Archive for March, 2009

Are We Near a Low in the Stock Decline?

Thursday, March 19th, 2009

Robert Prechter, New York Times best-selling author and renowned market analyst, was recently asked to present his thoughts on the real estate market and the financial crisis to the Georgia Legislature. The following article has been adapted from the transcript. Elliott Wave International has made the full presentation available free, including the full transcript and 30-minute online video.

By Robert Prechter, CMT

I'd like to try to answer a question: “Are we near a low in the stock decline?” Because in these times when stocks and real estate are declining together, they tend to bottom roughly together as well. So I want to take a minute and look at a valuation chart for the stock market.

Year-end Stock Market Valuation - 1927-1990

What we have here on the “X” axis is the bond yield/stock yield ratio for the S&P 400 companies. Sounds fancy, but all it means is that the further you go out to the right, the less companies are paying in dividends compared to what they are paying on their IOUs—on their bonds. On the “Y” axis we have stock prices relative to book value. Book value is roughly equivalent to liquidation value, in other words, if you went and sold all the assets on the open market. When stocks get expensive, prices tend to rise relative to book value, and dividends tend to fall relative to the cost of borrowing. Why does that happen? At such times, people don't really care about dividends because they think they are going to get rich on capital gains. So dividend payout falls, and stocks get more expensive.

The small square boxes indicate year-end figures. The large box is a general area that has contained values for the stock market for most of the years of the 20th century. We had a few outliers: 1928 and August 1987, which preceded crashes in the stock market. And of course stocks were really cheap in the early '30s and again in 1941. If you are really astute, you have noticed something about this chart, which is that I've left off some of the data. It ends in 1990. What happened in the past two decades? Now I'm going to show you same chart but with the data from the last two decades on it. The March 2000 reading we call Pluto. Real estate wasn't so bad; I think it only got to about Neptune. But the stock market reached Pluto in March of 2000 in terms of the bond yield/stock yield ratio and the price multiple of the underlying values of companies. That's going to take quite awhile to retrace.

Year-end Stock Market Valuation - 1927-1990

I've also plotted the reading for November 2008. The market has made quite a trek back toward normal valuations, but if you look at these multiples in terms of book value, we are at 4 times. It has to go down to 2 times to get back into the box, and we are getting there on the bond yield/stock yield ratio which means that the dividend payout is rising somewhat to catch up with borrowing costs. And because the S&P is down 45%, of course, the dividend payout as a percentage has gone up. But there is a problem there. If you're reading the newspapers, you know that companies have been cutting dividends. In fact, they've been cutting them at the fastest rate in half a century. So it is going to be difficult for values to get back to a normal valuation range. So the stock market has quite a bit lower to go in order to catch up with normal values, and this suggests that real estate may have the same sort of trend going on.


For more information, access Robert Prechter's full presentation to the Georgia Legislature, free from Elliott Wave International. It expands on the excerpt above with the full transcript, a 30- minute online video, and 12 additional charts and figures.


Robert Prechter, Chartered Market Technician, is the world's foremost expert on and proponent of the deflationary scenario. Prechter is the founder and CEO of Elliott Wave International, author of Wall Street best-sellers Conquer the Crash and Elliott Wave Principle and editor of The Elliott Wave Theorist monthly market letter since 1979

 

How To Tell a Good Forecast from a Bad One

Thursday, March 5th, 2009

Here's a forecast for you. Clear and direct. As quoted by a Reuters reporter in his January 15, 2009, article, entitled, "Global Lending Thaw May Yet Return to Deep Freeze."

"'This is a temporary respite and when it's over, the stock market will make new lows…,' says Robert Prechter, chief executive officer at research company Elliott Wave International in Gainesville, Georgia." [Reuters, 1/15/09]

But there are lots of forecasts out there – for the economy, for the Dow, for the price of oil, for the chances of the Boston Celtics repeating as NBA champions – so the question arises, how can you tell a good forecast from a bad one?

Bob Prechter addressed that very question with another reporter in a Q&A originally published in the book, Prechter's Perspective.

Editor’s Note: For more market insights from Bob Prechter, visit Elliott Wave International to download Prechter’s FREE 60-page Deflation Survival eBook, part of Prechter’s NEW Deflation Survival Guide.

The following text was originally published in Robert Prechter’s 2004 bestselling book, Prechter’s Perspective.

By Robert Prechter, CMT

Q: In general, is there any way for a person to tell a good forecast from a bad one?

Bob Prechter: There is a subtle way to tell a potentially useful forecast from a useless one. Most published forecasts are at best descriptions of what already has happened. I never give any forecast a second thought unless it addresses the question of the point at which a change in trend may occur.

As an example outside the financial markets: a sportswriter for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published his ratings (scale 1-5) for each of the players on the Atlanta Braves baseball team as a forecast of how they would perform in 1984. At the start of the season, he rated 1983's Most Valuable Player a "5," Atlanta's slugger a "4," and the right fielder a lowly "2" due to bad performance in 1983 following two excellent years. Later in 1984, the MVP was batting only .215, and the slugger was batting a dismal .179, while the lowest-rated player, the right fielder, had hit 8 home runs and led the team in batting average and RBIs.

The point is not that the sportswriter was wrong in his predictions. The point is that he didn't make any predictions, even though he thought he did and said he did. He was merely rating the 1983 Braves in retrospect. He ignored possible bases upon which to forecast the 1984 season, things like motivation, new developments or events in a player's life, cyclic changes in playing success, etc. As with most forecasts, these things weren't even considered.

Read forecasts carefully. If they are mild-mannered extrapolations of a recent trend, it's probably the best policy to toss them aside and go search for something potentially useful.

Q: Obviously, the same holds true in finance.

Bob Prechter: All the time. When economists say, as they so often do, that they see "no reason to expect anything different" from the recent past, they mean it from the bottom of their knowledge. The linear projections they typically employ result in logic such as that expressed by an economist in a national newspaper, who said, "This rising consumer confidence is good news for the economy. Rising confidence spurs the economy, and the pickup in the economy then serves to heighten confidence." By this line of reasoning, no change of direction could ever occur. That's why, absent other knowledge, the only forecasts even worth your time considering are those that predict a change. Not because the forecaster is certain to be right, but because it shows that he is thinking and perhaps employing a tool that can anticipate trends.

Q: So the word "prediction" doesn't necessarily apply to the future!

Bob Prechter: Right. And it's those predictions about the future that are the tough ones. That's why economists stick to predicting the past, which is a crafty solution. It leads to misery among the people who follow them, but it doesn't seem to affect economists' jobs, so it certainly keeps them happy!

Q: Do you think that predicting the economy is possible?

Bob Prechter: It is not only possible, it is downright easy compared with predicting the stock market. One economist has gotten a lot of chuckles by saying that the stock market has predicted something like 19 of the last 13 recessions. However, that is only a reasonable statement if you believe that a certain rigid definition of a recession is the only one that is viable. In fact, if you look at the ebb and flow of economic activity and generally realize that it lags stock market activity of between 0 and 12 months, you will find that there is no better single indicator of what the economy is going to do than the stock market. Not only that, but even 19 out of 13 is infinitely better than any economist has ever done.

……….

For more on deflation, download Prechter’s FREE 60-page Deflation Survival eBook or browse various deflation topics like those below at www.elliottwave.com/deflation.


Robert Prechter, Chartered Market Technician, is the world's foremost expert on and proponent of the deflationary scenario. Prechter is the founder and CEO of Elliott Wave International, author of Wall Street best-sellers Conquer the Crash and Elliott Wave Principle and editor of The Elliott Wave Theorist monthly market letter since 1979.