Give a Gift

Value Added

Time to Say Goodbye to the Bear?

A savvy market watcher, who has been correctly bearish on stocks, says the next bull market will likely start soon -- and it should be a big one.

By Steven Goldberg, Contributing Columnist, Kiplinger.com

March 10, 2009
Text Size T T
  • Comments
  • Print This Article
  • Order a Reprint
  • Advertisement

Don't call Jim Stack a bull -- yet. The veteran market strategist was one of the most bearish analysts at the start of 2008, and he has remained cautious. But Stack sees classic signs that investors are capitulating to the downward slide in share prices, signaling that the bear market will likely end soon. "We're reaching the point where we really question whether there's much more downside risk," he says.

For Stack, the glass is currently both half full and half empty. "Until we see solid evidence that a market bottom is in place, it's difficult to take a strongly bullish outlook," says Stack, who publishes the newsletter InvesTech Research from his perch in Whitefish, Mont. "On the positive side, we have all the extremes in pessimism that typically accompany a bear-market bottom -- a once-in-a-lifetime buying opportunity."

Another big plus: Stocks are dirt-cheap, whether you consider price-to-cash flow, price-to-book value, price-to-sales ratio or dividend yield. "This is a 1929-style bear market for lots of big companies, such as Dow Chemical, General Electric and International Paper, which have each fallen more than 80%," Stack says. The yield on Standard & Poor's 500-stock index is 3.6%, and stocks of many solid companies are yielding 5% or more. That's especially significant given how low interest rates are.

So, although Stack isn't ready to declare the bear dead, he currently recommends that clients keep 58% of their assets in stocks. That's a lot more than he's been suggesting the past couple of years.

Stack uses a bushel of technical indicators and fundamental economic measures to assess the market's direction. Many signals have flipped to the bullish side.

Investor capitulation is one of the final signs he looks for at a bear-market bottom. Says Stack: "By definition, capitulation occurs when investors ultimately decide to abandon the stock market in lieu of safer alternatives. It's often accompanied by panic selling and steep declines on high volume."

In other words, bear markets often end amid just the kind of sound and fury we've been witnessing of late.

How will Stack know the new bull market has begun? "One of the most important signposts is downside selling pressure drying up," he says. Stack wants to see a dramatic drop in the number of stocks hitting new 52-week lows. "Once everyone who wants to sell has sold, then pressure dries up."

Not long after the market bottoms, the number of stocks making new lows falls to fewer than 100 -- and that number remains fairly constant for a time. "If you see two or three weeks of that, it's meaningful," Stack says. After bear-market bottoms in 1990 and 2003, the number of new lows dropped to less than 20-and stayed there for months. (October 9, 2002, marked the low point of the bear market that began in 2000, but some analysts think the downturn actually ended the following March.) On March 5, a day on which the S&P 500 fell 4.3%, 728 stocks trading on the New York Stock Exchange hit new lows.

You'll make the most money on the upside if you hop aboard the market shortly after it signals that it has hit bottom. Stack says most investors will miss a big chunk of the rebound, so he's recommending a healthy allocation in stocks. "By the time you feel comfortable that the bottom is in place, you'll be uncomfortable going in because the Dow Jones industrial average will be up 1,000 or 1,500 points."

Don't expect the economic news to turn rosy anytime soon. The economy generally hits bottom about five months after a bull market begins. "As the market goes up, it's going to move higher on bad news," says Stack. "The bad news isn't going to go away."

Here's the sweet part: Stack thinks we're in for a doozy of a bull market. After the market bottoms, he anticipates back-to-back years of 20%-plus returns.

Why? Because stocks are so cheap and because this bear market has been so deep and protracted. Plus, the current bear arrived just five years after the 2000-02 bear market, which was also severe. The past decade has been miserable -- the S&P 500 lost an annualized 4% through March 6, according to Morningstar. From the market's peak in October 2007 through March 6, the S&P plunged 56%, making this easily the worst bear market since the Great Depression.

The odds of the current recession turning into Great Depression II are slim, says Stack: "The U.S. economy is very diverse and amazingly adaptive. And even if we're undergoing some of the same pressures of 1929, you have to bet that all these Nobel Prize-winning economists know something because the Federal Reserve and the Treasury are applying a textbook bailout. While the headlines are filled with everything that's going wrong, maybe it's time to ask what the market will do if some things start to go right."

Steven T. Goldberg (bio) is an investment adviser.

Topics:


DISCUSS

Permission to post your comment is assumed when you submit it. The name you provide will be used to identify your post, and NOT your e-mail address. We reserve the right to excerpt or edit any posted comments for clarity, appropriateness, civility, and relevance to the topic.
View our full privacy policy

Reader Comments (10)

Posted by: Raeann Salter at 03/11/2009 10:20:02 AM

Steven - Thank you for writing something positive about our economy. Our media only talks about how bad everything is and not how things will get back on track in time. Thanks Again.

Posted by: Rodger Mitchell at 03/11/2009 05:17:54 PM

Debt is money, and a growing, percapita supply of real debt/money is necessary for economic growth. How much debt growth do we need for economic growth?: # All forms of money actually are forms of debt. Currency, bank accounts, money market accounts, bonds and notes -- are both money and debt, differing only in liquidity. A dollar bill (a debt of the U.S. government) and a checking account (a debt of a bank) are quite liquid. A savings account (also a debt of a bank) is somewhat less liquid. Publicly traded bonds and notes are less liquid still, while bank CD's and real estate mortgages fall near the lower end of liquidity. All are forms of debt and money. # Economies are measured by money. GDP is one of many economic measures, nearly all of which measure money. A larger economy has more debt/money than does a smaller economy. Therefore, to grow an economy requires a growing supply of debt/money. # For an economy to grow, the debt/money supply must exceed population growth, inflation and the current account deficit (net money flowing out of the U.S.). A 3% inflation, against a total debt/money supply of $33 trillion, costs $1 trillion in real money, annually. Today's 1% population growth costs another $330 billion in per capita money. Include a $800 billion current account deficit, and the money supply must grow $2.1 trillion, or nearly 6.5% just to break even – that is, for a no-growth economy. By the first quarter of 2008, total debt/money growth had fallen to $5.3%, which was less than necessary for ongoing zero growth. In short, the economy had become starved for money (aka "credit crunch"), which is the root of today's problems. The economy is more complex than one equation. Several factors affect economic growth. But fundamentally, total, per-capita, domestic, real debt/money growth is required for economic growth....

Posted by: Joe Honick at 03/11/2009 07:11:30 PM

Mr. Goldberg, Mr Stack is full of beans instead of bulls. Makes me wonder where he was several years ago when I responded to an excited direct question from your colleagues about the then hot housing industry. I said then we were headed for a disaster because millions of people were getting mortgates they should not have gotten. The reponse I received to that assertion was hardly agreement and guess what....? Avoiding declaring this a depression is not only wild but inaccurate, and it would be more useful to get about more creative solutions than merely swampng guilty financial industries and others with bailouts.

Posted by: Bob at 03/12/2009 01:58:55 PM

I see a lot of opportunity to make money in the market but mostly by insiders and those that follow the market every second. Right now I see too much hype trying to turn every little news item into another little bubble. As a casual investor I'm not interested in getting back in until some real regulations with real penalties are put into place. At the present time I don't see Congress or the Fed with enough guts to do their job and clamp down where they really need to. Thus far there seems to be more secrecy than a Swiss bank about the final distribution of the bailout money. This does not inspire a lot of public confidence. So until our government is ready to play Sheriff instead of Santa Claus, I'll wait before risking getting burned again.

Posted by: Steve Goldberg at 03/12/2009 10:24:39 PM

I don't know when the market bottom will come. But the long-term odds have always favored the bulls. And if you wait for the economy to turn, I have little doubt you'll be too late.

Posted by: SteveTheHawk at 03/13/2009 12:39:35 PM

I firmly agree with "Bob" in regards to a complete lack of progress in regards regulations. Then again, I guess we are too busy flushing money down the tubes for corporate welfare. There are two basic things that need to be implemented immediately. First, reinstate the uptick rule. Second, reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. Get banks away (from) the investing business.... completely. They should take deposits and make loans, not hold derivatives. If banks are so important that they cannot be allowed to go under (thus risking taxpayer money), then they also cannot be allowed to engage in risky and reckless fiscal behaviors. I firmly believe that even mortgages need some legal restrictions as well (real down payments, real income verifications, no option arm's, etc). That being said, the lack of regulation is not likely to stop the next bull market, whenever that may arrive. I also agree that the economy won't turn around until well after the bull has started. I think there is a lot of cash sitting on the sidelines that is earning pathetic returns. When it dawns on these people that they can't just leave the money there forever, they will be back in the market. That will in turn force a lot short covering and in general push stocks up. The question to be answered is when will the investors win out over the fraidy-cats. Heck if I know.

Posted by: Judy at 03/15/2009 02:32:15 AM

Thumbs up for SteveTheHawk.

Posted by: Jake at 03/15/2009 08:13:00 AM

58% of your portfolio in stocks as the global economy is rapidly contracting, over capacity exists for most goods, the housing market has another leg to fall in the US and is at the beginning stages of decline in Europe and Asia, and the world's financial system(s) are destabilized with toxic assets? I think not. You're going to lose a lot of money unless you're a trader and are willing to dollar-cost-average on the way up and pull the plug before the markets collapse to new lows.

Posted by: Sam at 06/01/2009 03:26:38 PM

James Stack is one of the most savvy investment advisors commenting on the market today. In fact, shortly after this article appeared, Mr. Stack advised that his indicators pointed toward March 9 as the probable market bottom. As he says in his newsletter, it is looking more and more like that was the bottom and that a new bull market has begun. As for Mr. Honick (March 11 comment), he is the one who is full of beans. Mr. Stack predicted in his newsletter four years ago that the housing industry would collapse and be the subject of a trillion dollar government bailout. Thus, he insisted that his investors stay completely away from housing and financial stocks.

Posted by: John McGinley, CMT at 09/08/2009 07:43:52 PM

I assume Goldberg has not been reading Stack's letters since the bottom on 3/9. He has definitively declared the bottom was put in and has trotted out his definitive evidence. As a collegue in technical analysis - which is most useful at times like these - I couldn't agree more. Be interested in reading peoples' thoughts.



Featured Videos From Kiplinger





Connect With Kiplinger

E-mail Updates: Select the Kiplinger columns and topics to be delivered to your inbox.

email-sign-up

facebook
twitter
RSS