MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

It's Now Day Twenty Three of the Selling Stampede ... Is it over?

Old_Skeet
in Off-Topic
By defination there must be thee consecutive up days in order to declare a selling stampede to be over. As Maxwell Smart used to say in the TV series Get Smart ... "Missed it by just this much."

In checking the earnings for January ending for the S&P 500 Index TTM earnings (as reported) came in at $97.20. This is up from December ending at $94.86. The earnings outlook as we move through the year reflects improvement. I am thinking a good mile stone for the Index to be at February ending is 1990. This would compute to about a 2.5% increase for the Index during the month of February which is about the same that is expected for as reported earnings growth which are currently estimated at $99.53.

So ... Is the selling stampede over? Your guess is as good as mine. By defination, no. But, as long as the market continues to move upward, yes. I am thinking that it is over; and, by the time February ends we will better know.

This post concludes the series on the selling stampede unless something developes, in the markets, that would cause me to reopen it.

Have a good day ... and, most of all ... I wish all "Good Investing."

Comments

  • vkt
    I guess the answer is a resounding NO.:)
  • Old_Skeet
    edited February 2016
    It's is now day number twenty four in the selling stampede.

    Good news ... As I write, the futures in the S&P 500 Index are up this morning along with oil. The Dollar is weakening. Perhaps, today will be an up day for us ... tomorrow and the next?
  • hank
    edited February 2016
    Sometimes I get the feeling there's an artificially induced shakeout going on. Especially in the energy sectors. Shake out the weak hands. Then run the price back up. Geez - a lot of traders (i.e. hedge funds) could see quick gains of 30%+ if oil only settled-in around $40 from recent lows. Dunno. Could hedge funds and short sellers accomplish that with oil futures by working in some type of some concerted manner? Suppose it would be illegal.

    Equities are a bit different being more widely traded and also having run up so much from '08. I'd imagine they are due for a breather. And ... I don't think junk is a bad investment longer term. I do, however, think its fortunes are closely tied to the equity markets. I could be wrong!
  • vkt
    @hank, it is not uncommon to attribute invisible hands to market movements in forums.

    As for manipulation, with collusion possibly but not individually. Unlike banks, hedge funds aren't known for colluding, they are out to get each other than work with each other.

    But there is a possibility of the opposite happening, that the market manipulations by colluding banks that have been accused of (and investigated and fined for) cornering commodities derivatives trading that set commodity prices led to the unrealistic prices especially on oil earlier and that has been removed leading to a price reset. The momentum trading does the rest.
  • hank
    edited February 2016
    Thanks vkt. Agree, except for your grammatical construct: "... market movements in forums."
    The movement is in the commodity exchanges - not here.:)

    See: Dangling Modifiers
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangling_modifier


  • vkt
    edited February 2016
    @hank, in the best Joe Pesci Nu Joisey accent

    "oh yeah? I got yore danglin' right 'ere!"

    PS: please flag/delete if this is too off-color humor for the forum.
  • Old_JoeOld_Joe
    edited February 2016
    Relatively mild, actually.:)
    Nice jab job, Hank!:)
  • vkt
    Yes, it is not as risqué without the accompanying physical gesture associated with that idiom.:)
Sign In or Register to comment.