Archive for the Category »A Stock Market «

Stocks gain on reassurance from a top Fed official

NEW YORK (AP) — Reassuring comments from a Federal Reserve official and better earnings from two big retailers helped push the stock market higher Tuesday.

Stock indexes wobbled between gains and losses in early trading, then took a turn higher just before noon. That’s when news crossed that James Bullard, head of the Fed’s St. Louis branch, told an audience in Germany that the Fed ought to stick with its bond-buying effort to bolster the economic recovery.

“Those words were a salve for investors’ nerves,” said Lawrence Creatura, a fund manager at Federated Investors. Other Fed officials have recently talked about scaling back the program. “There’s a lot of uncertainty surrounding this issue. And uncertainty and investors aren’t always a happy match.”

The Dow Jones industrial average rose 52.30 points to 15,387.58, a gain of 0.3 percent.

The Standard Poor’s 500 index edged up 2.87 points to 1,669.16, a slight increase of 0.2 percent. Both the Dow and the SP are at record highs.

Many investors were already looking ahead to Wednesday, when the Federal Reserve will release minutes from its most recent policy meeting and Chairman Ben Bernanke will go before Congress to discuss his outlook for the U.S. economy.

“I think a lot of people are sitting on their hands waiting to see what the Fed says tomorrow,” said Michael Binger, senior portfolio manager at Gradient Investments in Minneapolis, Minn.

Binger said some investors believe the Fed’s support is the main reason the stock market has soared to all-time highs. If the Fed pulls back, they reason, the market’s epic rally would come to an end.

In other trading, the Nasdaq composite rose 5.69 points to 3,502.12, a 0.2 percent gain.

J.P. Morgan Chase Co. gained 1.4 percent. Shareholders of the country’s biggest bank voted to allow Jamie Dimon to keep his two titles, CEO and chairman of the board. Groups had pushed to split the two jobs, a drive that gained momentum from a multi-billion trading loss last year. The bank’s stock rose 73 cents to $53.02.

Home Depot surged 2.5 percent. The retailer reported an 18 percent increase in quarterly income as the housing market continued to recover. Home Depot rose $1.95 to $78.71.

Among other companies posting quarterly results, AutoZone jumped 5 percent. Better sales and shrinking costs helped the auto-parts company beat analysts’ earnings forecasts. AutoZone leapt $18.79 to $427.84.

It has been another solid earnings season for big companies, with corporate profits hitting all-time highs even as revenue barely rises.

Seven of every 10 companies in the SP 500 have trumped Wall Street’s earnings forecasts, according to SP Capital IQ. First-quarter earnings are on track to climb 5 percent over the year before. Revenue is expected to rise just 1 percent.

In the market for U.S. government bonds, the yield on the 10-year Treasury note slipped to 1.93 percent from 1.96 percent late Monday.

In commodities trading, crude oil sank 55 cents to settle at $96.16 a barrel.

The price of gold fell $6.50 to $1,377.60 an ounce, extending a slump that has knocked gold down 18 percent this year. Tame inflation, a stronger dollar and a surging stock market have undermined gold’s appeal.

Among other companies in the news:

— Carnival Corp slumped 4 percent. The cruise-ship operator cut its earnings forecast for the year late Monday as it wrestles with the fallout from high-profile incidents, which left passengers stranded at sea. Carnival’s stock lost $1.51 to $33.81.

— Best Buy dropped 4 percent after reporting a quarterly loss and sales that fell short of the forecasts of financial analysts who follow the company. Its stock lost $1.17 to $25.64.

— TiVo gained 2 percent, or 26 cents, to $12.92. The digital video recording company narrowed its quarterly loss with the help of higher sales from more subscribers.


Similar news:

The Stock Market – Which Side Are You On?


– Posted Tuesday, 21 May 2013 | | Disqus


I read a piece this morning by Josh Brown, the Reformed Broker, in which he destroys the 1999 comparison for the stock market.  He makes some excellent points about why the stock market is not only not over valued compared to 1999, but is actually a bargain.  You should read it because we should all be considerate of rational views.

I also read The Fed is NOT Printing Money by Jesses Cafe, which offers a view into a money creation process that is more geared toward the gaming of the financial markets through intermediary banks than it is the normal inflation of old.  I mean seriously, I do not call Ben Bernanke an evil genius for nothing; it seems that he and his associates have taken monetary policy to the Nth degree and figured out how to paint inflation as non-inflationary.  Our hero.

The point is that I think Josh Brown is 100% right.  There is no mania in stocks.  In fact, stocks worst offense right now is that they are strenuously over bought and sponsored by dumb money aggregates that are equal and opposite to one year ago, when the same dumb money was exactly as bearish as it is bullish today.  As he notes, the mainstream public may no longer be interested in the markets, but whoever that dumb money is, they proved a good indicator on an imminent bull phase last May.  Again, we present the proof compliments of Sentimentrader.com:

smart.dumb

Smart-Dumb money sentiment 1 year ago

smart.dumb

Smart-Dumb money sentiment today

I have absolutely no problem being bullish on the stock market because it is made up of companies both bad and good; very good.  After Memorial Day, my wife will re-start her career at a currently non-public technology company about which we are very excited.  Its technology began as the founders MIT thesis and is now rolling out into major markets and outlets.  One brilliant kid, an idea, a market and voila.

I totally believe in human progress and what great companies like Microsoft, Intel and later Google and Apple have brought us.  I believe in the software systems that are making the burdensome healthcare system more manageable and great companies the world over that fill a need, improve lives and win out in the markets of public opinion and financial transaction.

But the point I think the Reformed Broker is missing is what underpins the market of stocks in these corporations.  Looking at the stock market as a stand-alone, I tend to agree with his viewpoint.  But when policy makers are woven into the fabric of the market to this degree, they must be factored.  Questions must be asked like why on earth, with this excellent and healthy stock market and sufficiently functioning economy are they continuing to repress interest rates by buying $85 billion in bonds per month?

Arent those bonds debt?  Where did that debt come from?  Does bloated debt not imply that the economy in which the stock markets components ply their trade is a leveraged thing, as opposed to an organically thriving thing?  Why cant we just let the debt float on the open market and let it get resolved by the market if things are so good beneath the surface?

I think you know the answers to those questions.  That is the main point of bears questioning the stock markets fundamentals.  Not the old PE Ratio canard.  We are now in the post-PE world.  What matters is policy because it is policy that has created the seemingly healthy stock market.  So which side are you on; the side that sees the stock market and the stock market only, or the side that sees the stock market within the context of the universe in which it exists?

Biiwii.com


– Posted Tuesday, 21 May 2013 | Digg This Article | Source: GoldSeek.com

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
comments powered by Disqus


Similar news:

Small company stock are a bright spot

NEW YORK (AP) — Small-company stocks were a bright spot in a subdued start to the week for Wall Street.

The Russell 2000, an index of small-company stocks, climbed above 1,000 points for the first time and ended higher Monday, even as the Dow Jones industrial average, the Standard Poor’s 500 index and the Nasdaq composite index all edged lower.

The gains for the smaller companies are encouraging for the broader stock market because they show that investors are becoming more comfortable about the economy and investing in riskier assets, said Rob Lutts, Chief Investment Officer at Cabot Money Management.

Small-company stocks are considered riskier than the stocks of well-established, large companies like IBM or Coca-Cola. That’s because small companies are often relatively young and tend to have less diversified businesses than larger ones, making them more susceptible to swings in demand from their customers. There are also fewer buyers and sellers for them, which can make the stocks harder to off-load if prices start to fall.

“Having smaller stocks hit new highs means that the rally is broad,” Lutts said. “It gives us a little more confidence that it’s a good, sustainable rally that can hold together for a while.”

The better-known market barometers, the Dow and the SP 500 indexes, fluctuated between small gains and losses for most of Monday. They ended slightly below the record levels they reached Friday.

The Russell 2000 rose 1.70 points, or 0.2 percent, higher at 997.98. The index climbed as high as 1001.50 at midday.

The index currently consists of 2,008 of the smallest stocks of the U.S. equity market and the average company having a stock market value of about $1.5 billion.

Sunpower Corp., a manufacturer of solar panels, has led gains for the index this year, climbing $17.08, or 304 percent, to $22.70. Keryx Biopharmaceuticals is the second-biggest climber in the index, rising $5.32, or 203 percent, $7.94.

The Dow closed down 19.12 points, or 0.1 percent, at 15,335.28, paring its gain for the year to 17 percent. The SP 500 index fell 1.18 points, or 0.1 percent, to 1,666.29. Its advance for the year now stands at 16.8 percent.

Investors are focusing on the Federal Reserve this week and looking for clues about what it plans to do next with its economic stimulus program. On Wednesday Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke will appear before Congress and the central bank will release minutes of its most recent policy meeting.

The Fed is buying $85 billion of bonds every month to keep long-term interest rates low. That has encouraged investors to put money into stocks instead of bonds. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note has been below 2 percent almost continually since April 12. That’s less than many large companies pay in dividends.

Policy makers are unlikely to cut back on stimulus just yet since U.S. economic growth is likely to slow in the second quarter, said Scott Wren, a senior equity strategist at Wells Fargo Advisors. As a consequence, Wren said, stocks are likely to continue to rise.

“At some point, we will see some sort of a pullback, but it doesn’t seem like it’s going to be right now,” said Wren. “In the near term we’re probably going to trade a little bit higher.”

The stock market rally is also is being underpinned by investors moving back into stocks, reversing years of outflows of funds from equity markets, said Jerry Braakman, chief investment officer at First American Trust.

Investors have invested about net $17 billion into domestic stock mutual funds since the start of the year, according to data from the Investment Company Institute. Investors have pulled money out of mutual funds every year since the beginning of the financial crisis in 2007.

“This market rally still has legs, partly because we’ve seen huge retail inflows back into equities,” Braakman said. “It’s hard to beat the money flow.”

In commodities trading, the price of crude oil rose 69 cents, or 0.7 percent, to $96.71 a barrel.

The price of gold rose for the first day in eight as the dollar fell. The precious metal climbed $19.40, or 1.4 percent, to $1,384. Gold has slumped this month as its attraction as an alternative investment fades as the dollar appreciates.

The U.S. currency is strengthening because investors believe the U.S. economy is in better shape than the Japanese or European economies.

The dollar’s rally paused on Monday, though, and the U.S. currency fell against the euro and the yen. The dollar index also dropped, after climbing to its highest level in close to three years Friday.

In U.S. government bond trading, the yield on the 10-year Treasury note rose to 1.97 percent from 1.93 percent.

The Nasdaq composite index fell 2.53 points, or 0.1 percent, to 3,496.43 points.

Among stocks in focus on Monday:

— Actavis rose $1.65, or 1.3 percent, to $127.15 after the pharmaceutical company said it’s buying Warner Chilcott. The all-stock deal, valued at $8.5 billion, would create the third-biggest specialty pharmaceutical company in the U.S.

— Chesapeake Energy rose 53 cents, or 2.6 percent, to $20.80 after the natural gas producer named Anadarko Petroleum executive Robert Douglas Lawler as its new CEO. He takes over as Chesapeake continues selling assets to pare down an enormous debt burden.

—Websense, an internet security firm, surged $5.53, or 29 percent, to $24.76 after the company agreed to be taken private for $906 million by private equity firm Vista Equity Partners.


Similar news:

Hits and misses in Facebook's history

Facebook made its debut on the stock market a year ago on May 18 in one of the largest IPOs in history and the biggest for any Internet company.

The social network’s market value was more than $100 billion.

Now, Facebook’s stock is trading roughly 30 percent lower and has not hit its IPO price of $38 per share. Today, Facebook is valued at around $63 billion.

In the year since its initial public offering, Facebook has launched a slew of new features, including search features and a deep integration into Android smartphones and tablet computers. It also surpassed the 1 billion user mark.

Here are some key developments over the years:

February 2004: Mark Zuckerberg starts Facebook as a sophomore at Harvard University.

March 2004: Facebook begins allowing people from other colleges and universities to join.

June 2004: Facebook moves its headquarters to Palo Alto, Calif.

September 2004: Facebook introduces the Wall, which allows people to write personal musings and other tidbits on profile pages. Facebook becomes the target of a lawsuit claiming that Zuckerberg stole the idea for the social network from a company co-founded by twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and a third person at Harvard.

September 2005: Facebook expands to include high schools.

May 2006: Facebook introduces additional networks, allowing people with corporate email addresses to join.

September 2006: Facebook begins letting anyone over 13 join. It also introduces News Feed, which collects friends’ Wall posts in one place. Although it led to complaints about privacy, News Feed would become one of Facebook’s most popular features.

May 2007: Facebook launches Platform, a system for letting outside programmers develop tools for sharing photos, taking quizzes and playing games. The system gives rise to a Facebook economy and allows companies such as game maker Zynga Inc. to thrive.

October 2007: Facebook agrees to sell a 1.6 percent stake to Microsoft for $240 million and forges an advertising partnership.

November 2007: Facebook unveils its Beacon program, a feature that broadcasts people’s activities on dozens of outside sites. Yet another privacy backlash leads Facebook to give people more control over Beacon, before the company ultimately scraps it as part of a legal settlement.

March 2008: Facebook hires Sheryl Sandberg as chief operating officer, snatching the savvy, high-profile executive from Google Inc.

April 2008: Facebook introduces Chat.

February 2009: Facebook introduces “Like,” allowing people to endorse other people’s posts.

June 2009: Facebook surpasses News Corp.’s Myspace as the leading online social network in the U.S.

August 2010: Facebook launches location feature, allowing people to share where they are with their friends.

October 2010: “The Social Network,” a movie about Zuckerberg and the legal battles over Facebook’s founding, is released. It receives eight Academy Awards nominations and wins three.

June 2011: Google launches rival social network called Plus. The Winklevoss twins end their legal battle over the idea behind Facebook. They had settled with Facebook for $65 million in 2008, but later sought more money.

September 2011: Facebook introduces Timeline, a new version of the profile page. It’s meant to show highlights from a person’s entire life rather than recent posts.

November 2011: Facebook agrees to settle federal charges that it violated users’ privacy by getting people to share more information than they agreed to when they signed up to the site. As part of a settlement, Facebook agrees to allow independent auditors to review its privacy practices for two years. It also agrees to get approval from users before changing how the company handles their data.

December 2011: Facebook completes a move to Menlo Park, Calif. Its address is 1 Hacker Way.

January 2012: Facebook begins making Timeline mandatory.

February 2012: Facebook files for an initial public offering of stock. A few weeks later, it unveils new advertising opportunities for brands, allowing ads to mix in with Facebook status updates and photos.

April 2012: Facebook announces plans to buy Instagram, a photo-sharing social network, for $1 billion in cash and stock. It also discloses it plans to list its stock on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol “FB.”

May 2012: Facebook sets a price range of $28 to $35 for its IPO, then increases it to $34 to $38. On May 17, Facebook prices its IPO at $38 per share, and the stock begins trading the next day. The following week, the stock price starts dropping amid concerns about Facebook’s ability to keep growing revenue and sell ads on mobile devices.

That month, Facebook also updates its policy to give users more clarity on how information they share is used by the company.

August 2012: Facebook updates its app for iPhones and iPads to make it less clunky. The U.S. government clears Facebook’s Instagram deal.

September 2012: Facebook closes its purchase of Instagram. With Facebook’s stock price lower, the deal is now valued at about $740 million.

October 2012: Facebook says it has 1 billion active users.

December 2012: Facebook rolls out a messaging app called “Poke” to lukewarm reviews.

January 2013: Facebook unveils a search feature that lets users quickly sift through their social connections for information about people, interests, photos and places.

March 2013: Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg publishes book urging women to pursue leadership roles.

April 2013: Facebook unveils a new experience for Android phones. The idea behind the new Home service is to bring Facebook’s content to the phone’s home screen, rather than require users to check apps on the device.


Similar news:

A year after IPO, Facebook aims to be ad colossus

NEW YORK (AP) — It was supposed to be our IPO, the people’s public offering.

Facebook, the brainchild of a young CEO who sauntered into Wall Street meetings in a hoodie, was going to be bigger than Amazon, bigger than McDonald’s, bigger than Coca-Cola. And it was all made possible by our friendships, photos and family ties.

Then came the IPO, and it flopped. Facebook’s stock finished its first day of trading just 23 cents higher than its $38 IPO price. It hasn’t been that high since.

Even amid the hype and excitement surrounding Facebook’s May 18 stock market debut a year ago, there were looming doubts. Investors wondered whether the social network could increase advertising revenue without alienating users, especially those using smartphones and tablet computers.

The worries intensified just days before the IPO when General Motors said it would stop paying for advertisements on the site. The symbolic exit cast a shroud over Facebook that still exists. Facebook’s market value is $63 billion, some two-thirds of what it was the morning it first began trading. At around $27 per share, the company’s stock is down roughly 30 percent from its IPO price. Meanwhile, the Standard Poor’s 500 index is up 27 percent over the same period.

Despite its disappointing stock market performance, the company has delivered strong financial results. Net income increased 7 percent to $219 million in the most recent quarter, compared with the previous year, and revenue was up 38 percent to $1.46 billion.

The world’s biggest online social network has also kept growing to 1.1 billion users. Some 665 million people check in every day to share photos, comment on news articles and play games. Millions of people around the world who don’t own a computer use Facebook, in Malawi, Malaysia and Martinique.

And much has changed at Facebook in a year. The company’s executives and engineers have quietly addressed the very doubts that dogged the company for so long. Facebook began showing mobile advertisements for the first time just after the IPO. It launched a search feature in January and unveiled a branded Facebook smartphone in April. The company also introduced ways for advertisers to gauge the effectiveness of their ads.

Even GM has returned as a paying advertiser.

Now, Facebook is looking to its next challenge: convincing big brand-name consumer companies that advertisements on a social network are as important — and as effective — as television spots.

“We aspire to have ads, to show ads that improve the content experience over time,” Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told analysts recently. “And if we continue making progress on this, then one day we can get there.”

To achieve those aims, the company has rolled out tools to help advertisers target their messages more precisely than they can in print or on television. Companies can single out 18- to 24-year-old male Facebook users who are likely to buy a car in the next six months. They can target 30-year-old women who are researching Caribbean getaways.

Analytic tools like these weren’t available a year ago. But last fall Facebook hired several companies that collect and analyze data related to people’s online and offline behavior. Facebook’s advertisers can now assess whether a Crest ad you saw on Facebook likely led you to buy of a tube of toothpaste in the drugstore. The services take what Facebook knows about you and what ads you saw and combine this with the information retailers have about you and what you’ve purchased through loyalty cards and the like.

Advertisers are also making use of Facebook’s partnership with audience measurement firm Nielsen Co. Nielsen introduced a tool last fall that helps marketers discover “not only who saw their ad online and who saw their ad on TV, but also how these audiences match up,” says David Wong, vice president at product leadership at Nielsen.

Sean Bruich, Facebook’s head of measurement platforms and standards, believes the new tools are paying off.

“What we can see conclusively a year after the IPO is that ads on Facebook really do help drive people into the store and help them make purchasing decisions, help influence their purchasing decisions,” he says.

A recent Nielsen analysis found that consumers are 55 percent more likely to recall “social ads” than traditional online ads.

So powerful is Facebook’s new analytic arsenal that privacy advocates are growing concerned about the potential intrusiveness of merging consumers’ online and offline experiences.

People “are getting served ads based on things they didn’t put on Facebook and maybe wouldn’t be comfortable putting on Facebook,” says Rainey Reitman, activism director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit civil-liberties firm. Facebook says mechanisms are in place to protect privacy.

“We’ve never had anything like Facebook,” Reitman says. “We’ve never had an entity that was able to collect so much information on so much of the world’s population, ever.”

Advertisers aren’t complaining.

“Anywhere that more than a billion people spend time with their friends each month is extremely valuable to us,” says Brad Ruffkess, connection strategist at Coca-Cola.

At Procter and Gamble, the world’s biggest advertiser, “we saw almost from the start that social media is the world’s largest focus group,” says Marc Pritchard, the company’s global brand building officer.

Both companies are important advertisers on Facebook and members of the company’s client council, a group of more than a dozen brands and ad agencies that have met regularly with Facebook executives since 2011 to talk about advertising and marketing on the site. Other members include Unilever, ATT, Walmart and GroupM North America, a subsidiary of advertising agency giant WPP.

Still, some advertisers remain skeptical. Ryan Holiday, director of marketing at American Apparel, is critical of Facebook’s “sponsored stories.” These are messages from marketers that are interwoven into users’ news feeds. He says the clothing company spends less than 10 percent of its online advertising budget with Facebook.

One thing is increasingly clear: The future belongs to mobile advertising. And just a year ago, Facebook warned investors it was behind in capturing this market. In response, Facebook retrained engineers and rebuilt its mobile applications, which users complained were clunky. Now, there’s an explosion in the number of ads shoehorned in between status updates and cat photos.

“The transition to mobile happened even faster than we believed,” says Carolyn Everson, vice president of global marketing solutions at Facebook.

In the first three months of 2013, Facebook generated $375 million in revenue from mobile ads, about 30 percent of its total ad revenue. That’s impressive given that Facebook had no mobile ads at all just a year ago.

And there’s room to grow. Research firm eMarketer estimates that U.S. mobile advertising spending will grow to $7.29 billion this year, up fivefold from 2011. Facebook is expected to capture some 13 percent of the market, a distant second behind Google at nearly 55 percent, according to eMarketer. By 2015, the mobile ad market is expected to hit $16.2 billion.

Facebook’s stronger grasp of mobile advertising helped get General Motors back.

“Mobile was something GM was particularly passionate about,” says Everson, who joined Facebook two years ago from Microsoft Corp., where she headed global ad sales.

Everson says she sees Facebook as a future advertising empire. The goal is to help companies achieve so-called cross-platform marketing and target people with ads wherever they might be — in front of smartphones, tablets or TV sets.

“A lot of people might argue that TV is the first screen and mobile is the companion screen,” she says. Her take: Mobile is now the first screen. And Facebook’s hope is that advertisers will soon see it this way, too.

“Your customer is walking around with the most personal device they’ve ever had every single day, checking it 12 to, you know, more than 24 times a day depending on the market,” Everson says. “This is a mass medium.”

At the end of last year, 87 percent of Americans owned a cellphone and nearly half owned a smartphone, according to the Pew Internet American Life Project. Worldwide, research firm Gartner puts the size of the mobile phone market at 4.4 billion, enough to give one phone to nearly two-thirds of the world’s population.

Of course, television still accounts for the biggest slice of worldwide ad spending, and nearly 96 percent of American households own a TV set. ZenithOptimedia, a forecaster owned by the ad agency Publicis Groupe SA, says television accounted for 40 percent of worldwide ad spending, compared with the Internet’s share of 18 percent. By 2015, the Internet is expected to grow its share to more than 23 percent, but largely at the expense of newspapers and magazines. TV is expected to hold steady.

“On any given day in the U.S. alone, you can reach 100 million people on mobile,” Everson says. “Those numbers are not seen across any TV or print opportunity. I think it’s going to take hold, this message.”

___

Find Barbara Ortutay on Twitter at https://twitter.com/BarbaraOrtutay


Similar news:

MARKET SNAPSHOT: Stock Futures Flat; No Data, Fed's Evans To Speak

U.S. stock market futures pointed to a flat open on Monday, with investors seen taking a breath after a blockbuster prior week. There’s no data on the calendar, though Chicago Federal Reserve President Charles Evans is due to speak.

The action was in Japan, where stocks added to a record run, and in gold and silver, which remained under pressure.

Futures for the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJM3) fell 3 points to 15,312, while those for the Standard Poor’s 500 index (SPM3) dipped 0.4 point to 1,662.60. Futures for the Nasdaq 100 index (NDM3) fell 2 points to 3,020.75.

The data calendar for Monday is empty, though there is one Fed speaker amid a busy week for the Federal Reserve’s speaker list. On Monday, Chicago Fed’s Evans will be speaking about monetary policy and the economic outlook at 1 p.m. Eastern Time in Chicago. Evans is a voting member of the Federal Open Market Committee this year.

Among other Fed speakers this week, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke is due to testify on Wednesday before the Joint Economic Committee about the central bank’s economic outlook. (Read economic preview: U.S. economy walks uneven)

“This series of events certainly has the potential to overshadow what is likely to be a relatively quiet start to the week for fundamental macroeconomic indicators out of the US, but the big question is precisely when we’ll see the market react to the imminent tighter monetary conditions,” said Fawad Razaqzada, market strategist at GFT Markets.

“The longer the rally continues arguably the bigger the reversion we face, but if the economic backdrop is robust enough, then perhaps the resulting pain will be short-lived,” said Razaqzada in emailed comments.

Wall Street advanced to a fourth weekly gain last week. The SP 500 Index (SPX) rose 2.1% last week to close at a record of 1,667.47 Friday, its 16th record close this year. Similarly, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJI) rose 1.6% on the week to 15,354.40, its 21st record of the year.

Along with those index highs, more than half the stocks on the SP 500 hit new 52-week highs in the past week, which has some analysts worried.

Shares of Yahoo Inc. (YHOO) could be in focus after The Wall Street Journal reported that the company’s board of directors had approved the $1.1 billion, all-cash buy of blogging site Tumblr. A deal could be announced as soon as Monday, the WSJ said. Also check out: Stocks to Watch

Asia markets continued to push higher, with the Nikkei Stock Average rising 1.5%, driven by those Wall Street gains and after the Japanese government upgraded its outlook for the domestic economy in a Monday report.

Also, the Nikkei topped the Dow industrial’s absolute level for the first time in more than three years. Read: Nikkei tops Dow Jones. But is Japan out of gas?

European stocks moved higher as well, with the Stoxx 600 index adding to Friday’s move up when it closed at the highest since June 2008.

There was more pain for metals markets, with gold (GCM3) off another $13 and silver (SIM3) losing close to 4%. The yen took a break from a recent fall after a senior Japan official said the currency’s “correction” had mostly run its course.

Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires

Copyright © 2013 Dow Jones Newswires


Similar news:

James Surowiecki: Is there a stock-market bubble?

With the stock market setting new highs on a nearly daily basis, even as the real economy just slogs along, there seems to be one question on everyone’s mind: are we in the middle of yet another market bubble? For a growing chorus of money managers and market analysts, the answer is yes: the market is a house of cards, held up by easy money and investor delusion, and we are rushing all too blithely toward an inevitable crash. Given that we’ve recently lived through two huge asset bubbles, it’s easy to see why they’re worried. But in this case the delusion is theirs.

The bubble believers make their case with a blizzard of charts and historical analogies, all illustrating the same point: the future will look much like the past, and that means we’re headed for trouble. Smithers Company, a London market-research firm, says that, according to a number of market indicators, stocks are, by historical standards, forty to fifty per cent overvalued. The bears admit that corporate profits are high, which makes the market’s price-to-earnings ratio look quite normal, but they insist that this isn’t sustainable. They think that earnings will return to historical norms, and that, when they do, stock prices will be hit hard. Today, after-tax corporate profits are more than ten per cent of G.D.P., while their historical average is closer to six per cent. That’s a vast gap, and it’s why bears believe that the market is, in the words of the high-profile money manager John Hussman, “overvalued, overbought, overbullish.”

It’s certainly unusual for corporate profits to soar during a slow recovery. But the argument for a stock-market bubble is flawed: when it comes to the role that corporations play in the U.S. economy, the present looks very different from the past, which means that historical comparisons to the nineteen-fifties, let alone the thirties, tell us little. The four most dangerous words in investing may be “This time, it’s different.” But this time it is different.

Take taxes: one big reason that after-tax corporate profits are much higher than their historical norm is that corporations pay much less in taxes than they used to. In 1951, corporations had to pay almost half of reported profits in taxes. In 1965, they had to pay more than thirty per cent. Today, they pay only around twenty per cent.

Then, there’s globalization. Many of the “American” companies in the S. P. 500 are multinationals: a study of two hundred and sixty-two of them found that, on average, they got forty-six per cent of their earnings from abroad. This is a relatively new phenomenon. As late as 1990, foreign earnings accounted for only a small fraction of corporate profits in the U.S. Today, they account for almost a third of corporate earnings, and they’ve nearly tripled since 2000. So comparing corporate profits only to American G.D.P. yields a false picture of how companies are doing. The global economy, even with its current woes, is projected to grow more briskly than the U.S. economy over the next decade, so corporations will continue to benefit.

Finally, the decline of unions and the sluggish labor market have enabled corporations to cut payrolls, thus keeping profits high. The result is that labor’s share of the economy has fallen steeply. Skilled workers are still in demand, but most workers have little bargaining power. This could change if there is another economic boom—during the tech bubble, in the late nineties, wages did rise briskly—but, even in that case, corporate profits would likely stay high, as increased sales would make up for narrowing profit margins.

The underlying issue is that in recent decades there’s been a shift in the U.S. economy: it’s become far more congenial to businesses and investors. The fundamental trends that have driven the profit boom are unlikely to be reversed. That doesn’t mean that companies are going to be able to keep slashing their way to profit growth. As Doug Ramsey, the chief investment officer for Leuthold Weeden Capital Management, told me, “It’s hard to see how companies can get profit margins much higher, unless they want to see massive labor strikes across the country.” But keeping profits where they are doesn’t look all that difficult, which makes stocks today quite reasonably priced. It’s still possible that investor hysteria could eventually inflate stock prices, or that investor panic could send them crashing, but there is no profit bubble and, for now, no stock-market bubble, either.

For investors, that’s obviously good news: there’s nothing wrong with profits, and the rebound of the stock market has helped restore many Americans’ battered finances. Still, it’s unsettling that companies and investors are doing so well while the economy as a whole is stuck in the mud. Throughout the postwar era, high corporate profits were coupled with rising wages and strong economic growth. Today, there’s a growing divide between the fortunes of corporate America and those of the majority of Americans. You might hope that people could make back as investors some of what they’re not getting as workers, but in fact only about half of Americans have any money in the stock market, and most of those who do have only small sums. What’s more, the crash of 2008 scared many ordinary investors out of the market, so they haven’t benefitted from the recent profit boom at all. “There’s a lot of residual shell shock at work, and that’s made investors still pretty gun-shy,” Ramsey said. The stock-market boom is real, but most Americans have been left on the outside looking in. 


Similar news:

Buybacks are a big factor behind stock market boom

NEW YORK (AP) — It’s the narcissist rally.

Sure, there are plenty of forces pushing stocks higher — record corporate earnings, small investors finally buying again, signs the U.S. economy may be strengthening, central banks flooding the financial system with money.

But you may want to spare a thought, and a healthy dose of worry, for what is one of the biggest, and least appreciated, reasons for the rally: buybacks.

Flush with cash and a world of opportunity at their doorstep, companies have decided there’s nothing more attractive than themselves. So, they’re offering big money to buy back their own stock. This year, big U.S. companies have given the go-ahead for $286 billion of buybacks, up 88 percent from the same period last year, according to Birinyi Associates, a market research firm. If the pace continues for the rest of the year, the tally will exceed the record set in 2007.

Every manner of company is caught up in the buying binge, including home-improvement chains, makers of farm equipment and jet engines, airlines, sellers of soft drinks and of hard liquor alike. Not one to miss a hot trend, Apple recently authorized as much as $50 billion of buybacks.

Investors like buybacks because they suggest companies think their stock is cheap. They also help reduce the number of shares outstanding, which automatically increases earnings per share. And higher earnings per share often, though not always, lead to rising stock prices.

But buybacks are also crucial to the rally for a reason that’s not widely known. Companies are one of the few big stock purchasers nowadays. Nearly every other big player in the stock market has been selling more than they’ve been buying.

Pension funds have been selling. Local and state governments have been selling. Investment brokerages have been selling. And, yes, until recently, even Main Street investors.

You can see this in the data released by the Federal Reserve each quarter, and it’s a sea of red — save for corporate buying, that is, buybacks plus purchases of other companies. In total, U.S. companies, not counting banks and other financial firms, have bought more than $1 trillion of stock in the five years through 2012, net of stocks they’ve issued.

Experts note that companies may not spend all the money they have authorized on buybacks. But with investors clamoring for companies to return cash to them, either in dividends or buybacks, the odds are high that many will.

However much they spend, each dollar of buybacks appears to be having a greater effect on raising the prices of certain stocks. That’s because fewer shares are changing hands each day. On Wall Street, it’s referred to as a “drying up” of liquidity. And like in any market, a purchase or sale when fewer people are trading can push prices up and down much more.

DirecTV bought $1.4 billion of its own shares in the first quarter, or 7.8 percent of all trades in the company’s stock, according to data from Birinyi Associates. DirecTV rose 12.8 percent in the same period, two points more than the Standard and Poor’s 500. IBM bought $2.6 billion of its shares in the first quarter, or 5.6 percent of what was traded. It rose 11.8 percent.

Stocks move up for all sorts of reasons, so the exact impact on prices of individual stocks when companies buy their shares is unclear. In any event, the total amount of buybacks doesn’t appear to be enough to have a big effect on the whole market. If companies in the SP 500 follow through on their plans this year, the buybacks will amount to just 1 percent of total trading, estimates Robert Leiphart, an analyst at Birinyi.

Still, companies that do buy back their own stock are seeing prices soar, and almost immediately.

On Friday, Northrup Grumman jumped 4 percent after announcing it had authorized $4 billion of buybacks. The military contractor said it expects buybacks will cut its shares outstanding by 25 percent by the end of 2015.

Another big share buyer, Home Depot, rose 5.7 percent on Feb. 26 after it announced a $17 billion buyback program. The SP 500 rose 0.6 percent that day. If the retailer spends all the authorized in its plan, it will remove 18 percent of the shares outstanding at current prices, which will make the impact of a next round of purchases even more powerful.

Stocks of companies that have authorized the 10 biggest buybacks so far this year have risen 2.2 points more than the SP 500 in the week after their announcements, according to Birinyi.

Funds riding the Narcissus trade suggest the lift in prices can last for months, too.

The PowerShares Buyback Achievers and the TrimTabs Float Shrink funds, two exchange-traded funds, are both up 23 percent so far this year. By contrast, the SP 500 is up 17 percent.

Instead of getting excited, though, some on Wall Street are worried.

Gregory Milano, CEO of consultancy Fortuna Advisors, has run studies showing that companies that spend the most on buying back their own stock tend to underperform because they don’t spend enough on opening new factories, research or otherwise building their business for the long term.

Andrew Smithers, who runs a London-based investment consultancy, thinks buybacks have pushed stocks more than 40 percent higher than they’re worth. In his book “The Great Deformation,” former U.S. budget director David Stockman says Corporate America is drunk on buybacks and that they’ve helped push stocks up too far.

Another problem is that buybacks can give investors a false sense of strength of the true earnings power of a company. Forty percent of the increase in the earnings per share of SP 500 companies in the past 12 months came from reducing the number of shares through buybacks, estimates Barry Knapp, chief U.S. stock strategist at Barclays Capital.

Even if you’re worried, it’s not clear what you should do in the face of this massive corporate buying, which shows no signs of easing. Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst at SP Dow Jones Indices, notes that SP 500 companies have plenty of cash to keep buying — a record $1 trillion, not counting money set aside in reserves as required by regulators.

The dilemma facing buyback skeptics who are thinking of selling is the same one facing those worried the rise in the market has come mostly from the Federal Reserve efforts to stimulate the economy. “Don’t fight the Fed,” the old Wall Street saw goes.

To which should perhaps be added, “Don’t buck the buybacks.”


Similar news:

You Can Get 100% of the Market's Gains at Only 40% of the Cost

Over long periods of time, statistics show that stock market averages move higher. Since 1896, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has gained an average of 7.45% a year. In any given year, the return can be dramatically different than the average. The largest annual gain in the Dow was 82% in 1915 and the largest loss was 53% in 1931.

Over two-year periods, we see the same pattern. The average gain over a two-year period is 14.91%, twice the average one-year gain. The largest gain was 96% and the largest loss was 68%. The odds of a gain over two years is slightly higher, with 70% of those periods being up compared to only 66% of the one-year periods.

These numbers tell us that we can put the odds on our side when we take a bullish position in the stock market. The numbers also tell us that when stocks do fall, the downside risks are very large.

[Note: With stocks making new highs daily, many investors are worried the next market crash is around the corner. And it could be. Check out my free report, 3 Indicators That Flash 'Sell' Before a Market Crash.]

We’ve found a strategy that allows us to participate in all of the potential upside of the market while freeing up cash to put into other investments that could increase our returns. The downside is capped at about 40%, although there are ways to further reduce that amount.

Data for the Dow Jones Industrials Average was used to analyze the long-term probabilities in the market. This average was founded more than 30 years before the SP 500 and gives us that much more extra data. We believe that when looking at long-term trends, it is better to use as many years as possible.

For this trading strategy, we think it is best to use SPDR SP 500 (SPY). We recommend buying a call on SPY that expires in December 2015. There is also a long-term call option available on an ETF tracking the Dow, but it expires in January 2015. We prefer having the extra time to profit.

The December 2015 call options expire in 31 months. Since 1896, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has gained an average of 18.9% in 31 months and been up 70.2% of the time over that time frame.

A December 2015 call option on SPY with a strike price of $100 is trading for about $66.20. Call options give the buyer the right to buy 100 shares of the stock or ETF at the strike price any time before the expiration date. Call buyers benefit when prices rise.

With SPY trading at about $166, this option allows us to enjoy all the upside of the market for only 40% of the cost. Buying 100 shares of SPY would cost about $16,600. One call with a $100 strike price costs $6,620. A call buyer would have $10,000 to invest elsewhere while having the same exposure to the market as an investor who bought SPY.

If SPY delivers an average performance and gains 18.9% before the option expires, SPY would trade at about $197.38. The call option would then be worth at least $97.38, a gain of 47%.

If SPY falls to $120, the ETF investor would lose $46 per share. The option would be worth $20 at that price, and the call buyer would lose $46.20, nearly the same amount of money.

One advantage of the call option is that an investor would have $10,000 to invest somewhere else. Treasurys, for example, could offset potential losses or increase potential gains.

Using long-term call options is a smart alternative to buying stocks or ETFs. You could more than double your returns while reducing your risk. Since options are less expensive than stocks or ETFs, you will also be able to diversify your portfolio or invest more dollars in core positions with this strategy.

 

Related Articles


Similar news:

MARKET SNAPSHOT: Stock Rally's Breadth Is A Sign Of Strength, Froth

Stock indexes rallying to new highs have put investors on alert for a correction. Now they have something else to worry about: Too many individual stocks touching highs.

The SP 500 Index (SPX) rose 2.1% last week to close at a record of 1,667.47 Friday, its 16th record close this year. Similarly, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJI) rose 1.6% on the week to 15,354.40, its 21st record of the year. The major benchmarks, including the Nasdaq Composite (RIXF), have made a nearly unchecked 16%-17% gain for the year.

It’s not just the indexes that are stretching for the stratosphere.

Also in the past week, more than half the stocks on the SP 500 touched new 52-week highs, with 141 of those occurring on Friday alone, according to an analysis of FactSet data. Another 128 companies reached new 52-week highs earlier in the week.

“The number of people I’ve heard justifying the valuation has been mind boggling,” said Andrew Wilkinson, chief economic strategist at Miller Tabak Co. “The complacency is now incredible but nobody knows what the catalyst will be for a setback.”

The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), or so-called “fear index” closed down nearly 5% at 12.44 Friday, its lowest close since mid-April. The index has fallen 31% year to date, and current levels seem more at home in 2004 to 2007 than any other time in the last 10 years.

Optimism, whether blind or not, is so rampant, short sellers are particularly miserable. Some of the most-heavily shorted stocks are outperforming the SP 500.

“The bulls don’t have to try too hard because previous bearish forces are adding fuel to the fire, propelling the market higher,” Wilkinson said.

What has been missing from this rally is volume, owing to the slow grind of stocks higher, he said. Volume is about 14% lighter this May from the year ago period, according to Barclays. Similarly, second-quarter volume is nearly 9% off from last year.

Investment strategists often like to see a rally shared by a wide number of stocks. This breadth should give support to further gains, the thinking goes. But such widespread fortune has also been the precursor to pullbacks.

On Wednesday, 538 stocks on the NYSE reached 52-week highs, the largest number since Nov. 2, 2010, according to Jonathan Krinsky, chief technical market analyst at Miller Tabak,

Krinsky cautions that the last time there were that many 52-week highs on one day, the market experienced a 4.5% correction.

Similarly, surges of 600 or more NYSE-listed companies hitting 52-week highs in April 2010 preceded a 16% correction, which included the “flash crash” of that May, and a day of 600-plus NYSE stocks reaching 52-week highs on Oct. 3, 1997 — when the SP 500 was up 33% for the year — was followed by a 13% decline over the next few weeks.

“While a high reading of new 52-week highs should hardly be considered bearish, we simply want to highlight that a ‘surge’ in the reading is not necessarily the most bullish indicator either, especially following a sustained advance,” Krinsky said in a recent note.

Stock prices near record highs. But are they overpriced?

The real question then becomes whether stocks are overvalued or not. Here, data on one popular measure–price-to-earnings ratios–has something for both the bulls and the bears.

The SP 500′s forward 12-month P/E ratio is 14.4, according to John Butters, senior earnings analyst at FactSet. While that’s higher than the 5-year average of 12.9 and the 10-year average of 14.1, it’s less than the 15-year average of 16.5.

But even that might be misleading. Back on Oct. 9, 2007, when the SP 500 hit a record high before the financial crisis, the forward P/E ratio was 15.2, below the 5- and 10-year averages of 15.7 and 18.6, respectively, Butters said.

Relatively low valuations are mostly the product of high profit margins, cautions Russ Koesterich, global head of investment strategy for iShares at Blackrock. While both forward and trailing price-to-earnings ratios for large-cap stocks are below long-term averages, corporate profits currently make up about 10% of U.S. GDP, compared with a long term average of 8%.

“There’s the implicit assumption that margins will remain elevated, Koesterich said. “If you think margins will revert to normal then some of those earnings are not sustainable.”

FOMC minutes on deck

This week, attention will once again fall on the Federal Reserve as minutes from the central bank’s last Federal Open Market Committee are released. While the Fed has stated it will more or less stay the course with its $85-billion-a-month in asset purchases, stocks are setting new highs even as the call for scaling those purchases back has been gaining momentum.

Miller Tabak’s Wilkinson said the market appears to have a grasp of what the Fed is trying to do with quantitative easing and that gradual improvements in employment and housing are giving the economy enough inertia to more forward on its own soon.

“When you get a child riding a bike with the training wheels on and they don’t need them, it looks a bit silly,” Wilkinson said.

Also, low inflation below the Fed’s 2% target gives the Fed a lot of latitude in which to act, said Blackrock’s Koesterich. The real question, he said, is how investors act when the Fed starts taking it’s foot off the gas.

Earnings season winds to a close

Next week will also see the last of the Dow industrials reporting earnings along with much of the rest of the SP 500.

So far, 463 companies in the SP 500 have reported first quarter earnings. Of those, 70% have topped Wall Street estimates for earnings, while only 43% have surpassed estimates on revenue, according to FactSet’s Butters.

More than 20 SP 500 firms will report this week including Campbell Soup Co.(CPB) , Best Buy Co.(BBY) , Medtronic Inc.(MDT) , TJX Cos.(TJX) , Lowe’s Co.(LOW) , Staples Inc.(SPLS) , Target Corp.(TGT) , Gap Inc.(GPS) , and Sears Holdings Corp. (SHLD).

Home Depot Inc. (HD) and Hewlett-Packard Co. (HPQ) are the final two Dow components that will report for this season.

Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires

Copyright © 2013 Dow Jones Newswires


Similar news:
  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • Twitter