Executive Summary:
Investors received a rude awakening in 2000-2001. What had once been a goldmine of seemingly limitless possibilities suddenly became a treacherous market for investors, with many watching retirement funds and 401Ks decline for the first time ever. When the market’s downward spiral began last March, many expected a quick recovery and the recuperation of lost income. Unfortunately, there was no turnaround and investors continued to watch both corporate earnings and the markets take major losses. It is possible that the market has now hit its bottom… for a while. However, the highs of last year will not be seen again for several years.
The
next few years in investing will see more conservative growth in the
market. While the market is expected to
rebound, we believe that the turnaround will resemble the market trends
achieved between 1961 and 1974, where despite short-lived up-moves of as much
as 85%, virtually no net gains were made over more than a decade.
Nevertheless, there is money to be made in this new era for those who
are able to move beyond the traditional buy-and-hold strategy. The next ten years will be more of a trader’s
market, favoring the investor who can turn the market’s volatility to his
advantage, investing with the trend and staying out of the market (or shorting)
during periods of probable decline.
Technical
analysis is one technique helpful to those wishing to use this strategy, and
becoming well versed in various trading techniques will allow the modern
investor to take full advantage of both the ups and the downs in the market.
Since its inception King Investors, Inc. has used a variety of these techniques, focusing on the technology sector as a whole. Our major emphasis is on biotech, computers, internets and semiconductors, as well as on two non-technology industries, financials and oil services. Over this first year, we have managed to outperform the market in every sector we cover, just barely in one and quite handily in others. Overall gains in the various sectors range from 17% in financials to over 100% in semiconductors.
2000-2001 — A Look Back:


Wake-up call. These are the words we would use to describe
the events in the stock market since we started publishing our market
commentary. By the end of 1999,
investing in the stock market was beginning to become en vogue. At the dawn of this new millennium, as “Bill
Gates”, “dot-com”, and “internet startup” moved into the common vernacular of
our pop culture, the stock market had ceased to be viewed as America’s biggest
casino, where investing in common stocks and gambling were considered almost
one and the same. Instead, “I can’t
afford to take the risk” had turned into “I can’t afford not to.” Financial news networks like CNBC had
started catering to the mainstream buying public, and the preference for stock
options, online brokerages, and day trading all underwent explosive growth in
the years leading up to last spring.
If
investing were still likened to gambling, it would more likely be compared with
putting down money on the craps tables when someone is on a hot streak. Every IPO has to double…150% gains in
just two days…800% gains in three weeks.
These are the types of returns that many had grown to view as
commonplace. “No earnings? No
problem! I don’t wanna miss
out. Let it all ride….”
A
year later, the Dow, S&P 500, and NASDAQ are down over 10%, 20%, and
50%, respectively. The same financial
news networks that were promoting mass interest in investing had begun to use
words like “carnage” and “destruction” in stock news reports. Many of the internet stocks are down over
90%, and within the NASDAQ, the ten largest stocks alone have suffered a
combined loss in market cap of over a trillion dollars.
It
is impossible to fully comprehend the events of the last year-and-a-half
without first examining the performance of the stock market (and the US
economy) for the decade leading up to the bull market top in March of
2000. The buildup of pressure that
exploded to the downside last March had occurred not over a period of 6-9
months or even 18, but over nearly 10 years. As such, we must acknowledge the likelihood that markets
could indeed take as much as a third of that time, or 2-3 years, to turn
around.
A
full down cycle, from bull market top to bear market bottom, tends to involve a
turnaround not only of stocks and the economy, but of public sentiment as
well. At a bull market top, P/E’s are
typically at near-term highs (with P/E’s on the S&P 500 in the low 20s),
but the general public is buying more than they were when prices were
lower. Consumer confidence is normally
very high, and public sentiment is bullish to an extreme. In March of 2000, P/E’s were at all time
highs. Since that time, the S&P
has fallen 20%, and the NASDAQ is down over 60%, with at least two
temporary bottoms in the meantime that sent many advisors proclaiming “new bull
market” and sent investors rushing in to buy more stock, only to have them ride
it down for an additional 20-50% loss.
This marching of prices, to lower highs and lower lows, is actually
fairly typical for a bear market and was in large part to be expected. Stock prices have decreased and we have had
a slowdown in economic production, as well as corporate sales and earnings
growth.
The
difficulty, however, is in the public sentiment. True bear market bottoms seldom occur without a complete reversal
in investor sentiment. But we have been
conditioned over the past decade to expect appreciation on our holdings
of 20-30% a year, more than double the historical average. There’s an entire generation of investors
who grew up on consistent double-digit returns and can barely remember the
crash of ’87, people who buy under the assumption that all stocks eventually
have to go up. This is the sentiment we
are dealing with, and turning that sentiment from bullish to bearish, from
euphoria to fear, may take a while.
At
a bear market bottom, P/E’s are typically very low, with P/E’s on the DOW and
S&P in the low to mid teens, but the general public refuses to buy stocks
they paid nearly twice that price for 6-12 months earlier. Consumer confidence is usually very low at
these points and public sentiment is extremely bearish. The picture at present, however, is very
different. P/E ratios for the DOW and
the S&P 500 are still in their 20s.
An article in the New York Times in February of this year placed the P/E
for the NASDAQ 100 (the 100 largest stocks in the NASDAQ) at over 800! This figure was at an all-time high of 165
in March of 2000 and, because earnings have come down so much in the last year,
has risen five-fold in that time. And
while consumer confidence has been declining somewhat, overall public sentiment
is still relatively bullish.
A
contrarian view would suggest that since the general public remains largely
bullish, it would be wise to maintain a bear market mindset. While we do not fully ascribe to these
tenets, we must agree that despite severe price declines in technology related
sectors, the events of this past year do seem to fall somewhat short of a full
reversal. As such, we do not expect to
see anything close to last year’s highs for quite some time.
2000
– 2010 à
Repeat of 1961 – 1974:
The
NASDAQ has moved up as much as 40% off of its April lows, which may or may not
have been the bear market bottom. But
what do we expect as we go forward? Our
expectation is that this index won't hold much of its gains over the next
decade in either real or nominal terms.
In order to understand our reasoning we will examine the bear market
history since the turn of the 20th century. [We will look at the
DJIA and S&P 500 rather than the NASDAQ, in order to get sufficient
history, as the NASDAQ in its present form is only 30 years old.]
Bear
Market History:
There
were 17 bear markets in the U.S. from 1900 to 1991, turning in an average
decline of 39.8%. From 1900 - 1938
there were 8 with an average decline of 48.8%.
From 1938 - 1991 there were 9 showing an average decline of 31.9%. The bear markets with the larger declines
began when the price-earnings ratios were greater than 20. The recovery time to reach the previous high
took longer in these cases than when the bear markets began with much lower
price-earnings ratios. We feel the most
relevant examples to the current market are the series of bear markets that
began in 1929 and those that began in 1961.
The
bear market that began in 1929 was initiated with the DJIA 's price-earnings
ratio (P/E) greater than 20, an inverted yield curve and deflation. The one that began in 1961 started with a
DJIA P/E greater than 20 and an inverted yield curve, but
inflation-stagflation. Since the NASDAQ
bear market that began March 10, 2000 had a P/E ratio greater than 20, an
inverted yield curve and inflation-stagflation, we feel the present market
resembles the 1961-1974 market.

This
series of three bear markets — 1961-1962; 1968-1970; 1973-1974 — can be treated
as one long bear market. The high for
the DJIA (1961) was 735, but fell to 536 in 1962; it increased to 995 during
the 1966-1968 period, only to fall to 631 in 1970. Again, the DJIA increased to about 1000 in 1973-only to fall to
577 in November of 1974. That is, in
1974 the DJIA took a hit which left it at a level lower than the high of 1961
and at its bottom was only 41 points (7.6%) higher than its low of the 1961-62
bear market. Even when dividends
are added the result was a very small gain for the DJIA in nominal terms and a
great loss in real terms for that 14-year period. Since the peak P/E's of the current period were much higher than
those of the 1961-1974 period it is highly probable that stocks, and
particularly the NASDAQ as an index,,,, will not be a very good
investment vehicle over the next 10-15 years.
What
Is To Be Done Now?
If
the above scenario is correct, what strategy or strategies will perform best in
the coming years? In June 1987, prior
to the August-October crash of that year, Robert Solomon (of Solomon Brothers)
suggested that he made a ton of money between 1962-1970 as the averages went
flat. In our opinion, the market today
offers the same kind of (an) environment.
That is, the markets will rise and fall, but a buy and hold strategy
applied to a NASDAQ type index over the next 10-15 years has a low probability
of performing well. Therefore, the
stock trader will have a distinct advantage moving forward. One must either select securities very
wisely or trade the indices with facility.
We shall apply both of these approaches over the next several years.
On Technical Analysis and Trading:
“In the course of years of stock market study, two quite
distinct schools of thought have arisen, two radically different methods of
arriving at the answers to the trader’s problem of what and when. In the parlance of ‘the street,’ one of
these is commonly referred to as the fundamental or statistical, and the other
as the technical.” [Technical Analysis of
Stock Trends, Edwards & Magee]
Technical analysis is the study of the action of a stock or index in terms of its price movement and volume of transactions, often recorded in graphical form, to determine from that the probable future trend. More than anything else, technical analysis (TA) is based on one principle. The markets discount everything. Technical Analysis of Stock Trends (the “bible” of technical analysis) later states,
“Because they reflect the combined market activities
of thousands of investors, including those possessed of the greatest foresight
and the best information on trends and events, the Averages in their day-to-day
fluctuations discount everything known, everything foreseeable, and every
condition which can affect the supply of or the demand for corporate
securities. Even unpredictable natural
calamities, when they happen, are quickly appraised and their possible effects
discounted.”
It
is the job of the technical analyst, armed with this knowledge and with an
understanding of how to interpret this data, to deduce from the action of the
market the most likely direction of the coming trend and the most appropriate
buy and sell points. Over the years,
many have come to regard fundamental analysis as the only viable long-term
strategy for investing. We believe that
this point of view limits the investor and places undue faith in the market’s
ability to bring the undervalued stock back to fair value in a timely
fashion. The art of investing is the
study of three things: the economy, companies, and people. Fundamentalists place all of their emphasis
on the first two, completely disregarding the most powerful factor in
determining the price of a stock.
Technical
analysis is, in effect, the study of people’s impact on stock prices. The trader is the person who decides to use
these techniques to profit in the stock market. While the long-term investor frets over the market that moves up
and down in a trading range that in the end leaves him with little or no gains,
a skillful trader can turn over his money several times. In the above example of the ’62-’74 DJIA,
simply buying and selling three times so as to stay out of the market for the
worst 5 of the 13 years, would allow the trader to keep profits of as much as a
300%, while the long-term investor is left with no returns over the same
period. As we leave the bull market of
the ‘90s behind us and move into a new era of rising and falling markets, the
advantage will go to the trader, as many buy-and-hold investors will find
themselves in 2010 with roughly the same portfolio in “real” terms that they
had a decade before.
King Investors Market Call Performance:
Overview:
To say that we are pleased by the performance of our
market calls during this first year publishing our commentary in this format
would be a mistake. We are very proud
of our performance during the past year, particularly in light of how weak the
market has been throughout this period.
Our goal during severe market downturns is preservation of capital, so
we can be no less than delighted with what we have been able to achieve.
Sector
Focus:
In
our commentary, our market calls focus on technology, specifically the NASDAQ,
and these calls can be traded with QQQ, a NASDAQ 100 tracking stock. We also explicitly cover four tech-related
industries (Biotech, Computer, Internet, and Semiconductor), as well as 2
non-tech industries (Financials and Oil Services). The indices representing these sectors, and their corresponding
tradable tracking stocks are as follows.
|
|
Sector |
Index (ticker) |
Tracking Stock (ticker) |
NASDAQ ^IXIC QQQ
Biotech ^BTK BBH
Computer ^XCI None
Financials XLF XLF
Internet HHH HHH
Oil Services XLE XLE
Semiconductor ^SOXX SMH
Major
Calls:
A
major call is a signal that is explicit.
However, in the first few months of publishing this commentary, many of
the calls were not explicitly stated up front, and must be interpreted. The statement that there is a buy or sell
“coming” would not be interpreted as a call, but a forewarning of a likely call
to come. On the other hand, “we expect
to see this sector moving up shortly” always would be. For a major call, a number of criteria for a
buy or sell signal has to be satisfied according to our models, or the
technical action of the market must fit a pattern definite enough to give a buy
or sell signal without confirmation from our models. These calls are likely to last from several weeks to several
months before getting a reversal. Major
calls make up the majority of our trade volumes and profits.
Minor
Calls:
A
minor call is one in which not all of the criteria for a buy or sell has been
met, but there has been sufficient bullish or bearish pressure built up to turn
markets in the other direction, at least briefly. These calls are usually not explicitly stated as a long-term
signal, but implied, such as “market weakness anticipated” or “while some of
our criteria have not been met, we expect to see the market moving higher
briefly.” The ensuing market moves from
these calls are seldom prolonged, usually lasting from a few days to a few
weeks, and gains from these calls are generally limited to less than 5% or 10%.
Price
and Timing:
All
buy and sell calls are assumed to be in force immediately. For the purposes of performance tracking,
trades are assumed to be made on the trading day following the date of
the call, at a price equal to the average of the high and low on that day. Commissions are assumed to be negligible
($10 commission on a $10,000 trade is 0.1%) and are not calculated in the
returns. We should add that while we do
practice trading in both directions in the market, we have not recorded profits
from trading the short side of the market here. Including the outcomes from trading the short side would more
than triple the gains in most sectors.
Results:
|
|
|
Date of Initial
Call: |
Current Date: |
Performance to
Date: |
Annualized
Performance: |
Computer 17-Jul-00 3-Aug-01 34.3% 31.8%
Financials 12-Sep-00 3-Aug-01 16.8% 18.6%
Internet 11-Jul-00 3-Aug-01 35.8% 32.7%
Oil Services 24-Jul-00 3-Aug-01 34.3% 32.6%
Semiconductor 17-Jul-00 3-Aug-01 114.7% 104.7%
In order to get a true picture of these returns in light of the difficult market of the last year-and-a-half, we also present the following comparison. Figures represent the current value of $10,000 traded based on our calls as described above vs. the current value of $10,000 invested on the date of our initial call in a typical “buy-and-hold” strategy.
|
|
Value of
$10k traded based on buy and sell calls: |
Percent
Gain (Loss) by trading with calls vs. buy-and-hold: |
|
Value of
$10K invested in index at initial call and held: |
NASDAQ $4910 $12970 +164%
Biotech $6830 $14210 +108%
Computer $5250 $13430 +156%
Financials $9730 $11680
+20%
Internet $3930 $13580 +246%
Oil Services $10480 $13430 +28%
Semiconductor $5230 $21470 +311%
While
space constraints did not permit us to print every trade here in this format,
records of each of our trades can be accessed on our website, at
http://www.kinginvestors.com/indcalls/archives/trades.htm.
As
we stated above, the market in the coming years is likely to favor the investor
who takes advantage of timing, as well as selection, of his or her
investments. King Investors is here to provide
information that can be useful in that regard, both for the aggressive trader,
and for the more conservative investor who only wants to know when not to be
in the market. We have enjoyed
providing such commentary over the last year and look forward to continuing to
do so for many years to come.
Acknowledgements:
We would like to thank all of the readers who gave us feedback (both positive and negative) and helped us to evolve into our current form. In particular we would like to thank Dr. Jules King, Professor of Finance at the University of Arkansas, for all of his guidance—without which this company would not exist, Phil Horigan, for the many relentless critiques that contributed to the ever-increasing structure and clarity of the commentary, and Runako Godfrey, for his technical expertise in helping bring some of our models into being.