|
July 2007
As
Per The Script?
As
Per The Script?...Boy, it sure looks that way at this point. So maybe we should
not be so surprised at all that the markets of the moment appear
to be in a one way levitating act, except for a few very short
lived speed bumps now and again. If you can believe it,
we're referring to the script of the US Presidential cycle for
equities. Long time readers know we've referred to this in
discussions over the years. It's time once again to have a
little check in. We'll get right to it and start with a
picture of historical experience. What you see below is the
average of 56 years of Dow price performance split into four year
blocks coinciding with the four year presidential cycles over this
period.

Addressing
our near term world, the pattern of the second and third year of
the cycle is clear. An equity market rise into the Spring of
the second year, a correction into summer, and then a blast off
into the best of the four year cycle through the summer of the
third year in almost straight up fashion. Does this pattern
remind you of anything? It better. Just have a
look.

Again,
as incredible as it may sound when looking back across average
half century of market history, from the equity market bottom in
the summer of the second year of the presidential cycle to the
peak in the summer of the third year, on average the Dow has
levitated roughly 25%. Well wouldn't you know it, from the
Dow lows last summer near 10,750, the DJIA is now up over 25%
through the end of quarter. Right on cue. Can it
really be this easy as to simply place our faith in the
presidential cycle? At least in 2006 and 2007, it has been
this easy.
Let's
look at some numbers. When looking back across history, in
general, it has been the period of Sept/Oct lows of the second
year of the Presidential cycle through to a top in the first seven
months of the third year of the cycle that have produced the best
results in terms of market price appreciation. Of course the
summer time lows of 2006 came in July, but let's face it, that's
close enough. So in the following table we're looking back
across historical experience to get a sense of rhythm. We're
looking at the Sept/Oct low during the second year to the year end
period of year number two. As you can see, in each and every
case the Dow has produced positive returns, the majority of which
have been double digit. So too was this the case in 2006.
| Dow
Industrials Price Only Performance |
| Second
Year Of Presidential Cycle |
Second
Year Sept/Oct Low To Year End |
Second
Year Sept/Oct Low To High In First Seven Months Of Third
Year Of Cycle |
Real
GDP Growth Third Year Of Cycle |
| |
| 1955 |
19.8%
(Sept Low) |
42.1%
(July High) |
7.14% |
| 1958 |
15.1(Sept
Low) |
26.4(July
High) |
7.11 |
| 1962 |
18.0(Oct
Low) |
32.2(April
High) |
4.37 |
| 1966 |
9.7(Oct
Low) |
29.4(July
High) |
2.51 |
| 1970 |
13.8(Sept
Low) |
29.4(April
High) |
3.36 |
| 1974 |
10.1(Oct
Low) |
54.0(July
High) |
(0.19) |
| 1978 |
3.3(Oct
Low) |
12.2(July
High) |
3.16 |
| 1982 |
18.9(Sept
Low) |
44.6(June
High) |
4.52 |
| 1986 |
5.0(Sept
Low) |
38.2(July
High) |
3.38 |
| 1990 |
9.9(Oct
Low) |
29.9(May
High) |
(0.17) |
| 1994 |
1.5(Oct
Low) |
25.0(July
High) |
2.50 |
| 1998 |
28.1(Oct
Low) |
47.9(July
High) |
4.45 |
| 2002 |
13.3(Oct
Low) |
30.2(June
High) |
2.51 |
| 2006 |
10.0(Sept
Low) |
? |
? |
| |
| AVERAGE |
12.6% |
34.0% |
3.44% |
We
then look at the period, in the third column, of Dow price
performance from the Sept/Oct lows of the second year to the highs
in the first seven months of the third year. Again,
consistent positive performance in each and every case, but under
the microscope of this time frame, the numbers are big. Very
big. As you can see, the average price performance from the
second year summer/fall lows to subsequent first seven months top
is 34%. If we were to mark the lows of the Dow near 10,700
in July of last year, that would imply a potential first seven
months of 2007 top near 14,340 (a 34% average increase). As
you know, this is really for illustrative purposes more than not.
So far, we've stopped shy of this level.
One
last note on the above table. For reference we have also
displayed real GDP growth for the third year of the Presidential
cycle in the final column. We did this because at least so
far, 2007 is starting off with very low real GDP growth. 1Q
GDP was terrible, but we currently expect a much better number for
2Q in light of current data, but you get the point. It's
clear in the table above that really regardless of real economic
growth in the third year of each Presidential cycle, Dow price
performance has been hot. But as we dig just a bit deeper,
the years of negative real GDP growth (1975 and 1991) were
preceded by very weak equity markets in the prior year (second
year of cycle). So as we look at current circumstances, we
have clearly weakening real GDP growth in 2007 that was indeed
preceded by a big up year for equities in the second year of the
cycle (2006). For now, our experience in a weakening
economic growth period set against the strong prior equity market
move is different. In 1975 and 1991, prior weak equity
market years were indeed anticipating and discounting economic
weakness to come. In our current environment, it sure
appears to us that the equity market never anticipated or
discounted a slowing economy in the first place. Have we
confused you enough? We hope not.
As
we're sure you've guessed, we're simply trying to provide
perspective here. Although we've recently seen a number of
ardent bears turn bull as of late, and we see the dejection and
give up psychology of the remaining bears right here and right
now, we hope these numbers are a bit of a calming force
emotionally. What we have been living through in the equity
markets, certainly with the help of meaningful monetary
accommodation, is nothing but a fitting experience with very well
established historical Presidential cycle seasonal rhythm, that's
all.
A
few more numerical depictions of historical experience to help
provide a bit more perspective. For a bit of a change up
ball, this time we'll use the S&P 500 data. First, the
history of total third year Presidential cycle price performance
of the SPX.
| S&P
500: Price Appreciation In Third Year Of
Presidential Cycle |
| YEAR |
Price
Return |
YEAR |
Price
Return |
| |
| 1903 |
(18.4)% |
1955 |
29.7% |
| 1907 |
(33.2) |
1959 |
10.4 |
| 1911 |
0.7 |
1963 |
18.4 |
| 1915 |
29.0 |
1967 |
17.2 |
| 1919 |
12.9 |
1971 |
10.1 |
| 1923 |
(2.6) |
1975 |
32.3 |
| 1927 |
29.4 |
1979 |
12.2 |
| 1931 |
(45.6) |
1983 |
17.9 |
| 1935 |
40.8 |
1987 |
(3.1) |
| 1939 |
(2.5) |
1991 |
18.2 |
| 1943 |
20.6 |
1995 |
35.0 |
| 1947 |
(0.7) |
1999 |
20.1 |
| 1951 |
18.5 |
2003 |
20.2 |
What
history suggests to us is pretty much crystal clear. In the
last half century, there has only been one third year of the
Presidential cycle period that has witnessed negative results for
the S&P. The average third year cycle performance since
1955 is 18.4%. Again, in the wonderful world of make believe
as per "what if this happened in 2007", an 18.4%
increase for the S&P in 2007 would mean a target of 1,670.
Again, we present all of this completely in the spirit of learning
to accept and be at peace with whatever happens in the financial
markets, and in the spirit of acknowledging the lessons of
history, regardless of our personal outlook or beliefs.
One
final look back at a quantitative issue. When you look at
the first chart we displayed in this discussion, you'll notice
that after the summer/fall high in the equity markets during the
third year of the Presidential cycle, there has been a correction.
What has this looked like from top to bottom for each period?
In other words, IF we are to experience a correction some time
this summer, what should we expect, on average when has it
started, and how deep have these corrections been based solely on
Presidential cycle experience past? Wonder no more as the
following table lays it out.
| S&P
Price Only Data |
| YEAR |
Third
Year Presidential Cycle Correction: Summer/Fall Top To
Subsequent Bottom |
| |
| 1955 |
(9.7)%
Sept High/Oct Low |
| 1959 |
(9.2)
July High/Sept Low |
| 1963 |
(6.5)
Oct High/Nov Low |
| 1967 |
(6.6)
Oct High/Nov Low |
| 1971 |
(10.9)
Sept High/Oct Low |
| 1975 |
(14.1)
July High/Sept Low |
| 1979 |
(10.2)
Oct High/Nov Low |
| 1983 |
(6.3)
Oct High/Nov Low |
| 1987 |
(32.3)
Aug High/Oct Low |
| 1991 |
(4.1)
Aug High/Dec Low |
| 1995 |
(1.6)
Sept High/Oct Low |
| 1999 |
(12.1)
July High/Oct Low |
| 2003 |
(4.6)
June High/Aug Low |
Based
on the numbers above, the average correction over the summer/fall
period in the third year of Presidential cycles over the last half
century is a drop of (9.9)%. But if we exclude 1987 as being
a bit of an outlier, the average price correction drops to (8)%.
From current levels as of recent highs on the SPX, that would
imply a drop to about 1,420. Maybe the more important point
is that, again on average, these corrections in the third year of
the Presidential cycle have been relatively short lived.
Just look how many of these occurred over one month or so.
These corrections come fast. And that's certainly what we
would expect in today's very highly leveraged markets. One
pertinent question that we really do not have an answer for is,
have we already seen the correction as per the Presidential cycle
script? As you know, the hedge and proprietary trading desk
magnitude of influence on the short term direction of the markets
these days really has no historical precedent. And what
drives home this point more than ever that the leveraged
speculative investment money will determine market direction and
the speed of acceleration or deceleration is the fact that the
public really has not been participating in the equity rally since
last July at all.
Since
July first of last year, total US inflows to domestic only equity
funds has been negative (to the tune of about $35 billion in net
outflows). In the spirit of honesty, the public has been
buying foreign funds and ETF flows have been positive. Funny
thing is, with a domestic market run such as we have experienced
since last July, it's very uncharacteristic of the US public not
to be drawn like moths to the flame of investment performance.
Stepping back just a bit, you'll remember the Hank Paulson quote
we've shown you a number of times from the Fortune Magazine
interview late last year. The bottom line is that Paulson is
pointing to stock price increases as having offset the decline in
residential real estate values. But will it work is the
important question. We'd suggest that Paulson is not getting
his wish in that the public has not been following the script of
history. They are not throwing money at the equity markets
as they have been rising. That leaves us looking at perhaps
two potential outcomes yet to materialize. Either the public
indeed wakes up and starts throwing money at the US equity market
hand over fist to finally "get in on the action", or the
public simply is not going to show up, implying they are short on
the ability to invest (cash). In very simple terms, it seems
it's either one of the two. As you'd guess, we'll be
updating you on this more frequently ahead given the importance of
the answer to the question regarding public activity in US equity
funds. Does this
help explain the character of the equity market over the past
year? We hope it helps. Remember, the markets are
never right or wrong. The key to successful investment over
time is to remain unemotional.
YEAR
2006 MONTHLY ARCHIVES
YEAR
2005 MONTHLY ARCHIVES
YEAR
2004 MONTHLY ARCHIVES
YEAR
2003 MONTHLY ARCHIVES
YEAR
2002 MONTHLY ARCHIVES
YEAR
2001 MONTHLY ARCHIVES
YEAR 2000
WEEKLY ARCHIVES
|
The
Monthly Market Observations pieces are reflective of the
type of twice weekly discussions available to subscribers
of ContraryInvestor.com. |
|