Mixed signals from the markets

Apart from the market squeezing me out of 2/3 of my day's profits in the last 5 minutes (and then coming right back down to where I needed it to be), there were some interesting things to note in Friday's trading.

It was an options expiration day, which can and often does cause a lot of volatility in the last hour of trading...as if we haven't already had enough of that.

The S&P 500 went up about 50 points, or about 6.5% in the last hour of trading. The Dow went up similarly, going from about 7500 to just over 8000.

It was a remarkable (and painful, for the last 100 points in the Dow) run-up, but not very surprising given the thin trading and oversold conditions we came into the day with. In addition to options expiration, the rally may have been triggered by the announcement that Barack Obama has apparently selected NY Fed President Tim Geithner to succeed Hank Paulson as Secretary of the Treasury.

What I thought was interesting was the very small rise in government debt yields (i.e. drop in prices), considering how much those yields fell yesterday when the stock market made essentially the opposite of today's move, falling from about 8000 to about 7500. Thursday, the yield on the government's 10-year note fell from 3.40% the prior day to about 3.14%. Friday, that yield only went up to just under 3.17%

Similarly, the rate on the 13-week T-Bill, as represented by the IRX, fell on Thursday from .065% to .005%, as I mentioned in Friday's note on these pages. On Friday, that rate only increased to .01%.

What that says to me is that the stock market's rally was "technical" and not a sign that financial markets suddenly have faith in credit markets or the economy. Some closed-end debt funds I own were down on the day, reinforcing these thoughts.

The government bailout appears to have failed in terms of easing anything but bank-to-bank lending. That's better than nothing, but the real risk now is that government will step in to force banks to make loans, possibly even specifying terms of the loans such as capping interest rates (as Senator Christopher Dodd is already rumored to be proposing.)

This sort of action will simply prove right those who said that the real downside of the bailout is not that it won't work but that it will get the dead (and stupid) hand of government involved in areas in which politicians are notoriously ignorant.

In summary, Friday's market rally was a lot less about hopes that the worst is over for the economy and more about options expiration. I continue to be essentially neutral on the market, thinking that we are now, at 8,000 in the Dow, roughly in the middle of what I expect to be a two year trading range of maybe 6500-9500.

  • Bob Piccard
    Comment from: Bob Piccard
    11/22/08 @ 02:20:04 pm

    Ross,
    I think this kind of thing is absolutely fascinating. The way the mores of New Guinea tribesmen are fascinating. I wish you'd do more of it.

    For people like me ( maybe there are no people like me?), why would anyone buy a thirteen week T-bill at .005%? I'm pretty sure my checking account pays more than that.

    Cordially,

    Bob

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    11/23/08 @ 07:24:04 am

    Bob,

    I presume you are not being sarcastic when you said this topic is interesting to you.

    The answer to your question about why anyone would buy that T-bill is that institutions need to invest much more than the amount that would be covered by FDIC insurance in banks. They need to invest anywhere from a few million to many billions. For example, Fidelity Cash Reserves (their standard money market fund, which is supposed to always trade at $1) has about $131 BILLION in assets.

    The only place to put that kind of money with 100% certainty of not losing any of it is in T-bills.

    Actually, they seem to be doing some other things since their 7-day yield is 2.31%. Interestingly, their municipal (tax-free) money market fund is yielding only .73%, a taxable equivalent of 1.12%, whereas a couple of weeks ago there was so much panic in the muni market that the muni money fund was yielding more than the taxable fund, even before adjusting for tax-equivalence!

  • Bob Piccard
    Comment from: Bob Piccard
    11/23/08 @ 07:16:52 pm

    Thanks. No sarcasm.

    So we don't pay taxes on municipal bonds but we receive a lower rate. So isn't that a wash? Other than the anomaly you described above.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    11/23/08 @ 08:17:19 pm

    It's a wash, depending on your tax rate. They tend to trade, in normal markets, at a yield that makes it about a wash for people just below the highest tax rate. But right now things are just crazy. A few weeks ago, they were yielding much more than federal treasury debt (which is not tax free), interestingly.

  • Bob Piccard
    Comment from: Bob Piccard
    11/24/08 @ 06:41:55 am

    Thanks

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in now!

If you have no account yet, you can register now... (It only takes a few seconds!)