Let’s
cut to the chase. From 1979 through 1995,
platinum showed a gain during the January-February period 10 times, or 58% of
the time. Not bad, but not great. However, since then platinum has showed a
Jan-Feb gain 23 out of the last 24 years, or 96% of the time.
Figure 1 displays the average monthly gain for platinum futures since 1978. The importance of Jan-Feb is pretty obvious.
Figure
1 – Average monthly % +(-) for platinum; 1978-2019
Since
most investors will never consider trading platinum futures (and let’s be
honest, that’s probably a good thing), let’s consider the Jan-Feb performance
of an ETF that tracks the price of platinum.
Figure
2 displays the cumulative % +(-) achieved by holding ticker PPLT only during
the months of January and February since 2011 (it started trading mid-January
2010 so 2011 is the first full Jan-Feb period on record).
Figure 2 – Cumulative % +(-) for PPLT during Jan-Feb ONLY; 2011-Jan 6, 2020
Figure
3 displays PPLT results on a yearly basis.
Figure
3 – PPLT Jan-Feb performance
Summary
So,
will platinum extend it’s amazing streak of the past 24 years and register a
gain during January-February of 2020?
Ah, there’s the rub. No matter
how consistent any past seasonal trend has been, there is never any guarantee “this
time around.”
But if you were looking for a trading opportunity – and you were considering a bet on platinum, which side would you choose? Long or short?
Here’s a crazy alternative: While I don’t actually advocate this as an investment strategy, it is food for thought. In this article I wrote about ETF ticker MINT as a “safe haven”. So, consider this strategy:
*Long PPLT January and February
*Long MINT the rest of the year
Crazy,
right? But just for the record, Figure 4
displays the equity curve starting in February 2010 through November 2019.
Figure 4 – PPLT/MINT Cumulative % +(-)
Also,
for the record:
*Average
12-month % +(-) = +9.1%
*Maximum
drawdown % = -4.5%
Probably
not a viable standalone strategy, but again – food for thought.
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
Everything
in investing is a tradeoff. Are stocks a
better investment right now than bonds? Large-cap or small-cap? Growth versus Value? U.S. versus International? Making things more difficult is the fact that
the relationships are forever changing.
The key then is identifying the trend “right now” and trying to ride it
as long as possible. What follows is a
very long-term approach to determining whether to favor stocks or bonds based
on the stock market earnings yield and the 10-year treasury yield.
The
Data
A=
Earnings Yield
For
the “earnings yield” we divide 100 by the monthly value for the Shiller P/E
Ratio (https://www.multpl.com/shiller-pe).
The higher the p/e ratio rises the lower the earnings yield and vice
versa.
B=
10-Year Treasury Yield
For
the 10-Year Yield we will use data downloaded from MacroTrends.net (https://www.macrotrends.net/2016/10-year-treasury-bond-rate-yield-chart)
C = (A – B)
At
the end of each month we subtract the 10-year treasury yield from the Shiller earnings
yield to get our Indicator value.
Deciding
Where to Invest
*If the value for Indicator C 5 months ago was > 1.00 then FAVOR STOCKS
*If the value for Indicator C 5 months ago was <= 1.00 then FAVOR BONDS
So at the end of December we look at the value for Indicator C at the end of the previous July (i.e., 5 months ago) to see if it is above or below 1.00.
The
5-month lag is a nod to the fact that it takes a while for investors to recognize
a change in the relative favorability of stocks versus bonds. In Figure 1 the
blue line represents the earnings yield and the orange line represents the
10-year treasury yield.
When
the orange line in Figure 2 is above the blue line it favors stocks and when it
is below the blue line it favors bonds.
Use
the Model as a Strategy Guide
For
the record, I am not actually touting this as a “trading model”, but rather as
more of a way to determine whether to “lean stocks” or to “lean bonds.” But just to close the loop let’s look at some
hypothetical performance numbers.
If
the model favors STOCKS: We will hold the S&P 500 Index*
If
the model favors BONDS: We will hold the Bloomberg Barclays Long Treasury Index*
*Using
monthly total return data from the PEP Database by Callan Associates
(NOTE:
While the model uses intermediate-term treasuries to generate signals, for trading
purposes we will focus on long-term treasuries.
Our database for both starts in January of 1973)
Figure
3 displays the cumulative growth of $1,000 invested using our “Earnings Yield
Strategy” versus the cumulative for buying and holding the S&P 500 Index
and buying and holding the Bloomberg Barclays Long Treasury Index.
Figure
3 – Growth of $1,000 using Earnings Yield Strategy versus buying-and-holding
S&P 500 Index (1973-present)
Figure
4 displays some relevant facts and figures.
Figure
4 – Comparative Figures: Earnings Yield Strategy versus Buy-and-Hold for stocks
and bonds (1973-2019)
Key
things to note:
*Strategy
worst 12 months = -11.6% versus in -43.3% for SPX
*Strategy
Max Drawdown = -18.4% versus in -50.9% for SPX
*Strategy
– 100% of all 5-year rolling periods have been positive
A
Note Regarding Consistency
A few more notes regarding this method. Once again, I am not necessarily advocating this as a trading strategy per se. Also, if someone were using it to invest, when the day eventually comes that long-term treasury yields actually start to rise, a move from long-term bonds to intermediate-term bonds would likely be wise.
For
now, let’s highlight one last thing regarding consistency. Figure 5 displays cumulative growth for the
S&P 500 Index ONLY during those times when the Earnings Yield Strategy
favors stocks.
Figure
5 – S&P 500 Index cumulative % gain ONLY when Earnings Yield Strategy
favors Stocks; 1973-2019
Figure
6 displays the cumulative growth for the Bloomberg Barclays Long Treasury Index
ONLY during those times when the Earnings Yield Strategy favors bonds.
Figure
6 – Bloomberg Barclays Long Treasury Index cumulative % gain ONLY when Earnings
Yield Strategy favors Bonds; 1973-2019
In
terms of “avoiding trouble”, Figures 5 and 6 suggest that the Earnings Yield
Strategy does a pretty good job of it.
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
Crude oil has been moving higher of late. After bottoming in the low $40’s at the end of 2018, spot crude is now over $60 a barrel. Can this continue? One measure say’s “possibly yes”.
Figure
2 displays the ratio of (the price of a barrel of) crude oil divided by (the
price for an ounce of) gold. As you can
see in the lower right of Figure 2, the ratio recently bounced of a relatively
low reading – i.e., crude became very undervalued relative to gold. Does this matter? Let’s take a closer look.
Figure 2 – Spot Crude Oil / Spot Gold ratio (Data Courtesy of ProfitSource by HUBB)
One
way to quantify “extremes” is as follows:
*Take
the 36-month average of the CL/GC ratio
*Create
Bollinger Bands above and below the 36-month average using standard deviation *
1.25
See
Figure 3
Figure 3 – Spot Crude Oil / Spot Gold ratio with 1.25x Bollinger Bands (above and below 36-month moving average; moving average not shown)
What
we are looking for is:
*Times
when the ratio dropped BELOW the Lower Band and then
*The
distance between the ratio and the Lower Band narrows for one month
The
most recent “buy signal” triggered at the end of November 2019. Figure 4 displays the percentage gain/loss
for crude oil following the 1st “buy signal” in 12 months (i.e.,
overlapping signals are omitted) since 1984.
Figure 4 – Spot crude oil % profit/loss performance following previous “CL/GC Ratio” buy signals (1st signal in latest 12 months)
Figure
5 displays a summary of crude oil performance following the dates shown in
Figure 4.
Figure 5 – Summary of Crude Oil performance following previous “CL/GC Ratio” buy signals
For the record, the “sweet spot” appears to be 18 months after a new signal. As you can see in Figures 4 and 5, 7 of the previous 8 signals (87.5%) saw crude oil higher 18 months later, with an median gain of +42.6% . Nevertheless, it needs to be pointed out that a whole lot of downside volatility can happen along the way.
Figure 6 displays the previous signals on a chart of spot crude oil.
As you can see in Figures 4 through 6, previous signals from the Crude/Gold Ratio have witnessed some big subsequent moves in the price of crude oil. However, do NOT make the mistake of thinking that crude is sure to move higher in the months ahead. There are many factors that impact the price of arguably the world’s most important commodity. Likewise, crude has had a very good run since the buy signal at the end of November and may be a bit overextended to the upside. In the short-term it may be due for a pullback.
But speculators willing to assume the risks might keep an eye open for the next pullback in the price of crude as the long side of crude oil may be the place to be.
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
It’s the Holiday Season and people are busy so let’s keep this one short. Figure 1 displays the cumulative % gain/loss achieved by holding the Dow Jones Industrial Average ONLY during the last 7 trading days of each year starting in 1933.
Figure
1 – Cumulative Dow % price +/- during last 7 trading days of year ONLY;
1933-2019
The
long-term trend is fairly obvious. For
the record, Figure 2 displays some relevant facts and figures.
Measure
Result
#
times UP
67
#
time DOWN
19
%
times UP
78%
%
times DOWN
22%
Average
UP
+1.56%
Average
DOWN
(-1.11%)
% of
10-Yrs. UP
100%
% of
10-Yrs. DOWN
0%
Figure
2 – Relevant Facts and Figures
Last
year of course was a harrowing ride as the market plunged into Christmas Eve
and then reversed sharply the next trading day.
Also note that 78% winning trades is a far cry from 100% winning
trades. Nevertheless, it is also
important to note that that every rolling 10-year period has showed a gain (77
and oh is the score to date). Figure 3
displays the rolling 10-year return.
Figure
3 – Rolling 10-year Cumulative Dow % price return (last 7 days of trading year
ONLY); 1942-2019
Note
that the latest 10-years ranks near the bottom of all 10-year rolling
periods. This tells us one of two
things. Either:
*This little “quirk” of the market perhaps just doesn’t work anymore like it used to, OR;
*Things will improve dramatically in the years ahead
Not
making any predictions, but anything that generates consistently positive
results over 80+ years get the benefit of the doubt in my book.
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
Every once in awhile the implied volatility for the options on a given security goes – for lack of a better phrase – “Super Nova”. In essence, it soars to the moon. When this happens, the time premium in those options explodes and offer a tempting opportunity to option sellers. But the catch is that one has to be prepared for whatever risks are entailed.
So,
in a nutshell, when implied volatility soars an option trader who wants to take
advantage must craft a position that can allow them to take advantage of time
decay and/or a subsequent sharp decline in volatility prior to expiration with
clearly defined – and acceptable – risk parameters.
Ticker
ITCI
Take
for example Intra-Cellular Therapies (ITCI). As you can see in Figure 1 this is
clearly a stock that can “move”, having made an endless string of huge
percentage price moves over the years.
So,
let’s consider one example of a way to potentially take advantage of this spike
in volatility. The strategy is referred
to as a “Modidor” which is sort of slang for a “modified condor”. Figure 3 displays the options used and the
relevant facts and figures.
*The
breakeven price at expiration is $6.20 a share
*There
are 31 days left until expiration
*If
ITCI is at any price above $6.20 at expiration the trade will show a profit
*The
maximum profit of $280 will result if ITCI is between the two short strikes ($9
and $20) at expiration
*Above
$21 a share, the profit at expiration is capped at $180
*The
worst-case loss of -$220 will result if ITCI is below $4 a share at expiration
In
a nutshell:
*This
position is a bet on ITCI doing something besides collapsing -51.7% (from
$12.84 to $6.20) or more in the next 31 days. Under any other scenario the
trade stands to make money.
*The
trade has a relatively high “potential reward to potential risk” ratio
*The
experience the worst-case loss would require a -69% decline in the price of the
stock in the next 31 days (which it should be pointed out is a possibility for
a stock like ITCI).
On
the face of it this trade sounds like a decent bet. But just remember that ITCI is extremely volatile
and HAS moved for than 50% in a month before.
So, anything can happen.
As
always, the trade presented here is NOT a “recommendation”, only as an example
of one way to play an extremely high volatility situation.
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
I
look at a lot of stuff. Which can be slightly problematic. On one hand, it is important to be aware of
one’s surroundings. On the other hand,
there is always of danger of being over reactionary to some “tidbit” of
information that strikes you as “important” out of the blue. Still, I like to collect screenshots.
A
Disclaimer and Apology
I
believe it is always important to give credit to the source of
information. So normally when I show a
chart that is not my own it is always accompanied by “Courtesy: [Source Name
Here]”
Unfortunately,
I have come to realize that with several of the screen shots that appear below
I failed to note the source. So after
giving it some thought here is the deal:
*Please
note that NONE of the screen shots below are my own original work. I simply found them to be of value and want
to pass along the information contained.
*I
sincerely apologize to the author or company that provided any unsourced screen
shots below for not listed their name/web/site/company/link/etc., and I also
sincerely thank you for passing along such useful/interesting information.
*For
what it is worth, I believe that most (though probably not all) of the unsourced
screenshots below came from articles that appear on www.SeekingAlpha.com which I find to be
a terrific – and wide-ranging – source of information. In fact, if you are a “market geek” like me
you can sign up for a daily email from them which comes with a variety of
article links.
OK, so with disclaimers and apologies in place, let’s proceed.
Are
10-Year Yields Headed Higher?
This screenshot is from www.Sentimentrader.com. In the top clip we see the trend in 10-year treasury yields, and in the bottom clip we see the “Spread Between Hedger Net Position in Copper Minus Gold”. For the sake of brevity, I am not even going to attempt to explain what all that means. I am just going to highlight the fact that when the value in the bottom clip exceeds the upper dashed line it has in the past done so near a low in 10-year Treasury Yields.
Figure 1 – 10-Year Treasury Yield versus Copper/Gold Net Hedgers Difference (Source: www.Sentimentrader.com)
As
always, past performance does not guarantee futures results. Still, the reading at the far right suggests
that 10-year yields may be poised to rise in the months ahead. If so, this is bearish for bonds.
Happy
New Year’s, Signed “Metals”
Figure
2 is one of the charts I failed to note the source for. But it highlights the fact that metals tend
to be strong performers early in the year.
The most bullish 4-month period of the year for Copper tends to be Jan.
through Apr. and Platinum has often showed significant strength during Jan. and
Feb.
While
I am not “recommending” trades do note that these four metals can be traded using
ETF’s CPER, SLV, GLD and PPLT (note: there are other ETF’s available but these
tend to be the most heavily traded for each.
Figure
2 – Metals tend to show seasonal strength early in the year (Source: ???)
Growth
versus Value
Over
the past 10 years growth indexes have significantly outperformed value
indexes. So of course, human nature
being what it is the vast majority of investors have moved away from “value”
stocks since “growth stocks are clearly better performers.” Except of course, for when they are not.
The
most important thing to remember about the never-ending battle between growth
and value is that there are no permanent winners. A close perusal of Figure 3
reveals that growth vastly outperformed from 1990 to 1999, then value vastly
outperformed from 1999 to 2009, and since then growth has been the leader.
Figure
3 – Growth versus Value – No permanent advantages (Source: ???)
So,
does this imply that value stocks are likely to look better relative to growth
stocks in the not too distant future?
Well, yes that is what is implied.
The exact timing of when things might change is unknown. But the primary point is this: DO NOT assume
that you should focus on growth and avoid value indefinitely. History is not on your side.
The
Worm May Turn for Energies
Figure 4 comes courtesy of the venerable www.StockTradersAlmanac.com and highlights the fact that energy stocks (represented here by ETF ticker XOP) tends to be a strong performer from mid-December into late April/early May.
Energy
stocks have been the biggest “dog” in the stock market for several years
now. History suggests this won’t be the
case forever, and history also suggests that if things are going to improve for
energies the change may come sooner than later.
Before
You Fall in Love Again with Apple…
This
one comes from The Leuthold Group, a topflight analyst firm for a number of decades. It shows the history of stocks that at one
time comprised 4% or more of the S&P 500 Index.
Figure
5 – Stocks that exceeded 4% of the S&P 500 total value (Source: The Leuthold
Group)
AAPL
may well prove to be the exception to the rule, but the history of stocks that
reach such a lofty position in terms of market cap is “cautionary.” As long as the bull market remains intact it
is hard to see AAPL losing its leadership position. But “when the worm turns”
for AAPL the result may be swift and severe.
So keep a close eye.
Individual
Cash Levels
Figure 6 is also courtesy of www.Sentimentrader.com and displays the cash allocation among investors in the AAII survey. This is a “perspective” indicator and not a “timing” indicator. In other words, we should not look to it to provide “buy and sell signals”. Still, the historical message is pretty clear: High cash levels are “bullish” and low cash levels “not so much.”
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an advertisement
or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to sell or a
solicitation to buy any security. The
data presented herein were obtained from various third-party sources. While the data is believed to be reliable, no
representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty or liability is
accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such information. International investments are subject to
additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political instability and the
potential for illiquid markets. Past
performance is no guarantee of future results.
There is risk of loss in all trading.
Back tested performance does not represent actual performance and should
not be interpreted as an indication of such performance. Also, back tested performance results have
certain inherent limitations and differs from actual performance because it is
achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
Let’s begin with a massive over simplification. There are essentially 3 parts to the real estate market. There is building homes and buildings. There is paying for homes and building. And there is buying and selling homes and buildings (and/or holding and not selling homes and building hoping for price appreciation).
For each area, there’s a fund for that. To wit, we will look strictly at the Fidelity family of Funds (although there are ETF alternatives listed as well).
Ticker
Name
ETF Alternative
FGMNX
Fidelity GNMA Fund
MBB
FRESX
Fidelity Select Real Estate
VNQ
FSHOX
Fidelity Select Construction&Housing
XHB or ITB
Figure
1 – Real Estate related sector funds
One
alternative is to split dollars 1/3 each and rebalance once a year. This generates the results listed in Figures
2 and 3.
What
the simple 33% each approach fails to consider is the seasonal nature of these
markets. The construction sector tends
to perform best between November and April, the overall real estate sector
tends to perform well between March and July (also December) and the mortgage
backed security sector tends to perform best between May and October.
So
let’s consider an alternative that takes these tendencies into
consideration.
Months
FGMNX
FRESX
FSHOX
November-April
20%
20%
60%
May-October
80%
20%
0%
Figure
4 – Annual Allocations
So
to be clear:
*On
October 31st we put 60% into construction and 20% each into Real
Estate and Mortgage-Backed Securities
*On
April 30th we put 80% in Mortgage-Backed Securities and 20% into
Real Estate
This
generates the results that appear in Figures 5 and 6
This
“strategy” is obviously not without risks – as highlighted by the “Worst 12-mos”
of -23.1% and the “Maximum Drawdown %” of -32.2%. However, a quick glance at Figure 7 reveals
that the maximum drawdown occurred during the 2007-2009 real estate/financial
panic when just about everything (except long-term treasuries endured a roughly
similar fate). Excluding that period,
drawdowns have only exceeded -11% two times.
Figure 7 – Seasonal Split Real Estate Strategy Maximum Drawdown; 1986-2019
The Seasonal Split Real Estate Strategy has generated a higher annual return with lower volatility and lower drawdowns than the “split approach.” The bottom line is that seasonality is a potential “edge” that most investors never consider.
Figure 8 displays year-by-year results (2019 is through the end of November) for the Seasonal Split Real Estate Strategy
Year
% +(-)
1988
+22.9%
1989
+17.9%
1990
+16.2%
1991
+35.7%
1992
+20.5%
1993
+13.7%
1994
(-4.0%)
1995
+20.3%
1996
+13.7%
1997
+13.8%
1998
+21.5%
1999
(-1.2%)
2000
+16.8%
2001
+24.0%
2002
+16.9%
2003
+11.5%
2004
+20.2%
2005
+3.7%
2006
+18.8%
2007
(-6.5%)
2008
(-3.5%)
2009
+23.4%
2010
+37.0%
2011
+16.5%
2012
+21.2%
2013
+7.8%
2014
+12.2%
2015
+3.7%
2016
+7.4%
2017
+12.7%
2018
-(8.0%)
2019
+24.1%
Figure 8 – Seasonal Split Real Estate Strategy Year-by-Year Results
Summary
Is
this anyway to invest in the real estate sector? Well, it’s one way. As always what is presented here is for “informational
purposes only” and investors are strongly encouraged to do their own homework
before adopting any investment strategy
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
In a recent article I wrote about a potential seasonal speculation in soybeans. A similar potential opportunity also exists in the corn market. Like beans, the corn market is a highly cyclical market. This is in large part due to the planting and growing season (as explained here). This article is about a “seasonal/cyclical” speculative play using options on ticker CORN.
There
are two key caveats:
*The
trade highlighted is NOT a “recommendation”, only an example of how to
speculate on a potential move using options in order to achieve limited risk
and unlimited profit potential.
*Options
on ticker CORN are very thinly traded.
So, any investor who might choose to wade in needs to be aware that they
may need to consider using a limit order in order to avoid significant
slippage.
The
Setup
Figure
1 displays the annual seasonal trend for corn according to
www.sentimentrader.com.
It
is critical to understand that this is the “average” for what has happened in
the past and should in no way be viewed as a “roadmap”. Still, the point is pretty clear – late in
the year through the month of April tends to be the “bullish” time for corn.
Figure
2 displays that bullish sentiment for corn was recently quite low. While this by no means guarantees a rally,
historically this often a signal that downside risk may be relatively low.
Figure
3 tells us that options on the ETF ticker CORN (which tracks the price of corn
futures) are presently cheap – i.e., implied option volatility (the black line
in Figure 4) is extremely low. This
tells us that little option premium is built into the prices of CORN options.
Figures
4 and 5 display the particulars for one possible speculative play designed to
make money if CORN does in fact move higher sometime between now and the end of
April 2020.
So,
is this really a good idea? I am not
actually saying that it is. As always
with this blog, this is not a “recommendation”, only an “example.” Let’s hit the most important points to
consider with this example.
A
few things to note:
*This
position qualifies as “serious bottom picking” – which is generally considered to
be a loser’s bet. However, the
mitigating factor here is that we are risking only $90 (or possibly less if a
limit order is used to enter) per contract.
And position sizing should be kept on the small size. For example, a trader with $25,000 might buy
a 3-lot and risk 1.1% of their trading capital.
*If
CORN does NOT advance at anytime in the next 5 months this trade is certain to
lose money.
*If
CORN were to rally to its it’s 2019 high of $17.55 a share, this position would
roughly triple in value.
So,
the bottom-line questions for a trader in considering this trade are:
*Are
you OK with risking $90 per contract on the hopes that corn will rise between
now and the end of April 2020?
*If
you do enter the trade, how many contracts will you buy/what percentage of your
trading capital will you risk?
*If
CORN fails to rally will you simply hold the options or will you consider
exiting early if – for example – a key support level is broken?
*If
CORN does advance at what share price or option trade profit level will you, a)
take a profit or b) adjust the trade?
Buying
inexpensive call options is something of a siren song for a lot of traders and
can lead to mistakes. But sometimes it
can make a lot of sense as long as you:
*Put
as many factors in your favor
*Don’t
bet the ranch
*Formulate
and follow a trade plan
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
I
have been keeping an eye on energy stocks for quite awhile not. I wrote this article at the end of May
wondering out loud if Halliburton (HAL) was nearing a bottom. At the time HAL was trading at $21.29 a share.
It dropped as low as $16.97 (-20%) by the end of August. As of today, it is back up to $22.30. Is the bottom in in energies? No one can say for sure, but I have been
reading from a lot of different sources about how much energies are loathed and
beaten down and overdue for a bounce.
Of
course, the more I read people saying that the more I wonder if it is still a
little early. But to put things into
perspective, Figure 1 displays Fidelity Select Energy Services with a custom indicator
called “Vixfixaverageave” (I know, I know, bad name), which is basically a
double smoothed version of an indicator called “VixFix” which was devised by
legendary trader Larry Williams a number of years ago.
Note
that previous extreme peaks in the indicator have marked some fairly
significant low areas for energy services.
Given the current extreme reading for the indicator it would seem to
make sense to be looking at now as a reasonable time to start allocating more
to energy stocks.
Looking
at Things on a Seasonal Basis
On
a seasonal basis the month of December historically represents a very good time
to be looking at energies. As it turns
out, the energy services sector (and the overall energy sector as a whole) is
one of the most highly cyclical sectors around.
Figures 2 and 3 tell you pretty much everything you need to know.
Figure 2 – FSESX Cumulative % return, December through April; 1985-2019
Figure 3 – FSESX Cumulative % return, May through October; 1986-2019
In
Figure 2 we see that the cumulative total return for ticker FSESX only during
the months of December through Apr has been +6,624% since 1985.
In
Figure 3 we see that the cumulative total return for ticker FSESX only during
the months of May through November has been a stunning (-94%) since 1985.
So,
when do you want to hold energy related stocks?
Note
that as divergent as these numbers are, there still are no “sure things” in the
world of investing. Note that the
Dec-Apr period has showed a gain 76% of the time on a year-by-year basis. So do not make the mistake of thinking that
energy prices are sure to be higher 5 months from now.
Likewise,
note that the May-Nov period has showed a gain 44% of the time. So, despite the massive cumulative loss over
time, remember that on a year-by-year basis it is almost a coin flip.
Summary
The energy sector has been beaten down and has remained down for a number of years. Broad based energy proxies such as ticker XLE and ticker FSENX both topped out in 2014. Ticker XLE is presently trading at the exact same level it was at roughly 13 years ago. So yes, the energy sector does qualify as a bullish contrarian play at this point.
The only problem is no one knows for sure when or where the bottom is. So, what is an investor to do? Given the seemingly “washed out” nature of the sector itself and the fact that it just entered it’s “bullish seasonal period” it may be a decent time for a long-term investor to consider establishing a position in the energy sector in anticipation that it will perform better overall in the years ahead – and more specifically in the months ahead.
Just
remember that there are no sure things and that you must likely be prepared to “ride
it out” for a period of time to reap any rewards. Given this, also remember that position
sizing is of critical importance – i.e., “dip a toe, don’t bet the ranch.”
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.
I
haven’t written a lot lately. Mostly I
guess because there doesn’t seem to be a lot new to say. As you can see in Figure 1, the major market
indexes are in an uptrend. All 4 (Dow,
S&P 500, Russell 2000 and Nasdaq 100) are above their respective 200-day MA’s
and all but Russell 2000 have made new all-time highs.
As
you can see in Figure 2, my market “bellwethers” are still slightly mixed. Semiconductors are above their 200-day MA and
have broken out to a new high, Transports and the Value Line Index (a broad
measure of the stock market) are holding above their 200-day MA’s but are well
off all-time highs, and the inverse VIX ETF ticker ZIV is in a downtrend
(ideally it should trend higher with the overall stock market).
As
you can see in Figure 3, Gold, Bonds and the U.S. Dollar are still holding in
uptrends above their respective 200-day MA’s (although all have backed off of
recent highs) and crude oil is sort of “nowhere”.
Figure
3 – Gold, Bonds, U.S. Dollar and Crude Oil (Courtesy AIQ TradingExpert)
Like
I said, nothing has really changed. So,
at this point the real battle is that age-old conundrum of “Patience versus
Complacency”. When the overall trend is
clearly “Up” typically the best thing to do is essentially “nothing” (assuming
you are already invested in the market).
At the same time, the danger of extrapolating the current “good times”
ad infinitum into the future always lurks nearby.
What
we don’t want to see is:
*The
major market averages breaking back down below their 200-day MA’s.
What
we would like to see is:
*The
Transports and the Value Line Index break out to new highs (this would be
bullish confirmation rather the current potentially bearish divergence)
The
Importance of New Highs in the Value Line Index
One
development that would provide bullish confirmation for the stock market would
be if the Value Line Geometric Index were to rally to a new 12-month high. It tends to be a bullish sign when this index
reaches a new 12-month high after not having done so for at least 12-months.
Figure
4 displays the cumulative growth for the index for all trading days within 18
months of the first 12-month new high after at least 12-months without one.
Figure
4 – Cumulative growth for Value Line Geometric Index within 18-months of a new
12-month high
Figure
5 displays the cumulative growth for the index for all other trading days.
Figure
5 – Cumulative growth for Value Line Geometric Index during all other trading
days
In Figure 4 we see that a bullish development (the first 12-month new high in at least 12 months) is typically followed by more bullish developments. In Figure 5 we see that all other trading days essentially amount to nothing.
Figure 6 displays the Value Line Geometric Index with the relevant new highs highlighted.
The trend at this very moment is “Up.” So sit back, relax and enjoy the ride. Just don’t ever forget that the ride WILL NOT last forever. If the Value Line Geometric Index (and also the Russell 2000 and the Dow Transports) joins the party then history suggests the party will be extended. If they don’t, the party may end sooner than expected.
So
pay attention.
Jay
Kaeppel
Disclaimer: The information, opinions and ideas
expressed herein are for informational and educational purposes only and are
based on research conducted and presented solely by the author. The information presented does not represent
the views of the author only and does not constitute a complete description of
any investment service. In addition,
nothing presented herein should be construed as investment advice, as an
advertisement or offering of investment advisory services, or as an offer to
sell or a solicitation to buy any security.
The data presented herein were obtained from various third-party
sources. While the data is believed to
be reliable, no representation is made as to, and no responsibility, warranty
or liability is accepted for the accuracy or completeness of such
information. International investments
are subject to additional risks such as currency fluctuations, political
instability and the potential for illiquid markets. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results. There is risk of loss in all
trading. Back tested performance does
not represent actual performance and should not be interpreted as an indication
of such performance. Also, back tested
performance results have certain inherent limitations and differs from actual
performance because it is achieved with the benefit of hindsight.