I must have skipped the class where poor manufacturing data, a laggard job market, and growing wealth inequality combined with the social conflict such imbalances typically engender are actually net positive factors that favor and incentivize continued investment. It's a strange world indeed, yet apparently, it's the one that Charles Schwab and its army of financial advisors reside in.
Don't take my word for it. Listen to the words of their Chief Investment Strategist, Liz Ann Sonders, who stated in an interview on Yahoo! Finance that “I think what started five years ago was the beginning of a secular bull market, not just a cyclical bull within an ongoing bear.” As evidence, we can look to the fact that so far, stocks largely have shrugged off disappointing economic news, including weak job creation, slower manufacturing and slumping consumer confidence (The Daily Ticker, Deidre Hughes). Sonders believes that much of the recent bearishness in equities is attributed to the one-off extreme weather events that have stricken many parts of the east coast and that the markets are actually looking forward to a taper. She goes on to state, “I think the market wants to see tapering. I think it wants to see monetary policy move toward normalization and we are well past the point where a Fed having to open up the bazooka again would be good for the market.”
May I suggest that if you have a portfolio managed by a Charles Schwab "strategist" that you seriously consider looking for a professional that takes "strategizing" seriously? (on a side-note, I happen to be available...) This is not about a disagreement with a particular person's opinion : this sentiment that markets are going to move higher is shared by the entire investment advisory community! What are they going to tell you? That markets are going to go down? How could your advisor earn their commission when you are putting your money into cash funds or, God forbid, government bonds?
But it's not even about how many people believe that jumping off a cliff will lead to a soft landing. The core issue is that the data used to justify such sentiment is worse than wrong : it's simply not practiced by the institutional money.
Don't take my word for it. Listen to the words of their Chief Investment Strategist, Liz Ann Sonders, who stated in an interview on Yahoo! Finance that “I think what started five years ago was the beginning of a secular bull market, not just a cyclical bull within an ongoing bear.” As evidence, we can look to the fact that so far, stocks largely have shrugged off disappointing economic news, including weak job creation, slower manufacturing and slumping consumer confidence (The Daily Ticker, Deidre Hughes). Sonders believes that much of the recent bearishness in equities is attributed to the one-off extreme weather events that have stricken many parts of the east coast and that the markets are actually looking forward to a taper. She goes on to state, “I think the market wants to see tapering. I think it wants to see monetary policy move toward normalization and we are well past the point where a Fed having to open up the bazooka again would be good for the market.”
May I suggest that if you have a portfolio managed by a Charles Schwab "strategist" that you seriously consider looking for a professional that takes "strategizing" seriously? (on a side-note, I happen to be available...) This is not about a disagreement with a particular person's opinion : this sentiment that markets are going to move higher is shared by the entire investment advisory community! What are they going to tell you? That markets are going to go down? How could your advisor earn their commission when you are putting your money into cash funds or, God forbid, government bonds?
But it's not even about how many people believe that jumping off a cliff will lead to a soft landing. The core issue is that the data used to justify such sentiment is worse than wrong : it's simply not practiced by the institutional money.
The data for the above chart was provided by CNBC in an earlier broadcast. They received the data from a research firm whose name fails me at this moment (if anyone would care to provide that information, I would be more than happy to receive it!). Regardless of its origination, the chart tells us that from a percentage change point-of-view, market participants are choosing to dump out of positions during the last hour of trading. This apparently is a significant change of behavior from last year and the lesson here is this : if the institutional money does NOT buy on the dips, why the hell should you?
One of the slogans of my company is "Go with the Money." Part philosophy and part practicality, go with the money in this case means, quite literally, go with the damn money! Don't fight the institutional guys like some Robin Hood on Wall Street. Your leverage is far too small to be noticed and even if it wasn't, the institutional guys are playing with everybody's money, including quite possibly yours! If the firefighters are vacating a building, you don't necessarily need to confirm their suspicions. Better to risk looking foolish than the, shall we say, warmer alternative.
One of the slogans of my company is "Go with the Money." Part philosophy and part practicality, go with the money in this case means, quite literally, go with the damn money! Don't fight the institutional guys like some Robin Hood on Wall Street. Your leverage is far too small to be noticed and even if it wasn't, the institutional guys are playing with everybody's money, including quite possibly yours! If the firefighters are vacating a building, you don't necessarily need to confirm their suspicions. Better to risk looking foolish than the, shall we say, warmer alternative.
RSS Feed
