Monthly Archives: March 2015

On my prior post, regarding the FOMC meeting, I posted that

Most in the financial press are stating that the language of “patient” will be removed from their statement, but it is my OPINION that while the word may be deleted, the message will not be.

Then at the FOMC press conference, FOMC Chairperson Yellen stated

“Let me emphasize, however, that the timing of the initial increase in the target range will depend on the committee’s assessment of incoming information.

Today’s modification of our guidance should not be interpreted to mean that we have decided on the timing of that increase. In other words, just because we removed the word patient from the statement doesn’t mean we’re going to be impatient…..”

RE:  http://www.marketwatch.com/story/highlights-of-the-yellen-press-conference-2015-03-18?dist=afterbell

Well, I don’t know if I could have “called it” any better folks.  Look at her words and look at mine, which I released in my prior post. NOTE:  Check the “other” TSP sites, to include other general investing sites, and you will have difficulty finding such accuracy elsewhere on other sites, regarding market analysis.  As expected and previously discussed on this site, inflation seemed to be an important topic at this recent FOMC meeting.

With that said, the markets (as I anticipated) responded with enthusiasm, with the Dow going up 227 points.   The best performer today were International stocks (I-fund).  The next best performer was the C-Fund/large cap stocks, then small cap stocks/S-Fund.   I will be assessing my current TSP allocation and possibly making a change in one to two weeks.  ALL stock funds benefited from today’s news, FYI.   The SP 500 went up on high volume, and briefly cracked an important psychological level, 2100, then closed very slightly under that level.   See chart:

Below is a link to the PDF version of the statement, my comments are in red, and the important portions of the statement are highlighted in yellow.

FOMC-03-18-15

I remain 100% S-Fund with a possible fund allocation change to my account in one to two weeks.   TSP participants who were invested in stock funds prior to today (as I was) realized gains in their accounts and will likely witness additional gains if the market uptrend continues.   Please continue to refer your friends and colleagues to this website, for unmatched market analysis and commentary.

– Bill Pritchard

Good Morning Folks

As most know, the Federal Open Market Committee has been in session March 17 and March 18, and is expected to release their updated monetary policy statement at 2PM Eastern Time on Wednesday March 18.

Most in the financial press are stating that the language of “patient” will be removed from their statement, but it is my OPINION that while the word may be deleted, the message will not be.

As discussed on this site in prior posts, the PCE Inflation data is not where it needs to be (near 2% per FOMC on-the-record-remarks or in my opinion “showing clear and defined progress towards 2%”).   This, of course, assumes that the FOMC considers what it has previously released, statement-wise, to the public, as being important.   See prior post regarding this observation.

In a very quick overview of market action since last week, the markets have stabilized and tracked upward, however we cannot call this a “new uptrend” as the market action is akin to someone sticking their hand into an icy pond to check the water temperature.   I believe some participants are cautiously re-entering stocks, and we see a very slight movement upward.  The 2040 level on the SP 500 is the most recent support level.   See chart:

I am sticking my neck out here but my OPINION is we see no rate hike mentioned and thus the previously believed June rate hike will be determined to be unlikely.   I believe we will see increased discussion on inflation data, the rising dollar, and energy prices.    I believe we see some sort of language such as “continue to proceed cautiously” or “while we are encouraged by improving jobs data, the inflation data remains an area of concern” etc.

Again, all my opinion.   I have been wrong before…the FOMC may surprise me.   (Doubt it).

I remain 100% S-Fund.

– Bill Pritchard

Part-2 of Interest Rates, mostly prompted by some very good email questions yesterday, to include “where are you getting your data”

For official Bureau of Labor Statistics unemployment data, go to this link below,

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?bls

then choose Unemployment Rate (Seasonally Adjusted), fourth choice down under Employment category, then choose Retrieve Data.  That will then bring up the below chart, sans red circle:

Regarding the Price Consumption Expenditures Index (PCE), which Federal Reserve officials have gone on record as being the primary inflation measure (Google “inflation” and you will get numerous and different results), use this link below.  This is 12-month data- PCEPI Core (yellow line) is data without considering food and energy, PCEPI (red line) is “straight” PCE with nothing removed.   No matter how you look at it, we are not at the FOMC-desired 2% rate yet.

http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/pce-personal-consumption-expenditure-price-index-pcepi/

You can also go here, but you need to look closer to find the PCE:

http://www.dallasfed.org/research/pce/

You have to love the government, you need to hit five sites to get the data you want.   As to “Why the 2% rate?”, lets go to the FOMC themselves and ask that question:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/economy_14400.htm

An additional question is “What is inflation”, again, best we go to the FOMC and ask that, since they are the ones calling the shots (many definitions exist via Google).

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/economy_14419.htm

Note the frequent referral to PCE index, this is the primary benchmark the FOMC is using.

Observations, as discussed yesterday are:  1) Yes, unemployment is improving if we use the data provided,  below the 6.5% level which is the oft-mentioned level the FOMC is looking at, prior to interest rate hikes.   2) No, PCE inflation data does NOT reflect 2%.   Remember the FOMC wants 2%, t-w-o, not 1.5, not 2.5, but 2%.   We are simply not there yet.   PCE Core, which is not counting energy, is almost (but not) there, and PCE is clearly not there.   If PCE was 1.8, 1.7, 2.0, 1.9, over multiple reporting periods, OK, I may accept that.   But PCE is nowhere near even those levels.   PCE is in fact deteriorating, each reporting period.   It is not stable, nor improving.

In my opinion, we now may not see interest rate hikes in Summer/Fall, which is presently believed.   Not if the FOMC wants to abide by statements and language they release to the public.  As many federal government employees understand, releasing an agency policy statement then not abiding by it is a pretty big deal. 

I remain 100% S-Fund.  FOMC Meeting is March 17-18, we should hear some news by COB March 18 or sometime on March 19.    As discussed yesterday, if we learn that at that meeting, the FOMC is concerned about non-movement towards the 2% PCE levels, and implies a delay of the rate hike, the markets in almost all certainly will embrace that strongly.   The “Inflation” topic is front and center now, because the unemployment numbers, basically for one year, are where they need to be.    So the spotlight has moved over to Inflation.   Jobs data is first, as unemployed Americans and hungry families is a pretty big deal, but the jobs/unemployment data is now reflecting pretty good numbers and the spotlight is now on the PCE.   I would be shocked if PCE/inflation was not a topic at the next FOMC meeting.

“The strong dollar may hurt our economy” is sometimes discussed in the media, with the reasoning that Multi-National Enterprises (MNE) such as Wal-Mart, with stores overseas, may see overseas sales negatively impacted, since the foreign currency in that county now buys less that what it did last year.  These companies may report lower profits, and thus send their stock prices down.   While probably correct, I am not loosing sleep over a strong dollar.  Most corporate, Fortune 500 companies, are selling products domestically.   Ford does not sell F-150 pickup trucks to Germans in Frankfurt.  They sell them here, in America.  NOTE:  Boeing Airplane Company, etc may be an exception to this.   A strong American economy means folks are buying cars.  Strong economies typically result in strong currencies, and vice versa.   I am quite proud that our dollar is (thankfully) strong again.   Not a surprise was that its historical all-time-low was in mid-2008, in the middle of our mortgage and financial crisis in USA.    The strong dollar, cheap fuel, and other topics are best left to much smarter folks such as the FOMC to figure out.  In short, I am not getting wrapped around the axle over our “strong dollar.”   I like my dollar to be worth something.  Strong is typically good.

I may post additional updates prior to March 19, but to be quite honest, I expect some increased volatility and turbulence until that date, but with really no earth shattering news.  If the Dow drops 500 points or something, I will share my analysis, however I don’t foresee anything but rough seas between now and March 19.

Thanks for reading and talk to you soon

– Bill Pritchard

Hello everyone

First, I remain 100% S-fund.    Many will stop reading at this point.   For those who wish to continue, March 10 was not a pretty day in the markets, the media’s favorite index, the Dow Jones Index (only representing 30 stocks, far from a “good yardstick” of the entire market) was down over 300 points.  Volumes were up on all indexes, indicating distribution or “sell off” activity.   Today’s post will not have any of my typical charts, it will however attempt to address the “rate hike” issue, mostly the what, why and the when.   Many have approached me for some insight into this, as it is mentioned often enough in the financial press but no real background is discussed regarding this subject.  Numerous other TSP sites have talked about everything but this topic, so I am eager to fill in the voids which exist.  The following represents my opinion and my assessment based on how I see things.

It is my opinion that the March 6 and March 10 sell-offs are directly attributable to fear of the rate hike. 

The what:  The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is expected to raise short-term interest rates, many believe this will occur (the when) in summer/fall 2015.   As anyone with a desk calendar knows, we are approaching mid-March and Spring.

The why (this is important for us):  Rate hikes in theory are believed to result in increased borrowing costs for consumers, large business (who may be buying airplanes, heavy equipment, etc.), home buyers, and others.  Increased borrowing costs may result in reduced spending, which is counter productive to the economy. 

In summary:  Increased interest rates are feared to choke off or hamper business and consumer spending. 

With that very brief, Cliff Notes version, lets take a look at the January 28 FOMC policy statement, available at this link below and cut and pasted into this post.  

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20150128a.htm

Evident via the red highlights, is that fact that the term “maximum employment” is used three times, and that “inflation of 2 percent” is used twice.   It is apparent that both of these two items are important to the FOMC, prior to raising rates.   Remember, both.  Inflation rate is based on the Price Consumption Expenditure (PCE) measure.    Most feel that “maximum employment” means that the unemployment statistics must be below 6.5%, which they have been for almost twelve months now.   See table:

So we have one of the “both” criteria, pretty clearly established, for almost a year’s timeframe.   However, the FOMC also seeks 2% inflation rate, and we are not there yet.   Note they don’t want inflation higher than, or lower than 2%, they want 2%.   See graphic:

It is believed that the super cheap oil prices have thrown the inflation rate figures off, hence they are super low.   “Why 2%” and not 3 or 4%?   That is really not known, most conclude “because that is what the FOMC wants” and no additional clues or explanation has really been offered by the FOMC as to that particular number.

The point is this:  An influential government body has released to the public a policy statement.   Multiple times in that statement, they mentioned that they want both a good employment picture and 2% inflation.   Well, we haven’t achieved both.  Regarding inflation, we are not even close.   So I am not so sure that we do see rate hikes in Summer/Fall.  I myself previously believed this also, until digging into the FOMC statement. 

The FOMC meets again March 17-18, so until then, I expect some market nervousness and increased volatility.   As always, I will ultimately respond to the market itself, but based on some additional analysis, to include the above, the Dow Jones 300 point drop on March 10, in and of itself, while not desired, is not causing me to change anything.   If the FOMC murmurs, whispers, implies, anything regarding delaying the rate hike (likely due to inflation targets not met), the markets are going to the stratosphere.   MY OPINION and standard disclaimers apply. 

It is what it is:  we have major elections in the not too distant future (Nov-2016) and this is not the environment for the government body, which oversees national monetary policy, to waffle on their statements or take actions when previously mentioned requirements are not met.   The current administration and political party has enough fires to put out, they don’t need more.  FOMC Chairperson Yellen is a Presidential appointee.  Vice-Chairperson William C. Dudley, also a Presidential appointee, is in charge of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (aka Wall Street).   A violation of the “both” criteria (a rate hike with only one or the other criteria), with a subsequent interest rate hike, could severely damage many 401k balances, retirement plan balances, and the net worth of many voters.   This is more critical the closer we get to November 2016.  I don’t anticipate any deviation from the “both” criteria.

I remain 100% S-Fund.     Thank you for reading and continuing to share this site with your friends and colleagues.

– Bill Pritchard

Hello folks

If you can please take the time to complete this poll below.  This is prompted by reader email, some who wish less G-Fund, some who feel that the current system in use is too risky.   Please be careful and don’t accidently vote twice.  Based on this poll and additional polls and feedback, I may modify the system discussed on this site.  Thank You !

LINK:   http://goo.gl/2RzQuY

Hello Everyone

Well, February is now behind us, and I am happy to report that the market uptrend continues.  February performance (SP 500 Index) displayed the largest monthly gain (5.5%) on the index since October 2011.   Coming out of a “sideways” January, this is welcome behavior.

The top performing fund in February was the S-Fund, although it is important to note that the C-Fund and the I-Fund also came in very strong.  Additionally, allow me to highlight the fact that I have “remained in position” (in the S-Fund) since January 1, due to my analysis and proprietary system which reflected that the S-Fund was the best location to be in- even in light of the “sideways action” which we all frustratingly had to endure since approximately November 2014.   Out of ten possible fund choices, to include the “safe haven” G-Fund (which I have no problem using in times of turmoil), the S-Fund was my choice, and I am pleased (and not entirely surprised) that this fund, as expected, was the ideal choice and top performer out of ten funds.    Lets take a look at some charts, one with no comments, then one with comments:

Moving forward, it should be noted that the I-Fund may be the place to move to in the near future.   This fund is rather sensitive to world economic issues and political turmoil, so I confess that I am a little “gun-shy” about this fund, in light of everything going on globally.   I will keep folks posted on my decisions, however it is apparent that at least from a performance standpoint, I-Fund may potentially outperform the other funds in the next few months.    At this point, “we are not there yet” and I want to wait until mid-March before I make any serious decisions on changing my TSP allocation.  I remain 100% S-Fund for now.

The good folks over at Investor’s Business Daily are assessing the Accumulation/Distribution level of the SP 500 index as a “B”, out of A to E.  This means that institutional investors such as mutual funds, hedge funds, retirement plans, are actively purchasing and investing (versus selling and exiting) in large cap stocks, the type which make up the SP 500 Index.   I use this rating to “back up” my own analysis, and they are both in concurrence.   In January, the ratings were a little weaker in the D+, C, and C+ range, but improved in February, which is also evidenced by the chart analysis above, reflecting an uptrend.

That is all for this update.   In the “ask and you shall receive category”, please continue to refer your friends and colleagues to this site.   One of my goals is not to necessarily beat the market, but definitely to not let the market beat us.  

Thanks for reading, and again, I am 100% S-Fund at the present time.

– Bill Pritchard