Yes, the stock market rally has been very narrow. And yes, since the last stimulus check went out/inflation surged (March 15), inflation has beaten nearly all stocks.
Yes, this is worrisome, and "muddies" the signal of a strong economy.
97% of stocks were >200d MA in mid-April. While the overall SPX climbed and stayed well above its own 200d MA, the pct of stocks above their 200d MA steadily declined.
This is a sign that the rally through most of the year was being led by fewer and fewer stocks.
3/8
The following chart breaks the S&P 500 into ten deciles by mkt cap starting on March 15 (Last stimmy check, inflation takes off).
The 10th decile (largest), provided the best returns over this period. The smallest (decile 1) actually lost money the last 9 1/2 months.
4/8
The 5 largest stocks in green (AAPL, GOOG, MSFT, TSLA, NVDA), the return of the other 495 stocks (brown) and the equal-weighted S&P 500 index (cyan).
Take out the five stocks and the other 495 underperform the index by 550 bps! This is massive!
5/8
Moving beyond the S&P 500, the picture changes dramatically.
The MSCI ACWI ex-US (purple), the Midcap Index (green), and the Russell 2000 Small-Cap Index (brown) all failed to match the rise of inflation since March 15, with the Russell 2000 losing money over this period.
6/8
Since March 15, the RTY underperformed the SPX by 24.95% (top panel). This is the 2nd worst 210-day period since the index’s inception in 1978.
Only the underperformance in late 1998, following the sharp sell-off in stocks around the failure of LTCM, was larger.
7/8
These charts show a stk mkt driven by a handful of the largest stocks.
The smallest SPX, midcap, small-cap, and the world ex-US all failed to beat inflation.
Many say stocks are a good inflation hedge. This year, that has only been the case for a small number of stocks.
8/8
Others proclaim the big rally in stocks signals a strong economy. However, the most economically sensitive of the indices, the smallcap Russell 2000, has lost money in the last 9 1/2 months (since stimmy checks).
When viewed this way, the market’s message gets very muddied.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Yesterday, Jim appeared on Bloomberg TV, warning that if the Fed cuts rates and the market thinks this is wrong, 10-year yields could surge through 5%.
(Perspective ... 10-year yields were last above 5% in October 2023 and as high as 4.85% in January).
🧵
2/8
President Trump disagrees with this thinking and believes the federal funds rate should be 1% right now.
From a "truth" posted on June 30.
3/8
If (or should I say when) Trump gets a Fed Chair to make 1% happen, how will the 10-year react?
Reminder of what happened last year to long rates when the Fed cuts rates (peach arrow) and the market does not think it's a good idea (cyan arrow).
I would argue that if the Fed cuts rates and you assume mortgage rates follow the federal funds rate lower (they may NOT be the case), home prices would rise, putting the monthly payment right back at $2,860.
Polymarket recession odds peaked at 65% on May 1st, the April ISM release date, suggesting Liberation Day and the 20% stock market correction did not damage the economy, as the "soft data" warned.
Subsequent April data confirmed this.
Will May see more of the same?
🧵
2/12
The prevailing narrative in the market for months has been that the labor market is going to fall apart, forcing the Fed to cut rates.
This has not happened, and so far, the "soft" (survey) data have been wildly off in predicting the economy.
3/12
ISM Employment upticked in May from April. The first monthly "May" data point suggests the labor market is still not weakening.
See the red line on the right. With increased tariffs (red line to the left), the prices of goods originating from China are increasing rapidly.
Also note that the Chinese-originated price rise (red line to the right) began around May 1st, the same time truflation started its upward march.
3/5
From the FT:
The Yale Budget Lab says the average US family would pay $2,800 more for the same basket of products purchased last year, should tariffs remain at their current level, with lower-income homes more exposed.
Chinese products being sold in the US have already seen marked increases in retail prices, according to analysis of high-frequency data from PriceStats by Alberto Cavallo of Harvard Business School.