a short term trend line.

BREADTH PERCENT ABOVE 50 DAY MOVING AVERAGE SPX 500

If you want to see how I applied it in the last big stock market decline, read “An exhaustive analysis of the U.S. stock market” late December 2018 when I suggested the probability was in favor of reversal back up was high. The next day, on December 24, 2018, in “An exhaustive stock market analysis… continued,” I shared:

After prices have declined, I look for indications that selling pressure may be getting more exhausted and driving prices to a low enough point to attract buying demand. That’s what it takes to reverse the trend.

I’ve been here before.

I’m seeing similar signals now, as you can see in the above chart, the participation in the downtrend has now reached the same level as the price lows of 2018.

Now, make no mistake, trends downtrends can continue. Price trends can unfold unlike anything ever seen in the past as every new moment is unique, having never existed before – so past performance is no guarantee of future results. I have never actually been here before, no one has, but I’ve experienced this kind of condition many times before.

I’ve shared many times, my indicators measure buying and selling demand, so when most stocks are already participating in uptrends, it signals those who wanted to buy have already. I believe the same is true for downtrends; aftermost stocks are already in downtrends, those who wanted to sell may have already sold, their selling becomes exhausted, and when prices are pushed down low enough, it attracts buyers to buy. It’s all probabilistic, never a sure thing. It seems many investors were shocked by the speed and magnitude of his waterfall decline – I was not. If you’ve followed my observations, you’ve read enough to know anything is possible.

The S&P 500 Percent of Stocks Above 500 Day Moving Average is also entering what I considered the green zone.

spx trading advisor

As such, the stock market looks deeply oversold to me. Since I already reducted exposure before this decline, we view this period from a position of strength. It doesn’t always work out so well, it’s always imperfect, but I’m not sitting here down -13% from two weeks ago taking a beating hoping the losses stop.

stock loss 2020 drawdown

Managing risk when it’s at a high level for drawdown control offers the potential to be in a position of strength at times like this, and it’s my preference. Portfolio managers with cash or profits from hedging now can enter stocks and markets at lower-risk entry points with a more favorable asymmetric risk-reward profile than before.

Although, as John Galt shared with me this next chart this morning on Twitter and said, “These are the pros & they were blindsided,” not all professionals are in a position of strength. The chart shows the net exposure to stock index futures at a high level.

spx futures exposure

Everyone gets what we want from the market; as we decide what we get.

If we want to avoid drawdowns, we reduce the risk of drawdown.

If we want to avoid missing out on gains, we stay invested to avoid missing out on gains.

Regardless of choice, it’s never going to be perfect. Those who expect it to be are always disappointed and unable to execute as a tactical operator. This is a human performance that prefers the “C” students. If we weren’t included to get perfect “A,” we have an edge for this skill. I focus my perfection on execution, but not on the individual outcomes.

I accept losses, so I’m able to cut them short. I’ve never taken a loss that was a mistake.

For me, not taking the loss as I had predetermined would be the mistake.

I love taking losses.

It’s why I have smaller ones. I prefer to cut my losses short, rather than let them become big losses.

If I didn’t love taking losses, I would have large losses like others do. Most investors hold on to their losses, hoping to recover from them. Sometimes it works, but when the big one comes, it doesn’t. I prefer more control, so I make active decisions and manage accordingly. Never expecting it to be perfect, accepting the imperfections.

My energy goes into my focus and discipline. For me, it’s all about mindset. I’m a perfectionist on how I execute my tactical trading decisions, which is the activity within my control.

When I enter a position, I can’t control what it will do afterward, but my exit will determine the result every time.

When I exit a position, I can’t control what the security does afterward, but I can re-enter it again if I want, or be glad I got out. Or, I may imperfectly not re-enter and later notice it trended up more. I still didn’t miss out, I made my choice.

So, yeah, I’ve been here before, in this kind of situation. All new moments are always unique. This time has never existed yet, so it’s necessarily unknowable and uncertain. When we accept it and embrace it, we can make decisions and go with the flow. The good news is, this seems like a lower risk level, and though it may make an even lower low at some point and yet unfold into a major bear market, it’s an asymmetric trading opportunity for me.

I enter my positions with predetermined exits in case I’m wrong, and let it rip.

Oh, and I glance at headlines and make note of them at extremes.

bearish bloomberg news coronavirus

I’ll just leave this right here for later reference.

WSJ bearish coronavirus news

I hope this helps.

Have questions? Need help? Get in touch 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 in Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. Shell Capital is focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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. I observe the charts and graphs to visually see what is going on with price trends and volatility, it is not intended to be used in making any determination as to when to buy or sell any security, or which security to buy or sell. Instead, these are observations of the data as a visual representation of what is going on with the trend and its volatility for situational awareness. I do not necessarily make any buy or sell decisions based on it. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change.  Do not make any investment decisions based on such information as it is subject to change. 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 are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect a position of  Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

 

Volatility is expanding, a little

January 6, 2020 By in Asymmetric Hedge, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetry ETF, Managed Volatility, Positive Asymmetry, Risk Asymmetry, VIX CBOE Volatility Index, Volatility Expansion, Volatility Hedging, Volatility Trading Leave a comment

To no surprise, the CBOE S&P 500 Volatility Index that represents the market’s expectation of 30-day forward-looking volatility, is trending up. 

VIX VOLATILITY EXPANSION ASYMMETRIC RETURNS

So far, it isn’t much of a volatility expansion, but it’s elevated somewhat higher than it was. At around 15, the VIX is also well below its long term average of 18.23, although it hasn’t historically been drawn to the 18-20 level, anyway. The average is skewed by the spikes in volatility; volatility expansion. 

VIX is at a current level of 14.82, an increase of 0.80 or 5.71%% from the previous market day.

Here are the 50 and 200-day moving average values for VIX.

VIX MOVING AVERAGE

As I shared over the weekend, and it was quoted in today’s MarketWatch article “U.S.-Iran tensions will spark increased volatility — here’s how to play stocks, fund manager says“:

“So, on a short-term basis, the stock indexes have had a nice uptrend since October, with low volatility, so we shouldn’t be surprised to see it reverse to a short-term downtrend and a volatility expansion.

“For those who were looking for a ‘catalyst’ to drive a volatility expansion, now they have it.”

I was referring to the U.S. conflict with Iran, of course. 

The VIX index value is derived from the price inputs of the S&P 500 index options, it provides an indication of market risk and investors’ sentiments. VIX measures the implied ‘expected’ volatility of the US stock market. So, many market strategists use the VIX as a gauge for how fearful, uncertain, or how complacent the markets are. The VIX index tends to rise when the market drops and vice versa. During the 2008-2009 bear market, the VIX trended up as high as 80.86. Although the VIX cannot be invested in directly, securities like ETFs and derivatives based on it may provide the potential for an asymmetric hedge. For example, over the past year when the S&P 500 stock index was down -1% or more on the day, some of the ETFs based on long volatility spiked 10% or more. Volatility is difficult to time right, but when we do the payoff can be asymmetric. An asymmetric payoff is achieved when the risk-reward is asymmetric: maybe we risk 1% to achieve a payoff of 5%. Since long volatility has the potential for big spikes when volatility expands, it’s asymmetric payoff doesn’t require the tactical trader and risk manager to be as ‘right’ and accurate. So, the probability of winning can be lower, but the net pay off over time is an asymmetric risk-reward.

You can probably see why I pay attention to volatility and volatility expansions.

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 focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change.  Do not make any investment decisions based on such information as it is subject to change. 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 are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect a position of  Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

 

 

Stock market volatility, participation in the trend, REITs, and MLPs

December 13, 2019 By in Absolute Return, Asymmetric Hedge, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward Leave a comment

The U.S. stock market as measured by the S&P 500 index reached reaches a new high, so volatility remains subdued. After prices trend up, investors become increasingly more confident and confident is reflected by a tight range in price. I saw this because the possible is also true; when investors and traders are indecisive, we see a more sideways volatile trend as the buying and selling pressure tries to decide in which direction to position capital. We observe this contracting volatility in the chart below. I colored the volatility band around the price based on an average true range to highlight its trend and range. The line on the top is the past 14-day average true range of the SPX showing historical volatility remains very low.

spx spy trading trend following

For a different perspective to see who historical vola.tiy is negatively correlated with the price trend, I drew the charts together below. When the stock market trends up, realized historical volatility as measured by and an average of the past 14-day true range of moment typically trends down.  As the stock market loses value, volatility increases. Volatility trading for an asymmetric hedge can result in a larger asymmetric payoff than the price itself.

spx negative correlation with atr volatility vix

As the SPX price trend is up, most of the stocks it tracks are in longer-term uptrends as evidenced by the below chart of the percent of S&P 500 stocks above their 200 day moving average. Right now, 77% are trending up which is the upper end of the breadth recent cycle I marked with the line. Breadth indicates participation in a trend up or down. The more stocks are trending up, the more healthy an uptrend. However, these measures reach extends at their high and low extremes in the cycle.  While 77% of the S&P 500 stocks in uptrends are positive at some point the buying enthusiasm is exhausted and it’s usually signaled by high readings.

spx percent stocks above 200 day moving average

I’m not asserting this foretells a big down move, but instead, it’s situational awareness that the risk level is elevated.

Next, is the shorter-term trends. The percent of stocks above their 50 days moving averages has been sideways since mid-October. Currently, 73% of stocks are in short term uptrends. So, by this measure, they haven’t yet reached the recent cycle high in July.

spx percent of stocks above 50 day

I sorted the S&P stocks to see which were below their 50 day to look for a pattern. Sure enough, I see one; it’s mostly REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) which is no surprise since REITs have been weak recently. We don’t own any of the stocks. 

quantitative analysis of technical indicators.png

The Dow Jones REIT Index is designed to measure all publicly traded real estate investment trusts in the Dow Jones U.S. stock universe classified as Equity REITs according to the S&P Dow Jones Indices REIT Industry Classification Hierarchy. These companies are REITs that primarily own and operate income-producing real estate. Based on the observation above, it is no surprise to see this index of 175 real estate stocks is below its 50 day moving average, but is above the 200-day moving average and is oversold today. My relative strength systems that signal asymmetric rate of change suggest REITs are near a short term low.

REIT

This reminds me of another high dividend-yield sector. In Alerian MLP Index is diverging from crude and reaching new lows on November 20th I point out this same trend system suggested a countertrend rally was probable and sure enough, it gained 7% since then. Here is the updated chart of the Alerian MLP Index.

MLP ALERIAN OIL GAS ENERGY MLPS AMJ

REITs may not play out so well, but, what is, is.

The trend is your friend until the end when it bends. So far, this uptrend hasn’t since October has done little but drift up aside from the -3% dip last month and a volatility expansion that was little more than a blip.

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 focused on asymmetric risk-reward and absolute return strategies and provides investment advice and portfolio management only 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. Any opinions expressed may change as subsequent conditions change.  Do not make any investment decisions based on such information as it is subject to change. 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 are 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. The views and opinions expressed in ASYMMETRY® Observations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect a position of  Shell Capital Management, LLC. The use of this website is subject to its terms and conditions.

A few observations on Global Macro and Trend Following

July 23, 2019 By in Absolute Return, Active Risk Management, Actively Manage Risk, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetry ETF, Asymmetry Ratio, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global ETF, Global Macro, Global Tactical Rotation, Positive Asymmetry, Risk Asymmetry, Systematic Global Macro, Tactical Asset Allocation, Tactical ETF, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, tactical risk management, Trend Following Leave a comment

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.

Earnings season is tricky for momentum growth stocks

July 25, 2018 By in Absolute Returns, Active Risk Management, Asymmetric ETF, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Managed Momentum, Momentum Relative Strength, Sector Rotation, Sector Trends, tactical risk management, Trend Following, U.S. Stock Market 1 Comment

Momentum stocks are stocks that show high upside momentum in their price trend. Momentum stocks are trending not only regarding their absolute price gains but also relative strength vs. other stocks or the stock market index.

Momentum stocks are usually high growth stocks. Since momentum stocks are the strongest trending stocks, their trends are often driven by growth in sales and earnings. Growth stocks are companies that are growing earnings at a rate significantly above average. Growth stocks have high increases in earnings per share quarter over quarter, year over year, and may not pay dividends since these companies usually reinvest their strong earnings to accelerate growth.

Now that we have defined what I mean by “momentum stocks,” we can take a look at some examples of momentum stocks and their characteristics like how their prices trend.

Grubhub Inc. ($GRUB) is an online and mobile food-ordering company that connects diners with local restaurants. GrubHub is a great example today of a high momentum growth stock.  GrubHub stock has gained 24% today after smashing Wall Street’s expectations. Earnings grew 92% to 50 cents a share, marking the fifth quarter in a row of accelerating EPS growth. Revenue soared 51% to $239.7 million, a quarterly best.

Grubhub $GRUB GRUB

Before today, GrubHub stock was in a positive trend that developed a flat base since April (highlighted on the chart). GRUB had already gained 60% year to date, but after such as explosive uptrend in momentum, it trended sideways for a while.

It is earnings season, which can be tricky for the highest momentum stocks. Once a stock has already made a big move, it could already have a lot of good news expectations priced in. That concerns some momentum stock traders. In fact, I know some momentum stock traders who exit their stocks before their quarterly earnings announcements. If they had exited GrubHub, they would have missed today’s continuation of its momentum. However, they would avoid the downside of those that trend in the other direction.

I’ve been trading momentum stocks for over two decades. Over the years I’ve observed different regimes of how they act regarding trend strength and volatility. There are periods of volatility expansion and contraction and other periods when momentum is much stronger.

Volatility is how quickly and how far the price spreads out. When price trends are volatile, it’s harder to stick with them because they can move against us. We like upside volatility, but smart investors are loss averse enough to dislike downside volatility that leads to drawdowns. To understand why the smart money is loss averse, read: “Asymmetry of Loss: Why Manage Risk?“.

Strong upward trending stocks are sometimes accompanied by volatility. That’s to be expected because momentum is a kind of volatility expansion. Upward momentum, the kind we like, is an upward expansion in the range of the price – volatility.

That’s good vol.

But, strong trending momentum stocks necessarily may include some bad volatility, too. Bad volatility is the kind investors don’t like – it’s when the price drops, especially if it’s a sharp decline.

I mentioned GrubHub had gained 60% YTD. I like to point out, observe, and understand asymmetries. The asymmetry is the good and the bad, the positive and the negative, I prefer to skew them positively. What I call the Asymmetry® Ratio is a chart of the upside total return vs. the chart of the downside % off high. To achieve the gain for GrubHub, investors would have had to endure its price declines to get it. For GrubHub, the stock has declined -10% to -15% many times over the past year. It has spent much of the time off its high. To have realized all of the gains, investors had to be willing to experience the drawdowns.

grubhub stock GRUB

I point this out because yesterday I wrote “Asymmetry of Loss: Why Manage Risk?” where I discussed the mathematical basis behind the need for me to actively manage the downside risk. To achieve the significant gain, we often have to endure at least some of the drawdowns along the way. The trick is how much, and for me, that depends on many system factors.

Earnings season, when companies are reporting their quarterly earnings, is especially tricky for high momentum stocks because stocks that may be “priced for perfection” may be even more volatile than normal. Accelerating profit growth is attractive to investment managers and institutional investors because increasing profit growth means a company is doing something right and delivering exceptional value to customers. I’m more focused on the direction of the price trend – I like positive momentum. But, earnings are a driver of the price trend for stocks.

Earnings can trend in the other direction, too, or things can happen to cause concern. This information is released in quarterly reports.

Another example of a momentum stock is NetFlix. By my measures, GrubHub is a leading stock in its sector and NetFlix (NFLX) is the leader in its industry group, too, based on its positive momentum and earnings growth. As we see in the chart below, NFLX has gained 88% year to date. That’s astonishing momentum considering the broad stock market measured by the S&P 500 has gained around 5%, and its Consumer Services Sector ETF has gained 11%.

NetFlix NFLX $NFLX

However, NetFlix stock regularly declines as much as -15% as a regular part of its trend. It has fallen over -10% five times in the past year on its way to making huge gains. The latest reason for the decline was information that was released during its quarterly earnings announcement. The stock dropped sharply afterward.

netflix stock risk downside loss

But, as we see in the chart, it’s still within its normal decline that has happened five times the past year.

While some of my other momentum stock trader friends may exit their stocks during the earnings season, I instead focus more on the price trend itself. I predefine my risk in every position, so I determine how much I’ll allow a stock to trend to the downside before I exit. When a stock trends down too far, it’s no longer in a positive trend with the side of momentum we want. To cut losses short, I exit before the damage gets too large.

How much is too much? 

A hint is in the above charts.

If we want to experience a positive trend of a momentum stock, we necessarily have to give it enough room to let it do what it does. When it trends beyond that, it’s time to exit and move on. We can always re-enter it again it if trends back to the right side.

Sure, earnings season can be tricky, but for me, it’s designed into my system. I’m looking for positive Asymmetry® – an asymmetric risk/reward. What we’ve seen above are stocks that may decline as much as -15% as a normal part of their trend when they fall, but have gained over 50% over the same period.

You can probably see how I may be able to create a potentially positive asymmetric risk/reward payoff from such a trend.

 

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?

July 24, 2018 By in Absolute Return, Active Risk Management, Actively Manage Risk, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Asymmetry ETF, Positive Asymmetry, Risk Asymmetry, tactical risk management 2 Comments

“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.

Does Your Firm Use Active ETFs?

July 9, 2018 By in Absolute Return, Asymmetric ETF, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetry ETF, ETF, ETF Hedging, ETF Strategist, ETFs, Global ETF, Sector ETF, Tactical ETF, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, VIX ETF ETN ETP Leave a comment

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

Is it a stock pickers market?

June 29, 2018 By in Absolute Return, Absolute vs. Relative Return, Active Risk Management, Asymmetric ETF, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Asymmetric Thinking, Asymmetry ETF, ETF, ETF Hedging, ETF Strategist, ETFs, Global Directional Trends, Global ETF, Market Breadth, Sector ETF, Sector Rotation, Sector Trends, Tactical ETF, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, Trend Following, VIX ETF ETN ETP 1 Comment
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

June 28, 2018 By in Absolute Return, Absolute vs. Relatative Return, Asymmetric ETF, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Asymmetry ETF, ETF, ETF Hedging, ETF Strategist, ETFs, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global ETF, Global Macro, Global Tactical Rotation, Sector ETF, Systematic Global Macro, Tactical ETF, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management 1 Comment
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.

 

 

The Starting Point Matters

November 30, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Active Risk Management, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward Leave a comment

For long term investors who buy and hold, the risk/reward expectations are sometimes very, very, simple.

If you bought the long term U.S. Treasury index via the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (Symbol: TLT) about 12 years ago your yield is around 5% and the total return has been 100%.

Keep in mind, the total return is price appreciation + interest (or yield).

At this starting point, if you are buying it today, your yield is 2.6%… so the expected future total return from the yield is half.

Bond Return Rising Rates

Clearly, the expected total return for bonds is much lower today than just over 10 years ago.

Since the yield is lower, the risk/reward payoff isn’t as positive. The lower yield limits the upside for price appreciation.

There may be times this long term U.S. Treasury is the place to be and times it isn’t.

But over a longer expectation, it’s much less attractive than it was.

No market or security performs well in all conditions, so traditional allocation often holds positions with a negative risk/return profile.

You can probably see why I think it’s critical to be unconstrained and flexible rather than a fixed allocation that ignores the current condition.

The successful will do on a daily basis…

November 12, 2015 By in Asymmetric Insight, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Thinking, Critical Thinking, Independent Thinking Leave a comment

“The successful will do on a daily basis what the average won’t consider doing even once.” – Mike Shell

Actively Managing Investment Risk

September 24, 2015 By in Absolute Returns, Active Risk Management, Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Hiring a Portfolio Manager, Position Sizing, Positive Asymmetry, Risk Asymmetry, Secular Bear Market, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, tactical risk management, Trend Following Leave a comment

The global market declines in early August offered a fine example of the kind of conditions that cause me to exit my long positions and end up in cash. For me, this is a normal part of my process. I predefine my risk in each position, so I know my risk across the portfolio. For example, I know at what point I’ll sell each position if it falls below a certain point in which I would consider it a negative trend. Since I know my exit in advance for each position, I knew in advance how much I would lose in the portfolio if all of those exits were reached due to market price movements trending against me. That allowed me to control how much my portfolio would lose from its prior peak by limiting it to my predefined amount. I have to take ‘some’ risk in order to have a chance for profits. If I took no risk at all, there could be no profit. The key for me is to take my risk when the reward to risk is asymmetric. That is, when the probability for a gain is much higher than the probability for a loss.

The concept seems simple, but actually doing it isn’t. All of it is probabilistic, never a sure thing.  For example, prices sometimes move beyond the exit point, so a risk control system has to account for that possibility.  More importantly, the portfolio manager has to be able to actually do it. I am a trigger puller. To see the results of over 10 years of my actually doing this, you can visit ASYMMETRY® Managed Accounts.

 

 

Using the Month of September to Understand Probability and Expectation

September 1, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Adapting to Change, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Critical Thinking, Independent Thinking, Mathematical Expectation, Probability Leave a comment

probabilty-coin-flip

September is the month when the U.S. stock market’s three most popular indexes usually perform the poorest. So say the headlines every September.

I first wrote this in September 2013 after many commentators had published information about the seasonality of the month of September. Seasonality is the historical tendency for certain calendar periods to gain or lose value. However, when commentators speak of such probabilities, they rarely provide a clear probability and almost never the full mathematical expectation.  Without the mathematical expectation, probability alone is of little value or no value. I’ll explain why.

For those of us focused on actual directional price trends it may seem a little silly to discuss the historical probability of gain or loss for a single month. However, even though I wouldn’t make decisions based on it, we can use the seasonal theme to explain the critical importance of both probability and mathematical expectation.

“From 1928-2012 the S&P 500 was up 39 months and down 46 months in September. It is down 55% of the time in September…”

“Dow Jones Industrial Average 1886-2004 (116 years) 49 years the Dow was up in September, in 67 years the Dow was down in September. It’s down 58% of the time in September…”

Those are probability statements. But they say nothing about how much it was up or down.

First, let’s define probability.

Probability is likelihood. It is a measure or estimation of how likely it is that something will happen or that a statement is true. Probabilities are given a range of value between 0% chance (it will not happen) and 100% chance (it will happen). There are few things so certain as 0% and 100%, so most probabilities fall in between. The higher the degree of probability, the more likely the event is to happen, or, in a longer series of samples, the greater the number of times such event is expected to happen.

But that says nothing about how to calculate probability and apply it. One thing to realize about probability is that it is the math for dealing with uncertainty. When we don’t know an outcome, it is uncertain. It is probabilistic, not a sure thing. Probability provides us our best estimation of the outcome.

As I see it, there are two ways to calculate probability: subjectively and objectively.

Subjective Probability: assigns a likelihood based on opinions and confidence (degree of belief) in those opinions. It may include “expert” knowledge as well as experimental data. For example, the majority of the research and news is based on “expert opinion”. They may state their belief and then assign a probability: “I believe the stock market has a X% chance of going down.” They may go on to add a good sounding story to support their hypothesis. You may see how that is subjective.

Objective Probability: assigns a likelihood based on numbers. Objective probability is data-driven. The popular method is frequentist probability: the probability of a random event means the relative frequency of occurrence of an experiment’s outcome when the experiment is repeated. This method believes probability is the relative frequency of outcomes over the long run. We can think of it as the historical tendency of the outcome. For example, if we flip a fair coin, its probability of landing on heads is 50% and tails is 50%. If we flip it 10 times, it could land on heads 7 and tails 3. That outcome implies 70%/30%. To prove the coin is “fair” (balanced on both sides), we would need to flip it more times to get a large enough sample size to realize the full probability. If we flip it 30 times or more it is likely to get closer and closer to 50%/50%. The more frequency, the closer it gets to its probability. You may see see why I say this is more objective: it’s based on actual historical data.

If you are a math person and logical thinker, you may get this. I have a hunch many people don’t like math, so they’d rather hear a good story. Rather than checking the stats on a game, they’d rather hear some guru’s opinion about who will win.

Which has more predictive power? An expert opinion or the fact that historically the month of September has been down more often than it’s up? Predictive ability needs to be quantified by math to determine if it exists and opinions are often far too subjective to do that. We can do the math based on historical data and determine if it is probable, or not.

As I said in September is statistically the worst month for the stock market the data shows it is indeed statistically significant and does indeed have predictive ability, but not necessarily enough to act on it. Instead, I suggest it be used to set expectations of what may happen: the month of September has historically been the worst performance month for the stock indexes. So, we shouldn’t be surprised if it ends in the red. It’s that simple.

Theory-driven researchers want a cause and effect story to go with their beliefs. If they can’t figure out a good reason behind the phenomenon, they may reject it even though the data is what it is. One person commented to me that he didn’t believe the September data has predictive value, even though it does, and he provided nothing to disprove it. Probabilities do need to make sense. Correlations can occur randomly, so logical reasoning behind the numbers may be useful. For example, one theory for a losing September is it is the fiscal year end of many mutual funds and fund managers typically sell losing positions before year end to realize losses to offset gains.

I previously stated a few different probabilities about September: what percentage of time the month is down. In September is statistically the worst month for the stock market I didn’t mention the percent of time the month is negative, only that on average it’s down X% since Y. It occurred to me that most people don’t seem to understand probability and more importantly, the more complete equation of expectation.

Expectation

There are many different ways to define expectation. We may initially think of it as “what we expect to happen”. In many ways, it’s best not to have expectations about the future. Our expectations may not play out as we’d hoped. If we base our investment decisions on opinion and expectations don’t pan out, we may stick with our opinion anyway and eventually lose money. The expectation I’m talking about is the kind that I apply: mathematical expectation.

So far, we have determined probability of September based on how many months it’s down or up. However, probability alone isn’t enough information to make a logical decision. First of all, going back to 1950 using the S&P 500 stock index, the month of September is down about 53% of the time and ends the month positive about 47% of the time. That alone isn’t a huge difference, but what makes it more meaningful is the expectation. When it’s down 53% of the time, it’s down -3.8% and when it’s up 47% of the time it’s up an average of 3.3%. That results in an expected value of -0.50% for the month of September. If we go back further to 1928, which includes the Great Depression, it’s about  -1.12%.

The bottom line is the math says “based on historical data, September has been the worst month for the stock market”. We could then say “it can be expected to be”. But as I said before, it may not be! And, another point I have made is the use of multiple time frames for looking at the data, which is a reminder that by intention: probability is not exact. It can’t be, it’s not supposed to be, and doesn’t need to be! Probability and expectation are the maths of uncertainty. We don’t know in advance many outcomes in life, but we can estimate them mathematically and that provides a sound logic and a mathematical basis for believing what we do.

We’ve made a whole lot of the month of September, but I think it made for a good opportunity to explain probability and expectation that are the essence of portfolio management. It doesn’t matter so much how often we are right or wrong, but instead the probability and the magnitude. Asymmetric returns are created by more profit, less loss. Mathematical expectation provides us a mathematical basis for believing a method works, or not. Not knowing the future; it’s the best we have.

Rather than seasonal tendencies, I prefer to focus on the actual direction of global price trends and directly manage the risk in individual my positions.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Connect with me on Linkedin and Follow me on Twitter. 

Why Index ETFs Over Individual Stocks?

August 8, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Empirical Observation, ETF Strategist, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Managed Momentum, Managed Volatility, Momentum Relative Strength, Sector ETF, Sector Rotation, Sector Trends, Tactical Asset Allocation, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, Trend Following Leave a comment

A fellow portfolio manager I know was telling me about a sharp price drop in one of his positions that was enough to wipe out the 40% gain he had in the stock. Of course, he had previously told me he had a quick 40% gain in the stock, too. That may have been his signal to sell.  Biogen, Inc (BIIB) recently declined about -30% in about three days. Easy come, easy go. Below is a price chart over the past year.

Biogen BIIB

Source: Shell Capital Management, LLC created with http://www.stockcharts.com

Occasionally investors or advisors will ask: “Why trade index ETFs instead of individual stocks?“. An exchange-traded fund (ETF) is an investment fund traded on stock exchanges, much like stocks. Until ETFs came along the past decade or so, gaining exposure to sectors, countries, bond markets, commodities, and currencies wasn’t so easy. It has taken some time for portfolio managers to adapt to using them, but ETFs are easily tradable on an exchange like stocks. Prior to ETFs, those few of us who applied “Sector Rotation” or “Asset Class Rotation” or any kind of tactical shifts between markets did so with much more expensive mutual funds. ETFs have provided us with low cost, transparent, and tax efficient exposure to a very global universe of stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, and even alternatives like REITs, private equity, MLP’s, volatility, or inverse (short). Prior to ETFs we would have had to get these exposures with futures or options. I saw the potential of ETFs early, so I developed risk management and trend systems that I’ve applied to ETFs that I would have previously applied to futures.

On the one hand, someone who thinks they are a good stock picker are enticed to want to get more granular into a sector and find what they believe is the “best” stock. In some ways, that seems to make sense if we can weed out the bad ones and only hold the good ones. It really isn’t so simple. I view everything a reward/risk ratio, which I call asymmetric payoffs. There is a tradeoff between the reward/risk of getting more detailed and focused in the exposure vs. having at least some diversification, such as exposure to the whole sector instead of just the stock.

Market Risk, Sector Risk, and Stock Risk

In the big picture, we can break exposures into three simple risks (and those risks can be explored with even more detail). We’ll start with the broad risk and get more detailed. Academic theories break down the risk between “market risk” that can’t be diversified away and “single stock” and sector risk that may be diversified away.

Market Risk: In finance and economics, systematic risk (in economics often called aggregate risk or undiversifiable risk) is vulnerable to events which affect aggregate outcomes such as broad market declines, total economy-wide resource holdings, or aggregate income. Market risk is the risk that comes from the whole market itself. For example, when the stock market index falls -10% most stocks have declined more or less.

Stock and Sector Risk: Unsystematic risk, also known as “specific risk,” “diversifiable risk“, is the type of uncertainty that comes with the company or industry itself. Unsystematic risk can be reduced through diversification. If we hold an index of 50 Biotech stocks in an index ETF its potential and magnitude of a  large gap down in price is less than an individual stock.

You can probably see how holding a single stock like Biogen  has its own individual risks as a single company such as its own earnings reports, results of its drug trials, etc. A biotech stock is especially interesting to use as an example because investing in biotechnology comes with a unique host of risks. In most cases, these companies can live or die based on results of drug trials and the demand for their existing drugs. In fact, the reason Biogen declined so much is they reported disappointing second-quarter results and lowered its guidance for the full year, largely because of lower demand for one of their drugs in the United States and a weaker pricing environment in Europe. That is a risk that is specific to the uncertainty of the company itself. It’s an unsystematic risk and a selection risk that can be reduced through diversification. We don’t have to hold exposure to just one stock.

With index ETFs, we can gain systematic exposure to an industry like biotech or a sector like healthcare or a broader stock market exposure like the S&P 500. The nice thing about an index ETF is we get exposure to a basket of stocks, bond, commodities, or currencies and we know what we’re getting since they disclose their holdings on a daily basis.

ETFs are flexible and easy to trade. We can buy and sell them like stocks, typically through a brokerage account. We 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.

The iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF objective seeks to track the investment results of an index composed of biotechnology and pharmaceutical equities listed on the NASDAQ. It holds 145 different biotech stocks and is market-cap-weighted, so its exposure is more focused on the larger companies. It therefore has two potential disadvantages: it has less exposure to smaller and possibly faster growing biotech stocks and it only holds those stocks listed on the NASDAQ, so it misses some of the companies that may have moved to the NYSE. According to iShares we can see that Biogen (BIIB) is one of the top 5 holdings in the index ETF.

iShares Biotech ETF HoldingsSource: http://www.ishares.com/us/products/239699/ishares-nasdaq-biotechnology-etf

Below is a price chart of the popular iShares Nasdaq Biotech ETF (IBB: the black line) compared to the individual stock Biogen (BIIB: the blue line). Clearly, the more diversified biotech index has demonstrated a more profitable and smoother trend over the past year. And, notice it didn’t experience the recent -30% drop that wiped out Biogen’s price gain. Though some portfolio managers may perceive we can earn more return with individual stocks, clearly that isn’t always the case. Sometimes getting more granular in exposures can instead lead to worse and more volatile outcomes.

IBB Biotech ETF vs Biogen Stock 2015-07-29_10-34-29

Source: Shell Capital Management, LLC created with http://www.stockcharts.com

The nice thing about index ETFs is we have a wide range of them from which to research and choose to add to our investable universe. For example, when I observe the directional price trend in biotech is strong, I can then look at all of the other biotech index ETFs to determine which would give me the exposure I want to participate in the trend.

Since we’ve observed with Biogen the magnitude of the potential individual risk of a single biotech stock, that also suggests we may not even prefer to have too much overweight in any one stock within an index. Below I have added to the previous chart the SPDR® S&P® Biotech ETF (XBI: the black line) which has about 105 holdings, but the positions are equally-weighted which tilts it toward the smaller companies, not just larger companies.  As you can see by the black line below, over the past year, that equal weighting tilt has resulted in even better relative strength. However, it also had a wider range (volatility) at some points. Though it doesn’t always work out this way, you are probably beginning to see how different exposures create unique return streams and risk/reward profiles.

SPDR Biotech Index ETF XBI IBB and Biogen BIIB 2015-07-29_10-35-46

Source: Shell Capital Management, LLC created with http://www.stockcharts.com

In fact, those who have favored “stock picking” may be fascinated to see the equal-weighted  SPDR® S&P® Biotech ETF (XBI: the black line) has actually performed as good as the best stock of the top 5 largest biotech stocks in the iShares Nasdaq Biotech ETF.

SPDR Biotech vs CELG AMGN BIIB GILD REGN

Source: Shell Capital Management, LLC created with http://www.stockcharts.com

Biotech indexes aren’t just pure biotech industry exposure. They also have exposures to the healthcare sector. For example, iShares Nasdaq Biotech shows about 80% in biotechnology and 20% in sectors categorized in other healthcare industries.

iShares Nasdaq Biotech ETF exposure allocation

Source: www.ishares.com

The brings me to another point I want to make. The broader healthcare sector also includes some biotech. For example, the iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF is one of the most traded and includes 23.22% in biotech.

iShares Healthcare Index ETF exposure allocation

Source: https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239511/IYH?referrer=tickerSearch

It’s always easy to draw charts and look at price trends retroactively in hindsight. If we only knew in advance how trends would play out in the future we could just hold only the very best. In the real world, we can only identify trends based on probability and by definition, that is never a sure thing. Only a very few of us really know what that means and have real experience and a good track record of actually doing it.

I have my own ways I aim to identify potentially profitable directional trends and my methods necessarily needs to have some level of predictive ability or I wouldn’t bother. However, in real world portfolio management, it’s the exit and risk control, not the entry, the ultimately determines the outcome. Since I focus on the exposure to risk at the individual position level and across the portfolio, it doesn’t matter so much to me how I get the exposure. But, by applying my methods to more diversified index ETFs across global markets instead of just U.S. stocks I have fewer individual downside surprises. I believe I take asset management to a new level by dynamically adapting to evolving markets. For example, they say individual selection risk can be diversified away by holding a group of holdings so I can efficiently achieve that through one ETF. However, that still leaves the sector risk of the ETF, so it requires risk management of that ETF position. They say systematic market risk can’t be diversified away, so most investors risk that is left is market risk. I manage both market risk and position risk through my risk control systems and exits. For me, risk tolerance is enforced through my exits and risk control systems.

The performance quoted represents past performance and does not guarantee future results. Investment return and principal value of an investment will fluctuate so that an investor’s shares, when sold or redeemed, may be worth more or less than the original cost. Current performance may be lower or higher than the performance quoted, and numbers may reflect small variances due to rounding. Standardized performance and performance data current to the most recent month end may be obtained by clicking the “Returns” tab above.

The Volatility Index (VIX) is Getting Interesting Again

April 24, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Absolute Return Fund, Absolute Return Investing, Absolute Return Investment, Absolute Return Objective, Absolute Return Strategy, Absolute Returns, Absolute vs. Relatative Return, Absolute vs. Relative Return, Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment Strategy, Alternative Trading Strategy, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Asymmetric Thinking, Counter trend, Critical Thinking, Dynamic Hedging, ETF Strategist, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Global Tactical Rotation, Hedge Funds, Hiring a Portfolio Manager, Independent Thinking, Investor Behavior Modification, Investor Sentiment, Liquid Alternative, Managed Momentum, Managed Volatility, Mean Reversion, Momentum Relative Strength, Risk Asymmetry, Sector Rotation, Systematic Global Macro, Tactical Asset Allocation, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, VIX CBOE Volatility Index, Volatility Trading 1 Comment

In the last observation I shared on the CBOE Volatlity index (the VIX) I had been pointing out last year the VIX was at a low level and then later started trending up. At that time, many volatility traders seemed to think it was going to stay low and keep going lower – I disagreed. Since then, the VIX has remained at a higher average than it had been – up until now. You can read that in VIX® gained 140%: Investors were too complacent.

Here it is again, closing at 12.45 yesterday, a relatively low level for expected volatility of the S&P 500 stocks. Investors get complacent after trends drift up, so they don’t price in so much fear in options. Below we observe a monthly view to see the bigger picture. The VIX is getting down to levels near the end of the last bull market (2007). It could go lower, but if you look closely, you’ll get my drift.

Chart created by Shell Capital with: http://www.stockcharts.com

Next, we zoom in to the weekly chart to get a loser look.

Chart created by Shell Capital with: http://www.stockcharts.com

Finally, the daily chart zooms in even more.

Chart created by Shell Capital with: http://www.stockcharts.com

The observation?

Options traders have priced in low implied volatility – they expect volatility to be low over the next month. That is happening as headlines are talking about stock indexes hitting all time highs. I think it’s a sign of complacency. That’s often when things change at some point.

It also means that options premiums are generally a good deal (though that is best determined on an individual security basis). Rather than selling premium, it may be a better time to buy it.

Let’s see what happens from here…

My 2 Cents on the Dollar

April 23, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Absolute Return Fund, Absolute Return Investing, Absolute Return Investment, Absolute Return Objective, Absolute Return Strategy, Absolute Returns, Absolute vs. Relatative Return, Absolute vs. Relative Return, Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment, Alternative Trading Strategy, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Business Cycle, Counter trend, Critical Thinking, Dynamic Hedging, ETF Strategist, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Global Tactical Rotation, Hiring a Portfolio Manager, Independent Thinking, Liquid Alternative, Managed Momentum, Managed Volatility, Mean Reversion, Momentum Relative Strength, Positive Asymmetry, Risk Asymmetry, Sector ETF, Sector Rotation, Sector Trends, Systematic Global Macro, Tactical Asset Allocation, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, Trend Following 2 Comments

The U.S. Dollar ($USD) has gained about 20% in less than a year. We observe it first in the weekly below. The U.S. Dollar is a significant driver of returns of other markets. For example, when the U.S. Dollar is rising, commodities like gold, oil, and foreign currencies like the Euro are usually falling. A rising U.S. Dollar also impacts international stocks priced in U.S. Dollar. When the U.S. Dollar trends up, many international markets priced in U.S. Dollars may trend down (reflecting the exchange rate). The U.S. Dollar may be trending up in anticipation of rising interest rates.

dollar trend weekly 2015-04-23_16-04-40

Chart created by Shell Capital with: http://www.stockcharts.com

Now, let’s observe a shorter time frame- the daily chart. Here we see an impressive uptrend and since March a non-trending indecisive period. Many trend followers and global macro traders are likely “long the U.S. Dollar” by being long and short other markets like commodities, international stocks, or currencies.

dollar trend daily 2015-04-23_16-05-04

Chart created by Shell Capital with: http://www.stockcharts.com

This is a good example of understanding what drives returns and risk/reward. I consider how long the U.S. Dollar I am and how that may impact my positions if this uptrend were to reverse. It’s a good time to pay attention to it to see if it breaks back out to the upside to resume the uptrend, or if it instead breaks down to end it. Such a continuation or reversal often occurs from a point like the blue areas I highlighted above.

That’s my two cents on the Dollar…

How long are you? Do you know?

Asymmetric Nature of Losses and Loss Aversion

April 8, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Absolute Return Fund, Absolute Return Investing, Absolute Return Investment, Absolute Return Objective, Absolute Return Strategy, Absolute Returns, Absolute vs. Relative Return, Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment Strategy, Alternative Trading Strategy, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Thinking, Critical Thinking, Dynamic Hedging, Empirical Observation, ETF Strategist, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Hedge Funds, Hiring a Portfolio Manager, Independent Thinking, Investor Behavior Modification, Investor Sentiment, Liquid Alternative, Managed Volatility, Positive Asymmetry, Quantitative Evidence-Based Rearch, Risk Asymmetry, Symmetry Tags: , 3 Comments

Loss Aversion:

“In prospect theory, loss aversion refers to the tendency for people to strongly prefer avoiding losses than acquiring gains. Some studies suggest that losses are as much as twice as psychologically powerful as gains. Loss aversion was first convincingly demonstrated by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman.”

For most people, losing $100 is not the same as not winning $100. From a rational point of view are the two things the same or different?

Most economists say the two are the same. They are symmetrical. But I think that ignores some key issues.

If we have only $10 to eat on today and that’s all we have, if we lose it, we’ll be in trouble: hungry.

But if we have $10 to eat on and flip a coin in a bet and double it to $20, we may just eat a little better. We’ll still eat. The base rate: survival.

They say rationally the two are the same, but that isn’t true. They aren’t the same. The loss makes us worse off than we started and it may be totally rational to feel worse when we go backward than we feel good about getting better off. I don’t like to go backward, I prefer to move forward to stay the same.

Prospect Theory, which found people experience a loss more than 2 X greater than an equal gain, discovered the experience of losses are asymmetric.

Actually, the math agrees.

You see, losing 50% requires a 100% gain to get it back. Losing it all is even worse. Losses are indeed asymmetric and exponential on the downside so it may be completely rational and logical to feel the pain of losses asymmetrically. Experience the feeling of loss aversions seems to be the reason a few of us manage investment risk and generate a smoother return stream rather than blow up.

To see what the actual application of asymmetry to portfolio management looks like, see: Shell Capital Management, LLC.

 

asymmetry impact of loss

Asymmetric Sector Exposure in Stock Indexes

March 24, 2015 By in Absolute Return, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Sector Exposure, Asymmetric Thinking, Data Driven Rearch, Empirical Observation, ETF Strategist, Global Directional Trends, Independent Thinking, Quantitative Evidence-Based Rearch, Risk Asymmetry, Sector ETF, Sector Rotation, Sector Trends, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management Leave a comment

When you look at the table below and see the sector exposure percents, what do you observe? Do these allocations make sense?

asymmetric sector ETF expsoure S&P 500 2015-03-24_16-39-11

That is the sector exposure of the S&P 500 stock index: I used the iShares S&P 500 ETF for a real-world proxy. The source of each image is the index website on iShares, which you can see by clicking on the name of the index ETF.

  • Asymmetric is an imbalance. That is, more of one thing, less of another.
  • A sector is a specific industry, like Energy (Exxon Mobil) or Telecom (Verizon).
  • Exposure is the amount of the position size or allocation.

Most of the sector exposure in the S&P 500 large company stock index is Technology, Financials, Healthcare, and Consumer Discretionary. Consumer Staples, Energy, Materials, Utilities, and Telecommunications have less than 10% exposure each. Exposure to Materials, Utilities, and Telecommunications are almost non-existent. Combined, those three sectors are less than 10% of the index. Industrial has 10% exposure by itself.  But this index is 500 large companies, what about mid size and small companies?

asymmetric sector expsoure S&P 500 2015-03-24_16-39-11

Below is the iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF. Most of the sector exposure in the S&P Mid size stock index is Technology, Financials, Industrial. Healthcare, and Consumer Discretionary. Consumer Staples, Energy, Materials, Utilities, and Telecommunications have less than 10% exposure each. Exposure to Materials, Utilities, and Telecommunications are almost non-existent.

asymmetric sector exposure S&P Mid-Cap ETF

We see this same asymmetric sector exposure theme repeat in the iShares S&P Small Cap index. Half of the sectors are make up most of the exposure, the other very little.

asymmetric sector exposure S&P small cap

This is just another asymmetric observation… the next time you hear someone speak of the return of a stock index, consider they are really speaking about the return profile of certain sectors. And, these sector weightings may change over time.

Diversification Alone is No Longer Sufficient to Temper Risk…

March 9, 2015 By in Absolute Returns, Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment, Alternative Trading Strategy, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Thinking, Business Cycle, Critical Thinking, Empirical Observation, ETF Strategist, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Global Tactical Rotation, Hiring a Portfolio Manager, Independent Thinking, Investor Behavior Modification, Liquid Alternative, Managed Momentum, Managed Volatility, Momentum Relative Strength, Quantitative Evidence-Based Rearch, Risk Asymmetry, Sector ETF, Sector Rotation, Systematic Global Macro, Tactical Asset Allocation, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management, Trend Following Leave a comment

That was the lesson you learned the last time stocks became overvalued and the stock market entered into a bear market.

In a Kiplinger article by Fred W. Frailey interviewed Mohamed El-Erian, the PIMCO’s boss, (PIMCO is one of the largest mutual fund companies in the world) he says “he tells how to reduce risk and reap rewards in a fast-changing world.” This article “Shaking up the Investment Mix” was written in March 2009, which turned out the be “the low” of the global market collapse.

It is useful to revisit such writing and thoughts, especially since the U.S. stock market has since been overall rising for 5 years and 10 months. It’s one of the longest uptrends recorded and the S&P 500 stock index is well in “overvalued” territory at 27 times EPS. At the same time, bonds have also been rising in value, which could change quickly when rates eventually rise. At this stage of a trend, asset allocation investors could need a reminder. I can’t think of a better one that this:

Why are you telling investors they need to diversify differently these days?

The traditional approach to diversification, which served us very well, went like this: Adopt a diversified portfolio, be disciplined about rebalancing the asset mix, own very well-defined types of asset classes and favor the home team because the minute you invest outside the U.S., you take on additional risk. A typical mix would then be 60% stocks and 40% bonds, and most of the stocks would be part of Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index.

This approach is fatigued for several reasons. First of all, diversification alone is no longer sufficient to temper risk. In the past year, we saw virtually every asset class hammered. You need something more to manage risk well.

But, you know, they say a picture is worth a thousand words.

Since we are talking about downside risk, something that is commonly hidden when only “average returns” are presented, below is a drawdown chart. I created the drawdown chart using YCharts which uses total return data and the “% off high”. The decline you see from late 2007 to 2010 is a dradown: it’s when the investment value is under water. Think of this like a lake. You can see how the average of the data wouldn’t properly inform you of what happens in between.

First, I show PIMCO’s own allocation fund: PALCX: Allianz Global Allocation Fund. I include an actively managed asset allocation that is very large and popular with $55 billion invested in it: MALOX: BlackRock Global Allocation. Since there are many who instead believe in passive indexing and allocation, I have also included DGSIX: DFA Global Allocation 60/40 and VBINX: Vanguard Balanced Fund. As you can see, they have all done about the same thing. They declined about -30% to -40% from October 2007 to March 2009. They also declined up to -15% in 2011.

Vanguard DFA BlackRock PIMCO Asset Allcation

Charts are courtesy of http://ycharts.com/ drawn by Mike Shell

Going forward, the next bear market may be very different. Historically, investors consider bond holdings to be a buffer or an anchor to a portfolio. When stock prices fall, bonds haven’t been falling nearly as much. To be sure, I show below a “drawdown chart” for the famous actively managed bond fund PIMCO Total Return and for the passive crowd I have included the Vanguard Total Bond Market fund. Keep in mind, about 40% of the allocation of the funds above are invested in bonds. As you see, bonds dropped about -5% to -7% in the past 10 years.

PIMCO Total Return Bond Vanguard Total Bond

Charts are courtesy of http://ycharts.com/ drawn by Mike Shell

You may have noticed the end of the chart is a drop of nearly -2%. Based on the past 10 years, that’s just a minor decline. The trouble going forward is that interest rates have been in an overall downtrend for 30 years, so bond values have been rising. If you rely on bonds being a crutch, as on diversification alone, I agree with Mohamed El-Erian the Chief of the worlds largest bond manager:

“…diversification alone is no longer sufficient to temper risk. In the past year, we saw virtually every asset class hammered. You need something more to manage risk well.”

But, don’t wait until AFTER markets have fallen to believe it.

Instead, I apply active risk management and directional trend systems to a global universe of exchange traded securities (like ETFs). To see what that looks like, click: ASYMMETRY® Managed Accounts

Sectors Showing Some Divergence…

March 4, 2015 By in Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Alternative Investment Strategy, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Thinking, Empirical Observation, ETF Strategist, Global Asset Allocation, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Global Tactical Rotation, Liquid Alternative, Managed Momentum, Managed Volatility, Momentum Relative Strength, Sector ETF, Sector Rotation, Sector Trends, Systematic Global Macro, Tactical Asset Allocation, Tactical ETF Managed Portfolio, Trend Following Leave a comment

So far, U.S. sector directional price trends are showing some divergence in 2015.

Rather than all things rising, such divergence may give hints to new return drivers unfolding as well as opportunity for directional trend systems to create some asymmetry by avoiding the trends I don’t want and get exposure to those I do.

Sector ETF Divergence 2015-03-04_11-24-54

For more information about ASYMMETRY®, visit: http://www.asymmetrymanagedaccounts.com/global-tactical/

 

Chart source: http://www.finviz.com/groups.ashx

 

 

The Holiday Party: Mindset of the Active Risk Manager

December 25, 2014 By in Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Thinking, Critical Thinking, Playing with Words, Risk Asymmetry Leave a comment

holiday parties

I keep hearing of symptoms of this awful virus going around. I’ll spare you of the details, but it involves both ends around the porcelain bowl. We’ve all been there, done that, and probably consider it a “bad outcome”.

Then, we have all these holiday party plans to spend time with friends and family, knowing this ‘bug’ is contagious and spreading. Hearing about it, the natural mindset of the active risk manager is to ask:

“Has anyone at the party had the flu recently?”

You wonder if you’re entering into a high risk of a bad outcome. Most people may not even consider it, and it’s those people who will probably be there spreading it around! I know people who never consider the possibility of a bad outcome; they tend to be the ones who have the worst outcomes, more often. Others may be overly afraid of things that may never happen, so they miss out on life. Some even worry about things they fear so much they experience those things, even when they don’t happen.

The active risk manager internally thinks of risk.

Let’s first use the dictionary to better understand the meaning of “active”:

1. engaged in action; characterized by energetic work, participation, etc.; busy: an active life.

2. being in a state of existence, progress, or motion:

3. involving physical effort and action :active sports.

4. having the power of quick motion; nimble: active as a gazelle.

5. characterized by action, motion, volume, use, participation, etc.

So, let’s say that to be active is to be engaged in action, participate, an active life, progress, nimble, motion, and even a state of existence.

Risk is exposure to the possibility of a bad outcome. When we are speaking of money, risk is the exposure to the possibility of loss. If we incur a loss, that isn’t a risk, that’s an actual loss. Some people believe that uncertainty is risk, but we always have uncertainty. So, risk is the exposure to a chance or possibility of loss. It’s the exposure that is the risk, the chance or possibility is always there. So, your risk of loss is your choice. We decide it in advance.

To manage is to take charge of, handle, direct, govern, or control through action.

A bad outcome in money management may be losing money, or in life it may be anything we perceive as unwanted. We can’t be certain about an outcome. Uncertainty is something we live with every day and in all things, so we may as well embrace it and enjoy not knowing the outcome of things in advance. So, risk is the exposure to a chance or possibility of loss. It’s the exposure that is the risk, the chance or possibility is always there. So, your risk of loss is your choice. We decide it in advance.

So, an active risk manager, like me, is someone who engages in the action of actively and intentionally directing and controlling the exposure to a bad outcome. Because I actively management my risks, I am able to trade and invest in things other people perceive as risky, but they aren’t to me because I define my risk exposure and control it. Because active risk management is not only a learned skill I have advanced for myself but also something that is a natural part of me and who I am, I am also able to live my life enjoying and even embracing change and uncertainty. Yet, I do that initially and naturally thinking of what my risk is. Once I understand my risk, I manage it, and then accept it for what I’ve decided it will be, and then I let it all unfold as it will. I control what I can and let the rest do what it’s going to do.

You see, it’s also a big risk to not experience life. Studies show that happiness is more driven by new experiences than any other thing. Hedonic Adaptation means that we tend to get used to things and adapt, good or bad. Broadening our horizons makes and keeps us happy, doing the same old things leads to a dull and less happy life. Much of our happiness comes from new experiences and change, because we get used to even the finest and fastest new car and eventually it becomes our new normal.

Although I feel a strong obligation to keep myself well, I’m not going to miss spending time with people I enjoy. Instead, I’ll take my chances and deal with, and actively manage, any bad outcome that arises from it. So, consider your risks, then get out there and enjoy yourself with new experiences. Even if you get sick for a few days, that too shall eventually pass.

Merry Christmas!

Tony Robbins on Asymmetrical Risk Reward

November 22, 2014 By in Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Risk Reward, Asymmetric Thinking Leave a comment

Just last week I posted my article Asymmetrical Risk Definition and Symmetry: Do you Really Want Balance? about asymmetric risk reward and how we want imbalance between profit and loss, not balance. That is, we want asymmetry, not symmetry. Tony Robbins has a new book out, mentioning the very concept of asymmetric risk and asymmetric payoffs. I’ve always been a big fan of Tony.

Richard Feloni interviews Tony Robbins about his first new book in over 20 years, “MONEY Master the Game: 7 Simple Steps to Financial Freedom,”. In an article in Business Insider titled “Tony Robbins Reveals What He’s Learned From Financial Power Players Like Carl Icahn And Ray Dalio”.

Below is a piece of the interview of Robbins explaining he learned about asymmetric risk reward, which used a link to ASYMMETRY® Observations for the definition of asymmetrical risk reward.

“You’ve gotta be obsessed because you know when you lose 50%, you have to make 100% to get even.

[Warren Buffett’s advice mentioned in the book] came from Ben [Graham], his teacher. It’s, “What’s rule number one in investing? Never lose money. What’s rule number two? Don’t forget rule number one.”

That would be boring if that was the only universal piece besides the other one, which I find fascinating, was that they’re not giant risk takers, most of them. They believe in asymmetrical risk reward. It simply means they take the smallest risk possible for the largest return possible.

The average person goes out and invests a dollar hoping to make 10% or 20%, if they’re lucky — so if they’re wrong they’re in the hole majorly. Paul Tudor Jones [had a principle he used to use] called 5:1. And 5:1 is this: If he invests a dollar, he doesn’t part with that dollar he’s investing unless he feels certain he’s going to make five. He knows — he’s not stupid — he knows he’s going to be wrong [sometimes] so if he loses a dollar and has to spend another dollar, spending two to make five, he’s still up $3. He can be wrong four out of five times and still be in great shape.

Most everybody thinks that if I want to get big rewards I need to take huge risks. But if you keep thinking that, you’re gonna be broke.”

Asymmetrical Risk Definition and Symmetry: Do you Really Want Balance?

November 15, 2014 By in Actively Manage Risk, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Asymmetric Thinking, Playing with Words, Risk Asymmetry, Symmetry Leave a comment

Asymmetric is imbalance, uneven, or not the same on both sides.

Risk is the possibility of losing something of value, or a bad outcome. The risk is the chance or potential for a loss, not the loss itself. Once we have a loss, the risk has shifted beyond a possibility to a real loss. The investment or position itself isn’t the risk either, risk is the possibility we may lose money in how we manage and deal with it.

Asymmetrical Risk, then, is the potential for gains and losses on an investment or trade are uneven.

When I speak of asymmetric risk, I may also refer to the probability for gains and losses that are imbalanced, for those of us who can determine probability. If the probability of losing something or a bad outcome is asymmetric, it means the risk isn’t the same as the reward.

Asymmetric risk can also refer to the outcome for profits and losses that are imbalanced, after we have sold a position, asset, or investment.

Some examples:

If we risk $10, but earn $10, the risk was symmetrical.

  • We risked $10
  • We earned $10 – we just broke even (symmetry).

Symmetry is the outcome when you balance risk and reward.

If we risk $10, but earn $20, the risk was positively asymmetric.

  • We risked $10
  • We earned $20

If we risk $10, but lose $10, the risk was symmetrical.

  • We risked $10
  • We lost $10 – we lost the same as we risked.

If we risk $10, but lose $20, the risk was an asymmetric risk.

  • We risked $10
  • We lost $20 – we lost even more than we though we risked.

Strangely, I often hear investment advisers say they want to balance risk and reward through their asset allocation.

Do you?

It was when I noticed my objective of imbalancing profit and loss, risk and reward, was so different from others that I knew I have a unique understanding and perception of the math and I could apply it to portfolio management.

You can probably see how some investors earn gains for years, then lose those gains in the following years, then earn gains again, then lose them again.

That’s a result of symmetry and its uncontrolled asymmetrical risk.

You can probably see why my focus is ASYMMETRY® so deeply that the word is my trademark.

VIX® gained 140%: Investors were too complacent

October 16, 2014 By in Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Crowd Psychology, Dynamic Hedging, Empirical Observation, Global Directional Trends, Global Macro, Investor Sentiment, Managed Volatility, Mean Reversion, Risk Asymmetry, VIX CBOE Volatility Index, Volatility Trading 1 Comment

Several months ago I started sharing some of my observations about the VIX ( CBOE Volatility Index). The VIX had gotten to a level I considered low, which implied to me that investors were too complacent, were expecting too low future volatility, and option premiums were generally cheap. After the VIX got down to levels around 11 and 12 and then started to move up, I pointed out the VIX seemed to be changing from a downward longer term trend to a rising trend.

As I was sharing my observations of the directional trend and volatility of VIX that I believed was more likely to eventually go up than down, it seemed that most others were writing just the opposite. I know that many volatility traders mostly sell volatility (options premium), so they prefer to see it fall.

As you can see in the chart below, The VIX has increased about 140% in just a few weeks.

VIX october

Chart courtesy of http://www.stockcharts.com

For those who haven’t been following along, you may consider reading the previous observations:

A VIX Pop Then Back to Zzzzzzzz? We’ll see

Asymmetric VIX

VIX Shows Volatility Still Low, But Trending

VIX Back to Low

The VIX is Asymmetric, making its derivatives an interesting hedge

Is the VIX an indication of fear and complacency?

What does a VIX below 11 mean?

What does the VIX really represent?

The VIX, my point of view

The VIX, as I see it…

Volatility Risk Premium

Declining (Low) Volatility = Rising (High) Complacency

Investors are Complacent

 

Asymmetric VIX

August 1, 2014 By in Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Managed Volatility, VIX CBOE Volatility Index, Volatility Trading Leave a comment

In The VIX is Asymmetric, making its derivatives an interesting hedge I explained how the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) tends to react with sharper and with greater magnitude than stock indexes. There is an asymmetric relationship between stock index returns and the VIX. Below includes yesterdays action when the S&P 500 stock index was down 2% and the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) spot gained 27%. The chart is a good visual of how, when the stock index falls, implied volatility spikes up.

 

asymmetric vix

source: http://www.stockcharts.com

I have been sharing some observations about the VIX recently because it had gotten do a low level not seen in many years. It’s an indication that investors have become complacent about risk. When a trend gets to an extreme, it’s interesting to observe how it all plays out.

 

 

VIX Shows Volatility Still Low, But Trending

July 23, 2014 By in Asymmetric Payoff, Counter trend, Global Directional Trends, Investor Sentiment, VIX CBOE Volatility Index, Volatility Trading Leave a comment

It seemed that many of the commentators who write and talk about the VIX started talking as though it would stay down a long time. Of course, that’s as much a signal as anything that the trend could instead change.

Below is a chart of the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) since I observed “VIX Back to Low” on July 3. It says to me that volatility, is, well, volatile. It trended up as much as 34% and then retraced much of that.

cboe volatility index vix pop

source: http://www.stockcharts.com

CBOE VOLATILTY INDEX VIX

Looking back the past several months, we can see since the beginning of July it has started to make higher highs and higher lows. Volatility (and therefore some options premiums) are still generally cheap by this measure, but from the eyes of a trend follower I wonder if this may be the very early stage of higher vol. We’ll see…

Either way, whether it stays low or trends back up, the monthly chart below shows the implied volatility in options is “cheaper” now than we’ve seen in 7 years, suggesting exposures with options strategies may be a “good deal”.

long term vix

Flaw of Averages

July 1, 2014 By in Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Flaw of Averages Leave a comment

In Declining (Low) Volatility = Rising (High) Complacency I said:

“The VIX has a long-term average of about 20 since its inception. At this moment, it is 11.82. It’s important to realize the flaw of averages here, because the VIX doesn’t actually stay around 20 – it instead averages 20 as it swings higher and lower.”

The flaw of averages is the term used by Sam L. Savage to describe the fallacies that arise when single numbers (usually averages) are used to represent uncertain outcomes.

A fine example of the flaw of averages involves a 6 ft. tall statistician who drowns while crossing a river that is 3 ft. deep on average.

 

DanzigerCoverArtSavage

Source: http://www.danzigercartoons.com/

You can probably see how assumptions using averages can get us in trouble. It only takes a little to be “too much”… and that is mostly likely a problem when we expect the average and the possible range is much wider.

The VIX is Asymmetric, making its derivatives an interesting hedge

June 12, 2014 By in Actively Manage Risk, Asymmetric Hedging, Asymmetric Payoff, Asymmetric Risk, Dynamic Hedging, Managed Volatility, VIX CBOE Volatility Index, Volatility Trading Leave a comment

Asymmetric payoff VIX

The VIX is asymmetric, its distribution is non-symmetrical, it is skewed because it has very wide swings. The volatility of volatility is very volatile. There is an asymmetric relationship between stock index returns and the VIX. This asymmetric relationship is what initially makes the VIX interesting for hedging against S&P 500 volatility and losses.

Since I started the series about the extremely low VIX level Monday, like The VIX, as I see it…, The VIX has gained 17% while the S&P 500 stock index has lost about 1%. The VIX is asymmetric. While the VIX isn’t always a perfect opposite movement to the stock indexes, it most often does correlate negatively to stocks. When stocks fall, the implied (expected) volatility increases, so the VIX increases. Asymmetry is imbalance: more of one thing, less of the other. For example, more profit potential, less loss or more upside, less downside.

An advantage of the VIX for hedging is that it is asymmetric: it increases more than stocks fall. For example, when we look at historical declines in the stock index we find the VIX normally gains much more than the stock index falls. For example, if the stock index declined 5% the VIX may have gained 30% over the same period. That ratio of asymmetry of 6 times more drift would allow us to tie up less cash for a hedge position. Of course, the ratio is different each time. Sometimes it moves less, sometimes more.

When the VIX is at a low enough level as it’s been recently, the asymmetric nature of the VIX makes it an interesting hedge for an equity portfolio. The best way to truly hedge a portfolio is to hedge its actual holdings. That’s the only true hedge. If we make a bet against an index and that index doesn’t move like our positions, we still have the risk our positions fall and our hedge does too or doesn’t rise to offset the loss. I always say: anything other than the price itself has the potential to stray far from the price. But the asymmetry of VIX, its potential asymmetric payoff, makes it another option if we are willing to accept it isn’t a direct hedge. And, that its derivatives don’t exactly track the VIX index, either. None of the things we deal with is a sure thing; it’s always probabilistic.

This week has been a fine example of VIX asymmetry. The chart below shows it well.

The VIX is Asymmetric

Note: The VIX is an unmanaged index, not a security so it cannot be invested in directly. We can gain exposure to the VIX through derivatives futures, options, or ETNs that invest in VIX futures or options. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell VIX derivatives. To determine whether or not to take a long or short position in the VIX requires significantly more analysis than just making observations about its current level and direction. For example, we would consider the term structure and implied volatility vs. historical volatility and the risk/reward of any options combinations.

My INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY® Interview and Portfolio Management

September 30, 2013 By in Actively Manage Risk, Adapting to Change, Asymmetric Investment Returns, Asymmetric Payoff, Counter trend, Dynamic Hedging, Global Directional Trends, Tactical ETF Portfolio Management Tags: , , Leave a comment

Portfolio Management is about buying and selling many different positions over time, not just one “pick”. I often say it’s like flipping 10 coins at the same time with each having a different payoff and profit or loss. It could be a completely random process (like flipping a coin), but if we can positively skew the payoffs (asymmetric payoffs) we end up with more profit than loss (asymmetric returns). And, as a portfolio manager I may flip that coin 100 or 500 times a year. The fact is: if the expectation for profit is positive we want to do it as often as possible.

Picking just one position is like flipping the coin just once. Its outcome may have an expected probability and payoff that is positive, but will be determined by how it all unfolds. We can never control the outcome at the point of entry. It’s the exit that always determines the outcome. We can say that same whether we are speaking of stocks, bonds, commodities, and currencies or buying and selling private businesses: if you actually knew for sure the outcome would be positive you would only need to do it once – but you don’t. So deciding what to buy is a small part of my complete portfolio management process. It’s what I do after I’m in a position that makes it “management”. To manage is to direct and control. If all you do is “buy” or “invest” in a position, you have no position “management”.

But when Trang Ho at INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY®recently asked me “What ‘s the one position you would choose over the next several months and why”, I gave her the first position I thought of – and the most recent position I had taken. I primarily get positioned with the current direction of the trend and stay with it until it changes. That may be labeled “trend following”. I define the direction of the trend (up, down, sideways) and then get in that direction until it changes. Trends don’t last forever. There is a point when the probability becomes higher and higher of a reversal. I call that a “counter-trend”. I developed systems that define these directional trends more than a decade ago and have operated them for-profit since. What I can tell you from my experience, expertise, and empirical evidence is that stock market trends, like many other market trends, cycle up and down over time. So, portfolio management is a daily routine of position management that includes predefining risk at the point of entry, taking profits, and knowing when to exit to keep losses small. That exit, not the entry, determines the outcome.

You may consider these things as you read my recent interview in Investors Business Daily titled: Market Strategists: 5 Contrarian ETF Investing Ideas.

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/investing-etfs/090613-670234-contrarian-etf-investing-ideas-stock-market-strategists.htm#ixzz2gNp8bWUT

Asymmetric Payoff: The Price of College Sports

September 28, 2013 By in Asymmetric Observation, Asymmetric Payoff Leave a comment

Schooled- The Price of College Sports

Not all asymmetric payoffs are fair. As the college football season gets into full speed, college sports gets some unwanted publicity. It was sickening to hear Arian Foster say:

“I called my coach and I said, ‘Coach, we don’t have no food. We don’t have no money. We’re hungry. Either you give us some food, or I’m gonna go do something stupid.’ He came down and he brought like 50 tacos for like four or five of us. Which is an NCAA violation. [laughs] But then, I walk up to the facility and I see my coach pull up in a brand new Lexus.” — Arian Foster

It’s sickening not so much because the coach broke the rules by feeding a player, but instead that someone who works as hard as a student athlete is sitting there hungry in the United States of America. And, while the college sports “industry” earns billions of dollars in profits. You surely don’t have to be a hardcore Libertarian to see the problem with that. It’s no surprise that many college athletes don’t have financial support from their family. It’s time for universities to focus on how to at least be sure student athletes have food and decent living conditions. I think they earn it.

 

The conversation will get started when the documentary Schooled: The Price of College Sports premieres Wednesday October 16th 8PM on EPIX:

“The EPIX Original Documentary Schooled: The Price of College Sports is a comprehensive look at the business, history and culture of big-time college football and basketball in America. It is an adaptation of “The Cartel” by Pulitzer Prize Winning civil rights scholar Taylor Branch, and his October 2011 article in The Atlantic, “The Shame of College Sports.” Schooled presents a hard-hitting examination of the NCAA’s treatment of its athletes and amateurism in collegiate athletics; weaving interviews, archival and verité footage to tell a story of how college sports became a billion dollar industry built on the backs of athletes who are deprived of numerous rights.”

Read more: Schooled: The Price of College Sports

%d bloggers like this: