I guess you’ve seen all the stuff about huge buying of options on individual tech stocks, both by Bar Stool-style traders and by Softbank, driving tech stocks up. My guess is that has ended for now. If so, it will probably take a week or so for trading in the big tech names to settle down.
I’ve read that when the Tokyo market found out what Son had been up to, and had made $4 billion on speculative options trading, Softbank dropped by 8% (?), losing shareholders $20 billion in market value. That’s because what he did is bet-the-company crazy.
One of the things I’ve noticed is that some second-line names are doing much better (meaning falling more slowly) than what must be Robinhood-ish favorites.
It’s never clear what triggers a market selloff. In this case, though, it’s doing a healthy thing by readjusting relative values among different groups of stocks–something I’ve thought would happen by a temporary reversal of leadership in an uptrend.
I think the fact that at zero interest rates stocks are the only game in town means stocks will drop to some longer-term trend line, stabilize, and then begin to move up again. A hope, not a belief–at the close today NASDAQ seems to have hit the bottom of a channel it’s been in since April. (It’s also about 25% above its March high, which says these are not bargain-basement levels.)
Over the past 5 trading days, NASDAQ is down by -9.2%, the S&P by -5.5%, and the Russell by -4.7%, so there is outperformance of a sort by the R2000.
Very often after a big selloff, market leadership changes. That didn’t really happen in March, although afterwards the R2000 began to keep up more with the S&P for several months. My sense is that the market wants to broaden out to find non-tech stocks that will do well over the next year or two. This is why consumer discretionary names have been doing well recently. But because some kinds of tech are going to be long-term winners, the move has to be based on finding consumer names that have good growth prospects, not just that they’re in another sector.
The market hasn’t gotten conviction yet with this idea, probably in large part because Trumponomics gets loonier by the day. The near-term economic outlook in the US had already been deteriorating before his latest China ideas, and won’t have a chance to be better unless he’s defeated in November.
Then there’s the human side of things. Who’d have thought we’d see George Wallace reincarnated, or the Waffen SS recreated, or scary abuse of power in the Justice Department–or that the Joint Chiefs would feel the need to say they would not obey any Trump orders to use troops to deny Americans their civil rights.
The last two paragraphs both bear on stocks like NWL. Arguably, NWL is a true “value” name. That is, all the bad stuff–and more–that could reasonably be expected to happen has already taken place and been factored into the stock price. So it has some downside protection. It’s also economically sensitive and non-tech; and maybe if management can use the company’s assets competently, good things will happen.
Another way of putting this is that in a world where TSLA can be down 30% in a week maybe the value formula of dead money for now with the hope of upside later on isn’t so bad to have as part of a portfolio.