Where Do You Get Your News?

September 27, 2012

While this will probably surprise no one (who has been conscious over the past decade), it is still pretty fascinating.

Trends are everywhere.  You just need a plan to capitalize on them.

HT: Michael Kitces

Posted by:

The Pragmatist’s Approach to Investing

September 27, 2012

Adam Davidson’s article “Hey, Big Saver!” in the New York Times is an excellent summary of the competing arguments on the merits of QE3. There truly are compelling arguments for why this will work and there are compelling arguments why it won’t. Effectiveness aside,  Bernanke has made his intentions perfectly clear:

When Bernanke announced that the Fed would be investing in the mortgage market indefinitely, he signaled that he’s had it with short-term fixes. His Fed is committed, he said, to taking extraordinary measures until unemployment goes down. In Fed-speak, Q.E. 3 is a clear message to banks, investors and private companies that the economy is going to grow, and the riskiest thing they can do is to hold on to their cash and riskless securities and watch their competitors profit.

Are his policies working or not? This is why I love technical analysis. Rather than get caught up in theoretic debates, technical analysis cuts to the chase and asks a different question: What stocks, sectors, and asset classes have the best relative strength? Based on that information, relative strength investors can orient their portfolio to capitalize on those trends.

Investors are not interested in winning theoretical debates. Investors are interested in making money! Rather than focusing on what the Fed, Congress, the President, the ECB, banks, consumers, economists, investment strategists, your brother-in-law… have to say about what is going to happen in the market, take the pragmatist’s approach and let relative strength dictate your investment decisions.

Source: CBS News

HT: Real Clear Markets

Posted by:

Danger: Pundits Ahead

September 27, 2012

The danger of listening to the forecasts of pundits is obvious.  For one thing, pundits are just as likely to get it wrong as anyone elseThe Big Picture carried a list of bullish forecasts from the beginning of the internet bubble that is illustrative.  (The original source was apparently Paul Farrell at Marketwatch.)

March 1999: Harry S. Dent, author of “The Roaring 2000s.” “There has been a paradigm shift.” The New Economy arrived, this time really is different.

October 1999: James Glassman, author, “Dow 36,000.” “What is dangerous is for Americans not to be in the market. We’re going to reach a point where stocks are correctly priced … it’s not a bubble … The stock market is undervalued.”

August 1999: Charles Kadlec, author, “Dow 100,000.” “The DJIA will reach 100,000 in 2020 after “two decades of above-average economic growth with price stability.”

December 1999: Joseph Battipaglia, market analyst. “Some fear a burst Internet bubble, but our analysis shows that Internet companies … carry expected long-term growth rates twice other rapidly growing segments within tech.”

December 1999: Larry Wachtel, Prudential. “Most of these stocks are reasonably priced. There’s no reason for them to correct violently in the year 2000.” Nasdaq lost over 50%.

December 1999: Ralph Acampora, Prudential Securities. “I’m not saying this is a straight line up. … I’m saying any kind of declines, buy them!”

February 2000: Larry Kudlow, CNBC host. “This correction will run its course until the middle of the year. Then things will pick up again, because not even Greenspan can stop the Internet economy.” He’s still hosting his own cable show.

April 2000: Myron Kandel, CNN. “The bottom line is in, before the end of the year, the Nasdaq and Dow will be at new record highs.”

September 2000: Jim Cramer, host of “Mad Money.” Sun Microsystems “has the best near-term outlook of any company I know.” It fell from $60 to below $3 in two years.

November 2000: Louis Rukeyser on CNN. “Over the next year or two the market will be higher, and I know over the next five to 10 years it will be higher.”

December 2000: Jeffrey Applegate, Lehman strategist. “The bulk of the correction is behind us, so now is the time to be offensive, not defensive.” Another sucker’s rally.

December 2000: Alan Greenspan. “The three- to five-year earnings projections of more than a thousand analysts … have generally held firm. Such expectations, should they persist, bode well for continued capital deepening and sustained growth.”

January 2001: Suze Orman, financial guru. “The QQQ, they’re a buy. They may go down, but if you dollar-cost average, where you put money every single month into them, I think, in the long run, it’s the way to play the Nasdaq.” The QQQ fell 60% further.

March 2001: Maria Bartiromo, CNBC anchor. “The individual out there is actually not throwing money at things that they do not understand, and is actually using the news and using the information out there to make smart decisions.”

April 2001: Abby Joseph Cohen, Goldman Sachs. “The time to be nervous was a year ago. The S&P was overvalued, it’s now undervalued.” Markets fell 18 more months.

August 2001: Lou Dobbs, CNN. “Let me make it very clear. I’m a bull, on the market, on the economy. And let me repeat, I am a bull.”

June 2002: Larry Kudlow, CNBC host. “The shock therapy of a decisive war will elevate the stock market by a couple thousand points.” He also predicted the Dow would hit 35,000 by 2010.

Note:  The Dow didn’t bottom until October 2002 at 7,286, down from 11,722.

These examples are particularly egregious because they happened at a market turning point, but the danger from listening to pundits is continuous.  You can always find pundits spouting their opinions on CNBC or other media.  To the extent that they influence you into not executing your thoughtful, systematic investment plan, pundits are a problem.

Posted by:

Fund Flows

September 27, 2012

The Investment Company Institute is the national association of U.S. investment companies, including mutual funds, closed-end funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and unit investment trusts (UITs).  Flow estimates are derived from data collected covering more than 95 percent of industry assets and are adjusted to represent industry totals.

This is starting to get ridiculous…

Posted by: