September 30, 2013
There have been 17 government funding gaps and shutdowns since 1976, ranging in length from one to 21 days. None has caused a market meltdown. The average decline in the Standard & Poor’. Keep reading here: Government Shutdowns–What History Tells USs 500 index during one of these periods lasting 10 days or more is about 2.5 percent. For those lasting five days or fewer, the average decline is 1.4 percent.
Here’s another good article on the subject from Vanguard: Fiscal Debates__Vanguard_9-30-13
Goldilocks, Gridlock, Diversification and Market Valuation
While the Easter bunny is popular at this time of year, it is the “Goldilocks” economy that’s got the stock market hopping. Investors have woken from winter hibernation to find that the economic porridge is just about right for stocks – not too hot and not too cold.
Why is this important? Historically, stocks have performed best under conditions of moderate growth and inflation. Slow growth conditions beget concerns about poor corporate sales and recession. On the other hand, very strong growth (think 1970’s) often leads to a spike in inflation expectations and shrinking profits from rising interest rates, materials and labor costs. At the current time, the balance between growth and inflation seems to be in, well… in a sweet spot. Continue reading and view complete letter
Here’s a look back at Bruce’s article entitled, “Love the One You’re With” which was published in the Sudbury Town Crier two years ago on St. Valentine’s day.
Love the One You’re With
Here is a capital thought this Valentine’s Day. At any given moment, there’s always someone out there who might look a little shinier than what you’ve got. It’s okay to look, but don’t be a fickle date, jumping from partner to partner.
In investing as in love, jumping from partner to partner will eventually lead to misery, more risk and….Valentines2011
Please click here to open letter: Jan 2013 Investment Letter
- Letter to Clients: The Shore Beyond. Do what Lincoln Did! Keep your eyes on the shore beyond. Is the market anticipating the next wave of technological innovation?
- Highlights of recent Tax Changes
- Investment Comments with Index and Core Fund Performance Review
- TWM Margin of Safety Select Equities highlights
As we survey the future, it is important to be aware of the economic, political and environmental impact of potential shale oil production on federal lands in the US. This is a real game changer because there is an estimated 800 billion barrels of recoverable shale oil on federal lands in the Green River formation. That is triple the reserves in Saudi Arabia. The math is such that over the years royalties from federal owned land could pay off the national debt without raising taxes, while also reducing costs associated with protecting strategic oil interests.
As you look back through history, technological innovation is spurred by the “recession-trigger effect”. The interludes between waves of technological innovation–the industrial revolution (1780-1840), the technical revolution (1880-1920), the scientific-technical revolution (1940-1970) and the information/telecommunications revolution (1985-2000) — are characterized by economic crisis and stagnation, which in turn triggers demand for new inventions and innovations.
So while our attention is riveted on the debate about whether to raise taxes or cut spending, the intractable nature of our economic situation will trigger a serious debate about shale oil production. It’s inevitable.
Here are some recent posts from Fuller Money on the subject: –>click here
I love it when we beat the NY Times to a story! This Sunday’s article Dueling Prisms for Valuing Stocks discusses many of the issues surrounding current stock market valuation that I brought to your attention in last week’s TWM Client Letter, Q4 Market Valuation Update — The Air is Thinner Up Here.
The article presents a debate between Jeremy Siegel, a Wharton finance professor, and Robert Shiller who originally wrote about the 10-year PE ratio in his book, Irrational Exuberance. Siegel agrees with the idea of smoothing earnings over time (which is the way TWM calculates the PE ratio for use in deciding whether to rebalance portfolios) because it reduces distortions in 1-year data that can mislead investors about market valuation. However, Siegel believes that the current 10-yr PE ratio is itself distorted because it includes two major earnings recessions (the tech wreck and the financial crisis) and, therefore, he thinks that stocks are more attractively valued than indicated.
As I pointed out in my letter, every thing else remaining equal, the 10-yr PE ratio is likely to decline a bit over the next year as low earnings from the 2001-03 period are excluded from the data. But Siegel obviously didn’t crunch the numbers because, in fact, the difference in valuation is small. I addressed this in my letter — the table on page 4 of our Market Update compares the 10-yr PE ratio of 21.5 with a 7-yr PE ratio at 20.8 (which removes the tech wreck earnings recession from the data).
What does this mean in plain english? The market is trading in the upper reaches of its “fair valuation” range, not quite in yellow light territory. But the market isn’t undervalued either. Read my Q4 letter for more.
In the end, it pays to remember that models such as Shiller’s PE-ten are only tools and we will never use them in a vacuum to determine your investment positioning. Judgement is always needed. Here is the NY Times Article in .pdf format Dueling Prisms for Market Valuation.