In mid-June, we began cautioning that the high-velocity, v-shaped recovery in stocks from their March lows was producing tactically overbought conditions, raising the likelihood of a near-term pullback.1 Fast-forward to early-September and the S&P 500 Index began what now appears to be an abrupt risk-shedding event, centered on the high-flying growth and technology stocks.
Admittedly, our short-term timing indicators, including the put/call ratio, tend to work better near lows than they do around highs in the stock market.2 As such, all we can really do is warn of overbought extremes, and offer a handful of negative catalysts that stocks may be more vulnerable to at the time. Still, a two-and-a-half-month lag is pretty good in our book.
Gauging the downside
We don’t pretend to know for certain whether the selloff is over, it’ll continue or how much additional downside is in store. However, we developed a new breadth indicator – the percentage of S&P 500 industry groups above their respective 50-day moving averages – that in our view, seems to be a reliable tool for gauging technical extremes in stocks.
For example, all 24 of the industry groups within the S&P 500 Index fell below their near-term averages in late-February.3 Such bad breadth and an extremely oversold condition proved to be a contrarian buy signal for stocks, which ultimately bottomed in late-March.
True, only 46% of industry groups fell below their short-term trends during the June pullback in stocks.4 Nonetheless, the current reading of 71% remains comparatively elevated, suggesting the selloff isn’t over and further drawdowns may be in store.
What was the catalyst for the recent turbulence? More importantly, should investors sell everything and wait to re-invest until after the US presidential election?
Figure 1. Stocks remain technically overbought and further drawdowns may be in store
A change of trend or a buying opportunity?
It seems reasonable to conclude that tactically overbought conditions collided with a month that’s widely recognized for its seasonal weakness. Since 1957, when the S&P 500 Index was created, its median price return has been -0.3% in September.5
However, when we analyze seasonal performance patterns in US presidential election years since 1957, the month of September looks quite different with a median price return of 0.9%.6 Why?
Perhaps the fiscal pump priming and campaign promises of the candidates stokes the hopes and dreams of voters, with positive knock-on effects for sentiment, spending and the economy. If that’s correct, investors may consider leaning into the current weakness and adding to their positions in stocks.
Understandably, politics and the election are popular topics right now, but should they dominate our investment decision-making processes? Are there any macroeconomic forces that matter more for long-term stock market returns?
Figure 2. In an election year, investors should consider buying the dips
Beyond politics, take advantage of low interest rates
In his Jackson Hole speech, Federal Reserve (Fed) Chairman Jerome Powell announced two major changes to the Fed’s monetary policy framework that will likely keep interest rates low for longer.
First, the Fed will no longer tighten monetary policy simply because of a low unemployment rate. That’s a notable departure from the broken Phillips curve, a simple yet flawed framework developed by William Phillips, which states that a falling unemployment rate should produce faster inflation. Second, the Fed will allow inflation to overshoot its 2% target.7
In our view, these significant policy changes mean the Fed’s less likely to repeat past mistakes (e.g., the 2015-2018 tightening cycle) by raising interest rates amidst persistent inflation undershoots, with calamitous stock market outcomes similar to 2018.
Rather, the Fed has renewed its commitment to keeping interest rates low for longer, thereby defending this fledgling economic recovery, while allowing the US dollar to weaken, inflation expectations to rise, and the bull market in stocks to continue.
We acknowledge some intentional, near-term reflationary pressures from policymakers and view a little bit of inflation as a good thing, meaning deflation risks are subsiding.
That said, long-term disinflationary pressures remain in place where interest rates could stay pinned by the Fed, a global savings glut, an aging population, productivity-enhancing technological innovation and the “Amazonification” effect which refers to consumers’ present ability to get lower prices from online retailers like Amazon.
The bottom line is low interest rates for longer are the starting point for the “recovery trade” we’ve been embracing, which includes a modestly positively-sloped yield curve, weaker US dollar, stronger commodity prices, corporate bond outperformance relative to government bonds, and stock market outperformance relative to government bonds.
Figure 3. Lower bond yields today (read: discount rates) usually mean higher stock prices tomorrow
2 Source: Invesco, Looking for signs of a bottom in stocks, 04/01/20.
3 Source: Bloomberg, Invesco, 02/27/20.
4 Source: Bloomberg, Invesco, 06/26/20.
5 Source: Bloomberg, Invesco, 09/11/20.
6 Source: Bloomberg, Invesco, 09/11/20.
Blog Header Image: Shana Novak / Getty
All investing involves risk, including risk of loss.
A decision as to whether, when and how to use options involves the exercise of skill and judgment and even a well conceived option transaction may be unsuccessful because of market behavior or unexpected events. The prices of options can be highly volatile and the use of options can lower total returns.
In general, stock values fluctuate, sometimes widely, in response to activities specific to the company as well as general market, economic and political conditions.
The opinions referenced above are those of the authors as of September 16, 2020. These comments should not be construed as recommendations, but as an illustration of broader themes. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future results. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions; there can be no assurance that actual results will not differ materially from expectations. This does not constitute a recommendation of any investment strategy or product for a particular investor. The opinions expressed are those of the authors, are based on current market conditions and are subject to change without notice. These opinions may differ from those of other Invesco investment professionals.
Before investing, investors should carefully read the prospectus and/or summary prospectus and carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. For this and more complete information about the fund(s), investors should ask their advisors for a prospectus/summary prospectus or visit invesco.com.
Talley Léger is an Investment Strategist for the Global Thought Leadership team. In this role, he is responsible for formulating and communicating macro and investment insights, with a focus on equities. Mr. Léger is involved with macro research, cross-market strategy, and equity strategy.
Mr. Léger joined Invesco when the firm combined with OppenheimerFunds in 2019. At OppenheimerFunds, he was an equity strategist. Prior to Oppenheimer Funds, he was the founder of Macro Vision Research and held strategist roles at Barclays Capital, ISI, Merrill Lynch, RBC Capital Markets, and Brown Brothers Harriman. Mr. Léger has been in the industry since 2001.
He is the co-author of the revised second edition of the book, From Bear to Bull with ETFs. Mr. Léger has been a guest columnist for The Big Picture and for “Data Watch” on Bloomberg Brief, as well as a contributing author on Seeking Alpha (seekingalpha.com). He has been quoted in The Associated Press, Barron’s, Bloomberg, Business Week, Dow Jones Newswires, The Financial Times, MarketWatch, Morningstar magazine, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Mr. Léger has appeared on Bloomberg TV, Canada’s BNN Bloomberg, CNBC, Reuters TV, The Street, and Yahoo! Finance, and has spoken on Bloomberg Radio.
Mr. Léger earned an MS degree in financial economics and a Bachelor of Music from Boston University. He is a member of the Global Interdependence Center (GIC) and holds the Series 7 registration.