Mar
3
700, from Phil McDonnell
March 3, 2009 |
Not only was the S&P drawn to the magic 700 round but others were as well in odd ways. The Dow index was down almost exactly 300 points on the nose. The NASDAQ was down almost exactly an even 4% (really 3.99%). Somehow it does not seem random. Even though one was price level, one in points and one in percent change, still all were quite round.
Comments
5 Comments so far
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles
I guess it reflects human attitude to ’simplify’ to be able to manage things, especially numbers.
And then it turns into psychology in setting thresholds and goals.
Just a simple parallel.
I tend to experience the same attitude when I do some training.
I set goals to myself using integers: e.g. swimming 60 laps in less than 30 minutes, running 5 km in less than 20 minutes and so on.
I guess I would trade with the same attitude.
I’m always amused how the indices, particularly the S&P 500, gravitate to round numbers. Outstanding limit and/or stops are more frequently posted around round numbers, in my view. I reckon it’s human nature.
But 700 on the S&P 500, now down 55% from it’s October 2007, I think discounts a lot of negativity and presents attractive valuations in general. Certainly not calling the bottom, but a simple averaging-in tactic might prove rewarding. Of course, use trailing stops in this highly volatile environment. Thus investment horizon might prove short lived.
Keep pressing,
Chris Monoki
It's been well-documented that the human mind needs anchors when no particular number is clearly preferable. When nothing else stands out, the "roundness" factor is the only thing people notice. Or the previous low or high, or something.
As for calling the bottom, my much-attacked prediction of complete economic collapse is still in force. Everything is disintegrating as expected. Isolated bottoms, like local real estate markets showing strength here and there can't fight the relentless wave after wave of different types of credit defaults from Eastern Europe to Detroit to newly resetting mortgage tranches. The death spiral of defaults begetting more defaults in a chain reaction can at this point only be slowed down, but cannot be stopped. All counter-measures result in more debt soaking up any remaining liquidity thus not improving the overall lending pool. Those who keep looking for a new 1979 BusinessWeek "The Death of Equities" headline as a marker of the bottom will be sorely disappointed.
I am amused, but not surprised by the S&P bouncing along the round number of 700 today. Transactions on top-down type funds, such as mutual, exchanged-traded and index funds put pressure on specific stocks, regardless of stock-specific risk or fundamentals. Thus sometimes a particular stock can get waxed merely because of index fund sways.
I took advantage of that today and bought certain stocks adversely affected by top-down demand, regarldess of their specific fundamentals. Name one? GE.
I should also say that I’m no technician…no Elliot Wave of Fibanacci follower. However, knowing that many follow technical analysis it is thus a market mover and necessary to follow. We had a triple bottom today. As a fundamentalist, I could give a hoot. But knowing there’s an army of investors that look at charts, today was important.
A triple bottom in one day? Surely that doesn’t mean anything. However, should you believe Pareto and Mandelbrot, such patterns — if they are indeed patterns — that happen in a day’s time, are scaled to a week, month, yearly pattern. As such, today was a day in which many investors see base and support.
Combine the above with round numbers, with a scalable triple ‘day’ bottom, with stocks 55% off highs, stocks are growing increasingly attractive, in my view.
Should the stock market find support and base out, and should the market trend upward, if only for a short-term, high beta stocks are the ones to own. You can devise a portfolio of 10-15 high beta stocks representing about 40% of total monies and still meet or exceed S&P performance. Trailing stops will pretect principal should the call go wrong.
I’ve been in cash well before the turn of the year, since I came back from Iraq. I have a decent grip on the global risks, helped by those more talented than me on this board have. That has certainly helped.
But the S&P 55% off? Shoot, that’s almost as good as a garage sale in Meridian Mississippi.
Concerned as I am, valuation presses me to be a bull on stocks.
Keep pressing,
Chris Monoki
gold was at 1000 not 900, here's two rounds for the price of one