This account is pending registration confirmation. Please click on the link within the confirmation email previously sent you to complete registration. Need a new registration confirmation email? Click here
"I've been a bear for three years," said Mr. Kass, general partner of Seabreeze Partners Management in Palm Beach, Fla. "This is a big change for me." Mr. Kass said the March lows would not just represent the lowest points of the year, but "possibly a generational low." Last week, he wrote a note, "Why the Bears Are Wrong," that tallied a host of hopeful conditions in the economy and the financial system. He saw potential in the Obama administration's plan to buy $500 billion to $1 trillion in troubled assets from banks using a blend of public and private money. If it works, the move could take the strain off the banks' struggling balance sheets and loosen credit markets, Mr. Kass said. Many analysts have said that financial companies, which plunged the markets into crisis, will be the ones to lead the way to higher ground, and Mr. Kass said he was cheered to see big banks leading the March rally. The S.& P. Financials Index rose 33 percent from March 9 through Monday, while the broader S&P 500 gained 16 percent. Commodity prices for metals and oil began to rise, signaling a hint of inflation and a chance that economic growth could find a foothold, he said. And he said he was encouraged by a bouquet of better-than-expected reports from the housing and retail sectors. Given the speed of the rally, however, Mr. Kass wrote a note on Friday saying that investors might seize the opportunity to raise cash and take profits. But he said he was still convinced that "the U.S. stock market will rise to levels higher than most anticipate," by as much as 25 percent by summer. Mr. Kass said he liked companies like Home Depot, Lowe's, the Walt Disney Company and real estate investment trusts. Even optimistic investors warn that a recovery in stocks will not look like a steady climb, and they say that economic growth may be slow for some time. But as stocks have picked back up, Mr. Kass said, he has noticed a new concern among investors. "The fear of being out has begun to replace the fear of being in," he said.
-- Jack Healy, "
A Pitched Battle for Turf Between the Bears and the Bulls,"
The New York Times (March 30, 2009)
"There are definitely speculative excesses in the market right now," said Doug Kass, president of Seabreeze Partners Management. "I don't think the whole market is in a bubble. But in biotech and some of the Internet stocks, there's no question -- we've certainly got bubblelike symptoms. And the I.P.O. market looks like a bubble, and that's serious, because that's where the first signs of the bear market that started in 2000 began."
-- Jeff Sommer, "
In Some Ways, It's Looking Like 1999 in the Stock Market,"
The New York Times (March 29, 2014)
What a difference five years make.
Back in March 2009, I
opined on "The Kudlow Report" that a generational bottom was being made during the first week of that month.
Five years later we stand nearly 200% higher in the
As illustrated in the chart below, Warren Buffett's favorite valuation measure -- namely, market capitalization as a percentage of nominal GDP -- has risen in the last five years from approximately 70% to over 140% today.
One of the great technical analysts (now retired) in modern stock market history sent me an email over the weekend and referenced the warning that this ratio is communicating:
There is no magic level for this relationship because what is extreme has changed over the years, particularly since the late 1990s. From the mid-1920s to the end of the 20th century, low undervalued levels were in the 20%-30% range and high levels were 70%-80% (1929 even went to 88%). Since 1998, however, the relationship of stock capitalization to GDP has changed. The huge increase in share issuance and valuations that accompanied the information technology boom in 2000 took the extreme to 174% or almost twice the previous peak made in 1929. Since then there was a low of 92% in 2002, a high of 140% in 2007 and a low of 70% in 2008. Now, five years later the ratio is back up to 144% as of mid-March 2014. We know it could go higher but presuming we have a new range since 2000 and the extreme in that year (174%) is similar to the extreme in 1929 that was not reached for the next 70 years, we have to assume that any ratio extreme currently in the 140%-160% range is a seriously high potential peak overvaluation area. It is noteworthy, that even at a lesser extreme of 125% reached in 2011, a 21% market correction ensued. Or to put it another way, if the 1930-1998 danger signal was a ratio of 70% or over and the new post-2000 range is about double the prior 70 year range, then over 140% maybe the new normal for overvaluation. The current level of 144% should at least tell us to be on guard. Risk is in the air and maybe in portfolios as well.
Is History Rhyming?
Four successive years of strong first-quarter stock market returns has been broken this year. And the quarter has ended with a breakdown in previous high-octane, high-beta leadership and with the
Russell 2000's relative performance waning. (Note: The same technical analyst mentioned earlier has taught me throughout the years that major market leadership changes often occur late in a bull market cycle.)
Meanwhile, a rotation into previously poorly performing conservative technology, telecom, big pharma, utilities and oil stocks (remember how badly these sectors performed in 1997-1999) remind this observer of the rotation back into value stocks in early 2000, right before the decimation of tech/Internet stocks began to occur.
Over the weekend I questioned, in Saturday's
New York Times business section, whether the undervalued conditions that existed five years ago have been reversed and whether the U.S. stock market is overvalued now.
Let's compare the Marches of 2009 and 2014.
In the past I have
outlined how we can identify the characteristics of bubblelike conditions.
In the main I see three bubbles that exist today:
the IPO market;
the social media sector; and
the belief that the Fed's quantitative-easing policy is sufficient by itself to generate a self-sustaining domestic economic recovery.
Away from identifying these three bubbles, most other asset classes (e.g., the U.S. stock and bond markets) have not entered bubblelike territory, but they are, arguably, entering levels of excessive speculation.
Comparing March 2009 to March 2014
There are several clear examples of why the markets of March 2009 and March 2014 are almost diametrically opposed, posing risks today just as they posed opportunities five years ago.