CMG AdvisorCentral

Tactical investing news, views and resources for financial advisors

TwitterGoogle+Linkedin
  • Blog
    • Contributors
  • Advisor Resources
  • About CMG
    • Sitemap
  • Events

Archives for February 2017

Charts of the Week

Posted on 02.27.17 |

This week we offer several charts concerning inflation, interest rates, U.S. economic recoveries, equity market performance and equity mutual fund flows.

This chart plots U.S. economic recoveries.  Note the blue line.  Debt’s a major drag:

0224-04

Source: Crestmont Research

Keep an eye on inflation (rising):

0224-05

Year-over-year change in CPI – look at the January numbers in the far right of the chart. The most recent BLS – Bureau of Labor Statistics Annualized Inflation Rate year-over-year equals 2.5%.  The Fed’s target has been reached:

0224-06

Source: Advisor Perspectives

And if you were wondering what inflation looks like by category:

0224-07

Source: dshort.com

0224-08

Source: dshort.com

Here is the current probability of a Fed March interest rate hike:

0224-09

Switching to equities, Ned Davis Research has something they call “Top Watch Indicators”… meaning indicators that help them spot a probable market top.

Here’s how you view the next chart:

  • When the green bars in the lower section rise above the horizontal dotted line (50), a market top is indicated.
  • The vertical dotted lines and shaded area indicates the times that more than 50% of their top watch indicators signaled a market top.
  • Percentage declines are indicated.
  • Green bar on the far right shows where we are as of 2-14-17.

0224-10

Source: Ned Davis Research

Chalk one little dot up for the active fund managers.  All the money has been flowing into passive index funds and ETFs:

0224-11

And all that money that chased into “high dividend papers?”  In a few short months, they’ve given up six years of excess returns.  I continue to be cautious on high dividend stocks due to over popularity, low interest rates and the risk of rising rates.

0224-12

Diversification has been under pressure the last few years.  The average university endowment lost 1.90% in 2016.  However, it is best viewed over the long term and designed to achieve a certain return relative to an acceptable amount of risk.  100% allocation to stocks is for a different investor risk profile.  Not wise to compare one asset class to a diversified investment plan.  With that said, in case you were wondering… this is how the 10 richest universities invested their money in 2016:0224-13

Categories: Global Economy Tags: Equities, ETFs, Inflation, Ned Davis Research, On My Radar, Stephen Blumenthal, Steve Blumenthal, Tactical Investing, The Fed, valuations

“Don’t Fight the Tape or the Fed”

Posted on 02.21.17 |

The number one rule many of us were taught is “Don’t Fight the Fed.”  I like to add “trend” into that equation and, as you’ll see in the next chart, the math is compelling.

When the Fed raises rates (don’t fight them) and the trend turns negative, equities underperform.  Focus on the red arrows.  Two different time periods are measured, however, the message is the same.  The big corrections come when both the Fed and trend turn negative.  I wrote some time ago in On My Radar to “watch out for minus 2.”  We currently sit at -1.  I’ll share this chart from time to time – especially if -2 is triggered.

Here is how you read the chart:

  • The top section plots the S&P 500 Index but focus on the middle section.
  • NDR has a Multi-Cap Tape Composite Model to measure the technical health of the broad equity market. That model aggregates the signals of over 100 component indicators and generates a signal based on the percentage of the component indicators that are giving a bullish signal for the S&P 500.  It measures momentum and trend.
  • The Fed component is really an interest rate component, which measures the trend in rates by looking at the yield on the 10-year Treasury note. When the 10-week trend in yields are lower than their 70-week trend in yields, the S&P 500 has produced larger gains.  When it is higher, the S&P 500 has performed poorly.  It’s that simple.
  • The combined indicator can produce a score of -2 (both indicators are bearish) to +2 (both bullish) and overall have done a good job historically as a risk-on/risk-off indicator.
  • The current reading is -1 (data shows we need to watch out for -2): refer to the red arrows.

0217-11

Source: Ned Davis Research

MORE

Categories: Equities, Tactical Investment Strategies Tags: Equities, ETFs, Federal Reserve, Monetary Policy, On My Radar, Steve Blumenthal, Tactical Investing, The Fed, trend following

Beware: Rising Rate Environment

Posted on 02.21.17 |

Reminder for bond investors: When interest rates rise, bonds lose value.  I shared the following chart in July 2016 (interestingly just two days from the 1.37% low in yields).  It shows how much money is lost for every 1% increase in rates.  The top section is the 10-year Treasury bond and the bottom section is the 30-year Treasury.  (I know I’ve shared this chart with you several times, but I believe it is worth revisiting.  I just don’t believe the average investor knows just how much risk they are taking on with their so called “safe” investments.)

0217-01

1.37% was the low yield back on July 13, 2016. The 10-year Treasury is currently yielding 2.42% and the 30-year is yielding 3.02%.  That adds up to a -8.84% loss in value for the 10-year and call it a -16% for the 30-year.  Maybe rates move back down, but I’m not so sure.  I’m a bit more worried about what those losses will look like when yields rise to 3.4%, 4.4% and 5.4% (similar to where they were in 2007).  -30% is a real risk.

MORE

Categories: Fixed Income, Tactical Investment Strategies Tags: Bonds, ETF, ETFs, fixed income, On My Radar, Steve Blumenthal, Tactical Investing, Zweig Bond Model

A Look at U.S. Domestic Debt

Posted on 02.13.17 |

Total Credit Market Debt in the U.S. is 352.4% of GDP.  Post the peak in 2008 at north of 380%, this chart shows deleveraging has begun.

Recall the Reinhart/Rogoff study that debt greater than 90% of GDP slows growth.  We’ve certainly witnessed slow growth in the 2% range for the last 16 years.  Debt’s a drag on growth.

0210-06

Source: Ned Davis Research

READ MORE

Categories: Global Economy, Tactical Investment Strategies Tags: Debt, GDP

College Endowment Returns Were Negative in 2016 and Negative Since 2007

Posted on 02.06.17 |

U.S. stocks have worked well since the 2008/09 financial crisis.  Modern Portfolio Theory – broad asset class diversification has not.  But I didn’t know it was this challenging.  I was somewhat surprised to see this from Bloomberg:

Endowments were hampered by investments in non-U.S. equities, which declined 7.8 percent, energy and natural resources, which lost 7.5 percent, and commodities and managed futures, which were down 7.7 percent.

Wealthier schools’ performance was dragged down by their larger allocations to riskier alternatives such as hedge funds. Hedge funds were among the worst performers for endowments of all sizes, with a 4.0 percent loss.

Endowments with more than $1 billion declined 1.9 percent, the same as the average.  The blue line tracks the performance.  Reflected are negative returns for 2016 and negative overall returns from 2007 – 2016:

0203-12

More from Bloomberg: Endowments were hampered by investments in non-U.S. equities, which declined 7.8 percent, energy and natural resources, which lost 7.5 percent, and commodities and managed futures, which were down 7.7 percent.

It causes one to think – who needs diversification anymore?  We likely need it most when the risk feels the least (like today) and need it least when the risk feels the most (like early 2000 and 2008/09).

Things just don’t smell right to me.  It feels like it is 1999 all over again.  This time we are witnessing a massive shift into low-fee passive (non-managed) index products.  Active money managers are taking it on the chin.

However, like all that money that raced to technology funds at the market peak in the late 1990’s.  The -75% tech wreck followed.  That same bad behavioral trend is alive and well today.  Stay risk minded.  It took 15 years and a 300% recovery gain to overcome that loss and get back to even.  Just saying…

Categories: Tactical Investment Strategies Tags: Bloomberg, On My Radar, Risk, Tactical Investing

Rising Inflation Pressures and What it Means to Your Bond Allocations

Posted on 02.06.17 |

Below is my “go to” inflation chart.  The Ned Davis Research Inflation Timing Model consists of 22 indicators that primarily measure the various rates of change of such indicators as commodity prices, consumer prices, producer prices, and industrial production.  The model totals all the indicator readings and provides a score ranging from +22 (strong inflationary pressures) to -22 (strong disinflationary pressures).  High inflationary pressures are signaled when the model rises to +6 or above.  Low inflationary pressures are indicated when the model falls to zero or less.

0203-13

Source: Ned Davis Research

Bonds, bond funds and bond ETFs lose money when rates rise.  I posted this next chart just a few days before Treasury yields hit a 35-year yield low of 1.37%.  What it shows is how much money is lost when rates rise.

If your starting point was a yield of 1.40% (top half of chart), as it was on 7/11/2016, and rates rose to 2.40% (which they did) your loss would be -8.84% if you were invested in 10-year Treasury Notes and -19.07% (bottom section of chart) if yields on the 30-year Treasury Bond rose to 3.25% (which it nearly did).  Further, note the risk of loss if the 10-year rises to 5.40%.  Note the -53.90% loss on the 30-year if yields rise to 6.25%.

0203-11

A number of pundits are calling for a 5% yield in the 10-year within a few short years.  I’m not in that camp but really… I don’t know.  I’m more in the “one more big recession” camp that will properly reset equity valuations and if so then rates should gap lower.

What I do believe is most important, is that investors should see this chart and size up the potential risk-reward for themselves.  With rates just coming off 5,000-year lows, my best advice is to think about your bond exposure as if your retirement wealth is dependent on it… and it is.

2.45% Treasury yields suck (as a good friend reminds me is a technical term) and rising inflation will eat into the net real yield and further cause interest rates to spike higher.  Treasury yields were north of 5% in 2007.

Be tactical with your bond exposure.  Don’t look at the last 35 years, as many people do, and project it forward.  The great bond bull market yield low is likely in.  Think differently about how you position that 40% of the traditional 60% equity / 40% bond portfolio.

Categories: Fixed Income Tags: Bonds, Economy, fixed income, Inflation, On My Radar, Trade Signals, Zweig Bond Model

Top Posts

  • Building A Hunker Down ETF Portfolio - Blumenthal at Barron's
  • Blumenthal in WSJ on Valuations And Forward Returns
  • CMG's Total Portfolio Solution Whitepaper Free Download
  • CMG Adopts GIPS Standards Verified By Ashland Partners
  • Charting The New Bull Market in Gold - Blumenthal in Forbes

Categories

  • CMG News
  • Conferences
  • Equities
  • Fixed Income
  • Global Economy
  • Market Snapshot
  • Marketing
  • Monetary Policy
  • Portfolio Construction
  • Practice Management
  • Tactical Investment Strategies
  • top posts

Archives

Browse the blog A-Z

CMG CAPITAL MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC. • 1000 Continental Drive, Suite 570 • King of Prussia, PA 19406 • P:610.989.9090 • E:advisors@cmgwealth.com

©2018 Capital Management Group, Inc, All Rights Reserved

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURE INFORMATION

Please remember that past performance may not be indicative of future results. Different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk. Therefore, it should not be assumed that future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy (including the investments and/or investment strategies recommended and/or undertaken by CMG Capital Management Group, Inc (or any of its related entities-together "CMG") will be profitable, equal any historical performance level(s), be suitable for your portfolio or individual situation, or prove successful. No portion of the content should be construed as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. References to specific securities, investment programs or funds are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to be, and should not be interpreted as recommendations to purchase or sell such securities.
Certain portions of the content may contain a discussion of, and/or provide access to, opinions and/or recommendations of CMG (and those of other investment and non-investment professionals) as of a specific prior date. Due to various factors, including changing market conditions, such discussion may no longer be reflective of current recommendations or opinions. Derivatives and options strategies are not suitable for every investor, may involve a high degree of risk, and may be appropriate investments only for sophisticated investors who are capable of understanding and assuming the risks involved. Moreover, you should not assume that any discussion or information contained herein serves as the receipt of, or as a substitute for, personalized investment advice from CMG or the professional advisors of your choosing. To the extent that a reader has any questions regarding the applicability of any specific issue discussed above to his/her individual situation, he/she is encouraged to consult with the professional advisors of his/her choosing. CMG is neither a law firm nor a certified public accounting firm and no portion of the newsletter content should be construed as legal or accounting advice.
This presentation does not discuss, directly or indirectly, the amount of the profits or losses, realized or unrealized, by any CMG client from any specific funds or securities. Please note: In the event that CMG references performance results for an actual CMG portfolio, the results are reported net of advisory fees and inclusive of dividends. The performance referenced is that as determined and/or provided directly by the referenced funds and/or publishers, have not been independently verified, and do not reflect the performance of any specific CMG client. CMG clients may have experienced materially different performance based upon various factors during the corresponding time periods.
Hypothetical Presentations: To the extent that any portion of the content reflects hypothetical results that were achieved by means of the retroactive application of a back-tested model, such results have inherent limitations, including: (1) the model results do not reflect the results of actual trading using client assets, but were achieved by means of the retroactive application of the referenced models, certain aspects of which may have been designed with the benefit of hindsight; (2) back-tested performance may not reflect the impact that any material market or economic factors might have had on the adviser’s use of the model if the model had been used during the period to actually mange client assets; and, (3) CMG’s clients may have experienced investment results during the corresponding time periods that were materially different from those portrayed in the model. Please Also Note: Past performance may not be indicative of future results. Therefore, no current or prospective client should assume that future performance will be profitable, or equal to any corresponding historical index. (i.e. S&P 500 Total Return or Dow Jones Wilshire U.S. 5000 Total Market Index) is also disclosed. For example, the S&P 500 Composite Total Return Index (the “S&P”) is a market capitalization-weighted index of 500 widely held stocks often used as a proxy for the stock market. Standard & Poor’s chooses the member companies for the S&P based on market size, liquidity, and industry group representation. Included are the common stocks of industrial, financial, utility, and transportation companies. The historical performance results of the S&P (and those of or all indices) and the model results do not reflect the deduction of transaction and custodial charges, nor the deduction of an investment management fee, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing indicated historical performance results. For example, the deduction combined annual advisory and transaction fees of 1.00% over a 10 year period would decrease a 10% gross return to an 8.9% net return. The S&P is not an index into which an investor can directly invest. The historical S&P performance results (and those of all other indices) are provided exclusively for comparison purposes only, so as to provide general comparative information to assist an individual in determining whether the performance of a specific portfolio or model meets, or continues to meet, his/her investment objective(s). A corresponding description of the other comparative indices, are available from CMG upon request. It should not be assumed that any CMG holdings will correspond directly to any such comparative index. The model and indices performance results do not reflect the impact of taxes. CMG portfolios may be more or less volatile than the reflective indices and/or models.
In the event that there has been a change in an individual's investment objective or financial situation, he/she is encouraged to consult with his/her investment professionals.
Written Disclosure Statement. CMG is an SEC registered investment adviser principally located in King of Prussia, PA. Stephen B. Blumenthal is CMG's founder and CEO. Please note: The above views are those of CMG and its CEO, Stephen Blumenthal, and do not reflect those of any sub-advisor that CMG may engage to manage any CMG strategy. A copy of CMG's current written disclosure statement discussing advisory services and fees is available upon request or via CMG's internet web site at (http://www.cmgwealth.com/disclosures/advs).