Economic Indicators

Does the stock market perform poorly in a deflationary environment? In the September 2016 version of his paper entitled “Deflation and Stock Prices”, Michael Clemens explores relationships between change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and each of stock market return and stock market valuation. He defines four deflation/inflation regimes based on ranges of annualized average monthly change in CPI over the previous 12 months. He considers both contemporaneous (last 12 months) and future (next 12 months) stock market returns. He measures stock market price-earnings ratio (P/E) as the average of Robert Shiller’s Cyclically Adjusted Price-Earnings Ratio (CAPE or P/E10), 12-month historical P/E and 12-month future P/E known with perfect foresight. Using Shiller’s U.S. monthly data spanning January 1871 through February 2016 and shorter, recent samples for Japan (January 2001 through February 2016) and Switzerland (January 2005 through February 2016), he finds that: Keep Reading

How do the long and short sides of futures trend-following strategies differently affect portfolio riskiness? In their September 2016 paper entitled “The Long and Short of Trend Followers”, Jarkko Peltomaki, Joakim Agerback and Tor Gudmundsen-Sinclair investigate via linear regression behaviors of the long and short sides of commonly used trend-following strategies across equities, bonds, commodities and currency futures/forwards under different economic conditions. They model trend-following performance by combining two sets of rules: (1) four slow-reacting simple moving average pair crossover rules using 75-225, 100-300, 125-375 or 150-450 daily moving average pairs; and, (2) four fast-reacting moving average breakout rules based on fluctuations around a long-term moving average. They apply the same allocation method for all rules to set a constant initial risk per trade, adjusted daily by scaling inversely with volatility. They examine how long and short trend-following returns depend on economic environment, focusing on interest rates. They assume trading frictions total $30 per contract. Using futures contract data for 22 equity indexes, 15 government bonds, 17 commodities and six currencies relative to the U.S. dollar, and contemporaneous Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) performance indexes, during 1984 through 2015, they find that: Keep Reading

Is global diversification within asset classes disappearing as worldwide economic and financial integration increases? In their August 2016 paper entitled “Globalization and Asset Returns”, Geert Bekaert, Campbell Harvey, Andrea Kiguel and Xiaozheng Wang examine whether economic and financial integration increases global comovement of country equity, bond and currency exchange market returns. They examine three measures of return comovement for each asset class: average pairwise correlation, average beta relative to the world market and average idiosyncratic volatility. They apply these measures separately to developed markets and emerging markets. Using monthly equity, bond and currency exchange market returns in U.S. dollars for 26 developed markets and 32 emerging markets as available from various inceptions through December 2014, they find that: Keep Reading

Regarding “Money Supply (M2) and the Stock Market”, a subscriber responded: “I’ve always thought…that both M2 and velocity were needed. If there’s more money, but it is not circulating, then it doesn’t have a chance to have much impact. That’s the situation we have right now for the most part.” The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis tracks money velocity based either M1 or M2 money supplies at a quarterly frequency, stating that: “Velocity is a ratio of nominal GDP to a measure of the money supply. It can be thought of as the rate of turnover in the money supply–that is, the number of times one dollar is used to purchase final goods and services included in GDP.” Specifically, the bank calculates money velocity as quarterly nominal GDP divided by average money supply during the quarter. Using quarterly values for seasonally adjusted Velocity of M1, Velocity of M2 and the S&P 500 Index as available from the last quarter of 1958 through the second quarter of 2016 (232 quarters), we find that: Keep Reading

A reader commented: “I couldn’t find an analysis for the M1 money supply similar to the one for M2. How about it? M2 cannot be an accurate money supply measure because it includes non-cash investments such as money market mutual funds. When the stock market corrects and people are exchanging stocks for say, money market mutual fund shares, the M2 figure will actually increase. The money supply is not literally increasing in such cases as no new cash is being created; there is merely an exchange of existing assets. Technically, only increasing the monetary base would increase the money supply, but M1 is a reasonable substitute for that as it includes the cash part of bank reserves.” The M1 money stock consists of funds that are readily accessible for spending: currency in circulation, traveler’s checks, demand deposits and other checkable deposits. Is there a reliable relationship between historical variation in M1 and stock market returns? Using weekly data for seasonally adjusted M1 and the S&P 500 Index during January 1975 through June 2016 (2,165 weeks), we find that: Keep Reading

Some investing experts cite change in money supply as a potentially important driver of future stock market behavior. When the money supply grows (shrinks), they theorize, nominal asset prices tend to go up (down). Or conversely, money supply growth drives inflation, thereby elevating discount rates and depressing equity valuations. One measure of money supply is the M2 money stock, which consists of currency, checking accounts, saving accounts, small certificates of deposit and retail money market mutual funds. Is there a reliable relationship between historical variation in M2 and stock market returns? Using weekly data for seasonally adjusted M2 and the S&P 500 Index during November 1980 through June 2016 (1,861 weeks), we find that: Keep Reading

What drives the price of gold: inflation, stock market behavior, public sentiment? To investigate, we relate spot gold price to non-seasonally adjusted Consumer Price Index (CPI), the S&P 500 Index and University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment. We start sampling in 1975 because: “On March 17, 1968, …the price of gold on the private market was allowed to fluctuate…[, and] in 1975…the price of gold was left to find its free-market level.” We lag CPI and consumer sentiment measurements by one month to ensure they are known to the market when calculating gold returns. Using monthly data from January 1975 (January 1978 for consumer sentiment) through June 2016 (498 or 461 months), we find that: Keep Reading

What variables best predict U.S. stock market returns? In his June 2016 paper entitled “Which Variables Predict and Forecast Stock Market Returns?”, David McMillan examines the power of 25 variables to predict excess return (relative to the 3-month U.S. Treasury bill yield) of Shiller’s S&P Composite Index both in-sample and out-of-sample. He chooses variables based on connectedness to expected cash flow/dividends and risk and assigns them to five groups:

1. Financial ratios: dividend-price, price-to-earnings, cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE or P/E10), Tobin’s Q and market capitalization-to-Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
2. Economic:  GDP cycle, GDP acceleration (rate of change in GDP growth), consumption growth, 10-year to 3-month Treasuries term spread and inflation.
3. Labor: wage growth, unemployment, natural rate of unemployment, productivity growth and labor market conditions.
4. Housing: house price growth, house affordability, home ownership, housing supply and new house sales.
5. Other: University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment, Purchasing Managers Index, National Financial Conditions Index, leverage and non-financial leverage.

He employs regressions to test in-sample predictive power. He then tests out-of-sample forecasts starting in 2000 using various forecast methods and accuracy measures and considering both single-variable and multi-variable models. Using the specified data series as available during 1973 through 2014, he finds that: Keep Reading

Using quarterly data in their April 2013 preliminary paper entitled “Analyzing Federal Reserve Asset Purchases: From Whom Does the Fed Buy?” Seth Carpenter, Selva Demiralp, Jane Ihrig and Elizabeth Klee find that some categories of investors appear to sell U.S. Treasuries to the Federal Reserve and rebalance toward riskier assets (corporate bonds, commercial paper, and municipal debt). Are stocks a part of this process? To investigate, we relate weekly, monthly and quarterly U.S. stock market returns to comparable changes in the Federal Reserve’s System Open Market Account (SOMA) holdings, comprised of U.S. Treasury bills, U.S. Treasury notes and bonds, U.S. Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIP) and Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS). The Federal Reserve reports these holdings with a small lag. Using weekly (Wednesday close) data for SPDR S&P 500 (SPY) as a stock market proxy and total SOMA holdings during early July 2003 through mid-May 2016, we find that: Keep Reading

Can investors exploit economic data for monthly stock market timing? In their September 2015 paper entitled “Getting the Most Out of Macroeconomic Information for Predicting Excess Stock Returns”, Cem Cakmaklı and Dick van Dijk test whether a model employing 118 economic variables improves prediction of monthly U.S. stock market (S&P 500 Index) excess returns based on conventional valuation ratios (dividend yield and price-earnings ratio) and interest rate indicators (risk-free rate, change in risk-free rate and credit spread). Excess return means above the risk-free rate. They each month apply principal component analysis to distill from the 118 economic variables (or from subsets of these variables with the most individual power to predict S&P 500 Index returns) a small group of independent predictive factors. They then regress next-month S&P 500 Index excess returns linearly on these factors and conventional valuation ratios/interest rate indicators over a rolling 10-year historical window to generate excess return predictions. They measure effectiveness of the economic inputs in two ways:

1. Directional accuracy of forecasts (proportion of forecasts that accurately predict the sign of next-month excess returns).
2. Explicit economic value of forecasts via mean-variance optimal stocks-cash investment strategies that each month range from 200% long to 100% short the stock index depending on monthly excess return predictions as specified and monthly volatility predictions based on daily index returns over the past month, with transaction costs of 0.0%, 0.1% or 0.3%.

Using monthly values of the 118 economic variables (lagged one month to assure availability), conventional ratios/indicators and monthly and daily S&P 500 Index levels during January 1967 through December 2014, they find that: Keep Reading