Large Caps Could Lead the Market Much Higher [View article]
We have had a HUGE run-up of P/E multiples since March. In fact, I could argue that the ONLY thing that has really changed since March are the P/E multiples.
Anybody who has been in this market over the last year knows how notoriously bad the forward earnings numbers are -- just take a look at forward estimates at the start of this year for THIS year.
While there is a lot of manufacturing leverage now that companies have cut so much payroll, the current fixed infrastructure is currently being supported by large government (both US and Abroad) stimulus.
The key question is: What happens when the stimulus is withdrawn?
The key metric is the top line, not the bottom line: Those forward earnings are only as good as the sales projections.
As an aside, there has been a significant tax cut which, if I remember the numbers right, amounted to 2/3 of the tax stimulus proposed by some Republicans ( there never was a unified Republican stimulus alternative, but the number $400 billion was often used as the tax cut required --- and the only stimulus needed).
We should have seen the top line numbers rising by now if the tax cuts were as powerful as they were being promoted, and I for one, do not see it.
As far as I can see, the $250 Billion tax cuts have had almost zero effect, and this is similar to the tax rebates of last year--coming into effect in at the end of the 2nd quarter, after the recession was 2 quarters old, and just before the economy tanked.
Top 10 Components of the Dow Jones U.S. Economic Stimulus Index [View article]
While it may be obvious, I do not think it meaningless.
All it says to me is that a portfolio of companies that has more exposure to the Stimulus may outperform a market neutral index like the SPY, and has done so, so far.
If you believe, as I do, that the consumer is retrenching, and that with capacity utilization at historic lows, private investment has tanked, then knowing which companies have the greatest exposure to the only significant buyer is good information.
I know nothing of how this index is composed and how the stock weights are determined, but I do not look at this as being anything more than a "portfolio strategist" estimate of which companies will do well in the near term.
Instead of it being Goldman or Morgan Stanley, you have some analyst hired by Dow doing the picking.
On Sep 06 06:46 PM whidbey wrote:
> What, if anything, does your post prove? That the stimulus has been > more effective for the index as compared to the S&P? If that > is your argument you deserve to be ignored. Pitiful and meaningless.
Was Friday's Rally Just a Hedge Fund Short Squeeze? [View article]
I think the market is so oversold that the stocks above are all screaming bargains. However, I don't think the market is trading on value.
It is trading on emotions: the fear of losing it all, and the greed of not getting in at the low.
When you talk of hedge funds, my honest, ignorant, simple question is: Where are they getting all the money? Do they not have to borrow it like everybody else? What collateral are they putting up and what leverage can they use?
More simply, if banks won't lend to each other, why are they lending to hedge funds?
From what I can see, the rest of the world is reluctantly going to go along with the British plan to recapitalize the banks and guarantee interbank lending.
While Paulson has not signed on to the interbank lending part, he has no choice if the rest of the world guarantees their banks.
Paulson has signed up to the injecting bank capital part. I think that is the most important thing he's done, and it should have a pretty immediate effect.
While I expect the markets to figure this all out on their own, it would be helpful if Treasury made another announcement about guaranteeing US interbank lending, like the rest of the world, today.
Monday could be a wild ride, but I think that once the fear is addressed, greed will start to take hold and we will see a pretty big rally to levels that are at least understandable from a valuation standpoint.
Where the market goes from there will depend on how much things are going to slow down and how much that slowdown will affect individual company earnings.
Large Caps Could Lead the Market Much Higher [View article]
Anybody who has been in this market over the last year knows how notoriously bad the forward earnings numbers are -- just take a look at forward estimates at the start of this year for THIS year.
While there is a lot of manufacturing leverage now that companies have cut so much payroll, the current fixed infrastructure is currently being supported by large government (both US and Abroad) stimulus.
The key question is: What happens when the stimulus is withdrawn?
The key metric is the top line, not the bottom line: Those forward earnings are only as good as the sales projections.
As an aside, there has been a significant tax cut which, if I remember the numbers right, amounted to 2/3 of the tax stimulus proposed by some Republicans ( there never was a unified Republican stimulus alternative, but the number $400 billion was often used as the tax cut required --- and the only stimulus needed).
We should have seen the top line numbers rising by now if the tax cuts were as powerful as they were being promoted, and I for one, do not see it.
As far as I can see, the $250 Billion tax cuts have had almost zero effect, and this is similar to the tax rebates of last year--coming into effect in at the end of the 2nd quarter, after the recession was 2 quarters old, and just before the economy tanked.
Top 10 Components of the Dow Jones U.S. Economic Stimulus Index [View article]
All it says to me is that a portfolio of companies that has more exposure to the Stimulus may outperform a market neutral index like the SPY, and has done so, so far.
If you believe, as I do, that the consumer is retrenching, and that with capacity utilization at historic lows, private investment has tanked, then knowing which companies have the greatest exposure to the only significant buyer is good information.
I know nothing of how this index is composed and how the stock weights are determined, but I do not look at this as being anything more than a "portfolio strategist" estimate of which companies will do well in the near term.
Instead of it being Goldman or Morgan Stanley, you have some analyst hired by Dow doing the picking.
On Sep 06 06:46 PM whidbey wrote:
> What, if anything, does your post prove? That the stimulus has been
> more effective for the index as compared to the S&P? If that
> is your argument you deserve to be ignored. Pitiful and meaningless.
Was Friday's Rally Just a Hedge Fund Short Squeeze? [View article]
It is trading on emotions: the fear of losing it all, and the greed of not getting in at the low.
When you talk of hedge funds, my honest, ignorant, simple question is:
Where are they getting all the money? Do they not have to borrow it like everybody else? What collateral are they putting up and what leverage can they use?
More simply, if banks won't lend to each other, why are they lending to hedge funds?
From what I can see, the rest of the world is reluctantly going to go along with the British plan to recapitalize the banks and guarantee interbank lending.
While Paulson has not signed on to the interbank lending part, he has no choice if the rest of the world guarantees their banks.
Paulson has signed up to the injecting bank capital part. I think that is the most important thing he's done, and it should have a pretty immediate effect.
While I expect the markets to figure this all out on their own, it would be helpful if Treasury made another announcement about guaranteeing US interbank lending, like the rest of the world, today.
Monday could be a wild ride, but I think that once the fear is addressed, greed will start to take hold and we will see a pretty big rally to levels that are at least understandable from a valuation standpoint.
Where the market goes from there will depend on how much things are going to slow down and how much that slowdown will affect individual company earnings.