MACD

Here is a weekly over view of the currency market from a technical perspective.  The divergence between the performance of the dollar against the euro-bloc, with the exception of sterling, and the other major currencies is noteworthy.  In the analysis, I suggest a few opportnities for near-term contrarians.  I fully appreciate that some readers eschew technical analysis and regulate it to the same space as numerology and witchcraft.  Yet, even still, it is useful to recall Keynes' view that the markets are like a beauty contest and the trick is not to pick who one thinks is the most beautiful, but to pick who others will think most beautiful.  Moreover, technicals allow one to quantify how much one is willing to lose in a way that fundamental macro-economic analysis doesn't.  It is a tool then for risk management.  

Technical indicators such as MACD, RSI and STO show that silver is slightly overbought short term.

However, silver can remain overbought in the short term as was seen in silver’s rally in 2011 when silver nearly doubled by surging from below $27/oz to nearly $50/oz in just 3 months - from January 27th 2011 to April 28th 2011.

What makes for a good investment is price. Price is everything. You need to receive value in excess of the price paid. An investment’s value is the amount of real cash its underlying assets can reasonably be expected to deliver to its shareholders in the future, discounted for its risk – period. The investment’s price will either be higher than its value (an uncompensated risk), the same as (neutral) or lower than its value (a compensated risk). But since value is an imprecise measurement, the best one can do is to build in a margin of safety by buying investments that are at deep discounts to a reasonable estimated value. Too many investors let an investment’s short-term price movements, or perceptions of short-term price movements drive their decisions. But since short-term price moves are unknowable, irrelevant and independent of investment merits, this is not worthy of any time spent analyzing. If short-term price moves were knowable, then a cadre of top-performing chartists and market technicians would have far greater net worths than Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger and the Saudi Royal Family. They would need only apply leverage to their process and repeat it a few times in order to accrue hundreds of billions of dollars. Question: How many market technicians occupy the Forbes 400? Answer: Zero. Why? Because successfully guessing future price moves based on charts, MACD indicators or tea leaves is not a repeatable process. Investors who do this generally have poor outcomes because they are pursuing answers to the wrong question.

The right question is: where is the value?

From early October of last year (Grand Plan and Global CB intervention) until the start of the LTRO program in Europe, Gold and Stocks (and Treasuries and the USD) all traded in sync with one another. Since the LTRO program, the equity market has generally been on its own in terms of belief. While growth hope, Europe's recovery, and the Bernanke Put (as well as a short-squeeze of epic proportions) were at play, it seems to us that the Fed's Twist program has been ignored by the money-printing crowd (since Twist was sterilized and did not expand the monetary base (excess reserves) - which gold reacts to; but did provide flow - helping stocks - as the Fed's DV01 increased; implicitly devaluing the currency even though Fed's efforts to dissuade have worked) while the ECB's LTRO provided a liquidity overhang that at-first-glance removed one short-term structural risk from US markets (the Europe contagion). Since we made clear that LTRO is in fact an encumbrance and not 'clean' debt monetization (which fits with gold not moving as much), equity markets in Europe have retraced all of those gains - leaving US still elevated. The last few days, gold and stocks have surged together as hope for LTRO3 (seemingly gone now) and Fed QE3/4 (not sterilized; with ES -7.75% from its highs?) has become imminent. However, Gold and stocks remain very far apart in the medium-term and Rick Bensignor sees trendline support and DeMark TD Setups providing an excellent risk-reward for a Short Stocks, Long Gold trade from here.

Currently, there is massive negativity surrounding gold and silver and in particular, gold and silver mining stocks. At times like this, when gold and silver have taken a fairly brutal hit in a condensed period of time thanks to low daily trading volumes both in PM futures and PM stock markets that make it very easy for the banking cartel to manipulate them, it can be difficult not to sell out of everything and run for the hills if one allows emotions to dictate one’s decisions (always a bad move).

The U.S. stock market is getting a wedgie, and so is the U.S. dollar. That matters, as wedges tend to break up or down in a big way. Stocks are a "risk-on" trade, the dollar is a "risk-off" trade, so they are riding a see-saw with wedgies. Yes, I realize this is an unpleasant image, so let's turn to the charts.

In this chart and analysis, we compare the S&P 500 (black line) to the American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) weekly survey. The AAII reports their respondents in three categories: bullish, bearish, and neutral. To analyze these AAII statistics, we create the “Farrell Sentiment Index,” defined as the number of bulls, divided by the number of bears, plus .5x the number of neutrals = Bulls/(Bears+.5Neutrals). This data can be quite volatile week to week, so we opted to convert this formulaic data series into two different types of charts.

Since the summer of 2010, the way gold was viewed and used by the overall market has changed.   For much of the period from Jan 1, 2008 until June 30, 2010 for example, gold (GC) has had an inconsistent relationship, in correlation terms, relative to the S&P 500 (SPY).  There were times during this period when it moved in the opposite direction, but much of this time it moved in the same direction as the market.  This can be seen in the first chart shown.

A down day in the US on Tuesday could begin to trigger intermediate sell signals...~ Lee Adler

The past several years have seen a growing backlash against "paper" investments as more and more investors consider hard assets to be a safe haven against the implications of central bank money printing. But as the global economy visibly slows, this question arises in many minds: Are commodities, which have been on a tear since the March 2009 bottom, finally topping out? The question requires both a fundamental economic response as well as a technical chart analysis. We can start by observing the common-sense connection between demand for commodities such as copper, cement, steel,etc. and economic expansion. When demand rises faster than supply, prices rise. Since supplies of commodities face all sorts of restraints in terms of extraction rates, energy costs, and declining reserves, increased demand quickly pushes prices higher.

A lot of technical analysts and financial pundits are expecting a standard-issue Santa Claus Rally once a "solution" to Europe's debt crisis magically appears. There will be no such magical solution for the simple reason the problems are intrinsic to the euro, the Eurozone's immense debts and the structure of the E.U. itself. The accident has finally happened, and it's called the euro/European debt crisis. I see a lot of analysts trying to torture a Bullish interpretation out of the charts, so let's take a "nothing fancy" chart of the broad-based S&P 500 with five basic TA tools: Bollinger Bands to measure volatility, relative strength (RSI), MACD (moving average convergence-divergence), stochastics and volume. If we use Technical Analysis 101 (basic version), a number of things quickly pop out of this chart--and none of them are remotely bullish.

If we scrape away the ever-hopeful headlines predicting a new figurehead lackey or another vote will magically fix Greece, Italy, the euro, Europe's crumbling banks, etc., the global stock markets can be distilled down to one chart. And here it is: a see-saw with the U.S. dollar on one end and the euro and equities on the other. I know the mind rebels at such simplicity, and so does the entire buy-side Wall Street edifice: if it all boils down to this, then there really isn't much value added by the endless reams of fancy reports and analysis, is there?

We are all quite aware of the fact that heightened volatility has become a short term norm in the financial markets as of late.  Not surprisingly, we’re seeing the same thing in a number of recent economic surveys.  The most current poster child example being the Philly Fed survey that has shown us historic month over month whipsaw movement over the last few months.  Movement measured in standard deviation parameters has been breathtaking.  All part of a “new normal” in volatility?  For now, yes. But over the very short term economic surveys and stats have been taking a back seat in driving investor behavior and decision making in deference to the “promise” of ever more money printing.  Of course this time the central bank wizardry will happen across the pond, although the US Fed is also now back to carrying out it’s own modest permanent open market operations (money printing) relatively quietly, but consistently, as of late.  Although over the short term “money makes the world go ‘round”, we need to remember that historic money printing in the US in recent years only acted to offset asset value contraction in the financial sector and did not lead to macro credit cycle acceleration engendering meaningful aggregate demand and GDP expansion.  And we should expect a Euro money printing experience to be different?  Seriously?

#404040;">

Here's what markets do when they break critical support: they re-test lows. That sets up an eventual target for this decline of 670, which would be a re-test of the March 2009 lows. Bulls have to answer this question: once the 200-week MA is broken, why shouldn't this market re-test the recent low? If it's "different this time," what makes it different from every other era and market? It might be a good time to recall that index funds are only "safe" in the sense that they aggregate the risk of all stocks in the index. A market that declines 40% will take index funds down 40%. There is nothing "safe" about long-equity funds that track a market heading down. Nobody knows what will happen tomorrow, much less 30 days from now or three months from now, but as of this snapshot of the market, the evidence of a Bear market decline is rather substantial, and the technical evidence of a Bull market is rather thin. As the saying goes, keep it simple.

I've been asked to comment on the work of a few noted deflationists who are calling for a top in commodity prices here. Their argument is pretty clear cut: Because inflation is a function of available money plus credit (their definition), and because credit has fallen, deflation is what comes next. When looking about for things to deflate in price, commodities are an obvious candidate for attention because they have risen so much over the past decade. In this view, three things have to be true: i) Demand for commodities has to fall below supply. After all, as long as demand exceeds supply, prices will typically rise. ii) Money, including credit that would normally be used to buy commodities, has to shrink. That's the definition of deflation that we're analyzing here. iii) People's preference for money has to be greater than their preference for 'things,' with commodities being very obvious 'things.' That is, faith in money has to be there or people will prefer to store their wealth elsewhere. These are all just versions of the old supply/demand argument for commodity prices, except that our consideration also includes the important element of the Austrian economic view of demand for money.