Search This Blog

October 31, 2012

WEEKLY MARKET COMMENTARY

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here.
WEEKLY MARKET COMMENTARY
Update on Risks and Opportunities in the Financial Markets
October 2012



Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff
Legacy Retirement Advisors
LPL Registered Principal
565 8th St
Paso Robles, CA 93446
805-226-0445
Jennifer.Langstaff@LPL.c
om
www.LegacyCentralCoast.c
om

CA Insurance Lic# 0B63553


Weekly Market Commentary | Week of October 29, 2012

Highlights

  • Between the election and the end of the year, tighter races have seen bigger moves and wider swings in the S&P 500. In addition, lame duck legislative sessions during presidential election years have resulted in a decline in the S&P 500.
  • While we expect progress to be made mitigating the impact of the fiscal cliff in this year's lame duck session, progress alone does not mean market gains are assured, as history attests.
  • The negotiations themselves, coming on the heels of hard-fought election battles, can drive wide market swings and result in modest losses.

Post-Election Apprehension

Our view remains that a closely divided and hard-fought election will be followed by more fighting in a divisive and bitter lame duck session in Congress, resulting in higher volatility and a potential pullback for the stock market. As the race continues to tighten, the market shed -3.3% during last seven trading days (October 18-26).

In general, the post-election environment has not been a bad one for stocks. The S&P 500 has posted gains two-thirds of the time from the election through year-end. This is similar to the performance of the markets during any other roughly two-month period. However, digging deeper into the markets' performance during elections that have similarities to the current one may shed insight into how the markets may perform in the coming months.

While the S&P 500 has posted gains, on average, between the election and the end of the year, the tighter races saw bigger moves and wider swings, as you can see in Figure 1. Nearly half of the time (four of the past nine elections), the ultimate loser of the election was ahead in the Gallup polls as of late October, highlighting a very close race. An exception can be seen in 2008. While 2008 was still relatively close, it was not as tight as the current race. Volatility was tremendous, as the financial crisis unfolded and stocks plunged as the United States fell into a deep recession-all unrelated to the election. The average percentage post-election change in the stock market (in either direction) for the close races in 1976, 1980 (though the election turned out to be an upset win for Reagan), 2000, and 2004 was 6.4%. This was triple the 2.2% average change in those elections that were not as close, when excluding 2008. The swing from high to low in the S&P 500 was twice as wide following the close elections than the others, excluding 2008. When including 2008, the tight races still had a much larger average move, but only slightly greater average swings.

Drilling further down to look at those presidential election years that had lame duck sessions in Congress also may offer insight, since Congress has a big budget challenge ahead in this year's lame duck session. These years have not been good for stocks. Excluding 2008 from the four lame duck legislative sessions during presidential election years since 1948, the S&P 500 was down in each of the lame duck sessions that took place in 1980, 2000, and 2004. The losses were modest ranging from less than 1% to nearly 4%.

Importantly, these market losses took place despite important legislative accomplishments in those lame duck sessions. The Congressional Research Service in their 2009 publication entitled Lame Duck Sessions of Congress 1935-2008 recount the accomplishments during these sessions:

  • 1980 -During the lame duck session, from November 12 to December 16, 1980, Congress completed action on many of the issues that had been left unfinished in the regular session, including the following: a budget resolution and a budget reconciliation measure; five regular appropriations bills, although one was subsequently vetoed; and a second continuing resolution was approved to continue funding for other parts of the government. Non-budget-related actions included an Alaska lands bill and a "superfund" bill to help clean up chemical contamination, a measure extending general revenue sharing for three years, a measure that made disposal of low-level nuclear waste a state responsibility, changes to military pay and benefits, and authority for the president to call 100,000 military reservists to active duty without declaring a national emergency.
  • 2000 -The House returned on November 13 and the Senate a day later; they faced a still-undecided presidential election yet faced substantial budget decisions. They approved a short-term continuing resolution and then agreed to a further recess until December 5. After reconvening on December 5, Congress agreed to a series of five short-term continuing resolutions, while final decisions on the remaining appropriations were being negotiated. During this sequence of events, the Senate recessed on December 11 after providing, by unanimous consent, that when the fourth in this series of continuing resolutions was received from the House, it would automatically be deemed passed in the Senate. Finally, on December 15, both chambers completed action on fiscal year 2001 appropriations measures by agreeing to the conference report on the omnibus appropriations bill. In addition, Congress also cleared the Presidential Threat Protection Act, the Striped Bass Conservation Act, and the Intelligence Authorization Act. It also sent President Clinton a bankruptcy reform measure, which the president subsequently pocket vetoed.
  • 2004 -From November 13 through December 9, 2004, Congress reconvened with a need to increase the debt ceiling and address spending bills. Congress passed an increase to the debt limit, and an omnibus appropriations measure was passed that included caps on domestic discretionary spending as well as the elimination of many authorizing provisions. Congress also passed several other reauthorizations, including the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a moratorium on internet taxation, and authority for satellite television systems to carry network programming.

While again this year Congress has a full lame duck session agenda and the stakes are very high, we expect progress to be made mitigating the potentially recessionary impact of the budget bombshell of tax increases and spending cuts due to hit on January 1, known as the fiscal cliff. However, progress alone does not mean market gains are assured, as history attests. The negotiations themselves, coming on the heels of hard-fought election battles, can drive wide market swings and result in modest losses. A mildly defensive posture may benefit investors heading into the final months of the year as markets may provide attractive buying opportunities.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

The economic forecasts set forth in the presentation may not develop as predicted and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

The Standard & Poor's 500 Index is a capitalization-weighted index of 500 stocks designed to measure performance of the broad domestic economy through changes in the aggregate market value of 500 stocks representing all major industries.

This research material has been prepared by LPL Financial.

To the extent you are receiving investment advice from a separately registered independent investment advisor, please note that LPL Financial is not an affiliate of and makes no representation with respect to such entity.

LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC

Tracking # 1-113260| Exp. 10/13

If you no longer wish to receive this email communication, remove your name from this specific mailing list, or opt-out of all mailing lists.

We are committed to protecting your privacy. For more information on our privacy policy, please contact:

Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff
565 8th St
Paso Robles, CA 93446

805-226-0445
Jennifer.Langstaff@LPL.com

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. To determine which investment(s) may be appropriate for you, consult your financial advisor prior to investing. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and cannot be invested into directly.

Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff is a Registered Representative with and Securities offered through LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC

 

This newsletter was created using Newsletter OnDemand, powered by S&P Capital IQ Financial Communications.

October 23, 2012

WEEKLY MARKET COMMENTARY

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here.
WEEKLY MARKET COMMENTARY
Update on Risks and Opportunities in the Financial Markets
October 2012



Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff
Legacy Retirement Advisors
LPL Registered Principal
565 8th St
Paso Robles, CA 93446
805-226-0445
Jennifer.Langstaff@LPL.c
om
www.LegacyCentralCoast.c
om

CA Insurance Lic# 0B63553


Weekly Market Commentary | Week of October 22, 2012

Highlights

  • Among the events vying for investors' attention this week will be the Federal Reserve meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday.
  • Nearly all of the world's major central banks have each engaged in a battle to provide aggressive stimulus of similar size relative to their economy in an effort to boost growth and battle the currency impact of the actions by other central banks.
  • With the world's central banks locked in a currency war, the winner may be precious metals.

Battle of the Central Banks

Despite Friday's sharp drop as companies reported poor earnings results, the S&P 500 Index posted a gain last week. This week, vying for investors' attention from the flood of generally weak earnings reports will be the Federal Reserve (Fed) meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday. The Fed is highly likely to confirm on Wednesday that it is continuing the third round of aggressive stimulus in the form of bond buying, known as quantitative easing (QE), announced at the last meeting. That highly anticipated move by the Fed helped stocks to rally to the highs of the year, despite the most warnings issued by S&P 500 companies ahead of an earnings season in over a decade as companies lowered earnings expectations.

The QE program is part of the Fed's battle against recession, given how weak the economy is-not to mention the threat of the impending fiscal cliff. But it is also a battle in a war against other central banks. The Fed has engaged in a massive amount of bond buying, yet as a percentage of the economy (GDP) the Fed's actions pale in comparison to those of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Bank of Japan.

Since mid-2008, when the world's central banks aggressively applied stimulus through bond-buying programs and expanding the amount of assets on their balance sheets, the ECB has increased its holdings by 17% of GDP-more than doubling assets from 16% of GDP to 33% currently. The ECB's balance sheet grew sharply after the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, and then jumped further as the two "LTROs," or three-year loan long-term refinance operations, took place in December 2011 and late February 2012. These most recent operations pumped more than 1 trillion euros into the banking system for the benefit of struggling Spanish, Italian, and other European banks.

Over the same mid-2008 to current time period, the Bank of Japan increased the assets it holds by 11% of GDP, going from 20% to 31%, and the Bank of England took assets up by 14%, from 7% to 21%. The U.S. Fed accumulated assets equivalent to 12% of GDP, from 6% to 18%. Other central banks have assets relative to GDP well beyond that of the Fed, especially among the emerging markets. For example, the People's Bank of China holds assets equivalent to about 25% of GDP.

Nearly all of the world's major central banks have each engaged in a battle to provide aggressive stimulus of similar size relative to their economy. This similar percentage has been not merely to battle recession. It has also been to battle the currency impact of the actions by other central banks. While certainly not the only factor affecting currency values, the central bank actions pump more liquid money into an economy and have the tendency to weaken the currency relative to those of trading partners-unless the central banks of those trading partners are also engaging in a similar amount of aggressive actions. Those countries that have engaged in more bond-buying as a percent of their GDP than the U.S. Fed have seen their currencies depreciate relative to the dollar, while those that have done less have seen their currencies rise versus the dollar.

The Fed's efforts are aimed at both keeping interest rates low for borrowers to stimulate economic activity and keeping the dollar from appreciating versus trading partners and risking damage to the economy from falling U.S. exports.

At the last Fed meeting in mid-September, the Fed communicated its intention to maintain a stimulative policy through mid-2015. The Fed is unlikely to announce any change to its stance this week. Considering that it will likely take coordination by the world's central banks when the time is right to begin to rein in stimulus, lest it result in a soaring currency that may imperil the recovery, it may be a very long time before the Fed feels it is able to begin to reverse the actions taken in recent years.

With the world's central banks locked in a currency war, the winner may be the precious metals asset class. Precious metals have the tendency to maintain their value relative to depreciating currencies. For example, the price of gold has roughly doubled since mid-2008, as central banks escalated their battle. The latest and unlimited round of QE by the Fed may be matched by other central banks. After all, the ECB stands ready to enact its unlimited OMT, Outright Monetary Transactions, created in September just ahead of the latest Fed announcement, and the yen fell last week as markets speculated the Bank of Japan would soon boost stimulus. We believe this will likely result in a favorable environment for precious metals for an extended time frame.


IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

The economic forecasts set forth in the presentation may not develop as predicted and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period, though GDP is usually calculated on an annual basis. It includes all of private and public consumption, government outlays, investments and exports less imports that occur within a defined territory.

Quantitative Easing is a government monetary policy occasionally used to increase the money supply by buying government securities or other securities from the market. Quantitative easing increases the money supply by flooding financial institutions with capital in an effort to promote increased lending and liquidity.

The Standard & Poor's 500 Index is a capitalization-weighted index of 500 stocks designed to measure performance of the broad domestic economy through changes in the aggregate market value of 500 stocks representing all major industries.

Precious metal investing is subject to substantial fluctuation and potential for loss.

The fast price swings in commodities and currencies will result in significant volatility in an investor's holdings.

This research material has been prepared by LPL Financial.

To the extent you are receiving investment advice from a separately registered independent investment advisor, please note that LPL Financial is not an affiliate of and makes no representation with respect to such entity.

Not FDIC/NCUA Insured | Not Bank/Credit Union Guaranteed | May Lose Value | Not Guaranteed by any Government Agency | Not a Bank/Credit Union Deposit

LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC

Tracking # 1-111393| Exp. 10/13

If you no longer wish to receive this email communication, remove your name from this specific mailing list, or opt-out of all mailing lists.

We are committed to protecting your privacy. For more information on our privacy policy, please contact:

Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff
565 8th St
Paso Robles, CA 93446

805-226-0445
Jennifer.Langstaff@LPL.com

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. To determine which investment(s) may be appropriate for you, consult your financial advisor prior to investing. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and cannot be invested into directly.

Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff is a Registered Representative with and Securities offered through LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC

 

This newsletter was created using Newsletter OnDemand, powered by S&P Capital IQ Financial Communications.

October 15, 2012

WEEKLY MARKET COMMENTARY

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here.
WEEKLY MARKET COMMENTARY
Update on Risks and Opportunities in the Financial Markets
October 2012



Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff
Legacy Retirement Advisors
LPL Registered Principal
565 8th St
Paso Robles, CA 93446
805-226-0445
Jennifer.Langstaff@LPL.c
om
www.LegacyCentralCoast.c
om

CA Insurance Lic# 0B63553


Weekly Market Commentary | Week of October 15, 2012

Highlights

  • Earnings expectations for the third quarter of 2012 are now low enough that companies are likely to be able to beat them as they report results this week.
  • However, investors should be cautious in extrapolating these beats to coming quarters.

Companies Finding It Harder To Manufacture Profits

Third quarter earnings are expected to be flat to slightly negative compared with a year ago. So far, 35 companies in the S&P 500 have reported earnings for the third quarter of 2012. This week, 80 companies are scheduled to report. While investors are very focused on what the profits were for the past quarter, it is what they may turn out to be over the next several quarters that will likely have the most impact on the markets.

Year-over-year earnings growth for the companies in the S&P 500 has slowed over the prior four quarters from 18% in the second quarter of 2011 to 8% in the second quarter of 2012, now followed by an expected -3% drop in earnings in the just-ended third quarter of 2012. Earnings expectations are now low enough that companies are likely to be able to beat them. Indeed, last week, global companies Alcoa and FedEx reported third quarter earnings that exceeded analysts' expectations. However, investors should be cautious in extrapolating these beats to coming quarters.

Over the next four quarters, the consensus of Wall Street analysts' estimated earnings growth rate is for a re-acceleration of earnings growth from about 7% to 17%. This seems unlikely, and exceeding these lofty estimates may prove nearly impossible. The stall in profit momentum is unlikely to be a mere one-quarter event. Not merely because the economic drag from some combination of higher taxes and spending cuts is likely to further slow the economy in 2013 from its currently sluggish pace of 1-2%, but also because of signs that demand and pricing gains have stalled. This can be seen in the recent release of the ISM (Institute for Supply Management) Index and this week's release of the CPI (Consumer Price Index).

ISM Suggests Sluggish Environment for Economic Growth

The ISM is one of the best leading indicators for the economy and markets. The Institute for Supply Management is a group that represents purchasing managers at U.S. corporations. The ISM surveys these purchasing managers each month and publishes the results in the form of an index. Purchasing managers are at the front of the line when it comes to activity in manufacturing. Manufacturing companies need supplies to produce products, and purchasing managers order these supplies. When demand starts to pick up for manufactured goods, these managers need to order more supplies. Conversely, when demand pulls back, they respond by trimming their orders.

Although manufacturing businesses make up only about 40% of S&P 500 company earnings, demand for manufactured goods has been a timely barometer of business activity of all types. This index is published at the beginning of each month, offering one of the earliest signals as to how the economy and outlook for business is faring each month.

The long history of the ISM shows us how effective it has been in signaling each recession and recovery. While the ISM has given a consistent signal when the recession is ending, it has also signaled when the recovery momentum peaks and the economy and profits slow. Looking back at the ISM over the past 30 years, we can see that there have been a number of peaks and troughs that led the direction of profit growth. The index has typically troughed around 30-40 and peaked around 60. Currently at about 50, the ISM suggests a sluggish environment for profit growth. The level of the ISM index indicates that earnings growth may be slightly positive this quarter, but unless it picks up meaningfully-which seems unlikely given the recession in Europe and slowdown in China among other challenges-profit growth is likely to be only half as strong as the consensus expects in coming quarters.

CPI Shows Businesses Having Trouble Raising Prices

A sign of weak pricing power by businesses can be seen in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), to be released on Tuesday of this week. A year ago, the CPI was running at about 4% year-over-year, but now is only running at about 1.7%. Businesses are finding it increasingly hard to raise prices. In fact, the prices manufacturers pay-detailed in the producer price index report released last week-shows that producer prices are rising faster than consumer prices. Limited job opportunities and after-tax income growth per capita in the United States of less than 3% is making it harder for companies to pass along higher prices to their customers. This is further depressing profit growth.

The trajectory of revisions to earnings estimates is likely to remain downward, despite companies exceeding profit estimates for the third quarter. This may limit the upside in the stock market during the earnings season, which runs from last week through the first couple of weeks of next month, and has typically been a time for above-average performance for the market.

 

 

 

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

The economic forecasts set forth in the presentation may not develop as predicted and there can be no guarantee that strategies promoted will be successful.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period, though GDP is usually calculated on an annual basis. It includes all of private and public consumption, government outlays, investments and exports less imports that occur within a defined territory.

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services.

The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) index is based on surveys of more than 300 manufacturing firms by the Institute of Supply Management. The ISM Manufacturing Index monitors employment, production inventories, new orders, and supplier deliveries. A composite diffusion index is created that monitors conditions in national manufacturing based on the data from these surveys.

This research material has been prepared by LPL Financial.

To the extent you are receiving investment advice from a separately registered independent investment advisor, please note that LPL Financial is not an affiliate of and makes no representation with respect to such entity.

Not FDIC/NCUA Insured | Not Bank/Credit Union Guaranteed | May Lose Value | Not Guaranteed by any Government Agency | Not a Bank/Credit Union Deposit

LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC

Tracking #1-109365| Exp. 10/13

If you no longer wish to receive this email communication, remove your name from this specific mailing list, or opt-out of all mailing lists.

We are committed to protecting your privacy. For more information on our privacy policy, please contact:

Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff
565 8th St
Paso Robles, CA 93446

805-226-0445
Jennifer.Langstaff@LPL.com

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. To determine which investment(s) may be appropriate for you, consult your financial advisor prior to investing. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and cannot be invested into directly.

Jennifer & Ryan Langstaff is a Registered Representative with and Securities offered through LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC

 

This newsletter was created using Newsletter OnDemand, powered by S&P Capital IQ Financial Communications.