Seeking Alpha

Jeff Miller

View as an RSS Feed
View Jeff Miller's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Dr. Chu Points to Nuclear Option in ETFs [View article]
    Nuclear- Thanks for an interesting comment. What are some of the companies tearing down plants?

    How do you determine that a stock is overpriced.

    Thanks again for joining in!

    Jeff
    Dec 17 10:37 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Dr. Chu Points to Nuclear Option in ETFs [View article]
    Elliott - -As you know, I follow your commentary because I respect you, your background and approach, and the logic of your analysis.

    This is a thorny problem and I appreciate your comment. The method I am using picks up market signals that reflect changes in the underlying viewpoints.

    As someone who -- like you -- is a public policy analyst, it took some time for me to accept that markets were not always in tune with rational policy analysis. Often it is a matter of time frames.

    In this case, it seems like there is a trading opportunity, which is what I am highlighting. We have a three-week time horizon.

    The long-term debate about energy goes on. I wonder if we will arrive at the right answers in time.

    Thanks for a thoughtful comment.

    Jeff
    Dec 17 10:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weighing the Week Ahead: Assessing Market Risk [View article]
    worldwary -- The link to Bill Luby shows his discussion of the index, which he compares favorably to the VIX. That is a good starting point.

    As David notes in his comments, it is a measure of financial stress. There are some other entries (one of which is also noted in my links) but they seem pretty similar.

    I completely agree that the factors measured may not be indicators for short-term trading. As you know, I talk about various time frames in my weekly review. Some of the things I follow are not really elements of a forecast for the coming week.

    Good question -- thanks.

    Jeff
    Dec 13 06:05 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weighing the Week Ahead: Assessing Market Risk [View article]
    David -- I don't know what you mean by "economic risk index, not a market risk index." The eighteen elements are all market quotes or spreads on quotes. VIX is one of the 18.

    Whether it is leading or concurrent is a familiar problem for us all. I like the selection method and construction, as well.

    Thanks,

    Jeff
    Dec 13 12:01 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why the Market Multiple Will be Higher in 2011 [View article]
    Kingpin -- Since (unlike many) I make a number of very specific predictions I am prepared when many go wrong.

    With this in mind, I am surprised by your citation of the IMF article.

    My premise is that government is bigger than you are. Fighting governments is a losing proposition (unless you are George Soros or on his team!)

    In addition, my comment on the European situation and the market has proven accurate -- at least so far.

    So I am interested. Where do you think I have gone wrong? Do you agree with the Santelli group and expect Euro parity?

    Thanks for your encouragement, and for joining in. I appreciate informed discussion:)

    Jeff
    Dec 12 11:38 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why the Market Multiple Will be Higher in 2011 [View article]
    Angel -- Interesting. I'll have to put it on my research agenda. That always seems to get longer no matter how much I do:)

    Jeff
    Dec 10 03:11 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Revisiting Spring 2009: Getting a 'Do-Over' At Both Creating and Preserving Wealth [View article]
    David -- I don't think I can do justice to an analysis of the cyclical theory in a comment, but I do have two thoughts.

    1) You have identified a problem in finding enough cycles during a time period when all else is equal. I am suspicious of any inference drawn from evidence about the market world that pre-dates 1975-80 or so, and even that may be too far back. There have been far too many changes.

    2) You get single-digit PEs when interest rates are very high, as they were in the 70s. If you can get 18% from a bond, what multiple would you pay for a stock?

    There is much more to consider, of course....

    Jeff
    Dec 10 02:26 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why the Market Multiple Will be Higher in 2011 [View article]
    jeffj -- Vince and I have tested many fundamental and political factors. It is a difficult research problem, without a good answer. One problem is that policy changes are anticipated by markets, and not always correctly. The other problem is that you need to reach far back in history to get change in the key variables. Meanwhile, many other factors change. The Clinton era, for example, was good for the market and for the deficit and actually higher in taxes, but that is only a general conclusion.

    A good question, and I wish there was a better answer.

    Jeff
    Dec 10 02:07 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why the Market Multiple Will be Higher in 2011 [View article]
    extremebanker -- Sure! That is how I pick stocks and probably how you do as well. It is still helpful to have an overall perspective on the market. I find confirmation in the fact that many stocks are trading at multiples that are attractive when compared to the earnings growth.

    Good point.

    Jeff
    Dec 10 11:15 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Revisiting Spring 2009: Getting a 'Do-Over' At Both Creating and Preserving Wealth [View article]
    David -- By now you have seen my companion article where I analyze historical data on multiples. I note this here for readers who may see this article without the other.

    seekingalpha.com/artic...

    Thanks,

    Jeff
    Dec 10 11:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why the Market Multiple Will be Higher in 2011 [View article]
    lower98th -- If you draw the line through the pink period you have quite a few blue outliers with no explanation.

    I have heard the falling interest rate environment argument before. I am curious about why people think this is relevant. If I have an asset allocation model, as many big pension funds do, I am constantly comparing alternative rates of return. I do not care where the markets were a month ago, since I am making regular adjustments.

    The real question is why the past direction of rates should be a variable in the model.

    Meanwhile, we'll soon see what happens. I think that most people will be surprised.

    Thanks for joining in.

    Jeff
    Dec 10 10:34 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why the Market Multiple Will be Higher in 2011 [View article]
    David -- If you want to be fair, you will do as I suggested and look at all five charts from the original article. I did not want to rewrite the entire piece for this occasion -- merely to show the relevance.

    If you draw the straight line you suggest, you will miss many blue points. And BTW, there is just as good a case for throwing out the "bond conundrum" period. No one thinks that the multiple should be 50 when rates get to 2%. Such low rates reflect real deflation risk, as they did in the earlier period.

    As I said, everyone is free to draw whatever conclusions he wishes, but checking the original article will be helpful.

    Thanks,

    Jeff
    Dec 10 10:27 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Revisiting Spring 2009: Getting a 'Do-Over' At Both Creating and Preserving Wealth [View article]
    sethmcs -- I am curious. How about an example of a stock that you feel is currently overvalued. Also, how about a comparison or two between Spring 2009 and now.

    My point is to get people to think about price as relative to earnings, not as an absolute. Give me a hand:)

    Thanks,

    Jeff
    Dec 10 01:16 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weighing the Week Ahead: Fundamentals vs. Fear [View article]
    Logical Thought - You ask why I did not include durable goods. This series has a lot of volatility, but adds something if there is a trend. This month's report was actually pretty good, if you allow for the major upward revision from the prior month. On balance, I did not see it as a significant departure from the trend. Here is a quotation from a source I find valuable, the Bonddad Blog:

    "Durable goods declined over 3% in October, but only with September's data revised upward to over +5%. In other words, October's durable goods orders were only the second best reading in two years. The upward trend is firmly intact."

    bonddad.blogspot.com/2...

    I'm not going to comment further on the ECRI right now. I have written about this index several times, including complete articles. I recommend that we let them interpret their own data.

    Thanks for the good questions.

    Jeff
    Nov 29 10:50 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weighing the Week Ahead: More Positive Signs [View article]
    Ricard -- as I suggest, reading the article and the comments is a good idea. There are sixteen dealers, not just Goldman Sachs, and there is competitive bidding.

    As to inflation, there is no way for people who look at overall data to have an intelligent debate with people who pick and choose. If one wants to see inflation (or deflation) it is always be able to find an example to make your point.

    It is interesting that the QEII discussion, which I continue to see as a sideshow, is attracting such debate. It also cuts across some traditional lines, despite some partisan emphasis.

    Thanks for taking a look!

    Jeff
    Nov 25 11:13 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
1,504 Comments
2,418 Likes