Stock market on track to hit 18,000 by early 2014

Posted by Shyam Moondra

In 2011, I predicted that DJIA was headed to 18,000 (“We are in a secular bull market - DJIA headed to 18,000,” The Moondra Post, March 14, 2011) and it looks like we are on track to achieve that record high by early 2014. Given that the current bull market is now more than five years old, many prominent analysts are predicting that a market crash of 10-20% is imminent. However, I believe that the bull run is not yet over.

The following trends favor a continuing up move in the stock market at least through March, 2014:

• The stock valuation is high but the market is definitely not overpriced. The forward PE of 15 for the DJIA, as currently estimated by WSJ, is by no means excessive compared to the high 20’s at the recent market peaks of 2000 and 2007. The market would look pricey if PE were to get close to high-teens, given that we are currently in a low-growth environment compared to the go-go years of the early 2000’s.

• Corporate profits continue to be at record levels, thanks to a superb job done by the corporate world in managing their cost-structure through the great recession in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008. Given that economy is currently strengthening (3Q13 GDP growth rate revised upward to 3.6%), further gains in corporate profits are predicted for 2014. Accordingly, there is room for continuing expansion of the PE multiples of the stocks.

• The unemployment rate has steadily come down to 7% from double-digit numbers at the height of recession, which means consumer spending would continue to increase in the foreseeable future. Also, increases in the stock prices and recovery in real estate prices have pushed the household wealth to record levels which would also guarantee increased consumer spending. Since consumer spending accounts for 70% of the economy, the economic activity would continue to be in high gear which would lead to further reduction in the unemployment rate, creating a sustainable upward spiral in GDP.

• Interest rates and inflation continue to be at low levels that always favor the stock market. In the near- to mid-term, we might see a spike in interest rates from the current 2.8% to 3.5% (on 10-year treasuries), but historically we would still be at relatively low levels. Since the corporations have a record cash hoard of the tune of $4 trillion, they may not have a huge need to borrow to support their capital expansion plans and thus the impact of higher interest rates on the economy could be somewhat muted.

• Currently, there is too much cash lying around in money market accounts and the stock market lacks euphoria which is typically seen at the market peaks (that's when stock prices go up sharply with heavy volume). That means the stocks have not yet peaked and that we would see a continued upward move in the stock prices.

• Europe and emerging markets are showing early signs of recovery after unprecedented austerity measures (taken to reduce budget deficits) devastated their economies. The U.S. recovery combined with recovery in Europe and emerging markets would give a further boost to global trade which would increase the U.S. exports and corporate profits.

• Finally, much has been made of the impending Fed tapering of their monetary stimulus program, QE3, in which the Fed buys government securities at a rate of $85 billion a month. The Fed has said that when economy improves and unemployment rate falls to 6.5%, they will phaseout monetary stimulus. The recent GDP growth rate of 3.6% makes it likely that the Fed would start tapering QE3 in 1Q14. Theoretically, QE3 tapering would have some negative impact on the stock market, but there would be some offsetting factors as well. As the interest rates increase in the face of tapering, the bond bubble would finally burst and some of the bond money would end up in stocks. Also, the underlying economy would be stronger and that means corporate profits would remain healthy. Therefore, tapering may not necessarily be a bad news and the fears of market crash are overblown.

Given the above global economic trends, there is a possibility that the DJIA might even surpass the 19,000 mark some time in 2014.

Outrageous ideas for speeding up economic recovery and job creation

Posted by Shyam Moondra

This Thursday, the Federal Reserve Board (FED) is likely to announce a new Quantitative Easing program (QE3) through which they will infuse liquidity into the monetary system, inducing investors to go after more risky assets rather than park their money in fixed-income instruments that they consider as safe haven in the present uncertain environment. The earlier similar programs (QE1 and QE2) have had some positive effect on economy but they provided only a temporary lift. What if the FED takes a different approach this time?

Here is a recap of where things stand right now:

• The stock prices are historically low with S&P 500 PE hovering at around little over 15. At the last market peak, it was over 30. When the market goes up, the investors feel wealthy and more secured about the future. That leads to their increased spending which fuels the economy.

• The housing prices are improving, but they are still very depressed from their historic averages. Higher housing prices have the same wealth effect as higher stock prices; homeowners start borrowing against home equity which leads to increased spending that boosts the economy.

• The corporations have the best balance sheets in a generation, hoarding cash of the order of $3 trillion. They are ready to invest in capital projects and hire more workers, but two things are holding them back: gridlock in the Congress that creates uncertainty (and corporations hate uncertainty) and tepid consumer spending.

• Having lost tons of money in the 2008-2009 market crash, the investors have parked their cash in government securities that pay almost no interest and corporate bonds that are barely keeping up with inflation. So what we have is a fixed-income bubble that would eventually burst, as all bubbles do.

Given the above facts, this is what we can do to increase the rate of economic recovery and speed up job creation:

• The voters need to take a decisive action in November and give control of all three government entities, the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives, to the same party so we can finally get rid of gridlock. Under Obama, we have made progress in terms of job creation from the depth of severe recession left by the former President George W. Bush (4.5 million new jobs created in the last 30 months compared with 2.6 million jobs lost in the final year of the Bush presidency). Obama has demonstrated that he is the absolute champion of the middle-class (that accounts for 70% of consumer spending) and protector of Medicare and Social Security safety-net programs. Therefore, the voters should put Democrats in charge of all three parts of the government. In the past, the voters preferred a divided government to have checks-and-balances and to avoid ideological domination by any single political party. However, in the current circumstances, getting rid of gridlock is much more important than worrying about ideological domination. In the absence of gridlock, the government will be able to swiftly move on tax reforms and adopt a long-term balanced plan to reduce federal budget deficit and debt.

• The FED has been buying treasuries and mortgage-based securities to infuse more liquidity into the system with the hope that investors would go for more risky assets such as equities. The FED actions have had limited success in achieving their goals and these actions have largely benefited the financial sector which is in much better shape today than it was in 2008. Therefore, may be the FED should buy equities instead of treasuries and mortgage-based securities to encourage the investors to move their money from less risky instruments to more risky equities. The previous government investment in equities by the Treasury Department under the bailout program TARP (e.g., in auto companies and financial companies) has produced good returns for the taxpayers; FED’s equity purchases now when the market prices are relatively low should prove to be profitable for the taxpayers as well as beneficial for the overall economy. The FED purchases of equities (they could buy the stocks in various indices such as Dow Jones, S&P 500, NASDAQ) will move the stock market up and create wealth. By the same token, the FED should snap up foreclosed properties (rather than buy mortgage-based securities that benefit only the banks) to reduce supply of homes and thus give a boost to the housing prices, thereby creating the wealth factor on that front as well. The Congress would have to revise the Federal Reserve Act authorizing the FED to buy equities and foreclosed properties and also increase funding for the FED so that it will have the necessary resources to effectively execute the plan of investing in equities and foreclosed properties.

• The FED has stated that it will keep interest rates close to zero at least through 2015. The idea was to nudge investors away from fixed-income securities and towards more risky assets and encourage corporations and consumers to borrow and spend. Unfortunately, the low interest rates are not having an appreciable stimulative effect on economy; corporations don't need to borrow much because of their huge cash pile and consumers are reluctant to borrow because they don't feel secured in the current economic environment with high unemployment rate. Also, the potential home buyers are putting off their real estate purchases thinking that interest rates will remain low for some time so it's better to just wait for lower real estate prices. Therefore, the FED’s low interest rate policy is actually having unintended negative impact on economy. May be the time has come for the FED to try a different tack and start increasing interest rates and force these waiting potential homeowners to start buying homes now which will have a big impact on job growth. Higher interest rates will also increase the spreads for banks that will allow them to make fatter profits and thus become financially more stronger than they are now.

Since the 2008 recession, we have had the slowest recovery on record. It’s time the voters and FED try different approaches to improve economy and create lots of jobs faster.

Should Federal Reserve Board increase the interest rates?

Posted by Shyam Moondra

Economy in deep recession, the unemployment rate zooming up, inflation out of control, corporate profits declining, dollar taking a plunge in the currency markets, and the stock market in a huge downward spiral. No, I am not talking about "today," I am talking about the 1970's.

The 1970's were the troubled years. Huge government expenditures necessitated by the Vietnam War and the oil embargo by OPEC (after the Yom Kippur War in October, 1973, which led to a big spike in oil prices), fueled the inflationary pressures throughout the economy. The people were losing their jobs and everything seemed to be falling apart. If there was such a thing as stagflation, that was it. President Carter had no stomach for the failed Nixonian style wage and price controls of 1971 (free-market economy and massive government intervention are like oil and water, they never mix!). Then in 1979, came to the rescue Paul Volcker, the FRB Chairman, who rapidly increased the interest rates to get some control over the inflationary spiral. The elderly people were in a dreamland earning more than 15% on money market accounts and CDs. The sustained high interest rates broke the back of the inflationary spiral. By 1987, Volcker left an economy that was getting ready for the biggest economic expansion we have seen in the modern history. The 1990's go-go years were the years when we had very low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment, high house ownership, budget surpluses at federal and state levels, and "irrational exuberance" in the stock market. The people generally felt very prosperous and confident about the future.

What we see today is not much different from what we experienced in the 1970's. We have the Iraq War, which has drained our economy of at least two trillion dollars (and still counting), oil and commodity prices fueling inflationary pressures, joblessness increasing, stock markets in the dumps, and people are generally feeling financially insecured. May be what we need is the Volcker treatment of high interest rates combined with responsible fiscal policies (especially on the side of government spending) to bring back the happy days again. It will surely be a painful period of several years before we are able to put our economic house in order.

At this juncture, high interest rates would have more upside than downside. Higher interest rates will strengthen dollar, which will bring down oil and other commodity prices and thus lower the inflationary expectation. Lower gasoline and food prices would enable consumers to spend more on other things, thereby revitalizing the economy. Surely, higher rates will make it difficult for the housing market to recover, but the housing troubles have more to do with the fact that mortgages were given to unqualified people, who are defaulting on their loan repayments. Overall, higher interest rates will be more beneficial than detrimental to the economy and they might even boost the stock market (which may seem strange, but it did exactly that in the 1970's).