Wednesday, August 21, 2024

2013 Financial Prediction, at an Old Friends Site

A prediction from 2013 financial blog. 

I'll take a stab at some of that for you, AR, if you don't mind.

davidshelton - commodities, and especially precious metals, are considered to be a good hedge against inflation; precious metals are also considered a safe store of value in time of economic upheaval. A lot of folks expect to see inflation rising skyward because of all the fiat money printing that has been happening for the several years. Housing is a hard asset and folks expect real estate to rise in an inflationary environment also. CPI numbers are doctored compared to historical measures. In other words, the government(s) have made so many adjustments to how CPI is calculated that looking at a historical graph that plots the official CPI numbers becomes meaningless and misleading. It still has value as a measurement tool, but only in a relative manner, imho.

Long-term interest rates are heading higher because of the risk inherent in investing long-term bonds is rising and investors are no longer willing to accept the puny returns that may not even keep up with future inflation. There is also a point at which, when investors realized that the Fed may not continue QE forever, that the risk of principal loss became very real all of a sudden. Investors decided to demand a higher return to accept that risk. Normally, 10-year Treasuries trade at a premium to current (and expected) inflation instead of nearly equal. To get to a normal premium, we should probably see rates on 10-yr Treasuries at 3.5% or slightly more. The bond market has been manipulated by the Fed's QE and money printing, but that cannot be sustained forever. Eventually, yields will find their way to "normal" levels in spite of Fed action. This happens primarily because the debt levels of the U.S. have passed the point where investors considered further investment to no longer be "risk free." Thus, the effectiveness of QE has run its course and the Fed is no longer in control.

I don't agree with the common wisdom that says that inflation is coming, though. The demographics of the U.S. population don't support continued rising demand. The peak of the baby boomers has past its peak in consumption years and has begun to save, pay down debt, and prepare for retirement. That means less spending by the largest (93 million, adjusted for immigration) and wealthiest (in aggregate) generation in the history of the U.S. is beginning to consume less and this trend is almost assuredly going to continue until the next generation of meaningful size hits its stride in the early-to-mid 2020s. Thus, I expect falling demand in the U.S. (same thing happening in Europe and Japan) to cause deflation instead of inflation. I realize that I am swimming against the current, but this is where all my research leads me.

Initially, if this actually is the beginning of a new bear market (one never knows for sure until it is well underway), then there is likely to be panic by all those who believe they understand what will happen next. Many will flood back into "safe havens" like precious metals and Treasuries pushing prices back up temporarily. But, once the initial wave(s) recede and deflation begins to rear its ugly head, there will be a dash to the exits. There aren't many places to hide in a deflationary environment. Cash is usually king because it will buy more next year, next month, next week, or even tomorrow than it will buy today. Holding fiat money is a scary thing to do in crisis, I know. But that may be the best option. I don't mean holding cash in a bank account, either. Financial institutions are still over-leveraged and profits are being created by paper entries (and can disappear quickly with a small rise in interest rates or a sharp fall in equities or real estate). There is a lot of risk lurking in every direction.

My position currently consists of some silver coins, a little gold, and a lot of cash (building a position over time by systematic withdrawals).

I am not a survivalist (I know it sounds like it). I believe in a self-correcting political and economic system that has swung too far in one direction and needs a major crisis to bring about the necessary adjustments to get the country back on track. It's coming. but then I also believe that the worst will pass after a few years and that a better foundation will emerge from the ashes. If I'm right, there will be a lot of great bargains for those who are ready with enough dry powder and enough patience to take advantage of the opportunities (much lower prices again). Take heart, after the worst comes the best.

Hindenberg Omen -- Advanced Analysis -- Does the Steepness of the Rally Prior to a Confirmed HO Offer Any Predictive Value"

 stock here: I was reviewing some of my 90 some followers, and there are a number of names, even from a decade or so, that I recall well.   One of these is springheel_jack, IN 2013 HE WROTE ABOUT A CONTRIBUTOR.   I put his table into an Excel Form.

https://albertarocks-ta-discussions.blogspot.com/

https://albertarocks-ta-discussions.blogspot.com/2013/08/regarding-ho-signals-brilliant-analysis.html

I wonder if AI can find the recent Hindenberg indicators?

-----------------------------------------------------

The Hindenburg Omen is a technical analysis pattern used by stock market analysts to predict the increased probability of a market crash. It was created by mathematician and market analyst Jim Miekka. This omen is identified by a combination of market factors, primarily involving the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).

Key Criteria:


New Highs and Lows: The pattern occurs when a significant number of stocks in the NYSE reach new 52-week highs and lows simultaneously, typically greater than a set threshold (such as 2.5% of all stocks on the exchange).
Market Uptrend: The market must be in an uptrend, typically indicated by the 50-day moving average or rate of change being positive.
McClellan Oscillator: A measure of market breadth must turn negative, signaling weakening momentum.


Confirmation: For the omen to be considered valid, there must be multiple occurrences of these conditions within a 30-day period.


Since 2013, there have been multiple occurrences of the Hindenburg Omen. For example, it triggered in May 2013 and was notably confirmed again in December 2021, shortly before the market turbulence of early 2022​ (StockCharts)​ (ChartSchool | ChartSchool)​ (Wikipedia). However, due to the indicator's propensity for false positives (it often doesn't predict a crash immediately), its use is somewhat controversial.

The omen is most relevant during periods of significant market instability, where conflicting signals (new highs and lows simultaneously) suggest market indecision or vulnerability.

-----------------------------------------------------

His basis: "I have always been interested that the number of sightings of the HO in a cluster does not seem to be a predictor of the strength or timing of any subsequent downturn. I have therefore been spending some time on the keyboard examining all the data associated with the recorded confirmed HO's going back to 1986.

His qualifiers: "Rather than use the DJIA that Dr. Robert McHugh used, I have used the S&P as it probably gives a better indication of the wider market. You still get the same approximate proportions of declines that are regularly quoted for the HO. i.e. 25% of the time the market falls by 15% or more, etc."

His general observation: "The interesting thing though, is that while the number of sightings in a cluster is no real guide to the dimension of any decline, the pace of the rising market before a confirmed HO is. Generally, the majority of confirmed HO with subsequent major declines have come after the market has averaged a gain of over 0.08% per day since the low that followed the previous HO. How long ago the last HO occurred does not seem to affect this observation."

The data he uncovered: "The results of the HO which followed daily gains averaging over 0.08% were -31%, -30%,-21%,-18%, -15%, -10%, -5%, -3% and 0%. That's 6 out of the 8 declines of 10% or more. By comparison, in the case of all other confirmed HO where the average daily rise of the market was less than 0.08% the average decline after a HO averaged less than 7%.  And that was only brought up that high by a couple of outrider observations."

Wave Rider's Conclusion: "The interesting thing about the cluster of HO you are currently recording is that the average daily gain since the market low following the last confirmed HO is the second highest on record. That assumes the May/June HO is considered a different one to the August one we are currently monitoring (AR's note: correct assumption). This suggests the present HO could be a portent for a very significant market decline indeed."


An additional point: Hence the rule "The faster they rise the further they might fall". Incidentally, the average daily growth rate before the August 5, 2013 HO was 0.193%. That is by far the highest ever, except the doubtful Dec 1998 HO."

[AR:  Good lord, I hope readers appreciate the implications of that last "additional point".]

--------------------------------------------------------------------- From Seeking Alpha comment
I am very happy for you to use the material in your blog. To help you I have listed the fuller version of the data below. Just a few things to note in case anyone looks to pick holes. The list is from Dr McHugh but I use S&P data not DJIA so some of the days to low, days from low and quantum of decline may vary slightly from his original data. The average daily change % is calculated using calander days (it doesn't really change the results to use trading days ....it is just easier to divide by calender days).

McHugh included one HO in his list that includes only 1 observation. He also notes that the Dec 98 HO was only there by the very smallest of margins. If you discounted both of these the correlation of size of downturn to average daily market rise leading up to the HO is even stronger.

The key cut off on this short list is about 0.08%. A daily rise of more than that before a HO since the last low is almost always followed by a large decline while generally the decline is less if the daily growth rate was less than 0.08%.

Hence the rule "The faster they rise the further they might fall". Incidentally the average daily growth rate before the August 5 2013 HO was 0.193%. That is by far the highest ever except the doubtful Dec 1998 HO.

While a large decline is not assured it does seem more likely in this instance. For the doubters who might jump up and down if the market bounces in a week or two or three, I would point out that the largest declines usually take 80 to 120 days from the HO. The decline is a long drawn out tortuous event not a race to the bottom.

Date Signals % Decline Daily Chng from last low

22-Dec-98 2 0.0% 0.227%
16-Oct-07 9 14.8% 0.152%
20-Jun-01 2 21.0% 0.142%
21-Jul-98 1 17.8% 0.133%
24-Jan-00 6 4.9% 0.123%
14-Sep-87 5 30.7% 0.116%
11-Dec-97 11 2.9% 0.104%
09-Oct-95 6 30.0% 0.089%
11-Oct-89 38 9.5% 0.088%
02-Dec-91 9 1.0% 0.070%
12-Jun-96 3 6.3% 0.070%
27-Jun-90 17 16.8% 0.068%
13-Apr-04 5 4.0% 0.066%
13-Jun-07 8 7.2% 0.065%
15-Sep-00 9 9.3% 0.065%
26-Jul-00 3 8.4% 0.059%
07-Apr-06 9 5.5% 0.057%
31-May-13 4 3.5% 0.055%
15-Jun-99 2 4.1% 0.046%
19-Sep-94 7 4.4% 0.043%
25-Jan-94 14 6.8% 0.035%
03-Nov-93 3 1.2% 0.033%
21-Sep-05 5 2.8% 0.024%
20-Jun-02 5 20.7% 0.015%
02-Aug-10 5 7.0% -0.015%
12-Mar-01 4 6.5% -0.075%

As regards your friend Hinch, what a coincidence. I live in Hobart and my first apartment here was next door to one in a tower block owned by a Hobart geologist who now works in the oil industry in Canada. Hinch doesn't happen to own the unit next to my former home does he?

Inflation Favors The Wealthy, Therefore Expect Continued Inflation

Posted from DigiNomad at BPT

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not much to say. We've entered the banana zone. It's good to be asset rich.

Here's some simple math (I'll post it because it's quiet and I'm working on simplifying this communication for clients and some courses I teach).

Middle class assumptions:
Year 0 annual living expenses = 100K
Year 0 assets in market = 50K
Year 1 asset inflation (market appreciation) = 10%
Year 1 adjustment to annual living expenses = 110K
Year 1 addition to assets in market = 5k (55K new total)
Net change in available assets relative to living expenses (aka wealth) = negative $5000

Wealthy / Elite assumptions
Year 0 annual living expenses = 200K
Year 0 assets in market = 1 million
Year 1 asset inflation (market appreciation) = 10%
Year 1 adjustment to annual living expenses after asset inflation = 220K
Year 1 addition to assets in market = 100k (1.1 million new total)
Net change in available assets relative to living expenses (aka wealth) = $80,000

Both groups experienced the same "positive" market outcomes in the year, but the outcome is clearly completely different. Then the wealthy congregate on CNBC,  Bloomberg and elite circles in coastal cities to gaslight the public about a "vibecession" because they're having the time of their lives with real life asset inflation that is only great for them.