Curse of the Trading Range 2
Adam Hamilton
Archives
January 21, 2005
Due to the stock markets' largely poor
performance in 2004, the idea of a trading range has come
back into vogue. Whenever Wall Street temporarily loses faith
in its usual all-bullish-all-the-time mantra, it tends to revert
back to drumming up trading-range expectations among its clients.
Trading ranges can be quite
advantageous from a financial-industry perspective. When the
markets are meandering in a trading range, both stock picking
and timing become crucial skills. Big profits can only be won
if the right stocks are traded at the right time. Trading ranges
probably reward hard-won market expertise more than any other
type of trending market.
Trading ranges negate the relative
ease of trading secular bull markets. In a normal bull, the rising
tide lifts virtually all boats. Just as in 1999, all one has
to do is buy a stock, almost any stock, at almost any time and
it is likely to blossom into a profitable trade along with the
markets. This is why the famous dartboard stock-picking studies
work so well during long-term bulls. But the value of pure luck
fades considerably in a trading range.
Thus normal trading ranges
can be good news for the financial industry, as the premium placed
on market expertise grows considerably when one can't just rely
on luck and buy any random stock and expect a win. But what happens
when the trading range becomes far larger and ominous than most
investors can even imagine?
Prior to the election
rally, the 2004 trading range lasted roughly ten months.
The psychological implications of the markets failing to advance
for less than a year are fairly trivial, investors can take a
sub-year consolidation in stride. But what if a trading range
lasted ten years or longer? Would it eventually cause
investors to lose interest and give up on the markets?
If a decade-plus trading range
sounds absurd, then you haven't done your market homework. On
February 9th, 1966 the most famous stock index on the planet,
the mighty Dow Jones Industrial Average (Dow 30) closed just
above 995, tantalizingly close to the fabled 1000 mark. But how
long after that did it take the Dow to actually close above 1000
for the first time ever? A whopping six-and-a-half years when
it hit 1003 on November 14th, 1972.
But wait, it gets worse. After
less than 50 trading days trying to establish a toehold above
1000, by January 1973 the Dow started faltering again. It briefly
challenged 1000 again in 1976 and 1981, but failed to break decisively
above both times. It wasn't until October 11th, 1982 when the
mighty index finally launched its final assault to leave 1000
in the dust for good.
The elite Dow 30, the bluest
of the blue chips on the planet, traded in an excruciating trading
range for no less than sixteen-and-a-half years from early
1966 to late 1982! As you can imagine, the psychological fallout
among investors in a market not advancing over 17 long years
is staggering. In fact, in 1982, financial magazines and newspapers
were heralding the "death of stocks". Sentiment was
horrifically negative, perhaps even challenging the early 1930s.
I believe a decade-plus trading
range is a curse for investors, the worst possible environment
for the markets. Yet, it is one of the two key ways overvalued
markets work their way back down to undervalued levels. They
can either mercifully crash fast and get all the carnage out
of the way in a few years as in the early 1930s, or they can
brutally consolidate over more than a decade as in the 1970s
and grind long-term investors into dust.
Unfortunately the evidence
is mounting today that we may be in another massive decade-plus
trading range in the US markets. I started seriously considering
this ominous possibility about three years ago when I wrote the
original "Curse
of the Dow Trading Range" essay. Revisiting my earlier
research, I am saddened to have to report that this nightmare
scenario indeed appears to be playing out.
This long trading range thesis
is based on the tendency of the stock markets to move in great
valuation cycles running about a third of a century each. Stocks
start undervalued, are gradually bid up to overvalued levels,
and then they slump back down to undervalued levels yet again
and the cycle begins anew. I call these great cycles Long
Valuation Waves. Their wavelength from trough to trough runs
roughly 33 years.
In 1966, for example, stock
valuations reached a multi-decade high. The next valuation high
was not achieved until early 2000, a third of a century later.
In 1949, stock valuations reached a multi-decade low. The next
valuation low was not witnessed until 1982, also exactly one-third
of a century later. While Wall Street will deny this market truth
to its dying breath since it won't help sell stocks to a perpetually
gullible public, the historical evidence is unassailable.
If you graph these Long Valuation
Waves, they look like parabolas. Our first chart updated from
my original essay shows the last two-thirds of the twentieth
century cut into individual thirds and superimposed over the
top of each other. Each third shows an entire valuation wave
from peak to trough to peak.
Other than the order-of-magnitude-different
Dow 30 scales, the similarities between the two ascent arcs in
the up-phases of the last two Long Valuation Waves are remarkable.
While the X-axis only lists the years for our latest valuation
wave from the late 1960s to 2000, the annual hash marks also
correspond to the previous valuation wave from the 1930s to the
late 1960s. Both vertical axes are zeroed so the respective percentage
gains are perfectly comparable without visual distortion.
While the visual comparison
of actual Dow 30 index readings from the last two valuation waves
is stunning and dramatically parabolic, the actual engine driving
the valuation waves is only apparent in the underlying valuation
readings. At various key technical points above we labeled the
prevailing US stock market P/E ratio and dividend yield at the
time to communicate the valuation dynamics under the surface
of the index moves.
Before we delve into valuation
waves though, a reference point is crucial. The century-long
average P/E ratio for the US markets is about 14x
earnings, so valuations near 14x are considered fair value.
In general terms stock markets are considered undervalued when
trading at less than 14x earnings and overvalued when trading
at greater than 14x earnings.
Dividend yields, the other
key valuation metric, work similarly but in the opposite direction.
The century-long average dividend yield of the US markets is
around 4.6%
or so. In general terms stock markets are considered undervalued
when they yield more than 4.6% and overvalued when they
yield less. If you keep 14x earnings and 4.6% yields in
your mind as the fair-value midpoint, it becomes much easier
to digest this analysis.
In both valuation waves rendered
above, the Dow 30 started higher from very undervalued
levels. In 1982 for example, the same year mentioned above when
mainstream financial magazines and newspapers declared that stocks
were dead, the US markets traded around 6.7x earnings and yielded
6.2%. It is at these very dismal valuation lows, when sentiment
is horrific and stocks are cheap, that prudent long-term contrarian
investors strive to throw long in a big way.
As late as 1949 in the previous
valuation wave, the markets were trading at 9.1x earnings and
yielding 6.3% in dividends, also chronically undervalued levels.
Believe me, it is absolutely no coincidence that the two greatest
bull markets in stocks in the past two-thirds of a century both
launched from terribly undervalued levels. Buying cheap
is as important for long-term investing as it is for short-term
speculating!
From 1982 to 2000, and 1949
to 1966, investors gradually became interested in stocks again
and bid up not only their prices, but their valuations.
Valuations relentlessly climbed in both super bulls for about
17 years, which is not coincidentally one-half of a typical one-third-of-a-century
Long Valuation Wave. As you can see on the chart above, PE ratios
for the general markets gradually rose during these two 17-year
periods while dividend yields gradually contracted. The markets
were inexorably becoming overvalued.
Both valuations and index prices
were rising in a parabolic pattern. Parabolas are neat creatures,
appearing all
over the place in the markets. Parabolic patterns start out
gradually rising, but with each passing year their percentage
gains increase until they eventually become unsustainable. Parabolas
are never sustainable in the long run because the capital ultimately
required to feed vertical growth rates quickly becomes absurd.
In 1999, for example, the Dow
30 gained a breathtaking 25% in a single year. This compares
to a long-term average somewhere around 7%. I'm sure you remember
all the New Era nonsense of 1999, when the general public started
believing 25% gains were now normal and could be expected
in the future. Yet the very mathematical nature of parabolas
crushes such naïve flights of fancy with all the subtlety
of a sledgehammer to the skull.
To illustrate the absurdity
of sustained parabolic price gains, imagine if the Dow entered
2000 at exactly 10k on the index. If we extrapolate two decades
of normal 7% annual gains, the Dow could have reached 38,700
by 2020. This is certainly possible. But if we instead extrapolate
two decades of stellar 25% gains, the final result becomes ridiculous.
Starting at the same 10k base, it would yield a Dow 30 trading
at an index level of 867,000 by 2020. I doubt all the
capital on the planet could push the Dow 30 that high in anything
less than a century!
As the Long Valuation Wave
peaks near, such as in 1966 and 2000, index levels and valuations
have simply been bid up as far as they can go. When the apex
of a valuation wave finally rolls in every third of a century,
there is not enough new capital available to flow into the markets
and sustain the parabolic rise in valuations and prices. At that
point the valuation waves head back out into the seas of time
and valuations and prices start falling.
Acknowledging the third-of-a-century
flow of the valuation waves is crucial if you want to understand
the growing danger of the curse of the long trading range. In
the chart above, the remarkable similarities in the previous
two mega bulls are stunning. If the ascent phases of the last
two valuation waves are this congruent, isn't it reasonable to
ask the question of whether the descent phases will be similar
as well?
If this indeed proves to be
the case, then the long trading range we saw from the previous
valuation wave peak in 1966 to the last valuation wave trough
in 1982 could be what we are now facing again from our latest
valuation wave peak in 2000 to the next valuation wave trough
somewhere out in the future. Ominously, the Dow 30 behavior in
the past five years since the valuation peak is already behaving
like a long trading range.
Our second chart this week
highlights this troubling congruency. The last long trading range
from 1966 to 1982 is rendered in red on the left axis and labeled
on the X axis. Our current Dow 30 performance from 2000 until
today is superimposed and slaved to the right axis. While there
are no current Dow dates on the X axis, the one-year hash marks
correspond to today as well.
Lest anyone suggest we cunningly
modified our vertical axes to force this relationship, the small
inset chart in the lower right shows the exact same picture as
the big chart with true zeroed axes for a perfectly undistorted
absolute visual reference. The implications of this analysis
are so dire that investors have to understand that there is nothing
contrived here. What you see on this chart is what is really
happening, so God help the long-term stock investors who fail
to recognize the curse of the trading range in time.
Recall that Long Valuation
Waves generally run one-third of a century or so each. Our opening
chart above showed the fun ascent phase, the first half. This
second chart highlights the not-so-fun descent phase, the second
half. During the descent phase valuations gradually migrate from
overvalued to undervalued and the actual stock markets meander
helplessly in a colossal trading range running for up to 17
years without respite.
Following the Dow 30's dazzling
February 1966 top just shy of the fabled 1000 level, the index
spent the next 17 years in a grinding trading range. The range's
extremes ran as high as 1052 in January 1973 to 578 in December
1974, a massive range of 45% from its 17-year high to its 17-year
low. If you carefully examine the chart, you will also note that
this 1970s trading range consisted of sharp bull years and sharp
bear years, temporary cyclical trends running for a couple years
within the primary secular trading range.
If we compare the Dow 30's
recent performance since its early 2000 top, the sense of déjà
vu imparted with the last long trading range is uncanny. In January
2000, exactly five years ago, the Dow reached its latest all-time
closing high of 11723. In October 2002, it briefly closed at
7286 in a particularly vicious V-bounce. Peak to trough, so far
this is a 38% trading range from its 5-year high to its 5-year
low.
The Dow's latest 38% range
is uncomfortably close to the 45% range the index witnessed in
the 1970s. Interestingly, if we limit our 1970s comparison to
only the first five years of the last long trading range for
a better match, the results are even closer. From the February
1966 high of 995 to the first major low of 669 in July 1970 the
initial 5-year range was 33% back in the late 1960s. So we are
already seeing more macro volatility today than last time even!
Technically you have to admit that the similarities between the
past 5 years of Dow action and the first 5 years of the last
long trading range are incredible.
Visually the comparison is
rather stunning too. Though the peaks and troughs are currently
out of phase by a couple years or so, the general technical nature
of the two long trading ranges is nearly identical. In both cases
we witnessed periodic sharp cyclical bear declines over a year
or two followed by equally sharp cyclical bull rallies over a
similar period of time. The net chart effect is a massive long-lived
trading range beyond the wildest expectations of most investors
today.
While the intriguing technical
comparisons observe an effect, the more important underlying
cause is the great valuation
mean reversion of the second half of the Long Valuation Waves.
Like winter inevitably follows summer, the mean reversion from
highly overvalued markets by historical standards to undervalued
markets is also inevitable and unstoppable. Not even governments
with all their sound and fury are able to prematurely end the
unpleasant second half of the valuation waves.
This ongoing process is easiest
to see if you read the valuations off the periodic interim tops
of the long trading ranges. From 1966 to 1982 for example, the
general stock market valuations went from 24.1x, to 22.3x, to
18.7x before they hit fair value around 14x in the brutal 1973-1974
cyclical bear. But they didn't merely stop at 14x fair value!
The next three peaks were 11.8x, 9.1x, and 8.5x earnings. Dividend
yields climbed from 2.9% to 4.9% across the market peaks in this
same period.
Valuation mean reversions don't
just run from overvalued to fair value, but from overvalued all
the way down to undervalued. Like a giant pendulum swinging through
a third of century, upside valuation extremes are followed by
equally stunning downside extremes. The valuation pendulum doesn't
just magically stop in the middle of its arc at 14x earnings
once its great swings start.
Our latest Dow peaks since
2000 have told an identical valuation mean reversion tale. Starting
at a staggering 44.7x earnings at its all-time high, the Dow
has dropped to 27.6x earnings in its 2001 peak, 26.1x in early
2004, and 20.6x today. This valuation trend already in force,
running from far overvalued to pretty overvalued so far, has
a highly probable future course of plunging through fair value
of 14x earnings to an ultimate undervalued low between 7x and
10x sometime in the next 10 to 12 years.
Our current Dow 30's dividend
yield is also mean reverting back up, from 1.0% to 1.3% to 1.9%
to 2.2% today. It ought to get over 6% before the next long-term
secular valuation bottom similar to 1982 is reached in the future.
Thus not only is the Dow 30's technical character looking like
the 1970s long trading range, but its underlying valuation character
looks like the same thing is happening again as well.
The curse of the trading range
is multi-pronged. If investors are faced with another 12 years
(17 total) of largely sideways US stock action, what vast psychological
havoc will this wreak? If an average investor starts investing
in his mid-20s and retires at 65 to start cannibalizing investments
to live, this leaves only 40 years to multiply wealth. If the
markets move sideways for almost half of an average "investing
lifespan", the damage done to a generation of investors
could be catastrophic.
After the markets grind sideways
for enough years, investors will gradually get discouraged or
bored and leave the markets. Sentiment will grow darker and darker
as valuations eventually reach undervalued levels. The vast promise
of the markets in the late 1990s will be forgotten, and stocks
will lose their luster compared to other asset classes. The curse
of the trading range is the worst possible development for today's
stock investors.
The implications of this troubling
analysis are profound for both investors and speculators.
If you are an investor, do
not even think about buying stocks for the long term unless we
are at one of the periodic brutal V-bounces following a year
or two of a cyclical bear market. The only way to "buy cheap"
in a long trading range is to patiently wait until the markets
are near the bottom of their range rather than the top. An investor
who went long in early 1966 had to wait 17 years to earn a penny,
but a prudent investor who waited until the July 1970 V-bounce
had a shot at dazzling 57% gains in only about two-and-a-half
years. Timing is everything even for investing!
While luck will take any investor
far in a secular bull, in a long trading range only the investors
willing to take the considerable time to study the markets as
a whole for timing and carefully pick individual stocks will
thrive. On the bright side, if your capital survives the long
trading range you will be blessed with the greatest long-term
buying opportunity in a third of a century, since 1982, once
the ultimate valuation bottom is reached.
For speculators, throw long
at the same V-bounces investors seek and consider throwing short
near the top of the long trading range. Today, for example, the
Dow 30 is definitely in the upper end of its likely trading range
so the probabilities of a successful short over the next year
or two seem much higher than a profitable long play. Expect sharp
cyclical bull and bear markets to meander within the long trading
range, running for one to three years in duration each.
The bottom line is the curse
of the trading range, if today's markets follow the last valuation
wave mean reversion's ugly precedent, is one of the most challenging
and dangerous environments imaginable for long-term investors.
If you don't strive to time the major cyclical runs and carefully
handpick the very best stocks, you could either lose money or
not earn any significant profits for 12 more years.
Like all investors I am not
thrilled with this prospect, but nevertheless I am determined
to play this evolving long trading range properly. Each month
we painstakingly compute and track the current major stock index
valuation numbers and publish them in our acclaimed Zeal
Intelligence newsletter. We also have exclusive subscriber-only
valuation charts updated on our website so you can track the
critical mean reversion in progress yourself.
As my partners and I navigate
these treacherous waters with our own capital, we will continuously
research the grand market timing and individual stocks to uncover
stellar trading opportunities for our subscribers.
Unlike Wall Street that is
always forecasting endless gains, we tell it like it is and don't
pull punches. Believe me, I would much rather be saying that
today is like 1982 and a massive 17-year bull market is coming.
But the sad truth is today looks much more like 1971 with another
decade of grinding sideways markets at best. Regardless of whether
we like them or not, like the tragic Asian tsunami the long valuation
waves will march right on through oblivious to protest and pain.
If the continuation of the
valuation mean reversion already in progress is inevitable, why
fight it or stick your head in the sand? A far more prudent course
of action is to adapt to the sub-optimal situation at hand and
thrive. Diligently study the markets, carefully pick your stocks,
but don't pull the trigger until the trading-range timing looks
ideal. Or join
us today in trading alternative secular bulls like commodities
that are soaring while general stocks grind nowhere.
While the curse of the trading
range will inflict untold misery among the unprepared, investors
and speculators who understand the times and act accordingly
can still thrive. Will you ultimately be counted among the former
group or latter?
January 21, 2005
Adam Hamilton, CPA
email:
zelotes@zealllc.com
Archives
So how can you profit
from this information? We publish an acclaimed monthly newsletter,
Zeal
Intelligence,
that details exactly what we are doing in terms of actual stock
and options trading based on all the lessons we have learned
in our market research. Please consider joining us each month
for tactical trading details and more in our premium Zeal
Intelligence service.
Questions for Adam? I would be more than happy to address them
through my private consulting business. Please visit www.zealllc.com/financial.htm for more information.
Thoughts, comments, or flames? Fire away at zelotes@zealllc.com. Due to my staggering
and perpetually increasing e-mail load, I regret that I am not
able to respond to comments personally. I will read all messages
though and really appreciate your feedback!
Copyright ©2000-2005 Zeal Research All Rights
Reserved (www.ZealLLC.com)
321gold
Inc

|