Is the Market Broken?

The stock market is reaching extreme levels in terms of the lack of volatility and high valuations. However, given the market’s ability to shake off bad news last year, it’s not surprising to see it rallying in the past few weeks. Earnings are finally growing again, the Fed is promising to remain dovish, and Trump is promising tax cuts. If at the end of all credit cycles the Fed decided to not raise rates like it usually does and tax cuts were passed, the market wouldn’t fall. This is the ultimate experiment in policy. As I’ve said in a past article, this scenario is equivalent of one discussed in a college classroom. The question is if monetary policy and fiscal policy had the single goal of keeping stocks high, how high would they go and when would the rally end?

The answer to that question is coming in real-time every day the market opens. Personally, I think pushing the stock market higher leads to unintended consequences. The biggest one is that tax cuts and rate cuts steal growth from the future. If growth is barley reaching 2% with these extra boosts, imagine how bad the economy would be without them. Firms can borrow at low rates and buyback their stock. Therefore, it’s not surprising the earnings recession has ended. With these phony positive results, the S&P 500 traded within a 1% range for the 38th consecutive session on Thursday which is the longest streak on record going back to 1978. The stock market isn’t much of a market anymore. The chart below shows the length of time without the S&P 500 falling 1%. It’s now been over 80 days since a 1% fall which is the second longest streak since at least 1996.

marketactivitysentiment

One of the reasons the stock market is overinflated is interest rates on government bonds are low; stocks are the only game in town. The chart below is a long-term measurement of mainly government bond yields. The 10-year bond yield increased 2.50% today to 2.3948%, but it still hasn’t been able to make a new 52-week high since December 15th. I think if the 52-week high of 2.64% is broken, it signals an end of the secular bull market in bonds. Once yields move higher, stocks will be less attractive. Bulls believe if Trump’s fiscal policies are passed, rates will rise, but so will earnings, so stocks can still rally.

strongestbull

This brings us to Trump’s economic policies which is why stocks rallied today. Stocks reached new all-time highs and the VIX hit the 10 handle again. Trump stated the government is ahead of schedule and will announce a plan to cut taxes in the next 2 or 3 weeks. I don’t believe that’s possible given the problems with the plan that I discussed in my last article. By rallying today, the market is pricing in the best-case scenario, which is that the plan passes Congress, isn’t stopped by the World Trade Organization, and the dollar moves up 25% after it passes. That sounds like too many obstacles to get around in just 3 weeks. While Trump is a new face, the politicians in Congress are almost all the same ones who have been there for years. I don’t see how the plan will come about that quickly.

In the CNBC news article discussing Trump’s announcement, Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at First Standard Financial, stated the market would be 3% to 4% higher without the political uncertainty. If the market rallies 3% to 4%, it would reach the Shiller PE seen in the 1929 bull market peak which proceeded the Great Depression. It does seem like the market can go up endlessly, but eventually it will stall out. It won’t stall because of a political squabble. It will crash because central bank intervention has made it not real.

shillerpe

As I mentioned in my introduction, the Fed is likely going to keep interest rates low. We received more confirmation of this policy by St. Louis Fed President James Bullard. Bullard stated the Fed would keep interest rates low throughout at least 2017 as there is no clear understanding yet of whether the Trump administration's fiscal policies will cause higher inflation or growth. This answers the question I have posed previously. As a reminder, I asked whether the Fed would raise rates preemptively or wait until we have a clear understanding of how Trump’s policies will affect the economy. This is a dovish response. It’s important to understand that this is only Bullard’s opinion. It also depends on whether Trump follows through on his promise that tax cuts will be proposed within 3 weeks.

The chance of a rate hike increased by 1% today for the June meeting. Usually the chance of rate hikes increase when the market rallies. I think the chance increased moderately because of these comments from Bullard.

The final charts I have below compare the stock market and 10-year bond yield to Trump’s approval rating. I think they are correlated because Trump’s approval rating is the equivalent of the population’s satisfaction with the direction of the country. When optimism is prevalent, investors buy stocks and sell bonds because inflation is expected to increase.

S&PvsTrump

Conclusion

The market has a tag team of support from fiscal and monetary policy which is now more helpful than expected. Instead of the Fed handing off the baton to fiscal policy to drive growth and support the economy, both are acting in coordination. Therefore, we are seeing the S&P 500 break records in terms of being stable. It’s amusing to see an analyst have to explain why the market isn’t even higher than the record high it has already achieved. It’s the equivalent of a baseball analyst seeing Ted Williams’ .400 batting average and explaining why it’s not .500. If tax cuts and reforms aren’t proposed in the next three weeks, I expect the market to correct. It was a bold decision for Trump to give such a strict timeline for tax reform, since he doesn’t control it; the Congress has the power of the purse.

Spread the love

2 Comments

  • Greg Traver

    February 10, 2017

    After the last 8 years of insanity, I'd really appreciate reading "President Trump" after all, most writers would have not dared utter the singular acronym "Obama" because we would "just die on the wheel of political correctness". Intelligent people understand what has happened and what is coming, idiots will claim that the bear was born under the era of "Trump" in the same manner they try to credit (the pervert) Bill Clinton with a strong economy that was seeded by President Ronald Reagan.

    And speaking of "experiments" how did the policy of "printing money" help the markets, America, or YOUR IRA?

    In conclusion: We have a President whose party DOES hold a majority, a majority that DOES hold the purse.

    Yes, we are going to have to eventually pay the pied piper who has been blowing smoke (and smoking who knows what)for 8 years, kicking the can down the road, but let's be fair now and not forget how we got here to begin with.

    Just imagine how "awesome" it would be with another Clinton leading the way. WOW! The market would just keep going gangbusters and we would all make a ton of cash, right?

    • Michael Randall

      February 12, 2017

      I agree that an article should use President Obama / Trump at the beginning but think it is inefficient to add President to every subsequent citing. Frankly I was constantly surprised to see / hear thousands of articles lead off with "Obama" over the past 8 years in the liberal media. I was definitely not a supporter but thought it was disrespectful. However Obama didn't seem to object to attaching his name to the funny mental legacy idea healthcare is a basic human right, whereas FDR and LBJ used The New Deal and The Great Society to drastically change the direction of our government. Perhaps the lack of respect started when they referred to 43 as "Shrub"? Since DJT's airplane / helicopter / buildings have his name in yuge block letters painted on them makes me think he might actually encourage the practice. The fact that you put President in front of RR but neglected to do so in front of "the pervert" shows your respect for the office. I used to think the smoke blowing that proceeded the 2008 fall started with President Clintons "everyone deserves a home" attitude but when I am reminded of the spike in the deficit under RR I hope the bear market is actually pinned on the RINOs / all politicians. I truly hope Trump drains the swamp. The infrastructure of America is deplorable but the foot dragging of Paul Ryan, etc. is actually encouraging to me since most of the shovel ready bursts of money in the past has been wasted by bureaucrats putting lipstick on a pig. Trumps promise last week in Texas to stuff the military with new planes / trucks, etc will be wasted since this equipment is not very effective against the guerrilla warfare practiced over the past 50 years. I don't know the answer but when the coming inflation causes a footlong sub to cost over $10 in middle America Trump will get the blame, or the glory, depending on if you own a franchise or not. Printing money has reduced the cost of all the consumer goods I buy but my own bias of negativity after reading articles like the above has not helped my IRA since I bought triple leveraged bear ETFs. While it is true if Madame Secretary had been elected my IRA might have bought a bunker in Canada where I'd be waiting for the apocalypse. But 1) the long term trajectory of the market, 2) the current low rates financing earnings expansion and 3) the coming corporate tax cut effect on earnings leads me to ignore the nattering nabobs of negativity.