Seeking Alpha

Stephen Aniston

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Stephen Aniston's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • GLD: 'I Am As Mad As Hell, And I Am Not Going To Take This Anymore' [View article]
    fish, that's a great chart. GLD and SLV will not go bust just like AIG didn't. If you have the second biggest ETF go bust, do you think anybody will ever invest in any ETF going forward? Not happening.
    Oct 26, 2014. 05:32 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Market Fears Unwarranted: Buy Stocks Today [View article]
    I am not sure who came up with the "Stocks are cheap" mantra. That was certainly the case up until 2012. After a 50% runup, not so much.
    Oct 25, 2014. 04:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • I Concede Defeat In Amazon.com [View article]
    Amazon used to trade for $10 in 2000. There could be a long way to the bottom if the overall market falls.
    Oct 25, 2014. 04:16 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Is This The Beginning Of A New Bear Market? Important Signs To Watch [View article]
    I meant to say 2006. 2007 is comparable to this year - weak first quarter, strong second quarter and a fizzle into year end.

    Let's discuss the 2014 GDP in March when the final numbers out.
    http://bit.ly/VeK1dl

    Right now, the US GDP was 15,916 billion in 2013Q4. In 2014Q2 it is 16,010 billion. This is only $96 billion growth over 2 quarters, or about 0.6% growth over 2 quarters. Double that to get 1.2% annualized for the year.

    As far as the PMI, the non manufacturing PMI was 55 in July 2007. The PMI in July of 2007 certainly didn't tell you anything about a forth coming recession.

    You are looking at the economy and employment NOW and extrapolating that there will be no recession in the future. If you looked in January 2007, the economy was fantastic and nothing warned you that in 12 months later the country will be slipping into a recession. That is my argument. Observing what is happening now is not a predictor for the future.

    By the way, these "BOTTOM PICKING" articles, could you please release it when we actually hit the bottom so I can trade it. Like in this case October 15th. An article on October 23rd, a week later, doesn't help me very much :)
    Oct 25, 2014. 04:12 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Volatility Trade Up 25% In 6 Days: What Now? [View article]
    UVXY is a very strange beast. If volatility continues to increase or stays in the 30 range or above, UVXY will be major gainer due to backwardation, exceeding 100% profit. If you short SVXY, the most you can make is 100%. So UVXY is better reward. This rally the past week or so is pretty much unprecedented. A bigger than 140 point rally after a big drop has happened only once before in Nov 2008. There were a couple of other similar big intra-month rallies like that in Oct 2008, July 2007, Oct 2000, Aug 2011. Pretty much in all cases the market then went to lower lows afterwards.

    To recap all of this, nobody has really traded VXX and UVXY during a rising volatility regime as these instruments weren't available in 2011. VXX return 250% for a period of 3 months in 2011, that would be a steady 500% gain if UVXY was available.

    We really haven't had a true correction that spans 2 or 3 months where the rallies are small and insignificant. Once that happens, the logic of shorting UVXY on every VIX spike will not look so smart. I think now we are entering this regime. I could be wrong. The question you really have to ask yourself, do I see the SP 500 rising another 15% next year - so to 2200 or 2300 or so. If you don't see that, you have to be long vol and kind of pick the right spots when rallies fizzle.

    A rule of thumb is rallies fizzle about 1.5-2.5% above the previous top. However, this rally could be different and fizzle below the previous top. If that does happen, watch implied volatility explode as people finally realize that the market is not going up anymore and have to buy protection at any cost.

    As far as the FED, yes they are an independent body, but they do have to report to Congress twice a year and their membership is selected by the President and confirmed by the Senate. If it wasn't for the Senate, Larry Summers would be FED chair. Some progressive Democrats opposed his chairmanship and that was that. So the Senate is more influential than most people think. It is important to note that Ben Bernanke is a republican and was selected by a republican president and republican senate. Yet he pursued easy money policies more associated with democrats. Why? Because that was the party in power. The FED, treasury and pres/government work together to run the country and they coordinate together. I know I am little out there on this, but I don't think the FED operates in a vacuum. Otherwise, the FED governors will not be jumping around and making statements every time the market drops 5% ;)
    Oct 25, 2014. 03:14 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Volatility Trade Up 25% In 6 Days: What Now? [View article]
    My Vix Contango Oscillator (VCO) has been in negative territory almost all year. When the VCO is negative, XIV/SVXY tends to lose value long term. VCO incorporates the contango of the futures curve and the spot value of VIX.

    VCO has been very heavily negative for many days now a condition only encountered in 2007 and 2011 when XIV got absolutely destroyed in both instances (80-90% losses). In other words, it is no longer a "buy and hold" type of investment. To date XIV is down for the year and is down, nearly 30% from the high with a bottom of 40%. During the last stock rally XIV didn't get to a new high but instead settled to a lower high. XIV normally leads the SPY. When it doesn't, watch out.

    Just in the past 2 months, you could've had a 25 to 35 and 22 to 55 trades in UVXY. UVXY is progressively going higher which is a condition unseen since 2011. Since it has been going on for quite a while, I think the risks are to the downside here than to the upside. So yes, I stopped using buy the dip XIV strategies in May and I am now more focused on UVXY. UVXY is a much harder instrument to trade, but I think we are in a regime change the long-term gains are to be had in VXX, long volatility trade. Once we go below 1850 for good, XIVSVXY will get absolutely slaughtered.

    In terms of change of outlook - 2 developments:
    1. QE is ending
    2. Election may put Republicans in charge of Senate (which has FED board of governors confirmation power)
    What this means to me is that not only QE is done with, once Republicans take the Senate, QE will be completely out as a tool in the FED toolbox. Seismic changes to monetary policy are coming just like when democrats reclaimed the senate in 2006 (do you really think if Republicans were in power we would've ever had QE?)
    Oct 25, 2014. 01:52 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Unprecedented Fear Reset: What Does It Mean For Stocks? [View article]
    If Republicans get elected to the majority in the Senate, I fear the days of QE are practically over. It is no coincidence that QE is ending precisely a few days before the November election. The results of that election will drive the fate of QE which is policy advocated by Democratic Senate and President. Once the Senate goes republican, the confirmation power is no longer Democratic and as result that would lead to a change in Fed policy. Hence, I agree. The volatility is tied to uncertainty about Fed policy. But generally, high volatility begets higher volatility.

    The monthly hammer that is being written out by the SP 500 in the Month of October with nearly 150 point handle is unprecedented in the history of the index. In other words, the 140 point comeback so far has only been eclipsed by Nov 2008. It is interesting to note that in all situations the market then traded and established a lower low. So this comeback is probably not the end of the "correction".
    Oct 25, 2014. 11:04 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Unprecedented Fear Reset: What Does It Mean For Stocks? [View article]
    The real question is why did the fear appear? 1 person sick of Ebola will bring the market down 6%. Who are you kidding?
    Oct 25, 2014. 07:51 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Volatility Trade Up 25% In 6 Days: What Now? [View article]
    FED trolls. If it wasn't for the FED, this would be a massively losing trade. Once QE is officially over, that 25% you gained will disappear in a day.
    Oct 25, 2014. 07:43 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The 2014 Stealth Bear Market: A Transition Or A Top? [View article]
    I believe 2004 was about 24 months removed from the latest recession. 1994 was also about 30 months from the latest recession. 2014 - more than 70 months. 2012 was a year comparable to 1994. 2014 is too late in the expansion to be comparable.
    Oct 24, 2014. 09:32 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Unprecedented Fear Reset: What Does It Mean For Stocks? [View article]
    The only difference between now and 2009 is that the VIX drop happened near the bottom of a 50% correction from the all time high, whereas now we couldn't even crack 10%. It's fair to say the situations are dramatically different. It's actually a little puzzling to see 2009, 2011 and what happened last week being mentioned in the same breath as if they are comparable occurrences. Even the May draw of 2012 was bigger than what happened last couple of weeks.
    Oct 24, 2014. 09:13 PM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Market Fears Unwarranted: Buy Stocks Today [View article]
    How is trailing P/E 15.7? 108 in earnings, 1960 / 108 = 18.1
    Oct 24, 2014. 08:57 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • QE Forever Is What Stocks Want [View article]
    Well, I think all I am saying is that the P/E multiple expansion is due to QE. Once QE ends, the multiple will go back to where it was before QE. So that alone will make the market go down 20%. And still, if the market is at 1700, it's still up quite a bit from the 2009 bottom.

    Now if the economy goes into a recession, valuations may go down even more.

    BUT, what I don't understand is why would anybody buy stocks at a higher and higher multiple. Essentially you are paying more and more for the same earnings. A couple of years ago, I would say this was possible as P/E were reasonable. Now, it is just plain crazy. I am not sure, but that doesn't sound like a smart way to invest for me. I would rather put the money in cash than accept a lower multiple. Sorry. Give me the same deal as a few years ago or no deal. I won't buy sneakers that are too expensive and I won't buy stocks either.

    That may be the key to you understanding why stocks are up a puny 3-4% so far this year. And they probably be down more if the FED doesn't intervene as they do. You should all guy cry to your mommy Yellen to give you more cookies.
    Oct 24, 2014. 01:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Market Fears Unwarranted: Buy Stocks Today [View article]
    Sure, it is locutus. Everybody is rushing out to buy stocks. I can just see the stampede.
    Oct 24, 2014. 01:15 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Be Careful, The Correction May Not Be Over [View article]
    The Baby Boomers are some generation - probably the most selfish generation in history. Their parents fought in wars and all they wanted was peace and happiness and worked to accomplish it. Baby boomers on the other hand are all about me, me, me. Bigger house, bigger car, bigger everything, cheat the government, cheat the wife, cheat the children, cheat everything. There are no rules and nothing is held in esteem. The financial, political and personal excesses are legendary. I don't know, but me personally, I can't wait for the baby boomers to leave the halls of power, because clearly they aren't exactly capable of handling them. We have had 3 baby boomer presidents and only Clinton was truly capable. Everybody else has been quite the failure in one way or another.

    What does it say of Obama foreign policy when Meet the Press gives more air-time to James Baker to articulate a sound Middle East policy. Susan Rice looked like a petulant school girl. Don't get me started. We need to bring out our 80-90 year old fossils to dig us out of a hole. Unbelievable.
    Oct 24, 2014. 12:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,706 Comments
3,762 Likes