Just A Reminder...

Tyler Durden's picture

As you glare hopefully at the critical 1400 level on the S&P 500, we thought a gentle reminder of that vertically challenged relative performance of economic fundamentals would be worthwhile...


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
FoolsAdvice's picture

pfft! Are economic fundamentals still relevant? 

vast-dom's picture

more importantly, do you trust those "fundamentals"? bc those too are goosed by QE. shift ECRI to 600 and actual SP to around 600-700 and you get the true fundamentals.

El Viejo's picture

That divergence sort of smacks of lack of fundamentals. Bubblicious!

quintago's picture

I get it. The ECRI indicator is off. 

vast-dom's picture

correct. it is exhibiting now classic horizontal QE induced levitation. put another way: spot the other case of prolonged horizontal levitation -- hint: you can't. this means ultra-synthetic float will at some point break down. but what the hell do i know?

Sylvia Plath's picture

".. but the market can also stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"

francis_sawyer's picture

Still waiting for the 'Quadruple Evel Knievel Formation' to emerge...

vast-dom's picture

the 200 pt divergence is similar to 2009 dip.

vast-dom's picture

QE = float = duration. 


battle between forces of market mendacity vs. reality, with the former winning, for now...

francis_sawyer's picture



Delta = "time for banksters to convert their year end bonuses [grazie a taxpayers] to PHYZZ ~ MINUS, commission paid to coke dealers & Ukranian hookers" = Duration...

Mike in GA's picture

And I got the bruises that prove that!

Stoploss's picture

Quick!! Throw a live chicken in it's mouth!!

Global Hunter's picture

Furthermore stocks are priced/valued using an assumption of continual growth into perpetuity (90s style), when in fact there has been no growth to speak of since 2008.  We'll need to use lower multiples on those "fundamentals" that you rightly question.  Perhaps you're being too optimistic with a 600-700 SP valuation :)

FoolsAdvice's picture

"These aren't the economic fundamentals you're looking for..." <hand wave>

JPM Hater001's picture

Don't confuse market fundamentals with economic fundamentals.  Supply and demand will always prevail.  Thge markets may just skew the economics up for a while.

resurger's picture

i thought technicals were O_0


slaughterer's picture

Fight the fed in the name of fundamentals.  

JPM Hater001's picture

I'm fighting the Fed in the name of Farah Faucet.

HaroldWang's picture

AAPL crushing shorts again today. Some things don't make sense but a stock that got manipulated down to super cheap levels was a no brainer to buy. AAPL holding losses in check with its strength today.

Gypsyducks's picture

If $515/share is "super cheap" what is $415/share?

HaroldWang's picture

We all have our opinions but AAPL still has amazing growth and funds that sold on the way down are chasing it up furiously. The story is still intact and momo chasers will try to test the 700 high again. Can't believe how many negatives that very truthful statement received. Grumpy bears??

CPL's picture

Wait for the Apple buy back when it's back under 10 bucks.  Then it'll be a cheap short.


Like the last time Steve Jobs left...and the time before that...and the time before that.  This time though, Jobs ain't coming back to steer the ship in the proper direction.  The assclowns running the company are repeating, play by play the exact same mistakes as last time.


Keep your gun in the holster for a bit.  They are just stocks...nothing important about them anymore or the accidental risk of profit.

cossack55's picture

So, you are unaware of "channeled" holograms. Stevie isn't deleted, he is in reset.

q99x2's picture

AAPL middle men are down to sueing competitors to try to make a buck these days. It's over Rover.

centerline's picture

Unless they have invented anti-gravity or something else reverse-engineered from UFOs they are in trouble.  The current tech is out there solid with the competition.  What they have going for them it seems is holding people's licensing information hostage.  lol.  Folks should know better than to run single-source.

Zero Govt's picture

..and the competition (cough) to Apple have what going for them precisely?

Microshit is so far behind Apple you need binoculars to see them

..meanwhile the GOOn squad are swimming in red ink selling their crap at a loss ...Priceless

any of you anti-Apple Einsteins got a leg to stand on put it on a postcard to:

Reggie's Desperate Last Stand, Monopolist Matrix Central, Shit & Bust. 

razorthin's picture

That divergence you are looking at is pure inflation.  The curves taken together, show classic stagflation.  In the past, prices reverted to the fundamentals.  This time really is different since we have a printfest like never before.  Prices will not revert unless the $US gains nominal value.  What are the chances of that?

TheCanadianAustrian's picture

Am I the only one that doesn't give a urine-bisected shit about the S&P 500?

Levadiakos's picture

Got to create a left shoulder somewhere

Jonas Parker's picture




"Fundamentals? We don' need no steenkin' fundamentals!"

                                                                   Ben Bernake

I am more equal than others's picture

read any good fiction lately?

faustian bargain's picture

naw man, just shift the green line down by 2 grid hashmarks and you'll clearly see the S&P has been underperforming for the past 4 years. (/sarc)

SheepDog-One's picture

What's 'critical' about S&P 1400? I remember when 'critical' level was 1000 only a short time ago. Bunch of hogwash, like tinsel on a unicorn its all just bullshit.

Boilermaker's picture

What's critical about a 200 day average?  What about 50 days?

What the *#$&@ does that have to do with the actual value of an equity at any given point in time?

slaughterer's picture

The green lines look like Maria's tits.

The red lines like Erin's tits.

Waiting for the two to meet.

Or maybe both girls grow a 3rd tit?