Uncategorized
Predictions Are Pointless – Why You Shouldn’t Listen To Gurus
Predictions Are Pointless – Why You Shouldn’t Listen To Gurus
Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,
“(Market) Predictions…
Share this:
Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,
“(Market) Predictions Are Difficult…Especially When They Are About The Future”
– Niels Bohr
Okay, I took a little poetic license, but the point is that while we try, predictions of the future are difficult at best and impossible at worst. If we could accurately predict the future, fortune tellers would win all the lotteries, psychics would be richer than Elon Musk, and portfolio managers would always beat the index.
However, we can analyze what occurred previously, weed through the noise of the present, and discern the possible outcomes of the future. The biggest problem with Wall Street, both today and in the past, is the consistent disregard of the unexpected and random events they inevitability occur.
We have seen plenty, from trade wars to Brexit, to Fed policy and a global pandemic in recent years. Yet, before each of those events caused a market downturn, Wall Street analysts were wildly bullish that wouldn’t happen.
For example, on December 7th, 2021, we wrote an article about the predictions for 2022.
“There is one thing about Goldman Sachs that is always consistent; they are ‘bullish.’ Of course, given that the market is positive more often than negative, it ‘pays’ to be bullish when your company sells products to hungry investors.
It is important to remember that Goldman Sachs was wrong when it was most important, particularly in 2000 and 2008.
However, in keeping with its traditional bullishness, Goldman’s chief equity strategist David Kostin forecasted the S&P 500 will climb by 9% to 5100 at year-end 2022. As he notes, such will “reflect a prospective total return of 10% including dividends.”
The problem, of course, is that the S&P 500 did NOT end the year at 5100.
It isn’t just Goldman Sachs always making bullish and erroneous forecasts but the vast majority of Wall Street analysts. Such errors in predictions are most evident in expectations for forward earnings. Ed Yardeni tracks the historical earnings forecast and changes for each year. Analysts’ expectations are clearly wrong by about 30% on average.
Despite increasing signs of recessionary risk, analysts are once again becoming increasingly optimistic about earnings growth into 2024. Of course, such would require substantially stronger economic growth to generate those earnings.
So, the question becomes how much faith should we have in Wall Street estimates when it comes to our investing?
Predictions Of The Future Have An Expiration
In the late 90s, there was a study on the accuracy of “predictions.” The study took predictions from various professions, including psychics and meteorologists. The study came to two conclusions.
-
“Meteorologists” are the MOST accurate predictors of the future, and,
-
The predictive ability was accurate to just 3-days.
Most importantly, once predictions stretch beyond 3-days, the accuracy is no better than a coin flip.
A quarter of a century later, the Economist magazine analyzed computer models and their weather-forecasting accuracy. Surprisingly, despite the massive increases in computer analysis capabilities, increased data collection, and improved models, the accuracy has failed to improve. Now, as it was then, the accuracy of weather forecasts is roughly 100% for 3-days into the future. However, at ten days, the accuracy is still no better than a coin flip.
Here is the critical point. When analyzing weather patterns, there is a tremendous amount of observable data. From surface temperatures to high and low-pressure zones, humidity, air quality, and numerous data points. That data, collected by Doppler radar, radiosondes, weather satellites, buoys, and other instruments, is fed into computerized NWS supercomputers where numerical forecast models go to work.
Still, with all that data, the predictions’ accuracy is only good for three to ten days.
Given the markets are affected by a broad spectrum of extremely variable inputs from economics to geopolitics, monetary policy, interest rates, financial events, and most importantly, human psychology, how accurate are predictions 12 months into the future?
As investors, how much weight should give to any prediction that extends for more than a week?
Navigating From Here
In the short term, all that really matters to investors is short-term market psychology. That psychology is easily seen in the technical analysis of market price data. This is why we spend each week discussing with you the technical support and resistance levels and the market’s overall trend – bullish or bearish.
In the long term, meaning over the course of the next decade, it is fundamentals and valuations that will determine the return on your investments.
With that in mind, my job as a portfolio manager is to navigate market risks as we see them. Making a “one-sided” bet on a potential outcome harbors an outsized risk of being wrong. Such would potentially impact client capital and damage financial outcomes.
Therefore, we approach risk management in the market by choosing to hedge risk and reduce potential liabilities. As such, given the market’s current structure, we have three options currently:
-
Do Nothing – If the markets do correct, we destroy capital and time waiting for the portfolio to recover.
-
Take Profits – Taking profits, raising cash, and reducing equity exposure before a correction helps mitigate the damage of a decline. However, if wrong, we can repurchase positions, add new ones, or resize portfolio holdings as needed.
-
Hedge – We have also opted to hedge by adding a position to the portfolio that is the “inverse” of the market. Such allows us to keep existing positions intact. By “shorting against the portfolio,” we effectively reduce our equity risk (and related capital destruction) during a market correction.
As noted, we continued to use a combination of both #2 and #3 in the past. Doing nothing leaves us overly exposed to an unexpected “volatility shock” in the market or the reversal of bullish psychology.
In our view, we can either manage risk or ignore it.
The only problem with “ignoring risk” is that such has a long history of not working out well.
Investment Guidelines
When it comes to investing, we tend to repeat our mistakes by forgetting the past. Therefore, it is worth repeating investing guidelines to return your focus to what truly matters.
-
Investing is not a competition. There are no prizes for winning but severe penalties for losing.
-
Emotions have no place in investing. You are generally better off doing the opposite of what you “feel.”
-
The ONLY investments that you can “buy and hold” are those providing an income stream and return of principal.
-
Market valuations are very poor market timing devices.
-
Fundamentals and Economics drive long-term investment decisions – “Greed and Fear” drive short-term trading.
-
“Market timing” is impossible– managing exposure to risk is both logical and possible.
-
Investment is about discipline and patience. Lacking either one can be destructive to your investment goals.
-
There is no value in daily media commentary– turn off the television and save yourself the mental capital.
-
Investing is no different than gambling– both are “guesses” about future outcomes based on probabilities. The winner is the one who knows when to “fold” and when to go “all in.”
-
No investment strategy works all the time. The trick is knowing the difference between a bad investment strategy and one that is temporarily out of favor.
“The investor’s chief problem – and even his worst enemy – is likely to be himself.” – Benjamin Graham.
Uncategorized
Homes listed for sale in early June sell for $7,700 more
New Zillow research suggests the spring home shopping season may see a second wave this summer if mortgage rates fall
The post Homes listed for sale in…
Share this:
- A Zillow analysis of 2023 home sales finds homes listed in the first two weeks of June sold for 2.3% more.
- The best time to list a home for sale is a month later than it was in 2019, likely driven by mortgage rates.
- The best time to list can be as early as the second half of February in San Francisco, and as late as the first half of July in New York and Philadelphia.
Spring home sellers looking to maximize their sale price may want to wait it out and list their home for sale in the first half of June. A new Zillow® analysis of 2023 sales found that homes listed in the first two weeks of June sold for 2.3% more, a $7,700 boost on a typical U.S. home.
The best time to list consistently had been early May in the years leading up to the pandemic. The shift to June suggests mortgage rates are strongly influencing demand on top of the usual seasonality that brings buyers to the market in the spring. This home-shopping season is poised to follow a similar pattern as that in 2023, with the potential for a second wave if the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates midyear or later.
The 2.3% sale price premium registered last June followed the first spring in more than 15 years with mortgage rates over 6% on a 30-year fixed-rate loan. The high rates put home buyers on the back foot, and as rates continued upward through May, they were still reassessing and less likely to bid boldly. In June, however, rates pulled back a little from 6.79% to 6.67%, which likely presented an opportunity for determined buyers heading into summer. More buyers understood their market position and could afford to transact, boosting competition and sale prices.
The old logic was that sellers could earn a premium by listing in late spring, when search activity hit its peak. Now, with persistently low inventory, mortgage rate fluctuations make their own seasonality. First-time home buyers who are on the edge of qualifying for a home loan may dip in and out of the market, depending on what’s happening with rates. It is almost certain the Federal Reserve will push back any interest-rate cuts to mid-2024 at the earliest. If mortgage rates follow, that could bring another surge of buyers later this year.
Mortgage rates have been impacting affordability and sale prices since they began rising rapidly two years ago. In 2022, sellers nationwide saw the highest sale premium when they listed their home in late March, right before rates barreled past 5% and continued climbing.
Zillow’s research finds the best time to list can vary widely by metropolitan area. In 2023, it was as early as the second half of February in San Francisco, and as late as the first half of July in New York. Thirty of the top 35 largest metro areas saw for-sale listings command the highest sale prices between May and early July last year.
Zillow also found a wide range in the sale price premiums associated with homes listed during those peak periods. At the hottest time of the year in San Jose, homes sold for 5.5% more, a $88,000 boost on a typical home. Meanwhile, homes in San Antonio sold for 1.9% more during that same time period.
| Metropolitan Area | Best Time to List | Price Premium | Dollar Boost |
| United States | First half of June | 2.3% | $7,700 |
| New York, NY | First half of July | 2.4% | $15,500 |
| Los Angeles, CA | First half of May | 4.1% | $39,300 |
| Chicago, IL | First half of June | 2.8% | $8,800 |
| Dallas, TX | First half of June | 2.5% | $9,200 |
| Houston, TX | Second half of April | 2.0% | $6,200 |
| Washington, DC | Second half of June | 2.2% | $12,700 |
| Philadelphia, PA | First half of July | 2.4% | $8,200 |
| Miami, FL | First half of June | 2.3% | $12,900 |
| Atlanta, GA | Second half of June | 2.3% | $8,700 |
| Boston, MA | Second half of May | 3.5% | $23,600 |
| Phoenix, AZ | First half of June | 3.2% | $14,700 |
| San Francisco, CA | Second half of February | 4.2% | $50,300 |
| Riverside, CA | First half of May | 2.7% | $15,600 |
| Detroit, MI | First half of July | 3.3% | $7,900 |
| Seattle, WA | First half of June | 4.3% | $31,500 |
| Minneapolis, MN | Second half of May | 3.7% | $13,400 |
| San Diego, CA | Second half of April | 3.1% | $29,600 |
| Tampa, FL | Second half of June | 2.1% | $8,000 |
| Denver, CO | Second half of May | 2.9% | $16,900 |
| Baltimore, MD | First half of July | 2.2% | $8,200 |
| St. Louis, MO | First half of June | 2.9% | $7,000 |
| Orlando, FL | First half of June | 2.2% | $8,700 |
| Charlotte, NC | Second half of May | 3.0% | $11,000 |
| San Antonio, TX | First half of June | 1.9% | $5,400 |
| Portland, OR | Second half of April | 2.6% | $14,300 |
| Sacramento, CA | First half of June | 3.2% | $17,900 |
| Pittsburgh, PA | Second half of June | 2.3% | $4,700 |
| Cincinnati, OH | Second half of April | 2.7% | $7,500 |
| Austin, TX | Second half of May | 2.8% | $12,600 |
| Las Vegas, NV | First half of June | 3.4% | $14,600 |
| Kansas City, MO | Second half of May | 2.5% | $7,300 |
| Columbus, OH | Second half of June | 3.3% | $10,400 |
| Indianapolis, IN | First half of July | 3.0% | $8,100 |
| Cleveland, OH | First half of July | 3.4% | $7,400 |
| San Jose, CA | First half of June | 5.5% | $88,400 |
The post Homes listed for sale in early June sell for $7,700 more appeared first on Zillow Research.
federal reserve pandemic home sales mortgage rates interest ratesUncategorized
February Employment Situation
By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000…
Share this:
By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert
The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000 average over the previous 12 months. The payroll data for January and December were revised down by a total of 167,000. The private sector added 223,000 new jobs, the largest gain since May of last year.
Temporary help services employment continues a steep decline after a sharp post-pandemic rise.
Average hours of work increased from 34.2 to 34.3. The increase, along with the 223,000 private employment increase led to a hefty increase in total hours of 5.6% at an annualized rate, also the largest increase since May of last year.
The establishment report, once again, beat “expectations;” the WSJ survey of economists was 198,000. Other than the downward revisions, mentioned above, another bit of negative news was a smallish increase in wage growth, from $34.52 to $34.57.
The household survey shows that the labor force increased 150,000, a drop in employment of 184,000 and an increase in the number of unemployed persons of 334,000. The labor force participation rate held steady at 62.5, the employment to population ratio decreased from 60.2 to 60.1 and the unemployment rate increased from 3.66 to 3.86. Remember that the unemployment rate is the number of unemployed relative to the labor force (the number employed plus the number unemployed). Consequently, the unemployment rate can go up if the number of unemployed rises holding fixed the labor force, or if the labor force shrinks holding the number unemployed unchanged. An increase in the unemployment rate is not necessarily a bad thing: it may reflect a strong labor market drawing “marginally attached” individuals from outside the labor force. Indeed, there was a 96,000 decline in those workers.
Earlier in the week, the BLS announced JOLTS (Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey) data for January. There isn’t much to report here as the job openings changed little at 8.9 million, the number of hires and total separations were little changed at 5.7 million and 5.3 million, respectively.
As has been the case for the last couple of years, the number of job openings remains higher than the number of unemployed persons.
Also earlier in the week the BLS announced that productivity increased 3.2% in the 4th quarter with output rising 3.5% and hours of work rising 0.3%.
The bottom line is that the labor market continues its surprisingly (to some) strong performance, once again proving stronger than many had expected. This strength makes it difficult to justify any interest rate cuts soon, particularly given the recent inflation spike.
unemployment pandemic unemploymentUncategorized
Mortgage rates fall as labor market normalizes
Jobless claims show an expanding economy. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.
Share this:
Everyone was waiting to see if this week’s jobs report would send mortgage rates higher, which is what happened last month. Instead, the 10-year yield had a muted response after the headline number beat estimates, but we have negative job revisions from previous months. The Federal Reserve’s fear of wage growth spiraling out of control hasn’t materialized for over two years now and the unemployment rate ticked up to 3.9%. For now, we can say the labor market isn’t tight anymore, but it’s also not breaking.
The key labor data line in this expansion is the weekly jobless claims report. Jobless claims show an expanding economy that has not lost jobs yet. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.
From the Fed: In the week ended March 2, initial claims for unemployment insurance benefits were flat, at 217,000. The four-week moving average declined slightly by 750, to 212,250
Below is an explanation of how we got here with the labor market, which all started during COVID-19.
1. I wrote the COVID-19 recovery model on April 7, 2020, and retired it on Dec. 9, 2020. By that time, the upfront recovery phase was done, and I needed to model out when we would get the jobs lost back.
2. Early in the labor market recovery, when we saw weaker job reports, I doubled and tripled down on my assertion that job openings would get to 10 million in this recovery. Job openings rose as high as to 12 million and are currently over 9 million. Even with the massive miss on a job report in May 2021, I didn’t waver.
Currently, the jobs openings, quit percentage and hires data are below pre-COVID-19 levels, which means the labor market isn’t as tight as it once was, and this is why the employment cost index has been slowing data to move along the quits percentage.
3. I wrote that we should get back all the jobs lost to COVID-19 by September of 2022. At the time this would be a speedy labor market recovery, and it happened on schedule, too
Total employment data
4. This is the key one for right now: If COVID-19 hadn’t happened, we would have between 157 million and 159 million jobs today, which would have been in line with the job growth rate in February 2020. Today, we are at 157,808,000. This is important because job growth should be cooling down now. We are more in line with where the labor market should be when averaging 140K-165K monthly. So for now, the fact that we aren’t trending between 140K-165K means we still have a bit more recovery kick left before we get down to those levels.
From BLS: Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 275,000 in February, and the unemployment rate increased to 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in health care, in government, in food services and drinking places, in social assistance, and in transportation and warehousing.
Here are the jobs that were created and lost in the previous month:
In this jobs report, the unemployment rate for education levels looks like this:
- Less than a high school diploma: 6.1%
- High school graduate and no college: 4.2%
- Some college or associate degree: 3.1%
- Bachelor’s degree or higher: 2.2%
Today’s report has continued the trend of the labor data beating my expectations, only because I am looking for the jobs data to slow down to a level of 140K-165K, which hasn’t happened yet. I wouldn’t categorize the labor market as being tight anymore because of the quits ratio and the hires data in the job openings report. This also shows itself in the employment cost index as well. These are key data lines for the Fed and the reason we are going to see three rate cuts this year.
recession unemployment covid-19 fed federal reserve mortgage rates recession recovery unemployment
-
Uncategorized3 weeks agoAll Of The Elements Are In Place For An Economic Crisis Of Staggering Proportions
-
Uncategorized1 month agoCathie Wood sells a major tech stock (again)
-
Uncategorized3 weeks agoCalifornia Counties Could Be Forced To Pay $300 Million To Cover COVID-Era Program
-
Uncategorized2 weeks agoApparel Retailer Express Moving Toward Bankruptcy
-
Uncategorized4 weeks agoIndustrial Production Decreased 0.1% in January
-
International3 days agoWalmart launches clever answer to Target’s new membership program
-
International3 days agoEyePoint poaches medical chief from Apellis; Sandoz CFO, longtime BioNTech exec to retire
-
Uncategorized3 weeks agoRFK Jr: The Wuhan Cover-Up & The Rise Of The Biowarfare-Industrial Complex