OFFICIAL STOCK MARKET & ECONOMY THREAD VOL. SCHOOL'S OUT

968
11
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Finals are over so I'm back for all you people who keep incessantly e-mailing and messaging me about losing your life savings in FAZ with no stops.

Sparknotes for the morons who want to put money in stocks off an online stranger's suggestion without evenbothering to read, much less understand, the thesis behind it:
Mr. Market is about to sell off hard and volatility is about to spike. This is no new bull market and the economy hasn't yet turned around even in nominal terms. Banks are still insolvent and overlevered and this rally was a scam to pass off asset depreciation onto the taxpayer. This rally is little more than a Ponzi scheme premised on unsustainable, one-time, illegal revenues.

LONG: ultrashort ETFs, T-bills, a little gold, volatility. SHORT: banks, insurers, REITs, airliners, long bonds, liquidity.

I'm also bullish on capitalism/free markets, Paul Volcker, Alexander Hamilton, sustainable growth, liberty. And bearish on socialism/government intervention, bank-government collusion, Bush + Greenspan, Obama + Bernanke + Geithner, asset bubbles/Ponzi schemes, theft.


The higher and longer we rally, the more bearish I get. This rally is a technically-driven quant deleverage-driven unsustainable bounce that will be met withmassive volume selling into a highly illiquid market. Expect volatility to spike and the market to hit free fall mode. I work as a global macro equity analystfor a large asset management firm with a well-known quant arm. I won't/can't name it, but word is it's facing MASSIVE losses and is opening upitself to new investors for the first time in several years, adding more credence to the thesis. Remember, this is a market-neutral, down big in this rally.Quant methodologies are getting whipsawed.

I'll start this thread out with one of the latest posts on my blog...

The S&P 500 is now up 31.0% since off of its March 6 lows around 666. Europe's Dow Jones Stoxx 600 Index has broken even YTD. But since the announcement of the Public-Private Investment Program (PPIP) on March 23, the equity market'srally has been defined by a rising channel on low volume. There have been no high-volume breakouts, the channel-defined uptrend's slope is very low, andthe market has trended approximately sideways since April 9.

Readers may notice I mentioned the possibility of a rally to Dow 9000 back around the PPIP announcement. I mentioned this because if the Fed and Treasury wereintent on printing our way out of this starting as soon as possible, their combined price-inflating powers would be unstoppable. There is no check or balanceto the Federal Reserve and there has never been an audit of its balance sheet.

However, since the PPIP's announcement, the equity market has not shown traditional bullish technical movement. A slow ascending channel on low volumeindicates a sloppy, bleeding market to the upside, nothing more than a setup for big downside action. Also, gold went down since the PPIP's announcement,which didn't add confluence to the price-inflating thesis behind the Dow 9000. This is why I turned bearish on the market, expecting a drastic sell-off,possibly to March lows and maybe below.

With such low volume, how is this market continuing its slow, yet upward ascent? Quant fund deleveraging has become the reason of choice to which this marketmovement has been attributed. Quants tend to short stocks with weak fundamentals and relative weakness versus indices, and quant deleveraging should manifestin weak stocks seeing dramatic share surges as quants scramble to cover shorts to lessen market exposure. And that's exactly what's happened. Stockslike XL Capital (XL), American Capital (ACAS), Vornado Realty (VNO), and Liz Claiborne (LIZ) showed massive rallies since March lows,leading the market and far outpacing stronger, more fundamentally-strong stocks, even ones with high beta. Even Crocs(CROX) enjoyed a 50DMA breakout. This is highly indicative of a "short squeeze" bear bounce, rather than a sustainable bottoming rally, whichis characterized by new market leaders and sectors showing relative strength against previous leaders and breaking outof tight bases formed over several months.

Even if perennial short candidates are being squeezed, why? Why are quants deleveraging so quickly into this rally? It seems like the initial rally ingiterscaught quants (and reality in fact) surprised. I am of course talking about the Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), and JPMorganChase (JPM) memos/releases announcing returns toprofitability for the banks. Then came the earnings reports to back them. As many of you know by now, these announcements were all a load of hot air, asillegal AIG (AIG) wholesale portfolio unwinds financed the one-time "fixed-income trading" revenues thatboosted all of the earnings and FASB accounting gimmickry allowed writedowns to take a minimal cut from positive surprises.

On top of that, however, Zerohedge pointed out the significant role Goldman Sachs(GS)'s program trading arm is having during this rally. With 1 billion shares principal traded becoming a weekly regular for Goldman and itsprincipal/customer facilitation+agency maintaining a ratio above 5x, Goldman has been massively increasing its participation (in its principal trading, atthat) while other quants and prog trading arms are quickly deleveraging. The conspiracy theorist in me wants to say the Fed/PPT is throwing kool-aid capital atthe market through administration girlfriend Goldman Sachs to drive up the market and force short covering. Of course, this is timed perfectly, as banks offerBS earnings reports financed by illegal AIG transactions aided and abetted by the Fed and Treasury. But of course, only the conspiracy theorist in me wouldever dare make such an assertion.

As a recap, this rally starts primarily with the AIG unwinds. AIG was bailed outby the Federal Reserve in September 2008 as its bankruptcy was deemed a systemic risk because of AIG's massive counterparty obligations in the CDSarena. The liquidity extended by the Fed to AIG was meant to allow CDS settlements to counterparties at significant haircuts, but with enough payment toprevent a systemic crisis. But were haircuts taken or were these trades settled at 100% face value with massive profits to counterparty banks? Former New YorkAttorney General Elliot Spitzer clearly seems to think not, as he wrote in his terrific article The Real AIG Scandal. All of the hooplah has led TARP's inspector general Neil Barofsky to launch an investigation into the extent of contract settlementrepayments. Bank of New York Mellon (BK) missed earnings estimates by $0.10 in the middle of amazing Q1 numbers from the otherbig banks. Such is the result when you aren't eligible for AIG counterparty money. Especially interesting is Goldman Sachs's counterparty relationshipto AIG, an issue delved into as early as last September itself in the the NY Times.

But I digress. The AIG CDS unwind trades were allowed by new trade protocolsgiven by the IDSA, the only regulator of the OTC CDS market. In turn, these massive unwinds (financed by the taxpayer, who paid for the initial AIG bailout andall credit lines extended since) yielded huge one-time profits for banks, who flaunted them like no tomorrow. After releasing memos (the first of which wasfrom Citi on March 10, the rally's first day) asserting first-quarter profitability, banks saw huge rallies in their stocks. At this point off of the lows,the rally was merely an oversold bounce and its sustainability was very much in question. Looking back, any sideline capital that was infused into financialson the news of these memos was misallocated, as the memos presented one-time illegal gains as indicators of sustainable turnarounds in bank earnings.

The market rallied on the news and started selling off around S&P 800, at January cycle lows and index 50DMAs. This is where I expected the rally to end,as previous support (January lows) tends to offer resistane once broken and important moving averages like the 50DMA offer important buy/sell points, dependingon the market.

Then came news of the PPIP and the market once again soared. Since then, the market has rallied just over 6% on very low volume. This is where the quantdislocation comes into play. Quants, who make market-neutral high-frequency scalp trades on leverage to produce returns, were caught short in a strong rally.Again, the rally itself was initially catalyzed by bank announcements that attempted to present unsustainable profits as sustainable, so the rally in effect ofthe news would also be just that-- unsustainable. But the quants were forced to deleverage into the rally as their models were getting whipsawed by the unusualmarket activity. As they deleveraged and covered short positions in weak stocks and were forced to hedge their delta by taking bullish positions, this addedfuel to the rally, which caused more deleveraging, and so on. This is evidenced by Renaissance's recent underperformance against the S&P by 17%, aswell as a possible reason for the possible unwinding of Morgan Stanley's PDT arm. Arecent WSJ article even claims quants are "brewing trouble" over atMorgan Stanley.

So where is the breaking point? A look into the why instead of how of thisrally can offer some insight. This whole rally is essentially a scam to pass off asset depreciation in struggling financials to the taxpayer. The AIGcounterparty profits were all taxpayer-financed. The PPIP's leverage is taxpayer-financed. But the real issue is the equity raises in this rally. Goldmanannounced an equity sale withits earnings a day after pre-announcing earnings. This is $5 billion of Goldman equity being traded for $5 billion of the public's cash on misconceivedpresuppositions of sustainable profitability. REITs have been offering shares all over the place, and conspiracies of their own have developed between theconnection of JPMorganChase and Merril Lynch/Bank of American analysts and the REIT secondaries these banks have been underwriting.

Also, the recent surge in Goldman principal program trading starts to take some context here. If Goldman's program trading arm has been feeding into therally and forcing quant deleveraging, then this explains why-- so it can raise cash by selling stock. Which I predicted and which indeed occurred. It'd be interesting to know how much ofGoldman's $5B have been raised at these scam-inflated prices ($123/share I believe was the going price for the secondary). As soon as it's"finished," I fully expect GS's 5x principal/customer facilitation+agency ratio to fall off a cliff. On top of the equity sale, Goldman alsojust sold $2B in bonds, just days ahead of stress test results. Again, thetiming is very strange. In a terrific article entitled Goldman's Offering and RecentRally: Coincidence?, Ben El-Baz states "although there is no hardevidence that Goldman intentionally hyped up the market rally and the financial sector to get a better price on its offering, it would be very naïve to assume that they passivelylet the market determine the price of this massive dilution." This principal trading participation is thecircumstancial evidence I'm sure he would love to see to back up his thesis.

Technically, the rally should end when quant deleveraging catches up with the rest of the market. That is, when the slow-money directional trend-settersdeleverage their long buy-and-hold positions into the rally at a higher pace than the fast-money liquidity-providing quants do. This should occur at importantinflection points where lots of supply is offered, otherwise known as resistance levels. I have been pointing out S&P 875 as a significant resistance levelthat might mark the rally's top and so far it hasn't been able to breach that level past a few points on no volume.

The selling/deleveraging into the rally has already started and should start picking up on volume soon. According to Washington Service, NYSE listed companyinsiders have been selling intothis rally at the fastest rate since October 2007. Insiders sold over $8 for each dollar they purchased ofstock in the first three weeks of April. To give that some context, the S&P topped out onOctober 11, 2007 and declined 57% before hitting March 2009 lows. If everything is so peachy and keen in the market and economy, why aren'tinsiders buying or at least holding stakes in their own companies? Possibly because they recognize that the "green shoots" are just weeds.

When it does end, slower money participants will be selling into a highly illiquid market, due to the deleveraging quants (liquidity providers) have had toface in the last several weeks. This will cause a spike in volatility and failed trade executions and whipsaws galore. Reality will quickly return to themarket and the AIG CDS unwind story may gain more exposure, especially through the work of Barofsky and Spitzer. This would damage the investment thesis of allthose who bought banks on their memos or earnings announcements, which would erase a big part of their recent huge gains.

So who loses in this rally? The taxpayer of course. As bank equity is sold to the public into a rally financed by illegal and unethical uses of taxpayerfunding. This is clearly all done with the full aiding and abetting of the Treasury and Federal Reserve, which has come under recent attack because of itsalleged involvement in forcing BofA CEO Ken Lewis tobuy Merrill Lynch and hide the distressed bank's true dismal state of affairs from BAC shareholders. If Goldman's principal trading increase isindicative of PPT activity, that also is taxpayer money being funnelled into an unsustainable rally, this time through the intermediary of Goldman'sprogram trading arm.

The memos, the earnings, the statements all say the same thing-- banks made money Q1 2009. They don't mention why-- because of AIG portfolio unwinds andaccounting gimmicks. Clearly causing an unsustainable hype in the soundness of American banks will lead to an unsustainable rally in equities. And that'swhat is happening.

The United States GDPcontracted over 6% in Q1 2009, well worse than estimates. A flu outbreak characterized as an imminent pandemic by the WHO is spreading across the world, withearly targets at total losses estimated around $2-3 trillion. General Motors (GM) announced its debt restructuring planthis week, met with sharp criticism and a drastically different counteroffer frombondholers, suggesting Chapter 11 is in order for the struggling automaker. Chrysler is expected to announce its own bankruptcy tomorrow. Even government stress tests,whose worst-case scenarios are tangentially worse than current economic conditions, suggest at least six of the 19 banks tested need to raise more capital. The sellingcatalysts are all over the place, while the buying catalysts were one-time unsustainable profits.

After announcing $1.2 trillion of arranged agency and Treasury purchases in mid March, The Federal Reserve didn't announce anymore quantitative easingtoday, while keeping rates at all-time lows. Once markets sell-off and liquidity once again contracts, the Fed will have much more political capital left to beable to monetize much more of this ludicrous spending. Expect rates to rise from here (TBT is a good play for that)until the next wave of deflationary deleveraging and equity selling allows the Fed justification for another big round of QE, again capping rates and inflatingthe Treasury bubble. Mortgage rates are at Greenspan levels. Clearly the powers that be are reflating a reflated bubble. From dot-coms to houses and now toTreasuries. What is all of this? Passing off asset depreciation to the taxpayer in the form of currency depreciation. Wait for the black swan in Treasuries toimplode the bubble (which is currently inflating), rates to rise, and rampant inflation.

But I yet again digress. Looking at the market right now, it is approaching the apex between important resistance at S&P 875 and the support trendline ofits ascending channel. After breaking its shorter term rising wedge, it has formed a bear flag, and is approaching a break of its channel trendline, whichshould send the market falling. Other indices show similar bearish patterns, with the Nasdaq approaching massive supply at its 200DMA. Several oscillators haveindicated divergences lately, suggesting the market is ready for its next wave down.

A breakout of 875 on big volume would change things, possibly indicating the BS rally found a way to incite slow moneyto buy into the rally, perhaps bringing enough buying power in to confirm a sustained bull market (assuming the Treasury continues to spend and the Fedcontinues to print). Irrational exuberance has been evident in the markets before but the deciding factor that allows it to drive sustainable (at least for the1-2 year time horizon) bull markets is the inclusion of slow-liquidity sidelined instutional directtional trend-setting capital in the rally. There is volumeto direct the equity prices' ascent. That simply doesn't exist right now and premarket gaps up are responsible for a big part of the rally. For therally to continue, even in the face of complete irrationality, it needs sidelined cash to come pummelling into equities. It needs large volume accumulation todrive directional trends. A low volume rally floating higher is not indicative of any of that.

I want to say here that I understand there is no arguing with the market. It is never "wrong" as only price pays. I share the opinion that the only"fair" price of a stock (or anything in the world) is its current price in the open market-- the intersection of supply and demand. However, thatdoes not mean price trends that appear sustainable are sustainable. That does not mean market participants are always right in their trades or that theirinvestment theses are "right." My point is that this current rally is unsustainable and the higher we go, the harder and more volatile the fall willbe. The catalysts behind the rally were all BS and there is clear government-bank collusion to pass off losses to the taxpayer.

I leave you with charts of securities I see possible big trades in.











































































































































If you guys aren't fully caught up now after this post, quit trading-- you never will be.

PS for you gold bugs-- wait a month or two, next FOMC announcement in June should see more QE, expect some gold buying ahead of it and on it if there indeed ismore quantitative easing (which I fully expect). Gold is a buy and hold, if you want to swing trade it, wait for the moves.
 
DYK you're a cool dude, i like you.

but
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
at people losing a huge chunk of their money based on ideas of a guy theydon't know on the internet. although you are very informative, these people were foolish and deserved to lose all that money
sick.gif
 
More indication of the unsustainable and soon-to-be-reversed divergence of equities from reality...

10-Year Treasury Notes ($TNX) yields are on the rise again after the most recent FOMC announcement. In Mid-March, ratestanked on news of quantitative easing, but the bond market has since shrugged it off as insufficient and yields are at higher levels than pre-QE. In fact,they're at their highest since November of last year. Evidently the stimulus isn't enough (yet, of course) and the bank earnings rally wasn'tindicative of the economic state that still persists. Equity markets scream complacency while bond markets are calling shenanigans.
























13 Week T-Bills ($IRX) are showing lower yields and more demand, even in the face of this rally (signified by theSPDR S&P 500 ETF in green on the chart). This suggests risk aversion in bond markets despite the stock ascent. Thelow volume in stocks and the outflow from longer-term Notes into short-term T-bills suggests an impending reversal in stocks and an end to the presentirrationally exuberant consensus on economic conditions in the United States.
























The Nasdaq Composite ($COMPQ) has finally reached its 200DMA and found some serious supply at that level. In marketswhere prices fall significantly below long-term moving averages, like in the case of a crash, large bear rallies to these long-term averages often occur, butthey are nothing more than bull traps.
























For some perspective, this is the Dow Jones Industrial Index ($DJI) in 1929-1930. After the fall 1929 crash, you can seea rising wedge bear rally of more than 50% into its 200DMA around mid-April 1930. This sounds identical to the currentmarket, especially when compared to the Nasdaq index. From there, the Dow tanked and eventually broke its crash lows and went on to go much, much lower. TheFed's QE + Treasury's spending + FDIC's guarantees won't allow deflation for an extended period like the 30s, but it is important to note thenature of bear rallies and not get complacent.
























The last chart is the Direxion 3x Inverse Financials (FAZ), the wild high-convexity ETF on which I'm so bullish.Chart shows a falling wedge coiling for breakout, corresponding with the apexes I'm seeing in index charts. It is important to note, however, that if thisrally has one more "upswing" left, it could be a parabolic move of sorts because of the lack of liquidity in the market, very similar to January ofthis year. The subsequent reversal would be that much more volatile and strong but it is important to keep all options considered.

 
Originally Posted by Gordon Gekko 979

DYK you're a cool dude, i like you.

but
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
at people losing a huge chunk of their money based on ideas of a guy they don't know on the internet. although you are very informative, these people were foolish and deserved to lose all that money
sick.gif


roll.gif


So true. I lost some money of my own in fact. Then 4/20 came around, my biggest day in the stock market ever.

High convexity ETFs require stops unless you open positions on trendline breaks. Calling tops and bottoms is not a precise business at all. Especially in themiddle of the most illiquid market since August 2007.
 
Opening positions on trend line breaks is based on speculation and these days anything goes. Been shorting financials in April? If anyones been betting againstfas as of late (other than 420), it hasn't been pretty in the short term. What keeps the obama admin. and the central bank from continuing to have anegative effect on stocks like FAZ in the long run? You've been bullish on FAZ (long) since the end of March when it was $20.00 a share and it'scurrently down over 50% in that time.
 
Originally Posted by Gordon Gekko 979

DYK you're a cool dude, i like you.

but
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
at people losing a huge chunk of their money based on ideas of a guy they don't know on the internet. although you are very informative, these people were foolish and deserved to lose all that money
sick.gif


people are wild
 
trendline breaks at least give a good risk/reward thesis for entering naked trades. calling tops and bottoms in high-convexity leveraged ETFs without stops isinane.

it's not sustainable because it's based off of one-time revenues in banks. if obama + bernanke + geithner went ahead and actually monetized the deficitspending of the next 2-3 years and bailed out commercial real estate, insurers, and airliners right now, i'd say okay we're in a sustainable bullmarket (in nominal terms) and we'd have an explosion in gold (where i'd be making my money). but that's not the case, this is a temporary,unsustainable, very reversible rally.

i've been bullish on FAZ since $20 but i've only started really building and holding positions in below $10. kept getting stopped out but finallyreached the point where stops no longer were necessary. doesn't matter where you got it in my opinion. $8, $10, $15, $20. gonna be big money for all thosebuy points.

before you talk #+#% read the post boss.
 
Originally Posted by sekim2detcidda

can we get updates on what stocks are nice yo buy

did you not just read his initial post of people pm'ing him for losing money on a stock he suggested?
 
Originally Posted by sekim2detcidda

can we get updates on what stocks are nice yo buy

example of taking financial advice from an online stranger without knowing why it's right/wrong.

buys: faz, skf, srs, sds, qid, twm, gld, ery, tbt
shorts: jpm, bac, gs, ms, stt, bk, pru, hig, all, met, lnc, pfg, amr, lcc, uaua, dal, cal, ge, db, ubs, rbs, cs, spg, vno, bxp, kim, dre, eur/usd, aud/usd,gbp/usd
 
Originally Posted by sekim2detcidda

can we get updates on what stocks are nice yo buy

example of taking financial advice from an online stranger without knowing why it's right/wrong.

buys: faz, skf, srs, sds, qid, twm, gld, ery
shorts: jpm, bac, gs, ms, stt, bk, pru, hig, all, met, lnc, pfg, amr, lcc, uaua, dal, cal, ge, db, ubs, rbs, cs, spg, vno, bxp, kim, dre, eur/usd, aud/usd,gbp/usd
 
unless you're an experienced and disciplined trader, YOU WILL LOSE MONEY ON ULTRA ETFS

(i've never owned an ultra, but they are clearly trading vehicles and not investment tools)
 
who's investing? these are meant to be swing traded, they have a time decay because of their daily resets. old news, champ.

who is left that truly buys and holds anyway? the buffett method, etc? doesn't the 08 crash prove that the infinite-term time horizon thesis waswronggggg??
 
i was agreeing with you, the mistake a lot of people have made is watching their ultra go down, not selling because they believe it will come back, and losingbig (stop loss on trades FTW)

ps: i thought your post was very seeking alpha....then i found your page, nice job
 
so.....did you keep that 500k+ that you made on FAZ a while ago or did you lose it all the next day??
 
laugh.gif
at people holding FAZ and not knowing about the decay.

Daily returns do not equal anything else but that DAILY returns.

Is it easy to get shares of an levered ETF to short? I never tried I always figured everyone else was already doing it?

The way Thursday traded makes me leary around here. I am out anyway, have been since about 7.9K and change.


Still isnt going to be any inflation thats my story and I am sticking to it
nerd.gif
 
What are some of you guys take on the stress test that will be released next week? How will it effect C and BAC?
 
DKY, i have been following your posts in the original stock market thread, as well as checking your blog daily. You are a smart guy and I am sure you haveprotfited greatly off the huge declines in Feb/march with short etf's that you are big on. I took your advice (you alone did not have entirely to do withmy decision...that would be foolish) in your prediction on Gold. I made a nice profit on the run up around the 1000 mark, took profits there. I also made somemoney on Faz/srs/skf a few months back. I almost 100% agree with you on your viewpoints on the current banking system, but unlike you I do not fight the trend.In March and April and now in May you are still big on short etf's, sure there are not too many reasons why these things should not be still making usmoney, but they simply are not. Every post in the past 2 months you have fought the uptrend, you will eventually be right when this rally ends, but why notjust follow the trend? I am a trader not an investor, investors make predicitons on where they think the market is headed. Traders on the other hand ride theups with long positions and the downs with shorts. Like you I have lost money in the past few weeks for loading up on short positons when the rally was stillgoing up saying to myself "this rally will end soon." But why not ride the rally up, take profits when it starts heading down, then ride it down withshorts? I am done betting against the trend day in and day out. The trend is your friend.
 
ETFs are the work of the devil, lost 40% in FXP held on and walked out with 25% gain (averaged). But UYG is killing me though,
smh.gif
at not wanting to take theshort loss (did it as a bounce play).

DYK, yo I read your article on SA, current market change any of your commentary?
 
Back
Top Bottom